TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @infowars
@infowars - INFOWARS
Exclusive: Canadian Advocate Tajana Cekic Sounds The Alarm On Canada Being Ground Zero For The Globalists' Model Of A Tyrannical Dystopian Horror Designed To Destroy The West @truthseer01011 @HarrisonHSmith https://t.co/TajWqQcjVc
@infowars - INFOWARS
The Attack On The USS Liberty: Clip from Alex Jones' 'Terrorstorm: A History Of Gov-Sponsored Terrorism' Watch it on X: https://t.co/ISpygNic93 Get a DVD hardcopy while you still can - includes over 1-hour of special features!! https://www.infowarsstore.com/terrorstorm-special-edition #History #FalseFlag https://t.co/1eP38cv5Nw
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript discusses Operation Northwoods, a proposed scheme in the early 1960s by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, led by L. O. Lemonser, to conduct false flag operations as a pretext for invading Cuba and waging war with the Soviet Union. The plan included hijacking jets by remote control, crashing them, and blaming Cuba, along with numerous other terrorist attacks to be carried out under the document. One scenario proposed the destruction of a US naval vessel to be blamed on a foreign power as a pretext for war with an agreed enemy.
The narrative then shifts to 1967, when President Lyndon Baines Johnson allegedly operationalized Northwoods during the Six Day War. During that conflict, the USS Liberty, a clearly marked US intelligence ship, was sent by Johnson to collect electronic intelligence in the Eastern Mediterranean, approximately 14 miles off the coast of Israel in international waters.
Speaker 1 describes the attack on the USS Liberty: three torpedo boats approached from the starboard quarter at high speed in an apparent torpedo launch attitude. Israeli surveillance aircraft flew low over the ship, clearly identifying it as American. At 2 PM that afternoon, the USS Liberty was attacked by three Mirage III fighter-bombers. The Mirages jammed US signals, and were unmarked, the only unmarked aircraft in Israel's arsenal. The fighter-bombers strafed the ship with their cannons, dropped conventional munitions and napalm from bow to stern.
After the Mirages, the ship was hit by a medium bomber, Desalit? miseries, carrying napalm and other munitions such as white phosphorus. The USS Liberty was then attacked by three Israeli torpedo boats bearing Israeli flags. The torpedo gunboats opened fire with high-caliber machine guns and launched torpedoes. A single torpedo struck the ship, creating a 30-foot exit hole on both sides. The torpedo boats then strafed life rafts in the water in international waters.
Throughout the engagement, the USS Liberty repeatedly called the Sixth Fleet nearby for air support or rescue. Two aircraft carriers and the Mediterranean fleet responded, but they were recalled by the White House. Rear Admiral Geist, commanding the carriers in the Sixth Fleet, called Washington to confirm the recall. Secretary of Defense McNamara came on the line, and then President Johnson allegedly told Geist, “I want that goddamn ship going to the bottom. No help. Recall the wings.” The report asserts that American forces were told to stand down despite the attack.
A Russian spy ship reportedly witnessed part of the attack. After three hours, the Israelis withdrew, allowing the damaged USS Liberty to limp to safety. The narrator cites interviews with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moore, other admirals, and the head JAG officer of the Navy who allegedly was ordered to falsify reports and cover up what happened. An Israeli pilot is said to have publicly stated that he refused three times, over radio, to attack the ship, noting it was an American ship in international waters, but he was ordered to engage under threat of court-martial.
The summary concludes with the claim that Johnson had personal control over the operation, positioning the ship in the Mediterranean and making a backroom deal with Israel to attack it and blame Egypt, aiming to draw the US into war and take over the Middle East. The captain and crew were allegedly told they would face life in prison or death if they disclosed what happened. Captain William L. McGonagall is said to have received the Congressional Medal of Honor in secret and was instructed not to reveal it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In the early nineteen sixties, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, L. O. Lemonser, concocted a plan for false flag operations as a pretext to invade Cuba and for war with the Soviet Union. In operation Northwoods, they planned to hijack jets by remote control, crash them and blame the attack on Cuba. There were many other terrorist attacks they planned to carry out that were contained within the document.
One scenario mentioned was the destruction of a US naval vessel that was to be blamed on a foreign power as a pretext for war with any enemy they picked. President Lyndon Baines Johnson went operational with Northwoods on 06/08/1967 during the six day war. During the six day war between Israel and the Arab nations, the USS Liberty was sent by Johnson to collect electronic intelligence in the Eastern Mediterranean. The clearly marked US intelligence ship was 14 miles off the coast of Israel in international waters.
Speaker 1: A short time after the air attack had been completed, the three torpedo boats approached us from our starboard quarter at high speed and in an apparent torpedo launch attitude.
Speaker 0: Israeli surveillance aircraft flew low over the ship and clearly identified it as an American vessel. At 2PM that afternoon, the USS Liberty was attacked by three Mirage three fighter bombers. From the onset of the attack, the fighter bombers were jamming US signals. Not only were they jamming US signals specifically, they were also unmarked, the only unmarked aircraft in Israel's arsenal. The fighter bombers strafed the ships with their cannons, dropped conventional munitions and napalm on the ship repeatedly from stem to stern.
After the mirages had done their work, the ship was hit by medium bomber, desalt miseries, carrying napalm and other munitions like white phosphorus. The USS Liberty was then attacked by three Israeli torpedo boats bearing Israeli flags. The torpedo gunboats opened fire with high caliber machine guns and launched torpedoes. A single torpedo struck the ship, blowing a hole in both sides, entering the ship and leaving a 30 foot exit hole when it exploded. Then the torpedo boats began strafing life rafts in the water, an international war time.
While all of this was happening, the oversized American flag flew clearly above the ship. The attack on the Liberty went on for hour after hour after hour. During the entire attack, the USS Liberty continually called the sixth fleet that was nearby begging for air support or rescue. Two aircraft carriers and the Med responded by launching fighter aircraft. Unbelievably, they were recalled by White House.
Rear Admiral Geist then commanding the carriers in the sixth fleet called Washington personally to confirm the recall order. Secretary of Defense McNamara came on the line and then President Johnson himself told Geist, I want that goddamn ship going to the bottom. No help. Recall the wings. Imagine being Admiral Geis begging the president to allow you to defend an American ship that's under attack and being told by him that he wants the ship going to the bottom.
Despite the fact that The US carriers withdrew their help, a Russian spy ship appeared and witnessed part of the attack. After three hours into the attack, the Israelis withdrew because there were witnesses, allowing the damaged USS Liberty to limp to safety. Forty years after the attack on the USS Liberty, we know exactly what happened. I've interviewed former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Thomas Moore. I've interviewed the admirals that were on the line who heard what president Johnson said.
I've even talked to the head JAG officer of the Navy who was ordered to falsify the reports and cover up what had really happened. One of the Israeli pilots has gone public as well, saying that three times he refused over his radio to headquarters to attack the ship, saying clearly that it was an American ship in international waters and an ally. He was ordered under threat of court martial to engage the ship. In a nutshell, this is what happened. President Johnson had personal control over the ship, parked it in the Mediterranean, made a backroom deal with Israel to attack it with an order to kill all aboard.
Then the attack on the ship was to be blamed on Egypt, US would enter the war and take over the entire Middle East in the aftermath of the attack on the most highly decorated ship in US history. The captain and his entire crew were told they would spend life in prison or be killed if they told anyone what happened. Captain William l McGonagall was given the Congressional Medal of Honor in secret and told not to tell anyone that he had won the award.
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that a State Department official was fired by Marco Rubio over a relationship with a woman linked to the Chinese Communist Party. James O'Keefe breaks down the OMG sting and its implications for our country.
@infowars - INFOWARS
A State Department official was just fired by Marco Rubio for having a relationship with a woman linked to the Chinese Communist Party. James O'Keefe breaks down the sting conducted by OMG that brought this story to light, and what the implications are for our country. James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII)
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker describes an unprecedented situation where "the president authorized secretary of state Marco Rubio to fire this guy." The Chinese government is responding to an undercover video of the State Department official talking about sleeping with a Chinese spy, and mainstream media like "The New York Times is even covering it." The State Department says the foreign service officer "failed to disclose his contact with the woman, the daughter of a Chinese Communist Party official." It's a developing story, and the presenter says his team was in shock to see the Chinese government responding. They seek to understand the officer's day-to-day role; "we're not entirely clear what he did," though ethical guidelines "prevent our government officials from being blackmailed or" possessing compromising material. The officer is "Daniel Choi." The speaker notes such things "do happen in Washington DC" and ends with "Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is a very unprecedented situation because the president authorized secretary of state Marco Rubio to fire this guy. Mhmm. And, and now we have the Chinese government responding to this undercover video of the state department official talking about sleeping with a Chinese spy. And this has prompted mainstream media. The New York Times is even covering it.
We forced the New York Times to talk about it. The foreign service officer failed to disclose his contact with the woman, the daughter of a Chinese Communist Party official, the State Department said. So this is kind of a developing story, and, you know, my team was was really in shock to see the Chinese government responding.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Do do you have any insight as to what his role specifically was, like his day to day tasks at the agency? Because, obviously, it's concerning that that the CPCP element to all of this is is deeply concerning for us. But, how would that have put his job at risk?
Speaker 0: Well, there are ethical guidelines for these state department officials. I mean, he's a US diplomat that works within the state department, and we're not entirely clear what he did, but the state department has specific laws and guidelines that prevent our government officials from being blackmailed or or there's compromising material that's obtained. This is this is something that happens all the time with people in our government, but it's it's pretty crazy that you have a state department official that is bragging to a total stranger. He's a foreign service officer, Daniel Choi. There he is.
That's his name. These laws are are exist within our government to prevent people from getting blackmail and using compromising material on our on our service officers, and god forbid that I was a Chinese spy. It's so easy for for James O'Keefe and his, citizen reporters to just, at restaurants, get these guys in our foreign service to to brag about what they're doing. I I can't imagine what a Chinese spy would do. And and those people do exist.
That that stuff does happen in Washington DC. So, it's not good. It's not good. It's not a good state of affairs in our government. While other networks lie to you about what's happening now, Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next.
@infowars - INFOWARS
🚨BREAKING DOJ EARTHQUAKE: Bondi & Bongino Clash Over Handling of Epstein Files Amid Reports of Deputy Director's Ultimatum Demanding Bondi Resign Watch Alex Jones Respond As Chase Geiser Breaks It Down On Tomorrow's News Tonight! https://t.co/zidAZsrFk0
@infowars - INFOWARS
WATCH: Ted Cruz Gets Exposed by Tucker for Being an Ignorant Warhawk Who Doesn't Know Basic Facts About the Country He Seeks to Topple @HarrisonHSmith https://t.co/IJDLdTAXF1
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1 about Iran, including its population, which Speaker 1 does not know. Speaker 1 defends his lack of knowledge, stating he doesn't memorize population tables. Speaker 0 suggests this information is relevant given Speaker 1's stance on the country. The discussion shifts to whether Iran is trying to murder Donald Trump, which Speaker 1 believes. They also discuss military strikes and US support for Israel.
Later, they discuss whether Mossad shares all intelligence with the US, and whether they spy domestically in the United States. Speaker 1 says allies spy on each other, which Speaker 0 questions. Speaker 0 asks if it's in America's interest for Israel to spy on the US, including the president. Speaker 1 says it's in America's interest to be closely allied with Israel, and Speaker 0 questions why Speaker 1 won't say he doesn't want to be spied on.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: How many people live in Iran, by the way?
Speaker 1: I I don't know the population.
Speaker 0: At all?
Speaker 1: No. I don't know the population.
Speaker 0: You don't know the population of the country you seek to topple?
Speaker 1: How many people live in Iran?
