Under the Humanitarian Initiative Veil | HBR Talk 380

Before we get back to UN Women’s grift, we’re going to continue looking at the USAIDs attempt at a soft coup. Is there anybody left who HASN’T tried to undermine the current, male-elected administration? How much of their antics before we decide we’ve had enough?

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hello, and welcome to HBr Talk three point eight under
the Humanitarian Initiative VEIL. I'm your host Hannah Wallant here
with Nonsense Annilator Lauren Brooks and the Personification of Perceptivity
Mike Stevenson, and we all, as always, we have the
DOSEE in charge working in the background to uh make

(00:23):
sure everything goes the way it should be. And tonight
we're still taking a break from you and women because
you can only put up with those bitches so much
for so long at a time. Uh. Really, it's because
US AIDS infections are scarier than un women.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
But I I hear you can I hear you can
cure AIDS by wearing condoms.

Speaker 1 (00:50):
Yes, yes, we need a US condom to prevent the
USAID's infection from spreading any further throughout the world. It
is is becoming a massive epidemic and unfortunately so many
people now have been affected by it that it's uh,
it's it's definitely much much more of an issue than

(01:13):
any other pandemic ever.

Speaker 3 (01:15):
Was we need a U s I U D. Is
that the right thing?

Speaker 1 (01:21):
Yes, yes, we need a U s I U D.
Yes we will. We will definitely not use I.

Speaker 4 (01:28):
E d here.

Speaker 1 (01:30):
It's worse.

Speaker 2 (01:31):
It's it's not an epidemic, it's an epic.

Speaker 1 (01:36):
Dumbass, there we go. It's an epidemic. It's it's worse
than the dip shit epidemic. It's the dip ship pandemic.
But this actually is more serious than that. And and
and you'll you'll see why as I get into it.
But before we get into that, as always, we gotta
do what we gotta do. And I got to remind

(01:58):
you that Honey Badger Radio dishes out Ace morgas board
of thought provoking discussions, including the the Bear We're poking
tonight and as experiences both recent long pass have demonstrated
the provoked thoughts are fighting back. They've made it clear
that for people like us, relying on third party platforms

(02:20):
like Patreon to fund our work is treading on thin
ice or building our house in the path of a
rapidly growing wildfire. In light of this, we strongly encourage
our supporters to switch at least their support for us
to Feed the Badger dot Com the most stable way
to help us out, And if you want to tip
us directly instead of relying on any social media platforms,

(02:44):
tip jar The link for that is feed the Badger
dot com splash just the tip, and here we go.
Uh oh oh, I see, I thought I had a
super chat, but I actually just posted something for the

(03:04):
live show in the super chat channel that was brilliant anyway,
So here you go, feed Thebadgery dot Com slashes the
tip and as always, the same risk applies to our
social media platforms, which is why you should further provoke
the thought police by tracking our thought provoking discussions on
Honey Badger Brigade dot com, where you can find your

(03:26):
way to all of our content, as well as a
link to feed the Badger dot Com in the drop
down menu at the top of the page. Interestingly, the
last actual superchat in our superchat channel on our discord
where we see the superchats or superchows, I should say
that you send through feed the Badger dot Com slashes

(03:46):
the tip. Is about men being protectors of the family
and how evil it is to undermine that, and this
show tonight tonight is going to be an sort of
a discussion about the undermining as of men as social

(04:07):
protectors of the country. Men. You know, they get sent
to war, they get sent out to fix the power lines,
they get sent out to build new homes. After a disaster,
they get sent out to rescue people. And flood and
fire and blizzard and drought, you know, any disaster that

(04:33):
that traps people in a very dangerous situation, threatens people's lives,
kills people, puts people in a situation where they've lost
everything and they need shelter. Men are the ones that
get sent out to do that. But as we had discussed,

(04:53):
you know, over and over again during HBr talks, discussions
on suffrage, history of an evolution of suffrage, not just
women's suffrage, but voting rights all together, and how voting
rights evolved out of men's service to their country. So

(05:16):
they're intrinsically connected. It's it's important for us to understand
that the stewards of government, the people who are citizens,
who are the stewards of what government may or may
not do, you know, to the citizens and for the
citizens and so on, are men. It's it's when men

(05:40):
get that up with women trying to exploit government to
do things that it shouldn't be doing, men have to
put their foot down. And that's what they did in
this last election. They said no to a lot of things,
and they said, we need to tear down a bunch
of essentially ship agencies and departments and build things back

(06:08):
up the way that they should be, or you know,
if there are things that just shouldn't be, not build
them back up, just not have them. And one of
those things was the giant money laundering system known as USAID.

(06:29):
And this is something that we knew about, like prior
to to the election, to a degree, we knew about,
you know, the fact that there were government agencies and
government departments that were essentially just there to launder money

(06:52):
for politicians and non government organizations in the the non
government organizations that police since had invested in, the companies
involved in the military industrial complex, companies involved in what
I would call the charity industrial complex, where they have

(07:14):
this entire organized system that involves government contractors, government employees,
non government organizations, networking between agencies and departments within the
government and networking with other governments in order to move

(07:36):
American taxpayer dollars and money borrowed in the name of
American taxpayers and future American taxpayers from middle class people
and producers of wealth in the United States to organizations

(07:57):
outside the United States and mostly to administrators of these
these organizations, not really to poor people in other countries,
they're not really. They'll they'll provide some services, but the
majority of the funding instead of going to help people
who need food, need to learn how to farm, need

(08:22):
assistance in obtaining things like maybe they need to have
animals in order to be able to have a food
supply or something like that. Then instead of doing that,
they're over there promoting abortion and gendered law and policy

(08:42):
on an intimate partner and sexual violence, with holding food
from men by redirecting existing national systems that provide for
the poor so that only women can access them, and
then it's up to the women to distribute the food.

(09:02):
Promoting circumcision. You know, there's like stuff that I don't
I don't think any poor person has ever gotten an
extra meal put into their belly by getting circumcised. Yeah,
you don't work that way.

Speaker 3 (09:19):
One of the most Orwellian misnomers in the English language
is non government organization. It's like nonprofit organization. There's nothing
more driven by the profit to its head on shows
than a nonprofit organization. And there's nothing more driven by
government influence than a non government organization.

Speaker 1 (09:41):
Yeah, well, one of the worst things is they have
influence in the government. And so, for instance, Planned Parenthood
is an NGO, right, they're supposed to be they're not.
They're funded by the government, but they're not supposed to
be part of the government. But policy gets dictated by

(10:05):
the interests or has been dictated by the interests of
Planned Parenthood. The National Education Association is a union, it
is a non government organization, but policy and government has
been dictated by the National Education Association for decades in
any education department, and you know, USA, it is supposed

(10:31):
to be funding a whole shitload a slew of non
government organizations that go out into other countries and they're
supposed to be doing charity work in these other countries,
and they have had a huge effect on government policy
with regard to like how we deal with these other countries.

(10:53):
And it's been it's been quite a scam for a
long time. So last week what we were looking at
is these people are panicking because their DEI hiring is
being taken away. And I'm going to go over that
again really quick. We'll listen to I think I need
to back this up a couple of seconds, because we

(11:14):
were listening to it for a little bit before the show,
but I want you to rehear one thing we played
last week. Oops, I guess I can't just hit the
space bar because it's not YouTube.

Speaker 5 (11:25):
A large number of our awards immediately. So in that
first week, we experienced a lot of threatening emails across
the staff, a takeover of what it was it deia
truth at opm dot gov, which was unusual to have

(11:48):
centralized emails sent to all government staff. And then many
staff who are under a particular hiring mechanism in that
first week were immediately put on furlough or laid off.
I am a part of that hiring mechanism.

Speaker 1 (12:08):
Then, so there she goes, she's talking about the overseers
of DEI, like human resources, the human resources workers that
were dedicated to ensuring that hiring was done through the diversity,
Equity and Inclusion model or uh DEI, which I like

(12:32):
to refer to as d I E instead, because when
a business does it, and you know, I've I've explained
before that every nation is a corporation and there is
a degree to which it is important to recognize it
as a business. So when when a privately owned business

(12:56):
from the private sector does this, it does result in
problems due to not not making talent, initiative, skill, and
character their primary focus when they're hiring somebody, but instead

(13:20):
making race, effects and religion their primary focus. And that's
really dangerous when you forget about those other things and
you make these characteristics that don't really have anything to
do with how well somebody does their job the primary focus.

(13:40):
You promote people who are not necessarily the best fit
for the job. You ignore if somebody else is more talented,
more diligent, better worker, has more skill that's particularly needed
in that area, and so on. If that individual is

(14:02):
the wrong sex, race, religion, what have you, and you
hire the person who is preferred in order to promote
supposed diversity, which really means everyone but white men, everyone
but straight white male Christians in particular.

Speaker 3 (14:25):
It's another euphemism. Well, I was about to say it's
another euphemism for communism, But every couple of years they
find another euphemism for the same original thing for which
communism was already a euphemism for. And it's pathetic, useless
mutant pig people trying to drag all the successful people
down into their swamp with them.

Speaker 1 (14:47):
Yeah, so it's we need to combat oikophobia with oinkophobia. Indeed,
that's that's my take on it. Get rid of that
real fast. But what that was, what she was The
thing she was whining about was that she lost her

(15:08):
DEI position, this DEI hire, lost her DEI position, and
she lost control over part of the company because of that,
Because she had control over part of the company not
only as a DEI hire, but as a person influential

(15:28):
in bringing in more DEI hires. It's it's almost like
bringing a virus into what it is, because it's the
woke mind virus uh into your corporation. And well, you know,
Jillette may have the choice to do that if they

(15:48):
want to because of their company. Uh, the federal government
is our company. We the people, and we didn't want that,
and and we voted against it. Primarily men voted against it.
If if women had been the only people to vote
in the last election, we'd be we'd be dealing with president.

Speaker 4 (16:12):
Cackle.

