Good afternoon, Seattle. Welcome to your afternoon newscast.
We're here to bring you stories that matter
most. Today marks the 16th anniversary of the
tragic genocide.
Commemorations
are being held all around the world.
We're
watch it?
Why?
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.
Friday, December 6, 2024,
and, boy, it is good to be back
sitting here. It's been far too long for
me to not be diving into this stuff.
If you caught my brief,
briefly joining a wake up this morning, we
talked about a bunch of stuff and was
just kind of it's trying to get caught
up on what everyone's been dealing with. But
we have a lot a lot to cover
today. And I wanna make a point of
what really put it this way, a lot
to cover this week.
And what I'm planning on doing today and
I'm gonna get into just briefly what, an
update on something and re one of the
reasons if you have been following every show
why I wasn't, well, the the daily wrap
up has been absent for,
more than usual with this week in particular.
This week, what I'm gonna do, what I'm
planning I I tweeted recently that I'm coming
back at this for a few different reasons
just
there's a fire that's lit under my, you
know, what? And I'm I'm just I I'm
I'm regardless of what's going on, it's important
to me that we push harder than ever.
And so what I've decided to do today
is I'm coming back and seeing so much
to to, you know, over the last week
and even more, so many different topics that
I wanna get into.
It was just
impossible to cover in one show.
So, I'm going to basically try to get
to all these larger topics just over the
last week and add to what's going on
as well over the next so many weeks.
I'm planning to do as many 5 shows
in a row this week, if not, more
than that and just keep going. And so
my plan is to sort of roll these
together and try to get to some of
these larger topics. So in the point in
all saying all that, I will have a
few things to say in general about foreign
policy, but today would I decided to put
that off until tomorrow. And we will be
getting that to into tomorrow.
Then I made a point about this this
morning, almost
about how incredible it is that of everything
going on. And I'm almost making that point
with what I'm
that's Bitchute.
That keeps happening. On that note, I have
a positive thing to say about Bitchute as
well.
But what that ultimately
kind of add almost backs up what I
was saying this morning, which is ultimately that
it blows my mind that
a genocide,
the most livestream genocide in history, the most,
I think, visible genocide we ever seen is
something becoming almost sort of like a secondary
story. Even as you could tell, like, just
because it is something that we're I mean,
honestly, from my perspective, it's because I'm of
the mind that the people that we're trying
to reach with this are, by and large,
very aware of what's going on. The people
out there that don't need the the people
that are in positions to change it, I
don't think are confused about what's happening. And
so it's sort of the point is to
continue to make sure we're aware of it,
and I'm going to keep covering it extensively
because I don't think it's going to be
and is currently the biggest story of our
lifetimes.
But
today, I think it's important to get caught
up on some of these other things going
on, and I will start with a few
points around foreign policy as well. But by
and large, today, it's gonna be really, what
I decided to do today was just sort
of go at the things that kind of
caught my attention first or really just by
organic, just default, ended up being the thing
that was put in front of me first.
And I put aside a lot of things
we're gonna get to, and you'll see what
I mean as we go through it. Like
you saw on the title, there's some of
these different larger stories that many we've covered
already in the past that have become more
important focal points today.
But I do think it's important that we
highlight how
just all encompass the the this the genocide
ongoing that the US government, the UK, and
Israel, and everybody else is involved with, not
allowing, but involved with on the ground, cannot
be something that we allow to become a
passive conversation. It just can't.
Now at my point again is to go
through all these stuff over all of this
over the week. Now my update in regard
to what the last, so many days have
been evolving and, there's a lot more as
well in that, but just one of the
things I wanted to update you on and
one of the reasons why there's been a
lot going on is one of the lawsuits.
Now we recently were were in mediation
for far too long around,
trying to resolve one of them. Now, long
story short, the bottom line was it was
definitely
a win as I see it. Now, obviously,
it's a loss for me no matter what.
If you've been following the story, the lawfarer
dynamic is that we lose because we're spending
way more than we have in order to
even try to fight it, which is ultimately
how this one ended up. And realize there's
3 technically, 4. This one's about to be
resolved.
Four copyright lawsuits that are, in my opinion,
completely illegitimate,
acting in good faith, and they're either fair
use or what I believe were Creative Commons,
and once I was told otherwise, ultimately pulled
it down. Intent, as even just discussed in
this recent mediation, is the main part of
it. Either way, the point is that this
one with 3 more coming, which is the
idea of more engagement money that has to
fly out the door,
Ultimately, my lawyer just dumped tens of $1,000
bills on me in regard to multiple lawsuits.
We were able to ultimately resolve this mediation
in a win because I think, ultimately, we
ended up having the upper hand in the
conversation where they recognized the juice was not
worth the squeeze in order to track down
and waste everybody's time, including the judge who
appeared to, through the mediator, expressed frustration that
we were wasting time on such a small
amount of money, which to me is a
lot. But the guy's talking about a $150,000,000
case. We're waiting. You know? And the point
is that we pushed back. They ultimately tried
to strong-arm and to say that, you know,
we we demand at least this much, and
we just I basically just said there's that
if you do that, nothing's going to happen.
And they ultimately settled for an amount that
they've spent more just in setting up the
mediation. So the point is I'm not trying
to get in too much detail. The point
is that these the this law firm
lost money to go after me in this
case. Now whether that is
my opinion is that somebody is driving these
things.
And what I don't believe that's the law
firm. That doesn't make sense to me. Could
be. My point would be, though, that the
law firm went at this because they were
told to or paid to or driven to
and lost money, which either means the person
spending that had to lose money or that
this was the design just to waste my
time. I don't know. But it it's nice
to know that there is my point is
that there's a positive note on this, that
we ultimately were able to show that through
the resistance,
through the, you know, spending money to ultimately
make them lose, I think it was worth
it in the long run. But the point
all around is still that we have to
pay all this money just to be able
to push back on this illegitimate process, and
that's the lawfare of it all, which we
see all over the place. It's crazy, the
system we're in. One of the main things
we're gonna talk about today over all this
stuff is that, as always, we don't live
in the world we think we do. The
people out there, the current administration, the previous
administration,
they are not who they pretend to be.
Simple as that. And it's time for us
as Americans, as grown ups, to start being
real about that and acknowledge what we can
see. And one of them is the reality
of the current system we live in. As
somebody recently said, and I said this morning,
it it was just sad but true that
rich people get lawyers, poor people go to
jail. That's the world we live in, and
that's not the world we should allow to
exist. We should be fighting to change that
and not just fighting to pretend to change
it and allow people to, you know the
same people to step in that we'll get
into today with the 9th or 10th billionaire
added to Trump's administration.
Pretty sure that's not an outsider fighting anything.
But the other note I wanted to highlight
today, which I'm very happy to point out,
just officially finished discussing the the over the
well, I guess, the ambassador program, as you're
calling it, for BitShoot.
Now, BitShoot is ultimately creating trying to give
themselves a face facelift. They're trying to revolutionize
what they're doing. And, again, as I've I've
said from as far as we ever talked
about this, of all the platforms out there,
BitShoot is one of, if not the most,
protective of free speech. Honoring it, rather. Like,
not no censorship.
And in a large way, to their detriment.
Continuing to get, you know, people that feel
don't wanna advertise or people that don't want
to, you know, work their put their videos
there because of how we see how vitriolic
and disgusting and racist the comments are. I'm
of the mind, and I'm very clear about
this. I think that's being done.
There's clearly, that's what free speech will look
like. You'll find people that are
disgusting because that's there are people out there
that are like that. And we have to
respect the fact that that is free speech,
and we have the free speech to tell
them what we think they are. The point,
though, is that I think on top of
that, with the bots and everything else, as
even Gab pointed out, the moment that they
blocked IP addresses from Israel, whatever you think
about that, suddenly their bot problem vanished. I
think that's very clear, and I think we're
all very aware of what's really going on.
It has nothing to do with Jewish people.
It has to do with the government. It
has to do with or insofar as Jewish
people overlapping with Zionism, yes. But any other
Zionist overlap that is causing this is very
clear what's going on. And what's important to
highlight though is that Bit Shoe is somebody
that is fighting for that in the context
of all that's going on, all of the
attacks and the pressure and the the the
threats, and they're standing by it. In fact,
leaning into it. And so they reached out
to me, as I mentioned, I don't know,
a couple weeks ago, and wanted to work
with me. Wanted to help support TLav, and
in no way, shape, or form, as you
know I would never allow, is there any
way anything that has to do with,
you know really, honestly, there's not even any
obligation other than me committing to help grow
their platform and help support what they're doing,
which I believe in. And so it's important
to highlight that there's no influence on content.
There's no ability of them to tell me
I need to do this or say that
or post this or engage
it's all of my own volition.
And I really respected that. That that was
the point was it's sort of like on
an agreement of of good faith. And that
is the kind of thing that I wanna
see more of. And so the point being
is if I just don't do anything and
I just ignore it and never talk about
BitChute, the point is they can just disregard
the com the the contract will go away.
And so at the moment, it has to
do ultimately with the growth of the platform.
And if they succeed, so do I. So
my point is, guys, I think if the
the fact that BitChute is supporting the last
American vagabond and we clearly do believe in
what they're doing and it is free speech,
then we should be supporting BitChute. And so,
that's why I'm gonna start leaning into that
more and I think it's important that we
do. Now, I'm still gonna be posting everywhere,
like always. I'm still gonna be doing pretty
much everything I've done the same way, but
I'm going to try to advocate for people
to go there and support what they're doing,
like I have been anyway.
And I wanna be clear.
I'm not only doing this because they're deciding
to support me. I've already been doing that.
I'm just happy to lean into it more
because I do believe in what they're doing.
And I would never take on an agreement
like that that I didn't believe in. All
that to say, let's start supporting BitChute more.
Because I do believe they're going in the
right direction and I do believe they're fighting
for what we're fighting for. And the moment
that we see something different, then we can
talk about it and we can change direction.
But I believe in what they're doing right
now. So on that note,
let's get into some main parts of today,
which actually, the one last thing is to
start with that opening clip, which we're gonna
start with in general, is it's it's I
mean, the the way that the clip was
made is a little bit, after school special
feeling to me, but either way, it's powerful
to think about. You know? And and as
the as you can see here on the
tweet that the person that shared this,
she simply says and, again, I unfortunately wasn't
able to find the the original where this
came from. So if you know who made
this, let me know so I can give
them credit and shout it out. But Joanna
shared this, and then she says Palestine, fast
forward to 2040.
Why didn't you we do anything?
And, guys, if you I mean,
if you've ever wanted to be able to
see into the future, you're looking at it.
If you I mean, it doesn't really whether
they win or don't get held accountable or
whatever horrible thing I'm hope doesn't happen comes
to pass, people will not forget what happened.
This will be discussed. It will be remembered
because it was documented
in real time. It's
very important to think about that. Even with
the technocratic censorship and re you know,
you know, what's the right term for it?
Cultivating history through algorithmic manipulation and, you know,
YouTube changing video, whatever. People will not forget
this. So when this time comes to pass,
we finally, whatever that looks like, get beyond
this time frame,
people will ask this question. How did you
possibly let that happen? How is it possible
that you could have not seen how clear
that was? Because remember,
hindsight is always 2020. People will look back
and see it.
The question to you is what did you
do? And we always ask this question.
What would you have done if you were
more worthy? We've always this comes up. As
we've always said, and it's been ad nauseam
pointed out, but it's correct. Now you know.
And she also points out, what about Syria,
Congo, Yemen, Libya, Donbas? She's correct.
Just not one
human life matters no matter where it is
or taken. Right? That's important to highlight. So
there's all the the weird thing that we
see a lot of the Zionist do. They're
like, well, you didn't care about this. Why
do you care about that? Which by the
way, suggests they're saying that if you didn't
care about that genocide, you shouldn't care about
our genocide, which is pretty disgusting to think
that's their argument.
The point is that we've all cared about
these things. People like Vanessa Bealey and Eva
Bartlett have been screaming about Donbas for a
long time. The point is that the establishment
doesn't care. The partisan screamers get a lot
of people to not look at it. But
Iraq, for example, Libya, people have been screaming
about these things. Yes. These were I mean,
whether you wanna argue that the actual definition
of genocide was met, these are all war
crimes. War crimes committed by the very people
pretending to fight against war crimes. That is
the reality of the world we live in.
So if you want to change that,
obviously, this has happened. We're in it. It's
happened. It's already going on. Right now, Lebanon
and Gaza are still being actively genocided as
we speak.
What did you do?
I think it's important to ask yourself what
you are doing. At the very least, just
being aware of it, pointing it out, not
being okay supporting companies that are allowing it
to continue. Now all that's to say that
we're gonna go into this in much, much
more depth as we have been since it
started and well before October 7th tomorrow and
the day after that. But I wanted to
make sure we saw that, and I'm gonna
give you a couple of quick points to
highlight what's going on, and then we're gonna
jump into the docs and conversation. To start,
we're gonna be ending with the conversation of
Elon Musk's
satellite network which Derek just knocked out of
the park. So if you were hoping to
see that first, it'll be at the end
of the show, but make sure you stay
tuned. There's lots to talk about. I wanted
to start with one point about propaganda that
I just found really fascinating.
And this is the way this is where
we are today.
Pretty sure I shared that. That's crazy. We'll
make sure you share that. So
somebody sent me this video and simply just
said, hey, this is interesting. It is an
interesting video. Now I just happen to have
already seen this because, you know, we're constantly
seeing all the weird things that pop up.
You know, even any of you that are
doing this like we do or just maybe
you're just whether it's because of the show
you run or you did you just immersed
in social media? And hopefully, you're not. Why
does I wouldn't. I don't think I'd be
if I didn't have to be. The point
is that if you when you're in this
every day, you see the the patterns.
You see the same videos that resurface every
so many years as the new thing we
never saw and it's just a in a
usually repackaged like we saw with, for example,
Lahaina where we all knew what was gonna
happen. All those same transformer videos from 4
years ago, they all pop up and go,
look what we just saw in Lahaina. And
most of us are like, nope. That's that
same old video every time that happens. And
every time people fall for it. It's just
the way it works. People are a little
too a la Twitter files. Right? That's what
was it was done to do.
This is a clip from a video a
movie or excuse me. A a show called
Disjointed. Now people do say it in the
in the comments.
What is important to highlight is this has
2,300,000
views.
And the vast majority of people commenting are
just going, wow. Like, this is crazy. The
point is, even the title says, this is
a cartoon that is said to have been
made in the seventies. Said to have been
made?
This is just wild to me. To cut
to the chase, I'll play it really quickly.
This video on Facebook, I don't know whether
this one is himself or whether he's just
sharing it, Jason Borrelli.
Somebody went out of their way
to take the video, remove the audio, add
some random background music, cut it into this
thing, and then add audio, add some random
background music, cut it into this thing, and
then add the type that says said to
have been made in the seventies.
Knowing they're lying. Understand. Because if you had
to do that, that means you knew you
cut off the audio which explained
that it was this.
A scene from disjointed from the 2018 Netflix
show. And you met my point in the
early 30 seconds ago was that if you've
been following you're on Twitter, you've already seen
this pop up here and there over the
years because it was interesting. Now the point
is, I'll play it really quickly. It is
a clip.
Oh, actually, in your mind, I don't think
I have it to play. It's not the
point is, the clip is, it's a random
clip where they're sitting painting inside and it
was a dispensary. That's it's called disjointed was
the name of the show.
And they're they're painting things and this one
woman has, like, a, like, a flashback or,
like, a, you know, like, I've whatever the
context was, it jumps into her mind. Right?
And all of a sudden, she sees this
weird kind of all encompassing thing where you
see people marching into buildings and you see
911 happen and you see l u f
o. And the point was people are going,
oh my god. Somebody made this 2,019
70 video that showed all these things. And
2,300,000
people were like, woah. That's crazy.
My point is simple. People are whether this
was I honestly think this is just some
random guy that thought he he got a
lot of shares and clicks out of it.
And just what deliberately tried to dismiss dis
misinform everybody
from who knows? So you guys don't need
to know tell know this. You all know
this already. But I just think it's fascinating
how much of this is going on to
such an extreme level. And that's not even
getting into, like, the malicious government led foreign
entities, the the partisan back and forth.
Just question everything, guys. I think that's the
point. It's important.
That's just wild to me how much reach
these things get. Now, if you had posted
this and said, hey, here's a thing from
2018,
wouldn't have got as much reach. Right? Maybe
they even made money. Maybe they're getting Facebook
clicks and ad people make money off these
things. And yet, we come out with well
researched work that should be bought, like, round
I don't know just independent media. That should
go round the world and back, and I'm
gonna show you 3 points about that today
alone.
Of
course, it goes nowhere.
Would if it was somebody in the mainstream
that was saying a fraction of the same
point, but that's how this works. So we're
gonna go to the docs and thing after
this opening point,
and I wanna make I wanna show you
that I I'm gonna give you the evidence
about the whole treated vinyl chloride because I've
mentioned it many times in the context of
Conyers, Georgia. But I want you to see
that from the East Palestine point to recognize
how clear this is that the corporate media
reported that this was something that would it
was treated versus something that was gonna explode,
and you don't hear that anywhere.
Not in any conversation, even one currently today
rehashing that same story.
It's just the point to that is to
show you how controlled this stuff is. That
no matter how much work we do, no
matter how well researched it is, no matter
how that there's a way to make sure
these things just don't go past a certain
level.
I'm sure we could find a way around
that in some way. I think there is
a level of organic reach that does somehow
in ways go around that. But just realize
that that is what we're fighting against.
And that's what and and the I guess
the other point on top of that is
just do not be swayed by whatever the
current thing is. Don't you consider it. But
to be swayed by whatever the current large
talking heads are pointing to is usually the
way this trap works. Consider it, but ask
yourself what else is going on, and also
go out of your way to look for
people in the independent media.
So, by the way, I was just rehashing
the idea about it's important to me that
we highlight some of the smaller people in
this field who are not getting the credit
they deserve because they came into it at
a bad time and are are objective and
nonpartisan and will probably never get past a
certain barrier. I'm surprised that we've gotten to
where we are.
So before we get into that, I wanted
to highlight a few important points that are
going on in foreign policy. Now Jeremy Scahill
wants to point it out, because you might
have you might have seen that Donald Trump
made these
threats.
As well as one recently we'll get to
later in the show about bricks and the
dollar. You know, the outsider is threatening to
rush the world to maintain dollar hegemony because
that's what outsiders do. Right? In this case,
he threatened
Hamas.
Oh, hell to pay in the Middle East
if the hostage is not released.
Which by the way, as j Jeremy makes
fun. It's it's pretty it's silly to think
that they're gonna cower because Trump said something
and they're not even he doesn't even know
what's going on right now. He's not in
he doesn't have the intel. He's outside. He
doesn't even sign the contract yet to get
the point is,
him saying that is pretty silly. Knowing that,
by the way, the the US government and
Netanyahu
and all and the Israeli government have actively
maintained,
sabotaged
every single element of this, and their own
people say that. So this means Trump is
either that out of the know, even from
just headline news from Israel, or he's still
lying for Zionism, which I think is pretty
obvious.
But he threatens them
to release the hostages, which they won't do
because then they'll be murdered
immediately, whatever you think, whether that's good or
bad. The point is, logically speaking, that's the
only bargaining chip they have. So this is
all about, as he highlights, Trump trying to
make it look like anything positive that happens
is because he yelled out loud. But it
says the statement from Hamas is that since
the beginning of the genocide, Hamas has publicly
announced they've been actively seeking a ceasefire, which
by the way is the most easily verifiable
thing in the whole conversation. The Times of
Israel wrote that the 9th 10th October last
year, they were actively trying to seek a
full ceasefire full exchange and Netanyahu continually said
no. And now we know today that he's
been foiling that since day 1. Their own
media has written this. Haraz, times of Israel,
I've shown you 45 times. Because, however, Netanyahu,
he writes, have sabotaged all of these attempts.
But due to his savage actions and decisions,
these deals broke. Therefore, Hamas understands, and this
is what he's writing. I don't know if
you could argue they know this, but he's
trying to frame it in a way that
makes sense that they that Trump's message is
actually directed towards Netanyahu.
They need to end their evil game by
using negotiations to release the hostages. Now you
could read it that way. I think he's
only saying it that way to argue that's
how Hamas would interpret it intentionally because they're
they've been trying to is their point. Hamas
is committed to immediately implementing a security council
resolution 2735.
He said, we're looking forward to the daytime
seeing an end of the genocide against our
people. Their free return back to their homes
all over Gaza. Our people are eager to
secure a better future.
And he simply goes for a couple of
thoughts. Trump's
Trump's bombastic threats to unleash some untold horror
if the Israeli and US captains are not
released occurs
as ceasefire talks have resumed. Hamas is not
going to do something or tremble in fear
because of Trump's threats of future action. The
timing does indicate Trump is looped is looped
in on the potential deal, I disagree, being
negotiated and wants to set himself up to
take credit for any success in the release
of hostages.
I get the sense. This is just all
just our opinions, but I get the sense
this is Trump just trying to lob this
in the air. And and and so if
Biden's administration
tries to get some end for their, you
know, on the way out benefit for their
reputation, then he could pretend that was because
what he's yelled out loud. That's what I
think. In any case, the point is Trump
actively saying there'll be hell to pay if
you don't. Please highlight for me how that
how that
gives you the indication of him ending this
war,
especially in a pro Israel way that they're
all this will be him going, or I
shouldn't say especially in a pro Israel. The
point is I think most people want this
to stop,
even most of their supporters. And that's why
they keep pretending Trump said he would end
it all. Right?
That's not the kid. This is him continuing
this,
Giving them a blank check, which they already
have, by the way. That's just all narrative
Trump versus Biden. They both give them a
blank check to continue to go after anybody
in Palestine because they didn't do what you
demanded for nothing.
So please show me how that can be
as an end to anything. It's the same.
How what's the saying?
Out with the all the,
old boss, same as the new boss or
whatever. Yeah. This is the same damn thing
because they are the same thing. But as
this all rod points out, Netanyahu never actually
wanted an end.
A child can see that today. The evidence
is right there for you. And here's Times
of Israel. Netanyahu says ready for ceasefire and
Gaza to free hostages, but won't end the
war.
And and what we're right we're this is
this is, like, day 7 narrative. We're we're
right back in the beginning.
They play the game where we wanna end,
but we don't wanna end the war. Well,
guess what, stupid? That's the whole thing everybody's
calling for. The entire thing about this is
ending the the point is a ceasefire
means an end to the war. So he
keeps saying, yes. We want an end to
the war, but not if there's an end
to the war. That's what he's saying.
He knows people are falling for this because
they want to. The reality is you can't
ask for a cease fire and the stipulation
being is that there's no cease fire because
that's actually what he's been doing, and even
Israeli media has been calling for that. But
it's all about a game of words. And
as we've shown you a 100 times,
they have made sure it does not stop.
And just to show you some of the
the horrifying things that are actually happening, as,
the chairman of the Euromaid Human Rights Group
says we observed an increase.
This is on the 30th November. An increase
in the pace of targeted killings carried out
by Israeli forces in Gaza,
targeting local activists working in civil media relief
fields.
Guys, this is a a relief worker.
Just take a look at this. It's not
as graphic as some of the others, but,
guys, this is an individual who got hit
so directly with some of these munitions that
they're still smoldering on his body.
These are not Hamas,
not militants. These are civilians.
Kinda hard to hide those, isn't it? This
is where we are. And Lebanon is even
more obvious.
Now lastly, on the pogrom overlapped, Amsterdam, you
know, one of these, of of the 100
of easily provable fake stories from Israel since
the beginning of October 7th forward. But my
point is that's the Amsterdam lie. Zachary Foster
points out Israeli news.
Israeli news is covering dozens of Israeli terrorists
who are setting fire to buildings and vehicles
in
the West Bank, waiting for world leaders who
apparently care so much about pogroms to issue
condemnations and impose consequences to the perpetrators.
It just it's unreal how obvious this continues
to be. There's no
complicated part of the story. These are settlers
who are burning anybody's homes who are not
Israeli.
And in Lebanon, in case you were curious,
62 times
62 times they have violated the cease fire.
According to Craig Murray, who was on the
ground and has a very respectable background in
regard to reporting the news, if that matters
more to you than just proving it based
on the facts. The bottom line,
easily verified. From the moment this started, they
were violating the cease fire. Then it became
well, they fired on us, so now they
broke the cease fire. Well, they responded because
you never stopped firing.
But that's how the game goes.
And here's even CNN, if you can believe
that, who's reporting the same thing. Israel is
violating the cease fire about a 100 times.
