reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @Kaizerrev
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
Nick Fuentes believes that Charlie & Erika Kirk were an Arranged Marriage & they meet at Bohemian Grove 🤯 Nick also has many questions about Erika about how quickly she took over TPUSA & more. "I don't buy any of the Israel conspiracies, but THIS I'm interested in." https://t.co/QBy4TNmSB8
Video Transcript AI Summary
I 100% believe that that's an arranged marriage. Erica Kirk is now taking over Turning Point. That's suspicious as fuck. She's presented as the archetypal 'trad wife'—'the ultimate trad wife'—speaking at the Young Women's Leadership Summit and on podcasts about being smitten with Charlie. Her first speech next to his empty chair was 'totally canned,' with tears that weren't there, and at the memorial she wore a white suit, fireworks, described as 'Mary in her white suit' energy and 'Claire Underwood vibes.' Then she says she's 'running Turning Point now' and 'seizing the reins'—'no one dare question me because I'm a widow.' 'Who is Erica Kirk now?' 'What makes you qualified to run Turning Point because your husband got killed?' This politics feels suspicious; I think it's an arranged marriage.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know, the thing about Erica Kirk is I 100% believe that that's an arranged marriage. Charlie and Erica, I do not believe for one second that they met organically. How do you think they met each other? Do you think that they bumped into each other at CPAC and Charlie said, hey, let's go on a date. No, they were set up together by somebody.
Who set them up? Charlie, I'm sure is he's super ambitious, super powerful running this organization. They told him you need a wife. I'm sure he wants a wife. They told him you need a wife.
If you wanna run for office, you need a wife and kids, you need a family. They're grooming him to be super powerful. So he's hanging out at Bohemian Grove and they say, we need to give you a wife. We know somebody. We know this girl and she's in she's in some How do they know her?
Who set them up and where did this girl come from that's gonna be Charlie Kirk's wife and bear his children? I think that was an arranged marriage. And that tells me that she is tapped into some kind of network in some way, I don't know how. People talk about she was a pageant girl and she ran this charity. Maybe there's a connection there.
I would not be surprised at all. That, if you're talking about Erica Kirk, that I believe. People say Israel killed Charlie Kirk. Yeah, I don't know about that one. Let's look at the marriage.
Erica Kirk is now taking over Turning Point. That's suspicious as fuck. Because what we are being led to believe is that Erica Kirk is the archetypal trad girl. Isn't that the perception they're cultivating? When you look at some of these clips, she's supposed to be the ultimate trad wife.
She's speaking at the young women's leadership summit. She's on podcasts saying, oh my gosh, I can't focus because I'm so in love with Charlie. If he's here, I can't focus, I'm so smitten. Like that's the character that she's playing. That's the character that they're selling us.
Her husband gets shot in the neck graphically in front of everybody. Shouldn't miss trad wife, shouldn't she be like despondent? And I'm not trying to judge how people grieve. It's not our position to judge how they grieve or what their response is. Maybe she's just got unbelievable resolve.
But if she really is the ultimate trad wife who knows her place and is the helper to her husband, a helpmate, and she's so smitten with him and she's the perfect trad wife like how she's been presented to us for years, then when her husband gets shot in the neck and blood starts burning everywhere in front of everybody who starts screaming and running away, shouldn't she be like in shock? Shouldn't she be like in a catatonic state or crying and be in a veil as a widow somewhere? But that's not what we got at all. She start The second he dies, she takes over Turning Point. That happened like two days later.
She's all of a sudden the president of this $500,000,000 organization. Super influential, now super powerful after Charlie became a martyr, and she's given speeches. She's given a speech and the speech I'm sorry, I was totally canned. The first speech she gave next to his empty chair, she's like doing this weird affect, wiping away tears that aren't there with this scripted speech, you know, the battle cry of this widow, the cries of this widow will echo like a And then at the WWE memorial, she comes out to fireworks and she does this like she's Mary in her white suit. Her white suit, her makeup, her hair did, and she goes out with fireworks at her husband's fucking funeral like this.