Speaker 1 (16:12):
But I can't take the woman seriously. Thank god she
didn't become president, because then then we would have to
take her seriously. But yeah, we would have been uh
dealing with the wicked witch of the East, like, I'll
get you my pretty jeez. But if only men had voted,

(16:39):
we would have had exactly the same result that we had.
So that tells you something, and I think it's important
for people to understand that what has gone on here.
Every every politician that gets elected makes changes in the government.
They come up with new policy, They add, they subtract,
they decide things should go a particular way. They they

(17:05):
work with Congress to pass new laws. They all the
things that Trump has done. Every administrator that we have
hired to be the CEO of our country as as
a people has done the same processes and procedures. So
people who work in government have to be accustomed to

(17:27):
the fact that every four to eight years, anybody can
come in and say, you know, from now on, all
this stuff that you've been putting on pink slips of paper,
we're gonna put them on green slips of paper for
no particular reason, and I want it to start yesterday.
They got to be ready for that. They got to
be ready for you know, you're gonna we're gonna update

(17:48):
all your computers, You're gonna have to transfer your stuff,
and we want it done within a week, and they
got to be ready for this policy that the last
administration said was vital to our country. We think actually
it was damaging, and we're going to stop the policy
and we're going to do the reverse of it. Because
that happens every time you go from Democrat to Republican

(18:10):
and back in all positions all over the government. Not
with everything, but with a lot of things right. And
so they this isn't new that somebody comes in and
shakes up their tree. But this time, this time when

(18:31):
the people whose influence on you know, who became the
president that outweighed the opposite sex's influence were men instead
of women. Now everyone in government is panicking and they're
creating these alternative systems to talk about how they're going

(18:53):
to undermine the current administration. If you ran a company,
let's say you make three pronged widgets and your your
new CEO comes in and discovers that three pronged widget
widgets are no longer useful, your company is like going

(19:15):
to shit. You have your sales are tanked, your consumers
are very dissatisfied, and they're kind of threatening to abandon you,
and and you're you're going to end up losing the company.
So new CEO says, all right, let's start by looking

(19:37):
into what we should be doing for our consumers, since
they are the whole reason we exist.

Speaker 5 (19:45):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (19:45):
And you discover that actually what consumers need is UH
four pronged widget. Not a huge change, but it is
a change. So we decide he's going to revamp everything.
Your machines are going to be updated, the manufacturing process
is going to be updated, and the company is going

(20:08):
to become three or four pronged widget sellers. And of
course your employees all go into a panic. We can't
sell four pronged widgets. That's morallyer on. We don't like
four prongs. We want three prongs. Three prongs is what
we've always done and it's the way things ought to be.
So they create an extracurricular chat that's not part of

(20:31):
the company chat system and talk about how they're going
to work with another bunch of three pronged widget companies
to secretly undermine all of the changes your CEO is making,
so that after your CEO has spent all of the

(20:54):
money and I'm needed to update the machines and everything,
they will they'll produced three pronged widgets, and they will
be sold as three pronged widgets, and it'll look to
the CEO like the company has been updated. Those are
get fired, maybe prosecute.

Speaker 3 (21:15):
I know this is a metaphor, but it's been so
long since the sort of three pronged fork. At some
point in history, fox all got changed to four prongs.
All forks are four pronged now. I do remember three
pronged folks. They were a thing in the twentieth century,
but now they're all sorry. Yeah, like I say, I
know it's a metaphor, but burned my brain off into

(21:39):
a literal thing. I wonder if I wonder if the
thing you just described really did happen in Fork Manufacturing.

Speaker 1 (21:49):
Yeah. Well, and the employees of the USA System, the
USA as Infection Corporation, have done exactly that. They have
forked the company, and they've gone behind the company's back

(22:13):
to fork the company. They went and formed protests. I
believe we were right about somewhere in here, real close
to like just having a minute left and I'll play it.
But they organized protests. They organized an international communications network

(22:38):
with people who make it their business to undermine governments.
When they don't like the outcome of free elections. So
these people are literally talking about undermining the results of
a democratic election in the United States. What can they

(23:00):
do to undermine your vote, to take away the result
that you voted for? I like, just think about that.
That is a soft coup. Even if they're just looking
at how can they do this in their little area,

(23:22):
which they may not be, that is a soft coup.

Speaker 5 (23:28):
There are more signal groups stood up. Like I said,
this is an agency of about ten to fourteen thousand
people within the US. We have about fifty thousand people
who are hired into the ecosystem of awards and grants
that are contracted by USA.

Speaker 1 (23:45):
Fifty thousand people in that system, and the system is
focused on undermining the federal government. So this isn't a
small conspiracy. We don't know how many of those fifty
thousand people are involved in this.

Speaker 5 (24:05):
And so this community started really gathering in signal, especially
as we saw the disinformation about USAID coming out of
x as Elon Musk escalated attacks. In that second week
after the administration, the all almost all of USAID staff

(24:31):
was put on administrative lead, including our ethics lawyers, our
HR security. So This was really when DOES took over
closed our buildings. In that February fifth, we had our
first large scale protest organized in which subtle congressional leaders
stood up with us along with agency leadership.

Speaker 1 (24:53):
This is this is a permanency, all right, that that
tested against an executive decision by the president who has
legal authority to meet those decisions. And when was the

(25:14):
last time you heard about this a protest during any
other president rule that that a government agency, the people
government agency protested uh In in public, in front of buildings,
in front of news media and said you can't do this.

(25:35):
We're in charge, and we say you're wrong. Go ahead, Mike.

Speaker 3 (25:41):
Yeah, she said the words I don't want to hear
us say. The word is a pee Wee's Playhouse wrote.
She said it disinformation. Yeah, you know what that means,
don't We Those told the truth And we can't be
calling those truth lies because we know they're not lies.
We know they're the truth. We have to break out
the magic word to the information. Yeah. I can't believe

(26:07):
there's they're still doing it. You fucking wore that word
all the way out.

Speaker 1 (26:12):
Yeah, but they believe in it. They'll use it with
each other because they believe in it and they don't
understand that we don't, so they'll continue to use it
because they think that it makes them sound right. But
but yeah, we'll finish the last five seconds here. But

(26:35):
I think this is that was basically what I wanted
to show you on this one.

Speaker 5 (26:39):
Many many things have happened. I'll talk about that next,
but we do.

Speaker 1 (26:45):
Yeah, so they they ended that that's what I was thinking.
But even that a Republican you know, had to actually
say point out and not just leave it for you
to notice. She's talking about or organizing. George Soros backed
groups five h five oh one and Individual Indivisible organize

(27:07):
these protests. So this is again someone who doesn't really
have a right to tell the people what to vote for,
that doesn't have a right to control, just just is
maybe entitled to contribute along with other citizens and this

(27:27):
is his opinion, and that's their opinion. And so on,
organized funded bust people in for a protest by employees
of a government agency against the executive authority of the
the UH of the administrative branch of the United States

(27:55):
federal government for exercising his authority and running the country
as he was voted in.

Speaker 6 (28:03):
To do.

Speaker 1 (28:08):
Because men voted for him, because men put him in office.
They're mad, They're not mad just because things are being
shaken up. The entire federal government bureaucracy, every organization has,
or every department, every agency, every sub agency has some

(28:33):
part of it that is like USAYED, where it's got
funding but not enough accountability for how that funding is used,
and a lot of the funding goes to some industrial complex.
I think you've heard of the military industrial complex. This

(28:57):
is the charitable organization, the human Inness, a humanitarian initiative,
VEIL industrial complex, the HIV industrial complex that they're organized
around creating businesses and non so called nonprofit organizations to

(29:17):
use government funding in other countries for the appearance at
least of helping people. And they move quite a bit
of money every year, huge amounts of money, more money
than you can picture in your mind, annually, without really

(29:40):
accounting for any of it to the public. We don't
get to hear this group, this company, this nonprofit organization
did this much work in this country in Africa to
make sure this so many people got housing or food

(30:02):
or whatever, that this money came from USAID. You never
see that there's not some publication that gets sent to
your house. It's not on the news, it's not talked
about very much at all. And instead, you know, you're
you're constantly seeing you don't ask questions about this. You

(30:24):
ask questions about this it's because you hate poor people,
or you hate black people, or you hate Muslims, or
you hate this group or that group. Uh that you're
you are infected with the isms and the phobias. In
the meantime, they're laundering money and ensuring that a bunch
of people who aren't doing anything for anybody get very rich.

Speaker 3 (30:49):
Yeah, the military industrial complex is in danger of eventually
realizing that they are the baddies because they essentially have
skulls on their hat, or you know the equivalent of it,
because they're called the military industrial complex, but the charity
industrial complex they wear rainbows. Do you see, we can't

(31:10):
possibly be the bad guys if we're wearing rainbows and
we call ourselves the good guys. Problem solves. They're not
the baddies. We can never be the baddies. No one's
ever going to see us as the baddies. So we
can keep on acting exactly like the baddies and't doing
exactly what the baddies would do, and we'll never have
that revelation looking over the guard tower that the people

(31:36):
were totally not oppressing. It's fine, don't worry about it.
And yeah, they're the moral busy bodies who will forever
rule over people with their conscience intact good times.

Speaker 4 (31:50):
Well see, I take a little bit of a different stance.

Speaker 2 (31:53):
I think that not only the military industrial complex, not
only do they know that they are the baddies, they
thrive off of being the baddies.

Speaker 4 (32:06):
They know what they're doing, and uh, you know.

Speaker 2 (32:10):
It's it's it's the world that they're trying to pull
over our eyes, not their own. They know what they're doing.
And I think the same exact phenomena is happening with this,
you know, charity industry. You know, because if they wanted reform,
if anyone who actually worked in that that type of business,

(32:36):
that lane of business, if they actually wanted change, then
change would happen. And it's just like what happens with us,
right like we want to see the change happen.

Speaker 4 (32:47):
Once the change happens.

Speaker 2 (32:49):
The need for us to exist goes away. And I
think all of us here are fine with that. That's
that's exactly what we want, right which is why we
are so in opposition to these people because they have
no intention on actually changing anything. They just want to

(33:10):
exist so they can continue to get the money grab.

Speaker 1 (33:15):
Yep, yep. And in fact, it's if I were to
look at you know, what would I be doing right
now if I was not an MRA my regular job,
I'm a direct support professional for intellectually disabled adults, would
probably I would probably be focusing about forty to sixty

(33:37):
more hours a week on that job, on what can
I do in that industry, both as an employee and
a volunteer that I'm not already doing. And it's not
that this takes away from that and it's bad. This

(33:58):
is very necessary, But if this stopped being necessary, I
would just pivot to that because there's always going to
be people who are in need in that area. It's
something more biological, not social necessarily, So you know, I
think a lot of us have something like that in
our lives.

Speaker 4 (34:19):
I would hope.

Speaker 3 (34:20):
So I don't think anyone knows they're the bad guys.
I don't think anyone thinks they're the bad guys except
the occasional like total psychopath that is so out there
that they eventually get arrested and then they go to
trial and they just they stand up in front of

(34:40):
the court and say, yeah, fuck it, I'm glad those
children are dead. I would do it again.

Speaker 2 (34:47):
Though.

