The Last American Vagabond - Russian ICJ Victory, Chinese Uyghurs And Hypocrisy & Israel Openly Starving Hostages/Palestine Alike

Episode Date: February 1, 2024

Welcome to The Daily Wrap Up, a concise show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant independent news, as we see it, from the last 24 hours (2/1/24).As always, take the information discussed in the video below and research it for yourself, and come to your own conclusions. Anyone telling you what the truth is, or claiming they have the answer, is likely leading you astray, for one reason or another. Stay Vigilant.!function(r,u,m,b,l,e){r._Rumble=b,r[b]||(r[b]=function(){(r[b]._=r[b]._||[]).push(arguments);if(r[b]._.length==1){l=u.createElement(m),e=u.getElementsByTagName(m)[0],l.async=1,l.src="https://rumble.com/embedJS/u2q643"+(arguments[1].video?'.'+arguments[1].video:'')+"/?url="+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+"&args="+encodeURIComponent(JSON.stringify([].slice.apply(arguments))),e.parentNode.insertBefore(l,e)}})}(window, document, "script", "Rumble"); Rumble("play", {"video":"v487615","div":"rumble_v487615"});Video Source Links (In Chronological Order): Derrick Broze Interview - Day 1 #FluorideTrial: The Government Fights To Keep Your Water Unsafe (43) Ne Viola Cenzor on X: "@TLAVagabond Are you and France the only entities covering this story?" / X Monsanto ordered to pay $ 2.25 billion to a former Roundup user, the biggest fine ever imposed on his weedkiller | FranceSoir The Complete History Of Monsanto, "World’s Most Evil Corporation" Stephanie Seneff/Denis Rancourt Roundtable - Glyphosate, mRNA & Spike Proteins Destroying Your Body Monsanto Archives - The Last American Vagabond New Tab (77) Elon Musk on X: "Enables control of your phone or computer, and through them almost any device, just by thinking. Initial users will be those who have lost the use of their limbs. Imagine if Stephen Hawking could communicate faster than a speed typist or auctioneer. That is the goal." / X (76) Elon Musk on X: "The first human received an implant from @Neuralink yesterday and is recovering well. Initial results show promising neuron spike detection." / X (50) RichPeopleWeekly on X: "@enhanced_games You're right, to an extent. Choice is ideal, until certain people deem it not to be. In case you were wondering where normalizing bioenhancement leads to, you may want to understand the reality of the situation a bit better. Bread and circus upsells the idea while vultures circle https://t.co/KwLWJ6kubr" / X Compulsory moral bioenhancement should be covert - PubMed Our Team - Enhanced Games. A Better Version of the Olympic Games. Billionaire Peter Thiel Backs Doping-Friendly Olympics Rival — What To Know About The ‘Enhanced Games’ New Tab (78) Luther ‘Ćyrus’ on X: "Source: https://t.co/klLRxyqjhN" / X Zero draft of the WHO CA+ for the consideration of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body at its fourth meeting (65) LastAmericanVagabond on X: "And they are #Baffled guys, just baffled. https://t.co/baWFztusn5 https://t.co/ZZ6tyVjI4r" / X Latest numbers for Canada’s fertility rate show all-time low, largest decline since 1970s baby bust - The Globe and Mail California may expand who can issue psychiatric 5150 holds New Tab (120) Uh oh on X: "@ShannonJoyRadio @TLAVagabond @libertytarian How is this any different from Nukem' Haley? 🤔" / X (121) 🥖🎪 on X: "Victoria Nuland landed in Kiev and started issuing threats towards Russia she can’t back up https://t.co/EaiMB9HMui" / X (41) Arnaud Bertrand on X: "Wow, stunning Russian victory at the ICJ in a case Ukraine launched against them https://t.co/UzVivM4qcE The ICJ "tossed out most of Ukraine’s pleas" regarding Russia being a "terrorist state" (they only ruled that Russia had failed “to take measures to investigate") and…" / X UN top court rejects most of Ukraine’s ‘terror financing’ case against Russia (7) 'Clearly a victory for Russia' as ICJ dismisses bulk of Ukraine's terror case against Russia - YouTube (81) Megatron on X: "BREAKING: 🇺🇸 ⚡ 🇮🇷 A War between U.S. Get full access to The Last American Vagabond Substack at tlavagabond.substack.com/subscribe

You may have noticed on the list of speakers that I appear as Abraham Schlein. Abraham is my real name. Avi is the calling name. But for the absence of doubt, I want to make it clear that the Abraham Accords are not named after me. I strongly oppose the Abraham Accords because there are not peace agreements between democratic societies, there are transactional agreements between authoritarian Arab rulers and an apartheid state. As far as the Arab signatories of the Abraham agreements are concerned, this amounts to a stabbing the back to the Palestinians. I'd like to end on a personal note, if I may. I'm an Arab Jew. I was born in Baghdad and I grew up in Israel.

My Iraqi birth certificate gives my name, my first name is Ibrahim. So I am the real Ibrahim al-Baghdadi. The other chap is a fake. He stole my identity. I'm proud of my Arab heritage, and I'm equally proud of my Jewish heritage. The three pillars of Judaism are truth, justice and peace. The Netanyahu government is the opposite of these core Jewish values. It is the most aggressive expansionist, overtly racist, and Jewish supremacist government in Israel's history.

The essence of Judaism is non-violence. The present government is the antithesis of this essence. As a Jew and an Israeli, I therefore feel that I have a moral duty to denounce Zionist settler colonialism and American imperialism and to stand by the Palestinians in their anti-colonial struggle, in their just struggle to live in peace and dignity on their own land. Thank you for listening. Welcome to the daily wrap-up, a concise show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant, independent news as we see it from the last 24 hours. Thursday, February 1st, 2024. Thank you for joining me today. We're going to get into a lot of topics today, something that I've touched on in passing numerous times and haven't really done too much in-depth work simply just because there's so many things to get into these days and have been for, I mean, since I've been doing this quite frankly, but in regard to the China Uyghur conversation and how that obviously overlaps with Palestine and Israel, and we're going to talk about the interesting dynamic and the hypocrisy around it,

as well as the other factors that may be at play to dissect it in the beginning of the show. We'll get into that in the early part of the show today, but how important this seems to be and how, as you guys well know, I think these governments, all of them are dangerous and would absolutely put you in a cage and ignore your human rights and your constitutional rights or whatever they may be as long as it suited their agenda and they felt the juice was worth to squeeze. I think that about all of them, as much as too partisan, you know, or rather just partisan entities out there would love to make it how, you know, you not saying this means that.

And that's just how this game is played today. But it's important to consider all the factors, right? The use of radical elements by Israel and the United States to destabilize and manipulate foreign countries, you know, these things are important factors. are involved in all this. But right out of the gate, I think it's very clear that China in its actions against these people are treating them as lesser than. And I think that's important. Subhuman, they're violating their rights, exactly like you're seeing the Israel due to Palestinians. Or I shouldn't say exactly. I mean, there's very many differences. I just mean in the sense that

their rights are being violated. And I don't think that's debatable. But there's different factors at play. Because it's interesting that you would are, that you're hearing from Israel. Well, we're allowed to, or rather just that this is acceptable or within the bounds of law. because of what they're doing, because of how radical they are, because of what they would do to us. Well, what's interesting is you're going to hear very similar arguments coming from China, but why don't they apply the same way? Even if you think they're both treating them in the, it's interesting. You can see the overlaps they're in.

And again, now I jump right into it. We'll get into that today. But I think it's really important to consider how these things are being applied to the larger conversation today and why in any sense, if groups' rights are being violated on in any situation while they're why are they being treated differently i think we obviously know why i mean at least that you know the factors the larger political factors of play we're going to start today with a point around a couple quick things i'm going to update during the fluoride trial talk about an interesting point of montanto that very few people seem to be talking about a quick point about neuralink and sort of the

internal biosurveillance discussion that overlaps with a really alarming point about You might have seen it circulating about the Olympics and enhancing, allowing athletes to enhance themselves to better the game essentially. It's very, very interesting. And I agree with some people that pointed this out to me about where this seems to actually be going, you know, both manipulating, you know, the best way to put it. You know, the bioenancement discussion. But whether it's about reducing aging or simply improving what you can do at the expense of others or rather just to be, you know, the gap that widens. between the species. Either way, I think the bio-surveillance aspect plays a prominent role in what we're going to look at.

We're going to talk about the WHO and the zero draft they released, and again, how that seems to discuss importantly surveillance. And I think this all overlaps in a really alarming way, and it comes down to not just broad surveillance about what people are doing in their daily lives, but internal bio-surveillance is exactly what we're talking about. being able to have certain genomic information to be able to, you know, map out certain things and certain populations. And this is what the WHO is essentially demanding as much as they would ever frame it like that. I think we all see how this is developing. We'll talk about some foreign policy in

regard to Ukraine, Russia, the International Court of Justice just essentially dealt out a win for Russia, which if you're actually honest about this conversation really should not have been that much of a shock. Just like with the Israel conversation, Ukraine puts forward a lot of, you know, our evidence shows not really backing things up despite being caught lying about almost everything. And the court came out and ruled accordingly. We'll get to that in a second. We'll talk about the briefly the point about Iran and just to follow up on how that is essentially exactly what we thought would happen. Despite all the partisan hype, if you listen to them, we were bombing Iran two days ago, right? We're going to talk about this one we're getting into the part about the Uyghurs.

And TikTok, interestingly, is what's kind of made me decide to put this point in today. but there's a point about TikTok, which I think is really important. Same thing I was just mentioning, how the partisan media seems to, you know, just nothing, if nothing, at least muddy the waters around these conversations,

which makes it infuriating impossible for people that are trying to be honest about these and nonpartisan as best they can. And then from there, we'll talk about the Uyghurs and how this interestingly overlaps. And again, how I think it's important, the Israeli conversation. And we'll finish today

with a bunch of discussion around Gaza and Israel, talking about UNRah yet again, but most importantly, I think the hostages and the discussion around how it's readily apparent, their actions, their words, I mean, everything, right on the surface that they do not care about getting these people home. I mean, as I said from the beginning,

if that doesn't sit well, at the very least, it's secondary to whatever their agenda seems to be. Even if you think the agenda will end up saving people in some way, the point is the agenda is violence. It is bombing and discriminant. even if you don't think that, they don't know where they are. So when they flood tunnels and bomb these locations, as we keep seeing 60 plus people killed by IDF bombings, their own people coming home and telling you that we were scared of the bombings. We saw people die next to us because of your

bombings. Hamas was cowering there with us as your bombings killed hostages. It's very clear. I think it's important to keep that in the context of the conversation of what they choose to acknowledge and the deals they refuse. I think it's really important to show you that the Cannibal directive is very real. And that is absolutely playing a factor. And these people, the families of the hostages, are screaming for the world to listen. And all you get is your government's telling you you're racist if you disregard what the Israeli government is saying, as their people are trying to get you to listen to the fact that they don't care about their families.

It's quite interesting and ignoring the emotional side of it just to watch how this is playing out. But it's horrifying. Now, fluoride trial to start. I want to make sure you didn't miss this. Derek, it's on day two of the trial he's keeping track of. Now, I know for some people, this either is, you know, conspiracy theory or not important as to the relative to other things going on. I find this to be monumentally important.

It plays into so many other factors we've discussed. I mean, really, at the core of this is the idea that fluoride, which it is, is a neurotoxin. It's interestingly overlap with all the discussions of neuroscience and how it affects. I think this is not just about, I mean, clearly my opinion, I think is obvious to prove, but this is simply advantageous. It's a byproduct that is being used. Now, again, the best way to frame it is something that the government would otherwise have to pay to dispose of has turned into something that you pay to put in your water.

Like your tax dollars pay for this. And it's as easy as proving that the history is obvious. You can look it up. The argument is today is that, well, we do it because it's beneficial for your health. that has been roundly shown to be, at best, they argue it has some sort of dental aspect of health. There's no other benefit they're even arguing today, and that has been shown to be false a long time ago. The fact that it's still in your water, despite all that is mind blowing. This trial has been dragged out for years, even though the final report has been done for years.

And that's kind of the crux of the point, is they're choosing to drag this back and hold it back. And that's why I titled it today, the interview I have with Derek today about day one, the government fights to keep your water unsafe. And that's what's happening. Because if you understand this and you've seen the leaked information, they know what's in the report. They know that it shows that it lowers IQs. The experts, which, by the way, I could just play for you real quick.

Just actually a really quick opening clip. Derek interviewed one of the experts in regard to this exact point today. And there's just quickly what he had to say about that exact point. Her professional opinion, is it fair to say that the conclusions of the national toxicology program that there is an association between higher fluoride exposure and lower IQ and children is accurate? Yes. I would say that in my view, the evidence is quite persuasive, that there is a negative impact of Florida exposure on the neurodevelopment of children, particularly the research that's been coming out in prenatal exposure.

My God. Now, you know, that's just one thing, right? That's just one thing that they've been allowed to drag their feet on, suppressed reports. And it's damaging. But you could argue it's not as damaging as others. I mean, the point is that's just one thing that they know is there that they don't, not only just don't care about, are actively fighting to keep in your water for years, long before that. I argue they knew from the beginning, which,

gets a little more dark, doesn't it? But nonetheless, think about what else, the glyphosates and the PFAFs and the dioxins and all these things that we're learning about together are horrifyingly dangerous and they know they're dangerous and they really don't seem to care. And I think this is paramount.

So that this trial goes forward, hopefully people can start to pay attention and more and more have. I saw CHD did a documentary. Unfortunately, they didn't reach out to Derek. I don't know why he's been pretty much the only one talking on this. But we do have, I think Kim Iverson recently started talking about this,

people are picking this up. It's important. And not only just because it might end up in a point where it exposes in a court of law that they have to admit this, but that it's showing you this entire time that they know it's dangerous. And I mean, look, you could argue that they just disagree and they're experts. That's what they're coming out to say. But it takes a very simple observation to recognize the body of evidence is overwhelmingly clear. And that's why groups are like the foreign action network. And which by the way, the government report, the national toxicology program report is a government report. So the point is this has all been known for people internally in this for a very long time

and they're doing everything they can to keep it from your view. So keep track. And some of the points that already happened are simply that they were objecting to studies outside of the country, which would have shown very clearly that they were wrong. Like everything they're doing seems to me to be about trying to keep this from your view. Now, he's going to keep following up on this. His reports are under, by the way, if you don't know how those, you haven't seen our website in general, you'll find the TLAB team right here.

And under each person's name, there'll be a drop-down menu of the different things that they're involved in. Derek is, you know, the ritualized sexual abuse investigation, exposing parasites test stress theory, two-part, you know, work, fluoride trials right here, which has all these different links in it so you guys can check out all the work he's done so far, which is a lot. There's been a lot of coverage on this. And, you know, things like this, proving that they were altering studies to remove negative conclusions and like this, things that should be bombshell reports in corporate

media, but if they were honest, right? As well, if you'd like to continue to donate and support, it's going to be there all week, you know, and it's TLAV costs. So if you want to support us, here's a way to do it, as well as the other ways that you might be able to down below the video. On that same kind of point about neurotoxins and things like glyphosate, which not necessarily, I do believe that, but larger than I think glyphosate is a bit more nefarious than most things we've talked about because of how ubiquitous it is around the world, which is very easy to prove, literally everywhere. I say this a lot when I talk about this, but I don't want this to become facetious or this is a fact. Is in the air you're breathing, the clothes you're wearing, it is likely in

your urine right now. That's not, I mean, I would be, I would put money on that. I would only say likely because who knows how people's bodies work. The end of the day, it is, the world has been drenched in glyphosate. It's horrifying. And they've done studies. The European Parliament did a study, like a demonstration, which I believe was meant to kind of prove that it wasn't that ubiquitous, and every one of them had it in their urine, which is crazy. Every craft beer in in Germany when they did the study, all had glyphosate, which by the way makes them no longer what they said they were. Organic wines in Napa, same point. So they're technically no longer organic, but they just pretend like that's normal now. So they still call them craft,

organic and whatever else, because it's too late. It's past. It's everywhere. This is why I'm trying to show people things like dioxins and whatever else in case we can get a front of it. The point is, this was the 31st, a French website covered this, a Philadelphia court. Think about how interesting that is. A French website covers a massive Philadelphia court ruling. Have you heard about this on Fox or CNN? This is Philadelphia for crying out loud. They imposed on Monsanto, which is technically Bayer Monsanto at this point, the largest

sentence ever handed down against a weed killer. $2.25 billion with a B in damages to one man who accused Roundup of Being the cause of his cancer. Now, we've heard this already. There was the janitor who won. So let's realize this is, I mean, if this was more broadly discussed, I bet you they would be bankrupt by now because of how many people have a valid case to show that they have cancer because of what they screamed would never cause cancer. It's important. Just to show you, though, that there is some momentum there. There are good things and people fighting for this, like Connett from Florida Action Network and the great work he's doing with that. And thank

the Neve Biola Point Tess. Are you in France the only ones covering this? I'm sure there's some others, but let's get it out there, get people to see it. Now, here is the website itself. Monsanto ordered to pay $2.25 billion to a former roundup user. And I think the, I really just wanted you to see this. You can read it for yourself to get more in depth on it. If you'd like to cover or see more covers that we put out over the years, this is an older, one of the most popular on our website, actually, the complete history of Monsanto, the world's most evil corporation, which is a quote, because it was literally the one, that award, if you want to call it that. Here's the one I mentioned. Stephanie Seneff and Danny Rancourt and I had a roundtable discussion

about this, and the point was glyphosate, MRI, and spike proteins destroying your body. And what this was really about, actually, hold on, I think I had another one with Stephanie as well. Maybe not. I thought I had one about that was different. But anyway, the point was that it's about how, essentially how glyphosate works with other problematic things, including the injections to sort of like synergistically destroy your body. And she's proving this with scientific peer-reviewed evidence. It's mind-blowing.

And the question for you is whether that's by design. I mean, I don't think we have to really stretch our minds that much today. After all the experimentation and all the things that are coming down and, you know, frame-shifting and extra proteins and DNA contamination and mass excess death and cancers and my God, we're all baffled about it, right? We're just so baffled. I think we all kind of see where this is going, as well as the tag, just in general, so you can look, we've been covering Monsanto for a very long time. Now, on that note, which may not seem exactly connected to you, but quite frankly, I see more

connection in this stuff than any, than a lot of things out there today, the direction of the experimentation, both with biological aspects, but the overlap to all of that. We've got into this, you know, nanotech side of it, but whether or not you see this is connected, Elon must post the first neuralink product is called telepathy. Of course it is. Enables control of your phone or your computer and through them almost any device, just to, by thinking. Now, even now that they're posting stuff like this, and even though we've talked about this work going up back a decade, people still read this and go, oh, that's like the, you know, 20 years from now. Guys, it's not. This is already happening. It's already been experimented on.

If you see a human test in live discussion on Twitter, it's probably been utilized by the military for 20 years. I don't know that for sure, but that's historically how these things tend to go. But at the end of the day, this is exactly what I've been talking about. Now, you still may see this is a positive thing or benign. Just realize that anything can always be used, accessed, manipulated by the very people we're all concerned about. Maybe that for you, that's all the Democrats. Maybe for you, that's all the Republicans. Maybe for you, you see through it all and recognize that it could be anybody in your government. Or what about if you only think it's the China government or the government? The point is, it's there. And that will eventually fall into the lap of somebody who can use

it in a negative way. These things need to be considered, not just just pressing on the positive angles that usually don't even come to pass. This might help Parkinson's people and people with no limbs. And, you know, I hope that ends up happening if this ultimately goes forward when I kind of don't want it to. But usually you look back and it's not, I mean, call me a pessimist, but history is there for us to look at guys. And it feels like we oddly never look back to see how these things tend to go.

We're in this hamster wheel and we just can't look back or up, I guess. But it says, initial users will be those who have lost the use of their limbs. Like I said, imagine Stephen Hawking could communicate. faster than the speed type or, you know, you get the point. And this is another one following up, just saying the first, oh, technically this was the first one. It looks like I put him out of order. The first human received an implant from Neurrelink yesterday and is recovering well. Initial results show promising neuron spike detection.