Speaker 0: 92,000,000. Okay.
Speaker 1: Yeah. How could you not know that? I don't sit around memorizing population tables.
Speaker 0: Well, it's kind of relevant because you're calling for the overthrow of the government.
Speaker 1: Why is it relevant whether it's million or 80,000,000 or 100,000,000? Why is that I didn't say I don't know anything about the country I didn't say I don't know anything about the Okay.
Speaker 0: What's the ethnic mix of Iran?
Speaker 1: They are Persians and predominantly Shia. No.
Speaker 0: It's not even you don't know anything about Iran.
Speaker 1: So Okay. I am not the the Tucker Carlson expert on Iran
Speaker 0: who says a senator who's calling to keep
Speaker 1: over the
Speaker 0: influence of government. You're the one who knows anything about the country.
Speaker 1: No. You don't know anything about the country. You're the one who claims they're not trying to murder Donald Trump.
Speaker 0: No. I'm saying that.
Speaker 1: Who can't figure out if there's a good idea to kill General Soleimani and you said it was bad.
Speaker 0: Believe they're trying to murder Trump?
Speaker 1: Yes, I do.
Speaker 0: Because you're not calling for military strikes against them in retaliation. Okay.
Speaker 1: We're carrying out military strikes today. You said Israel was. Right. With our help. I said we.
Israel is leading them but we're supporting them.
Speaker 0: Well, you're breaking news here because the US government last night denied, the National Security Council spokesman Alex Pfeiffer denied on behalf of Trump that we were acting on Israel's behalf in any offensive capacity.
Speaker 1: We're not bombing them. Israel's bombing them. You just said we were. We are supporting Israel as big. You're a
Speaker 0: senator. If you're saying the United States government is that we're at the run right now, people are listening. Hey.
Speaker 2: It's not even really a gotcha moment. He should be able to answer that question. I mean, that is that is insane. I I really wish Tucker didn't tell him the number. I really wish Tucker had just made him guess.
Because I have the feeling Ted Cruz wouldn't have known where to even start. I mean, I doubt he knows at all, which again, this isn't a small thing. That's like a like a primary stat you're gonna wanna know when you're going to fight somebody. Right? This is like getting into the boxing ring and going, who's my opponent?
What's his weight and height? Like, you're gonna wanna know that before you step into the ring with somebody. Just the basic fundamental stats about who it is you're facing off against. Ted Cruz doesn't know. He's not interested.
He doesn't care. Let's go to clip 16 now.
Speaker 0: Does Mossad share all of his intelligence with us?
Speaker 1: Oh, probably not, but they share a lot. We don't share all of our intelligence with them, but we share a lot. It's a close alliance.
Speaker 0: Do they spy domestically in The United States?
Speaker 1: Oh, they probably do, and we do as well. And friends and allies spy on each other, and I assume all of our allies spy on us.
Speaker 0: And that's okay with you?
Speaker 1: You know what? One of the things about being a conservative is that you're not naive and utopian. You don't think humans are all Part of the reason socialism doesn't work is the the the mantra from each according to his abilities to each according to his needs doesn't work. As a conservative, I assume people act in their rational self interest.
Speaker 0: So it's conservative to pay people to spy on you?
Speaker 1: It's conservative to recognize that human beings act to their own self interest, and every one of our friends spies on us. And I'm not
Speaker 0: Do you like it? That's my question. I'm not asking whether they have motive to do it. Of course, do. I understand that.
And I And by the way I'm not mad at them. And you're an American lawmaker, so I just wanna wanna know hold on. I wanna know your attitude. You said that your guiding principle, in fact the only principle, the only criterion
Speaker 1: I said guiding. The overwhelming. I wouldn't say only.
Speaker 0: Is is it in America's interest? Is it in America's interest for Israel to spy on us, including on the president?
Speaker 1: It is in America's interest to be closely allied with Israel because we get huge benefits for it. And you wanna wanna see the clear
Speaker 0: But but I just wanna stop on the spying for a second. That it it takes place, as you know, including on the president of The United States and several precedents. And I just wanna know if that's okay, and why is it okay? Wouldn't an American lawmaker say to a client state, you're not allowed to spy on us? I'm sorry.
I know why you want to. I'm not mad at you, but you're not allowed to. Sure. And I don't care for it. Don't wanna be spied on by you.
Is that it's kinda weird not to say that, but you don't seem able to say that.
Speaker 2: It's not conservative to defend yourself, actually. Totally insane. Wait, this is the Is this the cope from old Ted Cruz? Alright. We'll we'll read the cope from Ted Cruz, and we'll get into just a just a small smattering of just a few of the examples of Israel spying on Americans, including the American president on the other side.
Stay with us.
@infowars - INFOWARS
BREAKING: ‘Prince Andrew Was F*ing Underage Girls’ @OKeefeMedia Drops Undercover Tape of Royal Family Advisor John Bryan Exposing Prince Andrew’s Sexual Relations With Minors & Deep Ties To Jeffrey Epstein! @OwenShroyer1776 Is Live Now Covering The Latest Developments » LIVE X STREAM: https://t.co/o5IFCWceME
Video Transcript AI Summary
John Bryan, a confidant of the British royal family, including Princess Diana and Sarah Ferguson, initially defended Prince Andrew against allegations related to Jeffrey Epstein. Bryan claimed he helped raise Ferguson's children and maintained a friendship with Prince Andrew.
Prince Andrew's association with Epstein became public in 2010. Virginia Dufres alleged in 2014 that Epstein paid her to have sex with Prince Andrew when she was 17. Prince Andrew denied these allegations in a 2019 BBC interview, which was a PR disaster. Bryan then advised Prince Andrew to show empathy for Epstein's victims.
Despite publicly stating in 2022 that he believed Prince Andrew was innocent, Bryan now reveals in hidden camera footage that Prince Andrew did have sex with underage girls and lied about it.
The news outlet claims its motivation is the public's right to know and to expose evil, emphasizing the need to protect child victims and hold those involved accountable.
A separate discussion involves the effects of methylene blue, with claims of increased mental activity and an out-of-body experience.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He was in the navy. He was two hundred and fifty days at sea. He never saw him again. I was really pissed because he lied to me. Lied about about embassy.
And then I did a big thing in the Daily Mail saying that I believed in him, and then I found out he was lying. I was so pissed. No. He was underage girls. That's not cool.
Speaker 1: John Bryan has been a close to the British royal family for a long time. He worked for Queen Elizabeth the second, was, quote, best friends with Princess Diana, and had a long term intimate relationship with the Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson. According to Bryan, he practically raised Sarah Ferguson's children, the princesses Beatrice and Eugene. And Brian said that he maintained a friendship with Ferguson's husband, the duke of York, prince Andrew.
Speaker 0: Tell me like your story. Tell my story. Raised those kids. That was the way. Day to day, I was father of the audience.
Speaker 1: Prince Andrew's connection to Jeffrey Epstein emerged in 02/2010 when photos showed them walking together in New York's Central Park. Epstein had already been convicted in 02/2008 of procuring a 14 year old girl for prostitution. In 2014, a woman named Virginia Dufres alleged in a Florida court filing that Jeffrey Epstein paid her to have sex with Prince Andrew when she was 17, a minor. On April 25, a few weeks ago, Dufres died by quote suicide. Prince Andrew denied Dufres sex abuse allegations in a now infamous 2019 BBC interview.
Speaker 0: She said she had sex with you three times, once on his private island in a group of seven or eight other girls. No. No to all of it.
Speaker 2: All of it. Absolutely no to all of it.
Speaker 1: The interview was a public relations disaster for the royal family and prompted the queen to strip prince Andrew of his royal duties. In the aftermath of that interview, the prince sought advice from a longtime royal family confidant, John Bryan.
Speaker 0: Was in the navy. He was two hundred and fifty days at sea. He never saw him again.
Speaker 1: Two weeks after prince Andrew's BBC interview, John Bryan was brought to the Royal Lodge where prince Andrew lives to offer crisis management advice. According to the Telegraph, the meeting was conducted discreetly. At the royal residence, Brian observed that Prince Andrew was visibly distressed and struggling to focus, reportedly unable to concentrate for more than forty minutes at a time due to the strain he was under. As reported in the Daily Mail, John Bryan constructed a five page document emphasizing that Prince Andrew should publicly show empathy for Epstein's victims. Back in November 2022, Bryan publicly stated that he believed Prince Andrew was innocent of the claims made against him related to the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking scheme.
Now, in our exclusive hidden camera undercover footage, John Brian reveals for the first time that Prince Andrew did in fact have sex with underage girls.
Speaker 0: Was really pissed because he lied to me about it. Lied about? Pissed him. Yeah. No.
I knew he saw him. He lied to me that he was such a close friend. I was no.
Speaker 1: Now our newsroom has some concerns about where this investigation is headed and who may be implicated. But our only motivation in doing these stories is the public's right to know. And if this report and our subsequent reports shine a light into darkness and expose evil, then we are willing to take the risks. At the end of the day, child victims of Jeffrey Epstein need to be protected, and the people involved need to be held accountable by law enforcement immediately. Without accountability, our notion of freedom is just an illusion.
We're gonna be breaking our next stories exclusively at O'KeefeMediaGroup.com. You may see this Project Veritas sign behind me. Stay tuned for next week.
Speaker 2: So they're gonna have more. I'd say at least one more report could be multiple more reports. I'm curious. He shouts out project Veritas where he had a bit of a, you know, unceremonious falling out. I wonder if they're not doing a joint project here.
I wonder if project Veritas might have something else as well. It's important to understand, and while it's not everybody knows about prince Andrew at this point, but getting his close confidant here to confirm what he denied and then whatever comes next, It it just it it shows what Epstein was really up to, folks. And that's why it's so frustrating listening to Bondi talk about, oh, well, we're you know, we got Epstein with little girls, and we've got all of his pervert stash here. That's not what this is about. That's not what this is about.
And and you tell us Epstein is dead anyway. So why what are you why are we talking about Epstein? We're talking about his blackmail ring. So he was blackmailing the royal family. This is what Epstein was doing.
This is why he had all the slaves, the sex slaves over there at his island. This is why he had all those young girls at his island. You get people in a compromised position. They end up sleeping with a minor. Now you got them.
And there are tapes. How do you think the blackmail operation worked? And we're supposed to sit here and believe that it was just Epstein and Maxwell, and we can't know any clients? No clients have been arrested at all to this day? Explain that one to me.
Was Jean Luc Purnell one of the clients, one of the witnesses who also magically found a way to kill himself in prison? Epstein was part of a giant sex trafficking blackmail ring to control the most powerful and influential people in politics, finance, tech, and beyond.
Speaker 3: Well, you took methylene blue about thirty minutes ago. Are you feeling it?
Speaker 4: I think I am.
Speaker 3: What you told me during the break something. Repeat what you said is happening. You're feeling the I
Speaker 4: I feel like that stuff in my fingers. I feel tingling fingers.
Speaker 3: You're feeling the Palpatine love?
Speaker 4: I think I feel the Palpatine love. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Well, go ahead and there's the camera blasting with full power right there. Yeah. Powered by methylene blue, ultra methylene blue at the yellowshowstore.com. So seriously though, I didn't during the break, I said, you feeling should I feel the tingle? I do.
What are you feeling now?
Speaker 4: Well, it's kinda going up my arms. I feel it in my head and neck too. Like, when I'm talking, it seems like it's not really me talking. I can hear my talking and going, wow.
Speaker 3: You I agree. It's almost like an out of body experiment experience for somebody like what? That's how it's it's like, I didn't tell you that. It's like you're behind yourself.
