Israel Kills 4 Oxfam Engineers, “ISIS-K” Election Threats Surface At Opportune Moment & Iran Attack

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:21):
Welcome to the daily wrap up. A concise
show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant
independent news as we see it from the
last 24 hours.
Sunday, October 20, 2024.
Thank you for joining me today. I'll tell
you, I miss you guys when I don't
do a show in this much time. It's

(00:42):
weird how much I miss you know, as
much as you're not here with me in
this room, I miss this dynamic more than
you know. Especially, it's not just because of
needing to address the information. That that is
a huge part of it for me, which
is why we had a 6 hour show
in the last one we did. We have
had a couple of interviews in between. But
just with a lot going on, I haven't
gotten back to the show yet over the

(01:03):
week. So
glad to be here again.
Lot to talk about, of course. I'm gonna
follow-up in regard to Georgia. There's a couple
updates that I wanted to give you on
Conyers Conyers Georgia and what's going on around
the dioxin discussion that's still getting very, very
little attention.
We're gonna talk about, interesting point opening in
regard to
something I've talked about in the past, but

(01:23):
around kind of a an older fact check
around TLab that I thought was just interesting
to start with that you guys find will
find entertaining.
We're gonna talk about, the as I said,
Georgia, and then getting into some overlap there
in around kind of the 2 party illusion
discussion is kinda just how I've been framing
that. Whether it it it kinda revolves, you
know, the that topic usually revolves around the
election, sort of the the the 2 party

(01:43):
illusion dynamic around Trump and Kamala and, like,
the Elon Musk, Twitter overlap and how that
is all working. I wanna cover some important
points I think are relevant
just to that same this kind of growing
concern I have for how people are falling
for a lot of this stuff. And
and a a focus on Twitter
in that context, but the actually,
some really interesting points I think you guys

(02:05):
are gonna find fascinating. But then we're gonna
talk about
ISIS k. We've talked about this before. Sort
of the as they would frame it anyway,
the Afghanistan version of ISIS, and
it's we've gone over this extensively in the
past in regard to an attack on Russia
and how this is just undeniably, in my
opinion, based on all the evidence we can
see,
basic be well, let's be clear.

(02:26):
I've said this many times, and this should
not be a contentious statement with how much
evidence we can demonstrate or highlight just like
it's not contentious to highlight that Zionism is
exactly what it appears to be today.
ISIS, Al Qaeda, these are proxy elements, not
is I would argue sort of like a
Hamas overlap and not I who knows the
control level today or whether that's been completely
lost over the years, and it's just become

(02:48):
exactly what they wanted to be seen in
the beginning. I don't know. But I do
know that I Al Qaeda and ISIS are
proxy elements that were created by the United
States and Israel. There's so much evidence. It
pains me that I even have to give
this disclaimer when we make these kind of
statements.
Now the Hamas is very different. I actually
got into something online about this the other
day. My point has been very clear around

(03:09):
this.
It's I the again, the evidence is undeniable
that Israel was giving money to at least
some elements of this from the very early
stages
and all the way up until October 7th
in in in regard to as he has
stated publicly to divide them and stop the
2 state solution.
Now, of course, that all could be a
ploy. I've never argued otherwise that the evidence

(03:30):
is there just demonstrating what it shows. The
important point that I always make is that
Hamas itself,
since 2006, let's say, a lot has changed.
And I've always left open that caveat that
we don't know what has happened. That's the
point they're making over here about ISIS and
whatever else, more in a negative way I
would say, that they lost control and don't
care what happens or use it when they
can. But

(03:50):
Mas, as we can see in regard to
the resistance and how Palestine's embracing this idea,
things have changed. And I think it's clear
we can see that there's different elements
of the population that have grown up and
changed, radicalized by Israel's actions, and that group
itself has changed. But I'm still quite convinced
that there are elements that are at least
influenceable
or able to be influenced by Israel. And
so that's why I say I don't think

(04:11):
I I don't support something like that because
I don't know for sure whether it is
what some people may say on either side
of the conversation. I think that's a pretty
objective stance on what we can see. So
back to the point about
ISIS k and the reasons being brought being
brought up again today.
Of course,
pre election threats every single time. Iran is

(04:31):
threatening this, and Russia is threatening that, and
ISIS is going to attack the US because
elections and sort of you know, don't think
too hard into it. They just hate your
freedom. You know? It's really clumsy.
Now that's not even to say that it's
fake. For all we know, it's a real
threat. But let's be clear about where that
threat is coming from. It's not what they
would want you to think. And we're gonna
go over what that is in the background

(04:52):
and showing you how this is, I think,
the current embodiment. That's why I started with
that explanation
of what this proxy element is and how
it's being used by the US and Israel.
Now we're gonna go over that in regards
to and how it kind of dovetails with
the conversation of Iran. We're gonna talk about
Israel and what's going on with northern Gaza
and,
a a point about Lebanon before that actually,

(05:13):
and then just kinda finish with what's going
on in the greater conversation around that. And
it's
the same frustrating conversation that we've continued to
see for over a year now. That I
think more and more people are coming to
that kind of exacerbation
moment where you're just gonna I'm just I
can't believe this is still happening. I'm I
cannot believe that this is still at this
point with what everybody can see. And it's

(05:35):
really not even a hyperbolic point anymore. It
is literally the the vast majority of the
world that is very aware of what's happening.
And yet, the power structures that are so
the spotlight
could not be more on the people that
were 30 seconds ago screaming rules based order,
human rights and freedom, and the spotlight is
right on them as the worst

(05:55):
villains of today. And that's not I mean,
it's important to recognize how much the world
sees that. Of course,
the vast majority of the world could be
wrong, but I think the evidence is obviously
showing you what these people are. And that
doesn't have to mean every single element of
these larger groups. That's the point you made
about different elements within the United States, politically
and otherwise, but it's important to see the

(06:15):
real big picture and who's really involved. So
only if it there to start, I'm gonna
open with a couple of points I want
you guys to see.
This I recently put up this page on,
on the TLav website. And I've I've I've
mentioned this a couple of times already and
I'll be showing it more as we get
closer. Liberty on the Rocks 20 24. This
is the actual TLav page. This will be
the behind the scenes

(06:35):
page. So if if you wanna actually join
this event, you can buy the ticket here
and you can actually get the link here
to go watch the the the main event
which will be streaming live on the second.
But that won't be streaming live on this
page. I'm doing a secondary
behind the scenes event
kind of juxtaposed next to the larger event,
so simultaneous.
And so what this will be is you

(06:56):
can but if you if you wanna join
and come in person, it'll be in Sedona.
You can buy a ticket through here with,
Ryan 5 as the promo code for 5
5% discount,
and come join us there and be a
part of it.
Or you can, buy an online version of
that ticket, same thing, same code, and and
watch it on the main page. The link
will be here. Now this page itself,

(07:16):
on this bed in bed right here, will
be where I will be hosting a behind
the scenes
all day event alongside that, which will be
a whole bunch of stuff. I mean, it's
gonna be
me interviewing people sort of before they go
up and talk about what they're gonna be
speaking about and kind of like a behind
the scenes thing, I'll be wandering around and
talking to people in the crowd and it'll
be it'll be a fun thing. And it'll

(07:37):
also be
my me doing what I do. Right? So
there'll be a whole day of stuff to
get into. So it's not all gonna be
filled with interviewing people before the event and
event adjacent concepts. Sometimes that'll be something I'll
jump into my mind, and I'll talk about
something for however long where I'll play clips
of previous interviews.
And on top of that,
please feel free to donate to TLAB. We
can look at it as sort of a

(07:58):
a a running TLAB donation day as well.
Right? So either way, it's about trying to
raise money for everybody involved with this and
and really kind of promote the idea of
volunteerism.
And and by the way, interesting, I didn't
even notice this,
that there's
oftentimes,
volunteerism
gets miss,
accidentally used instead of volunteerism.

(08:18):
One means, essentially, like
it's weird, apparently, just like a the ism
is, like, volunteering
for things, and that's sort of like the
mindset. Whereas, volunteerism is about the idea of
voluntary
exchange between people and the larger conversation we've
gotten into, like anarchism, agorism, the idea of
of that, like, you know, the the larger
ideology that we tend to lean into without

(08:39):
sort of at least might say it personally
without labeling it because I find that my
at least personally, my mindset comes to tends
to go around to a lot of different
ideas.
You know, takes the better parts of different
things, which by the way, I think that's
what we should all be doing instead of
picking a label and boxing ourself in. Anyway,
make sure you check it out. It'll be
a great time. A lot of great people
speaking there. As you know, here's the here's
the page. Derek Rose,

(09:00):
Etienne or Howard himself,
James Corbett, Larkin Rose. It'll be a good
event.
So looking forward to seeing you guys there.
And, I had a really great interview, really
great interview with Vanessa Bealey on 18th.
As we I titled it the Gaza Technocracy
Incubator, which is coming from what she was
discussing and the global resistance last stand. She
made a really powerful statement in this. Something

(09:23):
that that I mean, as I even say
in the interview, something that
that I'm well aware of. But, nonetheless, the
way that she framed it, it gave me
this ominous feeling.
The idea that essentially
and and she she's in Syria right now,
and she as you know, she's one of
the last surviving real investigative journalists that is
on the ground, immersing herself in this and

(09:43):
speaking to people on all sides of conversations.
And and she's the people on the resistance
side of this. And from Syria, but as
well as we're talking about Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen.
In their mindset, as she understands it and
speaking to them herself,
see this as they're not fighting for their
own they are fighting for their own self
determination, their own freedom.

(10:03):
But they see it as they're fighting for
everyone's.
And I kind of agree with where they're
coming from with this. And she and she
highlights and the both points together
that what they're using Gaza for right now
is sort of they all they have been
for as far back as I can look,
testing purposes. As they'll sell weapons as battle
tested that they use on innocent gods and
people. It's not a secret. And so here,

(10:24):
she's talking about as they watch them use
different technology,
different gas weapons that we can't identify. But
specifically, the techno technocracy side of it with
Lavender, habsura,
these AI programs that are being used to
mass assassinate people, and they're literally training these
things for you
at a mass scale. And this is not
hyperbole, guys. They're hyperbolic or a an assumption.

(10:46):
This is what we're literally watching this stuff
roll out. And, of course, you could play
the old game and pretend, like, oh, but
they won't use it that way on us,
except that's never how history has gone. Somebody
eventually will always use it the way you
don't think it will be used, and they're
training it right now. And so in their
minds, they see this stuff. It's being used
on them. And they see this as a

(11:08):
war against
that, the technocracy
in general for the global idea.
Now you could disagree with that, but I
think that's pretty spot on with where we
are. And obviously, 1st and foremost, they're fighting
for their own self determination.
So make sure you check this out. Vanessa
Bealey, it's been a while since we connected
and she's fantastic. One of my favorite people.
So make sure you watch this, listen to

(11:28):
it, make some clips,
important stuff.
Also had what the one I kind of,
pulled off for a while because it was
sort of a more of a broad evergreen
conversation just about the loo the illusion of
authority and I really was hoping it wouldn't
get buried by the larger conversation of because
Lebanon was kind of really kicking off when
we first had this. But I played this
on the on 16th. Larkin Rose, the illusion

(11:50):
of authority and the collapse of the 2
party paradigm.
Really, really good interview. Larkin is a good
man, and he really does have an interesting
perspective on, you know, that it's it's a
very difficult conversation for a lot of people
to wrap their minds around. And if you
wanna understand
where a lot of my mindset comes from
when I'm talking about the idea that I
don't, you know, I think government is the
problem. You know, all these things that seem

(12:10):
to sort of challenge what most people feel.
It's coming from something like this. His book
in particular, The Most Dangerous Superstition, which for
whatever reason, by the way, I don't know
if you guys watched the livestream.
I I've I've had the book forever. It's
one of my it's really important thing. And
I've I've basically, for whatever reason, while I
was live with them, I kept forgetting the
title of the book. Who knows how about
hard the mind works? But the point was

(12:30):
it's just a fascinating conversation about a core
idea
That it's not just it's left or it's
like it goes to the core of everything.
It goes before left and right and all
of it. It's the idea of whether authority
itself, whether we should believe that anybody has
the right to rule over your life. They
can call it representation if you want. They're
still the ones deciding what you can do,

(12:51):
what you can say. And that's not what
we're told, but that is the way it's
working today. And we all know that.
Important. And I'm looking forward to speaking with
them again in Sedona.
So I wanna start with this. I just
thought this was kinda funny. This is not
new. But I was going through some old
stuff and I found this and and I
I just wanted to point this out. It's
interesting how much has changed actually since this
was being discussed and I think some of

(13:11):
these things are funny. Where was the date
on this?
I can't see it now all of a
sudden. But this wasn't,
no. That's for the that's the date of
the website. So I it's no it's old.
I think it was a year or 2.
I think it was around the COVID 19
era time frame. But so this is under
media bias fact check, and it says, the
last American vagabond.
Bias and credibility.

(13:32):
Of course, they have me all the way
on, not just the right, but the extreme
right. Think about how stupid that is. Do
you realize more than anybody today, the right
hates me? Not conservative is a liberal, but
the right verse you know, the the team
sport politics. During COVID, it was the other
way around, of course. But see, that's my
point about how
I feel I'm being objective and my opinions

(13:52):
are based on the facts, and then the
2 party paradigm kind of oscillates around me
in this wild mania of assumption and and
hyperbolic statements.
And sometimes the one versus the other seems
to be more like, oh, I like what
he's saying today. And then tomorrow, oh, no.
Now he's a straight now he's a right
wing maniac. Now he's a left wing snowflake.
Meanwhile, I'm staying objective and going by the
facts. You know, that's what we all should
be doing. But it's funny that that's how

(14:13):
that works. Extreme right. I just think it's
hilarious. But if there was a questionable source,
exhibits 1 or more of the following, extreme
bias
extreme bias,
consistent promotion of propaganda conspiracies,
poor or no sourcing to credible information. Think
about that. Now, of course, the way they
would play that is credible information.
But, of course, if you really pushed it

(14:34):
to the people and you asked on the
sources I would using, of course, they would
say, oh, nature? Yeah. Absolutely.
Yeah. British medical journal? Well, that's fantastic. Oh,
but when Ryan points to it, no. That's
fake news. You mean that medical blog? That's
how this is working. Or I can point
to any number of info of, you know,
peer reviewed scientific
literature or or peer reviewed science about dioxins
and the risks. You get the point. I
think it's just really sad that this is

(14:55):
where it's gotten to where there are people
that truly think this is some kind of,
like, you know, pinnacle of of objective information.
Like, having these fact checkers tell you what
to think when it's embarrassingly wrong.
Now there are people out there that are
ridiculous and sometimes, you know, the point being
that they can lump them in with I
think the point is to make people that
are being objective and doing the work but

(15:16):
are saying things that are unpopular look like
those crazy ones. And I'm not gonna you
know the ones that I tend to point
to because they're ridiculous.
I mean, almost always
stretching the truth or blatantly lying, and I
think that's by design. I think they're trying
to emulate what a lot of objective people
are doing.
But it says, right, of course, fact reporting
low.

(15:38):
According to its about us page Where was
it? I was looking for one more thing.
Fun It says founded by Ryan Christian,
and it says funding and ownership details are
not explicitly stated. You see what I'm saying?
You mean despite the fact that I explicitly,
almost constantly point out that we're user funded
or not user funded, but, yeah, viewer funded?
And the idea is that as donations and
that's it, we don't have ads, we don't

(15:59):
have don't, we don't have investors?
You mean despite saying that repeatedly? You know,
it's all dishonest. Obviously, it's explicitly stated that
that's the case. They just don't like that
because that's not they want it to be
open as if there's some kind of dark
seedy background that we don't know for sure
because there this is this is an effort
to make us look bad.
But it's actually working on our benefit because
I frankly think this stuff is sad for

(16:19):
most people.
Now, I'll leave the point oh, and then
that was that's actually where it brought me
to, is I'm gonna show you this last
part next. It says it's reporting alliance with
conspiracy theories and questions established
scientific and geopolitical narratives.
You're you're goddamn right I do. And it
says the video, gain of functions newest brain
virus and genetically engineered proteins to control everything.

(16:40):
Yeah. You realize those are 2 ex peer
reviewed scientific studies from nature. So I'd love
for them, the person who wrote this, to
explain to me why just because the title
sounds like a crazy story to them,
using peer reviewed science to prove facts suddenly
becomes crazy when you don't like what it
shows. And that's what happened during the COVID
19 conversation. Whitney and I got bumped off
Patreon for proving myocarditis was a thing. That's

(17:02):
how it works. Then it goes on to
say why the US and UK attack Houthis
was an act of war against the Yemeni
state.
Yeah. Duh.
They attacked a a sovereign country, but, you
know, narratives. The last one though was about
this.
And they point to this fact check that
we had. Did Trump sign 5 g bill,
but exposure effects are misleading?

(17:23):
Or Trump did. Sorry. Something read or wrong.
The point was they're trying to act like
this was a fact check. And the article,
actually, this is what I wanna show you,
the actual website that I point I've met
this point many times.
Here here it was back before it actually
went over a 1000000. 700,000 views on this
video. And all it says, 5 g bill
signed into law while everyone's distracted by coronavirus.
Remember how many times I've mentioned this? And

(17:43):
this is what's hilarious to me. That's exactly
what happened. Donald Trump quietly signed in a
bill while cone COVID 19 was happening. And
they just lost their minds because they see
COVID 19 and 5 g in the same
title. Now I've had many conversations about the
overlap of the symptoms and so on. Nothing
definitive because I don't think that was ever
necessarily proven.
Yeah. You know, the conspiracy theory way of
being objective and following the facts.

(18:05):
But what's hilarious to me is that they
try to make a point about how
it's the effects are misleading. What the idea
that 5 g has clear proven peer reviewed
science that shows the side effects, which is
all it's pointing to, but it shows you
the video in here which I thought was
fantastic. So I wanted to reference this again.
If you wanna watch this, make, it's right
here. 5 g bill signed to the law
while everyone's distracted by coronavirus. Now that I

(18:26):
wanted to bring up
because people out there are believing in Donald
Trump and the rest of them while this
stuff has always been happening. Donald Trump signed
this bill. While coronavirus, which by the way
he was spearheading the operation warp speed,
Five g bill was signed into And right
now, mow the most people pushing back on
this idea would be conservatives.

(18:47):
Where are they? How do we miss this
stuff? I guess he was misled. Right? Oh,
he got tricked by the other guy. Or
whatever the narrative will be to make you
forget about it. Like every other thing we
point to.
But that's why, by the way, my main
channel got deleted. When this went over a
1000000 views, they bumped us off YouTube.
That's how that works. Hope you're paying attention.

(19:08):
So before we come back to the Donald
Trump point, I just wanna start with that
because I found interesting. Let's talk about Georgia
for a minute. And another large story that
gets very little coverage because Yeah. I honestly
think because
right now, this story does not have a
partisan draw. And it may. For whatever reason,
they may, you know Nick Sorgen may decide
to start selling Starlink over here and all
of a sudden, it's a big story. The

(19:28):
point is it shouldn't need those morons jumping
the story to make this important. This is
a gigantic story. And it's array it's amazing
to me that we
I guess the larger population gets guided along
by so many of these influencers
as opposed to just seeking out the information
that's important. And in this case,
right right now, it's up in the air
based on his upcoming results.

(19:51):
When Scott has the results, I just text
him today actually. I I'm gonna try to
get him on as fast as possible to
discuss what he is finding. But as of
right now, it seems to be increasingly demonstrated
as worse than East Palestine.
He found the amount of compounds themselves were
12 to £20,000,000
of chlorine compounds compared to 2,000,000 in East

(20:12):
Palestine.
There's I to me, there's no way this
couldn't be worse based on what we can
see. I'm hoping I'm wrong. But here's what
he wrote on oct that I no way
that it could be not worse. I think
I said that wrong. Any case, the point
is, October 20th he posted this. I'm gonna
show you this video as well. He said
the video is from Friday 18th.
From of the business property of Larry Cox

(20:34):
across the street from ground 0 at the
bio lab. Remember, it's a bio lab company,
not necessarily a biological laboratory, at least as
we understand it.
The video was taken from any he tested
Larry Cox, property including the soil residues and
so on around the area and his vehicles.
Less than 24 hours after the shelter in
place was lifted and the clean up was
declared done. Now what's interesting is he's gonna

(20:55):
show you the video where you can still
see smoke coming off the ground. And this
this is as of
18th.
And he says, so why was BioLab in
their crisis contractor PR and response firm,
which appears to be the response group based
on the strap around neck and lanyard,
with the response group printed on the lanyard,
illegally trying to block Larry Cox and any

(21:15):
other business owner from accessing their property after
the shelter in place was lifted. And the
cleanup was declared done. So that's important. So
they're claiming they were done. So yet when
he tries to go test on the person's
property he has permission from, they won't let
it happen.
I mean, it's not hard to connect these
dots, guys. I mean, I I'm not gonna
say we can that means we can prove
there's a cover up going on. But what

(21:36):
else does this start to look like? Especially
when not a single person in this conversation
other than Scott and a few around this
conversation like myself have mentioned the word dioxin.
Guys, you have to realize there's not a
question. It's not if, it's how much. Without
question.
How many dioxins, how much what the level
of dioxin was that was released. That's the

(21:58):
question.
Nobody has mentioned this. And just like with
these Palestine, it took a week for anybody
to even mention that word and it was
because of pressure from the independent media that
lit a fire under the butts of the
corporate media who started poking questions in these
press conferences and they were forced to acknowledge
it. And now we know, oh, yeah. It
went 16 states across. That that's the new
information as of the recent thing we saw.

(22:19):
Yeah. East Palestine went about 16 states. We
knew that. I said that when it first
started. This was a lot further than they
wanted you to know. They covered it up.
No one got in trouble. Here we are
again.
So he says, is there a multibillion dollar
corporate undue influence going on here over the
EPA?
I think that's an obvious yes. Fi the
it says the Rockville County Fire Department and

(22:40):
others just like Norfolk Southern, East Palestine. But
that's the case. In East Palestine, they were
like I told you, don't forget that most
important part. And I'm gonna I'll include that
since I bring it up.
That Norfolk Southern misled, or rather by omission
lied to the fire department.
In an investigation,

(23:01):
they found the controlled burn was unnecessary. And
the reason, as I've said a 100 times,
that never seems to get out past this
show, is that
it was treated viral chloride.
Treated. I'm willing to bet you nobody you
talk to knows that, which still blows my
mind. How is that possible?
Because his people told him it was treated,
which means and they said it was most
likely not going to explode. The only reason

(23:22):
they justified
the vent and could not control burn, and
he withheld that information from the fire department,
who then later admit admitted that on the
record.
And nothing happened. In fact, I think Millforks
Millforks certainly gained from this entire process.
Either way,
this is what happens when we don't deal
with the problem and let the partisan narratives
fly out of control, which I'm not saying

(23:42):
ignore anything,
but just recognize how often that happens.
So in
East Palestine,
they influenced the fire department. They influenced everybody
around the conversation
and essentially allowed the corporation to dictate what
happened. Because that's I mean, this is just
if we were to talk about, like, Israel
influence or occupation of different things, the same

(24:04):
conversation with corporations.
These many many cases these corporations
run the show. And that's not how this
is supposed to work. It's supposed to be
the opposite way, of course. And it says,
why do the people attempting to illegally block
property and business owners like Larry Cox refuse
to state their company and names?
Sure seems like an honest engagement to me.
Why do they threaten to have people arrested

(24:24):
and tell people they're trying to access their
own property that the fire department or the
sheriff is ordering them to prevent people from
accessing their own property despite saying that the
cleanup was done?
Do people know they're breaking the law after
the cleanup is declared done and shelter in
place is lifted?
While the true it says,
for,

(24:45):
and shelter in place is lifted for BioLab
PR purposes while the truth is something else?
Well, he says perhaps the answer is that
essentially another version of controlled burn vent and
and all in quotes by the way. As
even I got I got Scott to say
in one of her interviews that it wasn't
the controlled burn, that's just that they can't
get that converse that piece out of the
conversation.
It wasn't controlled by every definition of the
word. We proved that in the first two

(25:06):
couple of days. And yet it still is
called a controlled burn, the corporate media.
Again, the point is simply, if there's no
control of oxygen, it's not a controlled burn.
If you see that much smoke, it's not
a controlled burn. Period.
That's you can find you can ask anybody
who knows what they're talking about. And that
may that's why it maximized the amount of
the oxygen that were released, even according to
Scott himself. But it says many of the
most dangerous

(25:28):
no. No. It goes on to say,
like in East Palestine and is going on
this in this video I'll show you next
with the fire department and the contractor spraying
water and creating what appears to be smoke
in the video. Many of the most dangerous
cancer causing chemicals, e g, like dioxins or
more, are odorless,
colorless, and with particle sizes the eye cannot
see.

(25:49):
So this video, as you can see,
on the h
it even kinda floored me.
So what you're gonna see here remember, when
we we we reported this, there it is
right there.
Now you got a hose, but this is

(26:09):
the same point. After this, you can see
smoke
And that's Scott's thing. You can't find what
you don't look for. The point is it
does appear to be smoke that's coming off
of this and that we can see even
confirmed by the corporate media that this is
still smoldering even as of 18th
possibly right now. And the reality is that
this only happened because they sprayed water on
it. They had remember their whole point was

(26:31):
this was out. It was out, it was
over, they ended everything and all of a
sudden, no, it kicked back up. That was
the story. And the only reason that happened
and I kinda think that's a a cover
story to a degree. It's not just like
the fire restarted. They essentially created some kind
of a chemical chemical reaction with the water
which caused us to go crazy, which by
the way is exactly like the Cebeso discussion

(26:51):
from Italy. It's like the exact overlap. That's
exactly what happened. Time Magazine calls that one
of the worst disasters in the environment in
history.
And that was a dioxin release. That's what
it was.
But they don't this is a reason they
don't want you talking about this stuff. Somebody's
aware of this. People know of these overlaps.
It's not being allowed to be discussed. How
is that possible
unless they know what they're doing and they

(27:12):
don't want you to know about it because
they don't know how to deal with it,
or they don't care, or maybe both.
I don't know.
Now, here he is testing as of 18th.
This is when he was there, doing some
more tests, following up. Now I'm just letting
you know that's ongoing. We're gonna be talking
soon.
Now this is a video from the local
this is, posted on 17th.

