Ryan Cristian on questioning absolutely everything

Jerm and Ryan Cristian tackle the shifting world of independent media, diving into the ongoing information war and the critical need to question dominant narratives. They reflect on personal awakenings, the impact of COVID-19 on public perception, and the complex influence of Israel in U.S. politics. Ryan emphasises the power of storytelling in shaping opinions, the challenges of uncovering truth amidst manipulation in even alternative media, and the importance of critical thinking. They note that historical moments of awareness can drive change, facts stand apart from feelings despite narrative distortions, and the current climate offers a growing chance for transformation, with independent media as a key battleground for truth.
Bio: Ryan Cristian is an American journalist and the founder of The Last American Vagabond, recognised for his contributions to independent media and his focus on challenging mainstream narratives.
Website: https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/More Jerm interviews: https://www.ukcolumn.org/series/jerm-warfare

Episode Transcript

(00:38):
Are you the last American Vagabond?
Well, I mean, you know, the name, you know, I probably just
say no. I think there's plenty more,
especially hopefully because of what we do, there's plenty more
people out there that embody what I think that represents,
you know, And when I first started that it was, you know,
not honestly wasn't even really like this defined, you know,
like metaphor in my mind. It just kind of jumped into my

(01:00):
mind. It was always a big traveller.
And I don't know, Vagabond in the sense of just kind of like,
you know, travel being the focus, not the destination, not
the derogatory way that word canbe used, you know, and yeah, I
just, it just meant it, it, it felt like something that
mattered to me, you know, like that.
We're we're because at the time we're travelling a lot.
And we were in the RV travellingacross the US at that time.
And I'd already travelled overseas.
And it just kind of like, you know, we're, we're carrying on

(01:21):
something like the old kind of like the, you know, and, and the
direction always lied, you know,what's the phrase from?
And, and the road always LED W, you know, kind of like that
mindset. And and so ultimately it
developed into something, you know, where I thought Simply
put, as it, as looking back at it, I've come to see it as sort
of like the never ending pursuitof truth, you know, And so I

(01:42):
don't think I'm the only one clearly, I think tonnes of us
exist, but even more so even just through the last American
Vagabond perspective, I think that because of that, many, many
people have now sort of embodiedthe idea of what that means, you
know, never just settling with what somebody told you last, but
always seeking more information and always looking for more to
develop your understanding. And I think that's powerful, you
know, and I think I think we share that.

(02:02):
I would add that the the word Vagabond in your instance could
be replaced with Vanguard. Sorry, I, I said, I like that.
That's thank you. I appreciate that.
And you know, and I, I think, I think we all are, you know, I
think right now the independent media sphere that where we both
share is, you know, it is a, it's an interesting battlefield
right now, you know, and it is this constant ebb and flow.

(02:24):
And I think right now, more thanwe've ever seen, and I think the
entire existence of this field, we're winning, you know what I
mean? Like and, and doesn't feel that
way because I think the more we change, the more that these
things, you know, despite the propaganda, despite the
censorship, despite the every other way that we go, you know,
one step forward, 2 steps back in this field, we're still
breaking through. Think about how powerful that
is, you know, and so it's like they're going to make your life

(02:46):
really uncomfortable because that's not what the power
structure wants. But but we're getting through,
you know, that's powerful, man. And so I just, I do, I, I see, I
see it the same way. Where are the front lines of
whatever this is right now? Yeah, I like to play around with
metaphors like battle of ideas and the trenches, information
war, that kind of stuff. But do you think, do you think
we really are in an information war?

(03:07):
Absolutely 100% like to the truest extent, you know, extent
of that phrase, like, but in a, in a lot of other ways too, but
just the basic understanding of that.
Like we're at a war over what information it, you know, over
information, over what it means,over how to interpret it, you
know, over what sources are supposed to be, you know, it's
like every single element of it down just the core of just like

(03:27):
what the meaning of words are, you know, like this is a a long
term manipulation. And so yeah, 100% we are in an
ongoing information war, a narrative war.
But you know, there's all sorts of other ways to get into that,
you know, just like kind of likeI went into, but even deeper
where it comes into like, you know, the definition side of it
or like the technocratic sort ofsocial engineering, even to the
level of like brainwashing, you know, like they're we're in some

(03:48):
or even crazier, like neuroscience, you know, it's
like we're getting to some really crazy stuff.
But yes, 100% we're in the midstof this.
And you know, where it goes is hard to see, but clearly it
seems like a lot is on the line.And I think we all sense that.
Would you go back, Ryan, to 2019knowing what you know now?
Yeah, well, I mean, it's hard tosay because right there's AI get

(04:11):
the quote of the question is it's like, you know, it is
ignorance bliss, right. And even though we clearly we're
not just blinded everything, it's like to for a lot of
people, I would say, I think I would yeah, I think probably
would share the idea that we were not blinded by like more so
the first ones to be like, yeah,that seems like there's
something wrong even before we knew, you know, like there's
clearly something that was off about that.
But to the average person, you know, it's a hard question.

(04:31):
Like, you know, is it better to be in a position where you don't
know how bad things are and maybe you're happier for it, or
is it better to understand how dark it is, maybe be able to
change it, maybe not, but then exist within that unsettling
reality. It's, you know, it's a, that's a
hard question. It's a philosophical question.
You know, for me, I think it's obviously my, obviously my
choice is the latter. I mean, that's, that's, that's

(04:53):
who I am as a person. I would always rather understand
and suffer for it than live in ignorance and bliss because of
ignorance. I just think that's obvious
because I think my core driving point is that I seek to change
things for the better. And if you're stuck in
ignorance, then there's, that's just simply not possible, you
know? So I would definitely stick with
where we are now because I stillfeel very motivated that we're

(05:14):
watching things shift for the better, or at least that we have
an opportunity to see that happen if we stay with what
we're doing. I like what you're saying
because it indicates that you'renot black pulled.
Definitely, that's an interesting thing to bring up
because prior to the selection, the election of, you know, the
last election process, it was a really weird kind of just to
quickly sum it up, you know, we,we, we have been going on for a

(05:36):
long time. And I, I point back to people
like James Corbett, who I see askind of a foundational element.
It's not the one of the Van Ocean elements in this field,
just the idea. Yeah, really seriously.
And and even people today that reference him and don't ever
have him on for interviews. It's just this weird, kind of
like he's not supposed to be acknowledged for obvious
reasons. But you know, the idea that he
had for a long time been like, you know, vote nobody, 2016,

(05:57):
whatever, you know, and I, I always resonated with me not,
and obviously, if you understandit, which we should, if you're
going to criticise anything, he's not saying, I don't care.
That's the whole point of the black pill label is that you
know, he's saying that this is away like if you look into his
argument that this is like, I would argue the system's broken.
You're not actually process participating.
You're giving a false binary or,you know, any different number
of ways you could break it down.Even if you think your vote

(06:19):
translates the thousand ways that's manipulated, stolen,
altered, lied about, you know, and so he's we're argument was
always been well, let's just protest, not ignore it.
But obviously, on a side note, one of the choices that's
supposed to be on your ballot every time is abstention, like
legal, recordized, tallied abstentions.
That's part of the process that they just ignore.
And there's a reason for that because they want you to think

(06:39):
not choosing is being not part of it.
The point, though, is that we'vealways been saying that, you
know, going and usually relegated to the corner like
children. These these conspiracy theory.
They don't know, you know, and then weirdly, we've been doing
this for a long time, James, even further, we get before this
last selection process and we doit again.
Vote nobody 2025, you know, and and weird, weird.
The response we got like wild from large people that came