Speaker 4: That is what it feels like. But my brain's going really fast, you know, because my brain sometimes it goes so fast that I can't get it
Speaker 3: out
Speaker 4: on
Speaker 3: Yeah. All it does is increase electrochemical activity in the mitochondria, but that's a big deal.
Speaker 4: No. I really like it. I'm gonna have to get on this stuff.
Speaker 3: Here, show her Kennedy taking it. Kennedy literally gobbles it.
Speaker 0: Unlimited power. Unlimited power.
Speaker 4: Am I gonna be like that?
Speaker 3: Well, I'm like that normally. So
Speaker 4: Yeah. You are like that normally.
@infowars - INFOWARS
Nuclear War Emergency Alert: White House Set To Announce Massive Bombing Campaign Inside Russia As Early As this weekend — Vladimir Putin Says This Will Officially Constitute A Declaration of War By The United States and NATO https://t.co/HEhqAnfK7a
@infowars - INFOWARS
@HarrisonHSmith @WitsitGetsIt Here is the full Flat Earth debate between @HarrisonHSmith & @WitsitGetsIt on InfoWars. https://t.co/fcFuhfsEuF
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, the host interviews Austin Whitsett, a flat earther, who explains his journey of researching and questioning the globe earth model. The discussion covers arguments based on observation, such as the spherical shape of the moon and the shadows it casts, as evidence for a round earth. Whitsett suggests alternative explanations and highlights the censorship and lack of evidence surrounding the globe earth model. The video also includes a debate between two individuals discussing various arguments for and against the flat earth theory, touching on topics such as the visibility of distant objects, the curvature of the earth, and the appearance of the sun during sunsets. The speakers present contrasting viewpoints on the shape of the earth, with one suggesting that atmospheric conditions and pollution can create the illusion of a curved surface, while the other argues for the round shape of celestial bodies observed through telescopes and the existence of gravity. The video concludes with a promotion for products and a request for prayers and support.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Alright. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the American Journal. I'm your host, Harrison Smith. My guest and opponent today is Austin Whitsett. He is a flat earther.
He's our guest today who's going to be debating on behalf of Flat Earth Theory. If you want to know more about Austin or Flat Earth Theory, you can follow him on x@witsitgetsit or by going to witsitgetsit dotcom. Austin Witsit, thank you for joining us. Welcome to the show.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, man. Thanks for having me on. How's it going, brother?
Speaker 0: Pretty good. And, so about a month ago, InfoWars Twitter account put out a question. Who do you wanna see Harrison Smith debate? And your name was by and, like, far and away the most popular response. Why is that?
Why is there this hunger, for the flat earth debate, but for you in particular, do you think?
Speaker 1: I think I think I've done pretty well in the debates, and typically, the opponents are not all that, worthy, humbly. It's just not typically as informed. So I think that especially with Infowars, there's a huge crossover. Right? They just wanna see the position accurately represented, on kind of the big stage if you were.
So I think that's probably more it is. I think a bunch of people think I'll I'll accurately represent what we, what we think.
Speaker 0: Well and and, obviously, there's been a lot of comments I've seen saying either this won't happen because Infowars is controlled or I don't know. All sorts of speculation about why Infowars doesn't cover, flat earth theory. But let me just ask you because we we got a little first 5 minute segment, and then we're gonna have 2 23, 25 minute segments, to to close out this hour. We're doing minimal commercial breaks here. We are on the radio, so we have to take some, but we're gonna take them minimally.
So in the first five minutes, I just wanted to introduce you and, sort of talk about the idea and everything. How did you get into Flat Earth in the first place?
Speaker 1: Yeah. So similar to what a lot of people say so you have you have the the side that says Infowars controlled opposition. They won't talk about Flat Earth, and then you have the side that says it's a CIA psyop used to distract people. I had a similar response. I, funny.
Actually, I heard about it through the rapper b o b. Right. So he was dropping the elements mixtapes, and, he was basically a 100% on point with all the conspiracy theories he was mentioning in the mixtapes. Right? Mhmm.
I had researched all of them. Then he said the earth was flat. And I was like, wow, bro. You just made me look ridiculous to everyone I was telling to listen to you. Right?
And then, like, similar to most people, I had the the initial reaction of what does that even mean. And then you start to just ask a 1,000 questions of, well, how would this work on flat Earth? Or how would that work? That doesn't even make sense to me. So then I just went to look up pictures of the earth from space.
I'm like, this is gonna be easy. I have millions of pictures. And, that was not the case. You know, this was 2015, and the last claimed picture to even be real at that time was 2 or 1972 for the Apollo missions. And needless to say, I was already very skeptical of the Apollo missions.
So, immediately, I thought, okay. Well, there may be something here, right, which there should be millions of real pictures. I should have live HD, live streams of the earth from space. So that's how it started, and then I kinda fell down the rabbit hole. And I think this is an important part of it all as well.
You'll instinctively just say, well, you know, how would, eclipses work? How does this work? How does that work? And if you can't find an answer, you think, oh, well, then it can't be flat. The actual way you have to go about it, and this is why all flat earthers exist is they went to disprove flat earth and more so they went to prove the globe.
And then when you look for the actual, you know, evidence that supports the claimed size of the globe, you've run into problems. Right? And so if if we falsify the globe, we don't really need to replace it or it remains true. So that's pretty much my, my, like, really succinct journey through this is I just went to look for evidence of the globe. I went into or I went and made observations myself.
It just didn't stack up. And needless to say, like, years later, it just gets worse and worse. And, you know, I can assure the audience, flat earth is going nowhere because of the lack of evidence. So, yeah, that's kind of my journey really quickly.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, it is interesting. And we'll we'll get into the actual debate portion here on the other side. It's sort of the first debate we've held, so it'll be interesting, but I, guarantee it'll be fun. Let me mention today's, debate is brought to you by Brain Force Ultra, infowarsstore.com.
Take your Brain Force Ultra, and we'll, hit the ground running on the other side. Stay with us short 60 second commercial break, and we'll be back with Austin Witsett to debate flat earth. Alright. Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen, to the great Flat Earth debate, myself and Austin Witsit. Austin Witsit can be found on x@witsitgetsitandhiswebsitewitsitgetsit dotcom, where he talks flat earth, as well as a number of other, conspiracies.
And so I figured the way that we would do this, I've seen other, you know, online debates do it where both sides will take about a 10 minute, opening statement to state their stances if you need all 10 minutes or not. And Austin and I talked during the break, and we've decided I'll go first, then Austin will get 10 minutes, to respond. That sound good?
Speaker 1: Sounds great.
Speaker 0: Alright. Okay. So, I'll just go ahead and begin. I wanna start with sort of 3 preconditions from my perspective, what I'm bringing into this debate. First of all, I do not care if people believe in flat earth.
I have absolutely no stake in the matter. I don't think people that believe in flat earth are stupid. I don't think that like, I understand the impulse. I understand the questioning of institutions. I get all of that.
I don't I don't discriminate against flat earth people. I just simply honestly don't think it's really worth discussing. But we are discussing it here, and and we'll get to why that is. But I don't care if you believe in flat earth. I don't judge people by that at all.
I have family and friends who believe in flat earth. I, respect them, tremendously. 2, I don't have any training, indoctrination. I barely have education in the matter. I have no loyalty to NASA or any other governmental organization whatsoever.
Just like all government organizations, NASA lies all the time. That doesn't mean the Earth is flat. But 3, in my position as a professional conspiracy theorist, I'm really incentivized to actually believe in flat earth, if anything. I know there's a huge and extremely supportive audience of flat earthers. And if I was, cynical and and greedy, I would pretend to support flat earth because I know that the the support that that could get me.
If anything, I'm sort of anti pandering here. I know about half my audience believes in flat earth, but I I simply don't. And, you know, it would really seem like it would be in line with my general position, which is questioning authorities and questioning the official story, but at the end of the day, I just sincerely don't believe it. So those are sort of my my preconditions. I don't have any training.
I'm not loyal to any, you know, science. I'm not a trust the science type of guy. I don't actually care if you believe in flat earth, and I'm really incentivized, if anything, to believe in flat earth, but I just don't. And so why I'm against the flat earth? Also so I can sort of divide into 3 parts.
1, I just genuinely do not think it's true. I researched flat earth. I'd heard about it like you. I had gone in going actually, I went saying I'm ready to be convinced. I've heard people think the Earth is flat.
I think that's awesome. Let me be convinced. I went in with a sincere willingness to be convinced. I found the arguments against the widely accepted heliocentric model to be entirely unconvincing. So I just don't think it's true.
2, I think these spiritual interpretations are, total nonsense. Regardless of the cosmic model, Earth, I believe, is a priceless jewel of unsurpassed galactic importance. I see God's handiwork in all of creation, including the divinely arranged solar system. If anything, I find the concept of flat earth completely out of step with the rest of creation, and I can explain that later. But 3, I think the overall discussion about flat earth is detrimental.
I'd almost go so far as to say toxic to the discussion that we have every day, which is about the lies told by government to keep us under control. I I actually in doing my research, I really came to the coo conclusion that if anything, flat earth is a, psyop, provided by the powers that be to distract, divide, and discredit the truth movement. So breaking down those three portions. Here's how I see it. There are natural phenomena that I can observe every day with my eyes that have no readily apparent explanation.
The sun, the moon, the stars, eclipses, sunsets, sunrises. These things are evident, but mysterious. I don't have an answer to them. Evidently, prima facie, you know, just from my own observation. So if somebody came to me and told me that we're standing on a stationary plane and that there's a dome above us that rotates at a continuous, you know, degree, and the moon and sun revolve around the earth, I would say that makes sense.
Yeah. That that comports with my observation. It certainly could be the case. But if somebody else came along and said, well, actually, the reason the sun looks like it's circling around us because the earth is spinning, and, you know, all the other, you know, aspects of the heliocentric model, I'd have to say, yeah. That also makes sense.
I can also picture that as being true. But then you have things like stars that don't behave like other stars, whatever you wanna call stars. The points of light, there are some that wander. Right? Planets.
It's where the term planet comes from. They seem to wander independently. Now if you assume the earth is at the center of these planets, you can actually map the paths. They're just sort of twirly, wiggly lines. But you can do it.
You can predict them, and you can actually track them and and measure it assuming that the Earth is the center. That does make sense. It's just you're gonna get sort of a different path for each planet that make different motions depending on the time of day. But then if you shift the center, the assumed center to the sun and you take a heliocentric model, all of these disseparate and seemingly random paths just go just shoot right in the middle. Suddenly, it's all very nice, clean, explicable, concentric circles.
That makes absolute sense. Obviously, these plants all seem to be affected by the same force, not completely different forces that give them different paths. They all actually take pretty much a similar path just in a concentric, circle model. So, basically, I've got 2 people in front of me. I'm you know, I just picture myself as like a goat herder in Greece 2000 years ago.
I just see this stuff, and I've got 2 people in front of me. One that's got an argument for, flat earth and the other that argues for the globe earth. And I know that, you know, in your in your argumentation, you like to present, the globe earth side as presenting a model. Therefore, it's making a positive claim. Therefore, it has the burden of proof.
But to me, these claims are equally burdened. I mean, they're both claiming to be able to explain what I'm seeing. Just because one side claims to be able to provide a model and the other side doesn't, doesn't mean that that second person, has no obligation to explain anything. I'm actually I'm looking for an explanation for these things, and one side can present it, the other side can't. So the tactic I've seen you take is sort of almost assume like, take the position as if it's a trial, like a criminal trial where the prosecutor has the burden of proof, and your job is to simply disprove or undermine or cause reasonable doubt in those claims.