(27:34):
Though this you know, some of the locals
have to say. And there's a part in
this that really does blow my mind. It
has to do with the water. And so
as of
17th, you're gonna see the water essentially bubbling
green and putting something out.
So to me, this goes back to the
idea of the person that was whistleblowing.
This is bigger than just whatever just happened

(27:54):
with the fire.
There is some massive action going on here.
I remember, this is the place that was
multiple issues like this over the years. And
the guy who died after he gave the
testimony, I'll play it for you next, he
literally said that they were covering things up.
He literally said that they he insinuated they
even started this fire to cover this up.
So there I I I get the sense

(28:14):
there's either some massive environmental issues here that
somebody either knows about and has been covering
up, or that they thought they get caught
for. Or hope or hopefully not, but something
even bigger. I'm just giving you my gut
feeling on this because everything about this points
in a direction of
something
far more serious. And don't forget, the guy
is a government

(28:34):
entity who testified
that this was a big deal, that essentially
covering this up, that they were hurting the
community, that people are dying, getting cancer, getting
sick, and then he walks out and dies.
That those are the facts. But you can
read into that whenever you want. So watch
this video first, and we'll come back to
that.
Tina, the the change is welcome news. However,

(28:55):
the community is still uneasy.
And that shelter in place lifted after more
than 2 weeks. People that live and work
here tell me they feel like they've been
on a roller coaster ride trying to figure
out what to do next year. Some of
them evacuated, came back, and then left again
feeling like they were unsafe. Now they tell
me they don't know if they trust the

(29:16):
all clear.
Yeah. You know why? Because they were getting
sick.
As as status Ku pointed out, Scott talked
about, people getting nosebleeds, headaches, chloracne,
which is an obvious indication of acute exposure
to dioxins.
Not my opinion. That's a scientific fact. That's
and and the Cerveza investigation
from Italy, again, one of the most the

(29:37):
the the top ten environmental disasters in history,
according to Time Magazine.
That
was a study that went on. And I
covered this in one of the shows I'll
point out in a second, so you guys
can go back and get, caught up if
you haven't seen them.
That they used that as the marker. People
who had the chloracne,
they you know, like a decade later, they

(29:57):
did a study about this. And they reached
out and they found out who actually got
the chloracne, and they said, okay, that's the
indication of acute exposure, so we're gonna use
you and then compare you to a control
that didn't have chloracne. That's literally the entire
study. And what did they find? I went
over it. Reproductive issues, cancers,
everything you could imagine. Shocking pea women that
were having, like, like, a 50% or more

(30:18):
decrease in reproductivity.
Exactly what we're talking about. Long term issues
that you would never associate with this exposure
because you don't see it, you don't smell
it, unless you were told by somebody like
this this was possible.
If you if East Palestine ever knew that
happened, they covered that with up looking, nobody
would've ever connected what happened with what they
were dealing with to this day.

(30:39):
One of the first people that reached out
to Scott to whistle blow about this from
East Palestine, she's dead now.
There's it's just we need to realize how
serious this actually is and I've gone over
the risks of the action so many times
and it still just does not seem to
connect with people.
Yeah. I don't see much
difference than yesterday. The uncertainty
continues. I just kinda feel like they're just

(31:00):
doing that. Stanley Ham and his family just
100 yards from BioLab's toxic disaster. Like you're
a prisoner in your own home. You know
what I mean? By a command, you know,
which I don't like that. He says he
and his parents are stuck at home worrying
about the long term effects of breathing in
chemicals. At first, you know, like I said,
they were saying that

(31:21):
they didn't think it was
it was harmful. The first time I inhaled
it, you know, I end up
my throat burned
for, like, a couple of days, and,
I kept having headaches.
Right now around BioLab in the nearby pond,
green water is still bubbling. Machinery is near
Look at how fast you just skip. What
do you mean green water is still bubbling?

(31:42):
What the hell is that?
What is that? What is that? Is that
because of the fire?
Like, what a casual jump over that. Do
your job. What is that? What are we
talking so to me, that is an ongoing
issue that's just because of this lab, because
of the company that is dumping toxic things
that people were trying to tell you about.
Green water bubbling up in the water. Guys,

(32:04):
there's something much worse happening here. I mean,
how what watch that again. Couple of days
and Around BioLab in the nearby pond,
green water is still bubbling. I mean, look.
What are you seeing right there? You can
see a pipe sticking out of the water,
and you see something spraying
out of that.
This is as of this is as of
17th, guys.

(32:24):
It's 20th.
This thing happened in late September, like the
end of September.
I'm I'm kinda blown away by that.
Right now around bio lab in the nearby
pond,
green water is still bubbling. Machinery is Wow.
By, and the air quality is being monitored.
Yeah. Monitored for things that are not the

(32:45):
risk at this point. They're monitoring for chlorine
and associated compounds. Now, yeah, you could that
maybe means dioxins, but I doubt that's what
it means. And even if it did, they're
not showing us this or even mentioning the
word. So let's realize that it's not an
honest engagement. But if you're testing flu chlorine,
which by the way would have dissipated by
now, obviously,
you're not gonna find anything. And this is
what he's that's why Scott's point is you

(33:05):
will not find what you don't look for.
The dioxins are an obvious
immediate problem that will then be there for
at least a couple of decades. That it's
it's has a decade half life inside the
human body. It it connect
it collects in the fats of animals in
the area that then people consume. I mean,
this is the reason this has been a
problem for decades that even CNN and different

(33:27):
groups were screaming about 100 of times the
levels in your fast food in 1995
and nobody's done anything about it.
The chlorine companies pushed back and were like,
well, we don't know. We can't just push
back on all of them. And everyone stood
back and I guess we just ignored it.
Good old USA style. Right?
Killed all those fish out in the water.
I felt like I we were being lied
to. Just like I feel like we by

(33:48):
pond.
Green water is still bubbling. Machinery is nearby,
and the air quality is being monitored. Killed
all those fish out in the water. I
felt like I we were being lied to.
Just like I feel like we're gonna be
lied to from now, from this point forward.
While this community wants to hear more from
BioLab, they're nowhere to be found. Mhmm. Extended
an invitation to BioLab to participate in this

(34:10):
press conference. And quite frankly, I think it's
a slap in the face. You see, think
about this, guys.
So we're talking about the reality.
We're talking about the reality that you are
now in a position whether it's Norfolk nor
Norfolk Southern or BioLab, because Norfolk Southern did
the same thing. Now that story got a
hell of a lot more attention.
I mean, I guess I see why because,

(34:30):
ultimately, the dynamic included the train, included a
major company, you know, included the the rush
to get it back going, what was on
the train. There's a lot going on there,
which I think you know, or just the
large event and the smoke. But, I mean,
similar thing happened here with the smoke that
went all over the I I just don't
get what the draw is the different
why it gets different draw. I think some
of them are partisan

(34:51):
politicized.
I think that's usually why. But the point
is that either one, Norfolk did the same
thing for a very long time. They just
refused to show up.
So how do they get away with this?
You literally are whether it's by, you know,
incompetence,
whatever,
it's your responsibility.
This is your company, and people are getting
hurt by this. And you just you don't
even show up? I I mean, that shouldn't

(35:12):
even be allowed. Like, we should have a
this should be some kind of this is
my point about if we if these groups
were acting the way that they claim they
do, whether the EPA or whatever else, there
would be some kind of immediate mechanism where
they're in you know, you're on the hook
here. You're paying for this. You have to
answer these questions. Like, why not? Because there's
a fascistic overlap for corporations and your government
today, and they're the same thing.

(35:34):
They don't care about you.
End of story.
Sorry to make that so blunt. It's the
reality. Frustration is boiling And quite frankly, I
think it's a slap in the face. The
county's frustration
is boiling over too.
I feel like the citizens and business owners
who have been held hostage,
for the last 19 days deserve to hear

(35:55):
directly
from the leadership and the corporate management
of Bylab. It's not they don't does they
deserve it, but that that's not that they
deserve it. They it's how is it not
legally obligated? How are they not legally obligated
to a deal with the problem?
Like, imagine it like this, that you're in
a car accident or something that's just you
and and your current circumstances,
and you get in a problem or you

(36:16):
start a problem or you spill something and
you just walk away and go, well, that's
not my fault. It happened to you. Is
that how the world works for you? Well,
obviously not. You're responsible.
Somebody will track you down and say, you
did that. You you're that's your car. You
caused the crash.
But not when you're a corporation that makes
a lot of money and then has, you
know, lobbyists and people inside, you know, or
maybe you have somebody that you know, your
cousin's in the government. You know, this is

(36:37):
just how this works. It's I mean, I'm
just assuming. Right? Or just, you know, theoretically
kind of considering what might be causing that.
My point is that something is.
I don't know for sure what it is,
but how is it possible that we're in
a position where they're not
obligated
to handle a situation that they're responsible for

(36:57):
when this is not even the first time?
Now even when we've reached out to BioLab
to try and get some answers here, we
have not gotten those answers that we're desperately
seeking for all of you guys at home,
and they're supposed to be answering the community's
questions at the assistance center right here. But
Ham tells me he doesn't know if he
trusts that either. Again, that shelter in place

(37:19):
has been lifted. Rockdale County Schools say they
go back to in person learning on Monday.
We're live in Conyers. Angelina Salcedo, 11:0:5 News.
I don't actually think that I have
his video and I don't wanna track it
down right now, but if you guys remember,
I bet you can find it really quickly
on the like an article.

(37:42):
Let's see.
That should pop up, I imagine. Yeah. Here
it is.
There's just one of them anyway. So I'll
include this so you at least give you
guys something to go on.
But the video of if you I'll I'll
try to find it if I remember after

(38:02):
the show, which I'll probably forget, to be
honest. But I'll I'll try and track it
down. Because he what he what he does
is very clear. He's in in the actual
interview or rather the the testimony. He's short
of breath and he go, oh, and he
kept I catch my breath. Which by the
way, every indication I mean, you could you
could easily make an argument that he got
injections. Maybe that would be causing aortic. Maybe
something else happened. It was not connected at
all. Or it could be that he had

(38:22):
acute exposure to these dioxin releases because he
was there dealing with it. And nobody's telling
them what's going on. He probably doesn't even
know that's part of the problem. But at
the end of the day, he was trying
to ring the bell. He was trying to
get your attention. He was saying that he
clearly insinuated that they might have started this
fire to cover up the fact that they
were trying to get an investigation, That people
are protesting to get them out of this

(38:42):
the the county.
And that they have done this many many
times. And he was stressing this fact that
they're dangerous and people are getting hurt. And
then he walks out and dies within very
short time period after leaving the building.
Rockdale County soil and water supervisor collapses, dies
shortly after speaking about bio lab chemical plume.
Hard not to feel that there's something going
on there.

(39:05):
So next part,
here is a local article again. This one
is from 17th October. We're being lied to.
Family yards away from biolab disaster wants answers
at the shelter in place lifted.
Here
is one from
October 3rd. Now this comes directly from I
a I H A.

(39:26):
And, that was again
let me make sure I got the name
right.
Where was it again?
It's it's basically the group that,
where was it again? I thought it had
There it is. The American Industrial Hygiene Association.
But it This is a group to put
out a
update to CBS to investigate September 29th chemical

(39:48):
fire at Georgia facility. Only one point or
two points we really wanna show you. It
says the fire has been extinguished,
but the material at the facility was still
smoldering as of 3rd. So here's the crazy
part. If so the 29th,
and then it's still smoldering on the 3rd.
Scott said it was still smoldering at, I
think, like, 12th to 13th.
So it's just still happening. That just does

(40:09):
not make sense unless there's something much weirder
going on here. Like, something they can't control
and they're not letting you know that. But
Scott was the one that said that and
he just left the area.
And I'll show you that again actually on
some of the other things we're looking at.
Then it goes on to say both state
and federal agencies including EPA are monitoring air
quality
in the area for chlorine and related compounds.
I was just mentioning that point. And it
says some exceedances above the action level for

(40:32):
chlorine were detected on the third. So even
think about that. So think about the amount
of chlorine that had to have been released
and burned.
And realize when it burns, that's what's turning
it into dioxins. Especially with the plastic pallets
and everything else that was in there, the
plastics in general.
But on the 3rd,
from 29th to 3rd, and he's still they're
still talking about dangerous levels of chlorine in

(40:53):
the air. So think about how much had
to have been released if the the what?
4 or 5 days later, we're talking about
chlorine still being dangerous in the air? That's
not and imagine the level of dioxins if
we're actually being honest about this conversation, if
chlorine was still being found in the air.
Now this one is on the next, I
think the
October 4th,

(41:14):
next day, from the Atlantic Atlanta Journal Constitution,
local paper, and it says, Rockdale County official
said that the plume is changing colors as
workers remove debris.
On 4th,
chlorine odor.
This is crazy. I mean, that's this is
not as simple as a fire, Whether chlorine
or not. There's just no way in my

(41:35):
mind. And it says hazy skies and an
odor of chlorine have persisted.
The fire has been extinguished, but smoke continues
to rise. This is the next day.
Due to the pool chemicals produced at the
plant reacting with the water that was used
to contain the blaze. How is that still
happening? So you mean you're still spraying water
on this that still causes this I don't
understand. So it to me,

(41:56):
if you if you keep reading it and
you're going, no, this just doesn't add up,
something's not being given to you.
That would be my first thought.
Something's being left out of the story that
would go, oh, okay. That's why that makes
sense. Why are they I don't know. But
something is amiss here, and I'm waiting for
Scott's results to find more out.
But this is how it ultimately started, and
this is reported at the beginning. They sprayed

(42:16):
it with the water, not knowing what was
there. And don't forget,
what's his name again? The one I just
mentioned, the the Rockdale County the supervisor who
was testifying who died,
one of the things he said is where
is the MSDS sheet?
The material safety data sheet. Or MS yeah.
MSDS.
Because I think the point is, they didn't
want if they would've been able to know
what was in the plant before they started

(42:38):
spraying water, they would've maybe known what might've
reacted, but they didn't. Which seems like a
deliberate action.
There's a reason he brought that up.
Sure wish we could talk to him.
Now it says chemicals released from the Conyers
fire include chlorine,
chloramine,
and chlorine compounds, according to Georgia Emergency Management
and Homeland Security Agency. Additionally, bromine,

(42:58):
another chemical used in spa and poultry and
we've talked about all these. All these are
dangerous in their own right
as an alternative to chlorine and as a
bleach like odor and was detected through at
through, though at lower levels.
Specifically, Georgia Tech professor Sally, I think, Nye
or Ning said a system known as the
atmospheric
scientific
Science and Chemistry Measurement Network detected

(43:21):
a 14,000
times increase in the amount of chlorine containing
particles in the air
and a 170
time increase in the amount of bromine containing
particles in the air over,
decantor on Monday morning.
Monday morning.
Typically, there's a little or there is little,

(43:42):
of either in the air.
Fourteen
hundred time increase in the amount of chlorine
containing particles? Is that a way to make
is that a way to say dioxin?
I mean, think about it. What's chlorine containing
particles?
I mean, that's obvious what it means. I'm
just saying that there's that's a bro opaque
way to say that.
At 14 thou a 100 times

(44:03):
any dangerous chemical is obviously not a good
thing. My point again. Now that's either a
way to make that to say that without
saying dioxins or meaning chlorine. And if it
means the chlorine particles, again, imagine if that
is the stuff that didn't burn and it's
1400 times more, imagine what the dioxins are
that were burned.

(44:25):
And it says, bromine exposure is also also
it can be toxic. The symptoms of which
are similar to chlorine exposure.
Good. Oh, fantastic. So this is just obviously
a day a problem. And again, the bromine
was a 170
times.
Now on that note, actually, let's just quickly
look grab we've talked about it before,
but let's just give you the quick, you
know, what it says right here on Wikipedia

(44:47):
about it. So it's a chemical element,
vault, red brown liquid, room temperature evaporates readily
to form a similarly colored vapor. Oh, fantastic.
Its properties are intermediate between those of chlorine
and iodine. Interesting. I mean, the chat if
you anything pops into your mind, you think
it's interesting. Isolated independently by 2 chemicals.
Oh, chemist, excuse me.

(45:07):
Very reactive
and does not occur at a free element
in nature. Instead, it can be isolated from
colorless
soluble
crystalline material.
Nothing is standing out. Let's go down to
the, usually there's a negative effects.
Some kind of a

(45:29):
toxicity.
Suggest that bromine
is a necessary
cofactor in the biosynthesis
of collagen.
Nevertheless,
that's biological role,
is toxic and causes chemical burns on the
human flesh.
Inhaling bromine
gas results in similar irritation of the respiratory

(45:50):
tract, causing coughing, choking, shortness of breath, that
might have been what the guy was experiencing
in the immediate aftermath, and death if inhaled
in large amounts. Wow. Okay.
Chronic exposure may lead to frequent bronchial infections
and a general deterioration of health. I mean,
is that not I mean, obviously, it's a
it's a easy thing to see that they're
gonna hurt your health. But when it gets

(46:10):
more specific about, like, immune suppression and reproductivity,
that would everything we're dealing with seems to
lean in that direction, which I find hard
to miss. As a strong oxidizing agent, bromine
is incompatible with most organic and inorganic compounds.
Cautions required when transporting bromine, yeah, seemingly.
It is commonly carried in steel tanks. I'll
leave it there. Just been curious if you

(46:31):
wanna look more into that. I'll include that
for you.
And then lastly here,
under is this toxic, it says the CDC
didn't answer questions.
That's not a that's not a joke. The
CDC didn't answer questions about the possible health
impacts from chemical release. Instead,
a spokesman said they refer to Gemma, the

(46:53):
other one of the other groups, which is
leading the emergency response. Oh, because you need
to ask the ones leading it to know
what general chemicals might cause?
Do you not realize how everyone in these
agencies seem to be on damage control like
forever now? They're just like, you're the enemy,
and we anything we give you is gonna
be used against us. Why? Because that's how
criminals think.
I mean, think about this. That is the
Center For Disease Control Prevention, a group that

(47:15):
you in many cases, the overlap whether I
mean, obviously, it's more the EPA. My point
is that they would have an answer to
this. They would they would have insight into
how these things might affect your body.
And when they were reached out to for
comment, they wouldn't respond. And instead, no asked
them.
Does that that seems crazy to me.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it. And
it says, however, on its informational website see,

(47:38):
here's that's even more crazy. So the CDC
has a website where you can look this
stuff up, and yet they still refuse to
give you the answer. They note that exposure
to chlorine can cause burning of the eyes,
nose, throat, can lead to headaches, nausea, and
choking. Now that's just chlorine
by itself without being burned into dioxins.
Now,

(47:58):
Cody Alcorn,
the journalist at 11 live, looks like a
local channel, he posted on 18th, as BioLab
continues so this is now on 18th, so
4th.
Right? Oh, no. I'm sorry. 17th was the
report.
They're saying
that BioLab refused to show up. Now I
would argue that was recorded probably a couple
days before that, posted on 17th. Either way,

(48:19):
the point is that BioLab has yet to
show up, unless it's happening right now or
recording, to be to speak to people who
they have allowed to get sick. And, arguably,
there seems to be evidence suggesting that it
might have in some way been more than
just an accident.
According to testimony from whistleblower who is now
dead.
As BioLab continues to dodge news conferences and
refuses to answer questions from the disaster that

(48:41):
closed schools, businesses, and displaced families in Rockdale
County,
They're crisis management PR firms, issues, generic copy,
paste press copy paste press releases.
Why?
Because they can.
Nobody seems to be able to do anything
about it. And so why would they engage?
The more they give you, the more they're
responsible.
Just like Norfolk Southern.

(49:03):
If they acknowledge the issue, well, they're more
responsible. But if they quietly expand it and
spread it as far as possible while deflecting
blame, well, it is it only takes a
matter of time before you go, well, that's
just background noise. You mean all the way
over there, another state? Yes. Not because of
us. That's just been there. This is a
tactic that we've seen used again and again.
There's 2 things that can happen. You can

(49:24):
own up to it and maximize your liability
and minimize harm, or you can maximize harm
and spread it out as much as you
can and minimize your own liability. What do
you think businesses will do, especially when the
governments allow it to happen?
Probably because they're a revolving door, and they're
gonna be there next.
Now here is an article from the 19th.
Yesterday,

(49:44):
protesters demand shutdown of Connor Conyers' bio lab
plant, which, by the way, has been going
on a really long time. There's entire groups
that have been pushing for this. I just
showed you one last show that we talked
about this, where they've been protesting this for
a long time,
falling on deaf ears apparently. Because people have
been been getting sick and been harmed by
this long before this fire.

(50:06):
Now the I I the other day, I
told you I wasn't gonna I wasn't referencing
any lawyers because and same point here. I
just I what he said I found interesting.
I wanna stress, I don't know this guy's
background. I don't know if he's an honest
lawyer.
I just don't I just wanna be clear
that I'm not saying that I you know,
if you end up leaning into this guy
because you're in Georgia, I I don't know
whether he's good or bad or up down
or whatever.

(50:26):
But just first impression, he seems to be
putting this out there and saying that if
you have any issues, reach out to him.
But I thought what he said was interesting,
and he seems to be a local guy
as opposed to just some lawyer out there
trying to capitalize on this. But either way,
he's a lawyer. Just leave it at that.
But
law office of Madi Abdur Rahman now I'll
play his video. He says if you or
someone you know have been adversely affected by

(50:47):
the chemical fire in BioLive in Conyers, Georgia,
complete the link below and reach out to
him. But here's what he had to say.
This is a local lawyer from the area
who's speaking out about what's going on.
Good morning, everyone. Attorney Maidy here.
I just wanted to tap in and, you
know, continue to provide updates for
this chemical fire case with BioLab in Conyers,

(51:07):
Georgia.
We are continuing to work on this case
day in and day
out, we do have a couple of updates,
but the most important thing is I want
to continue to remind everyone
that if you are experiencing any symptoms from
being exposed to the chemicals from the fire,
please seek medical attention.
The

(51:28):
concentration of chemicals that you were exposed to
is abnormal, and when I say abnormal meaning
human beings are not intended to be exposed
to these type of chemicals especially at these
concentration levels,
we know that at least as of
Tuesday Wednesday,
Conyers Georgia or Rockdale County was still under

(51:49):
a shelter in place order, so that must
suggest that there are harmful elements in the
Tuesday and Wednesday, know that at least as
of
Tuesday Wednesday,
Conyers Georgia or Rockdale County was still under
a shelter in place order, so that must
suggest that there are harmful elements in the
environment.

(52:09):
If something is gonna be harm, then the
question is what is that? That's gonna be
your health, so in any other circumstance when
you have some type of harm to your
health,
you go see a doctor.
However, we're not seeing any direction from the
local
state and possibly not even the federal government
stating that if you are experiencing these symptoms

(52:29):
that you need to see a doctor, So
I want to remind everyone that your personal
health is most important. If you're experiencing any
symptoms, please go and see a doctor and
continue to stay safe.
Right. Think about that. I mean, like, really
take a minute and recognize the small point
he made there. You're at a point now
where people are clearly suffering. Like, and whether
you whether it's a headache or or bloody

(52:50):
nose, which all have happened,
are aren't they supposed to be the ones
that are yeah. May go you know, the
the government, local especially, should be saying make
sure you check this out because we know
there's a problem here. The fact is that
my opinion,
just like I was just saying, the reason
that's not happening is because they don't the
the least they can engage,
the least liability you'll find. Because if you

(53:11):
go to them and say, go to the
doctor, you might be sick. Well, guess what?
Then they're gonna go, I think I might
be sick. And I I somebody needs to
take care of this. But if you don't
deal with it, they may just brush it
off as a headache. They may just pretend
like it's a bloody nose.
I mean, you know my opinion about government
in general. Pretty damn jaded. But you have
to acknowledge that this is pretty abnormal for
what we're told

(53:31):
these people are supposed to be doing. I
think that's pretty wild. And again, we're not
talking about I mean, the same thing happened
in East Palestine, where they got sick and
then were told to go get tested, and
then they went and got tested, and they
were refused dioxin tests.
I I don't know how you misunderstand that.
It's obvious what part of this they're trying
to cover up. In this case, they being
the immediate location, Norfolk Southern on the ground,

(53:53):
the work of the local EPA and the
federal EPA or local elements of that. And
then the federal EPA was present as well.
From the very beginning, they tried to hide
that fact. It's just it's been these stories
have been obviously corrupt from the beginning, and
that's why it's not some kind of, like,
bombastic story. Like, immediately,
it was obvious there was something very fishy
going on, which was why I left open

(54:15):
that I still do, that there was something
another part of that story that we just
still don't know. Something else on these trains
that they wanted to get the hell out
of there before it was recognized. I don't
know. I really don't know. But something stands
out as
there's there's a red flag in there that
seems to be something we don't know. You
know, like, again, that they rushed out and
they laid the track down, like, over the
top of what's built and they had to

(54:36):
dig it back up. Why would they do
that? It just it seems obvious that it
was about minimizing
their fallout
at while maximizing yours, which is always the
case. So I'm gonna include Well, I mean,
certainly the scientists have used it. I just
bumped out on accident. I'm gonna include
the shows we just did we did over
the last couple of week or so. Conyers
Georgia Biolab, and this is this is oh,

(54:58):
that was the older one. So this is
the first one here from 10th. Georgia docs
and risks 6 times greater than East Palestine.
That's according to Scott Smith. That was his
early estimate.
And, of course, then also US journalists taken
hostage by Israel. That's Jeremy that no one
seems to be wanna talk about.
Conyers Georgia BioLab could be the greatest dioxin
disaster in history. Now, that's again, according to

(55:18):
Scott. This guy he is a
well respected expert. And he's he's covered
pretty I mean, you name some of these
largest disasters you've heard of. He's
one of the people who's usually been there.
And I I mean, I say that only
because I there's a lot of disaster you
could point to. But the large ones, Scott
was there. He has a long history of
going to these and and very clearly highlighting

(55:38):
what they tend to cover up.
Just like with these Palestine.
Now before we move on to the next
segment, and I will be keeping up on
this by the way. As much as I
can and whatever I see, send me things.
If you got pee pee inside information, if
you're local there, reach out to me. You
know, I'm not gonna promise I'm gonna engage
with if you're local there, reach out to
me. You know, I'm not gonna promise I'm
gonna engage with everybody, but ultimately, I wanna
make sure I'm covering the ongoing story. Because
it's I guarantee there's something going on here.
The level is what we're
on wanna find out. To what level is

(55:59):
there a problem?
And I'm gonna be following up with Scott
as soon as he gets back to me
with his results, and we'll do our best
to keep up on this for you. Now
this, of course, is just another example. Now
I you know, just like last time, I
all I don't think that it's appropriate, especially,
like, after East Palestine, there was a moment

(56:20):
where the partisan media was jumping at every
smoke, every story, every crane train crash, which,
you know, we shouldn't ignore anything. Consider all
of them, but a lot of them were
just a random thing. At least that's how
it appeared.
And but nonetheless, there were people that saw
something there. Right? They saw they got a
lot of clicks when they pointed at these
stories, and so they started hyping all of
them. Oh, here's another disaster. Here's another fire.