Now, you know, maybe this is, maybe I'm wrong about it all and it's all going to help everybody. I just think we need to be aware of where this all seems to be going. Now, this is a little bit different. I think what we're looking at here in the Neurolink side of it is about, you know, the logical step for the average person. I believe we're well past the idea of some... I mean, look, the point is you're talking about being able to control things by thinking. So clearly you don't need wires, right?

I think that's obvious. Despite the fact that they continue to kind of promote this as something that is, you know, connected to you. I mean, to a point. And so I think that's interesting because I think we're... They are way past that. Getting into things like this, which I'll put one at a second, the idea of the reality of the decades-old concept of smart dust, DARPA's smart dust, which has been around for multiple decades.

Where is that now? God only knows. And I think that is very relevant to this idea, right? Of something that goes beyond, you know, inserting plugs and wires and so on and goes past that to the idea of bio-enhanagement, which is ultimately what this is either way. But I think we're at a point where we're actually in the overlap of like the bio-nanno kind of enhancement concept.

And this is where the, what? I was mentioning briefly before, which people weekly tagged us in this, enhanced games. I hadn't even seen this. This was totally new to me. It says, he's the fastest man in the world and a proud enhanced athlete. So I guess this is a new thing where they're kind of like going, oh, the old Olympics are the thing of the past. Now we're going to allow athletes to just juice up and take whatever is available.

I'm guaranteed there'll be some kind of a, they'll still be a line somewhere. I bet you that's what happens is where they're going to have like the black, the bad drugs. You know, you can't do, you know, steroids and this kind of stuff, but you can do genetic enhancements, right? Just like Rich People Weekly points out, well, basically I'll come back. I'll come back to his points. I wanted to go through this video first. It's ultimately his point is this is sort of like a like a manipulation, red herring, it's not the right word. You know, basically they're trying to manipulate you by going, look over here of this great thing and it's really about trying to decide for themselves.

What is the best combination of manipulations to benefit the election? elitists at your expense while telling you it's about this new you know that's what i i agree completely so first just watch this video and of course the best part is it's backed by peter thiel who could have guessed i'm sure whitney knew all along i am the fastest man in the world not without enhancements i've broken usane bolts world record but you've never heard of me i am a proud enhanced athlete Now we have important allies in our battle for bodily freedom. Bodily freedom. You've got to be kidding me.

So now it's the same ploy as like the transgender discussion. So it's, I mean, look, no one's stopping you from jamming. Well, technically, that's a whole different company. The government has tried to stop you from doing drugs all the time. I disagreed with that on a flat level forever. You should be able to do whatever you want with your own body as long as you're not harming anybody else or putting anyone else's risk, your children and so on, right? You want to inject yourself with steroids?

Go for it. It's your choice. The obvious downfalls are there. But to argue that it's, you know, therefore you that have to be accepted into this, you know, the sports field, I mean, it's obviously an unfair playing field, right? I mean, just because everybody could do it doesn't mean they would want to or that they have the financial ability to or even the technological ability to. You're going to tell me some high-level billionaire is not going to have more access to some new genetic

techniques. The point is that if you keep it with nothing, that's obviously the smartest and level playing field. which is why that's how it is, right? Nobody, nothing, just flat, no enhancements, unless you do it secretly. And so you have to build naturally as best you can, right? And that's obviously why the gender overlap became a very clear problem, because a man with testosterone, whether you call yourself a woman or not, have surgery or not, is still an obvious chemical, biological benefit, which anybody with a brain and, you know, a willingness to understand biology can tell you. So the problem is that when you move this into the era of bio-enhanagement and act like it's some kind of,

you know, again, what do you say? The, uh, his bodily freedom, you, you, you kind of turn this into a human, almost like a human rights issue. Like you're going to argue like we're discriminating against the genetically enhanced. Like, do you not see how weird that is? And I guarantee that's where this is going to justify the manipulation of them for the larger experiment's sake under the guise that it's a. about letting them do what they think is right as they're pumping them full of whatever they can

figure out and then utilizing it for their own purposes. They being whatever entities, whatever corporations are trying to figure this out. In our battle for bodily freedom is we build the first sporting event that allows performance enhancements and pays all athletes. Now, that's interesting, right? Because if you're making a new event, well, no one should have the right to stop you from doing that. It's interesting. Let's make an event for only enhanced athletes. My argument would be that anybody who likes that, you know, in an honest world, in my opinion,

you would still, people would still choose to enjoy the natural version of it in like a purer sense, but there would still be a novelty about look at how these are, they're faster and they're stronger and so on. But my point would be that the governments and the people that would want your leaning that direction are going to promote it more than anything. The media will promote the new thing more than anything to drive you to the new style.

And you'll see the other thing fall away. Like, that'd be my prediction. We'll see what happens. When we first announced the enhanced games, the Olympic Committee said we were a joke, an idea that couldn't be taken seriously. But venture capitalists know that the future isn't a joke. Today, I'm proud to announce seed funding from investor Christian Angermeyer.

PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, former Coinbase CTO Bologi Sribi Vassin. and many other leading investors, with millions of dollars to support building the future of sports. Yeah, or the future of their bio-manipulations and age. Like the point is, these are people that are across the board that don't seem to care much about sports, but they sure as hell care about the trans-humanist,

you know, technocratic bio-enhancement side of things, which is what they're invested in all over the place. But let's pretend like this is just a casual side project just to see you better at sports. We can show the world that science is really, real. What does that even mean? Like, so it's almost like a weird callback to like COVID and trust the science. Like, what does that? What do you mean science? Are we, are we at a point where we're pretending people are denying science? Like, that never actually even happened. Nobody was saying science isn't real.

I've never met somebody that says that. And if they do, you're, that's like saying something, like you can disagree on scientific outcomes, but to argue science is fake is like saying, you know, that's a good analogy, like something that's a general concept. that's not about specifics. I don't know. The point is it's stupid to even say that. But it's all about creating this kind of, you know, the people that follow are going to use that as a talking point. Watch it. Hansed games are real. E plus, right? I mean, isn't that just weird? It really is. Now, you know, again, if you want to go

out and do something like that and you want to participate, I mean, I'm not going to begrudge somebody from wanting to manipulate their body, but I think it's, I think it's pretty weird. and I think it's clearly manipulative when it's backed by a bunch of transhumanists that are trying to figure out the best way to do this. That's my opinion, obviously. But here's what Rich People Weekly said. He says,

Ma, science is real. The tagline and the backers gave away the scam. The billionaire cowards want to live forever and they're willing to experiment on others to see the best combos for health and longevity. When they find it, they'll make sure you can't afford it. Exactly. And here's what's crazy about this.

Enhanced games, which doesn't seem to be too huge, 10,000 followers, but clearly is backed by groups like Peter Thiel or somebody like Peter Thiel, they're not small, right? They responded to him. He literally says, LOL coming from, quote, rich people weekly. Like, what an idiot. Like, just such a ridiculous response. And he rightly says, I'm not surprised you can't grasp that tire.

Like, you think he's promoting rich people? Like, what a funny thing to say. Your whole promotion was about exalting billionaire backers and getting paid for experimental biohacking bread and circus. Transhumanism sucks. They responded again. You're very welcome to remain as neutral. Get this.

You're very welcome to remain totally showing you the truth and admitting what he said to remain as a natural aging human. Wow. When the rest of us are on a journey to become enhanced and defeat aging. Guys, that's literally what the actual enhanced gaming account, enhanced games account said in response to rich people weekly. He said, you're welcome to remain a natural aging human. Well, the rest of us become living forever enhanced bio machine.

Like, I can't believe that. And if you may try to argue that they're being facetious, I don't think so. I think that's very clear. And quite frankly, that's literally what this is about. And he responds by going your right, to an extent, choice is ideal until certain people deem it not to be. In case you were wondering where normalizing bioenhanagement leads to, you may want to understand the reality of the situation a bit better.

Bread and Circus upsails the idea while vulture's circle. Of course, he references the epistemology of moral bioenhancement. 2016, which you know what's coming next. Of course you know what's coming next. Well, in 2019 and after and before, actually, they said, well, well, well, if we decide that moral bioenhancement is a thing, well, we can logically conclude that it should be compulsory and covert because you just won't understand. I mean, this is real stuff, guys.

I've talked about this so many times where they say, well, if we're going to do it, we ought to make be compulsory. But if it's going to be compulsory, we'd rather be covert than overt because you just wouldn't understand, right? The idea is that it's for public health. And it's just like with COVID vaccines, they didn't get it. They needed it. They were wrong.

So this time we should do it secretly or maybe they already did. The point is, this is very obviously what we're talking about. And I don't believe he responded to that. I'm a little bit blown away that they actually responded with that. You can stay natural and organic and aging. We're going to become enhanced and defeat age. Or that's what they're feeding you while they do it for themselves and then leave you in the dust. That's what usually happens.

Here's their team, by the way, and you can look at, you know, just there's Peter Thiel as the, right here, as one of the investors. Palantir, you know, all the same stuff we've talked about. I mean, just these guys are technocrats. It's very clear. Transhumanist, in my opinion, driving this agenda, which is very concerning. Here's the Forbes article, if you want to read more. Billionaire Peter Thielback's doping friendly, interesting way to frame that, Olympics. What to know about the enhanced games. You see, this is not a tiny thing. And they, I bet you they delete that tweet. How much you want to bet. Somebody should save that. I'm willing to bet you that is not in their best interest,

and somebody's going to have a problem with that if we make that a big deal. Here, I should do this real quick. saying, hey, can you believe they actually said that? Give it to more attention. We'll see what happens. Now, in the same vein of thought, the WHO. Now, we will, I guarantee, be going deeper into this as well as what comes after. This is just the WHO zero draft. And this came out today. So thank you. Shout out to Luther Cyrus here for making this, you know,

posting this and tagging the link. I always think that's important. He says, WHO demands surveillance, among many other things, read the full thing, to monitor every man, woman, and child for disease control.

According to WHO boss, Tedros, the unelected bureaucrats require increased surveillance powers to track the public and monitor the healthy people, animals, and ecosystems, which is essentially what's happening.

So what's interesting, though, is there's more to it, but just for today's point, and we will be going further into this, especially as it becomes more prominent, here's what it says. And now, it just in general,

general strengthening and sustaining preparedness and health systems, resilience. And remember, they're constantly stressing the idea that it's not like mandatory or that it's not forced, even though as Derek's covered. And here, actually, I'll grab that as well. Just did a good article on this. I dissecting disease X, where they recently were going over this in the WHO. And he broke this down. And the pandemic agreement. So he just went over this and the history.

And, you know, going back to things like even event to a one and before, I mean, there's so much overlap to this. But it says the parties are encouraged to establish global. Now, see, people will jump on encouraged. Well, it may say that there, but if you look at the larger picture, it becomes clear, as Derek writes about in the article, that there's all sorts of mechanisms they can use to pressure. And like they said, if you don't go by this, it'll, you know, taint your world, you know, reputation, you know, all these different. And as well as that, we know that there are many different ways they can lean on these countries, especially when it becomes that if you don't do this, we're all going to die, which is the way they

turn in climate change, all of a sudden it becomes we have to, and if you don't, we're going to sanction you. You can see how this goes, as well as the fact that WHA's own documents, make it clear that there's all sorts of ways that they can pressure and force countries to abide by this, especially if they're pretending it's a pandemic. Or I think it is. But it says, encourage to establish global, regional, and national collaborative genomic networks that are dedicated to epidemiological genomic surveillance and the global sharing of

emerging pathogens with pandemic potential. So genomic, that's internal personal, that's internal biosurveillance of your genomics. I don't know why that's acceptable for anybody. People may not even grasp. Like, this is the point about the DNA and information. Like, I don't think we're at a point where we fully understand getting into the way the future is building what these kind of things truly mean. And either way, if it's something, I mean, there's no reason you should feel obligated to do

anything when it comes to your personal bodily autonomy. I love how dumb the argument, how humorous the my body, my choice kind of overlap is, right? How it's just something that was just paramount. And we've always said it until suddenly I didn't align with the agenda anymore. We just go, no, that doesn't apply. Even though we're literally talking about your body and then violating that bodily autonomy, but it doesn't apply apparently because it's not the same thing, even though it is. That's why this is over here.

And then the next part, just showing you know, it's listed this numerous times. This is saying, you know, each party shall in accordance with national law, adopt policy, strategy supported by implementation plans. It doesn't seem like it's a very, you know, if you want to. It's saying surveillance, including, you know, we've talked about the one health approach, which is the same concept as one world government, one, it's about one health. The health of the world, right? You can't, if your issue or your personal freedom is getting in the way of the health

of the world, that's the same thing they tried to do in our country and elsewhere, right? No one's safe until we're all safe or no one's sick or healthy until we're all healthy. It's absurd. It's like saying we're, you know, you're either with us or you're against us. This is just the new form of the boogeyman threat. Even if you think it's real, the point is still that they're using this, just like people can be terrorists, but they've used that concept to keep you under their boot. Outbreak investigation and control through intraoperable early warning and alert systems.

See, this is where we get into the internal biosurveillance and how this very much overlaps with what we're going. And if you think I'm wrong on that, realize that the leading actions by people that have involved with this, even people involved with the actual creation of the injections we've used, like Bob Langer, Moderna, the co-founder, that they've been working on for decades, or a decade essentially,

on how they can relay internal biosurveillance without having things, you know, using smart dust, using optogenetics, magnetogenetics, things that are outside and relaying information back. I won't even get into the kind of internal control that they're also working on

and achieving a long time ago. Interesting point for me is that having in, you know, warning alert systems, one health concepts. They're talking about being able, even if you just want to take it outside the body, we're still talking about mass surveillance of a population, even things like they talked about during COVID,

having little sensors in certain public areas that detect certain things in the air or the waste surveillance, where they can just claim something with us having no way to be able to tell whether it's actually accurate. If we can't accept by now that they've lied about things or that governments generally lie to suit their interests,

I mean, you're being wildly naive. to say today that they wouldn't do that like there's some altruistic entity is completely just devoid of understanding of the history of government in general. And there's more than this, but just for points to make it clear, the parties commit to strengthen

multisectoral, coordinated, interoperable, and integrated one health surveillance systems and strengthen laboratory capacity to identify and assess the risks, regain a function, and emergence of pathogens and variants with pandemic potential.

These X gain of function research alongside the internal biosurveillance and whatever other experiments they have running simultaneously. Now, we've talked a lot about the concept of smart dust and the biosurveillance relay information and how these things have already been used and have already working. We've talked about the dust networks that go back a decade where they were discussing tracking, shipping, and so on. These things are deployed already.

I think that's an obvious fact. My question was whether COVID-19, whatever that was, was an attempted experimental next step that maybe they're failed on, maybe they got what they needed from it, but this is where it's going. And if you think that sounds crazy, please watch this. It's very real and very current based on peer-reviewed science, military documentation,

and also that they're telling you right now what we're stepping into is the internet of bio-nanno things. This is directly from a peer-reviewed study discussing this, and we're talking about both implantable devices, which, I mean, Klaus Schwab told you that's where we're supposed to be, and they're telling you we're in. the Fourth of Dust Revolution, as well as smart dust concepts, where you have just these things flowing through your body,

and then you can relay this information to your laptop, to other discussions. I mean, this is not like we're going into the next 20 years. They're saying this is where we are, which means that you're not just the Internet things or nano things, where you've got nano devices connect the Internet, but internally, bio-nano-things, as well as just the alarming discussion,

which I'm not going to get too much into today, about genetically engineered proteins to control pretty much everything, but that's part of it. Now, just an overlap again to where we currently are, at least what we can see. Fortune writes about how the global cancer rates are expected to rise 77% by 2050. The WHO warns. Talk about surveillance. Why can't you see that? From aging to alcohol.

Here's why. Because before 2020, nobody aged. Before 2020, nobody drank, apparently. That's what it is, right? They're baffled, guys, they're just so baffled. It's so infuriating for seemingly everybody with a brain to keep watching this, to keep watching the things that experts predicted would happen come to pass, and then they go, well, it's probably these totally benign things that have always been there.

Or not benign, I guess, but things that have always been present. There's no real big shift in how much people are drinking, except for the normal based on how people drink and do drugs more when things are bad. Or aging. I don't think there's anything new. under the sun around aging other than their attempt to stop it. So what's crazy to me is that we can see the obvious, clear overlaps of lymphocytopinia, the things that are leading to absolute obvious cancer overlaps and the explosion of cancer

in people that have the injections and all we can say is probably aging and alcohol. 77%. I mean, these things are obvious as hell. Here's Canada. Get this. They reported this in the beginning of like 20 to 2021, but it's only gotten worse. This is from five hours ago. Technically, I think this might have been, let me see if it was yesterday.

Yeah, so eight hours ago, but yesterday, I guess. That doesn't make so much sense, but I think it was yesterday. Latest numbers, and this, but it is this year, just so we're clear. Latest numbers for Canada's fertility rate show it all time low. Largest decline since the 1970s. Well, ask Scotland, apparently they're baffled too, even though we all seem to know what's really going on. This is, but this is the problem. Now, one last point, I just wanted to include this because it's important and I'll know

I'll forget about it. This is in California. And I do see an overlap here, though, but you could overlap this with pretty much anything. Government being able to arrest you, or rather not even government anymore, just extensions of the apparatus of the government to let therapists and social workers, which I guess that would be government, decide when to confine mentally ill Californians. So it hasn't happened to a bill being proposed, but I'm willing to bet that goes forward. the idea that now they can decide.

Well, they are the experts, right? And who decides whether you're crazy? Well, you said the wrong thing online or you took too many COVID shots. There was an overlap in the beginning that literally stated that there was an issue. I think it was the U.K. bill that discussed the idea that there was potential mental issues because the point is it set these tables for anything. Either way, the idea that outside of the police, which are usually the ones that make these decisions, they're letting average people, therapists, social workers decide, based on their own political

understandings and biases to decide whether you should go to jail or mentally confined for ill mentally illness. The point for me is let's not forget a documented stated which I disagree with that I think is flatly obviously wrong but stated mental illness is now I'm going to forget it. Oppositional defiance disorder which literally just means you disagree with the government. I think about that is so alarming to me and you can look it up. It's a real thing, diagnosable mental illness. That's just a worry there. But getting into the idea, of where this goes with the manipulation, you know, think about how this could be used against you.

Now, let's get into foreign policy. This I found really interesting. Now, this, I haven't gotten into, well, I'll get to that a second, the China discussion part. I wanted to start with this just because it overlaps with, you know, in my opinion, really just to see how I hope people are beginning to see through, especially from the two-party paradigm, how these people are all just different variations of the same thing. And it's so obvious that I keep saying. stuff like this where, you know, Trump will come out and say, you know, if I was in, really

anybody who is not the current, you know, president and running that they would say, well, if I was there, you know, here's the, here's why it would be different. But usually not even getting into any, like specifics, Trump especially, but just, you know, letting his followers, like they usually will be like, well, he's right. And if he was there, he would be doing this and doing, then they fill in the blank with what they would want it to do. It's pretty pretty smart. The truth is that he's just like there.

that's what uh-oh points out. How is this any different than Newcomb Haley, Nikki Haley, which I've just called a neocon Frankenstein. She's just like pathetically trying to glom on to these old neocon talking points that personally, I think, are falling flat, but we'll have to wait and see how they, how they pretend it went. It's not real. But Michael Tracy writes, Trump finally elaborates on his Ukraine position. He says he'll get the European countries to match what the U.S. ascended to Ukraine. Oh, right. So he is absolutely continuing the war in Ukraine like I told you he would or is absolutely going to promote and support Israel, despite what people might say. That's not a call for cutting off arms to Ukraine. It's a call for increasing arms. He also once again

brags that he increased funding to NATO. I don't know why anybody with a brain would support any of that. And I think Republicans are pretty strongly against most of that. Rather, to put it this way, not the classical Republicans, but maybe the Patriots, which seem to be the largest block of like the MAGA group that like are sort of still voting Republican, but seem to differ on things that I think matter. I just wish they could see past the two-party illusion. I think they're getting there. But here's what he said.

Ukraine's an interesting case. People always want to know my feeling. Number one, we're in for 200 billion plus, and the European nations are in for 20 billion. And it's more important for them. And don't you think they should equalize? Nobody asks them, it's like I did with NATO. I said, we're spending, we're paying for NATO.

And we don't get so much out of it. And you know, I hate to tell you this about NATO. If we haven't needed their help, let's say we were attacked, I don't believe they'd be there. I don't believe. I know the people. I know them. I can tell you country by country who would be there and who, but I don't believe they'd be there. Do you believe that?

