Knowledge Fight - #130A: Endgame, Part 1

Episode Date: February 19, 2018

Today, Dan and Jordan embark on an adventure that is probably a very dumb idea: covering the entirety of Alex Jones' very stupid "documentary" Endgame. Dan found approximately 130 specific instances of Alex either lying or "playing with the truth," so this could take a while. In this first episode, the gents learn that Alex doesn't know what "quote" means, but he does love Nazi propaganda films.

Andy and Kansas, you're on the air. Thanks for holding. Hello, Alex. I'm a first-time caller. I'm a huge fan. I love your work. I love you. Hey, everybody. Welcome back to a special edition of Knowledge Fight. I'm Dan. I'm Jordan. We are a couple dudes that like to sit around, drink novelty beverages, and talk a little bit about Alex Jones. That is indeed what we do. Dan, is there a special hook for this special episode that perhaps is not the case on other episodes that we have done in the past?

Indeed, there is. And that is that I know a lot about Alex Jones' documentary end game. And I don't know anything about Alex Jones' documentary end game. That was the most successful thing that you and I have ever done. Let's quit. We don't need to do this whole episode now. Indeed. We fucking nailed that. For everybody who's checking us out and watching this, who doesn't listen to our podcast, we do a podcast where we cover Alex Jones and deconstruct a lot of the bullshit that he says. And today we are rewarding or punishing our listeners one way or the other.

We're definitely punishing me. Yes, that is true. With a long form episode wherein we will be covering the entirety of Alex Jones' documentary end game plan for global enslavement. Yes. And this is entirely Dan's idea. I had no input on it whatsoever. So anybody who with a nasty email does that. For instance, if you are one of our many new listeners and you suddenly find yourself in this situation, send an email to knowledgefightatgmail.com. Tell Dan what a terrible idea this was and how great I am.

I think a listener actually suggested we do this. I'm only taking half the blame. Well, then happy birthday to whoever is listening. Yeah. This should be the birthday present for all of you assholes because this took me for fucking ever to research and I'm glad it's over. So also what's my other... Oh, some of the narratives that we're going to run into, some of the things Alex Jones says that we're going to discuss, we have discussed on past episodes of the podcast.

So there might be a little bit of overlap. If you're a regular listener of the podcast, you may hear some things you've heard before, but I want this to stand alone as a thing. So I don't mind the idea that we repeat a little bit. So just have that in mind. It won't be too much. This is not just for our listeners. This is for posterity as well. Indeed. When the squirrel people have overtaken and run this great land of ours, they will look back and think, man, those two assholes got it right one time.

Sure. I welcome our squirrel leadership that is forthcoming. Yeah. Thank you very much for taking down the spiders, guys. A couple other quick points we are going to try to not drink until late this episode. We are going to try to not drink for at least the next 45 minutes, but we will get to the booze eventually and then that's this thing will kick into high gear. Yeah. Bear with us for the sober part of the show and then after a while we'll fucking nail it. And then what was the last thing? Oh yeah, Alex Jones sucks. And I'm going to give you this in advance for everybody listening and Jordan.

There is a bibliography for end game. You can find I've posted a link to it on our bibliography on Knowledge Fight.com. And one of the things that's really troubling about it. One of those is a bibliography and the other one is the bare bones of words being written down. It legit wouldn't fly in junior high. Like as a sort of work cited page. Because we got a situation where Alex Jones has a bunch of insert here in the bibliography. Like I'll get around to it later. Wait what? And he just never filled it in. Wait what? You can't do that. You can't just have a bibliography page with like, and we'll get to it later. And some of them are egregious because they're huge points that he's

trying to make. And he's like, insert here proof the Rothschilds are evil. What are you doing? You can't do that. Of course. And then the other thing is spiritually I'm right. And then sooner or later, history will bear that out. Right. And then the other thing is that Alex Jones, I mean, he talks a lot about how he came up reading encyclopedias that his dad had. And he loved encyclopedias on the mean streets. And unfortunately, I would say about a third of the references that he makes work cited pages are in CARTA pages. Microsoft and CARTA. Yes, they're in CARTA pages for like Play-Doh or whatever. On like CDs that would also come with 12 hours of free internet. That's what you're saying. I think that has to be the case because

quite frankly, I looked, they're not online anymore. No, of course not. These in CARTA pages. So it's just dead links all over the place. Also, he uses Wikipedia as a source a bunch, and then also tons of his own work. There's a ton of info wars in prison planet that are used as work cited pages. Well, yeah, but those are reliable. He uses his own documentary Terror Storm as a reference. He references his own documentary as they work cited for his current documentary. Yes, it's a complete disaster. And we'll get through all of it. But I'm just saying this to Garner. Now, I don't believe anything Ken Burns has ever made. Has he just been citing his own documentaries and all of his documentaries? I respect it. I thought baseball was suspiciously

similar to the Civil War. There's overlap. So all I'm doing is trying to garner a healthy level of pity before we get into this to say that I dig through that mud to get to a lot of this stuff. No, you are Jesus. Yes. Thank you very much. So now let's jump into it without further ado. Well, you're white Jesus. Let's get that right. Fair enough. Okay, let's jump into this and begin the Alex Jones documentary and game. Oh, man. I'm already out. This is terrible. Wow. Oh, yeah. Countless people will hate the New World Order and will die protesting against it. I already have to pause by HG Wells. I already have to pause because Alex is misusing this quote.

Oh, yeah. This is a quote from HG Wells book, The New World Order. And he's just taking the quote out of context. I read the entire book in order to be that's 16 seconds in already got to read this book already already off to a bad start. It turns out that what he was talking about was that there was a massive change that needed to happen in the world because you had masses of undereducated, underemployed youth and the problem was only going to get worse. It was going to necessitate a change in how things were operated. Yes. And it was just inevitable that, you know, we'd have to change if we were going to have any hope for most people to be able to continue living. And when that change comes, many will resist it. But what Alex is doing here is that

he's cutting pieces of the quote out while he's reading the quote and not mentioning that he's cut out pieces of the quote. Huh. Here from the actual text of HG Wells book, you'll hear what he's cutting out. Quote, countless people from Maharajahs to millionaires and from Puka Sahibs to pretty ladies will hate the New World Order, be rendered unhappy by frustration of their passions and ambitions through its advent and will die protesting against it. So what he's saying here is he's what Alex has conveniently cut out are the people who specifically HG Wells is saying will be against this New World Order of equity where people are able to survive. These people specifically Maharajahs, which is kings, millionaires, Puka Sahibs, which is a term that colonialists

made people call them the British in particularly when they colonized Burma. They made the Burmese people call them Puka Sahibs, which basically translated to pure white gentlemen and pretty ladies. You know, that's just a term of the time for like social elite high, high class dames. And you've got to understand HG Wells is also British. So lady isn't just a woman. It's a term of title. We are 16 seconds in and Alex Jones has used a quote that should be used against Alex Jones. Anyway, good. I hope they die. Wow. Wow. Appeared before the congressional committee to tell what I knew of activities with this is Smedley Butler. We'll get into him later that I know now. You know, you might want to say the word

Smedley Butler. You might like Smedley. What is this? What is going on right now? Are we in PG Woodhouse? What's happening? This is Kat's meat potter pure white. He's a good lad. He's a tough egg. He's a tough egg to crack. He's a tough baby. To attempt a set of a fascist dictatorship, the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society. Sure. And we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies. Any point yet? Anywhere we're going with this formal agreement that will end the United States as we know it. Nope. And he took the step without approval from either the US Congress or the people of the United States. The secret

organizations of the world power elite are no longer secret. It's known as the Builderburg. A lot of jump cuts. Could their objective be world domination? A lot of tiny little bits of broadcasts. Jim Tucker. I've chased Builderburg. Hey, Jim. 30 years. I'll never give up the chase. This guy's Jim Tucker. Jim Tucker is chasing Builderburg. Jimmy T. Nothing less than world government. I'm not comfortable with that at all. Who elected these guys to run the planet? They are the elitists. They feel they should run the world for their own selfish interests. Now we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. Builderburg is making great progress toward a world government.

So are we going anywhere with this? Not really. Builderburg is the bad guy. Builderburg is a bad guy. Why don't they have anything else going on yet? Well, here's the thing. I want to talk to you a little bit quickly about Jim Tucker because he's in effect very heavily into this documentary. I know he has a cowboy hat. He does and he has a... So then you can discount literally everything else he's about to say. So Jim Tucker has been researching Builderburg for 27 years at the point when this documentary has come out. Seems like he should have been done by now. Exactly. And he has pretty much nothing to show for it. He's got a great cowboy hat. He's got a great cowboy hat. He looks good reading a newspaper, smoking a cigarette, but he has no real definitive

information that he's really ever put out. So the thing that I came away from it is like, if he has any real proof, it will be in this documentary. Right. And it is not. It would have to be. So that was one of my guiding principles. All he says is that they're up to something. That's probably true. And he's very cryptic and spooky about it. And that he has some guy from Europe who he doesn't know who it is who sends him a list of attendees every year. That's all he's got. Okay. I have no idea who this guy is. He just faxes me over the attendee list every year. I am struggling to find the French word for deep or the French word for throat because I would have totally tossed that in there. Could be German. You know what I'm saying?

Like a deep throat, but I would have used a great. Oh, you could be so good. So Jim Tucker, my complete lack of multiple languages has destroyed me. Oh, say Traymah. So for many years, Jim Tucker is written for a publication called the spotlight. And that is a publication that the Anti-Defamation League has referred to as very anti-Semitic. Their editorial position is one of Holocaust denial, which the Anti-Defamation League literally called it the defamation league. We're anti whatever that guy is doing. So in 1985, William F. Buckley brought a $16 million defamation lawsuit against the spotlight. And the judges found that at least two of the charges raised by Buckley were they constituted libel. The first one was that the

Liberty Lobby's charge that the national review had promoted the right of militant sex deviates to molest small children by publishing both sides of the homosexual rights agenda or the homosexual rights debate. Okay, so you understand that sentence was I'm sorry. If I understand correctly, the judge found that the national review was not promoting militant sex deviants deviants deviates by being like gay people aren't evil. That's that's what was just even posting or even just like gay people exist. Right. And then the second one that was that constituted libel that this spotlight publication was involved in was that they repeatedly claimed that the national review had surrendered its

editorial independence to Zionist financial power through a deal with the ADL. And they found that there was no proof of that and that that constituted libel. So, so do they think that the ADL has the power to broker deals between why is that what they do? Sure. It's part of their purview. But I mean like you'd have to be really good at writing contracts and shit like that or they just put in people in contact with each other. They got lawyers at the ADL I'm sure. Yeah, but what I mean, why why did they go to the ADL? Well, the bottom line is that it went to court and it was proven to be libel. Well, yeah, of course it was. So Jim Tucker is written for that. I just don't like it that people whenever they do this type of shit, I'm already angry where a minute and 57

seconds in. Yeah. Get ready for the 12 and a half hour long episode of the dumb ass end game documentary. Yeah. But I hate it whenever people are just like, Oh, yeah, it's the southern poverty law center that has been brokering this deal between Iran and the secret patriots within the government. You're like, Well, just look at what they do. Like pick somebody who does that. Like if he said Goldman Sachs is negotiating the deal, I'd be like, Yeah, Goldman Sachs negotiates those fucking deals, not the anti defamation league. What office are you going to? You're a fool, man. What office are you going to? Do the ADL have big board rooms where that is their guy with a fucking PowerPoint presentation? Here's the best way to screw over the Zionists like what are you