(56:41):
Here's a
And I think that's how this tends to
go. Like, you do you decide for yourself
out there what you think is important. I
think we need to show some discernment and
recognize that not everything falls into these categories.
My point in this one, just like the
last one afterward, the Richmond one, is another
dynamic where it's almost a guarantee
that there is a release, but the question
is how much? Be and the reason being,

(57:02):
just like Scott would tell you if he
was on the show today, that when we're
talking about specifically
recycling plants,
which are packed full of plastics
and different plat pallets and cut the combination
of with wood and paper as well is
a guaranteed dioxin release. That's the same thing
with these Palestine and different dynamics we've talked

(57:22):
about. Or the different stories, Sevasto, we've talked
about from Italy.
So this one
is from 16th.
Shelter in place was issued as numerous firefighters
respond to a massive fire. A massive fire,
which you can see here.
Look at that.
A lot of smoke.

(57:44):
Look at that, guys. You see all those
things right there? See all those things right
there? All those packed blocks full of plastic?
There is no question.
Dioxin release.
No question.
Now different than chlorine, I argue the chlorine
being the main factor for what causes these.
So the the chlorine itself was a worst

(58:05):
example of the of the overlap. But I'll
I'll see if I can pull this real
quickly. I think it pops right up.
Yeah. I'll include this study for you, which
I is an important one from 2001, which
says again, since every molecule of dioxin contains
2 or more atoms of chlorine, chlorine is
whoops.
Chlorine is an absolute necessity for dioxin formation.

(58:25):
Therefore, when no chlorine is present, no dioxins
are formed. The point is that these plastics
have the the the,
what's I'm forgetting the term on the
I I forget the term, but the the
acronym which it's a derivative of this. And
it does very clearly cause dioxins.
So now we have another example.
On 16th. So I'm only including this,

(58:48):
obviously, because we should be continuing to look
into this, and maybe we can you know,
somebody can go test this as well, and
I'd be wanting to hear what you had
to say, is that I can't stop seeing
this like, okay. Whether or not you wanna
see this as a connected thing, I'd have
no reason to think that, but I also
agree that there's reason to consider that.
The the amount of dioxins being released.

(59:08):
It's like, okay. The the let me to
make this as clear as possible. We're all
worried right now where this goes in regard
to some larger concept about whether it's like
the deep like, people talk about depopulation,
which, you know, I I consider as much
as I think I can. And sometimes I
think it's highlighted when it doesn't need to
be. My point is it's obviously something we
should ignore Or other larger conversations of tectocracy,

(59:28):
the great reset, these things that in many
cases, eugenics even, are very
antihuman
perspective.
That have out of
everything that I've talked about and everything that
we could highlight,
I think it needs to be stated very
clearly that dioxins are the worst
part of it.
That's not a debate. DCDD,
which is what we're talking about, is the

(59:50):
most dangerous chemical in existence
according to all the scientists and chemists and
everybody we've talked
to. There's articles written about it. So if
we know that and we're watching these things
continue to go massive dioxin releases and they
weren't even mentioning the word,
is that either, again, because they just literally
don't know what to do? Or is it

(01:00:10):
something bigger going on? It's up for you
to decide, but look at how much is
happening.
And
you could probably map these locations
from when these events happened to show a
rapid increase, almost exponential, I would argue, in
cancers, in reproductive issues, in immune system problems.
I mean, just off the charts.
And then stand back and look at the

(01:00:31):
larger area around East Palestine,
Conyers,
Arkansas, every one of these and ask yourself
why
everyone gets
right now, I think it's 1 in every
2 people in this country will have cancer
at one point in their life. That's not
normal. I don't know why we ever pretended
that would make sense. So all I'm saying
is this kind of stuff,
we just need to start paying attention to

(01:00:52):
what these show you, even if it's just
a random thing, and recognize that something should
be happening. Whether that means we stop allowing
these plants to exist, start changing the chemicals
and not allowing the ones that are capable
of causing these, or just
get rid of everything that could cause this
problem. Because this is not some kind of
climate change dynamic. These are immediately
dangerous things that are being used haphazardly

(01:01:15):
at your expense.
That's something we should all care about.
So here is a local one from this
just saying dark plume of smoke from Rogers
fire seen as Rogers, Arkansas seen for miles
around.
Reports say recycling center evacuated.
Just one after another, guys.

(01:01:36):
Now, before we move on to the next
segment, I just said this Orville sent me
this, I just found this to be crazy.
This is a study from
2020.
The cost of stratospheric aerosol injection
through
21100.
The year 21100.
This is crazy.

(01:01:56):
And realize that's geoengineering.
You know, the conspiracy
theory to some people still. Mind blowing that
that's even still the case.
The cost of stratospheric aerosol injection. Now it
says, the paper presents the estimated direct cost
of geoengineering.
Specific form of it, but it's geoengineering.
Through the end of the century.
Now here's the crazy part about this. The

(01:02:17):
idea is that you know why they're doing
this? Because it's already been shown that this
the the mindset, the the the objective they
have with this
will cause a circum a situation where
it are they it might cause what they
think it's going to cause in a positive
way, but ultimately, I argued and thinking about
the brain can see that it's not necessary
because what they're arguing is a falsehood from
its core, but we are clearly hurting the

(01:02:39):
planet. My point though is that
the scientific research is showing that, yes, we
can drop this by 1, 2, 7 degrees,
but
once you start that process, you can't ever
stop it. Once you stop it, it causes
a cataclysmic kind of fallout from that. That's
not my opinion. I've seen many studies on
this, And yet their argument is, well, we're
all gonna die soon anyway. So, like, the

(01:03:00):
that's the mindset of this cataclysmic climate change.
We have to do it, otherwise we're gonna
be dead anyway. Well, I disagree with you.
You're literally setting us up in a situation
where we will then be in that situation.
You're causing that to be the case. That's
probably the whole point.
But so that's why they're mapping this out.
And I'll show you the amount down at
the bottom. It displays, they say, a range
of future solar geoengineering

(01:03:22):
deployment scenarios. Well, you know what's funny? How
about you? Somebody, right when I started this,
was already pushing back on the word geoengineering.
Too late. It's right there. It's just funny
how these people that have identified what they
call conspiracy theory are you know, they'll start
calling the people writing the study the conspiracy
theorists because they're so dead set on saying
this isn't real because they were taught that,
even though it's literally happening. But it says,

(01:03:43):
they're intended to reduce
anthropologically
caused radiative,
radiative forcing
beginning in 2035,
which by the way is simply another long
winded way of saying global warming. That's all
it means. Human caused global warming, which by
the way, I don't believe is a real
thing. Not in the sense that we can't
hurt this planet, but the idea that you
existing and your carbon is causing the it's

(01:04:05):
guys, we need to realize how silly this
whole thing is.
We the what's problematic, sort of like when
we saw during the conversation of COVID 19
illusion, that the very people that were screaming
that we had to take change, we're gonna
die in 2 years, suddenly started using 10
masks and 4 pair of gloves every day.
Yeah. Oops. Didn't think about that one. Didn't
know? You were so scared of your fake
thing. My point though is that we suddenly

(01:04:27):
missed the forest for the trees.
Right? That we're we we are hurting the
planet. That's without question. But because you're focusing
on something that is illusory,
you're missing the fact that you're still doing
that. Or that your militaries burn pits and
catastrophic events around the world. The fact that
the warfare they conduct is the biggest cause
of all of that stuff.
By far.

(01:04:47):
But, you know, because freedom or whatever and
we just pretend it's ridiculous.
We're ridiculous.
The point is that they're going to use
this to push in the idea that they
need to do this because they're saving your
life when ultimately they seem to be causing
what they think they're fighting or maybe they
know that. But beginning in 2035.
Now cutting to the chase, it says the
program relies on 3 or where was it?

(01:05:09):
Right here.
Relative to other climate interventions
and solutions,
stratospheric aerosol injection, geoengineering,
remains inexpensive,
but
at about $18,000,000,000
a year per degree Celsius of warring warming
avoided.
What a ridiculous thing to say. Now realize
how silly this is because of the cell,

(01:05:31):
they always love to work. Sort of like,
you know
you know, it would have been worse if
you didn't get it.
How do we know? I'll take your word
for it. But the point is
that per degree of warming
avoided.
Right? So if it doesn't warm, hey. $18,000,000,000
well spent, or not at all, or it
just didn't happen and it wouldn't have either

(01:05:52):
way.
It's sort of like you're saying, you know,
if nothing happens, then it's working. It just
seems like it's ridiculous to me. But either
way, I think it's important to recognize that
it's $18,000,000,000
a year per one degree.
That's a lot of money.
A solar geoengineering program. So all they're tell
telling you right now is they're they're matting.

(01:06:12):
We don't have a say in this. And,
oh, go over. The other point was they
try to pretend that it's sulfates alone. That's
not what it is. It's not just salt.
The we've talked about the aluminum, the barium.
Now they'll point they force, they'll admit that
and just claim that's the salt or whatever,
but it's not. It's a there it's this
is like claiming that what's in the injections
is just what was the other term. You
know, at the same point. Something that is
benign when in reality, it's got 14th ingredients

(01:06:33):
in it they don't tell you about. That's
the point. And these things are dangerous for
you. I mean,
studies have pointed out in the past about
the aluminum aluminum barium there in the UK.
And and the the Alzheimer's is through the
roof. And that's an immediate
overlapping cause for that. Gee, I wonder what's
going on. Sort of like the cancers we
have when they're dumping cancerous chemicals and everything
that you put in your body and wear

(01:06:54):
and think and breathe.
Must just be a coincidence. Now lastly in
this segment, I just wanna include this.
This is from the 8th October.
Combined
COVID flu vaccines are coming. Moderna has cleared
the
you know, and you guys already know this.
It's not news to you, but the sad
reality is just let's reflect. Maybe there's somebody
new in the chat. Reflect on how we
were I mean, it wasn't it was we're

(01:07:16):
psychic. It wasn't even that hard to see
coming because they've been promoting this kind of
idea. But during the height of the fervor
around the COVID 19 illusion,
what were a lot of us were saying
this. They're they're this is all about the
agenda. This is about the platform. This is
about the universal flu, the combination of injections.
And and people were gone. A conspiracy theory.
Well, this here we are. And this is

(01:07:36):
based on this is combining 2 things that
are already hurting people. And, yeah, that actually
includes the flu shot because it's a it's
a true statement of whether it's 1 person
out of everyone ever taking it or half
of them, it still can hurt you. The
point though is that when you actually look
at the numbers around the flu shots themselves,
there's a lot of fall off from that
too. Pales in comparison to the deadly COVID
shot, but now there's still myocarditis overlap. So

(01:07:58):
my point though is that you're taking these
things. And and on top of that, I
haven't actually gone through this in-depth. I grabbed
it toward the end, but I applied on
it. Because I wanna find out what kind
of flu shot and so on. Is we
know the COVID is mRNA. And that's what
it says right here.
MRNA
shots.
So I'm gonna go ahead and argue that
we're talking about an mRNA
flu shot combined with an mRNA COVID shot,

(01:08:20):
which, by the way, is not mRNA. Ladies
and gentlemen, you know this. It is modRNA.
That's not my that's not
hypothetical or a a guess. That's for a
fact. It's modified
RNA. Methyl it's m one methylsutouridine
modified RNA is what it is.
And that's one of the clear reasons this
is dangerous for you and why it stays

(01:08:41):
in your body and all the things we
talked about. But guess what? They're gonna do
it anyway. Because that was always the plan.
Well before we ever started this, this was
always the plan. So it doesn't matter that
they killed so many people and Trump still
lies about it and people that wanna support
him still ignore that. They're gonna do it
anyway.
I just think that is wild, but we
need to be as long as we're informed,
we can make an informed decision.

(01:09:03):
Now let's talk about that overlap.
Brad Miller has been really pushing this in
a good way, this this point that I
really want people to see that
I just you know, some people I get
and I understand it. I get why people
in a desperate feeling, in a in a
bad place because of what they've put you
in
want to see a positive sign in somebody,

(01:09:24):
want to believe that this one person, this
one vote, this one party is gonna change
every I get it.
But it happens every single time. And I
I hope I'm wrong. I literally, with everything
in my body, hope that you're right, that
he is gonna be the one to change
everything for the better movie. I hope, I
pray that's the case.
But I everything in my body tells me

(01:09:46):
otherwise. All the facts we've seen, all the
precedents, all the things that already happened, the
word, the overlaps, the associations, the funding, everything
tells me the opposite. Now that's not even
getting into what the other like, the that's
that's the thing I wanna say again that
I've said many times.
Pointing out a problem does not necessitate a
solution.
Yes. We should go to that next. We
should talk about what else we could do,

(01:10:07):
what else who should vote for, whether you
should vote at all. But first and foremost,
ex ex acknowledge
and engage with the problem.
As always, the whole thing is you can't
solve a problem until you first acknowledge that
one exists.
So immediately the question is, well, what would
you do then? Whoever you who would you
vote for? Oh, that that's not gonna and
you immediately fall back in your position because
you already feel like there's no solution.

(01:10:29):
That's not acknowledging the problem. That's ignoring the
problem.
And again, the idea that the person pointing
out a problem also has to be the
one to have a solution. It's just an
illogical mindset. It is a fallacy that is
meant to drive you back into your position.
Excuse me.
So as Brad says, to my fellow Americans,
we can't allow ourselves to be lulled back

(01:10:50):
to sleep and forget the intentional
treason committed
against this country via the COVID op. And
by the way, even if you think that
Trump was fooled,
which I still I could still keep an
open mind to that possibility, but it doesn't
explain why he would still be lying about
it. I could just say hubris.
But my point is that whether or not
he was fooled,
listened to the wrong people, you know, all

(01:11:12):
the things everyone loves to say right now
to make it sound like this one will
be the one,
you still have to acknowledge that it happened.
But that's not what that's his whole point.
People are I mean, I we saw Robert
Malone, the rest of them start,
aggressively pushing back. Kind of aimed at our
whole INA thing, to be honest, about saying
that, you know, forget the COVID op. I
mean, that he built his whole thing around

(01:11:32):
that.
And And now we're supposed to just forget
about it? Because, well, Trump's our only choice?
I mean, guys, that's childish logic.
Now he says a big part of that
op was conducted by our own military, he
says. And remember, he's this he was a
we are I'll show you. I'll see if
I'll bring that interview up. Brad's a great
guy. He was one of the first interviews
we had in the studio here. This might
be the first one actually.

(01:11:55):
Yeah. This is the original one from the
2023.
100 and first airborne battalion commander relieved of
command for refusing the COVID shot. Now that
is what it looks like to stand by
your principles, which a lot of people are
forgetting right now as we go into the
election and the Israel overlap.
Here it is.
I'll include both these. Oops.

(01:12:15):
Dang it.
Man, I Twitter is so ridiculous.
I'm gonna get into it in a second
because I have a whole section on this
today. I don't know if you're for the
podcast, it won't make sense, but as I
was just scrolling back and forth, Twitter had
the thing where you see I just went
back? I hit back on accident, and now
it won't let me go back. It won't
let me go to the the page I
was just on. Because Twitter staves, there's a

(01:12:36):
whole there's a whole Twitter right now is
weird
and on its face.
Like, manipulative in social engineering. It's really crazy.
Now, obviously it was going on before Elon
Musk.
But it's it's just so strange. I'll I'll
go I'll I'll come back to you. Keep
that mind keep that in thought or in
your mind.
Let me grab these interviews for you real
quick.
I'm what I mean is, you know, you

(01:12:56):
see what I'm talking about is it comes
to things where it, like, won't let certain
things happen. I, frankly I think it's about
specific stuff. Like suppression
based on accounts or even just like keywords
and algorithmic things. I really believe that. What
I was trying to do is grab this
one too, and I hit the wrong button
and it would let me go back. Okay.
So here's both the interviews for Brad.

(01:13:18):
This is what we just had in the
studio.
And we get into this a lot. You
know, we talk about the idea as it's
a declaration of military accountability, which he he
had something he put out, and foreign influence
over US policy.
He sees it, man. He really does.
Now, it goes on to say, regardless of
which senior military leaders knew the full scope
of the plan,
they all participated,

(01:13:39):
which resulted in millions of Americans killed, injured,
and otherwise harmed.
They all have willingly participated in the slaughter
of this nation that's hasn't ended and is
still occurring.
To the currently serving active duty generals and
admirals, every single one of you, without exception,
is a total coward,
unworthy of your rank,

(01:14:00):
positions, authorities, and responsibilities. So I remember the
101st airborne is a highly respected position. Right?
So the point is, he, you know, he
if if he hadn't had if he didn't
care about his principles, he would still hold
that position and be very influential in the
military. So he has a standing to speak
on these things. And he says all you
all are a disgrace to both the uniform
and the flag. Many of you should face

(01:14:20):
charges. He says as a group, you have
desecrated
the constitution,
broken federal laws, and enabled the,
diminution.
I think I've seen that before, like I
think like diminishing.
Yeah.
Dimunation of military readiness from within. You have
killed or injured many troops
entrusted to your charge. You either directly

(01:14:42):
and knowingly engaged in operations designed to destroy
this country's citizens, military institutions, or willingly participated
even once it was clear that the intent
was.
What the intent was? You have severed the
trust of the American people in ways that
may take generations to restore. You didn't just
abandon your country when it needed you most,
but actively sided against her. This nation has

(01:15:04):
been under direct attack for a few the
last few years. The worst perpetrators
came from within our own government, and some
of them wear military uniforms.
We can't forget that.
We can't forget that we are still in
this war.
And that's the whole statement you've heard many
times. Right? Foreign and domestic. You know, the
reason that was included. Because the founding fathers,
at least at that point, miss some of

(01:15:25):
them, arguably could see that threat even then.
Now here's the next one.
Let's, let's play the clip first, then I'll
read you what he says. There's Trump recently
speaking.
And, you know, it's this whole kind of
just kind of glomming on to the RFK
momentum and, you know, we're make we're gonna
move the toxins and we're gonna fight against
bad things and make America healthy again. I

(01:15:47):
I it's it's there's platitudes. There's statements that
mean nothing in my opinion. I mean, frankly
I mean, again, just to be clear, for
those that only see this one, whether it's
Kamala or Biden or anybody else, all of
them are just blatant liars that will say
what you wanna hear and not fall through.
And if you think Trump's any different, then
you weren't paying attention over the last however
many years. Because the reality is the same
thing about JFK and lock her up and

(01:16:08):
the Federal Reserve and all blah blah blah.
All these things. And we're I'll make points
about this in a second. But this is
the same thing.
So at the very least, if you're objective,
you should say, well, let's wait and see
because he didn't follow through last time.
Honored to receive 2 endorsements
of former Democrats
for president Tulsi Gabbard
and Now again, I have to I just

(01:16:30):
wanna say one more time.
I think it is really ridiculous, worthy of
ridicule to be a you know, you're a
former Democrat. So are you then are you
no longer believing in all of the tenets
you've built your entire career around? Because you
realize it's not just as simple as going
on this side now and the same ideals.
No. No. No. We're supposed to pretend that
they're very different. The republicans and democrats have
a very different set of ideals.

(01:16:51):
So you're just suddenly shifted entirely?
Or are you still believing in those ideals,
but you just think the Republican party is
better? Well, that means you're a Democrat that's
supporting the Republicans. You see how stupid this
is? They are all the same thing.
I hope that's clear.
Of former Democrats
for president Tulsi Gabbard
and
Robert f Kennedy junior.

(01:17:13):
Together, we're fighting to secure our borders, end
the endless foreign wars, and defend the Except
Israel though. Right? Because we'll support them all
the way no matter what. I guess he
forgot that part of his speech. Working people
of America.
We're joining forces to defeat government corruption, restore
free speech, and make America healthy again. We're

(01:17:34):
gonna make America healthy again, you know?
Oh, we love saying that. Right? It's different
now. Now it's a new mantra, you know,
because what it's because they wanna hear that.
And that's why he's saying it. Simple as
that. Whether it ever happens or not.
We're gonna get toxic
chemicals out of our environment, and we're gonna
Except we're putting them in your body, though.

(01:17:55):
Keep the shots because he still supports them.
Get them out of our food supply.
Nope. Not at all. I'll show you that
right now. Here here's Donald Trump handing out
McDonald's because that's the good food we wanna
lean into. Right? Remember the stores they kept
open, the small businesses like Burger King and
McDonald's?
It's all a facade, guys. We gotta get
them out of our bodies.

(01:18:16):
Wow.
Right. So they're literally running on this now.
Right? Because that's what's connecting. Now, by the
way, I do wanna say one thing about
just to be clear. I'm not suggesting that
it's wrong of somebody to be switch to
become a democrat or to change their ideals.
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying
is from a political perspective, when you're running
on these ideals and you're trying to sell
people on what you are your entire career

(01:18:38):
and then just jump to the other side,
that's my point.
Right? I I it's I if you decide
you wanna think something different on a dime,
that's that's completely up to you as an
individual. As a politician, you could I would
even say it would if you genuinely believe
that, then sure. But I don't think that's
what's happening. Especially since what they are and
what they're saying and doing is the same.
They're just simply jumping teams. Just to I

(01:18:58):
hope that's clear. So
here's what Brad said.
Yet, no mention whatsoever of justice for the
treason that occurred via the COVID
op. An op that Kennedy himself
referred to as a global coup d'etat in
his book, the real Anthony Fauci. Right? But
I guess it's easy as going, well, Trump
was tricked.
Okay. Moving forward.

(01:19:20):
Yeah. Is that how simple it is? He
was tricked. It's a coup d'etat of everything,
but it was just an accident that he
got misled.
How are we this simple?
Or are the top they still support the
injection and says that it was a a
monumental success and people saved their lives and
that's not what JFK thinks.
How was that how do you reconcile that
if you were supporting this team?
He says once again, Americans are urged to

(01:19:42):
move forward and just forget the attacks on
our fellow citizens, our wealth, our institutions.
Again, one of the largest, if not the
largest, transfer of wealth in this country's history
took place under COVID 19. We saw the
BlackRock sell out. We it was crazy.
He says, this is exactly what we did
with 911,
Gulf of Tonkin, death of JFK, etcetera. I

(01:20:02):
agree with him.
And don't forget some every single one you
just mentioned there. I mean, maybe for the
sake of Gulf say for the Gulf of
Tonkin, but I'm sure I could find some
connections.
There's an overlap, obviously, there. And he says
we're being told the lie that the poisonous
tree will render good fruit from here forward.
It's a good way to put that. The
poison that harms the tree is not addressed.

(01:20:24):
Right.
Very, very good point.
And here's another one.
Libs of TikTok says this is gonna go
down in history as the photo that won
him the election.
Literally, for her, I'd make sure it was
real. Apparently it's real. He's at a McDonald's.
Working at McDonald's because he's a normal guy
just like you. Right?
This is so funny how easy it is

(01:20:45):
to play some small minded people. But the
point
is nothing says make America healthy again like
McDonald's. Right, guys?
How silly.
I mean, you have to realize that if
you're gonna push the idea of toxic chemicals
in your food, this is number one list,
fast food.
And and, you know, it's I mean, everything
that they sell, everything is bad for you.
And not just the idea that it's unhealthy

(01:21:06):
like in a gaining weight way. It's toxic
for you, guys. Whether it's seed oils or
I mean, we go on forever. We've talked
about all of this stuff. Everything in there
from the oils they use, from the french
fries to the the content from the bread,
it is bad for you. It is hurting
you. It is endocrine disrupting chemicals. It's got
glyphosate. I mean, all of it because it

(01:21:27):
comes from the worst sources. It is cheap.
It is unhealthy. It is made to last.
And here he is literally picking this to
promote. What if you if you're gonna make
America healthy again, why wouldn't you pick any
number of the hundreds of thousands of large
companies that are doing good stuff? Because it's
not what they're really gonna do.

(01:21:47):
Like, let's just even put it this way.
Let's say he
I'm I'm gonna go ahead and make a
prediction.
If this becomes a bigger focal point, which
it seems to be, the argument that I
expect would be that he's starting there because
it is the worst. He's gonna make it
better.
Well, that's an easy thing to say, isn't
it? We're talking about a $1,000,000,000
corporation that's not gonna bow to Trump's interest
because they wanna be bottom line,

(01:22:09):
this is something that shouldn't exist if you're
talking about making things healthier. Now I'm not
saying in a way that we should force
them to shut down. Free do whatever you
want. But I'm talking about as the person
who is leaning in to make America healthy
again, it should be don't even engage with
these platforms because they are the worst possible
things you can put in your body. And
it's that's, you know, adding a salad to
the menu or changing one of the ingredients

(01:22:30):
on what it's it would take a bill
it would take so much money to overhaul
what they're doing because
the reason they're profitable is because they use
these things.
Now I could go off forever, guys, but
the point is you just gotta recognize that
you're being played here. And where's RFK with
this stuff?
I mean, it's gotta be pretty frustrating that
you just get using his name

(01:22:50):
to pretend all these things and then leaning
in with McDonald's.
This person says, oh, wait. Who owns McDonald's
again? Now, again, I wouldn't say owns McDonald's
because it's not as simple as that, but
guess what, guys?
Vanguard and BlackRock. What do you know?
What do you know? Look at that. They've
got a 100 almost a 109,000,000

(01:23:13):
shares combined between the 2 of them. Seems
to be the vast majority.
Look at that.
Does that matter? I guess only matters when
it's people you don't like. Right? Well, ignore
the Rumble aspect, you know, that Vanguard and
BlackRock have the 2 leading shareholders.
Why do they get to the top 2
or one of the top 3 or 2
of the top 3 in Rumble? But we
don't care about that. But if Albemarle and

(01:23:34):
the company involved with North Carolina, you know,
with the lithium and the hurricane have less
shares, suddenly it's the most monumental point in
the world. I I argue that either both
matter or they don't neither of them matter.
And I think they both matter.
But here is interesting to me is that
nobody really would point if if this was
something even tangentially to Kamala Harris, it'd be
the biggest story in the world. But of
course now, we'll talk about it.