She fucking posed. Did you see that? And then she goes up and says, yeah, I'm running Turning Point now and this is how it's giving me like Claire Underwood vibes. I think that was an arranged marriage and either she was like a handler or she was, she had political ambitions of her own. But yeah, I don't know.
Look, who is Erica Kirk now? This is a person that is being foisted on us. And look, don't get me wrong. You lost your husband. I'm deeply sorry for you.
I really am. I'm praying for you. I am deeply sorry for you. I can't imagine what you're going through. But you becoming president of Turning Point and now being foisted upon us, that's an altogether different story.
You know, it's like I said on Monday and Alex Jones didn't like this. He said it was mean. A lot of people didn't like it. You want our sympathy? You got it.
You want our prayers? You got it. People would, you know, walk over broken glass for this widow who can who can even sympathize, who could even understand what she's going through right now. But they're asking us to accept her as like this new leader. They're foisting her on us as a political leader and that I don't like.
I don't like that because that's manipulative. That is predatory. She's the widow, who can criticize her? She's a widow, who could ever say anything negative about her? They're exploiting that.
They're exploiting that. She's untouchable, she's beyond reproach, she's the victim of the tragedy. It's like when a victim of a school shooting starts running an anti gun nonprofit. You know, it's like March for Our Lives because who could criticize a kid that almost got killed in a school shooting? You know, it's given me vibes, I don't like that.
I don't like when some victim of some atrocity is then presented as a political figure because it's like, okay, who the fuck are you? You're the victim of some tragedy? That sounds like a really shitty thing to say, but it's like, how do I know you're not being controlled by somebody? Because quite honestly, we knew who Charlie Kirk was and he built the organization. We have no idea who you are.
What makes you qualified to run Turning Point because your husband got killed? What makes you qualified? We don't know anything about you. We don't know where you came from. We don't know anything about you.
For all we know, you are working for some other person or now the board is gonna run it. Now some shadowy force is gonna run Turning Point through you or you represent We don't know. We don't know who you are. But no one can say that because she's a widow and that I don't like. Because this is a high profile killing.
It is forcing people to ask a lot of questions. And this is the one aspect of it that we're not allowed to ask questions about because it's in bad taste. Well, you know what? This is politics. If you wanna speak at the funeral, no one's gonna question that.
But you seize control of the organization right away? I'm seizing the reins and no one dare question me because I'm a widow. Yeah, I don't like that. I don't like that one bit. And it doesn't really track.
Like I said, if you watch any of the clips, it's just like downright insulting the way that she's presented as like a trad wife. And correct me if I'm wrong and I might be, but if you're the ultimate trad wife, shouldn't you be a little bit more torn up about this? I know I sound like an asshole. Where's the tears? Really?
You're a trad wife? You're a you're a helpmate. You're smitten. You're so in love. Blah blah blah.
Your husband got publicly executed in front of all of his adoring fans three days ago. You're giving a speech today, taking control of Turning Point, vowing like that we're gonna make Turning Point bigger than ever. Is that typical trad wife behavior? Who is this person exactly? Who is this?
No one knows. So I'm Listen, and I know I don't really buy a lot of the Israel conspiracies. That is something I'm very interested in. Erica Kirk is someone I'm very interested in. You know, when people talk about energy weapons and decoy shooters and trapdoors, you lose me.
When you talk about the person that succeeds Charlie Kirk, that's relevant. Who's gonna take his place? Good question, it's the wife. Who's the wife? No one knows.
So, you know, some of that stuff, you know, the Epstein files, I don't know how much that plays into it because Charlie was in favor of covering them up. A week after the DOJ covered up the Epstein files, Charlie Kirk went on a show and said, I trust the government. I don't wanna ask any more questions about it. So I don't think that had anything to do with it. I think they just took advantage of it.