Jordan, let me blow your mind. Goldman Sachs is the idea. So also I wanted to point this out. That's the worst written Twilight Zone ever. You can you can find a back catalog of Jim Tucker's writing about the Bilderberg group online and holy shit. It's all in cram. It might as well be. It's so bad. It's just full of conversations that are hearsay. They're wildly like overwritten. The dialogue between these globalists at the meetings are all like, fuck these peon. He's writing fan fiction. That's what he's doing. How much sex is there? I think there's probably a lot. I think there's probably quite a bit of sex. Also, it's really fun because I watched another documentary that we'll talk about a little bit

later that involves Jim Tucker. And he's made it perfectly clear he's never gone into Bilderberg, but then he plans every year and then chickens out at the last minute because he's afraid that they're going to take him out. Okay. Well, then why are you still planning? Because he thinks that he got everybody. Look, you got to be if you're going to donkey hote, you got to donkey hote, man. You got to go all the way. He thinks he's going to have the nerve and then he's chickens out at the last minute. This is why donkey hote is ultimately an admirable figure. He never chickens out. Yeah. He had commitment. Yeah. So got his ass kicked a lot, but he still fucking went real quick before we get back to the video. Are we still doing this? Yeah, it's important

because he just played that George H. W. Bush speech that mentioned the New World Order. And it's really, really important that people take that in its proper context. It's really scary because he said the words New World Order and now everyone's afraid of that. But you have to understand that that speech was about how Iraq had just invaded Kuwait. That was the context of the speech. Right. The New World Order. It was not about how the rock had just defeated Hulk Hogan in the N. W. O. Wrong League, bro. Not Wrong League. W. C. W. W. O. Rock was W. W. F. All the way. I don't remember the nineties to quote the W. W. F. Attitude era slogan. Okay. Get the F out. All right. All right. They changed their name to W. W. E. That was their slogan. Get

the F out. So the New World. That's pretty clever. It's not bad. It's not bad. I want to be a dick about that. It's not bad. It's the best end result of being sued by the World Wildlife. Yeah. So the New World Order that Bush was talking about is basically this. For decades, the Cold War had been creating unsustainable tension between the U. S. And the U. S. S. R. Which had made it pretty much impossible for the U. N. To function properly. The two largest powers in the group were at odds with each other. And they would constantly look to face off with each other in proxy wars. Bush announces in that speech that he had engaged in talks with Gorbachev and Helsinki. Quote, We are united in the belief that Iraq's aggression must not be tolerated. No peaceful international

order is possible if larger states can devour their smaller neighbors. Clearly no longer can a dictator count on East West confrontation to stymie a concerted U. N. Action against aggression. Yeah, it is pretty funny in hindsight. A new partnership of nations has begun and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. And then he gets into the point where he says the New World Order. But the context of it is not some sort of spooky one world government as much as it is. The new way of things being done is dictators can't rely on this idea that the superpowers are going to be otherwise engaged and in practice that didn't work out that way. But that was what he was talking about. Yeah. And I think that's important. I mean, ultimately what he what is

confused here is any day you're talking about the New World Order of today or the World Order of currently or the Old World Order of yesterday. Like new does not mean it's a massive changing of the guard. A lot of times it means a simple concept like before we used to be busy with all this shit. Now we got to kill you. God damn it said I'm I'm trying to fight the Russians over here and we figured out that we shouldn't be doing that anymore. So now we have both of our massive military budgets with nothing to do. So guess what Gulf War, you know, they could have saved a ton of problems with the conspiracy communities if people had just been mindful and said like fresh international paradigm as opposed to New World Order. You know what I'm saying? Like it

would have been it would have been so much easier to just use like those terms like it like it whenever you're you know like when you're in a mixtape situation you're often like damn I often find myself in mixtape situations. International paradigm is fresh. Right. Absolutely. That's what they were saying in the 90s. So anyway, I really don't find a lot of evidence that George H. W. Bush was admitting to anything along the lines of what right. Anyway, let's get back. But you've never seen him wear Zuba. So that's true. Only an educated informed public can stop them in their tracks. It's good to be back at the Council on Foreign Relations. As Pete mentioned, I've been a member for a long time and was actually a director for some period of time. I never mentioned

that when I was campaigning for re-election back home in Wyoming. I still hope you don't. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories. I do like this. I need you to move off the problem. It seems like stock's losing. There's bill diverters right there. The trans-Texas corridor is a vital part because we stop here in Texas. We stop the new world order right here in Texas. This thing started here. What is this? What is fucking happening? Kill this damn thing here. Oh, that's a Verizon map. That's the government land seizure Verizon map. Yeah, we'll get into all this. This is sort of a sizzle reel at the beginning. I'm flabbergasted. We haven't even started this fucking documentary yet. Not really. We're at

eight minutes into this goddamn thing. There is a chance for the President of the United States to carry out a phrase his father used and that is a new world order. So that was Gary Hart and I only want to pause here really quick because I think that using Gary Hart as someone who's pointing the finger at the Bushes is not a good way to go. Who's Gary Hart again? Gary Hart was the guy who tried to run for president in 1988 against then vice president George H.W. Bush. I think I remember that a little bit. Opposition research dug up an affair he had and I think as I recall it was when he meant so if he'd run today he would be president twice. But it was during a time that as I recall it was when him and his wife were separated and so it wasn't even really infidelity but it got

really salacious. So weird to go back in time and see what took those guys down. He was the front runner on the Democratic side and at that point it had been since like it had been like a hundred years since an incumbent VP had been elected president. It seemed really likely that he was going. He had a fast track to the presidency and George H.W. Bush screwed him over royally and so he probably just hates him. Also in 1998 Bill Clinton put Gary Hart on a national security board that did a study as a bipartisan U.S. Commission on national security in the 21st century and he had so he has a lot of awareness of national security issues and what have you. Sure sounds like it. He warned back then that broad changes were needed but no one implemented

any of them and then 9-11 happened and it turns out he probably thought he was just talking about the ladies. He probably need a lot of bring a changes to these broads over. He wanted more diversity. Yeah. He would be nice. He probably had access to those warnings that you know bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S. again because in the lead up to September 11th he was going around being like everyone you need to take this fucking seriously right and no one listened to him. Well it's not like it's not like Osama was was quiet about it. He wasn't like it's not like he was just talking in back rooms with a bunch of fomenters. It was like or in a way. Hey everybody I'm going to attack America like I did years ago. I did it before. I'm going to do it again and

everybody's like well I didn't know what he would do. No one could possibly ever have guessed it. We only trained him how to. The only thing the only thing I'm saying here is that I think there's a reason that Gary Hart hates the bushes. 9-11 was a false flag. Right. Your New World Order will fall. Humanity will defeat you. The answer to 1984 is 1776. Man. Just where he stole that catchphrase from some European guy. Now we're into some serious 90s. This is like the opening to Ghost Rider. Do you remember that TV show? This is exactly that. It's less based in reality. In the near future Earth is dominated by a powerful world government. So real quick Alex is about to launch into

essentially just a baseless dystopian future vision. Keep in mind he has nothing backing anything up. This is really just him speculating about what he thinks is coming. He has had six hour dreams of the future. He does. He has prophetic visions. So this is clearly what's going on. Yeah. We just get to watch it now. Yeah. Once free nations are slaves to the will of a tiny elite. Oh no. That's way different. The dawn of the new dark age is upon mankind. Countries are a thing of the past. Every form of independence is under attack. With the family and even the individual itself nearing extinction. Purple penguins. Close to 80% of the Earth's population has been eliminated. Okay. No. The remnants of a once

free humanity are forced to live within highly controlled compact prison like cities. Has he ever seen the movie Baylor? Travel is highly restricted. Super highways connect the mega cities and keep the population from entering into unauthorized zones. Which zone? Unauthorized zone. The dangerous zone? The forbidden zone. Super compute. Chronicle and categorize every action. It's just a planet of the age. A prison planet dominated by a ruthless gang of control freaks. We're into the whose power could never be challenged. This is the vision of the global elite. Their goal. A program of total dehumanization where the science of tyranny is lost. The science of tyranny is lost. A worldwide control grid. Sure. Designed to ensure the

overlords monopoly of power forever. Our species will be condemned to this nightmare future unless the masses are awakened to the new world order master plan. He said. Somebody wrote this. He wrote it. I'm sure not right. He said nothing. No, he hasn't said anything. He said nothing. No. Except for his misreading of tons of documents and all we're going to get it to all of them. I got to be honest. I already want a beer. We definitely shouldn't, but I already want one. I just get frustrated. I kind of shut down after he said already already already already shut after he started talking to me. This is going to be a great trial of endurance. Like countries are a thing of the past. Every form of independence has been

snuffed out. And I was like, well, countries that haven't really been a form of independence. Now have they? Nor is nor is strictly speaking a family. Yeah, I know. In fact, those are things that keep you from independence. Those are forms of collections. Yeah. I don't understand what the point that he is trying to make so far yet is at all. Well, I mean, you can just throw it out because it's not based on anything. Well, am I going to, am I mad that 80% of the population is gone? Well, no, but you, we've already talked about this. You're kind of all right with that, that idea. But for me, I am okay with it being in here because he's lying about a very specific document that we'll talk about later. But

the globalists aren't really real strictly speaking, right? Don't want the strictest sense. Yeah, they don't. That's not in their plans. He doesn't know how to read. Anyway, let's let's move forward. Okay, lest we be here all night and mobilized to defeat it. erected by a secretive group. The Georgia guide stones are a testament to the elite's plan for a world religion, global laws, oh yeah, global court and army to enforce it. The Georgia guide stones. That's how he started and set in stone. It is written that the population never rise above 500 million. I mean, you could put anything in stone really. It's true. So do you know about the Georgia guide stones? Turns out stones aren't even really that expensive

anymore. It's true. Like I could get I could get something engraved. So the Georgia guide stones were built in 1980 with the finance and stone is Alex Jones's face with a penis in it. It's in stone. The population will never get larger than Alex Jones's penis mouth. So for those who don't know what the Georgia guide stones are, they were built in 1980 and the funding came from a guy who is using the nom de plume of the fake name RC Christian, which has led a bunch of conspiracy theorists to believe that he was a member of a remote controlled car. No, I wrote control Jesus. No, he was a Rosa Crucian. That's what the conspiracy theorists believe that it was a Portmanteau, Rosie, Rosie, the Riveter or Rose, Rose crucifix, Rosa Crucian. But the

facts about it, it's it's really crazy because it is still a mystery to some extent who this guy is. No one really knows a lot of people. A lot of people have speculated that RC Christian, DB Cooper, problem solved, two mysteries, one documentary. I enjoy that. No one speculated that. Well, see, there we go. This is why I'm on this show. Fresh takes. A number of people have speculated that it's Ted Turner because it's in Georgia and he's based out of Atlanta. That's nonsense. Calling himself RC Christian, totally a Ted Turner thing to do. Totally. Yeah. My name is RC Buffalo bison. Excuse me. So but it is fascinating to me the idea that this secret has been managed to be kept for a really long time. It's fun to be that as it may

on the face of each of the tablets that are set up there. There are there's 10 messages, not commandments necessarily, but 10 messages in different languages. There's English, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Russian, Swahili, Hindu and Hebrew. Right. The first one is that we are You should maintain humanity under 500 million in perpetual balance with nature. And that's the only one the conspiracy theorists ever talk about. Right. Because the next one is like, could you pick up some groceries at the store? Guys, be cool. Be cool is the next one. No, they never talk about ones like protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts. Sounds like a shitty new world order to me. Or let all nations rule internally,

resolving external disputes in a world court. It doesn't make any sense. It seems like common sense. Avoid petty laws and useless officials or another one balance personal rights with social duties. So I mean, it's not all like some sort of very evil ways before you cross. A lot of them are super benign. Yeah. So RC Christian, when he came and like talked to the quarry people, he said that he represented an organization that wanted to help create a age of reason. And so a lot of people have speculated that there's two possibilities. I believe that there's two possibilities that are possible at all. The first is that it's a well funded performance piece of art. Yeah, that is possible to me. I think it could be a giant Banksy-esque thing. And that people

