The World According To Some (14)

As the planet spirals into a fascist dystopia, we thought someone really should keep a record of this decline. So that, when the aliens are sifting through the ashes of civilization - they might be able to see where it all went wrong. This is "The World According To Some"... or as all the hepcats are calling it "T.W.A.T.S!”

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/some-dare-call-it-conspiracy--5932731/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
So they are calling it conspiracy.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
Welcome to some darcolic conspiracy with Brentley and Neil Sanders.

Speaker 3 (00:21):
As the planet spirals into a fascist dystopia, we thought
someone really should keep a record of this decline so
that when the aliens are sifting through the ashes of
civilization they might be able to see where it all
went wrong.

Speaker 2 (00:34):
This is the world according to some or.

Speaker 3 (00:37):
As all the hepcats are calling it twat. So it's
the twenty third of February and Elon Musk continues to
be a massive prick. Basically, he decided to stick his
oar in with loads and loads of different agencies and like,

(01:00):
I'll just read what it said. Sky News reported the
one hundreds of thousands of federal workers have received an
email with the following instruction. Please reply to this email
with approximately five bullets of what you accomplished last week
and c see your manager. What an absolute prick Like

(01:21):
I mean, it's nonsense on a lot of levels, really,
because it's one of those things where it's like one,
if you're trying to drive government efficiency, don't take me
out of my job to write back to you. Like two,
you don't know what the blood yell, it is the
odd job entails or what our company does. And three,

(01:42):
how are you going to sift through all that and
decide which is valid or not? Also, that just.

Speaker 2 (01:49):
Doesn't seem very efficient.

Speaker 3 (01:50):
No, And also it's just a wanker's move, Like if
your manager did that, you'd be like, do you not
trust me to be doing a job or whatever? Like
that's just it's it's micro management to a sort of
huge degree. And he doesn't even work at the fucking company. Apparently,
it's not even in charge of dose if we remember,

(02:12):
Like he's just some sort of consultant to the president somehow,
which totally isn't to get him off the hook for
any upcoming lawsuits. So he posted on Twitter, Elon did
consistent with President at Real Donald Trump's instructions, all federal
employees will shortly receive an email requested to understand what

(02:34):
they got done last week. Failure to respond will be
taken as resignation. WHOA, yeah, now that's the that's ridiculous
in it. I mean, that's the sort of ship that
I just I'd have. I'd throw a tantrum and resign personally,
and then they'd spend the rest of the afternoon walking

(02:54):
around like frantically googling how to retract an email that
you just sent to everybody. But this is the point,
like it's it is, it's micromanagement. And also that's I
don't think he's even legal, to be quite honest, because

(03:15):
I really don't think he's got jurisdiction over a lot
of these agencies. Certainly cash Battel didn't think so. Cash Hotel,
the newly hired director of the FBI. He sent his
own email to employees to clarify where he and the
FBI stood. So a FBI personnel may have received an

(03:37):
email from oh PM requesting information. The FBI through the
Office of the Directors in charge of all of our
review processes, and we will conduct reviews in accordance with
FBI procedures. When and if further information is required, we
will can coordinate the responses. For now, please pause any response.
So cash Battel has immediately had to spring into action

(03:59):
and say to everyone at the FBI, don't do that.

Speaker 2 (04:03):
Well, certainly, like if this could be a breach of security.

Speaker 3 (04:08):
Well that is one that that is one point, Like
I mean, like it's difficult to know whether he's basically going,
who the fuck is this guy think he is? Or
if he's actually gone, hang on, we can't really do
that because there's a lot of stuff, as you say,
that will be sensitive, shall we say.

Speaker 2 (04:24):
Yans of information from many many of these federal institutions.

Speaker 3 (04:29):
Yeah, this close to assassinating Castro's son, Like right, yeah,
I'll just email that to Elon Musk, shall I or
whatever it is that they get up to. But yeah,
this is the point. It's outrageous. Similarly, at the State Department,
Ambassador t Bourn nick Nige, currently performing the duties of
the under said Chief of Management, emailed colleagues to say

(04:51):
that no one is obligated to report their activities outside
of their department chain of command. Also, supervisors at the
Apartment of Justice Todd employees to refrain from replying to
the email, as they feared it could trigger ethics violations because,
as I say, like that, the DOJ, a lot of
them will be ongoing court cases and things like that

(05:13):
and investigations. So it's really not a great idea, The
Independent reported. One of the more fiery responses came from
Senator Tina Smith, who's a junior senator from Minnesota, she
wrote on Twitter, mocking Musk's own questionable employment status within

(05:33):
the federal government. This is the ultimate dick boss move
from Musk, ecept he isn't even the boss, He's just
a dick, said the Jis, wrote the junior senator for Minnesota.

Speaker 2 (05:50):
Senator Wow.

Speaker 3 (05:52):
She went on to say, I bet a lot of
people have had an experience like this with a bad boss.
There's an email in your inbox on Saturday night saying,
prove to me your worthiness by Monday or else. I'm
on the side of the workers, not the billionaire asshole busses.

Speaker 2 (06:10):
She gets my most wicked Yeah it's yeah, so yeah,
troubling paradise.

Speaker 3 (06:16):
It would seem like, I mean it was. It's one
of those things that, as I say, if Banks us
any sort of all sorts of questions to what on
earth was he thinking, like, because from a practical standpoint,
he can't possibly go through those all those emails. Think
about how many people for the FBI alone, and then

(06:39):
he sent it to the State Department, the Secretive Justice,
the d do OJA. God knows how many thousands of
employees got this email. Like, realistically, seriously, what was he
going to do with that data.

Speaker 2 (06:55):
I think every single one of those employees should have
sent him an email back with like redacted information, yeah sensitive.

Speaker 3 (07:05):
Like well, I mean this is the like how would
you even know? How would you even know? Because this
is the thing. He goes on to later say when
he gets a lot of criticisms of this for being
a wanker, that I was only doing it to see
if like people respond because like so many like people

(07:26):
that aren't really working and stuff like that, and it's like,
you don't know, that's not that's not a good way
to test, right, No one that responds to this email
is working. Well, what if someone gets five hundred emails
a day because they're working really hard and you sack
them because they don't respond in time to your email.

(07:47):
What if somebody has got like a huge backlog of.

Speaker 2 (07:50):
Emails sam folders?

Speaker 3 (07:53):
What yea? What if you misspelled like the name, Like
we've all been in companies where it's like yeah, sorry,
I don't know why, but it like it emails to
the wrong person or whatever or like you know, no
I haven't received that if you spelt my name correctly,
like and yeah, but again it's just elil must throwing

(08:14):
his weight around, and it was probably one of those
stupid ideas that he has, like because he doesn't really
like I don't think he's really got a huge amount
of business acumen. That's the sort of thing that somebody
would do on like a sitcom, like that a boss
would do on a sitcom, or that somebody who doesn't

(08:35):
understand how businesses work would go, well, that's a good
way for me to find out what my staff are
doing to fucking interfere with their day.

Speaker 2 (08:44):
Well, that's kind of app It's like The Apprentice.

Speaker 3 (08:49):
Oh good point. Yeah, oh yeah, christ.

Speaker 2 (08:52):
Is something Trump would do on The Apprentice something probably thought, Oh,
that's a great idea.

Speaker 3 (09:00):
I wonder if it is actually off The Apprentice, or
if i'd like the only thing I know about The
Apprentice is the English version of the very first series
of the woman called Miranda. I used to know her,
and she's actually very nice, Like she didn't come across well,
no one comes across very well on the show. That's
sort of the point of it. Yeah, that's an interesting

(09:22):
point though. I wonder if he has seen that, if
that's the Trump thing or whatever, because it is pointless
as well, because like you just can't interpret it and
what his idea of worth work and what other people's
idea is, it could be completely different. And as I say,
in order for you to be able to praise that,

(09:43):
you'd have to understand what everybody's role was, and you
couldn't possibly do that.

Speaker 2 (09:48):
No, And that's why I think like that's actually kind
of probably what happened here. It's more of like, oh,
that that would make good TV. Yeah, that would make
certain image, Like yeah, to other people, it's kind of
I guess virtue signaling in a way.