Maybe he's right. I don't know. I personally think it's ridiculous. I think personally NATO has, you know, I mean, it's a, it's a multifaceted entity. So it's not like saying, you know, the U.S. government. But even then, it's kind of the same point. but I was going to say that NATO's never seen a war that it didn't like. I mean, I think that's obvious how this is gone,

that it's always seemingly chomping at the bit. And I think that's largely because of who's leading it like the U.S. government. But I took care of NATO. I said, you've got to pay your bills. If you don't pay your bills, we're not going to be there to support you. And the following day, the money came rolling into NATO. But. Oh, good, right?

Good, because we only care about money. Right? Who cares about illegal wars? Who cares whether they'll actually support us. but we pushed and we got more money. Hooray, the businessman, right? Hey, maybe that's all you care about. Frankly, I think it's crazy that that's, I mean,

that's one thing I've always loved about Donald Trump. He just pulled the mask off. We're there for the oil. Good. I think that's disgusting. I think you're bad person, but good for being on it. Thank God, somebody will just tell you how bad they really are. The European nations, if you add them up,

the economy is about the same size as the U.S., believe it or not. A lot of people are surprised. You add them all up. and they are in for about $20 billion and we're in for $200 billion because we're stupid. All we have to do is say pay.

Nobody ever says to them pay. You don't even hear that. I say pay. And they'll pay too. You have to equalize. This is funny. Like, that's all that really matters. But my point, the main point is simply

that he would fund more in Ukraine. And I think that's obvious. I think that's been very clear. And I think it's just because he thinks that that's what the powerful person would do. I mean, I don't know. You guys probably have a higher opinion of him than I do. Either way, here is Victoria Newland.

Also against, right? So I know a lot of the Republicans would probably, you know, make out Newland what she is, a villain. But, geez, they similarly opposed to Russia. In this case, the very least, just see the overlap between the people that you might otherwise disdain who have the exact same stance, but might be framing it differently about Russia.

Victoria Newland landed in Kiev. and started issuing threats towards Russia that she can't back up. And it's just so funny. In this example with her coat and just this, she just seems like this meek, feeble person in this clip, even though she's powerful, but just saying things that have no meaning or backing

because that's not really what's going to happen. They've been doing this the whole time. Russia's going to win and they're going to get this and we're, or rather, Russia's going to lose and Ukraine's going to take back. And they're just, you know, stating what they want the reality to be. The reality is obviously quite different.

I have to say that I leave peace tonight. more encouraged about the unity and the result about 2024 and its absolute strategic importance for Ukraine. Of course, of course, right? Because it's election season, right? So it's so important. You've got to vote for the right person. Otherwise, it all goes to hell. But your vote matters. Choose who you like because democracy. But if you don't vote for him, you're stupid and it's all going to fail. Right. Hashtag democracy. I also leave more confident that even as Ukraine strengthens its defenses, Mr. Putin's going to get some nice surprises. Doesn't it just feel ridiculous?

Like, I don't know if it's just me because I see through it. But it's like Nancy Pelosi claiming that, you know, Palestinian protesters in the U.S. are Putin's puppets or whatever. Or when Maxine Watten Waters says that about the, you know, the car that drove by, Like, they're just ridiculous. Like, to me, I think that they're losing the, even the influence they have of average people. Like, you used to look at them and some people would and they, you know, they seem like

powerful entities and their threats hold water. And to me, that just seems like feeble. And Putin's got something to comment to him. It's like, who is this person? Are you just, I don't know. It just screams that they're inept, that they're incompetent, that they're, that they're just screaming, that they're trying to get you desperately to think what they want you to think in hopes that just might tip the table in there.

It's not. They're losing. On the battlefield and that Ukraine will... Mr. Putin's going to get some nice surprises. Even just the way she moves. I'm sorry to stop it. Mr. Putin's got to get some surprises. It's like you're watching your neighbor's soccer mom tell you that Putin's a bad guy.

Nice surprises on the battlefield and that Ukraine will make some very strong success this year. Make some strong successes because that makes sense. But Sarah Brown put sounds a good point. I wasn't going to get into it, but I was just reading about how Zelensky apparently fired some lead entity in the government. And it turns out right after she went by, let's not forget that she was in, she was the one that essentially picked along with the U.S. government, the cabinet that they elected after the illegal coup in the Maiton Square that was carried out by the U.S. government. You know, so it's just, it's not new. These people have always been involved with who and what and where and they call it democracy. But then when people actually vote in, who by the way, sometimes end up voting in people that we not think are very savory, but it's still tech.

technically the actual vote, they can't have that. They can't have real democracy or whatever you want to call it, because then they can't decide what happens. Everything about these people are dishonest and criminal, in my opinion, but Arna Bintran points out something important, which of course they're going to call the bastardization of the court and how the court showed its true face and whatever. I haven't seen those yet, but I guarantee we're going to see some of that

because the court, the ICJ, just basically gave Russia a huge victory. the ICJ tossed out most of Ukraine's pleas regarding Russia being a terrorist state. They only ruled that Russia had failed to take measures to investigate and rejected all other submissions made by Ukraine, which is not even that damning. You could argue that just like, I mean, isn't that what Israel's literally arguing, and we're in the middle of the war, we'll come back to those things and we're done. It's okay. I love how the excuses they give that are totally valid become illegitimate when anybody else uses them.

nonetheless the point is they just they're claiming at the very least which still that may maybe that's wrong but that they're saying that russia has foregone any investigation into allegations but it's kind of hard to see that as legitimate when they're throwing allegations every 30 seconds about things we've proven to be false either way it is a huge win here's what it says in france 24 and just so it's clear me saying that a win for russia like again it but i i would argue that I think that what Ukraine was alleging is completely flimsy, that not that that makes Russia the good guy, but simply that what they're claiming about Russia

in most every sense throughout the war have been shown to be manipulations, lies, false flags. But it says Kiev has accused Moscow of being a terrorist state, which is hilarious, not because they both probably aren't guilty of crimes, but that the illegitimate, occupied state of Ukraine with the puppet government put in place by foreign powers that has been carrying out its own ethnic cleansing,

in Donbass and everywhere else for however long. You're the terrorist state. You're the one, right? Whose support for pro-Russian separatists in East Ukraine has a harbinger of the full-fledged 22 invasion. But the ICJ tossed out most of the pleas, as I just told you, failing to take measures to investigate facts being the only thing they said had merit. And the ICJ rejects all of the submissions.

Now here's a clip from France 24, just kind of laying this out. I'm interested to see, let me know in the chat what you might have already seen, and how they're framing this. We already talked about how Israel was going to put forward a, which is just, it's almost comical, cartoonish, an allegation of genocide against Iran right now because of things they've said about Israel. While they're literally murdering 30, 40,000 people, right?

It's unbelievable how comical that is, and they're going to try to put it forward, they're going to promise you, call it the proof that the court's illegitimate, the moment they don't just blindly go forward based on Israel's insinuations alone. But again, this is about Russia and the recent ruling. Tell us a bit more about the court's decision today.

Is it a victory for Russia, a victory for Ukraine, indeed a victory for both? Well, this is clearly a victory for Russia, Nadia, because almost all of Ukraine's allegations here were thrown out. Now, they had brought this case under two different treaties. One is that financing of terrorism act, and they were hoping to pin Russia's support for militias in eastern Ukraine under this act. However, this court rule... Think about how crazy that is.

Right? So you're pretending that because I think you're probably talking about the Wagner group, which, I mean, it's no different than the groups that the U.S. works with all over the world. But of course, because Russia, bad guy, therefore only that is a problem when they do it, but it's good when we do it as terrorism. We do it, it's freedom, right? It's just, it's silly.

But on top of that, you're talking about them fighting the Ukrainian Ozov movement, which is literally one of the most contentious groups that like 30 seconds before they started were all calling Nazis. And it's just so, I don't know why even at this level, like they can't, like, you don't have to laugh and be, you know, show decorum. But say that. Come on and be like, this is incredible that you have the gall to bring this forward as you're doing, you know, but, you know, we know how political all this is. That the provision of weapons, provision of training, that did not violate this act. It is only about providing money. Now that also destroyed any hopes from Ukraine to pin, for example, the downing of flight MH17.

And both the fact that what they're talking about is they're trying to use the point of they're arming them and saying that that therefore means they're guilty of genocide. Do you realize how dumb that is when you have the U.S. government funding the worst of the worst around the world? Ukraine, Israel, provably, or rather just specifically having merit to the allegation of genocide, and yet they'll lob it right at you. And it gets knocked back down. and then they cry foul when that happens, while they're literally provably doing it.

In which it has been proven by another court here in the Hague that the weapons were produced by Russia, that basically disappeared with that ruling. The only thing that this court found is under that financing of terrorism act, that Russia failed to comply because they failed to investigate certain individuals who Ukraine told them could be financing terrorism. So what government gets told by their enemy that that guy might be a problem? and then they immediately comply and do an investigation.

Is that what Israel does? Is that what the U.S. government does? All of these double standards, it's painful, but people are finally seeing them, I think. That was a violation with that small beef, if you look at the bigger picture. The other treaty here was about the elimination of all forms of racial violence,

discrimination, sorry, and that, again, the court did not go along with Ukraine's arguments. They said the fact that the TARTA minority in Crimea is being targeted, That was not because of their ethnicity, but because of their political opposition to Russia. And that included the closure of the Majlis, the Tatar representative body in Crimea. Now, the only win, as you said, was on that Ukrainian language education, 90% decrease in Ukrainian language education in Crimea since 2014.

And the court did say that Russia should reinstate Ukrainian language education in Crimea. However, it did not provide any kind of... And this is while Ukraine has removed people that have not allowed you to speak Russian, you're not allowed to practice certain religions, wave certain flags. I mean, just think about how ridiculous that is. The only difference, Russia hasn't accused Ukraine and thrown them into front of the court. They probably wouldn't oblige anyway. But you see what I'm saying?

Like, it's wrong, no matter who does it. But it's just so incredible that they can lob this at a group that the court found isn't doing that. While you can prove they're actually doing that. damages for that or any kind of compensation for parents who had to not be able to see their children educated. And there was a sort of a slap of the wrist for Russia for violating preliminary provisional measures, which included the fact that Russia should not aggregate this conflict. Now, of course, it has invaded Ukraine. So to say that it has not aggregated is a very, it's a slap on the wrist.

It's something that, you know, the court was very keen to point out that this has been ordered, but it doesn't have any meat around it. They can't really do anything. So really a very good day for Russia here at the ICJ today. Sarah's arguing it that there, which is one of the obvious options. It's supposed to Wagner. They're talking about the elements in Donbass, which are, you know, by even the U.S. government's own assessment are a group that are in need of protection because of even

before all this, Ukraine's continued ethnic cleansing. That just kind of drifted away the moment that the narrative shifted and they're no longer Nazis on a dime. But either way, the point is that these are elements that are provably not supporting of terrorism, right? But it just, it doesn't matter. But again, it's obvious. That's why this fell flat. All right. A good day for Russia. What do you think happens now, Faddad? Well, so that's the question. This is a final ruling. There is no appeal possible. And this was also uncharted waters. I mean, this treaty on the financing of terrorism had never been tested at the UN court. But it's part of a larger strategy by Ukraine, something they've

called lawfare. They're taking Russia to court in various different fora. And they'll actually be back here at the ICJ within two days. On Friday, there will be another case there being discussed that Ukraine has brought against Russia, this time on the violation of the genocide convention. And there again, the court will have its say on where this court has jurisdiction. So another battle coming between Russia and Ukraine here at the ICJ. I don't think so. I mean, assuming this goes the same way, I kind of doubt it, right? I mean, they're just lobbing another false allegation at Russia.

And it's not because I'm protecting one way or the other. I just don't think that's a valid claim. I just don't. The evidence is not there. It certainly could be the case, and I can't see the evidence. But while we're watching Ukraine lie about everything under the sun, it's kind of hard to see the obvious. But we'll wait and see what happens. And again, how crazy it is that we can have.

have the other thing happen, where the ICJ does provisionally rule that there is merit to the allegation of genocide and that Russia or Israel legally is required to do X, Y, and Z. Stop the bomb, stop the, you know, mass killing, hold people accountable for in genocidal claims. None of that's happened. In fact, they've gone even harder after that and said publicly that they don't care, even though they continue to point at all sorts of other mechanisms and say, you have to follow this. Here's how they're not doing what they're supposed to. as they don't do what they're told. It's embarrassing. But here's to shift over into Iran,

Megatron points out, and this is what I think is frustrating about this conversation. This was today. A war between U.S. and Iran is on the brink, which actually may be real or maybe possible, but not for the reason I think this is being stated. It says the U.S. has decided to target Iran's assets and military personnel. Now, that's not exactly even, now, yes, they're claiming that. they're claiming that what they are going to target is Iranian, but that's not necessarily the truth. I haven't seen what they've bombed yet or are going to bomb, but the point is they're talking about the PMU.

I don't know why I just blanked on the full popular mobilization units, which is a militia, which is technically now part of the Iraqi military. So the point is that you bomb them and claim it's Iran, or rather if we report that it isn't Iranian asset because they said they're bombing an Iranian asset, you're just towing their line. Now look, I'm not criticizing. This is just being like a report. I tend to like what Megatron, you know, the news breaking stuff comes out. But let's be clear, they said they're going to be targeting Iran's, you know, military and oil installations and whatever else and the PMU. I'm going to argue that what they're actually going to do is extensions of the PMU.

like they do every time, which is what I told you what happened. I mean, even I told you that even before they came out and told you that it was not going to be directly Iran, but rather their assets and so on. Because that's, I mean, it was lunacy and it would have been had they even thought about actually bombing Iran for many reasons I went over in the last show. But this is, we have to be clear about this, that when, when they bomb a PMU outlet or location or one of their installations, it's not Iran. But they'll try to make that the case.

just make sure we understand that. U.S. officials have confirmed to CBS news that plans have been approved for a series of strikes on a number of days and we covered this in the last show. We covered this, what, day before yesterday, which is what they said, including Iranian personnel and facilities.

Inside Iraq and Syria. Okay, so that's likely not Iranian facilities. As far as I know, there's not any like specific Iranian installations, but they work together. And I guarantee they ship different things. They're even arming them, weapons, and so on. their allies. U.S. does that to all sorts of terrible people around the world.

Israel is one of them. The point, though, is that that's not Iran. And this is going, they're going to try to use this to make it seem like they responded to Iran when I, that's not what's actually happening. And the reason I think that's important is because it's about the narrative. It's about the hype and continuing this flow towards the idea that this is anything other than the U.S. government bombing a territory it illegally occupies. Because that's what's actually happening.

Now, here is what Austin says. said today. That's a dangerous moment in the Middle East. Well, it's been a dangerous moment in the East ever since you've stomped in there belligerently in occupied territories for your own interests at the expense of everybody else. The president will not tolerate attacks on American troops. Well, if they're in illegally occupied territories, it's a legal attack. Legal. Understand that. It doesn't mean we have to enjoy it, want it, call for it. I don't want anybody to be hurt. But nonetheless, your U.S. government, if you're in the United States, is the one putting these people, you could even go as far as to call them Human Shields if you want,

on an occupied territory. Knowing that legally under international law, which is why I continue to argue, they pretend that it was Jordan and not Al-Tomph, which, by the way, Jimmy was just recently talking about, which is not a new topic. Vanessa Bealey and Eva Bartland, we've talked about this going back years. The point is Al-Tomph, or the Ul-Rukbond camp, is an illegal installation, but he made a good point that we, just to contextualize it, that just so it's clear, that is an occupied territory that the U.S. government has created a U.S. base in, illegally occupying a credit. So just realize how completely outside the realm of international law that is.

No way to pretend that's justified. So now they're illegally occupying them. They have an illegal base that they've made, which cuts off all sorts of other aspects of what they need to, you know, their own tradeways and land bridges and so on. and then the group that they're occupying bombs them, shoots at them. Per the fourth Geneva Convention, an occupied territory has the legal right to armed resistance. They don't have to be bombed first. They don't have to be attacked first.

So for them to stand up and pretend like what they did is unjustified makes them the criminal. And they know this is the worst part. That's why they're ambiguous with the information, claim it was coming from Jordan. So when you're standing up there saying, we won't allow this to happen, well, you're the one breaking the law. Let's be clear about that. And neither will I. Our teammates were killed by radical militias backed by Iran. We're all supported, right?

Just like you support many number of other countries. But the point is, this is part of the very government that you're currently claiming to work with. How dumb is that? Part of the Iraqi military. I've showed you the documents on that yesterday. The day before yesterday. Which, by the way, means that some of the weapons shipments over the years, they ended up in the hands of the very people they claim they're fighting. Think about how stupid that is.

or manufactured if you want. And operating inside Syria and Iraq. In the aftermath of the vial Hamas terrorist assault on Israel on October 7th, yeah, that just brushes over the four amounts of genocide in that nice little package. terrorist groups backed by Iran and funded by Iran have tried to create even more turmoil. Have they? Regardless of what you think is actually happening, whether they're doing this just to get more things to happen, it's still legally protected under international law.

That has to matter. I mean, that's just one of the most obvious points about this is that they're the very people pushing the rules-based international order. They're the ones calling on international law as it suits their interests while they provably violated in every possible way. Including the Houthis, attacking commercial shipping in the Red Sea. So this is a dangerous moment in the Middle East. We will continue to work to avoid a wider conflict in the region.

By bombing people, by instigating more conflict, right? By bombing civilians, by bombing countries you illegally occupy, and are also starving, and acting like that's a deterrent. Even though I've never in my life seen a bombing by United States cause people to stop doing things. Because frankly, I don't think, I think it's obvious that it's not what they want. Deterrence is not military action like that. We all know that. Now, in the only sense that, like, you could argue, well, now, I mean, you could argue that there's different ways that you could do it that might deter something by, but it's not by bombing installations that kill people that they then feel they need to respond to. They know that. So that's why I think it's obvious that their actions are designed to drive it further or at the very least get, you know, a tit for tat situation going on. Take all necessary actions to defend the United States, our interest, and our people.

No, you're not. I can prove that. You know why? Because if you were, The only necessary action that would protect them would be to remove yourself from the illegal occupation, but you won't do that. And that's one of the possible options. So you're not doing everything you can. And we will respond when we choose, where we choose, and how we choose. Well, that's interestingly refreshing, as opposed to just, you know, stomping clumsily in and bombing whatever you want because you pretend you're the strong one. You're trying to emulate what they just did in response. But that, you know, in my opinion, it doesn't seem, it doesn't hold water. Like to me, that's them trying to pretend like it's going to be a measured response when it might just be that

they're not going to do anything at all because they don't think they have any good position right now. Now, that's what everyone here is focused on. Now, really, I think that ultimately my gut would tell me that they're going to do what they've done before, which is just it, that's not smart. It's not smart from their perspective, from in the reality of the situation, but that doesn't usually guide their decision-making process, which is going to be, as I already predicted, to bomb Iraq and Syria, claiming their bombing Iran locations like Megatron reported that's what they're saying anyway, when it's really just the popular mobilization units, which means they're bombing a part of the military of an location that they illegally occupy.

So exactly what's happening in regard to Israel and Gaza. No surprise there. And here, just under the point in regard to what he mentioned Yemen, right, the idea that what they're doing is somehow some big terrorist act, even though it's obvious. obvious what's really going on. And the U.S. government's the only one that's been bombing in response to this and killing people. Actually, back to that very point.

What they're doing is a good example of deterrence. They're choosing to selectively act in certain ways. And yes, using munitions, but they haven't killed anybody. In fact, they keep basically bombing to a degree these ships and they carry on their way. They go, they turn around and go back. So they're not even trying to sink these ships, it seems. Like, it just shows you how clearly what they're doing is actually what they're saying.

They're going to stop ships delivering weapons that are going to murder people in Gaza. And if the U.S. and U.K. continue to act, they'll act against them as well. But everybody else is going through still. It's not some massive hindrance to shipping. It's only to things associated to Israel and their actions therein, which has been proven over and over. So here's what he has to say about the U.S. and their ridiculous actions around all of this. The American administration has gone beyond double standards. The American administration has gone back to the Dark Ages.