Like, if NASA is the prosecutor and Flat Earth as the defendant. But that's not the case. I mean, I again, I see both of these, arguments having a burden of proof to some degree. But even if this was a criminal proceeding and that was the case, the reasonable doubt was the standard, I still would have to say guilty because the prosecution's case is airtight. You can nitpick at their evidence, but it's I've really seen nothing that undermines the core argument.
Right? So their story makes sense. It fits all of the evidence, and we can get into all of the evidence, for flat earth later, but there there isn't any. So that'll be an issue. And in the second part so that's that's the first part.
Just from my observation, what I'm seeing, looking for an answer, the heliocentric spinning earth round earth model fits everything that I see, explains it, to a to a very high degree. And even if there's, you know, little things I don't understand here or there, it doesn't do anything to make me think the whole model is fake. So that's just why I I don't buy the flat earth arguments. But the second part is the spiritual aspect to this. And and simply said, I do not believe that the shape of the earth has any spiritual importance whatsoever.
Flat earthers seem to ascribe extreme spiritual significance to the shape of earth. I do not. Whether the earth is flat or not, I feel the same way about God. In fact, I think the globe earth model comports more with my vision of God as it is a sweeping, majestic, minutely detailed, intricate, and perfect model just like most things in creation. A flat earth model to me is is childish and and simplistic in comparison.
Nothing else in creation that I can observe, you know, makes me feel like I'm, in God's celestial hamster cage that the firmament would represent. That being said, I know that this belief is essential to understanding the why of the conspiracy. Right? The idea that making people believe that we're on a planet spinning through earth makes people think we're less significant is therefore it's easy to sway people towards a materialistic understanding of, the Earth. I just I don't believe that in the first place, but, obviously, that would be the reason why the primary reason why they would want to keep the shape of the Earth secret if if that was the case.
So let's confront this, conspiracy because it would be a massive conspiracy necessary to uphold a lie of this magnitude. And it doesn't even make sense as a concept. Right? If you
Speaker 1: Harrison, you're under 1 minute.
Speaker 0: If you put yourself, in the position of people who are trying to keep this secret, there are, like, a million other ways you could do it. And I I only have been about a minute left, so I'll just, stream through these. Basically, the scale of the conspiracy necessary to keep this up would is too vast to be feasible. Millions of people have worked on space programs. Either they're all in it or there's some sort of parallel industry constantly the, people in the space industry.
Whether, you know, satellites or satellites or balloons, every image from space is, CGI, rocket launches fall into the ocean, just one of these would require thousands of people working for decades in absolute secrecy, and the payoff is what exactly? Possibly weaken people's faith? Yeah. I don't buy it. The scale of deception necessary is frankly too great, and the payoff is nonexistent.
The third part is the psyop, and we can get into this, a little bit. But, essentially, the only thing that gave me pause when researching flat earth was the fact that there are, like, fact checks, and that it is in fact censored. I, clearly, it is censored to some degree, not to as great a degree as other things. But I know we should all recognize at this point, the YouTube videos that have a little Wikipedia box under are probably worth paying attention to. So that gave me a little bit of pause.
But then again, just because something is censored doesn't mean it is therefore true. And we know things like Qanon are censored, but also entirely fraudulent. And to me, looking over the timeline, the growth of flat earth do not does not seem 10 seconds. Remotely organic. If you search news archives by years, there's no mention of flat earth at all pretty much until 2013 until Obama, of all people, brings up the Flat Earth Society.
And, yeah, this it seems like a, came out of nowhere. Nobody mentioned it before about 2013, and suddenly it's everywhere. It's the transgender movement of conspiracy theories. Nobody had ever heard of it a decade ago, but now comparison. About 25% of people, make it their entire personality.
So that's my feeling on flat earth. The floor is yours, Austin.
Speaker 1: Nice. So I'm just gonna try to address some of the meta things you mentioned here, because that was a similar approach I wanted to take you. We can get into the specifics in the open discussion. So like I said, I originally thought this must be a sign up, and it's used to discredit all the other conspiracy theories. Right?
But that actually is not the case. You know, actually, on the back of, Alex's book, right, or Tucker's book, it mentions Alex. It says, you know, he's super censored. Why would you have to do that if he's just wrong? He must be on to something.
They don't censor flat earth. There's an, as you accurately pointed out, they absolutely do, and not being kicked off Venmo, PayPal, Airbnb. We're talking about cosmology. As to why it's not as censored, there's no cover story. Right?
So with everything else, it's hate speech. It's dangerous, blah blah blah. It's dangerous medical misinformation that could hurt people. What what can you say about Flat Earth? Really nothing.
Right? So there's no even cover story to actually, censor it, completely. So what do they do? They shadow ban it, which is arguably worse because when Alex Jones gets kicked off everything, everyone wants to know why. When you're still on on YouTube, people think, oh, you're not censored, and then they can't find you.
Like, if you search Flat Earth, you get nothing but hit pieces. So it did absolutely explode. Obviously, the conversation would be, is it organic or not? But like you said, they pointed to the Flat Earth Society, which is specifically crafted misinformation. So that's, like, probably the strongest piece of evidence on off the rip against the psyop narrative is when I looked into it, the all the information that was presented to me as Flat Earth is not what Flat Earth actually was.
It it turns out it's totally different. It makes the, position asinine, and it's not actually what they think. And so that's exactly what you would do if you're discrediting the truth. And as to the compare comparison to, say, QAnon, we we know QAnon had a lot of truth in it. The reason QAnon worked was because it had a lot of truth.
And so, basically, it was don't get to these truths. If you're going to, we're going to round you up and guide how you interpret those truths, similar to Operation Trust. Right? And just sit on your hands. Don't do anything.
So if it's a psyop, it hasn't worked very well because every single flat earther saw through the pandemic immediately. Every single flat earther, protects their children from the onslaught of propaganda, probably the highest percentage of homeschooling, you know, in the world. It would be flattered. There's, so as to it mattering or not, I'll I'll I'll touch on that. You did mention that it does have spiritual implications in our opinion, and and you articulated disagreement.
But, it's pretty undeniable. So so the conversation really comes down to 2 primary points. And is it is the earth moving? Is the earth a sphere? Those are the 2 two primary things, and they're technically independent of each other.
Right? So the earth could be stationary in the sphere in theory. And when you first go down that rabbit hole, it gets very, very interesting. To mention a few things, right, you obviously have the idea of geocentrism as you mentioned. You mentioned the little squiggly lines.
Well, it actually is just spiral spiraling within a tourist field. It's exactly the flower of life geometry, which we see all the way from the small scale to the big scale. We would actually expect the macro scale to fall within the flower of life because everything does, including the quantum scale. But it's called the Copernican principle. That's really, like, the foundation of this.
Right? It's the idea that the earth does not occupy a special or unique position. So I certainly agree with you, bro, that looking at the current model would require a creator. This place requires a creator regardless. Actually, the first and second law of thermodynamics show you that naturalism is, insufficient, and you must invoke supernatural creator.
For the sun and the moon to coincidentally be the same size in the sky, but, actually, the sun's 400 times bigger, just coincidentally 400 times further away, How is that not, you know, requiring an intelligent designer? But at the same time, it isn't really about someone could say, well, I already believe in god. Well, yeah, but a lot of people don't. And atheism is the the number one growing ideology, if you can even call it that, which results in nihilism and apathy and makes for perfect enslavement. So this is, incredibly important.
And when you when you look into the motion part, we were 1 100% undeniably lied to and misled about that situation. We're told that we know the solar system's a fact, and it's been proven the earth moves around the sun. But in reality, you can look at Stephen Hawking, Edwin Hubble, Albert Einstein, Arthur Eddington, every major prominent astrophysicist or astronomer in history, and they will tell you, we can never disprove that the earth's in the center. Can't actually prove that the earth is moving. It's equally viable or more viable.
We prefer to not go that route because, Stephen Hawking said on grounds of modesty. And Edwin Hubble called it horrific and intolerable, a special and unique position. That's a philosophical decision that they made for the world and then misled the world about what it actually was. So that's important. And, we can obviously get into the specifics.
You can 100% prove the earth is not moving. It was done in 18/87 with the Michelson Morley, and it's been replicated many times since then. And what happened was they brought in Albert Einstein, flipped physics all on its head to keep the earth moving around the sun. And that's why all physics at a standstill now because as they they threw out the electrical field theory understanding of a background medium or what is called the ether. They kept the earth moving through space, and now we have, you know, this compartmentalization of physics that doesn't all work together.
So, to not overload everyone, my point there is that's one major part of it. Yeah. If the earth is in the center of the universe, it had to be created. And I get you could argue that it would have to be created either anyway, but you have a much stronger, illusory position of confidence when you say, oh, well, the universe is so big. The earth is this tiny speck of dust and this ever expanding universe.
And just based on mere chances and probability, the earth could exist and be habitable. Right? And that is the type of thinking that leads people to the idea that, well, no. This this place wasn't created. It was just random chance.
And that it's literally the Copernican principle ideology, which is that the earth does not occupy a special or unique position. So if there is in the center of the universe, obviously, someone had to put it there. It's the most special, unique position. There is nothing like it. That means that us humans who have domain on the earth are obviously very special as well.
It people do not believe, quote quote, unquote, believe in Flat Earth. They stopped believing in the globe, and they then realized, oh, wow. This has spiritual implications. People do not go and seek out Flat Earth because they want the bible to be literally true or something. It's it's quite the opposite.
People find out that the scriptures are now viable again. And so then it also comes into, curvature. Right? And then and so that's the 2 major things, and we falsified Every single part of the Global Earth model took 100 of years to theoretically patch Every single part of the global earth model took 100 of years to theoretically patch together, and it doesn't work. From the core all the way to the the the universe, none of it work.
It's not even close. And that's why you have dark matter and dark energy making up 96% of the universe. And, it's just an illusion that we're in the center because everything's accelerating away from each other. All these crazy theories where if you just have the Earth in the center, you don't need any of that, and it matches all astronomical observations. You don't have to claim that everything is an illusion.
So why were we not told that? That should be a very interesting question for the audience. You were lied to about cosmology, like, just on its face. Even if you wanna believe we're moving through space and stuff. So, and then the curvature, obviously, if the radius value is falsified, the entire model is falsified.
Right? Because gravity uses that, day night cycle uses that, Everything uses that alleged radius of orbit to go to space. All of these claims require that radius value be true. The distance is on the globe. So if it's untrue, the entire model is untrue.
So so that's a still man of our position is that we went to look for evidence of the globe, and it wasn't there. And falsification is independent of replacement. And I and I'll I'll I'll say this analogy. Maybe it'll land. It's if I went and looked through my parents' closet and I found adoption papers, you know, and I'm like, walk up to you and say, dude, Harrison, you'll never believe it, man.
My whole life is a lie, bro. Those aren't really my parents. I was adopted. And you say, well, who are your real parents then? I said, I don't know.
I just found out that they're not my real parents. I I I just falsified they're my parents. I don't really know who the Rowans are. You could say, wait. You think everyone in town's in on it?
Everyone in the church is in in on it? No. No. They believe the lie. They believe that those are my parents.
And if you said, well, until you can tell me who your real parents are, I'm not gonna believe that those aren't your real parents. That would be ridiculous. Right? Obviously, the falsification that they're my parents stands on its own. That's the way that this situation goes.
Frankly and respectfully, I would say it's somewhat coping. Do not focus on that. Focus on the evidence or lack thereof for the positive globe earth claim, which is antithetical to all evidence and experience, and then focus on random questions like the meme says, oh, how does everything in the universe work? Oh, you don't know? Well, checkmate, stupid flirt.
Right? If you've ever seen that meme, that that isn't a proper way to go about it. So that's kind of a lot a lot of the meta arguments there. I don't, I don't really see this being a successful SIOP. I think that, it's done quite the opposite, and people should just step back and kind of, look at the evidence for what it is.