Speaker 3 (10:07):
Yeah, yeah, exactly that. Yeah, quite, it's like that. It's like,
let's play boss, what would a boss do? And it's like, well,
that's not what a boss would do, but that's what
somebody who doesn't know what a boss would do might Yeah,
well yeah, they might think that a boss would do.
Like you know, it's this idea of like I am
the puppet master, I've got my fingers in all the
pies and nodes and blah blah blah. And it's like, yeah,

(10:29):
that's not how it works. That's really not how it works.
Like that would be pointless, Like there would be no
reason for you to have undermanagers and stuff like that,
if if he was relying on you knowing everything. But hey,
this is what happens when you get really rich men
that think that they know stuff but actually aren't particularly bright. Really,

(10:55):
and speaking of really rich men that think that they
know stuff but aren't actually very right, Joe Rogan had
a guest. Joe Rogan had a guest who had some thoughts,
some thoughts and opinions.

Speaker 1 (11:09):
Dear.

Speaker 3 (11:10):
No, well, I mean it started off so well because
the guest was Woody Harrelson, and so it was well, yes,
and no, here's the thing because like in the past,
Woody Harrelson has been the sort of like, you know,
some of his things have been kind and sensible and
blah blah blah. Latterly he appears to be sort of

(11:31):
just turning into that person who's read some shit on
the Internet. And it's bizarre because like, you know, he's like,
I don't think he's a stupid person by any special imagination.
Definitely can act, but as I say, he's got some opinions.

Speaker 2 (11:49):
He's been a nine to eleven truther.

Speaker 3 (11:51):
Yeah yeah, yeah, but he was more. He was also
into sort of like marijuana advocacy, but look, the use
of as opposed to like paper and things like that,
and and the idea of sustainability through sort of less
deforestation because she can use hemp instead of warden and
things like that, or just to make say paper and

(12:14):
et cetera, et cetera, all the.

Speaker 2 (12:15):
Things that which is obviously his pipeline into what he's
into now.

Speaker 3 (12:20):
Yeah, yeah, but again that kind of shows you, like
you know that, like I mean, some of these things
that he's going to be saying like seemed to fall
on one political spectrum. But like I always took it,
particularly in the past, and maybe I was completely wrong
that he was a bit of a sort of hippie
lefty type like and as I say, that's that's us.

(12:40):
That's how we got into it. We got into like
that through anti authoritarian, anti police, anti war, listening to
fucking hip hop and and Bill Hicks and shit like that,
Like do you know what I mean? So, like, it
doesn't it doesn't discriminate, does it. But anyway, Rogan comes
out swinging. Joe Rogan says everything Dr Robert Malone said

(13:07):
has turned out to be true.

Speaker 2 (13:11):
Great, Jamie, can we get a fact check on that?

Speaker 3 (13:16):
Well, Jamie doesn't affect check him. But basically so Robert Malone.
For the people that don't know, he looks a bit
like Kenny Rodgers. He's a doctor and he was actually
involved in a very very small way with the creation
of is it mRNA delivery technology. Now, he went on

(13:39):
to try and claim that he invented the whole thing,
which is just not true. It's absolutely not true. And
he tried to get some sort of like cachet off
that and that didn't work. So he then went on
to being like, oh, it's deadly, it kills you. And
one of the things that he was saying was that
the M n R vaccine will leave the spike protein

(14:02):
from covid in your body, which will cause irreparable damage
down the line. The major flaw with this is that
the M and R A technology doesn't have the spike protein,
and it in fact that's sort of the point. Like
whereas old vaccines would give you a small dose of
the of the virus or the condition of the disease

(14:24):
or whatever it is that they want you to be
come accustomed to so that your body can generate an
immune response, what the M M R O n A
does is it is it makes your body do the
same thing without the necessity for the contact with the
virus or the disease.

Speaker 2 (14:43):
So it just gives the information as opposed to the
actual virus.

Speaker 3 (14:48):
Yes, so it kind of I don't know what would
be a good sort of analogy because I don't I
was going to use computers, but as you know, I
don't understand. So it's like it's like when the computer
does the hologram thing and they know they lost it. Anyway,
so he's completely wrong. But anyway, Rogan says everything doctor

(15:12):
Robert Malone has said turned out to be true, all
of it, including Yale just released some study about people
producing spike proteins seven hundred plus days after the injections,
So this seems to be supporting Robert Malone's contention that
the spike proteins stay in your body. And this is
referring to a recent Yale study that looked at the

(15:36):
after effects of vaccination and COVID, and the author of
the study said typically spike protein could be detected for
a few days after vaccination, but some participants with PBS
had detectable levels more than seven hundred days after their
last vaccination. Persistent spike protein has been associated with long

(15:59):
COVID as well. That was surprising to find spike protein
in circulation at such a late time point, said Iowasaki,
who's the doctor. We don't know if the level of
spike protein is causing the chronic symptoms because there were
other participants with previous which is post vaccination syndrome, who
didn't have any measurable spike protein. But it could be

(16:21):
one mechanism underlying this syndrome. So basically they don't know
what's going off with this. They're looking at it, and
what it's saying is that some people have got this
spike protein in them. We'll explain it later because they

(16:42):
go on. But as you can see, that's what the
doctor says from the study. And even there it's like, well,
is he talking about people who have had COVID or
is he talking about people who have had the vaccine
or is he talking about a combination. We'll regard, We'll
come back to that because Woody Harrelson then decides to
use Dr Anthony Fauci of and I quote doing some

(17:05):
extraordinarily evil shit during his time as the director of
the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious diseases or NIAID.
So the cheers actor who's sixty three. God, we're all
getting old, which is nature's cruelest trick. He joined podcasts
Jer Rogan on the show The Jer Rogan Experience, and

(17:26):
the pair talks about their hopes for the country's future
in health. Harrelson described Robert F. Kennedy Junior, the United
States Secretary of Health and Human Services, as heroic and
a man who cares deeply, just before comparing his views
with Fouch's, and then he goes to say about Fauci,

(17:48):
he started with the AZT thing, and you know, AZT
was known to be highly toxic, really in effective drug,
and of course that was the one that they picked,
Harrelson Torogan, and so they started using that again, and
I don't know how many people got killed, that killed
friends of mine. AZT was very toxic, and they finally

(18:11):
had a yankit, and now they used different chemical cocktails.
But like, Fauchi did some extraordinarily evil shit, and he
knows what he did. Rogan then chimed in about Fauchi's
recent pardon, stating he's pre pardoned federally, but he's not
pre pardoned state wise. So on Biden's last day in

(18:32):
the Oval office, Fauci received a preemptive pardon from the
former president, much to the fury of his critics, who
believed that the doctor might have lied to Congress about
the origin of COVID and sending money to this particular
lab in wu Han to research gain a function viruses

(18:53):
and it just didn't. The reason that he was given
a preemptive pardon was to stop a witch hunt it,
which is the same thing that he did to hunt Biden,
because he knew they'd essentially they would they would be
targets and that could be abused regardless of like that
if they've done anything, which I don't think they either
of them had, really like, they could be persecuted and

(19:17):
it could be whipped up into a circus and just
cause incredible harmful these people, like outside of the normal,
outside of the normal realms of of of the law.
Now a hunter was pardoned on some tax stuff, and
I believe the gun charge as well, not not having

(19:38):
the gun. You're not supposed to have a gun if
you're a crack addicted, which by the way, is good control.
Which is odd that the right wing of vin Cherry
picks this particular time to think that that is what
should be done. And there is an argument that Biden
shouldn't have piled his SUN because it's sets a precedent.

Speaker 2 (20:00):
Yeah, totally.

Speaker 3 (20:01):
But Donald Trump's a prick, so I'd have gone, fuck it, Well,
what am I going to do? What we're going to do.
Let my kid be persecuted because of honor. Donald Trump's
the president. Honor's gone out the window.

Speaker 1 (20:15):
So true.

Speaker 3 (20:17):
Yeah, for the partner, for Fauci, who's not been actually
officially accused of any crimes because he's not committed any crimes.
Will date back to twenty fourteen, which was when the
National Institute of Health awarded a multimillion dollar grant to
EcoHealth Alliance, which was a search group to study back
coronaviruses in Wuhan, where the COVID nineteen eventually started. Because

(20:38):
of this pre empted pardon, Brogan said, but the States
can still sue him. Not only that, when you're pardoned,
you can no longer plead the fifth so you could
be held for perjury. There's a lot of issues with
being pardoned that I don't think Biden took into consideration,
or Fauci took into consideration either. I think he just
wanted anything to protect him because he knew it was coming.