Speaker 3 (34:48):
They tend to be very isolated, and they go to
prison for their whole lives, and they are the only
people who will even entertain the notion that they're the
bad guys. I think this is the most sinister thing
about humanity, that that we are driven by morality, and
that is what drives people to be so evil. Evil

(35:12):
people don't know they're evil for the for the for
the most part, for the largest possible part. I mean,
even the people with skulls on there, you know, just
despite the despite the meme, despite the scars we've all seen,
they they never realized they were the bad guys. The
fucking communists has never realized they were the bad guys.

(35:32):
The Nazis never realized that they were the bad guys.
They did everything they did because they thought they were
doing the right thing, and they were ruthless in their
attempts to do what they thought was the right thing.
But this is this is what's so counterintuitive that evil

(35:54):
is almost always born from people who think they're doing good.
And this is why everything gets so fucked up because
people because when people think they have morality on their side,
they have no reverse gear. And the further they get
into that quagmire, the further they get into the the

(36:18):
sunken cost fallacy. It's it's much like the circumcision. When
you've when you've mutilated your childs genitals, you can never
go back on it. You can never admit that what
you've done is the most evil thing you could possibly do.
When you when you've attempted to subvert a nation by
turning everyone gay, you were like, well, of course it's

(36:38):
a good thing to turn an entire nation gay. You
can't possibly have negative consequences because if you, if you
really could, you know, stand outside yourself and look at
things objectively, you would have to admit, oh, ship, yeah,
I destroyed a nation by by subverting it. And it's
it's never been more manifest than in this fast we

(37:05):
call progressivism. That's why it's called progressivism. That's why we
have to call it by That's why they have to
call it by a euphemism. Evil people always have to
call it good. Like every every dysfemism, every cacophonism, has
to be called a euphemism. Otherwise they could they can't
get people behind it, and like I said, they would

(37:26):
just be left as isolated psychopaths doing their own thing
and individually. To get evil to be exacted by collective,
it has to be disguised as a good thing. And
this is what's so hard to get across to people,

(37:46):
And this is why we're working so hard to get
across to people, and this is why we're fighting such
an uphill battle because we're always fighting against people who
will do this evil with their conscience.

Speaker 1 (37:59):
In tact, there's a mechanism actually in the human brain
that does this right where if you want a reason
to do something, because you personally have some desire to
do that thing, you rationalize and compartmentalize in order to

(38:23):
reframe it as good. So, for instance, with the military
industrial complex, if they couldn't reframe what they're doing, then
they would have to acknowledge that they are literally sacrificing
the lives of young men, mostly men, young men all

(38:45):
over the world, starting with our own country, but also
anybody that we're battling against for money, like they're essentially
creating a a human sausage factory into which young men

(39:06):
are put at one end like in a slaughterhouse, and
at the other end dollar bills are printed out. That
is the essential nature of the military industrial complex. If
there isn't a military conflict in which young men's lives
have to be sacrificed, either on our side or the

(39:29):
other side, or both, these people don't make money. If
we have a stockpile of defensive tools and our stockpile
is good enough because other nations are so afraid of
it that they negotiate with us, or we have such

(39:51):
a good relationship with other nations that they negotiate with us.
Either way doesn't matter. We already have these things, and
we don't need to purchase more, and we don't need
to pay for infrastructure to be transported to some other
country and run around our military presence there in order

(40:16):
to serve the needs of the soldiers that are there.
Then these people don't make money. They lose their profit.
And yeah, at least some people are old enough to
recognize the reference. Thank you, Murder of Crows, Pink Floyd's

(40:38):
the Wall. Yes, that is probably the most accurate description
I've ever seen of how the military industrial complex works.
It grinds up the lives of young men and some
young women, but mostly young men, and spits out money.

(41:00):
And there isn't something else. There's not a valid other excuse.
They will say that it's for humanitarian reasons, it's under
the humanitarian initiative veil to but it's still grinding up
young men, grinding them to death, or worse, grinding them

(41:22):
into this situation of perpetual undeath, wherein they're forever psychologically changed.
They're not the same person anymore, but they still occupy
the same body, and everyone around them expects them to
be the person that went off to war and not
the person who came back, and doesn't understand how to

(41:45):
relate to the new person that came back with all
of that set of experiences that changed him so much,
and that for the rest of his life. Then he
has to remember those experiences and he has to deal
with that, and you know, that's that's essentially all it is.

(42:08):
Final Midnight points out the cigarette industry and was making
a scent or two per cigarette. At some point they
knew it was killing people, and they just wouldn't stop. Yeah,
they had a wealth of evidence that what their product
does is very unhealthy. There's a parallel though, the sugar
industry does the same thing, and and to we demonize

(42:30):
the cigarette industry, which now I'm allergic to cigarettes, so
I don't have any reason to like them.

Speaker 4 (42:36):
But the fact is.

Speaker 1 (42:39):
The the processed sugar industry, both processed cane sugar and
processed vegetable sugars, corn sugar and beet sugar. Uh, you know,
corn syrup and beat sugar, like all of those things

(42:59):
do damage to the body and the brain. Sugar is
bad for your brain, and they we don't demonize that
industry even though there are different ways that it is
exactly as bad as cigarettes. They cause health problems that

(43:21):
lead to heart attacks and strokes where Alzheimer and Alzheimer's Yeah,
you might, you might survive, but just like that individual
that comes back from war an entirely different person, you
might lose part of who you are. Instead of developing
new aspects to who you are that that completely change you,

(43:46):
you lose big chunks of who you are and you
never get them back. And having had a family member
who went through that with with many strokes. You know
it's happen. It's a horrifying experience, and there's nothing you
can do about it. Once it starts, you might be

(44:10):
able to slow it down, but it'll continue to happen.
There's not a cure. There's only treatments, and those treatments
are only necessary because the American public is addicted to sugar,
and sugar is harder to quit than cigarettes.

Speaker 3 (44:31):
How many seconds does a twinkie take off your life?
Is it more or less than seven? How many seconds
off your life does one day in the education system
take off your life?

Speaker 1 (44:42):
Hey, I know a guy whose first heart attack was
at the age of thirty four. Jesus all right. And
I used to know a guy whose first heart attack
was at the age of thirty five. And I lost
a brother in law to a heart attack at the
age of thirty five. Like we're talking We're not talking seconds, Okay,

(45:09):
We're talking years now. Granted, I don't know how much
each twinkie might contribute or or other factors might be
involved there, But you know, I don't know very many
people who died just because they smoked cigarettes at the

(45:30):
age of thirty five or thirty four. Suddenly right, There's
only one one other ingestible substance that is legal that
I know that has done that to people, and it
was encouraged by the medical field.

Speaker 3 (45:52):
So but.

Speaker 1 (45:55):
Now, granted I do know I do have family members
that have gotten cancer when they were very young, but
we have a genetic predisposition in my family. I don't
think you can entirely blame that on cigarettes. Some people
who don't smoke in my family still get that cancer.
Everybody who smokes in my family gets that cancer, but

(46:19):
it doesn't There's no group of people in my family
that has a magic bullet to not get it. So
clearly smoking is not the main factor. It's the gene
whereas with sugar that affects the body pretty much regardless
of your genes. It's unhealthy for everybody regardless. And on

(46:41):
the other side of my family, my grandfather smoked for
forty years and he was over ninety years old before
he finally got the one little.

Speaker 4 (46:51):
Grain of.

Speaker 1 (46:53):
Rice sized tumor that eventually affects men if they get
very old, and that was he had a grain of
rice size tumor in his prostate that was very treatable
and he went through very minor treatment and it was gone, right,

(47:17):
And yeah, alcohol can be really really bad as well,
But I think more people overdo sugar than alcohol. And
there's a genetic component to alcohol too, like alcoholism, that
certain types of addiction do run in families. And I

(47:39):
know that there is a gene for alcoholism, and I
know at least at least two people that I have
found out have those that gene. So that's a it's
a rough situation, but you don't have to have a
gene to be vulnerable to the effects of sugar, right that.

(48:01):
It's another one. An industrial complex in the United States,
government propped up the sugar industry. I don't know if
people know that.

Speaker 7 (48:10):
Oh absolutely, I mean shit, if you go back for enough,
doctors were fucking giving maybe not advertisements, but saying that
cigarettes were.

Speaker 1 (48:22):
Okay, there's nothing wrong with them. You know, they used
to four out of five doctors prefer this one particular
rand of cigarettes. Yeah, you know, and they do the
same thing with this many dentists prefer. It's always one
less than out of total one less than the total
out of total number of dentists. Yeah, and then this

(48:44):
or that, right, like in what what a study or
is this something that you use. You just pulled those
numbers out of your ass, didn't. You don't touch me
with those numbers. That's nasty. But but yeah, so these
complexes do exist. There are numerous industrial there's an education
industrial complex where, you know, if if you don't need

(49:06):
new school books periodically, including history books, even even books
that are specialized, like obviously you need new history books
because history is being made every day, all right, yesterday
is history starts yesterday, and the future starts in five minutes,

(49:27):
and and so you know, you do need those. But
there's history courses that are just about the Civil War,
or that are just about World War two, or that
are just about the history of medicine up to the
creation of of uh this or that event, you know,
and and so on and that. Why would you need

(49:50):
new books once the information is known? But but they
they reprint those, They reprint new math books, new books
on grammar, new literature books, so on. And if you
don't need those, if you're if your school doesn't need

(50:16):
the new curriculum because the curriculum has not changed, and
they don't need books with the updated version of this
particular process or that particular grammar rule and so on.
Then they don't make money then, and uh, everybody thinks

(50:39):
that for instance, the god, I can't think what it's
called now, not the the way that they're teaching now
has a particular name for it. And it's essentially just
this is the formula for how you create your your
rubric uh and and how you organize what you're teaching
the classroom. And it allows teachers a certain degree of

(51:04):
freedom in what they put in their lesson plans and
so on, but it makes them more difficult for parents
to understand what's being taught.

Speaker 3 (51:15):
And it's called it's called bullshit.