If even CNN is reporting what we can
see, that means that it's so obvious,
so obvious
that they have to. That's my that's what
I would argue. And yet, here we are
with our corporate media for the most part
in most cases and the government blindly supporting
this. Now on Syria in general, I highly
recommend you check out our my recent discussion
with the Sibylian the first, the truth about
what is happening in Syria. You know, a
lot's happened since then, but it is still
the base reality of this. You can see
ISIS patches on the people that they were
sending in. This was not what it looks
like. This is yet another false flag, psyop
dynamic that the US government and Israel are
conducting in Syria, I think primarily
to hinder the flow of weapons to Hezbollah.
Which, by the way, if your issue is
that the weapons are going to a group,
then recognize that the US government sends weapons
to groups in the world more than anybody
else anywhere you could point to. And more
dangerous groups than anyone you could talk about.
Far more dangerous, far more terroristic than Hezbollah
or Hamas or anybody else. Of course, them
recognizing Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization. That's
just something the US says about people they
don't like. Bottom line is this is a
lie, and what they're doing is destroying
anything that's in their path, breaking sovereignty, murdering
civilians as long as they can stop a
legal action conducted by their adversaries.
And here is a clip that I wanted
to play just so you understand what's truly
going on in Syria.
Jeffrey Sachs, again, knocking it out of the
park as much as I think we should
question his intentions. The point is this is
easily proven. Every single thing he says in
here is not just a disagreement.
It gets documented. You can show the receipts.
You can show the UN documents. You can
show even the US government admitting every single
part of this. And yet here we are
today where the narrative has spun right back
into square 1. And if you think that's
re recognize that there's a changing of the
guard right now and not it's still all
your government. I'm I'm very convinced the left
right paradigm at the highest level is just
an illusion. But the point is that e
when you have the change, there are things
that shift. And we're watching these things shift
right back into place.
This is important to understand.
And I'll include I'll read that afterward actually.
Here's a good clip.
Barack Obama, president of the time, of course,
August 20, 2012,
talking about his red line
for Assad.
We have
been very clear to the Assad regime, but
also to
other players
on the ground
that
a red line for us is
we start seeing
a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around
or being utilized.
That would change my calculus. That would change
my equation.
Now, what happened is that shortly after that,
that's exactly what happened.
Just real quickly, can you believe that this
idiot is still completely going with the narrative
of them using chemical weapons? Like, of all
the stories we've had, this has been so
thoroughly broken down. Even by corporate media, someone
like Robert Fisk personally went there and broke
down how obviously this was a lie. Or
going back to the earlier point, one of
the earliest of de la Carla Del Ponte
from the UN openly saying, no. It was
the rebels that used them. And they still
to this day point at those things and
say Assad used them. We know they're lying,
guys. We know as a matter of fact.
I'm of the mind. He probably knows that.
Doesn't care. I don't think Piers Morgan is
even remotely honest. I think he's desperately trying
to play this middle ground role right now
where he actively
drives the corporate main the the mainstream narrative,
but while acting like he's somehow dancing the
fence. Now objectivity is important, but you realize
objectivity
is not
one thing from each side. That's the fake
understanding of the corporate media. There are facts.
And if the facts are a 1,000 to
1, well, it's obvious what side is the
truth. In this case, that's what we're talking
about, and he still stands in the middle
and goes, well, that's not objectivity. That's illusion
of objectivity
to drive a very clear narrative, which is
Assad gas and children. We have to stop.
What about the children?
A sad use chemical
weapons. And that as a result,
Obama was, by his own words,
obligated
to do something about it but didn't.
And remember, these are the moderate rebels that
use them as even Karla points out that
the US government was funding. And still does,
by the way, to this day.
He ducked his own red line.
And it was at that moment that Vladimir
Putin, who I remember,
I'm sure you do as well, suddenly wrote
extraordinarily
an op ed piece in the New York
Times
of all places.
And then he moved in to support Assad
and effect effectively
took control
as Assad's main supporter
in Syria. And many people think that that
was a catalyst for a lot of the
problems that then followed. Is that a Oh,
weird. Right. Right. Totally not the illegal invasion
of Syria. Totally not the murdering and framing
and and false flagging, if you will, of
all that's going on there or the ongoing
occupation and theft of oil and and weed
and food. Yeah. Not totally not that because
clearly you can see Putin doing all of
that. Right? Oh oh, you can't though. Seeing
as how he hasn't. Seeing as how he
hasn't occupied other areas of Syria, he has
ensured that Syria exists.
Now, of course, you could argue there's more
behind the scenes that we can't see, but
the reality is what we can prove and
what people on the ground like Vanessa Bili
will tell you,
Assad and Syria have their sovereignty in the
context of Israel and excuse me, of Syria
and Russia.
They don't in the context of the US
government, pretending to fight whatever they're pointing to
and breaking every single rule they claim Russia
is that you can see that they're not.
Or Israel occupying everywhere and murdering people any
way they want, but just think about how
this is not Russia good guy.
I think they're all very guilty of a
lot of things, but you could prove that
they're lying about this, And Russia defended Syria's
sovereignty against the obvious invader and did not
occupy territory.
So what do you call that? You call
that a lie?
An an accurate assessment of what happened, do
you think?
Not not really. Although I did witness some
of that close-up even at the g 20
in Saint Petersburg,
around the time of these events.
What this starts and it's it's really fascinating
to go back. It starts
in
1996
with Netanyahu,
who wrote a book called Fighting,
Terrorism.
And the thesis of the book is, quite
straightforward and
and and
very dangerous. He says, you know, there are
there's Hamas. There's Hezbollah. They oppose Israel. It's
not good for us to fight them directly.
That that won't work.
What we need to do is topple the
governments
that that back them. So what we need
is regime change throughout the Middle East. And
he actually gave a long list of 7
countries,
that included,
Syria,
Libya,
Iraq,
Iran,
Somalia,
Sudan,
and Lebanon.
And systematically,
the United States has done Netanyahu's
bidding for almost 30 years now going to
war
with every one of them except for the
big one,
that Netanyahu
so much longs for, which is the war
directly
between the United States and Iran.
Right after 911,
about 10 days after 911, I went through
the Pentagon, and
I saw secretary Rumsfeld and
and deputy secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just
to say hello to some of the people
on the joint staff who used used to
work for me, and one of the generals
called me and he said, sir, you gotta
come in you gotta come in and talk
to me a second. I said, well, you're
too busy. He said, no. No. He says,
we've made the decision we're going to war
with Iraq.
This was on or about the 20th September.
I said, we're going to war with Iraq?
Why?
He said, I don't know.
He said, I guess they don't know what
else to do. But they laugh at that.
That is so crazy.
I said, well, did they find some information
collect connecting Saddam to Al Qaeda? He said,
no. No. He says, there's nothing new that
way. They just made the decision to go
to war with Iraq. He said, I guess
it's like we don't know what to do
about terrorists, but
we've got a good military, and we can
take down governments. And, he said, I guess
if if the only tool you have is
a hammer, every problem has to look like
a nail.
So I came back to see him a
few weeks later.
And by that time, we were bombing in
Afghanistan. I said, are we still going to
war with Iraq? And he said, oh, it's
worse than that. He said he reached over
on his desk. He picked up a piece
of paper. He said, I just
he said, I just got this down from
upstairs, meaning the secretary of defense's office today,
and he said, this is a memo that
describes how we're gonna take out
7 countries
in 5
years. So I think we got that. And
then Syria, Lebanon,
Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran.
Where do you think they got that from?
I mean, guys, this is not a trick.
That's exactly what he's highlighting. That's why he's
laughing when he talks about this because it
is the most obvious thing in the world.
It is transparent.
But you see the insider circles actively act
like they don't know, left and right, mind
you, since they're on the same side about
maintaining a very clear agenda. Now why, of
all things, Jeffrey Sachs in the last couple
of months has been breaking down major I
mean,
that concerns me partly because
you wonder whether it's leading to some other
thing, which is why what I can't stop
seeing right now. The revelation in order to
get you on a certain position that then
justifies the next one, and I'm worried about
that. But, nonetheless,
as long as you're on guard about that,
you have to acknowledge the importance of the
truth that he's telling you, that the US
government has been at war with everything we're
talking about for Israel. And going back to
the Syria point, it's exactly what he's I
mean, it's everything we've talked about. It's about
rationalizing the next step. It's about, you know,
like, what we just saw abusing the moderate
rebel ad dynamic or rather just the rebel.
They jump, they pop up, and they act
they act like they're fighting for freedom, and
they rationalize the new step they wanna carry
out in Syria. And the point is about
stopping the transfer of weapons to Hezbollah.
Right? So just like he was telling you
right there, we can just start it's all
about these guys of stopping
what they claim is the terrorist
activity. Well, what happened with Iraq? They lied
to us about WMDs. What happened with I
mean, every single location was a manufactured illusion
that justified the killing of
1000000 of innocent people around the world. How
was that not the biggest terrorist group in
the world? In fact,
surprise, surprise, it is.
But the US went to war with Syria
in 2,011.
Secretly, of course, this was what's called Operation
Timber Sycamore.
It was
Obama assigning the CIA
to overthrow
Assad.
Overtly,
the United States overthrew Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.
It's interesting, appears to go back to 2,002.
This is after 9:11, of course, to watch
Netanyahu
as be being the lead cheerleader
for the US to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Now
we have a treasure trove of documents coming
out that this was really
in a
war on Israel's behalf.
Everything about the weapons of mass destruction was
phony, known to be phony inside the US
government, but this was the argument that was
given, and Netanyahu was there in Washington telling
him it'll be just great if you take
out Saddam Hussein. It's gonna topple all the
rest of the governments.
The idea was incidentally that
Saddam would be toppled, and then the US
military would go right
into Syria right away. But then an insurgency
trapped the United States inside Iraq so that
the Syrian war was actually delayed
8 years.
And you can thank in part Russia for
that. Okay? So if you understand the reality
now this isn't you could argue that wasn't
because Russia thought it was in their their
the that that they were just,
altruistically fighting for the interest of Syria. But
some would some would argue that and you
shouldn't disregard that possibility. I'm just much more
jaded when it comes to the interest of
governments. But, obviously, that's possible. But you can
see an interest even if it's self preservation
to stop in regard to what they knew
was coming with Ukraine and the rest of
it and the Middle East in general.
Or there's a larger agenda between Russia and
Israel and whatever's coming there. The point though
is that facts still matter. And in all
of this, whatever their intention is, it's always
important to decouple those two things. They obviously
overlap.
But you need to be able to acknowledge
the facts of the situation
before you necessarily jump to why they did
it. Because that's always the case. Well, why
did why would they do that? Well, we
don't know yet. But we can prove that
it did and we can prove how and
why. Or I guess not the why, but
you can prove the the facts of how
it went down. Right? And that's this is
a very important thing to consider. So I
think what we're seeing in general
is that the the the the lines all
draw back to very clear entities, and it's
not just Zionism,
but obviously we can see a central part
of this. Now why this doesn't get discussed?
Even though you can draw it the the
dots connect perfectly, and it is factually exactly
what happened.
But what we're watching is this crazy
Netanyahu
idea
of regional
war
so that Israel can have its,
its greater Israel as they call it. In
other words The occupying
other people's territory is what that is.
Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt,
Greater Israel was very clear, and it's not
a secret. It's they have patches on their
arms right now while they're destroying Gaza's territory
and ethnically cleansing people and committing genocide.
It shows you that they're guilty of exactly
what they claim Hamas or, Russia are trying
to do, which is go after other people's
territory next. And meanwhile,
their chief ally, the US government, is occupying
more territory illegally than anybody else in the
world, but we'll pretend it's only the hypothetical
you can't prove.
Everything
is to
stop the Palestinian
cause, and the US keeps
being involved in these wars. And there was
Jake Sullivan again today
explaining, yeah, terrorist, terrorist.
Who cares about terrorists? We're toppling Assad.
And this is again for
the Israel lobby, basically. It's okay. But look,
you're you're blaming Israel for all of it.
I'm fine. That's your view. Many people will
say no, Israel. I am I'm I'm blaming
Netanyahu in particular.
It ends right there, but don't you love
that? If you're blaming Israel, well, no. He
very carefully
and soundly laid out facts that point to
Israel. Now you wanna call that blaming Israel?
That makes the exact point that he has
an interest in deviating,
sidestepping, distracting, obfuscating, anything that shows that Israel
is the culprit. And you don't think that's
clear? Watch what he does. It's so transparent.
Now, well, I will give him credit for
the fact that he does throw bones more
than anybody else, and I think that's an
agenda, but I could be wrong. Maybe he
just is that blind. That would make sense
to me. My point is he does highlight
some things in his show lately that is
more than most
only in certain categories, and I argue in
places that we already see it. Now this
is a point we always have to consider.
There are things that we know are the
most verifiable. Like, for example, chemical weapons and
a saw that, like at some point, they
could throw that out as some bombshell admission
even because they know we all know it
already. Like, the WMDs didn't exist in Iraq.
Like, the point is there are levels where
they still pretend that's not true.
So but they could come out with this
big bombshell and say, well, now we know,
and Piers Morgan would finally act like they
deny it up until then.
My point is they know you already know,
and so they use that as leverage or,
you know, re release valve.
This is how the world works, guys, and
we have to be real about it.
So lastly, I just had to call this
idiot. I just this guy. Oh, the ones
right now that are standing up there day
after day and just talking you down for
pointing out what everybody can see,
special place in hell. Matt Miller, Patel, the
rest of them. You know, pretty much all
of them, my opinion. But Matt Miller says
the United States, this is on the 4th,
is concerned by evidence suggesting foreign interference,
influence, the fairness of Romania's electoral process. Can
you even imagine them coming out and saying
that right now? Talk about tone deaf, out
of touch, or
desperate and not caring.
There is nobody on this planet that interferes
in more
electoral processes than the US and Israel. It's
not up for debate.
On top of that, and I wouldn't say
I mean, of course, this I would even
argue likely that somebody else is doing this.
But for them to stand up and make
this point about somehow you have this moral
standing to call out what you think, what
you haven't even proven,
evidence suggesting interference.
Are you kidding me?
That's a political move, and we all know
that. That's the thing. Because I think most
people are aware of this other than you
know? Anyway, the point is that it's just
that lazy.
I don't think they know what else to
do, but keep walking the steps. We are
the moral, righteous,
freedom saving person, you know, and we're all
laughing at him.
But it says,
Romanians leaders in future and future are for
Romanians to choose.
Free of external manipulation aimed at impinging on
impinging on impinging on impinging?
I mean, it worked, but I feel like
he he just made did something else on
their democratic process. Infringing. But anyway,
have the right to choose without external manipulation.
Well, gee, that would be great to to
what about Hamas? What about Palestine? Which, by
the way, tomorrow, we're gonna get into information
which we've already shared on TLAB a long
time ago, which is the information about the
leak tape that shows Hillary Clinton saying that
they should rig that election. Now the reason
that I haven't brought that up in the
past is because you can't prove that it
happened from that. Only that Clinton suggested they
should or in retrospect was like, well, we
should have rigged it. Either way, it's important
because the 2006 election how often have I
pointed that out? I do not believe they
would have let that just happen even though
they went back on it afterward. I think
it was designed to use it to say,
see, that's who they picked. They're all terrorists,
which is where we are.
My point though is that you what what
about Bolivia? Right? What about Venezuela?
All you do is go after people you
don't like and act like they cheated somehow
even though you cheat every possible second in
everything gov has no moral authority and cheats
at whatever it's doing more than the next
3 combined.
Righteous and superior is just not working anymore
if it ever truly did.
Now to be clear, this is not an
attack on the country. It's attack on the
government that pretends to represent the country. You
are the country.
Now they, as in their citizen capacity, are
also part of the country. But when they
become part of the government, when they're acting
as the government, they are not. They are
a separate thing. They are people that are
supposed to be working for you.
And that's important
to understand that these people are supposed to
be acting out your will. We know that's
not how this works.
So when they stand up and pretend like
they've got some moral authority, it is it
behooves us. It is our responsibility
as Americans to stand up and say they're
not telling you the truth. They do not
represent us.
It's the only way we're gonna get past
this.
Now let's talk about dioxins in Georgia, Conyers,
Georgia,
and East Palestine for that matter and anywhere
else.
This story is important to follow-up on. Now
I do have one quick,
basically, that, that in
passing was con discussing Scott c Smith. He's
got the earliest results back from the docs
and part of it.
And as we as he told as he
said, and I've reported already from my personal
conversations with him. He was of the mind
that has potential to be the largest dioxin
release in history.
Now he's saying he is seeing more from
the earliest reports that he's ever seen, and
I'll play it for you. But I'll give
you this to read and make sure you
catch up on this if you aren't even
familiar with it because it is an important
story.
Now, honestly, my true opinion about this, which
I shouldn't even say that's I'm always telling
I'm almost honest with you, and I'm always
giving my true opinion. But the point is
that this
objectively
is one of the largest stories we could
talk about today. But weirdly, it's getting very
little attention. It's because it is abstract. As
one of the women say in these clips,
chemical exposure is invisible
for the most
part, that you just don't see it. And
it gets easy to ignore. And they know
that, and they play into it. Dioxin, TCD,
specifically, TCDD
is the most dangerous substance on the planet
according to every expert.
And it's what we're this is what we're
dealing with here. And it is released and
arguably the most we've ever seen. As I
said before, the Cebeso disaster from Italy in
1979,
which was a dioxin release
in exactly the same way, mind you, a
chemical reaction
was considered and is still to this day
considered to be one of the top 10
environmental disasters in history. And I argue based
on the data we've seen, I've went over
it in-depth in this show, is objectively smaller
than what we just saw.
And, arguably, he's been east Palestine. That was
much more difficult to read for a lot
of reasons.
I'll talk about it in a second.
Not murder by malfeasance. This was a general
conversation about the risk of dioxins and contamination,
but also a focal point on these locations.
As I wrote I wrote the dioxin contamination
and the ongoing cover up.
I just really can't stress enough how important
this is about the reality of why the
EPA refuses to point these things out, refuses
to even use the word dioxin.
They in my mind, they are one 100%
aware this is an overwhelming problem they don't
know what to do with or they made
it this way for clear nefarious intentions. I'm
more of leaning towards the former.
I think this is about the reality that
this has gotten so far out of control
because of their,
I get, malfeasance or just irresponsibility.
But now it's at a point where they
can't. They don't know how to deal with
it. They don't know how to get rid
of it. They can't burn it. This is
I've gone over this extensively.
They don't know how to get rid of
the dioxin in general.
And so they're gonna stand up and say,
you're all being poisoned right now because of
what we've done or haven't done, and yet
we don't know how to solve it. Why
would they report that?
See my point?
Now, an honest person probably would, but we're
not dealing with honest people. So the point
is make sure you realize that like glyphosate,
like PFAS, like a lot of these things,
it's a very real problem, and dioxins are
far, far, far, far more dangerous.
And are I guarantee you, affecting your life
right now. Based on what we can see,
based on the information, not just these locations,
We know that East Palestine,
the the risk, it went 16 states across.
Sixteen states. If I can actually see if
that'll pop up.
Yeah. Look at that. Boom.
And this is what's so crazy about this.
It's 5 months old. We were screaming about
how far this went right in the beginning.
Now, again, just like with I'm not psychic.
I'm not even more educated on these topics
than some of the other people in this
conversation. I simply just looked at it with
an objective view and showed what the facts
did, which was it was clear. This was
a huge problem that went way beyond a
1 mile radius around the area.
And yet EPA
maintained that forever.
How is it possible that Ryan Christian was
able to see more than the EPA? Because
it was obvious.
And so many people just go along with
what they're told.
In this case, we now know 16
states is how far this went, which means
the dioxin release went that far.
Scott is back. This is the reality, guys.
And as we've shown before, the reality of
how far it can go, the study specifically
from the Arctic shows that in the in
North America,
There are many, many dioxin sources,
and this study proves from 22,000
the year 2000 that from North American sources,
there are families in Arctic Canada who don't
have any source of within 200 miles of
dioxin that have dangerous levels of dioxin in
their breast milk because of the sources in
North America. Ask yourself how bad that would
be for the person that lives next to
that plant. Is it amazing that we don't
talk about these things?
Still going. No one has done anything about
this.
So on that note, let's talk about
the current situation.
That's just me trying to do my best
to give you a quick breakdown of how
crazy this story is, and still probably won't
go anywhere because of algorithmic censorship that we
continue to deal with. But watch this show.
Get in front of people. And I'll include
the new ones about Georgia.
Could be the greatest diocesan disaster in history,
that's quoting Scott,
as well as as his data showed that
the risk is 6 times greater than what
he saw in his Palestine.
So
stat and by the way, as I've said
before, many I I plenty of criticisms about
specifically
status quo and Jordan himself, but good on
him for continuing to break down this story.
I don't see anybody else talking about this,
and I'm sure they are. But good on
Jordan for staying with this because I think
this is monumentally important. So here's a clip
I'll play for you just really to get
to the point of seeing Scott say this,
but also hearing
Jordan report that what he's hearing from individuals
on the ground because I mean, obviously, they've
got a much larger budget and they're able
to do a lot of these different people
on the ground covering all these things and
so they're getting real time information about the
people in Conyers. It's important to hear.
I'll
just share a a comment I got from
a resident
in Conyers.
This was the other day,
about how bad,
the health symptoms are, for a lot And
this is new, by the way. This is
like this is not some 3 week old
video. Right? These people are suffering this right
now. A lot of people there.
I still quote, I still have a lot
of shortness of breath,
mucus buildup, headaches, dizziness, passing out, tired, more
achy,
sweaty, then freezing, burns on my hand and
sides of mouth,
hand tremors, trouble
See, this is really important. So, obviously, passing
out. Can you imagine pretending like that's not
a serious issue after all of us has
dissipated?
That's a dioxin problem, guys.
Anything else would be a real time you'd
be lit the point is as as
if you're smelling chemicals, you're dealing with chemical
exposure. So that's the earliest part where they
were, I can still smell these things. Now
we're at a point where this is, for
the most part, visually
via smell anticipated.
And if you're still feeling light headed, passing
out, feeling sick, guys, that's a very real
problem. And then as he just mentioned, burns,
they're talking about chloracne. They're talking about rashes,
and we keep showing you this. That is
acute exposure.
That is the main thing Cervaiso
research showed that the chloracne, which is what
it's called, is a response to either chlorine
or specifically dioxin,
is a indicative
of acute exposure, dangerous high level exposure, which
then the study goes on to show, 40
years later, reproductive issues, immune system problems.
I mean, unreal stuff.
And here we are. This is now. And
apparently, someone in the chat saying he just
did a live about this. I mean, this
is all real time information. What's a big
worst anxiety,
hearing loss,
vision issues,
eye pain,
fast pulse,
blood pressure spikes,
itching,
hair loss,
puffy face,
peeling hands.
How is nobody talking about this? Now, again,
there's so much going on in the world,
but this is such a even just the
fact that they're like, East Palestine, it seemed
like every partisan person in the world was
screaming about this, trying to get, you know,
their grifting on the ground, trying to sell
things. I mean, that's how it always happens.
What you know what that almost tells me?
It's my opinion that there's something real going
on here, more so than we've seen in
the past to where there have been, like,
it's a blackout. I'm not seeing anybody talk
about this.
This is like a grifting
gold mine for some of these people that
would normally be doing this. As I've said,
the same one from the Haines, the Nick
Sorters, whoever out there jumping in and trying
to be like, where's the air? Is everybody
when and they get caught grifting. Why are
they not doing it here?
I think that says something. It's just an
opinion, and it's an it's a subjective
observation, but think about that. These people are
this far after this story,
months later are dealing with this. I mean,
that's wild.
This person said, I know people all over
the area having similar issues, some worse than
others. Some have had to move permanently
already. Elected officials were noticeably absent from the
q and a style panel discussion that featured
East Palestine, Ohio residents. Scott resolves it. Before
you hear Scott, now what's really quickly, went
over that. Think of this is the same
thing every time. You know, you're you know
you know why that there's no officials, nobody
from the company? Because they don't have to.
Because nobody's caring or paying attention and so
they have no pressure. At least on East
Palestine, they got driven very because people were
screaming about it. People were highlighting. Even corporate
media was talking about it. And so they
were kind of driven to have to stand
up even though they dragged their feet every
time they could. So right now, how are
you gonna tell me that there's nobody there
representing so the people are having their own
discussion?
Yes.
Because nobody cares.
Because I'm of the mind that this is
not just the company, but there's a government
problem here. And don't forget,
the supervisor from the government who spoke about
this right afterward died after he walked out
of that building.
Could be a coincidence, but it's hard to
think with everything we're seeing that it was
just a random overlap. He was having shortness
of breath while he was speaking.