are buying into it and whatever, getting all hot and bothered about it. It'd be a solid move. Or two, I think it's entirely possible that this guy going by the name RC Christian was a front for a sort of apocalyptic group that believed the disaster was imminent and knew that this land in Georgia was not going to be flooded immediately by rising waters. It was safe from a lot of, it is really well situated. So they picked a great spot. Yeah. In terms of natural disasters. Holy shit. Now I'm on board. And the everything is set up astrologically. Like the different tablets are set up to be like maximums and minimums of the like wobble of planets. Aliens. It could be an alien. Totally aliens. But the more likely thing is like,

this is the way I would, I would assess it. They erected this monument to serve as a message to future survivors of this disaster that they saw coming. So that these survivors could avoid some of the things that got us into trouble and hindered our ability to save ourselves from whatever disaster was coming. Okay. Misguided or not, it seems like that might be the motivation. I actually like this a lot. I do too. I am way more on their side than I am on anybody else's here. Yeah. If you have some, if you have some conspiracy that's making cool shit like this, I want to see what's up. The other thing about it is this end game. Why would I want to be on the team of the guy making a documentary that doesn't have a point? And we're already seven minutes

in. Give me the team of the people who are like, I wonder what astrological signs are. And then they build a thing. But he's also got like, that's true. They don't have musical accompaniments. So one of the things that's also important to keep in mind is that RC Christian pretty soon after the building of the Georgia guide stones bequeathed to them to Elbert County, Georgia, who currently owns the monument. So if anybody really the county, not yeah, that's not another look where we're at some guy where we're at with Smedley Butler and all this shit. I don't trust anything. Exactly. I don't trust anything not being a proper noun. That's fair. I guess it is a proper noun. No, it is a problem. I mean, a personal name, but the fact that the county

owns it now means that if people really did believe it was some work of satanic nonsense, like Mark Dice and Alex Jones, definitely. Yeah, they could just have a council meeting. Well, they could really petition the county government to take it down. Or if the county government believed that it had anything nefarious or was some sort of evil thing, they could take it down themselves. But the reality is it staying up is profitable for both sides of it. Because if it went down, then Alex wouldn't have this spooky thing to point out. Right. And it's good for tourism for Elbert County. It works for everybody. And it's interesting and thought-provoking. Right. And they sacrifice a goat there every Tuesday. There's no doubt about that. That's

absolutely true. We're going to get into that a little bit later. What are we going to sacrifice a goat? Yeah. Is that what's going to get us through this? Yeah. Oh man, this is our own money bomb and it's the worst idea ever. And no one's donating as we do this live. I guess we're not doing it live. No, we're not doing it live. Jump back. In this film, you will learn how our world is truly governed. How is it? You will see how highly secret around table groups interlock to form a global intelligence network. This group has been steering planetary affairs for hundreds of years. Now in the final stage, they prepare for open world government. A goal tyrants throughout history have lost it after.

Dr. Michael Kaufman is a published ecologist specializing in ecosystem research. What did he publish? Not much. Anytime Alex's credit is he is a published. I'm like, give me a name and then give me the one thing and then tell me exactly how many hundred copies it's all because it didn't fucking sell a goddamn thing. And this guy's a lunatic. We're going to get to some really fun publishing talk a little bit later. But I want to tell you about Michael Kaufman. Information about brother of Andy Kaufman. Absolutely. Performance artist author. Information about Michael Kaufman online is pretty scarce. He did die in 2017. According to info wars and websites like him, like Alex Jones's website, he is responsible for getting the word out about

agenda 21 and the globalists plan to take over the United States land. Okay, right. Was that in one of his ecological papers? Probably. He did so in actually some pretty deceitful ways that we'll get into once we start talking about the wild lands project. Oh boy. Get ready. I'm going to take off the sweater. Dude, I'm looking at the time and we're six and a half minutes into this documentary. Oh boy. And I'm staring down two hours and 20. And I'm not, oh boy, we're going to be on day nine of this thing. So in a farewell post on info wars.com, I can only find it on in fours. I can't, I didn't know. I don't know if it was posted anywhere else, but if it was written, Kaufman had cancer and he recognized that he was

dying. And so this was like a farewell to that community. Right. And he writes, as a researcher in the American paper industry, I ran a multimillion dollar research project on the effects of acid rain. When the results came in that it was basically a non issue. I was told to quash my results or find a new job. That was when my eyes were open to the fact that it was politics driving the science and not the other way around. Now, I would say that the most likely real life explanation here is he did a terrible job on this study. And that the advisory board told him he needed to redo it because he forgot a variable or something along those lines because acid rain is a actual problem. I don't think anybody has ever said that it's not a problem. Well,

his fault is that's maybe why maybe he's right. Maybe acid raining from the skies is not an issue. I mean, consistent studies have shown that acid rain causes really serious problems to, I mean, first of all, just water life. You can end up killing all sorts of ecosystems and I would like to know far more about his study and how it was set up. I could not find it, unfortunately. Was it just like a guy wearing an acid suit being like, okay, now spray some acid on him and he's fine. And they're like, well, then it's no big deal. I think more likely this story is apocryphal and not real. I think he's just talking shit because like the pH balances of soil, all sorts of shit is really thrown off by acid rain. So the idea that he was told to falsify his findings

about acid rain is completely unbelievable, except possibly as a situation where the paper company he was working for wanted him to change his findings. But that doesn't make sense because they would be more interested in what he actually claimed to have found that acid rain wasn't a problem because then they could pollute more and all that shit. So it doesn't make any sense. That's a good point. No one's motivation makes sense in this story and the science doesn't make sense. So I'm left to believe that the one thing that he left behind in his farewell post was a big lie that makes me question any of the things he says. Right. Forest ecology and ecosystem classification. Dr. Kaufman played a key role in blocking the

ratification of the Convention on Biological Diversity in the U.S. Senate. That's just a very good answer. The new world order has been around for centuries. It's been receiving tremendous play over the last half of the 20th century. If it's the new world order that's been around for centuries, George Bush used a lot of the world order and really implies that he really wants to see a order in which we have a universal or global type of governance in which every human being on planet Earth is ultimately responsible to policies that are being formulated at the international level. It is a big idea. I don't understand why that's bad. A new world order. I don't understand why that's bad. Alex will try and explain. I don't get it. Alex will try. One side

of the world is affected by what the other side of the world does. It's a good idea. Right. We're going to wrestle with that a bit. Alex will try and make his case. I mean, I don't want any of these idiots doing it. Don't get me wrong. I think what they're missing is they think that the idea is bad and not the fact that everybody that they want in power is the worst person to be. Right. It's more about competence and execution than it is about conception. Yeah. President Bush said that the new world order was in tune and that's what they were working for. The UN is part of that government. They're working right now very significantly for a North American Union. That's why there's a lot of people in Washington that don't care too

much about our borders. Yeah. It gives us shit. Way to go, Ron Paul. Is that why? So here's some fun stuff about Ron Paul. Ron Paul used to put out a, I just don't care what he thinks about the UN because it doesn't really mean anything. No. But also he used to put out a newsletter, the Ron Paul report that frequently contained really fucked up stuff. Here's one example. About the LA riots, he said order was only restored in LA when it came time for the Blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after the riot began. I really did not want you to hear it. Oh God. On the HIV crisis, he said he wishes the gays enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick. I guess that's relatively inoffensive. It's pretty offensive. It's offensive,

but I don't quite know 100% how. On Black people in general, there's a quote. I don't like anybody saying anything on Black people in general. That usually means it's not a good thing to say. If you've ever been robbed by a Black teenaged male, then you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be. So anyway, Ron Paul claims that he didn't write these things and has no idea who did. There are no bylines in his newsletter. No, like the articles aren't signed. But other articles that were written in his newsletter frequently used the first person. So that's a little suspicious. My assessment is that either this is him lying about what he's written in the past or a completely unacceptable level of awareness to have about

something that has your fucking name on it. Can you imagine? Look, I don't put anything in there. I don't know. I don't even know where that came from. I don't even look at it. Who gives a shit? Yeah. Ron, I'm going to question your attention to details, Ron Paul. Although I do agree with non-interventionism largely. I am anti-war and pro marijuana. Hooray. We have a philosophic belief that national sovereignty is not important. It's also the reason I have made very strong suggestion that we need not be in the United Nations for our national security. It's really always the same. You go back throughout all of history. The Roman Empire, Soviet Union, Hitler during the Nazism was always saying that it's going to create the utopia for

the average person when in fact... Right. So he's just, I mean, I don't even know what that means. It's just like using examples of things in history. Yeah. If you go back through history, they're like, we're going to make a utopia for average people and then they don't, man. That's proof. He's also comparing empires and like authoritarian states as one unified thing. All the same. It's every government. It doesn't track that that is what all things are because there are benign instances. No. If you give three examples, call it all of world history. Yeah. What you're doing, what you're doing here is you're stealthily trying to be anti-government, just totally anti-government. Absolutely. That's all you're doing.

Back history always shows that it does exactly the opposite. Conquest and empire is as old as civilization. Sure. Babylon, Egypt and Greece. They all built empires in an attempt to rule the world. Those are the only ones. The Roman system at its peak dominated the known world. Complex governmental systems were developed to control diverse populations. Some of them were more successful than others. One of them, Genghis Khan, was incredibly successful. One of the big reasons why is because he allowed himself or his Khan empire to be absorbed by

local populations and took them on and allowed their cultural traditions to reign. But he doesn't want to talk about that. He doesn't want to talk about that. Immediately after he killed everybody who refused to join his army. Sure. Sure. Yes, there was that. No, I'm not saying it's perfect. He wasn't great at it. No. He was great at what he did. Yes. Yes. But you know what I'm saying, is Alex doesn't want to talk about other patterns of empires. If you are going to try and take over the world, you do it exactly like Genghis

did, which is be like, hey, I own this now, but you guys are cool. You want to join my thing? We'll all have a great old time. Yeah. I own this, but you could just keep it the way it is. Yeah. Yeah. I like what you're doing. It's landlord. Fuck it. I'll wear one of those hats. That was the crazy thing. It's a great hat.

Yeah. Genghis Khan would just walk in and be like, that's a great hat. Let me put that on. We're all friends. I'm going to get out of here. You, you, you are my wives. You're all dead. Let's go. Yeah. Bearing the period between the 15th and 19th centuries. Well, new empires emerged and again, waged war for supremacy. There's all their parts of the world. It's not just white history as well as the thriving merchant class were financed by a handful of private banks. Many of the great money houses

would hedge their bets and finance both sides of a war. So if Alex just wants to say that like banks, fund munition businesses and stuff like that, or they have investments in that, like I'm not going to fight you on that. You know what? But it's strange that he doesn't bring up that many of the weapons were made by the same people. Right. Also, not like you didn't. Also, this is an instance of Alex having a insert reference here.

Yeah. Sophisticated intelligence gathering networks gave the financier is a clear edge over the governments. They were slowly gaining control. If you're not watching this video, when he said sophisticated, it was it was three paintings of a guy at a door, like with his with his hand over his ear, like what's going on here? Sophisticated. Sophisticated doesn't get more sophisticated than a guy with a glass on the door.

Spycraft. Yeah. June 1815 agents of the British arm of the Rothschild family looked on as emperor Napoleon Bonaparte fought desperately to save his army from the jaws of a British Prussian pincere attack. A Rothschild agent was able to get the news of Napoleon's defeat at the hands of Lord Wellington to Nathan Rothschild, a full 20 hours before the news reached London. Nathan Rothschild looked a little bit like he was out of the clock. The head of the British arm of the Rothschild family put out the rumor to the London Stock Exchange

that Napoleon had won the war. Stocks plunged by 98% and Rothschild was then able to buy out the entire British economy. Almost unbelievable. Wait, you bought up the entire British economy? So now, Jordan, we've talked about this a little bit in the past, but I need to tell you the full story of this. Okay. Because this being nine minutes into Alex Jones' documentary should disqualify everything else he says. Okay.