But Yeah. But the the wife is sort of interesting. And I know I sound like a jerk. I Fine. I sound like a jerk.
I don't care. I That's a question that needs to be answered and she's in politics now. If she wanted to be a widow, then, you know, she should have just started some fucking foundation and said we're giving out the Charlie Kirk Memorial Scholarship or something. But she took control of a $500,000,000 all important political org that just got way more important. And you know, succeeding a guy that died, it's a little suspicious.
So yeah, I gave me a very bad taste in my mouth when I I the only one? I mean, tell me what you think. One's in the chat if you think I'm onto something, two if you think I'm a dick because I'm actually curious. I'm actually curious how many people bought it. And I didn't wanna say that right out of the gate because I know how that sounds and I know that comes across a certain way, but I'm just telling you gut level, my reaction.
When I saw her first speech, when I saw her second speech, I said, I don't like this. Something's not right here. This is weird. Her first speech in the Charlie Kirk studio, I said, this something's off here. She comes out and given a speech and she's like, you know, she's not even crying.
Like we know it because she's not even fucking crying. And it's once again, this is not like we're interrogating her. Why aren't you crying? It's like, isn't that strange? This is like other people were crying.
I was almost crying. You're his wife. You're his trad wife. You're not crying? And she was pretending to though.
She wasn't crying, but she was pretending to. She's like patting her eyes. It's like, honey, you're not crying. We know what crying looks like. Like it would have been, if she got up there and she was like beside herself, disheveled, maybe someone was helping her, maybe she couldn't finish it, maybe she was actually crying, I'd say, bless her heart.
But she came up there and she's like, given the scripted speech, doing this whisper thing. I was like, yeah, no. Sorry. Sounds fake. And then she's given another speech a week later, doing the Pose.
The Pose sent me, it's like, oh, She was literally doing Shawn Michaels. Remember when Shawn Michaels fought the Undertaker at WrestleMania twenty five? And he came out in all white and Undertaker came out in all black. It was like that. She she literally goes out there and she's like this, and the fireworks are blowing off and she says, I forgive the killer, scripted.
And now she's in charge of turning point. I I think that's very suspicious. So, I think you're right to question it. I think that's an arranged marriage if I've ever seen one. But that's just maybe I'm an asshole, but that's I think that's a question that needs to be answered.
Recoup percent $20.
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
Parker revealed that he's ANTIFA & then accuses a caller of being "Pro-Fascist". https://t.co/giKJbqIzuT
Video Transcript AI Summary
Two speakers volley questions about fascism and anti-fascism. Speaker 1 asks: "Are you Antifa?" and "You're pro fascism?" "But can you at least say that you're anti fascist?" Speaker 0 responds: "I wouldn't say so." "I'm not really... I have still both political views on things." "I'm not gonna say that if I don't know." The exchange probes neutrality: "You think we're new you think you were we were neutral on fascism in World War two?" "The US was Antifa against the Nazis." Speaker 1 presses: "So then, like, why wouldn't you want to be Antifa?" Speaker 0: "I don't know. I'm trying to." "I can't believe Trump has you, like, so cooked in the brain that you don't even know how to say that fascism is wrong." A sponsor line interrupts: "Innovega is redefining what's possible for people with vision loss." Later, "Are you against fascism?" and "If you are against fascism in the comment section, type three in the comment section you're against fascism." The discussion veers to "Partying convicted felonies. Well, let's talk about that. So"
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Okay. So going
Speaker 1: back this question? Yeah. We'll go back to that in a second. Can I ask you a question? Are are you Antifa?
Tifa? Are you Antifa?
Speaker 0: Oh, Antifa. No. Why do you say that?
Speaker 1: You're pro fascism?
Speaker 0: Are you assuming that I'm Antifa?
Speaker 1: I'm Antifa. Alright. I'm definitely anti fascist. Definitely. So do you agree with me that you're anti fascist?
Speaker 0: I wouldn't say so.