I'm I'm of the mind that it could've
just been acute very high exposure because he
was investigating.
And today,
dioxins.
And and to put it in context,
the it's the highest level of dioxins
that I have seen.
The
it's the highest level of dioxins
that I have seen.
Think about that. This man has been investigating
chemical exposure
his whole career,
has specifically gone over these around East Palestine
and plenty of others. He's got a very
prominent background. Look at his record. He's been
called breaking these things down. And in East
Palestine, he was one of the many along
Texas A&M, and I forget the other guy's
name. Was it Hescher? I forget. I think
Steven
I forget his name. But the point is
that they all found the same results. Shockingly
high levels of vaccines,
and they still don't tell you that. So
now he's telling you preliminary results around dioxins
are showing he's higher than he's ever seen.
That should be shocking. That should be news
across the United States. The highest level of
dioxins
that I have seen, And that,
is Scott Smith, independent tester who has tested
in East Palestine, Ohio,
over 30 times. And by the way, dioxins,
as we've covered,
there's, I believe, over 70 kinds and several
of them are the most toxic substances
known to man. And TCDD is what we're
dealing with. Scott told me that explicitly and
I've shown you this on the show. Both
Denise Palestine and here. Why? Because we're dealing
with the combustion
and and incomplete combustion of chlorinated products. In
this case,
specifically chlorine,
which as I've shown you the peer reviewed
study, chlorine is the make or break point
for TCDD.
The more chlorine, the more it is capable
of making this as a byproduct.
So here, when we have plastic pallets full
of chlorine that burned
along with everything else as he points out,
this is a perfect storm for dioxin release.
We're here because accountability
has not taken place in the way that
it should have taken place. We're here because
our elected officials did not take the necessary
steps initially.
By the way, this plant, BioLab, which the
community is now trying to shut down, has
had 2 other fires.
3, actually.
Beyond this one in the last decade. Mhmm.
Yet Which we've told you. Somehow their business
license wasn't revoked. Exactly.
Which, again, is just no way you can't
see that there's something going on there. Remember,
the main point we've talked about, right, which
is that ultimately, they have a sprinkler system
that is over chemicals that react
to water.
And this is the same thing that's happened
3 other times. I've I went over this
extensively on their own reports.
That, all those shows are linked. You can
watch them for yourself. And so
and I I as even, Terry, I believe
was named. I I don't wanna
I should have I should have had it
on on, the guy the supervisor that passed
away. I'm just mad that I don't remember
his name. The point is that he said
in that discussion, very clearly suggested this was
possibly by design, that this was a fire
that he's seen before and that the whether
it's an insurance scam or something far darker.
I also showed you the video of that
the creek that's near there with, like, bubbling
green water coming out of this thing. There's
so much more going on around this, and
I don't think anybody wants to actually find
out that there's something going on about how
this keeps happening.
And people are suffering because of it. I
mean, you can show the results around these
areas. Multiple examples and yet they just still
continue to do business.
I mean, it's this seems like a cutout
almost for something else. It's hard to see
that there's something going more going on here.
Now here is breaking points speaking with Jordan.
And I just wanna highlight this. This kinda
stuff drives me crazy. Because if there was
a genuine,
not restricted algorithmic controlled flow of information, these
things should be everywhere. Now this is a
slightly different one, but this is saying exclusive
audio. EPA official admits
Norfolk Southern misled Ohio and Pennsylvania residents that
air was safe. Now it's one point is
about the safe air.
But realize,
the point that I've been stressing, that's why
I wanna make sure we saw again.
Oh, and here here is the,
I wanted to show you this. This is
okay. Well, actually, let's do this first since
I I want the
this part we're gonna get into, this Norfolk
Lide Point. I just think it's a bombshell.
I can't but it's even in corporate media,
and nobody will talk about this.
But so the reason I wanna reiterate that
is so you can see that it's not
just some passing point that we're it's very
easy to prove. But first,
this blows my mind. So Jordan's talking about
dioxins. Like, he he's been very clearly talking
about this. Yet, when he goes on breaking
points,
specifically talking about the EPA cover up in
East Palestine around what happened, which is dioxins.
And he's point that's the problem. Right? When
you highlight what happened in this Palestine or
in communist Georgia, the conversations about dioxins, there
are other problematic issues, but
way the there's nothing that was more dangerous
than that part in this conversation
by far.
So when he has this conversation with her,
whether by her design or by their own
self censorship, there's no mention of dioxins in
the whole interview. How do you make sense
of that?
How do you have this con I mean,
look. Cut to the chase. I am convinced
that at some level, this you're not supposed
to talk about this. The dioxin is a
word that you're not supposed to say at
certain levels. Why that wouldn't be brought up
or why they cut it out? Because I
find it hard to believe that Jordan wouldn't
make that statement. He's that's everything he talks
about. When you when he's out you watch
his videos, when he's talking about either of
these conversations, dioxins are the focal point. Yet
he goes on the show,
Not and and the reason I'm showing you
here for the podcast is dioxin let's see
the transcript. It's nowhere in the entire video.
I find that to be absolutely mind blowing
and revealing.
Now in the video, as well, they mentioned
the EPA
leaked audio that they misled people.
Well, yeah. I really wish this would have
been something we talked about a long time
ago, not only that the air was bad,
as we should all know by now, but
that they lied
about the reason it got bad.
Here's the show we did back in July
19, 2023.
The investigation
found that East Palestine and the supposed controlled
burn, which is by definition not a controlled
burn. There was no controlled flow of oxygen.
That's why you got all the black smoke,
which proves that this was a not controlled
burn, which has
maximized the problem, mind you.
They found that it was unnecessary and that
Norfolk lied.
Here's the point.
I've made that I've referenced that many times.
This is directly from that conversation. This is
from June June 23rd
2023.
The title is decision to burn chemicals after
Ohio derailment under scrutiny at the hearing. So,
again, we're in a in a court hearing.
Here's what
it says. The tanks did not breach,
and pressure release devices worked, he said. Now
we're talking about specifically
Paul Thomas,
vice president for the manufacturer
OxyVinals,
who was an advisor for Norfolk Southern in
this context.
And it says,
vinyl chloride,
when exposed to heat, can undergo a rapid
polymerization reaction that can cause an explosion. That's
what they all reference. Right? That's what we're
worried about.
Thomas,
oops,
said
the company spoke to Norfolk Southern
and its emergency response contractors after the derailment.
Quote, we made it clear
based on our expertise of the chemical properties
of our product that stabilized
vinyl chloride would be unlikely to spontaneously
explode.
Polymerize being the quote.
That's a very big thing to point out.
Then it says the he said, oxyvitals did
not have real time information from the site,
and we did not participate in the recommended,
in the decision to burn it. He's very
clearly trying to make sure that I didn't
I didn't tell because that was
if you like I said it many times,
if you sat back and tried to devise
a way to make this the biggest possible
disaster, you couldn't have done better than this.
And, of course, recognizing that Keith Keith Drabic,
who was the chief of East Palestine's
volunteer fire department,
made the final decision.
And in other other reports we've shown you,
he feels like he was railroaded, no pun
intended. He was clearly manipulated.
They they and that's why I highlighted as
they lied.
He knew it was treated by a chloride
according to his advisers,
and he didn't tell them that. And then
pressured them to get this decision done. So
how do you not read that as they
wanted this to explode? Or that if they
did so, it would benefit them financially, which
is where we can see today. Seems that
they made out better than the they
did not suffer. In fact, it seems they
benefited from the whole process.
Easy to look up. So I think that's
really important to understand. So back in the
context of this, we can recognize
how easy it is to mislead all of
this. And, yes, the EPA lied. We're not
just about how bad the air was, but
they've all withheld this information.
And still to this day, this doesn't come
out.
Other than in this writing from corporate media,
my point is if you discuss these things,
you do not get the dioxin conversation. You
do not get the point that they knowingly
withheld information that it would not explode, which
was the primary reason it all happened.
I think there's more to this story. I
think it's quite obvious.
Now this was just one of the many
articles from March 18, 2023.
Dioxins in East Palestine,
100 of times greater than safe level. That's
indefentestic, mind you, and they still were not
talking about it. And still to this day,
do not say the word dioxin.
Now this is a new one in Conyers,
Georgia from November 24th.
US chemical safety board releases findings on Georgia
lab chemical real chemical release.
Can you take a shot in the dark?
What word they don't use?
Not a single mention of dioxin.
This is my point.
Now you realize
they're not pointing to it, but they they're
at some level, people like Scott are there.
He's asking about that. They know what he's
testing for.
Not a word.
I it's important to recognize how important that
is. They know what they're hiding. How do
you think they're gonna ignore the most dangerous
chemical in existence? Which by the way is
simple than it's it's anybody knows if chlor
in in these fields, EPA, if chlorine is
burned, there will be dioxins. They know this.
It is 1 +1 equals 2, and they
don't ever mention it.
Here's what the article says.
It says the safety board said the main
substance involved were collection of chemicals that are
commonly used for cleaning and disinfecting.
And they go on to list a bunch
of things, not even really mentioning specifically chlorine.
And it says these chemicals were stored in
the plant's warehouse and generated heat, eventually leading
to their breakdown and resulting in the release
of toxic vapors and fires, the c b
the CSB said. The resulting massive plumes of
toxic smoke contained chlorine
and other hazardous substances. That's where they just
see, they get away with it because they
can just portell what was included there and
cause significant off-site impacts.
That that's like
I mean, talk about bearing the lead.
Right? You're talking about the most dangerous chemical
and and
and including that in other hazardous substances.
It says the operator of KIK consumer products
runs the BioLab facility in Conyers, which makes
Clorox branded pool cleaning products made with chlorine
as and this is chlorine
in the context of this conversation.
Not just the other side products, but specifically
chlorine that burned. The CSB said the incident
began around 5 AM when a buyout employee
on fire watch
heard a popping sound
in one of the warehouses.
Yeah. Interesting how they have had 3 fires
in the past, and they need a fire
watch person who still did not stop what
happened. Maybe it's because they've got water sprinklers
over something that would blow up with fire
with water. Sounds like an obvious decision, not
an accident.
Since, eventually, the employee called 911 because large
hazardous plumes of vapors have been released inside
the warehouse.
By 6:30 AM, flames begin became visible above
the area of the chemical reaction and were
quickly exhausted
extinguished, excuse me, in less than 2 hours.
Adding at it that another fire broke out
shortly before 12:30 PM and was eventually extinguished
at 4 PM. The fire has completely destroyed
the warehouse. So how do you reconcile that
with what this guy said? So here he's
popping sounds.
Then he tells you he sees the toxic
plumes of vapors, which apparently only started the
what the the fire the reports were showing
after the second explosion.
So these things seem to be inconsistent,
I would argue.
Then it goes on to say, the environment
the EPA found elevated chlorine and hydrogen chloride
levels during air monitoring, maybe because they're not
monitoring for anything else.
The agency continued monitoring the air until October
17th when guess what? It detected low levels
of chlorine.
So just like East Palestine,
they test for VOCs, and when they find
them, they don't find them. They go, well,
you're all safe. Go back home. But they're
not though, because they're not testing for what
we now know was the problem that went
16 states across. You think that's an accident?
Guys, this this is criminal, what they're doing.
The agency continued monitoring till October 17th when
they found low chlorine.
So the chlorine,
not the byproduct of chlorine that is more
dangerous than anything else in the conversation, once
they saw the chlorine go down, they said
it was fine. They know it's not. Somebody
in this conversation
knows that it's not and did it anyway.
The CSP's investigation into the incident is ongoing
as it continues to look at the cause
of the the chemicals
decomposition,
the storage
and handling of these chemicals, as well as
industry guidance for fire safety concerns such I
mean, come on. How stupid this is? Three
times the same thing happens, this being the
4th and suddenly, we're gonna investigate whether or
not whether they went to the same motions
and didn't change anything from the first time
it happened.
Nobody seems to go to jail.
It's like we often get these little glimpses
in what I think is a the the
dark reality of what's going on everywhere else.
We live in this fantasy world, what we
think the world is like. And it can
be,
but because of our complacency and our apathy,
we've let them take control.
The board will provide its findings and recommends
in final investigation, blah blah blah.
Here's what CNN said. Investigators release update. Same
report.
Some additional points. It says the biolab officials
told the investigators that they have established a
permanent fire watch 2 or 3 months prior.
Why?
So we get a time frame now. So
2 or 3 months before, they established a
permanent fire watch, and then boom, fire breaks
out? That seems pretty counterintuitive.
Seems like that was put out there to
justify that there so we were being careful
and then it happened anyway.
Well, why would you see my point? It
seems they've had fires before. Why wouldn't they
always have a fire watch? 3 months before,
guys, just everything about this seems to lean
into like the guy was telling us. This
seems deliberate.
Prior to the incident, after storing odors
after strong odors from oxidizers in 2 storage
buildings were detected according to their report. BioLab
also told CSB that 2 employers were on
duty for fire watch on September 29th. 2
of them.
The warehouse was caught fire containing
99% t c TCCA, and we went over
that as well, by the way, which also
caused dioxin release, We already talked about it.
Used to make chlorinated tablets to control bacteria
and algae. That's why.
And
another acid, DCCA, which is used to make
swimming pool stocks, same point, a treatment used
to help break down contaminants. When TCCA touches
a small amount of water,
it doesn't dissolve.
It can't experience a chemical reaction.
So they all stood by. We're on fire
watch to make sure they could stop the
sprinklers that would cause I mean, again, I
mean, it's just redundant. It's embarrassing we pretend
like this is not something they let happen,
which which in turn produces toxic chlorine gas.
No, guys. It produces dioxins.
See, this is my point. Now, yes, as
my as my research showed, there is a
difference.
There is a chlorine gas that is used
as a weapon, not the same as dioxin.
But when you're talking about this, it's not
the same thing. Chlorine
being released out of a container is not
chlorine gas. I mean, technically, you could argue
it's a vapor of chlorine, but when you
say chlorine gas, we're talking about a weapon.
In this case, they're using chlorine gas, I
argue, to hide by word dioxin, which is
not the same thing. It's crazy.
And it says the fire was put out
by 8:10,
but around noon, another fire erupted.
The second fire produced thick black smoke, and
see that's my point. That's where the vapors
came out,
prompting evacuations of the area and on and
on.
It said the biolab has a strong track
record of working constructively with regulatory agencies they're
claiming and will continue to cooperate with their
investigation.
That's just the the boiler plate. Our top
priority is and has always been the health
and safety of the community with no not
a single person seemed to think that in
the community because it's just not true. And
we worked collaboratively
with first responders and local state and federal
authorities to successfully remediate situation. No. They really
did not seem to do that at all,
in fact. They seem to be hiding from
the reality of what it actually released. For
days, shifting winds swept the chemical haze back
and forth in multiple cities, including parts of
Atlanta, 30 miles away.
Yeah. There you go. You know you're in
this path, guys. This release, dioxin, just like
the looking back at East Palestine that went
16 states across,
you should be aware of what this is
causing.
CNN spoke with Conyers residents who said they
still have blurry vision, shortness of breath, throat
irritation, chronic headaches.
Same thing.
Chlorine and hydrogen chlorine were detected at high
concentrations for several days. This is my point.
That if you have a residual high level
of just that as a what didn't burn
off,
you know that a lot of this burned
and they know that too. The EPA discontinued
its monitoring on 17th for what we already
told you.
Now, Stacy Madduk Hopkins points an interesting point
of this, point about this out.
Inmates apparently, at a local jail,
were right across the street.
No one even cared to move them.
I just think it's important to point out,
these are human beings. Half of them are
there on
nonviolent drug charges is what general statistic
tends to be.
I mean, just think about how crazy that
is. So you're old. You barely I mean,
you technically did order evacuation orders, but you
didn't care to move these people who are
right in line. I just think that's wild.
It just shows you that there's this is
all feigned in my opinion. That they don't
really care about you. It shouldn't be too
hard of a sell. Now here's a local
report. This is from the 3rd.
Saying that they they demand justice. The people
of the county, the people of the local
area, they've been fighting this for a long
time, by the way. This has been ongoing,
what's the word I'm looking for? Petitions. It's
it's wild. So at least they're getting a
little bit more attention, which I do think
is giving them some traction. But it's wild
how little attention this is getting when I
think this is one of the largest stories
going on. And to listen at that forum,
what are some of the concerns that are
still being,
expressed tonight?
Well, Jennifer, the main concern is biolab rebuilding
in this very same spot where we saw
a plume of chemical smoke erupting just months
ago, but not only that. Some people concerned
for their health. Others just don't know where
to turn next.
I mean, think about the fact that you
had that many fires already.
In the exact same way, and you're gonna
just rebuild for the 4th time,
and you'd start all over again.
I mean, god, that's, like, you know, the
whole classic definition of insanity. Right? This is
you're gonna get the why would you expect
something different?
I don't know how you can at least
consider that that might not be some overlapping
government agenda.
How would they or at least somebody who's
corrupt, who's allowing to continue for whatever reason.
Message is simple. We've asked.
We've pleaded. We don't want a bill. We
want biolab shutdown. The Conyers community left frustrated
and upset months after a chemical fire sent
this plume into the sky in September. Do
we really want that kind of neighbor?
Do we really want that kind of business
in Rockville County
when the danger
outweighs the benefit? A call for a biolab
shutdown isn't the only demand. What you're saying?
Business license itself be revoked.
This after homeowners were left wondering if they
should stay. Businesses moved out of Rockdale County,
and dozens were sent to the hospital. They
diagnosed me with chemical inhalation in my limits.
Like
So make sure you didn't miss that. Really
quickly brushing over. They diagnosed her with chemical
exposure and lung damage.
You wanna tell me that that's gonna happen
from some some chlorine exposure in a short
period of time?
I mean, those things definitely added to this.
And and whatever other byproduct releases or chemicals
that were released, yes.
But what we're seeing, I think, is very
clearly about, you know, the most dangerous chemical
in existence and the effects. I mean, the
acute effects. The worst issue I think over
time is what will happen. You know, you
go 10 years from now and are riddled
with cancer, nobody is gonna point to this.
In fact and you try to, it's knee
I mean, I would argue literally impossible to
make a case about why that's their fault.
They know this. Somebody out there is very
aware of how this works.
Portia Miller wondering what her lasting health effects
will be. The only way to fight this
is for all the fighters to get together.
Jamie Wallace and her family victims of this
plume in East Palestine, Ohio after Norfolk Southern
train derailed in 2023.
I grew up there my whole entire life.
It'll never be
Don't forget.
In East Palestine specifically, it was the conjunction
of 2 actions from either side of the
paradigm that allowed this to be possible.
During Trump's administration, there was clear restrictions on
certain things that led to this, and Biden's
in regard to think to the union aspect.
Just as always, guys, whether that was by
design or not,
it's always
like that.
I think it's important that we always recognize
that that is the partisan game is a
way to make you only look at one
side of the story, which will always allow
them to never be held like, that you
don't ever address the full picture. You're never
gonna get full accountability.
Home again. She's in Conyers to show people
what they've learned. Chemical contamination,
you can't see.
It looks normal.
You can't see that hurricane that's still over
us because we're still being exposed. That's why
these people will keep fighting to get BioLab
out. If you really care for the for
the people,
just leave.
Meanwhile, they're standing up and saying how they
care about the community and the community supports
community supports them, you know, just all politics.
Now the residents here in Rockdale County are
asking the Rockdale County Commission to strip Bio
Labs business license
by the end of the week. I'll tell
you what really resonated here was the advice
from these 2 women from East Palestine, Ohio
that were affected. They, again, urging everyone to
document
everything, make sure that they ask questions until
they get the answers that they need, and,
of course, to support one another. We're live
tonight in Rocky O'Cammy. Angelina Salcedo, 11 alive
news. Yeah. Angelina, certainly some strong feelings and
some very serious concerns. Thank you.
And then just lastly on the segment before
we talk, we get into the conversation of
the methane suppressant,
which is, you know, we I'm sure you
can tell is all in the kinda same
vein of conversation.
This is just an important point to make,
and this is just the broad part of
this.
I I I'm not trying to be such
a pessimist, but realize that this is it's
it is where we are today, and that
this is the way these things work. And
if you wanna see anybody out there right
now that is more immersed with military contractors
and different things, it's it's the current administration.
Warren writes,
corporate greed is DuPont making $1,620,000,000
in profits this year, spending 1,000,000,000 on stock
buybacks, paying its CEO $20,000,000
and being fined just 480,000
for the release of a chemical that causes
leukemia.
Oh, by the way, DuPont being the famous
famously guilty part in the conversation of Peflon,
Knowingly
hiding that and never got really held accountable
for it. The company still exists. They're still
wildly profitable. The point is that they knew
what they were doing. There's a movie made
about it for crying out loud. Pregnant women
on the line. I mean, the point is
the story the movie only goes into a
fraction of what really happened. But at the
end of the day, they knew what they
were doing. They knew what their product was
doing to people, and they covered it up.
In fact, there's a point in, at least,
the movie they highlight is the idea of
all the pregnant women and innocent people on
the line that they knew they were affecting.
Long term, you know,
birth defects and on and on and on.
Here they are with the same
just slap on the wrist.
$408,000.
You know, they made that in the time
it took them to write that check.
It cost 505,08,250
to treat 1 kid with leukemia in America,
and they didn't even get fined that much.
Lewis Phillips says, DuPont plant in Louisiana fined
$480,000
for release of a cancer causing chemical.
To my point, guys, I mean, they they
know what they're doing. Just the these whether
it's the small bio lab discussion in the
context of everything else that's, you know, not
small, but, you know, or a DuPont level
idea or Wells Fargo for that matter. They
factor in
the cost.
So, good. So we'll just keep breaking the
law. If all it's gonna cost me is
$500,000,
we're gonna earmark that for possible effects and
keep breaking the law. Wells Fargo has shown
that explicitly where they keep doing the same
things, and Trump was all proud of the
largest fine we've given him for 1, was
a 1,000,000,000,000? I don't even know. The point
is, they made that much I mean, you
know, when they're making 10 times that in
a year,
it's
it's just incredible how obvious it always continues
to be.
So I agree. That is disgusting, and it's
not gonna change.
Neither it's Biden or Trump. And both of
them continue it, but it clear to be
clear, Trump is very much in the mindset
of big business.
Every single thing we're looking at today is
the opposite of being an outsider or fighting
the system.
Hopefully, we can see how obvious that is
too. Now in the context of the larger
agenda, which I think is important as Whitney's
pointed out and plenty of others, there's many
people right now in current administration of Trump's
administration that are in in line with their,
like, the republican climate change movement.
This is not a partisan game. And even
then, I don't even believe most of them
are in it for the narrative they're spinning.
It's about the objective that that's used to
cover.
So when we talk about this conversation, whether
you think that this is a, you know,
democrat objective or whatever else, the point is
this is about the great reset direct direction.
This is about the sustainable development goals, which
if you have yet to identify,
everything they're doing with administration are checking all
those boxes in different flavors, but still the
same thing, especially with the inclusion of Elon
Musk who's just a walking great reset, you
you know, in his own special AI good
guy way, but it's the same direction. So
I wanted to highlight first that we already
talked about this a while ago.
At this point, it was on it was
about Zelt, which if I remember correctly, is
in fact something that Gates is supporting. The
point today is that despite that being a
common point,
which I guarantee he supports it in a
general sense, it does not appear that he's
financially supporting the one we're gonna talk about.
Just these facts are important to highlight. But
this was one that we recently talked about.
It's called ZELP, developing and scaling technology to
help create a sustainable future for agriculture. Now
there's multiple things we talked about. Ones were,
like, actual, like, technological things that they put
on their face, which is just crazy. And
others were actual
digest like, put in the food that would
that would suppress the methane, which, by the
way,
not only is that not something we should
be concerned about, it turns out there's actually
a process that that's a part of that
is something we want. Either way, like everything
else from this conversation, yes,
the humanity is hurting this planet. By and
large, because of the government's pretending they're fighting
what we're doing. They're the chief responsible agents
of hurting this planet, burn pits and whatever
else they're doing.
It is not about the danger of climate
change and carbon reduction. That's all a ploy.
And it's easy to prove scientifically. But, yes,
we are still restoring this planet, so it's
important to make sure you see both of
those things. For example,
they keep pointing to the word sustainability, and
that started to scare people away from what
that word means. The truth is we should
want sustainability. What they're pointing to when they
say it is not sustainability.
It's a way to get you, in fact,
to not do it.
You see what I'm saying? Like, they point
to it, and then it makes that word
become dangerous even though it's not. It's what
they're doing behind that word. Sustainability
is a good thing.
In any case,
this was what we talked about then.