The American administration, the current administration, deals with humanity as a whole as if it's a group of slaves. Very interesting, right, deals with the world as a whole as if they're a group of slaves. Sounds pretty accurate. You must strike. This is the logic of the American administration. But this world, according to them, they are the masters of this world. to do everything. They're killing for other human beings. There's nothing negative in them doing this according to their view. But if others dare to do anything against the masters, it's a

catastrophe. That is the logic of the American administration. Three soldiers in an American military base who contribute to the aggression against our people. And I remind you that the American and Israeli media outlets at the beginning of the aggression against the Gaza Strip, they said that weapons and ammunition were transported to bases in this region to American bases via the warplanes to the Israeli occupation army three soldiers were killed and at the same time the American situation blocks its ears and closes its eyes to 30,000 Palestinian martyrs two-thirds of the more more are women and children we're talking about 21,000 martyrs from women and

and children and the American administration does not consider this to be genocide. It's crazy. Bottom line, being simply that what they're doing is treating the world like their vassal state and ignoring anything that they do as if, you know, it's in the interest of freedom, well, anybody does anything they disagree with, that's terrorism. Now, here is what an ardor trend wrote about TikTok. Now, let's get into the China conversation. I found this to be very important.

We've talked a lot about this. I've said this many times, and I'm just glad that he broke this down an easy way to relay, this game they're playing, that suddenly TikTok is the China bad guy app, when in reality, it's really no different than any of the rest of them. They're all problematic, and the point is that it's not what you'll see. To argue, first of all, that let's say the United States government controls Twitter, is not exactly accurate, but I think it's very clear that there's a lot of influence there, if not maybe actually controlling it.

It's up for you to decide. But we have to understand that these are not just benign things. there are very clear government overlap that they're using these to manipulate people to spy, to surveil. So TikTok is no different. Now, is that the Chinese government doing that? Well, I don't think it's the way they're framing it. Quite frankly, I think all of these governments utilize these things in certain ways. And we should also really ask whether there's more overlap than we actually pretend that there is to keep the divide going on. But the main point is the illusion around what is happening with TikTok and how the U.S. government does in fact have control

over what it's acting like and doing like and surveilling in this country. And it's not even owned by a Chinese entity so we can prove, but they just try to make that the case. You're going to watch a video from Tom Cotton that is almost impossible to watch. Like it's so wildly self-evident that he is just seeking his agenda,

and it doesn't really matter. He'll contort this in a certain way to make it look like this person is what he says he is. The point is, as Arnodd writes, the most insane thing about TikTok, which most people do not realize, is that the way it works is the U.S. is entirely down to U.S. legislators, but they somehow prefer to blame China for not regulating the app in their own country,

which is beyond absurd. He says, China has their own version of TikTok called Doyen, on which they put all sorts of limitations in terms of content, moderation, number of hours, kids could be on it, etc. TikTok is entirely a foreign product. It doesn't even exist in China. The CEO is not Chinese, despite the racist innuendos by idiots like Tom Cotton, he writes,

it's headquarters in Singapore, a U.S. ally. And if they wanted, U.S. legislators could very, could clearly implement the exact same rules as China on U.S. soil. There is absolutely nothing that prevents them from doing so. America's fully sovereign in that respect. But no, somehow they prefer to point to the difference between Doyen and TikTok as some sort of evil Chinese plan to dumb down their population when actually it's entirely a reflection of their own incompetence. Willful, willful, I would argue. If you think about it, it's the height of cynicism. They prefer to blame another country for a domestic problem than solving it, all part of America's post-reality era.

Pretty well put. You guys, look, it's everything you said there is accurate and easy to prove. Here is what they're back and forth, which they're telling you is hard to watch. Dan had a lawsuit and it was overturned. I can't remember the deal. And this is the CEO of TikTok. It's a Biden administration that reversed those sanctions, just like, by the way, they reversed the terrorist designation on the Houthis in Yemen.

How's that working out for them? but it was just really quickly that's that same point like just so it's clear it was a group that has been engaged with before that and the game is it just because Biden removed it which by the way was actually a good thing because the Ansarala movement which they called the Houthi rebels are not a terrorist organization and the only reason they framed them like that just like you heard a moment ago is because they were didn't they didn't agree with what they wanted to accomplish sort of like when I've told you before that they decided to remove terrorist allegations against entities only because they align with Israel Avi Shlem just made that clear

that it's really the Abraham Accords are just agreements between authoritarian states and apartheid states. They're abusing this. It's not about actually what it looks like. So the same thing we're talking about here. He mentioned it quickly. I just want to throw that in there that it's these people are all political agenda. They do not care about what the back show. No, no. It's another company. It's a Biden administration that reverse those sanctions, just like by the way, they reversed the terrorist designation on the Houthi. Houthis in Yemen. How's that working out for them? But it was sanctioned.

But it went back, though. Now they're, now the terrorists again. because Biden says. It's a Chinese communist. But they don't talk about that, though, right? He can criticize Biden for pulling it away, but he puts it back and we just move on. We don't go, oh, but now it's good. Because it's not about the truth or what matters.

It's about getting points against the other side. These people are so childish. But it was sanctioned as a Chinese communist military company. So you said today, as you often say, that you live in Singapore. Of what made. Even that statement. Are you accusing of lying? If you have evidence, put it for it.

forward. But it's the subtle insinuation that meant his followers can all jump on and go, oh, there's a liar. Are you a citizen? Singapore. Are you a citizen of any other nation? No, Senator. Have you ever applied for Chinese citizenship? Senator, I served my nation in Singapore.

No, I did not. Do you have a Singapore in passport? Yes, and I served my military for two and a half years in Singapore. Do you have any other passport from any other nations? No, Senator. Your wife is an American citizen, your children are American citizens. That's correct. applied for American citizenship?

No, not yet. Okay. Have you ever been a member of the Chinese Communist Party? Senator, I'm Singaporean. No. Have you ever been associated or affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party? No, Senator. Again, I'm Singaporean.

Let me ask you some hopefully simple questions. You said earlier in response to your question that what happened at Tiananmen Square in June of 1989 was a massive protest. Anything else happened in Tiananmen Square? Yes, I think it's well documented. There was a massacre. There was an indiscriminate slaughter. of hundreds or thousands of Chinese citizens.

Yeah, that's what masquer means, right? Maybe you thought you were going to get a gotcha moment there. Like, it's so clear that Cotton has already decided this person as some kind of secret agent, maybe he is. But the point is that you just, like you couldn't have figured this stuff out. Like, the way he's asking these questions is almost like he expected different responses. Is that, am I crazy or is this really hard to watch? It shows you how, like, aggressively dishonest these people are.

Yes, I think it's well documented. There was a massacre. There was an indiscriminate slaughter of hundreds or thousands. of Chinese citizens. Do you agree with the Trump administration and the Biden administration that the Chinese government is committing genocide against the Uighur people? Senator, I've said this before. I think it's really important that anyone who cares about this topic or any topic can freely

express themselves on TikTok. It's a very simple question that unites both parties in our country and government. Let me ask you a question. Do you, does it matter to you whether, like, I mean, it's so interesting to me. Why do we care about the, I mean, obviously he's trying to lay groundwork to make it seem as if this guy is secretly working for China. That's the only thing he cares about. Evidence be damned. We'll let the public opinion of the world do. That's what they do today. But why do we care so much? Like other than there being some explicit evidence, we can then look into, like the idea that he might be,

you know, compassionate towards China or that Elon Musk might have X, Y, and Z. Why is that so important to us? Again, save for evidence that might suggest something bigger than that. That suddenly it's such a big deal because Elon Musk agrees with this abortion should be bad or whatever. Like it's just so crazy to me the way that we use and kind of contort these things. Because this person is what he's trying to ask him now is whether he thinks this is a genocide against the Uyghurs. What in the world does that have to do with whether or not TikTok is something that should be removed or censored or regulated?

Because he's trying to contort that into, therefore he supports this. I mean, again, it's all abstract. But realize the point we're getting into is that none of these people care about a very clear genocide taking place against Palestinians. Governments around the world is the Chinese government committing genocide against the Uyghur people. Senator, anyone including, you know, you can come into TikTok and talk about this topic or any topic that matters to you.

You are a worldly cosmopolitan, well-educated man who's expressed many opinions on many topics. Is the Chinese government committing genocide against the Uighur people? Actually, Senator, I talk amazingly about my company and I'm here to talk about what TikTok does. Yes or no. We're here to give testimony that's true. truthful and honest and complete. Let me ask you this.

Joe Biden last year said that Xi Jinping was a dictator. Do you agree with Joe Biden? Is Xi Jinping a dictator? Senator, I'm not going to comment on any world leaders. I can promise you the ones that are already want to are using this like some huge gotcha moment. Oh, he won't even say. Like it's just it's the two-party paradigm increasingly gets more cartoonish with every day. Now, that's not even to say maybe he is a secret agent.

Maybe he is working for China. The point is that ultimately just the insinuation is not enough. to carry these conversations, but it seems to be for people in the two-party paradigm. By the way, look at this guy, this caveman sitting next to Tom Cotton behind him. It doesn't surprise me that that's the kind of person doing his research or lack thereof. Either way, this is pretty crazy to me, that this is the argument, right? I mean, so the point is that it's all about trying to contort these things into benefit the agenda. Do you think Com Cotton actually cares about Uyghurs?

Do you think that Tom Cotton or anybody in our government truly cares about human life while they're happily, like proudly ignoring what's going on in Gaza or proudly ignoring any number of other examples we've talked about? You know, in the past, we've talked about, you know, Rohingya or these different conversations and how the way that the government uses them or chooses to ignore them until a certain point comes to pass. Or how about the mass starvation of people in Venezuela or the mass starvation in ongoing war crimes being committed against people in Yemen? These are all completely, proudly committed by these governments. But all we want to talk about is, I think that's a very telling point. Now, again, or rather, I guess I said this early on in the show, the point for me, though, is that does not then mean by default that China's not treating these people, or let's just say committing war crimes, treating them as sub-hear,

rather specifically violating their human rights, whether that amounts to war crimes or genocide. That's a different question. but I think it's quite obvious that these people are being put in camps. They are being re-educated or demilitarized. The same kind of stuff we're hearing and the same things they're doing to Palestinians right now. So it matters. If one matters, the other one matters. That's the important thing we have to understand.

Here's what Aramate says. A fresh reminder. Oh, and this is coming off of this different clip from Arna Bouturon saying, wow, absolutely bombshell of an article on Xinjiang, which is the location we're talking about in regard to the Uyghurs. first of all the article is written by probably the two most highly respected German sinologist saying that they wrote this article after having themselves done their own private investigation on the area saying if you don't speak German here's what it basically says they confirmed that what happened there was a result of quote massive Islamist terror between 2010-2016 these are important factors because this is coming from

let's see what was this platform again just it looks like a oh that's he already said a prominent German platform. And he's saying that these are, you know, highly respected scholars on this topic of China. And they're saying that this was the result of Islamic terror. Now, just because of that, if you believe that, that does not then mean that you're allowed to treat people like their subhuman. That's the same point you made in Palestine. You don't just get to decide they're bad guys.

Therefore, we can do whatever we want because our people are at threat. Even if it's real, the whole point of rules-based international order or human rights or international law is that it is a balanced concept, you know, hypothetically, that you don't just get to decide that somebody is the bad guy, so you get to just shoot them on the spot, that there always do process, there's always human rights, there's always, you know, a process. But it's obviously not true. Both Israel and U.S. governments prove that on a daily basis. But the point is in this case, if you take this face value, and I do believe this is the case, that these groups were doing bad things. And so it's not just the fact they just

dislike them for what they are, and so they put them in camps. Those things matter, at least based on this, just please decide for yourself. It says they learned that in, they remind that in 2016, extremist U.Gers declared in an ISIS video that they planned to drown Han Chinese in a sea of blood. Doesn't that matter? You know what the U.S. government would do or Israel would do? They would probably murder people after that, with no justification. And it goes, and that they began recruiting young Uighurs as fighters from Afghanistan and Pakistan

in southern Jingjiang. Doesn't that? It's interesting, isn't it? Now, we're going to get into why I think these are interesting, specifically places like Afghanistan, where the U.S. government has been funding extremists for a very long time. All this almost led to a loss of control by the central government. Now, imagine what the U.S. government would justify.

If there was a massive group, look at what they're doing about militias. Like, I'm not going to get into it today, but there's a bill being floated about illegalizing militias, despite the fact that it's literally enshrined in our Constitution. Think of how crazy that is. there's a whole weird story about some guy cutting his father's head off we'll probably get into in the next show. The point, though, is that what do you think they would do and kind of what they're already doing,

aiming at all sorts of, you know, domestic terrorists and MAGA groups and so on. If they felt there was a clear entity that was doing, to the point to where they felt they were about to lose control of the central government, I mean, they would do anything and they would justify it all. Not for the bad guy enemy, though, right? You're not allowed to have the same rights and the same allowances. Neither one of them should be allowed to do these things is the point. as a result of the Beijing, as a result, Beijing felt compelled to respond with undoubtedly excessive measures to curb terror and gain control, which, I mean, these things need to be engaged

with, just because, like I said, that you think that their terrorist does not mean that you can disregard their rights. International, I mean, the human rights, international law. The international, the internal security of all of China was at stake, they argue. It should also not be overlooked, but the weaker population itself suffered from terror. That's from the article saying, Beijing's response was a transnational. national phase between 2017-2020, where Beijing was forced to declare a state of emergency, move military units to the area, and establish a strict discipline regime. Now, who knows how much of this is completely accurate and how much is what China used as an argument to justify what

they're doing? I think that's the points that I wanted to get out there for the most part. So the idea, obviously, I think, is Aaron is referencing, you know, the Uighur genocide. And he says, a reminder, and I mean, this is in quotes, as he's writing it, that the Uighur genocide is a typical neocon scam. Now, I agree with that in the sense of genocide. I really do. I don't think that's exactly, especially as we're watching a real genocide carry out.

But that does not mean that there were, I think there were human, their rights were violated. I think there are human rights violations for sure, possibly to the level of war crimes. He goes, yet media professionals widely parroted it, forgetting that words and evidentiary standards have meaning.

And that's from regard to the term genocide, right? It's weird until, only until Israel did we suddenly start caring about the, the metrics for what it actually means to be used. They would call anything genocide. If it was, you know, Russia blink too hard that day. Oh, genocide.

Genocide every day. Suddenly we have to, you know, investigate every bombing and make sure we're accurate. And again, I think everybody was laughing about that in a macabre sense, actually. But he goes, notable, the Biden administration has quietly stopped saying it. Now, here's what's funny. You can show right up until 2023 that the Biden administration at some level was still calling this genocide. but what you get from the left-right paradigm is that they were saying it, you know, too softly

or that they, you know, that they, which is hilarious to me that it's really, if they're all on the same side and they just try to make it look like the same side as little different layers, it's just about keeping the divide going. They're all completely against China and they're all completely calling a genocide.

And it's just hilarious that, you know, look, we should ask whether China has undue influence over somebody, maybe Biden, but it's all insinuation at this point. You know, you listen to Van's War Room and you'll come away thinking China's literally running our country today, and it's certainly possible. Quite frankly, I think there's a lot of right-wing talking points and manipulation and all that. The due party paradigm, we should be concerned about any foreign government.

Why don't we talk about Israel? I care about all of it. What we can see is provable evidence that Israel has influenced our government. I mean, I see efforts by every government, Russia, China, any of them that try to influence and insinue, you know, insight, insinuate, do whatever they want about our policy, try to convince our people of something that benefits their country. I mean, it's everywhere. But provably, we can see. the absolute on-document evidence that Israel's doing that. I don't see the same from China.

Tell me what you see. Send it to me. I'd love to see it. I get a lot of partisan insinuations. But the point here, going back to 2021, here's Biden administration, calling it a genocide. Just one follow up on the Quad Summit tomorrow. Does the president plan on speaking with our allies about ways we can force China to stop

the genocide that's committing against the leader of Muslims in Xinjiang in that summit tomorrow? Well, I know that addressing the genocide against Uyghurs, Muslims is something that will be a topic of discussion with the Chinese directly next week. But certainly this conversation tomorrow, and we're hoping I've invited National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan to come and give you a readout of that meeting. I know there's a lot of interest in the Quad Summit tomorrow, but we expect the conversation to be about a range of global issues. It is not focused on China.

Of course, China is a topic on the minds of many leaders in countries, but we expect they will talk about the climate crisis, about economic cooperation, about addressing COVID, a range of issues and discussions. And, you know, certainly the position of the United States is that what is happening is genocide. And we, you know, we'll look for opportunities to work with other partners on putting additional pressure on the Chinese.

What's crazy to me is she's clearly saying, you know, what's going on. is a genocide. But what they're talking about here in this tweet is that referring to it as in the past tense, where'd that happen? To me, it's my point. Like, there's just like this really clumsy effort to make it seem like one side cares a little bit less about this one. And it's about because China's influence. I mean, if it was China's influence, wouldn't they be going, it didn't happen at all? They're completely lying about them, that China's doing good things. It just seems really, it's just, there's so much partisan influence on this stuff. It's crazy to me.

But I just want you to see clearly, here's 2021 a little further. Biden's science, historic Bill punishing China for Uighur genocide. So both sides are actively named this genocide. That's important for the point about how they do not want to call what's happening in Palestine a genocide, despite mountains more evidence. And death and open calls for genocide, clear statements of intent, all the real, the provable things you need to accuse someone of genocide, not just casually calling what you say as an ethnic effort against a certain population, some of which is killing them, is genocide

because that suits your personal, you know, political interests. This is a statement from, and this goes back to Pompeo, interestingly enough, at the tail end of Trump's administration, saying, after careful examination of the available facts, I've determined that under direction of control of the CCP, they have committed genocide. So both sides. I just want to make sure it's very clear. And this one was, which one was this? The, oh, this is 2023, right? So this is January, 2023. So this is Biden's administration.

So up until last year, even. And I think still is the point. They're saying we see it in the genocide and crimes against humanity being committed against predominantly Muslim Uyghurs and other ethnic groups that this is committed in China, rights violations, and so on. And the point is they've discussed this as genocide in the document. Here, this one is medium, religious freedom for all, but it's done by U.S. aid. Interestingly enough, 2020. So it's Trump's administration time frame.

And it says, President Trump signed the Uyghur human rights policy. Policy Act. The legislation allows the United States to take decisive measures against China in response to its unacceptable treatments of Uighurs. Right. So the point is the same. It's all about both sides framing this for something that I think achieves a certain end. That's my opinion. That, again, is not to say that China did not act illegally against these people, but even though I think that they felt that there was a lot, that these people were being used against them. Not to say that China wouldn't abuse their human rights. I mean, for crying out loud, look at what they're doing to people everywhere else. There's technocratics

surveillance and control and, you know, social credit. Please do not take what I'm saying as somehow China would do the right thing. I do not believe that. I think their government is just as problematic, if not more than ours. But what I'm seeing here is that they, and that what shows you that is the fact that they abuse these people, even though, you know, they, I guess you could choose not to. But I believe that there is an element of this that's being done to them. I really do.

So here is, before we go to the next part, this is just. the Wikipedia page about the Uighur genocide. And what I'm going to show you is just how everybody seems to have called a genocide at one point or another. Then the main point is that every single one of these groups are trying to shout you down for calling the real current genocide what's going on a genocide. Which, by the way, the World Court has clearly also argued that. Now, this is Canada, July 2020, basically saying that the parliament of Canada recognized

the abuses as genocide, concluded that Chinese Communist Party amounts to genocide. You know, these are the same groups acting like, we have to investigate and we have to get all the certain metrics and intent. Where's that here? They didn't do that here. This conversation was just budding. Well, not really technically. We went back a lot further. But my point is that they did not have the level of evidence they have about Palestine.

And they were happy to say that then. Just like with Russia, they already accused them of genocide without any investigation. The Canadian House of Commons voted 266 to zero to approve a motion to recognize China as committing genocide. So they went through all these different levels. Here is the United States. Now, I mean, interest of time, just so you guys can read through this for yourself. The point is multiple senators from both sides of the aisle come out and issue a determination of genocide. National Review reports the U.S. government genocide determinations are an incredibly tricky thing.

They require solid evidence to meet the criteria set out by the day. So they even acknowledge that they need those things. They did not meet those things, but they still argue genocide nonetheless. As of the 2020 November discussion, U.S. senator, multiple more senators recognize same thing. That is genocide in a Senate resolution. January 2021. Pompeo announces the one we showed you, calling a genocide.

