I'm a computer programmer.
Mister Curtis, are there programs that can be
used to secretly fix elections? Yes. How do
you know that to be the case?
Because in October
of 2000, I wrote a prototype
for president Congressman Tom Feeney
at the company I work for in Oviedo,
Florida that did just that.
And when you say did did just that,
it would rig an election? It would flip
the vote 5149.
Whoever you wanted it to go to and
whichever race you wanted to win.
And would that program that you designed be
something that elections officials
that might be on county boards of elections
could detect? They'd never see it.
Mister Say that again.
Would you answer that question once again? They
would never see it.
So how would such a such a program,
a secret program that, fixes the election, how
could it be detected?
You would have to view it either in
the source code or you'd have to have
a receipt and then count the hard paper
against the actual boat tow. Other than that,
you won't see it.
Welcome to the daily wrap up, a concise
show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant
independent news as we see it from the
last 24 hours.
Saturday, August 31, 2024.
Thank you for joining me today. Focus show
to a degree,
kind of around a lot of what we've
been discussing.
But, obviously, after we've discussed this recent kind
of collaboration we're putting forward,
a lot has kinda come out of the
woodwork and I felt that was important to
I we've been saying I mean, I I've
talked a lot over the years, Election after
election, selection after selection around my opinions around
voting, the 2 party illusion. This is hardly
anything new. I mean, in last year, their
last election, at times when we had reasonably
the same amount of influence. So it's an
odd shift to see this suddenly such an
important and concerning and and, you know, like,
people were talking about what this is as
if it's like the a huge threat to
what's really going on. Just simply our discussion
about what our opinions are around voting, options
that are outside of that. It's a very
interesting development to see, and so I wanted
to talk about this today,
about the shift around this topic, and and
really just go through my opinions. And kind
of as I've been saying recently that we'll
get more into that as we get closer.
This is one of those shows today to
begin that or continue, but begin that focal
point more so as we get closer to
the election. So we're gonna be talking a
lot about that today, the 2 party illusion,
voting, you know, as, we're gonna I've recently
invited Larkin Rose to come on the show
because I'm a big fan of his work.
We've never connected before. But, as you know,
his discussion, his books, his excellent overview of
the the most dangerous superstition, as he calls
it, which is not so much just voting,
but more so our belief that the government
has a right to have authority over your
life. And this is something that's such a
core problem around
the the way that we are controlled
in the world, but in you know, from
my perspective today or the conversation
in the United States.
And this is such a difficult conversation. This
is why I often a lot of the
people follow this a long time. You hear
me say certain things over the years around
certain topics. One being, I'm more I'm pretty
much against government in general, but most people
aren't ready for that. And that's usually where
I leave that because they're not.
Now that is usually framed as I mean,
it's funny. I was still even just watching
a movie the other night where the very
premise of the the boogeyman, the big evil
terrorist man, was that he was trying to
point out that all governments were illegitimate and
that we need to remove them.
Interesting how that you know, and this is
kind of one of the newer movies, and
I I find that very interesting. Because the
reality is that there is a very valid
argument
about why government as an entity or as
a concept
is a problem. Now, of course, I could
be wrong. Of course, I could be missing
something, and I'm always discussing those possible
you know, being objective in these conversations. Not
saying that you're all wrong and I know
this is the case. I'm very
I feel very confident about my opinions. But
as you all know, I'm very open and
actively considering even when I know that I
like, let's just say something that I'm they
they feel a 100% confident about. I will
go into considering the sides of these opinions.
I've done this many times over the years
with all sorts of different topics.
So it's interesting to see how this has
changed recently around this recent announcement,
and a lot of people have found this
very
see this as the right direction. And we've
and I'm gonna go over a lot of
this stuff today as I've already been discussing.
I'll show you the shows over the last
couple of days to show you some kind
of building up to this conversation, making different
points around the idea of what this is
and what we do in general about being,
you know, about unity and collaboration and not
saying listen to us and nobody else's way
as as pretty much the rest of the
mainstream alternative media or all of it actually
is.
And framing us that way because of us
highlighting problems within that dynamic.
And it I I shouldn't go over to
we'll we'll I'll make these points as we
go through it. But what's interesting to me
is how important this conversation has always been.
And quite frankly, more than ever right now.
And that's why I titled it the way
I did today because I've been saying this
throughout different topics and I think I've been
proven right during the COVID 19 illusion.
My point was that this is something that's
been shifting people's opinions. It's not partisan. And
that scares the establishment and a lot of
people didn't wanna see it as anything other
than partisan and point to the other side
didn't really wanna digest that, but it was
clear. Same with Israel and Gaza. This is
not about partisanship. And even people like Greenblatt
in their leaked video will tell you that.
It's not a partisan issue, despite them in
public saying the opposite. What does that tell
you? The partisanship, the 2 party dynamic, or
in other countries, the different the idea of
divide and conquer, creating part, the a false
dichotomy to get you to invest within it,
and then using that to keep you from
seeing the reality. A Plato's cave kind of
dynamic where we think we're seeing the full
picture, but at the end of the day,
we're only watching the controlled dynamic that they
want you to see in order to keep
you pacified.
Now, again, as always, I could be wrong.
But the idea that people with so much
evidence pointing in that direction and almost everything
we talk about from any partisan conversation
seeing part of that story, but only insofar
as it shows the party they don't like.
So my point is we all see it,
but yet resistant to it when it comes
into conflict with something that you've wrapped your
identity around. And that's it's, you know, it's
okay. Like, this is the point about conservatives
and republicans,
or rather,
conservatives and and liberals, or, you know, republicans
and democrats. The idea being that people out
there obviously identify with these things, and I
would argue people that are honest about it
don't flip flop parties based on who's winning
or what want. The idea that you have
principles you stand by.
And you can call the rest of the
people in that party not what you are,
but you wouldn't jump away and say, no,
my principles changed. The principles are what matter.
And that's my point is you can identify
as one of these things, like, as, you
know, you as your principles, what you believe
in, what you think is classically classically conservative
or liberal. But the idea being that these
actual
party that as we call team sport politics
is being used to keep the people invested
in this so in so so much that
they it's become their identity, not the principles,
but the idea that just being a part
of that side
is more important to you. And that side
winning is more important to you than your
actual principles.
We're seeing that in a shocking display right
now. Whether it's RFK and that conversation and,
again, I'll even argue that it's logical explanation
about why he did it. Of course, that
makes sense. It all adds up. It's a
logical answer. But it doesn't change the fact
that you lay out your principles
and then go, but, well, I might be
able to do more here and so we're
gonna ignore those principles. And, again, you may
even think that makes the most sense. What
I'm trying to show you is that constantly
falling into picking the least bad option I
How have we ever been convinced that that
would drive us in a positive direction? The
idea being that we do it this time
and next time it'll be better. Show me
one time that's worked. Look back through this
cycle of doing the same thing and how
do we not recognize
that they say, This is the most important
election of our lifetime? Every single two
years.
That's why. Because it's always the same hype.
They recognize that it's coming to a point
where it's
not sustainable anymore. And that's what we're focusing
on. That's what we're teasing with these conversations
and for and obviously, it has struck a
chord. Both with people that are like, thank
God there's some,
actual conversation and not just driving into camps.
And then the other side, because it is
scaring the people invested in the status quo.
That's the way I perceive it. I think
it's a very important conversation. Now today, in
general,
there's 2 main things we're gonna watch for
those that watch this on the regular. And,
you know, I I consider this to be
pretty much a family show other than all
of the, you know,
I I don't wanna say graphic, but just
intense conversations. And sometimes, yeah, we're looking at
war scenes and so on. But I think
it's important for people to see these things
whether, you know, we if you're old enough
to be able to digest any kind of
news, and I think that's important. My in
in saying that, I wanna make sure you
guys hear this today that there's multiple points
in which there's gonna be,
today, cursing, not on me. I mean, I
just try not to do that in general
on the show, but some clips I'm gonna
play as well as some pretty crude,
you know, in in there's some comedy and
some other things that go into some levels
that I just would argue that just be
prepared. You know, maybe you don't want your
kids listening or hearing that. But I think
it's important. It does come to a point.
So one is actually a George Carlin clip
that we'll play. I think it's just funny,
but at the same time, it's, you know,
it's up to you to decide. I think
it's important to hear things even though I
think, frankly, cursing is the least concerning of
all things we could deal with. So that
being said, I think that that's a good
starting point. Then we're also gonna talk about
Israel as the overlap to a lot of
this stuff both as it pertains to voting,
APAC, but also just a discussion to end.
And and actually to start, actually, I'm gonna
I forgot. I didn't play that clip right
there. I for I just realized I played
the wrong clip to open. I'm just gonna
play this clip next since I want to
start with this.
Because today, I have a whole lot that
I put off around Israel that we're gonna
get to. And in general, since you guys
can tell, I'm I'm feeling much better with
my arm. But I've gotta be honest, it
still
doesn't it still hurts, but I'm just tired
of wearing this thing and I'm tired of
trying to you know? Anyway, but it might
end up
making me take another day off here and
there, but I feel on in the mend
in general. But my point is that I
have I put off a lot till tomorrow
and unless I feel like it's hurting more
than usual, I'm gonna do my best to
do a show tomorrow. So, like, a 90%,
I'm gonna make that happen. And I'm gonna
talk about a lot of that tomorrow in
regard to Israel.
But I'm gonna play at the end today,
we're gonna talk about a focus point around
the idea of free speech.
And the interesting focal point of people like
Elon Musk and others within this that are
seemingly, you know, free speech warriors that we're
gonna they tell you despite the fact that
they're actively censoring people on a regular basis,
but going after other conversations in the world
and saying, see,
we're the reason that we're whoever fighting for
free speech and it might and I I'll
even agree with some of the points they're
making. But I think the idea of framing
themselves as the counterbalance is part of the
manipulation.
And weird how none of them wanna point
out how aggressively Israel is going after all
of these different Americans
for having opinions.
And I'm talking about not just direct
aggressive action to get them arrested or removed,
but censorship through channels,
like, through different avenues and channels or just
through platforms. By the way, quite obviously on
Twitter, but they don't wanna address that apparently,
anybody, it seems. My point is that someone
like Sarah Wilkinson Wilkinson
or, Richard Medhurst or and people that are
getting arrested
by foreign governments, by the way, the ones
theirs point, well, I wanna look at France.
Look at Brazil. Look at what they're doing.
Weird how you don't care when, in this
case, people from the UK, but other examples
of people that are from the United States
are being arrested for saying things against Israel.
But it's funny how that doesn't come up
in the conversation.
Very selective outrage about what should or should
not happen. Another interesting point about RFK junior
coming out 2 days ago and saying,
freedom of speech doesn't exist without freedom of
reach. Paraphrasing. It's like, oops. That might have
been an accident. A little bit of a
confusion in your pair in your talking points
seeing as how that's exactly the opposite of
what Twitter is selling and you're supposed to
be this sort of unified front right now.
I find it very interesting. But we'll come
back we'll get to that and possibly more
in Israel if we end up getting through
this with enough time. But I'm gonna play
this clip to start just because since we're
not gonna focus on it today and we
will have an overarching point of how in
Israel is being ignored in the paradigm or
influenced everywhere, that really does matter today with
how aggressive and obvious and almost all consuming
it is, this is what's going on in
Israel that we're gonna get to more tomorrow.
The world,
without question,
sees this.
People are falling out left and right or
and I don't even mean for the paradigm,
but that too,
calling this out. Genocide, starvation,
rape, torture.
The worst of the worst of the worst
and everybody in this election and most every
powerful entity is supporting. And I don't even
wanna say supporting. I would just say standing
by
probably because of a lot of coercion, a
lot of threats, a lot of blackmail. Who
knows? But at the end of the day,
it matters, doesn't it? That the lar the
most obvious and and in my opinion, the
worst genocide we've ever seen because of the
frame, because of the amount, because of the
the time frame. I mean, everything about it
and all of them are blindly, not just
supporting it, but pushing further to competing with
each other to see who will be more.
And I still think that the idea is
that Trump is the one that's been selected
here, which is why Kamala, I'll point out
today, is making points that seem to that,
I mean, the the the momentum has begun
despite her bowing to Israel that she's somehow
the anti semite now. Funny how the Democrats
have become the racist anti semite, and 30
seconds ago, it was everyone with the red
hats. How we can't see this flip flopping
paradigm manipulation, I will never know. But here's
a clip to show you another person from
the intelligence community, from a a Jewish person,
from, in within Israel and the idea of
who's telling you that he had to leave
because they're committing genocide, and he knows it.
Now, again, I I think that's true from
the US side.
Israel's response to October 7th troubled former army
major Harrison Mann from the start. They were
dropping 6,000 bombs a day. They were
burning through munitions. Exhausting their supply. You know,
it was very easy to link
our support, which I was part of,
to
the the killing in Gaza. What bothered this
intelligence officer specializing in the Middle East the
most? His view that the Israelis were targeting
Palestinian civilians indiscriminately
and that US weapons made it possible. Were
the Israelis
using American weapons
against civilians in Gaza? I can say
almost certainly yes, but were they doing so
intentionally? I don't know how you kill
35,000 civilians by accident.
Israel insists it's doing its best to limit
civilian casualties
and that Hamas uses civilians as human shields,
But that wasn't enough. Weeks later, Mann resigned,
later explaining in a letter. At some point,
whatever the justification,
you're either advancing a policy that enables the
mass starvation of children
or you're not.
You felt your work was direct
Just to be clear, he said mass starvation.
Directly connected
to starving children.
Yes. There's gonna be times when there's members,
that that have different views. Certainly, you're right
to to go ahead and and get out,
and I'll just leave it at that. I
decided I would resign. More than a half
dozen government officials have publicly resigned to protest
US support for Israel's war.
Man is the first from the military,
the first from the intelligence community, and the
first who's Jewish. I think it's important to
understand just this is from a security
perspective.
Israel is not under
existential threat. And what do you say
to
Now that's important. Right? Whether or not you
agree or whether you think it's wrong. Like
the fact that this is somebody who has
seen far more than the average person. He's
on the inside of this. He's been involved
with the dynamic. He knows what they're seeing,
what they're ignoring.
They are not under existential threat. Now this
is opinion, obviously,
but I find it really fascinating that these
things are given no credence. And guess what
the answer is? You're a racist.
Because guess what? That's just about the only
answer. It is only growing in how obvious
this is just extreme
desperate deflection in every possible angle. Oh, yeah.
We're raping people? You're a racist. Oh, yeah.
We're murdering children? You're a racist. Oh, yeah.
We're starving people. You're a racist. Despite all
the evidence in every group everywhere around the
world, you're all just racist.
And in fact, the reality is the the
only people in this context that or I
should say, I'm sure again as always, there's
gonna be racist in any category, but by
and large, the only aspect that's being racist
in this dynamic are the ones that are
constantly saying everything's about the Jews. Guess who
that is? Zionism.
American Jews who would say to you, what
are you talking about? If you are somebody
who
is really motivated by the concern to protect
Jewish life, you should be fighting for
them to conduct it in a way that
does not turn basically the whole world against
them. Exactly. And there's a very, very valid
point by people very knowledgeable in the situation
that make the argument that this, whether allowed
to happen or not or designed or whatever
you wanna think about what happened on 7th,
but going forward at the very least is
being leaned into because it is allowing the
justification.
Zionism was at a point where they were
more exposed than ever, sorta like the 2
party illusion. I think there's a connection there.
And at the end of the day, clearly,
people started pushing back and calling things out.
There were more groups than colleges and everything
else, and suddenly,
you know, this is a used event.
That's not up for debate, guys. It's quite
the Israeli population are saying that. There's an
article I'll talk about tomorrow from Haaretz that
just came out saying they're using the October
7th,
ceremonies
to to I don't wanna misquote it, but
it was either divide or to do state.
The point is that the Israeli media and
Israeli people are the ones calling most of
this out right now. They're you're just not
being shown that by the west.
Typical.
The grandson of Jews who fled the anti
Semitism of Eastern Europe knows his stance will
create some harsh blowback. I didn't really feel
like I had that much of a of
choice. But he feel Right. Because he actually
understands what never again means. Not just never
again for people you don't like
or for the people that you want to
protect or however you wanna frame that, but
simply that it's a reality that committed genocide
is wrong. It's amazing that we have to
convince people of that. Because the only way
to influence US policy
is to no longer assist those who make
it. Right. Jim Axelrod, CBS.
Important.
Guys, that's CBS for crying out loud. In
no way does that mean CBS is suddenly
a truth teller. It means that everybody,
everywhere
recognizes the writing on the wall.
Israel,
Zionism more specifically, has failed.
And it's be and and literally, it's for
no other reason in this moment than their
own genocidal belligerence.
Because there's plenty of other reasons that's built
to this point, but they were managing and
controlling the the the illusion and the narrative
around it pretty damn well despite how flimsy
their propaganda seems to have always been. But
today, because of that belligerence, they have shifted
the conversation. And by the way, that's also
happening a lot of other ways. Now it
doesn't have to always be connected, but it's
hard to see that it's hard not to
see the connection political spectrum in this country
with how overwhelming the influence is and how
this is also falling apart. Now I'm I'm
gonna include the shows we just went over.
The last 2, just in case you missed
it, which I'm sure
these are both basically 4 hour shows, so
I recommend you do your best to if
you want to. You know? Do it and
watch them. But if you want to, go
through and watch these because there's a lot
of important overlap and kinda building to some
of the stuff we're gonna talk about today.
27th, the 2024 Zionist selection,
democrats take over republican party, and the digital
ID sleepwalk. All a lot of the similar
stuff today on top of the fact that
I'll make another point about the democrat coup
of the republican party, which I you probably
know it's actually what happened, but I think
it's funny that that's ignored when in any
other context, it would be concerning to them.
And I even see threads of the Republican
conversation
saying, you know, I don't know. There's a
lot of like, I'll I'll make a point
about it later. We'll get to it where
I think the health rater's like, don't panic.
It's okay. These are the Democrats that see
it. It's like, okay. I guess you just
pick and choose which ones you like. And
I just think it's funny how it's in
in any other context, it would be concerning
if they and if they hadn't
spoke up about something before they were acknowledged
as now on our side, they would've been
reflexively dismissed.
See? So all and all that matters in
that context is that you've said, now you're
on my side. It's pretty arbitrary. It's TeamSport
politics. Right? Now this one as well, the
next one, we get into the West Bank
conversation. Israel invades West Bank, curfew in Massachusetts
due to suspect
mosquito
encephalitis risk and the monkeypox deception. We go
to a lot of information on this. The
the, the and and again, peep put put
the the word invade is not incorrect here.
I am aware they're occupying West Bank, but
I'm talking about the physical invasion, like marching
in like storm troopers into the area.
Which is incredible. I mean, it's it's unprecedented.
It's got very little coverage from the west,
shockingly, I know. But then the
curfew in Massachusetts due to a con a
concern of a mosquito spread illness and I
go over the the GM mosquitoes overlap, the
I mean, everything that I've I'm convinced is
literally responsible for what they're doing and the
monkeypox deception overall, make sure you check it
out.
So let's start today with this point and
the content and this is this is one
thing I feel like I'm quite frankly part
of me is I don't really wanna this
stuff I think is less important overall
than what else is going on in the
world, but I do see that this is
important as it is
showing me how
insecure that's the wrong word. How
as we're talking about, like, the 2 party
illusion is more vulnerable is more vulnerable than
ever.
And the fact that this the way the
response that we got from this. Now if
you haven't seen this by the way, Derek
put this tweet out. Whitney, Derek, and I
had a long conversation over a couple of
days about
the the fact that people were highlighting and
the opinions, by the way, that we've had
pretty damn consistently since, I don't know, as
far back as you can look. 2 party
illusion, exit and build, the idea that we
see, in our opinion, that this is a
controlled structure.
I mean, how long have I been talking
about voting? And and, like, and there's a
lot of people that seem to be like,
yeah. I get it. And both sides seem
to call it out only as it serves
their side in that moment, but, you know,
that's the point
is, why now?
Why the sudden, reflexive, extreme pushback to a
simple coordination between us and other people that
have similar opinions? The idea of framing this
like you're
like some new click and you only listen
to us, hardly. Like, it's I mean, if
you have any understanding of what we do
and by the way, if you already watch
my show, I addressed this kinda before this
all spun out. Remember what I said? Exactly
that. Like, if you know our work, if
you understand how our our consistency,
or let's just say you don't, And you're
listening to conversations about these people are black
filled, they're trying to sell you into a
look at what we say, for crying out
loud. Look at our work. Look at the
principal stances and the consistency
for a decade
about having alternative paths and solutions, and I'm
gonna go through this.
So my point is, at a core at
the beginning, it is wildly dishonest the way
this is being regarded. Now look, if you
wanna argue that what we're doing is leading
you down the wrong path, that may that's
certainly something you can consider. Certainly possible. I
disagree.
But to take it one step further as
usual
and frame it as somehow
surreptitiously
guiding you in the, you know, into or
calling it a psyop of learned
helpless helplessness. It's it's incredible. Because
anything in this conversation, if anything is learned
helplessness, it is
well, I know they're all terrible, but one
is just less. And so what else are
we gonna do? Yeah. That's not learned helplessness.
We're over here going, look, here's other options
and other choices. And if you wanna vote,
do that anyway, but recognize that we don't
think it makes a difference.
And that's supposed to be black pill I
mean, it's just incredible. And it what it
really does show me is a is a
desperation,
a vulnerability
to go after the thing that seems to
be at the right moment, in the right
point in time,
truly breaking this down for people that are
going, ah, okay. That does make sense. That
is confusing and I have recognized that. And
it's scaring some of these people. That's my
opinion. I could be wrong.
So Derek announced this, the Independent Media Alliance
is real. And at this point, really, it's
just the the way we framed it. I
mean, right now, it's just a loose collection
of people that all see these certain things
and we have it's all building right now.
The idea right now of and just so
it was clear as we if you've heard
us talk about it, we're there's we're I
think we've all agreed that money is not
even gonna be part of this. This has
nothing to do with that. We're not making
some official like, outside of potentially, like, a
a platform idea and we discussed this out,
in in the open conversation of this. There's
people that have reached out to us like
Odysee. That wanna build a like a, central
point of our information flow and stuff like
that. And we haven't even sure we wanna
do that either. We're still conversing about this.
We're trying to be very careful and objective
and my point we talked about recently is
extreme transparency.
You will never wonder why this is happening
or who's behind what. It's always gonna be
very clear what's going on. And we we
put we sent out an email to people
that we felt were as we talked about
COVID, Israel, Gaza, and the 2 party illusion
that have been very consistent from the beginning
of these conversations.
I do wanna say at this point too,
I'm sure there's people out there that maybe
feel slighted that you weren't included. It's please
don't take it that way because this point,
it's multiple people deciding and we're always airing
on the side of don't include if any
one of us might not agree and, you
know, so ultimately and really it's about consistency
from a very beginning point. And I'm sure
there are people out there that think they're
in that category and you and you may
be. Just please don't take it as a
slight because this is a whole building thing
and it's still in the reach out to
us if if you're interested.
But at the end of the day, it
is about coordinating with content. I don't mean,
like, discussing the same
show titles or I'm talking about, like,
sharing each other's work, going on each other's
interviews, doing panels and discussions, and even and
we've even openly talked about inviting people that
are not in this, who have different opinions
to make sure we have different views, rising
up people that and this is the part
that I'm really excited about. People that are
out there on Twitter, on different platforms, YouTube
or Rumble or whatever else,
who are having conversations
like this
that just don't ever get reached because of
the algorithms today. Like, I find I don't
even know how it's possible that any of
us broke through all this stuff, but some
of us have managed to get some following
and we still feel the pressure and the
suppression
everywhere, especially right now on Twitter. The point
is that we wanna find those people out
there that have very, you know, a principle,
objective, and long consistent stances
that we can raise up and say, look,
these people are smart. They know what they're
talking about. They just don't have a large
following because the system doesn't want them to
in their opinion anyway.
So all that's to be said all that's
to say that this is something that we're
beginning.
And I think it really does start to
worry some people because it's getting momentum and
people are interested. Now just to start, Mark
says, well, I appreciate these journalists and this
I kind of already addressed it.
Isn't this a bit condescending that we should
only receive information from the correct sources? And
if you weren't correct at the right time,
then you are excluded from the special lines?
Now, look, again, I I guess you could
read it that way but that's not correct.
Right? Because the point is that this is
about just I mean, you have to have
a starting point. We have to have some
general criteria to begin what we're trying to
talk about.
And and as Derek writes, anyone and everyone
is free to form their own organizations with
their own criteria. Right? We're not trying to
box anybody out. And we're not even trying
to like, how often do I say that?
Which probably irritates half the audience. It certainly
could be wrong. No one in this group
is trying to say, we are a 100%,
no matter what right, everyone else is wrong.
We, as anybody else, believe in our opinions.
I believe I'm correct. But we are open
to other perspectives. That's like anybody anywhere. In
fact, it's the opposite of what you get
in the mainstream alternative media and the corporate
media, which is that. This is the truth.
You're wrong. Am I wrong? Man, it's what
we see in every damn context of the
corporate media and mainstream alternative media conversations.