Speaker 1: You're not anti fascist? What so are you pro fascist?
Speaker 0: I'm not really, like okay. I have still both political views on things. There's not everything every I don't agree on everything with the Republican Party. I don't agree
Speaker 1: on everything. I get you. I get you. But can you at least say that you're anti fascist?
Speaker 0: I'm not gonna I'm not gonna say that if I don't know, like, the
Speaker 1: You can't say that you're anti fascist? Jeez. So you're pro fascism?
Speaker 0: I'm not pro. Not pro, but I'm not.
Speaker 1: So you're neutral on fascism?
Speaker 0: Shit. I guess.
Speaker 1: You think we're new you think you were we were neutral on fascism in World War two?
Speaker 0: Okay. Okay. Hold on. I wanna go back to the felony Wait.
Speaker 1: I have a question. Do you think do you think that do you think that America was neutral on fascism in World War two?
Speaker 0: Probably not.
Speaker 1: So we were Antifa. So The US was Antifa against the Nazis. Okay. So so then, like, why wouldn't you want to be Antifa?
Speaker 0: I don't I don't know. I'm trying to Bro,
Speaker 1: I can't believe Trump has you, like, so cooked in the brain that you don't even know how to say that fascism is wrong. Like, you're against fascism. Literally, you can't even say that you're against fascism. Innovega is redefining what's possible for people with vision loss, restoring functional sight. That's how in the brain that you don't even know how to say that fascism is wrong.
Like, you're against fascism. Like, literally, you can't even say that you're against fascism. That's how that's
Speaker 0: how much Trump has you
Speaker 1: in the weeds that you can't even say you're against fascism, dude.
Speaker 0: You're spending back from the question about Biden.
Speaker 1: No. I'm just I'm just I'm not sorry. Are you against fascism?
Speaker 0: I'm not arguing against it. Haven't
Speaker 1: You're not arguing against fascism? Jeez. Fuck, dude. Okay.
Speaker 0: Arguing against anti fascism.
Speaker 1: Okay. Well, hey. Wait. Hey. By the way, if you're anti fascist wait.
By the way. The way. By the way. If you are against fascism in the comment section, type three in the comment section, everyone. Type three in the comment section you're against fascism.
Speaker 0: Something completely different. We got on topic of fascism instead.
Speaker 1: Okay. That's fine. That's fine. We'll go back. Like that.
We'll go back. It's fine. It's fine.
Speaker 0: Partying convicted
Speaker 1: felonies. Well, let's talk about that. So
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
TikToker "yourfavoriteguy" claims that Nick Fuentes is a Fraud & "got the call" over saying Israel was not involved with Charlie Kirk's death. https://t.co/gChgH1KUhC
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker labels Nick a fraud who doesn’t care about stopping Israel and suggests he recently got 'the call.' He asks whether Nick has ever urged a boycott, shown a BDS list, called to vote against Zionist politicians, funded Gaza aid, or organized his audience against Israel, and finds nothing. He claims Nick is 'a pressure valve for critics of Israel' rather than an organizer, noting Nick 'spews rhetoric' and clout-chases against pro-Israel conservatives. The speaker recalls Nick’s statement: 'The whole world is turned against Israel, and yet they're able to keep doing what they do. And the reason why is because they are more organized, more sullied than any other group.' He argues Nick has never organized his audience meaningfully, cites the Charlie Kirk shooting, and Nick’s dismissal of the 'Israel theory' as suspicious amid fan-talk connections with Ben Shapiro. He questions Nick’s motives, suggests he’s been co-opted, and plugs Substack with 'free Palestine.'
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We gotta talk about Nick. You guys know him. I think he's a fraud who doesn't actually care about stopping Israel, and I think he recently got the call. Before we talk about that, has Nick ever told his audience to boycott? Has he ever shown them a BDS list?