(07:03):
around, this weird movement, which has been there for a long
time and calling it, you know, black pilled and it's a purity
test and you're to your point, it's like, well, hold on.
You know, we're very clearly invested in this and we have
solutions that we discuss. It's like, so the weird thing is
those same people later were like, well, they're both bad
options. And so I'm just going to pick
jump. That's black build.
You're giving up by going well, that's all we have, you know, to

(07:24):
a small degree. And then there's much more
deeper versions of that, but it shows us that there's clearly a
vulnerability. At least that's how I read it
right, that finally people are starting to go, OK, you know,
questioning long held manipulation like Zionism or
whether vaccine, you know, all these things are suddenly going,
you know, maybe our vote is being manipulated.
Maybe it is both sides. And so they just freaked out
about it, tried to shut it down.A lot of what we predicted is

(07:45):
now happening. But what what kind of came of
that is the IMA right. Whitney and Derek and I
discussed, you know, OK, this isa weird thing that's happening.
It's on it's we haven't seen it like this before.
We sense basically the what the mainstream alternative media is
becoming, right? And so we said we need to
collect and just have like an alliance of people that we think
are being honest, objective, nonpartisan, who see through

(08:05):
what Zionism is to see through the two party illusion and just,
you know, no financial mechanism, just a collection of
people that believe in integrityand principles and, you know,
crazy, right? And so it just people, they just
lost it, you know, and so here we are.
And clearly what we were all pointing to is coming to pass
and now they're trying to like, turn it into, we all see it now.
And it's just, you know, I thinkit's kind of blowing up in their

(08:26):
face. But the black pill thing I think
is an important conversation because I think it's like it's
it's it's like all the inversionof all the terms now.
It's like what they're claiming is somehow, you know, fighting
for the future is what is actually being black pilled by
letting it all continue down thepath when we're trying to stop
the bad thing from happening. You know, to oversimplify it.
I mean, I have noticed that way too many people, shall we say,

(08:48):
on our side, Blackpool, nihilistic, you know, they just
give up on everything. There's no point.
That's a very dark place to be. Yeah, you know, but it's
understandable, isn't it? I don't, I don't agree with it.
And I don't think it's, I think it's like the last thing you
should do. I mean, like I've always said, I
don't care. If I could prove to a certainty

(09:09):
that we wouldn't succeed, whatever we think that looks
like, I'd still be fighting. I don't know how you can't,
right? It's like I it's like it's not
in me to just give up and sit back.
But you understand it, man. I mean, I think everything in
what the power structures are trying to do, one of the major
things within it all is to just make you give up, make it check
out right, convince yourself that you can't influence it.

(09:29):
They already spy on everything. Why even try?
You know, it's like that's the that is being black pilled and
that's central through the two party paradigm, or at least on
the other side, right, That's what that side does and that's
and it's really all of it, you know, but you get it, you know,
people get. So I mean, part of it is to make
you feel like you can't change anything and, and, and really
just not care enough to really be involved.
But part of it is to get you to utterly check out, even if you

(09:51):
care. Because there's so many people
in this field that really, really want something positive,
would fight for it, but are so overwhelmed by how impossible it
seems like getting involved and being one after another
dissolutioned by people you thought were going to change the
world. If you think politicians are
going to change something or movements that get Co opted, you
know, so people that have spent 20 years fruitlessly fighting

(10:13):
every day tooth and nail to justsee the same happening, you just
go man, I'm just going to try toenjoy my life like, you know,
you understand it. And but again, I agree with you
and I think it's like the least productive, it's the most
dangerous thing we can do right now, especially because I
genuinely think we have more opportunity to never to make
something change. Let's just do a quick bio.
Give me your background. You know, there's a lot to go

(10:36):
over. I think the simple quick
background is that this started,but as I was saying, we were
travelling. It was me and my friend at the
time. And you know, I've travelled a
lot over the years like this, this.
You can't see the top part of it, where the logo is.
Most people know it, but the type this image is I, I took
this image of people I backpacked with.
This was in Spain. When?
When? Shoot, it would have been 20.

(10:57):
I have to look it up, 2020. Let me see if it was 2022, like
23/20/22. I don't quote me on that, but
basically there was a long period of time where I was
travelling. It wasn't, you know, what's in
the RV 1st we did this. I backpacked our Spain.
I, you know, when I was younger,I went to Italy, went to Greece.
I've travelled a bunch of countries just backpacking.
That's where I kind of had that spirit.
And then this was after that where my friend and I decided to

(11:20):
take the RV around the United States.
And I, you know, I'm, I went to the Cullen Institute of America,
Napa Valley. I'm a classically trained chef.
That's what I've, I've done my whole life.
I love it. I've run restaurants, I've been
executive chef and general manager.
You know, I, I, I love the high.I've, I've worked at Ella, Ella,
Ella in, that's in Sacramento. I've worked in, now I'm blanking
on the terms like, you know, places like the, like the French

(11:42):
Laundry in Napa Valley, you know, like the high, high, high
level stuff I've worked at, at middle grain play.
Like I love it, I'm passionate about it.
And so I decided to put that aside essentially because
something was calling me in thisdirection.
You know, I didn't really think this wasn't even defined just
yet. My point.
But so the point was I took thispicture while travelling, you
know, and clearly it was, I think I just lost the train
there anyway, you know, so the point was that ultimately I

(12:04):
travelled a lot and we went on the back the, the, the RV tour
of the United States. And my buddy started a like A
blog about sports or something. It was just because he just
wanted to. And I said, Oh, that's neat.
I want to do that. Like I had no real idea of where
it would go. It was just a random spur of the
moment idea. The name jumped into my head
like out of nowhere, the picturelike it all just kind of fell
together and started as a, like a cannabis law reform thing.

(12:27):
By and large. I'm very, very passionate about
the idea, not just of like smoking cannabis.
That's sure that that is important, you know, your
personal rights and all and justwhatever else, but it's more so
about the lies around it that seemingly connect a damn near
everything else, you know, even foreign policy when you break it
down. And so it kind of opened my mind
to the massive lies told around what I think is one of the most

(12:48):
monumentally, you know, helpful earth changing things, hemp, you
know, cannabinoids in general that we've just been like just
pulled away from our lives for obvious reasons.
And, and so that just exploded over the next probably five
years to just be just everythingwe're being lied about.
So it just kind of grew and grew.
And, and even at that time, it was just a small little blog and
it was me with a couple of people.
We were just doing articles, no show.

(13:09):
I think the turning point came when I randomly decided I wanted
to do some kind of a show. And I, it's funny enough, and I
always say this, go back and look at some of the stuff I did
like. It's still on there.
I think if you, well, I think YouTube's been deleted, but I
think you can find it somewhere like one of the earliest videos
I did, if not the first one. I've shown it before.
It's so funny, the camera's way too close.
I'm all uncomfortable, you know,it's like, it's like, but you

(13:30):
know, I forced it through and you wouldn't even know because
I, I'd failed like 4 times before that and got frustrated,
didn't do it. But so I started the show and
intended it started out like 15 minutes long.
Now it's like 4 hours. But the point was just about
trying to inform people. And I think that started to
change what this platform was. And then I reached out to
Derrick Bros, I reached out to Whitney Webb, who was that time
was, you know, just a writer forMint Press news.

(13:52):
You know, did was do it, you know, just just kind of, you
know, in the in the field of Mint Press news.
And ultimately she was trying, Ithink, working on some of her
writings and want her to come over and work with T labs
started writing a lot of that important work and that process.
She was writing her book and shebuilt you unlimited hangout, you
know, and then Robert in Lakesh,you know, it's really important
for me, by the way, to anybody works with me.
And now in no way to say I'm like taking credit for that's

(14:13):
all them conscious resistance. Derek had way before me just
allowing people that work with me at the same time to to
continue to grow what they want on their side, because I I've in
this field, I've worked with so many people that are like, come
work with me and like you're, you know, you're ours, you know,
like you can't think, you can't work for yourself, you can't do
anything else. And I just respect that.
And so my point was that just kind of grew this out pretty
rapidly and it grew into more oflike a network, an ecosystem of

(14:35):
people working together. You know, and Taylor Hudak and
Matt are and all different kind of people that work with T lab.
And I think that brings us largely to the point where we're
at where, you know, it's it's just anything we cover is about
trying to breakthrough the illusion.
I've gotten a lot more into the day to day stuff lately because
I think it's really important towatch this weird transition of
the mainstream alternative media.