This is unbelievably bad. Okay. So, Jordan, this is a situation where, so there's a book, that was written by a guy named Professor Brian Cathcart of Kingston University in London. He wrote a book called The News from Waterloo that breaks down exactly what happened with the events of Nathan de Rothschild. Should have called it the water news. As it turns out, the entire idea of Nathan de Rothschild having early information about

Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, using said information to crash the stock market, then buying up everything at a reduced price is an absolute instance of anti-Semitic propaganda. In the summer of 1846, a pamphlet written under the pen named Satan began circulating around Europe. The pamphlet told the story of how Nathan de Rothschild was physically at Waterloo and saw the crushing of the French army firsthand. He knew he could use this to his advantage, so he did everything that he could to rush back to England, paying copious amounts of money to a fisherman to take him through a storm to do so.

He managed to arrive in London 24 hours before the news of the French loss and used the information to make 20 million francs. Satan was the pen name of George Derenveil, an enemy of the Rothschild, specifically, and Jews in general. The pamphlet was written in 1846, and Nathan had died in 1836, so he was not around to deny the plan. Is that how he was introduced at parties? Yes. Excuse me, yes, the Lord over there.

Yes, he is known as an enemy of Nathan de Rothschild and of Jews in general. He was not a fan of the Jewish population. So, even though Nathan had died 10 years before the pamphlet was written, it's still possible to look at the claims made and determine if they're false. It can be proven that Nathan was not at Waterloo. He was absolutely somewhere else, and that there was no stock market crash for him to exploit when the news of Napoleon's defeat had come in. It seems like that would be really easy to find out.

It is. Like, don't they have pretty good records of the stock market? I mean, money is a big deal, and they like to keep really good records of it, especially for a money-obsessed society like England at the time, so I'm assuming. There's absolutely complete records. You can find them. I'll post links to graphs that show the progress of the stock market around the time. Okay.

So, as pieces of this story from the Satan pamphlet were debunked, the story began to change. For example, when it was proved that Nathan could not have been at Waterloo that day, the story became that he had a quick messenger who got him the information. So, you get around these little things. It's much like what Alex did with Loose Change, where in pieces of his Loose Change documentary got debunked, he just changed them into something else. The evidence that people cite- Do you know how many miles he ran?

A marathon? You know what I would call it? I would call it a 26.2.0 marathon, you know what I'm saying? Because it was after the original marathon, and then it's also a play on 1776.2.0. I'm going to give myself some five points for that. All right, I'll give you six. I'm going to give myself five points for it. Put that down on the board.

Putting it on the board. The evidence that people cite to verify this conspiracy is incredibly thin. There's a London Courier newspaper article from June 20th, 1815, which is two days after the Battle of Waterloo, which states, Rothschild has made great purchases of stock. However, this is a forgery of the original newspaper. Those words do not appear in the real surviving copies of the newspaper,

but instead originate in the writing of a Scottish historian named Archibald Allison from 1848, two years after the Satan pamphlet circulated. A lot of people hate the Jews from all European nations. Good for them. There's also a journal entry from 1815, ostensibly from an American visitor to London named James Gallatin. He writes,

quote, They say, Monsieur Rothschild has mounted couriers from Brussels to Ostend and a fast clipper ready to sail at a moment that at the moment something is decisive one way or the other. However, in 1957, this diary was exposed as a hoax created in the late 1800s, well after the Satan pamphlet circulated.

Even then, that's not a bad, that's not damning evidence. Like it's not a bad idea to know as soon as possible how the war turned out. Sure. And we'll actually get to the reality. That's a good idea. So, however, there's one piece of real shit, right? A month after Waterloo,

a bank employee in Paris wrote Nathan a letter that said, I'm informed by a commissary white that you have done well in the early information which you had of the victory gained at Waterloo. Now to put that in context, fresh evidence has surfaced, which allows us to finally put the story in its proper context. Newspapers published in the week of Waterloo make it clear that the first person to bring authentic news of the victory at Waterloo to London

was not Nathan Rothschild. Rather, it was a man who had learned of it in a Belgian city called Ghent and made a dash to England. The shadowy figure. He wanted half a bartender in a fight. Yeah, yeah, beat up the guy and he's like, Hey, Waterloo, get out of here. This guy was only identified as Mr. C of Dover.

And he was telling the story freely in the city in the morning of Wednesday, the 21st of June, at least 12 hours before the official news had arrived at the end of the battle. Hey everybody, Mr. C of Dover is here. He always brings the best news. Mr. C, what's on your mind? It was published in at least three newspapers that afternoon. We also know that the news report written for one of these papers

referred to Nathan Rothschild receiving a letter from Ghent from one of his information sources who had heard Mr. C of Dover talking that reported the victory and of him passing the news on to the government. That's the first thing that he did, though this was noted alongside reports of two other similar letters that other people who aren't named and vilified by history are. So it turns out people sent letters.

Yes. We have proof. Yeah. So the question is, did Rothschild have time to buy stocks and shares with this information that he had gotten from a letter from Ghent? Well, yeah, he went on his e-trade account. Apparently. But in the thin market of the period, it could not have been enough to accumulate holding sufficient to earn him the millions that the Satan pamphlet wrote about.

What about the entire British economy? Yes, he did. That was like 30 or 40 bucks? No. Yeah. Inflationary? Yeah. Yeah. Nor did he manipulate the market to double his gains. For contrary to legend, there was no slump in stock prices that Wednesday. Nathan Rothschild may have done well in the purchases of stocks

that rose sharply following the confirmation of the victory, but his gains were dwarfed by those of numerous rival investors who without any advantage of early information had bought key government securities earlier, more cheaply, and in quantity. 200 years on from the Waterloo, then not much is left of Satan's tale. It's just possible to see the factual elements upon which a vivid myth was built. Yes, C.S. Lewis wrote it way better. This is just a smear of truth.

H.J. Jews. H.J. Jews. So, in 1996, there was this guy named Bill Still. He made a film called The Money Masters, which retells the story of Nathan Rothschild. Who would do that to their kid? Bill Still? Bill Still? Hey, Bill Still.

Yeah, it's rough. Bill, how you moving? Ah, you're staying real still. He's a slow mover. So, he retells the story of Nathan Rothschild manipulating the British market for his own gain wherein Bill asserts that Nathan's courier who brought him the information about Waterloo was named Rothworth. Interestingly, the only historical reference.

Who names these people? I'll tell you who names. I've read better. Look, I've read better fantasy novel names than this. Ann McCaffrey writes dumber names than this. I'll tell you who named this guy. He writes less dumb names. Whatever.

The only historical reference you can find for the name Rothworth in this context is he is the name of the courier character in the 1940 Nazi propaganda film, The Rothschild's Share at Waterloo. Okay. Now for an added punchline. Always comes back to the Nazis and hating Jews. Yep. That's where this narrative that Bill Still made a documentary about came from.

Jesus. And here's the final punchline of this. Alex Jones has had Bill Still on his show multiple times. Of course he has. So this worldview that Alex Jones is espoused right here, nine minutes into his documentary. Nazis. Is freshly out of Nazi propaganda.

So also there's no major crash in 1815 in the European market. Nathan made purchases in July 1815 after a very slight dip in the market. Then he bought again in October 1815 after the price went up a bit. Then bought 600 shares, 600,000 pounds worth of shares on October 1816. Then finally sold in November 1817. Thereby netting himself a profit of about 40% in the course of 30 months. That's still great. It's good.

That's a good return. Yeah, it's good. That's a good return on your investment. But it's not nearly what, you know. No, it's the entire British economy. It's, but it's not nearly the kind of thing that these people present. No, of course. And all of that information is available.

You can find all of it. Like it's, this is some of the easiest stuff to debunk. It's, it's right there. And this is perpetuated through years just because of the desire to scapegoat you. Alex kind of does, still doesn't believe that they had newspapers back then. Probably. Wait a second. Wait, where did you get that?

You got that from a newspaper in 1815. They didn't even invent those until the 20s, man. Didn't come around until the cotton gin. Wait, I'm thinking of that other guy who made an invention that we learned about in elementary school. Anyway, Alex Jones is repeating a very clear Nazi propaganda from 1940 filled by Joseph Goebbels. Hey, congratulations, Alex. When the news of Napoleon's defeat finally arrived,

stock soared. Britain was now the undisputed ruler of Europe and Rothschild ruled England. The already dominant British Empire grew even more aggressive. They did. Her troops and bureaucracy spread across the globe. The sun never set on Britannia's holdings. This is really bad. The banking cartels.

This is a really bad documentary. Since about 1800, they have funded both sides of almost every war. And of course, they're getting the interest off of the loans that they've given the various governments and the wars that they have actually helped stimulate and create. Real quick, I want to just pause again there real quick to really put a button on what they're saying, like the idea that there are banks that make a profit off of selling and investing in munitions companies and stuff like that is very real. And that's something that needs to be dealt with.

It needs to be maybe the munitions company should probably be talked about too. Yes, absolutely. You think you think those guys should probably have a they don't want to talk about that. Oh, they don't want to talk about how the guns are also like, you know, when you're when you're fighting a war, yes, money is important. But also the guns do a lot of the lot of the killing part. Right. Like maybe we should take the guns.

I then the banks couldn't invest in them. And then we wouldn't have those like I agree with I agree with you principally. But the thing that I wanted to bring up is that the effect of what they're doing is pitching this narrative where in the two belligerent actors in a war aren't really to blame. It's these it's not Jewish banks, five or manipulating them into fighting so they can be put into debt or whatever. Yeah. And I just want to be super clear about this.

This is out of the protocols of the elders of Zion. Right. This is other anti-Semitic propaganda that is now being spread by Michael Kauffman on this document. Man. Yeah. People got it led up on the Jews. It would be nice.

By 1900, Germany was a rising force and a leader. Oh, also that thing about the banks funding both sides of wars. It's another instance of insert reference here. Yeah. Of the industrial revolution. World War One, for instance, there was absolutely no reason to have World War One. What? Except that it was an ideal opportunity for the banking cartel to make a pile of money

by funding both sides of that particular war. So there is no reason to have World War One at all. 1914, the heir to the Austrian, Hungarian throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated while traveling in a motorway. Great hats. Oh, is this the video of him getting assassinated? I'm pausing it right here because I want you to take very keen notice of this picture. Lot of hats.

Lot of hats. So real quick, I'll just tell you this while this picture is on screen because it's fun. Dangerously close to Fez's. The assassin of Archduke Franz Ferdinand is named Gavrilo Princip. And we'll talk about him a little bit. But that's not him. No. Alex thinks that's him.

That's Christian Bale from the news. Yeah, this is actually a very famous mistake that a lot of people have made. That photo is not Gavrilo Princip. It fits. This is from a book called The Trigger, Hunting the Assassin Who Brought the World to War by Tim Butcher. The picture is not Gavrilo Princip. It fits so well with the narrative of a desperate assassin that countless historians, reporters, broadcasters, and filmmakers have claimed that the subject is Princip.

It is not. The subject of the picture is actually an innocent bystander, a man named Ferdinand Baer, who was caught up in the sweep of arrests following the shooting. This is very easy to find the fact that Alex Jones is presenting it in here as Princip is embarrassing. A black hand, a Serbian secret society with connections to French and British intelligence took credit. Pew! So, um... Pew!

What was that? Who left that in there? They had a photo of this. Who left the fucking Star Wars? Pew! Alex's only reference for this in his bibliography is the Wikipedia page for Black Hand, which is not good. That's not going to cut it.

No, that counts. So, the Black Hand was a group that was responsible for committing regicide in the early 1900s. And also, if you received a Black Hand in the post, you would be killed by pirates, right? I believe so, yeah. I believe that was the way it worked. So, most of the claims that the Black Hand was deeply involved in the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand come from testimony provided in the treason trial against Serbian military intelligence chief Dragutin Dimitrijevic, who historians believe was exaggerating the role

that the Black Hand played in an attempt to avoid the death penalty himself. He was involved with the Black Hand, but by saying it was like a conspiracy of all these people, he might be able to spare himself. Diffuses the blame in the... Yeah, yeah, yeah. It did not work. He got the death penalty. Aw, poor guy.