So this is about a starting point
and hopefully getting more people to have opinions
that are outside of the paradigm. Because I
think we all know I mean, look. Here's
what's funny. The right will tell you the
left is the problem. The left will tell
you the right is the problem. So clearly,
we all see in some way or another
that the paradigm is the problem.
It's just selective on how far you wanna
go. So it's really funny that we'll go
the paradigm is the problem and they all
freak out and say, not this person. I'm
not talking about Mark. I'm talking about the
general conversation. That somehow that we're
tricking people or something. And at the end
of the day, you're making the same point.
You're just only making about one part of
it.
So to be clear, this is going to
expand. Right? And and the point is about
not saying this is the truth or the
source, but rather let's discuss
what these things may mean. Let's look at
different source material. Let's have conversations and debates
and panels and
distill it down to something that we all
generally think is the right direction.
I mean, that's the best anybody can ultimately
do. Now to me, that seems like a
very valid direction. Of course, no matter how
well or clearly I explain
this, I think there's a very clear
dishonest effort to make this look like something
that is not what it is in order
to
undermine
what is a clear threat to the status
quo. Not just us, but anybody
informing people and gaining momentum about it that
you're being tricked,
that you're being played. Not with one thing
or the other, but just in a general
sense, in this dynamic, in our political spectrum,
every single day of your life whether it's
the corporate media or the voting process in
general, we are being manipulated. And it again,
at certain points we all seem to be
able to see that.
Now Derek said we are already seeing the
narrative come together that Whitney,
myself, and Derek are blackpilled,
which again, I'm it's just it's almost I
couldn't even believe this is being stated,
or promoting learned helplessness.
This is the farthest from the truth. He
says I've been promoting real solutions instead of
immoral corrupted politics.
And of all 3 of us, in my
opinion, Derek is hands down
almost exclusive. I mean, he's constantly
pointing at other directions. They just don't like
that possibility. And we'll get into that in
a second. His exit and build conversation doesn't
have to mean move to the middle of
nowhere and build a homestead. It means exit
out of the broken system and build something
else. That could be hap that could be
done in your home, on your computer.
The problem is that they just don't want
that to be a a plausible thing. Or
a lot of people have actually
been
driven into learned helplessness, and they look at
it and go, yeah. That's not possible. That
is learned helplessness.
By pointing out that the system always ends
up in the same position and that there
might be other solutions, how in the world
is that learned helplessness?
I mean, I can't make that any more
clear. It's blowing me away how obvious that
is. Now I'm actually gonna go into this
pretty in-depth. Somebody makes a really great outline
of why he thinks this is the case.
And it's a very well put together argument.
I'll show you why I don't think it's
accurate.
Now, here's what Whitney said
in in the same vein. She goes, the
talking point that's going around that myself and
others who reject the 2 party paradigm
are teaching learned helplessness to our audiences.
What is actually learned helplessness is teaching people
that our only hope is a society,
as a society, is to vote for a
lying politician every 4 years. I mean and
we're gonna get to some of these clips
from, Lark and Rose, which I think really
is one of the best on this conversation,
being able to break this down in a
way that's easy to understand.
But we all know this. Like I've said
many times, like the running joke that we
all snicker at it. Oh, the how do
you know a politician's lying while their lips
are moving? It's like and that's not a
partisan joke, guys. We all kinda laugh about
that but then it's like, oh, well, you
know, my my lying one is less than
your lying one so I win.
You know, it's like the the very strange
way to look at things. And it says
framing our only hope as Trump or Kamala
when both have terrible policy records from when
they were in office is telling people they
are helpless without one of them.
That is the real black pill exactly. Telling
me to forget the record policy record of
either, such as Operation Warp Speed, is dishonest
and insane or just about anything Kamala's ever
done. Because, again, I'm not gonna pretend that
she's not one of the worst people out
there.
She says, myself and others like tlavinbros
tell people to exit our corrupt system. That
doesn't just mean move in the middle of
nowhere. There's a lot of potential options there
and build something new. We are solutions focused
and tell people to take their power back
from the politicians
who have enabled the theft of our wealth,
freedom, and developed local community. I mean, that's
the whole point, guys. We're not
teaching learned helplessness. We are trying to empower
you to be able to make your own
path forward and not rely on some ideologue
to tell you how you're supposed to think.
That's the main part here. I think that's
just so powerfully important. And I I didn't
even mention oh, shit. No. I I have
it I'll come up to other directions. But
I mean, the point being of just voting
a third party. Now you know my opinion
and I still stand by. I don't think
your vote translates and I think there's a
lot of evidence for that. But I've never,
as you guys know who watch this again,
there's a lot of lies circulating, and it
shows you how desperate this situation is about
what we actually think. Like, I that I'm
I've never made, you know, that why we
could just vote for a party. I was
like, yes. I say that every single time.
If you think that makes a difference, then
do it. I support that decision. I still
would argue that it's not gonna make a
difference, but I think you should try if
you think it makes a difference. And I
would say the same thing about the 2,
Trump or Kamala, and I say it every
time. I'm just trying to help hopefully show
you why I think it's an obvious manipulation
especially when you
are telling us that they're both pretty bad
and I'm gonna go with the lesser true
evils. It's like, okay, then right there, why
wouldn't you at least consider another option? Well,
because you've already been trained to think you're
helpless, which is that, well, we know it
won't matter because the 3rd party is only
gonna give the vote to the other. How
in the hell do you know that? How
we all see the polls from Clinton and
Trump when they were lying through their teeth
or they were misinformed.
I made I'm gonna read that article as
we get closer to the election as I
just recently read from 2016.
The point simply being,
how do you not know how do you
know that your vote is not the one
that might just tip it to Jill Stein
or whoever you think is the one that
might be voted for? And instead, you get
played into going the other direction and you're
the one. It's the same kind of argument
about the the other. That vote for, you
know, one side of what you believe and
otherwise that or bet or it's really about
not voting. Right? That maybe you're the one
vote that could've changed everything. Well, why does
it only apply
when it works for the establishment? And then
when it comes down to it, it's like,
well, your vote only matters if you vote
for one of the people that we want
you to. I mean, even saying it out
loud, it's like, how do people fall for
this stuff? It blows my mind. So the
idea of choosing what you actually wanna vote
for, that's just following your principles. And let's
just even say that voting for 1 or
the other 2 was gonna give it to
somebody else. Why why is it your responsibility
to make your one vote what everybody else
the better I mean, this is the idea.
I mean, think of it like this. During
COVID 19, they kept telling you get the
shot because if you don't, everyone else will
get sick and you're responsible for
isn't that funny how that's the exact same
dynamic for voting? Well, if you don't vote
for one of these 2, you're gonna screw
it for everybody else. How does that possibly
make sense with any other dynamic about voting
we tell ourselves? That your vote matters and
follow your heart and vote for what you
believe and accept.
I just think it's it really it kills
me. And I'm starting to believe that more
people believe what I'm saying and what we're
talking about than damn near anybody else, and
that's why this is so desperate. I know
I always lean in that way, but I
don't do it just because I want to.
Like with COVID 19, I believe the majority
saw through it. And I'm starting to see
examples from this discussion as well that people
are like, thank god somebody's finally
having you know, this is happening. People are
pulling this out. Like, we need to change
the system, not just fall into the hamster
wheel every 4 years.
So after that, she said, oh, that was
it right there. So here this. And then
from there,
you're not gonna it's a 10 minute clip,
so I just in your time, but make
sure you listen to it. Derek makes a
very impassioned
video about why this is incorrect and why
you are the one that needs to empower
yourself to make real change. And he just
says rejecting
corrupt politicians and the 2 party lie is
not a black pill. He says it's a
better white pill about the point being about,
you know,
digest
he makes a good analogy of it. Now
somebody did make a great point, by the
way. Even myself, I'm trying to, like, I'll
I'll show you where I was going, like,
that's the black pill. I myself agree with
this person that we gotta stop using these
terms. It's like in a way you fall
into these dichotomies whether you want to or
not where now it's this or that or
black or what. You know, they it's it's
in and of itself kind of a controlled
dynamic. Right? Then Nick, I I I agree
with that. So we gotta stop just labeling
things within the the framing that they give
us. And I agree with that. But I
still agree with these points and I myself
was doing the same thing.
So I'll include that for you to watch.
My Arb make sure you watch this.
Now I read to you what Whitney just
said, what's what she just said. Here's what,
Dairo said. Why not vote? And this is
where we're gonna get into some of these
examples.
Why not vote for the lesser of 2
evils?
And
work on developing a local community parallel system.
But all of us will say, yeah. You
could go ahead. I mean, absolutely. No one
here is saying, don't do it. You're gonna
ruin everything. No one's doing that. We're just
trying to show you that we think that
it's a fruitless effort. But if you believe
it, absolutely. We support your decision to follow
what you believe. But if you're telling us
that you're voting for the lesser and you're
begrudgingly doing so because you know it won't
make a difference otherwise,
that is the problem. We're trying to tell
you, vote for what you believe in if
you think it makes a difference. Follow your
principles. Do what you actually think is gonna
make a difference. Don't listen to all these
screeching 2 party status quo managers trying to
tell you that you are not being an
adult by voting for who you believe in.
I mean, I can't believe these arguments make
sense to anybody. Like, let's just even say
that they the reality of that is exact.
That if you vote for somebody you want,
then in fact, you're gonna end up that
that'll end up helping somebody else win that
they want or that they don't want.
I mean, even if that is the reality,
again, it is about you choosing what you
believe in and following your heart and voting
your principles. It's not your responsibility to help
them get what they want because they're telling
you that you're not an adult if you
don't go in their path. It is a
really crazy and, frankly, childish argument.
It's very strange how everything's very Orwellian right
now. Everything's been inversed.
As Derek calls the great inversion, but
I think what's important is following what you
believe in any context, in any conversation. How
is it ever wrong to follow your principles?
And she says again or he finished by
saying, not voting for the candidate or party
that will ostensibly put up fewer barriers, that,
by the way, is an opinion,
to to this goal seems counterproductive,
which is usually what we get.
Right, with these responses.
Now, these could be bots for all we
know, could be real people. That's always something
we have to consider.
The point, though, is that saying this person's
worse, well, that's completely your opinion, and there's
people that think the exact opposite. So all
we have to base it on and that,
again, you can base it on your opinion.
But when they're bringing this to an argument
saying you're doing this and that person's only
gonna do that, that's an opinion. So the
facts we know are what we need to
be guiding this conversation, not necessarily that that
person will
do more to affect my I mean, you
get the point. I'm trying to think of
the way to frame that. You know, hurt
the things that we want more. And she
says, of course, you can absolutely do that.
Period.
Voting once every 4 years takes a few
hours. Right? That's the point. It's pretty simple.
You don't need to ask anybody to do
that thing. It takes very little effort. The
problem is focusing on voting as our only
way out.
We should mostly focus on developing a parallel
system.
But that gets that's that's apparently black pill.
That's that's what we're being told.
Now here is the argument somebody put forward,
starting with David Whitehead,
who says, learn despair,
and then psyops exposed. It says, ask study
these terms.
They have been employed on populations by totalitarian
regimes for centuries. I agree. But you're you'll
begin to see that this argument,
at the very least, could be applied both
ways. I frankly, and this could just be
because that's how I see it, I see
it applying far more to what he and
the rest of them are doing. Actually, I'm
not sure. I mean, I get I I
would assume based on which I shouldn't do,
his state his post here that that is
what he thinks and you'll see what I
mean. But, ultimately, anybody in the position where
just putting out the opinion we're putting out
is somehow learned helplessness, I'm gonna argue that
what they're presenting is in fact the obvious
reality of that. But either way, let's read
this and you can decide for yourself because
that's what objective coverage is actually like. Learn
despair, learned helplessness, learned in in,
in defention.
That's actually an interesting one. A a friend
of mine, he says, sent me this after
listening to a show I did on this
a while back. He fled Venezuela to the
US years ago and experienced this tactic directly.
Now I'm a just say it now. You
can my opinion about the dynamics of Venezuela
and why they're in the position they're in,
you're well aware of. So I'll say that
now regardless of what it said in this
post, that's not the point of it. But
it says, I noticed the critique of a
certain overuse
of my term of the term SIOP, which,
yeah, is very obvious, which, of course, is
a historically loaded term of art of war
of art of war from the US army
after World War 2.
You suggested that the real SIOP going on
here is a kind of self induced state
and has to do rather with a pension
for self sabotage on our side.
I agree.
You know where I'm going with this. It
says that happens when either organically or artificially,
people on the truth camp
start giving friendly fire and spewing despair and
negativity
by labeling the any promising revolt
action as a potential trap or trick by
the status quo. Okay.
So right there,
obviously, the aim of this post, as you'll
see from the next one, is about what
we're doing. But think about this for a
second. As I think I just clearly showed,
in no way are
we spewing despair.
Now just because something that is a difficult
situation that we highlight makes you feel that
way, does not mean that we're going, we're
screwed.
There's a lot of tough things going on
in the world, and that's just the reality.
But what we're doing is showing here's that
bad thing and here's how we can fix
it.
Not just going through the same old motions
for one of the worst people and he's
just not as bad.
Spewing despair and negativity is not even remotely
what we're doing.
By labeling any promising revolt, which is what
we're talking about,
changing, revolting.
Right? The actual system. Not and and the
I the idea that Trump and RFK Jr.
Are some kind of revolt from the system
that literally works right through the same old
system is stupid. I'm just gonna say it
real guys, that's sad. Like, the idea that
this is the revolt changing through the same
controlled system that any other context, the same
Republican party, the same conservatives would tell you
is a broken system. Didn't we just get
done telling ourselves that they were stealing everything?
The machines are broken? Well, here we go.
Same machines, same system. How in the hell
does that work out? Vote harder, I guess
is the mantra, after it just was it's
sto it was stolen and they cheat. So
why wouldn't that happen again?
Like, I just don't get how anybody cannot
see through the disconnected narratives, at the very
least.
So right now, as when we're saying, look,
we need to push back against this system.
We need to change, revolt,
take action
against this problem.
And they go, you're just trying to spew
negativity. Well, that's just false. Well, they're both
bad, and I don't know what else to
do, so we're gonna pick the lesser evil.
Clearly, I think you can sense which one
of those is what he's describing.
Now he says, in that sense,
I believe that the correct term y'all were
looking for is learned despair
or learned helplessness or learned in def in,
in defention.
It's a term straight out
of con, conductist psychology
and was deeply and thoroughly practiced as a
psychological technique in the Venice in the Venezuelan
experiment
against the middle classes for decades. Now, again,
that's up for you I mean, I wouldn't
surprise me. I think all governments are concerning
and I wouldn't surprise me if any of
them did this stuff. But his next point,
which greatly contributed to the extent
of state of things, which I'm I'm of
the explicit opinion that every I because I
said I was gonna say. But that what's
going on there is the default of direct
and ex and on the record action from
US foreign policy, and then they bragged about
it. But then we have a, you know,
30 seconds later we act like we didn't
remember that Bolton and Abrams literally told us
that that's what they were doing which caused
destruction. And well before that even, the idea
I mean, going back to Chavez, their actions
have deliberately destabilized the country and they have
told you that. But in any case, may
and maybe they did this too and added
to it. It's certainly possible. But it says
it's been employed in the US you in
the US context for many decades.
So right there, what they're saying is that
this is also in the United States. And
I think what we're talking about, since we're
referring it to a psychological operation army program,
is that that is absolutely what your government
has done to you.
Right? So the idea is that this is
being done as a political dynamic to keep
you in a position where you don't know
what else to do so you fall in
line. Isn't that what he's talking about? How
is that not the exact definition of choosing
to fall into lesser truly evils every 4
years because what else are you gonna do?
And that I agree. This is conducted by
the US government against you. And we're over
here trying to see at least give you
another perspective, another option, another
direction. But, no, they've
thoroughly trained you to be desperate.
And it says, if only more subtly from
as he per as he frames it from
Venezuela. He says, it's an intricate process when
applied to human collectives, and it it reminds
me of Hunger Games a bit. Those behind
power must work out societal crises
in order to eliminate the
empowering qualities and features that hope generates in
the populace.
Right.
Exactly.
Are we over here creating crises to keep
you in control? No. No. We're we're pointing
out that they're doing that.
So that's the reality. They're they're
manufacturing
crises or whether it's problem reaction solution, whether
it is divide and conquer, destabil you know,
c
what's the other frick famous,
order out of chaos? I mean, these are
the things that they do
as just power structures.
And he goes on to say,
but going only far enough as to cement
the absolute normalization of a childishly cynical sense
of overall helplessness among the majority.
Right? Again, I don't need to say it,
I mean, not even remotely what we are
talking about.
Helplessness is not the same as providing op
other options, which I'm gonna get into in
a second, which I already basically pointed to.
But it says, the puppeteers must do this
without going too far,
that's important,
at so as to enable the empowering features
that ultimately erupt
from a total loss of absence of hope.
Features which, by the way, come from developing
a healthy, cynical,
existent existentialist worldview after the individual has managed
to face and survive nothing
nothingness and boredom and death.
Just a person for Dan Daniel David,
Yenny from Venezuela. So here here after that
breakdown, here's what this person says.
The actual psyop, he says, is negativity,
and he's just quoting what he said. Of
course, plucking out the one that applies when
that if you read the whole thing,
it really doesn't to what we're saying.
The, the psyop is negativity by labeling any
promising revolt action as a potential trap or
trick by the status quo. I agree.
He says and here's how he frames it.
So it shows you how the mind wants
to go where you are what you see.
He says, for example,
the Trump, Musk, Tucker, etcetera, are all part
of the swamp.
It's just so stupid.
It's a it's an inversion, a trap. Well,
guys, I mean, I of course, maybe they're
not. Like but for these are literally the
most obvious examples of insiders that we could
even talk about.
So we should at least consider,
obviously, as a possibility that maybe they are
keeping you wrapped up in the same cycle
of the same thing with the same people
in the same directions all over. Yeah. But,
Sue, the point is
negativity by labeling these revolts or actions, is
that a revolt? I know they really love
to get you all charged up about that,
so a big change it's not. These are
insiders
participating in the same old thing that they
do every 4 years. It is the epitome
of the cycle of the system.
And these people are literally part of that
system in every possible way. Elon is a
military contractor for the US government. Do you
realize that means, right now, Biden's administration?
Oops.
Doesn't make sense, does it? Unless you
block out your mind and pretend that anybody
trying to show you that problem is the
problem.
And he says superficial black and white negativity
program. He said it's based on the concept
of psychological splitting, which the learn to spare
SIOP tags into. I agree with that. I
I think, I mean, other than the idea
that we're that that he that the framing
is about that.
Frankly, David Whitehead, I don't even know if
that's what he meant. You know, he's just
basically breaking down that point, which I think
is an excellent point. For all I know,
he's talking about exactly what I'm talking about.
But what's funny is how Bernhard Guenter
takes that point, plucks out the one thing,
and then frames it about specifically Trump, Musk,
and Tucker Carlson,
etcetera,
as the revolt against the system.
Yeah. That you vote for and goes through
the same cycle that they all apparently could
cheat and remove whatever they wanted and it's
all in a like, think about how silly
and in in
it just doesn't line up.
So that being stated, I think it's very
clear that what's happening is a projection. It's
an Orwellian concept. Accuse them of that which
you are guilty. I mean, there's a 1,000
different things that we could frame this with.
And I think it's pretty damn obvious.
Now I pointed this out around these these
kind of memes that were circulating.
This person says,
it's time to unite, to take this country
back. Together, we win. Divide it, we lose.
This classic divide and conquer kind of mantra.
And it says, you're either MAGA. And what's
funny about it, isn't that exactly what the
Democrats were just saying? It's these things just
get recycled, and they just laugh it up
because the the good side said at this
time. Right? Stronger together.
Come on, guys. It's just the same old
things. And it says or it so it
says, you're either MAGA or you're Uniparty.
There's no more Republican.
It's like how as I've said very many
times before this happened, well, the 2 party
illusion just got a face lift. I've been
talking about the whole patriot thing for a
while, in a positive way, though. Like, I
was like, these guys are just about to
see through the bigger picture. And that they
got pulled right back in with the election.
Some of them did. Again, let's start with
the republicans of team sport politics. I'm of
the mind that'll
the majority
is feeling uncomfortable about how weird this all
is. The conservatives, liberals, and people that can
see through it all.
And I shouldn't even say it like that.
I'm I'm usually I say that when I
say republicans and democrats. To be clear, I
as I think I was until I said
the last part, the conservatives and liberals are
just people that have principles. They they believe
in certain political principles or, you know, ideological
principles and
and aren't necessarily taken by the teams who
are politics. That's the I I that's my
personal categorical the category
how do you say that? A category of
difference. The at the end of the day,
there are people that are stuck in the
top of it that just don't care.
But he said I said, the 2 party
illusion got a face lift. They have rebranded.
And many are falling for it. If you're
still participating
in the controlled 2 party system,
you're still part of the illusion, whatever you
call yourself, patriot or whatever else. If all
you did was just change the name of
1 of the parties and act like I
just it's just guys, it's the same dynamic.
Exactly the same. And Whitney said reminds me
of you're either with us or you're against
the you're with us here. Excuse me. Either
with us or you're against or you're with
the terrorists.
And that's the same thing we saw during
you know, that's George Bush obviously, and then
you saw that with the COVID 19, the
war on terror. I mean, everything they do
is the same kind of game because they
know that it works.
It's been a decade of very successful rebranding
by the neo cons, she says.
And Sanctis says, to be clear, I'm not
arguing we should vote we shouldn't vote. I
probably will just in case, he says.
But I'm over the paradigm.
Also, everyone on the right seems to gloss
over the narrative disconnect of stolen 2020
and vote harder 2024. It's exactly what I
was saying. Yeah. That's pretty silly. Right? I
mean, nothing shifted, guys. It's the same machines,
the same power structure. The it's it's literally
the same power structure that they say stole
it.
I I just and and we're not even
addressing that conversation. Doesn't that seem a little
bit uncomfortable?
Just it's I think I think they are
desperate. In a a large way, the entire
empire is very clearly recognizing people are poking
into it. That's what I think, personally.
And, really, to make one more point about
this.
Again, if you want to vote,
if you
believe, and you and clearly, in my opinion,
you're voting for what you actually want, whatever
that may be and whatever, even outside the
2 party talk concept, then I support that
even though I think it probably won't it
doesn't make a difference. It doesn't translate.
But I would also point out though that
in my opinion, and this is secondary, because
like I said, that's where I stand.
I will tell you my opinion if you
wanna hear it, but I'll support your choice
if you believe in what you're doing. But
I argue that on the secondary point on
that, that if you do vote though, in
my opinion, it is really you know when
they talk about the consent of the governed?
That's what this is. Whatever you vote for,
if you're putting if you're in my opinion,
you are simply saying, yes.
Yes.
We consent to you doing what you do.
And I know I I just I think
that is one of the most foundational
the the issues here is that if the
system is broken, which we all seem to
recognize in different dynamics, going into that and
doing so you are simply consenting
that that is okay for them to keep
going for another 4 years with the same
war mongering occupation, death, murder, rape, torture, all
the same things that they're doing, supporting all
of those things in Israel.
So just think about that is all I'm
saying. But again, I will always stand by
that because I know I'm being objective, I
could be wrong. So I just want people
to do what they actually believe and stand
by their principles. Even if I disagree with
those principles, I will still respect that you
believe in what you're doing.
Now Derek says oh, this was the same
what we we read earlier, just saying we're
seeing these comments about black pill. O'Callaghan says,
the conservatives who have spent the past decade
mocking the NPCs are now all parroting unity,
which, I mean, you that doesn't have to
be a bad thing. Maybe they just decide
that this is something we we unity is
a good thing. Right? I mean, it really
hap it is no matter what. People coming
together and and, you know, sharing common mind.
That's a positive thing in my mind. But
it's making the point that, like I was
just saying, it's funny how when it suits
the interest of the control structure that these
things just shift. Right? You're mocking all of
them about what they were doing. Now it's
you basically taken over the talking points of
the left when they were doing it. And
they can't even seem to recognize that in
the team support politics, or they don't care.
He says all the new republican heroes are
literally
liberal globalists.
He's that's my point about the the
you know, maybe I'll just bring that up
now
since that does seem to kind of cross
over right there.
I just think it's funny. I was gonna
point this out again. I made this point
the other day. Sort of as a kind
of like a like, kind of prodding like
that. I I don't necessarily think this is
the case certainly possible, but I find it
odd this doesn't get more attention.
As this person says, democrats are not liberal.
They're leftist authoritarians.
Says 3 former democrats who've had enough. Oh,
weird. That's the leading structure of Trump's restriction,
it seems. And it says, interesting. Couldn't you
consider this to be a democrat led coup
of the republican party with all the coups
going around? Certainly interesting, isn't it? No one
wants to point that out.
And then Health Ranger says this, leading report,
who I don't support, says, RF Kennedy junior
says former Trump, president Trump is going to
be adding more Democrats. Uh-oh. So the Democrat
who's pretending he's a Republican is now gonna
be adding more Democrats to his Republican administration.
And the
you know, yeah. I I think in any
other context outside of the hero worship, they
people be like, oh,
I thought we just all said they were
all pedophiles. It's like, hold on. I think
that's funny. Now Health Ranger coming into the
rescue says, no need to panic, everybody. It's
all good. RFK Junior was a former Democrat.