And that's what I encourage people to do. And just like you said, I will say, just like with everything else, like with the pandemic, we got gaslit the whole time. Oh, you science denier this. Science denier that. Oh, you know, you have no idea we're talking about.
Trust the experts. And, of course, it was all a lie. It was all a lie. So ridiculing people, mocking people, dismissing them as a dismissing as a SIOP and stuff is not a pro approach we should take as truth. Right?
We never do that. So long story short, when you look into the actual alleged claim that the Earth is a spinning globe, which again is antithetical to experience. So so you're saying, well, I think you have, the burden of proof as well. I agree. If we say that the earth is flat and stationary, that has a burden.
And it's substantiated with every observation and all day experience that we have. You you everyone experiences the Earth is stationary. Everyone experiences that the stuff in the sky moves in relation to the Earth not moving. We fly planes like the Earth is flat and stationary. We build bridges, runways, railways, all engineering as if the Earth is flat.
Everything that we do is is if this Earth is stationary and flat. The horizon, I mean, it comes from the word horizontal. So the default empirical position is that the earth is flat and stationary and that the sun and the stars and the moon, they move over top of us. There's a claim that comes in and says, well, that's actually an illusion. Right?
And everything is back. So that would have the burden of proof and that's the line of logic for that. Alright. And with that, that is your time, and we are headed to break, guys.
Speaker 0: Alright. Fascinating stuff. We'll do open discussion on the other side. If you got any videos or anything we wanna we wanna play, we'll, we'll get into it on the other side. Stay with us, folks.
Go to infowarsstore.com to support this important Alright. Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen. We're skipping the next commercial break. So we got a solid 25 minutes to, do open discussion with myself and Austin Witsit. Again, you can follow Austin, at witzitgetsit on Twitter and witzitgetsit.com.
I lost my paper that says it, but that's right. Right? Wait. Yeah. At which it gets it.
Okay. So, yeah. Open to open discussion time. Obviously, we both, brought a bunch of stuff in our opening statements. I guess to me, again, I'd every debate I've watched from Flat Earth sorta has the same paradigm, the same dynamic.
It's somebody like yourself that's arguing for flat earth, and then there's, like, the Bill Nye, the science guy, Neil deGrasse Tyson wannabe. And, frankly, I don't like I don't really care about the scientific arguments as much when it comes to whether experiments are valid or whether the physics checks out. I I really do just go down to, like, basic observation and logic and what would be necessary to cover this sort sort of thing up, and we can get into the SIOP aspect in just a little bit. But, like, the moon is a sphere. Right?
Can we agree on that? Because, I mean, to me, it's it's pretty undeniable. The moon is in fact a sphere that we can all see. Do you agree with that?
Speaker 1: Well, I've never seen the other side of the moon, but it I would agree that it looks somewhat spherical. Sure.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: But, you know, I've I've replicated a moon, like, with the polarization where it looks like a sphere. And you can walk over there and put your hand right through it. Right? The project it's a projection. Just with electromagnetic polarization in the Atmos, you could have a I don't know what the moon is, but I would agree.
Yeah. It does. It's certainly round and looks like it could be a sphere. I've never seen the other side of it before. So I can't say I know it's a sphere right Once we did, we either one side.
Speaker 0: But the shadows on the moon certainly make it look like a sphere. Right? I mean, unless you have another explanation for why the shadow moves the way it does across the the moon. I mean, it's it's it basically has to be a sphere. Right?
I mean, are you saying that the moon is a projection, or do you think it's a physical object?
Speaker 1: I don't know what the what the moon is. I'm just saying I'm not like, a lot of evidences suggest that it's not particularly solid, actually. Like, there are even the astral astronomical society said that they've seen stars through the moon. There are things called lunar waves. The terminator line, sometimes there will be things lit up on the other side of the terminator line, right, which which shouldn't be happening if it is a solid sphere with the actual shadow.
I don't even claim to know that that is, quote, unquote, a shadow. We can replicate that with polarized lenses. It can just literally be like a plasma polarized lens, and it could be solid for I know and just be optically displaced within a medium. Both models, I think, is when you start hearing the stuff you've never heard, it sounds like I'm just reaching, making stuff up. But no.
But both models claim that the sun and the moon aren't actually where we see them. Right? That they're apparent positions. So that's interesting to know. It could be a solid sphere and just not where we see it.
It'd be relative to each observer, based on their angle to it. So this is what I I will say that it is actually kind of a meme. Normally, people do wanna like, what's the moon? I don't know, man. I just know that the Earth is not what they said.
You know, I want can I ask you a question? Like, you're like you said you're just kind of into observation. Right? That's what made me a flat earther, bro. Mhmm.
Because I did not wanna be a flat earther. Okay. Let's just get that out. Like, it discredited everything I ever said. Right?
I'm like the conspiracy theorist of my family. So, like, all of a sudden, I'm gonna come around saying the most ridiculous thing ever. I'm immediately discredited. So I I went out and looked, though, bro. I you can see mountains from 300 miles away.
They should be 2, 3 miles below earth curvature, and you can see them.
Speaker 0: Well, we'll we'll talk about, curvature here in just a second. But, you know, again, it seems to me like you can see the moon, and it's pretty clear what it is. It's a rocky body. It's solid. You can see the craters.
I mean, powerful telescopes or even, you know, powerful cameras can zoom in quite a bit, and, it's not a projection. It it seems fairly solid to me. So, you know, to me, this is, you know, obviously, just because the moon is a sphere, doesn't mean the earth is a sphere. And I know the argument, that I've heard quite a bit is like, just because pool balls are circular, doesn't mean the pool table is circular. Yeah.
That's true. Just because the moon is a sphere does not mean that the earth is a sphere, but it might kinda be like a hint. Right? It might kinda be a clue, and it and it sort of means that if you use terms, that I've heard where it's like this this cartoon Earth of this you know, some idea of a orb suspended and nothing. It's like, well, that's not actually that ridiculous because we we literally see one every day.
I I think the shadows obviously, show that that it's a sphere. And then you have things like the eclipse, and, you know, you brought up the fact that the sun is 400 times the size of the moon, but 400 times away. So it's, you know, a perfect match. And, yeah, I mean, that whether the sun is is 400 times or 200 times, whatever the actual multiplication is, The fact is that with solar eclipses, you can see that the moon is clearly in front of the sun, and yet they're the same size. So whatever that, you know, calculus is, it is the distance is equal to the size difference.
You know, you you know what I'm saying? So, obviously, the sun is behind the moon. The moon is an object that is, apparently equivalent in size of the sun because of our distance from it and the perspective of it. And, again, that sort of I mean, once you if you accept that, if you accept that the moon is a sphere that's above the earth, everything else kind of follows. I mean, I really think that debunks a lot of flat earth.
I mean because then, obviously, the moon has to go away for a certain period of time. It matches up with the spinning of the earth. I mean, if the moon is a sphere and is a solid object that's floating above the earth and and circling around it, I mean, that seems to me like it doesn't necessarily prove that we are circling around the sun, but it certainly proves that the earth is a sphere and the moon is circling around us. Right? But to me, again, that's just, imminently observable.
Speaker 1: Like I said, it could be a sphere. It does somewhat look like a sphere. I will just say, stars have been seen through the moon, it appears. I think that reality is way more mind blowing than we know, And, people think they have answers to everything, but really when you look under the hood, there are answers for everything. But if if we kinda talk about that if we use, like, Occam's razor that which requires the least amount of assumptions is most likely to be true.
Doesn't mean it is true. But we see the sun and the moon appear to be the same size, and we have a a night light and a daylight. And they they're the same exact size in in such an extent that we can get perfect total solar eclipses. And they claim that that is just a coincidence based on, the way that Mars sized body hit the earth and broke it up, and a little piece of debris stuck around the earth and then gravity coalesced into a sphere that stopped around 238,000 miles away. Just coincidentally, the size of that rock matches up with the size of the sun optically even though it's 400 times smaller, than it is.
But that but I mean but but just say, obviously. That is the case.
Speaker 0: Right? I mean, it it is the same size prospectively as the sun, but, clearly, it's on the same plane as the sun since it passes in front of it. So whatever that differential is, it has to be I mean, that that is accurate.
Speaker 1: Right? Sure. But if it was just barely behind it, it would look like the same size. So they could be very similar distances in the same size. Right?
Speaker 0: Well, no. They I mean, they'd have to be a little bit because they are exactly the same size and different. And, again, I don't think that just because the moon is a sphere, that means that I trust that they understand how it was created or, I mean, I I you know, the moon could be hollow for all we know. The whole, like, it rang like a bell when they crash something into it. I mean, there there have been a lot of stories.
I don't think we know everything about the moon's entire life cycle, but I do think it's a sphere in the sky, which, you know, would hint that there are other spheres in the sky. It would hint that that's a possibility. It it would make me question why the moon doesn't fall when everything else falls to earth because of gravity. You know, it would it would hint that either it's not affected by the force of gravity or it's being affected in a different way, which to me explains, orbit, pretty pretty well, pretty succinctly. I I wanna show a couple video a couple images here because this again sort of illustrates to me that not only is the moon a sphere, but it's being lit by a light source that is extremely far away.
We can go to some of the pictures, called ball and moon. And there are a couple of these, but you can do it yourself. If you see the the moon during the daytime and you hold a ball up, they have essentially the same shadow It'll be cast on the ball as the moon because they're both being lit by the same source, which would be the sun, which would be extremely far away. So, how would this happen without an extremely far away sun lighting both the ball and the moon?
Speaker 1: Well, for 1, they actually don't look entirely the same. Right? You actually see that there's a gradient of light on a sphere. Similar though. They they are somewhat similar.
Yes. That's how we made the model. Right? We looked at the sky and then we created the model over 100 of years. So, of course, it matches the sky.
It's how we made it, global Earth model. But, I'm not there could be a relationship between it being lit up, or there are many theories about it. You know, like, everything is could have an electromagnetic relationship. It could be charging up. It could, all be within the same energetic cycle above us or whatever.
I'm not even saying that they don't have a relationship. Many people have tried to, you know, measure the the moonlight and say it isn't high, and there's all debate about that and stuff. But this is kind of this is kind of what I was talking about, though. Like, I get that this is probably even a good faith genuine question. That's how I you you wanna know how everything works.
And since we've been given all these alleged answers as to how it works, we think, well, Flatter has to replace everything I was told is true, but not really. We see a star through the moon. What they said can't be true. Like, we just saw that this this the moon looks blue during the day. And then they we showed up we we showed a picture we showed a picture of the Earth from the moon, which was NASA came out and admitted they photoshopped one of those pictures and didn't tell the public about it.
Right? Just a second ago, that was shown. So I guess what I'm saying is the if do you agree that if the radius of the globe is falsified, everything else is falsified. So as to a question like, how would the moon work on a flat Earth? I don't know, but it is because we measure the surface of the earth.
I think that that is the most important part. And I I wanna say this one more thing. When it comes to you, you're right. It's like you can't look at the ceiling and say that's what the floor is. Right?
Mhmm.
Speaker 0: It's
Speaker 1: even more than that. It's if the earth is in the center of the entire universe, it would be illogical to think that it's like everything else. It's the only thing that's in the middle. Everything else was created to move around it. Right?
So that's an important distinction there, and most people don't point out. It would be illogical to say the earth should be like what's in the sky when everything in the sky moves around the earth. The earth is distinctly different. Right?
Speaker 0: Well so yeah. But again, we're we're dealing with, 2 two forms of reality, the the perception and the actual. Right? So it looks like everything's circling around us, but that would also be the case if we were spinning. It would look like everything was circling around us.