Has he ever called on his supporters to vote against Zionist politicians, support an aid campaign to Gaza, done anything to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people, or organize his audience any meaningful way against Israel? I don't think so. I can't find a thing of any of those things. And if he hasn't done any of that, then all he is is a pressure valve for critics of Israel to vent, not actually organizing. You know, it's ironic because yesterday he made this statement.
The whole world is turned against Israel, and yet they're able to keep doing what they do. And the reason why is because they are more organized, more sullied than any other group. Nick. Nick. Organizing?
Organize? You have never organized your audience in a meaningful way to stop Israel. All you do is spew rhetoric and you clout chase against other pro Israel conservatives and politician. You know, it's really weird because after the, shooting of Charlie Kirk, rest in peace. I don't support political violence.
Nick came out immediately and said, he doesn't buy the Israel theory. It's bullshit. He dismissed he dismissed it, which is so suspicious because on the flip side of that theory, people are accusing his fans of being involved somehow because there is a little bit of connection. Watching Nick shoot down questions about Israel and Charlie Kirk, at the same time Ben Shapiro is shooting down questions about it being a Nick fan, it feels fake. It feels like we're not in a real timeline.
What's going on? You know, maybe, maybe, maybe Nick has read the writing on the wall and he believes in some sort of theory that makes him scared to speak out. You know, that could be it. Or maybe he got the call. Because why wouldn't Nick organize his audience to do anything about Israel?
Isn't that weird? He just talks. He doesn't raise any money or but he talks about organizing. He talks about stopping the Zionist influence over our government, which is harmful. It's harming the American people, and it's killing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with our tax money.
Nick, you know, I talked to you I'll I'll talk to you about organizing, but you have some explaining to do. This is it's not a good look. You're just a pressure valve. You know? Honestly, it just seems like you're co opted.
Anyways, you guys can follow my work on Substack. It's a link in my bio. Thank you. And free Palestine.
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
Nick Fuentes pushes back on the Right blaming Israel for Charlie Kirk's assassination & also says we need to move away from blaming Israel for everything in an interview with Russell Brand. "They just wanna satisfy an emotional craving whenever something bad happens." https://t.co/cBKN4Q2e4x
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker notes that people are often pulled by instinct and emotion, and the crowd tends to rush to blame Israel. He says he would examine evidence impartially, even if his stance has been pro-Israel, and acknowledges that a rush to judgment can unfairly target the same suspect. He stresses the importance of telling the truth, being objective, and weighing the facts rather than satisfying momentary emotions. He warns against relying on simple heuristics that connect bad events to predetermined culprits, such as blaming Israel or linking violence to political opponents, and urges stepping back to gain broader perspective. He advocates considering second- and third-order effects and the knock-on consequences of punishment, warning that policy responses and government action must be thought through patiently.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Well, I have to say that there's always a temptation because the crowd goes one way and always based on instinct, based on emotion. And even in my case, wasn't even so much against the left with my audience. They wanted to rush and blame Israel. That was the first gut reaction of my audience. And in this case I said, I'm certainly not reluctant to blame Israel for one thing or another.
If there's evidence, I mean, be it based on who I am. Said, but you know, he was a pro Israel guy. So I mean that that would be like saying to Ben Shapiro got taken out God forbid and people said Israel did it. I don't that would be pretty far fetched, you know, but that was kind of the rush to judgment on our side was it's the same suspect. It's always the same culprit and I guess for me it always just goes back to you have to tell the truth.
Know, I think that a lot of people and that seems obvious, but what a lot of people find themselves doing when they talk about these things is they want to satisfy an emotional craving or an emotional state and you really need to be careful. Am I telling the truth? Am I being objective? Am I looking at the facts or am I saying these things to satisfy something that I'm feeling right now? Because I think that's what a lot of people are doing.