Speaker 1 (51:18):
No, there's a it starts with the sea, and I
can't think of the name for it. And there was
a whole braig hullabaloo over it or uh, common core
they call it common core. There's a whole big a
hullabloo over common core. Thank you zer Ins for for

(51:38):
getting that into the chat. Uh and uh. And actually,
by the way, the comment about men protecting the family
was also from Zerank, so thank you for that too.
Even though it was a previous show's chat, it was
a neat way to introduce the talking and yeah, social
emotional learning is another thing. Social emotional uh, the understanding

(51:59):
of one's social emotional experience, like they're that side of
what's going on with them. That's something that you use in, say,
dealing with people with mental health conditions or intellectual disabilities.
In a medical situation, you may have somebody who has

(52:22):
difficulty communicating. And so when when they want to say,
I don't want gravy on my mashed potatoes, I want butter,
and you're putting gravy on their mashed potatoes instead of
saying no or stop or you know, giving you the
hand signals for no and stop, the sign language for

(52:45):
no or stop or anything like that. They pound on
the table and yell. And if you are trying to
encourage them to use their words and to communicate with
hand signals, and you recognize that you can get them
a different serving of mashed potatoes and give them their
butter and just you don't have to worry about the

(53:06):
other ones. That's social emotional learning, and it's supposed to
be done in a therapeutic setting. When they start doing
that in the classroom, what they're doing is trying to
teach your child that they should doubt their identity it's
about changing behavior, and it's about changing behavior. It's supposed

(53:31):
to be about changing behavior to help the person fit
into their environment and interact functionally with their environment instead
of being at odds with it and having emotional outbursts
and getting themselves into trouble. Well, when the teacher creates

(53:53):
an environment in which you're not allowed to be yourself
and your what's normal for you, and what's normal as
part of being a member of the human race is
the rejected way of being, and you have to fit

(54:13):
in by adopting a false personality disorder or a false
gender identity or any other such thing. Social emotional learning
becomes a way of manipulating people instead of a way
of helping people, because you're being forced to fit into
a box, instead of being encouraged to communicate your wants

(54:36):
and needs in a way that people can understand and
doesn't result in conflict.

Speaker 3 (54:43):
When male teachers want to discipline students, they can do
it in the same way fathers do. Is given the
stink and raise their voice ever so slightly so that
that deep sound resonates around the room. But then they
got rid of male teachers and for the most part,
male parents and the leftover female teachers were like, well, ship,

(55:04):
what do we do. We've got to bang on the
fucking desk and and maybe kick them a bit and
maybe rape a few of them. That's the only way
we can really discipline them and you know, completely unravel
their identity in the same way the military industrial complex
does two soldiers. Funny, isn't it. Yep.

Speaker 1 (55:26):
So what we're what we're dealing with here is one
of many of these types of conflicts, and so it's
or complexes. It's it's not just the military, it's not
just the education system, it's not just the environmental system.
I think I once told the story of how the
e PA showed up on a farm in Ohio and

(55:50):
protected stray lamb to death or not lamb, but a
stray fallen to death, Like literally, they protected it to death.
The farmer had this fawn that was invading his feed.
So his cows were eating, and this fawn kept coming
up and getting into the feed, and he couldn't stop

(56:11):
it without hurting it. So he just gave up, and
somebody called the EPA and they showed up, and I
guess the wildlife people showed up as well, and they
ordered him to stop keeping this animal as a pet,
which he was not doing. So he couldn't stop. You
can't stop doing something that you're not doing, and you know,

(56:35):
and he explained the situation to them. They didn't believe him,
so they decided to take the fawn away from him
and relocated where it would be safe from him. And
they chased it around all day, terrified the shit out
of it, and when they finally caught it, they put
it in a truck, got it loaded up, got ready
to take it to someplace else. It had a heart

(56:56):
attack and died. Literally protected it to death. Brilliant government.
But like these agencies and organizations they all, their purpose
is really primarily to make money for administrators of the

(57:17):
industries like the businesses and non profit organizations and so
on that they fund to do jobs for them, and
the administrators of the agencies and departments. That's that's pretty

(57:37):
much it. They provide a way for politicians to get
around the spoil system, which it used to be every
time you got a new administration, you got a new
bureaucracy that would flip back and forth left and right
because they'd fire all the old employees. Employees and replace

(57:59):
them with their supporters each time, and now they don't
fire the old employees, they just grow the government bigger.
And that's what we're dealing with here. So Data Republican
goes on. Rotucci herself goes on to talk about bringing

(58:19):
in international actors to assist with the Color Revolution right
against her own country, of which she's an employee. Through
being an employee of the federal government, being part of
the bureaucracy. She is literally talking about bringing foreign individuals

(58:44):
into this discussion, into this organization to undermine the federal
executive branch of the government.

Speaker 6 (59:01):
Is happening.

Speaker 8 (59:01):
I think we're still in the like figuring that out phase,
but I do think, yeah, twenty second century will be
a great place to build those connections. I know John
Hopkins is also working to bridge international domestic democracy complict
mitigation spaces.

Speaker 1 (59:18):
And to Hotel's point, just just a reminder, she just
mentioned like a respected institution there, John Hopkins, So like,
unless she's talking about a guy who just coincidentally has
the same name, that's bizarre to me in and of itself.

Speaker 8 (59:39):
Yeah, actually, just bringing in like we don't have to
be intermediaries either, we can bring in actors or colleagues
from around the world. We've dealt with this directly, a
very specific specific issue sets.

Speaker 1 (59:52):
So there she goes she's talking about bringing in foreign
actors with experience as part of color evolutions in their nations,
in other words, overthrowing their governments to help with this.

Speaker 2 (01:00:11):
This is it's it's blowing my mind a little bit
because you know, when you brought up Data Republican a
couple episodes ago, you know, I was trying to remember
where I remembered that name from, and the first instance
was when Doge happened. And you know, as we all know,

(01:00:35):
DOGE was supposed to be the Department of Governmental Efficiency,
right breaking down the bullshit that's going on in the
government so that we can, you know, more effectively use
the tax dollars that are being stolen from us. And she,

(01:00:56):
now that we know that she's she's a she uh
seem to be very much on that side. So this
feels very much like a flip. His switch has been flipped.

Speaker 4 (01:01:10):
What is this? What are you talking to?

Speaker 1 (01:01:12):
Somebody have in their eyes open. Yeah, this is somebody
like going, whoa, holy fuck, what's going on with our government?
This is insane? Yeah, but yeah, I think it's almost impossible.
Uh two, investigate like what the the federal government does,

(01:01:41):
what the bureaucracy of the federal government does, not, what
the Congress and President do, But what all the various
departments and agencies do, you know, without noticing a few things,
like especially if you start getting into how money is
spent and what it's being spent on, and how many departments, agencies, bureaus, subagencies,

(01:02:06):
sub departments and so on there actually are in the
federal government, and how many divisions each of those have,
and and so on. Just get on the the the
website a USA spending dot gov once and do a

(01:02:29):
search through all departments, all right for spending on this
spell this is spelled r H E s U s
U A. Reesei's monkeys esis monkeys. Yeah, they are used
for research. They are used for scientific research. You will

(01:02:50):
discover a rabbit hole of epic proportions and that I
went through this. The military buys a lot of them,
but so do several other government agencies, none of which
I would have expected to need to be doing research. Uh,
They're they're used in research done on how chemical substances

(01:03:18):
and microbes affect the human body. Right, So you have
the military doing that kind of research well and again,
and then you you have other agencies also doing that

(01:03:39):
kind of research.

Speaker 4 (01:03:41):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:03:41):
Now the military industrial complex has been completely corrupted and
uh turned inwards on itself towards the American people. Yeah,
they are conducting experiments on us. Do you remember during
COVID when there was that truck that got turned over

(01:04:05):
and there were a bunch of monkeys that got loose?

Speaker 1 (01:04:09):
Yep, yep, there was. There's been a one recently too,
and I mean there's been several instances that actually look
like the start of the movie Twelve Monkeys, yeah, you know.
Or contagion, there's another one. And the reason they use
monkeys in those movies is because of that's that's if

(01:04:29):
they're going to test a virus or a cure for
a virus, uh you know, or a bacterial infection or
a fungus or any anything uh like that, this is
what they use. But if you do a search in
USA spinning doc go for just that that just that

(01:04:49):
word r R H E s U s ESUS monkeys
that that will, like I said, you will be amazed
how many different organizations within the government within the bureaucracy
are spending on them. Outbreak, Yeah, Outbreaks another one that
was very much like every movie like that. Yeah, twenty

(01:05:16):
eight Days like yep, yep, all of them you'll find.
And I believe it was monkeys in the stand too.
They weren't released the the but the the experimentation was

(01:05:37):
being done on monkeys there as well. So yeah, and
do you remember the theory on how HIV got started.

Speaker 3 (01:05:51):
Yeah, we're told it happened in the wild because chimp
started eating monkeys or fucking monkeys maybe, but yeah, in
the wild, sure, guys. Definitely poetry experiments ship yep.

Speaker 2 (01:06:08):
And and and that that begs the question of why
Fauci was so involved with AIDS and HIV way back
in the eighties.

Speaker 4 (01:06:17):
Yep. And uh it hasn't.

Speaker 2 (01:06:21):
History just repeated itself and here we are again. You know,
I'm telling you, any a conspiracy theory is only a
conspiracy until it's proven true. And I I, you know,
I can't. I am losing fingers counting how many times

(01:06:42):
that the things that I thought were you know, just
I don't know, it can't be Oh no, that's that's nope, Nope,
it's actually true. These people do not want you around,
They don't want us around.

Speaker 4 (01:06:58):
They are.

Speaker 1 (01:07:01):
It's not not a conspiracy theory anymore. It's just a conspiracy.

Speaker 4 (01:07:05):
Yeah, it's it's it's a conspiracy fact.

Speaker 6 (01:07:09):
Yep.

Speaker 1 (01:07:10):
Oh yeah, just just that's that's like I said, you know,
go down that rabbit hole sometime you'll you'll be shocked.
But yeah, So they're bringing in foreign actors to undermine
your vote.

Speaker 8 (01:07:25):
Whether that's on tackling corruption or how to respond to corruption,
mobilizing around corruption.

Speaker 1 (01:07:31):
Notice, if you label a democratic election result corruption, it
suddenly becomes okay to undermine our democracy. Our democracy is
not as important as their goals, guys, like their democracy

(01:07:54):
is important, Your democracy is not. You see how that works.

Speaker 2 (01:08:00):
I'm losing count of how many times I have to
remind people that we live in a republic and not
a democracy.

Speaker 1 (01:08:10):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:08:10):
Yeah, And what the difference is between the two, because
they people just do not understand difference, and it's.

Speaker 1 (01:08:19):
Oh it just What people should understand, though, is that
there was an election, we got a president elected. There
was you know, this this was actually a really safe
election as opposed to the previous election that they told

(01:08:41):
us was safe. This election involved actual ensuring that people
who were whose votes were cast actually existed, were alive
and were citizens that were supposed to be voting. Uh.
And so the president that we got was a result
of the process acting the way that it was intended

(01:09:03):
to act, the process playing out the way it was
intended to play out. And these people are mad because
you didn't give them the result that they wanted. When
they say our democracy, that is their dog whistle for
our control over the election process, not for democracy. They

(01:09:31):
are not talking about democracy.