The extent of the Black Hand's involvement in the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand appears to be that they provided Gavrilo Princip and his accomplices with some weapons and allowed them to travel freely to Sarajevo and Bosnia. Gavrilo and his crew were the ones who planned it, and they were not part of some massive international conspiracy. So, it was more like they just went to them to buy guns. Yeah, they were motivated by a hatred of the Austro-Hungarian Empire who had been oppressing and destroying their homeland.

Not unreasonable. The situation in late 1800s, early 1900s, was a complete mess in the Balkans, and the concerns of the Serb populations were not being heard by anyone in power. Never heard that story before? Never, never. At the time of Princip, the South Slavs had recently been part of the Ottoman Empire, but their land had been taken over by the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the 1870s. Meanwhile, Serbia had gained its independence from the Ottoman Empire in the late 1860s,

and had abolished feudalism. So, it sat there as like this shining example of self-rule that was possible if only one fought for it. Yeah, you got to knock that down. Yeah. Can't be having none of that. So, Gavrilo Princip grew up in a small town, a very small town, and a feudal situation. He was a serf in a family of serfs.

They were completely oppressed. Everyone was miserable. Right. So, it seems like he should just have been happy with his luck, right? Sure. Just write a song about it. Yes! And just whistle in a way.

Come on. 01:02:04,000 --> 01:02:04,480 Come on. So, as a Bosnian Serb, he thought that the oppression he experienced was all because of his ethnic identity. Probably not wrong. He thought that it was like, I'm a Bosnian Serb. This is what ends up happening to folks like us.

Yeah. However, he ended up going away to school in Sarajevo. Ooh. And in order to get there, he had to make a long foot path to get to a train. Can't let those small town people outside. They'll see the world. Exactly. Then we'll all get in trouble.

So, as he traveled the country on foot in order to reach the train that would take him to Sarajevo where he went on to get an education, he witnessed the feudal plight of all of the neighboring communities, be they Croat, Serb, or Muslim. Feudal and feudal. Exactly. Everyone's plight was connected and was the result of the oligarchs, the Austro-Hungarian Empire. In college, he met with a bunch of radicals and having witnessed the relative freedom of

Sarajevo. They planned to free their homes from the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Right. And they did. Yeah. They succeeded. It's very similar to what we do now, except if we had now technology back then, I think you would have a pretty solid podcast.

I don't, I don't, perhaps. I don't support what he did. I think assassinating a leader is still wrong, but it is fascinating to look at, like, you have one kid from a small town who went, got radicalized, assassinated a leader, triggered a world war that ended up being so mishandled led to a second world war. Yeah. And the holocaust that happened during that world war ripples still to the present day. Right.

It's insane. The chain of events that were set in place by just oppressing one family. Or, I guess, oppressing an entire population. Yeah, I was going to say. There you go. It's, it's, it's crazy. I think, I think it's more interesting because it clearly shows how these massive machinations that were most likely going to wind up exploding into war sooner or later.

Right. The system before world war one was not tenable. It's not like, oh man, everything's going on perfectly. And then this guy throws a little wrench in there. Like, he was, he was just the match on a massive tinder box. That's how that worked. But it is still cool that one guy is that match. Yeah.

You know, it's like, holy shit. It, it was just this one dude who picked the right day. It's the difference. And it's a, and it's a whole comedy of errors the way that they wound up actually successfully killing him in the first place. Like it's bananas. Some guy threw a bomb. It didn't work.

Another guy's gone through the war. It was a fucking, it was a free for all where people are just running around. And that was the time where you could just assassinate a guy. It was like a group of six people. Yeah. All fucked up except him. Yeah. There was no like JFK super plan where you hide up there.

It was like these, it was, it was three stooges assassinate the king. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you take away the horrors of World War one that are associated with it. There is a, like, there is a humorous aspect to the visual. When this thing happened, if you played Yackety Sacks behind it, it would be exactly the same. We've got it.

We've got to move along. I'm judging myself here. Oh yeah. What are we, what are we on? Oh man. We're on an hour and 10 already. Holy shit. Not quite.

I don't think, but holy shit. All right. Here we go. Oh boy. So judging by her rate of speed right now, this is going to be a, it's going to be 36 hours. All right. We got to move through. We might not be able to do this.

We might not be able to do this in a week. We might be able to do this period. Oh, also just real quick. Neither him nor Michael Kaufman ever proves any of the things that they're asserting about World War One being specifically to get countries into debt and control them. Right. That's not in the bibliography anywhere. It's just asserted.

Also, if it was the aftermath of World War One would prove that was a terrible idea because, because of that idea that we put everybody into debt caused World War Two. Yeah. Like the reason that we didn't have a World War Three was actually more likely because we forgave so much debt that the Germans and the Japanese had accrued over the time and said, you know what? We're going to do a clean slate. You guys start over and in fact, we're going to help you rebuild.

It turns out that if you want to not fight World Wars, you don't punish the people who had nothing to fucking do with it. It's not like the German people are like, oh, sanctions are really working out to keep us from fighting a war. Opposite happened. Yeah. Anyways, hour six and a half. This is just saving right and right.

Yeah. This is just when the movie turns into saving. That's the next hour. Yeah. Armaments companies financed by Rothschild controlled banks in Germany, France, England and Austria. In the bibliography. Insert reference music.

At least 20 million were killed in the war before the conflict so terrible, the people vowed to never fight again. They did it. They dubbed it the war to end all wars. Part one question is why did they want war? Well, first of all, is money and power. But secondly, they wanted to create the League of Nations. They had this in their plans all along.

And as a consequence, once the war was over or about to be over, they begin to formulate this idea of a League of Nations. This guy looks like Lou Dobbs. It would never, ever happen again. I don't trust him. Hundreds of years of practice made the bridge. That's good. That's a hiding.

Also, just real quick, he's asserting that the World War I was committed in order to form the League of Nations. Yeah. No citation of this. It's just something that he's asserting. The complex world that was going on pre-World War I and all of the many factors that led to the tragedy of a very unnecessary World War, it's insulting to them to say like, no, it was just a bunch of weird elites wanted a League of Nations.

Right. Because that wasn't that that's not the case. Also, the citation that Alex has for the League of Nations is just the Encarta page for the League of Nations. Perfect. They're empire behind puppet governments and councils. In the name of stopping all future conflicts, they propose that countries would join a League of Nations.

And Sean Connery would join the League of Nations. Their true intention was for the League to serve as a framework for World Government. President Woodrow Wilson, who had spearheaded the establishment of the Private Federal Reserve System in the United States in 1930, strongly supported the establishment of a League of Nations. Woodrow Wilson was a very naive president. He was basically a college professor that was grafted into this whole system. Fuck yourself. Look, Woodrow Wilson sucks, but that presentation of him is insulting because, look, the things

you can't take away from him are that he was the professor. He was a professor of political science at Princeton. Second, he was the president of Princeton, which is a political position from 1902 to 1910. Further, he was the governor of New Jersey from 1911 to 1913 before becoming president. If the claim is that he was just a professor who got drafted to be the president, it doesn't it doesn't match. He has a political background. It matches up with an apocryphal story about Woodrow Wilson wherein a campaign manager type

fella is walking down the street and he sees him and he says, you look like president and that's, that's the story of the apocryphal story. That's what he's basing it on. Pretty much. What an asshole. Yeah. The only president in the entire history of our government who has no experience serving in a publicly elected position is Trump.

The League convened in Paris in 1919, but many nations. Eisenhower wasn't, Eisenhower wasn't elected. Public, I misspoke. I was going to say. Publicly elected official or government military. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I was going to say. Sorry.

Mike wouldn't have forgotten that. So real quick, you just said there that many countries saw the League of Nations as a threat to their sovereignty and refused to join. The only countries that I can find that didn't join that were relevant are the United States, the USSR, and Germany. And none of them were because of threats to sovereignty. The U.S. didn't join because of the prevailing attitude after World War I was. Don't get involved.

Isolationism and anti. Leave us alone. Non-interventionism was the word. We moved oceans away from U.S. So we didn't have to keep fighting these wars. No one wanted to be interested in European affairs in the United States. They're like, fuck it. We support this, but you could do it.

I want to be a part of this. Everybody was treating Europe like a French art house film. Mm-hmm. Great, but I don't want to see it. Yeah, I don't. Here the reviews are good. I'll watch it later. Yeah, the USSR didn't join because they were a totalitarian government and were not invited.

They would be added to the league later, but were kicked out in 1939 because they invaded Finland. As for Germany, the rest of the world blamed Germany for starting World War I. So of course they weren't allowed to join the League of Nations when it was formed after World War I. Which was a bad idea. They were admitted in 1926, but Hitler withdrew in 1933 shortly after he became chancellor. And we know where that went. So, oh man. So if you have an authoritarian leader and he's like,

what we need to do is get away from all of these international treaties and all of this stuff. And we need to make sure that we are not in any way responsible for their actions or anything like that. Usually that's like a power grab and then it will eventually be pushed outwards. It's typically move one in a multi-move scenario. Yeah. You're doing something else. Yeah, there's a start point. Generally speaking.

Gotcha. Either you try and get away with it while involved like Russia did with invading Finland. Exactly. Or you get out ahead of time. And then you start some shit. Frustrated by the U.S. Congress blocking the League of Nations, British intelligence with the help of the Rockefeller family set up the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City in 1921. The Council recruited the best and brightest of American life to support the growth of the Anglo-American Empire.

The CFR stated mission is to abolish all nation states in favor of an all-powerful world government. Where did they state that? They didn't. Their stated purpose is very different. It seems like a weird stated mission. Is that like front page of their website? No, actually their stated purpose on their website is very clear. The Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, non-partisan membership organization think tank and publisher

dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators, students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. Right, but what about the fine print? Founded in 1921, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. CFR carries out its mission by maintaining a diverse membership, including special programs to promote interest and develop expertise in the next generation of foreign policy leaders. They go on to explain that after the difficult negotiations of the 1919 Paris Peace Conference,

a group of diplomats, financiers, generals, and lawyers concluded that Americans needed to be better prepared for significant responsibilities and decisions in world affairs and sought to be that educational voice. Right. So there's also, I'm not going to read this whole thing because it's super long. So where did they say, no more governments, one world government? They don't say that. No fine print? Like because I've signed a lease before and it turns out that they were telling me that there were no governments.

So I just want to be sure that there's no fine print on this. Well, one of the things that really scares Luddy's conspiracy weirdos like Alex about this, like destroying borders and uniting one world government is they often cite this 2006 op-ed posted on the CFR's own website written by the president of the council himself, Richard Haas. The basic argument is as follows. The world's 190 plus states now coexist with a larger number of powerful non-sovereign and at least partly and often largely independent actors ranging from corporations to non-governmental organizations from terrorist groups to drug cartels from regional and global institutions

to banks and private equity funds. The sovereign state is influenced by them for better and for worse as much as it is able to influence them itself. The near monopoly of power once enjoyed by sovereign states is being eroded, not by some sort of evil nefarious plan, but just by the rising power of corporations. Well, in as much as we're able to communicate better, there's a freer flow of literally everything across the entire world and it takes away from the power of states to be able to. Which is why countries like China and Russia and North Korea struggle so hard to keep the

outside internet from being in. Totally. Because if you start to see around the world at what other people are doing, you're like, wait, why are we? Or if you let your people go overseas and experience it themselves. Right. Like what happened with every low-principe going to Sarajevo. So he goes on, he talks a bit about this idea like needing to redefine what a lot of our

national ideas are and this is a quote from his op-ed. Our notion of sovereignty must therefore be conditional, even contractual rather than obsolete. If a state fails to live up to its side of the bargain by sponsoring terrorism, either transferring or using weapons of mass destruction or conducting genocide, then it forfeits the normal benefits of sovereignty and opens itself up to attack, removal or occupation. The diplomatic challenge for this era is to gain widespread support for principles of state conduct and a procedure for determining remedies when these principles are violated. The goal should be to redefine sovereignty for an era of globalization, to find a balance

between a world of fully sovereign states and an international system of either world government or anarchy. The basic idea of sovereignty, which still provides a useful constraint on violence between states, needs to be preserved. But the concept needs to be adapted to a world in which the main challenges to order come from what global forces do to states and what governments do to their citizens, rather than from what states do to each other. That's a very, very reasonable position put out very clearly by the leader of the

Council on Foreign Relations, does not want to destroy state sovereignty, wants a greater understanding of the world we live in. Now then again, I suppose the question to ask after that though would be what is the logical endpoint of that train of thought and I think it is world government. I think it's world governance to some extent. But I mean, it's like with the United States. But world government is a sort of broad enough concept that there are really benign versions of it and there's really non-intrusive ways for sovereignty of states to be retained within

a world government. Agreed, but they're all kind of stupid though. Maybe, like with the United States, it's all very stupid. We're all flawed humans. It doesn't make any goddamn sense what we're doing. Right, because it's humans implemented. I am saying that I want to go to war with Indiana. I think it's time that Illinois took back our fucking rightful land from Gary Indiana.

