Mike Williams Discusses Tavistock, Adorno and Their Affiliaiton with The Beatles

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Hey there, everybody.
Pt Pop here with all four lobesof my brain securely bound
behind my back, and welcome toanother episode of PT Pop, a
Mind Revolution, where I leadyou out of the rabbit hole, one
grain of truth at a time.
Today I've got a great show foryou today.
I've had Mike on the show acouple times before.

(00:27):
He's had me on his show.
Today we're talking with MikeWilliams, the extraordinary
Beatles conspiracy researcher,and he's known worldwide.
His presentations andinterviews on the McCartney and
the Beatles conspiracy haveachieved over 5 million views
worldwide.
So glad to have you here, mike.
How's it going today?
Good, good, can you hear meokay?

Speaker 2 (00:49):
I can yes.

Speaker 1 (00:50):
I don't know if you've had a chance to regroup.
I didn't think you were allscattered last time.
You have a lot of informationin your head so I was enjoying
what you're saying.
But you know, I was just tryingto different or draw the line,
the connection between tavistockadorno and the beatles, and

(01:11):
just kind of break it down,because if it weren't for you, I
I would have no idea eitherthat person or that entity
existed.
And, um, I've read more thanbilly sheer's book, yeah, and
it's fascinating.
It's just fascinating,especially what you see what's
going on with the lies in ourown government right now with

(01:32):
the attempted trump'sassassination and the.
There's different spins on thatstory and how they try to
manipulate everybody and turn itinto a thing.
So that that's kind of what Iwas trying to do with with the
tavistock and things like that.
It's all controlled peter atthe end of the.
So that's kind of what I wastrying to do with the Tavistock
and things like that.

Speaker 2 (01:46):
It's all controlled, peter.
At the end of the day that'swhat we have to understand, and
I've been talking about this fora very long time there's very
little, if anything, in ourworld, in our reality, that is
organic or natural.
I mean, your family is organicand natural if you have children
, and so on.

(02:06):
I'm talking about theinteractions that we have with
institutions, with politics andthe media, the military,
academia.
All of that stuff.
All of that stuff is completelycontrolled because there is an
agenda, there is a one worldagenda, and a lot of people used

(02:27):
to think that that type of talkwas from conspiracy theorists
and tinfoil hat wearers, and nowwhat's happened is so much is
being rolled out now by thecontrollers that they're no
longer hanging in the shadows.
They're coming out into theopen and they're no longer
hanging in the shadows.
They're coming out into theopen and they're talking about

(02:48):
their plans and they're talkingabout where they want to go.
And I point people to the WorldEconomic Forum.
Go to their website.
If you think what I'm saying iscrazy stuff, go read their
website, because they're tellingyou everything that's on their
agenda and where they thinkthey're going.

Speaker 1 (03:08):
How did?
How did let's start withTavistock?
How did?
What is that?
And you know where did it comefrom, and you know I'll let you
take it from there because Ithink that's fascinating.

Speaker 2 (03:19):
Tavistock is just a fascinating entity in and of
itself we have to understandfirst of all that there is a, a
internationalist organizationand structure that's what I try
to explain that to my audiencethat whenever you see the word
world or international in frontof some organization, that is

(03:42):
part of the one worldcontrolling apparatus.
So, as an example, we have theUnited Nations, united
Internationalist One World.
We have the World Bank, we havethe World Court, we have the
Bank of InternationalSettlements, we have the

(04:02):
International Monetary Fund.
We have organizations like theWorld Economic Forum, the
Bilderbergs, the Trilaterals,the Council on Foreign Relations
.
These are all deep stateinternationalist organizations
that are controlling the worldacross all ends of the spectrum.

Speaker 1 (04:28):
And they're run by billion, if not trillionaires.
Right, they're the richestpeople in the world run these
institutions.

Speaker 2 (04:34):
Yes, so you have it's all.
It's all tiered.
So the higher you go up thepyramid, the more shadowy and
the darker these people become.
The more shadowy and the darkerthese people become.
As an example, one of the verypowerful yet very secretive

(04:55):
secret society is the Blacknobility.
So very few people know who theBlack nobility are, who are
members of the Black nobility,but they sit toward the upper
tier of the pyramid.
So what you have is this systemis run by a cultist.
So when I say a cultist, I'mnot just talking about sorcerers
, although there are sorcerersand witchcraft those types of

(05:18):
things are involved.
What we're talking about isit's the hidden hand.
So a cult or cultism simplymeans something is hidden.
So we don't know about it.
So they go about their businesswith this hidden hand and what
they present to the public isnothing more.

(05:39):
It's, it's a veneer, and theytell you that that's your
reality.
Yeah, behind that veneer, behindthat curtain, there's the great
oz and there's all of theselevers and buttons and all of
these mechanisms that they'repulling and pushing every single

(05:59):
day to manipulate the world tomarch toward their end goal.
Their end goal is a one worldgovernment, one world religion,
and they have been at it for avery, very long time and I've

(06:19):
argued that really theinternational system that's in
place today really has beenalive and well and really got a
lot of traction after World WarII.
It existed before that, clearly, but it was after World War II

(06:41):
that they set their sights onthe United States, world War II
that they set their sights onthe United States.
Before World War II they werefocused on Europe.
So it's divide and conquer.
So during World War I, that'swhere they were focused on
making the changes they neededto make within the nation states
in Europe.

(07:01):
And then, once they got toWorld War II, then the bullseye
was on the US.
So you have this kludge ofsecret societies and I
oversimplify it by saying itthis way, but it's an effective
way to explain it.
Think of it as the overarchingsecret society is Freemasonry,

(07:26):
and then within Freemasonry.
You have multitudes of secretsocieties that work together and
they have a common goal.
The common goal is to controlit's world domination, it's
world control.
And the one thing that thecontrollers are very good at,
that we, the masses, are notvery good at, is they're able to

(07:50):
set aside their differences forthe larger goal, that have
friction between them within thepyramid of power, but they're
able to sit down and say, okay,look, let's keep our eye on the

(08:11):
ball, let's get into the endzone, and then, once we're there
, once we achieve what it iswe're looking to achieve, then
we can sit at the table and wecan hash through what our
differences are and we'll getthat result, whereas most of the
population does the exactopposite.
Nobody wants to march into theend zone until all of their
idiosyncrasies and theirdifferences have been resolved

(08:33):
beforehand, and then,hypothetically, they will move
forward.
But, as you know, since all ofthese different positions and
ideas and thoughts, and All ofthese different positions and
ideas and thoughts and positionsthat people have can never be
resolved satisfactorily toeverybody's satisfaction,
they're not going to move theball forward.

(08:57):
And again, I'm talking about themasses in general.
But the controllers themselvesare very, very good at being
able to set aside theirdifferences and move forward.
So, and Tavistock is part ofthat internationalist structure,
so it's really not thatcomplicated.
Just think of it as it's aworld government that's in place

(09:18):
.
And so the world government hasits courts, it has banking for
the monetary system, it has theUnited Nations.
Well, like every corporation,they have to have their
marketing, sales and propagandaarm right.
They have to have that, thatvein, and their job is to social

(09:44):
engineer the masses, toformulate the um, the, the
execution of the strategies thateither they develop themselves
or the strategies that come downto tavistock.
So above them there's thecommittee of 300.

(10:05):
And a great book on that, and Ihighly recommend people read it,
is a book by John Coleman.
It's titled the Committee of300, the Conspiratist Hierarchy,
and Dr Coleman released thisbook in the early 1990s.
I think it was 92 or 93.
So it's about 30 years ago.
90s, I think it was 92 or 93.

(10:27):
So it's about 30 years ago.
And what you'll find is whenyou go through this book, it
will hit you that he's talkingabout a level of control, peter,
that existed 30 years ago.
That will boggle your mind.
And now it's 30 years later.
It's also in this book where hetalks about the Beatles being a
creation of Tavistock.
Now, this book is not about theBeatles.

(10:49):
I always have to explain thisto folks.
The book is about the Committeeof 300 and the controlling
system, the controlling matrix.

Speaker 1 (10:58):
Okay, so the idea of Tavistock creating the Beatles
wasn't your idea.
You were turned on to it bythis book.

Speaker 2 (11:07):
Yeah, so what happened was in the memoirs of
Billy Shears going back maybetwo or three editions ago.
There was a blurb on page 350going into page 351.
And I don't know if those wordsare still on that page anymore.

Speaker 1 (11:23):
And that's the book.
Might not be, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2 (11:25):
Yeah, I think mine was.
Maybe the 2018 edition, maybeI'm not really sure, but Tom has
made some updates to the bookTom U Harriet, who's the author
slash encoder so I don't know ifsome of the wording and the
pages have shifted around alittle bit.
But in any case, back when Ithe edition, I read on page 315,

(11:47):
351, at the very bottom of page350, I'll never forget this,
pete.
The narrative said that GeorgeMartin was going to take their
little songs talking about theBeatles songs, their little
songs and make them famous andmake them great.
And when I was reading the book, I thought, well, that's kind
of an interesting way to explainit.
He's going to take their littlesongs.

(12:09):
So, in other words, thenarrative was marginalizing the
Beatles' songwriting.
And then on the next page, ittalked about the Committee of
300 and the snitch.
So I mean, I knew of thecommittee of 300 and I'm looking
at and I'm reading theparagraph and I'm thinking the

(12:31):
snitch.
Well, I knew that the committeeof 300 was written by John
Coleman.
I hadn't read the book yet, butI had watched interviews that
John Coleman did back in the day.
There's one, in fact, that Ihave on my main YouTube channel.
I think it goes back to thelate 90s, maybe early 2000.
And so I thought is memoirstalking about John Coleman and

(12:57):
the book the Memoirs of BillyShears?
So I went and bought the bookthe Committee of 300, and I read
it and, lo and behold, there itwas.
So there's about maybe eight to10 mentions in the book about
Tavistock and the Beatles, andColeman talks about how Theodore

(13:21):
Adorno was heavily involved inthe writing of the Beatles'
music.
So this is something that hetalks about.
And again I want to reiteratethe book is not about the
Beatles, it's about theCommittee of 300 and Tavistock
and the controlling system.
But because the Beatles aresuch a huge psychological

(13:44):
operation, they get notablemention whenever Tavistock was
discussed in the book.

Speaker 1 (13:50):
So who is Theodore Adorno and what is his relation
to Tavistock?
Is there a correlation betweenthe two?