One of the tweets we shared at the
time, critical sway, says the Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation just announced a 4,700,000
grand for a company that sells face mask
for cows. How dumb was that? I mean,
just as the stupidest thing in the world,
and it is real. I talked about it.
Here's the actual,
Gates Foundation
grant for, you know, the the document for
it. And it just it just goes over
here that that self, that was what I
was showing you.
And we're living in ridiculous times, I agree.
And this is doctor, Vandana Shiva simply saying
Gates is so wrong. His point is that
cows are basically, cows are the enemy, and
artificial meat is the better way to go.
Clearly, you know, interesting how the bad thing
is what it seems to be undermining the
thing he's investing in. How interesting. But he
say she writes, cows are not the problem.
The methane they emit is part of a
biogenic
cycle.
Lab meat that he is proposing will increase
demand of land for feedstock
fivefold, and we've already talked about this, and
will increase emissions 25 times. It's like everything
else. Now realize that there are like, for
like, taking something like green energy,
windmills or whatever else. Like, there is a
part a realm in which that might benefit
somebody.
But to argue, one, that we should rush
into it now when we do not when
you've already proven that at scale, it doesn't
currently work. But on top of that, that
in many cases, it's just an illusion in
general. My point though is that if somebody
wants to build that or in some a
business wants to use them or a government
wants to decide. It's a point is that
it's still something out there that might help.
Solar panels, for example, have all kinds of
uses. You see, my point is we tend
to
kinda broad stroke and say, oh, that's all
bad. And, yes, I agree with the direction
of the government and the the larger agenda.
My point in saying this is that you
can see
that what they're doing to solve what I
argue is not even actually a problem is
actually causing that problem to get worse.
And that's and that's not breaking news to
any of you, but realize just the dynamic
is important to see that it's in fact
using it to drive you, in some cases,
the reflexive
dismissal or,
you deciding to push away from it. Right?
It's because they no. They point to sustainability.
We go, no. No. That's a bad thing.
That is in in of itself part of
that agenda, to get you to not be
sustainable in the way that we should be.
Same kind of thing here. I think it's
even interesting. So they're they're oh, actually, not
the exact same thing here. But simply the
case that their
solution is, in fact, far more dangerous.
Very it's interesting. Now we've already talked about
this. Here's just the the clip that Brock
made for it. The FDA approves lab grown
meat.
And it's a it's a good clip because
it's terrifying. I mean, this is cancer in
a bottle. I mean, it's just it's crazy
how dangerous it is. And then even the
same point, speaking about scale, when you actually
break this down and realize they're shifting away
from sterile labs because they're too expensive, and
that opens up a door for the most
horrifying part of this. The dangers
of the of, you know, basically, of
toxins and grown bacteria and different things that
we they can't control outside of a very
stale environment. But you realize
in, like, a a a livestock area where
they,
you know, the disgusting reality of how they
kill the cows and and and fabricate the
meat,
which if, what a slaughterhouse. If you ever
see one, I recommend it. It's the worst
thing you ever seen in your life. Worst
thing to understand the reality of it and
maybe why you shouldn't support this stuff, but
the point is that that's what they're used
to. And if you've been in there, they're
horrifying. Blood everywhere. It's disgusting. It's hardly sterile.
I mean, it is in the sense that
it's as it has to be, but, ultimately,
it is very disgusting.
And that's what they would that's what they're
arguing in this conversation that we have to
get to is that back to that same
level. But the reality is you're not working
with just animals that are skinned. And, you
know, the point is that in this case,
you're working with lab grown
sterile meat.
And that is rife rife where it's
perfect conditions for the growing of dangerous things.
Now, anyway, watch it for yourself. In every
possible way, this is a bad decision, and
he's still forcing it. A lot of them
are. I think there's an agenda there.
Now Daily Mail writes that farmers will be
ordered to feed cows methane suppressants to stop
them belching and breaking wind under you know,
again, the reality was the fart dynamic. It's
not even the reality of the situation.
Weird that that became the fixated part of
it. But this was on 20 23 April.
This is all from the previous show we
discussed as well as this one. Major livestock
producing countries
commit to mitigate methane.
So let's be clear. The the issue of
methane is not an issue in the context
of what we're talking about here. And what
they're doing in most cases are adding something
that it does bring along danger. So like
everything else we're talking about. And you've already
got commitment from most of the countries doing
this to do so. This is back in
2023.
Here's the conversation.
Other things we discussed in this show, but
specifically the part about,
oh, actually, it's not even the title. But
this was the show we discussed that in.
So you can the the links are all
down below if you wanna check the show
out. I'll include it for you. Now today,
this is from November 26th, major retailers joined
forces with the UK dairy farmers to trial
methane reducing feed additives. Don't you love the
trial?
So you're the experiment as usual? Now, yes,
they've already done studies and so on, but
the point is that the this is not
this should not be something that's decided without
your agreement. Because you realize we're not talking
about an individual company. I mean, we are.
But we're talking about the the
a government agenda.
Right? Signing major country agreements to do this.
Well, that's my point. It's coming from some
kind of centralized, great reset, sustainable development goals
mindset. So there's pressure from a government level,
and they argue benefits, which ultimately end up
being coercive to, you know, you get funding
or you don't based on what actions you
take. It's the ESG dynamic.
Right? So here we are, where their major
retailers are joining forces with UK farmers to
reduce this, and you start to see this
spin out through the conversation.
My point is that individually, they could decide
to do these things that they wanted to,
and that's that's the free market dynamic where
you can then go, well, fine. I'm not
gonna buy your milk because I don't want
that. The problem is that this becomes coercive
and forced. And these guys that we have
to do this, we're all gonna die from
climate change, which drives them to take action,
which ultimately
ignores harm.
Because the the illusion, the assumption is that
we're in more danger if we don't do
this now. Even if it hurts you, we're
all gonna die in a year if we
don't do it now. So then it becomes,
well, it's dangerous. The benefits outweigh the risks.
That's we're back in that same square.
So here it is, and we're talking specifically
about bovir.
Bovir, however you pronounce that.
And this is this is
concerning to me for obvious reasons. Now there's
plenty of groups that have boycotted this already
right out of the gate. Boycott calls grow
over Arla's bovier feed trial for dairy cows.
Here's what it says. The company, which owns
the UK's largest dairy cooperative,
revealed on November 26th this year that it's
partnering with a major British retailer such as
Morrisons, Aldi, and Tesco. Now to trial the
specific bolivir,
a methane reducing product. Now whether these companies
have overlapping interest that might be funded by
some Gates project or so on, it's certainly
possible. People like this have their fingers and
everywhere. It's like the Clinton overlap. It's just
it's just so far reaching. Doesn't mean it's
ignore it. My point though is specifically the
company which, I forget the name. It'll get,
hold on. It's right here. It is
Elanco US Inc.
It does not appear to be funded by
by Bill Gates.
Unless I'm missing that, please let me know
because it wouldn't surprise me. But I think
it's important that we're accurate about this because
it gets reported as, you know, the Bill
Gates thing. And clearly, you could point that
he supports this. He does. I mean, he's
funded his own versions of it. Just important
to highlight that I do not believe that
he's specifically funding this group. But again, you
could argue that it's through some other thing
that you can't connect it to him, which
would kinda make sense today. I honestly outwardly
wonder why they continue to do certain things
that they know will cause outrage.
Why wouldn't they just use a shell company?
You know what I mean? Like, that's I
so we have to think about that going
forward.
But it says, while ARLA claims the initiative
will help British farmers transition
to more sustainable practices, the trial has sparked
significant backlash from environmental and health advocates,
which maybe we should listen to them. Seems
as how that's their point that's their what
they do.
They're advocates for environment and health, and they're
concerned about it. The point is that this
is the not an individual company doing this
because they think it's this is the move
to more sustainable practices,
which my point is it's not more sustainable,
guys. It's not. It's actually exactly the opposite.
The only reason they use the word sustainable
is because they claim it's helping with climate
change.
When you actually look at what this needs
to be what needs to be done, it's
hardly more sustainable. And in fact, it's more
dangerous.
But it says it works by suppressing an
enzyme in the cow's stomach that produces methane.
Now right out of the gate, I made
the same argument last time. We don't know
what this ultimate looks like going forward. You
never really do. There's there's studies they've done,
which may give you some insight, and you
do find we'll go over it in a
minute. There's some interesting examples that show that
there might be longer term issues. Like, so
suddenly it suppresses this enzyme for the digestive
process.
And that is a byproduct of something that
we didn't predict. And you don't find out
until suddenly people are breaking out with cancers
everywhere or whatever it does. Or the cow's
all start dying. You know, my point is
these things are never fully flushed out. And
we've seen this time and time again as
people point out about this right now. As
we'll go through the actual examples, which actually
seem pretty concerning,
the point is that even if they're benign
and it just says, well, it seems dangerous,
but in small amounts, it's not. It's worth
it.
How many things like that have we gone
through to go back and look and go,
well, turns out they were wrong? How about
COVID 19 injections they still deny? Or any
number of things looking back as far as
you wanna look. Agent Orange or, you know,
just a thousand different things, DDT,
or things currently they're ignoring, like dioxins or
PFAS or whatever else. The point is that
I think that is concerning. We should not
be okay with them giving something to a
mass consumed product that is suppressing
normal bodily processes for the interest of something
that in fact doesn't need to be done.
But it says, how critics argue that the
long term effects of the additive on animal
health and environments are unknown. You know why?
Because they are, which is my point.
So if we don't know the long term
effects, how in the world are we talking
about and already using this
in a product that is more widely used
than damn near anything we know about? Milk.
Now this was put out as a boycott,
this tweet here. And it says the ingredients
in Beauvaire,
silicon dioxide,
propylene glycol,
and what's ultimately broken down to 3 NOP.
It's a nitrooxypropol
propan propanol.
Nitro oxypropanol, not that that not that hard
actually, but 3 3 NOP or 3 NOPs,
but the br the abbreviation is, have raised
serious concerns. We'll go through 2 of them
in in particular. Despite claims from animal nutrition
experts,
the company behind,
Boviar,
which okay. Just so it's clear. Despite the
company itself using their experts to tell you
it's okay, that it is safe for animals
and customers, the UK Food Standards Agency issued
a report last year
highlighting
the potential dangers of 3DOP
because they're there.
So this is my point. So knowing if
there were any dangers and it they wouldn't.
Why are we even entertaining this conversation? Well,
because they say, well, climate change.
Well, you have to do this now or
we're all gonna die. So it's okay you
take the risk. No. No. No. It's not
okay. Not for me or my family.
You take it if you want. Alright? But
the problem is this becomes something that is
immersed. And there's already conversations about whether it's
being folded into the other milk supply, which
I haven't been able to verify. In fact,
I think it's a little bit of misunderstanding,
but it would not surprise me.
But it says the report describes it as
a co as coercive to the eyes, skin
irritant, potentially harmful by inhalation, and we'll go
over these.
Despite the backlash, Arla claims it's committed
to its sustainability
goals with a target to reduce c o
two by 30% 2030. There you go.
That is what is more important to the
narrative than anything else, and maybe they believe
it. The point though is that they're willing
to take these risks because we're all gonna
die if we don't.
See how dangerous that becomes? How much is
allowed and honest people fall for? I don't
know how, because it's the most obvious thing
in the world. But mister Fireside broke this
down,
saying that this is being added to beef
and milk because it's thought to prevent climate
change.
And he says, you know, he calls it
woke science, which to be clear, again, this
is the same game that gets played from
the partisan level.
Yes. Obviously, it slants to the left. But
realize, as we've already pointed out, there are
people from the Republican side, even currently in
this administration, that are previously pushing back on
this but have now changed soon because it's
beneficial to them and are not part of
the Republican climate change side of this. And
it does exist. It's very clear. And then
when you realize that whether they call it
climate change or or whatever they wanna call
it, you can prove that the same actions
are being taken for other reasons and other
flavors that go in the same direction.
It's just it's just very clear, but people
don't wanna acknowledge it because they don't want
they want it to be they want it
to fit their partisan view.
Now, what was the main point we're gonna
show here?
I I forgot I had it, pulled up
here. Hold on.
Oh, this one right here. Oh oh, it's
already up. Let's see. There you go. So
it's there are much more than you can
read. It's just all different thoughts and different
things. This point was saying be the beef
and the bovir beef and milk are fast
making their way into the shelves.
Kohl's, Australia, Aldi stores,
Lurpak products, Arula products in the UK, those
just growing. The FDA has also approved it
for the US market.
It's coming your way. Now, it says the
company that owns Bolivar is they say it's
safe and passed European safety authority tests. The
report says the genotoxic potential of 3nop has
not been fully clarified.
I'll show you the study.
So So we don't really know whether, you
know, toxic, but we're gonna die it anyway
because, you know, climate change. 3NOP was found
in the liver, kidneys, and adrenal glands, bone
marrow, muscle, fat, and brain of the intestine
animals. But don't worry. Don't worry. It does
not translate even though I can show you
that it kinda does.
The The panel considered the consumer products. I
think our the general I'll go through most
of this as we go through. But the
thread's important to give you some important breakdown.
Yeah. So in in other words, small amounts
are found in the cows. And I'll I'll
go through the actual science. I think it's
more important to read it from the study
so you can see that it's not just
a a person's point, but the good thread
breaking the step down.
And here's the
company itself.
The proven solution for methane reduction. Proven. It's
a big claim. Well, it isn't. It seems
to be proven that it reduces the amount
of methane, whether that's necessary or its benefits
outweigh the risk dynamic. That's I've argued not
true, but up for debate.
And realize that all it does is reduce
it by on average, the number shows to
be 27%.
That's it. A 27%
reduction in methane from the cows.
Now, who what what even if it's just
what we can see in the byproducts, I
argue it's flat out not worth it because
this is not something we need to worry
about. But whether we end up with some
long term issue from this, then we can
look back. And I hope we don't. I
hope we don't have to play that game.
But it seems how this works.
Here is an FDA release
from the fda.gov
website. Or rather just, you know, that's posted
on theirs.
You can read what they respond. Now, this
happens to be in regard to,
a a inquiry about this company. Now, Elanco
is the company again. Elanco US Inc. Now,
to cut to the chase, you can read
what they wrote. It's just simply to read
what the actual,
you know, kind of an MSDS kind of
dynamic, which this is not explicitly that, but
this is the same idea. Stands for material
safety data sheet. It's about the information. So
you can see right here, 3 NOP,
10%.
Silicon dioxide,
60%.
And it goes on to highlight propyl propylene
glycol as well. So I wanted to go
over just some of these things to start.
Now, first,
just propylene glycol. And I wanna make a
point about this. It doesn't it's it's now
what's funny about this in a scary way,
there's so many things like this that be
are kind of regarded as benign because they're
everywhere, which you look into them and they're
not really benign.
There's some there's people arguing scientifically, by the
way, and I wasn't there's a whole side
point to get into about whether there are
a lot of people who have an allergy
to milk
that turns out that they have an allergy
to propylene glycol.
And because it's prevalent in some in in
well, I guess prevalent would be the wrong
word, but is present in milk because of
this overlap, that that might be the case.
But that's for another conversation.
The point though is that this is something
that is in a lot of other things.
I get what I was trying to say
right there, just how crazy it is. These
things can be so prevalent, and yet it
turns out that they're
not really ultimately safe in the way that
they say they are. But the main point
I wanna make is could potentially lead to
trace amounts of this in dairy products
and that are consumed by breastfeeding mothers.
So this is one of the other things
that are in this. So all I'm showing
you is that the process of this and
how it's being used can translate in one
of the ingredients,
which in and of itself should not be
okay. Period.
But what I wanna highlight is that these
are other ingredients that also carry over. And
all of them show the same thing. We'll
go over it. So it's pretty clear that
this stuff does translate. So whether it's in
breast milk for women or for a cow,
we're talking about the same kind of idea.
And I'll show you the studies that break
this down. So if if this does have
some level of translation,
you should know that. And you should be
able to the the this should be able
for you to weigh, not some government program
that puts this in something that you're not
aware of.
Oh, I'll leave that up, actually.
So the next part is what it says
right on the document.
Under warning,
not for human use.
Caution should be exercised when handling this product.
It may damage male fertility
and reproductive organs.
That's right on the FDA page.
So
if it translates, which it does, even if
it's a fraction,
as always, they the what they play the
game is whatever it is, generally accepted as
safe or whatever. The whole benefit's outweigh the
risk dynamic.
But you have to realize, even if they
say that,
that means that there is still a level
of detriment. This is still even if it's
a fraction of a fraction of what would
cause the normal amount, it's still giving you
a fraction of that damage.
That's important to realize. It's not like they
just drop below a certain level and it
doesn't harm you. It's a dangerous substance. So
it does have that response. But to a
smaller level, maybe you won't even notice it.
Point is, you should know this and it
should matter.
Then the question becomes, is it bigger than
it looks? Is there more going on? Is
it be more prevalent? Is it gonna be
something that you digest in other products? You
don't realize you're not just drinking milk, but
you're eating other dairy products. You can see
how this can spin out into something that's
much more problematic. And then you can realize
that it seems like every single thing under
the sun
that we are constantly talking about that is
in everything you're digesting and wearing and breathing,
whether it's glyphosate or PFAS or dachshunds, that
all seem to lead to fertility and reproductive
issues.
Guess that's just one of those coincidences. The
bottom line is that this is right on
the document.
The thing there it is in this milk
and can translate, which I'll show you, can
lead to fertility and reproductive organ problems. Seems
pretty important to me.
Now here's on the Wikipedia
of what the that's the 3 nitro oxypropanol,
33
nope. It says,
the FDA concluded that Beauviere meets safety
see, the point is they're just they're talking
Beauviere because that's what the main chemical is
that's already on Wikipedia.
That the safety that the bovir meets safety
and efficacy standards for use in lactating dairy
cow cattle, stating that it does not negatively
impact the milk production or quality.
Oh, what about safety? It seems like an
important nah. As long as milk is okay,
as long as the milk tastes okay and
doesn't and produces the same amount, then that's
all we care about, apparently.
The point though is efficacy standard. What do
you mean efficacy?
Bovier is about reducing methane. This is about
the safety of the product that does that.
But their first sentence is about how it
does that seem interesting? Then it goes on
to say, 3 noth can be harmful if
inhaled than as an irritant of the eyes
and skin. That's the that's the general thing,
not necessarily passing through the cow and into
the milk, but there is still that overlap.
It does exist.
Then it says, the product has been approved
for use in over 55 countries.
Approved.
Financial incentives for farmers
through participation in voluntary carbon markets.
Okay. So you see where this goes.
Whether or not whether or not let's just
even say this is completely benign. I don't
think it is. But what it does, it
creates this dynamic where you now have farmers
who are playing this game of carbon markets,
carbon credits.
And that is a way to coercively drive
them into doing exactly what they want. We've
already talked about this. I mean, no I
don't think anybody out there is confused about
what that means.
Now this is expected to come from carbon
marketplace participation through platforms like ATHEON or TruTerra,
which allow farmers to sell verified carbon credits
generated by their methane reductions.
So just on a pure financial benefit, you're
gonna get people to do this because they'll
benefit from it. You're bribing them to do
something that most farmers probably wouldn't do.
And then, eventually, can coercively use that to
get them to take actions they really wouldn't
wanna do.
Helps create a robust market for carbon credits,
says it right there. So maybe that's the
only point. And this is about getting people
walked in normalized with the idea of your
carbon credit, social credit control structure, which is
one part of the great reset dynamic.
Now here's a study
from 21, 2021.
Safety and efficacy of feed additive consisting of
3knop, Bovir.
It's very simple. The genotoxicity of 3knop is
not completely elucidated. That's where we are now.
This is an old study, but that's what
they're referencing in current information.
We don't know.
So on top of the, the very clear
issues that were pr will guaranteed to be
lesser than if you just drank 3knop, but
are still there,
Reproductivity,
reproductivity, organ issues, possible skin irritation, and so
on. And then, you know, the unknown of
how that can hurt or affect your DNA,
which is what it means. Genotoxicity.
Again,
though,
almost ubiquitous
attributes
to everything that they say is totally harmless.
As I'm not making this up, it's everywhere
you look. Genotoxicity,
reproductive issues, immune suppression, weird how it all
comes together.
Right there in the study.
Here's another one. This one
is outcome of assessment of 3NOP.
This one is from 2023.
Here's what it says.
At 200 mega, milligram dose,
effects identified
including included
decreased ovary size,
decreased serum activities of alaminemino
transferase,
something in your body, and
lactate
dehydrogenase,
and reduced feed and water intake. So again,
to be clear, we're talking about the animals.
In this case, we're talking about the the
cows that are that are being given this.
But the point is it's the same thing.
And to a lesser degree
that I'll show you in a minute, that
does a small degree, but does translate through
the milk.
So again, it's not that a, like, for
example, more dangerous, I argue, than the dioxin
point we just covered. But it is still
something that you should be aware of and
you have a right to say no to.
I don't want this stuff being put in
my infant's mouth that probably has a longer
lasting issue for their reproductivity or their immune
suppression. Or maybe this is far worse than
they're telling us in the studies,
as usual, it seems. But in this case,
we're talking about the animals.
And it's talking about specifically that at this
level, which again down here points out that
that's what they're giving,
decreased ovary size. So same point, different study,
but also reduced feed and water intake.
So the animals have that response. So I
again, does that not have some kind of
a byproduct? All of these things will over
a long period of time. The group concluded
that the additive could be considered safe at
200 milligrams,
and that the margin of tolerance of 2
could be established. So realize, they're saying they
conclude that it that is the safe level
despite oversize being decreased.
It's the same every time we look at
this. The same thing we saw on the
Pfizer study for the COVID shot. I keep
showing you that. It was a almost 10%
decrease in the pregnancy index, and they said
because it was under 15, we don't have
to report it.
I've I've read that 45 times. That was
on Pfizer's own documents. Don't you think women
would want to know that that shot gives
them almost a 10% decrease in the pregnancy
index? Yeah. They really would.
Same thing here. Yeah. That's considered to be
safe. I care that ovary size will be
reduced or reproductive organs will be produced even
if it is a fraction.
We all should.
Then it says the group we're talking about
concluded the group that did the study concluded
that at higher dose levels, 300 milligrams,
in additive, the additive has the potential to
cause
meshemal cell hyperplasia
and benign tumors.
Doesn't sound like something that's not worrisome. I
mean, there are clear overlaps to this.
And 300 milligrams. Now there's you can look
up the information. They it's not just differences
wherever you look.
Now the group concluded the additive should be
considered co co coercive to the eyes and
the skin, which is common for everything else
we've shown you. I think that was it.
And the study here from
food and chemical talks toxicology from Science Direct
from 2019
says residues in edible tissues and milk upon
3knop administration
may be present
in minute amounts.
There you go. But unlikely, it says, because
the majority of the applied radio label is
ex excel
excuse me, exhaled
as c o 2.
But
oh, that's right. I didn't have it in
this, but I can search real quick. I
lost the highlighting.
It's only 75%.
It was eliminated carbon dioxide. So there's a
25% variable there. So 75%,
they're saying approximately
was what they released as carbon dioxide by
breathing this stuff out.
Right? But the problem is that
if the majority even if it's the majority,
which they're claiming it is, that's not that's
25% that's not. That doesn't sound like a
minute amount to me. Because because again, read
it again. The residues in edible tissues, meaning
what you might consume from that cow,
and milk
have 3knop that may be present in minor
amounts,
but they say but unlikely because the majority
is a is exhaled to c o two.
But it's not. 7 well, it is the
majority, but that's 75%.
I think that's interesting. And it says 3nop
is quickly transformed into end endogenous,
HPA, and further degraded products and incorporated into
carbohydrates, lactose.
Okay. Well, does that doesn't that then sound
exactly how it ends up in milk or
other parts of your body? Yes. It does
to me.
And it says the concentration of radioactivity
in the edible tissues of the lactating goat
so there's 2 this one's about a goat
that they tested this on. Was low,
but not nonexistent. And it says only approximately
5% of the dose were found
in the edible tissues,
and approximately
6% of the dose was found in milk.
6%.
That's that's hardly nothing. So we're talking about
specifically no the 3 not, but, obviously, others
as well if it translates.
But 3 not is the foot what they're
focusing on here. 6% were found in milk
and edible meat that you're gonna eat. So
now realize that you're now eating meat from
that cow, but you're also drinking the milk.
So now maybe you get 12%. You see
how clearly this gets out of control?
And the and it says in most of
the milk, the radioactivity
was associated with lactose.
Radioactivity
does not sound like something we should ignore.
So all of this shows you that this
is something that is being ignored because, well,
climate change is more important.