Don't forget. There are lots of former democrats
who can carry out key roles in the
Trump administration while operating in a way that
is fully congruent with Trump's goals for America.
That's a little bit wordy for your please
don't freak out. I find it to be
interesting. Elon Musk was a former democrat. Yep.
We know. And when I was in college,
he says, I was leaning strong left too.
Oh my god. Look at this. Okay. What's
funny to me
is this feels like an effort to try
to bridge something that 30 seconds ago was
like shall not pass. Right? These are the
worst enemies. They're all bow except now. Anyone
that wants to join, you're welcome to come
on over. I just find it to be
odd. Now I know that's not I'm being
facetious. That's not really what they're saying. But
what's interesting to me
is is that this seems like more damage
control for something that should be at least
some like, well, that's odd. It seems interesting.
Now I'll leave it there. I thought that
was funny. Now I'll include our interview I
have with David Knight,
fighting for objectivity in a partisan world gone
mad, because it just fits with what we're
talking about today. It really isn't a a
good conversation.
And he he addresses Alex Jones and Trump
and his whole perspective on all that, why
he left. And, you know, it's it's a
I I think it's an important conversation to
realize how these people are not what they
appear to be. And he's somebody who worked
with them and he sees it, guys. He
recognizes it. You know? From Alex calling Trump's
vaccine the sugar water.
I mean, that's a real quote. He actually
said that. People took it because he said
it was sugar water and some of them
probably die. I mean, I don't I guarantee
some of them died. Guys, it's just with
how deadly that thing is, that's the reality.
Now maybe he believed it. I don't know.
But didn't never got addressed. And here's Trump
still supporting that injection to this very day.
So
other points about the black pill dynamic on
the other side of this. Same same tweet
about the you're either MAGA or you're against
us.
This person says, after Whitney says, reminds us
of you're either with us or you're with
a terrorist, he says, there's no other option
at the moment.
I just I said, okay. Hashtag black pill.
Which again, it's like I said, I'm gonna
stop trying to work within their paradigm as
always, but
this is the the major point.
I I feel like I've already said it,
so I'll breeze by it. But the idea
being that we're saying, you know, look.
Here are other possible options. And we support
what you believe if you're actually doing what
you believe, but here are other things we
should be doing. And let me explain to
you why all of these different things.
Black pill to saying there's nothing else we
can do. That's what that is, guys. And
you're saying we're falling into a situation where
they all suck, but we know that you'll
see that all across the Internet. Ignorance masquerading
is logic, in my opinion.
This person says black pill is a grift,
as if that's what Derek was doing.
If you can't at least be somewhat hopeful
about RFK joining, you're blackpilling.
Again, I is it I mean, maybe I
don't even need to point this out. Is
that can we all just collectively agree that
seems
very naive?
Just flat out wrong?
So
we don't know for sure. Right? These are
people that are gonna be alike. We don't
know the policy, what'll happen after 4 years.
But we're just supposed to be excited because
because they said things that sound nice?
You can't think of the last
however many administrations where they said a lot
of things that didn't happen, like Trump's or
Biden's or whoever else, but they are okay.
He said that we Trump's better and we're
oh, so we just have to be excited
about it. No. Because people that have been
paying attention realize that this is the same
old cycle. And I I I say every
time, I hope I'm wrong. I hope you're
right that they changed the world.
But based on any
overview of the reality this is like playing
a game, like gambling,
and having the same thing happen every single
time for a for your lifetime.
And then going, you know, I'm gonna bet
that it's gonna be this way this time.
And it's like, yeah, maybe.
But if you were a betting man, your
logic would be like, it's probably gonna be
the same way.
But he says the entire second half of
RFK speech promoting everything you could have ever
want, at least give him a chance. Well,
you know who else did that? Trump.
Right? Or Biden or George Bush or Obama.
They come out and say, this is everything
we're gonna do, and they don't do any
of it. Ask Obama. What about Guantanamo Bay?
What about Afghanistan?
Everything they promise never happens.
I shouldn't say it like that. There's always
times. By end of the day,
him saying things in speeches and then you
getting mad that someone doesn't just put down
their principles and go, okay. I'll give it
4 years. Let's give it a shot. Despite
their record, despite what they've said, despite who
they are, despite all of the things we
have to be concerned about, the contradictions, the
policy from the past, we'll just go time
out because he said nice things. Let's just
give it a shot.
You know what can happen in 4 years?
Like this idea that we're supposed to just
let it fly and see what happens. I
mean, isn't the idea that Whitney and Derek
and the rest of us or anybody, even
the Republicans during COVID-nineteen, what was the point
that this is building? We're watching the technocratic
prison get built around us. But, yeah, let's
just roll the dice for 4 years and
just hope it doesn't happen. We're of the
mind that this is gonna be something that
happens that we won't be able to come
back from. Like, in the context of anything
we've talked about, like glyphosate spraying, that they're
trying to build. And that's not an idea
of giving up.
The point is they are telling you what
they want, and we see them building something
in the interest of getting you to a
point to where going point from that point
forward, it won't matter anymore. Because because then
you won't be able to access the Internet
because of your digital ID and your facial,
whatever else. I mean, I don't know how
it will ultimately
materialize. I hope that it doesn't.
But if we all gen and again, as
republicans, we're also saying during COVID 19, if
we see that coming,
just because you want to believe he's the
one that should save you from that does
not mean we should all just blindly
sleepwalk into that possibility.
Or at the very least, I can respect
that you think that to act like our
opinions just default wrong because of what you
think is pretty childish.
Like, that's the idea. We can entertain each
other's opinions. The at the end of the
day, this is all about this or nothing.
That's black billed.
Or, I mean, I I shouldn't say it's
black billed because at the end of the
day, you may believe he's gonna change everything,
but
you have to be open to the possibility
based on everything else that that one choice,
or you hoping that it happens because you
believe in him is not the default for
everybody or else you're black billed.
And ND News points out, he said nice
words, and you're obviously fooled easily. I look
at a lifetime of behavior and patterns. That's
what an objective person would do. Booby or
he's talking about Kennedy is a piece of
s h I t user, he says. If
his last name was Smith or not Kennedy,
you'd never have heard of him. Frankly, I
kind of agree. I don't necessarily know if
I agree with the indictment of his entire
personality. I'd like to believe that he's got
some but, you know, again, I always get
into that because I think a lot of
his past work was good, but then you
just I just can't get past what he
says about Israel. I don't see how any
honest, compassionate,
principled person can stand by Israel right now.
I just don't. It it blows my mind.
But anyway, he says, if you can't see
it yet, maybe you will someday.
This person says, take the big take the
black pill like us. Purity spiraling. That's the
one I keep telling you about as well.
Purity test, black pill. Somebody clearly seeded this
into the conversation and then it's just taken
up everywhere.
Which to me shows you that there's more
coordination here than ever. But it says purity
spiraling doesn't do anything at all except make
you feel good.
Well, that's not what we're doing, bud. Right?
We're we're over here talking about possible other
solutions. And you're saying this to me when
I'm highlighting the fact that you're saying
well, I'm I'm pointing out the 2 party
illusion.
But this person says, we just changed what
those 2 entities are, so now we're good.
And I'm like, no. It's the same thing.
That's all that's the only point I'm making.
That's the same thing.
That's purity spiraling. Why? Because in his mind,
there doesn't exist anything outside of those two
part. What about the 3rd party option?
What about any other things we talked about,
which again, I'm gonna get into in a
second. Like, I'm gonna say, ab abstention or
or exit and build or any number of
other options we've talked about, which I think
3rd party from someone who believes voting matters
should be an obvious.
But nope.
But I'm purity spiraling. Isn't it the exact
opposite? That the purity is that you have
to vote like this, otherwise you're ruining it?
Yes, guys. That's projection. You're literally saying what
you're doing and all we're it's it's it's
almost comical.
But I said, you're a child lost in
an illusion if you think pointing out the
problem while actively providing solutions is black pill.
You're just showing yourself to be a mindless
follower of the 2 party illusion influencers. The
purity test here is objectivity
versus hero worship.
He says, I can acknowledge the problem with
Trump while also acknowledging he is less likely
to throw me in a Gulag. Again, there's
my point. That's opinion.
You may be right, but that's your opinion.
So don't throw it at me like it
matters because it's your opinion. What we do
know,
as he's acknowledging that Trump has problems. He
just said that. But then you lean into
what you've been told or what you want
to think despite his record that he won't
be the one or at least he's less
bad.
That's the crux of the point here.
Because he says, less likely, less likely to
throw me in jail or kill me. So
great. So you're going with the guy that's
less likely to murder you. That sure sounds
like a great choice for a solid one.
I mean, think about how stupid that is.
He says pragmatism is necessary
instead of unrealistic ideal idealism
in times like this, which, you know, whatever
to what what times like this? Yes. I
agree. It feels more crazy. Why do you
think that is? The situation,
generally speaking, has been this way for a
very long time.
Every time of the election, they kick it
into fever pitch because they want you to
think like that. Oh my god. The world's
gonna burn down if we don't get that
person. If we get that person, it's worse.
So we'll go with that per it's a
basic
simple I swear to god they're laughing every
time we talk about this because of how
silly this is, how simple it is.
On top of that, pragmatism
is something that's important. You wanna be rational.
Right? Pragmatic being making what's the most logical
choice in this situation?
But that doesn't challenge your,
your ideals, your principles.
To pretend like those two things are mutually
exclusive is part of the problem.
Quite frankly, I will stand by my principles
over anything.
Like, if I'm in a position where that,
you know, that's prag it's it's pragmatic,
seems to make the most logical sense, but
it it makes me
it it challenges what I believe,
my principles, like, about compassion or caring about
human life or what whatever it may be
to you,
then no. I think that's a no brainer.
Just because something simple makes sense does not
mean you challenge what you believe in. And
these people are telling you it's the adult
thing to do to just get rid of
your principles because, well, what else? That's blackfield.
I gotta stop saying that because, again, I
don't wanna play into it, but that's that's
the that's what they're calling us. And it
says orange man did everything in his power
to help give big pharma.
And then he says, would orange man have
mer mandated the shots? This person asked. And,
again, it's I hate this this game they
play where when he says vaccines and other
things, he's always secretly wink wink, queuing on
said, talking about one thing over here even
though those are all big pharma drugs too,
or however they wanna break it down.
Trump put this position in place. Operation Warp
Speed, the the emergency situation, the Defense Production
Act, everything that happened is because he started
it. Dur Biden just continued the same policies
and they're doing the same thing right now,
they're gonna hand it right back to Trump.
His simple point is,
he did everything in his power to help
big pharma push their poison, and he still
does to this very moment, guys.
He never had author he never had the
authority to mandate it,
but he ensured those that did could.
That's opinion, by the way. I but I
agree with him. Because I can't prove that
he did it with that intention, but what
he did allowed it to happen. That's responsibility
because you're in charge.
As simple as that.
Trump authorized Operation Warp Speed. Well, he goes,
no. He didn't. Biden utilized
executive action
to an unconstitutional degree. Was Trump supposed to
ban executive orders?
Wait. How exactly would Trump ban executive orders
during Biden's administration?
Logic aside. The point being,
this happened during Trump's administration.
During Trump's administration,
shots were being forced on people, and then
also during Biden. Yes. You can try to
blame it on anybody else. There's also responsibility
there.
Wouldn't have happened without him setting this into
position.
He said Trump authorized Operation Warp Speed, which
allowed the experimental drug to bypass years of
testing. He brags about it to this very
day. Trump kept Fauci in his position as
well as as, Redford at the CDC, Robert.
He he also he allowed them to run
the show in the morning updates for months.
He did. I remember he gave Fauci and
Birx medals of commendation
well after concern.
He says, next you're going to tell me
he's a Zionist. Duh.
You're you're purity spiraling. You see my point?
Purity spiraling?
So you're the one going, yes, we acknowledge
all the problems, but we don't have a
choice.
And you're and this guy who's trying to
go, but this is obvious. These are facts.
He is not on your side.
I just don't I I I again, sure,
could be a bot, or it could be
somebody who is so desperately lost in this
one direction that they just can't see the
obvious.
He says, of course, he's bad on many
things, but the Dems are objectively worse.
There you go. Simple.
You've given up. You're willing to lean into
a bad option because what else?
I can't make that any more clear.
And then Derek highlights Carrie Wedler, who I'm,
you know, who briefly worked with c Lab
and it was only because of, you know,
life stuff going on that we had to
break I hope the workers in the future
quite honestly. I think she's fantastic.
He says that Derek says another intelligent, consistent
woman who is not falling for the lie
of sadism and the Zionist Bilderberg cabal. Oh,
I think she's okay. Good. No. There's no
video. I was gonna play it if she
had it.
But this person responds saying, I get that
both choices are bad. In quotes, his choices.
How is not voting for the less evil
one going to change anything?
He says, I couldn't bear the chance that
communist Kamala wins. And, again, you're falling into
these traps.
I I don't have to get into the
fact that neither of these people are communist
and neither of them are remotely leading you
in that direction and they're both essentially authoritarian
capitalists. The bottom line is that even the
idea of communist is just government.
That's the I don't I don't support either
of the any of them. All of them
as we can clearly see, both in Israel
and the United States right now, that any
of them can lead to the kind of
centralized control that we don't want. Any of
them. It's a historical manipulation to make it
seem that is only the prob and there's
I mean, again, I this whole conversation I've
had a thousand times. The idea that you've
been convinced because of that buzzword that she
wins its worse,
you've given up.
He says, I'm not in an age where
I can leave my life behind and start
a new one. Again, that's not exit and
build does not mean leave the country or
leave it. It means simply exit the broken
system and build something new, whether online, whether
in the middle of a field somewhere, but
however you see that being possible.
Here's what Carrie said. Not sure who's worse.
I think it might be at the end
here.
Oh, no. It's right there. Not sure who's
worse, she says. The people worshiping the authoritarians
running for office and believing they will save
them or the people who are entirely aware
these candidates are evil, as they all seem
to point out,
but choose to vote for them anyway out
of mindless indoctrinated
loyalty
to the demonstrably broken corrupt system.
Well said.
It's very simple. And, yes, there are other
options. We're not going, screw it. We check
out. No. Not not even the claim of
abstention is what we're talking about there. That's
voting abstaining. We'll show you that in a
second. But same point here. He responds by
saying, and this is Derek saying we already
are seeing us called black pill.
He says, you can talk about solutions without
disparaging the closest thing to a friend
any freedom loving American has.
Quite frankly I just kinda feel bad for
somebody that would call, I mean, a friend.
Really? That's pretty pathetic. I mean, you you
know these people?
It's sad. I mean, that's the whole play,
isn't it? To get you to think, oh
look he's playing a guitar, he's just like
me. Oh, look, he's got a dog. Oh,
he loves his dog. Like, they're just trying
to get you to think they're like you.
Because like this.
But the idea,
aside from the
embarrassing friend, the idea of saying
that he's the closest thing any American, any
freedom or loving American has?
Seriously?
I mean, what about Thomas Massie, for crying
out loud? What about Ron Paul? Are there
people that are clearly far far far far
far more no. Yes. They're not running right
now.
His point could simply be as of the
choices. Well, I disagree with that too.
I would argue that and, again, I don't
support literally anybody running for president or pretty
much ever, but Jill Stein arguably has more
of a direction that is positive in the
idea of what they're pointing to. But again,
I don't support them. I'm sure right there
people take that as a left versus right
point because that's the only thing they can
grab onto. They're all the same to me.
The problem here is that you wanna believe
that you know this person and that somehow
his actions have shown you anything in the
direction of freedom.
You mean assassinating people without legal justification? You
mean occupying countries and stealing their resources? You
mean forcing injections on people or rather creating
the justification to do so? You I mean,
come on. Freedom loving?
The guy has been open about his life
for a very long time. Have you ever
read his book? Have you listened to what
he says about how he manipulates people just
like this? I mean, it's just sad that
people just gobble up what this career manipulator
wants you to think he is.
A Christian? No. Republican? No. But who cares
because guess what? He's the one that's gonna
save the world. And you know what? I
really hope I'm wrong.
But as Derek says,
that ain't Trump.
He says, is Kamala better than is Kamala
then? Because you see? That's the only way
their mind can rationalize any of this. Because
when you counter signal Trump, you promote Kamala.
Well, what about Joel Stein? What about
Cornell White? What are other people that are
arguably running?
He says only people who have simplistic thinking
and are still trapped in the left right
paradigm think not liking one person means acceptance
of the other. It really gives a pretty
simple, childish
perspective.
He says friend, enemy, distinction.
Learn about it. It's just sad. Right? So
now you're now you're making friends and enemies
like you've ever even met these people. They're
all your enemies. They all laugh at you.
Now he also follows up and says, you
people are counter signaling friends, thus promoting your
enemy. Same point.
Simple binary thought process. Right? Left or right?
Friend or enemy.
It's not like that's that the world is
not like that.
He says the Trump side is about a
bajillion times better choice.
So so when you all go on about
this and that connection,
which we know about
being bad, it is being black. So by
pointing out a fact that you've acknowledged
we're helping Kamala,
that was something that I didn't expect someone
to say. Because you see, the point there
is he's actually suggesting you should not talk
about it. Maybe even omit it.
Are you really a lie?
We don't want to highlight this because guess
what? It's bad for Trump. And that bad
thing for Trump helps Kamala. So let's just
not talk about it.
That's crazy, guys. That's dishonesty at the very
least. But, yep, it's everywhere.
I think it's important to think about because
what that shows you is a learned helplessness.
That you are literally going, well, I don't
know what else to do because that's it.
And he sucks or he's bad or better
than her. So you ultimately accept something that
is the lesser of pro like, so again,
you are in a path that makes you
check
choose
something that is the worst the the least
bad option
over
and over
and over. Do you not see that as
a as a decline?
A constant,
never ending decline?
It's no it's no surprise why we have
people like this in front of us right
now as we just constantly get worse and
worse and worse, the lesser the lesser. Now,
yes, not maybe in your mind, it may
not be the lesser the worst option at
that moment, but if you're always choosing the
lesser of evil, you're gonna continue to go
in that direction. It's a decline.
As truth Souljah points out, Trump had 4
years to, quote, drain the swamp.
And what did we get?
Operation Warp Speed, sicko appointments like Pompeo, Haley,
Abrams, Bolton. Hopefully, Hopefully, even Republicans can reflect
on how psychopathic those choices are.
And by the way, they were the same
people when he picked them. Remember all the
narrative? Enemies closer. I'm sure we'll hear the
same nonsense again. He's he's he says, now
we're supposed to believe that Adelson, Swooley are
backing the white hats. This dream team can't
challenge the deep state?
CIA equals Mossad. I mean, I it's it's
sad that we at least can't consider how
concerning this is, that we might be played
again.
But as I'm you know, sadly, a lot
of people are leaning into this. I was
get met Given the the joke about door
Dewey Doerr saying that he drained the swamp
and he found his cabinet at the bottom.
Well, I guess everyone's just on the Trump
train now.
Who cares about Vance and all the rest
and all the problems, all the overlap, Palantir?
We'll get to that.
But I guess it's the least bad, so
I'm supposed to be the wrong one for
pointing out that all of them are hurting
your interests. All of them are trying to
put you in a technocratic prison. All of
them are try the ones that we're talking
about anyway, of the 2 we're discussing.
Frankly, again, I argue that they're all in
that same path. My point is there are
options outside of voting that are viable and
are far more politically active.
But, again, if you think that that's not
the case, at least consider voting for something
that may not be the lesser of evils,
but simply what you actually want. And if
that's Trump, then that's up to you. Or
if that's Biden or rather Kamala, that's up
to you. And I'll support your choice if
that's truly
what you believe.
I just frankly think we can see across
the whole spectrum that most people don't. Yeah.
We know it's bad, but that's the best
we've got. This is what we get right
now.
And as Whitney pointed out, hold on, I
think that was,
yeah.
I guess the same point I read before.
Simply saying, you know, people are telling us
we should ignore
operation warp speed. Here's Robert Malone.
Of all people, mind blowing. For those who
continue to obsess,
obsess,
over, one of the most obvious I mean,
this killed millions of people, guys.
Now you could argue that in this country
alone
I mean, bottom line is that this was
the basis for a lot of stuff around
the world, this push.
It killed a lot of people.
It
paralyzed
a lot of people.
It will kill a lot more as this
goes forward.
Are we really and I just I mean,
really, realistically.
Now to be very clear, obviously, I'm talking
about around the world when I say 1,000,000.
But we're talking about a a program that
became the basis for a lot of things.
You realize other countries began in the same
directions because of what the US did?
If we're pretending that we should we should
never stop talking about that, that we're because
we're still literally watching people suffer through the
side effects of what they're forcing on them.
And by the way, he still says it's
okay. So it never even ended.
Shouldn't we be concerned or shouldn't of all
people someone like this who was calling, I
can't even understand. I don't know how to
take this.
To me, it concerns me. It begins to
show the lines of something that was never
really what it appeared to be.
He says, why do you think I took
so long to personally endorse Trump?
I don't know. Because he murdered people? He
says, I am I am almost 65 years
now. And one thing I have learned is
that perfect is the enemy of good. Goddamn
it. I just don't understand how anybody takes
these things as logic. So we don't we
shouldn't want perfect because that hurts good? I
mean, I understand the logic of the point
in some context. We're talking about somebody who
put out a program that you criticize for
killing people, and we're supposed to go, oh,
it says, poor past that now. Let's say
he's worth
less bad than her, which is what he's
saying, so let's go with that. Even though
he killed lots of people with this and
still pretends it's okay.
I mean, I'm I'm really floored. I've never
been in a position where I've I I
so I mean,
I don't even know how to describe how
disconcerting all of this is other than to
say that it just shows me it's worse
than I thought in the context of who's
actually lying to people out there.
Not in a general sense. I actually believe
that we're having more positive change now than
I've ever seen.
I genuinely think that. I think the reason
this is so chaotic, as I think I
said in the beginning,
is because more people are seeing and aligning
and asking questions, so they're turning up the
dial. That's what happens every time. So it
may be kind of counterintuitive, but the point
is or not but, more not not counterintuitive,
but maybe
confu
or it may not look as it seems.
But at the end of the day, they're
turning up the volume on the fear because
I think people are pulling back more than
ever. That's what they always do. And that
fear tends to pull people back in line.
But he says,
make a checklist. Think it through.
Harris Walls, 1st Trump fans, plus RFK, Musk,
Gabbard, and question mark.
That's it?
That's a checklist? I'll make a checklist. They're
the same effing thing.
They're all doing the same things. They're all
I mean, I'll I'll play it in a
second. Alright. Actually, no. That's not the one
I'll play. I don't have the clip I
played before, but I'll make a point about
this. Where they're saying the same points.
I think it was actually, Jill Stein that
put that out saying, look, that's, you know,
no surprise, they have the same talking points
about the biometric wall. They literally are giving
them the same speech,
and each one thinks that that's gonna counter
the other pla- It's on the It's right
in front of you. And because he's collecting
his his
playing cards of people in our political establishment,
we're supposed to pretend like that's gonna be
a change. Elon Musk is so obviously not
on your side. Gabbard has shown herself to
be a fallen political
she's done it before.
Hill Clinton for crying out loud. RFK just
went against everything he believed in to lean
in with Trump. Well, I mean, it's unreal.
And god why Harris, Waltz, they're the same
thing. They're all politicians that are blind supporting
Zionism and are actively supporting all of the
same ultimate points that are driving us in
the technocratic control structure. And I guess it
doesn't matter because he's not as bad.
He says, get your priorities sorted out. You
know, with a grown up. Now stop pissing
about with stupid trolling. Get get to work.
Ridiculous.
I mean, I'm just I'm almost blown away
that this is even I mean, it kills
me. Here's what he said. Troll no imperium.
Troller y?
Why this commitment to a compromise of integrity?
Well put, because that's exactly what's happening.
Principles, beliefs, ideals, integrity, people are sacrificing these.
They are compromising what they believe because they're
told that's what adults do. In some cases,
that may be the the reality,
but not when you're doing something. I mean,
bottom line is that's a that's a personal
choice. And anytime you're doing it, you are
contradicting what you believe in. So if you're
gonna do that, damn well go to beat
ups. I mean, that doesn't mean to bad.
The point is that in this case, or
really in my opinion, any case, the idea
of ignoring what you believe because the the
it's the other choice is worse, that's lazy.
It's lazy. It's counterintuitive. And ultimately, as I
said before, it's ignorance masquerading as logic.
He says people died and countless children were
maimed as a result of placing their faith
and trust in this charlatan who still tells
them it's okay.
This is an individual claiming the vaccine is
now being used
to beat cancer.
Have you not seen that?
It's right here.
The pandemic and this is this is from
May or excuse me, March. No pandemic no
long the the pandemic no longer controls our
lives, it says. The vaccines that saved us
from COVID are now being used to help
beat cancer,
turning setback into comeback.
That's what it
says. You're welcome, Joe. And the point is
that's what Joe Biden was saying. Right? So
Joe Biden and the rest of him came
out and said that.
So because he's full of hubris and what
it's my thing, I'm the one that did
that. He says, you're welcome, Joe. 9 months
approval time versus 12 years. Yeah. Thanks for
killing a lot of people
that it would have taken you.
Oh, wait. That's the, the wrong one. Hold
on. He's got it right here.