Speaker 2 (13:57):
Yeah.
So the first thing we need todo is let's just back up and
understand Tavistock and thenwe'll get into Adorno.
Let's just back up andunderstand Tavistock and then
we'll get into Adorno.
So Tavistock was an outgrowthof Wellington House, which was

(14:20):
the propaganda arm, for theorder of business was to get the
British people to agree tobuild consensus to go to war
with Germany.
And this was a very tall orderbecause the British had no
reason to want to go to war withGermany.

(14:42):
They viewed the Germans astheir neighbor and they had no
issues with the Germans.
And that was a big problem inthe very beginning of World War
I, because the British weretrying to march forward, they
were trying to instigate the warwith Germany and the British
people were stepping back andsaying we don't support this.

(15:04):
It's the same thing thathappened to the United States in
World War II, and Tavistock hadtheir hands in that as well,
with FDR.
So Tavistock was given themission or Wellington House was
given the mission of getting theBritish people on board to
build consensus to go to war,and through a massive propaganda

(15:26):
campaign which included flyersand pamphlets saying that the
Kaiser and his military werebayoneting babies and all that
stuff.
But it's the same type of thingwe saw with the United States
during the Iraq war, where theyhad the diplomat's daughter at

(15:49):
the time and nobody told us itwas a diplomat's daughter who
said that the Iraqis were takingbabies out of incubators and
killing them.
That never happened either.
So it's a very similar story.
So they built this entirepropaganda program and it was

(16:11):
highly successful.
And then, once the war was over,the Wellington House
essentially just transitionedover to the Tavistock Clinic.
Now, when it was the TavistockClinic and this was 1921, if I
recall, what they were doing wastaking soldiers from World War

(16:34):
I who were traumatized from thewar, shell-shocked, and they
were bringing them in forpsychiatric evaluation and
treatment, in for psychiatricevaluation and treatment Very
dubious.
So they basically hadestablished themselves a base of
patients or subjects that theywere going to experiment on from

(16:56):
a psychiatric and psychologicalperspective.
Now this continued on for well,well, for a very long time.
Tavistock again, as the clinicwas established in 1921 and they
are alive and well today.
So we're in 2024 and what I'veexplained to my audience is

(17:19):
tavistock has been in thebusiness of social engineering
and mass mind manipulation,behavioral modification, for 120
years.
That's a long time to bemajoring something.
So they uh, infuse themselvesinto the every facet of um of

(17:43):
governments, into politics, intothe corporate world, into the
military, into academia.
I mentioned about World War IIwith Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
His job too was to try to getthe United States to go to war

(18:03):
in World War II, because beforethat the United States was not
interested in going to warbecause at the time it was
viewed as Europe's war.
We didn't have any businessbeing over there.
So Tavistock deployed itsagents One of them was Edward

(18:25):
Bernays, who's considered thegodfather of propaganda to the
United States and they startedformulating the propaganda
program under FDR to get theAmerican public to enter into
the war.
And it was the same thing.

(18:47):
We had all of these pamphletsand remember the movie shorts
when people would go to thetheater about the evil Germans
and all of this, and later on itwas the Japanese.
This was all the doing ofTavistock.
They have been at it for a verylong time.
They are extremely good at it,navistock.
They have been at it for a verylong time.

(19:07):
They are extremely good at it.
And if you go to their websiteit looks like motherhood and
apple pie If you read it.
I mean, you know, just for thebenefit of the world and all
that stuff.
But when you get into whatthey're really about and let me
just do this for the audience,pete there's two great books
that I recommend for people whowant to get acclimated and to

(19:29):
get a baseline on Tavistock.
The first one is this book,which was released in 2008.
It's Daniel Estulin's bookTavistock, the Tavistock
Institute, social Engineering,the Masses, and the other book
is another john colman book, afantastic book.
Colman's exceptionally good atwriting his books because he has

(19:52):
30 something chapters in here,but he's he.
He writes his chapters veryshort and sweet.
He gets right to the point okayokay, so it's not real dense.
He makes his points and then hemoves on.
But this book TavistockInstitute of Human Relations
Shaping the Moral, spiritual,cultural, political and Economic

(20:13):
Decline of the United States ofAmerica this is a very, very
good book.
And another book leading intoall of this because we're going
to talk about cultural Marxismis another book by John Coleman.
He was very prolific with hiswriting and this one is titled
the Rothschild Dynasty.

Speaker 1 (20:37):
Has Coleman passed on ?

Speaker 2 (20:40):
I believe he's very old, if he's still alive.
The last time I checked he wasin his eighties and this goes
back a few years ago.
So I tried to locate him, Itried to get a contact for him,
going back about, I would say,four years ago, and I couldn't
find anything.
His website was defunct.
Because he's almost the sameage as my mom Mom's 89.

(21:01):
Because he's almost the sameage as my mom Mom's 89.
So you know, he said what hehad to say and you get older and
you move on.

Speaker 1 (21:14):
So I don't know if he's still alive, okay.

Speaker 2 (21:18):
It'd be cool to have him on as a guest.

Speaker 1 (21:19):
Oh, it'd be great.

Speaker 2 (21:20):
For yourself.
Yeah, a wealth of knowledge,but I could not find a good
contact for him.
If somebody out there islistening to this and has a good
contact for Dr Coleman and ifhe's still alive, please feel
free to contact me or Pete andwe'll connect with him.
Excellent, so that's Tavistock,and I went through it real
quick and I have some notes here.

(21:43):
Let me just read this here Okay.
So they have far-reachinginfluence throughout governments
, non-government organizations,otherwise referred to as NGOs.
A lot of NGOs operate throughthe United Nations, the private
business sector, so this wouldbe your corporate world, public
and private institutions, massmedia, global think tanks, the

(22:07):
military, education and, ofcourse, the music and
entertainment industry.
So they have their hooks intoeverything.

Speaker 1 (22:14):
Everything, yeah.

Speaker 2 (22:15):
So their methods to overcome obstacles is social
engineering, otherwise known asbrainwashing, conditioning and
indoctrination.
They look to reshape andredefine values, morals, beliefs
and ethics, and to create a newculture.
So the culture that most peoplelive in today and embrace is

(22:43):
pop culture.
So pop culture was delivered tous by Tavistock and the.
Frankfurt School from thecultural Marxists.
Ok, it's not our true culture.
Our true culture would be ourancestral culture.
So, as an example, I'm Italianand Welsh, so for my mom's
Italian side we would haveItalian traditions, and what the
controllers have done was toerase and to get all of that

(23:10):
ancestral and family traditionsoff the table, because that's in
their way.
They need everybody to be onthe same page.
So what they look to do ishomogenize society and the
culture, and pop culture doesthat.
So you know what's pop culture?
Pop culture is netflix, it'shamburgers, it's hot dogs, it's
beer, it's ball games.

(23:31):
You know that's a far cry fromour heritage and our ancestral
culture.
Um, so they look to break downtraditional structures, and
we'll get into this.
So when we talk abouttraditional structures, we're
talking about family values,beliefs and institutions such as

(23:53):
religious institutions.
They have had an all-out war onChristianity.
Because they need Christianityout of the way and we'll get
into that in a little bit.
Because they need Christianityout of the way and we'll get
into that in a little bit theyimplement a diametrically

(24:14):
opposing framework to theexisting structures.
So this would be like thecounterculture of the 1960s
would be a good example of thatFree love, drugs, androgyny,
multiculturalism, moralequivalency who's to say that
that's wrong or who's to saythat that's right?
Everybody has a differentperspective, and we'll get into
that too.
That gets into critical theoryin the Frankfurt School.

Speaker 1 (24:32):
Just real quick.
I just want to mention thatwhen I think of the 60s and the
hippie movement, I was just alittle kid, I was like two,
three years old.
But when I look back in the thehistory books it seems like it
just appeared out of nowhereyeah and that to me and I is
proud as part of it.
They, they engineered it to comein at this time when the youth

(24:53):
was vulnerable, spearheaded bythe beatles at first it maybe it
was elvis but then the beatleskind of blew the doors open and
everybody started growing theirhair and doing drugs.
And then the hippie boom justappeared.
You know, all of a sudden,people got their hair down on
their waist and they're smokingdope and and I just I, even as a
kid I'm like where did thiscome from and why are people

(25:15):
doing this?
And you know, you, I evenquestioned things when I was
really little.
But I think you're, you'regetting to that.
I think it's kind of whatyou're alluding to.

Speaker 2 (25:23):
Yeah, it's all scripted and orchestrated.
It's engineered to happen.
And we'll get into that too,because what we'll do is we'll
talk about the Frankfurt Schooland then we'll get into the beat
movement which was theprecursor leading into the
Beatles.
So everything has a step on theladder pete.

(25:45):
They just don't dive intosomething.
So it's very incremental andit's very methodical how they go
about their change, because ifthey go about it too abruptly
then people are going to turnaround and say hold on a second,
what's going on here?
So they want to build it niceand slow so that you acclimate
and assimilate, and they've madea lot of advances over the

(26:07):
years.
Decadence is something elsethat is very, very key to the
Frankfurt School and Tavistockand cultural Marxism.
And of course they want tolower critical thinking.
And this is all done throughyour media and your television
shows just to relegate people tojust nonsense stuff.

(26:30):
In Daniel Eshlein's book hemakes some very good points and
two of them that I just latchedon to.
He said one of the things thatTavistock is really really good
at is creating cults and thereason why the creation of cults
is important because cults haveleaders and then you have cult

(26:54):
followers.
So even things that don't seemlike a cult are actually a cult.
As an example, religion is acult, a cult.
As an example, religion is acult.
Following your bands like theBeatles is a cult and people who
follow certain entertainers andcelebrities.

(27:16):
There's a cult mentality,there's a pop culture.
So the word culture has theword cult in it and so they
create all these differentbuckets and factions because
they know that one piece is notgoing to fit all.
So they create lots of bucketsand lots of cults, but at the
end of the day they're allorganized so that these cults or

(27:39):
their cult followers march inthe same direction.
Followers march in the samedirection, even if it's not
obvious.
But if you take a look yearsdown the line, you're going to
see hey, they're all turningthis way, and we'll get into
that in a little bit as well.
The common thread that we'llfind with Tavistock, with the

(28:00):
Frankfurt School of CulturalMarxism, is a common thread of
oh the other.
I'll mention Tavistock in asecond.
I said there was two pointsthat Daniel Eshleman made.
Let me go to that now.
The other point that Danielmade is Tavistock looks to
relegate the adult mind down tothat of a child's thinking.