Speaker 3 (01:09:36):
Yeah, it's not a democracy or a republic. Democracy means
rule by the people. Republic means rule by law. We
are ruled by people who do not have to follow
the law and do not give a flying fuck.

Speaker 1 (01:09:49):
The supposed to be a democratic republic, but they've removed
both of those factors.

Speaker 3 (01:09:57):
Yeah, I guess it's an oligarchy, but which means ruled
by a small group of people. But nobody knows who
that small group of people is. They are necessarily behind
the scenes. And I know that sounds like a conspiracy theory,
but I mean, what else is that it's clearly not
a monarchy.

Speaker 1 (01:10:15):
I don't know. They have a meeting every year and
they televise it, and they all dress like space aliens. Like,
I'm serious. The World Economic Have you seen the way
some of those people dress go into the World Economic
Forum meetings, you know, and those guys do run the
world unless there's somebody pulling their strings.

Speaker 3 (01:10:36):
Yeah, there's a cabal behind the care always is.

Speaker 1 (01:10:38):
There's somebody pulling their strings. That somebody isn't from this planet,
you know. Like, I hate say that, but these are
the richest people in the world, the people with the
most money, the people with the most strings that that
they're holding. The ends of that are attached to institutions
like banks and governments and military and uh, you know,

(01:11:02):
the businesses that control things like travel and having a
place to live and stuff like that. These are the
people who's you know, the strings that that have the
most pull on those agencies and organizations and institutions are
in the hands of the people that attend the World
Economic Forum. Yep, those are that's who's running the world.

(01:11:27):
They're not secret. They not only are not secret, but
they are comically tone deaf and make themselves look as
much like Doctor Evil came from the planet Mars as
humanly possible. While discussing how they're going to force you
to change everything about your life so they can make
more money, harvest more money from from your existence.

Speaker 4 (01:11:53):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:11:53):
Now, when you ask that question, the World Economic Forum
was not the first thing that came to my mind.
The first thing that came to my mind was the
build a Berg group. So yeah, no, if I'm thinking differently,
I mean, obviously there are the same people one and
the same Yeah, So yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:12:13):
Yeah, they are the same people. And there's there's all
kinds of videos you can you can watch on on
YouTube and on rumble where people and and actually even
on TikTok where people just go through and draw the
connections between UH companies like Blackrock and individuals within the

(01:12:39):
World Economic Forum, the various banks in the world, UH,
and the various governments in the world, and and how
much of everything is owned by these companies in certain families.
And when you when it really comes down to it,
it is a tiny handful of individuals with a lot

(01:13:02):
of money who have made it their multi generational mission
to retain that level of influence in the world and
and to make sort of royalty of themselves. So you know,
it's it's not like people will call it a conspiracy theory,

(01:13:25):
but they're doing it in public. It's not a secret,
it's not a conspiracy. It's it's just them engaging in
business in public where you can see them, and you
just haven't been paying attention public wise, you know, like
people just haven't been paying attention. It's like living, I
don't know, uh, living living in a world where there's

(01:13:52):
a laser beam that goes out to to everybody's everybody's
minds and controls everything they do and say, and you're
conscious of it. You know the laser is there, you
can see it, but since it's everywhere, you tune it
out and you forget that it exists. And so when

(01:14:14):
you're making your choices and you wonder why you can't
make your own decisions, it never occurs to you that
that laser beam is that's beaming control into your head
is responsible. Except instead of a laser beam, it's money,
it's currency and credit, and it's controlled those strings. That

(01:14:38):
laser beam is controlled by that tiny little group of people.
It doesn't come from a tower. It comes from a
dynasty that's been that's existed for a long time, and
it's not even you can't even really associate it with
a demographic, the widespread spread demographic of people, because they

(01:15:03):
don't give a fuck about their own demographic either, just
their individual family. So but yeah, going on with this,
we will see the rest of what she's got to
say here. But it's just that reframing. Like I was

(01:15:24):
talking about, that compartmentalization. We don't like what they're doing.
So even though it's not illegal, it's not unethical, it's
not immoral. They've identified money laundering taking place and the
exploitation of specifically this government agency as a means of

(01:15:46):
laundering money instead of helping people. But they label it
corruption to put a stop to it, like that you
stop stopping you from stealing from the American people in
order to line your own pockets is corruption if you're
the one lining your pockets your own pockets. Yeah, that's

(01:16:11):
the type of framing. And it's like I said, people
do this naturally. When I was in my twenties, now
I was about thirty.

Speaker 3 (01:16:23):
My.

Speaker 1 (01:16:25):
Mom was watching my son and I was at work,
and I get this phone call at work, Please tell
your son that he has to have other nutrition besides
the antioxidants that are in chocolate. Had overheard I had
this conversation with my mom. I hate wine. I don't

(01:16:47):
like to drink it. It tastes nasty to me. It doesn't.
It tastes like grape juice that went bad or whatever
flavor of juice, right, So I don't drink what it is.
But my doctor was like, well, it's good for your
heart to get it's something in wine, And so I
started like researching, like do I really have to drink

(01:17:08):
wine to get this? Can I get this from somewhere else?
Turns out you can just eat grapes and get it.
You don't or drink grape juice the no sugar added
variety and get it. And it's also in dark chocolate.
So if you eat unsweet dark chocolate, which I like,
not very many people do because it's not it's kind
of bitter. It's like drinking black coffee, but it's black

(01:17:30):
chocolate basically. So I was talking to mom about that.
I'm like, here's the other sources for this. I can
get this from these sources. I don't have to buy wine.
I don't have to drink wine. I'm good. And I
didn't even think about a five year old picking up
on that conversation. A few days later, he argued with
his grandmother that he should eat his rees's cups before

(01:17:53):
before he eats his lunch because they're good for his
heart and he might not have room for them if
he ate his lunch first.

Speaker 3 (01:18:00):
Did you? Says yeah, no, but I'm starting to wonder
now how they.

Speaker 1 (01:18:08):
Make Well, it's a last name, are e e s
e is a last name. You say that now, Hey,
I'm in I'm in America. Nutter is a last name.
I drive past uh a an arena here in in
my part of Dayton, going to and from between my

(01:18:32):
place and my daughter's place on a regular basis. That
is literally called the Nutter Center. Jesus, everybody from the UK,
have a good laugh for a minute. The that's called
that because the the individuals with the last name Nutter
donated quite a bit of money. To believe, that's Wright

(01:18:52):
State University that owns a Nutter Center. So it's still
funny because I know that that where we would call
someone a nutcase and in the UK they'd be called
a Nutter. So if you ever come to Dayton, I'll
have to show you then where the Nutter Center is.

(01:19:13):
It's huge, uh for for being clearly not a mental
health facility, but you can go there, like it's big
enough that inside the arena there I've I've actually watched
I want to say it was in there. It might
have been another one of the we've got a few
around here. It might have been Hobart, which is I

(01:19:35):
think gone. But uh, monster monster trucks. We watched monster
trucks inside the arena. So but but yeah, so this
this individual, this group of people, uh, that has reframed

(01:19:59):
this stuff in there mind just like my son, you know,
I want to eat the candy first. Well, it's healthy,
so I should eat it first, right, We do that naturally.
That's a natural human behavior that you know, as you
mature into adulthood you learn to go Now, wait a minute,
am I Am I really being wise when I say

(01:20:22):
I should eat my candy first just because it has
this one nutrient and not my vegetables or my you
know meat. I'm sure I'm going to have room for
dessert after. But even if I don't, I can always
have it later for a snack. Not really being rational
about this. You know you could check yourself a little bit,

(01:20:44):
or if somebody else checks you, you know you have
this capability of going, well, okay, that's a good argument,
I'll rethink that. But when you wallow, when you isolate
yourself and instantly at yourself within a community of people
that you all speak the same false framing language, and

(01:21:09):
you all have these ideas that you know when you
take what's normally ethical versus unethical, such as telling people
that you are using the money that you have taken
from them through through threat of force, that that it's

(01:21:30):
going for something serving their interests and therefore they should
they should be okay with that, and then you use
it for something else instead, right, doubt that's unethical. Anybody
could normally recognize that that's unethical. But if you spend
your whole life reframing in your mind that, well, it's

(01:21:52):
for the it's for the greater good, it's important that
we do these things. We're the good guys, you can
create a mentality where you can justify just about anything.
And that's that's how they end up in this situation
where they call oversight to end misappropriation of funds and

(01:22:22):
uh money laundering corruption, but they don't consider the misappropriation
and the money laundering to be corruption because it makes
them money.

Speaker 8 (01:22:42):
We can bring those folks in and kind of be
those facilitators. And so again, I think those coordination structures
are just starting to take place, and you know, while
they think it should is happening. I think we're still
in the like figuring.

Speaker 6 (01:22:57):
That out phase.

Speaker 8 (01:22:58):
But I do think, yes, twenty second century will be
a great place to build those connections. I know John
Hopkins is also working to bridge international domestic democracy complict
mitigation spaces, and to Hotel's point, yeah, actually just bringing
in like we don't have to be intermediaries either, we
can bring in actors or or colleagues from around the

(01:23:21):
world who have dealt with this directly, very specific specific
issue sets.

Speaker 1 (01:23:27):
It hits differently after you know, you hear all that
and then you hear that again, doesn't it. Yeah, like
that's that it becomes a little scary. Like they're organizing
internationally to undermine oversight of their agency because they consider

(01:23:50):
ending their money laundering and their misappropriation of funds to
be corruption and authoritarianism. So men voted for a man
to go in and clean up the government, to clean

(01:24:13):
the misappropriation, the money laundering, the use of your money
against you in various ways out of the federal government,
and these people organized internationally with communist organizations around the world,

(01:24:39):
and in particular with George Sorow's money, to undermine that oversight,
to create a soft coup against the servant that you
voted for, to go in and clean up their mess.

(01:25:05):
They justify the international aspect by claiming that the authoritarians
are already globally networked. Says that a republican.

Speaker 9 (01:25:15):
International side certainly are you in the said community has
very close relationships with locals across the entire world, and
have worked globally on globals global authoritarianism. This movement right now,
we're very much framing it as an anti authoritarian movement
in the US.

Speaker 1 (01:25:36):
But notice that she admitted that they're framing it as
anti authoritarian in the US. So just you know, for
the listeners, I want you to think about something. What
is more authoritarian?

Speaker 3 (01:25:54):
Right?