(01:23:56):
It's being inconsistent. It's called hypocrisy.
Here
is
another point.
Oh, the irony. Yeah. Even McDonald's and Israel.
Yeah. They're one of those. This is one
of the companies that dramatically benefits from working
with Israeli companies that are using Palestinian land.
But who cares? Right? Because,

(01:24:19):
Now, Derek Burrows made a good point.
And this is kinda what we keep seeing.
What we saw at the bitcoin conference Actually,
I'll I'll grab that article for you. It's
a good article.
We were actually at the bitcoin conference. I
got to see him speak and it was
honestly I mean I it's
I people were laughing at him. To be
quite honest, I was in a huge room
full of bitcoiner people and they were pretty
much making fun of him the whole time.
But either way,

(01:24:41):
it's about trying to co opt this thing.
And it's working for some of them. Peter
Thiel, the whole overlap, the technocratic group that
we're seeing build.
This one by Derek I'll include for you
to read, it's a good article. And it
gets into the that conference but the bigger,
direction of it all.
But this is a recent discussion on 15th
where Donald Trump is discussing the Fed.

(01:25:02):
And as Derek writes, Trump says some basic
s h I t about the Fed. And,
I mean, it's basic. It's the same thing
he does in all these contexts. But, again,
because he says it, suddenly people lose their
minds. Now, I get the interest in seeing
somebody
who has influence,
saying things that you're not used to people
saying in a main stage like that.
But it's about, excuse me, about action.

(01:25:23):
It's like Russ Albright. I hope that happens.
Something tells me it won't, at least not
the way we think it will. Or there'll
be some kind of excuse for why it
can't happen now and then it never does.
The point
is that if you're going to address this,
we have to first acknowledge that he made
this he made a whole big thing about
the federal reserve, his last election, and nothing

(01:25:43):
ever happened.
So he just floats another statement to me
saying that the fed and and the bigger
point for me is he says something about
the fed that makes, you know, they're bad
or, like, the point is about how it's
the easiest job and Powell just gets to
do, you know, work one day a year.
I mean, making fun of him. Right?
But he doesn't answer the question. And that's
why people like Jack Posobiec and the rest
of it jump in and sort of frame

(01:26:04):
it for you the way that you're supposed
to read it, even though he doesn't even
answer the question.
That I'll get to that. It's a point
about Iran where Jack does that. In this
case,
he doesn't answer it. The question is about
whether or not he's going to work with
Powell or not, and he ultimately skirts the
question, but they love it because he said,
bad guy Powell.
How much you wanna bet, nothing changes? And
then they're gonna say he's the best because

(01:26:24):
Trump picked him. It's you can't you it's
whichever whatever they choose, they're gonna claim that
was the right choice because people are blindly
it they're
locked on to his star. That's how this
works. Here's the clip.
And backwards and forwards about It depends whether
you wanna keep Jerome Powell as chair of
the Federal Reserve.
His term as chair runs on to May

(01:26:46):
2026.
Would you seek to remove remove or demote
him?
Look.
I I think it's Okay. So just so
it was clear the whole thing, would you
get rid of him? Demote or get rid
of him? That's the question.
The greatest job in government
about depends on to May 2026.
Remove or demote him. Look,

(01:27:07):
I I think it's the greatest job in
government.
You show up to the office once a
month, and you say, let's see. Flip a
coin.
Yeah. Which would which is fine. The guy
it's it's it I think it's a ridiculous
situate position in general. I think the whole
thing is illegitimate,
but he doesn't answer the question. And everybody
talks about you like you're a god. Oh,
what will he do? I mean, before the

(01:27:27):
guy used to walk into my office,
he was, like, begging to host. He was
he was fine. So you did you did
So you know what? You know what? It's
so
I don't know why more people who are
confident people can't recognize what he's doing
and how petty it is.
That he this guy is so full of
himself,
and I don't know why why people who

(01:27:49):
even like him can't acknowledge that. It's just
hubris. It's off the chair, off the charts,
That he has to tear down somebody that
he sees as, like so he goes to
everyone, think, oh, he's like, he treats the
life of God. So he has to go,
yeah, he's he's terrible and, like, he's cutting
him down to make himself feel big because
he has to be the biggest one in
the room. That's who he is and you
all know it. If you've read his books,
understand what he said about himself before he

(01:28:10):
became a politician,
he very clear about it. And he and
if you read his books, then you know
you'll know how he's playing you right now.
You talked about you talked about removing him
once. I did because, he was keeping the
ridge too high. Yeah. And I was right.
And you would do that again? In fact
see. He didn't answer again. He skirts it
again.

(01:28:30):
He actually dropped them too much when I
did this. He because I said
I was threat. The point is that Trump
asked and he he was so willing to
comply that he dropped it more than I
needed. Oh, Trump is so good. And to
terminate him, there was a question as to
whether or not you could.
And there was an article in the New
York Times, 2 half pages. One page said
I can do it, my lawyers. One half

(01:28:52):
page said I couldn't, and that was enough
for him. And he dropped the hell out
of the race. He dropped them too much.
He went so
he dropped them actually too much. Okay.
He Still haven't answered the question, mind you.
Still rambling on about something that nobody asked.
Here's a story.
I think that if you're a
very good president with good sense,

(01:29:12):
you should be able to at least talk
to him. I don't say make the decision
at all, but I I mean, I'm I've
been a Hostess has gotten the entire time,
suggesting
the opposite actually that people are saying. That
you know, man, we always a good president.
You should be able to work with him.
Right now, the presentation essentially he went after
the Fed. See?
He's gonna get rid of him. That's the
conversation under this tweet.

(01:29:33):
Maybe they didn't listen to the entire thing
because right there, it seems to suggest that,
you know, you should be able to work
with him. I'm gonna I'm gonna bet you
that that's what happens. Very successful businessman. I've
done really good, much better. Now people are
understanding how good I've done because they're seeing
it. Oh, okay. So the question he didn't
answer ends with him praising himself. Typical. Real.
Much better than the fake news wants to
give me credit for.

(01:29:55):
It's just fantastic.
Now, of course, anybody that is a super
Trump supporter is gonna frame me as being
somehow obsessed with Trump. The reality is they're
all this bad. It's just the point is
right now, this is clearly what's about to
happen next. I could be wrong, but I'm
watch.
I'm telling you guys, this is the selection.
This is what's going on, and this is
all my opinion.

(01:30:15):
But I think it's just all the all
of the
indicators point in this direction. But if you
wanna try to compare, I mean, it would
go Kamal was ridiculous.
Biden, Obama, Bush, they're all the same thing
to me. So to me, right now, this
is the focal point of what they're gonna
put in front of you next, and that's
why it's important to break down. And it's
amazing that people fall for this stuff. But
as Derek continues,

(01:30:36):
it doesn't matter. He says, this is how
he operates.
Alright. I'll just start over. I think we're
gonna stop at the beginning. He blows a
huge opportunity to talk about ending the Fed,
which he won't do is the point, and
exposing the financial scam that he says is
a silly joke. This is how he operates.
He he throws a bone to different issues
and crowds who follow them. It doesn't matter
if he ever does anything about it. He

(01:30:58):
made us laugh or he trolled them. He's
exactly right. It's whatever ends up happening, they
lean into it like it was always the
plan.
Because these people are the ones kind of
corralling
the actual conservatives that are actually objective, that
might actually care about one way, but they
get pulled into it because they're following the
party. Because that's what we're all told we're
supposed to do.
They said the bar has been set so

(01:31:19):
low that people are willing to accept lip
service and hopium.
You're going to look like a fool for
trusting him in all of them again.
Agree.
And here
is,
the the this is just hilarious to me
that this every year like,
of all events that seem to happen, this

(01:31:40):
one always stands out to me is just
cutting through the BS and showing you that
they're all on the same team. The correspondence
dinner where they all stand up and give
jokes and you know, remember even last time?
Hillary Clinton was there, he was there, and
they're laughing together. You know, it's just it's
just so sad. You can see right through
it. Now also,
the idea that we have some some planned
dinner where all of the supposed journalists who

(01:32:01):
are supposed to be holding these people to
account are all there hobnobbing and hot as
he says. This the dude yucking it up
with Trump,
right next to him is cardinal
Dolan,
a man who has been accused over the
years of covering for priests who abuse children.
Look it up. And, of course, he denies
it, but the evidence shows he, at the
very least,
encouraged them to take payoffs and leave rather

(01:32:23):
than be investigated, which, by the way, if
you're still a a person out there denying
the reality of the Catholic church
controversy that's going back decades forever
and as as a as a Christian, I'm
saying this. I understand. Because it doesn't undermine
my beliefs to point out that evil people
have found their way in positions of power
in the church, which is, by the way,

(01:32:43):
what's been going on since the existence of
the church. It doesn't make the church itself
bad. Good. It's up for you to decide.
And my point in saying is that there
are bad people in every position of power,
whether it's religion or not. We're seeing it
in Israel right now.
But think about that. And of course, you
can maybe just sit next to him. My
point is about the larger conversation.
Right? The idea that these people are all
hobnobbing next to each other, rubbing elbows, and

(01:33:03):
they're all I mean, they're the all on
the same team as they what this needs
to show you. You can decide for yourself.
Don't just trust me. Look into it.
Now, here's what Jack Poso said.
I just this is the kinda stuff that
makes me almost like almost like feel uncomfortable
while I'm reading it. Like, it's just it's
I, you know my honest opinion? As always,

(01:33:24):
I don't think he believes this. I think
this is him filling a role.
Either way, there are people who feel like
this, and it's it's I I feel, like,
embarrassed for them. He says, 500 years from
now. And of course, you could also argue
that he's kinda trolling or joking, but they
always love to walk that line while they
this is what they're really pushing. Well, it's
a joke if they get called out for
it, but really it's it says, 500 years

(01:33:45):
from now, they will never believe us that
a figure such as Trump actually existed.
That one individual would face imprisonment,
survive multiple assassinations, and keep fighting for his
country, it will seem impossible.
They will think we made him up. You
mean other than the fact that you could
find, like, 45 people in history that have
been in the exact circumstance?
These people are so stupid. I don't understand

(01:34:05):
why people listen to people like this that
are so obviously compromised and so obviously manipulating.
It kills me. This person says, no. They
won't think we made him up. He'll still
be alive and the ruler of all mankind.
Now that is more of a a joking
position.
But still, the Trump worship, or any politician
worship, is embarrassing. You should be embarrassed.

(01:34:26):
Did the founding fathers tell us to worship
a president? No. They told us to question
all of them. In fact, I think it
was Roosevelt that said it was servile
to blindly support your president. In fact, he
called it morally treasonable to the American people.
Look it up.
There's somebody doing a morally treasonable act according
to our founding fathers. But who cares? Because
he's the one.

(01:34:47):
Well, I'll include this as well, this breakdown
of all the different clips where Donald Trump
is telling you that Israel should be able
to control what you say and or congress
for that matter. Here's the one where he
says that he will be once he's elected,
he'll remove the Jew haters from the country.
Right? By the way, and this is good
this is the whole point right here. This
person says Jew hate is constitutional. Now I
kinda got the sense that was trying to,

(01:35:08):
you know, like, that might be like a
IDF troll trying to get something to be
said the wrong way. So I said, okay.
While deserving of ridicule and condemnation,
yes.
That was truth. I said, but to frame
it correctly,
having an opinion,
even unpopular or disgusting,
is constitutionally
protected.
Or rather, the inherent god given right is

(01:35:31):
outlined by the constitution, which is the right
way to say that.
Just wanted to include that. Because the reality
is they're they're screaming about one side's gonna
remove your free speech. You know, literally, the
guy who was
violating your free speech on Twitter is telling
you that she is gonna end free speech,
Elon Musk.
The point is that, obviously, the worst of
opinions are why free speech exists or the

(01:35:53):
idea the out why it was in outlined
by the constitution, the inherent right.
Because
the the worst of speech is what needs
to be protected.
Now that's the problem for a lot of
people. They don't want to do that. You
if you don't if you don't believe that,
then you don't believe in free speech. And
as I always say,
if you then then make a case for
it. Let's have an argument about why limited
speech, and that's where we're going right now.

(01:36:15):
There's articles being written about why free speech
was a failure. Flatly disagree.
But my point is that the people out
there on the right are the ones leaning
into limited speech while pretending to fight for
free speech. Not every conservative, but clearly at
the top of this party line, we can
see it. So that's what I wanna highlight.
Trump is literally telling you that we're gonna
and even Elon Musk made points about this

(01:36:35):
in regard to the conversation in anti semitism,
That we need to get rid of them.
Yet, again, to stay as clear as possible.
If there's somebody out there that just hates
Jewish people for no reason and expresses that
online, or says it to people he knows,
that's protected under the constitute. Or rather, again,
it is outlined as an inherent right by
the constitution.
And, again, I I will I will tell

(01:36:56):
you you're disgusting. You're a terrible person for
blindly hating people because of their religion without
even knowing them. But it's protected
under an inherent right in the constitution.
If you don't believe that, then you don't
believe in free speech. Simple as that. And
then, of course, the larger point is that
what they call Jew hate is simply fighting
for the independence of Palestinians.
Right? Or pointing out that the Israeli government

(01:37:18):
just killed people with a bomb. Oh, you're
a racist.
That's literally the definition of antisemitism in some
groups right now. If you criticize Israel. Period.
I'm not even it's not hyperbolic at all.
That's the fact. How did we ever get
there? How did anybody ever pretend that made
sense?
This is the lunacy we're dealing with. Here's
Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur.

(01:37:40):
David Jacobs, who is apparently
a guy, he says, Francesca Albanese has asked
me for evidence of her hate speech. Well,
let's break it down. God, just this is
just he should be embarrassed. But I either
he has an agenda or he is this
blinded
by this this agenda.
So she responds, said I'm waiting for the
evidence of my hate speech, doctor.

(01:38:00):
So first, she responded to the this thread,
which I'll show you next. It says, the
confusion
regarding hate speech and evidence,
the conflation of the two things, in in
the patchwork of arguments presented is astounding. Her
point is that you're basically saying so when
she presents evidence that,
for example, the first one to the Jewish
lobby, which is what it they would call
it, which is what it is. That's what

(01:38:20):
even Miriam Auto said in Donald Trump calls
it.
When she says that they're the ones influencing
out x, y, and z, which is what
they're literally on the record lobbying for, and
he calls that racist antisemitism. Well, it's a
fact. It is a verifiable fact, but you
don't like that fact, so you call it
anti semitism. And even now, these definitions would
call it that. That doesn't change that it's
a fact. So now you're turning definitions out

(01:38:42):
that create
that claim that facts are anti semitic.
But she goes, the notion that scientific principles
should take precedence over ideology
extends beyond the realm of legal discipline.
See you at the University of Toronto. I'm
sure you have noted day and time of
the event. I want to make sure we
keep keep an eye out. You guys are
watching. Don't let me miss that. If there's
an event where they're gonna be debating or

(01:39:03):
something, I'd love to see that. So here,
here's what he says.
On October 27, 2020, the government of Ontario
adopted the recognized
the this is the, you know, the
Israel focused anti the definition of antisemitism which
means that you you it go saying Zionism
is a is a bad thing or Zionist
entities did x y and z is the

(01:39:24):
same thing as Judaism. It's not.
Plenty. I'm arguing it's getting
there is a hell of a lot more
today, Jewish people in the world that are
calling out Zionism as not Judaism, as exactly
the opposite of what they believe right now,
all around the world. So you can't just
pretend like half the Jewish population is just
suddenly anti semitic because they don't believe in
a political ideology.

(01:39:45):
But that's what's starting to change the conversation.
So all he's doing is pointing you a
definition that says criticizing Israel is anti semitic
and then going, well, she's doing that so
she's anti semitic. It's lazy and it's intellectually
dishonest.
But he goes on to say, they define
anti semitism as
making mendacious
dehumanizing,
demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such

(01:40:07):
or the power of Jews as collective, nothing
she did, such as, especially not
especially but not exclusively, the myth about a
world Jewish conspiracy or the Jews controlling the
media.
Okay.
See, here's the point. If we're talking about
a Zionist political organization that has influenced all
sorts of things, that is not the same
thing. Which is why they're so desperate to

(01:40:27):
conflate Judaism with any with Zionism so they
can pretend you're being antisemitic.
It's pretty simple.
But he goes, in 2014,
you posted the following. And see, he's so
lazy about this that he doesn't even make
the right point. She's not
talking about controlling anything. She says,
America and Europe, one of them, subjugated by
the Jewish lobby, and the other by the

(01:40:48):
sense of guilt about the Holocaust. Yeah. That
makes people upset, but it's a truth.
There are people all around the world that
are calling these things out. Jewish organizations.
And don't forget that Donald Trump himself,
in in front of a a a Zionist
what was it again?
Oh, this that's right. It was advanced Trump
rally.
It's so crazy to me. Where Miriam Adelson

(01:41:09):
was there presenting him, half the flags behind
him were Israeli, and they had all the
Israeli lobby and all these different supporters there.
And the point was that he addressed it
as the Jewish lobby. Because it's not even
the Israeli government will talk about it, but
if you point it out, suddenly you're a
racist?
That's exactly what it is. Now here's what's
hilarious to me, is that they will make
the effort to conflate the two things and

(01:41:30):
say, well, they're the same thing. And then
when you point it out, you're racist.
Didn't you just tell me that they're the
same thing? That Judaism is ziah? Okay. Well,
then why would it be the Jewish lobby?
I mean, this is this is what desperation
looks like. Your narratives are falling apart in
front of you. You don't know what else
to do but call people racist.
And he goes and also defines it as
drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policies to that

(01:41:51):
of Nazis,
which by the way is the worst
in no anybody with a brain today is
not gonna pretend that you can't see every
single parallel in existence
around whatever we're told about what happened in
World War 2 to what they're currently doing
everywhere.
It's it's it's like saying that there's murder
taking place, therefore, that's like a murderer and

(01:42:11):
saying it's racist because you're comparing it to
something that it is. They're killing people. They
are experimenting on people. They are using human
shields. They are
ethnic cleansing. I mean, every single element. And,
guys, these are not up for debate. These
are represented by human rights groups. B'Tselem, for
example, which is an Israeli human rights group.
United Nations.
Every group he could possibly talk about other
than their governments and politicians are pointing these

(01:42:34):
things out. Now
I don't even need to go for it.
He does the same thing over and over
and over.
She will talk,
debate,
prove circles around this moron. I'm looking forward
to it.
Now this person says, you know, back on
the point about, you know, stealing Donald Trump
and 2 party illusion. She goes, that's and
this is Insurrection Barbie. It says, that's why

(01:42:55):
Trump is the only solution.
To a meme that says, it's not, as
you've seen us show in the past,
white versus black, straight versus gay, rich versus
poor, man versus woman. It's the state versus
you.
Okay.
Now think of this abs I mean, just
like humorously stupid to point out that Trump

(01:43:16):
is the option. Okay. So if there's only
the state and you,
which is what it says.
So is Trump you? Or is Trump the
state?
Let's just be very careful. Just think it
through. Take a second. Okay? There's only 2
options. You shared the meme, lady. There's the
state and there's you.
So if he's not you,
follow me here,

(01:43:37):
he's gotta be the state. Right?
So what are you missing? The point is
I'm trying to highlight here is that these
people are sharing memes
like the, you know, the one about, you
know, you in this movie, you support the
resistance. This movie, you support the resistance. But
in the rural world, you support the empire.
Elon shares these things. And then while they're
literally supporting the empire, it's I think this

(01:43:58):
is almost trying to present what they want
you to see them as while they're doing
the opposite.
So I simply responded, let let me understand
your logic here. You believe that voting
in a presidential election for the chosen representative
of the Republican party is not voting for
the state?
We can't be this easy to manipulate, guys.

(01:44:20):
I just can't be this simple.
And then he responds saying, deep state
deep state a real threat.
So my so I think what he's trying
to say is that it's the deep state
that's the real threat. Okay, then. So you
don't understand the meme then. Right? Well, the
point well, he didn't necessarily post it.
The point being, though, is if you're gonna
say the deep state, well, then there would

(01:44:41):
be 3 things in this meme. It'd be
you, the state, and the deep state. I'm
just trying to be specific, and that's my
point is about the memes they share. They're
trying to tap in to what the independent
media has been doing or the people are
challenging these ideas.
Right? Like, the point exactly what Derek Prose
made about the Bitcoin conversation. That it's about,
it's it's about challenging the financial system, but

(01:45:01):
Trump and them are gonna make it the
system. They're gonna warp it in to make
it the system. That's not how this was
supposed to go. It was a it that's
the whole point about this. Instead of fighting
the state, you're leaning into it and acting
like that's the solution.
It's as simple as that, and it happens
every time.
I simply said, so they don't understand the
meme at all. And he says, can you
explain it? And this guy says, Trump is

(01:45:22):
the deep state. And he goes, no way.
It's just it's war hero worship, which is
it's sad. Now this one, he deleted already,
which is funny. But I said the same
thing and we understand the logic. And it
was something to the fact that, you know,
you don't understand anything, that he's the one
and Trump's gonna save us from the other
and I simply said, well, one of us
is misunderstanding. That's for sure. I bet, personally,

(01:45:42):
that it's the one who is hoping that
billionaires and technocrats
follow through with their promises, but that's just
me.
Think about that, guys. So I'm over here
saying, he's the problem. You know, and that
the government's gonna be whatever.
To a meme that says state versus you.
And they're saying, no. No. He's the one
who's gonna save us in that dynamic. And
I'm the old there's only 2 things happening
here. And one of them is trusting and

(01:46:03):
hoping that billionaires and technocrats,
you know, follow through with their promises.
How often has that worked out for us?
Last one. Oh, same thing. Deep state is
what you want to avoid.
And that's why I respond. Well, if so
then you understand the meme. Right? You can't
say that and pretend that that's obviously contradictory.
And somebody just sent me this. I just

(01:46:23):
thought, this is crazy. Like, this is where
the mindset has gotten. You know, people like
Health Ranger here who has been pretty
counter to
gen you know, mainstream narratives. What's it's almost
like the republican side of this that has
framed themselves as, like, the anti establishment side
have, like, literally become the establishment. And that's
my point. They always have been. That's the

(01:46:44):
reality of the government at least have always
been that they're just one thing. But what's
weird is that we've always all of a
sudden, these these supposed independent media parts are
just like as it says, vote like your
eternal soul depends on it. What a weird
overlap. So vote. Vote like you are. Like,
okay. Well, that's something that usually is
left to the mainstream discussion. Get out there

(01:47:04):
and vote, guys.
But then vote like your eternal soul depends
on it. That's not by accident, guys, and
that's weird to me. That's why I keep
talking about this overlap of your religion with
your journalism.
That it's just weird. And it shouldn't be
there. Like, I you could I'm not saying
you shouldn't be able to express what you
think and who you believe in and your
religion. What I'm saying is when it comes
to the and not not even this necessarily

(01:47:26):
this post.
But when it comes to your journalism, and
you're breaking down information, which we've seen from
Jones and plenty of them, where suddenly it
becomes some kind of god this and god
while you're reporting a story. And that influences
how you frame it. Well, now you're talking
about facts
overlapping with something that's faith based. It it
obviously, somebody objected can see why those things
shouldn't be in the same conversation.

(01:47:48):
I'm saying this as a Christian. You understand?
That's my my point. But, lastly,
on the point of the 2 party illusion
of Donald Trump before we get into Twitter
in particular, this is pretty crazy to me.
Every day it says from now, through Mark
May, November 5th, excuse me,
Elon Musk says his America PAC,
America Inc, I think is what it is,

(01:48:09):
or just America,
will be giving away $1,000,000
to someone
in swing states who signed our petition to
support free speech, even though you're not supporting
free speech. How funny is that? And the
right to bear arms which I don't even
know why think about how weird it is
to make who what did you sign a
petition for? Those are constitutional rights. He's trying

(01:48:29):
to give the impression that if you don't
sign this and lean in with them that
then it's all gone. That's not even possible.
That's not possible. They cannot honor your rights,
but they are inherent.
They're god given. That's the whole point. They
are trying to warp the way you see
things just like the Twitter files and everything
else that's happening.
On top of that, you're literally bribing people
to engage with the political dynamic that you

(01:48:51):
want.
Isn't this I mean, imagine if this was
the other way around. They were they were
just making a case that through illegal immigration
that they were buying votes. And you could
make a fair argument for that, but you're
literally buying them. And I already made this
point before. He says, we wanna make sure
that everyone in swing states hears about this
and ends up he's trying to lie to
you. He is playing you like a fool.