(20:59):
It's just a bummer that someone had that kind of
power for so long and was such a fucking monster,
and that there is a problem right with that in
as much as.

Speaker 2 (21:11):
He did, even a Biden fan, But come on, he didn't.

Speaker 3 (21:14):
Oh he's talking about Fauci person there, which is but yeah,
Fauci has not done anything. He's honestly going. Yeah, the
States could sue Fauci. The States could sue Fauci. We
could do him for perjury. Who could We could send
him to jail by by bypassing the pardon, by prosecuting
him on a state level. And the problem is that

(21:35):
it's like for what, seriously for what? Like when and
if any conspiracy theorist listen, they might be going for
the vaccine, Neil for killing every only with the vaccine.
It's like he didn't. But that's not even what they're
talking about.

Speaker 2 (21:55):
They're talking about Trump did the vaccine?

Speaker 3 (21:58):
Come on, absolutely all.

Speaker 2 (22:01):
The responsibility for his amazing work on Operation Warp speed speed,
amazing thing, like they all seem to forget that, but.

Speaker 3 (22:10):
They're not arguing for that they're arguing for him lying
about the origin of COVID, which has not been proven
by any stretch of imagination. And then the majority of evidence,
the best evidence points to it being zoonotic and not
being the lablique at all. And AZT, like Woody Horriston,

(22:31):
has got this idea. So if people don't know, AZT
was AIDS medicine, it was one of the first AIDS medicines.
And I'll just just read this. AZT or azido thine
madane was originally I've probably budgeted that was originally developed
in the nineteen sixties by US researcher as a way

(22:53):
to thwart cancer. The compound was supposed to insert itself
into the DNA of a cancer cell, a mess with
its ability to replicate and produce more tumor cells. But
it didn't work when it was tested in mice and
it was put aside. But two decades later, after AIDS
has emerged as a new infectious disease, the pharmaceutical company

(23:15):
Burrows Welcome, already known for its anti viral drugs, began
a massive test of potential HIV agents, hoping to find
anything that might work against this new virus. Among the
things tested was something called compound S, a remade version
of the original AZT, and when it was thrown into
dish with animal cells infected with the HIV, it seemed

(23:37):
to block the virus activity. Right, So several things we're
talking about time when there was no available treatment at
all and people were absolutely desperate and AZT was the
only thing that seemed to show any use at all.
Now you'll notice that it says it broke down the

(24:00):
DNA of cancer, and this is where you get the
conspiracy theory. And this is for moosted by people like
Joseph mccola, was that the guy that did it and
lots of other people. It's become one of those sort
of ubiquitous things that aids didn't necessarily kill people, or
aids only killed certain people. There's all sorts of theories.

(24:22):
One theory is that it was targeted to kill black people.
The other thing was it was targeted to just kill
black and gay people. And then there's a further theory
that actually the thing that kills you is the medicine,
which is the AZT, or that the medicine vastly speeds
up the death process because what it does is it

(24:44):
destroys your DNA so that the HIV can't spread onto
that bit of your DNA. That's not what he does.
That is the conspiracy theory, and that comes from that
knowledge of how it's supposed to work against cancers. So
they've got azet and in the early eighties, there was
a trial of three hundred people and it seemed to

(25:06):
help a little bit, but the main point was that
there was there was there was no other treatments. Now,
this study that they did with three hundred people, it's controversial.
Reports surface soon after the results that they may have
been skewed since the doctors weren't provided with the standard
way of treating the other problems associated with AIDS, such

(25:26):
as pneumonia, diarrhea, and other symptoms, which makes determining whether
the AZT alone was responsible for the dramatic results nearly impossible.
As I said, like this is at a time where
they're dealing with a new it's not brand new, but
it's like it's never been as prevalent, and AIDS causes

(25:47):
all sorts of other problems. For example, some patients receive
blood transfusions to help their immune systems, including new healthy
blood and immune cells and this could have actually contributed
to them fighting virus which could have been that could
have been miss misunderstood as being as a result of
the ACT alone. There are also stories of patients from

(26:09):
the twelfth sentens where the study was conducted, pulling their
pills to better the chances that they would get at
least some of the drug rather than just placebos. So,
because they were desperate and they knew that some of
them will be AZT and some of them would be placebos,
they shoved them all together so that basically everybody got

(26:30):
at least some ACT. Now, the problem is that this
drug was also really really expensive. If anybody's ever seen
the play or the television series Angels in America, that's
about HIV in the early stages, and it discusses roy
Cone and how he was able to sort of stockpile AZT.

(26:52):
And here's the thing. Roy Cone was one of the
most powerful people in America at that time, and he
actively fought to get AZT. That gives you an idea
of like he was getting it when other people weren't.
It wasn't available to anyone else, and he was getting huge,
huge amounts of it. Why would he have done that

(27:13):
if it was, if there was better stuff, he wouldn't.
Now nobody suggesting that act was a cure obviously didn't.
It simply didn't. It helped, and in some cases it
prolonged life. The problem was that a lot of people
suggested that that HIV might have slightly mutated or altered itself,

(27:34):
meaning that AZT wasn't effective or became less effective as
the disease became more prominent. And today there's several classes
of HIV drugs which each designed to block the virus
specific points in its live cycle, and these are used
in combination and they have the best chance of keeping
HIV at bay and they can hopefully sort of you know,

(27:58):
keep people alive for a long time. And these are
called anti retroviral drugs, and they've made it possible for
people with diagnosed with HIV to live long and relatively
healthy lives as long as they continue to take the medications.
For some people though, AZT is still a part of
that medication. So despite its its limitations because it doesn't

(28:19):
work for some people and high doses can be dangerous,
there is a suggestion that there are some positive effects.
But here's the thing again, the mischaracterization that Woody Harrison
has got there is that it wasn't supposed to cure.
It was the only possible thing that they had at
the time to try and prolong people's lives. And it's very,

(28:43):
very sad that he have friends who took AZT and died,
But the likelihood is, particularly if it was in the
early nineteen eighties, that if they hadn't have taken that AZT,
they sadly would have died a lot sooner. So it's
pretty irresponsible for Woody how and Joe Rogan to be
flaunting that shit and the spike proteins. So this was

(29:07):
apparently confirming that Robert Malone was right. You know, he's
always been right, and you know, the quote that was
taken said, yeah, the spike proteins were shown in people
seven hundred days afterwards. So anyway, Reuter's explains a small
US study explored whether immune markers seen in many long
COVID sufferers were also present in people with post vaccine symptoms,

(29:30):
but it did not suggest that long COVID is really
post vaccine injury, as is claimed via headline shared on
social media. And this is basically what they've tried to
characterize it as on the rogan that the spike protein
were there as a result of vaccine injury, whereas they weren't.
They were there in people who had been vaccinated, but

(29:53):
as a result of long COVID. This city doesn't make
this clone. It even points out that long COVID predates vaccines.
The study doesn't address the source of the spike proteins
found in some PVS sufferers it was. Saki told Reuters
in an email that the team is currently looking to
see if the proteins derived from the vaccine or possibly
from a prior infection with the virus. We don't know

(30:16):
if the level of spike protein is causing the chic
chronic symptoms because there were other participants with PVS who
didn't have any measurable spike protein at all. Akiko Osaka Sterning,
professor of amunobiology at YSM and co senior author of
the study, said in a press release it could be
one mechanism underlying the symptom. Responding to the misleading post

(30:36):
online it Was, Saki pointed out that many people developed
long COVID before vaccines were available. She also noted studies
that show people with long COVID who were not vaccinated. Sorry.
She also noted studies that show people with long COVID
who were not vaccinated benefited from getting vaccinated afterwards and
this improved their long COVID symptoms. So they've completely he

(31:00):
misrepresented that as well, Like the study is inconclusive, but
it doesn't for a for a second suggest that the
vaccine is the origin of the spike protein. Like they're
looking at at long COVID essentially, they're looking at a
broad array of things and seeing if there is, as

(31:20):
you said, one mechanism underlying the syndrome. But but how
that's been represented by Woody Harrison and Joe Rogan is
completely incorrect. And you know who else they only went
and had a bloody go at.