(28:20):
So that's where we lose thecritical thinking faculties.
Everything becomes very um,based in emotions, very reactive
.
People are not thinkingrationally and logically,
they're not listening and to apoint counterpoint, they're very

(28:41):
reactive.
They're very emotional and alot of times what happens is
they lash out, they become angryand even there's times when it
resorts in violence.

Speaker 1 (28:53):
It's like a tantrum, like a child having a tantrum.

Speaker 2 (28:56):
It's like right, they're having a tantrum.
And one of the reasons why theylove this is because and we see
this now taking place in the UK, in England, where they're
having all these riots all ofthese riots that are taking
place, they've all beenorchestrated and instigated with
agent provocateurs Because,from the controller's mindset,

(29:19):
the more out of controlsomething is, the more they can
come out and say we have toinstitute control.
So it's problem, reactionsolution.
So they create the problem.
The solution is going to bereaction is going to be.
People are very upset and angryand they're distraught and

(29:40):
they're nervous about what'sgoing on with all this violence.
And then they present thesolution.
It's like oh well, you knowwhat?
We can squash this.
We will need more surveillance,a bigger police state, and this
is why we need things likedigital ID, passports, so we
know who everybody is, and thisis why we need facial

(30:02):
recognition software.
Yeah who everybody is, and thisis why we need facial
recognition software.
Yeah Right, so they create allof this stuff.
And so I was going to say thecommon thread with all of this,
when we talk about Tavistock,frankfurt and cultural Marxism,
is there's a psychological pieceto this behavioral modification
, as I mentioned before, andhedonism.

(30:23):
So those two things go togetherbehavioral modification,
psychological manipulation, andhedonism or decadence.
Because the hedonism and thedecadence what that does is that
breaks down society, breaksdown society norms, and from the
perspective of the controllers,this is uh, they view this as

(30:47):
an alchemical process.
So, in order to bring about thenew, you have to eliminate the
old or the existing, and this isa tenet that crowley teaches as
well.
He talks about.
In order to bring in the new,nothing from the previous can't
exist.

Speaker 1 (31:07):
so to undermine so undermine the christian values.
They turn the population intohedonists.
So we focus more onself-pleasure, pornography,
sexual gratification, drugs,drugs, and we become so immersed
in that it's.
It's a form of control and theycan do what they want with this
.
Um, yeah, you're, you'releading to that, but that's like

(31:31):
I've seen it firsthand with.
I look around me likeeverybody's wrapped up in their
teslas and their.
There's a dunkin donuts thatopened up the street down for me
.
Uh, we've got two dunkin donuts.
Now, for some reason, the lineof people was down the street on
the sidewalk for donuts andcoffee.
I'm like why?
I mean?

(31:52):
But because they just thinkit's just, it's just donuts and
coffee, but that's a whole,nother thing.
But it's kind of the same thing.
They distract us with sugar andfast food and food deserts and
that's the pop culture yeah,yeah exactly no, you're.

Speaker 2 (32:06):
You're right on point , because we had a similar
situation going back a few yearsago, when they opened a crispy
cream in my town and I'm I cancare less about crispy cream
donuts yeah, they're donuts,right, and they have coffee, so
what?
So does 500 other stores?
Yeah, yeah, right within thevicinity, and it was the same
thing, pete there were peoplelined up.

(32:27):
You would think that they werehanding out money.

Speaker 1 (32:32):
Oh, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2 (32:33):
And I could not believe the line all around the
Krispy Kreme.
And this is the problem.
Yeah, it was unbelievable, itwas the same thing and this is
the problem that we have withsociety.
And the problem is very fewpeople take the time to step
back and assess it, becausethey're so wrapped up in all of

(32:55):
the materialistic goodies thatare presented to them on any
given day.
Like you said, whether it bedonuts, whether it's going to be
TV sets, or the new phone orthe new car, whatever.
People are completely caught upin this materialistic world and
what that does is that pullspeople away from their spiritual

(33:19):
connections.
And we've gotten to the pointnow where a lot of times when we
talk about spiritualconnections and when I'm talking
about spiritual connections,I'm talking about connection
back to source, the creator, god, back to the divine
understanding, more aboutmetaphysics you're contemplating
what your purpose is in life.
Why are you here?

(33:39):
Where you?
Are you actually here to standon line at the crispy cream?
Because a new store opened upis?
Is that really why you're here?
So they don't want any of that,because they don't want people
philosophizing, they don't wantpeople being introspective.
Um, they don't want any of thatstuff.
They want everything to be at avery basic um, at a veneer,

(34:02):
like I mentioned before, verytopical, and just to go about
your homogenized life and justgo with the flow yeah, don't
stir up any problems, so anyway.
so that's tavistock and um goingthrough some of the attributes
of what it is that they bakeinto their agendas and into

(34:26):
their initiatives.
You know, the Beatles were apsychological operation, a
massive psychological operation,as was the entire British
invasion.
Now Tavistock is out of Londonand there's a good reason why
they refer to the Britishinvasion as the British invasion

(34:47):
.
It was because it was theBritish secret societies, along
with secret societies across theworld, including those here in
the United States, who werelooking to usurp the current
system and to begin the processof breaking it down and
implementing their one worldorder.

(35:09):
Now let's talk about theFrankfurt School, and that'll
lead us into Theodor Adorno.

Speaker 1 (35:17):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (35:17):
Okay, so.
So Tavistock originates out ofWellington House and there's a
history before that as well, butI won't get into that.
We'll just start withWellington House going forward.
That's 120 years of history, Ithink.
For the purposes of our show,that'll suffice.
Yeah, the Frankfurt School wasestablished in 1923.

(35:40):
So think of it as two yearsafter Tavistock formed the
Tavistock Clinic.
Coincidence?
No, not really.
I should also mention thatTavistock, sigmund Freud, was
their poster child, and Imentioned Edward Bernays was

(36:01):
also part of the Tavistocksystem.
Edward Bernays was also part ofthe Tavistock system.
Now, the Frankfurt School wasnot a school in itself.
It was really an adjunct toFrankfurt University and it was
comprised of Marxistintellectuals at Frankfurt
University in the 1920s and the1930s.

(36:23):
So think in terms of you havethis think tank of Marxist
intellectuals that wereoperating for about two decades,
and when we talk about theFrankfurt School, they're
connected at the hip withTavistock, as is the Fabian
Society, which was anothersecret society out of Britain

(36:45):
that was closely aligned withthe Frankfurt school, with
Tavistock and all of these other, uh, secret societies and, um,
these organizations that werelooking to implement a one world
order, and many of them, likethe Fabians, were into eugenics
big time, as as were theFrankfurt School group too, but

(37:05):
the Fabians more so.
Based upon my research, theywere heavily into the concept of
eugenics, or depopulation.
So when you read about theFrankfurt School, of course,
when you go to Wikipedia and yougo to any of the online
mainstream resources again, it'slike Tavistock's website.
It's going to read likemotherhood and apple pie.

(37:26):
You're going to're going tothink this doesn't seem so bad,
you know.
And they're going to talk interms of being altruistic, um,
an egalitarian world whereeverything is is equal, there is
no class structure.
Um, this is the type of stuffthat you're going to read.
So the question, you know, whenI was reading all this and then

(37:48):
I was reading the books thatwere really digging in, the
question I asked was well, wasthe Franklin School really
altruistic and egalitarian orwere they gaslighting us?
And I came to the conclusionthat it was a lot of gaslighting
.
So one of the approaches thatthe Frankfurt School was engaged

(38:13):
in is to make people thinkillogically.
So if I say black, black, yousay white.
If I say left, you know, theysay right.
so if I say the sky is blue,they'll say no, it's really not,

(38:35):
it's green, yeah, right and theobjective of the frankfurt
school and a lot of these eliteorganizations was to continue to
push that type of dialectic inorder to slowly get people to
question their own logic andability to reason.
So Bertrand Russell, who is aBritish elitist, he died in the

(39:01):
1970s, a big time, one world,new world order type.
Here's a quote the objective isto produce an unshakable
conviction that snow is black,and that's what I was talking
about.
Now what the Frankfurt School?

(39:21):
The way they looked at that andsaid well, if we get to gray,
we win.
So Bertrand Russell is sayingif I can get you to think that
snow is black, the Frankfurtswere saying we'll settle with
gray, because once you thinkthat snow is gray, we've won.

Speaker 1 (39:41):
Yeah, you've won.

Speaker 2 (39:43):
Right the war for the mind.

Speaker 1 (39:45):
They do it all the time on the news all the time.

Speaker 2 (39:48):
Well, if we go to the whole thing with transgender
and telling us that a child'sgender is not defined when
they're born, that that theyhave time to decide, that,
that's a perfect example of whatwe're going to get into, which

(40:09):
is critical theory from theFrankfurt School.
That's a perfect example oftelling people that snow is
black or that men could lactate.
It's the same thing.
So there were four, there weremore than four, but there were
four primary players at theFrankfurt School.
There was Max Horkheimer,theodor Adorno, herbert Marcuse

(40:36):
and Eric Fromm, and they wereall cultural Marxists and they
had a different approach toMarxism, pete, than what was
experienced before.
So during the Russian Revolution, which was really the Bolshevik
Revolution, during the WorldWar I period in Russia, that was

(40:58):
Lenin Marxism.
Lenin Marxism is denoted byviolence.
Marxism is denoted by violence.
So they're going to achievetheir goals, their Marxist, able

(41:26):
to get Marxism at a worldwidelevel.
Well, the Frankfurt Schoolcultural Marxists Horkheimer,
dorno, marcuse and Fromm theseguys turned around and said bad
approach, because you're notgoing to win anything that way.

(41:50):
You can't do it throughviolence, so you have to subvert
from within.
So it's a much more incrementaland methodical approach to do
it this way, but in the end it'sfar more effective because
people won't even realize thatthey're being subverted and
commandeered.
They will just go along to getalong and a decade ago, by 20,

(42:18):
30, 40, 50, 60 years, and beforeyou know it, you're in a
completely different systembecause, because people
completely lost perspective onthe baseline, they don't
remember the baseline anymore.
So if we take a quote from MaxHorkheimer and I pulled this a
while back, this comes fromHenry Macau's website and, by

(42:41):
the way, henry is Jewish, forthose that-.

Speaker 1 (42:45):
Well, Adorno was too right yes, they all were.

Speaker 2 (42:48):
They were jewish cultural marxists.
This is something that umpeople don't like to talk about
it, because whenever you talkabout the jewish control system,
people recoil yeah, yeah, andthey call you a nazi you know,
and there's no reason to recoilbecause it is what it is.