Speaker 1 (01:25:55):
If there's an agency that comes along and, against your will,
under threat of force, takes money, skims money off of
every paycheck you earn, and sends it to people in
foreign countries under the pretense of helping starving children that

(01:26:18):
they're not actually helping, and then they do things that
you maybe don't approve and things that the people in
those countries don't want, like promoting gender critical feminism or
intersectional feminism, or if you retain the right to keep

(01:26:47):
that money and decide to look at organizations that you
might think deserves some funding and give it to those
that have a good track record for serving the purpose
that you would want them to serve if you're funding them,
like maybe purchasing canned goods for a food bank, or

(01:27:10):
giving money to an organization that funds prostate cancer research,
or giving it to an organization that has been subject
to international oversight and is proven to actually give food

(01:27:32):
to starving people or assist starving people in growing their
own food in foreign countries, Like which is more authoritarian
if you have the power to decide what you're going
to do, or these people decide what you're going to do.

Speaker 3 (01:27:48):
I think we need to fuck around with the fruity
Latin words like authoritarian. These people are thieves and liars
and frauds and traitors. Good strong Germanic words that we
already have for these fucking Charlatans. Well's a's a Latin
root word as well. But whatever, there's all kinds of

(01:28:10):
words we can use for such people, but authoritarian is
fine as well. They're bostards. I mean, I don't know
why we would stare away from the swear words, the unts,
they're shits and all that.

Speaker 1 (01:28:27):
It's quite interesting. They're literally reframing by projection, these people
that want to engage in oversight and and tell us no,
we can't just engage in authoritarian money grabbing. Uh, they're
the authoritarians. It blows your mind when you really think

(01:28:50):
about whether they're false framing. But you're right. They are thieves.
They are fraudsters, and they are using. They're not just
thieves that like sneak into your house when you're not
home and take money out of your your sock drawer
or wherever you know you keep it. And I don't

(01:29:10):
even have a sock drawer actually, but that's okay because
I don't have any money to put in it either. Uh.
But but yeah, they take take something and then leave
when you're when you're not there and you're not any
These are highway robbers, right. These are the people holding
up your your vehicle at gunpoint, hijacking the vehicle, throwing

(01:29:32):
your child out at fifty miles an hour and taking
your wallet in the process, and they're calling it authoritarian
that as a nation, we voted for a cleanup guy
to go in and engage in some oversight and put
the cabash to their thief y. And this is how

(01:29:57):
they're reframing it. Oh, he's the authoritarian. He's stopping us
from stealing from the people.

Speaker 9 (01:30:08):
But depending, you know, the authoritarians are network globally, and
this is our movement, our very movement we're talking about
right now as the potential to make the global anti
authoritarian movement given our networks. I also want to talk
to the international side. Certainly are usc.

Speaker 1 (01:30:30):
And that was the that was the into it. So
they're basically their excuse right like like like she said,
is that the authoritarians are global, so we have to
be global too. This is like, this is literally a

(01:30:50):
a false framing of epic proportions. We the thieves are
anti authoritarians, and the authoritarians that are stopping us from
taxing the people to line our own pockets. They're calling
Robin Hood an authoritarian. This is this is the Sheriff

(01:31:17):
of Nottingham calling Robin Hood an authoritarian, reframing Robin Hood
as an authoritarian in order to enact a soft coup
because we elected Robin Hood president. Essentially, I mean, I I.

Speaker 3 (01:31:40):
Resent that metaphor. Robin Hood was a communist. Robin Hood
was a proto communist.

Speaker 1 (01:31:45):
You might have you might have been, but he didn't
steal from the rich. He stole from the king. And
what he stole from the king was taxes that were
taken from the people.

Speaker 3 (01:31:57):
Should have just abolished taxes.

Speaker 1 (01:32:04):
That legendary hero is uh that princess for president because
people are never going to be okay with the idea
that they can't take out of their neighbor's pocket to
get their goals. Met I wish I could I have
some optimism there, because if if somebody came along and

(01:32:27):
I knew for an undeniable fact that they were going
to completely eliminate the income tax, like Trump has said
he wants to do that, I'm not holding my breath, right,
But if I knew for an absolute fact that if
candidate x uh you know, Joe the Joe.

Speaker 4 (01:32:48):
The uh.

Speaker 1 (01:32:51):
Uh anti authoritarian, Joe Joe the the I R S Hater, Right,
if I knew that guy running for off was going
to successfully eliminate the entire income tax system at the
federal level in the United States. I would vote for
him no matter what other policies he wanted to enact. Yeah,

(01:33:15):
just to get rid of that, because it would be
so yeah and cap show there you go, Joe the NDCAP. Well,
Joe the ancap might eliminate the entire government. I wouldn't
be opposed to that either, though, But you know, let
the states each have their own military and they communicate
through like a central hub that you don't even really
need a government for that now because we have internet capability.

(01:33:39):
So yeah, that I'd be all for it. But of course,
you know that's most people would not.

Speaker 5 (01:33:51):
Like.

Speaker 1 (01:33:51):
That'd be the last time you get to vote, too,
because once they dismantled the government, there'd be nothing to
vote for. Then again, you know, some some some people
might there might be enough people that we go for it.
But yeah, here's here's part of the pay dirt.

Speaker 3 (01:34:15):
Here.

Speaker 6 (01:34:18):
The foment of the current constitutional crisis is our opportunity
to catalyze and synergize a dynamic change, making a dynamic change,
making fractal ecosystems capable of co generating the emergence of
the new thriving together.

Speaker 1 (01:34:36):
They so in their language what she just said. Let
me go back over that again, all right, because that
that was I know, it sounded like a bunch of
buzzword gobbledegook, right that was.

Speaker 2 (01:34:52):
I was going to say, this motherfucker has given me
Michael Es and.

Speaker 1 (01:34:57):
At least give us some buzzword garlic bread to go
in that, right, That's right, Yes, mister three oh three
said it. Obfuse skating language. When I wanted to cuss
a guy out in the hallway at school because some
dumb shit he said to me. And I knew my
dad worked at that school. He was a teacher at
that school, and I knew that I would get in
trouble first at school and then at home, and then

(01:35:20):
I'd have to hear about it at the family Christmas
because two of my aunts were teachers and my uncle
was a principal retired. At that point, instead of saying
fuck you and the horse you rode in on you,
you bleeding hemorrhoid, I said, fornication upon you and upon

(01:35:43):
your equying transportation to this location, you bleeding and inflammatory
wound upon the fundament. And he looked at me, and
he looked around, and one guy laughed, he understood exactly
what I said, and everybody else was kind of like
blame blink blink blinkety blink blink. Oh, except only one

(01:36:07):
person knew what the fundament was, and that that's an
old archaic medical term for the anal sphincter, which is
why a bleeding inflammatory wound upon the fundament is a hemorrhoid.
Obfuscating language, So their obfuscating language here basically says that

(01:36:30):
they are going to use the situation to undermine how
the government works by creating little sub economies that can
act independently of the government and force people's behavioral decisions

(01:36:53):
on the basis of not having access to that little
sub economy. In other words, kind of like back in
the day when a group from a particular country, an
ethnic group from a particular country, would all run Even
now that still happens. But for instance, and this is

(01:37:18):
a story that a guy I dated in college told
me he had a colleague in the military who somebody
played a prank on him. You had to have your uniform,

(01:37:38):
you know, steam pressed periodically and locally. All of the
laundries that did that service were owned by people of
the same ethnicity, and they all knew each other. They
probably all lived in the same general area because there

(01:38:01):
used to be it used to be very common for
entire neighborhoods to just all be one minority ethnicity. That's
where they could get houses. And somewhat that was manipulated
by banks. They wouldn't loan you money to buy house
in a neighborhood where it wasn't your cultural center, but

(01:38:25):
they would in this or that particular area. And but
part of it was people are just more comfortable around
people who have the same cultural traditions and understand like
the same religious belief systems and the same practices and

(01:38:52):
the same festivals and so on. Right, So there's a
there's like a two pronged this is how people were
kept in groups. So this guy is told to say
something to them in their language, and he doesn't find
out what it means before he says it, and it's
a horrible insult that hearkens back to some incident that

(01:39:15):
or practice actually that was done against them in a
war that was it was particularly hated practice, and so
the insult was it was really compounded and the guy
ended up having to go outside of his community after that,
get his uniform pressed, because none of them would serve him.

(01:39:38):
And so, in other words, you can, by creating a
little sub economy, control what people can buy in certain areas. Right,
And you can do this this was this is social
credit back in the day. You can do this with groceries,

(01:39:59):
you can do this with cars. You can do this
with farm equipment. Heck, farmers, you don't. If you look
at family farms, they don't all own a combine and
a harvester, and you know, a wheel rake and every

(01:40:20):
every little thing that every giant thing really, because a
lot of that equipment is huge. But every machine costs
as much as a house. Not every single one, but
many of them do. And so one farmer in a
co op might buy one of those machines, and he's
got he's paying on a loan that's similar to a mortgage,

(01:40:44):
and another one has a different one, and they contract
with each other to rent out those machines to each other,
and and that way they can they can all do
their work. And similarly they will do the same thing
with breeding animals and so on. So these sub economies,

(01:41:05):
if you get excluded from that, you can't make money
or even buy goods in that particular subeconomy in that area,
you can. If you get excluded from a sub economy
that is essential to your well being, you might as

(01:41:25):
well pack up and leave where you are because you
can't survive there. So what they're talking about creating is
essentially ways of forcing people to comply with their their
interests by controlling what they have access to if they

(01:41:49):
don't comply. And yeah, mister three or three, that was
a really malicious prank that the guy played. Some people
don't understand the difference between funny and you know, being
an absolute dick to someone. And so, you know, you
get when you get into jobs that just use people

(01:42:11):
for cannon fodder and you don't have to be a
genius to be cannon fodder, then you run into more
of those people to play those types of pranks.

Speaker 6 (01:42:22):
The foment of the current constitutional crisis is our.

Speaker 1 (01:42:26):
So the foement of the current constitutional crisis. What she's
saying there is we don't like the current administration, so
we're going to label it as if it's an emergency,
that this is something terrible that has happened to us.
Someone with different ideas than we believe in is in

(01:42:47):
charge right now? Constitutional crisis.

Speaker 3 (01:42:50):
Oh my god, it's a crisis. But it is constitutional.

Speaker 1 (01:42:56):
Yes, it is constitutional. The people have spoken, how dore they?

Speaker 3 (01:43:04):
So we have to somehow undo the constitution like we
do all the fucking time. Rip the first Amendment.

Speaker 6 (01:43:14):
Yeah, is our opportunity to catalyze and synergize a dynamic
change makes so.