That's very clear to me. The intake and
that's again, if you haven't caught it, that's
not the reality.
I've I don't we talk about this so
much over the years. Frankly, I think it's
one of the most embarrassingly obvious lies. That's
why I don't do too much work on
it these days. I just think it's pretty
it's like everything else we're talking about. There
are people that are, like, religiously into this
conversation, but the science is pretty obvious.
Anyway, we gotta do it many times. The
intake assessment that goes on for the consumer
is challenging but seems possible.
Using the total radioactive residues in the edible
tissue, thereby discounting identified endogenous substances,
I e, radioactivity
identified as lactose in milk, as well as
radioactivity
thought to be incorporated into protein or fat.
Conclude under conclusion, it says these metabolic reactions
eventually result in the incorporation
of 3nop,
carbon,
into carbohydrates.
And most likely, also into amino acids and
fatty acids, which
you will then consume
if this was one of those animals.
Here's the study itself. I recommend you look
for there's a lot in this. There's other
parts I highlighted that I don't wanna try
to track down.
I think that's incredibly important. Now, I wanna
be clear. And of all the things we're
talking about, the the small amount that translates
into the meat that they're denying, by the
way, is is on a lesser scale, at
least what I can see of some of
the things they're talking about. But this is
still a huge story.
The reality that they're lying about it and
the question is why? Why are they doing
this? If if I which I am of
the mind that they don't think the, you
know, the climate change lie from the highest
levels of power. It's a there it's a
ploy. So what is the real objective here?
Depopulation?
Maybe.
I mean, there's some we should not something
we should dismiss. It's a very real conversation,
eugenics conversation.
Maybe there's something else which we'll get into
next. Maybe there's more to the story than
just what we're being shown
as usual. Right?
Now, just quickly to show this, this is
Alexandria and plenty of others made this point.
Showing you one of these milks. It's in
Norway, I believe. And they're saying they began
selling climate milk from cows being fed toxic
3 knob.
Then it says they didn't wanna buy it,
so now they're mixing it with climate milk.
Now this is coming from Peter Sweden, I
think. That's what they multiple people just copy
what he wrote and put it out.
And by the way, she's a proud Zionist.
I think that should matter today.
What I think is important though is if
you look at this,
all that says is lightweight
o 5 fat,
25%.
Right? That's that's what it's saying. And down
here, it says, q climate milk, which is
what it is, by the way. So, to
be clear, this does have the bolivier in
it, is ordinary milk from Norwegian cows that
burp less and is fine. That's what it
says. Q climate milk comes from cows that
emit
25 to 30% less methane. That's what that
mean. That's what the number is.
So, I don't know whether they think they're
confusing that.
That's the image they're all pointing to. But
maybe I got maybe there's it's it's Norway
with translation. Maybe there's more out there. Guys,
it would not surprise me for two reasons.
That if they would come like, nobody buys
it, let's say, and they start mixing it.
Because they are gonna argue, well, there's no
danger.
So studies all say it's safe. So what's
the issue? Right? Well, clearly, there's an issue
because you're having to mix it. Because we
don't want that. And they know that. But
my point is I haven't proven yet that
I can, like, prove that they're doing that.
If you have got something that can show
that they're now mixing it and putting it
out on a shelf, especially if it's on
a shelf without that label,
please get that in front of me. Get
that doorbell in the chat. Somebody would please
get that to me. That's a huge point.
Today, I was unfortunately not able to verify
that.
And lastly, I just wanna share this one
I use for the show today. Sal shared
this. Again, I swear to god we're sharing
these things. Is that not I keep doing
this and you share it, then you come
back and it's unshared. It's like, Twitter's so
broken today. But carbon reduction sets you free,
it says. And it's an old school prison.
You know, this is how that feels right
now. All of this stuff. Or, you know,
the come join us for the good AI
Bitcoin revolution. It's just like, join us in
this Panopticon.
We're be we're being played everywhere. And as
Sal points out, you are the carbon they
want to reduce. That's an article you can
read, by the way, or bumper sticker.
Very important to consider all this. But also
to consider what else could be happening. Right?
So as we've highlighted all of this, we
should be asking what else might be going
on, whether it's milk or anything else.
As doom points out,
breaking just in. US Department of Agriculture issues
order mandating bird flu testing of all of
the milk supply.
Could be just a coincidence overlap. Those do
exist. But I find it interesting the timing
of all that. Right? When you're getting this
big push around this milk conversation,
and all of a sudden, they're pushing for
national testing of the milk supply. Now, realize
most of what we just pointed to is
in other countries, in the UK, Norway.
But the timing is hard to miss. And
as doom rightly points out, time to bust
out the PCR with a count a cycle
threshold of 45 plus. If you don't remember
what that means,
the site the PCR test was something as
even the creator, Carrie Mullis, pointed out, is
not designed to tell whether you're sick or
not. It's it is simply the ultimately, the
higher you put the cycle threshold, you can
find literally anything.
That's not hyperbole, by the way. It's he
only he almost jokingly says that it'll help
makes you believe in god. You the smaller
you go, the you'll find everything everywhere. He
literally points his point, and you it's not
an illusion. He's the point is that
using the cycle threshold that high, you will
find anything, anywhere you wanna look for it.
And the bottom line is the cycle threshold
45, you wanna make it simple for those
that find that to be hard to believe,
it upwards of 95% false positives.
That's the point. As doctor Scoglio, PhD, tested
a kiwi live on the air to get
a test false positive. Same point. And then,
of course, after they got the injection, they
tested them with a 25 cycle threshold, which
made it look like they weren't sick.
I, by the way, reached out to Denny
Rancour to
get him back on the show to discuss
his, you know, important, I argue landmark study
around the data showing you that if they
wanted to, they could have made this without
having ever having any pathogen. Doesn't have to
say that there wasn't. The point is mathematically
speaking, you could have made an entire illusion
if they wanted to. And I do think
that's largely what happened. The idea that
conflating flu and pneumonia,
cycle threshold false positives, and then calling vaccine
side effects, COVID 19. We've we've it's it's
why flu vanished. Actually, I think there's a
tweet I'll show in a second. But so
back to the point, all of a sudden,
they're calling for testing all of the milk
supply. So right here, we should be asking
2 things.
What are they just trying to test it?
Or are they doing something else?
Or even before it,
is Bolivierre whatever else we're talking about only
what they're saying? Or is there something else
there? I'm just these are just possible theoretical
questions, and we'd no re anybody that would
immediately go, that's fake. That's conspiracy.
You're a lot you are part of the
problem today.
Yes. You could point to something and say
that's unlikely. I don't believe they would do
that. But to reflexively dismiss a possibility because
you don't like it or because you've been
trained to think that it's lunacy,
that is the problem.
It's like anything else we talk about. If
you go into it expecting to find what
you're look you will find what you're looking
for. If you go, that can't be real,
but I'll look at it, you're gonna you're
gonna end up concluding it's not real because
you already set that tone.
If you have the mind that your government
is not capable of doing something surreptitiously
like that, you have not educated yourself about
the history. You've not you haven't looked into
the COVID 19.
So on this conversation of the milk, we
should ask these questions. And let's not forget,
Oh, this oh, so this goes back to
April of this year. Remnants of bird flu
virus found in pasteurized milk,
FDA says. I mean, frankly, I don't even
know if I believe this.
And we've talked about this, but this was
on July 28th.
Bird flu emergency declaring. Don't forget that, by
the way. Now they've declared an emergency for
bird flu, but they've broadened it out to
include flu.
Just literally flu in this country is under
an emergency declaration.
Normal seasonal flu. Again, one of these things
that we broke down that nobody else seems
to identify, which should be a huge story,
but fell under the radar.
And then once it eventually comes to pass,
of course, the partisan screamers will make it
a point. But if we had noticed it
before then, maybe we could stop it.
Love to see that happen. But the point
is that this is already there.
COVID vaxx mRNA found in breast milk.
27 December
27, 2022.
So the point is to overlap this with
the idea of what can translate into milk.
So is it not possible that they're I
mean, they could even just point out that
they're giving mRNA injections to the cattle too.
Maybe that can translate, which we all have
considered.
But my point is to ask whether there
might be something else going. Are we watching
them manufacture the next
illusion
or
creating the real next problem?
These are all very real questions we should
ask, and they have done this before. It's
not an illusion. You You could prove they've
tested on Americans many 100 of times. They've
admitted to many of them like operation sea
spray.
Or here's one from April 8, 2023.
Mice that were vaccinated,
in quotes, because it was you'll see why,
with mRNA loaded milk.
These are not and just as always, for
those new to the show, every one of
these things are coming from peer reviewed science,
from government documentation.
Not to say that we blindly believe what
they're telling us, but it's it's to point
out that these are not some fringe, random,
you know, some tweet where somebody claims they
saw something.
That's not how we work. We talk about
things that we could prove.
And in this case or we make it
clear that we're giving you a hypothetical possibility
around something we can prove.
They're arguing they they
m inoculated these mice with milk that they
loaded with mRNA.
So if we're worried about the translation,
there's very real reason to be worried about
it. And on top of that, about whatever
else may be coming across. Here's in one
of the studies.
An oral vaccine for SARS CoV 2
in milk derived exomes
exosomes.
There's multiple examples like this. So I'm worried
about what might be beginning to be set
up or might have already happened or might
be going on next.
This is from, trial site news. Chinese
load
cow's milk with mRNA exosomes, successfully immunizing mice.
Points out peer reviewed study detects vaxx mRNA
in milk of lactating moms shortly after vaxx,
which, by the way, we already know. We
were breaking this stuff down in 2021.
Rise raises concerns of babies' exposure to toxic
mRNA. Remember, right in the beginning, one of
the first death that we highlighted was the
infant that died,
I think it was within the fir or
the day of breastfeeding.
And it it's it's very clearly shown to
be an immediate reaction to what they were
doing. And that it was denied immediately, but
we saw more and more of it. And
this is the reality where we are.
2022. Detection of messenger RNA COVID 19 vaccines
in human breast milk. There is a for
the podcast, these are all different studies. JAMA
network.
All it's it's constant
and still ignored. Or how about this one?
McCullough Foundation points out persistence of spike protein
at the skull of men's brain axis may
contribute to neurological sequalae. Or as how do
you say that? Again, it's,
I forget. COVID 19. The point is your
spike protein continues
to be made.
Now, of course, we should also point out
that it's possible this is all completely manufactured.
But I don't I don't my point has
always been consider the possibility this is all,
you know, a theater, but realize that what
we're talking about is a protein.
A protein can come from comes from anything
that was once alive.
So if we're of the mind that we
don't think viruses are real, which is something
you should not ignore,
I'm not the I'm not sure. I'm in
the middle still. I have been for a
long time because I don't think either side
of that conversation has fleshed it out enough
for me to feel that all the answers
all the questions are answered, which seems to
irritate everybody. The point, though, is that bacteria,
for example, which it seems that most people
in that theory in that camp acknowledge is
real,
can have bacteria can have proteins. Right? So
my point would be simply that just a
protein
does exist. So wherever you think that comes
from, you shouldn't say that that necessarily has
to be a virus. My point is that
if you see a spike protein that is
causing a problem, that seems like a very
real thing that we can easily show is
possible.
So when we can see that spike proteins
are continually produced in the body,
realize that we're not even talking about a
virus here. We could be talking about something
and again, that's what we're talking about. We're
talking about an injection that causes the mass
production of these proteins. We all agree that's
possible. So the point would be whatever they're
doing is the problem, whether or not you
think those things are there. And realize that
we can show repeatedly the spike protein itself
is cytotoxic
and that it continues to reproduce,
or rather just be produced. And the bottom
line is that that is exactly what we're
pointing to here. What is going on? What
is this being primed for? I mean, I
think it was
was it Martin, doctor Martin, about the priming
the platform idea? Maybe it was George Webb.
I forget. But that's this is what like,
he argued that we're they drilled the well
and this we're they're waiting to, you know,
the next step, which is very concerning to
me. And then on the point of proteins
itself,
January 16, 2024.
Gain of function's newest brain virus, genetically engineered
proteins to control everything. Again,
high level peer reviewed science
coming from Harvard, coming from Nature or or,
cell dot com. And what they're highlighting is,
in this case, specifically, one of the main
ones was,
now I'm blanking on it, ferritin.
And they're already working on, shall I just
grab that too?
Ferritin injections,
deadly lipid nanoparticle spike protein design, and the
new mod RNA ferritin nanoparticle universal flow injection.
These are real things that are, actual they're
already being put together. They're already testing these
things in the real world settings.
The reality of it is dangerous. And this
point is about showing you how they're genetically
modifying
or engineering proteins to just control,
to influence, to create, to do all sorts
of terrifying things. So that's my point back
to the original is that we don't even
have to get into the idea of whether
you think a virus is there. They could
be literally manufacturing these things
in all sorts of ways. And the overlap
of the milk that we just showed you
is itself coming through breast milk, walking with
the cows. I mean, there's something in there
that makes me very uncomfortable.
Add this one to the, show notes for
you.
Now on the la lastly on the segment
before we jump into the conversation of Trump's
cabinet and the mRNA overlap,
well oh, actually, and I will play oh,
actually, I'll play that in a second. I
have a clip from doctor Martin that I
wanna include that overlaps with the Trump administration
from last time. But here is, as Pelham
points out from last year, the World Economic
Forum spokeswoman who believes that there will be
a never ending pandemics or there will be
never ending pandemics. Why? Due to CO 2
and methane emissions.
Scientists are not in a position to talk
about vaccination, but this is not gonna be
the last pandemic that we see.
We're seeing we will see more and more
pandemics arising,
due to climate impacts
and the emergence of, new bacteria,
as a result of,
increased green hard gases and methane emissions so,
that we just don't have immunity to. So
I think, you know, as a collective, everyone's
been talking about COVID, but, okay, that's COVID,
and it's gonna stay with us. But, you
know, this is just the start.
She she seems to know for sure a
lot of things that nobody knew. Right? Definitely
gonna be with us, which, by the way,
was what we all were telling you in
the beginning. This was this was an ongoing
dynamic. You know, it was yearly COVID shots.
All these things they were so aggressively shouting
down. Funny how it's exactly where we are
now.
The point being, the the lie around c
02 and methane and the idea that we're
somehow changing it. This is the normal cycle.
You could look back
100 of 1000 of years.
The point is they're trying to rationalize where
we are with that cycle to make it
seem like that's us causing it and the
endpoint being that's gonna cause more illnesses,
Which I don't know how you read that
in any other context if you know that
point of, other than them making that the
case, whether through lies or actual release.
I think that's incredible.
Now question it. Don't just take my word
for it. I think the obvious point is
that they're manufacturing the justification for whatever happens
next.
Here's Peter Otis. This is from yesterday or
2 days ago,
telling you the same thing. Now listen to
the way he says this. This guy's a
maniac.
For crying out loud, Peter, get a comb
and brush your teeth.
Here's the reason why we need to care
about this stuff.
Nicole is that we have some big picture
stuff coming down the pikes starting on January
21st.
Mister Bloomberg mentioned h five n one. That
I'm really worried about On January 21st? Because,
you know, we all know how viruses and
pathogens love to follow a timeline. Right? They
must have an appointment with Peter Hotez.
It's all over,
wild, birds, on the western part of the
United States. And going up in the north,
it's getting into the poultry.
We're seeing, sporadic human cases. No I mean,
guys, he's making this sound like it's everywhere
we've all proven that. No. It's not. You're
finding very sparse
examples of, by the way, which I don't
even think we can prove. For if they're
using PCR tests, guys. I hope you know
that. We've already talked about this. So for
all we know, it's not even existing. Or
maybe it's just the flu. Or any number
of other overlaps. But to make it sound
like this is everywhere,
even with their own narrative, is just not
true. They've been hyping small examples of this
for a long time.
This guy is is a career hype man.
Human to human transmission yet, but that could
happen. It's in the Right. So we have
all these cases of bird flu popping off,
but we have yet to see human to
human transmission.
I mean, so you could argue that, like,
oh, what's the right word for it? Not
anthropologic, but like the
whatever the word is for how long the
the timeline of how these things evolve.
Aren't we supposed to aren't we told always
how these things take 1,000 of years to
evolve, but yet weird that we got one
after another during COVID 19, which obviously was
not really happening?
So why do you think you know it's
gonna pop off tomorrow despite there being seemingly
no evidence for that actually happening? The catalyst
for why things even if it's actually what
goes on, jumping to a human from an
animal. Again, the zoonotic transfer point in general,
there's very high level people that are highly
respected that push back on that in that
is an illusion in and of itself.
But he wants you to think that it's
everywhere and that it's right around the corner
despite everything saying the opposite. This guy I'm
telling you, this guy's job is to scare
you. Cattle, it's in the milk. And that's
just the beginning. We have another major career,
but that could happen. It's in the cattle,
it's in the milk. See, the based on
what he just said to you, it's in
the chickens. It's in people who are getting
it. They they're in the cattle and the
milk.
Oh, so just broadly, bird flu is in
the cattle and your milk?
Think about saying such an irresponsibly broad statement
on MSNBC
as a supposed health,
whatever you wanna call
it. It's not in the cattle and in
the milk. You've had very specific examples of
where you claim you found that. As we
just showed you about being in pasteurized milk,
that's not everywhere in the country. It was
one example.
Look at the guy's eye. I mean, guys,
this guy is a maniac. I just can't
get past how dangerous these people are. Well,
they point us to people like us who
are being objective. And, yes, talking about things
that in a are hypothetical possibilities,
but using factual, provable information.
It's just because we continue to be shown
to be right, and these people continue to
be shown to be wrong. They are after
peep it's it's it's seems to be most
everybody outside of the mainstream today willing to
call out these kind of lies.
Why do people like this continue to have
a place?
And that's just the beginning. We have another
major coronavirus likely brewing, in What does that
even mean? Likely brewing?
Do you realize how abstract these statements are?
What if you're boiling it in the pot?
You realize that I mean, I could go
it just it just kills me. Any like,
this is what I think is so hilarious.
If you ask people who are educated in
this field, they they laugh at this guy.
What he just said is stupid.
Asia, we've had SARS in 2002,
SARS 2 COVID 19 in 2019,
and we know these viruses are jumping from
bats to people thousands of times a year,
but that's they're still You mean, like, when
you guys went there with with,
Ralph Barrick and literally did that? Made that
happen with self spreading injections or self spreading,
at least as they claim? Right? That's that's
the reality of this, if you wanna go
into that part of it, questioning all of
it, whether it's valid or not, their own
evidence shows you how far back they've been
making this happen or at least they laid
out the false narrative to make you think
that, but none of that's acknowledged in the
conversation.
These people are children. More that we know,
that we have a big problem with mosquito
transmitted viruses all along the Gulf Coast where
I am here in Texas, so we're expecting
dengue and,
possibly Zika virus come And the 45 times
I've covered the reality of both the things
they use to create and and and manipulate
the GMO mosquitoes, which causes them to, in
fact, be stronger and not die and translate
that to their populations, or what they spray
to go after them, which, in fact, cultivates
a worse dynamic because it kills also their
their surrounding elements that fight them. So even
if it does kill them in the process,
I've proven this with their own studies that
show that the population actually grow.
You think they don't know this?
And, again, for those new to the show,
I'm referencing peer reviewed science that goes over
what they claim is happening.
And here we are where it keeps being
used.
If you can't see that that's the manufacturing
problem that they have to deal with, then
I don't think you're paying attention. I mean,
bacorapuche
virus, maybe even yellow fever. And there's more
than we have all this sharp rise in
vaccine preventable
diseases going up be You mean like the
polio example that was caused by vaccine dry
polio?
Because of in part the anti vaccine activism
that's so prominent right now. We have Anti
vaccine. He made his whole turn out of
that like we're some kind of lobby.
These are just random moms out there who
are trying to go you're a murderer. And
they go, oh, you're the vaccine lobby. Vaccine
anti vaccine lobby. He said that on a
public video to a random mom who by
the way lost her child. That's the kind
of person you're looking at.
A fivefold rise in pertussis cases, whooping cough
over the last year. Fifteen measles outbreaks this
year. We've got polio. 15. Oh my gosh.
Let's all break down the country and lock
down. Right? The point is these things are
and, you know, really the point should be
I shouldn't I'm a stop hyping this this
idiot. But at the end of the day,
how do we know any of this is
true?
I'm not gonna deny anything's possible. But how
why these are the same people that lied
to us about literally every part of what
we just went through. And we're supposed to
take them at face value now? I I
I doubt any of you actually are. It's
embarrassing.
Big picture stuff coming down the pike starting
on January 21st.
What does that even mean?
Because they they they they have, like, an
appointment to certain timeline.
It's just silly. It's really silly.
Now the the important thing to realize,
current administration of Donald Trump. Now, obviously, we
have yet to get 20 the 20th January,
so anything could change. But realize that the
current administration
is packed with mRNA supporters,
including Trump himself, by the way, who continues
to support the COVID 19 injection. But as
Jane Ruby points out, president Trump is already
pushing mRNA vaccines for cancer
after the COVID shots caused the greatest surge
in human cancers, the turbo cancer dynamic.
And it says, and it should concern you
that the VP pick, Vance,
is heavily invested
in more plasma mRNA
with his body Vivek Ramaswami, as well as
numerous others.
That should matter.
This is from,
the Truth Social Post. And we I've already
I've shown you many examples of Trump pointing
this out. Time to use mRNA for fight
cancer.
You don't think he knows what his audience
thinks?
So there's an agenda that's that is circumvent
rather
I'm sorry. Word for it. Like, the so
he's in he sees what you're pointing to.
He sees that you know this stuff is
dangerous, and he still pushes that narrative.
Remember that whole thing he said where he
could shoot someone in Times Square and you
still vote for him? Well, there you go.
That's exactly what he's talking about. Or the
poem about the snake. Yeah. He told you.
And you guys still wallow him because at
the end of the day, he is pushing
the thing that you guys somehow rationalize into
being something else. It's a secret four d
chess move, and he's trapping them. Yeah. I
sure hope so. But how many times does
that not come to pass? You know, you
guys get the point. That's why I think
most conservatives are very uncomfortable with what's going
on right now. And by the way, here's
that clip from doctor Martin.
And, again, this this is the clip is
entitled, it's the US doing this. Now realize,
he's talking about what was going on in
Trump's administration
before.
I mean, going back to the origin, even
before his administration, but all through his administration,
into the beginning of warp speed, and in
the 1st year of the COVID 19 illusion,
and then in through into Biden's administration. But
that's when this was being discussed.
Right after 9. We should be having a
public dialogue, and it should be something that
rises to the level of legislation. We should
not allow the National Institutes of Health or
the Department of Defense
to allocate funding to amplify these agents
so that allegedly we can study them in
the case that they fall into the hands
of bad people. Because the evidence
has shown us bad people who actually have
unleashed these pathogens since 1991. And by the
way, if you go to the miscellaneous memorandum
7 and other documents, we can
go back to the 1950s.
The bad people who unleashed these things on
the population
are us.
It is the US who's doing
it. Now I wouldn't say us, obviously. It's
the government where I don't see it as
this. I mean, obviously, this is an entity
that does not represent you. But here's the
interview. This is from 2023. But realize the
point is we go through these documents that
go well back in the Trump's administration.
There's no way you could argue that this
was not something they were involved with, especially
with him continuing to support to this day.
Operation Warp Speed was his baby. So
I just think that's important to recognize, guys.
There's no way you can decouple these things,
and yet people are choosing to ignore what's
going on.
Truth seeker points out, if Trump was misinformed,
which tends to be the narrative right now.
Like, you know, the last cabinet was bad
because he got tricked. He was misinformed about
what was going on. He trusted Fauci. Somebody
close to me made that point. He trusted
what Fauci told him. Okay. Fine. Still his
fault. Are are we are we in kindergarten?
Are you not responsible for your choices? Because
he tricked me. No. You still made the
choice. As a a true leader, which is
not anybody in this conversation for the government,
a leader
is responsible.
I don't care whether it was some lonely
entity. You know, the point is that if
it happens under your administration, to your watch,
or whatever context you're discussing, a team, if
you're the leader, if you're the coach, your
responsibility.
Somebody who goes, no. No. He did it
without asking me. That's a check. That is
somebody you should laugh at. That is somebody
who's going to throw his somebody subordinate to
him under the bus to avoid responsibility for
something that the leader should own even if
he wasn't involved.
The point here is that during the COVID
19 dynamic, you can show a 1,000 different
examples that Trump made choices that were even
against what Fauci wanted, which we can look
back and still point to as a problem.
That still that had very negative consequences. And,
yes, there was Fauci there involved with it
all as well. But did he not hear
what his own people were saying about Fauci
during the entire time? It's amazing the willful
ignorance is created to ignore what he did
and still promotes.