Oh,
wait. Oh, that's you know, that's crazy. So
this has this is this has been I
okay. Just for the record.
Oh, never mind. Okay. I was gonna say,
I I've just to explain, I thought that
this had been edited. And I did I've
I I'm it was a and I'll show
you that it's right there. I even just
read it. For a second, I thought I
didn't see the cancer part. Anyway, wasting time.
The point is,
he
is saying you're welcome, Joe.
Right? That that he says beating cancer with
mRNA shots is a positive thing. Why does
that not concern people?
Why are we not worried about the fact
that this is still being leaned into? His
response is, you really did not listen to
what I wrote or read it. But he
says, I read your statement, but chose instead
to focus on the lives lost as a
result of the former president
and his decision to fast track the release
of these bio weapons onto our unsuspecting population.
His willingness to entertain
the advice of Birx and Fauci and even
give them medals for it should give everyone
pause.
Robert was simply saying that you didn't listen.
My point was to ignore those things. It's
like, no. I chose not to. I chose
to care that his actions were criminal
from a global sense and is still stood
by them. How that's never I mean, you
could argue that that is the reality, but
I also still wanna vote for. That's fine.
That's up for you to decide. But to
pretend like it should not be a factor,
that's alarming to me.
Now Whitney Webb said amazing that people who
built their alt media careers
on calling the COVID vaccine a crime against
humanity
are now saying that me not wanting to
vote for the guy who calls that vaccine
one of his greatest achievements means I'm black
pilled communist SIOP agent.
I mean, they're all over the place, guys.
And I think what this is showing, at
least me in my opinion, is the people
we all thought were doing the people that
were using the COVID momentum to become something
bigger in interest of cheating you or lying
to you later.
I'm not saying I'm pointing at anybody in
particular. But my thing here is that I
can't believe there's anybody,
as she says, who built their entire careers
on pointing out the problem who are now
going pushah. Push it aside.
Trump is better important than his murder. I
just it's s That shows me that they
never actually believed what they were saying.
That's my opinion. I could be wrong. But
here, I think it's important to consider the
fact a lot of that community is now
just dumping all this into a very problematic
direction that has overlapped with all of the
same problems.
Now this was just the one I thought
was interesting.
This this guy just says, but Trump's not
even MAGA.
What? I don't even know what's going on
anymore. These people are changing the reality as
it goes.
Trump make America great again was literally Trump's
thing and he says it all the time,
but he's not even MAGA. Okay. I don't
even know what that means. Or here's not
my point is showing you this. There's a
lot of stuff flying around. It's just desperate
to try to make this make sense. And
one of those things is claiming that we're
something we're not because
people are looking at what we're saying.
This is Derek bro saying people are calling
Whitney, Ryan, and I black billed because
they still believe in the presidential elections are
real.
Many people, including in the Freedom Movement, hap
still haven't accepted that government is immoral.
We are dealing with fanatical status from the
left and the right.
This person responds by saying, no. It's because,
get this, guys, Whitney and Ryan are paid
by some WEF connections.
Why? We all had a good laugh about
that. Are you kidding me? Like, I mean,
this this is incredible to see. Let me
finish. I'll read what I said too. And
he says, I don't know you.
People aren't stupid. When people have wounds on
their heads, radiologic scans, he's talking about something
that he he is claiming he's got some
radio burn on his head that's from something
that I mean, we shouldn't dismiss the idea
of target individuals. I think it's a very
real topic in fact. But I just the
the idea that he thinks we should blindly
start screaming on what he's showing you on
Twitter because he claims that. I mean, it's
just if he we how many people out
there are lying or deceiving? The point is
as Derek writes in the conversation below, we
don't know. We're happy to consider what you're
showing us but you the way you're doing
this, saying that because you don't point this
out or have me on the show that
you're a lying shill.
We've all dealt with that. It's it's may
I've just I feel bad for them quite
frankly. But the point is,
when people have these wounds, he's pointing at
and you'll see the pictures down below,
the the alleged reporters ignore it.
It doesn't take rocket science to figure out
your frauds. So this is the guy who's
got a personal issue because we did not
highlight
oh, I thought it was right down there.
It is in here somewhere.
Anyway, it's not worth it. It's he posted
it down below of his little, like, burner
on his forehead that he said was, you
know, maybe it is. I don't know. That's
not my that's not the point of right
now.
But my that's why he's muted because this
guy constantly is doing this constantly, constantly. The
point is, he's lying.
Or believing that we've got WEF connections based
on somebody saying something. So right there, and
this is my point from before, I've already
noticed this, very subjective.
So I don't know why we would blindly
take anything at face value from anybody, let
alone somebody putting out subjective sub subjective claims.
And I said these baseless accusations are desperate
and show how vulnerable the 2 party illusion
truly is. Just in a general sense. The
fact that people are having to lie about
what we are, misrepresent our stance, in fact,
project what they're doing onto us, I think
it shows you how clearly vulnerable this whole
thing is. Now we're WEF funded?
I mean, I get this this is serious.
I was also just told in one of
these conversations online that I apparently supported the
jabs.
Guys, you all should have a great laugh
how stupid that is. Of all people, in
this whole conversation, that I ever, not for
at any moment, not it ever
supported any of these, let alone the COVID
19 injection. But on top of that, that
we were being funded by the very thing
that we have spent the last 4 years
screaming about, writing about, discussing, and we're still,
right now, keeping up on the conversation of
the of the,
pandemic accord and all of this stuff. We
recently had a conversation about it. But that's
the point. Is it only gets more and
more what is it on here? No. Let
me see.
Yeah. More and more subjective
and dismissive. Now on the point of voting
itself, I thought it would be important to
make to to highlight this as we probably
will have more conversation as this goes forward
about this.
But Jones Plantation
was highlighting John Rich with about a 1000000
followers saying, are you registered to vote? Millions
of patriots or not. It's easy. Click on
this. Okay.
Jones Plantation says, you're not allowed to complain
And this this is what he says in
the video. You quote, you're not allowed to
complain about the outcomes if you didn't vote.
Which is this classic,
frankly,
incorrect in my opinion. That's why I'm gonna
make a joke about George Carlin. I'll play
it for you. Despite what this guy says
at the bottom. Because in a way, my
point I'll I'll I'll say in a second.
George Carlin is using, like, what we would
call blackfield today to it's schtick. Right? And
I I honestly, I think he probably believed
it to a degree or believed it. But
the idea is, like, we're screwed. Kind of
that's that was always his kind of schtick.
But the point he's making in his discussions,
in his jokes, in his real discussions,
are that it's that way because of the
structure. And that they'll never let it change
as long as we allow them to be
in control.
That's kinda the point we're always making. That
it's there is another option. But if we
keep playing within this controlled system, that there
we're always gonna get what we've always gotten.
It's pretty simple. But so he says, you're
not allowed to complain about the outcome if
you didn't vote. And that brought to mind
that George Carlin quote. It's why I brought
grabbed it. But it says, and he writes,
Joins Plantation writes, a a system
so great that your only option is to
actively participate in your own enslavement and vote.
So we can get this country turned around.
Nice guy, but his insane contradictions don't even
register. And he has to wait 2 minutes.
You can listen to it. Anybody that sees
through, like, the lie of statism or what
this is, their contradictions are so prevalent and
they're so right on the surface. And a
lot of it ends up being rooted in
sort of like or like a naive sort
of belief that they're gonna do better and
we have to pick 1 because that's all
we have. It's the same it's the same
thing we always hear.
This person responded saying also,
since they all sound the same quoting a
single figure head like George Carlin, right, makes
them a cult. Then now again, the fright
the fact that I'm gonna play this clip
in a second because I think it's perfect
and funny, does not mean that all we're
going on is some George Carlin clip, obviously.
But that's a simplified reduction down. Everybody's saying
don't vote. They're all just listen to George
Carlin's jokes and all said that. That's right.
Right? As simple as that. That's my point.
If these are these are the kind of
things being floated out there in order to
get people to go, oh, yeah. Dismiss what
they're saying. Don't listen to it because that's
logic. Right? That's intelligence to disregard without considering.
But he says it makes them a cult.
It's a pretty extreme statement.
The nonvoter dialogue only works in a democracy,
not a republic, of which we haven't voted
in since 1950.
I don't even understand the argument that a
nonvoter dialogue
I mean, I get the point of the
difference between democracy and republic or the point
of which we haven't voted in since 1850.
But a anyway, like, the whole there's a
conversation to have we have to be to
have right there around the difference, around the
illusion of 1 Virginia. And the point of
not the point is always is it's not
nonvoter.
There's a lot of those that exist, but
what we're talking about is not just not
doing anything.
My point has always been about the
been about abstention. Like, on the record, I'll
I'll point it out in a second when
I get to the article.
On the record,
voting abstention.
Not not voting, but voting abstention. That's how
it's supposed to work. I've made this point
many times. They they've stole that from you.
You're supposed to have an option where you
can check abstention, and then that goes on
the record. And when you get the tallies
at the end of the election, it says
this many this, this many that, and this
many abstention.
That's how any vote is ever supposed to
work. They don't want you to have the
option to protest because that's what it's supposed
to mean. They don't wanna see 95%
of the population abstained because it shows you
that they're illegitimate. That's what that shows you.
That's why they don't want you to have
that option. That's stolen from you.
But he says Jones Plantation responds saying, yes.
The nonvoter is part of the cult. Like,
he's joking. Yeah. The non the nonvoter is
part of the cult. Got it. Makes perfect
sense. Keep telling yourself that. This person says,
the nonvoter doing the same thing over and
over
perfect. Expecting a different result.
I don't exact I don't know how exactly
you could frame not not doing something as
doing the same thing over and over. I
mean, I funny. You know where this is
going. He says, you all did that to
yourself, LOL. Pointing it out shouldn't be wrong.
We're getting some results. Same results.
Maybe if we try a different version instead
of the only two options, we can find
common ground. So he he's not necessarily
disagreeing.
He's simply saying that we're all ending up
in a similar position, but Jones' annotation says
doing the same thing over and over, expecting
different result. He's like, you realize that's exactly
what you described yourself.
He says, voting in a greater evil, lesser
evil democracy,
mainstream,
don't vote you, which is not actually what
j I've seen Jones he that's not what
he said. I've seen him discuss this.
I I'm I think that's him, if I'm
correct. Well, in any case, the point is
that's not what I'm saying. He says, you
move your show one person.
You your movie only shows one person and
what happens with that evil? Maybe we need
to have another choice not connected to either.
Anyway, it's it's this I mean, conversations like
this are actually fruit. Let's have an actual
conversation about how we can come to common
ground. I love things like that. But the
point is, to start,
about the idea that you're not allowed to
complain.
Well, I actually think this this joke from
George Collin makes more sense than you realize,
which is that if you voted, you have
no right to complain. For those of us
that are either one of the peep which
again is the largest voting block in this
country, people that don't even participate. And I
think a lot of them, if you actually
ask, are out of protest.
Or because they don't think it's honest or
because that this system that's not all the
choices. Right? That's that's where abstention would come
into play. If you gave them that option,
they'd probably go in and say I abstain
because you're cheating or you're lying or because
whatever.
That's why most people have become disillusioned in
it because that's the same old cycle. They
know it's a lie, and that's why it
shows you already that most Americans see through
it.
But if you didn't or rather you
voted 3rd party, let's say, or abstained on
the record or just wanted to abstain, the
point is you have far you have every
right to complain because you are the ones
that made this choice. If you voted for
them and then they do all these bad
things, well, at the end of the day,
you can see that that's ultimately your responsibility.
But either of those arguments are more of
a joke, quite frankly. At the end of
the day, we need to take responsibility for
what we're doing and not stop falling into
the same trap every time. Now I I
really do think as much as this is
funny. Now get ready. There is cussing and
crude jokes in here.
But it also really does kind of bring
this to a simple point. And recognizing that
none of these people care about you, I
think, is an important part of all this.
Election day, I stay home.
I don't vote. Fuck them. Fuck them. I
don't vote.
Two reasons. Two reasons I don't vote. First
of all, it's meaningless.
This country was bought and sold and paid
for a long time ago. The shit they
shuffle around every 4 years
doesn't mean a fucking thing.
My opinion is that he very much believed
that.
Like, if you ever seen his talk shows
or, you know, where he was, you know,
still was kinda was in his jokes because
that's who he was. But, you know, there
was times on where he was very serious.
He'd make these points and he was very
intelligent. That's why his he is comedy, if
you wanna call it that. It is funny,
but it's more of a a a critic
a a critique
in a very comedic way. He's very he
was a very smart man. My point is
I think he very much believed the ideas
of what he was talking about. And, again,
I would argue
that it was more so about the idea
that if we keep playing in this broken
system, that we're always gonna get this. That
not so much that we're just screw, give
up. But
framing it that way is makes it more
makes it more funny. And, you know, again,
maybe he did, maybe he didn't. I think
at the end of the day, my opinion
is that he didn't. But you guys can
decide for yourselves. But it is more funny
when you make it the way he's doing
it. And secondly, I don't vote because I
believe if you vote, you have no right
to complain.
People like to twist that around. I know.
They say they say well, if you don't
vote you have no right to complain. But
where's the logic in
that? If you vote,
and you elect dishonest incompetent people, and they
get into office and screw everything up, well
you are responsible for what they have done.
You caused the problem. You voted them in.
You have no right to complain. I,
on the other hand,
who did not vote, who did not vote,
who
in fact, did not even leave the house
on election day,
am in no way responsible for what these
people have done and have every right to
complain as loud as I want about the
mess you created that I had nothing to
do with.
So I know that a little later on
this year, you're gonna have another one of
those really swell presidential elections that you like
so much. You'll enjoy yourselves. It'll be a
lot of fun. I'm sure as soon as
the election is over, your country will improve
immediately.
As for me, I'll be home on that
day doing essentially the same thing as you.
The only difference is when I get finished
masturbating,
I'm gonna have a little something to show
for it, folks.
Thank you very but there's a reason. There's
a reason. There's a reason for this. There's
a reason education
sucks, and it's the same reason that it
will never ever ever be fixed. It's never
gonna get any better. Don't look for it.
Be happy with what you got because the
owners of this country don't want that.
So that's kinda my point. Like so to
be very clear, if there's ever a better
definition of black pill, it's exactly what he
just said. That's not what I think, clearly,
but my point is showing you this through
the context of what which, again, I said
that before. I believe it's more about making
this a funny outline. Ultimately, I do believe,
as somebody's putting out in the chat, he
himself got politically in motivated for other campaign.
You know? I think he argues
when you listen to him that there are
paths that this is the problem because we're
stuck here. He loves to call out the
public, which I think is right. A lot
of people are just mindlessly ignoring the problems
because they've been conditioned to, but people just
you know, it's about finding that kind of
motivation and and not falling into the same
stupor every time. Right? So I just wanna
make that clear. As much as this might
be counter productive because people are gonna pretend
that we're being black billed, the point is
just to make it clear that his arguments
post that point. Don't just give up. Don't
don't matter. But what he's about to say
next, I think, is just it's funny, but
it's also important. I think it's accurate,
accurate. I'm talking about the real owners now.
The real owners, the big wealthy business interests
that control things and make all the important
decisions. Forget the politicians.
The politicians are put there to give you
the idea that you have freedom of choice.
Mhmm. You don't.
You have no choice. You have owners. They
own you.
They own everything.
They own all the important land. They own
and control the corporations. They've long since bought
and paid for the senate, the congress, the
state houses, the city halls. They got the
judges in their back pockets, and they own
all the big media companies so they control
just about all of the news and information
you get to hear. They got you by
the balls.
They they spend 1,000,000,000 of dollars every year
lobbying
to get what they want.
Well, we know what they want. They want
more for themselves and less for everybody else,
but I'll tell you what they don't want.
They don't want a population of citizens capable
of critical thinking. They don't want well informed,
well educated people capable of critical thinking. They're
not interested in that. That doesn't help them.
That's against their interest.
That's right.
They don't want people who are smart enough
to sit around the kitchen table to figure
out how badly they're getting fucked by a
system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years
ago. They don't want that. You know what
they want? They want obedient
workers.
Obedient
workers. People who are just smart enough to
run the machines and do the paperwork and
just dumb enough to passively accept all these
increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the
longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of
overtime and the vanishing pension that disappears the
minute you go to collect it. And now
they're coming for your Social Security money. They
want your fucking retirement money. They want it
back
so they can give it to their criminal
friends on Wall Street. And you know something?
They'll get it. They'll get it all from
you sooner or later because they own this
fucking place. It's a big club,
and you ain't in it.
You and I are not in the big
club. And by the way, it's the same
big club club they used to beat you
over the head with all day long when
they tell you what to believe. All day
long, beating you over the head in their
media, telling you what to believe, what to
think, and what to buy. The table is
tilted, folks. The game is rigged, and nobody
seems to notice.
Nobody seems to care.
Good honest hard working people, white collar, blue
collar, doesn't matter what color shirt you have
on. Good honest hard working people continue. These
are people of modest means. Continue to elect
these rich cocksuckers who don't give a fuck
about them. They don't give a fuck about
you, they don't give a fuck about you,
they don't care about you at all, at
all, at all.
Yeah. You know?
And nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to
care. That's what the owners count on. The
fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant.
Exactly.
I'll include the video to watch. There's a
compilation here, but 8 minutes full.
I'll include for you. But, you know, ultimately,
what's he talking about?
The oligarchy. Right?
So let's consider what we're talking about here.
Well, Walls and and Caris are obvious. Rich
politicians that clearly don't care about the average
person. But then you've got Trump who's a
very wealthy individual who clearly has shown himself
to be what we've already talked about. You've
got Elon Musk who's a
a very, very wealthy technocrat
oligarch
military contractor,
technocrat, you know, the or not a great
reset kind of check every box. Then you've
got RK Jr, a classic elitist. You know,
these are all exactly what he's talking about.
Now, maybe we can consider that they're actually
trying to change something from maybe.
But to blindly accept that as the only
choice, because what else?
I mean, it's lazy if nothing else. I
mean, we have to be able to try,
like, nothing nothing that is worth doing is
ever the easy choice. This is the easy
choice. You're falling back and going, well,
I'm I'm just gonna check that box.
Someone he's she he he only imagined what
George would say about you today if you
were telling him what your choice was. Now,
I've already kind of said it, but the
point I will include this as I've done
it many times before.
But a lot of talks about this. As
the title is for this show, why your
vote no longer counts, the true power of
abstention.
And at the time, election fraud are already
underway. This was for 2018.
The bottom line is that abstention, as I
said, is something that needs to be there.
Like, during nullification, it's something they've stolen from
you. That you're supposed to have a right
to circumvent them.
Nope.
Not any
representative government we pretend we have. Right? Except
where they take out all of your representation.
The idea clearly is that there's something that's
supposed to be there so that we can
have an indication
if people are abstaining
for a variety of reasons. Usually out of
protest, out of concern that there's something wrong
with the process,
that the there's cheating that went on. Whatever
it is.
That number shows you a diverge of people
that are saying we are
you know, there's the normal choices. We're choosing
abstention because we think that there's something amiss
here. That other people then looking at the
process can go, okay.
Clearly, most Americans don't agree with the choices.
They don't want that for obvious reasons.
The point is that if it was there,
it could show that more people are interested
in other directions, which by the way would
then open the door for a third party
to actually have a chance.
It does right now, arguably, if if you
believe the voting. And I'm talking from within
that context, by the way. Again, my point
is always there. I don't believe the vote
translates to the outcome. It should and it
could in a real representative government.
But in the context of if it might
have an effect, the point is that this
is there for you to be able to
protest. And my point is knowing that it's
broken in my mind, that's what I would
go and do. I'm abstaining
on the record, which means I'm active in
a lot of other ways. They're far more
affected, by the way, as well.
That means I'm active on the ballot for
saying I think this is broken.
The problem largely for those that might wanna
vote 3rd party is they've been convinced that
it's fruitless. That if you do it, you're
only gonna give it to the one you
don't like more. You you don't you dislike
more. But if you ever the last election,
you saw 70% or 40%, whatever it is
abstaining, you'd go, well, shoot. Maybe there's a
possibility here. That's why a lot of people
who actually believe the RFK was gonna do
what he said thought I mean, why wouldn't
you keep going? Your whole stance, which I'm
gonna get to in a second, is that
they're all bad and Trump said the same
thing. Trump on the record said he'd rather
have Biden as a vice president before this
happened because RFK was whatever he called him.
Typical Trump stuff. Now he takes him.
The problem clearly
that these people are actively
challenging,
like, you know, the I'll get the one
I was gonna say is ultimately that RFK
Jr should have stuck it out,
gotten to 5%, which I guarantee he would've,
and started a new party.
How is that not positive change? Look. Fine.
Okay. So Trump or Kamala, whichever one you
don't want wins.
Surprise, surprise. It's gonna go in the same
direction it was going anyway. That's the whole
point we're trying to make.
I hope I'm wrong, but it I think
history shows that. But if you start a
new party, well, the next time around, maybe
we can actually have something happen. See, they
don't want to allow that. So acting like
the adult in the room would ignore that
possible change because it's not immediate. It's not
right now, and Kamala is gonna end the
world. Well, guess what? The other side says
Trump's gonna end the world, and that's how
that always goes.
But, of course, logic at this moment is
being called black pill, so let's ignore it.
But, obviously, I think ultimately this is something
you should consider. We have the idea of
the this is why I one of the
many reasons I believe and wanna work with
Derek Rose, as you guys know, he's a
writer for the last American Vagabond. And one
of the conversations he's been doing long before
TLAB work is the idea of exit and
build.
You wrote a great article for TLAB, by
the way, about kind of, like, challenging that
idea. You'll owe nothing and be happy. The
point is the opposite. Right? And it about,
know, it's and again, to be clear, exit
and build is not just about moving into
a homestead.
That's clearly one of the viable possibilities, but
it's simply about exiting the system. And if
you listen to this, if you read it
these writings on it, it's very thorough. It's
very detailed. There's a lot of different slip
people think this just means checkout.
They want to see it that way and
ignore the bigger picture. If you if you
think that and you go through this information,
you'll feel pretty sheepish because it's very detailed.
And the idea is simply in all of
the different possible ways, exiting from the system.
And again, you could mean that politically, you
could mean that from and if from,
buying things out, you know, with so solid
with, sound money, growing your own food. There's
all sorts of ways you could pull out
the system, whether that's grocery stores or you
see what I'm saying? It's all the ways
from the normal control structure that you can
choose to exit.
And then while that is happening, you can
try to build new things. Build a a
co op in your area where your community
can create food I'm thinking it's still food,
but you see what I'm saying? Like, build
outside of that structure. The problem is that
everything that they do in this discussion
represents a challenge to the control structure. And
guess what? The managers of the status quo,
the left and the right, and all the
ID logs screaming that these guys are the
only choice,
don't want the change.
Now I wanna play some important discussions from
Larkin Rose here. Now I really, really hope,
as I just said in the beginning of
the show, I've recently just invited him on.
I think we're if sometime next month, we're
gonna be having him on the show.
Yeah. I'm waiting. He's gonna respond and give
me the exact day.
And his conversation, and I'm a include this
entire it's, like, 10 hours, but it's just
an audio reading of his book, which I
have here in the office. The most dangerous
superstition.
Very important to consider. At least consider. And
you don't have to, you know, rate it,
I recommend. You don't have to listen to
10 hours of the content if you don't
want to. But listen to these clips at
the very least and ask yourself if he's
making sense.
Stand back objectively and consider his opinion. Don't
come at this from the idea that this
is a black pill guy trying to confuse
you. Sir, consider that as one of the
possibilities. Be objective. But actually listen to this
with an open mind.
And you tell me this does not make
sense.
You could still go, well, but I disagree
at the end of the day. As much
as it still makes sense, I think this
is the right choice. But if you listen
to this, plant these ideas on your mind,
you will begin to recognize the outlines of
this everywhere.
The reality
that the system itself
is inherently contradictory.
The idea that
choosing to acknowledge or pretend or the living
in the fantasy that somehow this grouping of
powerful elitists
get to decide what you're not allowed to
do or just in at this point, regardless
of the constitution,
and then use violence
to tell when you do
because you did the wrong thing. Now in
some cases, we've convinced ourselves, like drug use,
that that's just in bad well, it's about
liberty and freedom at its core.
And are we do go dealing with cannabis,
for example, we're realizing that this was always
a larger manipulation.
And so that is one of the obvious
points of the largest, most dangerous superstition. With
it ultimately pretending they have that authority over
your life
is an illusion.
But it's so difficult for some people to
put their to wrap their mind around this.
That's why my point from before, I usually
say that I'm against all government, but people
really aren't ready for that yet. I'm seeing
an opening here to a degree for people
to at least begin considering
that there is, are other paths
outside of this kind of structure.
Juror Warfare shared this.
Look, Jer Larkin rose on the most dangerous
superstition. He argues that belief in government authority
leads to mass violence.
I mean, that's quite obvious. Look at the
world.
War I mean, violence and war and conflict
will always happen, I think.
Groups will collect, they'll have different agreements, but
the idea of mass violence, world wars,
nuclear weapon use, torture, that that kinda these
are state
driven. These are state control.
We're talking about governments that are acting with
your authority to do these things to people
in the world. Look at what Israel's doing.