(01:49:11):
Or he really is that uninformed.
Maybe both. Patrick Henningston says, but, Elon, your
recent campaigning on Twitter shows that you are
extremely anti first amendment. Which, by the way,
we should all be able to see if
you're not blinded by partisan politics. He says,
Carrie, explain.
And he's posting this from
the 20th. And it says, so Elon Musk

(01:49:32):
just announced a $1,000,000
lottery prize, AKA soft bribe, for you to
sign his new first amendment petition
to sign his loyalty to first amendment. However,
back in May, Elon publicly
called
for poll posted below
all American students, etcetera, to be deported
for taking down the US flag, which by

(01:49:53):
the way is a supreme court is roundly.
These are protected acts. And flying another country's
flag, which you have every right to do.
I mean, and the how do you not
so you you could argue he suddenly changes
mind, but you can see these things still
happening. They're still censoring on Twitter. But my
point is that Donald Trump is talk about
removing the Jew haters, and he's literally talking

(01:50:14):
about these people don't believe in free speech.
They want you to believe that their limited
version, if that's even what they actually believe
in, is somehow the full picture and everything
else makes sense. They're playing you.
I'm trying to reach the conservatives that might
be open to this, and the TeamSport politics,
they don't care.
He says, pretty obvious he was referring to
students protesting hoisting a Palestinian flag. Yeah. Obviously.
They've been pointing to them. He says, some

(01:50:36):
of his followers
agree with this anti First Amendment proposed law.
Quick lesson for the constitutionally illiterate. Even burning
our flag is protected. It is.
Texas verse Johnson 1989.
He says, sorry to his many fans for
pointing his hypocrisy out. I do really appreciate
Elon's past efforts to make Twitter more inclusive
space. I don't. I think it's all a
scam. Think it's obviously not the reality of

(01:50:57):
what's going on. He says, but it's a
legitimate concern for someone who many would agree
with has bought their way into power.
But as Elon sometimes claims to profess, the
first amendment is for speech you don't like,
Not just for political fair weather.
See, they love to say the thing that
they know you think, but they don't do
it.
And that's like that's what exactly what, Derek

(01:51:18):
was just saying. They float this middle of
the ground idea and they let you believe
into whatever side you want, nothing ever happens.
Or worse, they they completely undermine it. They
censor people. They remove your first amendment. It's
just again, no respect it. Again, the the
right way to say that. It's always important
to make sure because it it becomes like
somehow that they gave you these things if
you don't frame it right.
And since many would agree that feigning constitutional

(01:51:41):
values is akin to phony patriotism.
His or or you could even say like
a stolen valor kind of a conversation. His
hypocrisy on this, it it he this could
indicate some deeply held fascist or other beliefs
or just a political opportunist.
Both.
He says, so Elon, have you changed your
position on this? I don't believe.

(01:52:03):
I think he put the wrong tweet at
the bottom there.
No.
Oh, this one first actually. So this is
the secondary part of this. Remember, so now
that that's $1,000,000
that's gonna, I guess, randomly go to some
people. Let's I wonder if it even happens.
Wouldn't that be interesting if just nobody gets
it? It gets floated but nobody gets it?
But so $1,000,000 going to somebody every month
or I forget what time frame he said.

(01:52:24):
Based on whether you do this and, you
know, trust that they're gonna do it and
not just give it to who they want.
Hey. Award this company. But the point is
that on top of that, they were doing
what was it? $75 or some kind of
an offer for anybody that brought in somebody
else to sign the petition.
So my point was obvious. Are you really
gonna be just to be real, they're not
gonna bring in a democrat, guys. That's not
gonna happen.

(01:52:45):
So they're gonna bring in republican. That's so
what he's effectively doing is
bribing people to get people to vote. That's
buying votes, what it is. And he says
Elon Musk raised his payment now to $100
for voters who signed the petition supporting free
speech. Right, Pierre?
Now on top of that, it wasn't just
this. Remember the first part of it was
bringing them into the swing states. That was
the first offer. So he's throwing money at

(01:53:05):
all of this stuff.
It's very manipulative. Now this specifically is not
about the votes. It was about the swing
state conversation. And that's all that's still there.
If you bring somebody in and have them
sign up to vote in these locations, ultimately,
you get money from Elon Musk. Again, assuming
that it works out.
Sarah Emerson also points out, he's quietly created
2 new entities this month on this was

(01:53:27):
the yeah. It's October. One called United States
of America Inc,
which names him as the sole director.
This follows his $75,000,000
America PAC donations, that's what we're just pointing
at, dark money reports, and the government efficiency
commission.
Right? So I mean, he's I mean, he
is now
essentially part of the government as a contractor,
but he's going to be

(01:53:49):
part of the government. And that's going to
change. I mean, in my opinion, it's gonna
just show you what's already been happening, but
it's going to legally on the surface change
a lot. And I'd I'd argue nothing will
actually change. They'll still act the same way
they do, and I think that's the point.
But I find that to be interesting, the
way this is all going.
The the problem is they built this interesting

(01:54:09):
narrative around this to where if you call
him out or Trump that you suddenly are
just because you hate republicans, or you're obsessed
with Trump.
Well, I'm sure some of that exists, just
like you're just as obsessed with him in
the other way. But
a lot of people are just being objective
and calling out that there's an issue here.
Like, apolitically pointing out that what he's doing
around Venezuela, for example, or a any number

(01:54:29):
of things are alarming.
And I deserves to be called out. But
people
it's it's again, one side of it's over,
like,
jumping in every shadow around him, and the
other side is ignoring all of them. It's
how this system works.
So talking about Twitter in general.
First of all, I just wanna point out
a couple of things I thought were interesting,
some of these differences.

(01:54:49):
They're now I guess gonna stop blocking from
like they can still see your content but
they can't engage with it, which I I
really don't care. To me it's it's more
so about stopping the constant trolling and shitting
of the people that you know are doing
that for obvious. So as long as they're
not commenting, it doesn't bother me. But the
point and again, anyone's doing this, what we're
doing and, you know, that for as long
as we have, you're gonna get people that

(01:55:11):
will, like, obnoxiously
constantly do and it it like, for example,
the person that's pretending to be me. So
the the this gets into the idea of
censorship versus your first amendment, which people always
conflate. They don't understand government. My point is
that I will people are out there and
acting in bad faith and constantly do I
I will block them. I don't care about
that. It's not it's it's not about blocking
someone's conversation. It's about somebody who's trying to

(01:55:32):
manipulate the conversation. And, obviously, it's my platform.
So you no. I don't want you to
be but now he's going to allow people
to see it, which I we'll see how
it plays out. But this person made a
good point. And at the exact time Twitter
is further eroding western textual norms and values
of rights to personal privacy. Because remember, Elon
was the one, leaning into the whole no
removing anon

(01:55:53):
being an anonymous in the platform, the digital
ID push is coming.
I think it's all connected. This makes a
good point. Slow incremental changes, boiling frog. And
he says and I don't know if this
is a real quote or not, but they
say secrets and closed doors and non disclosure
rights for me, full blown exposure of your
entire lives to the global brain blockchain for
all of thee. I think they're just kinda
making a, you know, cheeky point about it.

(01:56:15):
But so now whether you block something or
not, the content's viewable to everybody. I actually
think that's probably a better way for content
wise, but it's interesting the point they're making.
Maybe it's maybe it's overthinking it, but I
do think this is where we're going. Here,
another one was interesting. This is totally separate,
but this one I found kinda odd.
Very, you know, sorta like Elon buying votes.
Here you go. You can buy replies.

(01:56:36):
Why would you allow that? Doesn't that seem
to sort of undermine the, I at least
the pretend nature of what this is supposed
to be where it's honest engagement?
It says boost your replies with premium. Watch
the conversation flow. So, essentially, you could just
drive your replies into the conversation.
That seems pretty dumb to me. That's that's
breaking the platform for your benefit.
Or another way to control it, I would

(01:56:58):
argue.
But here's some things I wanted to point
out from Twitter that I think and this
overlaps with the foreign policy conversation.
I pointed this out around the recent horrifying
con the the what we just saw with
the tents and the people burning alive while
on hospital beds
in Gaza.
It's just disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.
And I pointed this out when I was
trying to share this in Robert's

(01:57:20):
article. I said, hey, Elon. Why is it
that every single post, and I found at
least 4 of them,
that I can find that highlights the fact
that Israel just burned people alive in hospital
beds
refuses to allow me to embed them. And
it could just be me. I think that
might be part of this.
Must be one of those coincidences.
Now I'll show it to you right now.
So I was trying to grab Lokey's tweet,

(01:57:40):
for example, and I was trying to embed
it. Oops.
Embed.
And I go to it, and it says,
oh,
not found.
Weird.
Every one of them. I mean, literally everything
that I I I was only the only
one I was able to get work was
somebody who caught this right here, for Khan,
grabbed this

(01:58:01):
and say, here, that's that's just the right
one. But he he basically grabbed the thing,
quoted it, put it out there, and I
think it was just because it hadn't been
seen yet. So I I embedded it, put
it up. My point is that every single
one of them down here you can look
at. Every one of them. I tried this
and it didn't it didn't work.
So is that just me? See my point,
guys?
That's not just an accident. Okay? I called

(01:58:22):
it out. No one's doing it. So there's
something strange. So if there's other there is
somebody over here who said that he was
able to get this one work
Not saying anything fishy isn't happening, but this
one worked for him, he said.
Which I don't know whether it did or
not, but my point is that he said
he tried it to work. So, am I
being stopped from doing that? Or is it
just a glitch? You guys can decide for

(01:58:42):
yourselves. You know my opinion. I think there's
something much more
manipulative going on with this platform right now,
more than we've ever seen before.
And I think it's obvious that this is
Israel's influence on this is undeniable.
From the authentics
verification that is still there.
Nobody in the nobody. Not nobody than me

(01:59:03):
seems to be pointing this out. Not even
the censored man who got this all the
attention. Maybe he hasn't seen it. Maybe that
because of this, that he's not even seeing
what I'm saying. But I think ultimately, it
is a big deal. It is a unit
8200
intelligence entity that works with Israeli intelligence.
That is literally staking your biometric data that
is that Twitter doesn't even need right now
at very least,

(01:59:23):
and holding it and using it Just to
identify you and anonymize. That's crazy. And Elon
pretended that wasn't gonna happen anymore. He literally
said, okay, we're gonna use Stripe instead and
then didn't do that. They do use Stripe
in other parts,
but they still use an Israeli company, an
intelligence entity,
to verify you for authenticity.

(01:59:44):
That's wild. And c h e q is
the company they use to stop the bots
that literally is using Israeli bots. And we've
this has been proven by, I think, Sensor
Man and others.
That's why they removed the like, she show
the showing of the likes because it was
highlighting
how these things were being used. And he
called it out. And suddenly, they removed it.
We're being gamed. I think it's obvious.

(02:00:06):
So this person, after I posted this about
them burning in tents and they wouldn't let
me share it, says f around and find
out.
Typical.
Probably an idea of bot, for all we
know.
But I said, so in one post,
demonstrating how you are both okay with genocide
and censorship.
Sure glad you guys aren't falling for anything.
2 party illusion.

(02:00:27):
So again, he said this worked for him.
Now, I wanna play this for you really
quick. This is really strange to me. Now,
this is what I'm dealing with. Now, this
hap this is the kind of stuff that
I don't really show you often, but since
we're kinda getting into it, I wanted to
show you this. I found this. This is
me with Twitter
every day. And I'm talking
every day since this
sent I I mean, I can't even say

(02:00:47):
the moment he took over,
but this is what I'm dealing with every
single day. I I I I bring up
tweets and they'll all sit in the browser
for an hour. And all of a sudden,
this is what's going on. And I'm telling
you guys, that's every single day
where I'm trying to go through I'm just
gonna mute this because it's background noise. Where
my tweets just all of a sudden don't
load. And I have to go through and
hit reload on every single one, but not

(02:01:09):
just once. Look. I have to click it,
like, 45 times in a row, like rapid
click. You can kinda hear it, I think.
Look at that.
You know how irritating that is?
I go through it for you.
I was there and look how long that
takes.
And in your tweets that I just had
pulled up, so I have to go through
and rate hit every single one every single

(02:01:29):
time. I mean, and if this was one
time now here's here's where I should put
this, guys. It goes on for forever. I
go through, like, every single tweet. Look.
Oh, it's not showing it.
Every single one on both those browsers.
You realize how stupid that is? So there's
only 2 things in my mind.
Either this is just how bad Twitter is,
which is pretty crazy, and we should ridicule

(02:01:50):
and call out that, that Twitter is that
bad today that it just doesn't work properly.
But I don't think that's the case. You
tell me and if you are you seeing
this anywhere?
I'm genuinely of the mind and this is
being applied. Now, look, we already showed you
this. We already showed you
Where is it?
This

(02:02:12):
one. We already showed you what APAC tracker
revealed
before they removed this from being seen.
Twit TLav had 60 different tags applied to
the the Twitter account. That were, the all
suppressing the flow, and yet we still somehow
get some reach. Think about how crazy that
is. Random things, abusive,
whatever these things mean, compromise. All these things

(02:02:33):
are used to suppress the reach of our
content. TLEV,
More than
anybody in in this entire conversation had
shown. For there was a, like, a loop,
like, some kind of, glitch where Grok was
being asked it would demonstrate the different tags
you had. And then all of a sudden,
Grok went down and it came back up,
and this wasn't being able to be done
anymore.
Every time we can see how transparently

(02:02:54):
they are gaming us.
So my point is that this is what's
happening to me and plenty of others in
my opinion. And that's why this kinda thing
happens where it just you just cannot, you
know, it's it's about suppression, it's about slowing
you down, it's about diminishing your efforts. In
some cases just stopping your spread and stopping
you from being able to access it. Sometimes
it just didn't work for me.
I just I found that to be relevant.

(02:03:15):
And interesting that this is even happening still.
So here
is another one that I found really interesting.
So I was gonna show you this the
other day, and since I had it pulled
up, this has already shifted. So now it
says, v visibility
limited.
I always found that fascinating. So, it's you
claim it's v it violates or may violate

(02:03:36):
hateful conduct,
but you allow it to stay there?
That's interesting, right? But yet, when something happens
to me when they are even wrong in
the past, or YouTube, wherever else, where they
misinformation medical misinformation when it's not even about
medical information,
the point is it just it's overly applied.
But check this out. It says,
Aden Hunter says, This is how

(02:03:58):
Jews talk about us amongst themselves. Now, I'm
not framing this as Jewish people. In my
opinion, it's obviously, as I've said every time,
in this context, it would be Jewish people
that are influenced by Zionism.
But realize it's not just Jewish people. There's
people that are Christian who clearly are influenced
by Zionism in the same way.

(02:04:19):
Arguably more than the world today than Jews.
So, the point is about Zionism.
That's the reality. You can argue, you can
make up everything you want around that. The
I to frame that I'm somehow attacking Jewish
people is simply not the case. I'm going
after the Zionist influence over anybody that includes
Jews. But his point is simply that and
he's not wrong.
This is what they're saying, which is crazy

(02:04:40):
that you should look at. But I wanna
be clear that I think that's the Zionism
that is causing that. I know plenty of
Jewish people that would call this out, guys.
So I don't care if you think that's
half a percent or 50%. It matters to
highlight it the right way. And it says
they debate how we should be slaughtered.
They think all Palestinians should be killed, babies
and all. He's right. It's easy to see.
It's everywhere on this platform. It says, and

(02:05:01):
this is just what we see online. And
the privacy of their homes is it is
far worse.
Now check this out, guys.
You can go through and do every single
one.
But this this is the one of the
ones I grabbed.
This crazy.
So they suppressed this tweet. They suppressed the
view of this tweet for showing what they're

(02:05:22):
saying.
Okay?
This one,
from this guy right here. And, again, you
can look them all up.
There it is.
That's not suppressed.
That's strange?
Not suppressed at all. You know why? Because
it doesn't have much reach,
but it's not an equal application. And I'm
not calling for any censorship. What I'm saying
is this says, orphans, future terrorists, all of

(02:05:44):
them should be killed. That's what this guy
says in response to a conversation about children
and orphans being killed inside of these schools.
So Twitter, in its infinite knowledge and insight,
decides to limit the ability of this tweet
highlighting that
in a in a way that shows you
how all encompassing this is, but allows the
tweet that calls for children to be murdered,

(02:06:06):
orphans to be killed.
And that one's okay.
Do I need to explain that? Is it
not obvious that they want this to be
not viewed because it shows you the real
picture, but they're okay with the hatred? They're
okay with the calling for children to be
killed?
How do you misunderstand that?
This is a compilation of information that shows

(02:06:26):
you how disgustingly hate filled Zionists are in
this context.
And they don't want that to be shared.
That's the same reason I show you the
doctor's tweet that I share is limited visibility
every single time. Be not because it violates
any of the rules, I could prove it
to you, but because they don't want the
rage to get out. Because it's powerful.
And, again, they in this case being Twitter.

(02:06:49):
Now, here Oh, well, there was I thought
another one. But anyway,
there you Go take your time if you
want to. I've already shown you in the
past how to do the search.
Right? The advanced search. Type in the words
actually these are a little more difficult because
you have to what I do is I
use Google translate. Type in the words, and
then type in the Hebrew. Because that's they're
all in Hebrew. That's why people aren't seeing
this as much. And then you can find

(02:07:11):
it using their tag.
And that I just showed it to you.
Right there. Right? So you type in their
tag right here.
And then, oh, you know what? You can
really oh, wait. You wouldn't have this to
type grab it from. Plus you have to
type out the words and copy it over.
You'll find every one of them. They're all
there. None of them not a single one
that I found is visible. Limited visibility.
I think that is a powerful point, personally.

(02:07:32):
To show and I mean, look at this
guys. I I didn't even show you. Look
look at
look how many he's showing you. Every single
one of them, screaming for children to be
killed, laughing about people being hurt, raped, tortured.
It is despicable.
And to be clear, not what every Israeli
or every Jew thinks. It's just simply not.

(02:07:52):
Now on top of that, under the couple
points overlapping with this, I thought were interesting
as Casey Wright points out. Maduro
speaking about this overhead, this weird beef with
Elon Musk. Right? And what he says and
he calls him, we'll cuu whoever we want
because that's what Elon actually said about Bolivia.
He says Elon personally bankrolled
the effort to oust him for a $1,000,000,000,

(02:08:12):
which by the way seems to line up
with the way he was acting.
But that's what Maduro says, so you have
to who knows if it's true?
He's a member of the government, and governments
lie. But the bottom line is that Elon
at without and I think it was Al
McLeod pointed this out, had no didn't even
mention, Venezuela
before
2023 or whatever it was. Not not a

(02:08:32):
word.
And then all of a sudden was just
gung ho about overthrowing Venezuela.
I just it's not it's kind of easy
to see. I think I genuinely think that's
the reality. And and Venezuela does have gigantic
lithium reserves.
Some of them are, like, you know, on
not even, like, developed.
But he also points this out. He says,
so it turns out the Venezuelan gang that

(02:08:55):
everyone says has taken over Colorado,
Maduro says that that gang
is led by the same guy who led
the charge that were trying to oust him.
Think about that.
So here we have a guy who's being
used to try to oust Maduro, but apparently
funded by Elon Musk, if you take Maduro
at his word, which you should question.

(02:09:15):
And now,
by his word again, the guy who was
being led that way is now suddenly in
the United States.
Now shouldn't we maybe ask seeing us how
Elon has also been pushing this argument from
Colorado? It's it's no. Let's just say for
fake sake of conversation that this is true.
Well, wouldn't that seem to suggest that he's
responsible partly for what's going on in Colorado?

(02:09:36):
I'm not the evidence isn't there. But I
found it fascinating. Now this could just be
Maduro
kinda trying to get him back for their
little back and forth dynamic.
But it's interesting, and I do I do
let's not forget that the Venezuelan resistance,
these people were horrible. They were funding the
worst people just like every other situation.
They were the ones that were beating people

(02:09:56):
up, then they were the ones that were
throw they're throwing Molotov cocktails on the trucks
and blaming it on the other side.
Every time in every dynamic, you can see
the people that they support or they use,
and they're the worst. Because the worst are
usually more amenable to buy to here's money.
Do what I tell you.
Well, either way, he says the CIA hired
them to oust Maduro. They failed, and now
they're doing now they're here in the United

(02:10:16):
States committing crimes.
What I find interesting about that and here's
the actual article, by the way. It's in
Spanish. It's translated. It's what he highlights.
Here's a little bit of TikTok.
By the way, with no source material, just
an image and text because, you know, Twitter
files.
I I did see this thread and I
I should've just saved it. But the the
this I didn't I just my opinion was

(02:10:37):
this this was one of few images that
were posted
by some building management company that clearly had
an interest in not highlighting the problem. Doesn't
mean they were lying. But it's hard to
take if face value a person who has
every reason to not want that story to
be told, who came out and made this
big story about how they were, you know,
basically leaning into the story that the republicans
are pushing around this conversation.

(02:10:58):
Now, obviously, there's a gang issue here and
obviously there are Venezuelan gangs. It's the question
of whether the full story they're pushing is
the reality. For how many times they're lying
and all the information even within this story
they've been caught making up, it's kinda easy
to at least recognize that there's lies and
that the bigger story is
rather, the the story is being used for
partisan narratives. My point here

(02:11:19):
is that
if that's the point, if what Maduro just
said is true, here's loads of TikTok highlighting
a person who got beat up because of
gangs that Elon Musk is funding. At least
was in regard to a Maduro and now
are back in Colorado. Like, isn't it weird
though that they were gonna scream about,
I don't know, any other dynamic of illegal
immigrants of these problems or the pointing at

(02:11:41):
them and blaming Kamala Harris.
I just find it almost in entertaining to
see how that overlap might make sense. And
quite frankly, it wouldn't surprise me. Let me
do this real quickly. I forgot about
this.
You just got Twitter filed.
Oh, there it is.

(02:12:03):
Parks and rec. I think that's funny. But
so my point being simply that, you know,
obviously, there's more always going on behind the
scenes. Always. And it's obvious to see that
Elon Musk has is is he's acting in
his own interests. So when you see him
get aggressive, he involved I mean, he he's
not fighting for free speech. He's not trying
to save the country, guys. He's fighting for
himself.
No. I could be wrong, but

(02:12:25):
look at our track record. I think it
speaks for itself. I think the evidence is
pretty damn obvious what's going on. Trump is
the same conversation.
So we just talked about Elon's great reset.
We've rolled out every single thing that the
the the conservatives, the republicans were screaming about,
rightly so, during the gray the COVID 19
conversation, the great reset, the World Economic Forum.
But Elon rolls out the same things and

(02:12:46):
we go, yay, because he's the good guy.
I just we can't be that easy to
manipulate. But I wanna oh, here's the article
we covered then. It's a lot. Here's what
Alex Finn had to say on
the eighteenth.
He says, Elon's 44,000,000,000
per dollar purchase of Twitter is the single
greatest investment in human history.

(02:13:06):
This is so silly. I mean, it's right
out of Trump's hyperbolic
wheelhouse.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is totally delusional. Right?
Let me let me make a
wildly bombastic statement then go, if you disagree,
you're crazy.
Just good good start. Right? But he goes
on. The point in this one is to
show you that he's just blind you know,
Elon's the greatest. Everything's the Elon, you know,
he didn't just buy a network. He bought

(02:13:27):
power and exposure and he's changing the world.
This is what it's all about. You see
down here, the people who thought this was
a bad investment are playing checkers while Elon's
playing 4 d interdimensional chess. Oh, we're back
there now. We're back at 4 d chess
again.
I guess they just can't think of new
things to say. Well, here's the point that
actually I wanted to highlight.
On
15th,
he says, I'm being 100% serious.

(02:13:49):
Your only goal
in the next 3 years is not to
die.
We are about to enter the greatest age
in human history. Now he calls himself Steve
Jobs mixed with Steve Austin, building the first
one person $1,000,000,000 company. Who knows if he's
even I don't know. I don't know anything
about him, but that could just be all
Twitter nonsense. But, again, my point is to

(02:14:10):
know what why he would even know this,
but you can think for yourself. But he
goes, it's simply that it's being stated. And
I believe this is a it's a pro
Elon Musk, pro republican mindset
despite what we just came through.
It says, we are about to enter the
greatest age in human history.
AGI, going to Mars, reversing aging. You see
where this is going?
If this was Elon if this was Kamala,

(02:14:31):
if this was Biden, if this was any
democrat, if this was Klaus Schwab,
you already know the answer to the that
you can finish this sentence yourself.
Reversing aging, humanoid robots, self driving cars.
We are all about to enter the 1st
golden age of our lifetimes.
We are about to achieve endless abundance all
in the next 3 years.

(02:14:52):
So now you've got the republican climate change.
Right? You know, we're gonna die in 3
years. No. We're gonna save the world in
3 years. Like, it's the same damn thing
from different sides. It's always the way this
works.
He goes, I'm not kidding. Derisk everything in
your life. So basically, his point is you're
gonna if you just last it out, you're
gonna live forever.
Well, isn't that a perfect wasn't that a
sort of like a trust the plan in
another way?
Quietly box yourself in your house and don't

(02:15:13):
do anything for just let it all play
out?
Yes.
I don't know why we can't see that.
It says no more hard drugs, no more
skydiving, no more speeding. There's a decent chance
in the next 3 years we figure out
how to reverse aging and nobody dies anymore.
Which I'm not even saying is necessarily, like,
that crazy.
Because you I I mean, I won't go
into it now, but there's some damn terrifying
stuff that there's there's some real conversation to

(02:15:35):
this. And I think that my point would
be let me finish it real quick. It
might sound crazy and illogical, he says, but
this is the worst time in history for
you to die. Stay inside.
Order all your groceries. Learn to use AI.
Build products. Look, lock the f in.
Right. So
lock down?
Use AI? Order your groceries in Amazon? Okay.
So COVID 19 again? Yay. Republicans and Elon.

(02:15:58):
And it says, we are about to make
it.
So he says
oh, it's all about the aging point. So,
I mean, the the reality being,
there's obvious technology
that is leaning in this direction, but it's
just like everything else we talk about. Are
we really gonna pretend there's gonna
discover how to reverse aging and be like,
here you go. Free for everyone.