(14:56):
I've just never seen it more obvious.
Anyway, I'm kind of rambling beyond it, but the point was,
you know, I gave you the the overview of how it came about
and you know, from there we've done a lot of other things, you
know, you know, I did. We started pirate stream, which
is seems to kind of be drifting away, but IMA we started that
after like I just told you, you know, and and I, you know, I
hope just keep growing this in ain a way that's like a, you
know, continuing to gather people that we see really not

(15:17):
about opinions, but just about principles, integrity, you know,
people that stand by that show their print, their their
actions, the precedent they set and the outcome, you know,
they're consistent to what they believe in, and that seems rare
today within the mainstream alternative media anyway.
Back in the early 2000s when 911happened it, it didn't occur to
me that this could have been a cover up.

(15:39):
And I think it was only around 2009 when I watched a
documentary, I think it was called The Great Global Warming
Swindle. That I think might have been my
first Damascus moment, my first red pull moment.
And when was yours? It's funny, I get we get that
question. We used a lot more, but every

(15:59):
time it comes up, it's, it's weird because I think it was
more, that's the right word for it measured, I guess.
But like, it wasn't as like the some massive shoe that dropped
for me, you know, like so I, I remember watching, I woke, I
remember waking up on 9/11 and seeing that.
What were you doing, by the way?What's that?
What were you doing? Sorry.
So I just woke up, I was at my house.
I woke up and walked out and theTV was on.

(16:21):
Weirdly, nobody was in the room.I just, the TV was on and I
walked out and was like, what? And I just saw it.
And weirdly enough it didn't, wasn't some like, you know, it
was weird how it was shocking like, oh, that's crazy.
But it wasn't like some, Oh my God, you know, it's like until
I've fully begun to understand, like what seemed to be, you
know, all of it. But even at that time, I was
just like probably just taking largely what was being
presented, you know, and but very early on in this

(16:43):
conversation, it started to develop into something, you
know, there's just suspicious parts about it that even at that
time when I was really not in the know for the most part, you
know, that I was just picking upon, I think it became around the
development of this site and thepeople that I overlapped with,
you know what I mean? I started because, you know,
I've always been very open minded and wanted to hear
people's opinions. I loved talking about things

(17:04):
that, you know, fringe idea, youknow, you can call that
conspiracy theory, but it's plenty of things that are just
even like fringe science ideas, you know, things about outer
space, you know. So ultimately I was always
really open to just these ideas.And once I started to talk to
people, interview with people, like one of the earliest things
I did way before the show, even the website was barely going on.
I always, I think his name was Dara.

(17:26):
He was a blind guy that ran a radio station.
He's a good guy and like a like a local kind of his own
personal, you know, broadcast radio thing.
And he liked the show or the website stuff.
And he saw me online and reachedout to me and said, Hey, like,
you know, come, come on the show, came on the show.
And then that was the first timeI started.
He wanted me to continue to do the show with him.
And so we started coming to the show and he was really into all
these different things. And we started doing a thing on

(17:47):
the show called Conspiracy Crossfire, where we basically
had a big hat full of like everyconspiracy listed that we and we
would just draw and talk about at the end of the show.
And so it like, you know, you start to learn more and
understand these things. And even just from an
entertainment perspective, whichby the way, I think is part of
this, it's kind of weaponized today that people are like more
in like the reality TV version of a lot of this.
But my point was that the entertainment value of it all is

(18:09):
just it's excites, entertaining.It's interesting to read about
these crazy ideas. My point is that over this time,
it really evolved for me, you know, like kind of like a slow
growing process where I'm like, wow, that's crazy.
That's what happened. And I mean, I, there were things
like I saw James Corbett do something about like Oklahoma
City. I don't know, like just so many
years ago. I remember going, even then
going like, Oh my God, like, so that guy too was like MK Ultra.

(18:31):
You know, it's like you just, you don't realise how finding
the, how many of these things interconnect even to this day.
I will research something. For example, I looked into
Rwanda. It was the, the, the anniversary
of Rwanda. How was the, how was hate using
that word? For some reason, anniversary
doesn't seem appropriate. And I looked into it with what's
going on today. And I just figured, you know,
like I, I know that there was anoverlap with Israel, but I'm

(18:51):
curious to die further. Never really done that.
And I was absolutely blown away by how shockingly clear and
obvious it was. If you don't know this, by the
way, Israel's was like arming and involved with that genocide.
Same with Bosnia, same with South Africa running theme here.
The point is that I was blown away by how easy it was to prove
right on the surface arming themwith Uzis and machetes.
Anyway, I'm just going like, Oh my God, that blew my mind.

(19:12):
And so even to this day, I stillfind that I blow into new
theories, you know, and I go, wow, that changed my mind.
So I, you know, I think that's what a lot of people go through.
I think the whole kind of shoe dropping awareness of certain
things. I think that represents that
people that they were already sort of aware, you know what I
mean? Like they were seeing it but not
allowing themselves to accept it.
And that was kind of the moment that brought it all together.
As opposed to where I think I was always pretty sceptical.

(19:34):
And it just kind of grew for me as I learned more, which is kind
of a different way about it. But you know, it's, it's
different for each of us. The COVID era for me was very
exciting on so many levels, but one of the reasons is because it
appeared to me that a huge number of people were quote
unquote waking up. However, Ryan, I don't know if

(19:55):
you've noticed the same thing, but it appears now that all
those people have gone back to sleep.
You know, it's weird how to be, there's a lot of factors to
that, you know, yes, I think in a lot of cases, which is always
how it tends to go, is that you have moments of awareness like
we're dealing with right now, which is what I always point
out, and that there's always something, an event, you know,
maybe organised, maybe hoax, maybe PSYOP or maybe an organic

(20:19):
event that they use and who knows?
But you know, never let a good crisis go to waste.
The point is that there's alwayssomething that comes along, It
shocks people back into place, feels less likely today, to be
honest, today feels different. It really does.
But that's always what happens. So after that, there was
something else, you know, and people, they, it's usually
partisan driven and it drives you back into like people that
have like warped their identity around partisan politics, which

(20:42):
I also think is dwindling. And so it just kind of shocks
them back into place because they feel like they have an
obligation to do so. And so I know there was a lot of
people throughout COVID that kind of fell into that trap that
still I think we're sceptical ofsome of the other things, but
are now, you know, maybe kind oflost in other new narratives.
But there's also an element to that of people that were not
really even, whether they were aware or not, were using that
awareness to kind of straddle, you know, kind of sidle up next

(21:05):
to this movement and use it to benefit themselves maybe for the
next agenda. This is what I always see
happening. I see it happening right now,
not to name anybody in particular, but people that I
think are like one step removed from mainstream media who
suddenly go, I see you, you know, it's real bad and whatever
else, or did it during COVID rather to make the point.
And we're like, you know, these are killing people.
We see it now and, and getting people, Oh my God, they see it

(21:26):
now. Look at that.
They're finally coming around. And then the moment that they
had an opportunity or it was important to them to pull you
back into something partisan, that's what they did.
And a lot of us started to recognise or even right back
into the COVID-19 thing, promoting mRNA shocks the moment
it was in their benefit. The point is, I think a lot of
them recognised an opportunity to use that momentum to benefit
them or the stab, the power structure did the same.