That motherfucker Gary stole our land immediately after he found out that Napoleon had lost at Waterloo. Right. It's time we took it back. I agree. Look, I mean, you're making a demonstration of the point and I agree with you. It's stupid. Yeah, it's nonsense.

There's a way for those ideas to be merged into one. And again, it comes down to execution as opposed to conception. Conception is good. I just don't trust any of these people to execute it. If you have people who know what they're doing, usually you have a good idea that they implement and it works out well. If you have people who don't know what they're doing trying to implement a good idea, it doesn't go well.

If you have people who know what they're doing trying to implement a bad idea, usually it goes exactly the way that they want it to. The problem is generally speaking, the people who know what they're doing are usually trying to go the bad way. Yep. They're the ones who are using that knowledge against us. And the people who want to help, usually stupid. Or they're being held back by too many stupid people yelling at their wrongs.

Exactly. Anyway. Ministered by a tiny elite. By 1930, the promoters of boys. We just skipped. We just yada yada a lot of time. The Fabian Socialist centered in London and the Fascist based in Italy and Germany. So if you understand what he just said, he said by 1930, this powerful world controlling group

had split into the Fabian Socialists, the Fabian Society, and Fascists in Europe. That's poppycock. But you remember the famous fight that they had? No, I don't. Yeah, yeah. No. So what happened? I somehow missed this in my research.

Oh, yeah, yeah. No, no, no. He's saying that this is everybody know this. No, no. He said this is a false split. He's saying they're still working together, but it's a fake split. Yeah. Anyway, go ahead.

They had a big public dustup. It was like, have you ever seen Fast and Furious 5? Oh, love them. It was a, no, no. It was in the last one where he's like, I gotta, yeah, I can't be with my family anymore. I gotta go rogue, do that whole thing. And then he does these things. And Hitler is Vin Diesel in this scenario, I believe.

Who's the rock? I, Churchill? Okay. So what's interesting is that Alex's citation for this point, the documentary, is just two Encarta pages for the Fabian socialists and for fascism. I am still never going to get over the fact that you keep saying it's Encarta. Yeah. It's crazy.

So irresponsible. So now this idea that they came from the same. It's two National Geographic photos of Hitler. The idea that they came from the same place is so stupid. It's such nonsense. Because the Fabian society is actually really interesting. They formed as a splinter group out of this group called the Founder, or the Fellowship of New Life.

All right. That doesn't, that sounds culty. It is. That sounds super culty. It's my kind of cult though. Okay. So the Fellowship was an organization founded in 1883 that sought the cultivation of the perfect character in each and all.

They advocated for pacifism and vegetarianism. From an 1883 meeting. God, I wish those two didn't go together so often. I just, give me the pacifism. Don't give me those can't eat animals with faces bullshit. I like meat. So from an 1883 meeting articulating their goal. Quote, we recognizing the evils and wrongs that must beset men so long as our social life is

based upon selfishness, rivalry, and ignorance, and desiring above all things to supplant it by a love based upon unselfishness, love, and wisdom, unite for the purpose of realizing the higher life among ourselves and of inducing and enabling others to do the same. And we now form ourselves into a society to be called the Guild or Fellowship of the New Life and to carry out this purpose. The Fellowship. That sounds a lot like cosplay. It might as well have been.

There was some pretty sex heavy stuff going on with them. Yeah. Very libertine. Yeah. No, I'm listening to them describe themselves and I get exactly what they are. So the Fellowship of New Life was very strictly about internal transformation of the individual. So when some members wanted to get involved in politics and external affairs, it was decided that they needed to start a new group to do that, and that was where the Fabian Society

started, which ended up being the Fabian Socialists. You know what's fascinating? Conversely, Italian fascism started when Benito Mussolini was kicked out of the Socialist Society and became a fascist. Because he was too busy being a fascist. He became a very, very incredibly nationalist. And his fascism went along with that. And the Nazis grew out of the German Workers' Party who were from the jump a bigoted anti-Semitic

virulently nationalistic organization. They hated the Socialist Democratic Party of Germany as well as the Communist Party of Germany. They thought they were fighting Bolshevism and international Jewry. By the time Hitler joined up, they were fully anti-democratic, anti-Marxist, anti-liberal organization. Over Hitler's own objections, the party changed its name to the National Socialist Germaners' German Workers' Party specifically in order to trick left-wing workers into supporting them. Yep.

Most of the rise. But people need to. Some people are stupid. They still say, oh, you know what, the Nazis were socialists and you're like, God damn it, you're the dumb people that they tricked. Yeah. That's, and it's amazing that it's still effective after all of the debunking. Course it is.

That has been done. But that's the point that Alex is trying to make is that both of these groups have their roots in the same socialism and that's not true at all. Well, I think they, I think we've got our perfect example for why this shit still happens and continues to happen. It is because the smart people who are going all out, we're trying to transform ourselves. We're trying to make the world a better place. Fabian socialists.

We're trying to do all of this stuff. Fabian society people. Exactly. Did you see how many fucking words they used to try and say that? Yeah, quite a few. And then who's on the other side? The Nazis. What did the Nazis describe themselves as?

They yelled. We hate Jews. Right, they just yelled a lot. Who has got a simpler, more, simpler, more easy to communicate message? You're right. It is concise. That's our issue. Yeah.

Smart people have always, any time we have a society like this, like, why can't we start a knowledge fight society that's just like, don't be a dick. Just two minute podcast. Yeah. Like, hey, stop. Here's my, here's my mission statement for, for, for my life. Before you do something, stop. Think for two seconds.

Am I being a dick? And if you are, don't do it. We should just put out an episode that's just, Alex is lying. Yeah. Andy in Kansas. Alex is lying. Anyway. National socialism will use its own revolution for establishing a new world order.

Adolf Hitler. So this is fun. In the, in the bibliography, it says, insert here, citation for the quote. Which they can't do because this is a fake quote. I looked into it. Of course it is. This is absolutely a fake quote. Of course it is.

That doesn't sound like him at all. Nope. It's not a real quote. Alex is just reporting a meme. This is a meme. Great. Great. Supporters of the fascist in the United States and England believed that the military should

be used to quickly transform the world into a new world order. That's not the definition of fascism. All the more sophisticated practitioners of people. That's what's stated that incrementalism was the sure path to world. That's not how socialism works either. He's not asserting that though. That again, if you're, if you're not watching this, which God love you. Fascism is fast.

Socialism is slow. That's basically what he's saying. It's not how that works. But that could just be this film stock. He might not be actually asserting that. He might just be using that. He put it in his documentary. He's definitely did.

Okay. Fine. In that case, he's a dick. Yeah. Congressional Medal of Honor winner, Major General Spendley Butler, went public in 1934. Exposing an attempt by the Robert Bates to launch a military overthrow of the United States. The war hero testified to the McCormick-Dixon committee in Congress that some of the most powerful men in America had tried to recruit him to lead a military coup so they could set up

national socialism in the United States. I appeared before the congressional committee, the highest representation of American people under subpoena to tell what I knew of activities, which I believe might lead to an attempt to set up a fascist dictatorship. I was supposed to lead an organization of 500,000 men, which would be able to take over the functions of government. So you want to know something fun? He smokes four packs of cigarettes a day?

It appears that he wasn't lying. Oh, yeah. No, no, no. I think I've heard about this one. Yeah. The Wall Street plot. Yes. Yeah, yeah.

The one to take over fucking no, no, no, no. I totally remember this guy. This is the guy who is, who may or may not have been telling the truth about the plot to fucking murder FDR. Not murder him necessarily. Perform the coup. Yeah. Depose him and put him in a ceremonial position.

And do you know, do you know why they fucking did that? Do you know why they did that? Because he was trying to implement actual socialism. Well, and they wanted the gold standard to come back to that as a big part of it. Well, yeah, but that's a reasonable part of it. So he was, Smidley Butler was approached by two dudes named Gerald McGuire and Bill Doyle, who are members of the American Legion, who are trying to enlist him on behalf of Wall Street financiers who hated FDR.

They started by appealing to him because he was a veteran, that they were like, we want you to give a speech to the American Legion Convention. But Butler got suspicious when the speech they wanted him to give was mostly about how they needed to bring back the gold standard. So he's like, Hey, that doesn't seem like what we need to tell these veterans. Guys, wait, what? He got really suspicious. So he strung him along and insisted on meeting the bank roller of their operation.

Right. Met him. It's a guy named Robert Sterling Clark, who is the heir to the Singer sewing machine fortune. Clark was concerned about the destruction of the economy. And he said that he was willing to spend 15 of his $30 million to save the other 15. So that doesn't, that's not good math. That's not good math. Clark paid this Gerald McGuire to go to Europe and look into the political climate there in 1933.

He was particularly impressed by the Italian fascists and how they merged business with government. Hey, when he came back, when he came back, Dan, when he came back, do you know what he said? What did he say? Dan, when he came back, do you know what he said? What did he say? He said, show me the money. Yeah. Oh, I get it.

That took me a second. It's spelled different. That's why that's why not that I'm an idiot. I'm sorry. I am going to. So it was finally revealed to Butler. Five points for me. Oh, that seems unfair.

So it was finally revealed to Butler that the real reason they were approaching him was that they wanted him to lead an attachment of 500,000 veterans to Washington to overthrow FDR. He did not go along with it. Instead reported the plot to Congress. In their investigation, the house found that it appeared that his testimony was credible, but there was no evidence whatsoever that merited anything further than compelling McGuire to testify, at which point he denied everything. No one was charged and the House Committee refused to subpoena.

Many of the other people alleged to be involved because their involvement was based on hearsay and secondhand information at best. Right. So it's a really interesting moment in American history, but the more you look at it, the more it looks like the opposite of what Alex thinks it is. It's in fact the exact opposite of what Alex thinks it is. This was in theory a coup planned by rich business interests, specifically because they feared socialism and communism in the form of FDR.

McGuire told a reporter quote, So it's a plan by the fucking globalists. Well, McGuire told a reporter quote, We need a fascist government in this country to save the nation from the communists who want to tear it down and wreck all that we've built in America. In preparation for their coup, they spread rumors that FDR was deathly ill to ease their path to deposing him. All in all, this supposed coup to me is most reminiscent of Alex Jones's fake counter coup

that the Patriots did to try and put Trump into power, which puts him on the exact wrong side of this. Yes. He's the McGuire of this, not the Smedley Butler. Yeah. So that's, I really find that incident in history really, really interesting because, you know, most times when you have a story like that, you know, it gets investigated and it turns out there's nothing to this.

Right. Or something like that. For it to be like, oh no, that's a real thing. No, Smedley Butler won the Congressional Medal of Honor. Yeah. He's not, he's not coming out there like a half-cocked Alex Jones guest. Well, I mean, Jesse Ventura was the governor of a state. Yeah, but he didn't win any fucking medals.