Incoming Biden administration had already declared, by the way, in 2020, that in their campaign, that they've already determined that it is genocide, that America would continue to recognize it as genocide. But this is interesting. The quote came out where he says, the fact that culturally there are different norms that each country and their leaders are expected to follow,

which then, because that's how the two-party paradigm works, even though they've continued to call it genocide, becomes that he says, there's cultural differences to justify genocide. I don't actually think that's what he's even saying. And I'm no fan of genocide joke. Not at all. I'm not no fan of Trump either.

But the point is, it's not really, they do this all the time. They just make it into what they want. And now as they're both calling it genocide, he just isn't calling it genocide hard enough. So he works for China. Makes hell how sense. July 2021, while speaking at the Singaporean branch of the Internal Institute,

for Strategic Studies in American Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin called it genocide, crimes against humanity. Mark 2023, House of Representatives also deems it genocide. Now, you can go through the rest of them. Israel, internally enough, voted to condemn their actions, which is, you know, ridiculous, seeing as how in 2021 they've been occupying Osstein and genocide and that entity for decades. Russia, Belarus, Tersmekistan, many other groups, expressed support for China's policies, supported their policies. Now, obviously you could argue that's a political objective there, but ask yourself why all these countries would agree and support it.

Maybe they like genocide. Maybe they don't think that's what's happening. Maybe they've recognized that the U.S. government and U.S. aid and these groups have carried out agendas like this from their inception. Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka have signed a U.N. documents supporting China's policies as well. Pakistan, July 2021, the prime minister, said an interview. It was conned at the time that he believed the Chinese version of the facts pertaining to abuses in this area, that undue attention was being given to what they're doing there and they're basically saying that it was ultimately overblown. Interesting, this person is no longer there and I believe he's even to put in jail.

Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Philippines have issued statements in support of China's policies. Myanmar. These are locations that have gone through genocides and are supporting China's policies. I find that interesting. In February 2019, Turkish foreign minister made a statement saying it's a great shame for humanity, essentially siding with the Uighurs in this conversation. Czech Republic, unanimously passed a motion condemning the abuses

and naming them both genocide and crimes against humanity. France, same thing, genocide. Lithuania, basically saying it's crimes against humanity that constitute genocides at the same point. Netherlands, calling it a genocide. Ukraine, interestingly,

had originally signed on to it in 2021, which called for independent observers to be provided, but withdrew its signature two days later. interesting? I don't even know what I would think this means. Ukrainian lawmakers later stated that China had forced the policy pivot by threatening to limit trade and block a scheduled shipment of at least, guess what, 500,000 COVID injections. I'm not even sure how I think that fits into everything, but I find that really interesting. There's something in there, I think. United Kingdom, a letter was signed by basically United Kingdom signing a massive letter.

Get this. Accusing China of systematic and calculated program of ethnic cleansing against the country's weaker minority and compared them to Nazi Germany. I just think this is so interesting, while they're all very aware, to some degree, I would argue, of what's been ongoing in Palestine for a very long time. Or, by the way, that they've been openly starving and blockading to the point, at very least to the point of war crimes, Yemen for a decade. Hundreds of thousands of people have died due to starvation, and that's not this, I mean, not a word about that. 2021, British Parliament rejected a resolution which have banned UK trading with other countries engaged with genocide. Prime Minister Boris Johnson opposed the resolution. So they rejected a resolution that would have banned them from dealing with countries engaged in genocide.

Why would they not want that? It's like putting forward the Stop Arming Terrorist Act and having almost every congressman voted down, which is real. That was Tulsi Gabbard, and it was a very simple bill that was simply we should not arm people that are on the watch list. And they all voted no. Like sometimes you get those insights because they can't have that. Same thing here. because I think they know Israel and some others or Saudi Arabia.

Well, they need to be able to front trade with them so we don't want to sign that and trap ourselves as if they care about their own legislation anyway. They're arming the Aalzov movement. There's a current bill in place that says that's illegal, but nobody cares. 2021, House of Commons unanimously passed it calling it a genocide.

Now, this is just other domestic reactions. Chinese government officials and many Chinese people state that foreign discourses cast in terms of genocide, human rights abuses, and concentration camps simply show foreign political bias and ignorance of the facts. Here is what they say in general, and very simplest terms on BBC, so I'm sure there's stuff they left out.

China says the crackdown on Jingjiang is necessary to prevent terrorism. Well, sounds very similar to what we hear from the belligerent illegal actions of the U.S. government and root out Islamist extremism. Same point. Same with Israel. And the camps are an effective tool for re-eastern, educating inmates in its fight against terrorism. Well, let's think Montana Bay or publicly what Israel's saying about all Palestinians right now.

De-radicalize them. Same point. As we see the same images of Palestinians and bags and blindfolds, it's just like we saw with the Uighur conversation. My point is obviously that there's a very clear hypocrisy taking place here, a double standard. It insists that Uighur militants are waging a violent campaign for an independence state, which is, by the way, what they always do. What they did with the Ukrainian situation, what they do with the Kurds, what they're doing with Taiwan, is they motivate these people to push for their independence when really it's

about using them to batter them against the people they want to destabilize and they could care less what happens to you. Ask the Kurds. But say, by plotting bombings, sabotaging civil unrest, sabotage, civil unrest, which is pretty much the MO of USA and the rest of them, CIA, but is an accused of exaggerating the threat in order to justify repression of them. China has dismissed claims it is trying to reduce the weaker population through mass sterilizations as baseless and says allegations of forced labor are completely fabricated. Now, who knows?

I would not be surprised if both those things are true. What's interesting is you can prove that Israel, the United States, and their assets around the world are very clearly involved with forced labor. Look at the lithium mines all over Africa or the allegations of mass sterilizations. I mean, they've literally been caught for using campaigns, maybe by accident, if you want to believe, that sterilize people in Africa. I mean, there's many examples of that, and that stems directly from U.S. agendas. So is it accusing them of that, which you are guilty? Are they both doing the same thing? You guys can decide for yourself, but you can clearly begin to see the double standard.

Now, this is the U.S. sanctions tracker. So it says the following is a list of actions that have been taken by the U.S. government in response to what they claim are gross human rights violations against U.S. and other Muslim groups. And this is all against China. 117 punitive sanctions, five laws. and policy statements have been passed, 11 investment bans, the Jingzeng Construction and Production Corps is under four separate sanctions, the Uighur Force Labor Prevention Act, a law

banning the import of products made by them. But who cares about the ones they get from the Palestinian lands, right? It's just so much hypocrisy. And it goes on from there. My point is all of this is because of the allegations, which I do agree, there are some levels of human rights violations, but how many things have been done against Israel? Oh, that's right. They sanctioned Hamas.

And that's it. Right? So nothing about the last 75 years of brutal apartheid, oppression, occupation, rate, theft, murder. I mean, human shield, organ theft, all of it being clearly proven, even reported by Horat's. Going back as far as you want to look, I've talked about all of it. But here's December 13th, 2023. U.S. Britain imposed new sanctions on Hamas, which, what the hell is that going to do? Their leaders are in Qatar who are still reaping the benefits from Israel's support, as much as we want to pretend otherwise.

and do you think that's going to affect anything? You're not going to sanction. You're going to do anything about it? Of course not. Not even when the World Court deems it plausible that they're committing genocide. But they did actually do something. This is actually interesting,

but I think in the same vein, this is just about saving face. And really, it amounts to basically nothing as far as I'm concerned. I'll show you why. This is from today, I think, or yesterday. This today. In a historic move, Biden actually sanctioned

extremist Israeli settlers in the West Bank. but they're not Americans. It's saying that they will, and there's a lot of them, by the way, there's a lot of them, like, you know, American, Israeli, Israelis, settlers. Their assets in the U.S. will be frozen,

should they have them. Biden's order will further allow the U.S. to impose sanctions on additional individuals targeting Palestinian civilians. Well, wait a minute. So not the Israeli government, doing way more than them, provably, by any metric,

but the group that they gave legal authority, which is unjustified, to arm themselves and go beat rape and do whatever else they've done already provably, according to Horat's. How does that make sense? And on top of that, my point is, if you're going to sanction Israelis that are not American, and they may have U.S. assets, but maybe not, you think that's going to ultimately matter? Is it going to affect them in any way?

Or is it just a meaningless sentiment that's meant to make you look like you're doing something while actually ignoring the largest problem for a small secondary, well, an important secondary aspect of it? this feels like a huge side step to me, quite frankly. If you're going to sanction anybody, you could obviously sanction the group that was just legally accused of genocide, which the court said has merit. This is just an extension of that group. I mean, that's how crazy this is. So frankly, I don't think this is legitimate.

This is Biden's administration trying to gain back some support before the election and really to make it look like they're not part of an obvious complicit part of a genocide. Now let's talk about the Uyghurs in regard to where I think this might be stemming from. And this is hypothetical. This is just my thoughts. What I went over will what we can prove right there. This is just simply trying to show you that I do think that it's the M.O. of these groups to fund, seed, and drive extremism to destabilize and manipulate and manipulate.

We saw that in Syria. we saw that in Yemen and Venezuela. We saw it everywhere. They do this as a matter of policy. Israel isn't fooling anyone by speaking up for Uighur Muslims. Its self-interest is obvious. This was from 2021 July. Last month, Israel was 2021 again.

Israel called out China over human rights abuses against more than one million ethnic U.S. Muslims in Xinjiang. This was reportedly after U.S. pressured it to do so. Says down here that Beijing denies all allegations of abuse against the U.S. although the regime initially denied the existence of the forced incarceration camps, it now describes them as vocational training facilities. So you can look at that as a lie that they got caught in, which completely shows you that they're trying to hide certain things,

or maybe they just didn't see them as incarceration facilities. But either way, that's pretty much what they obviously are. You're putting people in these four, they don't want to be there. You're putting them in these re-education camps. I mean, that's straight out of Nazi times, right? Or the same thing they're doing to Palestinians right now. But realize that that is the same kind of overlap here, that there's about the narrative versus the reality.

The U.S. government does this every day, but they're still committing rights violations, in my opinion, against these people. The question is, are these people being driven to act crazy and irrational and extremist to achieve an agenda from the outside? Jingjiang cities are under occupation. Police checkpoints are in place every few hundred meters. Surveillance cameras are everywhere. The government is also a...

attempting to wipe out the Uighur identity of the region, destroying mosques, bulldozing traditional neighborhoods, and banning the Uighur language. Now, this is from Middle East Monitor, understand. The same systematic, which I believe those are happening. Nobody should be okay with that. The same systematic offenses are all too familiar to the Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. This week alone, 2021, mind you, this is not post-October 7. Just the week alone in 2021 in July we're talking about, Israel bulldozed land owned by the Islamic Endowment Department in Palestine. in the neighborhood of all Siwana, Cwana in occupied Jerusalem.

On Wednesday, the Israeli authorities demolished an Arab Bedouin village of Arakib. In the southern Negev region, guess what? This is not a typo for the 190th time. Is that because Hamas invaded on October 7th, that the 190 times they destroyed the same village?

I mean, how is this not possibly publicized? How is this not the biggest thing? world. And there's plenty of other locations that are more than that. A hundred and ninety times over 75 years, they have demolished this Bedouin village. I just can't even wrap my mind around how crazy that is. And nobody cares about that. Moreover, an Israeli-run Jerusalem municipality, and by the way, realize these are people that have been displaced to this location, and then they get removed again. Moreover, the Israeli-run Jerusalem municipality has called for the eviction of a hundred Palestinian families from their homes under the pretext that they were built without permits.

You know, the places that they shoved them into when they've displaced them the first time and then would, they refused to ever give them permits, which we can prove. And then when they decide one day, they go, oh, you don't have permit. You got to move again. It's a manufacturer situation. They've applied for permits every year since they've been there. I can prove this. They just deny it.

And then later say they don't have it. And then have them pay to demolish their own home. This is just the most sinister thing ever. This is why this has been such a hard, important topic to get out because it's been this way for so long. Once the families are evicted, said local media, they will be demolished to make way for a park for illegal settlers. Israel cannot convince any reasonable person

that it is concerned about the human rights of Uighur Muslims. I agree. China is the occupation state's second largest trading partner after the United States. This is what I constantly show you. Israel has a real relationship with China. And by the way, that's where a lot of this transfer of American technology comes from. You don't need enemies when you've got friends like Israel, is the point.

And this is, I think, about creating the dynamic that benefits Israel, but this is about, I think, a U.S. agenda that they're going along with to a degree, the occupation state. But to be clear, the United States and Israel's governments have provably over the years funded, as we've said, more than once, the most radical elements of Islam, while pointing at that is the reason that they should exist. And the point is that they do this because the moderate elements of the groups

they don't agree with are not as bad and scary the point is that they want that to be what your impression of Islam or Muslims or is around the world. And this is the same reason they funded Hamas and then pointed Hamas as the problem.

How do we not see this by now? The occupation state is thus simply finding a difficult to balance its interests of two major allies to protect its own national interests. Human rights concerns are purely self-serving. I completely agree with that. So this is just a quick point.

This is from the 2023 October. Why Uyghurs cannot unconditionally support Palestinians? Now, they're just brief points. Maybe they mean nothing. But my point is simply to show you that there is a level of the Uighur community that seems to support Israel, which at every sense does not add up. In pointing out, just that I went from here to research more, some Uighur organizations receive financial support from governments like the United States.

and pro-Israel organizations. Now, how does that make sense? Here's USAID, 2021. USAid, and let's be clear about this, by the way. USAID, as Corbett put it, are just simply Trojan horses of regime change. I mean, they've even admitted this themselves. More than once, I think, of the one, I've shown you a direct quote where they basically say paraphrasing that they do today

what the CIA used to do in clandestine fashion 60 years ago. So they're essentially admitting that what they do is regime change, tactics, but they don't say that. They act like they're fighting for freedom and they act like that's what the CIA was doing. The point is, this is not something you should trust. This is not a group that's interested in democracy or saving other countries.

It is a trapdoor. It is a Trojan horse. USAID takes the... Let me grab this real quick, actually. I can see if that pops up. Oops. Let's just do Corbett. It should pop up.

There it is. NGOs are the deep states Trojan horses. That's the title. I'll include that for you. It's worth watching. Oh, by the way, maybe you might have noticed that he up. He changed his website. I didn't see that until just recently.

So, U.S. aid in regard to the Uighurs, takes these atrocities very seriously and is responding to them by supporting the documentation of genocide and crimes against humanity. We will soon, which I argue means they've been doing it for 10 years, more than that. We've seen them in Taiwan, same point. We will soon launch a new religious freedom activity. What does that mean? That will in part address the Uyghur crisis, a new religious freedom activity? U.S. Aid welcomes Congress's bipartisan support on the issue.

So the title was Democratic Values in the Indo-Pacific in the era of strategic competition. Yeah, in the era of exactly. That's what it's really about. And it says, we are expanding support for civil society, human rights defenders, and independent media, read exactly what you would think, right? De-stabilization, our assets and our manipulative media that we put into place to promote accountability for those in power. or to remove the ones we don't like. The project will also seek to work with members of the religious minority groups. Right.

So the opposition, including Uyghurs who have been displaced from China, enabling them to tell their stories. Same thing to do with Iran. These groups are absolutely involved with, now look, let's just take it at face, let's pretend for sake of conversation that this is exactly what's happening. First, with the Uyghurs, China's abuse. That doesn't have to be false for this to be the same, to be manipulative. they would step in and still using the ploy using the plight of these people to achieve what they want. It's the same thing they do everywhere.

So that could be the case. They're just taking advantage of a genocide or war crimes to then use that to manipulate and destabilize China. Or they could have actually deployed these people for the interest of doing that so they can then use the same action. Either way, this is what they do. Here is interestingly a change.org petition. and you can look up this guy's Twitter account for that matter. And what it says is, this is November at the end of 2023, so very recent. Basically, they're worried about the hypocrisy of Arslan Hydeiat, who is the program manager of campaign for Uighurs, who was a Uighur himself, with respect to his position on the Israeli-Palestin conflict.

Apparently, he first declared support for Palestine on October 5th, but then five days later switched to support for Israel and issued a so-called apology. saying ironically now apparently is back to supporting Palestine, but it shows you an interesting overlap there. Here's one from another prominent aspect element in the Uyghur discussion. This is the foreign minister of the exiled government of Turkestan, saying, well, some Uyghurs may differ. I hashtag stand with Israel against the aggression of Hamas, which is backed by China and Iran.

As China supports Palestine, it relentlessly wages genocide and maintains an occupation in herestriqistan. So to me, this is Palestine along with many Muslim nations, shamelessly sided with our oppressors. I mean, it's interesting. So to me, that's hard to back. The argument that you wouldn't see the obvious occupier as the Israeli occupation of Palestine,

as opposed, either way, that to me is an interesting point that seems to suggest there might be more underlying support for Israel where it does not make sense because of other reasons. Here's just a random chat group where they're talking about this.

You guys can look through it for yourselves, saying the U.S. is trying to use these Muslims to create a rift between China and the real Muslim world, which does make sense. It's interesting. Here is the Israeli post from 2022, or the Jerusalem Post. Israel joins 50 nations in condemning China's imprisonment of Uighurs. Again, this is as they're ethnically cleansing, an obvious group.

One of the most obviously considered discussions, Palestine has been discussed for a very long time. So, very self-serving. This is Axios reporting 200 Jewish groups urge Biden to take action against the Uighur genocide. The horror stories of Uyghurs take it in the night, separated from their families, sound familiar, and put on trains forced labor camps are all too familiar to the Jewish community.

Right? Well, you could argue that's discussing Nazi concentration camps, right? But, I mean, we know that's what they're insinuating,

but let's consider the fact that we could talk about Zionists doing that to Palestinians right now. And maybe one of the reasons why this motivated effort was most of these Jewish groups that you could talk about

are very clearly Zionist influence. Not all. But the point here I want to end with on this. And that's, again, those are all just kind of floated points that want you to consider. You guys can think for yourselves. But let's remember,

as we just talked about the suspected terrorist, everyone was trying to blame on Azerbaijan, it turns out to be a Mossad, at least working with Mossad in Egypt to support, to what's the word I'm looking for, recruit members of Mossad. This is a guy who was arrested in Egypt and went to prison for 10 years for recruiting for Mossad, which is what this person ended up to be. Even though he was on the border saying he was from Palestine. and ultimately go through the show, we can back this up very clearly. I think what we're staring at in most these cases are the same thing we've been seeing throughout Syria and other locations, which we know Israel plays a very strong part in, which is creating the very terror they use to justify their Zionist actions,

which, by the way, here is Heretz from 2022, how Israel uses radical Islam to justify its occupation, which I knew I was going to grab, I should have it first. But just, you know, to make the simplest point for those with the current context, text. Oh, did it go away finally? Nope, there it is. Here's Haretz telling you two days up to October 7th that the Lekud Party, specifically Netanyahu's party, anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to bolster, support bolstering Hamas, and transferring money to Hamas. This is part of our strategy. You know, the Palestinian state that up until only recently were they pretending they always wanted, while funding Hamas and

pretending they were the reason they couldn't do it. They're dishonest about everything they're doing here, the Zionist government. So my point is, they're funding these elements. So is it not possible that this has been an effort to destabilize, whether through United States or Israel, China, to make them more amenable to what you ultimately want to accomplish, something we should very much consider? Again, does not mean that, I mean, in fact, I think it's provable that China is abusing these people. But taking Israel's narratives and U.S. narratives, doesn't it change the dynamic a little bit? Neither side should be able to justify human rights violations because of X, Y, and Z.

But it seems like they both are. That's the point. And as well as the fact that you see that this is being used against people. And look, I would argue very clearly that I think China's attempted in certain ways the same kind of things. But we can see, this is a track record for the U.S. government to be funding the worst elements of all these locations and then later pointing at those elements to justify its theft occupation and so on. So we're at, let's see, about two hours. Let me see what can get through wrap up here at the end. or not now I mean, but it's just back, man, you're thinking about the time frame.

Keel and Johnstone writes, and this is what we'll start the Israel segment today in general. Top 10 reasons that people support Israel. One, their favorite political party supports Israel. Number two, they were taught to support Israel and revising their worldview is hard. Number three, they believe the media would never lie to them. Number four, they hate Muslims. Number five, they want Jesus to come back and send not. Nonbelievers to hell.