(21:47):
And so I think those two things exist.
But overall, I still think that most people came out of that
different, you know, a little bit more aware if you know, to
1° or another. And evidenced by the fact that
even Democrats at this point are, you know, even right early
during the, the, what was it theOmicron, I think, and right
after just as a notation for time, whatever you think that

(22:09):
means that they're most Democrats at that point were
were resisting the, the like the6th booster, whatever it was the
time. And I remember thinking that was
so crazy because they, these arepeople that have taken every
shot like dutifully, or at leasta lot of them and were telling,
telling you, you were a bad person for not.
And then suddenly there was that6 was too much for them, right?
So, and, and your and their government was going that's
important. You have to same thing they said

(22:31):
before, so showing you that there was a line for them and
even they stopped. And now it's like more than half
of even healthcare workers are refusing these shots.
And that that was on the FDA. They said that in the last
interview they had. And so I'm just going like, wow,
man, that that didn't go away. Now, maybe they're lost in the
Israel conversation. Maybe they're lost in the
immigration conversation, but that is a powerful thing to
think about. And honestly, last point to

(22:51):
this, I truly believe that more than anything right now,
regardless of the different parts and stances, the vast
majority of people are very disillusioned about everything
government. I think that's a.
Good thing that's a good thing. I completely agree.
But at the same time, Donald Trump has done a magnificent job
of bringing millions of people back into the system.

(23:12):
I, I speak to a lot of Trump supporters and I'm not anti
Trump. I like, you know, I'm, it's not
one or zero. I like some things that he says
and does and I don't like other things that he says and does.
And I know that he's a puppet and he's only really essentially
middle management. Yeah, I mean, it's it's the same
thing we were just talking about.
People want to believe and same point as the bad stuff before I

(23:32):
understand. I get why we've been conditioned
to desperately seek somebody to end all the bad things.
You know, it's like it's easy tosee how this has been
constructed. And so it's like, wait, somebody
comes out and goes, I promised to end all those bad things.
Oh my God, somebody's even, you know, nobody's even pointed to
those things before, you know, and we saw that with his last
administration, the Fed 911 lockher up, you know, and it's like,
they're good people. Shut up.

(23:53):
We're going to leave alone, you know, it's like, it's like, OK,
clearly that was used and the same thing we can see today with
Maha and, you know, every other argument.
I mean, it's just it's embarrassing to see how many
ways they've continued. And then you get people like cat
turd on Twitter to come out and go, we're winning, Everything's
great. And I'm like, here's the living
embodiment of that meme. That's like, this is fine.
The house is burning down, you know, and it's it's clear that
they're just trying to corral people into it.

(24:14):
But, you know, I, I think that alot of people are trapped back
into it. But I do still think that people
like, look at Epstein, you know,I mean, that has fractured them
right now. Now, you could argue that's
because of how bad they handled that.
I mean, Trump coming out and calling it a hoax after it was
driving their momentum seems pretty stupid and ill advised.
But clearly, if that's possible,then it was already building
right there. You know, and I and I do see

(24:35):
that. I think a lot of my point was, I
think more people at this point are sceptical whether or not
they're conservative Republican,MAGA support Trump, They're
like, OK, something's wrong. Whether and and really what it's
coming down to, which I think isimportant to start considering
is they're still, most of them are like, I still support Trump
or even RFK junior, but they're being manipulated, right?
They're being blackmailed by Israel or RFK is being

(24:56):
blackmailed by something. And so it's like, OK, maybe I
would not even that's probably likely even.
But that doesn't just, you know,remove them from responsibility,
but might that gives them a passthat gives them an ability to
go. We all still love Trump and he's
the great guy, but it's Israel doing it.
And now how Trump gets around that, especially when you start
to understand that he is completely taken by Israel, is
that's that's the confounding moment for them.

(25:18):
And I think that's why right nowthe government, not just the one
side of it, is really concerned about where this is going.
You know, and at last, I do think the technocratic side of
it is their last effort to sort of, you know, get us to a point
to where our opinions don't matter anymore.
But Ryan, haven't you followed the latest queue drop?
Trust the plan, bro. Right, exactly.
Military tribunals, like I remember when we were covering

(25:39):
that, I remember talking about that before it was even called
queue, follow the white Rabbit. You know, all these different
people that were out there talking about, you know,
helicopter crashes and Marines and saying, you know, these
there's these stories that were circling right when that was
kind of going around. And I remember laughing at it
going like, well, interesting. But where?
Where's the the source material?Yeah, look, look at that
consistency all the way back to that.
Where's the source material? How can you prove these things?

(26:00):
And so it evolved. And even at the beginning, I'm
thinking, OK, like maybe this isinteresting.
Like what if you actually have people in the government that
are, you know, secretly seeking to change it for the better, you
know, and it's like, OK, so let's let's follow this.
And it became wildly evident right before it even shifted
into being partisan that this was this was weird, right?
There was something off about this, the way people were

(26:22):
assuming about what it meant. That was obviously a bad sign,
right? And using that to make
arguments. But the most obvious point was
where it was like just hard shift into Trump MAGA, you know,
Republican when in the very beginning it was talking about
how the parties were a lie and how it's like, so something
didn't it was a manipulation from the very beginning.
As far as I'm concerned, at the OR at the very least, there was

(26:42):
some kind of an element that gothijacked and they used it for
the same problem. I don't really know.
I think I think it comes back tothe evidence showing that this
was a manipulation from day one.And if there's certain people,
you could argue we're most likely behind it, you know, but
it's clearly using for the, you know, to perpetuate that same
problem. But I mean, I honestly can't
believe people still give any kind of credence to that.
But despite how many times it has been proven to be completely

(27:05):
wrong. But then you make the same point
about Alex Jones. You make the same point about
everything the corporate media says or everything the
mainstream alternative media says, but they just keep going
back for more. Some of them, anyway.
What do you mean by the term mainstream alternative media?
I I saw David Icke about a year or two ago using it and it was
the first time I've ever seen itbeing used.

(27:26):
Yeah, I think he coined it to behonest.
I think he's the one at least, you know, you know, really
popularised it. That's at least where I, I
picked it up from. And it is, you know, so the
mainstream media just representscorporate media, you know, like
the like a captured business, not about information, you know,
it is about using information tocontrol opinion.
That's self evident at this point on top of the fat and very
partisan driven elements. But on top of that, we can see

(27:48):
that it's been infiltrated by intelligence.
You know, there's 100 examples of that right to this very day.
So mainstream alternative media,in my opinion, first is the
extension of that same manipulation because they're
aware that nobody listens to mainstream mainstream media
anymore, right? So early on, and we're talking
like at least David would point back to like some of the earlier
days of like the independent media becoming really a

(28:09):
recognised thing that they were like immediately trying to Co op
people trying to, you know, start new, like, you know, get
people that like, like, and I don't know who you can make your
opinion, you know, decide about like a Megan Kelly Tucker.
But I think what's interesting is these are people that like I
said, like half a step removed from corporate media.
And now like, you know, we're we're calling out the the
problem and it just feels very suspicious to me, you know, any

(28:31):
number of them. But so then it evolved into a
little bit further, which we seetoday, which is like this clear,
kind of like, you know, not justthe people that moved away from
mainstream and started saying things, but people like, you
know, random that, you know, came out of nowhere, like random
TikTok guy that came out of win.Within six months, he's got 10
million followers and he's endorsed by everybody in the
field. Go ahead.
Ian Carroll does it. Well, there's one of them.

(28:53):
Yeah, there's plenty of them. You know what, it's interesting
to watch. And my my point is always that
I'll, I'll make it. A general point is, is that I
think right now the majority or let's just say a large part, if
not the majority of mainstream alternative media are people
that aren't even consciously aware that they're being used.
Well, you know, whether that's AI, literally don't see it
because I just don't care or it's willful ignorance.