That's fair. Yeah. He won the Hell in a Cell match. One time. I don't know if he did that. I don't know if he did either. Fascist had also made deep inroads in England. Edward VIII, King of England, was forced to abdicate the throne

because of his public support for Hitler. This isn't true. He was forced to abdicate because he wanted to marry a woman named Wallace Sampson, who was an American socialite who had been previously divorced twice, and that was not allowed. Nope. Because as the king, Edward was the monarch, and that is the official head of the Church of England.

At the time, the Church of England had a policy that divorced people can't get remarried unless their ex-spouse was dead. So it would have been bigamy if the two of them would have been married in the church's eyes. So everyone was against it. The Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin told Edward that if he went against the public's wishes and married Wallace anyway, much of the government would resign in protest. So on December 10th, 1936, Edward abdicated the throne formally.

On June 3rd, 1937, a month after his her divorce was finalized, he married Wallace Sampson because he fucking loved her. They stayed married till he died. Right. They were together anyway. No, I saw a little bit of Netflix as the queen or whatever it is. Now, here's the unfortunate part.

No, he's totally, no, no, absolutely. I know he was a Nazi. Don't worry. Yeah, he became the Duke of Windsor after he stepped down. His brother granted him a title, but he used definitely a Nazi, but that really only came to the surface after he had actually abdicated. In late 1937, he visited Germany and met Hitler at the Ober Salzburg Resort. It appears that at the meeting, he was convinced by Hitler

that it was in everyone's best interest to side with the Nazis over the communists, and there was nothing to be gained by sitting out and waiting for one side to destroy the other. However, it's clear that he was never a, quote, full Nazi. He took residence in France, and in 1940, when the Nazis invaded France, he and Wallace fled to Portugal. He never rose past having pro-Nazi inclinations, which is horrible on its own, but it wasn't the reason he abdicated. The reason people think this is the case is because the situation seems so bizarre

that someone would step down as the king because they loved someone and wanted to marry them. Right. But that's just a stupid thought process. Which is, it's fascinating to look back at this because we're not at all close to it, and just go through the list of dumb shit that happened. Like, okay, he can't get married to this girl, this lady, because he was divorced. No, she was. She was divorced.

Twice. Right. She was divorced twice. Yeah. And so that doesn't make any sense. That's silly. But think about it. Of course you can.

Of course you can. You watch old episodes of Happy Days, and they talk about divorcee being hot to trot, and like, stay away from them. That lingered for years after this. Why can't he do this? This is in the 30s. Because he was going to be the king of England.

01:33:20,240 --> 01:33:22,400 Now, why is he the king of England? Who gives a shit? Right. Why can't he do that if he's the king of England? Because technically, according to magical beliefs, the king is also the head of the church. Which, why would you give a shit about that anyways? The reason that the king is the head of the church was because of getting married to a divorced bitch. That's true.

Like, what is going on? All of this stuff is so stupid. I never thought about that. It's banana stupid. It's so circular. It's ridiculous. Wow. And all of this made perfect sense to people at the time.

Yeah. Yeah, to the point where they would threaten to quit the government in mass. Yes. Okay. Hold on. I think you're working something out. This is a beautiful mind moment. I'm furious.

I'm furious. Because the reason that the king is the head, I know. Okay. Good. No, I'm sorry. I want to hear that thought. It's just so stupid that the reason that the king is the head of the church of England is because he wanted to do worse crimes than what the king had to step down.

These people are so stupid. It's pretty wild. Religion is dumb. But I mean, you take the Nazi piece out of it, which is a big problem. And Sandra Boakley is still a good actress. Hey now. You take the Nazi piece out of it. Wait.

So, like, that wasn't why he abdicated. And at the point of abdication, like, legitimately, it's a beautiful idea that he did love her enough that he was like, fine, I don't need to be king. Fuck this. Also, it's a smart idea too. He didn't want to be king. Yeah, it didn't seem like he did. No.

It seemed like that. He wanted to fuck around. Well, he also, it seemed like the role of being king was very confining. And his personality was not well suited to that. Right. So, it probably is for the fact. He was a bit of a gadfly. It's probably for the best in history.

He was a bit of a man about town, so to speak. A little bit of a dick swinger. Yeah. Anyway, he was a Nazi-ish, but that wasn't why he stepped down. Also, that's the weirdest part. Why do these people believe that if he were a Nazi, he would have to step down? That's crazy. Because being a Nazi would have been totally fine.

If he was the king and he wasn't banging somebody who had been divorced. Right. If he was just a Nazi, everybody would be like, oh, okay. Well, I guess we're all Nazis then. It would have been fine up to a point. Yeah. Also, they're all related to each other. Sure.

You know, like all of the fucking rich British royalty are related to all the other rich everywhere else royalty. They can all fucking die. Who gives a shit? Oh, I'm Hitler. No subtitles, by the way. No. He's just presenting a German speech with no idea of what it says.

The Fabian socialist bloc was able to maintain control. What was that? Fill in time. In the buildup for World War II, and during the conflict, the bankers again financed both sides just as they had done with Napoleon. Huh. Oh, yeah. Gonna Nazi.

Gonna Nazi. Oh, oh. For the rise and fall of the Third Reich, Europe lay in ruins. A lot of it did. It's true. Can't fault them there. Lot of B-roll. Lot of B-roll footage on this.

Yeah. A lot of public domain. B-roll. See, this is what I'm talking about. What is this? There's so much filler. What is happening? Once again, the elite claimed that only global governance could save humanity from certain destruction.

And this time, the elite would succeed in setting up their world body. Ah, the UN. There we go. In April of 1945, at the Presidio Naval Base in San Francisco, the United Nations was founded by the victors of World War II. It's not. You're right. The United Nations complex was then built in New York City on land donated by John D. Rockefeller.

So I want to pause there for a second because that means nothing, but it's fun. John D. Rockefeller did donate the land, but this wasn't the UN's plan. The UN wanted to build their own city. And then they're like, we can't afford that. That's crazy. Yeah. And so John D. Rockefeller. Yeah, the UN wanted to build like a model UN, like a literal model UN.

Like they wanted to build like a self-sustained city. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So that was what their plan was. And this is the vision of the future. We can make a city where no nation's about. Like we can't really do that. That doesn't work. Also, also, what is this?

The 1900s World Fair. Come on, guys. Also, the idea that like no laws apply because it's international land or whatever in the UN compound is not really true. Right of return, Dan. Laws do apply. It's just that there's no sales tax. That's all that you can't kill someone. Oh, shit.

It's duty free. It is. Oh, man. And their cafeteria is open to the public. What? Yeah, you can go. So this is actually just. Is that true?

Yeah. This is how to go eat at the United Nations. That's something I discovered in my research. Second thing I discovered in my research is that. So the reason John D. Rockefeller had this land is because his son Nelson Rockefeller put an option on it. Because there was a guy named William Zenon, second Dorf senior who had he owned the land, right? Why is it we never talk about people with regular names? I don't know.

It's weird. Every show we do, everybody's name is the most bad shit it can possibly be. Second Dorf. So second Dorf. He owned the 17 acres of land in Manhattan. Second Dorf on golf. I like second Dorf's tribe. That was a good movie.

Dreyfus. So he owned this land, the 17 acres in Manhattan and his original plan for what he was going to do with it was he was going to create a self-contained city in Manhattan. So what he was going to do, he was going to build 200 foot walls and an enclosure. This is already a bad idea. There's an artist's rendering of it. It's one of the craziest things I've ever seen in my life. And he was going to build the cube.

You have all these giant buildings around it and they look like trees outside a building. And it's just this giant, huge, flat thing. It would be a self-contained city, everything you need in there, hospitals, entertainment, all this shit you never have to leave. And there was an airport on the roof. So that's dope. You would have planes taking off from the middle of Manhattan, 200 feet above the ground. So he had this plan, this second Dorf senior guy, right?

And he was like, this is a good idea. I can't afford to do this. No. So the option on the land fell to Nelson Rockefeller. He was able to buy it for much less than it was worth because he'd put a secondary claim on it. Ended up paying like $8 million for the land. I think it's something with the tune of like $80 million current day. Right.

He got it for his steal. And he believed in the UN Charter. And so he was like, you guys can use it. Okay. It means nothing. Second Dorf. Yeah. Your eyes are a bit bigger than your stomach.

Great idea though. I would say that maybe having the airport on top is going to cause a lot of noise pollution. Danger. I think there's going to be, look, at the first town meeting, it's going to be a struggle. Imagine missing a runaway. It's going to be a fight. You go through, you go through everything. So, but I love it.

I'll post a picture of the artists rendering. It's so crazy to look at just in terms of like someone thought to do that. It's fucked up. Shortly after the elite established the United Nations as their base in the United States, the newly formed world council quickly began work on the next phase in their plan, the incremental formation of continental super states. The first step in their trilateral plan was the creation of the European Union. So I just want to say really quick.

That's one out of three steps. The EU was founded in 1993. So that would have been, it took them 50 years in order to get this thing going. And they started after the Second World War when everyone would have been totally into this sort of thing. Yeah. The sort of unity and the coming together and all that shit was pretty high after World War II. Apparently it's a lot harder than it looks, Dan.

They were, the world was desperate and it ruins this idea. The idea that it would take them 50 years to put these plans together. Also, Alex has no citation for this. No. Well, where would you get a citation for your trilateral plan of the globalists? It's unpopular. Nonsense. Where Napoleon and Hitler had failed to accomplish their goals using force,

the globalists would succeed using stealth. Ah. The British spearheaded the formation of the Council of Europe on May 5th, 1949. The Treaty of London claimed to only establish trade ties between European nations, like NASA would get in North America. Its true intention was the formation of a European super state. You can't assert things like that. You can't say there are true intentions without proving it.

Because you can go find the Treaty of London from 1949. I read the whole thing. It's a very, it's a completely benign document. That it even contains such horrors as this. This is very scary. Every member of the Council of Europe must accept the principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights. How dare they?

Fundamental freedom. Harumph. Harumph. Yeah, this is gonna fucking terrify you. European Union! This is gonna terrify you. The aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve a greater unity between its members and for the purpose of safeguarding and realizing the ideals and principles

which are their common heritage and facilitating their economic and social progress. This aim shall be pursued through the organs of the Council by discussion of questions and common concerns, and by agreements and common action on economic, social, cultural, scientific, legal, and administrative matters. This is why we lose to an asshole with a Make America Great Again hat. I just got bored halfway through you reading that. Of course, I'm gonna vote for the guy who says,

I'll fix it! The entire thing is really just about like, we're gonna create a forum where we can come together and talk about our shared purposes. Hey guys, how about we don't kill everybody? Is that everybody on board with not killing each other? I started to realize that I think Alex has just pissed off whenever any countries collaborate. I think that's really all he just, he fucking hates. And I got bad news.

That's the inevitable next thing that has to happen, or else the other option is we all fight. Well, yeah. And I don't want that. Most people don't want that. You know, it does. Those arms manufacturers do. Sure seems like it's an impossible cycle to get out of at this point,

where it's like a constant fighting. Just interestingly, it's not if we collaborate. We destroy each other, and then the people who are left to pick up the pieces are like, well, it's a good idea to collaborate. We start to build stuff again. And then when we're in a comfortable enough place where the war is far enough away for most people to have forgotten about it,

then you start getting rabble-rousers, like an asshole like Alex Jones, or like all of those guys who are going to say, well, you know what we need to do? We need to have stronger borders. We need nationalism. And that winds up leading to that other side of that fucking conflict that's going to last for goddamn ever.

And then after everybody's done with that, the people who are left to pick up the pieces are going to try and put together everything. They're going to come together. They're going to try and build something that's going to be comfortable for them enough. And then once enough time has passed, and many people have forgotten about the fucking horrors of the past,

then they're going to start this whole fucking shit over again, Dan. Did you ever, in junior high, have to do like a class project with someone you didn't like and you kind of couldn't get anything done because you guys didn't like each other? Yeah, when I was in second grade, we did something with Legos. And then the teacher maybe sat you down

and was like, hey, guys, you know, you're good at this. You're good at this. Why don't you guys work together on stuff? And you start working together and you realize that you're getting something done together. And all of a sudden you realize you don't actually hate this person that you're in a group project with and you grow through it.