(02:16:20):
Are we really that naive? I mean, even,
like, even if you go back a 150
or 50 years or a 100 year, the
point is that even then when it kinda
was the way things worked to a degree,
where they would roll out new but even
then, you look back and realize, okay. Well,
they had this on the burner for 50
years for the military.
It's never how this works for average people.
And that's that's just inventions that better your
life. If we're talking about something like this,

(02:16:41):
that turns you into, like, a different species,
or you could frame it however you want.
You are now separate. You be if you
live forever, clearly people that die, you you
you you're a lesser than.
This will I mean, people have made this
point about genetic and genetic, you know, engineering.
That essentially, you're gonna get to a point,
which already happens right now, where you can
go, oh, I want my baby to have
blue eyes. I want them to be strong

(02:17:02):
and fast and have blonde hair or whatever.
Right? I want them to be black and
I want them to run fast and whatever
you want. The people are gonna choose
what they want from their child.
And now here's the question. For those that
can't afford that, because you know that's how
it's gonna work, what happens to them in
50 years? A 100 years?
500 years?
You literally become a different species. That's not

(02:17:24):
even up for question. You will eventually become
something that is, like, time machine. You know,
like, what are the the more locks and
the you're gonna be different things because they
you will change so dramatically. At the very
least, you will be seen as lesser than.
Now to some people, they probably just shrug
this off as crazy. But guys, it's literally
in this is going on to some degree.
And if we're talking about the idea of

(02:17:44):
never dying anymore,
hoping, you know, honestly,
the second part of this is whether that,
you know, that's almost that's from religious perspective
is pretty blasphemous. Right? You are that is
blasphemy. You are actually
that's what people in the comments are like,
that's anti religion, anti god.
But this is the interesting part about this
is you're having people that are driving from
a Christian right mindset who are leaning into

(02:18:06):
this. That's what Elon is all about.
I just don't know why people in the
conservative side of this who are open minded
enough to think about this can s push
back on this stuff. Call them out because
they're not being honest with you.
But he goes people in the replies saying
they don't wanna live forever. Okay, boomer.
God, that's so stupid. All these dumb little

(02:18:26):
cheeky You know, so based. And okay, boomer.
I mean, I'm just, like, maybe I'm just
the old guy now, but I think those
are stupid. I think they're just dumb statements.
But this guy goes, a lot of people
calling me anti god because I wanna live
forever.
You ever go to the doctor? Take medicine?
What an absolute like, okay. That's a terrible
argument.
To not die is literally anti god. That's

(02:18:47):
exactly what that means.
But you can decide for yourself. Maybe you're
not religious out there. I just think this
is driving us in the direction that everybody
would freak out about if it was anybody
else.
And that point is, this is not Elon
saying this, but this is my direct the
direction of this technocratic circle. There's no question
there. You wanna listen to Peter Thiel talk
about this stuff? Guys, they're all leaning into

(02:19:07):
this. Talk the Ambrosia company is literally taking
blood of younger people and in infusing it
with old with an older person's blood to
make them live longer. These things are already
happy. That that goes back a decade.
So who knows where we are right now?
Now let's get into foreign policy.
Because I think this is important because, right
now I mean, whether this is something as

(02:19:28):
Vanessa Bealy highlighted as sort of the
the the almost like the justification
to map out how this stuff gets used.
There are so many overlaps what's going on.
But my personal opinion is this should matter
regardless.
Because what's going on here in most of
these cases is being funded with your tax
dollars if you're in the in the United
States or really in the west.

(02:19:49):
And that should matter because human life should
matter to all of us.
But let's start with the ISIS conversation.
Now this one, really, I've talked about before,
I think twice,
and in-depth.
And I'll include those articles for you to
read.
So this starts with The Guardian, technically, and
it says, you are next.

(02:20:09):
Online posts show Islamic state interest in attacks
in on the US ahead of election.
Now I don't know if it's just me
sort of, like, looking at corporate media or
politicians and just going like I mean, it's
like a cartoon.
It's like it's like they have gotten so
used to the how like, they can't even
recognize how out of touch they are with
what actually makes sense anymore. Like, you're next.

(02:20:32):
They they they literally claim apparently put a
poster out, a propaganda poster that's like, you're
next. We're coming for you at the capital.
I mean, why would that even make sense?
If the objective is to do this, why
would you tell them you're gonna do it?
Because that's what happens when they want you
to think it's gonna happen. When they either
want you to think it or they want
you to know who you're to blame when

(02:20:54):
they do it.
I mean, really think about how stupid that
this is as stupid as pretending that Iran
warned about attacking you, but then somehow failed.
They literally told you so you could and
even then, you weren't able to stop most
of it. The point is that this is
stand out on its on its face.
I mean, on top of the fact that
we know what ISIS and Al Qaeda are.

(02:21:15):
Ridiculous.
Because these are elements that are literally influenced,
if not controlled, by the people we're talking
about.
That's why I've included the documentary yet again.
Oh, it's this, oh, it's right here.
James Corbett's The Secret History of Al Qaeda.
If you it's telling you. If you watch
this, you will not be able to question
this information. It's
airtight.

(02:21:36):
But here is the article
from today. After the FBI arrested an Afghan
man in Oklahoma,
planning an election day shooting on behalf of
the Islamic State, because, you know, they just
hate your freedom. Right? The terrorist organization reentered
what has become one of the most chaotic
news cycles leading up to the November vote.
Yeah. As I've re I phrased the title,
pretty much the most opportune time to be

(02:21:57):
like, oh, no. They're gonna attack you because
they hate your freedom, despite the fact that
it doesn't make sense with anything else that's
going on.
It says, warnings about
Islamic State sponsored or inspired attacks in the
West have intensified,
which means nothing.
It's like they said October 7th. Well, it's
a day that things could happen,
so be fearful.

(02:22:20):
Inspired attacks means there's no evidence, but they
think they might do it just because
and really the framing is that our elections
are the envy of the world, which is
a ridiculous joke. Nobody thinks that. Other than
people in the political sphere and blinded 2
party paradigm believers that don't know that nobody
thinks that.
It says in a statement in the Tawhidi

(02:22:41):
case,
a US attorney general, that's the guy's name
up here,
Nasir Ahmad Tawidi.
In a statement on the case, the US
attorney general Merrick Garland remarked
there was a continuing need to, quote, combat
the ongoing threat that IS and its its
supporters pose to American national security.

(02:23:01):
You know, you mean the group that Trump
defeated 4 times?
Right? And they get actually gets into this
article. They mentioned this point. They don't mention
Trump, But there's a reason Trump said repeatedly
over his administration. They are a 100% defeated.
He said that over and over.
So it's kinda silly. So either he lied,
which it could be both, or they did,
or, you know, or it never existed. You

(02:23:21):
know, whatever you wanna frame it as. It's
silly to make these arguments.
My ID my point is that
the
the on combat the ongoing threat to our
national security.
I mean, if this, first of all, is
a group that we can prove is completely
interlinked with our governments, well, Then we should
be very out
aghast by that. That means your government is

(02:23:42):
literally planning something, or it's a group that's
gotten out of control,
and that they're responsible for that case.
But either way,
what we keep seeing with how this is,
let's say, working inside of Yemen,
still to this very day, this big pocket
of ISIS just seems comfortably snug right into
the controlled US and Saudi Arabia area that's
only grown.

(02:24:03):
My point is that they're
locked in it,
And yet somehow are able to they're they're
working with each other. You can see it
right on the information. Or that they've moved
them around and given them medical treatment or
is is real. I'm I'm gonna get into
all this in a second.
The point is clear that this doesn't make
sense, or ISIS attacks Iran, let's say.
Aren't they supposed to be the leading state

(02:24:25):
sponsor of terrorism, but yet they're being attacked
by the leading terrorist organization? Yeah. That doesn't
make sense.
But it says describing how his agency has,
quote, one hell of a job managing the
threat of the resurgent
terrorist organization. Oh, okay. Simple as that. They're
just coming back up again.
Okay.
Well, it doesn't make much sense when you
understand the dynamic of what's really going on.

(02:24:45):
I mean, are they what from where? The
only way you can connect the dots is
to recognize the people that the US government
Israel have been funding.
It's obvious.
There's on Today, it's on the record. It's
all been exposed. They have been funding the
most radical elements of Islam for a very
long time.
Saudi Arabia has admitted this more than once.
And that's where this ideology comes. The whole
Wahabi sort of Sunni mindset, which is driving

(02:25:07):
the most radical elements. And that's largely why
they're going after they have this this whole
religious divide, the Shia Sunni divide. It's this
is a religious war in that context, and
they're stoking that.
Anyway, go forward. It goes on to say,
despite the talk of top officials, public perception
still remains that ISIS was defeated or else
someone disappeared. Well, gee, maybe that's because the

(02:25:28):
president said that 5 times. I wonder. But
it says increasingly been discussing attacks on the
west and the US homeland.
Because, of course, it makes perfect sense for
them to go work on a bomb you.
You ready?
Get ready. Here we come. And it goes
on to say the online conversations are being
led by Islamic State k
or
ISIS k, which is important. We're gonna get

(02:25:50):
into it next, which
is a proxy element. The it is Today
is the proxy element of Israel and United
States, in my opinion. Based on the evidence.
The branch based in Afghanistan that was behind
the Moscow attack, which again, that's where this
we did a deep dive because of that
attack.
They killed a 100 and 5 145 people.
I'm of the mind after this story today.
I was thinking about this today. How many

(02:26:12):
times we've talked about Afghanistan?
And what do I say every time? That's
the lie that we somehow just left Afghanistan.
It's you can easily prove that there are
elements still there, that there are contractors that
still exist there, academy black water type elements.
And on top of that, that they still
have overlap with the Taliban and different groups
that they clearly have worked with despite the

(02:26:32):
narratives.
So my point is, I'm beginning to think
that that's what this was all about. At
least, maybe the the
saving grace because they or I who knows
how you know, the 20 plus Vietnam style
failure, but I don't wanna look at it
as, after they took minerals and lithium and
everything else, opium.
The point though is that now because we're
after the fact,

(02:26:53):
I believe that this it's it's gonna you're
gonna see a resurgent as they're highlighting it.
The ISIS threat in Afghanistan, which will justify
that they have to go back in there,
which they already left.
Even though I think what we're showing is
that they are part of their element. They
are another moderate rebels dynamic. But it just
re recreates this whole war on terror dynamic.
And so the growing ISIS k becomes the

(02:27:14):
bigger problem because I I that's what I'm
reading from this. My opinion. Mostly based on
the facts, but whether that is where resurgence
is is the resurgent spot or not, that's
for you to decide. That's what I think
is the that's what logically lines up here.
Now going forward, it says,
where was I? ISIS,

(02:27:35):
k or
ISK in this article. Islamic State versus ISIS
says, has quickly become the most active international
force of the terror group.
Having already carried out the deadly plot in
Russia,
and now they're in Iran. Okay. Let's reflect
on that.
So we're talking about a group that we
claim

(02:27:55):
what that they claim hates our freedom. Right?
Hates our freedom. Okay. But then you keep
telling us that Russia and Iran are terrorists
or or just despotic places.
So why are they attacking them?
Okay. And then the idea is that they're
going after you because they hate the west
and
Israel because they just hate the Jews. Right?

(02:28:16):
Isn't that they keep telling us this. And
Iran is sponsoring it. Oh, okay. But they
attacked Russia and Iran.
The people that you're fighting in this dynamic,
I mean, it really is this blatantly obvious.
Especially since beyond all of that, we can
simply walk this back to where it started,
which is the US and Israel.
Now my point is that we're now seeing

(02:28:37):
this
most active international force out of the place
that they were occupying for 20 plus years
and that they grew,
that they are creating,
and is attacking their enemies.
Pretty easy to see. And now ISIS K
has recently, quote, reiterated its intent to target
the US
with a poster
depicting its militants holding a grenade in front

(02:28:57):
of the US capital, captioned, you're next. Again,
guys, it's as if it's what they would
see in a like, what they're they're, like,
making a movie. I think these people are
so out of touch with what we think
and how we read situations that they're making
movies. Like, their propaganda is like 19 nineties
movie style stuff. It's ridiculous.
Can't they think I don't or they just
think we're that stupid.

(02:29:19):
They're gonna go, we're coming for you. I
mean, I guess you could argue that they're
they did that to sow discord and they're
not gonna go after the capitol. I mean,
but, guys, again, all those points together show
you that this is and I we'll go
through it. I'm gonna give you the other
parts of this that will connect with what
I've been saying. To me, that's cartoonishly stupid.
This is the guardian obtained the same poster,

(02:29:39):
which was released online through known ISIS k
platform. Okay. Let's think about that.
So we're in a technological age. Right? To
where they can track people down within minutes
using technology.
And we're gonna pretend that they don't know
where to find these people who have a
platform?
Are they that technologically advanced? They can stay
one step ahead of the CIA?

(02:30:00):
Or the Mossad?
Really?
I mean, because I've made this point so
many times over the years, you know, that
they they have their tariff platform, they post
their tariff content. Whatever it is. Are we
really gonna pretend that they can't find out
where that is? I mean, you could argue
that they are technologically advanced, but that's not
the way that they would want you to
view them.
I just find it to be silly. And

(02:30:20):
it says, this is additionally concerning, quote, given
the branch's
mass casualty attacks on Russia and Iran. Here's
how they frame this. Leaving the United States
as the remaining adversary.
Hold on. So now you're claiming that they're
an adversary of Russia and Iran even though
you keep telling us that they're the terrorist
funders?
It just you can't just keep playing it

(02:30:41):
every direction whenever you want to, which is
what they do.
And it goes on to say, when ISIS
k has seized on the the tawmelt in
in Afghanistan
since the Taliban took over,
you mean since the group that never actually
stopped being there, that you worked with and
had meetings with, that you allowed to be
in power,
suddenly was in power, took over and now

(02:31:01):
everything's happening? No. You guys, you made this
happen. So right there proves what I'm saying.
But improve it, but it adds to what
I'm saying.
They left this. Trump was having talks with
tal Taliban, the group they used as the
justification
to invade
20 years later.
And then you leave under Biden,
Taliban's still there.

(02:31:22):
And then you blame that for why this
is resurging. How do you not see that
as a manufactured thing?
And it says, they've established a face of
operations in that country. Its broader movement has
also been heavily recruiting since October 7 of
the tax. And the Israeli military operations that
followed. Oh, okay. You get it? So they
hate the Jewish people. They're gonna want they're
gonna go after Israel.
But they went after Israel's enemies, though.

(02:31:45):
Don't think too hard into it. Just believe
ISIS is gonna take you crap for your
freedom. Right? That's how lazy this is.
Building since October 7th? Then why would they
go after Iran if you're telling us Iran
was part of October 7th?
I just can't I just I don't understand
why people can't see through this stuff. And
it goes it ends saying, Weber noted that
a part of the problem is raising awareness

(02:32:05):
surrounding the seriousness of the moment in the
common misconception that ISIS was defeated.
But he added branches still remain in Syria,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and elsewhere. Oh, so then
literally nothing happened? You fought a war on
terror still to this day and they're everywhere?
Yep. Because the whole point was they weren't
actually doing that, guys. We need to be
clear about that. They were using these people.

(02:32:27):
They were growing these people. They were funding
these people.
If we can't acknowledge that by now, I
don't think we're ever gonna succeed in anything.
My point is I believe that we are
seeing this stuff, and people are coming to
terms with it.
So on that point, I'll play this clip
again. And by the way, somebody told me
it was from 2015.
The point for me on this clip was
not necessarily relevant around the date, because I

(02:32:47):
was I was clear that it was old.
I think I said 2018 when I framed
it. And my point is simply that this
is an older opinion of Trump's.
And I've seen I mean, in the next
clip over, he talks about taking the guns
and due process later. This clip, he talks
about shutting down the internet and saying that
if you believe in free speech, you're stupid.
It's lit it's what he says. We got
a lot of stupid people. Oh, free speech,

(02:33:08):
he says.
You can certainly argue he changes opinion, but
how in the world that would be the
case? I mean, it's kind of a hard
thing to think there was a dramatic change.
I hope he did. But my point is
you can clearly see as he's talking about
getting rid of people that have views about,
you know, Palestinian supporters being framed as anti
semitic and get rid of them out of
the country, or Elon Musk saying we should
deport them. You can clearly see that they

(02:33:29):
do still have these opinions. But this overlaps
with the very thing we just talked about.
In this clip, he's saying that ISIS is
recruiting from online. That article had a whole
section about people being recruited.
And the idea being that we need to
shut it down because they're gonna recruit and
people are gonna get radicalized. And we're going
back to square 1. And it guess who
we ask to help?
Who do who who do we reach out
to to help us shut down the internet?

(02:33:51):
Because we're losing a lot of people because
of the internet. And we have to do
something. We have to go see Bill Gates
and a lot of different people
that really understand what's happening. We have to
talk to them, maybe in certain areas, closing
that Internet up in some way. Somebody will
say, oh, freedom of speech. Freedom of speech.
These are foolish people. We have a lot

(02:34:11):
of foolish people. Wow. We have a lot
of foolish people. We've gotta maybe do something
with the Internet because they are recruiting by
the 1,000.
I just don't know how you wreck
freedom of speech. Like, you don't
diminish that idea.
And, I mean, I I mean, look, anything's

(02:34:33):
possible. I just think you need to be
real with yourself and acknowledge that that was
stated. And not brush it off like he's
just somehow different today. Because the opinions they
take today very clearly show you they feel
the same way.
Just using a different topic.
But so it's interesting to see the rise
of that. Right? So let's get into this
point.
So this was this is the article from

(02:34:53):
today, or rather,
15th. But talking about the current situation. Isis
k behind the foiled election day terrorism plot.
US officials say.
Yeah. I'm not sure. Good good journalism, guys.
Anonymous guy in the US government that we're
supposed to hold to account says, great journalism.
That's everything you see in corp media today.
They don't they don't challenge the media anymore
or the government. But so this goes back

(02:35:15):
to the article the show we did on
the on March 22, 2024.
Who is behind the Moscow Crocus City Hall
attack?
They claim it was ISIS k. My point
going through this really did expand my understanding
of specifically what this next this group is
what they're doing and how they play a
role in this manipulation. So there that that
was the first one, and then we followed
up on

(02:35:35):
the 23rd.
All evidence points to US, Israel, Ukraine
behind the Crocus City Hall shooting, and does
ISIS k even exist?
My point is I think the evidence shows
that they're just a a legitimate proxy element
today, as all of it is in some
way. But whether they, my point is that
Saudi Arabia, or I think it was Mohammed
bin Salman made a point to say publicly

(02:35:57):
that they basically started these groups, but they've
lost control of them. Paraphrasing.
Which would make sense in a way. Right?
Like, that they just funded them and dumped
money into them and got them to do
certain things and then they just continue to,
a point where they had their own power
and they just bucked them and went away.
I mean, that happens to everyone they work
with. I I've I've said over the years,
Saddam Hussein was an ally of the United
States until suddenly he wasn't. Osama Bin Laden

(02:36:17):
was an ally of the United States until
suddenly he wasn't. They used him in Afghanistan
to fight against the Soviet Union. They made
a movie about it, Charlie Wilson's war. The
point on top of that though,
the Washington Post called him a warrior of
peace until suddenly he wasn't.
How do we not make how do we
not put those two things together? Because our
media sphere is dishonest.

(02:36:38):
And so my point is that the we
always can see these elements that we like,
what the ISIS point is that they were
being used,
and then suddenly, maybe, maybe, they just went
on their own way and said, screw you,
we don't wanna work with you anymore. My
point would be if that was a group
that they could take care of, they would.
Just like we see in every other example.
They suddenly don't like them anymore. They don't
that now our puppet president doesn't like what

(02:36:59):
we wanna do anymore. Replace them.
But scream democracy as we do it. That's
how they
work. So here's some of the quick information.
I recommend you watch both those shows because
it's very clear to me. Wyatt Reed points
this out. For anyone wondering how the US
government could be so sure ISIS k carried
out the massacre in Moscow, this should help.

(02:37:19):
And it shows Sharpe's,
Seth Harp. Incredible.
The leader of ISIS k was a contractor
at Bagram Air Force Base, then worked security
for drug lord, Razdan Gostam, a top CIA
proxy.
He later worked for Amrula Saleh, chief of
the NDS, literally the CIA's right hand man
in Afghanistan.

(02:37:40):
It's right there on the Wikipedia page, or
it used to be until they changed it.
Which is what's happening
constantly today. I mean, if somebody I'm not
even gonna go into it, but somebody made
a point about the Twitter archives being removed.
I'm I'm why I don't know why we
think that wasn't I I my thought was
probably Elon Musk. Probably the Twitter itself. Probably
for obvious reasons.

(02:38:01):
And it's it was like 2020 to 2024.
But overall,
it just shows you the kind of scrubbing
of the history that like, it's right at
19 right out of 1984.
Where every I mean, there's just as we
go forward, there's so much alter on these
platforms that we just don't even know what
to believe anymore.
But here is the actual page going back.
I was able to find it on archive
dot today or archive dot p a p

(02:38:23):
h.
This guy looks like an Oompa Loompa with
his hair. It says, he worked as a
subcontractor
of a security company and frequented Bagram Air
Print Airfield. Excuse me. He was a special
guard of then first vice presidents Abdul Rashid
Dastem, who they mentioned, and Amstraw Lesley. And
had a license to transfer weapons since 2017.

(02:38:43):
Now the base itself,
as it says right here,
was formerly the largest US military base in
Afghanistan.
Like, guys, we have to see how obvious
this is. The guy's literally working directly through
a US base.
It's just hard it's impossible to miss. And
that's and on top of that, 2 different
CIA proxy elements being overlapped with this one

(02:39:04):
guy. Now what's hilarious about it is guess
what? That's no longer there today. They have
literally removed any mention of that from the
Wikipedia page. This is the world we're entering
into. This is the 1984 brave new world
technocratic future that we're all worrying about, that
we're one step at a time, boiling frog,
being slowly pied piper into by the Elon
Musks of the world.
Now back to the point,

(02:39:25):
this is ISIS k.
Or the this is what,
Wyatt Reed was highlighting as
the elements, the leadership of this overlapping point,
because that's who they're talking about with this
guy. So here
is just a point that I brought up
in the last show. Curious, ISIS chooses to
attack Russia and not Israel in the current

(02:39:46):
political circumstances.
It's a good point. Right? With if you're
all telling us that that's the all of
these are aimed against Israel, which is what
Israel's saying, then why would they go after
Russia? Who you're claiming is on the other
side of this. It just doesn't logically make
any sense.
But it goes, come to think of it,
when do they ever attack Israel? And that's
the right question to ask. Because it hasn't

(02:40:06):
happened. How do you explain that?
I mean, in the context of they're the
one they're focusing on. It's all because they
hate the Jews. That's what that's what they're
putting in. That's what they're currently saying.
Now, also, we shot all this was pretty
much from the last shows.
This person points out that one of the
people they caught, this was one of the

(02:40:26):
only pictures we got
at the Moscow Crocus Hall attack.
As they simply said, doesn't look like ISIS
to me. I agree. It looks like a
white guy. So you're gonna make up that.
But that doesn't mean you couldn't be a
white guy in whatever ISIS is. You know?
A proxy element of I mean, that's actually
the point. But
just consider that it's there's something else, a

(02:40:47):
foot here. Oops. Oh, dang it. I hope
I didn't just lose something.
Okay. No. Now this this is just another,
what, local article saying Russia thwarted ISIS k's
plot,
as they would frame it to trigger inter
religious discord.
So it's interesting that this is about, like,
creating that sectarian
divide. Like, that's part of this bigger dynamic.

(02:41:10):
Here's Jerusalem Post
saying Israel treating Al Qaeda fighters wounded in
Syria civil war. That's the point we keep
highlighting is that this is how obvious this
is. This is the Jerusalem Post. And they're
they're literally giving medical treatment to the ISIS
and Al Qaeda fighters.
Why do you think that is?
Here's Avi Yemeni,

(02:41:30):
misterzionistrevelnews.com.
He says, while the usual lunatics on Twitter
are busy blaming Israel and America for the
barbaric attack in Moscow today,
ISIS claim responsibility, which I thought was hilarious
at the time. I'm like, oh, so you
trust ISIS now?
Or is it just that you're easily happy
to look into it or blindly trust it
because that's what you want to be the
case? You don't want to blame the obvious

(02:41:51):
culprits.
I mean, it just this guy is the
the entire platform, I think, has lost a
lot of momentum because of how obviously they're
shelling for the genocide of Israel right now.
But think about how silly it is. Couldn't
you or as a supposed journalist, aren't you
gonna go, well, maybe they just wanna take
credit because that makes them look like they're
stronger? They get, you know, street rep or
whatever you wanna talk about? Street cred?

(02:42:14):
No. Because, you know, they claimed it because
that works for me. So let's pretend like
they're crazy for saying the opposite.
So Avi trusts ISIS. Make sure that goes
down in history. The point though, as
the RT India pointed out,
this whole breakdown
is something that ISIS stopped using a long
time ago. It says rumors ISIS claim responsibility

(02:42:34):
are unfounded.
The widely shared image of the alleges, which
Avi took at face value,
alleges to be a statement by the group
taking responsibility,
but the news template that ISIS apparently abandoned
many years ago. Now maybe they picked it
back up. But the point is, it seems
like what somebody who
used ISIS in the past
might be an easy rote route to take.

(02:42:55):
You know, an element that funded and armed
and used them might suddenly use the old
dynamic they were using before?
Certainly possible.
Here is a Mint Press news article. Israeli
website claims ISIS commander revealed as Mossad agent.
It's a very big story. Let me look
at it. It's it's a this is from,
Whitney Webb, 2017.
And it's a Israeli website. And the information

(02:43:17):
seems pretty damn clear. This was covered pretty
broadly.
The reality is, guys, this has been exposed
by Israeli media many times. They very often,
whether Hamas or anything else, very often dress
up like their adversaries and carry out terrible
attacks. That's called terrorism, by the way. And
realistically or funny enough, I accidentally started playing
this earlier. That's where it actually comes from.
Well, I mean, certainly, the Zionists have used

(02:43:37):
it and brought it, in fact, to the
area. Terrorism as we know it today, the
planning of bombs and marketplaces and so on
and so forth, was in fact introduced into
the Middle East by the Zionists in the
twenties.
But the net result of of Zionist,
terrorism and and violence in the in the
1st 3rd of 20th century has brought forth,
to my mind, the the anomaly,

(02:43:59):
the horrific and
unacceptable status in the Middle East today of
the state of Israel, which is in fact
an armed garrison state,
which now exports more arms and distributes violence
all around the world,
vastly disproportionate to its size. I mean, in
that respect, I think it's a it's it's
a horrible cycle
of of violence. But in it all, I
think the Palestinian is the victim. There's no

(02:44:20):
question about that.
That's pretty obvious.
Here's a Harass article, and he is signing
Iranian official, but the point is that they
still covered it. It says Israel's Mossad
created ISIS.
Now, there's a clip we'll show you in
a second, which makes this awful very hard
impossible to miss. The truth though is that
this is
documented. The information is obvious, and it's not

(02:44:41):
just Mossad. It is also the CIA and
the United States working in conjunction in this
effort.
Censored man shared this, and this is just
an old clipping that says, greater Israel, which
we've talked about many times. The 1982 plan
for Middle East empire aided by ISIS.
Well, it the clip you could disregard. Maybe
they don't know. Maybe they're not sourced well.