That would mean it was circling around us. So it it it again, it doesn't seem to me like, there's any evidence that earth is the center. I I mean, what about the mapping of planets? Because I know one of the things, again, we have an image of this motion of solar system planets relative to Earth. So, basically, this would be the, orbital path that the other planets would take, Mars, Venus, you know, all these other planets.
If Earth is assumed to be the center and they're they're like, you know, spirals, they're like they they move around a lot. And if the crew can pull up that picture, motion of solar system, I can pull it up on my screen. So, you know, how do you explain these paths in this motion, without, you know, a force acting on the planets other than gravity? I mean, how do you have a planet going towards and away from us if if they're circling around us?
Speaker 1: Well, there is a force. Automatically, there's some type of force. Right? Because everything's moving around. Mhmm.
If you look at a Farrell cell image of a magnetic field, so it's just a creative invention that was made, used, 2 little pieces of glass. You put a Farrell fluid and another fluid inside of it, line it with LED lights, and you can see the magnetic field.
Speaker 0: Right.
Speaker 1: It makes that exact same pattern. The torus field, sacred geometry, the golden ratio. At torus field, every one of those planets pass perfectly within a Taurus field. And, of course, the heliocentric side's explanation for this is it's just a coincidence, which is pretty ridiculous
Speaker 0: Well, how can
Speaker 1: because we see the same we see the same geometry everywhere.
Speaker 0: But but how can, it match perfectly when each planet is a different path? I mean, they can't all match perfectly because they don't match each other.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But within the tourist field, there are multiple different, paths. Right? So if you look at a crystal image, and I could maybe pull it up, but you look at a magnetic field, you're gonna see that all of those patterns are in there individually. And, basically, each one of these, quote, unquote, planets are taking their own path within this forest field.
They all fit within it perfectly. And and you said that there you don't see any evidence that the earth is in the center. You are aware that the current model says you could never prove that the earth is not in the center and that all astronomical observations make it appear as if the earth is in the center of the universe, but that that's just an illusion.
Speaker 0: Well, it's it's it's illusion because it's illusion because we're on earth, and this is our only platform from which to observe space.
Speaker 1: Sure. And it gets a little bit more complex than that though because even, like, the distant galaxies moved in relation to the Earth. Right? And so then that's when Edwin Hubble was like, wait a minute. This doesn't make sense.
And they had to say the whole universe is accelerating and expanding in all directions, create that illusion. Then they're like, wait. What causes that to happen though? There has to be some type of energy that would make it expand faster than the speed of light, and that's where you get dark energy, which which is is never been discovered, defined. It'll never be found, and and you have dark matter to fix the gravity problems.
I will actually say, yeah, you can use a Lorentz magnetic force to not get too technical, but, it's it's pretty funny that you can show what's called a dynamic equivalence, meaning the way that the force makes objects move around each other from a geocentric universe. And, it's a magnetic Lorentzian force. And what a coincidence the patterns of the planets fit perfectly within a magnetic field's geometry. So And more elegant, actually.
Speaker 0: Okay. But the but none of that actually explains what the the force is moving it or or how it's set on this path. And the other thing is that you would also get paths that match up to this if you were to take a Mars centric model and plot the movement of the planets as if Mars was the center. You would get the same patterns. I mean, it's like one of those little toys with that has the gear, and you put the pencil in and spin the gear around, and it creates the pattern.
It doesn't matter which hole you put it in. It creates a similar pattern that will will have, will look on the face of it similar to, like, the Taurus field or the the magnetic field. But that would be true if you plotted the, motion of the Earth relative to Venus or Mars or Jupiter or any other planet. Earth is not the only one that plotting the rest of the planets creates this, this design. So that that that again is not evidence that Earth is in the center.
It's just it's actually it's evidence that Earth is on the circular path that all the other planets are on because that's what matches perfectly.
Speaker 1: Well, it's not just about the path. It's about distant galaxies. Right? So you're right. You can you can match it on any planet or whatever, and you could treat it as if it's in the center.
Certainly with relativity, it says it's all equally valid. You can choose anything as the center. But this is a little different than that. They looked out into deep space, quote, unquote, and saw the galaxies moved in relation to the Earth. They should not have been.
In this model, the Earth is tucked away in an insignificant corner of the universe. It is a random, you nonunique position. Everything should be moving every which direction in relation to, say, the singularity of the big bang or whatever people believe in, not the earth, but they discovered it was. So it's not as simple as just I can put the coordinate system anywhere. It's that the universe has to be accelerating and expanding away from every other point.
There is no center, and everything just makes the earth look like it's in the center. Although you could map it out both ways, but that's not the the proof, first of all, it's on its face. All observations show the earth in the center. So to say it's not in the center, you're gonna have to prove that. Then we went and looked further and even the distant galaxy show that.
Speaker 0: But, I mean, there is the the heliocentric model that maps everything and and explains everything really well, and you can make predictions based on it that are proven out in observations. So, you know, to say that that everything centers around the earth, obviously, the heliocentric model is not centered on the earth, and that's on a very small scale. And you could say the whole solar system revolves around or the whole, you know, universe revolves around the Earth, but at least in our solar system, it makes a lot more sense that things circle around the sun. I mean, the math, it makes a lot more sense in that regard.
Speaker 1: If you assume that the sun is 93,000,000 miles away and this huge ball of gas Right. In a back if you assume the size of it and then you assume gravity, which is that, you know, the bigger the mass, the more gravitational pull, which isn't even considered a pull or force anymore because that doesn't work. But that's actually not true either. The Heelstinck model doesn't work. I mean, this this is why we have dark matter.
It doesn't work because this is this is why we have dark matter
Speaker 0: in night. There are certain there are certain aspects of it that, you know, we haven't figured out yet, but every but the stuff we have figured out, works extremely well. Right?
Speaker 1: No. No. No. No. In 1933, a guy named Fritz Zwicky went and looked at galaxies, and he saw that this HOMA cluster, so a cluster of galaxies, it was off by 99% the amount of mass it was supposed to have for gravity to be true.
And so they just said, oh, well, just plug in a number for missing mass. Now they call that missing mass dark matter, and it's still there. And it makes up 83% of the entire universe. It's this model isn't even close to working. Gravity is off by 83%.
Like, how how bad does your theory have to be before it's considered wrong?
Speaker 0: Well, you know, my theory actually, you know, has the possibility of distant galaxies. Where are the distant galaxies in the firmament? I mean, how can you even make this argument if space doesn't exist? Does space matter?
Speaker 1: No. No. Outer space as defined, right, doesn't exist. But just like Edwin Hubble said, everything could be much more local, and it the medium could be much more dense. And then he said, and might I add suspiciously young.
Do they have a bias against this because it creates special position for the earth, and it makes the universe younger. It makes it a closed system, and it means everything's moving around it. And they will tell you in all their literature that it's just a philosophical bias. They they don't want to believe that, and that's not a straw man. That's what they say.
Right? They straight stand up straight. You can never disprove the earth in the center. But the the best way to do it is is to if the Earth is moving around the sun, 66,600 miles per hour conveniently enough, you should be able to measure that. Right?
And we we have interferometry that was supposed to measure it, and it did not. And we've done it since then. The Earth is not moving. It's been falsified. So Einstein came in and said, oh, well, the device you were using to measure actually shrank.
You just couldn't tell. And then time slowed down and created the illusion that we are stationary and you can't measure us moving. That's mainstream claim is that the ruler shrink effectively. You just can't tell, and time slowed down. It just appears to be the same time to you.
Right.
Speaker 0: And
Speaker 1: therefore, you could never prove that the earth is moving or, of course, just the earth isn't moving and all observations showing us what's really happening.
Speaker 0: Right?
Speaker 1: Well and and Okay. We weren't told any of this.
Speaker 0: But then that that would mean that, if the Earth's not moving, then the the stars are moving. The sun is circling around us, again. So I I get so we have a firmament dome, around a flat earth. I I mean, what I mean, you don't you don't have you don't actually have a model. Right?
So, what is your conception of what earth I mean, again, my conception of earth is is not exactly super scientific. Like, I don't know all of the details of it, but it makes perfect sense. Earth is spinning, tilted axis, moon orbiting us. We orbit the sun. Other planets also orbiting.
So I mean, all that makes perfect sense. Do you have any semblance of a model for flat earth at all?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Sure. So it's a torus field. Just a torus field, and that explains pretty much everything. I I could pull up an image.
I don't know if that's possible, but Yeah. A ferrocell image of a torus field will show you can just Google Ferro cell image magnetic field. You'll see a bunch of them. It's just a torus field. And, there's a vortex in the middle.
And what a coincidence, you take the magnetic flux out of the earth, you put it on a flat earth map, and you get a perfect vortex around the center. You take the planets, and you fit them within the force field. It's perfect. So and, of course, they claim claim
Speaker 0: It's it's not perfect. I mean, you you can bring up the image, but it it doesn't match perfectly. It it generally looks somewhat like it, but because magnetic fields, you know, visualized, match the magnetic field of earth? I mean, that's not even, so, yeah, I mean, is this your model or I mean, that's that earth is round, so that can't be it. Right?
Speaker 1: No. No. This is this is well, this is a flat earth. Ironically, this is actually the ISS trajectory on the left. This this right here in the and this is a feral cell image of a magnetic field.
All of these patterns fit perfectly within that. And then there's also this. This is the magnetic flux data of the the magnetic film in the earth that all fits perfectly within what we see in a a magnetic field. Then this is called a a block domain wall. It's a it's a plane.
Speaker 0: Well, are you because right through the middle, we live on that. I'm not sorry. I'm just not seeing the images that, you're pulling up. So if we can, if you if you can share your screen, I I just, wanna make sure we know what you're talking about exactly.
Speaker 1: Sorry. Yeah. I I am sharing screen on Skype right now, but I don't know if you can see it.
Speaker 0: We'll we'll figure that out. We we have about we have about, 2 minutes to break, but we'll work that out with the, with the crew, during the break here. But what about so and I I got some more images, I wanna show you. Again, I I don't I I really just don't think that saying earth is a torus field, I mean, that's not a physical description of where we are or how the world is composed or the universe is composed. I mean, is there a firmament?
What is underneath us? Are we on a flat plane? Is there a map you can present to me, that that makes any sense at all? What is Antarctica an ice wall, or is it a continent that exists? I mean, what is the actual argument saying that it's a it's a magnetic or torus field is not that's not actually a a physical description of where we are?
Speaker 1: Well, shouldn't we apply the same logic that we do with everything else that we look into as truthers? Do do like, basically, the our critique is that we're not a cult of thought. Right? We all think for ourselves, and we're all trying to figure out what's going on. And there was a cultish belief system presented to us that you're not allowed to question without being ridiculed.
Right? But, like, what's beneath this? I don't know what's beneath you on the globe. The deepest hole ever dung is 7.8 miles. No one knows what's below 8 miles.
No one. And the globe model admittedly can't even explain it mathematically within their model with supercomputers. And, well, what is Antarctica? You can't freely and privately explore past the sixtieth south latitude. We effectively live in a real life hunger games.
Like, that's a real thing. Whether you think there's a globe or not, you can't freely and privately go out there. And then that's based on what our government did. In 1946, they brought the they we have the Nazis over in 45, Operation Paperclip. 46, Operation Highjump.
We went to Antarctica. And then we consider considered, Antarctica our number one focus.
Speaker 0: And then all of a sudden We'll be right back. We'll pick it up with Antarctica on the other side. Austin Witsett, the debate continues in the next hour. Stay with us. Alright.
Welcome back, folks. Again, we are on radio. This is a radio broadcast on terrestrial terrestrial radio. However that works, we we don't know. We're not sure.