(43:08):
There's no problem with sayingyou talk about the Catholic
control system, or you talkabout Christianity, or you talk
about Hindus or Buddhists, butif you say the word Jew or
Jewish, people get reallynervous and, like I said, they
recoil.
So Max Horkheimer said thefollowing this is a quote and,
like I said, they recoil.
So Max Horkheimer said thefollowing this is a quote.
And Horkheimer was one of theleading Jewish Marxists of the

(43:30):
Frankfurt School, whichpioneered cultural Marxism.
The revolution, and he's talkingabout the Marxist revolution,
won't happen with guns.
Now, remember I was saying itwas saying, hey, lenin had it
all wrong with his guns and hisviolence.
Rather, it will happenincrementally, year by year,
generation by generation.
We will gradually infiltratetheir educational institutions

(43:53):
and their political offices,transforming them slowly into
Marxist entities as we movetowards universal egalitarianism
.
So they keep talking aboutuniversal egalitarianism, but
that's really not what they'retalking about.
I mean, really, it's topigeonhole the population, the

(44:20):
masses, into a one world Marxiststate.
That's what they're looking todo.
And, interestingly enough, backin the early 1900s this

(44:46):
document came out.
It's called the Protocols ofZion and I've had this for many
years.
It's not easy to find on theinternet anymore because they
don't want anybody reading it.

Speaker 1 (44:51):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (44:52):
But what it is is.
It's a document which isbasically the game plan of the
Jewish Marxists and how they'regoing to go about changing the
world.
To go about changing the worldand as an example, I'll read
only some of the bullets here,not all of them Place our agents

(45:17):
and helpers everywhere.
Take control of the media anduse it in propaganda for our
plans.
Start fights between differentraces, classes and religions.
Use bribery, threats andblackmail to get our way.
Use free Masonic lodges toattract potential public
officials.
Appeal to successful people'segos.

Speaker 1 (45:41):
Money Appoint puppet leaders who can be controlled by
blackmail Replace royal rule,in other words monarchies.
How old is this document?
How old is it?

Speaker 2 (45:50):
This goes back to I think it was 1904, 05.

Speaker 1 (45:54):
Okay, all right.

Speaker 2 (45:56):
So let's just say, about 120 years ago.
Yeah, okay, I'm not going to goread through all of this.
It's not a very big document,not a very big document, but
everything is here Now.
When you read it, you're goingto see the game plan unfold
right before you, and you'realso going to see that a lot of
this stuff is already wellunderway, if not already baked

(46:19):
into the cake.
Some things are still on openswitch, but it's very important
for people to read stuff likethis, because when you read the
Protocols of Zion and then youget into the Frankfurt School,
you quickly realize that theyhave the exact same ideology,
the exact same ideology.

Speaker 1 (46:38):
So they must be working together.

Speaker 2 (46:40):
Yeah, yeah, so it's it's all part of the same thing.
It's a long-term ideology thathas been in place for a long
time by communists, andcommunism is a Jewish ideology.
A lot of people don't know thateither, but it is so.
Now, with the Frankfurt School,they came up with what is

(47:05):
referred to as critical theoryideology.
So the critical theory dividesthe masses into two categories
oppressors and victims.
So just think about that Today.
What do we have?
We have oppressors and victims.
That's always the battle.

(47:26):
It's always somebody fighting,the oppressors or the man, and
that goes back to the 1960s.
Yeah, okay.

Speaker 1 (47:36):
And they always put a hero in the mix that's going to
come and save you from theoppressor.

Speaker 2 (47:41):
Right.

Speaker 1 (47:42):
That's right.
I don't know if that's part ofit, but it seems like there's
always a guy in a white horse.
There's always a guy going tocome galloping in to save us all
, donald.

Speaker 2 (47:50):
Trump.

Speaker 1 (47:51):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 2 (47:52):
Elon.

Speaker 1 (47:52):
Musk Exactly.

Speaker 2 (47:54):
Okay, these are the guys that are going to ride in,
like you said, pete on the whitehorse, yeah, and they're going
to do battle on your behalf.
You don't need to you.
You can tweet all day long.
That's fantastic.
Continue to tweet.

Speaker 1 (48:09):
If you're allowed, but let.

Speaker 2 (48:12):
Elon and Donald Trump and whoever else, let them take
the the bad guys on.

Speaker 1 (48:18):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 2 (48:19):
Okay, and folks, what you have to understand is all
of these people, musk, trumpthey are all part of the
controlled system.
They're all part of it.
The very system that oppressesyou is not going to magically
become unoppressed and free you.

(48:40):
It's just not going to happen.

Speaker 1 (48:42):
Okay, so, I completely agree.

Speaker 2 (48:44):
Yeah, their premise is to keep your head in their
system.
So the political agree, yeah,their their.
Their premise is to keep yourhead in their system.
So the political system is Imean, the political system is a
uniparty.
It's one system and they play,they play off of each other as
if there's two distinct factionsout there, but at the end of
the day, they're one in the samewith the same goals.
And I've explained, I've triedto explain this to many people,

(49:05):
Peter, over the years.
We did not get to where we aretoday with the system because
two parties were fighting eachother.
Two parties were workingtogether with each other behind
the scenes to move the ballforward, while giving the
perception that there aredifferences, giving the

(49:26):
perception that there aredifferences.

Speaker 1 (49:33):
Well, if I'm not mistaken, our original
government back in the 1700s wasthere weren't parties.
I don't think George Washingtonwas a Democrat and Jefferson
was a Republican.
I don't think they.
Even they did.
I don't think they believed ina party system back then.

Speaker 2 (49:43):
Yeah, yeah, you might be correct.
I'm trying to remember goingback party system back then.
Yeah, yeah, you might becorrect, I'm trying to remember
going back.
I did some reading about thatyears ago, but, in either case,
what we have today whether theyhad parties or not back then
today it's just one.
It's just one big club, yeah,and and we're not in it.
Um, I mean, just just take alook at everything that goes on,

(50:06):
all the crimes that arecommitted, committed and
nobody's held accountable.

Speaker 1 (50:11):
Oh, exactly.

Speaker 2 (50:13):
Nobody's held accountable.
So critical theory which cameout of the Frankfurt School
again divides the masses intotwo categories oppressors and
victims, and the intent was todestabilize society and to
destroy the quote oppressiveorder.
So one of the ways they didthis was through feminism.

Speaker 1 (50:33):
So let me give this example.

Speaker 2 (50:35):
So they want to eliminate the traditional family
nucleus because that's in theway of this one world communist
state, of this one worldcommunist state.
And so what they did was therewas two things there was a war
on man, on the male, and it wasalso a war on women.

(51:02):
And people think, well, a waron women.
Yes, so, going back to the verybeginning of time, the
traditional family nucleusconsisted of the husband or the
father, which was the provider,the safety, the hunter and so on
provider, and we had the wifeor the mother who would take

(51:28):
care of the children andmaintain the home.
And so there was that synergy.

Speaker 1 (51:35):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (51:36):
And it's traditional.
And it's not just traditionalhere in the United States, it
goes back through the beginningof time, through all cultures.
Sure, some people might want toargue that in certain family
dynamics it was somewhatdifferent.
That's okay.
It's okay if it's somewhatdifferent, as long as the
balance is reached and there'san agreement between the man and

(51:59):
the woman, the husband and thewife or whatever.
That's how they're going towork it.
But the cultural Marxists, theFrankfurt School, were not
interested in a balance.
They weren't interested in anagreed upon dynamic.
So what they did with feminismwas they turned around and they
went to women.
It was a full-fledgedpropaganda war on women.

(52:20):
And they said to them look, whyare you home taking care of the
kids?
Why are you doing that?
Why are you interested intaking care of the of the house?
Why are you, you know, why areyou doing that as your husband
gallivants off to work and he'smaking money and he's able to go

(52:41):
traveling or whatever you knowthe husband did for a living.
So what they did was this isgoing back to the Bertrand
Russell quote, where they'regoing to convince people that
snow is black.
Critical theory, basically, isgaslighting.
It's getting you to believesomething.
A belief that you have is not avalid belief, because a lot of

(53:07):
women back in the day weresaying well, look, I'm perfectly
happy being home, taking careof the household, caring for the
children, I'm perfectlysatisfied with doing that.
So a lot of women were pushingback on this and they just kept
at it and kept at it and kept atit.
And that's when they startedwith women's lib and getting

(53:28):
women into the workplace.
Because as soon as they wereable to do that, that allowed
the family to begin todisintegrate children going to

(53:49):
preschool care, going to schoolduring the day, after school
care.
So the children then hadlimited interaction with their
biological parents, essentiallyalmost becoming wards of the
state.
And so there was now influenceson the children, where the kids
can be conditioned andpropagandized with curriculums,
whether it be in school oroutside of school, to start to
shape their minds.

(54:11):
And the other thing that theydid was, in order to get the
women out of the ladies, out ofthe house, was to create an
economic and financial situationwhere it became so expensive to
be able to own a home.
Right, because back in the day,when I was a kid, my mother
stayed home.

(54:32):
She cared for the children.
Dad went to work and in factdad had basically two jobs.
One was like a part-time job,but he had a full-time job, and
a part-time job but we had anice house on Long Island.
We were basically blue-collarmiddle class and we were able to

(54:53):
live that way.
But then, as time went on,future generations could not
afford to have that type of homeon one income.

Speaker 1 (55:07):
No.

Speaker 2 (55:10):
It couldn't happen.
So that's the other thing thatthey did.
So they have multiple levers.
They have levers where they'rejust psychologically screwing
with people's heads and tellingyou do you really want to be a
mother?
Do you really want to watchkids?
Do you really want to go to PTAmeetings?
Do you really want to do this?
Don't you want to be in theworkforce?
Don't?

Speaker 1 (55:29):
you want to make the same money.
And then, while they're doingthat, they're altering the
economic and financial landscapeto make it necessary for the
woman, in many cases, to have togo to work and if you look at
the condition of our country,just in the united states, the

(55:51):
violence and the kids that arekilling each other and shooting
up schools, and how it's justhad this horrible effect because
there's no parent, there'snobody at home.
Now, right, both parents areworking, the kids are, are
losing their minds, um, and youcan see where it's headed
they're, they're, they're tryingto steer us towards okay,

(56:13):
things are too expensive.
Now I have a feeling they'retrying to push us towards this,
uh, socialistic economy wherethe government takes care of
everybody, yeah, and we're alljust like, oh, okay, yeah, if
you want to give me a couplethousand bucks a month, I'll be
fine with that, but that wasjust a thought I had there.
No, that's.