(02:45:02):
But what does it actually stand for?
Right? What does ISIS stand for? Maybe you
don't know.
Oh, this is an this is an old
report from corporate media in the United States.
Story about how you tried to find out
what the
what the Now, by the way, for the
clip for the podcast, it's you can hear
it. But they he pushed this kind of
overlay on it. I think it goes away.
But this is a clip from from like

(02:45:22):
a like a what what was it again?
I forget the name of the show. You'll
rec you'll rec it's it's like a 60
minutes equivalent kinda thing. It was very mainstream.
So this is a very mainstream discussion at
a time back then when I guess it
wasn't, you know, as aggressively shot down as
being anti semitic, you know, facts.
Call them aside when they deal with, public.
Find out what the
what they call them aside when they deal

(02:45:44):
with, public Again, sorry. One more time. It's
a it just it says Seaspan right underneath
that. I forget what the show was called,
but it's on Seaspan just to make that
more clear. So I'll let it play out
here. But the
what they call the Mossad when they deal
with, publicly? I thought it was a reasonable
question, but the trouble is, you can't pick
up the phone book. There's no, Langley in,
in Israel, as you can look up, you

(02:46:04):
know, CIA or in our case, the Mossad.
We thought we should ask, what shall we
call it in English? You can translate the
Hebrew words. As I said, Mossad is institute.
But when they write a letter to their
friends in the CIA or the British intelligence,
what do they call themselves? It took a
while. It was a matter of asking the
prime minister's spokesman. The best you could do
because officially,
the Mossad is under the prime minister's office.

(02:46:26):
And, I think he sort of wondered why
he wanna know and all that, so we
explained. And he came up with, the Israeli
Secret Intelligence
Service. I mean, if it were to have
initials, it would be I s I s.
Just simple words like that. Interestingly enough, a
kind of a British
Right. See, at that time, that wasn't some
big bombshell. That was just, okay, acronym.
That didn't exist the way it does today.

(02:46:48):
Kind of incredible to think about though. Right?
And it certainly could just be a coincidence.
But with all that we know, it's not.
Now let me put it this way. It
could just be a coincidence that that name
is the what was used, but the reality
that they are involved in this creation is
not a falsehood.
Just think about how ridiculous that is.
Now here is a Newsweek article. ISIS fighters

(02:47:09):
regret
attacking Israel.
That's what it says. And have, quote, apologized,
according to the former defense minister.
I mean, how many things do we actually
how much can we ignore?
So you can clearly show your seats documentary
wise of the the origin story of creating
them, working with them, the fund the the

(02:47:31):
kind of,
incubating period of the, the,
Mujahideen
or someone allowed an element, the Al Qaeda,
and then from their ISIS, you know, the
the the actions in Iraq and Syria, which
sort of drove this into reality, and they're
funding and arming of it all.
Or the idea that you can see that
their elements they're pointing to are attacking their

(02:47:51):
adversaries like Iran. Or that when they happen
to attack them, they say, whoops. We're sorry.
And that they have this the initials of
the secret service of, the secret elements of
Mossad.
Or that they've given them medical treatment.
I mean, it kinda takes a special kind
of ignorance to pretend like that's not the
most obvious thing in the world.
Antior.com,

(02:48:12):
in Israeli intel chief, quote, or not quote,
but just sorry. In Israeli intel chief. We
don't want ISIS defeated in Syria. Now, of
course, the argument they're making is that that
element sort of like, we'd like to see
disease proliferate in Gaza, doesn't necessarily mean they
made it happen, but it still shows you
a morally ambiguous perspective where we're willing to
let them suffer for our benefit. Well, we're

(02:48:32):
we're willing to let a terrorist group hurt
people innocent because we don't like Syria for
a greater Israel agenda. So it just always
shows you what Israel really is. But that
also recognizing that they have created this element.
Here's the cradle. New batch of ex ISIS
members transferred from Syria
to Ukraine.
And guess how easy this is to prove?

(02:48:53):
And we've shown you this a 100 times.
This is, this was on corporate media.
K? This was being shared. I mean, we've
seen this many times. Remember on on CNN,
they accidentally showed a guy given to Zig
Heil on the middle of the street, and
then they blurred it out later? Well, this
also happened, where they found an ISIS patch
on one of the guys' shoulders, and then
in the later episodes, they blurted out. Think

(02:49:13):
about taking the conscious choice to hide the
fact that people you're blindly supporting are wearing
an ISIS patch.
Right there.
More than 1, by the way.
See that?
Very clear.
Here's now here's more of them.

(02:49:35):
Just, same one there, but then other elements.
I'm and you you can find these a
lot. I found I think I've found at
least 3 different examples of 3 different times
of that happening.
Doesn't that mean something? Well, it should. Since
we just showed you the conversation from the
cradle, that they're just simply move them over.
What does that mean? They're an element. They're
they're a piece on a game board for
the people that are using them.

(02:49:58):
Now, again,
I really if you have not seen this
now, Ian, realistically,
this is a longer than the normal view.
The link to the main I think the
links are
oh, wait. Oh, no. That's right. The links
are in each individual link. So if you
click each one, the link to the documentary,
which is what I recommend you watch, is
in there. But if you wanna listen to
our commentary on top of it,
James, Brock and myself go over each one,

(02:50:19):
part 123.
And we give our, you know, stop every
now and again and make comments about certain
things.
But just watch these documentaries, guys. It will
change your entire perspective
on how this all started and what's currently
happening.
And then again, the last point about this,
before we bring it into Iran.
This just happened.

(02:50:40):
January 5th, 2024.
ISIS claims responsibility
for deadliest attack in Iran.
Right? So ISIS attacks a US and Israel
adversary of Russia and then claims responsibility and
Nabi goes, yeah. See? They claimed it. We
trust what they say. Despite the obvious overlaps
and and inconsistencies.
And then, of course, they attack the other
adversary. And they also claim it's the same

(02:51:02):
exact thing. This was also the same exact
conversation.
But let's not even say you've ignored all
the other evidence. The point is what I
said up here. How many times exactly do
we need to see ISIS or whatever we
know it as,
attack the enemies of Israel? And this was,
as always, at the peak of hostile rhetoric
between Israel and Iran

(02:51:22):
before we truly understand what we're seeing.
That it is them, guys.
It's ridiculous and obvious.
Now,
talking about Iran in particular here. Because we've
seen this interesting discussion that's what I titled
just the Iran attack part of the title
today. Recently,
this was yesterday or at least recovered by
Jerusalem Post yesterday, Israel will respond to what

(02:51:44):
he claims is an attempted assassination of Netanyahu,
which is kind of hilarious to see how
much the Trump camp and Netanyahu, they kinda
emulate each other. Like, I think they're just
picking up a playbook from what's going on
with Trump. Whether whatever you think about the
earlier discussions, there's been at least 2 of
these that I think are ridiculously not what
they appear to be. You could've say you
could possibly talk I mean, look, I've made
the same argument about his ear and how

(02:52:05):
the I I don't think it's possible that
you could have no mark on your ear,
but you guys can decide for yourselves what
that means. Going forward,
even the last one apparently was completely shown
to be nothing of what they said it
was.
Or the one where a guy had a
gun in the field somewhere that we just
don't even know what happened.
And yet, that contradicts the first one where
I guess they weren't allowed to fire, but
that one they did. Or it's just so

(02:52:27):
stupid.
I think they're just driving this narrative that
he's attacked by the deep state and they're
trying to kill him everywhere, so we have
to save the world.
Well, here we are. Now I would not
put it past Iran from trying to do
this, especially with what Israel's been doing. But
I just wanna just consider the fact that
this has just floated to rationalize what's about
to happen.
And it says Israel's already poised to retaliate

(02:52:48):
against Iran.
And then, of course, now they say, oh,
then they tried to kill me. So now
it's for sure. That's what I think is
happening here. But either way, it would realistically,
they would even have a however you wanna
frame this. Like, I don't like the idea
that we can go, that's okay, allowed because
they did it first. In fact, I think
we shouldn't do that. That's makes you as
bad as them. But the point would be

(02:53:09):
from the side of the US and Israel
is that, well, they just assassinated one of
their people, so from the US and Israel
perspective, they would have a right or do
the same. I don't believe that.
Either way, my point is to say why
that might if it is happening, it would
make logical sense.
But so on that note
about them claiming he tried to be assassinated
and then all and the point driving towards
a possible

(02:53:29):
another attack on Iran from Israel, unjustifiably,
Ken Klippenstein
broke this down on 19th.
He says, I published the leaked US intelligence
document that are detailing Israel's preparations for a
strike on Iran.
Now I'm kind of on the fence about
this. But he goes, as with JD Vance'
document, once again, the media refuses to publish
them. Let's see if this gets me banned

(02:53:50):
again.
Now the whole JD Vance thing was interesting
because ultimately they tried to make it about
doxing, which it is. It was kind of
a fine line.
But just like with, like, the now in
no way was this at the level of
the Hunter laptop story, it's interesting how they
kinda had their own version of that. Where
this story was there's there was some stuff
to be talked about and they're just kinda
I I talked about it recently, and it
just

(02:54:11):
just gets ignored. Because that's our guy, and
you doxed him. You know, it's just it's
just it's sad how childish these parties are.
It's the same on both sides. And it's
it's just they see everything in the other
and nothing in themselves, and it's sad.
But the point here is about the leak
alleged
of US, of US intelligence documents that they
claim they essentially got from spying on Israel,

(02:54:32):
or rather that's not the claim, but that's
the what they've seen through the leak,
which they the his article, which by the
way is, it's right here. You can watch
it. You can check it out there.
But in this, he basically goes over the
fact that that they
it exposes that the US is spying on
Israel. They don't trust them. They're trying to
seek seek out what they're gonna do next
and so on. And, ultimately, these show a

(02:54:54):
leaked plan that Israel's planning to attack Iran.
It's interesting.
But it, to me,
screams
I guess it's my kind of, you know,
jade it's the way I kind of see
this is what I would expect. Let's put
it that way. That doesn't mean it all
that has to be the case. But then
ultimately, that are wrong
that this would what they was what they

(02:55:15):
would do
to drive action.
Right? Like, sort of like like leak the
idea that they're gonna do this to maybe
stop them from doing it. Like, that'd be
one way to look at it. Like, the
US, start trying to recognize how much they're
failing in this agenda to try to stop
the belligerent Israel that they can't control from
doing what they don't want it to do,
if that's the case. Because I I do
believe that they don't want this to happen

(02:55:36):
with Iran because they're gonna lose.
I think that's the fundamental truth here. I
think that they all I think even Israel
knows that. They're trying to drive in some
kind of end time prophecy.
So it's interesting to see. So consider that
it could be something that's not there,
or you could even argue that it's Israel
floating this in order to sort of drive
that action.
It's hard to see. But here's what here's
what the Washington Post covered.

(02:55:59):
Oh, actually, no. I I that's right. I
wasn't gonna go through it really, but it
just says US investigates
intelligence leak about Israel's plans
for attacking Iran. 2 highly classified reports about
Israel's preparations for striking Iran were posted online
by a pro Iran site.
Now that seems to be challenged now by
the actual facts. So that is one of
the reasons why

(02:56:20):
I get the sense this was something that
was I mean, and honestly, in most cases,
when there's a a leaked thing that sort
of aids some in some way their agenda,
I mean, my
skepticism here immediately stand up. It's okay. Well,
that probably was dumped in the story by
them to drive a certain feeling and create
the air the way they want it to
seem.
So the pro Iran site is what gave

(02:56:40):
that it makes me think that because it
turns out that this doesn't seem to be
the actual case. So they've slanted it on
that to make it seem like Iran is
the hacker. Right?
So read and do it for yourself, but
here's what's interesting.
Drop site news says a a set of
classified US intelligence, which,
Ken Klopfenstein shared the 19th, so just to
give him credit for that,

(02:57:00):
purported to show information about Israel's plans to
strike Iran
that have been confirmed as authentic by CNN,
which frankly is nothing to me, but they're
claiming it's real. Drop site news has also
been reviewing these documents since they were posted.
And in their opinion,
ultimately, the different hallmarks seem to suggest that
it is real. The nature of the motivations
of the leak are yet unknown while the
US government claims to be conducting an investigation.

(02:57:23):
Yeah. Whatever. The documents which make reference to
Israel's unacknowledged nuclear program can see below. So
that is an interesting anomaly there because but
I don't think Israel cares I think Israel
wants us to know they're there but doesn't
wanna be seen as admitting it publicly. But
we all they know, we all know. It's
not it's a big open joke. He's actually
been caught
stupidly saying something in that direction

(02:57:44):
on, like, live video before, and they had,
like, a dumb smile and moved on. It's
it's many times. So just because they acknowledge
that does not mean that that was, you
know, not within their knowledge.
I actually think that almost leans more to
the idea that Israel wanted this to be
put out.
But it goes, the admit the administrators of
the Telegram channel, where the classified documents were
first posted, updated with this information, simply saying

(02:58:05):
it came from the Middle East Spectator,
a different news aggregator that put this out.
And then it
says, another statement by the Telegram channel were
rejects claims made by Axios and Jerusalem Post,
which that's why that's I think that's why
that got planted in the story,
that it was Iran affiliated.
And more info on how the leak originated.
So the the group that actually leaked it

(02:58:26):
is claiming it wasn't Iran affiliated. Now, of
course, they could be lying, but I don't
see the interest in hiding that. It almost
would be something you'd want to praise if
they were on the other side of it.
Anyway, that's where this is at right now.
And so the point is that we're all
they're really doing is floating the idea that
they're about to attack Iran.
So just like the other way around, maybe
that's a calculated move. Maybe they want Iran
to be able to defend it so they

(02:58:48):
don't feel like they have to respond. That's
a very common thing in all this, but
that's not what I would expect from Israel.
Not right now.
Now, Mensch Osint or however you say that,
the account says my 2¢ on the US
leaked documents about Israeli preparations attack on Iran.
He says he believed they're legit.
They mentioned an Israeli covert UAV
flight

(02:59:08):
activity at Ramon airfield between October 15th 16th.
And, coincidentally,
on October
17th
at 1 in the morning, a drone alert
that triggered around Ramon airbase. He says that
was the only time ever a drone intrusion
alert sounded in Ramon area, this on October
24th when alert sounded everywhere.

(02:59:28):
And he goes,
bottom line is that he ultimately thinks the
documents based on what they were saying about
that is one of the reasons that it
suggests that it's real.
And then of course, I just find this
interesting. So the US civil defense news, which,
you know, you should
be skeptical about, or, like, you know, question
everything all the time. This says US troops
and American air defenses are now fully deployed

(02:59:49):
in Israel, ready for the coming war with
Iran.
Except it's not. That's a video from 2019,
and they're lying to
you. These people are everywhere. Now, they either
are not doing their due diligence,
or they're trying to make you think that
we're building towards a war with Iran. I
frankly think it's more the latter. I think
there's an agenda here. But you can decide

(03:00:11):
for yourself whether this platform didn't do its
due diligence or it's lying to you. It's
up to you. But I think that's important.
Why is that happening? Now Jimmy just shares
this kind of missing you know, making a
joke about team America World Police. You know,
calling us out for invading, you know, putting
troops in other country.
You remember that movie, basically? It's like, you
know, I don't wanna say the cuss word,
but, you know, the point is that people

(03:00:31):
are trying to make us think this is
happening.
Now this is interesting.
To me, to give you my thoughts first
on this, this is another this is posted
on August 8th, so it's not new, from
CBS News.
It's an audio recording
of Donald Trump discussing highly classified or confidential
secret documents. There's 2 things I'll talk about

(03:00:53):
this. 1,
I just have to point out how,
like, we're being run by a bunch of
children, a bunch of high school god gossiping
children. That's I you'll listen to it. You're
you should be embarrassed that these people are
somehow seen as leading this country.
But
the point for me is I get the
sense that this is about

(03:01:14):
seeding the idea that Donald Trump doesn't want
the war that will happen. That's what I
think. That he wanted to stop it, but
he couldn't stop it before they let it
happen kind of a thing. Even if it
begins while he's at president, which is one
of the things happening next. But you can
decide for yourself, as always.
But it's it's
blaming it on Milley for the most part,
and then the way they kind of yuck

(03:01:35):
it up about the whole thing, I'll point
out next. But here here's what it says.
Oh, wait.
Okay. I mixed them up. Sorry. Just making
sure I didn't have these out of order.
Bad sick people.
That was that was your coup, you know,
against you. I mean, is that Marjorie Taylor
Greene? I think so. I think I don't

(03:01:56):
I don't think they're friends at this point
anymore. That was 2021. But let me know
what you think the voice is. Well, it
started right at the time. Like, when Millie's
talking about, oh, you were gonna try to
no. They they were trying to do that
before you even were sworn in. That's right.
Trying to overthrow your life. Well, with Millie,
let me see that. I'll I'll show you
an example. He said
that
I wanted to attack

(03:02:17):
Iran.
Isn't it amazing? I have a big pile
of emphasis that just came up. Look.
This was him.
They presented me this. This is off the
record, but they presented me this. This was
him.
This was the defense department in him.
He's talking about, going after Iran,

(03:02:37):
which by the way, right now and even
then, Donald Trump was very clearly making a
case for
openly, constantly,
and because Israel wanted that.
And so
doesn't this kinda make doesn't make sense, does
it? Like, maybe he did that behind the
scenes. He's saying no. That's certainly possible. To
me, this feels like a deliberately leaked concept

(03:02:58):
to make it seem like you weren't the
one when you were. When you were just
doing what you were told by the funding
that was coming your way from Israel and
Zionism.
But I I I just find it interesting,
the way it's being framed. Now, on top
of that, it's the way that they talk
about this. Like, it embarrasses me as an
American. We looked at some. This was him.
This wasn't done by me. This was him.

(03:03:20):
Oh, and these are classified documents that he's
not supposed to be kind of cavalier in
a cavalier way just handing around the room.
All sorts of stuff. His pages were all
warped.
Wait a minute. Let's see here.
Well, I guess my point is if this
was leaked out, it's almost more embarrassing that
they think this. And it does it feels
staged to me. The way they're talking, the

(03:03:41):
way that they're making these points, like, as
if they know you can't see them, it
feels staged.
And I could be wrong. But either way,
if it was, that's even more embarrassing because
this is what they think you should be
listening to and this seems embarrassing.
Yeah. I just found isn't that amazing?
This totally wins my case, you know. Mhmm.
Except it is so highly
Kylie.
Secret. There's a secret in for it.

(03:04:03):
Secret. Secret. We're not supposed to be showing
you. This you attack
and Hillary would cut that out all the
time.
She'd send it
to Anthony Weiner.
Yeah. The pervert.
Think about these these are low brow, lowest
common denominator people. It makes me sad. Oh,
by the way, isn't that incredible? Yeah. I

(03:04:25):
was just saying because we're talking about it.
And, you know, he said he wanted to
attack Iran and what
he said, bitch. He said, you did it.
You did it, Trump.
I just, you know, it's
these people are juvenile.
It just kills me. Now this and I
am I wrong though? Doesn't it feel like

(03:04:45):
this is, like, blunt? Like, they're like
the way they're talking, it doesn't seem like
to me, it seems like they're standing around
a recorder, and they're all making this that's
what it sounds like to me. You guys
can decide for yourself. Well, this was done
by the military given to me.
I think we can probably play. I don't
know. We'll we'll have to see. Yeah. We'll

(03:05:05):
have to
Yeah.
See as president, I could have de Blasio.
Yeah. But now I can't, you know. But
this is Yeah. We have a problem. Isn't
that interesting? No. We have a problem.
I mean, technically, that's a crime.
But who cares though? Because it's it's not
it's Trump, so we shouldn't care. Right? It's
so cool. You know, it's so and I'm
looking here. I have a

(03:05:26):
and you probably almost didn't believe me, but
now you believe me. No. I believe It's
incredible.
Right? No. They Hey. Bring some, bring some
goch in, please. Yeah. Bring in some more
Coca Cola. Make America healthy again. Woo hoo.
Alright. So I already made my points on
that. To me, that sounds very clumsy, and
I think that it was about creating a
narrative.
You can decide for yourself. Now here's more

(03:05:47):
today. This is October 17th, posted by Jack
Posobiec.
And he goes, Trump comes out against the
regime or a change in Iran. No. He
doesn't at all, actually. But that's what Jack
wants you to think. Because that's how he
play up his role in all this. He
comes out against regime change. No. He didn't
even ask the question as usual.
And in fact, I think it's obviously the
opposite like he tried to do twice during

(03:06:08):
his administration. But let's listen to Jack Poso
because he knows what's going on. Here's what
he said on the pat back Patrick Beck
David show.
Running around What's gonna happen year round with
you by the by the end of your
administration?
I don't I'm not actually to see Iran
be very successful. The only thing is they
can't have a nuclear weapon. They can Are
you okay with the same admin Okay. So
right out of that, right there, alone. Eve

(03:06:30):
now they clearly said that they will never
and they won't want they even the state
department and the International Atomic Energy Agency as
of this year have confirmed that they are
not doing that. I showed you this in
a recent show. The narrative and the people
in the parties don't care. They'll always pretend
like that's not the case because Israel says
it's not the case. They've been saying that
for 40 years. They're lying to you. My

(03:06:50):
point is that he said that because that's
where that's coming from. There is nothing other
than that other than they're removing themselves under
Trump's administration
from the JCPOA, which gave them the legal
right, I think it was article 36, to
increase their enrichment.
That's where we still are. And they're not
even at the point of what they need,
90%.
They're they're a ways away from reaching the

(03:07:10):
percentage needed to make the material needed to
make a bomb. It's funny how they never
wanna frame it like that for you. Right?
The facts.
So here he goes in and says, they
can't have that though, which why why though?
Every other country in the world, including Israel,
clearly is allowed to.
Why are they different? Because this is something
Israel's saying. That's why. So right out of
the gate, he does not say no regime

(03:07:32):
change. He makes a clear case for why
that might be the case.
And it gets worse.
Very successful. The only thing is they can't
Oh, so he says, I want them to
be very successful. That's what they love to
lean into. That's my point about how Trump
plays it both ways. So they'll ignore the
rest of it and be like, but he
said successful. He can't have regime change. He
said, well, maybe in his mind, he wants
the shaw back in place. That's probably what

(03:07:53):
Jack wants too. The point is that's regime
change.
And just because you make a statement that
we wanted to be successful, you can rig
it into it all you want.
My point is he didn't answer it. Because
I could just as easily read read into
the nuclear comment, which would mean he wants
them to be regime change, so they can't
have it. But my point is you don't
know. I think all I'm basing on is

(03:08:13):
his past actions, which clearly show that, yes,
he does. Have a nuclear weapon that Are
you okay with the same administration and way
of governing states, or would you like to
see it go back to the seventies when
Shahs was running it and Iran
When Shahs was running it. The point is
that Shah was a dictator and it was
a terrible situation for most Iranians. You know,
yeah, the Israeli US and his Iranian elitist

(03:08:35):
that lived in this nice little bubble, which
is what they only showed you, yeah, they
had a great time. Had everything they needed.
Everybody else was struggling. And then when 1979
regime or rather the revolution took place, coming
the the operation Ajax was the regime change,
they revolted and took back their country. And,
yes, have plenty of problems.
I mean, if you think right now it's
if you you look at half this country

(03:08:56):
hates our government, think about the context of
how that gets framed from the US perspective
at any other country.
It's just so bad how we can't apply
that logic in the partisanship anyway.
The point is that this is not
what anybody should be calling for. Or why
we think we should be discussing what we
want for Iran. Why is it our discussion
to be having? It's not. Was one of

(03:09:18):
the top three countries in tourism. Yeah. We
oh, so I should let you hear it.
So,
yeah. Top 3 countries when you overthrew the
government because you allowed people who the the
idea was the Iranian people suffered. It doesn't
matter what other metric you throw out there.
The vast majority of Iranians, and Robert's talked
about this extensively,
were suffering
because it was a despotic country for people.

(03:09:38):
This was an overthrown country. It's the same
thing that's happening to the Iraqi people, to
the Syrian people, to the
libi Lebanese people.
It's look around. Oh, no. Excuse me. Well,
that too. The the Libby what is it?
Libyan? Libyan people. Excuse me.
So we don't we can ignore all that?
Every one of these supposed liberation that or

(03:09:59):
the people of the country suffer ex
incredibly.
But they don't care about that. And this
this guy, what he's Ronnie, isn't he? Can't
get totally involved at all. You know, I
mean, we're super Right. Tourism.
Yeah. We can't get totally involved at all.
You know, I mean, we're super Right. We
can't run ourselves. Let's face it. Okay. So
he just skipped right past it. He didn't

(03:10:19):
say no. He said, we can't get involved
with that. But you are, though. Too late.
You got involved 15 times during your administration.
Israel's driving that aggressively. They're about to attack.
And whether you're Biden or there, you're gonna
support it.
So he didn't even answer the question. And
this is my point. So Jack will oh,
see. See. He said no in regime change.

(03:10:39):
No. He did not. Jack is a liar.
Sure. Patrick, we can't run ourselves. Sanctions. That's
gonna they they don't have the people are
gonna turn and flip on them. It's not
gonna be a
God. I I really don't like this. I
gotta be honest. This this is terrible.
He doesn't know what he's talking about all
the time. The point is
put sanctions, it's going to hurt people.