Number six. Their employment depends on it. Number seven, they have a personality that always sides with power. Number eight, they want to fit in socially with other people who support Israel. Number nine, they hope to retire in an Israeli settlement someday, an illegal settlement. Number 10, they want a career in media. I love that. It's kind of hard to see exactly that that's exactly right.

Now, going from those points, here's many examples of that. Arnautran writes, and the winner for the most. repugnant and dishonest article of the month, or if not, that I've almost ever seen in Newsweek. With the title, Israel implemented more measures to prevent civilian casualties than any other nation in history. That's real. And even took a screenshot, just in case they deleted this. This is a real article. This is from yesterday from Newsweek.

Israel implemented more measures to prevent civilized. I can't even believe that. Like, you can try and argue that they've put measures forward. to try to minimize, but you can prove that's not happening. Even their own allies are now going, you gotta do more, which means they're not doing everything they can. So if they're not doing everything they can, and they're being told they should do more,

how are they implementing more than any nation in history? There's only two ways to look at this, right? Either they're lying about that, and they're clearly not doing that, or the most alarming thing to consider is that they are. And that's still what they're doing, and that means that just nobody in the media has ever cared, that the U.S. government or the rest of them are just so haphazardly bombing civilians,

which, by the way, that might actually make sense. Look at Obama's drone bomb campaign, 90-something percent civilians, and that just wasn't something we blew up and made a big deal? How's that possible? Now, frankly, I think it's the first. I think it's very obvious that they have not taken measures more than any of their country. It's just very clear to me. But it's something worth considering that they may think that's a valid argument

because they also know how little other countries actually care about civilians. That's one of the things that Israel's seemingly doing a lot these days is essentially admitting bigger things by trying to cover their butts or showing you the true dark nature of what's going on in order to save themselves

from what's happening. Now, taking that statement, more than any other nation in history, and then look at this. Arna Bhattran writes, I rarely praise the Guardian, but this is an extraordinary visual investigation of the sheer level of destruction.

Now, we've actually already done this, but this image is really hard to ignore. Absolutely crystal clear when you look through it that the objective is to render the place utterly inhabitable and destroy Palestinian civil society. And we just talked about that, interestingly, you know, using USA to promote civil society as they're destroying it. Places destroyed our homes, mosques, schools, hospitals, cemeteries, historical landmarks, supermarkets, etc. Everything that makes up a community. Complete disconnect from the stated goal of fighting Hamas. look at this image.

Everything red are damaged buildings since October 7th. Guys, that is easily, 50% of the entire area. Maybe more. You tell me what you think.

At the very least, to pretend that that's in some way targeted is laugh out loud, ridiculous. Or that they've taken every measure possible. So you're literally talking about 2.2 million people in this tiny area

and pretending if you bomb to the ground, 60% of it, that somehow you're not also killing all these siblings, but we can see it since they've killed 30,000 people. I mean, it's just so on the surface. This is why people are so unnerved by this whole thing, because it's not only showing you that Israel is what we've been telling you they are, rather the Zionist elements of the government, or most of it for that matter,

and a lot of the population that they've convinced, but that it's bigger than that. that it's most governments, it seems, that are willing to ignore, at the very least, one of the most obvious genocides and living memory for their own political purposes. Even if you may argue that they secondarily kind of care about it, it's more important to them to ignore it because of their agreements with Israel, whatever. It's really hard to face that as somebody who has only just woke up to this, right? Those of us that have been following this or watch this show, you know, you could call yourself initiated.

You understand that there's a lot of lies. But let's say you don't know any of this, that you're kind of, coming from watching Fox News and going to Walmart and suddenly you're bombarded with this horrible reality that nobody cares about anybody in the government and they're all lying to you. Like that's a cognitive dissonance. That causes a lot of uncomfortable feelings. But you got to work through it because it's the truth. The point is that you can't stare at this picture and pretend that they're actually caring

about anything other than their agenda. And I agree with or not. This is about settlements. It's about deploying more illegal settlements and further occupying the, area while displacing everyone Palestinian completely. I argue including the West Bank. I think that's part of this.

Unbelievable. Here's the South Africa has to say. I'll just let it play. Reiterating the fact that the United States government and Israel play a double standard. President, the events of the past few months in Gaza have illustrated that Israel is acting contrary

to its international law obligations. including those in terms of the genocide convention. South Africa has thus opted to resort to international judicial mechanisms, including at the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, to seek justice for the people of Palestine. We reiterate that the international community cannot proclaim the importance of international law and the importance of the UN Charter in some situations and not in others as if the rule of law

only applies to a select few. For international law to be credible, it should be uniformly applied and not selective. Accordingly, on 29 December 2023, South Africa filed an application instituting legal proceedings at the International Court of Justice against Israel under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Obviously the main point, you're hypocrites, right?

You're picking and choosing how to apply this, and we all see it. We've all always seen it. We're at a point, finally, where the international community is pliable enough to where we can actually push this and we have enough support from the average people that, maybe, just maybe, we can do something different. I certainly hope so. The point is, they're certainly trying. We're standing up and we're saying this is incorrect.

What you're doing is illegal, what you're doing is hypocritical. Please pay attention. The question is whether you're willing to pay attention. Here is another example. Both from Descensored News, by the way, you should be following. Speaking to the UN Security Council, UN Relief Chief Martin Griffiths describes the disastrous humanitarian situation that's been caused by this ongoing genocide.

I mean, it's just unparalleled. In the size and the time frame, I mean, there's nothing like this I've ever seen. 22 out of 36 hospitals, non-functional. 14 hospitals remaining only partially functional. Functional, excuse me. Severe shortage of medical staff, 60% of housing units gone. 75% of population displaced, clean water inaccessible completely. But it's all about Hamas, though.

I'll just keep saying that. The 13 of the 36 hospitals in Gaza are functional and these only partially. They face severe shortages of medical staff and supplies. Fierce fighting, as we know has continued in the vicinity of the Nasser and Al-Amal hospitals in Kahn-Unis, threatening the safety of medical staff, the wounded and the sick, as well the thousands of IDPs seeking refuge there. The intense fighting around Khan Yunus continues to drive thousands of people into Rafa, already hosting over half of Gaza's population of 2.2 million people.

Thus, the compression of people in Rafa is a major issue of concern for all of us, but for us in the humanitarian agencies. Across Gaza, over 60% of housing units are reportedly, allegedly destroyed or damaged. We now estimate that some 75% of the total population have been displaced, and their living conditions are getting worse each day. Heavy rains are flooding the makeshift tent camps, forcing children, parents and the elderly to sleep in the mud if they can. And clean water is almost completely inaccessible.

With little public health support available, preventable diseases are therefore rife and will continue to spread and will become, if they have not already, become the chief killer of Guasans. The further spread of hostilities southwards, along with the increasing deprivation and desperation of people there, can only be expected to increase the pressure for mass displacement into neighboring countries.

The so forth spill over. The ability of the humanitarian community to reach the people of Gaza with relief remains grossly inadequate. And to say it's grossly inadequate, as it says here, is grossly inadequate. It's just incredible where we are. Here is a U.S. investigation, actually. Israel, and that's what I hate about this stuff, and this is how wishy-washy the U.N. usually is. Most likely drop the 1,000-pound bomb on U.K. doctors in Gaza. But you read it, and it's very clear. In fact, Israel even said we won't do it again. So it's not hard to understand that it happened, but yet you still have to put

does most likely. That's why they frame it like that in the title with quotes. Israel enforces most likely used a thousand pound bomb when they hit a compound housing British doctors. Don't you think the UK government should care? It's the same point they made about the U.S. entities that Biden seemingly doesn't care about. These people don't care about anything that goes against their agenda, including you or their own people. And by the way, this is doctors working for U.S. and U.K. organizations in southern Gaza, according to a U.N. investigation. But since the UN is Hamas, I guess we all just ignore it, right? And results released on Tuesday, UN investigators said the early morning strike of January

18th probably involved an MK8-3 bomb guided by a GBU 32, a type of kit that turns free-fall bombs into precision-guided missiles. And saying, quote, we need to know that facts, we need to know the facts as to why this airstrike took place, which it clearly did, and they all acknowledge, and receive assurances of non-recurrence. So if you know what happened, You know Israel did it, and you know that they even spoke up and said, we won't do it again. Why would you frame it as most likely? Because that's a political game that's being played. It's painful.

It's like any other example of claiming that these shootings were just, you know, they got killed as opposed to being shot by Israel. It says, we further demand that our colleagues in Gaza, their families, and all civilians and humanitarian workers in Gaza, be protected from further attack. Israeli military, gave assurances to the UK. and said the coordinates of the site in the town of Almawasi, you know, the place they promised was safe, had been marked as protected. Oh, you know, as protected as these locations where they dropped 2,000-pound bombs

after designating them as safe, according to New York Times and arrests. But yes, that one, but this one's unique because they promised. It's just disgusting. Here, Dr. Mustafa El Marasi points out on this street, on both sides, are the buildings. I had an office with a beach view, only the beach remained,

and we shall return to build a new office. Just take a quick glance back and forth, right? How you can have a metropolis? Wait, now you can't even see the street, because it's completely, this is what it looks like when you're breaking it down to the soil to be able to rebuild settlements, right? You got life, and then you've got after Israeli

illegal occupation, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. But just think about it. that. Here's another example. And I love this because this person trying to make it out to be like, okay, this is the kind of thing that kills me about this conversation. So first of all, if you think that October 7th was the biggest thing ever since 9-11, you realize that both these things can exist simultaneously, right? You can argue that October 7th was a genocide. And you can also recognize that what's happening to Palestinian was genocide. Now, I agree completely with what you think happened on October 7th because we've gone through so much evidence

that proves that your own government probably killed most of people that happened that day. But the very least, a lot of them. That's admissions by Israeli Jews, by Israelis, by helicopter pilots, by security heads, by tank drivers. I mean, it's painful the kind of stuff that's being ignored right now. But my point is that instead of going, yeah, that's unreal, the argument is, well, here before and after. Here's the caboots barry. So your point is to show a man walking up, why is that before? It seems like that's on October 7th, apparently, but then showing the that we've proven, that Horatz has proven, that Channel 12 has proven was done by Israel. See how this works?

That building, you're pointing out to act like that was after the, what happened from what? That was because of Israeli tanks and shelling and bombings, per the tank drivers, the helicopter pilots, and the person who worked at the caboots? But, you know, who cares? Because don't let the facts get in the way of your narrative, right? I mean, my God, that's unbelievable that picture right there. Here's one path network. I'm not familiar with them, but I just started following me.

I like this post. I said, hey, Elon, does Israel enjoy killing civilians? Even when it's not a, quote, accident? Here you go. And they're referencing when Elon went and made these statements. Here's basically showing you the reality while he's making these illegitimate statements. Just visited Israel and has this to say. Israel tries to avoid killing civilians, doing everything he has to avoid killing civilians.

There's not sort of joy expression. Clearly, that's the narrative, right? Everything they can, except all these. provable example. There's not sort of joy expressed of killing it. Well, it's... Well, it's...

Well, it's regret. Obviously, if civilians die accidentally... Yeah! Every civilian casualty is it's a tragedy. I wish IDF no child there.

You can have all the money in the world. yet still be held captive. Stop playing yourself. Visit Gaza. Interesting. Good point. Well, I agree with everything. But if they don't kill them, here's another thing that happens.

Instead of killing, well, they torture them. I've shown you this since November 8, 2023, Amnesty International. Many other groups have done similar investigations, and it's very real. This is after October 7th. Israel, horrifying cases of torture and degrading treatment of Palestinian detainees amid spike in arbitrary arrests. So not only are they torturing, but detaining them unjustly in an arbitrary arrest,

meaning they're arresting them for no reason. These are the human rights groups that they used to point to to justify their actions. Now they're being called out, and what do they call them racist? Funny how they weren't racist all the other times that you pointed at what they were saying, right? Point is that's also what's going on here. And here's examples of people that are being released. As we've already shown you, compare that to the people being released from Hamas.

You could argue that they're doing that knowing that they're faking, they're being nice when they normally aren't, like certainly possible. But all we have are what's the facts in front of us we can prove. And we continue to see people released who are fed and say they were treated kindly. And one after another, the truth of what they've been doing, the Palestinian detainees, comes out by human rights groups, by other governments, by their own statements. The Palestinian new or al-Qadi, who was released after a year of administrative detention, which means he was never even charged the crime.

He suffers from heart disease, was prevented from taking his medicine for such a long time in a sufficient way. Just look at the way he is. Look at his eyes. The way the eyes look, I forget what that's called, but that doesn't come with, that is massive trauma. Oh, this one. Just visited Israel and has a... Hold on. Make sure I got the right one. Oh, wait. Or maybe I didn't have the video. Oh, you know what? I didn't because it's in Hebrew or in a... Yeah, it's, I have to translate it. But the point is, and I Am Palestine writes, he also suffers from fractures in the chest due to torture.

He also didn't change his clothes for 120 days, not because he wanted that, but because that's what happened. Here's another one. Daniel Modus writes that the new batch of kidnapped civilians that were just released this morning with signs of torture on their bodies. This is the norm, guys.

I mean, you listen to any, even the UN has written entire documents about this. Same with Amnesty, same with Human Rights Watch. We all pretend like it must be a lie because Israel says so, right? Look at these people, guys. they're being tortured, they're being beat up. Here he is speaking about it, saying he didn't, he went four days without food or water.

A testimony of a Palestinian prisoner released by the Israeli occupation after weeks of arrest and torture. I mean, ongoing Israeli occupation in the Gaza Strip. Oh, I think this was just out of order. This is the point was just simply, oh, that was the other thing. So here's what, basically, they don't kill them. They randomly detain them for no reason, torture them, you know, whatever else. But on top of that, while they're in the designated areas,

we've shown you many times, right? As they're being told, go to this area, you'll be safe, go there so we can actually go after Hamas. Well, what's actually happening, as Middle East eyes pointing out? Palestinian journalists, Alam Sadiq, documented his evacuation from Kahn Yunus

to Rafa. Right, Kahn Yunus being the place where they told you you'd be safe, they bombed it the entire time, and then out telling him, now you go to Rafa. And on the way, this is the point, with a journalist, and several other journalists also documenting it, he described how they were being bombed, being shot at, and snipers all trying to shoot them along the

entire way. You just have to realize that this is not an accident. These people are being tortured. Every day they're, like, you realize they could just bomb everywhere and kill them all right now. But that'd be a much more obvious to the world. But it's also a level of vitriol. Like, they want these people to suffer. That's why they're laughing and cheering and making statements and dancing around how they want to see them all going, you know, Amalach and all that stuff. Like, it's very clear. So this is just about individual actions as well as a mandate to make these people suffer.

And if they die in the process, who cares? This is while they're going to the safe location. Oops, I left this up the whole time. That's okay. For those in the podcast, I'm not going to stop it and read the whole thing because it's a bunch of just understand what you're hearing is

the journalists and different people covering this showing you that as they were being evacuated and going in the direction, They were supposed to go in walking on the road. They were told to go on. They were being shot and bombed and manipulated the whole way. Look at how far they have to walk, guys. Like, think about it.

That's crazy, especially when you realize that they've got children, they've got people in wheelchairs, they've got pregnant women, people with arms cut off with no anesthetic, and they're hobbling along this road because Israel threatens to bomb them if they stay there no matter what. Very, very, very, like a democracy, right? God, look at that. God, look at that. Wow. We have our kids, we have our children, have men's women, we have, men's, we're, we're, we're, we're, say that. Now.

We're not having a halate, some of the podcast, we're going to be caught on. You can't see the where we're people who are there's

to watch haughty haunt. God, where are you now? I'm in my name of care.

I'm not there and I'm Godhawr Mauda Mottah Murtagah Aftar of the

of the This is the death road, but we were forced to take it. Yeah, God, yeah, God, he's fes the homo'athe all right of the road. We're asking Allah, Allah, Salamma, God. We're going on a raffa. Yeah, God, yeah, God. Oh, you're chavain. I'm not afraid of death.

The scenes were scary as death was everywhere. Imagine Imagine walking down this road just watching some random person next to you get sniped in the head and just fall to the side which we've already seen happen multiple times and you just got to keep walking. I hope I'm not next.

Think about what that does to somebody. What if your child is walking next to you? You know, think about what that does to you. Think about what that does to the child and how he perceives the world after that. This is the actual issue of this which is the heart of the people that's

from the mosthue that we've seen, to the same, he was dead, he was... Basically the image that was stuck there, so you're talking about, the worst thing they saw was an old man

who died in his wheelchair. The carousa, he was a mucholed, as a, for the other who was he was up who, who was in with him, who can't do it, God. He doesn't want to do it for us.

They can't leave us to have to death. They can't hear him somewhere on the road. You know, they will never be able to wash the state away from what they are. Here is New York Times investigation as already showed you. Arets covering it. They bombed the areas designated safe with the most destructive bombs. You just don't misunderstand that. Now, as well as the reality that if they don't kill them in this process, here is Amos International

saying damning evidence of war crimes, Israelis attacks, wipe out entire families in Gaza. I've already shown you this, showing you that they are deliberately targeting them. This was just between October 7th and 12th. They've had five examples of them targeting people or not choosing to tell them and bombing the locations anyway. I mean, it's just everywhere you look. Israel targets infrastructure in Gaza to ramp up civilian pressure on Hamas. December 11th, PBS. Here's Vox. Israel hits civilian infrastructure as ceasefire calls grow. We all seem to know it, but nobody has the courage to make it genocide to call out what

they're doing as deliberate because we know that it is. Here, and just so it's clear, this is not unique to post-October 7th. Nine years old, Israel's finding it hard to deny targeting Gaza infrastructure. It is always what they've lived through. Now, think about living through that for how many decades with nobody, not only nobody paying attention, but all of the mainstream community calling you terrorists for being genocided. Think about that.

Here it goes back to 2010. I lost everything. This is human rights watch. Israel's unlawful destruction of property during Operation Cast led. All these human rights groups have been calling this out for so long and just nobody cares. We act like our memory disappears and we go to the next year and then it's all back to the allegations again. You're racist, you're anti-Semitic.

Here's the cradle. Gaza journalist Anas al-Sheraf reports that the Israeli troops have fully withdrawn from the areas. I don't know if that's because of this discussion of a deal, which we'll get to in a second. Or there's more coming that we should be worried about. The point is that because they've removed themselves, these journalists have been able to go through, and it is passive destruction. But that image we showed you a moment ago pretty much does the picture. shows you the picture, just flattened metropolis areas, down to the dirt.

And he goes, this shows you something in, showing you how much has been broken. Here's another example. I'm saying journalists were able to today to cover from the northeast, west of Gaza for the first time after the withdrawal of Israeli forces. He reports that the entire area has been wiped out. The amount of destruction is indescribable. Some areas were destroyed for the sake of destruction only, without any, military goal, which by the way, seems to be what even corporate media is finding the courage to

point out. It's just ethnic cleansing, complete absolute destruction for their own benefit. Interestingly enough, one of the things that one of these people found, which I think is indicative of some kind of a setup and not, I don't think this is by accident, he said, the remains of Israeli weapons left behind after they would draw from northeast Gaza. Now look at these things, guys, these are not something small. Do you think that's by accident? Do you think, here's my thought. One or two things. Either this is because, like here, let them use these so we can then point to what they're doing to justify our actions or for something bigger. For some kind of a false flag action, they'll find these.

I don't know. But do you really believe they left all of that in a place where they claim they're fighting terrorism? Come on. I think we need to really begin to see the wag the dog elements of what we're watching here today in general, not just today. Now, Daniel Lois also points out, Israeli politician who you've already seen, this one right here. Daniel Weiss explains how she plans to use illegal settlements to push the Palestinians out of Gaza after mocking U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken

as not very smart. Well, she certainly got that right. But the point is ultimately that she is telling you that no matter what they're telling you over there, we're going to kill all these people, or rather we're going to displace all these people because we're going to put settlements in because, I mean, you realize this is public,

openly discussed, as we've already shown you. There are open displays, displays, and conventions for how they're going to occupy, with these illegal settlements, Gaza, realize currently right now, it's already illegal occupied. That's not even up for debate. But realize what they're saying

is they're going to deploy more of these illegal settlements. Actually, it's funny. I've been waiting for a moment to use this. I'm going to play this right now. I'm so tired of people pretending like this place isn't occupied. Like, oh, they pulled out in 2006. They didn't give them any self-determine,

any autonomy. They pulled out and controlled everything. And did, I mean, it's still a controlled entity because the larger area of Palestine is still occupied is the point. Well, let's play this really quickly. I do think this is, just to show you, this is an expert on the topic. It was, you know, shocked that they would even make this argument.