(29:13):
I don't want to look where that funding is coming from because
then it will stop my momentum or, you know, whatever it is, or
audience capture through the same kind of mechanisms.
I think a lot of people are, youknow, being used in that way and
and are, you know, you people are you're a shill and they will
go, no, I'm not. And they truly believe they're
not. You know, it's like it's an
interesting development, but there are still the ones that I
think are absolutely knowingly like intelligence or working for

(29:35):
a foreign government or working for the US government or
whatever it is. Clearly, I think that's obvious.
But so that's what it is to me is kind of like the new
adaptation of that control structure through the the thing
that they saw taking over the structure, which is alternative
media. So they just mainstreamed it,
right, started Co opting, capturing, you know, creating
their own fake independent platforms, Newsmax and one
American news. You know, it's like it's just,

(29:55):
you know, on left and right, by the way, it's it's just your
government doing it. But that's what I mean by that.
And today it's just evolved intosomething that's becoming more
cartoonish by the day. How much of everything that's
going on around us, Ryan, do youthink is by design and by
emergence it's. Hard to say.
I would I, I would not question everything like if somebody was

(30:19):
like, I'm making a fair an argument about why they think
every single thing that we ever see is in some way influence
control. Honestly, that seems very
possible today and it would surprise me, but I do think
there's organic things. I mean, I like, I think I can
speak for myself which don't don't take my word, question
everything I do go look to the source material.
Don't take my word, but you know, I'm, I'm organic.
I'm honest, I'm not influenced by anybody.

(30:40):
I decide every day what I want to talk about.
The funding is by donation only.There's nobody you know, it's so
I know that there are organic things in this and I know that
we have some level of success. So I would never say that
there's not possible. There are people out there that
are genuinely doing things for the right reasons that get some
level of I just don't think we're ever at a point where
you're ever again going to see anything like organically go
viral unless that's something the structure wants to allow.

(31:02):
I think that has been the way for a long time.
And so, you know, it's hard. That paints a picture of even
if, like I said, even the peopleout there that may not know
they're being manipulated are insome ways being done in some way
being manipulated. So that that's just an influence
level. You can see how that can trickle
through almost everything we see.
I mean, the mainstream media, for example, or media Hollywood,

(31:24):
it's not a secret. I mean, if you know that
Pentagon, I was involved with movies like toy Toy Story, which
you can look up for yourself, you know, to propagandise you to
be pro America. It's like this is everywhere.
So there's nothing free. Anytime they have an opportunity
to try to put something in frontof you for even if they think
it's for your benefit, they rationalise that you thinking
that's going to save the country.
The point is still the same thatit's not real, right.

(31:45):
And so I think it's obvious thatwe're at a very weird state
where with algorithms and AI manipulation and large language
models and digital twins. And, you know, we're at a point
where I don't even think we truly grasp how far we've gone
to, to in that direction. You know, or you could take it
even a step further just to havea conversation about it for fun,
that maybe we're living in something that's not real in the
1st place. You know, it's like there's a

(32:06):
lot of different ways to look atit, but I, I think it's a lot of
what we deal with is just manufactured, influenced, lied
about, you know, sadly enough, but that's again something we
can change. Your Hollywood comment is
actually very, very well taken. I mean, if you think about any
movie that has the FBI or CIA init, they are always the good
guys. Well, you know, it's funny.
I, I, I agree with that. But there, there, there have

(32:28):
been time, like I've noticed a shift over the years where, you
know, there was a time like thatwas the case where it always
kind of seemed that it was, you know, they're saving the day.
And then there was a period where it almost kind of almost
always ended up being like the corporate villain who was taking
advantage of them. And that's not the same story.
But then it became like intelligence, like a like a, you
know, like Mission Impossible, where it is the US government

(32:49):
that's doing the bad thing, but it's also the US government
saving you. And the lot, the narrative is
the rogue agent that goes up on his own, you know, who saves you
from the villain government. OK, So the logic is don't get
mad when the government breaks the rules to save you.
Isn't that exactly what Trump's kind of overarching narrative is
right now? You know, it's just funny.
It's like the whole point is predicted programming, you know,
And that's the idea is these things are done not just to

(33:11):
subtly convince you that Americais great or whatever they want
you to think, but to convince you of very specific ideas.
Like here a weird example, whichwe could you could people
rightly if people have a reason,it's not illogical or how to say
that, right? The movie White Noise that came
out before East Palestine. It's just, I thought I just
talked about it again 2 days ago.
It's so weird, not the movie, but just East Palestine that you

(33:34):
could easily look at that and belike coincidence, you know what
I mean? But and crazy coincidence bound
right down to the smoke, the sky, the location, which is
insane, you know, or everything else that happened and just go
like, was there something to that?
You know, was this designed to to put, you know, give us a
certain impression about who knows?
But it's certainly like mathematically speaking, think

(33:56):
about how hard the odds of that at every location in the world,
this one place is the same place, which is the same way the
sky look, which is the same event, You know, it is really
weird. But I I think that that speaks
for itself. I can add to it.
You're saying during the COVID era, I stumbled across a movie
called Contagion. I don't know if you've heard of

(34:16):
it. Yeah.
Came out, I think in 2011. I'd never in my life heard of
the movie, and I watched it and the hair on my arms stood up
because everything was preciselyhow it played out.
Yep. Yeah.
Even the term, even the term social distancing was in the
movie. And I had never heard that term
before 2020. I know man.
And see this is the weird thing.Now you can go back and look,

(34:37):
can see that there were rumblings of this like outlines
and I'm sure you've seen that like, you know, and this was pre
COVID-19, but it was clearly used and introduced during this
time frame. But that they were having models
like, OK, let's let's not forgetevent 201 was before this all
started. Even before that you have
Crimson contagion, you've got event 201 or a, a dark winter.
And you know, there's tonnes of them.
And if you look back these exercises, there's even some for

(35:00):
spars going forward. We passed the date arguably was
supposed to happen, but you know, it's not always exact if
that's even the way that works. But the point is that in those
if you look, they sure as hell outline this stuff, you know,
social distancing, masks, different quarantine dynamics,
or even the idea of stuff that we never even heard of before.
Like you know what all everything we experienced all

(35:20):
the crazy things of the way theytreated elderly people.
But the weird thing was how in most of these like U.S.
government run exercises like spars, for example, if you read
this, it I still this still blows my mind.
They frame themselves as the villain.
They literally have part of the story where they the media
catches them lying about part ofthe story.
And I'm going like they're they framed themselves as the

(35:43):
deceptive liars. It's like, how do we not take
with that show? They know?
I mean, I mean, I don't know howyou would frame that.
Is that because they know we seethem that way?
Is that just sort of like undermined?
That's the truth? I don't know, but I still find
that very telling. And then what do you know?
They get caught lying about every single thing about the
story. You know, it's very weird.
But yeah, your point is well taken that this was either
socially engineered into our minds to sort of accept that

(36:04):
that's what would happen, or it was just something we're testing
our ideas on it. Like there's a part of that the
people don't think about. A lot of it can be just test in
the waters, you know, rolling itout in a specialised
circumstance to see how we respond or doing exercises with
communities and how do they act when we do that.
You know that happens a lot, by the way.
How do you philtre what you readand see?

(36:25):
How do you know what's true, andhow do you know what's not true?
Thank you. Question everything you don't
right until you can prove something.
And even then you still got a question whether you could be
missing something, right? And people hate that idea.
That's just being genuinely objective.
You know, it doesn't mean you, you know, just do nothing all
the time. The point is that, you know,
you, you look to source materialand you report based on what the
facts show as best you can, while always keeping your mind
open to the fact that you could be missing something.