Speaker 1 (31:34):
Oh hit me.

Speaker 3 (31:36):
The Girl Scouts of America.

Speaker 1 (31:40):
I was expected.

Speaker 3 (31:44):
Nobody expects me, Like that's that's why they're so incidients.

Speaker 2 (31:52):
Is an anti feminist rant coming.

Speaker 3 (31:56):
No, it's it's it's slightly less stupid, but in many
ways much much more stupid. So Woody Harrowson was making
the claims, not not specifically about Girl Scouts, but about
the cookies that they sell, you know, which are exclusively

(32:16):
sold by the Girl Scouts, and it's for their it's
for charitable organizations. My understanding is anyway, Woody Harrelson said,
I was reading a study on Girl Scout cookies where
they break them down and find out what's in them.
Holy shit, they're fucking toxic as fuck. There's so many

(32:37):
bad ingredients. Thin mints being the worst of the offenders.

Speaker 2 (32:42):
Shout out, fin Mints.

Speaker 3 (32:43):
I love them fin Mints. Five flavors of Girls Scout
cookies contained levels of glypher sate and heavy metals above
EPA water safety limits. The new investigation found one hundred
percent of Girl Scout cookies glypher sate. The controversial herberts
I had found in round up eighty eight percent contained

(33:04):
toxic metals like arsenic, lead and mercury. So Rogan, because
he's up on this shit as well, Rogan says thin
mints had the highest glycher sate levels one hundred at
one hundred and eleven point seven ppb, which is parts

(33:24):
per billion three hundred and thirty four times the levels
of what experts say are harmful.

Speaker 2 (33:32):
Well, so the Girl Scouts, I'm thinking right now, Hold on, guys,
do we blame the Girl Scouts or can we blame
the cam Trails for this.

Speaker 3 (33:48):
Well, let's see, it's all the ingredients.

Speaker 2 (33:51):
Come on, the Girl Scouts aren't trying to kill you.
It's because the cam Trails have put these chemicals in
the ingredients, and that's what's happened.

Speaker 3 (34:01):
Sure Also, Also, Joe Rogan's a very popular program, right,
okay for although Hollywood actor Woody Harrison, and for Joe
Rogan to go on that and to millions and millions
of people say that the Girl Scouts of America cookies
are fucking toxic as fuck, full of arsenic lead and

(34:26):
mercury with levels three hundred and thirty four times what
the level of the experts say are harmful. You'd hope
that they were right, wouldn't you, Because like, otherwise, that's
that's liveless, isn't it. That's got to be actionable. Surely, Well,
it turns out that the Girl Scouts are actually facing
a class action lawsuit themselves, and so what what Rogan

(34:49):
and Woody Harrison are doing is repeating part of this
in the courts of New York the nonprofit organization and
the licensed bakers of their beloved cookies ABC Bakers, and
for Railrow USA's Little Brownie Bakers are being sued and
the studies that Joe Rogan brought attention to are being cited.
Now the Girl Scouts have responded. They said, bring it, bitch.

(35:19):
They said, a recent report claimed that our Girl Scout
cookies contain certain levels of life estate and heavy metals.
We want to address these allegations and share the facts.
Girl Scout Cookies are made with ingredients that adhere to
food safety standards set by the FDA and other relevant authorities.
Our trusted bakers remain committed to compliance with all food
safety standards and regulations set forth by the US and

(35:42):
Drug Administration FDA, the Environmental Protection Agency EPA, and other
relevant health authorities. These standards ensure that food products are
safe for consumption. As a result, Girl Scout Cookies are
safety consume and are manufactured in accordance with all food
safety regulations. So they went on to say that like
basically any farm product has got some level of life

(36:04):
for sake and other heavy metals that could be considered toxic.
They say, environmental contaminants, which can include heavy metals, can
occur naturally in soil. This means that nearly all foods
using plant based ingredients, including organic foods, may contain trace amounts.
This does not mean that these foods are harmful consumed

(36:26):
called it. Yeah, like I got the reference. So basically,
like what it might be, or certainly what it may be,
is that they're picking up not the metals but the minerals.
Just like within chemtrails, where people thought that there was
aluminium and things like that in the soil. It wasn't
aluminium the metal. It was aluminium the mineral, which is

(36:48):
fairly ubiquitous in soil and is perfectly harmless. It has
got some effects on crops, inasmuch as any type of
soil has got effect, and crops you need like certain
types of sword to grow certain types of things. But
it's not so sorry. I thought, maybe it's that, Maybe
it's just that, like the FDA has got some fairly

(37:11):
shoddy standards in comparison to say Europe or whatever. But
I would I had a bit of a sort of
a poke around because I was like, what's going off
with this? Because and this was the thing that a
few weeks ago I found you. I was like, oh,
I forgot balls deep into this thing. It's ridiculous. So anyway,
I found this lawsuit. It was on this website called
the Legal Journal, and the Legal Journal lists some rather

(37:36):
strange aspects of this this lawsuit. So independent laboratories have
discovered dangerous levels of live stay and heavy metals in
every Girl's Gout cookie test across three states. According to
a recently released groundbreaking study. The investigation found that nine
ninety six percent of samples contained lead, eighty eight percent
show the presence of five different toxic metals. Health researchers

(37:59):
express particular concern about the high levels of glypha, say
the active ingredient in round at week killer, which some
studies have linked to autism spectrum disorders. And at that
point my spider censors started sing tingle autism is spectrum
disorders word. So anyway, this lossit goes on. Laboratory testing

(38:24):
commissioned by gmoscience dot org, which is a consumer advocacy
group and Moms across America revealed widespread contamination across all
cookie varieties. The Health Research Institute in Fairfield, Indiana, performed
glyca sate testing, while New Jersey Laborators certified conducted heavy

(38:44):
metal analysis on twenty five samples from California, Iowa, Louisiana
and the test screen for glyfase and AMPA, which is
its breakdown product five heavy metals. See if you recognize
any of these aluminium, arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, all the

(39:04):
chemtrails chemicals called it yeah, and also chemical residues and contaminets.
The claim that glypha sate causes autism is backed up
by citing doctor Maria Rodriguez, who's the lead research at
the Developmental Disorders Received Institute. She explained the significence of

(39:25):
the twenty twenty one clinical psychopharmacological and neuroscience study. Our
research demonstrated that glypha say exposure during critical development periods
produced behavioral changes consistent with autism spectrum disorders. Finding these
same compounds in popular children's cookies raises serious public health concerns.

(39:46):
So can you spot the red flags? Let's just go backwards.
The first one is that they try and back up
the claim that glypher sake causes autism by not citing
a but by citing a woman who says that she
did a study that she swears blind. Seemed to show

(40:08):
this thing that's not what you'd call good science. As
we've spotted all the metals that they supposedly found in
these biscuits could well be not the metals, but the
minerals that are harmless. But maybe maybe gmoscience dot org

(40:32):
hasn't got an act to grind, maybe an organization that
specifically looks at demonizing GMO science, maybe they are actually
being fair, and maybe maybe they are accurate in their lawsuit,
which is basically to prove that somehow these cookies cause
autism essentially. So anyway, so I thought, well, who the

(40:57):
fuck is this GMO science?

Speaker 1 (41:01):
I wait to find out.

Speaker 3 (41:03):
So I went to their website and it didn't It
didn't Robert Malone, Well, they didn't film me with confidence
because there was no actual study there. Right, they show
the results of this study, but there isn't a study, okay,

(41:23):
And then you can click and follow the link that
supposedly takes you to the study, and it takes you
to a PDF version of the front page, which basically
just shows you which is the page that you've just
gone to. And so I was like, that's unusual.

Speaker 2 (41:38):
It's not a journal.

Speaker 3 (41:40):
No, no, anyway, So these tables show the amount of
the stuff that they found, and it's by a song
called Michelle Pirot, Stephanie Senef, and Zen Honeycott. But the
article the website says, and this was one thing that
made me think, Ah, if the tests that you conducted

(42:01):
were reproducible, what type of peer review did you do?
And the response on the website says, transparency and scientific
rigor its central.