Occupied. It's not seeded control. Did it not seed control in 2005? No. No. What was eliminated was what was taken away in 2005 was the presence of the colonies. But Gaza has remained very much occupied. Under legal international law, 100%.

UN has never said otherwise. Only because there is control of land, air. Can I finish? There is not just the control of air, land, electromagnetic space. Exactly what Mark Lamont was saying. He got aggressive pushback from Israeli represented, even though it's a provable fact. See space, but there is also a very tight control of what enters

and what exits Gaza, we're including with the right that Israel has reserved itself to carry out preventive strikes, which have killed. many in the Gaza strip. No, Gaza is still occupied. That's a preemptive self-defense nonsense. There is a world-to-world consensus in international community, including ICRC, which is normally quite restrained. I mean, everyone has concluded that Gaza is still occupied

through modern methods of warfare, even if it doesn't have boots on the ground. There is effective control. Right. That's the important part. And she's an expert international law. The point is that if we can see, and they're publicly telling you,

and they've got open conventions for the continual deployment of settlements in the area that they just pushed all the Palestinians away from. We know this is not about what they say it is. Like that's a provable fact. So right now they will not admit this is actually what's going on, despite their own people, their own government entities saying they're doing this. And we need to find ways to push them out, drive them into the sea, drive them into Egypt. And if you listen to Biden, if you listen to other people that are shouting down narratives that they want to control on Twitter and elsewhere, they'll pretend like this is not even remotely what's happening. You can't pretend that this is about getting rid of Hamas

when you're clearly driving all Palestinians away so you can take further control, right? Which is exactly what they're telling you. If you listen to what she's saying, she's saying we're going to get rid of all of them, not just Hamas. It's absolutely mind-blowing. Listen to what she said. So glad I'm not blinking because what he says is not smart.

There is no chance, no chance whatsoever for a two-state solution. See? And it's not like, my point is, you can hear the same thing from Netanyahu, from Neptali Bennett, from Gavir, all the ones, they're all saying that. But yet they just keep going back to it.

Blinken just keep saying, because that is the only thing they have left. Israel has shot themselves in both feet, so at this point the narrative is gone, but they can't just go, okay, well, then we're going for genocide. So you've got to go for some argument that still holds sway with people in your place. political circles.

Even though Israel's going, this will never happen. And I've been telling you how long that they've always said that. It seems that he takes some paper and reads and someone forgot to tell him in the administration that it's not relevant. And he keeps reading from it. Now, it's because it's a narrative. They know they're lying. They know that you guys don't want that, but they want the Americans to think you do.

So we don't recognize how obvious this is. genocide. I mean, he reiterates, in my eyes, in an embarrassing manner. We have now 800,000 Jews living in 250 settlements. All illegal. Every single one of them are illegally occupied entities per the UN, for human rights groups, for everybody. They don't care. In Judean, Samaria. That's West Bank in Gaza. Well, technically, I think it was, I forget which one is supposed to be Gaza, but the point is that's what they're talking about for before. They're trying to push back into a day. Will you put Mr. Blinken, where will you put your two-state solution?

Where are you going to do it? In the West Bank, settlers have often gotten government recognition for settlements. They built illegally after the fact. Well, just because the Israeli government acknowledges it does not make them no longer illegal. From an international law perspective, they've always been illegal. legal. The point is that every area there's ever been a settlement put, which by the way includes the areas that Hamas broke into, by the

way, those were originally outlined as areas that were supposed to be part of a Palestinian state under the original 67 borders of a two-state solution. And it's always pretended like they're going to get there at some point as this Palestinian will just stop bombing us, even though it's the Hamas

entities they funded to do so. See the point? But what's happened is in between that time, under the guy that it's only the Palestinians keeping it going, they increment mentally take more and more and more, and the UN has always said it was a crime. And the U.S. even quietly goes, hey, stop doing that, but they just keep doing it. You realize how crazy that is that can just blatantly do the obvious illegal thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over. No one ever does anything about it.

And they sneeze the wrong direction over here, whether it's a crime or not. And everybody points at the Palestinians. Think about what that does to your psyche. It's not government policy to allow settlements in Gaza, but Vice says she may not wait and may take a similar approach there. What we are going to do and telling you secretly, we are going to squat close to the border. Right now there is a border that prevents us from entering. But maybe the northern part of Gaza, which is actually not under any formal sovereignty. It's called the no man's land.

Think about that. They call where all those Palestinians live, no man's land. So maybe over there, it will be easier. So once we start, then once there is an opening, then there will be the second stage and the third stage. It will happen in my lifetime. My God. Sociopath. I mean, let's be clear.

She's well aware of the human beings that were living there. They don't even play into, they don't even factor in. They're not humans to these people. These are Zionist entities. Now, just to be clear, again, Janis Tirawi points out the settlement map of the Gaza region. And guys, this is very public. Just look these up.

I've already shown you like 14 different examples of Ben Gavir dancing with them at the convention and cheering about how they're going to take Gaza, you know, the settlements and deploy them into Gaza. Here is a group of them talking right here, six Israeli ministers, the finance minister, heritage minister, national security minister, cultural minister, tourism minister. These are people that are, in some cases, part of the military cabinet are saying that they're going to take these areas. It's called conquering and colonizing the Gaza Strip, and they're all part of it. They're all cheering. And there is, the two specifically her, the one we just pointed to. This is a government organized and supported agenda.

I mean, who do you think is letting them through to block the aid, which we'll get to in a second? The government. This is from Middle East Eye, war on Gaza, Netanyahu looking for countries to, absorb ethnically cleansed Palestinians. Now, they're not calling it ethically cleanse, but realize if you're looking for people to absorb the groups that don't want to leave, what else do you call that? You're forcing these people to go somewhere else that are guys that they, and remember, when they call it voluntary migration, that's not, you're not allowed to push back on

that. The woman, I forget her name now, on Sky News, I think, pushed back and said, oh, you mean voluntary, like with the Jews in Nazi, or in Nazi Germany? no one would take that point as assuming that she meant that's what she thought. She was clearly making a contrast point to say, well, how dare you suggest this is voluntary? We all know it's not. It's about as voluntary, as you said, what happened in Germany? She's clearly her point is that it wasn't voluntary in Nazi Germany.

But of course, they spin that into her anti-Semitic phrase because they can't acknowledge the point that makes them look like what they are. I'm talking about Zionist, just to be clear, in that same game that they always like to play. this is illegal, it's immoral, and quite frankly, it doesn't seem like the rules-based international order even cares a modicum about this. Now, here's another one. I already played this one, but just to show you, she's saying it very clearly, we're going to move them by starving them.

Arabs will move. Why do you say that? If you don't get them, we want to have our hostages, right? So we don't get them food, we don't get the Arabs anything. they will have to leave the world will accept them. Right. So if we force them to starve and, you know, whatever else, no medical treatment, nothing, because no aid, well, the world will, isn't that exactly what I've been telling you? That they're doing this to force the world's hand to act like they, well, we have to do something humanitarian.

Well, they're all going to die. So let's step in and move them to Egypt because that's going to save their lives, despite the fact that you're falling right into the ploy. It shouldn't, we should be acknowledging, well, let's stop them from being start to death. How about we don't jump to the next step that they're starving them for you to achieve? But either way, do you get the problem there? How exactly are you pretending your hostages will be okay if you're starving them where they are? She doesn't care about the hostages. This is a Zionist agenda to create these settlements.

If you're not letting aid in, how do you think your hostages are feeding or feeding themselves? I mean, just think about that for a second. It's the same as pretending bombing the area somehow going. to save them. You're killing them. And I think we all know that they know that. Now, here's the point about this has gotten, this escalated even further. So one of the ways they're doing this is by now blockading the aid trucks from coming in, even though you got people like Eli David acting like, there's hundreds upon hundreds of trucks coming in every day and you guys are lying. No, they're actively stopping it with the help of the government of Israel. The point is Israeli settlers harass an aid truck

driver. Now, there's examples not just of harassment as they're all yet. Examples of them actually pulling out of a truck, pulling them out of a truck and attacking them essentially. And isn't this exactly what we see happening in other situations that get condemned? I bet you won't hear a word about this. But this is about stopping the aid in general. Now remember, we've already gone over this. This is like what, the seventh day in a row? Israeli settlers gather at the port of occupied ISDA to prevent humanitarian aid from going to Gaza.

This is Israeli media reporting that. And now, just in case you think this is unique. Look, and this is at stopping of January 24th. I'll show you the new one. But just in case you think this is some kind of misrepresentation, this is the Mossad official account, or one of them anyway. It is their official account.

And they're saying, thank you to everybody who came out to prevent aid. So how exactly can you pretend that you're not trying to prevent aid while praising your Israeli counterpart or rather Israeli entities for stopping aid? Explain that for me. Like, this is how crazy the dynamic is right now.

And it goes on forever. And this is the only one I see where they go, shocking. And Israeli soldier arrested for blocking Hamas, blocking aid to Hamas. Okay, but how are you arresting a soldier while you're not doing anything about it? I don't believe it. Another day and then the rest of them, every single one of them. Coming to the Shalom crossing, a different crossing, to stop aid. Defense minister gets an earful.

Stop humanitarian aid. On and on and on and on. Same thing from today. 29. Let's refresh it. I bet you it's even more. Yep. I did another one.

Oh, wait, no, this, hold on. That's pretty interesting. Why does, why is January 24th at the top? That just rearranged itself. In any case, let's do latest. We'll show you the Gaza receives humanitarian aid directly from IDF soldiers. He curses UNRah, Sinwar Hebrew eats underground. What does I say?

Sinwar eats meat underground and we eat bullets in the head. Oh, okay, so this is one of these fake displays, I think, of people acting like, you know, we've already seen many of these where they miss translate what they're saying. In any case, the point is they're reporting. it seems that there's... What does this actually show? Oh, great. So you've got this little four-cart trolley

bringing something in. You've got to be kidding me. So to them, that's humanitarian aid coming in while you block these gigantic trucks full of sugar and wheat. It's just so easy to show these liars. It's crazy to me. My point, though, right there.

January 30th. Crossing, blocking aid. Blocking aid. A point here. I swear to God, this was... I just had this up, and these things are all Anyway, the point all you really need to see is thank you for everyone that came out to prevent aid. It's very clear that they're promoting the act and they have to let them in there to be able to block this, you understand?

And again, here's Egypt going back to October saying Israel's stance is stopping anything crucial to Gaza, which means to their hostages too. And here is the UN Undersecretary General for Humanitarian Affairs saying we face repeated refusal by Israel to enter Gaza for much-needed materials for all. unclear, inconsistent, and unspecified reasons. So literally from every angle. Egypt, the UN, Palestine, Gaza, everyone is saying that Israel's the one stopping aid, and the only one saying otherwise is Israel. What do you think is happening? I think it's pretty obvious.

This comes right up until January 24th. Egypt, C.C. accuses Israel of impeding aid to Gaza. Now, here's where it gets even more interesting. We know they've been doing this the entire time. It's provable. It's documented. they just state otherwise. But now they're coming out as of today and saying,

maybe we should stop aid. It's like, my God, they're just trying to move the narrative and the interest of what they're already doing. Israel's finance minister, Smotrich, who is a maniac, says allowing humanitarian aid in Gaza goes against the goals of the war. But wait a minute, that means that your only goal is to annihilate everything there.

And maybe Hamas is the goal, maybe not. But by not allowing aid, you're starving and hurting your own people, who you otherwise claim is your number one objective. So it can't be. It's provable. He says, I spoke with Netanyahu in this regard, and it's got to change soon.

Here's the Guardian. This is from today. Israeli ministers reportedly considering limiting aid. What do you mean limiting aid? Like, you're barely, if ever, letting it through. And now what this narrative is meant to do is conceal within the narrative that they have been doing so.

And only now is it suddenly changing. It's a pretty weak effort to try to retroactively change, it by pretending if we're only changing it now, then we must have been doing it the whole time. They're not. It's provable, and we've shown you that, but this is just a weak effort to try to shift the narrative. But either way, they're admitting that they're going to try to stop aid.

It's right, whether or not it's been happening the whole time, that's a big deal. But none of the rules-based international order seems to care. But it's also, again, as I've said three times, about their own people. As I said, this was on the fifth day. They continue to block aid to the hostages as well as Palestinians. for the fifth day in a row. How does that make sense to anybody?

Well, the point is a lot of Israelis are livid about this because they know that it's directly hurting their own family members. But here's Elon Levy, representative of October 7th, coming out to pretend that he cares about the hostages. UNICEF says, I love how this person, everybody under the sun is apparently a bad guy because they don't want to acknowledge the lies of Israel right now. UNICEF, we cannot abandon the people of Gaza.

Now, what I love about the way this keeps happening, Is anywhere in there, does that suggest that that's because of Israel? I mean, it's obvious. And that's why he responds because his guilty conscience, he knows it's aimed at him, even though it may not be. But that's how he responds to it by saying, as for the hostages, we don't care. Right? It's just so obvious these, he knows.

It's a guilty conscience. You know you're the bad guy in the situation. So what you do is you took it as it directed at you. It may have been, but you made it about you by responding back to them as if they were aiming it at you. you get my point? Like it's so clear that's what a guilty conscience does.

The point, though, we cannot abandon the people of Gaza. It's obviously about the fact that we need to continue to do more to help them as they're now saying we're not going to send anything. I mean, it's just,

it's static, it's obvious. So when he says, as for the hostages, we don't care, well, they've already spoken up about them. They've repeatedly stated, we need to do all these things for everybody there. Or we need to do a ceasefire

to save the hostages, which, by the way, you guys keep refusing. So who actually cares about who here? Elon, you guys care only about your own agenda at the expense of literally everybody, and I think literally everybody's beginning to see that. Fares points out which hostages? The 10,000 you have in the jails before October 7th or the 2,000 you've kidnapped since then.

What about the 400 kids you took just recently? Which is real, by the way. We've already covered this. Israel's kidnapped. This is just from today. 44 people from the West Bank in the... past 24 hours. Children, former abductees, like I keep telling you, the majority of these cases occurred in Bethlehem, where 30 citizens were abducted, including 18 children, probably getting

you know, bulked up for when they're going to exchange again so they could just not actually lose any standards, give people they already took, which they scoop up right afterwards anyway, which is what happened last time. Many children were taken as hostages to pressure their family members to surrender, otherwise known as a human shield, which, by the way, we've already he talked about. 2013. Palestinian children tortured, used as shields by Israel, per the United Nations. Reuters.

Israeli soldiers who used Palestinian boy, a nine-year-old as human shields, avoid jail. Defense for children international, an international human rights group. Israel forces use five Palestinian children as human shields. That's 2023. This is from 2017. Generally, human shields. Since the beginning of the occupation in 1967, Israeli security forces have repeatedly used Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as human shields. Israeli soldiers routinely used Palestinian civilians as human shields by forcing them to carry out life-threatening tasks.

It was also following a high court petition against this practice, which was filed by human rights organizations around the world in May 2002, that the IDF issued a general order prohibiting the use of Palestinians. as a means of human shield against gunfire or attacks by the Palestinian side. But then it goes on to say following the order, the use of human shields dropped sharply. However, the army did not construe as a human shield the use of Palestinians, provided they consented. The army continued the widespread use of this practice, which they referred to as the neighbor procedure. Following another petition filed by human rights organizations, the High Court of Justice ruled that this practice, too, violated international humanitarian law, and that this thus was illegal. And guess what they've never stopped doing?

Here is the Institute for Middle East Understanding the neighbor procedure, Israel's use of Palestinian human shields from 2012. Human Rights Watch. During military operations, Israeli soldiers routinely coerced Palestinian civilians, including children, to perform life-endangering acts that assisted military operations, the practice known as the neighbor procedure. Now, see. Now, if you want more on that, I've gone over this in depth, more than once, in fact.

There's also a clip, just on Rumble, on Rumble just about this one section, but the open secret of Israel's use of human shields, it's, I mean, it really is unparalleled. Like the way that these conversations are ignored uniquely about Israel, it's just, it really is unparalleled. These things are public, open discussions.

And only, and then they accuse one side of doing the same thing, and it only goes one way. It's really crazy. By the way, on a quick side note, I'm just looking at the chat, if, you know, this setup is slightly different at this point, because of the new audio interface. So let me know if the,

the sound is too loud or if you think the mic is too close, you got to tell me this stuff, guys, because I'll adjust accordingly. Someone in the chat says it looks like I want to eat the mic or something like that. Let me know because I want to make it as, you know, best as possible, especially for the podcast. It's all audio. But watch that for yourself because I think this is an important show. Now, the point about the hostages and the lie of someone like Elon Levy acting like they don't care about the hostages, right? Well, what about the reality that we've already discussed about the tunnels, which, by the way, remember how far ahead of the story we were, the reality that they are, in fact, flooding these tunnels with seawater as well,

as much as they already, they're kind of pretend in this clip that that wasn't the case, but that this also added, in my opinion, to the flooding of the ground. Like, look, it's certainly capable of flooding with lots of rainfall. But I've seen years in the past with, I think, more rainfall that didn't seem to flood up to their knees. So I think there was a level of this that was adding to the flooding in the ground, which was meant to increase the illness, in my opinion. opinion, which, by the way, seems to be exploding right now. I don't think I'm going to get into

it today, but they're talking like hundreds of thousands of different levels of illness blowing up all over the place, which is what happens when you destroy any health infrastructure and flood the area and remove food and clean water. It's a guaranteed problem. But this is, Israeli military confirms the flooding of Hamas tunnels. Well, the simple point, other than all of the byproducts of that and deliberate destabilization, they know for a fact that they're hostage. in some cases are held in tunnels. That's what they're telling you anyway. They've said it many times.

Hamas in their terror tunnels, right? Saying our hostages are there. Well, then they're flooding the tunnels. I mean, do that is, do I even need to put that together for you? It's very obvious that they don't care about the people that are held or they wouldn't just arbitrarily fill tunnels.

They may very well be in there. Or bomb buildings, which we also know they're held in which they've already told when they came back. But they keep doing it. So these people are liars, guys. just recognize that. They don't care about the very people they're using to justify murder, genocide even. Now, here's the cradle in regard to this new supposed deal. Israel's agreed to ceasefire proposal. We have an initial positive confirmation from Hamas. This is from the

from the Spokane, Qatari spokesman. Now, that's not actually what I think is going on here. This was the original statement that was put out by like U.S. and Israeli media. So here's first of all the Jerusalem Post, Hamas gives initial approval for Gaza ceasefire, which I don't even know if I believe that. Because they've been very clear about the minimal expectations for any deal. Full ceasefire, full exchange, removal of Israel troops. Which, by the way, are the three things that Israel say will never budge on. So I don't know how they would reach this now.

But it says they, it says, I expect Hamas will not reject the paper, but it might not give a decisive agreement either. What does that mean? you're going to pretend that they agreed. So I think ultimately what they're saying here is that kind of like tacit approval doesn't sound to me like this was agreed upon. But you're kind of getting that statement from the Western media right now.

Now, this says conflicting Israeli ceasefire reports. This is weirdly enough from tomorrow. You know, the time difference is funny. But it says reports whipsaw oil markets. Qatar says Israel agreed to a ceasefire proposal. So Cutter is the one that put that out there. And it says, Al Jazeera reported this,

it deleted the tweet hours later. Reuters, also quoting an unnamed Qatari official, said no agreement have been reached. So I'm leaning more towards this point, that Qatar, probably from pressure from Israel, put this post out that made it seem like they did because I think that was meant to make Hamas look like they're not agreeing.

I think that's really important Israel, seeing as how Israel is the one that keeps refusing the deals, and three times now they've put out the statement that Hamas is the one. even though every other party to it was saying, well, no, that Hamas offered the deal for everything and that didn't meet Israel's expectations. So what they keep lying about is the point.