(36:46):
Like you don't have to always state that, that that's, that
should be sort of self evident if we weren't in such a clouded,
ridiculous part of our, our history.
That's why that's I, I, I jokingly call it irritatingly
objective, even though it's justbeing objective.
You know, it's like people are just so unused to that.
But you know, it's, it's my process is everything I can and
it like, so let's take it like this.
East Palestine happens or, or anything like that.

(37:09):
I dive into the story media, right?
What are they saying about it? What's being reported?
Who's there? What's going on?
At least as they claim, Where's the source material to what
they're claiming? What are the what are the
agencies involved saying? Compare it to what they wrote,
right? Let's find.
And once you have someone like Scott C Smith on the ground, OK,
what is he seeing compared to what they said?
And you know, you keep these things saying go all the way
back six months later and go look at what they said day one,

(37:29):
that contradiction out, you know, things like that.
But you always question all of it.
None of us taken at face value, whether it's CNN or whether it's
an independent investigator or somebody right next to me
working all along my team, you know, it's like you question
everything and it shouldn't be insulting.
That's just because we could be wrong, right?
We could genuinely believe we'reright and be missing something.
And so you you absorb all of it.You can.
My point is, if you're just kindof looking at everything all

(37:50):
day, you have to kind of fine tune your, your focal point,
right? And so you go to a story and
you're investigating that story.My point is you look at every
possible data point you can and try and come to your own
conclusions about it. And you know, and usually you'll
find some kind of a, you know, aseries of information or you
know also, by the way, most important, I think precedent.
No, that doesn't prove right. But when these things start, you
go, OK, what's Norfolk Southern been involved in before, right?

(38:13):
What happened the last time there was an, a disaster?
How did they handle that? What do the narratives say?
What, what did it end up being? Right.
And then you look and you go, okay, there's some comparative
points here. And so, yeah, right there.
This is what mainstream media and mainstream tend to do is
that you go, you know, you kind of sprawl into that based on
that that happened. Therefore, we know they're
guilty. And even if they are guilty
later, you were still dumb and irresponsible for doing it based

(38:35):
on your assumption. That's the way this grows today.
But I get that. I think that explains, you know,
just everything you can possiblylook at.
And I think I try to err on the side of what you can prove or
always, if that's, you know, if it's available, that should be
the only thing you're really using to guide the story is what
you can actually prove on the ground what's actually
happening, you know? And then for me, I followed up
on these stories. They go forward.
You know what, what have they done things that people, you

(38:56):
know, the new story comes, the 24 hour news cycle goes crazy
and people drift in the background.
People don't find out that, for example, Norfolk Southern was
caught in court admitting that they withheld information from
the Volunteer Fire chief. That was that vinyl chloride was
actually treated vinyl chloride,which meant it was very unlikely
to explode. Still, most people don't seem to
know that. I've said that like 1000 times

(39:18):
on my show and Fire Chief himself alluded to the idea that
he was somewhat railroaded, no pun intended, in that same
point. Basically saying, you know,
giving him limited information and then like forcing him to
feel like he has to make a choice, choosing to explode this
and then finding out that it wasn't even necessary.
Like there I still argue there was something that happened
there, not to get off on that topic, but that we don't even
understand something very weird went down there beyond what else

(39:40):
happened. I'm convinced of that.
But you know, so the point is you keep following these things
and the stories become clear, you know, at least as much as we
can. And I you just got to continue
to be objective as it goes forward.
But do you question everything? I mean, I've had flat earthers
on my show and I must tell you, I've had some of the best
discussions with them. It's an interesting topic to
that very point. I had a show I did a long time

(40:01):
ago called, I think it was called flat.
I think it was just called Flat Earth theory Colon, an exercise
in keeping an open mind. That's what it was, you know,
And so I did and I researched just for quite a while because,
you know, same even to this veryday, I get people that are like,
you know. You didn't even look and here
you got to check this link out and it's like, you know, I look,
it does. Look flat though.
I mean, it does look flat if you're honest with yourself.

(40:22):
Well, no, no, the point, the point is that the, I mean, look,
I, I think my Long story short, I went through it very in depth
and, you know, everything anybody's ever sent me, plus
everything else I could find, and I researched my, you know, I
don't think that's what the evidence shows.
But what's interesting is that it's like, it's like with the
moon discussion, OK, if you findthings like Antarctica, if you
find all these different, you know, things you can prove, for

(40:43):
example, like faked photographs.Now, does that then prove they
didn't go? No, it proves something
happened. They lied for some reason.
One of the options could be that's the case.
Same with the Earth thing. OK, you know, there's all these
different examples that I think are, I think I conflated those
things, an Arctic Flat Earth. The point is that the moon or
any of those conversations, there's evidence to suggest that

(41:04):
something's awry. To jump to that that's what it
means in my opinion, is kind of like a self fulfilling prophecy.
You know, it could mean that there could be logic around
that. And there's plenty of very
interesting points to suggest, like Antarctica and and and and
is Colonel Byrd. Yeah, it's bird, I think.
I think it's Bird. It is Bird, but it's, I forget

(41:26):
it's a different Colonel or whatever he was his rank.
Was he Admiral Byrd? I think it's what it was.
He Long story short, I'm sure you remember there's very weird
stuff about what happened there and maybe no one's allowed to go
over. There's all these different
things around that story and including the scientific stuff
that I think is very strange. The radar stuff.
I agree. These things stand out to me as
you can't deny the weirdness of that.

(41:47):
What does that mean? Could mean that or it could mean
something else. So my Long story short, I don't
think that's what it proved, butyes, very much so.
Always an open mind. And I'll give you one more point
that I think is important. This kid, this people get put
this to me almost, they think it's going to be a gotcha
moment. Oh, yeah, I question everything.
What about God? I'm a Christian, right?
And I go, yeah, I leave it, you know, wait and see what they

(42:08):
say. Like as if, you know, most
people respond like what? You don't believe in God?
It's like, you know, you have tothink this through first of all,
now and I I never, I make a verybig point to not overlap my
religion with politics. I think they're they're
inherently counterintuitive. 1'sbased on faith, one's based on
facts. It's like I can't stand when
people in the mainstream alternative media blend their
religion with their politics. That's manipulation.

(42:29):
It's propaganda. Now my point though, is that in
this conversation, can I question whether God exists?
Yes. Question everything I question
do I think is it possible? That's not not yes, I do I
choose to have faith. That's what religion is.
If you think out there that you believe in God because you know
for a fact, then you don't understand how this works.
Probably you know it's inherently based on the choice
to have faith that that's the case.

(42:50):
That's my personal response. That's my personal life right
and so I choose that, but am I willing to consider a question?
Is it possible that I'm wrong? Yes.
That's not blasphemous because Ithen choose to have faith about
that. My point though, is that we
every single thing in our lives,everything we should be willing
to stand back and go is it possible that I'm wrong?
Is it possible there's somethingI'm not seeing the changes this
entirely and genuinely go yes, that is possible.

(43:13):
Then you're not being honest with yourself, right?
And that's an important thing. It's weird how how uncommon that
even is today. And I think that's by design.
But even saying that and explaining it as as I did that,
I think it's just very clear Youstill get people, people they're
Christians. They say, yeah, believe you're.
It's blasphemous. And I think it's just funny that
they've been convinced somehow that like, you know, same kind
of people, by the way, that would tell you that God sent

(43:34):
Trump, things like that, or, youknow, on both sides of the
paradigm. But a lot of it seems to centre
around, you know, somehow like this is some godsend idea.
And you talk about blasphemous, you know, that's idolatry, but
in a different conversation. You shouldn't be afraid of what
the answer might be, because if you're searching for the truth,
then the truth will be revealed.Yep, one way or the other.