Speaker 2 (42:13):
To our work.

Speaker 3 (42:14):
Can we appreciate your diligence ins liability?

Speaker 2 (42:20):
Wait?

Speaker 3 (42:22):
Wait, I need to start gig because they transparency in
that you love this. Transparency and scientific rigor are central
to our work, and we appreciate your diligence with assessing
the reliability of our findings. One member of our team
is an MIT research scientist with hundreds of publications authored
by her. We also have educators, physicians, philanthropists, artists, activists, mums, farmers,

(42:50):
and designers who are involved in our process. Right good,
that's great. They go on. Our testing, followed stringent validated
methodology is to ensure accuracy and reproducibility. We utilize an
independent ICO accredited laboratory specializing in food contaminant analysis. The

(43:10):
testing protocols adhere to standardized procedures for detecting toxicants, including
with mass spectrometry, with rigorous controls to eliminate cross contamination
of false positives. Additionally, we employed the change custody documentation
to maintain simple integrity from collection to analysis. The main
laboratory utilized is Health Research Institute in Fairfield, Iowa, owned

(43:33):
by a renowned researcher and author. You might have noticed
I've not answered the question yet. While our findings have
not undergone formal peer review in a scientific journal, the
laboratory methods used are widely accepted in toxicological and food
safety research. Furthermore, our results aligned with broader studies highlighting
the present of contaminants in processed foods, which reinforces their credibility.

Speaker 1 (44:00):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (44:01):
So when asked, you know, if these tests are accurate,
why have you not had them reproduced and had them
per rude? They've said, what if our people went to
m I T.

Speaker 2 (44:12):
Who were you to ask?

Speaker 3 (44:14):
Who the fuck are you to ask us? Look, we
did it properly. We don't need to have it backed
up the moms. We asked farmers, right, and who would
know more than a farmer? Like that's fucking embarrassing. Like anyway,
you know what else is embarrassing? Well, no, we are

(44:37):
still on this because Snope said a bit of a
look into it, and so dtr Jessica B. Stayer, who's
the CEO of Vital Statistics Counseling, Public Health Scientists and
Health services researcher and host of the Unbuying Science podcast,
explained to Snopes in an email. The certified lab results
showed that all tested parameters fall well within ESTABL food

(45:00):
safety guidelines. The variation between samples is normal, and no
single result approaches levels of regulatory concern. In fact, the
results demonstrate compliance with food safety standards rather than raising
red flags. This is total fearmongering. The hr I LAVE
reports show glyphas eate levels for each tested samples fall

(45:20):
well within EPA parameters deemed safe for human consumption. However,
the results are measured in nanograms per gram, which, after
converting to parts per million, shows the levels within acceptable
ranges one. For example, one sample of thin mints source
from Louisiana, testing at one hundred and eleven point seven
nanograms per gram for glyphas eate, the highest of all

(45:42):
samples tested. This converts to zero point one one one
one parts per million on part with the lowest tolerance
determined by the EPA, so Steer told Snopes that a
sixty six pound child would need to consume approximately nine
thousand cookies every single day for weeks to approach the

(46:03):
EPA's chronic reference dose.

Speaker 2 (46:06):
I could have done that as a kid. Well, yeah,
this is true, but I wouldn't been allowed to. But
I could have done it.

Speaker 3 (46:14):
The second piece of testing pertained to the heavy metals
elsenick lad cadmium, mercury, and aluminium or five of which
the report claimed were present in twenty two twenty five samples.
But according to the actual lab reports, an accredited according
to NJ Lab reports and accredited laboratory that tested the
samples for these metals. This is true. Snopes cross reference

(46:35):
the chart below from GMO Science have found it to
accurately reflect the lab reports. So, as you said, there
are these metals. However, GNO Sciences chart site the EPA's
regulation of metals within drinking water an important detail that
serves to skew the perception of the data present it.
Scientifically speaking, using drinking water standards for food guidelines is

(46:56):
like comparing apples to oranges. The body process is contaminants
differently in food versus water, which is why we have
separate standards. For example, cadmium for food has much lower
absorption rate than cadmium in water. Additionally, would consume much
more water daily than a single than any single food item,
which is why water standards are more stringent. Using water

(47:17):
standards to evaluate food creates are necessarily alarm and doesn't
reflect how these substances actually interact with our bodies. Steers
sold Snopes it would take thousands of cookies daily to
even approach concerning levels of lead or cadmium. This illustrates
the fundamental principle of toxicology that the dose makes the poison.
Virtually anything can be harmful in sufficient quantities, but the

(47:40):
levels detected here are far below levels that could cause
harm through normal consumption. Based on certified laboratory resorts. For
the New Jersey laboratories, the levels detected are well within
normal ranges for grain based products. The highest lead level,
forty two point five parts per billion, remains below the
FDA's action level of one hundred parts per billion for
food tend for children. The mercury levels, mostly under two

(48:02):
parts billion, are far below the FDA is a thousand
parts of billion. Actually levels for seafood. These levels are
consistent with what we typically see in similar products and
don't indicate a safety concern. So, just to sort of
back up, this study said that Girl Scout cookies were
dangerous and had dangerous amounts of chemicals and heavy metals

(48:26):
in them. The heavy metals weren't metals, they were minerals,
and the levels were far far below the safe level.
The reason they managed to skew the results by using
the wrong set of measurements. Yeah, they just simply lied
about the amounts of glyphosate in it. And they did
this with their own laboratoris which they refused to have

(48:49):
it tested again and refuse to have it peer reviewed
because they knew that when anybody would test this, it
would turn out to be bullshit. But this was repeated
by Woody Harold and Joe Rogan on the Joe Rogan
Experience without fact checking, and they essentially slandered an institution.

Speaker 2 (49:09):
That's all well and good and all very interesting, But
the whole time that you've been talking about that, the
only thing I could think of is a pet Neils
never had a Girl Scout cookie.

Speaker 3 (49:22):
I've smoked Girl Scout cookies.

Speaker 2 (49:27):
Yeah, there is a strain. Isn't there girl Scout cookies?

Speaker 3 (49:30):
But no, I don't think I have Actually, no, they're not.
Did you have them when you're in America?

Speaker 1 (49:37):
Did you?

Speaker 3 (49:38):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (49:38):
We had them on base. It was always like a
really a fun experience. When they came around. It was
like because they didn't they weren't on sale all year
or nothing. That's just like they would do like charity
drives and sell them then and there. They were great
in the eighties and nineties when I was a kid.
They probably had different like ingredients in them. To be fair,
they probably weren't.

Speaker 3 (49:59):
They probably did have that time.

Speaker 2 (50:01):
Yeah, but they were great.

Speaker 1 (50:03):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (50:04):
I loved like thin mints. And then there was like
one that I used to always eat. Probably people think
that's weird, but Samoa and it was like covered in coconut.
I like bounties. I'm like one of the only people
in England that seems to like a bounty.

Speaker 3 (50:16):
No, I don't like a bounty.

Speaker 2 (50:18):
No, nobody does. Everyone thinks you're weird because you like bounties.
You're like, what, it's lovely. But yeah, girls out cookies, man,
that's the only thing I think about the whole time.
I've had had one of these, but for the breakdown anyway,
it was brilliant.

Speaker 3 (50:35):
I had a twinkie. I've had a twinkie that was nice. Yeah, Yeah,
they were right, and I they were massively out of
date because they were sent to me by this girl
that lived in America and she went to our school
and then she moved back to America and yeah, she said,
and by the time they arrived there about like a

(50:55):
month out of date.

Speaker 2 (50:56):
But yeah, when she's end ten years ago, yeah, probably.

Speaker 3 (51:07):
Well this is it. It tasted fine, like as far
as I could tell, So, yeah, it was all right.
But yeah, so that's how Joe Rogan and Woody Harrelson
got a lot of shit wrong and slandered a lot
of people Anthony Fauchi, for one, and made errors about
Robert Malone and yeah, got it all wrong about girls

(51:30):
gout cookies. Sorry. UFC is increasingly getting sort of drawn
into the conspiracy world. Like we're seeing people like Conor
McGregor trying to sort of force the way into the
the sphere of politics. We're seeing crossover with the manner

(51:51):
sphere and men's rights movements. Donald Trump, for Christ's sake,
is at at the UFC and he's sort of interacting
with Dana White Joe Rogan obviously, and then you're getting
people like the Tates turning up. So you've got Dana
White and the Tates and Connor McGregor all there. And

(52:15):
that's weird really because, like you know, as far as
we were the place for sex trafficking and rape is
the wwe didn't really need a dumb too serious ja.
But anyway, it's still true. But anyway, so this is
what we see a nice yes, yeah, no, look into it.