Another thing that they do is they tend to fall back on this kind of heuristic level thinking or like a rule way of thinking where they say something bad happens. Oh, well, Israel is implicated when bad things happen or oh, a right wing person got shot. Came from the left. We have to get away from that kind of heuristic Bay based thinking and think more in terms of maybe zoom out and get a broader sense of perspective. And I think think in terms of second and third order effects, we have to be a little bit smarter than just kind of like our first gut reaction.
It's like we just said a moment ago, you know, yes, everybody's everybody's first impulse is people are making us unhappy punish them. People are saying these things we got to go after them. We have to think though. What what is the knock on effect? What's the chain reaction?
Okay, we punish these people. What do they do next? What do they do in a year? What do they do in two years? What does the government take away from this?
What could be justified down the road? We always have to be a little bit smarter than we want to be in a moment like that. But that takes some patience. It takes time to develop that sense.
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
Matt Walsh during Groyper War going against White Nationalism https://t.co/qeR7epYmE0
Video Transcript AI Summary
"Why is it wrong to want to preserve our heritage, the country that our ancestors founded European?" I don't believe that our unifying principle was ever race, skin color, ethnicity. Our unifying principle was a essentially a doctrine. It was a the the doctrine of human rights. I think it's un American is what I would say. But why would it be immoral? It would really depend on what motivates that. And, and if you're saying that it's not motivated by bigotry, all I could do is trust you on that. I can't look inside your soul. I mean, it sounds like it, but, I don't know why you want me to to do that.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Why is it wrong to want to preserve our heritage, the country that our ancestors founded European? I don't believe that our unifying principle was ever race, skin color, ethnicity. Our unifying principle was a essentially a doctrine. It was a the the doctrine of human rights. I think it's un American is what I would say.
But why would it be immoral? It would really depend on what motivates that. And, and if you're saying that it's not motivated by bigotry, all I could do is trust you on that. I can't look inside your soul. I mean, it sounds like it, but, I don't know.
I don't know why you want me to to do that.
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
"I will DIE for America, can YOU say the same!? I AM AMERICA FIRST!" 😤 Nick Fuentes SOUNDS OFF on Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Elon Musk, Milo & others who called him a Fed https://t.co/4wj9l5Lhxo
Video Transcript AI Summary
"I am America first. You are not."
"Elon Musk, you weren't born here."
"Milo, you're a Jew and you weren't born here."
"Kanisawans, your husband wasn't born here."
"Ask the show. Who is the fed? Will the real federal agent please stand up? Who's the real federal agent?"
"Elon, Peter Thiel, JD Vance Tucker, and George Farmer, the son of the head of the alliance of Christians and Jews in The UK?"
"Patrick Bet David said, why do you say the n word? It's to show people I'm real."
"Why do you roll out of bed at 3AM and do a show? Why do you say you're gonna have hate sex with can of so ands? Why do you say nigger? It's to show you I'm the real nigga on the show."
"All these people that have been taking checks from Fox News, Turning Point USA, Dennis Prager, they're just not ready for this. They're not ready that we're in the groiper generation."
"Eight years lied about, censored, attacked, persecuted while you were at parties getting millions of dollars for doing bullshit."
"Your show is ass and you're full of shit and you're retarded."
"I'm coming for all of it."
"They came to my house. They tried to kill me."
"You might kill me in the process, but you're fucking done."
"Signed America. That's my body. And that's me. And that's my body."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm the realest nigga on the internet that's in the middle of my generational run. And it is not going to come to an end anytime soon over my dead body because a bunch of fucking autistic spurgs that weren't even born here are gonna try and lie on my name. Elon Musk, you weren't born here. Milo, you're a Jew and you weren't born here. Kanisawans, your husband wasn't born here.
Go the fuck home. This is America first. I was born in America. This is the only country I've ever known and I will die for America. Can you say the same?
I am America first. You are not. You're not even American. And to the extent that you are, you're a fucking traitor. That's the last word on that.
Ask the show. Who is the fed? Will the real federal agent please stand up? Who is it? Who's the real federal agent?