Right. The world could be like that. No, what happened was I killed Danielle. Oh, man. Yeah, I killed her. Oh, no. Did not get along with her. She was from Russia though, so it's fine.

I don't know. It was the 70s. So here's another quote. Let's see. James Warburg, we shall have world government, whether or not you like it by conquest or by consent. Boy, that does not sound real.

So this is an instance where he, again, doesn't have a citation in the bibliography, but we can see here Senate Foreign Relations Committee 1950. It seems like such an aggressive thing to say to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Well, the full quote is, we shall have world government whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government

will be achieved by consent or conquest. That is close. Very different. Well, whether or not you like it is different. It's a very big situation. But it's also the context is really off. I read the entire speech that he gave, and he went on to say,

Mr. Chairman, I'm here to testify in favor of Senate Resolution 56, which, if concurrently enacted with the House, would make a peaceful transition of the United Nations into a world federation, the avowed aim of the United States policy. The passage of this resolution seems to me the first prerequisite towards the development

of an affirmative American policy which would lead us out of the Valley of Death and Despair. See, his concern was that the way things were looking in the mid-50s and the Cold War, so many of the world's alliances were based on negative policies, which is to say policies that existed solely against something as opposed to affirmative policies

that would exist to support something. And he says, quote, until we establish this goal, we shall continue to ask other peoples to unite with us only in the negative purpose of stopping Russia. Fear-inspired negative action makes poor cement for unity. So that was kind of the big context.

That's actually a really smart thing to say. He went on to say, Senate Resolution 56 goes up to the root of the evil of the present state of international anarchy. It recognizes that there is no cure for this evil short of making the United Nations into a universal organization capable of enacting, interpreting,

and enforcing world law to the degree necessary to outlaw force or the threat of force as an instrument of foreign policy. It states the objective in unequivocal terms. Warburg goes on to say that the resolution requires literally no further steps from the United States. It is a broad declaration of purpose and nothing more. Later, he was questioned about the speech

and the subject of disarmament came up. And he said this that I thought was really interesting. I enjoy it. It's a good way to look at it. I've never seen any hope in disarmament or limitation of armaments by agreement between sovereign nations or states because all of the treaties

between the sovereign nations and states are such that anyone can break them at their convenience. And the result, the only result, is that you give a head start to the aggressor. Which is fairly true. So anyway, what do you think? I mean, it's a, well, I kind of agree and disagree with his philosophy on disarmament.

I get where he's coming from. It's an interesting thought. I get where he's coming from. I don't know if I would, like to me, the only way that disarmament works is you first. 01:48:57,520 --> 01:48:58,720 Or I first.

Exactly. If you want everybody to disarm themselves, you have to do it first. You can't be like, well, we'll go, you know, the way that we have now where it's kind of this ticky tack, okay, Russia, you get rid of 30. We'll get rid of 30 very slowly.

Because it's so slow, it leaves you open to a changing of the guard. And you get somebody who's obsessed with nukes running the whole program. That seems like an inevitability. Yeah, it needs to be. Kind of like a chaos theory type thing. Jurassic Park.

Eventually someone is going to be in power who shouldn't. Exactly. So back to this. It's your Nero. It's your emperor, like the benevolent emperor is a great system of government up until you get a shitty emperor and everybody dies. Yeah.

You know. Back to this question of the UN and this hearing that Warburg was in, the deputy undersecretary of state for policy matters, Dean Rusk had this to say, when we turn to the United Nations and its charter, we're conscious of the dominant role which support for the United Nations has played

in our foreign policy. The purposes and principles written into the charter of the United Nations are in essence a summary of the foreign policy of the United American people. We should not underestimate the importance of the fact that these principles so congenial to us have been subscribed to by 58 other governments. The worldwide acceptance of principles

which are central to our foreign policy is a tremendous asset which the United States must carefully nourish. Which is also something that most people don't talk about a lot. Most of the UN foreign policy is our foreign policy. Yeah. Anyway, they-

But it's a good idea to rail against them. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee got together and they put out a report on September 1st, 1950. The committee declined to support any of the pending resolutions or to report out a resolution of its own. But in a certain sense that still does make, that still makes sense for

and Alex Jones to hate the United Nations because if their foreign policy is our foreign policy, well, he hates our foreign policy too. So- No, that's a fair point. I mean, he just hates policy of the foreign. He hates cooperation. He hates unity.

He likes othering. He likes segmentation. But anyway, the point is that this thing, 56, what was it? What was the resolution 56? Which was supposed to just declare that the United Nations is cool? It was non-binding.

It was us saying, hey, look at those guys. Let's make them cool too. Senate didn't pass that. No. Senate is useless. They can't even say stuff. In 1954, the elite of the planet met in secret at the Bilderberg Hotel in Oosterbeck, Holland.

The Bilderberg group- Oh, he's got a pyramid! That their mission was the formation of the EU. It's interesting. The Bilderberg group in 1954 said that their mission was the formation of the EU. Which would take 40 years later, 1993. So are we afraid of the Bilderberg group?

They don't seem to be very on top of it. Everyone should be afraid of them. They seem very lazy. So here's what's fun. In the years since 1954, when the Bilderberg group met for the first time, their minutes have come out. And mostly what they talked about was the attitudes, the prevailing attitudes that business leaders

and government officials had towards the Soviet Union. And then what the fuck is up with this Ginsburg guy? He's saying all kinds of shit. Howling. Yeah, ugh. So it was mostly about the Soviet Union and whether or not trade would be possible and if we would be able to get behind the iron curtain,

stuff like that. I've read most of the minutes of the meeting. It doesn't talk about forming the EU. No. Once the EU was established under the guise of trade deals, a North American Union and Asian Union would be formed. The three interlocking super-states formed the core of the global government, while the United Nations would serve

as a world regulatory and enforcement body over the third world subregions. The Bilderberg group consists of the heads of all of the managing roundtable groups that steer individual countries. So we're seeing a picture of a tree. With a bunch of... There's no leaves on it.

It's just a bunch of... Well, that's because it's the dead tree. It's true. Of Bilderberg. And it's just a bunch of names of organizations and stuff. Okay, so one branch is the United Kingdom. The other is the United States. The US, European interests.

Israel seems really big. But it's also sparsely populated by organizations. Anyway, I just want to talk really quickly. That tree is not healthy. I want to talk really quick about Bilderberg and one of the arguments that Alex is central to his worldview. And that is that they insist on operating in secret

and yet he has tons of fucking articles about them. Right. And he brings up... He's going to flash up a couple of articles about them that he has on microfiche and stuff like that. Oh, where did he get those? So the other thing that's really funny is I found a documentary that our boy John Ronson did.

Okay. Where he went with Jim Tucker to Portugal to stake out the Bilderberg group. Our same Jim Tucker? Yes, Jim Tucker from the beginning. He's about to come back. Cowboy had Jim? He's going to come back in a big way.

So John Ronson made a documentary about this and they end up getting followed by some black cars and it's all very, very suspicious, but nothing ends up happening. Of course. Once again, Jim Tucker says he's going to break in and he chickens out at the last minute. So afterwards, John Ronson wanted to figure out

what's the deal and he got in contact with a bunch of people from the Bilderberg group and they agreed to be interviewed. So he just texted somebody and they were like, Oh, yeah, no, no, I know Dave. Come on down here, Dave. Come on, come on. The Bilderberg, we're fine. He ended up getting interviews with like two or three

of the players in the Bilderberg group who were at the meeting in Portugal and they explained to him very politely and candidly that the reason that they prefer secrecy and don't want reporters to come is because the people who were there would never speak freely if they knew that things were going to be recorded

or they were going to be released. Right. You can't have a frank and open discussion about ideas. Some that might be bad and get shot down, you might be embarrassed by the idea that like, I really fucked up. Yeah. You end up losing face in your own country or in your...

Which makes people not want to come and then you... Yeah, you wouldn't be able to get anything done. And that seems like a compelling argument, quite frankly. Yeah, I imagine if... For secrecy. I imagine if Apple and Steve Jobs in every one of those like planning meetings had the press in there, we would not have as many cool Apple shifts.

Think about how many articles there would be about these stupid ideas. Somebody would be like, oh, what if I put all of the music you had into your hand? They'd be like, you're a fucking moron. Steve Jobs. Career over. Exactly.

Yeah, it would be a disaster. You'd just end up with half-cooked ideas being reported as real. It'd just be a mess. Right. And especially with people... Anyways, what we're saying is end the free press. Sure, except John Ronson.

But like also with reporters like Jim Tucker and Alex Jones on the scene... I don't know why you said reporters. Well, heavy air quotes. But like imagine what... With assholes like... Yeah. Imagine what they would misrepresent

if they were able to go into those meetings. So it would just be a sort of spiraling down the drain of getting anything done. I'm comfortable with that explanation. Now, are they also... I think Alex would just jerk off onto the table. Oh, totally. And be like, please, let me join, please.

Now, are they probably also collaborating and making deals that are maybe exploitative to some degree? I would assume almost a hundred percent. Rich people with access to other rich people is never a good... Right. They're always going to make some. But it doesn't mean that they're trying to create a one-world government.

That's a little bit of a stretch. No, and in fact, it would probably be bad for them. Yeah, I think it would be a terrible idea. Yeah. Pitcher the elite power structure of the world as a giant pyramid. I get it. With only the elite of the elite

at the tip top of the capstone. Are they going to build a pyramid around Earth? Until the mid-1980s. The hero of the controlled corporate media denied its existence. Oh, I saw this in my library study class. Into the late 1990s. So here's an article that specifically brings up

the meeting at the Bilderberg Group and that Quail was there. Bridge only consisted of rare one-line mentions. But there are articles about the Bilderberg Group. He's showing one line, but it's so stupid. All right. He's undercutting his own argument. Here's a foreign paper that talked about it.

I got a full three inches to do on this Bilderberg thing. But you can only mention them once. Their stranglehold on information has begun to slip. On the outskirts of the national capital today, black limousine with darkened windows converged on a hotel where private security guards imposed ironclad control. Spoiler alert.

Ironclad control. We're about to enter a really fun portion of this documentary. Maybe the most lively portion of it. Okay. This is some crazy shit. Good. I'm glad we get it out of the way up top. I'm glad that the last eight hours of our episode

are going to be boring. This is Alex Jones, goes to Canada. Oh, no. Hey, this is Dan. And this is where we will have to leave off for today. Oh, what a cliffhanger, right? Alex Jones goes to Canada. What's going to happen?

What's going to be there when he shows up? And what sort of trouble will he end up getting into? Tune in tomorrow to find out. Guys, this is ridiculous. If you'd like to get a taste of the citations for all of the stuff that you've heard here today on the show, please go to knowledgefight.com. We have a bibliography in progress there

that should cover everything from today's episode. You can just go to knowledgefight.com if you want all sorts of stuff. There's all sorts of goodies there. There's also a button that says Support the Show. You can click on that if you'd like to become a policy wonk and support the sort of stuff that we do. You can also find us at Knowledge Fight on Facebook,

also at Knowledge Underscore Fight on Twitter. We're on iTunes, and we would appreciate it very much if you would subscribe. Leave us a review, that sort of thing. You can leave reviews on Facebook as well. It's really nice, and it helps all sorts of things. And I'd like to, yeah, just thank everybody for... Oh, God, I'm so tired.

Still, I still have not recovered from the nine-hour recording of this end game stuff that will be coming out over the course of the week. So, enjoy that, and I don't know. See you soon. Andy in Kansas, you're on the air. Thanks for holding. So, Alex, I'm a first-time caller.

I'm a huge fan. I love your work. I love you.