Speaker 1 (01:43:23):
It's our opportunity, because everything's an opportunity, right, So the
the the people have spoken, how doare they? This is
our opportunity to uh make changes that will allow us
to more easily clamp down on.

Speaker 6 (01:43:40):
Them a dynamic change making fractal ecosystems.

Speaker 1 (01:43:47):
Fractal ecosystems would be those little sub economies right where
if you say the wrong sentence in a particular language,
you can't get your uniform pressed unless you go to
the next county over.

Speaker 6 (01:44:06):
Capable of co generating the emergence of the new thriving together.

Speaker 1 (01:44:11):
In other words, we are going to force people to comply.
That's what she said.

Speaker 6 (01:44:19):
There based socio political economic governance systems.

Speaker 1 (01:44:26):
So show political economic government systems subeconomies that can be
used through policies of exclusion to manipulate people into compliance
into doing what we want. That's what she's saying.

Speaker 3 (01:44:44):
Go on, it's not based. It's cringe.

Speaker 1 (01:44:48):
It is incredibly cringe.

Speaker 6 (01:44:51):
That is a long sentence.

Speaker 1 (01:44:54):
No shit, Sherlock. What the fuck? It's bad when they
recognize that their own gobbledegook is gobbledegook?

Speaker 3 (01:45:06):
Right.

Speaker 1 (01:45:07):
And so what she just described is what happens when
feminine relational aggression meets government policy, also known as social credit.
And you know, to me, like there's two layers to

(01:45:28):
the whole social credit thing. I look at it from
the perspective of an an cap who doesn't want to
be micromanaged, because I don't think that anybody has the
right to do that. And the social credit system, when

(01:45:49):
they combine it with a digital ID, will make it
so that you have to comply with a social credit
system because they will be able to use something akin
to the sub economy system to cut off your food supply.
You don't buy the right thing, you say the wrong thing,
you live in the wrong place, you associate with the
wrong people. You suggest, for instance, that if something is

(01:46:11):
a human right that's everybody's right, not just for women,
Then suddenly you can't buy tomatoes or go to the doctor.
Your car will be remotely shut off because they can
do that now, especially if you've got a much newer model,

(01:46:32):
they can just remotely shut off your car. Everybody who's
not driving old junkers that don't have that system installed
in it. You can't get on the bus, you can't
pay your rent, you can't get electricity to run your

(01:46:53):
heater or gas to run your heater. You said the
wrong thing, You said that men are human? How dare you?
That's a social credit system. The other end of it is,
there's a prediction that I've known about since I was
a little kid, because I was fascinated with the book
in which it was written, that someday and edity will

(01:47:17):
come along and create a system wherein if you do
not comply with that system, with the requirements of that system,
you cannot buy and sell anywhere, you can't do business
at all. It's in the Book of Revelations. So that's

(01:47:42):
a scary thing at the other end, not the earthly end,
definitely something that creeps me the fuck out right. But
that's what these people are talking about, is finding a
way to install from the bottom up a social credit
system that they can use to force you to comply

(01:48:03):
because they don't like that you voted for somebody to
come in and clean up their corrupt mess. They don't
like facing the oversight.

Speaker 3 (01:48:16):
These people have killed a lot of words through over
use and through association with the process of allowing pathetic, useless,
mutant big people to drag successful people into their swamp.
They killed the word woke fairly recently. Before that, they
killed the word progressive, like these are usable words that

(01:48:40):
can refer to things, but now they're just impossibly corrupted.
And they've even done it with the word social, Like,
if we ever do pull ourselves out of the other
end of this black hole, having finally somehow escaped it,
I don't know if we're ever going to be able
to use the word social all ever again, given its

(01:49:04):
association with socialism and social justice warrior and all and
all this bullshit. It is applicable, and so you can
socialize with people, but we might have to just revert
back to calling it familiarized. You can familiarize yourself with people.
That's almost a synonym of of of of socializing, but

(01:49:27):
it works better because because it's anathema to everything that
socialists stand for. Because you may have noticed that socialists
hate the family, and yes, family familiar the same word.
There's nothing socialists hate more than the familiar. They want

(01:49:50):
to abolish the familiar in favor of the zeno of
the stranger, of bringing in that which was not there
for the it being new. It's it's novelty for the
sake of novelty, different for the sake of different. And
and I don't know if we're ever going to be
able to get that stink off of the word social,

(01:50:12):
but I we we might have to do that. I'm
a word nerd, so I see everything in terms of
of of how we phrase things. But it really does,
it really does start with that sort of ship and
maybe even end with that sort of ship. I just
it's and it's so ironic because the most again this

(01:50:34):
is this is one of those uh or welly and ironies.
There's nothing more anti social than socialism. This it's it's
nothing breaks up society more than socialist. And I'm like this,
it's become so muddy and so unusable that I can

(01:50:58):
only see a future in which we just essue this
whole concept of social from our language, because we have,
like I said, we have other words. We can use
more appropriate words, and like, I don't see how we
come back from this other than turning social into a

(01:51:19):
fucking curse word.

Speaker 1 (01:51:21):
Frankly, well, honestly, it's more about concepts than words, and yeah,
you know, the most important concepts are the boundaries between
things like government authority, which it, like I said, in
my opinion, it shouldn't exist at all, but if it's
going to exist, there needs to be set boundaries between

(01:51:44):
that authority and your bodily autonomy, your your human rights.
And we did a show years ago, like two or
three years ago, maybe longer actually it might have been
during the first Trump administration, and it was in response
to the Women's March. We did a whole series on

(01:52:04):
their manifesto on their on their page, and one of
the things that they had gone on about was civic involvement.
And I explained what human rights are and what civil

(01:52:25):
rights are in terms of like what does that mean
the government has to respect or or what what does
that mean kind of legally and what does what does
it define a human what is a human right and
what is a civil right? And you know, human rights

(01:52:46):
essentially draw the line between your autonomy and that of
the next person, your your ability to act, and you
know what happens to the next person and their ability
to act and what happens to you. And in terms
of government, what the government may or may not do

(01:53:07):
to you, and your civil rights are essentially how that's
laid out in law. How the law of your land
describes the boundaries that the government has between itself and
your human rights. Our government in the United States and

(01:53:29):
the Canadian government as well have been inching over people's
human rights a little bit at a time for the
last one hundred and fifty years in the name of
the greater good. People think that well, you can, you
can just be above the all this if you homestead,
for instance, or you know, you go out west and

(01:53:53):
live in Arizona and Adobe hut, have some of your
own animals, hunt fish whatever, like. I don't know, fishing
in Arizona's probably not going to be very easy. But
you know, someplace where there's wildlife, someplace where there's water,
collect your own water instead of getting it from the city. Create,

(01:54:15):
you know, create devices to to make your own electricity
and all that. There have been I've read news stories
where the federal government has gone in and eliminated entire
chicken farms because they think the chickens might have bird flu.
They don't test them for it, they just go in

(01:54:38):
and kill them. And there was an ostrich farm that
made news a while back in Canada that that happened
with then, and it's it doesn't matter what state you
live in or what province you live in. If your
federal government is doing it, they go. They go into
every state, they go into every province. There's been situations

(01:55:02):
where there's various ailments that you know, they want to
be careful your cattle don't have this ailment or that,
because it's dangerous for people to eat it if they
have it right, And there was a hearing the government
literally stopped a woman from testing her cattle to make

(01:55:26):
sure that they were healthy, because if she was testing
her cattle to make sure that they were healthy, then
you know, other ranchers that weren't would look bad because
they weren't doing it. And then also she would have
evidence against an authoritarian push to get rid of her
cattle on the basis of, you know, we think they

(01:55:48):
might have this ailment, but we're not going to test them,
just to be on the safe side. We're going to
kill them all. We're not going to reimburse you. And
they've done that to numerous farmers, ranchers, homesteaders. They have
used imminent domain to take land and then not do
anything with it. They've used imminent domain to take land

(01:56:11):
and give it to private corporations. They've gone after people
for collecting, cleaning, and using their own water for even
just for graywater, like you know, doing your dishes and
cleaning your laundry. They have gone after people for having

(01:56:31):
off grid electricity and not using electricity. And so if
if you think you can go off grid and avoid this,
the answer is you can't, because they will come and
they will take your shit and force you to be

(01:56:54):
on grid until you become homeless from non compliance, which
in China has happened to a huge portion of their population.
They have the same homeless problem in China that they
have in California, where there's people just living on the
street ten cities and such. Not because they're not doing

(01:57:17):
anything about it, but because they have made so many
people homeless through their social credit system that there's no
place else for these people to go. They can't displace
them without doing something like putting them in camps, which
may be the next step. They do have those. There's

(01:57:40):
in fact, you should look into how the products that
they sell on Timu get made.

Speaker 3 (01:57:51):
This is why, as much as I support migtao, it
is not the be all and end all. It is
not the only answer. You may think you can go
your own way and get off the grid, but we're
far too far gone for that.

Speaker 1 (01:58:07):
We're in a system at this point where government authority
and government overreach are so all encompassing that if you
go off the grid, the grid will come after you.

Speaker 3 (01:58:18):
You know why men can't go their own way because
they don't have any rights. And that's why Magdao and
men's rights advocates need each other as as as different
elements in the same movement. Dare I say? I know
they say magtais not a movement, but the active verb

(01:58:41):
is go, so I would hope it is a movement
at least it's part of the movement. We need to
go our own way and advocate for our own rights
at the same time, because only with this pincer movement
can we actually undo this fucking nightmare. Best of luck everyone.

Speaker 1 (01:59:06):
Yeah, that's the other thing, Like we are able to
do what we can do right now because it hasn't
gone too far and just yet. But if the government
decided that they were going to stop us, we don't

(01:59:28):
have the power to keep them from doing that. At
case in point, the the Bundy bunch, all right, ZERANX
springs up, what would Clive and Bundy do? And it's
the question isn't what would Clive and Bundy do? The

(01:59:52):
question is why did it work when it worked, and
why won't it work in the future if it is
decided that they're going to for you into fifteen minute
cities and so on. And the answer is this, in
order for them to be able to force you into that,
they have to have enough power over enough people that
they can't protest against it. They can't march in the streets.

(02:00:15):
They can't take their weapons and go attack the capital.
You know, they can't do what people were accused of
in twenty twenty, much less put the absolute cabage to it. Right,
they can't even do what people did in twenty twenty,
which was pretty much ineffectual protesting. It achieved very little.