Elon, Peter Thiel, JD Vance Tucker, and George Farmer, the son of the head of the alliance of Christians and Jews in The UK? Or the realest fucking nigga you know. Patrick Bet David said, why do you say the n word? It's to show people I'm real. Why do you roll out of bed at 3AM and do a show?
Why do you say you're gonna have hate sex with can of so ands? Why do you say nigger? It's to show you I'm the real nigga on the show. All these people that have been taking checks from Fox News, Turning Point USA, Dennis Prager, they're just not ready for this. They're not ready that we're in the groiper generation.
Because all this time, these past eight years, what do you think I've been doing? Your attacks, your slander, your persecution, I have only been growing stronger. Don't you get it? I have only been gathering strength. Eight years lied about, censored, attacked, persecuted while you were at parties getting millions of dollars for doing bullshit.
Your show is ass and you're full of shit and you're retarded. And that is why I'm not just coming for Rumble. I'm not just coming for Twitter. I'm coming for all of it. I'm coming for all of it.
You thought you'd bring me on the show and press me about Dave Smith. You don't know who the fuck you're dealing with. You let in a fucking dragon bitch. Imagine shooting a man with this last bullet, which actually happened to me. They came to my house.
They tried to kill me. I'm still here. I'm still at this house. You know where to find me. Bitch.
You tried shooting with with your last bullet and I stand there unfazed. So bring it on. Elon Musk, Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Charlie Kirk. I'm coming for all of it. I'm gonna fuck up your apple cart and all the king's men are not gonna be able to put it back together again.
You might kill me in the process, but you're fucking done. Signed America. That's my body. And that's me. And that's my body.
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
Palantir has a enemies list of 1-2 million US Citizens that they have classified as "potential political dissidents" 👀 https://t.co/7yOvDOc7mI
Video Transcript AI Summary
Israel uses a system called Lavender to decide who to kill, assigning scores to Palestinians and drone striking those above a certain threshold. Palantir creates these "murder lists" by scraping data from Facebook, satellite imagery, and other surveillance sources, compiling personal information to assign weighted scores and identify targets.
Palantir, founded by individuals with ties to the Israeli government and the CIA, also maintains an "enemies list" of 1 to 2 million US citizens for the CIA and federal law enforcement. This list classifies Americans as potential political dissidents based on surveillance data and AI, assessing their threat level to the government, extremist views, and potential for anti-government activity in scenarios like martial law or civil war.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is how Israel makes decisions about who to kill. Anybody above a certain threshold of that value of that score will be killed. So let's say Lavender has a list of millions of Palestinians. Let's say a hundred thousand of them have the % rating, % Hamas terrorist. Israel's gonna drone strike and kill all those people.
Then they're gonna move on and say, everybody above 90% threshold is gonna get drone strike and killed. Everybody above this, a sign of value. This is what Palantir does. They're in the business of creating murder lists. They're scraping Facebook, scraping satellite imagery from various militaries and intelligence agencies and other forms of surveillance to create databases of personal information, names, faces, dates of birth, financial information, geolocation, bank information, healthcare information, relationships, family or otherwise.
And they're creating kill lists, assigning weighted scores, using algorithms, using artificial intelligence to tell the military which people to drone strike. And before people say, Oh, well, that's totally innocuous, three Zionists involved with the Israeli government and the CIA from the very beginning created a total surveillance state platform. They are clearly loyal to Israel. They built it in Israel to kill Palestinians. Some people might try to convince you that that doesn't matter.
So what? That's happening in Israel. That's happening in Gaza. Who cares about whether they're killing people in Hamas? What does that have to do with America?
Would you like to know that Palantir has an enemies list of US citizens as well? This is confirmed and verified that Palantir has a list that they maintain for the CIA, for federal law enforcement of one to 2,000,000 Americans that they have classified as potential political dissidents. They have this, you can Google this. They have millions of American citizens on a database that they created with surveillance, with artificial intelligence, a weighted score to determine which American citizens will be a threat to the government. Which ones are extremists?