Speaker 2 (56:32):
that's exactly where they're taking this, peter.
They're taking this to, to thepoint where look, at the end of
the day, eugenics did not goaway.
So depopulation is a very bigitem on their agenda.
We'll talk about that in alittle bit, because it's getting
to the point where people areno longer.

(56:54):
A lot of people are no longerproductive in society.
They're counterproductive,they're into decadence, they're
into inane activities you know,so they're not contributing to
the benefit of the health of ofsociety or the culture.

(57:15):
They're not contributors no so,uh, and this is being done by
design and at some point, like Isaid, you know, we're going to
see declines in the population.
That's my personal belief and Ithink the March 2020 event was
a way to kick that off.
So critical theory dissectsexisting societal beliefs and

(57:36):
criticizes them in a way toredefine existing beliefs,
values and morals which wereimposed by governments,
religions, et cetera, asoppressive, thus inhibiting
human potential.
So they criticize it, sayingthat the reason why you believe
what you believe and you do whatyou do is because it's been
imposed upon you by governmentsand religions.

(57:59):
It's not because it's inherentto, it's not instinctual to your
thinking.
It's because somebody told youyou had to do it that way.
Now, that's not to say thatthere are things that we're told
have to be a certain way, butit's also not the case that we

(58:19):
don't have instinctual feelingsand understandings of how, of
right and wrong, as an example,of what's the right way to raise
a family.
And the right way to raise afamily is to ensure that we have
as much attention at home as wepossibly can with the children
and the proper education and tobe taught proper etiquette and

(58:43):
manners, and for the mother andfather to be very good role
models.
Now, I know that you knowthat's a tall order, because
everybody's different andeverybody has different
experiences with their families,myself included.
But that's the premise.
I mean, that's really what weshould be striving for.

(59:04):
We should be striving for that.
We should be striving for amore intellectual, more
philosophical, a society that isbased more on going with their
instincts, their God-giveninstincts and reasoning than all
of this crap that's just beingfunneled through our television

(59:27):
sets and dumped into our livingrooms and just dumbing
everything down.
So that's the thing.
So again, victims and oppressors.
So with critical theory and theFrankfurt School, the
oppressors are the government.
It's the fascist state.
You'll hear the FrankfurtSchool talk about fascism all
the time, but Darnold talksabout that.

(59:47):
He says that at work people areproducers, at home they are
consumers.
That's the result of acapitalist, fascist state.
Now there's a lot when you lookinto Theodore Adorno.
There's a lot that Adorno saysthat I mean, it makes sense, it
resonates to a point.
There's a lot that Adorno saysthat I mean, it makes sense, it

(01:00:08):
resonates to a point.
But then you have to take astep back and say, okay, well,
adorno said the following things.
I'll take you through some ofthe things that he said.

Speaker 1 (01:00:15):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:00:16):
Okay, but then you have to lay it up against, okay.
He said that Now where are wetoday?
So what he was talking aboutdidn't really transpire, it
didn't.
So was he gaslighting us at thetime, or was he a person that
had, was altruistic in a way?

(01:00:38):
And you know let's just sayI'll play devil's advocate that
he didn't have the fullunderstanding of where things
were ultimately going down lateron down the line, decades down
the line.
So, maybe at his point in time,when he was talking about this

(01:01:01):
stuff, he actually believed thisstuff and he thought that maybe
he could help move humanity ina in a better direction, maybe,
okay.
So I don't want people to goall nuts thinking I'm defending
the frankfurt school or theodoreadorno.
I'm just saying that, hey, youknow, I wasn't there, I wasn't
in the man's head.
All I could do is read thethings that he said and I could

(01:01:24):
build a case to say that maybethat's where he was at, although
I can also make a case thatsays now, 20, 30, 40, 50 years
down the line, the stuff he wastalking about really didn't
transpire.

Speaker 1 (01:01:40):
So he was part of the Frankfurt School.

Speaker 2 (01:01:42):
Yes, Okay, Adorno was part of the Frankfurt School
with Max Horkheimer, who I readthat quote before another guy by
the name of Herbert Marcuse andalso Eric Fromm, and we'll talk
a little bit about Adorno injust a moment here.
So the Frankfurt Schoolrecommended the creation of
racial divides.
Continual change to createconfusion, and we see this all

(01:02:06):
the time.
So going back to something assimple as masks work, masks
don't work, masks work, masksdon't work.
This was the Fauci bit.

Speaker 1 (01:02:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:02:19):
Right, going back and forth.
This is creating confusion.

Speaker 1 (01:02:22):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:02:22):
Teaching sex and alternative sexual lifestyles to
children.
We see that in spades today,undermining the authority of the
schools and the teachers,promoting excessive drinking and
drugs, emptying the churches.
Again, this is the war onChristianity.
In memoirs it tells us that theIlluminati, or the Controllers,
declared war on Christianity onSeptember 11th of 1962.

(01:02:45):
That's when they formally putthe stake in the ground and they
said okay, we're going todismantle Christianity.
The Frankfurt School advocatedcreating an unreliable legal
system with victim bias,dependency on the state,
controlling the media to dumbdown and encouraging the

(01:03:06):
breakdown of the family.
They promoted pansexualism, andthis goes back to the cult of
pan, and when we talk aboutpromoting pansexualism, we're
talking about the search forpleasure and overthrowing
traditional relationships, goingback and breaking down the

(01:03:27):
family and the traditionalrelationship between a man and a
woman and their children.
They also were advocates ofmarginalizing the role of the
father.
So they wanted to abolish malequote dominance, because men
oppress women.
That's their propaganda Menoppress women and so therefore,

(01:03:53):
again we're going back to theoppressor-victim discussion.
They advocated removing theparents as the primary educators
we talked about that andobfuscate the difference between
genders.
In fact, there's a quote by EricFromm, who was one of the

(01:04:14):
members of the Frankfurt Schooland he said he was an active
advocate of the matriarchaltheory and he was quoted as
saying that masculinity andfemininity, he claimed they were
not reflections of quoteessential sexual differences.
So masculinity and femininitywere not reflections of

(01:04:36):
essential sexual differences, asthe romantics had thought, but
were derived instead fromdifferences in life functions
which were, in part, sociallydetermined.
Okay, again, so we're back tosnow is black, this type of this
type of thinking?

(01:04:56):
Um.
They also, uh, said that theuse of music can be used to
promote mental illness anddestroy society yeah verses or
lyrics that were set to musicand repeatedly intoned are very
effective.

(01:05:17):
So lyrics that were repeatedover and, over and over again
was a form of hypnosis.
It was a form of indoctrinationand brainwashing.
Adorno had said that they couldpromote a culture of
indoctrination and brainwashing.
Adorno had said that they couldpromote a culture of pessimism
and despair via radio andtelevision, and this is
something that we see all thetime.
Anybody who sits down andwatches the cable news networks

(01:05:42):
like CNBC and MSNBC, Fox News,CNN and so on nothing ever
positive.

Speaker 1 (01:05:50):
Oh yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:05:51):
Comes out of that screen, ever, ever.
Everything is pessimistic,everything is violence and war
and upheaval.
It's, it's, it's done to createstress and anxiety and worries
in your life.

Speaker 1 (01:06:04):
Now about Adorno.
You've touched on him a littlebit here, but in his studies,
his published studies, on thesurface he claims he was
anti-pop culture.
Yeah, he was an avant-gardemusician that wrote atonal music
, not pop music, right?
So they portray him on thesurface as being against all

(01:06:24):
this stuff right when, in when,in fact, I think he used this.
This is my theory.
He used this stuff inconjunction with the Frankfurt
School and Tavistock to altersociety.
Yes, because he was aware ofthe psychological implications
of music and all the things youjust mentioned.

Speaker 2 (01:06:42):
Right.
So what he did was because thatquestion comes up a lot people
will say well, adorno was not afan of pop music or jazz.
The frankfurt school's culturalmarxist agenda, this quote

(01:07:13):
egalitarian end state that maxwas quoted as talking about.
So so if we take the beatles asan example, so the beatles
started off very pop oriented.
Right, they're beginning theirearly songs, going back to
please please me and with theBeatles, pretty much
straightforward rock and roll.
But if we take a look at theevolution of their music, from

(01:07:36):
please please me, which wasreleased in March of 1963, up
through let's just pick revolver, their seventh album, and we
take a look at how the musicmoved and changed in
sophistication, shaping themusic to move it into a certain

(01:08:12):
direction so that it willsupport the cultural revolution,
so it would support thecounterculture and it and it
moved into more of an atonal.

Speaker 1 (01:08:19):
A lot of lenin's and harrison's too, moved into more
of an avant-garde genre and verystrange and out of the you know
out of left field type of music, right, whereas paul and ringo
all ringo is not really a factoraltogether, but paul's was
still his.

Speaker 2 (01:08:37):
His progression got more um, orchestrated and
elaborate right, right and andif we go to um like revolution
number nine, we think about that.
That's avant-garde, atonal.
In a way that's a collage ofstuff yeah, yeah right.
And then you got lennon in his,uh, his solo career, uh, with

(01:08:59):
yoko ono and the avant-garde andreally again atonal types of
it's in that, it's in that realmof atonal it's, it's just it's
not tonal, it doesn't have acore, it's all over the place.
So, folks, if you're notfamiliar with atonal music, a
best example would be uh, listento an old horror movie where
the piano was just all over theplace.

(01:09:21):
I'm just, you know yeah, ohyeah right, that's.
That's a good example of atonalmusic.

Speaker 1 (01:09:27):
If you want a good example of making everybody
think things are black, yokoOno's music and John Lennon's
Yoko Ono's music.
For the life of me, they'vebeen trying to convince me,
right as I was a child, that herscreaming to a microphone is.
That is where it's at when itcomes to avant garde, and I I'm
like there is no way you canever convince me that a woman

(01:09:48):
screaming to a microphone ismusic.
But they are, they're.
They've desperately tried totell us that music like that is
music.
I think that's just an exampleto pull the beetle beetle crowd
in.

Speaker 2 (01:10:01):
That's a perfect example that it's a perfect
example.
And and it was even Lenin wasadvocating that, pushing how
brilliant she was and that shewas ahead of her time, and very
few people really understoodYoko Ono's genius.
It's the same thing.
Pete with the CIA createdmodern art.
They knew that modern art wasjust a bunch of nonsense.