Look at your US government supporting what they're
doing. That's your
support.
The consent of the government is being used
to murder children in Gaza right now. Is
that what you voted for? No. It doesn't
matter because they don't ask you what you're
voting for. They want your consent. So whoever
has it can keep doing the same things
they've always been doing.
He says it leads to mass violence, oppression,
and enslavement because people mindlessly follow orders from
those in power like a cult. Exactly.
Larkin insists that individuals must take responsibility for
their own actions and stop bowing to government
control. In other words, you can't vote your
way to freedom and prosperity.
The sad thing is so many people, and
some that may have think they have good
intentions,
argue that this is naive.
And, you know, maybe it is. But I
would argue at least consider the possibility
and recognize a way out of the same
thing that may you actually feel helpless about.
Same old cycle of lesser evil.
Almost everybody I talked to wanted more government
than I wanted. I would argue with them
and and feel like, I totally won that
argument. But I would notice contradictions in my
own belief system. I basically whittled down the
government I believed in until I realized
to be legitimate
and moral and righteous and something that should
exist,
it isn't government anymore. It's just people doing
what people have the right to do. So
I sort of
accidentally
fell backwards into being an anarchist. It literally
means
rule by no one, not having a ruling
class. We act like grown ups. And it
sounds like, well, you must not believe in
right and wrong. It really is the exact
opposite. Because theft is wrong, it's also wrong
when government does. When you're advocating an authoritarian
ruling class, you are going against what you
know to be right. You've just been taught
that there's an exemption
for the people in this weird monstrosity called
government. What I do is try to convince
monstrosity called government. What I do is try
to convince people
to actually adhere to their own moral code
and apply it to everybody.
It's how long are the people
going to imagine an obligation
to obey the worst people in the world.
Without lots of people doing that because they
think government's legitimate,
none of the tyrants have any power. Government
means the exercise of authority
over a people or place.
Authority is the key to it because authority
means the right
to rule. The concept of the right to
rule, that is the heart, and that's what
the most dangerous superstition is. The Now important
to point out, doesn't that sound a little
bit like, you know, vassal states and and
lure lure like, this is this is this
is what, Matt Matt Ehret and I have
talked about in the past.
That ultimately, we never really changed. And we
came from a time where there were, you
know, like,
what are the what are the the term
they use for that? You know, a ruler
that divine right. They believe they have the
divine right to rule. Well, remove divine. It's
the same thing. So at the end of
the day, in the past, we were told,
oh, they're god they're godly or whatever. They
were divine. You know, their bloodline is supposed
to be ruling everything. Right? And people bowed
to that. And eventually, it got to the
point to where people no longer were whatever
reason, were no longer okay with that. Slowly
changed and all of a sudden, they convinced
us
that we were the ones choosing.
But we recognize I mean, you you can
go specifically
ex to the bloodline discussion and find how
alarmingly weird it is, but that every single
president, say for a few of them, have
related to the same bloodline. It's not a
joke. Every time people bring that up, people
dismiss that as fake. It's easy to look
up. It's a very interesting conversation. Trump and
Clinton were cousin the point is you can
show on the stage of Trump and Clinton,
the only two people that were related were
Trump and Clinton and look at who ended
up being possible choices. I guarantee we'll see
the same thing and I'll make the same
point then. Now that doesn't have to it
could be coincidence for all we know because,
you know, who knows? They all intermingle with
blood who knows? The point is
that
we can see a clear line from people
that pretended they had a a divine right
to rule.
Now we just switched into an authoritarian government
situation where they don't they have a right
over us. And then we pretend we're picking
them, but are we? Which is the crux
of the point? And it's the most dangerous
superstition is the idea of the authority, but
the voting part of it is how we
grant them that authority or at least keep
the illusion going.
Very important to consider. But Matt's point, and
we've talked about the full before, is that
with the WHO and the rec World Economic
Forum and all that's happening, his argument is
that that same power structure that's always really
been there
is made it made the choice that they're
now gonna step back out of the shadows.
The technocracy is gonna show itself and say,
look, we're we need to take control, you
know, whatever it is. Then we're gonna step
back out and say we need and that's
what they're representing as the world they,
pandemic accord and all the stuff they're working
on, which is centered around the idea of
pandemic, but really it's just about global influence.
A control structure from the top that it
gets to dictate, and then all of a
sudden you end up in a forever emergency.
And then you see what I'm saying? Either
way,
whether his opinion is wrong or not, we
can see that the right to rule has
never really gone away.
Mentality is the source of all of government's
power. That's why what people believe
is the thing that matters. If people stop
believing in an obligation to obey,
when enough people stop believing that any empire
falls over. Your empire is just doomed. It's
one of the hardest things for people to
realize. The difference between what most people call
their god and what most people call government
is that most people actually believe in government.
It makes normal people cheer for their own
enslavement and the enslavement of everybody around them
thinking they're being good law abiding taxpayers.
It's weird to watch.
Here's another one. This one is from Jones
plantation. We referenced earlier, another shorter clip, but
the, the best things to see in this
conversation are more long form. Because he he
lays this out in such a great way.
These are just because, you know, in general
for time and just get you to get
on this path and consider what he's saying,
read the book in general. But, ultimately,
if you really wanna understand what he has
to say, you gotta sit down and listen
to him and listen to his long form.
That's the point. Most of these things are
not easily summed up in quick little sound
bites, which is the way all the world
works today. There's a reason for that.
He said this is the the Jones Plantation
frames that says the government is not corrupt.
Government
in its current form is corruption.
It is organized crime disguised as public service.
There is no voting solution.
You know, reading Whitney's books and so on,
like, you can see that there's a very
clear point there around why we're just dealing
with a criminal organization who's convinced us that
we're choosing them.
As always by way of coercion and violence.
When when they write a law, they're saying,
you must do this or you may not
do that, and here are the nasty things
we're gonna do to you if we catch
you disobeying us. They don't recognize that they've
been taught to
hallucinate an exception
when it comes to law.
So people imagine themselves to be
peaceful and and pro peace and pro everybody
getting along,
and yet the vast majority of people still
vote for a big authoritarian monstrosity
to rob all their neighbors. And so, like,
a lot of what I've focused on
is trying to get them to see
they are being tricked into cheering for things
that go against what they really believe in
and who they really are. Yep. Simple.
Just a thought points out. Americans don't vote
based on their principles. Now what I would
argue is most,
right, that I and or rather that because
of the broken system that they're forced or
convinced that they're not supposed to or can't.
But any case, what we're seeing right now
is that almost everyone we're seeing talking about
this are not voting based on principles. They're
voting based on their fears.
That's self evident. That's exactly what's happening. That's
the only pot main point that matters. We're
not even talking about policy, really. We're just
saying she's worse. He's worse.
It is an emotional act, not a rational
one, which I've talked about so many times
over the years. It's about emotions. Because when
you're emotional, you don't think clearly. You're not
thinking with logic. We've all been in that
position where you react emotionally because you hear
something that wasn't true, and then you later
come to your senses and you go, okay.
I'm sorry. I overreacted. I wasn't in my
why? Because your emotions took over. Your government
knows this. They keep you in a position
of constant fear, constant concern because that is
easier to manipulate. They use fears and worry
and concern and look at this date look
at what happened to the children. Oh my
god. And they they constantly get you in
a position where you fall to things that
don't really add up. They don't really add
up.
A population, she says, a population so terrified.
Oh, that she says, and that's exactly what
the ruling class wants, as I said. A
population so terrified that they forego logic, critical
thinking, and self preservation. In their desperation, they
place their trust their trust in predators. They
ignore the red flags, the lies, and the
obvious. They ignore history and reality itself.
Their fear solidifies their fate.
They they're they're willing they willingly hand their
power to their oppressors.
They defend their oppressors.
They em they
empathize with their with them. They believe they
are their saviors. The point is this is
what Caitlin Johnstone talks about the
cycle of abuse.
Like a like an abused wife.
Right? You defend it. You ignore it. Like,
and the point is eventually you come through
and you this is what we're dealing with.
We're in an abusive relationship with our government.
Says that but the powerful egg egg egg,
exist based on a farce.
They maintain their dominance with lies, propaganda, and
manipulation.
Nothing about their power is real.
Once enough,
of us recognize this and stop consenting to
this charade, they will lose that power, and
we will gain it. Once we recognize this,
there will be no stopping us. We are
far too many. Now the point is right
there,
I think at the core,
without acknowledging it, that that scares some of
these people.
Well, you know, the truth a lot of
people make this point over the years. A
lot of people want subjugation. A lot of
people just want to be told what to
do. And that could be as a byproduct
of being put in this position for so
many generations. But some people just are easier.
Just tell me what I'm supposed to do.
The idea that somehow that you might gain
responsibility
over your life, I think that scares some
people.
So it's one part of this to consider
as well.
Now we've talked about recently on 20 on
12th August, the rise of partisan psychological warfare.
It's a very real aspect of this, which
both applies to the idea of the partisan
manipulation, but just of dealing with, you know,
like 5th generation warfare aspects of this, which
I'll point out more in a second. I
wanna include that because we're gonna talk about
this if you wanna dive more into that.
But this is what's interesting to me. This
comes to the partisan manipulation aspect.
So first,
oh, this I didn't grab this one. Hold
on.
This is a great clip made by Decensored
News. And I was asked, so the question
is which RFK Junior is telling the truth?
Is RFK Junior is now suggesting that Trump
is going to protect American freedoms inside of
the wars.
But before that, RFK Junior was saying that
Trump wasn't gonna do those things. Now, of
course, obviously, he could've changed his mind, but
I don't think we all I don't think
anybody truly believes that's what ultimately happened. The
same thing happened with Bernie endorses Clinton or
r f or or Gabbard endorses. They've all,
moments ago, were saying she was the biggest
villain in the world, and now all of
a sudden they endorse her because she's the
best chance. That's crazy. That's that's schizophrenic.
So this clip is about RFK junior who
just joined this person saying that this person
was going to be the worst thing we
could do. Or rather that either of them
would be the worst thing we could possibly
do. I find that to be pretty crazy.
So here,
here we go, is r f k junior
versus RFK Junior. Presidential debate
left no doubt
that neither president Trump nor president Biden is
prepared to unify our nation.
In fact, their rhetoric and their actions will
only divide us further. I've made So just
to be clear, Trump's rhetoric and actions have
not changed since RFK joined the campaign. This
is despite what people are trying to project.
Trump is the same person. He's saying the
same things other than here's what RFK brought
to the table, and we're gonna do the
health thing. Whatever.
He's the same person doing the same things.
You could listen to him in his interviews.
So this idea that somehow he's no longer
gonna do that or his rhetoric won't divide
is just simply not true. Either RFK lied
about it there or he's lying about it
here. Simple as that. The heart wrenching decision
to suspend my campaign
and to support president Trump. If an establishment
Democrat wins
or if the Donald Trump wins, the cold
civil war is only gonna intensify.
Wow. We're gonna get more of the same,
more division,
more poverty,
more debt. So do you really are we
really gonna tell ourselves that he just goes
and talks and Trump's like, I promise I
won't do that, and that's good?
Or or what could you possibly say that
would change an opinion like that? That's so
rooted in his entire history, what he is
and what he's doing. You don't have a
conversation on the phone that suddenly goes, well,
never mind. I don't agree with that. So
he's either lying here or he's lying there.
That that's simple.
And all of these crises
will only accelerate. Don't you want a president
who's gonna get us out of the wars
and who's gonna rebuild the middle class in
this country?
He put a Goldman guy in charge of
the Treasury Department,
an Exxon CEO in charge of State Department,
a pharma president in charge of HHS.
Which by the way, in different ways, he's
doing the same thing right now. Just we're
not in the COVID pandemic focus discussion right
now. We're on the technocratic
train. So you're gonna get Palantir and Thiel
and Musk. That's what's happening. It's the same
damn thing, which sadly if we don't do
it now, will become relevant or you'll be
recognizing that 4 years from now. Looking back
and going, yeah, sir. Do you wonder why
Palantir rules our life now? I wonder why
that's controlled? Why do we only able to
exist on social media?
I hope I'm wrong.
A Verizon Lobby is in charge of the
FCC.
Don't you want the regulatory
agencies to be free from corporate corruption?
Yeah. And that's what president Trump told me
that he wanted.
Coal and oil.
Somebody pointed this out to me, by the
way.
If you watch this whole thing, all and
the parts where he's on stage with Trump,
he's very careful about what he says. He
doesn't say Trump will do this. He said
Trump told me he wants that or, like,
listen again.
And that's what president Trump told me that
he wanted. That's what he told me he
wanted.
That's a very interesting way to frame that.
Not it means nothing, maybe. I don't know.
But
I think if we're paying attention, people don't
wanna believe the newer guy as a a
politic they're all politicians, and they know what
they're doing. They say things in very, very
whether it's a legal discussion or, you know,
whatever it is.
That's what simply what he told me he
wanted. Maybe he's lying though. I don't know.
Like, that's a that's not a very definitive
statement, and yet it's you know, maybe it's
just very Trump esque right down the middle.
You can believe what you want.
Coal and oil lobbyists to run EPA and
the Department of Interior respectively,
a big ag robber baron
as the head of the Department of Agriculture
and the neocon
militarist
John Bolton
as national security adviser. Uh-huh. He also told
me
that he wanted to end the grip of
the neocons
on US foreign policy.
I mean, this is just like locker up
JFK. The it he's just telling you what
you wanna hear, guys. What they're doing is
addressing all of the things that we're saying
he's gonna do. That's what they did last
time. Remember remember Trump is good at this.
We were over here going the the
the solution's gonna be worse than the problem.
And then, like, 3 days later he comes
out and goes, I promise that won't and
then that's literally what happened.
He's just listening to you guys. He's listening
to what you're saying or rather what his
critiques are and then what his audience tells
him. Whereas then they go he comes out
and says, I promise this.
It's just words. I hope he's gonna do
it, but look at what happened last time.
I don't know why this is so hard
for some people to why do it? It's
because they don't want to hear it, which
means it's not an honest conversation.
I'm not a fan of president Trump. I
wanna beat him
in a campaign on a level playing field.
I wanna talk about his issues about locking
down the economy, shutting down 3,300,000
businesses, about running up a $34,000,000,000,000 debt
Yeah. About engaging us in forever wars and
doing favors for Wall Street. Right. Right. Yeah.
That's what happened, guys. It doesn't it doesn't
change all of those things. But what's interesting,
right, how long ask yourself right now. How
long until
these people begin to become Trump enemies? Just
like the last time. Every single Bolton, Pompey,
every one of them eventually came kind of
adversarial with him or became the enemy. Despite
them being the, we gotta have the enemies
on the inside to fight the inside, whatever.
I again, I hope wrong. But at the
end of the day, I think we're gonna
see some differences here because these people, at
least on the surface, are not even remotely
the same thing.
Do you want a president who's gonna get
us out of the wars and who's gonna
rebuild the middle class in this
country. His pick as vice president
is a salute to the CIA
Yep. And to the intelligence community and to
the military industrial complex.
Their gravy train is gonna continue. Or So
you could have frame this as he's just
simply telling you the truth at this point
because maybe he thought he was gonna be
wrong. I don't know. But it is the
truth. It's obvious. So those things don't just
go away because he'd suddenly work with Trump.
Vance doesn't become somebody he's not without the
same background because he decides to jump in
with Trump. It is there.
Are you going
to actively campaign for president Trump?
Yes. I will. I'm gonna work to get
him elected. He reauthorized
FISA
and the Patriot Act. President Trump Yep. Shut
down 3,300,000
businesses. President Trump said that he was gonna
run America like a business.
And he came in, and he gave the
keys to all of our businesses
to a 50 year bureaucrat who'd never been
elected to anything and had no accountability.
He closed down 3,300,000
businesses
with no due process, no just compensation
in violation of the 5th amendment.
Now to be clear, because I'm sure the
people that only wanna hear 1 you know,
see it the way they wanna see it,
the reason this is being played is because
of how they're all like this. It's all
games and illusions and, you know, this this
is them
manipulating.
Kamala, Walt, the red. They're all the same
thing.
And, again, my focus is a little bit
more towards Trump only because I believe it's
obvious right now that he's the person being
shoved in front of everybody. But if you
are you asking the question, I there these
are all the same politician,
part of the blob, all trying to get
you in this and and
Coke and Pepsi.
Right? It's ultimately still a dare a very
dangerous drink that's gonna hurt you. They're all
doing the same thing. That's my point. Now
I I'm sure people don't agree with that.
But at least consider based on history,
actions, statements like this. I mean, you know,
just try trying to shake people out of
this stupor. And I'm really what I'm speaking
to out there is not the people that
are gonna ignore it no matter what. The
TeamSport politics people don't care. I'm trying to
reach the people out there that are being
convinced
that you're supposed to vote for one of
them when you really don't want to. I
by the way, I had the great interview
with Sam Husseini about vote packed.
That's an obvious potential solution if you believe
the voting translates to simply team up with
somebody on the other side and vote for
your 3rd party so the votes don't get
taken from the other 2. Either way, I'm
trying to reach you in the sense that
you should truly vote for what you believe.
I don't know why anybody should have to
convince you of that. Just recognize that you're
being manipulated to think you have to settle.
That you have to choose
all evil
because that's what an adult would do. No.
Adults stick to their their principles. They believe
in something and they follow through. That's what
adults do.
With the lockdowns,
the mask mandates, the travel restrictions,
president Trump presided over the greatest restriction on
individual liberties this country has ever known. Yep.
Don't you want a president who's gonna protect
America's freedoms?
Wow. And who
is gonna protect us against totalitarianism.
He didn't stand up for the constitution
when it really mattered. He broke his promise
to declassify
the JFK
assassination
files. And as Whitney pointed out, remember,
declassify is not the same as unredact.
That that that's just another level of the
game these days. Right? So, yeah, here's here's
400 pages of basically black lines. Good, you
know, they they did the same thing where
they gave you something, but nothing really changed.
There was no it didn't change the dynamic.
It didn't change and give you anything new.
It just gave you something that wasn't there
before that doesn't add anything. That's what they
do.
He promised again.
I mean, I just it's it's it's really
just the, I guess, a sign of insanity,
if you wanna call it that, doing the
same thing over a respective result. That you
know somebody who's already lied to you. But
of course, the narrative from their side is
that it wasn't a lie and something else
changed and here's the different situation. The democrats
wouldn't let him or whatever. But at the
end of the day, there's a lot of
examples like he's calling out where he simply
did not do what he said he would.
So you can call it a lie, you
can call it something else. But an honest
person would go, well, okay. Well, I'm I'm
gonna hear what he's saying and take it
with a grain of salt because maybe it
won't happen like last time. That's not hatred.
That's not anti anything. That's just being objective.
Same with the other thing. It's being framed
like something else because I think it's dangerous
to the ultimate status quo. President Trump also
assaulted the first member, fair failed to
defend press freedom
when he continued president Obama's persecution and prosecution
of Julian Assange. The Trump White House also
went after the 4th amendment prohibitions
against warrantless searches and seizures with this intrusive
track and trace surveillance systems
and obliterated our rights to privacy in this
country. Don't you want a president who's gonna
protect America's freedoms
and who
is gonna protect us against totalitarianism.
President Trump's beloved operation warp speed
shut down jury trials
for any corporation
that was involved in COVID countermeasures. Here's what
the 7th amendment said.
No American
shall be denied
the right of a trial
for a jury of his peers
in cases or controversies
exceeding $25.
There is no pandemic exception and the So
in case you missed that, it's just one
of a 1000000 different examples being besieged. A
lot of examples.
Well, that's just that's just simply unconstitutional, guys.
It doesn't there's no way around that. You
don't get to go emergency and and but
they did though. And that was Trump. That
was the emergency
that contradicted or circumvented your constitution.
And they all went and then here we
are. We're we have never come back from
that. It's one more step in the same
direction. He's just one more player pushing this
board further and further. That's all this is.
The bottom line is that was unconstitutional. Like
his conversation about your second amendment and we'll
take the guns, we'll do due process later.
Yep. Yep. Rittenhouse's comments were actually true despite
his being screamed at by Meaghan to get
fall back into line because that's certainly honest.
No. He clearly said that. And there are
clearly issues with different stances he's had. He's
the one that made bump stocks. I mean,
there's so many things.
But we all just see what we wanna
see if you're trapped in the paradigm, guys.
And that's what this stuff is trying to
break through.
There are other solutions
outside of these control players.
To think not or only think you only
have these choices is where the illusion is.
Waiver of the 7th amendment for
for corporations
that were involved in countermeasures
meant that no matter how a how reckless
the corporation behaved, no matter how negligent was
it was,
no matter how toxic or unnecessary the ingredients,
no matter how shoddy the testing,
no matter how grievous your injury,
you could not sue that company.
They had a ticket to make anything they
want without any kind of accountability.
And don't you want a president
that's gonna make America healthy again?
Man, what a contradiction.
President Trump has told me that he wants
this to be his legacy.
I'm choosing to believe that this time he
will follow through. Oh my god. What a
great way to end that. What a great
clip.
Choosing to believe. Well, you know, I hope
he's right too.
I'm just not
naive I guess to just put, I mean,
I'm not gonna put my hopes on somebody
who already showed they didn't follow through and
just hope it happens again. You know? I
mean, even if you wanna believe that's r
RK's best option to maybe have a difference
in this, I completely disagree. Some that's right.
If him actually if you believe in him
and him actually starting a party that might
actually change the broken system, that would be
impossible,
real change.
Not falling into the same hamster wheel and
per and expecting a different result.
Now ro Robin Suggs also adds, and which
Trump is telling the truth. Right? Because Trump
said RFK Junior is a Democrat. Plant. That's
what he said. A radical left liberal who
who's been put in place in order to
help Crooked Joe Biden, the worst president in
the history of the United States get reelected.
There's plenty of those going around, guys. It's
and I look. Here's here's one from Truth
Social.
The idea
that we can't think about again, either Trump
is just saying this to be like, he's
my political adversary, so I'm gonna lie about
him, if you wanna think it that way,
or he was telling the truth and now
you're okay with that. I mean, how do
you make sense of this?
You can't just keep going, well, that's politics
for you. They all lie. Well, okay. That's
our point. So you're gonna pretend like we're
gonna trust these people when all they do
is manipulate, lie, and undermine?
That's isn't that George Karl is that George
Karl's point or Larkin Rose's point? Yes.
You're engaging with a a in complicit
or a, explicit
explicitly criminal enterprise.
They are openly dishonest. And we all just
give them a pass because it's the most
dangerous superstition.
Here's the clip of the truth social. He
says, I lived with RFK Junior in New
York and watched him convince governor Cuomo to
make environmental moves that were outright nasty.
Upstate New York has not allowed to drink
and frack as Ohio, Pennsylvania. Oh, good. So
we stopped fracking. What a monster.
Because my this is my point. Trump is
a is a
he's not about the the idea is this
is about big business. He's always been like
that. And so he's gonna care about what
other business interests are desired. Money. Making money.
To all these people that pretend like RFK
is gonna influence, I hope so. I don't
think that's the case.
Upstate New York, you know, it goes on
to say, because of this, prices have skyrocketed
all over the country, but especially upstate New
York.
Energy costs are the highest in the US,
with the exception of California, run by Gavin
Newsom, the worst governor in the states. I've
he says, I even take Biden over RFK
Junior.
That's what he said. This is August 26th,
guys. Because our country would last a year
or 2 longer prior to collapse. That is
excuse me. April. April 26th.
But it would be dead either way.
Is that how you talk about and he
says right here, his views on vaccines are
fake.
Fake.
Why? Because he undermines Trump's legacy of making
the injection that saves everybody's lives.
I just don't know why honest people can't
see how unnerving this is. This is not
honesty.
At the very least, you're believing who he
who you think he really is and this
is all the illusion, but then you're you
can tell he's duplicitous. He's lying. He's completely
playing. That is simply how this game works.
And I think, ultimately, everybody knows that. It
really does concern me how this is being
played so openly.
So either of them hate each other or
Vance said Trump was the worst person alive.
Now they're all how do we not see
what that shows us?
It's all a game.
Now, Decensored News points out then this is
and here here I'm gonna show this again
in a minute, I think. Or we might
we might have to cut this a bit
short today based on time. I might have
to push the other Israel stuff off to
more Israel conversation tomorrow, but I'll mention that
at the end. Here's what RFK Jr. Said
5 hours ago.
Bitshoot says, we at Bitshoot respect the courage
of Elon Musk
in his stand to protect the voices of
Brazilians.
Yuck. That's too bad.
I just don't agree with that at all.
I I I think I might get to
that point here. I I think that we're
being played, frankly.
I think BitShoot is going in a positive
direction, but I don't know. Maybe they I
we can disagree. Maybe I'm wrong. That's always
possible. But it says, while x currently cannot
provide a voice to all Brazilians, silence now,
I frankly think there's more going on there
than we think about what's actually happening there.
And the overall, I think that what's happening
around Brazil is more of a useful tool
at the moment.
That what whether or not Elon is helping
them use Twitter, that they're not the Twitter
itself or Elon himself are not some kind
of fighting for free speech element. I think
it's verifiably true. Based on this one statement
here, easy to see.