(43:55):
And and the point is to questioneverything.
That doesn't mean deny anything.That's the whole, in fact, it's
funny how that gets taken as dismissing.
In fact, the words mean the opposite.
If you're questioning everything, you're engaging
everything, every source, every possible data point.
It's The funny thing is questioneverything's the tagline because
that's just a concise tagline. But the, the real idea is

(44:16):
question everything while considering all possibilities.
But that's not as nice to say, you know?
So it's just that's the real wayto look at that, you know, and I
think everyone's beginning to see that, especially today as I
mean, almost every 30 seconds now there's some new story
proving that the government liedor that these people in media
were lying about this or caught working for somebody else.
And, you know, and so people arejust one after another or
COVID-19 are starting to see that there's it's just smart to

(44:39):
question these things. I don't know how to ask this
question. So Ben Shapiro, I think he
coined the statement facts don'tcare about your feelings.
And I've and I've often, and I've often said that he's not
correct in that because human history is about storytelling
and narratives. Yes and no.
I mean, I think what you're talking about might be two

(45:01):
separate things like like so I would argue, especially with
what we do that there is empirical truth.
There's that doesn't mean we always agree on that like right.
I mean, there scientists can disagree on what they think is
the empirical truth, but I do think that there is one truth
about what we're talking about. You know about one there it
could that's that that's like the universal reality in my
opinion. You know that there is a
provable like the to argue, liketo argue that there are

(45:23):
different truths about one thingwould come from like a
philosophical like quantum mechanics kind of point.
You know, like like that we likethat your reality is only for
you. You know, it's a whole different
idea, but so if we're talking. About anism, yeah.
Yeah, right. But if you're just talking about
just information and we're not getting into the philosophical,
then there's the truth, right? There's one truth about 1 fact
or one idea, right? Did this happen or not?

(45:44):
There's one answer. Now we can debate that.
But so what's interesting is your point, though, is that
these the way that information can move is very much connected
with emotion, with feeling, with, you know, with just the
what's exciting. But at the same point, you know,
just how, how you can tell the story the right way.
And over the years, even before we had TV media, you know,
sitting on the fire, telling stories to keep history going, a

(46:05):
lot of times that became blendedwith what what made the story
exciting to repeat, you know, what got it to become a story
that people wanted to hear. And a lot of times that was
folded in with myth. And, you know, and, and these by
design in some cases to make sure that these stories
continued. You know, there's all sorts of
different things like that. But so I, I don't disagree.
I think there's a lot of that toit, but to Ben's to what Ben was

(46:25):
saying, which I agree with, eventhough today he's showing that
he doesn't agree with that, which I think is hilarious, is
that, you know, the point is facts are facts and they don't
care about whether you don't like them.
It's the real point he was trying to make, you know, at at
the time when he was pointing atwoke college kids doing the same
thing he's not doing for Israel,you know, and it's just too
embarrassing to watch. They literally don't tour about
cancel culture and and using, you know, shutting down speech.

(46:49):
And now they're doing the exact same thing for woke right Row
flakes and snowflakes. You know, it's the same thing.
But yeah, I, I think that it is important to consider both, you
know, that clearly emotion playsa factor and that's how
propagandists very much use it against you.
But that remember that there is,when it comes down to source
material and truth, that there'sjust one fact when we're talking
about the information. I got very excited now when you

(47:10):
said work right, because it's something that I've also pointed
out and I keep getting pushed back.
Oh, it can only exist on the political left.
No, it exists everywhere. Well, because it's not about
it's see, this is the people that say that only think woke
means pronouns and and and trans.
It's not what it means. It's just these these are this

(47:31):
is the way that they choose to view it like it.
OK, but even if you want to taketheir argument, wouldn't they
say cancel culture? Yes, they would, right.
So if we're talking about them shutting down speech around anti
semitism, even these people can obviously see that's the same
thing if if not just a slightly focused version of it.
I argue that's really what was the whole point.
Regardless, it's not about what it is.

(47:51):
I mean today clearly Zionism is real and the influence that's
important to them and that's whythat's the focus in one way.
But from the point of why it's being used from like a control
structure point, it's the same outcome.
It's about controlling speech orcontrol using speech to control
you, right, And not just to censor you, but to use that as a
justification to deport people, to arrest people, to remove

(48:12):
citizenship, to spy, to surveil to 100 different things we could
list off right. So it's clear that those things
both play a factor. But so obviously the woke right
or that we jokingly call the broflakes.
You know, it's like it's it's all about it's cancel culture.
It is, it is, is censorship around speech, right?
It's, it's, it's, it's, it's ideological manipulation.

(48:33):
I mean, that that's what this comes down to.
And it's, it's very clear to seethat it exists on both sides.
I mean, right now, like, for example, you saw people like
Libs of TikTok after the after the whatever you want to call
the shooting for Trump at ButlerThere, there was people that
there was, what was it? 1 was a woman who worked at Home
Depot who, Yeah, who made a verytasteless joke that said, man, I
wish the guy was a better shot or something like that.

(48:54):
Clearly she's talking about hoping Trump was killed.
But if you can't take a step back and realise how many people
on the right have made exactly similar comments about Biden or
whatever the point is, yes, that's distasteful.
But she obviously has a right tosay what she thinks, right?
And obviously done in a way thatwas meant to be a joke.
Point is, criticise it. But they went after her.
They found out who she was. They got her name, they got and

(49:16):
it was tweet, tweet and captain and quoted and they kept going
and, you know, lived with TikTok, shared it and they got
her fired from her job. Why was that not exactly what
the left was doing to anything they didn't like about the
right? You know, we all know it's the
same thing. If we're being honest with
ourselves, the people that are trying to scream it's not are
the ones that are only invested in one side of the paradigm, and
they're part of the problem, whether they know it or not.
Is Israel controlled by the US or is the US controlled by

(49:38):
Israel? That's a fair question.
And I think it's an opinion, youknow, and I think I think plenty
of people make the argument thatit's the US dictating.
And by the way, there's plenty of points that seem that make
that seem logical, you know, that the US is ultimately the
one dictating Israeli. And one of the larger reasons,
Israeli policy, one of the larger reasons people make that
point today is because, and rightly so, that you can see

(49:59):
that the US government, if they decided to, could stop funding
right now and the war would largely collapse, right?
And so you can easily go, OK, well, then they're controlling
it. But that's, that's, that's not
fact. That's a logical conclusion
based on the way that appears, right.
So clearly it's only one point though.
So to stop, to answer your question, I, I think it's
obvious if you look at my work, I think it's very obvious that

(50:19):
the Israeli government has shocking level of influence, if
not complete control over U.S. policy.
And what's wild today is it's I mean, it's gone so mainstream
that people Glenn Greenwald was just saying in regard to
Republicans being in Israel, that he I think his caption was
politicians going to speak at their home district when they're

(50:40):
in Israel talking to Netanyahu. Like that's what he's saying.
George Galloway talking about how weird it is that they're all
going to bow at the Wailing Wall.
Like these are things that used to be roundly called anti
semitism, even by some of them. And now it's like the point is,
it's not hard to see. It's not about I mean, look,
there's an overlap to religion because of what Zionism does.
And we can get into that if you want to the that sell them.

(51:02):
The leading Israeli human rightsgroup openly calls it Jewish
supremacism because that does exist.
But it's not just about Judaism.There's plenty of Jewish groups
that actively call out Zionism. So we have to be objective about
that, right? But clearly it does exist.
The point is that this is this overwhelming thing moving
religion from it. That is on the surface that you
can see not just AIPAC, but any number of ways that the Israeli

(51:25):
society, Israeli government, Israeli entity, Israeli
intelligence are like publicly immersed with what this country
is to the point to where half most of our Congress is willing
to go against their own constituents interest, interest
for what Israel wants. I mean, right on the surface,
shouting down people who are going to vote for them because
they don't think they're doing the right thing.
At what point have we ever seen that?