(01:10:24):
Ed Martin, art was just a bunchof nonsense.
So if we just put, you know, acanvas up and somebody throws
three dots of red paint on it,yeah Right, and you're told that
that's brilliant, and peoplewould look at it and stare at it
in museums and go, you know,just, those three dots are just.
I don't know how he did it.
Well, that was the CIA.

(01:10:46):
That was another psychologicaloperation to get people to think
irrationally, because arational person would look at a
white canvas with three dots andsay are you kidding me?
That's a white canvas withthree drops of paint on it.
I'm moving on, I'm going downto the diner to get a sandwich.
Um, but it got people into thismindset where they were

(01:11:08):
accepting irrational, illogicalsituations and presentations and
embracing them.
So, so Adorno, so Adorno, youthink about what Adorno you know
?
Uh, and I do believe Adorno wasum at the.
He was in a position, a very,very influential position, with

(01:11:31):
the Beatles music, working withGeorge Martin, I think.
If I had to say the way I thinkthe organizational structure
worked, I think George Martinreported in to Theodore Adorno,
that's how I think it worked.
That's you know, that's just myopinion.
And so when we think about um,what we were talking about

(01:11:51):
before, the progression of thebeatles music, starting with
please please me, and with thebeatles, very basic stuff, and
then when you start getting intohelp and then revolver um, you
know, in fact, with revolver umthe take on that was you know,
now the Beatles are moving moreinto music that doesn't make you
move, it makes you think it'sthinking person's music, and

(01:12:14):
then of course we get intothat's Rubber Soul.
I think I should.
I said Rubber Soul, I hope.
Then we get into Revolver andthen from Revolver of course we
get into Sgt Pepper.
But that was all table settingand Sergeant Pepper of course
kicked off the psychedelic eraand drugs, free love, and any

(01:12:36):
time there's a discussion aboutthe Beatles, a documentary and I
know you can attest to thisthey will almost always talk
about how influential theBeatles were to culture change.

Speaker 1 (01:12:51):
Oh, absolutely.

Speaker 2 (01:12:53):
So it was everything, it was the music, it was the
way they dressed, it was eventhe way they spoke, and
Tavistock creates all of thesegenres, pete, as you know.
And even if bands were not inon the, on the psyop per se, in

(01:13:14):
other words, bands were signedand recruited.
The thing is they operatedwithin that genre's parameters.
So in other words, let's justsay classic rock as an example.
So they would come in and theyoperate, they play within that
genre of music, classic rock orthe british invasion.
It's a process of emulation, sothey didn't actually have to be

(01:13:38):
schooled in what the, the endgame goal is of the new world
order, or the, or the controlsystem, the one world order, a
lot of these bands.
They were put in a positionwhere they emulated the style of
music, they emulated the lyrics, they emulated the singing,
they emulated the way the musicwas presented, whether it be the

(01:14:01):
way they dressed or the way thealbum covers were reflective of
occult symbolism and stuff likethat, because I get that
question a lot too.
People will say well, everysingle band was signed on a
dotted line on this thing I saidno, not every single band.
There were key instrumentalbands that were leading the way.

Speaker 1 (01:14:24):
And yes, they were in on it.
But you have to understand mostpeople don't know.
When you get signed to a, thelabel takes over and tells you
how to dress.
Yes, they tell you what song isgoing to be in the album.
They tell you what key they'regoing to be in.
I think the big producers, whoare run by something else right,
manipulate the sound to make itmore that's absolutely right so
yeah yeah, the labels are alltied into the music and

(01:14:47):
entertainment industry.

Speaker 2 (01:14:48):
It's all controlled and the music and entertainment
industry is controlled fromcradle to grave, from beginning
to end.
So if you're going to be inthat system one way or another,
you are going to lose your voice.
You are going to lose a levelof your creativity and your vote
or your voice in what goes on,because at the end of the day,

(01:15:12):
they're going to present it thisway.
Look, this is a business, it'sour business and we're going to
tell you how you've got to putthis together.
Because, whether you like tohear it or not, mr or Mrs, band
or artist, you are a product,and so a lot of these
entertainers and these musiciansand these bands, they go from

(01:15:35):
this whole like, well, we'remusicians and we're all about
creativity, to being tolddirectly or indirectly by the
music industry, by the labelsyou're a product.
It's as simple as that.
And um, and at the drop of a hat, they will bring in whoever

(01:15:56):
they need to bring in musician,wise, to, to record on the track
.
So, if you know, if you're theguitar player in a band and you
know, you put a guitar trackdown, the producer sits down and
says, yeah, I don't think so.
I, I I've got a guy that I wantto lay down that guitar track
because he or she's a muchbetter guitar player or I've
worked with them before.

(01:16:16):
Maybe it's just a matter ofI've worked with them before,
and there's even you know this.
It's interesting because thereare even people who have youtube
channels, who are in you knowYouTube channels, and they're
producers.
I'm not going to say who theyare.

Speaker 1 (01:16:29):
Yeah, I know, I know some of them yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:16:31):
Yeah, and even I watch their shows, you know,
because I love the musicalaspect of it as a musician.
Yeah, but even they have saidthat they have brought people in
to re-record tracks.
They've hired other musicians,they've hired songwriters to

(01:16:52):
write music for a particularband so that they can create
content for their albums orwhatever it is they're going to
release.
So, boy, we really got off on atangent there, or I did.

Speaker 1 (01:17:07):
Sorry, yeah, but that's okay.

Speaker 2 (01:17:09):
But what Adorno did was Adorno used the Beatles, he
leveraged them right.
So he leveraged the existingsystem, if you will, the
existing pop music.
And it was very ingenious, Himand George Martin.
What they did was very geniusthey.
They continued to evolve itover time until it got to the
point where it was extremelyeffective in changing societal

(01:17:34):
norms and creating culturechange let me stop you.

Speaker 1 (01:17:37):
So how did say, let's say, martin report to adorno?
And initially martin didn'tlike the beatles, he didn't like
their music, right, thoughtthey were crap, rubbish.
So so they decided somehow theyblackmailed martin or did
something, got him.
But but how did they know thiswas going to work and become the

(01:17:58):
phenomenon that it became?
That's this where did they seesomething in these guys and
their sound?

Speaker 2 (01:18:05):
no, no I think the sound the decision was made.
the decision was made severalnotches up the chain.
So, uh, I think george martinuh started working with emi
parlophone in 1955 and by thetime he was 29 years old he was

(01:18:27):
handed the label to run theParlophone label.
Parlophone is a part of EMI andinitially I'm not convinced
that George Martin was broughtinto the loop as to what the
Beatles were going to be usedfor initially, because the way

(01:18:51):
it works, pete, it's allcompartmentalized.
It's a need-to-know basis.
So there are people that weredeveloping all of this above
George Martin, that wereformulating how they were going
to make major changes in societythrough music.

Speaker 1 (01:19:12):
so you know so the beatles, the four who went.
Well, it couldn't have been theinitial four, but the band may
have been handpicked even whenthey were kids, right?
Yeah, when they were first,musicians said, hey, these four
guys that come from thisbackground.
Lennon's perfect to manipulatehis mind because he's had trauma
.
Paul had trauma.
He lost his mother to breastcancer.

(01:19:33):
I think they look for brokenpeople.
Ringo had been hospitalized asa kid.
He was kind of shattered by hischildhood being so sick.
Could it be they look forpeople that were very
susceptible to a suggestion, toum, a suggestion yes and um, and

(01:19:55):
families that are somehow, uh,connected into into the system.

Speaker 2 (01:19:58):
Oh, okay, okay.
So, um, now, interestinglyenough, if, if you go on the
internet and you try to find alot of information on paul
mccartney, biological paulmccartney's father uh, jim
mccartney, biological PaulMcCartney's father, jim
McCartney you're not going tofind a lot, which is very
strange, because here we havethe father of one of the most,
arguably one of the most famousmusicians of all time, and

(01:20:19):
there's essentially very littleon Jim McCartney.
Now, in memoirs it tells usthat Jim McCartney was steering
his son away from Christianity.
So that's a little hint therethat something was going on.
Now, I'll get back to this in asecond here.

Speaker 1 (01:20:40):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:20:41):
But you're on a good point, especially like with
Lennon.
Lennon had a lot of trauma.
He lost his mother, who wasraised by his Aunt Mimi.
His father, freddie, wasnowhere to be found.
A lot of people also don'trealize that John Lennon really
had a dislike for Christianityearly on in his life.
There's some stories in thebook the Lennon Prophecy.

(01:21:04):
It's a book I read.
The author's name is uh josephnisgoda, and some of the stories
that um joseph relays in hisbook are actually quite
disturbing as far as lenin's uhdislike, uh for christianity.
We also have these and I'vementioned this on a number of

(01:21:24):
shows.
We have these images of thebeatles, primarily paul
mccartney, george harrison andand john lennon, associated with
bird cages.
Now, bird cage symbolism inilluminati speak refers to mind
control, mind control subjects.
So I have images where PaulMcCartney and George Harrison

(01:21:50):
have the bird cages on theirheads, and then I have another
image of John Lennon in aSuperman shirt leaning up
against the side of a bird cage.
Now, the Superman shirt isinteresting because that goes
back to Crowley and that goesback to Nietzsche and it's
referred to as the uber menschto superhuman, and this is
something else that thecontrollers are very much into

(01:22:13):
the development of thesuperhuman, the trans, the
transcended human and supermanwas written here in cleveland by
two jewish men.

Speaker 1 (01:22:22):
Yes, and it's, it's.
It's basically a jewish storyof I can't remember the exact
story, but it's nothing aboutKrypton and all that stuff.
It's about Moses or something.
It's a lot of Jewish symbolismin Superman that they don't talk
about.
But I'm sorry, go ahead.
No, that's okay.

Speaker 2 (01:22:41):
So when I see this type of symbolism, what comes to
mind is that the Beatles, inall likelihood going back to
your point comes to mind is thatthe Beatles in all likelihood
going back to your point it'spossible they were in some kind
of program early on in theirlives and that they were being
handled and groomed.
Of course, now, when you're ayoung kid, you're unaware of
this stuff, but you are beinghandled and you are being

(01:23:02):
groomed and you are havingexperiences and you are doing
things which culminate to acertain point in your life when
the switch is thrown and you'rebrought in for the next phase or
the next stage of what's goingto go on.
And so I believe there was awhole phase with the Beatles
being groomed and handled priorto going to Hamburg.