(03:11:00):
I mean, this is is he this is
where you're from.
I don't know if that's exactly the case,
but I think he's Ryan. The point is
guys this is what they're trying to do.
I've shown you this many times.
Oh, wait. That's not it.
There it is.
This is during Trump's administration. This is Rudy
Giuliani talking about the sanctions they had on

(03:11:21):
their government of Iran and that starving people
to sell in their organs for food
was how you have a successful regime change.
So what he's calling for is that, more
sanctions. And guess what? His narrative that giving
them sanctions will make them flip right away.
No. It won't. It hasn't. Not once. They've
been doing this for decades,
and it hasn't. They're fighting back because they

(03:11:42):
care more about their independence than they do
about just about anything else because they've had
a fight for it from these governments while
those governments claim to be fighting for the
very same thing.
So now tell me that you're not a
serious threat.
It's the regime we're trying to overthrow sees
us as a threat. You are a threat.

(03:12:03):
It is a reality. The protests are getting
worse. I don't know when we're going to
overthrow them. It could be in a few
days.
And he's talking to the MEK,
which is the group the US government and
and Israel have been wanting in charge for
a long time.
Now I'm willing to bet you anything, even
if they go with the shah's
relative, which is what they're pushing now.

(03:12:24):
The MEK has a structure in there because
they've been stoking them this entire time. That's
who he's being paid to speak to right
now. They are a terrorist organization even according
to the US government.
Months, a couple of years are getting worse.
I don't know when we're going to overthrow
them. It could be in a few days,
months, a couple of years, but it's gonna
happen.

(03:12:44):
They are going to be overthrown.
The people of Iran obviously have now had
enough.
The sanctions are working.
The currency
is going to nothing.
And, of course, they blame that on Iran.
How many times have you heard them say
that? They can't even manage their country. Their
economy is terrible. You literally just told you
why. Because they're destroying their currency be with

(03:13:05):
their sanctions.
Same thing I do in Venezuela, same thing
I do everywhere and then blame them for
it. And the mindless followers like the jacks
of the world are going along with it
because they have an agenda. They don't care
about the truth. They're where Russia was. They're
where Poland was. We see signs
of young men and women saying, give me
some food.
We saw a sign of a man trying

(03:13:26):
to sell his internal organs for 500 American
dollars,
probably a fortune in Iran today.
This is truly pitiful.
These are the kinds of conditions that lead
to successful
revolution.
My god.
So so the idea is that you can't
you can't there's no misspeaking here. He this

(03:13:48):
the the English language is clear. The words
have meaning. He goes from our sanctions have
destroyed their currency. They don't have any money.
And they're because they don't have any money,
they're now selling their organs for food. That's
what makes a good revolution. That's what he
just said. You're nowhere in there can you
go because Iran bad guy. Now even if
you think that even if that's the truth,
it is still their fault. They're still willing

(03:14:08):
to starve people to death in order to
get what they want even if what they
want benefits the people.
Which it doesn't, by the way. And we've
seen that repeatedly.
These are monsters, guys. These are the war
these are the terrorists of the world.
Even if you wanna pretend everything that they
claim, the terrorists, ISIS and Al Qaeda, are
the you know, just as bad as they
say they're what they are, but they're also

(03:14:29):
being funded by them. The point is that
what they're doing from an institutional level at
the top of the whole pyramid, they are
the worst of the worst.
You have to understand how much the influence
and funding and directional action this is causing
what we're dealing with today.
Thing around What's gonna happen to you around
Turn and flip on them. It's not gonna
be a

(03:14:51):
So as I said,
I'm shocked to find out Jack is misrepresenting
the clip. Shocked, I say. As usual, he
gives a non answer, Trump, and his mouthpieces
make it into whatever is most advantageous at
the moment. Anyone who thinks Trump will do
anything but exactly what Israel wants with Iran
is a child.

(03:15:12):
I hope I'm wrong.
Now so can some points actually I think
right now what I'm gonna plan on doing
is I'm gonna cover the parts in the
title, but I'm gonna push some of the
gen more the larger Israel coverage offs I
have to get going here pretty soon.
But I wanna I'm just gonna quickly show
the Lebanon parts then go into Ron and
then show you the Oxfam part to finish.
The, the rest of it was really some

(03:15:33):
important stuff that I did wanna show you
about Sinwar and and more about the food
aid
just in general. But I do I just
I I don't think I've got much time
left. But so this is
a a clip I wanna show you about
Lebanon. Because, like, the overlap I mean, the
bigger point is that clearly, they really want
you to think that Iran is some kind
of mastermind linchpin of all this. It's just
not the case.

(03:15:53):
Obviously, they're aligned. They're allies. And especially more
today, seeing as how they're being driven, you
know, the the it it's advent it's completely
in their interest right now to align. Even
if they weren't before, but they were. They're
they're recognizing that they have a stance against
the oppression that they're fighting.
Simple.
But to claim that they're somehow driving all

(03:16:14):
this stuff and then claim that's terrorism while
you're literally watching you I mean, I think
most people in the world have never seen
a more vivid, provable example of terrorism in
their lives.
You may not be identifying it as that,
but you're watching this and going, god. This
is how is this possible?
I mean, you most people are clearly going,
yeah. Israel's doing some terrible stuff. That's what

(03:16:34):
terrorism looks like, guys.
The narrative doesn't even matter in this context.
They're literally
broad stroke murdering anybody in front of them.
It's terrorism.
Again, the reality of definition there is that
they're using
military force to achieve a political end. That's
the actual definition of terrorism.
Now Leila Mullan Allen points this out. Entire

(03:16:55):
family of twin and my my point in
general is that this is also happening in
Lebanon. To go back to what I'm talking
about here.
And if they wanna claim it's all about
Iran, which connects to what we were just
saying. But that they're bombing indiscriminately in Gaza,
in Lebanon, in Syria.
It's it's it's in in Yemen.
All those are happening.
An entire family of 23 people was wiped

(03:17:15):
out by an Israeli airstrike on the northern
Lebanon Christian village of Aitou
on 14th.
So all those republicans out there fighting for
the proclaiming you're fighting against all you're that
Israel just murdered an entire Christian village in
Lebanon.
They had fled the bombing in the south
to take refuge there.
2 of them were babies.

(03:17:36):
Only pieces of them were left.
That's your legacy.
Hold on.
How did I miss that? Oh, here it
is.
I'm at the site of an Israeli airstrike
yesterday on the village of Aitou. That's in
Zgarta, a very
Christian area in the north of Lebanon. And

(03:17:57):
this is PBS, by the way? This is
a small mountain village, and this house was
hit. It was sheltering
about 29 displaced people who'd fled from the
south and suburbs of Beirut. The house has
been completely flattened. In the trees behind, you
can see there are still clothes that have
been flung around. Civil defense volunteers are behind
me, still sorting through the rubble. They've now
removed all the bodies. 23 people were killed

(03:18:20):
in this strike. Many I mean, think about
how crazy it is that this can be
on corporate news now. And I've been pretty
pretty consistently for half at least half a
year, like, really consistently.
Now, definitely still holding back on important stuff,
definitely still slanting coverage, but covering
it. Straight up murder. There's no way you
pretend this is not exactly what it looks
like. The evidence is there. Again, it's not
Gaza. There's people that are filming. There are

(03:18:41):
people that have access. You're gonna see the
dead bodies. You're gonna be able to prove
that they were not terrorists. You're gonna be
able to show this more definitively than anything
we've seen in Gaza, even though that was
pretty definitive.
And yet, still, it continues.
This is the hardest part for people to
grapple with. It should be. There's no way
that

(03:19:01):
the the only thing well, the most important
thing that needs to show you is that
they are exactly,
really, the worst example of what we thought
they might be.
That's that's even that's almost been hard for
me to come to terms with, as much
as I see them.
To think it really is that, oh, how
else do you freed this?
Where is everybody? How is it possible to
pretend that any of them are good if

(03:19:23):
we're literally allowing this to continue? If I
were in congress,
I would not stop screaming about this for
247.
It's not because that's the only issue I
care about. It would be because we are
funding a genocide.
You will go down in history. Look. Go
back in these genocides in the past, I
guess, other than Israel, which is the interesting,
common thread.

(03:19:44):
The point is that people are remembered for
these things forever.
And I just think it's incredible that there's
not people, like, where like, I I mean,
there's plenty, I think, being done good right
now by Thomas Massie and people like that.
But where wouldn't they be why aren't they
screaming about this?
Why aren't they standing up and constantly making
a statement? I would be on I'd be
on TV every night. I'd be making posts

(03:20:05):
all over. We are we candle out if
you get enough momentum coming from that mainstream
level, we can actually change this. There's definitely
legal avenues to take to stop them from
funding them. They're already flirting with that idea
because we're forcing that even though they're gonna
continue funding them. The whole aid dynamic. They're
going, if you don't
give them more aid while we pretend you're
not stopping aid, then we'll stop weapons in

(03:20:26):
30 days. That's what they just said.
30 days. We'll give you 30 more days
of genocide and you'll forget about it by
then and we'll move on anyway. That's what's
going to happen.
I just don't understand it, guys. I don't.
I refuse to believe that every single person
in every single position is completely gone. I
just I think it's a large portion,
but I I mean, I guess I could

(03:20:47):
be wrong. Of them children. You can still
smell the burning on the air and in
the background. There are
Israeli jets flying overhead.
This really is a complete sight of destruction
here. All the cars here are on fire
as well, and it seems that nobody would
have been able to get out of the
strike without severe injury.
Here is a antiwar.com.

(03:21:09):
Civilians reported killed as Israeli strikes multiple buildings
in Beirut suburb,
19th.
Now these aren't, like, one off story. This
is every day, and it's happening in Lebanon.
It's happening in Gaza. They're just straight up
mass murdering people on such a high level
that it's becoming impossible to even cover it
all.

(03:21:31):
Sarah, in one image, really does break this
down for you. And this is another Christian
village by the way. And I don't I
don't know how many times I made this
point over the years. Whether it's Syria, whether
it I mean, everywhere you look. It seems
as if Israel no. Let me put it
the right way. It is is as it
is happening that Israel is targeting the Christian
locations
almost predominantly.
In Syria,

(03:21:51):
the Christian populations were almost in tar predominantly
targeted until they were removed. Same thing with
Gaza where they ultimately forced these elements out
other than the ones that were still there.
This was a pressure out or the idea
that they removed oh, that's a different point.
But the the Jewish population from Gaza was
forced out by Israel and they use it
to blame it on the Gaza location. The
point is that they've seen this in Syria.

(03:22:11):
Syria, the 3rd largest population of Christians in
the Middle East and still large, and now
they've been targeted
by Israel's bombing in Syria. We don't talk
about that. And we act like they're the
greatest ally of Christianity, or people do. Here's
another example. My point is that I believe
this is not by accident.
This is the village of Rameh in Southern
Lebanon. Israel's deliberately obliterating entire villages and towns

(03:22:34):
in Lebanon,
erasing centuries of history and culture.
Oh, wait. I'm sorry. The let me I
take it back. I thought this was the
Christian one as well. I just showed you
the one, by the way, 30 seconds ago
that was a Christian location. Any case, this
is just a village,
which really, it shouldn't. It's human life, and
it all should matter just as much.
Village up top.

(03:22:58):
Entirely bombed at once.
Just absorb that.
Talk about precision. Right?
We're pinpoint targeting Hamas, Hezbollah. What are you
talking about? Tawninals, human shields? No. No. We'll
just 2 couple 2,000 pound bombs, just bolt
annihilate the entire village, and now here's how
it looks.
Completely bombed out. The entire hillside village.

(03:23:21):
You you know, you think you might, you
know, briefly see a conversation about that on
corporate media. No. Doesn't even matter. Imagine having
an entire city bomb to nothing and not
even having it mentioned on the news.
That's where we are.
Now Israeli airstrikes,
as of today, have barred beginning to bomb

(03:23:41):
right next to the Beirut airport. Here we
go again, ladies and gentlemen. And guess what?
I just told you about this. They weren't
letting them fly out, And then the US
government wasn't allowing its own people to leave
and was saying, yeah. You could pay for
it though. And then Israel wasn't letting them.
And then Americans were being killed, which is
happening in all these locations and nobody seems
to care. Where are all the America first
out there that aren't caring about Americans being

(03:24:01):
killed by Israel? I just point Tom Cotton.
I have it somewhere in here. Made this
point about how dare you not call out
the hostages. Okay. Why would dare you not
call out I'm just real murdering Americans in
Lebanon and Gaza.
What about that? Oh, nobody comments. How funny.
Well, here's a video of them bombing from
today.
Here's
the one of the things they used for
the head that the image today. Robert Inlakash

(03:24:23):
shared this today. Western governments condemned Hezbollah killing
4 Israeli soldiers in drone strikes on a
military base. So a military strike is legally
protected forever from every dynamic at this point,
they make it out to be terrorism.
Complete silence on the current terror bombing of
Beirut and cities throughout Lebanon. We just showed
you the one on the Beirut suburbs. Here
is the airport. I mean, this is a

(03:24:45):
civilian location. In every possible way, this is
protected. They're not even making an argument about
why they're doing this. They just do it.
Complete silence.
Why will Sky News read out the names
of the Lebanese victims? Of course not.
It's crazy. This is in real time, guys.
They're as we speak.
Here's the national. Beirut Airport preserve, persevere,

(03:25:08):
excuse me, amid
Israeli bombs
and GPS jamming. Think about how crazy that
is. They are literally bombing and jamming the
GPS of planes that are trying to fly.
These are civilian airliners.
Can you imagine if that was Iran, if
that was Syria, if that was Russia?
Or even the allegation was floated by Israel.

(03:25:29):
Oh my god. We talked about it for
a week.
Now they're jamming GPS of flights full of
civilians that might crash and kill them all,
but we won't even mention that.
You all know exactly what's going on.
Now I'm gonna I'm gonna talk about this
in a future one. This is just simply
about the current presence, which we already know.
The US has presence in Israel, and this

(03:25:52):
admits they've been there from the beginning. From
September 7th anyway. Fusion cells, they're already there.
They've been there the whole time. They're admitting
they were part of sussing out Hamas and
so we were lied to. Yeah. Big surprise.
They were on the ground, boots on the
ground from the very beginning just like we
told you. Surprise, surprise.
This one I'll show you on the way
out, which I'll reference again just because it
is so mind blowingly crazy.

(03:26:14):
The New Yorker.
This is the title of the New Yorker.
This is on
shelves in the supermarket.
Rationalizing
the horrors of Israel's war on Gaza. Why
would that even be something you would say?
Why would you rationalize the horrors of
well, because you wanna
obfuscate, gaslight.
But this is the worst part.

(03:26:35):
The novelist, Howard Jacobson, has argued that too
much press coverage
of dead Palestinian children
is a new form of blood libel against
Jews.
I mean, it speaks for itself. I mean,
I could go off on this for the
next 5 I mean, I could talk about
this for an hour.
There's so many different things you could talk

(03:26:55):
about. The just it's the the idea whether
it's aimed at Jews versus the political actions
of a government or the simple idea
that even if you're over covering the murder
of children, that somehow that could be flipped
into attacking the person murdering the child.
I mean, guys, this is a case study
right here of everything wrong with the Zionist

(03:27:18):
perspective.
I just it blows my mind that there
are people, and I do think this exists,
that actually don't see why that's a problem.
I'm convinced that's a small, small minority of
the conversation. I think we're dealing with a
bunch of very deranged people, and then some
that are falling for this mindset or blindly
blinding themselves to it, and then everybody else

(03:27:38):
sees what's going on.
Shit's really not my opinion. It's pretty easy
to see right now. But my god.
This is who we're dealing with.
And as Sal Diagris points
out, Israel kills 3 school buses of kids
daily.
That's not a joke.
I it's it's crazy to see how many

(03:28:00):
we can see on average being killed. And
here,
they're telling you too much coverage of that
is is a attack on Jewish people. Who
Who's even talking about Jewish people? We're talking
about the Israeli government. But because you conflate
the 2, wouldn't that even be not wouldn't
that be, by your argument, the right case?
No. You're racist. Yeah. Okay. Doesn't make sense.
Well, the reality is that this is going

(03:28:21):
way back before October 7th, as Gren Glenn
points out. May 9th, 2023,
Israeli strikes on Gaza killed top militants and
10 civilians.
Oops. What what was that about the ceasefire
they broke on October 7th? Oh, that's right.
It didn't exist, and you were bombing it
the whole time. Or the idea that as
this the many As just actually coming from
UNICEF that made this point,
on October 6th.

(03:28:43):
2023, the deadliest year for Palestinian children, says
UNICEF.
But that's October 6th, Ryan. This makes sense.
Yeah, you all know it does.
UN leaders being
Or rather, German German leaders making statements that
killing civilians is okay because
narrative.
And then, a actual

(03:29:03):
morally sound person speaks up and says you're
a lunatic and that's not the law. And
this all come in at this point to
get a few in the next show, I
think.
Now, what we're dealing with in Northern Gaza,
which we already know, is heartbreaking.
I mean, it really is. Like, the if
you if from the podcast, you gotta just
see this video. The stretching,
sprawling view of the down down the middle

(03:29:24):
of a massive area that used to be
beautiful.
It is now gone.
Decrepid tents in the middle of the street,
old broken buildings. I mean, this is an
entire this is this is like multiple multiple
multiple city blocks.
Again, it's it's the whole area really. But
it's just that's Is that pinpoint targeting or
is that just ex- it's just demolishing everything?
You don't need to answer that, it's obvious.

(03:29:45):
It's self evident. It's a it's a, what's
what's that again?
Blank on that term all of a sudden.
Something question.
It's funny how things just jump out of
your mind. The bottom line is that it's
obvious what you're looking at. That is destruction.
That is not about trying to stop bad
guys, that's about destroying human life.
Rhetorical question. There it is. So,

(03:30:08):
same point here.
I'm gonna I'm gonna get I'm just gonna
randomly quickly go through with this this is
video
being put out of them
combating terrorism.
These are civilians we're talking about, guys. They're
not even trying to pretend these are all
hamat. They're just rounding up civilians
and treating them like prisoners. Look at the
and and torturing, raping, killing.

(03:30:28):
It's not hype that's not hypothetical, guys.
Journalists on the ground,
covering what's going on. We'll go over this.
This is one of the worst things.
A child gets attacked, shot by a sniper,
and they wait until all the other children
run up to self him and they bomb
it again.

(03:30:48):
I just don't know how much we need
to see.
You know, the idea that
you're all children, guys.
It's gone.
Look at that. Dead bodies everywhere.

(03:31:08):
You wanna tell me
you wanna tell me that that's somehow about
fighting bad guys? Right? You snipe a child
and blow up everybody trying to help them.
Every day, guys. Every day. This is what's
going on.
Israeli strike on Gaza kills 28 including 5
in a school. 5 children. October 17th, every
day.

(03:31:29):
Mary Balgudi, North Gaza is facing the harshest
condition since the start of the genocidal campaign.
Oh, at least 450
killed in the last 2 weeks in Northern
Gaza alone.
As far and that's as far as she
knows.
Where Palestinians are intentionally starved especially in the
last weeks where no one aid is allowed.
No aid at all.
Breastfeeding mothers, wounded people, starving children are being

(03:31:49):
bombed and riddled with bullets while enduring Israeli
savagery with no shelters, no hospitals, no water,
barely a glimpse of electricity, and their list
has been a year plus.
Rami Abdul says Oxfam has confirmed that 4
of its water engineers were killed in Israeli

(03:32:10):
airstrike on Communist.
The engineers were working to provide essential water
services to Gaza. Well, it's obvious why they
killed them. They can't let them have water
because then they could survive.
And not even that's not facetious. That's the
reality. That's what's happening. They just murdered representatives
of Oxfam, an international organization that's not Hamas,
that nobody's gonna cry foul about. Well, the
UN may be in some elements of it.

(03:32:31):
Not the US government, not the rules based
order. Don't don't expect that because they don't
care.
Here's Oxfam, international. Oxfam condemns the killing of
water engineers in Gaza from 19th.
Don't be surprised if you hear nothing about
this. Or if Matt Miller says he'll refer
to Israel and will raise the issue and
never brings it up again.
Arnaud Patran highlights?

(03:32:53):
Last month, at the UN, Netanyahu said we're
not gonna settle Gaza.
In July,
in Congress, Netanyahu said Israel doesn't seek to
resettle Gaza.
Yet his own party now calls for preparing
to settle Gaza. Which by the way, you
know because it's obvious because you've seen it
the entire time. Because they've been saying it
out loud the entire time. My point is
that they lie publicly and then do something

(03:33:15):
else. But you should know this by now.
Here's horets. Netanyahu's Likud party issues an invitation
to event title preparing to settle Gaza.
They're laughing at you.
The ridiculous morons like Brian Mast that believe
that they're they're either being lied to and
think they know, or they're lying to you,
America, because they're working for somebody else. There's
only 2 things happening here. Because they're pretending

(03:33:37):
this is blood libel. How dare you accuse
us of doing what we're openly doing and
praising and celebrating and having conferences for?
Crazy.
Israel will strike on Northern Gaza, kills at
least 87. That's today.
1 after another.
Now, we're gonna go over this doctor part
in a coming up show, but I do
wanna show you I added a bunch

(03:33:59):
more.
So here's the thread by the way. I
added, I think 16 more videos or more
than that. Now, may maybe
12.
But, more doctors every day. Adding to this
list of people Oh, and that was the
other point too, just to show you quickly
that this warning
being put on there, that's what I was
showing you earlier. That's suppressing the reach, and

(03:34:19):
it's all because of this video. Because the
video is powerful. And I'll show you right
here.
Here's somebody else showing it, which I'm glad.
I'm glad to see. Johnny, u t u
d t u t d, whoever that is.
Looks like I'm following, I don't remember.
Point.
There's no
no warning.
Okay?

(03:34:42):
Well, you should probably get it now since
I shared it. Here's my share. Different one,
different post, also got the warning. What you
guys see, it's every single time I share
it. I think it's because of the obvious
that it's a powerful video that is getting
reached, and they don't want that.
Here's, like, the warning I get.
We put the warning on the message. Well,
it doesn't it doesn't violate any of your

(03:35:02):
rules of engagement at all. But what does
is, you know, go and kill all the
children, like that guy speaking of, but you
don't care about that. Right? Obviously, this is
about, like I said, suppressing the the tweet
that shows you what they're doing. Not the
actual tweet of them doing it. No. That's
okay. But you compiling enough to show you
how bad they are, that's gotta be limited.
Same point for mine. That's what's happening.

(03:35:26):
And Cam Hippy says, the world owes Netanyahu
a thank you.
Because people are ridiculous.
After everything I just showed you, that's what
he's saying.
Now, I'm gonna come back to most I'm
gonna come back to all this. We'll wrap
here.
Yeah.
Ultimately, the point is they're still starving. Israel
has barred 6 international medical charities from even

(03:35:48):
entering Gaza. According to WHO,
the sad reality guys is they are going
to continue to push this unless we do
something about it.
There's nothing else to me. There's no other
way to frame this. We need to stand
up and do something or this will continue.
Now I'm never calling for violence. I just
simply do not think that's gonna be an
answer to this problem. I think violence begets

(03:36:08):
violence. But
if, for example,
if everybody in this country simply stopped, which
again, like literally impossible I would argue, or
not literally, but
wildly unlikely.
If we just all said, we're not gonna
move, we're not gonna go to work, we're
not gonna do anything until you stop funding
Israel, guess what? They would stop. There's just
no way they can even function without they
peep the the worker bees.

(03:36:30):
But that's not gonna happen. I hope it
does. My point is that we could do
something.
But the problem is always is these partisan
screamers that don't care about any of this.
They don't care about you. They care about
using you to benefit, just like the politicians.
But we don't see that because we align
with our party lines and we think that
we're on the same teams.
The sad reality is that a lot of
you care about what's going on in Israel,

(03:36:51):
but they don't.
If you do, do something.
Push them. But, of course, you're gonna get
pushed back. You're gonna get pushed out like
we saw with Kyle Rittenhouse the moment he
barely said the wrong thing. That's how this
works. But maybe then you should recognize that
you don't wanna be part of that anymore.
That they're not honest. They're not engaged with
the truth. They're doing it for their own
purposes.
Do something.
If you have a moral if you're a

(03:37:12):
moral person, if you have compassion, if you
have empathy,
I don't know how you're not.
I can't live with I mean, I'm doing
this because I couldn't live with myself if
I didn't try to do
everything that I could to stop what's going
on with your tax dollars, our tax dollars,
in our name.
Every single person being murdered over there is
being murdered with a bomb that says, this

(03:37:33):
is from the United States.
And some of them would perceive it as
such.
And it's kinda hard not to at this
point. But, hopefully, they're listening to what we're
saying and recognize that it's just like we
would recognize the same in foreign countries. It's
not the peoples. It's the government.
And that's the point about Vanessa Beale recognizing
that we
are a global resistance at this point. We
are fighting against something much larger than Israel,

(03:37:55):
United States. We're fighting against this growing, budding,
technocratic power structure that is literally using this
to
grow and train what it's gonna be using
on everybody else. And I think it all
starts right here. And if we don't help
this succeed and I don't mean I don't
mean, like, winning or losing, but stopping this
agenda from happening.
And I do think that begins it from

(03:38:15):
my perspective with stopping the Palestinian plight from
being or rather the
Palestinian existence from being rubbed out.
That if we can't stop that, we will
all lose.
That's what I believe. I believe it's obvi
I see this all building, and if we
like, I mean, whether you it's about the
Palestinian plight or not. If we allow Israel
and the United States to win whatever that

(03:38:36):
looks like after doing what just happened, and
that we just move forward, not only will
this the genocide be normalized, or the idea
that this is how you respond to your
enemies, killing civilian population until they give up.
Like, this will be the new world that
we live in. I don't think we're I
don't think anybody's okay with that.
If you agree with that, if you feel
the same thing, then do something about it.

(03:38:59):
I just know that this is the time.
Right now. Moment by moment, we're losing one
more life, one more opportunity.
Find the courage to do something.
I love you all. Thank you for being
here today.
As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

.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;}Israel Kills 4 Oxfam Engineers, “ISIS-K” Election Threats Surface At Opportune Moment & Iran Attack

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;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

All Episodes

Israel Kills 4 Oxfam Engineers, “ISIS-K” Election Threats Surface At Opportune Moment & Iran Attack

Stuff You Should Know