(02:00:41):
And so when it gets to that point, the thing
that stopped the government from just wholesale running over the
Bundy bunch at the Bundy Ranch was they cared enough
about optics to not perpetrate another Ruby ridge. But they'll

(02:01:07):
get to the point where they don't give a flying
fuck about optics because there's nothing that you can do
in response to it. When they get to that point,
someone like Clive and Bundy stands up to them, they
will just mow down every living person on that land

(02:01:30):
and do what they want with it anyway. And that
is why we are needed. That is why this is
so insidious. What we're looking at that a government agency,
the people that work for that agency, rather than following

(02:01:53):
policy that is oversight, rather than obeying the will of
the people, ceasing to steal from us to line their
own pockets. They're organizing with militant groups, militant communist groups

(02:02:17):
around the world to try to undermine the cleanup of
our government, the prevention of what I'm warning about. They're
afraid they won't be able to achieve it. When men
put their minds to it, and they decide to support

(02:02:38):
somebody in tearing down the scaffolding underneath that exploitative system.
They scare the fuck out of the women who are
stealing from them. And that's why you know, like this,

(02:02:59):
there are you can see men in the call, right,
but the people doing the talking. Did you notice I
didn't hear a man's voice the whole time, did you Nope?

Speaker 6 (02:03:16):
And it now we have one guy here of the
current constitutional still hurts our opportunity.

Speaker 1 (02:03:23):
Yeah, So this is what we're dealing with right this,
and this is here. She wants us to watch a video.
I'm not going over this. This is six minutes long,
and it's time for us to end the show tonight.
But if you're not, if you're on X and you're

(02:03:44):
not following Data Republican, you should start following Data Republican
because this is something you should be keeping track of.
It may not seem like a men's issue, but it
is a men's issue in the same way that the
evolution of the parliamentary system and voting rights was a
men's issue. It's men who step up and put the

(02:04:07):
stop to this. It's men who voted a man into
office to clean up the government after decades of women
voting men into office to give them gibbs so that
they could exploit the government. This is the situation where

(02:04:30):
women aren't going to step up and fight against this,
even though you're hearing about it from one Most women
won't even fully understand what's wrong with it. They'll be
going along with it. So men, it's up to you

(02:04:52):
stay abreast of this, no pun intended, and you know
what's what they're doing, and make sure that you alter
what you're doing accordingly. Especially when you go to the
pulling booth. You pay attention to everything these people say

(02:05:13):
and what politicians say about them and about what they're doing.
Who's willing to stand up and actually do something about
this behavior, who's willing to hold them accountable versus who
says it's a distraction, Because you want to know who's
going to fight in your corner to put a stop

(02:05:35):
to this and who is just going to ignore it
because they're doing the same thing some other way. But
with that, I will thank you all for listening, and
I would encourage you to find this thread and continue
because there is quite a lot here, and I'm not

(02:05:57):
going to go over every tweet in this thread, but
I do think that it is very important that you're
aware of it, and that that you follow up on
it and recognize that your your government the bureaucracy underneath

(02:06:17):
your government is fighting against the the authority of the
public over the government. In doing this, your authority is
being undermined. And uh, you definitely need to be active

(02:06:39):
in fighting back against that. And in terms of if
you want to see changes in in uh, federal governments
and world governments, I know you're gonna have to start locally,
but I would encourage men in the men's rights movement

(02:07:01):
to start getting involved on the civic level. You know,
in your community. Run for city council, run for dog catcher,
if you have to county commissioner, school board. You know,
if you are the least bit inclined to get involved
like that, do it. Get involved and start being one

(02:07:27):
of the people who influences where your political party goes locally.
The more men in the men's rights movement that do that,
you know, the more you're able to influence state level
elections and federal level elections. And and yeah, I mister

(02:07:48):
three or three pointed out ice ICE is hiring. Mm hmmm,
so it's not. It's another one of those dangerous jobs though, But.

Speaker 3 (02:08:01):
Yeah, uh uh teach women. I know that's a weird
couple of words that we don't hear very often because
men don't get to be teachers or parents. But in
the event that you do teach women, you don't need
to program them into anything. If anything, you need to
deprogram them, but you probably you'll have a hard time

(02:08:23):
deprogramming them because there's so many of them have been
so programmed that they can't be deprogrammed. But there's another
generation coming up, like and see if that generation can
be raised without the programming that has so corrupted the
last fucking five generations of them. Help help help to

(02:08:50):
teach women, ah, to just be fucking normal, to to
not be programmed in the first place into this insane cult.
And you can do that by being a parent, or
by being a teacher, or by being an internet influencer,

(02:09:11):
whatever the fucking word is for for whatever it is
we're doing here.

Speaker 1 (02:09:16):
I don't know if that's I don't I don't like
the label.

Speaker 3 (02:09:22):
No word, but you know, just just just fucking talk
to women.

Speaker 1 (02:09:31):
Well, be careful how you talk to women, because you
don't want to get you don't want to give the
woman a power to cost you your job. But for
men getting involved, I you know, I it's hard to
put this on men to teach women to adult women have.

(02:09:51):
They've got a bubble wrap kind of shield around them
that they can use to stop you from teaching them.

Speaker 2 (02:09:59):
They can.

Speaker 1 (02:10:00):
They don't even have to work at your job to
go after you. Just don't. Don't forget donglegate.

Speaker 4 (02:10:07):
You know.

Speaker 1 (02:10:07):
All they have to do is get mad at you
and say that you did something misogynistic. And even if
you're not their colleague, you know, not their coworker, they
can still get you fired. All they have to do
is get an outrage mob going or contact your employer

(02:10:28):
and say, you know your employee did X y Z
and I'm deeply offended. So guys need to take control
of their local governments. Really, it's this is why I
say I want to see more men in the men's
rights movement getting involved in civics, not because uh, it's

(02:10:52):
not just because it's a duty of American citizens, but
because we need to put masculinity back and into this.
And because you can't change women, you can only change
what what authority is doing. Women are going to have
to change themselves. And I'm sorry, but you can't. You

(02:11:18):
can't trust that that you're going to be able to
change them now your daughters. Fathers out there, definitely teach
your daughters to be better than the generation of women
to change, That's what i mean. But not adults. Don't try.
You like not saying that you don't try to talk

(02:11:39):
to your friends about this stuff. But you can't trust
that you can talk to adult women that you don't
have a really good close relationship with about this stuff.

Speaker 3 (02:11:52):
Don't don't know, don't bother with the ones who are
already broken. I'm just I'm just trying to push back
on because from the left and the right, I hear
all we can do is tell men what to do
and teach men to be more and all that shit.
Yeah all right, yeah, maybe, but I'm here to say,

(02:12:15):
you know, women can be teachable, maybe from an early age. Yeah,
maybe from a certain angle, but we're not going to
change anything if all we do is keep nagging men
to do ship fucking well.

Speaker 1 (02:12:34):
The biggest thing is that women and particularly young women
and uh you know, like teenage girls need not necessarily
a female version of Jordan Peterson, but a female version
of what Jordan Peter Peterson started out to be. They
need somebody to get through to them that they can

(02:12:55):
be happier and healthier if they make wiser decisions and
rather than taking the easy road or the emotionally uncontrolled
road and the intellectually lazy road, that if they challenge

(02:13:18):
themselves to consider all of the potential consequences of their
choices before doing things like screwing around like a three
dollars hope, for instance, that their lives, the trajectory of
their lives will be at a higher level of ease,

(02:13:38):
and not just leisure, but just not having to deal
with stupid shit happening to them because they did stupid shit.
They won't get the stupid prizes because they won't play
the stupid games. And right now we have population wide
a female mentality of I have the right to play

(02:14:02):
stupid games and you have to deal with the stupid prizes.
It's not my fault the prize is stupid. It's your fault.
The prize is stupid. I don't have to deal with that.
That needs women talking to women to change that, because
if the people that they are trying to dump the
stupid prizes on are the ones that are objecting, the

(02:14:27):
result is just going to be women saying, well, you
just don't want to take responsibility, and you don't want
to take responsibility because it's responsibility for their choices. But
they won't see it that way. They'll see it as
I got to talk to this guy's boss and get
him fired so he knows that he can't do that.

(02:14:50):
I hate to say it, but that's unfortunately true of
women as a population, left a and right, up and down,
traditionalist and feminist, and even some in the men's rights movement.

(02:15:13):
I've run into them, had knockdown, drag out fights with
them and been unfollowed, blocked, even had them leverage their
social pull against me by turning some other guys in
the men's rights movement against me for criticizing another woman

(02:15:34):
in the movement. Oh, you're gonna scare her away. If
accountability scares her away, she was never really here to
begin with. But yeah, you can teach your daughters because
you are their fathers, right, but you can't teach your neighbors.
You need you need to shield yourself from the consequences

(02:16:00):
of their outrage. The only way to do that is
to kind of do the same thing that you do
with You can't stop your neighbor from committing, you know,
stupid crimes and stuff like that. Either you can't really
engage in violence to protect your neighbors from your other neighbors,
you have to call the cops. So I guess you

(02:16:22):
can think of the women of the movements as the equivalent.
It's gonna be up to us. And I hate to
make people helpless in any way, shape or form on
any level for any reason, but the reality is that's
that's the way this situation is.

Speaker 3 (02:16:43):
Create strong men. Strong men create good times, and weak
women create bad times. I'm I'm sticking to that axiom
because I sincerely so all the energy that you'll have
been putting into creating weak women over the last century,
at least take that energy and put it into creating

(02:17:04):
strong men. One way or another's.

Speaker 1 (02:17:07):
Strong men and strong women and strong women too.

Speaker 3 (02:17:10):
But you know, strong strong women support the strong men
who create good times. I think that's right.

Speaker 1 (02:17:17):
Strong women support strong men. Weak women seek to exploit them.

Speaker 3 (02:17:22):
Indeed.

Speaker 1 (02:17:24):
So with that though, I am going to end the show.
Thank you all for for listening. Thanks Mike and Lauren
for going through this with This has been some disturbing content,
but I feel like we really had to cover it,
and starting next week we're going to get into some

(02:17:45):
more disturbing content that has nothing to do with you
and women. We're taking a break from that because we
really have to look at this and it's a yay,
but when you see it, it's not gonna be it's
gonna upset you. And I'm sorry an event, but we
have to talk about this and it's it's a serious issue.

(02:18:06):
People who both on both sides of the fight again about,
you know, whether the United States should be involved in
the Ukraine Russia conflict, need to see this. It was
my attention was drawn to it by one of my
mutuals on X and I'm still I watched it a

(02:18:30):
few days ago and just thinking about it, I'm enraged,
and so I want you all to be enraged too.
So that's what we're going to do next week and
with that I will close us out. Thanks guys. Word