But it somehow, we're broadcasting worldwide, flatter globe. So we do have to be take certain commercial breaks. This will be a short segment, then a 60 second break, and we'll be back for 2 more big chunks. We're just gonna, dedicate this whole hour to continuing this conversation because clearly, we've barely scratched the surface. Antarctica.
I think there's a lot of suspicious stuff about Antarctica. I think that there could be major military operations. There could be lost civilizations. There could be, fertile land, right, on underneath the ice with, gas gaseous air pockets that preserve heat. There have been stories like that.
I've read the accounts of of admiral Byrd and and operation high jump. Right? I I get all of that stuff, but it ain't an ice wall. I mean, it does exist. And, you know, if it was me and I was trying to keep some sort of military operations, some sort of breakaway civilization secret, it would be the greatest gift in the world to have, a bunch of my worst enemies, the truthers and conspiracy theorists out there, thinking that, it it doesn't exist at all.
That the idea of Antarctica isn't even real. And, I mean, the map doesn't make any sense. I mean, just how do you comport this with the with everything else? I mean, there's a yacht race around Antarctica. Right?
People have circumnavigated Antarctica. It it didn't take them as long as it would have taken them to go on the outside ring of a flat earth. So, again, if you're saying Antarctica, doesn't exist or is an ice wall or something, I mean, that alone sort of paints a picture of a model because you have to have a ice wall around the outside and the earth in the center. So is that the model that you're, going with for flat earth?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, I'm certainly open to that model. I I think, again, the whole thing is attaching from making up claims you can't verify just because a bunch of people gave you claims that we can't verify, and so we need to replace them. But, yes, it could be. It's it's known to be the highest elevation in the world.
Just look up pictures of it. There is certainly what you could call a wall of ice, owning the water in, can't fall off the edge of the lake. There are stories of extra land beyond that. Actually, Emerald Bird even seem to imply that, but there could be more land. And when it comes to the yacht race allegedly around Antarctica, it could just look a little deeper, and what you will see is that these boats have a top speed.
It's a race. They do the same a similar race with the same boats in the north. And if you compare the top speeds, it's a joke. In the south, their their top speeds in a race are way slower.
Speaker 0: Right. But it would make
Speaker 1: sense if it would make sense if they're actually traveling further than they think they are.
Speaker 0: No. No. There's And
Speaker 1: then they're they're
Speaker 0: No. They're sailboats, and they and the and the wind patterns dictate it. So in places where there's high wind pattern you know, there's, like, northern trades, the southern trades, like, wind generally sticks to suit. Because of the spinning because of the spinning of the earth, unfortunately, the the, weather weather patterns are fairly predictable, and the and there's not a strong wind that pushes you around Antarctica unlike other places where they hold boat races.
Speaker 1: So Antarctica is known to be the the the windiest place on the earth, and and the southern jet streams are actually significantly stronger. You Google what's the what's the what place has the strongest winds on earth, it will be Antarctica. And I think they have the pictures ready as well if you don't mind if we pop it up just so people can see what I was saying. Yeah. So if you look here, you're gonna see that that is a Farrell cell image of a magnetic field, that orange picture.
And if you take the planets, they all fit right within that in little different portions of it. And, that they literally do. I've actually overlaid them and transitioned them. They all fit perfectly within a frail cell image. And then the other image is gonna show you the magnetic flux data on the Earth on a plane, which conveniently once the they actually took this off the main website.
They took the azimuthal projection off once people found it, and we had to make our own. It's a perfect torus. It's a vortex just like in the magnetic field. And then that white line through the the middle of that bottom right picture there is called a block domain wall. It's a plane.
Meaning, we do live in a tourist field even in the globe model. They have to admit this. Right? And there's always a plane through the center of it, And that's where you reside is on the plane. We can't go beneath that.
Right? And neither can anyone that believes in the globe. So just to clarify that not to necessarily bring it back, but, it perfectly explains where we are, explains containment. It explains the motions, a Lorentz magnetic force. And it's all way, way more viable than the other model.
Like, just the fact that
Speaker 0: Not really. We'll we'll be back in about 60 seconds. We'll continue this conversation. We'll we'll overlay those pictures and see if they match. I don't know what the crew's up to.
They're getting creative with us. In the world of unfettered discourse, a stirring debate is on the horizon. The age old question of the Earth's shapes, surface, and the challenging cosmos of conventional thought. I can't read this quick quickly. As the galaxy watches, these two formidable forces clash under the watchful eyes of 1,000,000, seeking to uncover the truth that is shrouded in mystery.
Yes, folks. This is the Star War, it's American Journal. Info wars.comband.video. I'm your host Harrison Smith. My guest is Austin Witsit.
Witsit gets it on x@witsitgetsit, and his site witzitgetsit.com. And of course, he's he's he's done this debate many times. This is my first to go, but I've I've watched many of your debates. And some are in I have to tell you, some are infuriating, some are extremely entertaining. And, I I'm always I'm always torn in the middle because the flat earth people, I always like more personally, but I just I just don't think they're right.
I'm torn by this. But let's let's talk about some of the other issues that I see constantly brought up, like some of the main arguments, for flat earth in favor of flat earth. Things like the curvature, seeing over the horizon, air next to a vacuum. I mean, these things, I I see brought up over and over, but they really don't seem that complicated to me. For example, being able to see over the horizon.
I I think you brought that up in your opening. The issue is not that you can occasionally see in in certain circumstances and and under certain conditions, you can see farther than maybe mathematically, geometrically using platonic solids you should seemingly be able to see. That's not the issue that you have occasional times where you can see farther than you think you should be able to. The issue is that if the Earth was flat, you should always be able to see significantly farther than we can. I mean, how is it that on a flat earth model, you can't see things thousands of miles away, hundreds of miles away, or even just tens of miles away on a normal day.
I mean, what would explain that other than, the curvature of the earth?
Speaker 1: Yeah. That's a good question. So, there's something called attenuation. So so light is absorbed into a medium. Right?
That's why you can't see the Hollywood sign from, just a few miles away. Right? I don't encourage anyone going and trying that. Just take my word for it. Stay out of there.
Speaker 0: But,
Speaker 1: any anyway, my my point is that you can't see forever. Right? The opacity of the Atmos. There's actually an a very famous observation of the Canagu mountains from 100 of miles away, and you can't see them until the sun sets behind the mountains. And then because that light is so much brighter and you have the contrast of the shadow of the mountains, you can see them.
And then it should be miles below the curvature of the earth. So even in the globe paradigm, right, it would be, why can't we see the mountains before that? Well, it's because the the utmost between us and the mountains are blocking the light. It's being absorbed, right, until you had a bright enough light to see it. But so that so that's a pretty it's pretty simple.
We wouldn't see forever on a, flat earth. That's a that's misconception.
Speaker 0: Okay. But we would be able to see significantly further than we can. I mean, the average, you know, view distance for the horizon's, like, 2 or 3 miles. Right? But when I fly on a plane, planes typically fly at about 6 to 8 miles off the surface of the planet.
I can look down. I'm looking through atmosphere, and I can see the ground perfectly well. So how is it that the the our view distance isn't at least 6 or 8 miles since I know from my own personal experience that I can see through the atmosphere for 6 to 8 miles when I'm in a plane?
Speaker 1: Well, first of all, we see way further than 6 to 8 miles. Right? I mean, it's not that sometimes we see too far. It's that almost every day you're gonna see too far. The the globe model actually says that on average, you see at least 15 to 20% too far.
That's the average. But on a plane, you're looking straight down vertically through the Atmos. Right? And we have, like, density layers. So looking out horizontally through it or certainly closer to the surface is gonna be way more compounding denser medium that's gonna block your light.
So it's not the same as looking straight down through it. I will say also my boy, Jaren, he looked up or he went and made an observation in California, like, a week ago, and no one could see the mountains. Right? They were 75 miles away. They were 75 feet up.
They should have been blocked by 100 and 100 of feet of earth curve. No one could see them. So one might clap their hands and say, look, the Earth's a globe. We can't see the mountains. But then they pulled out their infrared camera and they could see the mountain.
So what that proves, even if you dot the Earth was a globe, is that the atmosphere is actually blocking the mountains. A light from the mountains, you can't see them, until you put out infrared, which cuts through a lot of the haze. It only has a small spectrum of light, a longer wavelength of light, and, you're able to see it with less obstruction. So, that's pretty simple. Also, this picture they're showing right here is also not proof that the Earth's a glow because if you look at the same shadow in a plane, you'll actually see that it's out parallel below you, and it's merely an, a perspective thing.
Speaker 0: Okay. But where's but but where's the sun in that picture? I I mean and you even said the sun sets below the the, mountains in the in the last example that you used, but that that's doesn't make sense. I mean, the the sun doesn't set on a flat earth model. It just moves away from you.
Right?
Speaker 1: Well, it moves away from you and then looks like it's going down. Just like if you see a plane flying towards you, it looks like it's going up. Then as it flies away, it looks like it's going down. Or if you look down a long street, you'll see street lights look like they're going down. They're all the same height, though.
Right? It's just perspective. The same reason that a hallway converges, the sun does the same thing. Naturally, we have many observations of the sun disappearing above the horizon. So the sunset happens above the horizon.
So that actually perfectly matches plain earth. The sun is just small local moving away from us. Looks like it's going down and then disappears into the distance. But on a globe, it should always be going behind the physical curved horizon. We see the sun disappear above the horizon.
Speaker 0: We see the sun disappear above the horizon? Yeah. Yep. Not any sunsets I've seen.
Speaker 1: I'd say this is people of the horizon. More rare.
Speaker 0: But, I mean, look. If if the table if, you know, this tabletop is, is the earth, I mean, it doesn't matter how far away the sun gets. If I'm on the tabletop and the sun is above it, I should be able to see it. Unless the sun is a, like, a stage lamp. Right?
Like a a spotlight, a, a shielded spotlight where I'm blocking perpendicular view. I mean, if the sun is a ball or or even if it's just a disc, I should be able to see it. No matter how far away it gets, I'll still be able to see it. There's no illusion where the sun drop I mean, it's pretty clear the sun drops behind the earth and then disappears for, like, 12 hours then comes up on the other side. I mean, again, this is just observation, but it perfectly comports with the round earth model.
I do not see an explanation for this in the flat earth model.
Speaker 1: Well, so for one, it actually doesn't. Right? The they say that when the sun sets, it actually was below the curve of the earth for multiple minutes. Right. Every day
Speaker 0: Right. Because Earth cracked. Because light bends. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So just another illusion that's convenient. Bright, but fine. Yeah. Sure.
Light could bend. It's not
Speaker 0: really Well, but how do you explain sunsets? How do you explain the colors of sunsets without, a round because in the round earth, it's it's pretty simple. Right? The lower it goes, the more layers of atmosphere it's going through. Certain light frequencies are blocked by it.
Other light, as you point out, like infrared will break through. So you've got these spectacular colors because they're the, whatever, higher or lower frequency that break through the atmosphere. I mean, how do you explain sunsets, having colors if, the earth is just moving away from us? I mean, that there there is no physical explanation for that like there is in the round earth.
Speaker 1: Of course, there is. You're looking at the sun, the source of light through the most dense layers of the at most. Even though it's above you, which, mind you, it's 93,000,000 miles away on the globe far above the Atmos. Right? You're looking at an angle that goes through the Atmos.
So you're seeing it through all of those layers of air. It's just like how if the street lights were going down the street, I could put my thumb up and block them. I could see a shadow relative to that. It would look like the street lights are below my thumb. I could put a a 2 foot trash can on the ground and see the see the street lights that are 10 feet tall look like they're below the trash can.
Just based on perspective, you would be looking through the horizontal Atmos since perspective is having you look down at where the sun is.