Which ones are potentially domestic violent extremists? Which ones hold anti government views? Which ones would the government have to worry about in a martial law civil war scenario? They maintain that for The United States. You're telling me that's not a problem?
This is who we're dealing with.
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
YE - HH (Classical Version) https://t.co/Xjx5EV5UbI
Video Transcript AI Summary
I am a cook. I like when people fuck on my bitch. People see my Twitter, but they don't say what they say to my face.
With all of the money and fame, I still can't get my kids back. Niggas see my Twitter, but they don't see how I be feeling.
So I became a Nazi. I'm the villain. How Hitler? They don't understand the things I say on Twitter. All my niggas Nazis. How Hitler?
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Fuck is my nitrous? Yes, I am a cook. I like when people fuck on my bitch. Wish it that I'm posting on Twitter. They telling me, yeah, they don't say that.
How niggas can see me in public. I'm driving in all chrome made back with all of the money and fame. I still can't get my kids back with all of the money and fame. I still don't get to see my children. Niggas see my Twitter, but they don't see how I be feeling.
So I became a Nazi air bitch. I'm the villain. Nigga, how Hitler? Nigga, how Hitler? They don't understand the things I say on Twitter.
Nigga, how Hitler? They don't understand the things I say on Twitter. All my niggas Nazis. Nigga, how Hitler. Nigga, how Hitler.
Nigga, how Hitler. All my niggas Nazis. Nigga, how Hitler.
@Kaizerrev - KaizerRev
Tucker Carlson calls out Ben Shapiro for beating his chest & bragging about what Israel did to the Gaza Strip in an interview with Piers Morgan. https://t.co/nJxRjEPlfH
Video Transcript AI Summary
Intentionally killing civilians is wrong, and it's troubling to boast about it. While some may argue there are justifications in war, the moral implications of targeting women and children are hard to defend. Even in extreme situations, like a world war, the loss of innocent lives raises serious ethical concerns. It's difficult to justify any war actions that lead to civilian casualties, and while defensive actions may be seen as more acceptable, the reality of war is ugly and painful. Ultimately, intentionally harming noncombatants contradicts the values we claim to uphold.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: If you're intentionally killing civilians, you probably shouldn't beat your chest and brag about it. You know? Maybe you can make I agree
Speaker 1: with that.
Speaker 0: Maybe you make the case that we had to do it or whatever, but you should
Speaker 1: I agree.
Speaker 0: You should weep. And that's evil, and you should just say it's evil. And I know it's really really threatening to
Speaker 1: Is it evil then?
Speaker 0: Ben Shapiro to say that or whatever.
Speaker 1: Is it evil?
Speaker 0: To kill civilians on purpose? Yeah. It is. I think it is.
Speaker 1: Really?
Speaker 0: Kids and children. Well, how is it not actually? In a war? Well, you can call it whatever you want. How is it right to kill women and children?
Speaker 1: I didn't say, well, because I think there's a moral right behind you if you are literally To
Speaker 0: kill women and children? What?
Speaker 1: If there's a if there's a world war that threatens the entire you want? If it threatens the entire world.
Speaker 0: Yes. Some people killed your kids like your 8 year old? Like, how is it morally justifiable?
Speaker 1: Well, because actually you have to well, by your criteria
Speaker 0: That's disgusting.
Speaker 1: Okay. It's nothing so no war is morally justified?
Speaker 0: I mean, I think it's pretty hard to justify. I mean, yeah. I'm sure, you know, a pure defensive action, sure. But all I'm saying look. It's all ugly.
It's all hard to stomach. I've actually seen some of it up close, super ugly.
Speaker 1: You can say that you can say you hate it.
Speaker 0: Let me may may I
Speaker 1: The fact you've you've fibbed with it being morally justified.
Speaker 0: To intentionally kill noncombatants, women, and children, I think we can say that's wrong. In fact, I thought that was the thing we were fighting against.