What next, what RFK says. He says, we
invite all silence to join BitShoot, blah blah
blah. He says, the the best way for
to avoid being silenced is to create content
on mobile platforms, I agree with that, which
are committed to the protection of free speech
everywhere, which I think BitShoot is. That's pretty
clear based on how you can look and
there's some pretty rough things, those comments. They
allow people to say what they want, which
sometimes that means bad things. That's free speech.
Twitter is not like that. Period. And I'll
make that case here, actually.
RFK Jr. Literally says, freedom of speech without
freedom of reach
is not freedom of speech.
He's actually just said that.
And as Decentral News points out, well, okay,
then why did you pray then why did
you praise x? Which has an explicit policy
of freedom of speech not reach, As a
bastion of free speech 15 days ago. Which
he did. The bastion of free speech called
x must be protected.
I mean, guys, like, so are we like
at this point right now, we must be
feeling uncomfortable if you are just not checking
out because this shows you something you don't
wanna see. This is wild.
They're all liars, apparently. It doesn't nothing is
sacred. There are no principles. It's all just
control. It's all just we're on one side,
now we're on the other. Follow me. Doesn't
that concern everybody?
Now here, this I I wasn't I wasn't
gonna play this, but I'll just play this
since that's the exactly what's going on here.
I think it was this. Yeah. Here we
go. This is another this is a clip
from,
Casey
Wright.
Yaccarino verse Yaccarino.
I was shocked by the evidence uncovered by
the house judiciary committee that a group of
companies organized a systematic illegal boycott against x.
Of an open feedback loop
for the advertising experts in this room
to help
develop Twitter into a place where they will
be excited
about investing more money. Product development,
ad safety,
content moderation.
Content
moderation.
That's what the influence is.
That puts your global town square the one
place that you can express yourself freely and
openly. We have built
content moderation tools
that have never existed before at this company.
If you are gonna post something
that is lawful,
but it's awful
Mhmm.
You get labeled
at long term risk.
People are hurt when the marketplace of ideas
is constricted. And we've introduced a new policy
called freedom of speech,
not reach. Well, look at that. Well, that's
embarrassing.
How does that work out? Right? Because let's
realize, Elon has now at least been put
forward as a potential cap position in Trump's
administration.
Either way, he's clearly a central role in
this whole new Republican push.
So how are we making sense of this,
guys? If he's saying that which by the
way is correct.
Look, he still says it still says k
24 right there. It's funny. Freedom of speech
without freedom of reach is not freedom of
speech. Because that's a that is a basic
concept. As Sam Husseini said in our in
every before last, that is it hit there's
a precedent for that. If you have freedom
of speech but no reach, then you don't
have freedom of speech. There's already been a
precedent set. That's they're 1 and the same.
Or at least RFK, I guess, unaware that
they're doing that is aware of that at
least. And so here he shows here's Elon
saying the same thing. The new policy is
freedom of speech but not reach. So you
don't believe in freedom of speech. And this
should be self evident because they're literally censoring
people all over the Israel conversation because the
ADL and Israel themselves are completely controlling this
platform when it comes to that. I've seen
this a 1,000 different ways. They have said
themselves they're working along with the ADL. They
said on the record in their own lawsuit,
they've complied with 87%
of some or rather that was in the
lawsuit, they said that
GARM's standards, they've it it met, if if
not exceeded, every one of them. That's in
their own lawsuit.
Yeah. The whole GARM thing, I think, was
complete manipulation, but different conversation. They've also been
shown to meet at least over 80% of
the government demands.
So we're all being played if we think
these people are acting in anything other than
the same system we've always seen. It's just
being a given a re a a facelift
like the 2 party illusion in general because
you're all out there listening, because of you
out there going, yeah, there's something wrong and
that is more than you think.
Everyone out there actually begins to see this
and it's causing this if people are the
2 party illusion is feeling vulnerable and that's
why this is happening in my opinion. That's
why the volume is getting turned up and
people are starting to get more and more
uncomfortable because when that happens, people fall back
into line.
I just think that's wild.
And Just A Thought also points out, it's
impressive how the establishment got all the RFK
supporters, well, some of them anyway, who opposed
endlessly vaccinating themselves
to support the guy who gave us Operation
Warp Speed. But, hey, Ron Rob Malone said,
shut up about that. It's not important anymore.
Because that makes sense. Right?
Well, here, to talk about the digital ID
aspect, what I think is very important to
this because the whole idea that we're talking
about on the side of the whole the
the technocracy march is that these people represent
the most obvious
representation. That's amazing. Right? They represent the most
obvious
position
driving us in that direction.
At the very least, out of the 2
people we're being presented with right now, unquestionably,
why doesn't that concern the most resistant to
all those things during the COVID illusion?
I I think it does. I just don't
think we're being given the full picture. I
think we're being shown what the TeamSport Politics
Republicans believe and versus the the Democrat, but
the most people are like, hold on.
But still kinda gravitating towards, well, Trump's the
only one because they still some of them
believe that. But they see it though.
There's something uncomfortable about this. And they they
they if given another viable option, would probably
take it because they see these things.
Here's a clip, a a tweet I just
recently put out.
Here's Donald Trump on the biometric tracking system.
I'll play it for you. The very good
COVID injection I played before. I'll play it
for you. How and how Israel should rightfully
have control over the US Congress. All three
of those videos. All facts, easy to prove.
You might be surprised, maybe not, to know
that Kamala Harris
shares
all of these stances.
Apparently, pointing these facts out is black pill.
Doesn't it matter to you that they are
all sharing in these prominent points that are
driving us in direction that all of us
don't want? Doesn't that matter? Pointing these things
out is simply objective reality. And that has
to be able to very at least influence
which one you choose, let alone the reality
they're all being lied to. But, nope. As
we just saw earlier, you're not supposed to
point that out because that hurts Trump which
helps Kamala. So lie to yourselves is what
we're being told. That's what the adults do
apparently. Truly, that is what it is, what
the controlling faction which calls themselves adults do.
That's what all of the structure in the
mainstream media. They lie to themselves every day.
Frankly, we're tired of it.
Now I think that's what's shifting.
So let's play these clips first just in
case you hadn't seen them. Now this is
a clip from,
I think it was 2016. It's not new.
Doesn't change the fact that right up until
this point, they're all discussing the biometric wall,
which is what this is about.
And if you haven't noticed, people like Thiel
and Vance and even even Musk, they're all
pushing and have contracts around. I'll show you
in a minute. The biometric wall that it
will be there regardless of who wins.
Now I shouldn't say it like that because
maybe we can stop it. But that's what
they regardless of who wins, who will try
to do that. And that should concern us
all.
Alright.
We will finally complete
the biometric
entry exit visa tracking system, which we need
desperately.
For years, congress has required
biometric entry exit visa tracking systems,
but it has never been completed. The politicians
are all talk, no action, never happens,
never happens. Hillary Clinton,
all talks. Unfortunately,
when there is action, it's always the wrong
decision. Do you have an Except when he
says that they're all fine people and that
they are friends, you know, when that matters.
Notice.
In my administration,
we will ensure that this system is in
place,
and I will tell you, it will be
on land.
It will be on sea. Mhmm. It will
be in air. We will have a proper
tracking system.
Oh, good. Isn't that what we all want?
Like, I I I you can hear that.
They don't even they're like, oh, yay. Wait.
What? Like, that's not that's crazy. That's the
opposite of what anybody wanted. But when Trump
says it like, can you even imagine Biden,
which they they've said too. They they oh,
they're gonna track us. Oh, they're gonna honor
yeah. Yes. They all will.
But when Trump says it, apparently, it's the
good guy, bad thing. Right? Or like Elon
Musk, it's the good AI. Right? It's the
good technocracy.
I or the good billionaire oligarch working for
the military.
I don't know why we fall for these
things.
Now that's the clip about the biometric wall.
Realize Kamala Harris is out there saying the
same thing. They all want this right now.
Here's the clip about Donald Trump telling you
that the vaccine this is not that long
ago with, the interview with, Candace Owens. Where
clearly she was trying to give him, like,
an opening to kinda go, yeah, Biden, or
that was bad under him and not me.
But, nope, he pushed back and said, no.
No. That seems good.
Just like what he tried to tell you.
That's what he says to this very day.
People have died under COVID this year, by
the way, under Joe Biden
than under you. And more people took the
vaccine this year, so people are questioning how
Well, no. The vaccine worked, but Yeah. Some
people aren't. The ones the ones that get
very sick and go to the hospital are
the ones that don't take their vaccine. But
it's still their choice.
And if you take the vaccine, you're protected.
Look. The results of the vaccine are very
good. And if you do get it, it's
a very minor form. People are dying when
they take the vaccine. Wow.
Think about that.
That's his opinion.
Now, do you think he believes that? And
based on what else he's doing, we shouldn't
take we shouldn't believe anything he's saying. He
says what he what he wants you to
hear. Just like Kamal and Waltz and Obama
and Bush and everybody else.
We just don't wanna believe that because apparently
that's black field acknowledging the reality.
Here's the one about it is real. Now
frankly, I find this to be the most
concerning. And I frankly think this is the
one that's reaching the most republicans out there,
or conservatives, that recognize that this should be
concerning no matter what country this is. But
for whatever reason,
on 3 different videos I have, I'm just
playing you one, he explicitly states that Israel
at least once did and should again
control congress. And the one I have on
his recent sear, campaign tour where he says
that if they had the power they were
supposed to and rightly should,
that the people like AOC wouldn't get elected.
Like, do you realize how crazy that is?
They're literally telling you that do you who
cares who votes for what? They would be
able to make that stop. Yeah. Good day.
Freedom. Democracy.
Right?
That guys, that's crazy stuff. And this is
really reaching the people out there that would
otherwise ignore it if it was or rather,
they're simply the people that might be swayed
by Trump's statements. But this is concerning
because I think it's that obvious.
You know, the biggest, change I've seen in
congress is Israel
literally owned congress. You understand that 10 years
ago, 15 years ago.
And it was so powerful. It was so
powerful. And to I think you know exactly
what I what I'm saying. They had such
power. Israel had such power
and rightfully
over congress. You know? That's wild to me.
Not just time. There he does says it
again right here. We can watch the clip.
I'm trying to hurry because I've got a
little time left, and I wanna get to
the end of the blank clip. The point
clearly is that that is being discussed right
up until his recent campaign trail. And I've
just played those videos recently where he said
the same thing in front of a room
full of Israeli Zionists. Men Mary Madelson I
mean, literally, in front of his own campaign,
standing there with Trump Vance on the main
front, has a bunch of Israeli flags behind
him as well as American. More Israeli flags,
by the way. But who cares? Doesn't matter
though. Right? Because that's not supposed to be
alarming despite what he's saying all over the
place.
Now the SABE Act
is the point we're gonna get into around
this in the digital ID discussion. And I
have a point to add to this today,
and it's exactly what I was warning about.
The point in showing you all this is
that you're being you're you're sleepwalking into this
control structure if you think that either one
of these candidates are going to be something
that benefits you.
Watching it happen. The same act that we
talked about before is a Trojan horse for
the digital ID. Now I'm gonna make a
point about this right now as well as
Derek's amazing article that just came out. Whether
through Biden, Harris, or Trump, digital IDs are
coming to America.
Now that's just again, that's what they're all
calling for. We can stop this if we
try, if we want to, if we stop
particip participating in this broken game. But frankly,
I think the problem is that both sides
pretend that going through these motions will change
something when all of them are showing you
what they're gonna do.
So first
oh,
wait. I forget if shoot. I'm trying to
remember if
I went through this. Hold on.
Okay. We'll read this first. Now I just
wanna make sure if I wanna make this
point first or not. This was about the
say I'm just gonna move this over then,
so I don't forget.
The point is that this is I'm I'm
I'm gonna go
through the article, it's important because it we
get built into this. The point that I've
been saying about this, remember, is that, in
the SABE act,
it was about real ID compliant.
That now I remember. That's why I did
the other one first. Real ID compliant identification.
Now, yes. There was the option for, let's
say, birth certificate and other options. The point
made right now is that most people right
now don't even have access to some of
the things they were offering. And, period, the
point is
it's about what comes next.
So they get you in a position where
you've accepted this legislation that says you have
to have Real ID compliant, which by the
way is digital identification. That's what Real ID
and I ID 2020 was about. I went
over it in this show explicitly.
And then, once we go through what's happening
right now with the mobile driver's license direction,
and all of a sudden you're put in
a position where you're only allowed to use
the digital aspects on your phone, well, guess
what?
Now that very legislation put out by Republicans
set up you basically have to use Real
ID compliant identification, which is exactly what I
predicted.
It's all coming together. So that means that
all you have to be able to vote
is a digital identification.
By the way, even Republicans out there call
this stuff out. We all see it.
So they're driving you into this using your
fears of partisan
topics, like illegal immigration, which we should care
about. We should care if people are voting
who don't have,
citizenship. Of course, we should. But we don't
need digital IDs to do that. You're being
played in every one of these dangles. Catherine
Austin Fitz has been talking about the same
thing. Don't let the Republicans trick conservatives into
the control structure.
So we'll come back to that. Let's talk
about
the general point about digital IDs,
which is really the same conversation. So Derek's
article just came out, very important. Whether through
Biden, Harris, or Trump, digital IDs are coming.
Thank you, by the way, whoever
suggested that I do this and take these
screenshots because otherwise,
every time these things, things go away. For
the podcast, just my highlighting. That saves me.
But here's what it says. A recently leaked
draft
of an executive order shows the Biden administration
is considering expanding the required use of digital
IDs to fight fraud.
That's the that's the narrative they're using. Well,
all these different frauds and I'll save that
point for a second as it relates to
this covid point I'll make in a minute.
But the idea of saying that people are
for, you know, manipulating the system. Oh, we
gotta have digital IDs because that'll stop it.
No, it won't actually, but that's their narrative
versus immigration for Trump.
Similar moves are made by president Trump under
the guise of illegal immigration as we've talked
about a lot. Whether it's the border, whether
it's the voting aspect now in regards to
the immigrants coming through. Right? And they'll self
forget how all of this works, and I'll
make that point in a second. But it's
obvious. Our foreign policy has driven this, been
argue arguably by design. Or on top of
it, we have Israel very clearly manufacturing some
of these problems. But it says, the draft,
viewed by notice of the group that was
covering it, calls for federal and state governments
to accelerate
the adoption of so called mobile driver's licenses.
Quote, it is the policy of the executive
branch to strongly encourage the use of digital
identity
documents.
You see, not just driver's license, but digital
identity documents. So they begin it as a
a
whatever the acronym is, the DML or digital
driver's license or I forget what the acronym
is. I think it was DML for some
reason.
Mobile license, something like that. The point is
that they're talking about documents in general. So
the moment they start this, they say, hey.
Take this app or may maybe it's needed
for certain governmental processes. That's what this is
actually about. That's what they'll say in in
the article. That's what they say when their
discussions about it that Derek covers. And what
the point is then they go, well, here.
Now you have to use it for everything.
Social Security card,
birth certificate.
It's it's it's right on the surface.
So once they make that move, and let's
say we blame it on Biden because that's
what will happen, they're all doing it, then
all of a sudden they go, see? It
was the Democrats that made that the case
even though we put the legislation out that's
what that made that the reality. Because without
the SAVE Act and the real ID compliant
in order to vote, all you really have
is a choice about whether you want to
use the digital aspect. But now, because you
have an aspect of voting,
which, of course, on this side, they're doing
it with other processes as well, they're driving
you into one clear position between the both
of them. That's how the 2 party paradigm
works.
Now I'll come back to it. Now it
says according to a guide to dry digital
driver's licenses,
users will open the chosen app,
scan the front back of their dry physical
license, and then verify their identity with a
selfie, of course, biometric data. Once verified, the
user can begin using their DigitalID app as
they would a physical card.
According to notice, the draft order is aimed
at addressing the loss of 1,000,000,000 of taxpayer
dollars relating to fraudulent claims to benefit programs,
like the CARES Act. What do you know?
Trump's whole thing about getting the funding to
small businesses which, by the way, went to,
like, 99%
large business that lied. And guess what? Nobody
really did anything about it. And I told
you that was gonna happen because it happens
every time. So the problem is they literally
made that thing happen. And I'm not even
sure if they're pointing at that explicitly, but
my point is there's your problem reaction solution.
Look. We need digital IDs because every time
we do some kind of a program, everybody
lies about it. Well, no. You guys give
it to your crony buddies and you pretend
like it was all stolen. That's what happens
every single time. I I mean, guys, I
predicted it before it happened. It wasn't like
I was psychic. A lot of people probably
did the same thing because it's what happens
every time.
I think it's funny how that always works
out. But it says, adopt a single
government run identity system. That's the whole point
of this. Not just here's a convenient app
for your mobile license because it's so cumbersome
to carry that physical thing that's smaller than
your phone. That makes a lot of sense.
Right? The point is about making sure there's
a choke point. There's one stop
for all of your digital identification.
And when that happens, the other options on
the Save Act no longer are even possible.
That's how that works.
If adopted, this system would fundamentally change how
Americans prove their identity online, file their taxes,
access certain websites and services.
We wanna make sure that we accelerate people's
use of digital to access the government.
Mhmm.
Now just to be clear, the Republican side
is doing the same exact thing under a
different guise.
I just did one big screenshot, so it's
a little fuzzy. But it says in November
2020, the US Customs and Border Protection, CBP,
proposed a new rule that would dramatically expand
the use of facial recognition surveillance at the
border.
Right?
This is and by the way, this has
been going on a long time where there
are airports, like, during Trump's administration and then
into Biden's.
It's like it happens this way every single
time.
We saw the same thing with Bush and
Obama. It's the same it happens every time.
The c p the CBP posted a notice
announcing their intention to collect the face print
of nearly every single non US citizen who
enters the and exits the United States.
Stored in a government database for up to
75 years. Now right there, you may go,
well, who cares? They're not Americans. Well, first
of all, we should care that other human
beings are being abused that same way if
you understand that it is abused and how
that might be used. But here's the point.
It the this 2020 effort
was a continuation of policy set forth by
the CBP under the Trump administration.
And in 2017,
where it actually put the push truly began,
the CBP
announced plans to scan the faces of
all flyers
exiting the United States.
Everybody.
So the point is, I think this is
an overlap of something where they try they
put it out as all non US citizens,
but guess what? They take everybody just to
be safe.
That's what this is. And they store them
all. 25 years. But it's worth we only
care about the non citizens. Oh, so we're
told.
It's always like that. We'll take all your
COVID data, but don't worry. We won't use
it anywhere. Or under the guise of COVID.
And guess what? France and everybody else got
caught like everybody did, sold it to somebody.
Yep. That's how this works. They get caught
lying and no one does anything about it.
That is about biometric information
and about ever I argue
Americans in particular.
The CBP envisions a system where airports install
cameras at boarding gates, which by the way,
that's what's happening today. We already know that.
To take pictures of all passengers leaving and
entering the country. All of them. The pictures
will have facial recognition software applied to them.
Biden himself continued on Trump's surveillance state path
as part of his own immigration plan. Even
under immigration, by the way.
In late February 2021, the last American vagabond
reported that more than 40 privacy,
immigrant rights, and civil liberties organizations
called on the Biden administration
to abandon a bill which would extend the
Trump administration's border policy.
Particularly the ongoing creation of a virtual or
biometric wall.
They're both driving it forward.
And this point, these people were they didn't
want it. They didn't want her Trump. They
didn't want her under him.
And then they're just rights groups, individuals. The
letter notes that the increase in surveillance technology
that they put out about this at parts
of entry is, quote, concerning,
particularly because of increased biometric collection, which most
prominently includes
expanded facial recognition
and DNA
collection.
Why are we not concerned about this?
The organizations
behind the letter were also critical. And by
the way, as always, guys, there's links to
everything in here. You can see on here
without the highlighting,
every claim he's making here is linked to
what we're talking about, to come in whether
it's government,
whatever. It's linked so you can verify it
as always. That's what we do.
It says the organizations behind this letter were
also critical of key companies, and this is
very important, awarded federal contracts to develop virtual
wall technology. Can you guess which ones those
are?
They have financial ties to Trump, of course,
and are also involved in created police surveillance
tools.
Whitney's talked a lot about those tools. Precrime,
all sorts of invasive stuff.
Specifically, the letter states, quote,
Anduril Industries, one of these entities we're talking
about, was founded by major Trump donor Palmer
Luckey, which Whitney's talking about a lot.
With founding from Palantir's
Peter Thiel and related funds, who seems to
be the main string puller of the current
administration behind Trump and Peter as even Steve
jokingly calls Vance his p Theo's golf glove.
I mean,
Theo is the one that connected these 2.
Pete Vance is openly against Trump before this.
And they're all basically driving I mean, the
Palantir overlap, teal, and the connection to the
surveillance state, Elon Musk, and all the things
that overlap
is so concerning.
Because Palantir, remember, was the surveillance state concept
under the COVID 19 illusion. And these are
all I mean, if you can't see the
bipartisan handing the baton back and forth, come
on. I I don't know what else to
show you. These people have been building this
ever since.
And now, what they're he what they're showing
you here is the idea of the very
virtual wall that they're building is the the
it ties right back to the people that
are currently funding Trump's administration.
Handing off the baton. It says the company
was awarded a contract by the CBP in
July 2020 for a potential
249,000,000
dollar 249, 500 249,000,550,000
to set up over 200
mobile surveillance towers in border communities.
You think that's only gonna surveil the border?
We already talked about the whole,
was it non the
shoot. I can't remember. Non constitutional zone? Unconstitution.
The zone around the United States where there's
no con there's no constitutional it's damn, it's
gonna drive me crazy.
I can't really well, the point is and
it's get even saying it out loud, I'm
sure people who never heard it before will
act like it's fake, like they do every
time. The a so the a c o
u has talked about this. Let me just
grab real quick.
There it is. Look it right there.
The 100 mile border zone.
That's not even the best one.
God. I can't remember what it was. Non
constitutional?
Let's see if that pops up.
Let's see what it says right here. Yes.
It says the 100 mile Yeah. It says
non constitutional zone refers to an area within
a 100 air miles of any international border
or coastline in the United States where federal
authorities claim additional powers to conduct searches. Well,
it simply means the constitution does not apply.
The zone is not explicitly mentioned in the
constitution because it just shouldn't exist. It is
unconstitutional in and out, obviously.
So the point is that when we're talking
about this stuff,
we're talking about towers in these areas, which,
by the way, are not bound by the
constitution, which they they are regardless of what
they say, but they don't respect your constitutional
rights in this 100 mile zone, which, by
the way, encapsulates all of Maine, for example.
So So if you live in Maine, by
the state by the federal government's perspective, you
don't you they can vile your rights don't
apply in that area. That's unbelievable.
There's no way that in if you ever
wanted a better example of how their the
government is rogue,
it's right there. You've never needed a better
example. They are literally creating zones where the
constitution doesn't apply. That's a rogue technic or,
authoritarian state
or despotic.
It says this technology
forms the backbone of the new virtual wall.
It says that 60,000,000 has already been awarded.
The remaining is coming.
It says privacy advocates have long criticized Peter
Peter Thiel's Palantir,
excuse me, of being a prime example of
a private surveillance firm
intertwined with the national security state. How's that
not fascism?
I mean, this is literally the problem.
And it's not just Trump, by the way,
guys. It is simply authoritarianism. And that is
what all these sides are doing. It is
private entities completely overlapping and blurring the lines
between government.
That's the problem. This whole pry public private
partnership seems to be exactly that, all of
them. Theal, it says or, hold on. Where
did I leave off there?
Oh, right here.
Palantir has also played a large role in
the COVID 19 contract tracing surveillance.
Thiel continues to play a role in US
politics through his funding of Trump's vice president,
Vance. And he's also open to supporting Trump
and funding of Trump's 2016 campaign.
Thiel doing,
along with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, is
a steering committee member of the secretive Bilderberg
Group. TLAB recently reported that Schmidt has also
called for some form of Internet ID to
verify users in the alleged attempt to prevent
election misinformation.
Jay Stanley, senior policy
analyst with the ACLU speech privacy and technology
project, said the switch to digital IDs would
have big implications for American life. If not
done just right or hopefully not done at
all, digital driver's licenses could be disastrous for
privacy.
Increase in in in inequity and lead to
pervasive, and this is the important part for
any American, I argue, no matter what stance
you have,
lead to pervasive ID checks in American life.
The gestapo idea. Right? Show me your papers.
That's what they're doing. And these are these
are
all sorts of different groups on all sides
of the,
partisan spectrum
that are calling this out. And they're not
they're not saying, they're simply saying this next
step, this digital driver's license step is going
to be a problem.
In June of 2022,
a report that we've talked about before,
which was the NYU School of Law, put
this report out called paving a digital road
to hell,
called saying that's what those will do.
They examine the role of the World Bank
and other international networks which have promoting which
have been promoting the use of digital IDs
in recent years. They report the report from
NYU School of Law reports, they point a
finger at the World Bank and the aforementioned
ID 4 d initiative we've talked about more
than once, but also notes that the program
was started with a catalytic,
a
catalytic investment
from none other than Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation, the Omidyar Network, as well as various
governments.