But he says, if Trump was misinformed about
the jab, why did he add pro jab
people to his cabinet today?
If Trump was misinformed about the jab, why
does he still praise it?
And then he goes, don't don't forget that
Marco Rubio is gonna be secretary of state.
Here he is going, I know I looked
away from the needle, but I need I
need a tan. But vaccine is safe and
effective, and I decided to take it myself.
They're all on the same boat, guys.
Here's his pick for surgeon general, Janet. We
and we've played you all these before. Here
she's gushing about the vaccine, and it's as,
she says, he who once said that the
COVID vaccines were a gift from god.
These are the people he's choosing.
Now we already went over the general cabinet
conversation
thus far anyway on November 30th, the new
Trump administration, and the technocratic Zionist coup of
the United States.
I recommend you check this one out because
I this is not some hypergolic statement. I
am convinced this is what's going on.
Here's Alex Jones saying, remind your family today
that the COVID event was all part of
a carefully crafted lie designated to turn society
into a permanent big pharma controlled police state.
Imagine saying that while you're currently pretending Trump
had nothing to do with that? Or ignoring
his involvement or continuous support? Like, it's this
is a
the things like this that show me this
person is dishonest.
You're playing into people's beliefs. And as David
I points out, but your hero, Trump,
oversaw lockdowns, gave Fauci a com
a commendation, which he did, and claims to
be the father of the vaccine, while the
big pharma police state is really being orchestrated
by the military like the fake vaccine on
behalf of the global cult. You know, the
globalism elements that he ignores, like Israel.
Here's another example. And I don't know if
you've seen this, but this is what's coming
out of the senate select committee.
It's a lie. It was made in a
lab. Woah. We were theorizing about that in
2020. Funny how everybody else was shouting us
down.
The point is that that certainly still could
be a possibility. And again, consider the bacteria
point they made about whether it could be
something other than a virus being used. The
point is they're working on something in these
labs. It appears to be the case. And
I do think that they're doing something that's
dangerous.
But either way,
Alex Jones is saying total vindication.
The government just told us what the government
did, and we buy it because it works
for our narrative. That should be the headline.
The government finds that the COVID 19 was
made in a lab in a bioweapon.
Okay. Again, certainly could be. We were earlier
than ever most people talking about that, but
why do you trust what the government says?
So the US government breaks down that this
was made in a lab that the US
government was responsible for. And you you blindly
take that as a vindication?
Shouldn't we be a little more skeptical? But
no. Because it's the democrat's bad guy. Right?
These are the good republicans in senate that
do the good thing and the good bad
guy democrats were the ones that did it.
It's kindergarten level, guys. It's stupid. And as
I Iike says, so why did flu disappear
worldwide when COVID appeared with its flu like
symptoms? Why did the symptoms, in quotes, go
on increasing so they could designate more and
more other diseases as COVID? Here's what I
was saying earlier. Why do they have to
fix the cases with PCR test that its
inventor said could not tell if you were
sick? Why did they have a fix have
to fix the deaths by putting COVID on
the death certificates with people who died from
any other cause within 28 days? These are
all things we talked about. Why were US
hospitals given massively increased money for diagnosing COVID
and not regular flu or pneumonia? The point
he's making, if this was a bioweapon,
you could argue it was designed to be
benign, but how would that make sense with
how it's been used?
It could mean that they lost control. It
could mean it's certainly possible.
But again, being objective with discernment,
it does not line up.
It's far more likely now with how we
saw it, continue and how it went. This
was more about Danny Rencourt was saying. That
it was that we've continued to consider the
entire time. That it may have not even
been something that was there. That they were
met they were using all of the other
things to combine to give you this impression.
Doesn't mean they couldn't do something tomorrow.
But if you're gonna kept say we were
vindicated that COVID 19 was a lab made
virus,
it's a bioweapon that implies that it's deadly,
dangerous, or at least should be.
That's not what happened.
This is why did they kill tens of
thousands in care rooms? I mean, again, all
these points. Killing people with things that weren't
the injection. Why?
Why did they kill people with COVID treatment
drug remdesivir, which was well known to cause
multiple organ failure?
I saw I saw I can go on
and on. A bio up in virus would
not require any of this. It would do
its job without any such manipulation.
It's amazing that street wise people will believe
anything so long as it confirms the narrative
that they have been pushing out for year
after year.
Yes. Well said. Now, by the way, I
I just thought of this. I wanna show
you this real quick. For some reason,
when I try to highlight
yeah, look, I can't for some reason when
I'm typing, it won't let me highlight.
Only when I'm typing on Twitter.
Not that that matters. I just I get
the and I get this feeling that a
lot of this stuff is tailored towards certain
people. It's just I think I'm fired. It's
very strange. No matter how much I type,
it won't let me highlight.
And that caused me to make mistakes quite
often, actually, which is probably the point. But
of course, you do eat anything else, you
can.
I just find that interesting. I re I,
you know, as I said, I point these
things out sometimes, more often than I don't.
But I'm telling you guys, this is like
95% of my Thai experience on this platform.
It's just non stop weird things that don't
make sense, don't line up. My you know,
this doesn't work on my phone. It works
over here. This doesn't work here. It works
on my phone. It's just really. It's either
either it's that clumsy of a platform, which
is certainly possible, or it's being tailored to
be clumsy for certain people. But David Knight
also points out, as we've shown you many
times, Alex Jones talking about the shot as
harmless
sugar water.
He's it's I've shown you a clip many
times.
So if it's a bioweapon,
which by the way included the piece from
the shot. We're talking about the spike protein.
How is it sugar water? I mean, these
things have to be considered by people that
watch these shows.
Just be objective. Recognize that either he's that
bad or lying to you. Kevin McKernan
points out something around the modeling aspect, and
I find this to be important because this
is not about the the the deadly bioweapon.
It's about the injection that was given. Now,
you could also argue in that context that
the injection itself was the bioweapon,
that that's a fair argument to make. But
that's not what he's saying over there. He's
talking about the lab the select committee
of the government
in the senate
arguing that the virus that was naturally circulating
was actually made in a lab.
See, that's very different than arguing that the
because this is what the reality the data
very clearly shows, other other than trying to
lean into what makes your narrative look good,
is that the post injection time frame was
when it really started to go bad.
Tandem occurrence says the vaxx killed more than
COVID. This is not modeling data, which is
what everything else we tend to see. And
we've already shown you this. Cause look, this
data was the same in 2021, 2022, when
we were exclusively breaking this down. From their
own data. Funny how that backs up what
we were screaming about and being called conspiracy
theorist for. But just like anybody else that
was doing it correctly.
The point is you can see post the
injection, it exploded.
Exploded even though we're told it was 2019,
2020.
It's very important to understand. Something happened which
was
post government action that caused excess death that
we've more than we've ever seen, it seems,
in many and most locations. And also, that
the ejection administration
seems to weirdly correlate almost exactly with the
rise of excess death. I'm sure you can
figure that one out.
Sense receptor
puts that points out a great clip from
core, core, Pierre Kory.
The data shows a depopulation event.
So whether it was intentional or not, you
can argue about it. But the outcome of
the pandemic and particularly the m r n
a shots was has led to incredible amounts
of excess mortality.
Now, again, all of this is to point
out, this is the the current administration and
the leader of the the president himself who
still support this stuff.
I just hope that's something that can cause
a little bit of
awareness, discernment, uncomfortable feeling.
You should be because where it's going is
dangerous and people are blinding themselves to it.
Brad, and if you look at the history
of this fascination with depopulation
strategies,
and they've actually tried they've actually tested vaccines
in the past to look at that.
I would say that I agree with you,
Mark. And even if,
even if even if I said I didn't
agree with you, like, oh, it couldn't be
a depopulation, it couldn't have been willful and
planned. Right? Let let's let's let some of
our folks say,
I don't believe that. Okay?
The second thing I would add is,
well, the data does show a depopulation
event. So so whether it was intentional or
not, you can argue about it. But the
outcome of the pandemic and particularly the mRNA
vaccines
has led to incredible amounts of excess mortality,
and young people dying.
And and then let's go a 3rd 3rd
option. Let's say it wasn't willful, and it
was just a harmless series of unfortunate decisions.
We chose the spike protein
as, the, as the antigen for the vaccine.
It doesn't explain
how
there's been other vaccines released, which caused so
much harm. They were shut down and recalled.
Here, we had people, groups
of awake citizens, studied citizens, groups of physicians
all around the world who were screaming from
the sidelines,
from within weeks of the campaign,
about the amount of damage and destruction and
death they were seeing related to the vaccine,
And yet everything was censored, everything was suppressed,
and the machine kept going that And Trump
still supports it. And you know we've seen
all this. I just don't know how anybody
can make sense of that. Jab campaign, they
just ratchet it up more and more and
more with late night show hosts, and they're
singing their songs and cartoons and,
French fries giveaways. And, like, I I mean,
I just watched this madness propelling this really
toxic intervention. And so
whether it was started willfully or not,
there's too many actions that they've taken to
propel
something which has caused immense amount of deaths.
I mean, there's there's about
9 diff Steve Kirsch has done this very
well. There's numbers of different groups,
many different,
arithmetical and statistical analyses predicting.
But at last check, the the average or
best predictor of how many people have died
in the United States, just United States, is
somewhere between 500,000
and a 1000000 peep
And Trump continues to argue that he saved
millions of lives with the shots that killed
millions of people.
Pretty gross. I've written a number of op
eds in major And just for the partisans
that get angry about that point alone, realize
that Biden continued it just as much. For,
media outlets.
One of them I wrote in Newsweek. And
in 2023,
as of the 1st 9 months of 2023,
a 158,000
more Americans died,
than would be predicted, than when it's a
normal rate. And that's more than all the
combat losses since, Vietnam as, ever, Vietnam including
and since. And so and yet there's no
discussion. There's no congressional hearings. They did have
an attempted a congressional hearing in the UK
because the UK is getting hammered with excess
mortality. And there's only a couple of politician
willing to bring that to the floor. But
we have had no systematic use, no recognition.
I mean, the c the life expectancy in
the United States in 3 year period went
from 79 to 76.
Who has to die to have life expectancy
go from 79 to 76? Wow. It's not
old people. It's young people. So it's not
only that we've had excess mortality,
but it's in the young and healthiest people
of society. Ed Dowd's done these analyses. I've
written extensively on this. The life insurance data
doesn't lie. That's one thing you can't corrupt.
Right? That's a massive industry that lives on
their data. And if you look at their
reports, you see these massive explosions in the
deaths of some of the youngest and healthiest
because it comes out of the group life
insurance data, which is generally
the Fortune 500 employed.
Major employers. These are you know, the employed
the working employed young is particularly white collar.
I mean, that's that's the healthiest sector of
society and always has been. And suddenly, they're
dying in the Q3 of 2021 at rates
that have never been described outside of wartime,
and yet
radio silence.
How do you not acknowledge that? Damn them
for continuing
to push this now.
Damn them for allowing that to happen when
it was clear in 2020.
2020.
I don't know how many times I can
play doctor doctor Bakhti
screening about this in 2020.
Every gene based vaccine
is deadly.
Here we are. Now we were breaking down
the data from 2020, showing you Forbes highlighting
their own data that show they knew that
it wouldn't stop transmission. I mean, guys, this
is so obvious. And those of us that
were ahead of that conversation were just completely
sidestep,
suppressed. I got kicked off Patreon, PayPal,
everything.
1,000 of dollars lost even though we were
correct. And it's not about me and being
right. It's about the reality that people out
there were breaking this stuff down, trying to
save lives, and the people that are being
driven to support the man who is supporting
it and still
still
refuse to acknowledge that. That it was obvious
or rather that they've not refused to acknowledge
that he continues to ignore the reality and
support him anyway.
Under some, I guess, flimsy argument that somehow
it's a means to an end. I don't
care what you think the end is. There's
nothing that justifies what's happening there. Nothing.
You're being played, and it's disgusting how obvious
it is.
Now overlapping this with the conversation of of
digital currency and where we're going with the
Bitcoin dynamic or really just kind of the
general great reset directive,
sense receptor also pointing out, Kathar Austin Fitts
had to say, if you don't get central
digital control
in all digital monetary system, I don't care,
she says, what vehicle used to do it,
whether it's the Federal Reserve, a CBDC, or
Bitcoin.
If you do that, you're walking into a
digital concentration camp.
Now all of this overlapping together,
the the origin point of the the or
or the original point of the milk.
Right? What they're doing to it, the overlap
of the possibility of arm or mRNA, the
injections giving the population,
You know, all of this driving in a
clear direction and my overarching worry that there's
something else going on in all of that.
But even if not, whether we're talking nanotech
or whatever else,
then we are talking about the conflation, the
the or the combination
of these conversations
in order to lead you into a position
that is easier to be controlled. And this
is the technocratic discussion.
And the point is in this administration, you're
seeing the hallmarks of every single part of
this.
And here's what Catherine has to say about
it.
Up under a system of government where the
bankers run monetary policy, but the people's representatives
run fiscal policy. That's what the revolutionary
war was about. It's about taxation with or
without representation.
Now if if you're gonna consolidate and collapse
the system
into the bankers on a very central basis,
being able to control and operate both monetary
and fiscal system,
you're you're moving out of a world where
we've known personal freedom and liberty into a
world
where it's what Augustine Carson's, the head of
the BIS, said. We can make the rules
centrally, and we have the technology to enforce
those rules. In other words, we decide when
and how and where you can spend your
money. For analysis on CBDC
in particular
for the use of general to the general
use,
we tend to establish the equivalence with cash,
and there is a huge difference there.
For example, in cash,
we don't know, for example, who's using a
$100
bill today. We don't know who is using
a 1,000 peso bill today.
A key difference in with the CBDC
is that central bank will have
absolute control
on the rules and regulations
that will determine the use of that
expression of central bank liability.
And also, we will have the technology to
enforce that.
Those are those two issues are extremely
important, and that makes
a huge difference with respect to what to
what cash is.
To the pandemic.
If you get if you get central digital
control in an all digital monetary system, and
I don't care, you know, what vehicle you
use to do it, whether it's a Federal
Reserve CBDC
or Ripple
or Bitcoin or something else we create, you
know, Worldcoin.
You know, if if you do that, you
are walking into a digital concentration camp. And
that means, go back to the pandemic,
if they don't want you going more than
a mile from your house, your money won't
work more than a mile from your house.
Your electric car won't work more than a
mile from your house. If they don't want
you buying pizza,
your money won't buy pizza. And you can't
pay cash for pizza because you're in an
all digital monetary system. One of the
we have 14 items in this blueprint of
what states need to do. Number 1 is
preserving cash and checks.
You need to have you you cannot go
to an all digital monetary system. You need
to have an analog system.
One of the reasons you need to have
an analog system everybody in North Carolina can
explain to you why you need an analog
system, because when the electricity goes,
you better have cash, you better have an
analog system.
In New Zealand, when the cyclone came through
2 years ago,
the head of the central bank stood up
and gave a speech afterwards and said, thank
God we had cash. If we hadn't had
cash, you know, nobody would have been able
to transact.
After the after what happened in Western North
Carolina,
the Norwegian Central Bank came out and said,
you know, we're down to 3% cash. We're
going to reverse it because we're looking at
what happens during disasters all around the world.
And if you don't have cash, you're toast.
And your government knows that.
Right? And there's a very clear dynamic being
built for that one of many, but that
exact purpose. Now, as she highlights, this is
this is Trump's thing, World Liberty Financial.
This is the there's a lot of this
building out right now. I sure hope that
it's something that might be trying to fight
with the same thing, which is certainly possible.
But I think all of the evidence shows
otherwise. And we discussed this in a recent
IMA panel, the independent media alliance with cat
with that Kathryn is a part. Co opting
freedom, the Bitcoin slide of hand and the
new AI control structure. Make sure you check
it out because I'm very concerned about where
this goes. And as she points out, whether
bitcoin or cbdc, a private element,
they're building it right now.
It's important to recognize that if you if
you can recognize that he's still lying to
you because it is a lie. There's no
way he does not see that he's lying
about that, about the COVID shot.
How do I mean, how else do you
make sense of this?
Trying to drive you into a position where
this is going to be profitable for him
at the very least. But on top of
that, the larger agenda. I know you don't
wanna believe that's who he is. Maybe he's
being played. Isn't that the argument of halftime?
So if that's possible, then you should consider
it. Right?
And I will also talk about Derek's recent
article, Meet the Spyware Companies, the preparing to
unleash their tech during Trump's 2nd term. And
it goes into the reality of the overlap
with Israel and the mini startups,
another Israeli intelligence connected firm that are building
out in this country right now in the
spyware field. 50% of all of it is
run by Israeli tech companies.
So let's finish with the conversation of the
larger overarching discussion.
Now the we had an IMA panel recently
oh, I'm sorry. I'm I'm I'm skipping one
thing. We're gonna end with the conversation of
his recent article.
Eric Derek. The it's called you can't hide.
Direct quote, by the way. Elon Musk and
SpaceX are helping US intelligence build the world's
largest spy satellite network. Before we get to
that, same point though in the conversation of
his cabinet. Just a few points I wanna
make about this before we finish with Derek's
article. And we're getting and what we were
just talking about
is another article from about the spyware. Right?
And so the the connected point here is
about the idea of not just the Israeli
overlap, which is prevalent in every person he's
picked, but also the fact that we're talking
about, well, three things. Not being an outsider.
We're gonna show you that next because these
are just the this is the Aldigarch. You're
literally watching the deep state populate in front
of you. In fact, going back to Matt
Ehretts' points,
we he he theorized he hypothesized this is
where we were going, that the real ruling
structure was wanting to step back out into
the light. Remember we talked about this? I
mean, I think this is an important point
that we should not skip over. One of
the main things we were talking about with
Matt and his many articles for TLab is
that historically, there is a ruling structure that
goes back to feudal times and so on,
like bloodlines and whatever else. And the point
is clearly that at some point,
from pressure from individuals or by design, that
they folded this into some kind of it
went from bloodline,
god given divine right to rule into the
idea of,
you know, the however you wanna frame it
the right way. It was in sections. It
slowly changed. But now into the idea that
we're somehow choosing them. Right? That they convinced
us that we were the ones picking the
person that was gonna rule. And even then,
you can still see these families of politicians.
You know, the point is, he argues that
they recognize that it's time for them through
technocracy
to step back out in delight.
I'm telling you guys, if there's never been
a better example of what we're looking at
or of that than what we're looking at.
As well and and this being the point
right here.
Experts stunned as Trump picks 9th billionaire for
the top job. And it's not just about
billionaires, but it's about the Zionist app overlap.
It's about the technocracy. It's really just about
whatever direction they're driving in. And those are
the people stepping out to tell you that
they're the outsiders when literally they are the
definition of the insiders of the deep state.
Now, this point overlapping with the last point
showing you that we're bringing together all this
stuff into this current administration.
And we discussed this in the IMA panel,
cabinet picks, policy proposals. We go over a
lot of it. Not everything, obviously. There's a
lot to talk about.
But the 9th billionaire. I mean, please, just
on that one point alone, explain for me
how that demonstrates being the outsider.
Isn't I mean, wasn't the one of the
main points that Trump,
Republicans were pushing during the election was to
look at all the billionaires that are supporting
Kamala, even though Ford broke both them down,
and and that's actually this article here that
Derek wrote as well.
That both sides were backed by this, like,
billionaire, Zionist, technocrats, like,
almost the same.
But think about that.
Now it's not worth no one's gonna acknowledge
it now because they're gonna be the good
guy billionaires, which certainly possible. I hope you're
right. But if you go through and look
at them, it's a who's who of technocrats,
Zionist controllers, deep state monsters. It is the
swamp. And even the Guardian wrote about it.
Trump assembling US cabinet billionaires worth combined $340,000,000,000.
I just can't believe anybody's falling for this.
Mike
Lee, you a US senator for Utah who's
been unabashedly,
you know, praising Elon and Trump and just
I I've already caught many misinformation
or lies, if you will, coming from this
account. But it says, in a meeting today
with Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy and speaker
Johnson, you know, because Johnson's who they all
called Rhino a second ago. You know, now
it's just funny how just whoever's on our
side suddenly works. Democrats are not on that
on that point, actually.
Again, we should laugh about how many Democrats,
all of them it seems, are lighting this
leading the administration. I find it interesting that
the the the Republicans who would be the
quickest to point out a possible conspiracy theory
are not willing to consider whether this is
this is the Democrats that you hate so
much who are taking control of your party.
I also don't even think that's what's happening,
but I think it's funny that you can
see every single one of them. Every one
of them in the course the core circle
are democrats who just decided to become republicans.
I just think it's interesting. And why it
just shows you the willful ignorance. It was
black blood. I'm gonna blow it up, you
know, cover my eyes. I don't wanna see
it. But it goes on to say, Elon
in Quebec
referred to the fact this is what they're
all discussing in this important meeting.
That unelected bureaucrats now make most federal law,
bombshell,
and control much of our economy.
We've been stripped of the benefits of a
constitutional republic.
Then you just get done telling us it
was a democracy? Either way, the point is,
duh.
You mean literally you guys right there on
screen? Now other than Johnson,
we're talking about literally unelected bureaucrats. You're talking
about people that got picked and not elected
to be in a position. A position, by
the way, that doesn't even exist yet. And
they're literally sitting there acting like, this is
what I keep showing you. These 2 are
have made
a career.
And I I don't I mean, like, more
of an metaphorical sense. Like, they have made
a career since the election time frame of
pointing at problems that that the the establishment
created and using those problems to usher in
a new problem. That's my opinion in the
the latter half of it.
But what I mean, autolife bureaucrats is what
what Trump has been picking. It's what the
the billionaires that he's aligning in his cabinet.
And, yes, that's obviously what anybody with a
brain has been calling out for a very
long time. We don't live in a democracy.
We don't live in a republic. We live
in an oligarchy. We live in a situation
where both sides of the paradigm have been
choosing,
allowing unelected bureaucrats to choose what happens.
So I just think it's again, I I
don't if you're right, I will be happy
about that if they mean this and they
do change it.
But I just think it's a little bit
absurd that we're watching billionaires lie on this
platform. Technocrats and Zionists and unelected bureaucrats sit
up and tell us about how we need
to stop unelected bureaucrats.
That should be kind of comical, I think.
But hopefully, we can see through it. Most
people don't seem to be in the context
of the people, the partisans.
June June doctor June Ruby
highlights one of the cabinet picks, which is
exactly what we're talking about. Handpicking Jared Kushner's
father as an ambassador to France is exactly
what he was just talking about. Now, not
in the sense of picking laws,
but ultimately,
unelected bureaucrats,
especially a wild Zionist that is to
one removed from Israel itself. Trump named Jared
Kushner's father, Charles Kushner, as the new ambassador
to France. The same Charles Kushner that Trump
pardoned for hiring a prostitute to seduce his
brother-in-law so he could blackmail his sister. He
was also convicted of tax evasion, witness tampering,
and illegal campaign contributions.
Getting tired of the win yet? She says,
these are the villains, guys. These are the
swaddle.
On top of that, here is a live
broadcast from Bennet Johnson saying, Trump doubles down
on support for Kash Patel, Hegseth.
Both will be confirmed, it says. I love
it. Nobody could know this.
Joe Biden doomed. This is these people are
some these cartoons in my mind. The point
is that, yes, he is doubling down on
some of these picks that are terrifying. People
that are very clear Zionist, and I mean,
at the expense of American rights,
and people that argue, in particular, who probably
won't be confirmed. But they're saying this because
a senator said so. The point is the
confirmation part is gonna happen, and that's gonna
be, I think, these are people largely are
designed to not be picked, I think, for
certain reasons. In any case,
Kash Patel is concerning as hell. As Eva
Saliagris points out, what an effing joke. As
he goes on and says wake up and
prioritize Israel. But America first. Right? But prioritize
Israel.
But America first.
Oops. Those things are contradictory. Don't think about
it though because that doesn't because then you're,
like, anti MAGA or against the Trump objectives.
Just willful blindness. But of course, here's Zionist
Laura Loomer. We all know, gosh, Patel is
great.
The issue will be whether they'll try to
block his confirmation. Of course, you think he's
great because he's a why a pro a
Israel first, America second politician.
And again, I just said, sure Patel is
great if you blindly support Israel over American
rights as we know you do, Laura.
Here
is the Blaze Media. Another blind sycophant for
the Republican party and Trump in particular.