(52:40):
Vince McMahon terrible, terrible, terrible human being, and Stephanie McMahon
probably complicit in it. And she's now running the Department
of Education in America, which is stupid. Anyway. So there
is this UFC fighter called Bryce Mitchell, and for some
reason he decided to come on Twitter and explain why

(53:04):
he knows that the Earth is flat and it doesn't rotate.
Oh yeah, So I've watched this video, and I've watched
this video a few times and I've got absolutely no
idea what he's talking about. He draws a ball, right,
and he says that if you're in a helicopter, the

(53:27):
higher that you go, the longer it would take to
get around the entirety of the planet. And it's like, well,
I mean yes and no, because the air is thinner,
so it means you can go faster. But technically I
suppose you're going further. Yeah, but it depends how high

(53:47):
you go, because like, the planet's very, very big, so
I think you have to go a long, long way
to make it significantly further distance. But yes, I think
that is a thing. Like anyway, how this even begins
to fucking show that the Earth is flat, I've got
no idea, Like, I've got absolutely no idea. I presume

(54:12):
or assume that he's gone, and it doesn't does it.
It doesn't matter how high you fly, you still travel
with the same distance at the same time. And to
be honest, I don't even know if that's true, but
that's fucking stupid. Anyway. Last year, Bryce Mitchell said that
he'd want to homeschool his son because and obviously it's

(54:34):
not just it's not to do with something city like
flat Earth or anything like that. He's put more thought
into it. It's because he doesn't want his son to
grow up to be communist, or to worship Satan, or
to be gay. Which is obviously you know some of
the things that can happen if you go to school, you're.

Speaker 2 (54:57):
Not allowed to graduate if you're not those things.

Speaker 1 (55:00):
Well, this is it.

Speaker 3 (55:01):
You lead a certain amount of credit in all of
those things, like at least half a semester of sort
of like you know, limp breach around, like that's all
you have to do. Just just grind through it. Think
of it like cookery or like or like home economics.

Speaker 1 (55:20):
Nobody liked it.

Speaker 3 (55:21):
You just sort of forced your way through it. I
got pissed in Home Economics on more than one occasion.
Whenever there was like this is when I was like teenager,
Like whenever we had to make some sort of apple
crumble or apple pie or anything like that, I'd nicked
like half a bottle of port from a month and
put it in the pie and drink some of it,
and yeah, great days. AnyWho. So in twenty twenty four,

(55:47):
Bryce Mitchell said we're going to have to homeschool all
our kids or they're all going to end up turning gay.
And he said this on Instagram where it's holding his
infant son, Tucker, who he said, he said, the reason
I'm going to homeschool took hers because I don't want
him to be a communist. I don't want him to
worship Satan, and I don't want him to be gay. Mitchell,
who's got a record of sixteen and three UFC featherweight

(56:10):
fighter whose nickname is a thug Nasty, made the homophobic
remarks right after he encouraged his nearly five hundred thousand
Instagram followers not to vaccinate their children, and just before
he complained that public schools don't have enough students reading
the Bible. He said, they took it out of schools.
I've replaced it with Edgar Allan Poe, who shacked up

(56:30):
with his cousin Mitchell and Arkansas Nature, an Arkansas native
who works as a cattle farmer when he's not in
the MMA cage. My son ain't going to be reading
no Edgar Allan Poe. Okay, he's going to be reading
the Bible.

Speaker 2 (56:46):
Now.

Speaker 3 (56:47):
I don't know whether you've ever read an Edgar Allan Poe,
and if you've ever read the Bible, but there's plenty
of all fucked up shit in the Bible than.

Speaker 1 (56:57):
It truly is.

Speaker 3 (56:58):
What's that bit about? And they've favored the men who's
had whose admissions were like that of horses. That makes
a raven saying eleanor and never more, over and over again.
Pretty fucking tame. Like the bit where Noah gets rapes
in his sleep by his son, that bit that that's
uh that that really does make No, it's no, it's.

Speaker 1 (57:26):
I don't think it is, isn't it.

Speaker 3 (57:28):
Some look either way, there's a lot of rape in
the Bible, and there is there's not that much in
say the Telltale Heart. There's a bit of murders, but
but also there is quite a lot of murder in
the Bible.

Speaker 2 (57:44):
One thing, Jamie's going to fact check this.

Speaker 3 (57:48):
I thought it was Shem or Ham or whatever.

Speaker 2 (57:52):
I'm sure it's his daughter or something.

Speaker 3 (57:56):
Yes, well, no it's Ham. Oh Ham rapes his mother.
Hey up, blood yell? This is this is Some people
have interpreted that Ham did in fact rape his father.
Others people say that Ham raped his mother. We really
need to find the director's cut to see which is

(58:17):
canonically accurate.

Speaker 2 (58:19):
It seems to be about the interpretation of the word
saw his nakedness, his nakedness. It doesn't but that means
the same with like also in the Book of Genesis,
you got Adam and Eve where they saw their saw
their own nakedness. So it's not necessarily like to do
with having sex. It's about seeing their their shame.

Speaker 3 (58:41):
This is why you should when when you're looking for
these things. It's probably why you should go to school
to learn these things rather than try to interpret them yourself.
Because now I don't quite understand his beef with ed
grahall and Poe or why he's picked out grown and Poe.
One of the weird things that he doesn't mention about
edgroll and Poe was that Edgar Allan Poe he did

(59:03):
Mad Mary's cousin. She was thirteen at the time and
he was twenty seven.

Speaker 2 (59:14):
So yeah, there's a few parallels like that in the
Bible too, which were seen as favorable.

Speaker 3 (59:23):
Yeah, but he does. I don't know why he's picked
Edgar Allan Poe. Like, to be quite honest, he may
have even got him confused.

Speaker 2 (59:29):
The only thing that he could probably remember, Yeah, like
having to have read in high school, because you do
read Edgar Allan Poe in American literat in high school. Yeah, well,
fair enough. I loved it. That was like one of
the things for me, like where I started to really
kind of get into poetry and narratives. Was like when
I first encountered Edgar Allan Poe when I was in

(59:51):
like eighth grade or something, and it started. It's just
the first thing that kind of started to speak to
me on like a different level.

Speaker 3 (01:00:00):
And did you roase to escape gayfree and with only
mild communism?

Speaker 2 (01:00:05):
I guess we'll leave that for the listeners to decide.

Speaker 3 (01:00:11):
So this Bryce Mitchell Fellow is this is not the
only stupid thing that he said. In January twenty twenty five,
he made several controversial statements, including praising Adolph Hitler, which
is for some reason de rigueura at the moment. He
also denied the Holocaust and made anti LGBTQ remarks. He said,

(01:00:31):
I honestly think that Hitler was a good guy based
upon my own RESEARCHO.

Speaker 2 (01:00:38):
I thought it was going to be mild. Wow.

Speaker 3 (01:00:42):
I honestly think that Hitler was a good guy based
upon my own research, but not on my public education
in doctrination. And he further claimed, when you realize that
there's no possible way that they could have burned and
cremated six million bodies, you're going to realize that the
Holocaust ain't real.

Speaker 2 (01:01:00):
Theropes get so tired.

Speaker 1 (01:01:03):
Wait.

Speaker 3 (01:01:04):
Additionally, additionally, Mitchell suggested that greedy Jews were destroying his
country and turning them all into gaze.

Speaker 2 (01:01:15):
It's just so stupid, I'd say, Man, this.

Speaker 3 (01:01:21):
Is why you should go to fucking school like and
why you probably shouldn't get beaten in the fucking head
as a profession.

Speaker 2 (01:01:30):
Yeah, I was thinking head trauma might have been.