Just ask yourself, if you're over here supporting
Trump's biometric wall, are you okay with the
fact that it's getting and really specifically, the
idea of the ID 40 initiative, which is
about the digital ID aspect in all of
this, Or even, let's just say, the idea
of the SAVE Act,
specifically about the idea of this digital ID
overlap in voting. We'll realize that that's backed
by the ID 40 initiative, which is Bill
and Willigates funding, or maybe our network, which
is Musk and Pierre Omid it's all these
overlapping people. Well, not explicitly Musk, but from
the beginning, yes. But it says, quote,
we have noted that the World Bank and
the ID 40 initiative do not stand alone
in pursuing the the the digital ID agenda.
They exist within a global network of organizations
and individuals.
Sounds concerning?
In addition to governments like the UK, the
US, and France, philanthropic foundations and banks, the
NYU report also points a finger at private
biometric corporations
like
like, the we've talked to him before. That
was hard to read. And, Dylan, I think
Thales and Jim also Thales being the one
we've talked about more than once. And he
says, TLoVE has previously reported on the role
of Thales Group in promoting digital identity schemes
in North America and Europe. The fact remains
that under the Trump administration, the push for
surveillance via facial recognition,
digital identities, and biometric schemes expanded.
These same programs have continued under Biden and
may be expanded by his new executive order
before he passes the torch to Trump or
Vance or or vice president Kamala Harris, who
both of which will continue the same thing
as they've already stated.
Whether pitched to American people as a solution
for fighting fraud or illegal immigration, one way
or another, the growth of the surveilled state
is set to continue
unless we choose something else.
Simple as that.
Now I include these discussions about the border
in case you wanna read that.
Now
the point about the say back. So we're
talking about the mobile driver's license push, or
I think it was MDL. That's what it
was. MDL.
So here's what's important about this. The point
they made before, simply that they've already set
us up for the SAVE Act, which includes
a couple of other choices,
but the main one being Real ID compliant
driver's licenses.
The title of this show being the SAVE
Act, Real ID and 20 and Real ID
and ID 2020. Using the 2 party illusion
and, and the election to usher in a
technocratic state or something like that. Because I
can't read the rest of it right there.
The bottom line is about the real ID
point. So they have real ID compliant driver's
licenses is the one that most people will
lose, and there's other options that which alleviates
the concern that it's only about that. Right?
Except
which what we just read for you
is that this is already happening.
And what we heard was that this is
about not just your driver's license, but just
simply all your identify identifying documents, which then
puts those other options
suddenly in only where which we will no
longer accept the physicals.
So, clearly, when you put these two things
together, you create a no. You have to
have a digital ID. The Republicans will blame
the Democrats. The Democrats will blame the Republicans.
And that's how that always seems to work.
The truth is it's your government who has
done this to you.
Funny how obvious that would be if we
just stop falling for the same illusion.
But here's biometricupdate.com.
Hawaii,
7th state offering mobile driver's licenses is an
Apple Wallet. This is from the 29th August
this year.
Here's what it says.
Hawaii mobile driver's licenses can now be added
to Apple Wallet or iPhone or Apple Watch.
One step after another.
Real ID
compliant.
Hawaii driver's licenses and state
identification
cards can be added to iPhone and Apple
Watch as of 28th August.
So there's a there's a reason that they
have it under Real ID compliant. And the
idea is that have to be compliant with
the Real ID a Real ID aspect or
ID 2020, which is all about the forceful
push for digital identification in a broad sense.
I went over it very deep in that
show. You should watch for yourself right here.
So the point is that they and they're
adding them to these, and you could put
them on there, and it's about all of
them eventually, and they're making this clear. But
right now, openly saying that's the direction.
Now it says, the state says other digital
ID wallet providers will be added to the
scheme over time.
How much you wanna bet,
Twitter
becomes one of those things. The whole one
stop shop. But that's really just a side
point. The reality is about any of these
driving you in the same direction, whether or
not you think you've got choices about which
control structure. Right? Look. You could pick whichever
one you want, and all of them lead
you into control. That's always how that's the
illusion of choice.
Lastly, it says, guess what? Fourteen states,
14 in this country, now have an active
mobile driver's license program. Happens it's happening all
around us right now. Arizona, California, Colorado, den
Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana,
Maryland,
Mississippi, Missouri, New York, Ohio, and Utah, as
well as Puerto Rico.
How do we not see how this is
progressing?
Derek also points out, you guys remember when
Trump signed the executive order for the biometric
entry exit program for all Americans?
This was part of his immigration strategy. This
has been expanded by Biden and will continue
the next administration. Same point, just simplify. You
wanna share that? Very obvious.
Now here's a clip from Whitney and I
talking about the aspect of Trump's administration and
the Vance, Peter Thiel funding, and the biometric
wall aspect. It's important to understand how this
is all coming together.
Start with the with the article we discussed.
We have mentioned this before. We've touched on
it. But this is such a really this
point alone is very obvious to anybody that
I think is not pulled into one part
inside of the other. I mean, obviously, the
border, the wall, going from a wall to
a met met, you know,
what do you a survey what do you
a smart wall is the best way to
put it It's an interesting shift from Trump's
perspective. Right? And so go ahead and start
wherever you'd like on this and why you
think this connects to a larger sort of
honeypot sort of manipulation discussion.
Yeah. So first off,
the sustainable development
goals, also known as agenda 2030 from the
UN, one of the main
policy agendas there is to have biometric
entry and exit systems for every country.
This is being rolled out in lockstep throughout
the entire world right now. And this year,
it's, being implemented. I think next month, it
starts actually being
So just realizing that if this I mean,
all of the concern about which we should,
the same the sustainable development goals, the WHO,
the overlapping WEF, the COVID discussion.
More than anybody
in the paradigm, the Republicans were on guard
about that, and we should be. But now
it's like it doesn't even matter. Despite the
fact that what they're pushing forward as a
solution for the problem that they're focusing on
is one of the things that we're pointing
out.
If you if if Trump came out and
said, I'm gonna initiate the sustainable development goals
for this one point, people would lose their
minds. But if you just don't include that,
they've got it on the same thing because
you don't wanna see it.
It's all about the game of getting you
to think, like, getting you outraged about this
immigration point in order to drive you in
the direction of something you otherwise would've resisted.
Doesn't mean the immigration point is not important.
It simply means they're using it because you
care about it to get you in a
position that they want.
And arguably won't even solve the problem they're
trying to fix because it's not even about
that.
Implemented in Europe,
for for foreign travelers entering Europe. The UK
rolls it out next year.
And, of course, there's a big push for
it to do it in the US and
also in other countries.
It's intimately tied up with the whole digital
ID,
agenda that's been ongoing for a very long
time and particularly during the COVID era, as
I'm sure you are aware and your audience
is aware,
there was a big push against digital ID
and vaccine passports, which were sort of a
beta test for the digital ID system,
during the COVID era. And currently, we are
seeing an effort to manufacture consent among
right leaning Americans
who opposed vaccine passports
and digital ID,
to get them to go along with,
this biometric entry exit agenda.
That's at its core, a globalist agenda.
And also intelligence linked surveillance agenda. I mean,
fundamentally the same at the end of the
day.
But under, you know, different rhetoric. And so
essentially what we've had over the past, you
know, year, right, is a lot of,
increased attention
paid by the media to the situation on
the US Mexico border.
It's important to point out that the US
Mexico border
for decades decades has been very insecure. And
even though rhetoric has been different between presidents,
no president, including Trump, has ever shut down
that border.
No one has constructed a physical barrier. Trump
campaigned on that, but by 2019 had pivoted
away from a physical barrier, what he called
at that point, a medieval
wall.
No medieval walls, he said, no. We're going
to have a smart wall.
Yeah.
And the smart wall is bio is not
a physical wall at all. It's, you know,
enabled by drones and AI, surveillance cameras, surveillance
towers,
that dot the US Mexico border, and this
is actually an effort that precedes Trump significantly.
It was first launched after 911 as SBI
net by the newly created DHS
and was relatively unsuccessful
because of I think it was like Boeing
and some other you know super bloated corrupt
US government contractors that were creating a system
owned by the government and they were you
know, milking money and being incompetent and slow
to, like, make profit
as contractors
are the big ones, you know, or want
to do. And so in comes,
this new startup by this guy named Palmer
Luckey, who was part of the Peter Thiel
network,
probably best known Palmer Luckey, for creating Oculus
Rift, the virtual reality system that was sold
to Facebook, which Facebook again is a company
that was essentially
you know, we think of Mark Zuckerberg as
creating it, but it would not exist without
Peter Thiel, who was the person that turned
Facebook into the company it is, and was
on its board for a very long time.
So, Palmer Luckey, you know, involved with Facebook
and then leaves, and then Thiel starts funding
his defense startup, AI defense startup,
called Anduril,
which is tied up with this same network
of companies Steel is responsible for that are
contractors,
to the military and intelligence communities of the
US, you know, including Palantir, of course, being
the main
company in that web. But Anduril is intimately
connected,
because of people like Trey Stevens,
who's been at Palantir,
works for Thiel's Founders Fund. Founders Fund invested
in Anduril. Trey Stevens co created Anduril with
Palmer Luckey.
Trey Stevens was also involved with Trump's DOD
transition team,
which Peter Thiel was also intimately involved in.
And Trey Stevens was also on the board
and still is on the board of Carbon
9 Carbine 911, which is the 911 emergency
system,
company that was heavily funded by Jeffrey Epstein,
basically created by former Israeli prime minister Ehud
Barak,
and unit 8200 officials
to take over, essentially, the US 911 911
call system,
and turn it into, like, a a system
that has precrime and extreme surveillance
functionality.
So Trey Stevens is involved with that crowd.
And within CARBINE 911 is a woman named
Latal Hashem, a career Israeli intelligence operative who
currently works for Erik Prince of Blackwater fame,
who is also very much inserted into,
this network and and, you know, the network
behind the Trump administration, essentially.
So these are and, it's important to point
out to, Andrew Rohl, Palantir,
Trey Stevens, Peter Thiel, these guys all have
extreme CIA connections,
extreme deep state connections.
This is the supposed deep state that Trump
supporters are supposed to hate, and they are
the ones building the smart wall. In this,
you know, I would obviously, there's a very
insecure and troubling situation on the border, but
people only care about it because it's being
given extreme media attention
and, you know, concern about it is being
drummed up as a way to manufacture consent
for
something must be done.
And the something that must be done, of
course, is the smart wall. And this is
being pitched with an independent media by people
like Brett Weinstein on Tucker Carlson,
being pitched by people like Colonel Douglas McGregor,
who also, I believe, had some sort of
advisory role in the Trump administration.
And unfortunately, you know, the smart wall is
not something that's going to promote individual liberty
or freedom. It is this exact same UN,
biometric entry and exit system that depends heavily
on digital ID.
Simple.
You know, and what's crazy is that, like,
I get how having the information that it's
all at once can feel overwhelming or like,
oh, she makes me sad. I would get
that comment a lot. Oh, she depresses me.
It's like, what's crazy about it is, like,
let's say you never realized
like, what's a good example? You know, just
like something your government responsible for. Right? And
that you find out
whether it's, you know, you find out that
they rely on you about 911 or whatever
these topics are. And all of a sudden
you go, wow. That's depressing. Well, you know,
yeah. It is. But it's still the truth.
And wouldn't you rather know like, this is
the question about whether you would rather know
or you'd rather put your head in the
sand. And some people, genuinely, as I said
in the beginning, just want to be told
what to do. They wanna ignore. That's some
people. I'd like to believe it's not the
majority.
But the bottom line is what she's saying
is the truth. And if you wanna make
an informed decision, which is how you actually
have a representative government or actually have some
kind of republic, then you need to know
all the facts. And and again, on top
of all of that, none of us are
saying, therefore, we should give up. In fact,
quite the opposite. We're trying to empower you
with the information and the facts to make
decisions that can actually benefit your life.
But, of course, a a very con very
powerful kind of controlled effort right now is
trying to make us appear to be crazy
or black pilled or lying to you. Here's
a great article we put out or a
a show from the 23rd using Trump and
the 2 party politics
to trick conservatives into supporting a technocratic control
grid. It's kinda just the general point we're
getting at and I wanna include that show
so you can watch more if you want.
Now, here's what Trump just recently put out
on,
Twitter.
And it's about cryptocurrency. Now, remember, Whitney Webb
has talked a lot about this.
The idea
that
he said, we don't want CBDCs. Of course,
which even just saying that doesn't necessarily mean
he might not rationalize it and convince you
with a narrative, which the team sport politics
Republicans will push everyone to agree with anyway.
But
the public private partnership overlap, where as she
points out the privatization of Palantir or just
the being a private entity, was a shift
away from the lifelong total information awareness direction
as a government. So they went private with
it. It's the same damn thing she's talking
about, which it appears that JPMorgan overlapped in
the whole thing with Jamie Dimon. Like, if
they end up making a private kind of
coin the same way, just because it's not
a central bank back, doesn't make it's the
same thing.
Same way with Palantir versus whole information awareness.
It's still government control. It's still the same
conversation.
So if you are willing to ignore that,
again, it's about being played based on your
own political standing. And so here, he's simply
talking about being the government of the group
cryptocurrency.
And remember what he said. And I think
what what Kath and I are gonna talk
about, I think, coming up soon, when she
when she'll be in studio soon, about what
what both this conversation, but RFK statements on
it. And now the idea is that ultimately
what he said is is crazy. It's it's
it's goes against their stance. It changes bottom
line is that if we're gonna talk about
taking the crypt the Bitcoin that's been stolen
from Americans and making that some kind of
reserve card, that's the exact opposite of what
the original mindset was behind any of these
things. The idea was to challenge the dollar,
not become its useful tool. That's the problem.
And on top of that, they have no
right to take that and use it for
themselves. They're not giving that back to Americans.
That's not how that works. They're playing you.
So here, I'm worried that this is exactly
what that's about.
Afternoon, I'm laying out my plan to ensure
that the United States will be the crypto
capital of the planet.
They wanna choke you. They want And, of
course, the point in saying that right now
is because people that's something that's a rising
conversation. He's he knows how to tap into
what we're talking about. I'm willing to bet
you more than anything else that this will
become nothing. If anything, a what Whitney's talking
about, but maybe just nothing. Just the floating
of the idea to get you all hyped
up about it, the co opting of the
Bitcoin movement, which we already talked about in
order to get all these people believing. He's
gonna do this and he's gonna release Ross
Albright.
I'll believe it when I see it. If
he if any just like during his last
administration, if he does something I agree with,
I'll still go, yes. I like that. So
I'm not ridiculous. I'm not part of the
2 party illusion where I'll just dismiss anything
Trump does because I'm a child. We should
all want good things regardless of who does
them. Even if Trump is the one that
saves this country, even if you hate him,
he's just so good. He saved the country.
But you know that's not how that works,
both left and right.
Gonna choke you out of business. We're not
gonna let that happen.
So it's just about pushing the idea that
they're going to be different somehow. I just
don't believe it. I hope so. But at
the end of the day, I think that's
about getting you in the comfortable position of
thinking that what he puts out will be
about in the interest of the crypto community
when really it's just gonna be a a
CBDC
in disguise. That's what I worry about. That
it has to happen for sure, but if
if you're not willing to consider that possibility
because Trump's my friend and he knows this
and that, then you're you're just you're being
infantile about it. You don't know this person.
You don't know what he actually thinks and
feels. We should be skeptical. Right? That's the
old Theodore Roosevelt quote I just said. Anybody
that thinks they should be giving blind support
to the president is servile, and in fact,
he calls it morally treasonable to the American
public. You should be questioning the authority all
the time. Even because they could just be
wrong or mistaken.
Anything else is hero worship, guys. And this
is a great article from Derek, the co
opting of Bitcoin,
Bitcoin Nashville, Peter Thiel, and Donald Trump and
Rumble is what it's all about. This whole
co opting of movement to controlling the structure
at the same point we just discussed.
Now on that same tweet I put out,
somebody responded by saying we're doomed.
So just again, so you can hear my
real opinion about this, I said, I disagree.
I think we're we are we I think
more are seeing the problem than ever before.
And that is why the government,
all of it, is turning up the heat
on the American people.
I really believe that.
I believe that people are beginning to see
through the illusion,
and the only way to get you back
in position is to make your life uncomfortable.
That's what happens in any dynamic. That's what
they do with sanctions and foreign policy. Right?
These peep these people know they're being hurt
by American government. They don't care. They just
want their their child to stop starving. So
they fall into line. It's what we're being
done. That's what this is really all about.
And that's again, the point we even even
if you see it, even if you know
that they're doing it to you, people just
don't wanna live in an uncomfortable position anymore.
So they fall into line.
Scott says people think there's nothing in it
for them to bring down the empire. They
understand that the victor to the victor goes
to spoils. But they've never imagined that they,
we, could be the victor
and what that can mean.
Again, my point from before, I think some
people got scared of that idea. But it
says it can and should mean
an immensely more civil and abundant world. Who
speaks of this?
It's a great point.
We this is just so far outside of
the realm of thought for some people. It
it's it's scary.
But the idea being that
you don't always have to allow somebody else
to be like, you could be the one
in control of the conversation.
Your life.
Now, on that same clip that Derek put
out earlier, which you should listen to. It's
about 10 minutes long. This person responds by
saying and this is only just to get
to this clip. I mean, really the point
is simply about him pointing out Larkin Rose
and this discussion about the border.
Now, we're we're pretty much gonna end on
this just so you guys know. This next
segment, there's still got a couple of little
more time. But I'm gonna get into this
Israel point tomorrow, as well as if assuming
I'm I'm pretty sure I'm gonna feel okay
tomorrow. But this is the conversation about free
speech as well, which by the way really
does connect with today for the most part.
But the point being overlapping with Brazil and
the concerns about how it's being used, but
the conversation of free speech. Free speech is
under attack around the world. I said it
in the beginning.
Except, weirdly enough, not really concerning yourself with
the idea of
people all over the world, in the US
and entire in the UK and the United
States included, being threatened, attacked, arrested, or
censored
because of the open in in a deliberate
actions of a foreign government, Israel.
As Max Blumenthal points out, Mary,
Costa Colitis,
Acclaimed Australian journalist facing charges of violating Australia's
Radical Discrimination Act? Isn't that the same thing
you're all screaming about in France? And which
matters? Of course we should care about that.
But why don't you care about the same
thing over here in Australia or in France
when it has to do with them censoring
around Israel.
Can you do you not see this entire
silent spot in the conversation? Because right now,
they're censoring about people being racist or, you
know, attacking the people and, like, migrants. And,
of course, only frame from is Musk and
them in their conversation about
Muslim immigrants for the most part.
Except in that same you could show people
in that same conversation being arrested because they
are pull simply holding a Palestinian flag or
protesting the genocide. But weird how that speech
is not concerning to you. It's selective, and
it's very, very clear that it's not about
free speech to these people.
Same point here around Sarah Wilkinson, which I'm
gonna make a lot take time to talk
about tomorrow. Because it's an important conversation.
Or and, oh, that's a clip this this
person put out talking about this. It's past
powerful.
I mean, the point is, there's a lot
of these. And we've talked about this a
lot. There's a lot of people. Richard Benner's
just got arrested for the sake. But no
one wants to talk about that. Not in
that conversation.
Now we will come back to that. Now,
the point here is him pointing out Larkin
Rose's stance about borders.
And saying it didn't age well. Well, I
I don't I I quite frankly think it's
it doesn't matter what narrative is spun up.
And that's the point we're gonna get into
to finish in general. It's about the weaponized
migration conversation, which is, again, on the surface
for the republican conversation. Yet, when it comes
to this, we can't acknowledge that very point.
Like, Even if the way you wanna say
it's China or Russia,
well, if it's being weaponized, why are we
pointing at it like it's some like these
people's fault? Or like an invasion of these
people? They're just simply pawns being used within
the larger manipulation. But you see, it ends
up becoming, which I think is by design,
you're being led into this position by the
pied piper of whether whatever we're talking about,
technocracy or whatever else. He's turning you into
what they said you would become, whatever this
kind of click that they're putting forward as
the majority is, which is not the majority
in my opinion.
You're the ones out there pushing false information
and subjective claims that are easily fall
Or becoming the racist people they said you
would be. I don't think that's even remotely
all conservatives. The point is I think this
is a trap.
Now, well, well, you'll get what I mean
with that when coming to the border conversation.
1st, the point about Larkin Rose, because we
mentioned him earlier about the border.
Now listen to this again with an open
mind. I know it's difficult. Now I don't
even necessarily have the exact same opinion as
him in the or the larger point. I
mean, I for the most part, I actually
do, but it comes back to the reality
of
the circumstance of our world today. And that
most people are not even, like, so far
away from even beginning to open their mind
to something like this that we have to
be realistic about it. Right? Then that's the
same point from before. Pragmatism
is
there's a place for this. But at the
end of the day, if that pragmatism challenged
my principles,
I would side on my principles. That's the
point. So in this case, we're simply talking
about inching and incrementally moving people in the
direction of seeing what I think is the
reality.
Right? So that's not giving up on those.
That's it's trying to open people's minds to
this. The point being, though, that just simply
going, borders don't exist for people would it's
it's it's, frankly, the governments themselves abuse that
to make it look like that I think
that it's all about manufacturing
your opinion using things like weaponized migration. But
it's still real because they're still people. Right?
But listen to his opinion about this, then
we're gonna talk about the conversation.
A couple different things to overlap this to
kinda finish up the show. But this really
comes back to the same point about government
authority.
And let's, you know, talk about borders and
everything else, the way that this is dealt
with and the way it's used to control
you.
Dive in here. The to me, the 2
the 2 arguments I see from people who,
who
describe themselves as libertarian but want borders,
one
one that to me is the easiest to
just demolish is the notion that well, just
like I have my property and can decide
how to do it, the nation has its
property.
That's only true if the politicians in DC
own every square inch of the whole country.
Because if they decide
that those people can't come in, it means
those people can't come into my property even
if I want them to.
This is a perfect example of how statism
seduces people into throwing away their principles.
Now right there, the point is you don't
have to agree with the maybe you think
that regardless of that or you're a libertarian,
you think the borders are like, that's just
like, my point, it's about, it's about, like,
free speech, I always point out. Like, if
you argue that there should be some things
that are sensible, then you just you believe
in limited speech. And maybe that's even the
right way to go. Have a conversation about
that. Make your case.
But to pretend that you believe in free
speech while openly ignoring the fact that people
are being censored, well, then you're just being
dishonest. So in his case, what he's arguing
is that the idea of borders themselves are
are just it's part of this larger illusion
of the state.
So maybe you agree with everything else, but
you simply go, but today, there here's why
it's and I'd be open to that because
I've been similarly arguing that there's a process
if you even wanna go in that direction
because of how far we've gone. But, nonetheless,
the point is the same.
If you have a principle,
if you are, like, if you're, in this
case, a libertarian and you believe in these
principles and then would go well, but not
that. There's a there's the it's simply just
acknowledging that the idea of the state and
as he calls the most dangerous superstition,
it simply drives you to make exceptions for
the power structure where it applies to those
principles.
I I get that that if we wanna
really engage with this problem, that's the first
place to start.
Because it's always based on fear.
And it's all and sometimes it's, you know,
they they want people scared of something they
just totally made up or something they exaggerated,
but they'll they'll use fear from something that's
real too.
And the template is always, hey. We, the
government, the ruling class, we need to be
able to have this power to use force
because of scary things that might happen otherwise.
Right. And then And by the way, that's
just like the vaccine conversation. Right?
Based on hypothetical fears. I mean, even that
WHO article I show you all the time
that's now deleted, but I got the way
back machine where people were writing from within
the group saying it's all based on pandemics
of fear and and hypothetical and oh, and
and worst case scenarios. That's what this is
really about. Right? It's the and and then
even if you agree that's a possible situation,
you're still handing over your rights, your, I
mean, everything. Control over your life because of
something they tell you might happen. And then
if if you fall out of line, well,
they can use violence against you. And every
one of those things challenges your principles if
you know, from the point we're talking about,
libertarian or really just freedom and liberty.
That has to include the power to control
people who didn't do anything yet.
And so the excuse for the border is,
well, a lot of those people who would
come in
are either, you know, there may be the
concern that they're gonna commit crime or there
may just be the concern that they're gonna
vote democrat because they're gonna be mostly collectivist
or whatever,
and therefore,
it's justified to initiate violence against this gigantic
category of people
that include individuals that didn't do anything. Well,
as soon as you accept that, you've just
accepted the premise
of every statist program in every tyranny everywhere
in the world forever
because that's what they always do. That's the
basis of gun control. Some people with guns
are gonna do bad things, therefore, we're gonna
violently disarm everybody.
Some people might you know, some people are
gonna abuse drugs and get addicted, therefore, we're
gonna violently cage anybody we catch with this
substance.
And, again, you if you wanna argue like,
I'm not saying you have to blindly accept
his
views,
right, that are on this side of that
spectrum. Maybe you're somewhere in the middle. But
the logic is what I'm talking about here.
And the idea being that you may even
agree with that. Maybe you think drugs are
bad. You should give the government that power.
But the problem is once you open that,
which we did a long time ago, we
it more and more as we all see.
And, of course, the game's play where you
think, oh, it's the left that does it.
It's the right that does it. Really, it's
2 parts of the same ultimate game. And
they all
kind of,
what's the word I'm looking for?