(51:46):
Historically, what we remember of politicians is they're wishy
washy. They'll say whatever they need
to say to get your vote right. Except when it comes to Israel.
That's a very common statement. Except when it comes to Israel,
when it comes to U.S. politicians, you know, it's,
it's very clear to me. The evidence is go far back.
Things you want to go shows thatthere has been provable evidence
of that, whether it's infiltration, assassination,
blackmail, you know, which is easily provable.

(52:07):
But then you go into things likeevidence of Netanyahu talking to
his own people, leaked evidence of him saying, oh, wait, it's so
easy to control the US government.
I put the left versus the right.I'm paraphrasing, but that's
what he was insinuating. And it's so easy to manipulate
them. Don't worry, we can control
them. You know, it's like very clear
or how many times that he has driven the US government, you
know, to war, right, for the Israeli government, like every

(52:28):
single one from, you know, you can go down the list has been
for Israel, you know, so it's obvious that's the case.
But I, I would argue that's verysimilar to a lot of other places
in the world. Now, I can't speak to as much
insight like I, I'm focused on what's happening here, but the
UK, France, for example, it's, Ithink it's the same thing.
I think it's of Germany. I think it's very obvious and
whether that's just oh, good, good, good.

(52:48):
So. I was going to say JFK wasn't
all that keen on Israel though. Yeah, really the good point,
right. So JFK, it was just before he
was killed, the two main things that are about what were
happening was he was calling to register APAC as a foreign
agent. And it was, I think it was
called something different when that was happening.
But the point was they were theywere trying to register them.
And I've covered in the show, I'm just blanking on what it's

(53:09):
called. They registered, He wanted them
to register as a foreign agent under FARA.
Then he died and they changed the name and they pretended it
was an American company. And it's, you can look it up in
Wikipedia. It was an Israeli thing.
They that was created by Israeligovernment and Israeli people.
And it was not about just Americans in Israel or in the
United States who are Jewish. It's Israeli company or rally in
a group, then it's, it's right. It's easy to prove.

(53:30):
And so they became the most influential lobby, over 80% of
politicians on left and right very clear.
That's a that's a an obvious problem.
But my point was it was JFK. So that was one thing and it was
the other thing was the Damona Nuclear Research plant research
facility. They wanted that to go away
because clearly they were working on nuclear weapons,

(53:50):
right? And JFK died and those things
went back to the background there.
That's not hard to see, right? And we all can.
I mean, it's provable evidence today they have nuclear weapons
and they only country in the world that's we even give a name
to it, not publicly, but in the background.
It's called nuclear ambiguity. Only country in the world that
gets that. And they've even accidentally
said they've gotten them many times.
And the US government still refuses to acknowledge that

(54:13):
there's, you know, you can only have so many one thing.
Like, how do you say it like that?
There's things that happen that you don't see happen anywhere
else other than the relationshipbetween the US and Israel.
And I mean, like, not just like their friends, you know, passing
random things, but like weird anomalies or things they choose
not to say or things they'll do against their interests.
And it's only in this relationship.

(54:34):
So, you know, this is my point is everyone does see this and
I'm not trying. I, I rarely am hyperbolic.
I'm rarely kind of the kind of person that will make a
statement even like that. But I've been saying it's like
with COVID or anything else, guys, it's, it's easy to see the
whole world ever other than the governments that are
manipulated, the people broadcast propagandising around
it are very aware of what's going on right now, just to
varying degrees and what they think is happening, but at least

(54:55):
that they're committing a genocide in plain daylight that
everyone's a part of that they don't want to stop.
It's just insane to me. It's coming for landing.
Give me a nugget of wisdom, a parting thought.
Well, you know, it's kind of like the stuff we talked about
today. My, my whole thing today.
You know, what I'm really tryingto stress on people is stress to
people is, you know, we have these moments throughout

(55:15):
history, and I've seen there's been plenty of them in the past,
where you, you have these moments of awareness or, or
other different, you know, kind of things, moments of possible
change that are, that are very clear, right?
People are, you know, that we're, let's put it this way,
that the power structure is for one reason or another, kind of
vulnerable. And it's obvious that we have a
moment to do something right now.
And, you know, I was saying the same thing when like we had this

(55:37):
really worldwide kind of moment for a week or so and it still is
continuing. But like right around when the
protests were starting in colleges, right?
And of course, you saw this massive thing that turned into
framing them and lying about what they were doing, you know,
and turning it into they're all racist and they Jews, even
though it was put on by Jewish organisations, even though there
was largely Jews that were there.
It's insane what happened. But the point is that then bold

(55:58):
over into what the immigration thing is.
But the point was this became a worldwide movement.
I talked about this. It was like I was, I was like
moved by it. And, and this wasn't, you know,
people in this country love to box everything into left and
right as we see it, but it's notthe same everywhere.
There's different, different conservative, liberal leanings.
But the point is that along around the world, people from
all walks of life, all religions, all different

(56:19):
political standings were screaming about this.
Not just that we need to stop what they're doing, but the the
kind of the sentiment that we are all Palestine, right?
That this is not about Palestinians alone.
Yes, what they're genocide, whatthey're doing to them is the
most important thing to me in the world right now.
But the point is that this is larger than that.
And they know that they're the ones trying to tell you that.
Like the whole argument that they always say that if we don't

(56:39):
stop Hamas, you're next. The reality is the other way
around, right? The reality is that if we don't
stop what they're doing, which we're already seeing, ask
Lebanon, ask Syria, ask Egypt, ask anybody else in the greater
Israel, you know, boundary, and then beyond that, what they're
already talking about Smotrich and the rest.
So the point is that this is going to expand.
And let's be clear, biblical rather religious Zionism, which

(57:01):
seems to be half of Trump's cabinet, if not more.
Huckabee Hegseth, like openly, proudly Miller.
They believe, and you could ask Smotrich and Ben Kvir and the
rest, they believe that the Westhas to collapse before the, you
know, Israeli government to makeit simple.
Well, kind of control the world.That's America first.
There are people that are in Trump's cabinet who who believe
that that's how this should go. You know, So just recognise that

(57:24):
we're at a moment where we can actually step up and change this
and the world sees it. I've never seen a better
opportunity to see something really change.
And, you know, maybe we can talkabout living in a world with no
government. I'd love to have that
conversation, but that might be a little too much for people.
But just see how we can change things today.
And I do think it's it's more possible than ever.
So thanks for having me on, brother.
I'd love to do this again. Just quickly how can I follow

(57:45):
you? The the, any platform for the
most part, the tag, the tag is usually TLA, Vagabond, Twitter
or Gab, anything else. But as always, I recommend, you
know, and like I mean literal, most platforms other than the
ones we've been censored from, which are quite a few, you can
find us that way. But I recommend, as always,
going directly to the website thelastamericanvagabond.com.

(58:05):
And I always say, don't let the platforms, whether the ones you
trust or not, be the conduit between you and our information.
Go right to the source, right? Go to what we're saying on the
website, you know, and, and thenfrom there, if you want to, you
know, broaden out or, or rather do that to any websites you
like, right? But go right to the source.
I think that's important both because of, you know, you're, if
you're supporting us through YouTube or Rumble, well, you're
really supporting Rumble to a degree, you know what I mean, as

(58:27):
opposed to going right to the site and watching it there.
I think that's important. But thelastamericanvagabond.com
and we will have more coming around a few other things like,
well, I guess I don't think it'sa website, but we're going to be
having like an IMA page for the Independent Media Alliance on
the Odyssey portal coming. And I'll point that as it comes
along. But yeah, large of the website.
So thanks for having me on.