Four rager cover ups that Kash Patel would
expose as FBI director. Gee, is it gonna
be JFK, 911, the COVID scam? Nope. It's
gonna be the Epstein list, which I guarantee
will never happen, not in full because they're
all on it. Or the idea of January
6th pipe bombs because we know that's a
huge point. I mean, these are things that
I can't would be interesting to know, but
not January 6th, but the pipe bombs. Or
deleted text message of January 6th, or Russiagate.
Are you kidding me? Does anybody need Russiagate
broken down for them? We I mean, this
is this is a diversion.
You're being played. If you're gonna talk about
somebody heading the FBI, how about first we
talk about getting rid of the whole thing,
which is what you promised to do? But
that doesn't seem to be the case with
everything that's happening. But you're gonna tell us
you're gonna break down the Epstein list. I
mean, most of these things are already out
there for you to see. We already understand
what the pipe bomb lies were, the idea
of the
this is like the Vegas thing where they
drip out information.
I don't know why people who are honest
about this but still want to believe in
them are not the first to go, woah,
okay. Well, that's crazy. That's what you care
about?
Because you know it. It feels wrong, and
you know it.
Cori Lynne of Cori's digs has an ongoing
Trump picks that you can check out. It's
her, continuing ongoing list of the Trump announcements
and eventually when they get picked. So it's
a good thing to keep to the side.
And Larkin Rose points out the thing I
mentioned earlier. The idea of bricks. Right? So
is this what an outsider fighting to fight
against the deep state would do? You know,
the deep state dom control with the dollar
domination,
you know, and the petrodollar.
We can all acknowledge that is part of
what we're talking about. Right?
I know conservatives would agree if it was
outside of Trump's support. The reality being that
all of this stuff represents the problem. And
not necessarily that the like, just the larger
idea of just a fiat currency, the way
it's used to sanction. The point is this
is a problem.
And the Bitcoin or cryptocurrency was at least
arguably put forward in order to challenge that.
Now they've absorbed that. They're using that to
bolster the dollar. And here's what he says.
The idea that BRICS countries are trying to
move away from the dollar while we stand
by and watch is over.
We require a commitment from these countries that
they will neither create a new currency nor
back any other one to replace the mighty
US dollar.
It's just this is authoritarian monster stuff, guys.
Like, first of all, what right do you
have to tell anybody what they can do?
These are foreign countries. They can do and
his point is we'll be we'll now the
argument, of course, from the supporters will be,
well, they can do it. There'll be consequences.
What do you mean consequences?
First of all, the 100% tariff is a
tax on you, moron, not everybody else. It
will affect Americans more than anybody. Un other
than maybe the interest of the corporations that
would suffer from not being able to sell
those. But realize, the US is just one
market. And in some cases, it's the biggest
market. But nonetheless, it does not remove it
hurts you
no matter what. It's just incredible that we
can't recognize that. The bottom line, though, is
that is coercive measures because a country decides
to do what's right for them.
The dollar is what allows the Trump administration
or any other administration to coercively use that
control to sanction, to start I mean, everything
they do is illegitimate and illegal.
It's the dominance they use, and they use
it against everybody, including their own allies like
he's doing right here. He even says,
tariffs and should expect to say goodbye to
selling to the u wonderful US economy. They
can go find another sucker. There's no chance
that the BRICS will replace the US dollar
international trade. Well, there's very clearly a chance.
Now to my in my mind, it's just
another rising control structure.
But it says, and any country that tries
to should wave goodbye to America. Any country.
So, one of the allies, well, you're no
longer no. It's
belligerent.
This is the might makes right. This is
the last thing we should want. We are
being driven into our own demise and people
are so blinded by partisan exuberance they can't
see what's happening. And as Larkin says, gee
whiz. It's almost as if Trump cares more
about using his power to protect the Federal
Reserve and the banking racket than he does
about America's prosperity. Who would have thought?
Finally, somebody honest and objective who can point
out what is clearly happening.
I don't care if it's Biden or Kamala
or Trump or anybody else. Anybody saying that
is not your friend.
He is in fact not I mean, look.
You can look at it for multiple things.
That kind of action is going to cause
more problem for you, more problem for the
country, more problem for this economy. But on
top of that,
you're being a dictator. Because look. What you're
saying is not just that you can't use
any other currency. You can't create a new
currency.
He's saying he says, we'll requ you basically,
a commitment from countries that they will neither
create a new one nor back any other
currency.
In what world do you think that that
is something you have the right to do?
That's called not just being the policeman of
the world. That's called being the dictator of
the world, and yet they love to pretend
otherwise.
Any country out there can decide to use
what they think is in their interest, even
if it's at the expense of the United
States. But you see, in their mind, that
is something they can't allow.
That is not what we pretend we are.
Never have been.
And I I I'll include this video at
7 minutes, but high impact folks goes through
the same thing. Trump just issued a serious
threat to the entire world in order to
rescue the dollar from certain doom.
You'd think that most of the people on
the Republican side of this would be arguing
something different than that, but
I just don't get it. And lastly, on
this segment, before we finish with, Derek's article,
this this is the kind of thing that
kinda keeps it's very trend very, very clear.
Trump asked to dismiss Georgia election interference rather
his lawyer does
in the Georgia election interference case because of
presidential immunity.
God, it must be nice to be in
that category, right, where you can just kinda
resign and not have criminal criminal accountability
or
have something, whether you think it's criminal or
not, have something that you're being charged for
as a crime.
And then getting elected as president and going,
can I just not have that happen now?
Am I now that I'm president, I'm immune
from I mean, it's just crazy to me.
I mean, I guess even arguably that would
the point is he is president, and but
I don't I don't know if it works
as
currently immune from crimes you may be committed
or like, the point is what if you
murdered somebody?
You get elected and it turns turns out
you killed a guy. It all breaks out.
Are you then immune from prosecution? I don't
find I don't see how that makes sense.
But either way you look at it, it's
very dishonest. You're just hoping to get out
of a crime. But, I mean, obviously, the
other side of the argument is whether you
think the charges are even legitimate,
which is a fair conversation. But
this is my point is from a non
partisan view, that this is what government does.
They abuse their power.
Simple, guys. I just hope wish people could
see it more like that.
Now, lastly, this does very much concern me.
I'm gonna go through this article in general.
I think it's important. I'm gonna be interviewing
Derek in the next week to talk about
this and the other article in general. Give
us more insight on this.
But the title, you can't hide, which again
is a direct quote from somebody citing what
they're working on.
And this is what Elon Musk is working
on. And also important to highlight, I'll say
highlight, I'll say right from the beginning,
multiple contracts
for this exact program were conducted
under the Biden administration.
I hope that should break down some of
these illusions. Explain for me if the Democrats
are fighting him and they all hate Elon,
trying to destroy him, why Biden's government would
allow a contract for him to profit.
Why? Because they're all working for the same
agenda, and this is one part of it.
It says Starlink is what is known as
a satellite Internet constellation,
which is operated by Starlink Services,
an international telecommunications company
that is wholly owned by Musk's aerospace company,
st bay SpaceX.
Starlink satellites were first launched by SpaceX in
2019.
Now, reportedly provide Internet access to people in
more than a 100 countries.
Now, obviously, you could argue there's benefit there
to people that didn't have it before. Maybe
it's cheaper. But I worry about what is
being created with this
At, you know, a choke point of say
or possible surveillance dynamics that are overlapped with
Israel, the current US,
deep state dynamic.
The most recent numbers on Starlink satellites say
the satellite constellation consists of more than 700
small satellites in low earth orbit. SpaceX has
plans for 12,000 satellites over the coming years.
Starlink is said to have more than 4,000,000
worldwide subscribers.
SpaceX has become a key partner in the
US military intelligence apparatus and is helping them
build a massive surveillance grid. So if we
can prove as we can this was happening
during Biden's administration,
how do you make sense of that?
Other than to realize that both sides have
the same agenda. It's only gonna continue under
Trump's administration. It's already going.
It says in September 2023,
Bloomberg reported that SpaceX had received its first
contract, all the links are in here, from
the US Space Force
to, quote, provide customized satellite communications for the
military
under SpaceX's new Star Shield program to move,
Bloomberg noted the move, it noted, would, quote,
extend Elon Musk's role as a defense contractor
for the Biden administration and now the Trump
administration.
It says StarShield will offer service to the
military for 1 year using SpaceX existing Starlink
satellites.
Air Force spokeswoman Anne Stefanik told Bloomberg that
the contract provides the StarShield end to end
service via the Starlink constellation.
User terminals, ancillary equipment,
network management, and other related services. That is
to say that the US military and intelligence
will be piggybacking off of Starlink satellites,
which are being sold to the average person
as a convenient and fast way to access
the Internet.
Now even right there, you could argue that
maybe, let's just say, Elon Musk and Sterling
are completely unaware, and yet the government that
clearly will do whatever it wants might use
that to spy on you. I mean, I
don't see why they wouldn't. They're doing it
with everything else anyway. My point, I think
or my my opinion, I would be obviously
that he is aware of that. But the
point is that they could do that whether
he is or not. So however you like
to make that make sense for you, as
long as you're willing to consider the point,
I'm fine with. Realize that I think that's
what's going on. The pursuit of military contracts
is not a new feature of SpaceX business
model.
In 20 in 2002,
it was reported that SpaceX had contact contracted
with an undisclosed
US intelligence customer.
More recently, Musk's Starlink contracted with the US
Department of Defense for an undisclosed amount to
provide Starlink communication to the Ukrainian military.
Now again, is this an outsider?
Right? Is is it isn't this exactly what
conservatives or republicans would call the deep state?
And yet they're working with him. They let
him buy Twitter. They you know, it's it's
just it's very easy to break down how
this floated narrative that would generally is accepted
by the partisans. It's just not true. It
can't be. But it says, in February 2024,
the Wall Street Journal reported on the existence
of yet another contract between SpaceX and the
US government.
The previously unknown 2021 contract was worth a
whopping $1,800,000,000
and related to the secretive star shield
satellite constellation. The US government agency contracting with
SpaceX was unlisted in the documents viewed by
the Wall Street Journal.
The size and rights of the agreement
illustrate a growing independence between SpaceX, a dominant
force in the space industry, and the national
security establishment.
You know, the deep state or whatever. I
I mean, honestly, the reality is it's a
nebulous concept that everybody has a different opinion
about. Again, it really means, as it's also
called the shadow government, just the unelected, never
changing
power structure.
I shouldn't say never changing, but, you know,
just they're stacked. They're not being voted in
and out or whatever that illusion is.
So what you can see
as even their writing,
very clearly, it illustrates a growing dominant force
in the industry of SpaceX and the national
security establishment. I find that to be a
little bit contradictory to what they're claiming is
going on.
The Wall Street Journal also reported that Gwynne
Shotwell,
president and COO of SpaceX, acknowledged there was,
quote, very good collaboration
between the intelligence community and SpaceX.
The same intelligence community, we're told, is going
after both of them. Right?
In March, Reuters spoke to 5 sources with
inside knowledge of a classified contract between SpaceX
and an undisclosed US agency intelligence agency.
According to these sources, SpaceX is building
a network of spy satellites
with none other than the US National Reconnaissance
Office,
the NRO,
as part of the previously reported $1,800,000,000
contract that they kept very secret.
You should be asking why.
Especially since this is supposed to be I
mean, we'll spy satellites, but the surface narrative
is that we're all fighting for, you know,
why is this kept secret from you if
the argument is to use them against bad
guys overseas?
I'm sure you can connect those dots.
If you never heard of the NRO, you
I forgive you because it's something that is
kept secret and historically was completely undisclosed until,
I forget the date, 1990
something.
But it says these same sources told Reuters
that if the program is successful, it would
quote, significantly
advance the US government and military ability to
rapidly find targets almost anywhere on the planet.
Is that what we all want? I mean,
even if you believe Trump will have this
power, who what happens when Democrats have control?
If that's the I just know how I
was laughing when I make that argument. It
seems so flimsy to pretend like you can't
think 4 years ahead. Bottom line though, is
anyone in the world could have this power.
We're talking about a structure that has nothing
to do with who you're voting in and
what the current government looks like. That's the
reality of these power structures. And you're allowing
these people to build something out that is
you know, we're talking about dystopian government technocratic
future stuff here, guys, and it's literally being
built out in front of you. And we
can't stop talking about these partisan games.
It says by April, the report appeared to
be confirmed
after it was announced that SpaceX would partner
with long time military contractor, Northrop Grumman, on
the classified spy satellite system.
The
the classified project was being developed by the
National Reconnaissance Office.
The NRO is an intelligence agency within the
US Department Department of Defense, which designs, builds,
launches, and operates the reconnaissance satellites for the
government, spying.
The agency was founded in 1961,
but its existence was classified secret until 1992.
Here's a little breakdown of that.
It says the NRO provides satellite intelligence to
several government agencies including the NSA,
the National Geospatial the, Steospatial Intelligence Agency, the
NGA, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, the DIA.
And funny, I'm I bet most people don't
even know some of these. And, also, recognize
that there's probably 15 more we've never even
heard of. Just like back in 1990, we
didn't know this place this one existed either.
That's how out of control this is. And
I'm arguing these these things are are governments
in and of themselves at this point.
Bottom line,
the the outsider fighting the deep state is
literally building
deep state spy satellites with the government that
is being contracted by the NRO that provides
surveillance for the NSA
and every other and the DIA and everything.
I mean, it's crazy to me how we
cannot see how clear this is. The inmate
SpaceX carried out its first mission to help
the NRO launch satellites into space. The headline,
SpaceX launches 1st batch of new spy satellites
for NRO. It's literally the headline. Tells you
everything you need to know. The number of
satellites launched into orbit by the NRO and
SpaceX were not disclosed to the public. But
I wanna play you this I've shown before.
And really, this does may this this really
does unnerve me.
Seeing just since 2019,
what your what the space, at least, as
as we know for all we know, it's
far far worse than this. But this is
what we're being shown
of all the satellites in space from 2019
to today
with apparently the majority of them being Starlink.
So the the kind of dumb things from
the whatever TikTok is covering the date. But
you can see this is from this is
2020 right now, and it goes from 2020
to 2024.
How is that enough to hear?
My god.
I mean, just this is this really is
terrifying.
Right? And so think about this as the
idea is, 1, kind of happening rapidly without
even really an acknowledgment of this.
How many of those have weapons on them?
I know we're supposed to pretend there's treaties,
but they don't follow any treaties. How long
until something like that's used? How long do
that false flag breaks out? I mean, my
god.
I don't know why this is not something
that is more I mean, I mean, I
do know why because it's it's being generally
ignored by most of the corporate media. And
by the way, you could look this up.
This this is not a secret. Like, these
you could find these on Space Starlink
websites.
This is where we currently are. So keeping
that in in what what we're talking about
in mind with what this is, the amount
of control
that is I mean, think, like, think about
the idea of what that shows.
When we're talking about spying in particular.
If they wait till we get to the
worst part. If they can look everywhere at
any moment, which I argue is probably already
happening, how much what more can how how
what further can this go?
Real I mean, real I mean, how and
why would it be hard to wrap your
mind around real time audio anywhere in the
world?
How how long until you are no longer
private on anything? I mean, realize even before
this point, we've already talked about and this
again, these kind of points are quickly reflexively
dismissed by people that don't wanna consider it,
but we have gone over peer reviewed science,
even World Economic Forum presentations where they're talking
about using energy or using any number of
things to read your thoughts.
It's not the thing of the future. It's
happening already. Using wifi signals to be able
to 3 d map rooms. This stuff is
all real.
So ask yourself what else is going on.
Back to this point, what Elon Musk is
literally building around you right now. Or at
least, it were whoever is building it, they're
making it look like he's doing it. I
mean, I I am I have a huge
skeptical point about whether he is even the
person behind all this stuff. Either way, it
is it's this is what's going on.
It says, while the public has been watching
with joy and awe as Elon Musk and
SpaceX bring America into the space race of
the next generation, that's kind of the general
mainstream media framing and mainstream alternative media framing
of all this.
Musk is actually launching spy satellites aboard the
SpaceX Falcon 9 Rockets. Right? So one thing
is happening is they're launching these and you're
being
they're covering it as some kind of other
experiment, but you're not being told that it
has spy satellites
for the government that we all pretend he's
fighting or other things that I argue are
probably also happening.
But it says the latest partnership between SpaceX
and the NRO came in October
when the company was awarded contracts for 9
launches
under the National Security Space Launch
phase 3 lane 1 program.
And this was $733,500,000
contract for 7 missions for the Space Development
Agency. There's so many of these 3 letter
acronyms and agencies.
And 2 for the NRO which were projected
to launch in late 2025 and 2026.
Again, so there's a contract being conducted during
Biden's administration
that gives the benefit of the accomplishment of
it to Trump.
Important to think about. Some supporters of Musk
might argue that he is simply being a
smart businessman
and cashing in on US government money while
remaining agnostic about how the technology supplies is
deployed.
Not only is such an excuse a cop
out and an attempt to at absolving Musk
and his cohorts of personal responsibility,
it is utterly ignorant to deny the danger
in supplying the world's largest military with an
even greater ability to spy on the world.
And obviously, far more than that.
And I in both ways. Not just the
largest military, but the the government most responsible
for the death of people around the world
or occupation occupying territory. But not even just
spying.
Again,
actual deployment of kinetic munitions is certainly possible.
Or any number of other things we could
talk about.
Again, experimentation. I mean, guys, this goes into
so many other realms.
Hypothetically, obviously, my point is the one we
can prove right now is the idea of
spy satellites. But it's just as possible that
these things could have anything else.
And and again, how long until that's just
the case?
I mean, historically, that's how these things go,
especially if it's in the interest of the
military. And it says, take a look at
the words of Christopher Scalise,
the director of the NRO.
To understand the danger posed by StarShield and
this is where it gets terrifying.
Scalise reports directly to both the director of
National Intelligence and the secretary of defense.
In October, Scalise spoke at an event hosted
by the Center For Strategic International Studies detailing
how the NRO is planning to use the
satellites provided by businesses like SpaceX.
Predominantly SpaceX, obviously, based on the amount through
there. Quote, from last June to December of
this year, we'll have probably launched a 100
satellites.
So we are going from the demo phase
to the operational phase. That's scary to me.
Where we're really going to be able to
start testing
all of this stuff, who knows what that
really encapsulates,
out in a more operational way. So now
we're going from the experimental stage to the
real time stage. We're gonna roll this out
in earnest. So if this is an earnest
now,
I am terrified to find out what earnest
looks like.
Or in a more operational way, it looks
like.
I I mean
now this is this is the part. He
says, what are they going to be doing?
They are part of the proliferated
architecture
to go off and and get us reasonably
high resolution imagery of the earth at a
high rate of speeds, Gliese says, in quotes.
He says, now you can't hide
because you're constantly being looked at.
Why would anybody want that other than the
government
on you?
Here's the actual clip, I think it's at,
was it? Let me see. Hey everybody.
I think it was 56.
Oh wait, let me double check. Hold on.
5426.
You.
So the answer is yes. They are NRO
owned if you if you mean it in
the sense that is NRO gonna be operating
them, the answer. So he being clear that
the NRO we're discussing is the one
in control of this, which is scary to
me. Yes.
And what are they gonna be doing? They
are part of the proliferated architecture to go
off and and, and get us
reasonably high resolution imagery of the of the
earth
at at a high rate of speed.
At a high rate of speed. This is
the part where you can't hide. Yeah. We're
we're constantly this idea of persistence where you
can So he repeats it right there too.
But the point is that in the larger
conversation,
he says it 2 different times earlier. That's
just the best one to play right there.
And you can watch for yourself. Or he
goes, now you can't hide, no. And she
just references, well, that's that part about you
can't hide. He goes, yeah, you can't hide.
It's like, gosh darn it. Just it's incredible
to me how
how this is not, you know, terrifying to
some people. And he says, however, Scalise warned
that with such an influx of satellites in
orbit and the heaps of data coming in,
humans won't be able to keep up.
Thus, and here becomes the the worst part
of all, he claimed the NRO will get
help from artificial intelligence.
Gee, I wonder if Musk will have a
part to play in that. It says, no
doubt Musk will be ready to offer some
assistance in the form of data gleaned from
Grok that you happily provide on Twitter. The
AI bot integrated into Twitter, which has gathered
billions of data points from the pop the
platform's
100 of users millions of users,
from the platform's 100 of millions of users.
Operation operating
a proliferated architecture means that it's no longer
possibly right to go off and for an
individual sitting at a control center to say,
I know what the satellite is doing. He
goes, we have to have the machines to
go off and help us there. We need
artificial intelligence, machine learning, and automated processes to
help us do that.
It says the relationship between the NRO and
Musk, SpaceX, and StarShield is obviously growing by
the day. Musk is increasingly allied with the
US military and intelligence apparatus and further entrenching
himself and his companies as part
of the military industrial complex.
Star Shield is part of SpaceX's special programs
group. And the vice president of SPG is
retired Air Force general Terrence
O'Shaughnessy.
In 2020,
after a 39 year career with the US
Air Force, Terrence O'Shaughnessy retired
and then later became a senior adviser to
Elon Musk on matters regarding SpaceX.
Now certainly that could be the easy way
to look at it. Or maybe you can
say that this was something like, when you
talk about intelligence, a lot of times this
is what it will look like. Somebody left
that field and started working for the private
industry or not actually. Or they simply left
to continue the operation under the guise of
a civilian asset? Like, that's how this stuff
can work. Now I'm not saying that's what's
happening. Could be, though. Consider that. Then it
says prior to joining SpaceX, O'Shaughnessy served with
the Air Force, United States Northern Command, NORTHCOM,
and, of course, NORAD.
North American Aerospace Defense Command. Not a small
thing. Where he was responsible to the president
and secretary of defense.
O'Shaughnessy, who was reportedly responsible for the DOD
supplying 16,000 medical personnel during the US military
national COVID response.
Alright. So he's part of NORAD directs,
answers directly to the president of secretary of
defense.
Secretary and the the the secretary excuse me.
I can't talk. The president and the secretary
of defense
then decides to retire and join SpaceX to
continue the technocratic overtake. But it says O'Shaughnessy
called for, quote, an initiative sensing grid
from undersea
to maritime
to terrestrial
to air to a space based layer, which
can ultimately lead to a system of systems.
Now this is before
he left the military. That's important to highlight.
But does that sound familiar to you?
Does what he what he's saying there
sound familiar?
I'm trying to find it right now.
That's so frustrating. I got these all lined
up, it's trying to time that perfectly and
I can't find it now.
There it is. So, what I just read,
a intuitive sensing grid from undersea to maritime,
to terrestrial, to air, to space. Well, it
sounds like something, doesn't it?
And if this system is in place,
and I will tell you, it will be
on land,
it will be on sea, it will be
in air, we will have a proper tracking
system.
Finally complete
the biometric
entry exit visa tracking system. Would
Yeah. Sure sounds like something I've heard before.
And he goes on to say, however, he
emphasized that this grid is brought together in
a resilient,
redundant architecture where the military can, quote, effectively
command and control
the, quote, network capabilities.
They will have established
and and they will have established an all
domain sensor network where anything can sense anything.
That does not sound like a world I
wanna live in. That sounds like a 1984
technocratic dystopia,
which is what we're all trying to tell
you. They're literally building out around you while
you're high fiving about what Trump said that
day. And just to be clear, as much
as it the current says, it's it can
feel like you're attacking one side in this
because that's the current power structure.
My point is that who if it was
Biden doing this, we'd be saying the same
thing. And the the democrats, I would be
saying while you're high fiving well, high fiving
what Biden said he did that day. It's
the same point.
I just hope the partisan's concealable, I guess,
doesn't matter to them because they ultimately wanna
believe in the one person. But I want
you to I hope you know my opinion
is that's not the majority. I think it's
the minority today.
But either way,
I hope you can take the time to
stand back and recognize that whether you think
they're doing it on purpose or not, it's
very clear where this is going.
Interestingly enough, the NRO
has a history of some pretty shady activity,
which is this.
And this is just completely what jumped into
my mind. I asked Eric about this and
I
I'll say it when I'm done reading this.
But something about what this outlines stands out
to me
as a very specific entity.
And realize we're talking about the infiltration of
the government, which probably just gave it away.
But the point is the secret agency,
the secret agency's secret budgets yield lost billions,
officials say, was a New York Times headline
that read in January 1996.
That's remember when they when the NRO became
exposed.
The story detailed how the NRO, which had
only been publicly acknowledged by the US government
4 years earlier, had, quote, lost track of
more than $2,000,000,000
in classified money in 1995.
Oh, I'm sorry. It was 1992.
So 96. This is where the article is
talking about it.
It says 1 senate intelligent committee,
a aid, blamed the lost funds
on the NRO's, quote, own internal secrecy.
More than $1,000,000,000
in funds would eventually be found.