I don't know. Consolidate. They'll bring it down
to that they they reduce it down to
that same point. So both of them together
ultimately achieve them through 2 different actions,
and both sides point at the other, but
ultimately the same thing continues to happen. And
they kept they disregard more of your constitutional
rights, and they after they they con you
know, and it's it's like, ask yourself this,
if the left, let's say, goes after your
guns,
right, and tries to slowly say, well, the
second amendment shouldn't matter anymore. And that ultimately
happens, let's say. What even though, literally, it's
not even technically possible the way we are
supposed to understand the constitution.
But then, you go and let's just say
the next administration comes around and they they
claim they dislike it, but ultimately the point
is it still happens.
What difference does it ultimately make if it
goes forward in that position? Now the guns
are more extreme example. My point is though
that this keeps happening. Whereas the biometric wall
or anything else or this time, it's immigration.
Now it's about fraud. The point is the
things keep happening, and they keep incrementally removing
or rather continuing to illegally not respect your
constitutional rights.
I I mean, it matters who you think
is responsible, but if no one ever changes
these things and they're all like I keep
saying, this linear line in the same direction
where it really matters,
you need to start acknowledging that this is
just your government doing this to you. I
know that's the worst thing for some like,
the the the paradigm, the the status quo
protectors,
that's the last thing they want you recognizing
because then they lose their power.
And
the the truth of the matter is you
don't get to rule the world, you don't
get to control the world. I own my
house. If a bunch of people from a
different religion who speak a different language and
I have almost nothing in common with them
want to buy up every single property around
me and the people who who are currently
around me agree to sell to them, I
do not have the right to forcibly interfere
even though I'm not gonna like the outcome
just because I'm, obviously, I'm more familiar around
people who I know what they're saying and
I can say to them, you know, even
if it's that simple.
The fact that
in the big picture, allowing freedom
might have adverse consequences
doesn't mean slavery is better. And that has
Think about that. It's a very great simplification
of a larger thing. Right? Just because having
freedom might cause negative outcomes for some people
doesn't mean slavery is the way to go.
Right?
The the the way the point he's making
is that's how this government operates or government
operates.
Extreme control over the outcome because of what
might happen and drives you in a position
of, you know, freedom versus slavery. It's usually
that binary. That's the left and the right.
That's how this works.
Oops. People from a different religion who speak
a different language to them. I do not
say to them,
allowing freedom
might have adverse consequences
doesn't mean slavery is better. And that has
always been the excuse for all government.
And so this thing, the fear mongering whether
it's exaggerated or even if it's appropriate of
lots of these people coming in will do
this, we better keep them all out with
the use of force.
The moment you do that, you don't have
freedom anymore. You're now advocating
statism. Statism
Now, yeah, you could make an argument that
what he's doing is kind of absolutist. Right?
That it's, like, all or nothing. But, I
mean, at the end of the day, he's
just trying to make a principal point that,
you know, once you allow the contradiction
of your principal because of the excuse they've
given,
you're you're o that door's been opened. I
mean, look at we can see it. We
all see it. Again, the left and right
simply wants you to look at one half
of it.
Truly, it's all right there in front of
us.
Now I'll include this for you so you
can watch it yourself. This is Ben, Tinkin,
not familiar with, who posted this.
Now
I've talked about this recently. I talked about
it a lot over the years. Weaponized migration,
in this case, experimentation.
Tools for subversion, division, and manufacturing consent. Now
the point is weaponized migration.
I think we I'm just gonna reiterate this.
I mean, I'm not I'm ending the show
on this, but there's a lot to overlap
here. It's obvious this is a tool that's
been used. Governments have used this concept for
a I mean, far back as I can
look. Destabilization,
manipulation. And again, this is going I mean,
like, way, like, way back before modern times
where people would would cause chaos to be
able to in create an influx of people
because that, we all understand, causes destabilization.
It's not the fault of people, especially when
they're being driven into it by a dishonest
entity.
The point though is that this is very
much happening today. And I think the problem
is that right now, a lot of these
pea like I just pointed out, how we
only wanna point out the freedom of speech
issues that apply to the one thing that
you wanna highlight. That's very dishonest. The bottom
line is that it's clear that the reality
of the immigration
that's being used is undeniably
tied to the very people who are pointing
at it to justify their next actions.
Whether it's Israel, the United States, or plenty
of other overlaps. S l Catan,
Kenthon points to something very simple. He says,
for all those Americans and Europeans complaining about
refugees and unlimited immigration, here's the cause and
effect. Now it's not the it's as this
simple. There's plenty of other factors. But just
as a really basic point, if you export
war
and occupation,
you're gonna import refugees, guys. It's as simple
as that. If you manipulate
people like in Venezuela
and then openly praise how your sanctions will
cause chaos, and then and then
see this influx of immigration, you don't blame
the people. It is the reality
of the action. It's a simple byproduct.
Now that doesn't change the fact that that
many people will cause chaos. And I'm this
I'll make this I'll be the same person
arguing that the idea of just letting everybody
in doesn't make any sense.
But, nonetheless, there is a level of responsibility
for what has happened here. So but but
that's the this is obviously the complicated situation
that always gets pulled. The end of the
day, though, it's about principles, like always.
And we have to be aware
this is not by accident.
And right now, you're getting spun up, some
of you, into an idea that you're supposed
to be hating these people because, well, they're
destroying the West. They're destroying it's like some
design waiting to collapse the West, which, you
know, maybe it is. I don't see that
evidence. I see that constructed narrative around what
we're looking at.
Frankly, I see something a little different. Consider
all of them, but recognize that the same
point applies.
If you think every single one of these
people have some secret designed to rape your
wife and steal from you, you're ridiculous. And
you are absolutely falling into a trap just
like everything else we've discussed. Certainly could be,
just like the other white guy around the
corner, but doesn't mean you blindly assume that
because some guy in power told you that.
Have a little humanity and compassion to recognize
that, one, your government's convincing you this is
a problem because they need you to feel
that way. Here's your Save ID Act, whatever
it is. Or the reality that you're assuming
based on a bunch of peep narratives strung
together by manipulators,
which causes you to be a bad like,
ultimately,
assuming people are
the worst possible scenario when you don't even
know this person, it's that makes you a
bad person.
Show
compassion
and show
what's the right word? You know, defend yourself.
Defend your family.
Protect yourself. Make sure that you're safe and
secure. But assuming
based on that is I just think it's
silly.
I mean, try to and the the the
Venezuela aspect is such an important one because
it's such an obvious overlap.
And we I mean, we and the caravan
and the whole way it was used,
and here we're right back into it again.
It's it's just over and over and over.
Now what I'm gonna get to here is
the obvious reality, even overlapping with Venezuela, that
Israel is involved with this. It's not up
for debate.
I mean, remember the Venezuelan aspect is the
literally the person that they were trying to
put in power in Venezuela. It's it's on
the record. She literally wrote a letter to
Benjamin Netanyahu saying, we need you to do
a regime change here. It's crazy.
And so what we need to recognize is
there whether explicitly each one we're looking at
is some on that moment designed by Israel
or some large long term plan, it's openly
stated that this is how this is supposed
to go by the cabinet and the current
administration and their religious discussions from many different
rabbis that point these things out.
So first,
here is Nancy Pelosi making a point that
I wanna address,
Told Bill Maher that she plans to grant
citizenship to every illegal immigrant,
which
is ridiculous.
But my point here is that I think
this is very clearly designed whether this mindless
follower knows or not. I'm talking about Pelosi.
That to drive you into Trump.
Because this is just crazy. I mean, it
doesn't make sense. You're literally I mean, the
point is this has always been there. It's
not new.
But David Icke says this is the plan
in every country,
not least the UK because it's globally coordinated.
By the way, Ronald Reagan and father George
Bush were big time cult owned. See my
books. Well, she references them. So the point
is about this weird discussion about just, you
know, who cares if they're ill in in
this case, we're talking about people who came
in here illegally or are here for whatever
reason, but are here illegally.
It is a crime. Whether you think it
should be or not,
that's the current reality.
So to pretend that they're not criminals because
you don't want that or, alternatively,
to pretend that they're all doing this because
they'll all vote democrat, it's just it's lunacy.
I the numbers are it's ridiculous, but these
are the 2 paradigm. They're they're tricking you
in every possible way. But first, listen to
this because I wanna make sure we understand
this. California
lawmakers
just passed a law. I've it hasn't been
signed by governor Newsom,
but giving,
government
assistance
to undocumented
immigrants to buy houses.
That's kind of a different place than the
Democratic Party used to be on immigration. Is
it not? And like I say, that's what
the country's gonna do. But that's certainly where
California is. Well, let me just say, immigration
had always been a bipartisan issue.
I refer you to the But not free
houses?
Well, that's not free housing. It's it's
the American dream being available to more people.
But Yeah. Yeah. By giving them free houses
with your taxpayer dollars. I mean, guys, there's
no it doesn't matter your stance on the
reality. I'll I'll read my my comment in
a second. I mean, we have to know
this is because of US foreign policy in
at least a large part. But and so
they're responsible in that way, but that's this
becomes your responsibility. They're using your money to
do this. And the bottom line is that's
just not a lie a feasible idea.
1 I mean, for a 1,000 different reasons,
but not least of which is that you
should not have to do that. You could
argue that a compassionate person might want to,
but that's not your obligation
to to spend it. And and again, the
crux of the point is that they're illegal
immigrants. Now if you were talking about just
immigrants,
parent, green card, whatever else, I mean, I
I at least could understand why somebody might
wanna do that. I still would argue that
it's not the the government's not it's not
the government's place, left or right, to decide
what you should spend your money on. I
know that's how they pretend. It's just not
the case, whether taxes or anything else. But
this is about
illegal immigrants. And I'll I'll be the first
to point out that a lot of the
right conversation centers around illegals when reality is
a lot of them aren't. They just sweep
them all in together, which is ridiculous and
disgusting.
But in this case, it's about illegal immigrants.
I don't know how anybody can pretend this
makes sense. It's just ignoring the law because
they like that. And I'm gonna point that
again. It's I don't think even for a
moment, this is about the fact that we
can even pretend we know that every one
of them from all these different places all
vote democrat.
Why do we pretend that makes sense?
The numbers don't even add up by the
way. It's not the reality. Understand this about
immigration. The best speech on immigration was by
president Ronald Reagan.
This is the last speech I will make
as president of the United States. I wanna
communicate a message
to to the country I love. And he
talked about
the Statue of Liberty and the bat beacon
of hope it is to the world and
what America was preeminent in the world because
our door was always open, and we will
cease to be preeminent
when we shut the door. Now that's I
don't do justice to the great Is that
and by the way, it's a strange thing
to pretend that we are supposed to care
about preeminence.
They're talking about government control and influence. The
American people in this country, like, the I
I mean, there's some overlap there, but that's
simply about saying that we need to let
immigrants in the country because we won't be
as influential and powerful. Like, that's the whole
point about China and and and US preeminence
and making sure that they're not the one
leading the next step. That's not about us.
That's a weird conflation.
A communicator.
Google it. It's a fabulous speech. And George
Herbert Walker Bush
continued in that respect for the diversity of
America and the rest.
California's
always in the lead. Maybe others will follow
that lead, but that's up to those states.
But we are very blessed here with beautiful
diversity.
Do you you vote for this law? Excuse
me? So you'd vote for this law? Well,
I don't I'm not familiar with exactly what
it is, but making the American dream of
homeownership
available to all people is something we have
to do for people who are here now.
This is before you, missus. This is undocumented.
This is for the undocumented.
Yeah. But that that's what it means. Right?
If you're undocumented, it means you're here illegally.
Simple. I mean, it's it's what the definition
means. I looked it up just to be
sure. It's people that are here without proper
documentation,
which is a crime.
What I would like to do is move
them to documented.
They said that they're under them. Okay. Fine.
So let's just say that's what okay. Then
the idea is not that
you buy them a house and give them
all these things. This is what the right
is using to make this case, and they're
not wrong. This is crazy. This is ridiculous.
It doesn't even logically or legally make sense.
You're gonna end the the game they're playing
is because they're all gonna vote Democrat.
Now the simple point is that this is
silly,
and we should call that out. I'm of
the mind that this is an easy point
to make about how obvious it is that
what they're putting forward is that ridiculous. It's
like putting Kamala as the one leading the
jury when everybody 30 seconds ago knew she
was ridiculous. It's, I think, obviously organized to
drive you into Trump. I I don't know
how I to me, it's just as plain
as day, but, of course, I could be
wrong. My point comes back to the idea
that I don't think your vote translates to
the outcome. I just don't. So the idea
even about democrat voting democrat, it's also part
of the illusion.
But it's a it's a crazy thing that
we can act like this in any way
makes sense. If you wanna make them legal,
then make that happen.
Right? If you don't start by buying people
houses and then figuring it out after that.
To me, that doesn't even make sense, and
I think that's the point.
Okay. Thank you.
One of the best things that we can
do for our economy
is to pass comprehensive
immigration
reform.
Does anybody think she's actually in control of
anything?
Seriously.
Same thing with a lot of people on
left and the right. Like these people, I
just am convinced they are not even remotely
in the know of what's going on.
I think they are. But here's an old
quick an old tweet from Kamala, 2017.
An undocumented immigrant is not a criminal.
I just it's it's I think this is
almost designed
to make that res respond. I mean, well,
yeah. Man, they are. Like, we're literally speaking.
I said, I'm the first to point out
that most are in this position that they're
in due to US foreign policy.
All sides of it. But what you're saying
is laughably stupid,
as they are quite literally breaking the law,
which by definition makes them a criminal. It's
not rocket science here, ladies and gentlemen, but
lying is what you guys do. So you
have to ask yourself, why are they doing
that? Wouldn't they come out and simply say
that we you know,
yes. They're in the current structure that makes
them ill you know, it puts it drives
them to criminality, but we wanna seek to
change that. Well, you could at least understand
that argument. This is just simply not true.
But that is what it's all about. And
I think it's all about distilling you into
a certain position.
Now, quickly to overlap this to end, kinda
coming from a point about how this is
being played. This overlaps with a few different
points. I recently talked about this. The idea
of the Venezuelan gangs that have taken over
these apartment complexes, which
please look into these kind of things with
skepticism,
and and look into the claims being made,
like always.
Now he shared this to me because I
think he was watching from before, and I've
recently talked about this.
And what you're gonna get is a New
York post article and a really weird video.
I mean, remember, raw news alerts have just
recently got shown for and I think it
was even no. I think it wasn't this
conversation. Anyway, they put a video out that
wasn't accurate was false,
which happens all the time. These these these
kind of news alert platforms seem to kind
of constantly do that lately. Either way, they
put this video out which shows you an
an unidentifiable video of some location that I
don't think we can verify, which is very
quick and shows a couple people going into
a room. That's it. Which is caused all
the ruckus. And then a bunch of undefinable,
you know, just random
shots of dirty stuff. And I mean, it
it doesn't always seem to show you anything.
But it says, an armed gang of illegal
immigrants in Venezuela has reportedly taken full control.
We already talked about this. Right? So this
came up again, and New York Post is
stating that exactly.
Saying,
they have seized multiple complexes.
Now this is the one this is from
August. This is not the we showed one
last time saying the same thing. Now based
on my research, not from fact checks or
whatever else, but looking into it, looking into
local media, didn't seem to be the case.
I made the case last time. Clearly, there
was a gang problem in the area, Aurora,
without question. And one of the gangs is
this Venezuelan gang that's been there long before
this whole Venezuelan conversation. So it's just it's
weird. I feel like this is a very
weird and manipulated conversation on purpose for obvious
reasons. And I think part of this is
the obvious drive from Israel in the weaponized
migration aspect to drive this into I mean,
all these different overlaps. But I don't think
that's even remotely the only thing going on.
But either way, the point is to simply
argue this is happening.
Maybe it is. Right? Looked at okay. Maybe
maybe they have. My point was last time
I looked, it was clear that based on
all we could see and, of course, they
could've been lying about it. I said that
then. But based on all the evidence, all
I I didn't seem to prove that other
than a useful political talking point during a
very clear immigration focus to make it out
to be this case. And that's why Venezuela
and so on.
Now my thought is this time, okay. Maybe
it maybe happened. Maybe now they did because
they were there. Okay. So I looked into
it. I read the article. Okay. And they're
simply claiming that's happening. You read most of
this article. It's saying that there's obviously a
gang problem in this area. That was just
the case for a long time now.
The only and then the they simply add
without no without no quotes or anything that
it's they've reportedly
taken over these buildings.
That's New York Post for you. Okay.
So I I looked into this as much
as I could and I found nothing but
peep like, other platforms, including Fox News, that
simply said that wasn't true.
So I just want you guys all to
be very careful. Their post is a major
platform. So is Ron News alert. Think half
a 1000000 or 1000000 followers. Here's the Denver
post.
I forget where it wasn't this one exactly.
Oh, I'll just Let me see. Can't be
right there. It's completely unacceptable to have
Yeah. This just says complexes where they're unsafe
because of rampaging activity. That's the crux of
the point. This one, Fox News is the
one I wanna show you. This just says,
is a violent gang of illegal immigrants taken
over Aurora?
And this is from the Denver Post. Now,
of course, obviously, you could argue these are
media platforms that have an interest in trying
to make it look like their area is
not bad, so you consider that they're just
making it up. But if your response is
to say they're lying about it and then
side with another side that doesn't have evidence
to back it up other than a video
that you can't verify, just ask yourself. Because
my point would be that you can show
videos like that all over Aurora.
The claim I'm gonna show you is that
they're saying that's not taken over this gang
this building. Simply that there's just gang activity
all around these areas and that we're being
misrepresented for very clear partisan reasons. My point
is they could be lying, but evidence is
what matters here. Now it says, is Aurora
overrun by gang of illegal immigrants? He says,
of course not. This they're claiming conservative and
liberal
mayors of Aurora and Denver have even come
together to dispel these claims.
Now, yes, but that's their location, so maybe
they don't want you to see it. Just
being objective. My point is I think it's
obvious this is more of a
hyperbolic claim.
Says there's no conspiracy to cover this up,
an international gang, organization that is run by
Venezuelan nationals, not necessarily the Venezuelan government, mind
you. Quite frankly, Venezuelan nationals doing this are
more likely aligned with the Guaido element or
whatever current push from the opposition is going
on. But I don't know. That's my opinion.
The point is neither do they.
And is being, a criminal organization, the repur
anyway, the point the the same stuff in
this longer article. Here's the Fox News.
A Republican platform, Aurora police say gay activity
isolated as Denver police deny apartment takeovers. Now
it's simply saying, the Denver police department
said in a statement when police departments, at
least arguably lean right at the gut's the
narrative anyway, but who knows?
Said in a statement Wednesday that it was
not aware of any Denver apartment buildings being
taken over by Venezuelan gang, Trendy Aragua.
Despite this, the department stated that it takes
the presence of gangs very seriously and goes
on to make it clear that there's a
very clear gang problem in Aurora. Okay. Yeah.
My point is, do the do do do
the due diligence for yourself.
All you'll find is that they have one
statement in here with nothing to really back
it up, and that's pretty much popular of
the conversation. And you can see a very
clear interest in framing, I mean, look at
all the videos and all the images,
Clear where they're leaning in. The point is
this is interest of saying, see, you know,
Venezuela should have been not Maduro. And bo
realize both Kamala and Trump support the opposition
to Maduro.
How many times when you see the same
path? Anyway, to sum this up,
he responds to what Kamala said. Please note
this is an actual statement from Kamala. It
is. And I he said the US Democratic
party has as a whole has a massive
incentive to bring in and legalize illegal immigrants
as they vote overwhelmingly democrat. Now that's that's
that's a classic claim.
From my research, it seems to be not
even remotely the case. It seems to be
a multifaceted thing. And let's think about this,
guys. We have people who are coming from
all around the world. Now you you could
even argue that predominantly Mexico. And, like, I
don't think that's even remotely the case. Either
way, when you look at the reality from
what you actual not not from
political polls in this country, if you actually
tap into the conversation around the world, most
of these other countries and the peoples within
them are very aware.
It's not a left or right thing that's
destroying their world and starving their family. It's
just the government of the United States.
Simple as that. And so they,
largely, I don't think even want the right
at the end of the day, to make
it simple, the game that it's only gonna
be they do this because they vote democrat.
How are we pretending we know what these
multifaceted people from different parts of the world,
all seemingly that I it's just silly to
me.
On top of that, let's remember my in
my opinion, at least, that the vote doesn't
even translate. So all this is about is
trying to create the paradigm, as always.
Right? Well, here they are saying they're legal
and they shouldn't even matter. And here they
are saying, well, they want to because of
this. And, well, at the end of the
day, they're both doing this to drive you
in a very clear position, in my opinion.
And to end, I'll play this clip again
that Adam Green put out about a rabbi
in Israel telling you why
mass immigration is supposed to happen and why
they should make it happen.
Days.
You're gonna need the
iron of
esav, which represents Edom, which is the West,
Europe, and the Americas,
to get intermixed with
Ishmael, which is basically Arabs and Muslims. How
in the world was this ever gonna happen
if not for this refugee crisis? At the
end of days, you're gonna have this intermixing
between Esav,
Edom, which is the West, and the East,
which is the Muslims and the,
and and the Arabs,
making this through this influx into the world.
They're gonna have a far larger
birth rate than the indigenous people there, and
they're going to sort of conquer by number.
And they're Okay. So if the whole point
is they're taking over the West. Right? Day
by day, the West is losing what it
is, which is what we keep getting.
Okay. Let's just say you that's just the
case. Do you need to recognize that there
are people being used in all of this?
That it's not like some individual
design to run over and do bad things
because what? To what end? What how in
the world do you recognize
that it's some kind of a takeover, but
yet then blame the individual? Like, I it
just it's see me it it in and
of itself doesn't make sense. What the reality
in my opinion is is not just Israel
either, but we can see a stated
and openly discussed. And I'm not talking about
just rabbis. Listen to Ben Gavir and Smotrich
and even Netanyahu where they tell you how
these things are supposed to go. And then
we can't even fathom the possibility that it's
being designed while they're being called out for
the genocide that we all see whether it's
distraction or to bring in the end times,
which is what he's talking about.
I just and then you get the Elon
Musk of the world who are rising up
these peep or the Tommy Robinses that are
driving
exactly what they want from the other side.
Many different sources for this, where there will
be many, many people killed and so on
and so forth. So
the idea of having these refugees come into
Europe, it's no longer a matter of whether
it's right or wrong. It's just simply a
fulfillment of what it was meant to be
all along. This is a fulfillment of, you
know, the rechazal and the prophecies.
This has to happen, and this is just
another sign that we are nearing, you know,
the completion of this tikkun of the entire
world. But we know one thing, right, that
when it comes to the classic Rome,
you know, which is Europe,
they're finished.
And you don't have to be a prophet
or a great analysis for that. You have
to open the view, the the the the
TV or the Internet and see that exactly
what was prophesied then, that the sons of
Ishmael are gonna go and cause cause havoc
around the world. So France is completely barbecued,
England is next, now half of Europe is
completely
com
half dead. Now look what's going on in
America.
So, you know, now in a country
near you. Asking what's gonna be with the
Goyim when Moshiach comes. Will they be destroyed
and annihilated?
Someone asked who cares.
Okay.
As a nation, they'll cease to exist even
as individuals.
Every individual, those survivors.
Not only as a nation, they'll cease to
exist, even as individual. In modern terminology,
they call it
cultural genocide.
They'll be annihilated, but
they basically learn there's gonna be cultural genocide.
You know what? The Goyim's the Goyim as
they exist as Goyim Befrehasma, that's
done with.
At the very least, I hope you're willing
to consider different possibilities.
Right? And and make sure objectively recognizing that
this, at least in my opinion, is about
a Zionist manipulation and not one religion or
one group of people.
There it's overlapping. It's multifaceted. It's about power.
It's about pow
empire, power, you know, power structures controlling
you.
Whether we're talking about the smallest example of
your current situation politically or the election itself
or the larger foreign policy dynamic, it's obvious
to me at the very least that people
are actively trying to convince you to do
exactly what they need you to do for
their outcome.
And, you know, their effort is trying to
convince you that what you need to do,
what they're trying to get you to do
is in your best interest despite it being
explicitly to the opposite. And so there's a
whole game they play trying to get you
to care about the things they need you
to care about in order to drive you
in that direction.
And every time this comes back around, we're
able to look back at the 4 years
before it and go, man, that's they didn't
do what they said they would. They actually
made my life harder. Oh, but, oh, they
told me it was all because of the
other side, and so maybe we'll just go
through it again. Right? Why not just give
it 4 more years and just give it
a shot?
Well, I'm pretty sure we did that the
last 47 times so I'd like to change
something different. Who wants to join me?
Thank you for being here today and at
least opening your mind to the possibility that
there are other paths. The opposite of black
pill, like, recognizing solutions that are outside the
chosen paradigm that they definitely want you to
keep. I mean, everybody seems to recognize it
in one way or another.
Try to reach people. Have a measured and
balanced conversation. Don't get angry. Try to convince
people with facts. And if they don't want
to hear it, then back away and come
back later. Water the seed, come back later.
Right? That's what this is all about. Talk,
have conversations.
I think there are more people out there
willing to listen than you think.
The idea that people are more stuck than
ever, I think is part of the illusion.
People are waking up.
They see it.
Do your best to try to reach them.
Thank you for being here. I'm very proud
of what we built here, guys.
I love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.