(01:23:24):
And once they got to hamburg,that was another phase or
another stage of their groomingand their handling.
I mean when we, when we thinkabout um, they connected with um
, with stewart sutcliffe, righthad, or told, had a relationship

(01:23:46):
with Astrid Kircher, thephotographer.
Well, she connects up with theBeatles I think it was in late
1960s and she starts taking allof these artsy photos of the
Beatles.
But back during that timeperiod when the Beatles hit
Hamburg back in August of 1960,they were a non-entity.

(01:24:09):
They were not good musicians,they weren't writing songs.
So I see this again as tablesetting.
This is the type of thing thattakes place where certain people
are introduced into theequation in order to create the
backstory.
It's the same thing with KlausVorman.

Speaker 1 (01:24:32):
Yes.

Speaker 2 (01:24:33):
Okay, and if we take a, if we want to pick on another
band, tom Petty I rememberwatching a documentary on Tom
Petty when Petty was nobody.
There was still all of thisfootage, video footage, film

(01:24:55):
footage of him when he was noton anybody's radar.
So who was like why is somebodyfollowing him around?

Speaker 1 (01:25:05):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:25:06):
Filming him when you know the chances that he was
going to become famous is, youknow, is like anybody else.
I mean, it's, it's, it's, it'sa million to one shot, right?
I mean, I'm talking about froma, from a public perspective.
Of course, if he's onsomebody's radar, it's not a
million to one.

(01:25:27):
So, you have to start askingyourselves that question.
Gordon Lightfoot was anotherone.
I remember watching adocumentary on Gordon Lightfoot
and when he was up in Canada andhe was doing his shows in his
bars and doing his gigs, therewas all of this film footage of
him, peter, and really artsytypes of footage where they're

(01:25:50):
shooting from the ground up ohreally yes, certain angles, and
you know, I was watching thiswith my wife and and the
question we asked ourselves iswho's filming this and why?

Speaker 1 (01:26:02):
are they?

Speaker 2 (01:26:02):
filming this so this is the type of this is the type
of stuff that we see and it'sdifficult for a lot of people to
get their heads wrapped aroundbecause people just can't think
in terms of that much planningthat far in advance.
But there is that much planningthat far in advance.
The families of these peopleare somehow, or usually, tied in

(01:26:30):
to the system, into themilitary, as an example, into
intelligence.

Speaker 1 (01:26:37):
Exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:26:38):
You know.
So anyway, boyle boy, I reallytook us off on a little ride
there.

Speaker 1 (01:26:43):
Yeah, I took you off the trail you're on.
Took you off the trail you wereon.

Speaker 2 (01:26:54):
So anyway.
So I think, going back to whatyou were saying about Adorno,
yeah, he wasn't a fan of popmusic and all that stuff, but he
was leveraging it.
He was leveraging it in orderto be able to push the agenda
forward.
He was not going to be able topush the agenda forward by
coming out with atonal music andthen trying to get people to
enjoy it, like it, play it, buyit.
That was never going to happen.
Atonal music is very, verydifficult in my opinion to enjoy

(01:27:18):
.
It's very it's it's.
It has a lot of tension, a lotof stress, it doesn't have
moments of release, and so it'snot anything enjoyable to listen
to.
So what he did was he leveragedthe existing system to push the
ball forward.
Now Frankfurt's network extendsinto eugenics I talked about
the Fabians before populationcontrol, sexual and family law

(01:27:42):
reforms.
It's linked to publishinghouses, medical and educational
and research establishments,women's organizations, marriage
counseling governments, etc.
So the Frankfurt School, likeTavistock, are embedded within
the very fabric of ourinstitutions, within society,

(01:28:07):
and the Frankfurt School andTavistock are connected at the
hip as well.
As Tavistock was also a highlyfinanced still is to this day by
the Rockefellers, and the CIAis one of Tavistock's largest
clients.

Speaker 1 (01:28:25):
Wow, I didn't know that.

Speaker 2 (01:28:27):
Yes.
So again, folks, these books,coleman's book on tavistock he
goes through a lot of this anddaniel astulin's book, um, I can
only do so much as far as uhtaking you through this stuff.
But yeah, so that's the dealwith um, with theodore adorno.

(01:28:47):
Um, I've struggled with adornoa little bit, peter, because,
like I said, was there thispiece of him that was, there was
an altruistic aspect of himwhere he actually thought that
he was going to somehow achievethe goals of the human potential

(01:29:08):
movement of the 1960s.
With Willis Harmon, who was apeer of Theodor Adorno's, and
Willis Harmon was behind thehuman potential movement and the
Aquarian conspiracy.
The Aquarian conspiracy waswhat was behind the
counterculture of the 1960s.

(01:29:31):
So I, I don't know Um, but it's, it certainly didn't, it
certainly didn't work out thatway.
And so when we go, when we gofrom the Frankfurt school and
another connection point leadinginto the Beatles I mentioned
earlier was, I mentioned earlierwas the Beat Movement.
So the Beat Movement werecultural Marxists as well and

(01:30:12):
three primary players.
There were more, but there wasWilliam S Burroughs, who was on
the cover of, who is on thecover of Sergeant Pepper, alan
Ginsberg and Jack Kerouac, andthe members of the Beat
Generation developed areputation as new bohemian
hedonists who celebratednon-conformity and spontaneous
creativity.
Now the spontaneous creativitygoes back to the cult of pan.
So all mixed up in thiscultural marxism, pete is the

(01:30:32):
cult of pan and the cult ofdionysus.
Basically, doest thou wilt, ifit feels good, do it.
And we have the nike taglinejust do it.
So it all goes back to that aswell.
And um elements of the beatmovement were incorporated into

(01:30:54):
the hippie and largercounterculture movements.
And um the beats had apervasive influence on rock and
roll and popular music,including the beatles, bob dylan
and jim morrison.
The Beatles, bob Dylan and JimMorrison.
The Beatles spelled their namewith an A, partly as a beat
generation reference.

Speaker 1 (01:31:15):
I never connected, that Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:31:17):
Yep Goes back to the beats.
Also, the Beatle goes back tothe Scarab Beetle of Egyptian
mythology, because the EgyptianScarab Beetle is associated with
enlightenment and John Lennonwas a fan of Jack Kerouac and,
as I mentioned, the Beatles putWilliam S Burroughs on the cover
of the Sgt Pepper album.

(01:31:37):
So of course, that again led usinto the Beatles, and the
Beatles were really the firstmanufactured band to come out
with a full-fledged mission ofsocial engineering.
Um, they were the bedrock, andother genres were built upon the

(01:32:00):
Beatles, even genres whichpeople think are completely, uh,
unrelated.
Uh, the Beatles are thefoundation of the house.
So your roof may not look likeyour roof, may not look like
your basement, but without thatbasement you wouldn't have the
roof, it's all connected.
It's all connected.

Speaker 1 (01:32:20):
Yes, I think what I've always wondered is, as I
said when we first met, is whydid the Beatles have such an
influence on me?
How did they take me by thethroat as an eight-year-old kid
and I couldn't look away.
And you know, I wondered ifthere's anything in the music,
especially newer music, wherethere's some type of hidden tone

(01:32:42):
, like a Hertz or something thatmakes it hypnotic.
Because I listened to Crosby,stills, nash and Young's album
they're one of the first albumsand I, as a grown man, I can't
listen to it because every timeI hear it I go into like I'm
high, like I'm just like Whoaand I go this is not right,
there's never.
Why would this music do this tome?

(01:33:03):
And I've always wondered what isit about this genre that took
young people's mind like mineand just totally threw me?
I mean, I was off in the woodsuntil I was in my 30s, obsessed
with the beatles.
I mean anybody, if you met anyof my family or friends from
that era, they would tell you Iwas a lunatic for the beatles.
And you, you get into fightswith people that they were the

(01:33:24):
best band and, um, do you knowof anything that's in the music
itself that they've put into any, not just their music that is
hypnotic in such a way.
Since you've done hypnosis, isthere any way to to break the
tracks apart or hear a tonethat's buried in the mix that is

(01:33:45):
like a dog whistle?
I know that's on sergeantgtPepper's.

Speaker 2 (01:33:48):
Yeah, I don't know of a way to identify which
frequencies have been put intothe music to elicit some kind of
response.
Now, Alan Watt, the musicianand the truth seeker, not the
other Alan Watt, Okay yeah.

(01:34:10):
I had Alan alan.
I had a quote of his.
He was actually not a quote butit was a an interview.
And at the end of my umfollow-up to my big presentation
, did the beatles write alltheir own music?
I did a follow-up title theaddendum.
At the very end um, I had aninterview it was about five or
six minutes of Alan.

(01:34:30):
He explained.
Now I don't know how Alan knewthis, but he said that George
Martin was an expert inincorporating frequency, sound
frequency, into music.

Speaker 1 (01:34:50):
Seriously, yes, yes, you just.
Oh, I was pulling that out ofmy backside.
No, no, I'm onto something.

Speaker 2 (01:34:57):
Yeah, you're onto something.
So he talked about this and,like I said, I don't know how
Alan knows this.
So this tells us, if Alan iscorrect, and I I suspect he
probably is.
This tells us what I've alwayssuspected that george martin was
more than just a producer.

(01:35:18):
He was, in my view, uh, asocial engineer, a social
scientist working with theodoreadorno, perhaps even working
with I mentioned before willisharman, who was behind the human
potential movement, and you'llread about willis harman in the
memoirs of billy shears.
He gets notable, mentioned acouple of times in the book okay

(01:35:39):
so I think all of these guys,pete, were um, they were all on
the same page and they were allworking for, uh, for the same
company, with the exact, exactsame objectives.
And you know the way themasonic system works is it's a
pyramid structure, it's like abig corporation.
Think of it as masonicincorporated or freemasonry

(01:36:01):
incorporated, and um you have achart there of that, don't you?
I have a chart.
I have a chart that I don'thave it up here with me right
now.

Speaker 1 (01:36:10):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:36:12):
A person by the name of Dylan Monroe.
I stumbled upon this going backabout two months ago and he put
together a pyramid of power.
It's a hierarchy.
It's a hierarchy and he did aphenomenal job of there's five

(01:36:35):
tiers and placing who's where inthat tier everywhere, from the
mass population at the verybottom of the pyramid, up
through the corporations, upthrough the international
structures like the UnitedNations, the International
Monetary Fund and all that stuff, up through the secret
societies like the Freemasons,going up into the Vatican.
And, by the way, he shows thatAlistair Crowley's religion of

(01:36:59):
Thelema, which is Luciferianism,which is the cult of Pan, is
very high up that pyramid, as Ihad surmised by doing my own
research.
So I was very happy to see thatthat I don't know dylan at all.
I just happened to come acrosshis work when he placed the lima
that high up the uh into thethird tier of the pyramid.