$2,000,000,000
they've lost. Sounds like something else we keep
hearing about. Right? Like, the Pentagon lost funds.
I mean, this is this is how the
government operates, guys.
This is just this is just a very
provable and obvious example of one part of,
I think, is how the whole system works.
Again, they eventually, quote, fined a 1,000,000,000 to
fill that gap. But it says, critics of
the reconnaissance office said today, this is a
quote from the article that from 1996,
that the money had been hidden
in several rainy day accounts that secretly solidified
into a quote, slush fund.
Guys, that's just how your government works. That's
not different than today. All the black operation,
the black budget, black money, it's everywhere. Most
of the money that goes flowing overseas is
going somewhere else than what you think it
is. But it says, interestingly, the report states
that the NRO, quote, operates in the deepest
secrecy more so than any government agency.
Think about that and realize who's working with
this group.
The Times describes the NRO as more of
a set of interlocking,
compartmentalized
groups operating mostly in the dark about what
each other is working on.
As of 1996, the NRO was running a
$28,000,000,000
a year black budget
or classified
above top secret for military and intelligence programs.
Guys, that's 1996.
Can you imagine what's going on today?
Now first off, how does this not just
represent the deep state?
Completely black budget, but above top secret, compartmentalize,
and even know what each other is doing.
Or you could realize that or I would
argue that there's something else driving that. Again,
just just my opinion here, but it stands
out as overlapping with exactly what this group
would do. 1 month before the terrorist attacks
of September 11, 2021 or 2001,
former air force intelligence officer Brian b Reagan
was arrested by FBI agents at Dulles Air
International Airport for stealing
material from the NRO.
Apparently, they said he want to sell it
to foreign countries.
A decade later, in 2012, McClatchy DC is
a is a a platform, a a outlet,
released an investigation detailing how the NRO was
accused of pressuring its professional polygraphers
to obtain intimate details on the private lives
of thousands of job applicants and employees.
Quote, the National Reconnaissance Office is so intent
on extracting confessions of personal or illicit behavior
that officials have admonished polygraphers
who refused to go after them and rewarded
those who did, sometimes with cash bonuses,
said the report. The confessions collected by the
polygraphers include drug use,
child abuse, suicide attempts, depression, and sexual preferences.
The NRO record records the polygraph sessions and
stores them in a private database.
McClatchy remember who's working with this group right
now. McClatchy reviewed hundreds of documents, internal memos,
and emails, and found that the NRO was
pushing
ethical and potentially legal boundaries by establishing
a database,
which tracks the number of confessions per applicant
or employee and then uses the number of
confessions extracted by polygraphers to grade them in
annual performance reviews.
The NRO was also accused of requiring employees
and applicants to take multiple polygraph tests in
an effort to obtain details about a wide
range of personal behavior.
You're starting to get the intro the point
that I'm getting at. You know, who else
acts exactly like this? Bizarrely,
while the NRO was reportedly interested in knowing
the criminal background of its current and future
employees,
the agency did not turn over information to
law enforcement when a contractor they worked with
admitted to molesting a child.
The contractor was a substitute teacher in Escondido,
California and admitted to abusing a 3rd grade
student in 2005.
Yeah. This isn't the eighties, guys. It's 2,005
or some long time ago. McClatchy reported that
the NRO never contacted the Escondido
police department or the school district where the
man had been employed.
Finally, in December oh, before we get to
that, actually. So
my point on this
is this seems strikingly similar to what we've
seen the Israeli intelligence apparatus do in every
single field we've seen them work in. On
top of that, all the groups they seem
to find and work through. And I guess
this is not just the Israeli. Same with
the US government as well, but I think
that's why they intertwine.
There's groups that they fund to work against
their adversaries, like, for example, the NEK. Now,
admittedly, at least as I understand it, it's
not a group that they created,
but it's a group that both the Israeli
and US app intelligence apparatus have funded and
cultivated in order to try to supplant the
current Israeli Iranian government.
And these are maniacs. The this is the
a perfect example of a radical extremist element
that they just ignore because they wanna work
with them, like the moderate rebels or, you
know, Saudi Arabia,
the government anyway.
And the point is that if you look
at the MEK and look at how they
conduct themselves, it is you might as well
read from this article.
Exactly the same thing about sexual preferences, about
forcing confessions. And guys, look at what the
Israeli government just they've been doing nonstop. And
it's done long before October 7th. Now, this
is just my opinion. It's just it's it's
just an overlap.
Very well could just be what they've done
because they want to or because they did
it because they recognize with Israel. The point
is it could be no connection.
But I do find it interesting with what
we see, how
invasive,
how in infiltrating infiltrative,
how much they have infiltrated the
Israeli government into this government. And you wonder,
at what point did that truly happen?
Is this just simply their ask you know,
as Netanyahu says 20, 30 years ago, we
controlled US congress.
We divide you know, fight them against each
other. We'd what we could he said it
many times.
Maybe this is why.
The most secret agency in all of it.
You see what I'm saying? Like, this is
very strange to me. And this is what
Elon Musk is working with to build a
spy satellite network
that can look anywhere. You can't hide.
Now it says, finally, in December 2013, the
NRO launched a reconnaissance satellite known as USA
247.
NRO launched night 39 or NRO 39. Where
the launch while the launch of the satellites
would usually go unnoticed by the general public,
NRO 39 generated controversy
after the office
of the director of National Intelligence
tweeted a logo of the satellite. The logo
featured an an animated octopus
wrapping its tentacles around the world with the
phrase, nothing is beyond our reach.
That's December 5, 2023.
Why would they do that? Now, I have
the mind that those things are accidental.
Or why would they, you know, they would
have deleted it. So clearly, this is something
I think was you,
you know, there's a lot of ways we
they where they use something that is that
you would be upset with because it's like
like we're dealing with today.
They divulge something that they would otherwise hide
from you to get you to react in
a way that justifies the next step. It's
constant.
But that's just my opinion. I mean, it
could just be this guy did it by
accident. Who knows?
I don't think that. But so they reveal
this. And it get in. Nothing is beyond
our reach.
Now it says under Elon Musk is a
technocrat, not a hero. It says, with a
full understanding of the history of the National
Reconnaissance Office, the Starshield program, and the extensive
relationship between SpaceX and the military intelligence networks,
we can clearly state that Elon Musk is
a tool for the military industrial complex. Now
you could argue
without his knowledge or that he's agnostic about
it all. But either way, you're building out
the thing you claim you're fighting.
Even further, it says Elon Musk is a
technocrat,
a proponent of technocracy,
a system wherein management of governments is handled
by technical experts, often involving technological focused solutions.
Now, I'd argue that's a very, very, very,
very
experts often involving technological focused solutions. Now I'd
argue that's a very, very kind way to
frame that. Now you could argue that's one
version of this. I think where we can
see the clear embodiment of technocracy today, it's
it's much more darker than that in my
opinion. Either way, it's a fair
general ex,
description.
The problem though
is we're watching this play out without your
knowledge while you're being told you're voting for
like, we're watching this technocratic control structure. That's
actually what I recently wrote about.
Right? That the technocratic coup we're watching. I
mean, they're we're watching this play out. We're
watching little trial balloons happen all over the
place. And they're even floating the idea of
these freedom cities, which is the same conversation.
Now, it says, when we examine the world
of 2024,
we clearly see the signs of technocratic influence.
For example, we can see this influence in
the wealthiest companies and the most influential CEOs.
These individuals are running companies that have amassed
large amounts of financial wealth as well as
unfathomable
amounts of digital data on all of their
customers.
From Jeff Bezos at Amazon, Bill Gates at
Microsoft, mucks Mark Zuckerberg at Facebook, lesser known
names at Google and Apple, and, of course,
Elon Musk, Tesla, SpaceX, Twitter, we can see
the technocratic
ideology.
In fact, Elon Musk has assigned himself the
title of techno king
at Tesla.
A term similar to the technocrats, technate king.
How do you miss these overlaps? He's literally
telling you what he's doing.
These men and their colleagues in various technological
industries wield immense power through their companies,
wealth, and cultural influence. These individuals have enough
money, resources, and connections to shape a lot
to shape elections, steal them, if you will,
gen geoengineer climate,
cause dips in the stock market, to name
just a few examples.
They are the technocrat class of 2024.
Elon Musk is perhaps the most infamous technocrat
who is now working directly with the president
Trump elect. He has advocated for implanting chips
in human brains, transhumanism,
turned Twitter into an everything app similar to
China's WeChat, merging with AI, and now is
working directly
with the US military and intelligence to develop
a classified spy satellite network. On the record,
by the way.
As he writes,
what will it take
to educate individuals who profess to love freedom
and value privacy to reject Musk's Starlink?
It's a good question.
And I really do think that we're at
a point now where
there's a lot more reason, has a lot
more evidence
to push back on this.
Now,
let's get into
oh, here. These are just the highlighted
parts of that. To finish up in general,
here's a couple of articles, and I wanna
overlap this again. So the whole point is
to bring this back to cycle, to circle,
like, we try to do often in these
shows to the beginning points about whatever's going
in the milk they're using, the translation of
mRNA through the milk, the idea of what
might be used, you know, all these open
possibilities.
But first to highlight just the point we're
making, here's Bloomberg. Elon Musk wins Space Force
contract for Star Shield. Realize that's very clear.
The link to this video, if you wanna
check that out itself. The link to the
video where he's saying this, if you wanna
check out the guy from what's his name?
Scalise.
And this just kinda blew me away. Like,
this this is from 2023.
And this guy this is like the 5
g dynamic where we know that they're not
testing it. They admit they're not testing it,
and we just go, okay. And we let
it keep going.
SpaceX Starlink Internet satellites, quote, leak
so much radiation that it's hurting radio astronomy
scientists say.
Now, again, that doesn't mean that it's translating
to you with the on Earth, but how
many before that starts to happen? And maybe
that's not possible. I don't know. But I
think that's crazy to think about. And there's
gotta be some level of byproduct there. I
just don't know. I get the sense that
in most cases, they never really care about
the consequences of what might happen. Especially the
ones they don't even know are possible because
they're not choosing to look.
It worries me.
Same point going into the overlap of this
and coming from the article. The use of
artificial intelligence to make the government more efficient,
to
help NRO spy on everything in the world,
or whatever else they can fathom under the
guise of or it could be the guys
or the actual building out of this.
This is from Digital Digital Trends from August
2024.
A modular supercomputer
built
to birth,
scary part of the word, scary word to
use, to birth
AGI.
Artificial general intelligence.
Could be online by next year. Hey. Perfect
time for Trump's technocratic overtake. And it says
AI startup, SingularityNET,
is set to deploy multi levered cut multilevel
cognitive computing network in the coming months. It's
designed to host and train with models that
will form the basis of
AGI.
Capable of matching, even potentially exceeding,
human cognition.
Here we go, guys. I mean, again, it
could be that these are all hype and
it's never even possible, which is something we've
considered. Or they're want us even if it
is, do they want us to think they've
gotten there so they can just give us,
you know, algorithmic data they can put and
claim it's AI telling us what to do.
Or it is possible. It is happening. I
mean, either way,
this is the dystopian next step. Like, I
don't understand how we don't realize how obviously
this could go awry. Once you pass this
point, and everybody's talked about this, you have
an exponential increase. An artificial general intelligence that
can exceed human cognition
will go from that point to so far
beyond we can even fathom in 40 in
half a second,
in whatever the time frame is, in a
rapid scale because of exponential learning with the
way that they can grow.
And that means that we're at a point
where suddenly I mean, how long until they,
like, out of every movie we've seen, go,
oh, okay. These guys are the problem.
Clearly, these people are the problem. And whether
they sweep us all under the rug as
humanity or identify that the governments are destroying
our entire world, hopefully, we get it right.
Hopefully, we don't even end up in that
position. To realize that this is what they're
driving you into.
I hope I'm
wrong. And then bringing it back to the
larger conversation,
the Internet of bio things is upon us.
I wrote I discussed this on January 20th
this year. And this is the point about
the the Internet of bio nano things. The
interface between the artificial intelligence, the biological,
processes, injections,
and the idea of having, like, an inner
like a like a smart dust overlap.
Something that is nanotech that can flow around
everything that will be manipulated via whatever systems
they're using. And if you think this is
crazy, guys, this this image right here is
directly from their own peer reviewed studies from
World Economic Forum Discussions. This is not hypothetical.
This is already in existence.
They are telling you that's where we are.
So when you see things like this,
science girl shares this, a nanobot
helping a sperm with motility issues. So next
time they show you that big clunky thing
and they go, breaking, cutting edge, realize you're
being played and they're literally dealing with things
that are this small.
Oh, helping an egg. Again, they could be
lying, of course. But I I of the
mind, this is what's going on. It says
these metal helixes are so small, they can
completely wrap around the tail of a single
sperm and assist it all the way along.
This is just one example, guys. I mean
and yet we're pushing back on the idea
that something might have been in there that
we don't know about in regard to shots
or whatever else or spraying in the world.
I mean, I'm gonna play you some things
right now that proves to you that this
is already in your world.
First,
a quick clip from a symposium
about 20 years ago.
10 years ago, the symposium discussing something 10
years before about what is already out there.
God only knows where it is now.
Literally scatter this stuff like dust
or embed it into a sheet of paper.
This was commercially released 10 years ago.
It's a tiny computer and it features data
processing, data storage, wireless comms.
And it's probably as close to the true
SmartDAS vision from the early DARPA days as
we've come so far.
They're designed to harvest energy from the environment
around them and to communicate by our mesh
network. Okay. So this is a symposium and
I've brought this up many times. Actually, I'll
grab the original link for you so you
can prove it for yourself, which we always
should.
What was it?
Oh, yeah. MakerCon.
There it is.
So the point
for before I show come back to the
actual screen is, you know, you can look
at this, guys. I mean, this was 20
years ago we're talking about. The symposium was,
I think, 2011.
This is about 10 years before that.
The mew chip, that's that's a salt crystal
you're looking at. And as I understand it,
it's way smaller today.
That is something you could blow in the
air that will land on your skin as
Eddie highlights will use your own body's energy
to actually be able to relay information. Two
way comps.
DARPA designed, not this one, but the one
he's talking about next, right here.
And that this is real time. This is
a long time ago, in fact. Now here
is even a decade before that.
Now, in the the time frame gets a
little bit fuzzy in regard to when and
how these things were deployed. The realize the
realization is a group called Dust Networks was
doing this decades ago. And I've covered this
extensively, and I'll give you the article. Watch
for yourself. This is and by the way,
this things are have to use the way
back machine to even find these things. Here's
an image or rather a video from that
group that is that had a government contract
that was using these for shipping lanes in
the ocean.
It's just like anything else, like dioxins. It's
incredible. These things can be so easily demonstrated,
and yet we act like we're not even
sure where we are. This is where we've
been.
They're using this stuff to roll out what's
coming next.
My name is Chris Piestar, and I am
the founder and chief technologist of Dust Networks.
I got started in this business way back
in the nineties when I coined the phrase
smart dust to describe the vision of the
future where wireless sensors become ubiquitous and improve
the quality of all of our lives.
SmartMesh IP is a revolutionary new product that
brings all of the benefits of reliability, security,
and low power that we've developed for the
industrial process automation market. And brings that into
the world of the Internet protocol.
So first and foremost, SmartMesh IP is IP.
We use the IPD 6 Internet protocol to
send So get it to avoid all the
other stuff, just cut to the chase.
I just wanna show you the image he
uses to demonstrate what they're doing. And realize,
even at this time he's doing the video,
this is not the nineties. This is this
is wild. It's a real world example.
Oh, maybe this is the wrong one.
It serves the purpose of what he just
said at the beginning there. There's another video.
I might just be going too fast. I
think I did this last time where he
where he she shows him giving you a
demonstration about what it looks like and he's
basically just throwing what looks like sand in
the air, you know. And the point is
as we've you know what? I'll bring this
one up too and this will make the
point even more clear. So here's the Maker
Con point or the the discussion from 10
years ago. And again, they're about a 10
year old thing they're talking about. But in
this case, let's see.
Is it this one?
I think so.
No. Dang it. What what the what was
that called?
I can't remember now. It was so basically,
the it was a Wells Fargo
or was it it was a bank that
was using creating nanotech
smart dust patent around the idea of using
that at an ATM.
Gosh. I can't remember the name. I'll I'll
include it in the in the links before
and the, the links after the show if
I can remember what it's called.
Let's see.
Oops.
That probably won't come up, search for it.
Oh, maybe it does.
Yeah. I mean, this is this isn't the
one I was looking at, but look at
that. So this just pops up. And there's
Wells Fargo too.
2016.
System and methods that facilitate authenticating a user
making a payment using microelectrical
systems or called MEMs. That's another I e
smart dust. Right there.
I just think it's so wild how we
can't be honest with ourselves. You know why?
Partisan screamers. That's why. Partisan manipulators
and the people manipulating them that keep us
trapped in the mud, and then scream at
you when you point out that we're trapped
because you're black pills or whatever. It's all
right in front of you.
And I'll include the show where we go
over this in mostly at in most of
the stuff we discussed, January 22nd. Is smart
dust already in use? Yes. And in the
population, and was COVID 19 an attempted experiment
the next step? I think so. Now to
end,
I'll include this as well so you have
this patent. But I'll I'll wanna try to
find that show. I'll include that too if
I can.
But to end, just a general point to
overlap it with what we're saying overall. Don't
forget, we already talked about this. It's being
reported that Israel is testing all sorts of
new weapons they can't recognize.
I think we're at a stage where it's
whether it's Zionist in Israel, whether it's Elon
Musk and the NRO. There's all this stuff
happening right now where we are being
shuffled rapidly into something. And I think they're
testing and trying to figure out like, I
think that just like with COVID 19. I
think it became very clear that
there was something they were trying to ex
execute on a timeline that just did not
happen.
You guys can decide for yourself. But I
think whether you put together put the come
to the same conclusion that I do from
this
or not.
The facts are there to be laid out,
and the information shows you that we are
not being led in the direction that they
claim we are. God, that shit has to
matter more than anything. I'm very concerned about
how that comes together. And I'm worried about
what we're seeing play out in front of
us
mostly because I think a lot of this
stuff is already happening.
But I'll leave it there for today. I
really hope this can be reached or this
can reach people and that you guys will
help us get reached and share it with
other people. Make clips, tag me in it.
I say that often, but very few people
take me up on that, guys. If you
care about this work and you wanna pluck
out part of the show, you guys can
pluck this part part of the show out,
put yourself on the screen, make comments about
it. I don't hopefully, not in a TikTok
version way. But, you know, I and I
I'll share it. You know what I mean?
Like, the point is, it's not just about
promoting this work, but it's about promote promote
or my work rather, but promoting the content.
You know? And make how about make take
what I'm talking about
and just discuss it on your own.
Include the link so people can look show
what, you know, what we're talking about, but
I'll happily share that. Just get this stuff
out there. I am thoroughly convinced that whether,
you know, it's not just eLab, but people
in this field when I argue, like, the
IMA, objective nonpartisan entities,
are being more suppressed than we realize.
And it's not about being completely ignored because
that would be too obvious, but it's about
making sure that these things never organically break
out the way that we see things do
often when they shouldn't,
often when it seems artificial.
That's a whole different conversation, but all I
hope is that you could take the time
to get this reach however you can because
people just need to see this. That's all
I really care about, is about changing where
we are.
That's, you know, stopping people from being murdered
overseas
in the name of everyone here using your
tax dollars. Now tomorrow, I'm gonna be talking
about foreign policy. I'll I'll try to make
that the the focal point, but anything else
that pops up, we'll cover what's going on
in new developments in administration, more,
Syria, we're gonna talk about in general. We'll
talk about Lebanon, Gaza, more so than we
did today and anything else that pops up.
So thank you for continuing to support this
platform. As I mentioned earlier today, you know,
we do we have
ridiculous costs coming in for all these lawsuits
we're fighting.
And I genuinely think it's about trying to
suppress and stop what we're doing. I mean,
I think it's pretty obvious based on the
time frame and how it's worked out. And
even the last thing I mentioned about how
they responded, like, almost exposing the fact that
they wanted this to make it they even
at their expense, end up being a financial
detriment to me. I just think that's very
What law firm acts like that? It's it's
absolutely obvious to me.
But the point is,
for no other reason than if you believe
in the content and how we're doing this.
If you believe in what we're doing and
you support the work, then
help us continue.
That's all that really matters. All the rest
of it is all noise. My point is
that we're going through a lot of attacks
and we need more support than ever. But
I want you to do it because you
believe in what we're doing and you believe
what we're trying to fight for. So thank
you for tuning in. Thank you for sharing
the work. I love you all. As always,
question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
Let's
also be clear.
The future is not just happening.
The future is built by us.
You know, the the whole idea that humans
have, you know, this they they have this
soul or spirit and they have free will
and nobody knows what's happening inside me. So
whatever I choose, whether in the election
or whether in the supermarket, this is my
free will, that's over.
Today, we have the technology to hack human
beings on a massive scale. Yeah. I mean,
everything is being digitalized.
Everything is being monitored. In this time of
crisis, you have to follow science. Decarbonization
of sea economy. Where are they traveling? How
are they traveling?
What are they eating?
What are they consuming on the platform?
So individual
carbon footprint tracker.
Stay tuned. We don't have it operational yet,
but this is something that we're working on.
I mean, my top recommendation, honestly, would be
just to have a carbon tax. Often said
that you should never allow a good crisis
to go to waste because a crisis is
an opportunity
to also do good reforms
that in normal times people will never agree
to. But in a crisis, you see that
we have no chance. So so so so
let's do it. Surveillance,
people could look back in a 100 years
and identify
the coronavirus
epidemic
as the moment
when a new regime of surveillance
took over, especially
surveillance under the skin,
which I think is maybe the most important
development of the 21st century,
is this ability
to hack human beings to go under the
skin, collect biometric data,
analyze it, and understand people better than they
understand themselves. This, I believe, is maybe the
most important event of the 21st century. By
hacking organisms,
elites, they gain the power to reengineer
the future of life itself. Itself. Because once
you can hack something,
you can usually also engineer it. Natural selection
is replaced by intelligent design. The era of
inorganic life is now beginning.
In the coming decades,
AI and biotechnology
will give us godlike abilities
to reengineer life and even to create completely
new life forms. We are about to enter
a new era
of inorganic life shaped by intelligent design,
our intelligent design. Body will be safe
if not everybody is vaccinated.
Are you vaccinated, if I may ask? Yeah.
I am. Yeah. I mean, I'm very pro
vaccination. We've, it's the science is unequivocal. The
difference of this forced,
industrial revolution is it doesn't change what you
are doing. It changes you if you take
a genetic editing. Right. Just as an example,
it's you who are changed. And, of course,
this has a big impact on your identity.
Can you imagine, sir, the 10 years when
we are sitting here, we have an implant
in our,
brains,
And,
I can immediately feel because you all will
have implants.
I can and we measure
your brainwaves.
And I can immediately
tell you how the people react or I
can feel
how the people react,
to your answers.
Is it imaginable?
Just think of sensors
planted into our brains. Basically, implanted in your
skull. So,
but it would be
flush with your skull. So you basically,
take out a chunk of skull, replace put
put the neurolink device in there.
You you put the the electrode you'd insert
the electrode threads very carefully into the the
brain. To build basically an interface
to the brain.
Yeah.
Electrode to neuron interface
at a mic micro level. Okay. What is
that? Like, I mean, like, a plug in
my head that's gonna fit into a hard
drive? Like, how does that work? Yeah. Yeah.
Chip and a bunch of tiny wires.
This this would be implanted surgically,
And it would do what could you input?
Could you download JIM? Mhmm. Yes. What what
what
the long term aspiration for neuropsych was would
be to achieve a symbiosis with, artificial intelligence.
What we have seen so far, it's corporations
and governments collecting data about where we go,
who we meet, what movies we watch.
The next phase
is the surveillance
going under our skin. COVID is critical
because
this is what convinces people
to accept, to legitimize
total biometric surveillance.
One of the things that I think is
so essential to free and open societies is
freedom of thought.
And up until now, the conversation we've been
having is around freedom of speech. Once we
can access people's thoughts and access people's emotion,
we have to create a space that enables
people to think freely.
What's the first industrial revolution we need to
is a
fusion
of our physical,
our ritual,
and our biological
identities.
It is important
to use the COVID 19 crisis
as a timely
opportunity.
So people assume,
we are just going back,
to the good old world, which we had,
and everything will be normal again
in how we are used to normal in
the old fashion.
This is,
let's say, fiction.
It will not happen.
See,
cut, which we have now,
is much too strong,
in order not to leave traces. Also be
clear.
The future is not just happening.
The future is built by us.