Speaker 3 (01:01:32):
Yeah, well, this is the thing. I am spotting more
and more overlap between the conspiracy crowd and uh uh
and the UFC and and mm a, yeah, but you

(01:01:57):
can't spell conspiracy without cte, you can. You know who
he doesn't like and this surprised me.

Speaker 2 (01:02:09):
Oh m a, oh he doesn't.

Speaker 1 (01:02:17):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (01:02:20):
Other than Jews and gay people.

Speaker 2 (01:02:23):
I started going. I was like, oh, maybe he doesn't
like a certain right wing figure Ben Shapiro. Oh no,
he doesn't like Jews.

Speaker 3 (01:02:29):
Ye, no, he probably doesn't like well. In twenty twenty four,
he denounced Elon Musk. Now, this is weird, right because
he went on Patrick back David's show, and I think
Patrick bed David is Jewish. But anyway, Bryce Mitchell opened
up about his outlook on Elon Musk, who he insists,

(01:02:50):
is fooling the world in essentially hiding his true evil.
Somebody that has fooled everyone but simply cannot fool me
is Elon Musk. Mitchell claimed, I think that he could
possibly be. Now, I could be wrong, I could be
completely wrong, but based off of what I think, he
could be the false prophet who presents the mark of

(01:03:12):
the beasts of the world and presents the Antichrist on
the world stage. That's how evil I think he is.

Speaker 2 (01:03:20):
For the listeners. As soon as he started, I just
put up like the six to six six symbol in
my hand, like I just knew that. I knew that
was coming.

Speaker 3 (01:03:31):
Wow, I'm surprised. Actually there isn't more. Elon Musk is
is the Antichrist? Do you know what I mean? Because
he'd like, I mean Christ, so many people have been
the Antichrist over the years and whatnot.

Speaker 2 (01:03:45):
I like, and he looks he looks like blab Yeah,
he is the face. He looks like the Lord of
the Flies. Disgusting character.

Speaker 3 (01:03:59):
Yeah you know when did you do see when if
you were doing add ground paw, we did Lord of
the Flies right, Okay? And there was a. There was
a right Mandela moment with Lord of the Flies. And
I don't know if anyone listening can remember this, but
I remember like, when I was about to start reading
Lord of the Flies, I had at least three or
four adults come up to me and go, oh, Lord
of the Flies, you like the bit where they eat

(01:04:19):
Piggy and Piggy is the fat kid that's in it,
and they don't eat Piggy in it.

Speaker 2 (01:04:26):
But that wasn't just me.

Speaker 3 (01:04:27):
Other people I know have said, yeah, yeah, everyone misremembers
it and thinks that they eat the fat kid in it.
They don't. They eat a pig and they killed Piggy.
Oh shit. Sorry kids, if you were the Lord of
the Flies for you, But yeah, had a bit of
a weird one anyway. So Mitchell is not like, he's

(01:04:50):
not an idiot. He goes on to explain his thoughts,
revealing exactly why he believes Elon musk to be the
false prophet.

Speaker 2 (01:05:00):
You want to reveal why he is an idiot?

Speaker 3 (01:05:04):
So why do I think it's Elon Musk? Well, there's
two pieces of evidence that more significance. Sorry, So why
do I think it's Elon Musk?

Speaker 1 (01:05:13):
Well?

Speaker 3 (01:05:13):
There's two pieces of evidence that are more significant than
any other pieces of evidence. One, it says in Revelations
that the false prophet will deceive with fire from the sky.
Elon Musk has this fake space program called space X,
and let me tell you, he hasn't been passed the firmament.

(01:05:35):
No man has ever been pasted the fir. In all
the excitement of Satan, I'd forgotten he was a flat earther.

Speaker 2 (01:05:44):
That's brilliant. However, I need to ask you a question.
Here are you reading his words verbatim? Did he say
in Revelations?

Speaker 3 (01:05:54):
Yeah? One.

Speaker 2 (01:05:56):
See, this is the problem with fake ask Christians. They
don't know. It's not called revelations, it's the Book of Revelation,
the Revelation of Jesus Christ. It means they haven't actually
read the title, let alone actually read his book. This
one annoys me so much.

Speaker 1 (01:06:16):
This is real.

Speaker 2 (01:06:17):
Mean to interrupt, but this is like me.

Speaker 3 (01:06:20):
This is like me with the word factoid, isn't.

Speaker 2 (01:06:22):
It is exactly that anytime Revelations in the Book of Revelations,
you haven't read it. You haven't even read the title.

Speaker 3 (01:06:35):
He also goes up to say he's not been in
space He's not put a rocket on Mars. He's not
done anything that he said he did. He's not a scientist,
he's not a propultion engineer. He doesn't make electric cars.
He pays people to do it for him. He's one
of the greatest scammers humanity has ever seen. Maybe the

(01:06:55):
earth is flat, who knows. I think he's actually a
step further than just a con artist. I think he's
Evil embodied. And I can say that with confidence because,
like I said, one piece of scripture, the false prophet
will deceive with fire from the sky. Mitchell continued giving
more reasons for why he links Elon Musk with evil.

(01:07:15):
Here's another piece of evidence. Elon Musk is inventing chips
that are going into people's brains. And I'm telling you
that is the behavior to look for when you're talking
about the Antichrist. There's going to be a mark on
everybody's head, and there's going to be a mark on
their hand. That's what they call the mark of the Beast.
And I'm telling you Elon Musk, if he hasn't invented

(01:07:36):
the mark of the beast yet, he's laying the groundwork
for the Antichrist to take that mark of the beast
and implement it on all humans. Elon Musk has actually
put a chip in somebody's brain and convince them that
they're healthier. Now, I'm telling you that's beyond a con artist.
That's evil embody to lie to somebody to the degree

(01:07:56):
that you could tell them, hey, put this chip in
your brain and I'll help you. He's going to convince
millions of people to put that chip in their brain.
And I'm telling you right now he sounds like the
false prophet, and the false prophet is going to present
the Antichrist? Hm.

Speaker 2 (01:08:15):
Hm Can I take a minute here just to like
break down some of this context. Yeah, Like I think
you know this is This was interesting to me, so
I think it might be interesting to other people who
are listening to this might be interesting to you too. Now,
this view that he has, it's not the flatter stuff,

(01:08:37):
but this view of the false prophet and the Antichrist
coming to rule and they're being a microchip. And you
know this this common sort of narrative that is in
Western Christianity. Now, like Christianity is two thousand years old,

(01:08:58):
do you know how old this teaching is?

Speaker 3 (01:09:02):
What the bulk of the Beast.

Speaker 2 (01:09:03):
Well all the yeah, this the Antichrist is going to
come and rule the planet as like a politician, and
he's going to have a false prophet as like the
forebearer of him, and it's going to be the one
world government, new world order. That whole type of thing.

Speaker 3 (01:09:20):
Did it start about the time that not there call
it conspiracy came out.

Speaker 2 (01:09:25):
It's forty years old came out. It came about in
the eighties really by remember the guy's name right now
off hand, but his book was called The Late Great
Planet Earth. And this is where this whole idea comes from.
It's so new, so new to like Christianity, which goes

(01:09:45):
back into antiquity. Nobody believed this stuff for like one
nine and fifty years. It's like it's so new, and
it's just weird how prevalent it is. And these people
just repeat it without understanding the historical context of like
what people actually believed as Christians through millennia. It's fascinating

(01:10:10):
to me.

Speaker 3 (01:10:11):
Hey, God, it's forty years old. You know what's also
nearly forty years old. The Omen three, in which in
which Damien is played by Samuel becomes a politician and
believe he's like either the senator or the president or whatever,
and he's trying to take over the world and create
a one world government. Like yeah, so fucking well, because

(01:10:32):
like in right Revelation the Book of Revelation, is is
that the rapture? And is it? Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:10:42):
Again, it's just it's a modern day reading of what
it is said in the Book of Revelation. There's nothing
about like a rapture actually happening. It's just like people
because it's interpreted a specific phrase or specific reading from

(01:11:02):
a little piece of it of like of like being
swept away in the middle of the night. But they
act like this means that the pretribunation. Yeah again, this
is this is all very very new. This comes this
comes about in the eighties. Mhmm.

Speaker 1 (01:11:23):
Wow.