So that's what I kind of think is happening here. Reuters reports, no agreement have been reached. Hamas, it says, this is according to Reuters, unlikely to reject ceasefire, but will demand Israel. Withdrawal. So here's the point. Why would you frame that as unlikely to reject,

but maybe kind of attack, approval and leave out the main point that one of the sticking issues is that they have to withdraw where Israel said that will never happen. So it's a very clear statement, it's a clear reality that this is not happening. So then why are they pushing it forward like it's going to? And this is the point I already showed you before. Ben Guevier, part of the extremist current government, openly said that he would bring down or dismantle the entirety of Israeli government if they made any reckless deal with Hamas. And he explains in the article that any deal with Hamas is reckless.

Think about that. So I don't think that there ever, I don't think there's any deals in the cards right now in general. But here's what Netanyahu said as of, this is late yesterday. On this deal, quote, there is a lot of noise in the media surrounding the efforts to obtain another release of abductees. So I would like to make it clear.

We are working to obtain another outline for the release of our abductees. but I emphasize not at any cost. Well, that's quite interesting. Now, I guess you could always say not at any cost, right? They're not going to hand over the entire country, right? But what he really means is that we, if it comes against our agenda for what we're doing with Gaza, we won't do it. He says, I have red lions among them, and it's right there.

We will not in the war, one, we will not remove IDF from the strip, two, and we will not release thousands of terrorists. Otherwise, known as they're detained Palestinians with no. charge. So then obviously this isn't happening, right? It says we are constantly working to free our hostages, which you're not. That's a lie. You can't go from saying that those are secondary to any of those first three things and saying we're constantly working to free them as we flood the tunnel they may be in, bomb locations they may be at, and they all come home saying they were terrified we were going to kill them. You're not. That's a lie. And he says to achieve the other goal of the war,

which is clearly their only goal, which is not even about Hamas, it's about all of Gaza. But it says the elimination of Hamas and the promise that Gaza will no longer pose a threat because they put out illegal settlements on it. We are working on all three together and will not give up any of them. Okay, so clearly you're never going to make a deal unless it means Hamas just hands them over, which is, by the way, what was originally going on. I think the only reason they had one pause is because they felt so much pressure, they thought it might alleviate some of the problems,

which is why they just scoop back everybody they took out or everyone they let out they scooped them all back up. We've proven this. Again, it's provable by the other points we made. It's showing you that they scooped just yesterday, kidnapped 44 people from the West Bank. Now, to be clear on this, realize that these are, they are choosing openly to continue bombing where they killed already their hostages. because they won't agree to end the war, but that doesn't surprise me, to remove the IDF,

which be weirdly enough, they seem like they've already backed them away to some areas, but not released the people that are held on the Palestinian side. So Hamas has made it clear. They want full ceasefire and the exchange of all their hostages.

And that's off the table, according to Netanyahu. So let's talk about UNRWA to finish for the most part. I think that's it, yeah. In regard, And there's a little bit of overlap here. I just want to make these points clear how they're pointing at these entities and claiming they're all terrorists that justifies why they can't make any more deals.

It's the self-fulfilling prophecy. It's the way they've been using Hamas, which they funded to be that the entire time. It says if funding remains suspended, UNRWA says this, the United Nations Palestinian Refugee Agency, we will most likely be forced to shut down operations by the end of February, which of course to them, they're saying, good. But the point is that this is the last, this is the only, reason so many of these people are still alive. So I guess they achieved their goal, is the point. Now, Craig Murray points out the UNR Gaza director at the UN yesterday says, and this is where it's

really interesting because this whole story is completely broken down and disintegrated. Of the 12 people against whom Israel made allegations, two of them are dead. One can't even be identified. And one doesn't even work for UNRWA. So this is just throwing at the wall and see what sticks like always. But as this gets further and further away from what they claimed, Israel, as usual, goes further and further in the other direction. Now it's gone to 6,000 of them are all Hamas members. It's based on the original point of basically zero evidence, mostly insinuation.

Mark Seedon points out, so from 12 to 4 per Sky News, which says, intelligence of Israel, and this is on the 30th of January, claims that four understaff in Gaza were involved in Hamas kidnappings. The rest of it gets even more ambiguous. But it says on what basis, and by the way, that's out of 30,000 under employees? It says, on what basis did the U.S. and UK governments come to the conclusion that this warranted collective punishment by defunding UNRWA? And again, remember, even the U.S. Post said, based on allegations, while they're starving this country, the Israelis can't even get their story straight. This is actually a really powerful thread. But I think I want to play this clip first,

actually. Not this one. Where was that? Oh, hold on a second. There's no way I didn't include that. Okay. That's frustrating. One second. There was a great clip by, man, I hope I didn't lose that. Hold on a second.

That's frustrating. Well, there's a really great clip. I think it was decensored news. Let me look real quick. It was of Matt Miller. Before this, talking about what, Hamas or what UNRah was doing and how positive it was, essentially. Let me see.

Do this real quick. What do I got here? All right. I'm going to play this clip really quickly and I'll look for that. I'll be right back. Zionism is racism. Israel cannot be both. Israel is either a racist, Jewish state or it's a democratic state for everybody.

And that's what I would like Israel to be. I'd like a democratic solution, one state with equal rights. for all its inhabitants. Your organization, Human Rights Watch, issued a report last year about Israel, and the conclusion was it is an apartheid state. And there are four major human rights groups in the last two years who issued similar reports

which is the same conclusion. Israel is an apartheid state. So apartheid is racism. Apartheid is discrimination. But Israel is the only member of the United Nations that I know, which is officially racist. And I say this because of the July 2018 nation state law, which says the Jews have a unique, unique right to self-determination. in Israel. Unique means exclusive. It means Arabs have no right to self-determination. It means

even if Arabs became a majority, they would still have no right to self-determination. So most certainly, Zionism is a racist ideology and it is largely responsible for the Anakba that has unfolded throughout the last century and continues today. So apologize for the delay that I've seen that clip many times, but I'm glad I did because I did find it. This is an important clip.

So what it shows you is really interesting is it's somebody basically, which reading right off piece of paper, which seems very staged to me, basically laying out the narrative that we're hearing today, but this is back on, like nine days before the ICJ trial. And what he's saying is basically Unra does invaluable work. Now, what he's saying today is very different. So just think about how hilarious this is.

So one day to the next, the narrative completely shifts, and with his like smug dismissal of this in the other way, this is what their job is. They obfuscate. Now watch this clip. Thank you, Matt. In light of a January 9, Israel-Kineset member-led meeting in the Knesset, condemning the UN agency, UNRWA,

for fostering a welfare-dependent Palestinian population that breeds dissent and teaches children in their textbooks that the land is Palestine and Israel is the illegal occupier with other. Oh, which by the way are the facts. Funny that. Funny how the facts are racist. Their instruction to hate and kill Jews plus their association with terror. And realize the way they frame that is that by default saying that that's the case,

which are the facts are equivalent to hating Jews. And that's what you see what he said there. Other things about hating Jews. Well, those aren't anything about that at all. Those are the legal international law and the facts. That it is an occupier and it is Palestine. To say that does not mean you hate Jews, but that's what he just conflated. I mean, this is the way the game has always been played and no one, I don't think anyone's falling for it anymore.

Terrorist groups like Amos and Palestinian Authority, what is Secretary Blinkin's response to Knesset? Response to Knesset members Sharon Haskell and Simka Ropman, who are calling for the funding of UNRWA to stop. And I have a follow up. So I'm not going to respond to the comments by individual members of the Knesset, but I will say that UNRWA has done and continues to do invaluable work. to address the humanitarian situation in Gaza at great personal risk to UNRWA members. Okay, so you're telling me you know that, but you're still willing to defund them

because of allegations, knowing that that important work would stop while they're starving. They know all that, and he just... I don't think they care, you can see it. I believe it's over 100 unrest staff members have been killed doing this life-saving work. Oh, they've been killed, have they?

By what? Osmosis. They've clearly been killed by Israel. They've clearly been barred. while doing jobs under the UN flag, knowing that they were in protected locations, but he can't bother to say that, can he? And we continue to not only support it, but we continue to commend them for the really heroic efforts that they make oftentimes while making the greatest sacrifice. The follow-up is, how can you expect Israel and other nations to believe that the UN agency

UNRWA is a credible humanitarian agency since, according to Jerusalem Post reports, UNRah teachers and students celebrated Hamas brutal attack on Israel October. No, they celebrated the legal armed resistance is what they celebrated. But they keep conflating that with they celebrated because of this act, because they somehow knew that while it was happening, they went on to commit crimes. How would they possibly know that in Palestine while it was ongoing? Because that's when they were celebrating.

Right, obviously. They're celebrating the fact that they were resisting. Sure, somebody in there might have liked the crimes, but to make that the allegation, because you claim you fact, actually know that, it's just not true. Over seven, and over half of the Hamas Terrace behind that massacre where graduates of UNRWA schools in Gaza and weapons were found in UNRUS schools.

Well, I think most people... Yeah, because IDF says so. In Gaza are graduates of UNRUS schools. They're one of the leading, if not the leading providers of education. So I think that's a little bit of a breakdown in logic there. Oh, it is. I guess not today. It's funny how much five days it makes a...

difference, doesn't it? Suddenly today, it's completely obvious, and we all know we've known for a long time. 30 seconds ago, it was a lack of logic. I mean, these people just don't care. I think, frankly, they think you're too stupid to put these dots together, even though it was just right before it started. But I will say, I'll answer the question by saying, look, whenever we see reports of that nature, we ask specific questions about UNRWA and ask that they be followed up. It does not change the life-saving work that UNRWA is doing every day in Gaza that I just detailed a moment ago. Except right now, though. It doesn't change. change, but now it does, because Israel

said so, so suddenly that thing you said 30 seconds ago is not there and never existed and you're crazy and anti-Semitic. Just painfully stupid. Now here's the other one. There's actually three clips that I grab right there. This is one from today. Matt Miller has time

to make jokes amid famine. A couple more things. The chief of the chiefs of Who, UNICEF, and several other organizations, NGOs. You know, they're bad. You're old enough to remember.

You're old enough to get the joke. The WHO, I think you mean. Yeah, right. Yeah. WHO is on first. Yeah. Who's on second. What's on second? That's right.

We know that one. That's right. That's right. Thank you. Yeah. Are you done? Right. Let's get back to the genocide.

You're ignoring. There are a lot of people in this room have no idea what we're talking about right now. Sorry. We know it. I still. I always know it. Go ahead, Zai.

All right. So, you know, the chiefs of these organizations have warned. And that, you know, suspended financial aid is going to result in a total disaster. I mean, you know, there are reports about, you know, just booming famine and so on. And I know I asked about this yesterday, but it seemed to gain more urgency, especially that Lesnarani said that without the aid, the aid, they cannot possibly operate beyond the end of this month. So I don't really have anything to add to what I said yesterday, which is that, Number one, there is an urgent humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

It's what has animated all of the efforts from the secretary and others in the U.S. government. Right, but somehow like magically independent from anybody's responsibility, right? There's just this ongoing crisis. We all have to work together to deal with. It's so infuriating. All you have to do is pressure is real and it'll be over tomorrow. These are disgusting people. To try to get humanitarian assistance in.

Number two, UNRWA plays a critical role. You have heard us say that. dating back to before Friday when these allegations were announced publicly and we temporarily paused our aid. You've seen us say it since then. And number three, that is why we think it is so important that the United Nations conduct a prompt thorough investigation to make sure that there is accountability and make sure that any reforms that need to be instituted are put in place. It is, as I said yesterday, precisely because the need is so dire that it's important that the nations conduct a prompt and thorough investigation.

God, just so, so much gaslighting. And then apparently I just saw this. I'll include it is a clip since we're already past three hours. It's a clip of the basically reading in regard to the ICJ ruling. The ICJ has offered a resounding rebuke. For the podcast, this was yesterday. To those at the UN. Who claimed that the case of genocide against Israel,

was meritless and baseless. The charge of genocide is meritless. Meritless, counterproductive. The charges of genocide, we believe that they're unfounded. Unfounded? And we have said that we believe that they're unfounded. We find those allegations to be unfounded. And completely without any basis in fact whatsoever.

The court also dismissed the premise that somehow Israel, by its very nature, would be above the law and could not be accused of committing the crime of genocide. To those with misplaced, outraged, be outraged by the crime. Right. Not the accusation. By reality on the ground, not the words to describe it. Enough racism and supremacy, enough impunity.

Which, just by saying that, They'll call him anti-Semitic and racist. That's how cartoonish this whole thing is. Now, this is a great thread, which I think I might go through in another show just because it's so outstanding and it's long. I want to give this. It's due deal. It's time.

But Isha K breaks this down and goes through the Unra, basically as they're calling it, the Terrorogram, and just breaks down how frivolous and flimsy and subjective these claims are. And this is where most of this is coming from. How a telegram group of 3,000 Unra teachers in Gaza celebrated the October 7 massacre? Now the point is you go through it and is simply saying the list of mods and their contact numbers,

meaning they were not employees but contractors, first of all. And she goes, I mean, she goes over all of the stuff showing that they're accusing them of anti-Semitism, but then proving that they can't even associate the statements with the right people and say, and some of these statements are things like occupied, right, becomes anti-Semitic like we just showed you. But it's just incredible. It goes through all of this and breaks it down, showing you that they're lying about most everything that's being put forward and their assumptions and they're conflating between what they're saying with what they tell you, they mean. It's crazy. And it would no evidence the organization just assumes that everyone

on the group is a teacher. Anyway, I'll go through this again, because we're already running really long today. The point, though, is that here is, and I'll probably go through most of this latter part in the show, this is Sherry Mendez. Right after all this happens, right after the ICJ ruling, and I mean, their entire narrative is collapsing in on themselves. So what do you do? You fall back to the atrocity propaganda. Let's grab this lady who already went around and said things we can prove are false. They did. She was one of the earliest ones citing things like beheaded babies and other topics, which

are proven to be false at this point. So she goes back out and she starts making similar allegations. Gentle mutilation of women. By the way, things that Owen Jones, already from the Guardian, already reported, were not in this video they're claiming proves all of this. So how do you make that make sense? But she's making the rounds and she's just stating these things again, which they always act like as some new level of evidence. No, it's the same one who got caught lying before,

circling back around and going on new shows and reiterating the same points. And here Muhammad Chihita points out that Sherry Mendez told the New York Times that she only saw four women with signs of sexual abuse. That was reported in the New York Times, some with a lot of blood in their pelvic areas. But she then elsewhere went on to say, quote, evidence of mass rape of so is brutal that they broke their victim's pelvis, which we prove to you is literally impossible by an individual person, that it takes a level of a car car car car. crash type of impact to break a person's pelvis.

But I guess that the facts don't matter. But the point is, was it only four? Or was it mass rape all across the entire area? Clearly, the narrative expanded since then. And she goes, Sherry had also claimed elsewhere to have seen a decapitated pregnant woman, her beheaded unborn child. You know, things that even Horat's has proven were not happening. They were fake, but she claims to have seen them.

She already expressed the strong opinions on Gaza, how the PR battle for the image is, Israel's image, make the military battlefield look easy. The point is this is about controlling the narrative and their own Israeli media has already proven that those things are false. She's already been caught lying. So the fact that she's being recirculated

is just a desperate effort to keep these things in the media. Michelle points out that her question about Sherry Mendez. It says, why is Sherry Mendez this lady presenting information? She's an architect. That's her job.

Volunteer morgue worker. But yet she's this person prominent because I think that she's the one that went along with it. like many of the others, like Levy, who already got caught, using things we can prove are not from 2024 or three, but we can prove her from very late as late as 2020, like the image of the woman. They claim as a woman who was raped. We can prove to you that it's an old image. It's all over the internet from 2022 and before, but they keep using it. But she's not a medical professional, and yet she's the one circling this around. It's very interesting. Now here's a new one, which we will go through. This is from today or yesterday. Death and donations. Did the volunteer group handling the dead of October 7th exploit its role? Yep. It's exactly what we've been telling you.

The Zaka Volunteer Group. I forget the person to put this forward, but there was like a battle between these volunteer groups to get the most attention. And they provably lied. That one Zaka guy is the one that keeps talking about the oven and the baby, the woman's won't being cut open. Again, if you haven't heard this, even Israeli media has proven that these did not happen

because there weren't people that were in these areas that were of the same age, that the people that were elsewhere there did not see the same things. Like, they've thoroughly shown that these did not happen. And just, you know, do you need to look further back

to the 40, we had a baby story that was even told Biden claimed he saw it, showing you the kind of controlled moving parts through at the top levels of power, and then they walked it back because it was a lie or babies being hung on clothes lines. They lied about all this stuff.

This is a video in Hebrew where they're basically saying, that Channel 12 admits the idea of bombing of the Al-Ali hospital, which, guys, we already know. If you aren't biased in this situation, it was a very provable concept. Even one of the,

I think it was Neftali, came out and said, they bombed, we bombed it because of Hamas, deleted it, and then put it out in different way. We all saw it, even Twitter's community notes

back when they weren't completely taken over, pointed it out. This is David Collier, who continues to lie, just like Elon Levy and the rest of them, saying, I am Kabutskafaraza, saying the, you know,

I think point, was the videos down here. I didn't want to get into it. The point was these two videos. Just to all include them, I've shown you both of them already. These are the video compilations of how they keep lying

and are proven to lie. This was Israeli Channel 12, I think, or 12, 13. And what is he thinking? They're pointing out, they lied. They lied about this one. They lied about this is the guy right here with the babies in the clothes line.

They're lying. In this media, they're saying this one about, it's not an Netflix show, it's not a cable show, and goes on to list up all the things that have been proven to be false on mainstream Israeli media. And yet we can't engage with this. Now, I already played this in the beginning,

but the point is highly respected British Israeli historian Avi Shalame says he has a moral duty to denounce Zionist settler colonialism and American imperialism and to stand with the Palestinian people for the struggle of peace and dignity in their own land. Alan McLeod points out that if anybody, this is the Chicago City Council, calls for a ceasefire. Guess what? Wall Street Journal.

writes an article yesterday, Chicago votes for Hamas. To show you just how much Zionist influence, it's incredible. Calling for a ceasefire is now voting for Hamas? No, it's not. In fact, it's the exact opposite at this point. The end of the day, it's about saving human life. Primarily, the hostages they claim they want to save, but clearly they don't want that. And just so you know, this does seem to be building.

I'm going to wait to get into this deeply because I'm not. sure if this is more hype than anything else, but it says the intercept obtained a memo sent to the Air Force about standing by for ground involvement in Gaza from the U.S. military. With everything going on, I can't believe, but kind of, I probably wouldn't surprise me to find out they would go in on the ground while being accused of genocide in the world court. But we'll see how to happen. Overall, guys, I think it's easy to see that the U.S. government is actively involved with this genocide. And as an American, you should care about that.

So stand up, stand up, do something about it, speak up, tell your neighbors, tell your friends, you know, about anything, really. This topic's very important, in my opinion, obviously, but just anything you think matters. I keep saying this in the end of the shows, get together with people and have conversations about this stuff. Debate the topics in an amicable way. Like, right, so it's okay, you disagree. Discuss the finer points of this.

Understand these things. Don't just regurgitate what I say or what somebody else says. understand them. It's important. More and more, you can see how this thing, all of these situations are building. And the more you understand them, the more we can fight back. It's very important. And again, don't forget that there's a lot of people out there that are good people fighting for good things. I think that's an important, especially now. I mean, quite frankly, I'm saying this today more than it for, for myself more than anybody. You know, because this stuff weighs on you, as I keep saying. It really does. And it's important that I

remember that, that there are a lot of good people, like all of you in the chat, all you in this community that are actively doing everything you can to fight for the right things, the right reason, you know, moral concepts, integrity, honesty, truth, human life. I applaud you for it. The point is that we need to fight and spread that and inform more people and get them. Because again, I quite frankly think even people lost the two-party paradigm is what they want. And if they truly understood that they're being played, that they would be amicable or, you know, open to that. So thank you for being here today and continuing to support The Last American Vagabond. Make sure you keep your eye out for upcoming work from Derek Brose on the fluoride

trial. Now, if you'd like to continue to support the Last American Vagabond down below, release every video on the donate button on the website. There's a lot of ways to do so. We do need your support, but the most important thing is sharing the work. To thank you for tuning in today. I love you all. As always, question everything. Come to your own conclusions. Stay vigilant.