(01:37:23):
Um, I said, well, there you go,you know so, um, so this
pyramid, the way is like I said,it's just like a corporation
Whenever there's a project orthere's an initiative or there's
some kind of an agenda thatneeds to get done, they tap
their resources, their networkfor the best skilled people to

(01:37:47):
pull together whatever it isthey're looking to do, and
that's what I think happenedwith George Martin.
So I think, initially, georgewas not brought into the fold
because at that point there wasnot a need to know, but the
Beatles, unbeknownst to him,were being brought along by
levels above him, by levelsabove him, and so when it was

(01:38:14):
time to bring the beatles, uh,in under his wing, that's when
he was told you're going to takethem on.
And not only are you going totake them on, but you're going
to be instrumental in creatingwhat they became.

Speaker 1 (01:38:29):
Because because without, without George Martin,
the Beatles, they were goingnowhere, nowhere fast, and and
I've covered this on on so manyshows without getting into it,
yeah, you know, I think thething that makes it seem like
they were manufactured isbecause when you hear the early
recordings in hamburg, the crowdis like, oh yeah, great, but

(01:38:54):
I'm supposed to believe that wasjust an off night and but come
on, I mean they're, they wereaverage at best doing shimmy
shimmy shake and you know allthat stuff.
I'm just like that has to be,somebody had to go.
I don't care what they looklike now we're going to make
them into something.

(01:39:14):
Yes, it just seems like theywere plucked out of.
There's no way of all the bandsthat were in hamburg and in
liverpool and england that theyjust happen to get lucky.
It's just, it just doesn't seempossible yeah and um.

Speaker 2 (01:39:27):
We have to keep in mind that the beatles went to
hamburg in august of 1960 andthey were known as a bum group,
and this is explained by theirmanager at the time, their
handler, alan williams yeah inthe complete beatles from the
1980 documentary, which wasconsidered the beatles
documentary until Anthology wasreleased.

(01:39:49):
And so from August throughDecember of 1960, the Beatles
basically banged around Hamburg.
It was the red light district.
There was lots of booze, therewas lots of drugs, it was lots
of lots of prostitution.
In fact again the book LennonProphecy, joseph Niesgoda, goes
into this the Beatles weretreated for sexually transmitted

(01:40:14):
diseases, stds, and they leftHamburg in December of 1960
completely dejected becausenothing happened.
Nothing happened.

Speaker 1 (01:40:24):
Oh yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:40:28):
And it didn't pick up until 1961.
And you and I talked about thison our first show.
When you know, all of a suddenthey start getting all of these
gigs and they're getting bookedleft and right in adjacent areas
and this is a band that reallyhad nominal skills musically.
Yeah, exactly, and nosongwriting ability, pete.

(01:40:58):
I have a quote from GeorgeMartin where he said that it was
not evident, it was not obvious.

Speaker 1 (01:41:04):
Yeah, that they were songwriters.

Speaker 2 (01:41:08):
So you know, there's so much with the beatles story.
There's so much that, uh, thething is, but when you talk
about this, you're one of the.
You know, you're one of thevery small percentage of people
that actually are objective andhave an open mind to this stuff.
So many people just absolutelyshut it down because, like I

(01:41:29):
said earlier, what is what doestavistock create?
It creates cults, and nobodywants their cult belief system
to be questioned nobody.
Oh, I know nobody.
And uh, it's a shame too,because I try to explain to
folks.
It's okay to question it.
Your life will be okayafterward.

Speaker 1 (01:41:48):
It really will be well, I think the thing with me
is, um, I started thinking aboutsome of the music of theirs
when I was a kid that I didn'tlike.
Like I've told you love me, doI?
Yeah, song.
If it dropped off face theearth, the world would be a
better place.
But when I was little, I talkedmyself into going.
Yeah, I love this song, youknow, and even songs I couldn't

(01:42:08):
stand like like Tomorrow NeverKnows and Number Nine.
Eventually it's like, oh, thisis amazing, you know.
Yeah, I'm like, wait a minute,what happened?
I, you know, and it's likecigarettes or booze.
When you take you have yourfirst beer.
My first beer tastes like crap,you know, and I didn't want to
drink it again, but I couldlaugh and be more lighthearted
and hit on girls.

(01:42:29):
It's just like you talkyourself into liking garbage.
Yes, and I don't know if that'sall part of the process, but I
also noticed that I've got a2019 Subaru Forester.
Every time I turn on theignition, the radio comes on.
I'm like, why?
Why does the radio have to comeon to the last song?
You know, last station tolisten to?

(01:42:50):
And I thought and then we wereat a mall over in the east side
of cleveland and everywhere youwent in this mall, there was
music outside and it was.
It's an outdoor mall.
There's speakers on thesidewalk, you hear classic rock
all over the place going tostores, classic rock all over
the place like why are weconstantly awash in music in
this culture?

(01:43:11):
And cnn and fox in the airports?
And I I started to question allthis.
I'm like, wait a minute, why?
Why do we constantly have to bebarraged with music and
messages?
And we're now walking?
Well, this isn't a billboard.
You've got your grudge hat onno offense to you and grudge,
but we're walking billboards.
They've got us promoting theiragenda with logos ike, you know
the nike logo or or reebok orwhoever it is and I was like

(01:43:35):
what, what?
Nobody else notices it,everyone.
So what your radio turns on?
When you turn on the car, justturn it off.
But that's at the point.
There's a reason why they dothat why is it doing right?
yeah, I.
I don't think it's bycoincidence or convenience.

Speaker 2 (01:43:51):
So people yeah people have to stop thinking in terms
of coincidence, coincidence,coincidence oh yeah, I mean I
mean there are coincidences, Imean there's no question.
But the thing is, it's about.
It's about pattern recognitionand we do have to take a step
back and take a look at wherethe world is at.
You have to ask yourself thequestion, be honest with

(01:44:11):
yourself, be objective and saydo you like what you see?
Does this seem normal to you?
I'll answer, from myperspective no, it is not normal
.
There's a tremendous amount ofdysfunction and decadence and
it's completely upside down.
The entire political system isa clown show.

(01:44:36):
Oh yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:44:37):
It's really bad.

Speaker 2 (01:44:38):
It's really bad and people are still playing in it,
people are still cheering it onand believing in it, and I don't
know People who are criticalthinkers, people who could think
clearly.
They were a very smallpercentage of the population and
a lot of times we sound likelone wolves.
You know how yeah, oh yeah.

(01:45:00):
Nobody wants to hear when wesay, hey, you know, I don't know
, I don't know about that guy orwhatever.
People don't want to hear it.
People love to worship, theylove to follow, they want to
have their heroes.

Speaker 1 (01:45:15):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:45:17):
That's what they want .
That's what they want.

Speaker 1 (01:45:19):
And I've got a podcast, Mind Revolution, where
I say be your own hero, becauseno one's coming to save you.
No, Donald Trump is not goingto save us or keep the legals
out.
I mean, he didn't do it thefirst time, why does anybody
think he's going to do it thistime?
I just don't understand.
You know I hate to pick on mywife, but she watches these

(01:45:41):
reality TV shows and they comeon and I tell her I said there's
a whole camera crew that thesewomen do you ever watch New
Jersey Housewives or any ofthose horrible shows?
It's just these really horriblydone up women with plastic
implants and boobs hanging outand they bitch and scream at
each other and cry and get drunkand all this stuff.

(01:46:03):
And I said to Meg I saidthere's a whole camera crew
behind the scene.
This is not reality.
And I said to Meg I saidthere's a whole camera crew
behind the scene.
This is not reality.
There's grips and gaffes andcameramen and producers and
sound techs.
There's no way it's spontaneous.
And if they don't do it rightthe first time, they say cut,
Okay, Gene, say that, Call thatgirl a prostitution whore with
more intensity.

(01:46:23):
All right, let's do it again.
And she's like, yeah, I, I knowthat, but I just like watching
it.
And and when you watch herwatch it, it's like she becomes
a child.
Yes, I watch she.
Just she becomes, she goes intothis little world and I just
sit and watch her.
I just horrified at you knowhow she's so bedazzled by these

(01:46:46):
tvs, and her mother watches too.

Speaker 2 (01:46:48):
Remember what I told you, that one of their tactics
is to reduce adult thinking to achildlike state.

Speaker 1 (01:46:55):
Yeah, yeah, I mentioned that when we did the
last interview about all thecartoon animals they use to
entertain us with insurancecompanies and things like that.

Speaker 2 (01:47:05):
Yeah, and we talked about the Beatles Now and Then
video which looked like it was,you know, like a Sesame Street
episode.
It was all this silly, goofystuff and if you watch the
comments and read the commentsunder that video, it's amazing.
You have adults just fawningover this stuff, oh yeah,

(01:47:26):
reacting like children andwriting out childlike comments.

Speaker 1 (01:47:30):
It's just absurd yeah , yeah, they're in tears,
they're, they're choked up,they're verklempt because
they've got.
You know, and I used to be likeI still get like that over some
music, yeah, uh, but it more ofmy stuff is with clapton and
his blues solos.
That really moved me, but, um,that's a whole not thing, but

(01:47:50):
this has been great.
I don't know if I got you offtrack because I kept asking
questions.

Speaker 2 (01:47:56):
No, I think we covered just about everything we
got there.

Speaker 1 (01:47:59):
Thanks everybody for watching.
That was Mike Williams talkingabout Theodore Adorno Tavistock
and their connection with theBeatles.
I hope you liked this video.
Thanks a lot, mike, for beingon the show.
It was a great pleasure workingwith you and if you like this
video, give it the thumbs up,subscribe, share it.
The greatest way you cansupport this channel for free is

(01:48:21):
just to like and subscribe.
Thanks a lot for watching.
I'm PT Pop on A Mind Revolutionsigning off Auf Wiedersehen,
baby, would you like fries withthat?
Would you like fries with that?

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.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;}Mike Williams Discusses Tavistock, Adorno and Their Affiliaiton with The Beatles

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

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

Mike Williams Discusses Tavistock, Adorno and Their Affiliaiton with The Beatles

Stuff You Should Know