Speaker 3 (01:11:24):
So so a lot of it is is sort of
like it's more pop culture and conspiratorial reading of it
than than strictly biblical. Absolutely, And would that be coming
from like you sort of like you sort of Jerry
Folwells and and that sort of like evangelical Douglas Co's and.

Speaker 2 (01:11:45):
And yes you're you're fundamentalist conservative Graham or American Christian movement,
Like that's where it comes from. I mean, like maybe
it doesn't necessarily exactly come exactly in the eighties, but
it was most popularized that's where it's popular, which is

(01:12:06):
a great planet Earth, which is also the same it
much has been kind of in the zeitgeist of the
movement there. But it is strictly that it's not like
like Anglicism, like British Anglicism. That's not in it, and
people don't think of like the devil and Antichrist like that,

(01:12:27):
even in like the Church of England.

Speaker 3 (01:12:29):
Well, I'm just thinking that like because these three things
have come together are basically like so this concept of
like the sort of the Antichrist and the sort of
physical devil, and anti communism and this concept of the
new World order, it's all coming together from these same
same people at the same sort of time, isn't it.

(01:12:50):
And cultural Marxism, all of that is from that same
group of people that the Heritage Foundation people poor way
rich as you say, Billy Graham and preachers like that
Jerry Folwell, non dare call it conspiracy. The John Birch
Society and these three strands of which are pretty intertwined,

(01:13:14):
have done pretty much everything to inform modern conspiracism.

Speaker 2 (01:13:19):
Absolutely, like that I'm saying this from experience. This is
exactly what I believed. This is where I went. Like
nine to eleven was the pipeline to this fundamentalist religious
kind of view of a conspiratorial world basically, and a.

Speaker 3 (01:13:40):
Lot of it again was based on of like I
have been listening to Behind the Bastards today and they're excellent. Levatski,
the Emerald Tablets and things like that, and Brotherhood of
the Snake, the Real Society, all of these things there
all works of fiction. They were written by as works
of fiction that people like Si then went oh no,

(01:14:01):
there weren't works of fiction. They were they were unbeknownst
to the authors, channeling knowledge and it's like, oh wow,
that's amazing, Like this is where that that stuff comes from.
The concept of karma apparently, like and having good karma
or bad karma comes from was popularized by Lavatski. Crazy

(01:14:23):
but yeah, so some pretty outrageous thinking by Bryce Mitchell there.
But you know who doesn't tolerate outrageous thinking.

Speaker 2 (01:14:36):
Keer Starmer nearly Keir Starmer's thought Police.

Speaker 3 (01:14:44):
Yeah, you see, the Internet was up in the arms
because of the thought police harassing a woman and this
was like people like, God, God, you can't do anything.
Maybe Farays was right. You get arrested just for saying
things in in this country and it was reported by

(01:15:04):
the Daily Mail. Furious Brits of slammed Manchester police and
labor for shameful behavior targeting a grandmother and this was
exposed by The Mail on Sunday. Two police officers were
caught on camera paying a visit to her grandmother simply
for criticizing labor politicians on Facebook. That's not true, so

(01:15:29):
we're after a good start. Sorry for spoilers, but that's
not why why they were there. Detectives have been accused
of acting like East Germany's starzy secret police for quizzing
Helen Jones over her calls for the resignation of local
counselors and brailed in the whats up scandal, exposed also
by The Mail on Sunday, police conceded that the fifty

(01:15:52):
four year old had committed no crime, yet missus Jones
said that she's effectively been silenced by the officer as
she was intimidated by them calling at her door and
he's too terrified to post on social media Again, voters
have rallied to her defense and blasted the shocking incident

(01:16:12):
as a waste of police time and accused the government
for alleged abuse of power. And all the Lazza Leilani,
jacob Ree, Smart, Jackie Devoy and all the smart people
were outraged. And just to remind people, we don't mean
smart as intelligent. We mean smart like a smartphone, as

(01:16:33):
in they are connected to the internet. However, there was
a problem with this story, a big problem with it.
It essentially wasn't true, Like they didn't threaten this woman
with their rest, they didn't silence her. What happened was

(01:17:00):
this woman had made some statements on WhatsApp and somebody
had reported her and said, this woman is harassing me.
This woman is being rude to me online and is
harassing me, and so I want to press charges. And

(01:17:21):
so the police looked at it and they said, yeah,
there's no crime has been committed here, but if someone
makes a complaint about somebody, the police have to go
and inform them that a complaint has been made and
tell them what action has gone. So the police said,
we spoke to the woman for six minutes to advise
her that she was the subject of a complaint of

(01:17:43):
harassment and to answer any questions that she may have.
No further action was necessary as no crime had been committed.
We are under a duty to inform her that she
is subject of a complaint. The genuine threats that have
been made to local councils recently have meant it be
more necessary to ensure all reports are looked at. So
what's happening is is this sort of like silly little

(01:18:04):
local council of drama going off. It's not important what
it is. Everyone's in there and obviously some people are
threatening councilors because that's what people do. And in the
heat of this, she's said something that somebody else has
taken to be either threatening or harassing. Upon looking at it,
they haven't. But if a police investigation has been opened

(01:18:27):
into you, it's really just common courtesy to go and
make sure that. For a start, it was to see
if she had any questions, and to make sure that
you haven't received any hate mail. You haven't received any
bother or anything like that. Because somebody reported you to
the police. We don't think you've done anything. We're just
here to check on you well being and make sure

(01:18:48):
you're right.

Speaker 2 (01:18:49):
It sounds like they're getting the other side of the story.

Speaker 3 (01:18:53):
Yeah, it sounds like, you know, this is the sort
of community police policing that most of the time people
are saying, who also heavy handed? If they only just
talked to us and stuff like that. I well, that's
what they did. They turned up knocks on this woman's
door and said, hello, we're so sorry something well, we
need to tell you about this. There's no need to
worry about it because no action is going to be taken.

(01:19:15):
We just wanted to make sure that you've been okay,
You've not had anything strange or unusual happened to you. No,
is there anything that you want to ask? Is there
anything more that you can tell us about the situation?

Speaker 1 (01:19:27):
Right?

Speaker 3 (01:19:27):
Lovely, thank you. And so one of the sort of
complaints that was put about as well by Laza and
all of those you know, the smart people, is that
were they out solving real crimes. So the Manchester Police
made sure of telling people on this day officers for
making two hundred and three arrests for crimes like a

(01:19:47):
salt burgley and rape, tackling these priorities and why the
complaint were tackling these priorities and why the complaint was
dealt with two days after it was reported. So they
did it when they had time. They weren't someone wasn't
getting stabbed to death. But here's the thing. You know,
all that stuff the Greater Manchester Police, the statement from

(01:20:08):
them and their response, that was all in the article.
So all the smart people had been complaining about something
in which the article itself said it really wasn't a
big deal. I mean, that is irresponsible on the part
of the Daily Mail and they know what they're doing.

(01:20:28):
It was just a rat tat story, but everyone was
complaining it and sharing it. And even if you read
the actual story, it said she wasn't arrested, she wasn't harassed,
she was spoken to you very politely to inform her
of something and then they went on their day. And
if she feels like are intimidated into silence because of that,

(01:20:52):
why you didn't say anything wrong. At no point did
anyone say you mustn't say that again. In fact, they
found what you said to be perfectly fine. So just stupid,
just stupid. But this is again we've spoke about this

(01:21:14):
a bit before. This is the problem with print media
and stuff like that, and even online media. They're in
such a saturated market now that people they need to
draw people in with flashy headlines, which has always been
the case, but it's even more sort of egregious and
slippery nowadays. And also they tend to note it that

(01:21:36):
people don't read the article. They'd take from it what
they will. All that stuff that the police said was
right at the end of the article. It was all
about two thirds of the way through, but most people
would have given up after the second photo, do you
know what I mean? So they don't get to that point.
All they know is that someone has been harassed. They
don't read it properly. They've pretty much formulated what the

(01:21:58):
story was before they even is reading the headline. And
this is this is evidenced by the fact that it
was regurgitated by all these fucking smart people.

Speaker 2 (01:22:08):
It's almost as if they're not trying to inform people
but control the narrative.

Speaker 3 (01:22:17):
Weird like that, isn't it.