Speaker 0: So the
Speaker 1: sun gonna see that light through that.
Speaker 0: The the sun, it gets bigger as it passes, as it as it, goes to set. I mean, it doesn't get smaller. It's not it's not a diminution to nothingness. Right? The idea that if it's just moving away, it should just get smaller and smaller and smaller.
When it goes to the atmosphere, often the the atmospheric lensing makes it appear as though, if anything, it grows bigger, but usually it just it looks like it it stays the same. And again, you know, like atmospheric lensing or or, you know, refraction, explains pretty much all of this. Like, the idea that you can see farther than you think technically you should be able to, that's because, yeah, the Earth's atmosphere bends the light. I mean, light bends. Everybody knows this.
This is why I can talk to you through a camera lens. Right? Because the lens itself is is bending the light. That's why, I I mean, so the light bends with the atmosphere, and so it goes farther than you think it should be able to.
Speaker 1: And different, though. Your your that's 2 different media. Right? So you have the lens and you have the air. It's 2 different media.
It's called Snell's law, which is 2 different mediums but not a singular one. Now it's not that light can't be displaced within a medium. It's just that that's an unfalsifiable claim. They claim that light can be infinitely bent around the globe. You could see the back of your head if you wanted to, that there's no limit to it, which makes it unfalsifiable.
But, sure, you can say that, but there are certain observations we've made that falsify the refraction claim. And without refraction, entire globe falls apart. For example, I had a air force pilot reach out to me, and has chosen to remain anonymous for pretty obvious reasons. Verified him for sure, Air Force pilot, and he told me that he saw the k two mountain range from 300 nautical miles away, and he was flying at 28,000 feet altitude. And the elevation of those mountains are at 28,000 feet, And he saw the mountains level with him as he actually, you know, did target acquirement, establishing the landmark with his manual viewing pod.
He saw the mountains level with him from 300 miles away. It should be, like, up to 5 degrees below you on a globe. Right? Because even though they're the same height, it's obviously on a globe, but it was level with him. And, like, at that height, you can't even invoke refraction admittedly because it's so high.
It's it's like the much, thinner parts portion of the Atmos. And, of course, it doesn't even go 5 degrees anyway. So and and that's it. That's what woke him up. The flat earth was his experience in the air force, and I've never heard a rebuttal to that.
Most people just claim the guy doesn't exist or he must be lying. Well, he certainly exists because I I verified it. So if you see what I'm saying, he he he saw the mountains 300 miles away, and they were level with him.
Speaker 0: Right. Right? The 20,000 But But he saw it but he saw it from an extremely elevated position, and the mountains themselves are elevated. I mean, we're not talking about a guy saying something 300 miles away from ground level. So, you know, that that again, I you know, there are certain circumstances, certain, conditions of the atmosphere where you can get things like that.
I mean, everybody knows. I mean, rainbows are an illusion. Mirages are illusion. Like, there are certain things that, the atmosphere does to light that, is is dazzling or baffling to the human eye, but that, again, we would be able to see every mountain from 300 miles away if the earth was flat. Seeing it, you know, in one circumstance, doesn't prove anything.
We had a we had a pilot who called in yesterday talking about flying at night and seeing the glow of cities from about, I think you said about a 100 miles away, and then and slowly you see the the glow of the city rise up. I mean, hell, even when I was driving into Austin from, the Renaissance Fair last weekend, the first thing I saw of Austin was the top of the skyscrapers. I mean, it's just everyday observations you can see that the that the globe exists, that there's a curvature and that things disappear over the edge of it.
Speaker 1: I think that's kind of the the big part here is that there's just typically a misunderstanding of the flatter position or what it actually has adequate explanations for. Like, seeing things disappear bottom up would be what happens on a plain earth. You have the ground ramp up. But just to clarify what is wrong with the observation in the plane, It's not that they're so far away you shouldn't see them because you're right. He's super high in the air.
Right? So you're looking up from higher on the globe. And you can see further the higher you are whether the earth is flat or whether it's a globe. The problem is that they were level with him. They should have been 5 degrees below his level.
His plane's level, it should have been 5 degrees below that. They were level with him. That's a ton when you're talking about a military fighter jet establishing target acquirement or looking at the landmark. 5 degrees is a ton in the air force. And mind you, I mean, I I'm not air force pilot.
I let I I just listened to him. He broke it all down. Show me everything. He said that there's not a pilot in the world. There's not an air force pilot in the world that would that would tell you that 5 degrees is some type of acceptable range of error.
Right? So yeah. And and, honestly, like I said, I talked to kinda the top guys that defend the globe. They all just say this can't be true or it would absolutely refute the globe. Well, he he did it.
So so it it was level with him.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, without without proof, you can you can take his word for it. But again, I I don't think that, you know, one anecdote, yeah, disproves all all of the things that that we're talking about. And, again, you know, attenuation can go some way to explain some some aspect of, like, things like why the sky is blue or why, sunsets are are multicolored, but it doesn't explain why the sun disappears completely at night. That's that's not explained by attenuation.
Attenuation is just the diminution of of light as it passes through an atmosphere. That's not, it doesn't make things completely disappear in the way that we see the sun just obviously go behind the horizon. And I I do wanna look at a couple other pictures here. I know you're familiar with it, but I haven't heard your response to it. Things like the link, Lake Pontchartrain Causeway, if the crew can, bring this up where I mean, unless I'm missing something, it it very clearly so this is a, you know, longest bridge in the world for a while.
I think there may be a longer one now, but Lake Pontchartrain just outside of New Orleans, this bridge is leveled to the surface of the water, but you can see a very clear curve as it diminishes over the horizon. So, this was taken, I think, from about 15 stories up, with an extreme zoom lens. That's why everything is compacted. That's why those, bridges or the the humps look so dramatic. Really, they're they're pretty, you know, your typical, humps, but that's just an effect of the, massive zoom optical zoom lens.
But I mean, clearly, it goes over the horizon, and there's other, you know, pictures like this. I mean, why would it look like this if the earth was flat?
Speaker 1: Yeah. So and just to throw out, I did drop about I just really quickly dropped, like, 5 other pictures of Poncha Train, that we should pull up because, this is not what you see when you look at the whole, the whole bridge. It's insanely flat. But I'll point out a few things about this. This is an older argument from around 2015.
It's kinda become a meme, actually. And most clovers have abandoned it because, if that's the curvature of the earth, the earth has to be, like, a fraction of the size they claim it is. It would have to be a tiny, tiny, tiny globe Earth for that to be the curve of the Earth, way smaller than 4000 miles. It's a a 100 mile radius globe. Right?
It's way too drastic a rate of curvature over that distance. In addition, it's a foreshortening effect based on optics in the Atmos, which that place notoriously has pretty crazy, atmospheric conditions and pollution and stuff. And we've replicated a flat surface. You put enough, enough of a atmospheric temperature fluctuation and stuff. It'll start to warp it, compress it, and make it look like it's curving also based on your angle.
In in this picture, I'm pretty sure they actually compressed it. You can take a picture. It's so deceptive. Alright. You can take a picture of a desk Hold on.
Hold on. Flat.
Speaker 0: Hold on, Austin. We have a, we have a guest appearance here. Alex Jones has made his appearance at the Flat Earth debate. Listen. I'm I'm
Speaker 2: only gonna ask you a real quick question. Are the sun and other planets flat as well? Because I've been a big astronomer since I was a kid with my dad when we had the professional telescopes when I was a kid. Now anybody can get them to have the computerized controls. I've sat there overnight drinking a 12 pack of beer in college with a 35 millimeter camera hooked to a 12 inch refractory telescope and taken photos of Saturn and Jupiter, and watched it as it's turning.
Watched the globes turning. I put green lenses on, you know, the telescope. We could watch the sun in over, you know, an hour, see it turn and and see, you know, seek coronal mass ejections moving in the time lapse. Boom. It's round.
Done.
Speaker 0: Debate over, Austin. I'm sorry to tell you you have now lost the debate, and the earth is round. What's your what's your response to what Alex just brought up there?
Speaker 1: Yeah. The the sun could be round, and it doesn't mean that the earth is. Right? So it's it's, and also, by the way, the earth can be round and flat. Of course, it could be a plain shape.
It could be a plain circle. But, yeah. I mean, I I I agree that they look like they could be spheres. They certainly look like discs in the sky. They have cycles, but They all move around the Earth.
The Earth's in the center. Right? It it it is illogical to look at the ceiling and be like, well, that's what the Earth is. Right. But So that's my that's
Speaker 0: Again, you you can you can plot the the paths of the planet from the earth, and you can predict them and everything. But it it makes so much more sense when you take the sun as the center. Everything's in a perfect little circle. Everything's concentric. It it makes a hell of a lot more sense than trying to plot things from a geocentric, which, I mean, how do you explain the way that the plants move in and then away from us, and then towards us and away from us?
I mean, you can you can say torus field, but, frankly, it's just not a good enough explanation.
Speaker 1: The magnetic force. Right? So there's a Magnetic. Book there's a book by a PhD professor that is called relational mechanics. He breaks all this down, the specific force, Lorentz magnetic force, shows the dynamic equivalence of the planetary motion from a stationary position.
Relational mechanics, Andreas Cease, and there are many other papers like that exist. So the ironic part is it actually works better. This is where I I like, it works way better. You don't need dark matter. You don't need dark energy.
You don't need expansion. You don't need all these made up pseudoscience fairy tales. Gravity's been disproven. Everyone knows relativity doesn't even work. We don't have something better.
Speaker 0: What what do you mean what do you mean gravity's been disproven? I mean, gravity exists.
Speaker 1: The theory of relativity has been disproven just like Newtonian gravity was disproven before that.
Speaker 0: Right. So these are these are refinements of theories to explain natural phenomenon, but gravity exists. Right? And it's different than electrostatic attraction. It's different than magnetic attraction.
It's something else. Right?
Speaker 1: No. I wouldn't say it's well, okay. It's it's the effect of things falling to the earth. Right.
Speaker 0: Right?
Speaker 1: And it's little g gravity. Of course, it exists. We use it for engineering. We use it to determine weight. Of course, it 100% exists.
But but but why? What is it? Is there a force pulling everything down to the earth? Well, that's what the globe needs. The evidence for gravity is the way that it's been defined is that, well, the earth can't be a globe without it.
But, no, actually, density causes things to go up and down and electrostatics. Wait. Wait. Woah. In electrostatics.
Speaker 0: Why does density cause things to go up and down?
Speaker 1: Because of of buoyancy. So the relative density of the object with the medium, the pressure mediation causes it to go up or down like a ping pong ball, floats in the water Right. Golf ball.
Speaker 0: Because because of gravity. Because buoyancy is an effect of gravity. Because without gravity, there'd be no reason for it to go up or down. It would Wait.
Speaker 1: Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait.
We gotta we gotta okay. So the the principle of, density. Right? Mhmm. Long predates the idea of gravity, but, eventually, we did throw little g in there.
Like I'm saying, little g isn't a problem for or for flat earth at all. It's just the downward acceleration. Little g is not the cause. It's the effect. Everyone knows the effect exists.
Things go down when they have weight. Gravity, gravitas means heavy, how heavy something is, weight. We don't dispute that. We dispute the claimed cause of gravity, that the bending and warping of concepts called space and time somehow create illusions where everything shrinks and slows down and makes things fall to the earth in a straight path that's curbing at the same time. That's just all pseudoscience.
I actually did a I I did I wanna plug the level the level documentary. I did a test there where we did actual science, and I used a Van de Graaff generator, which which manipulates electrostatics. And I made the object change weight, fall at a different rate, go up and down just by manipulating the electric field, and that's what we have on the earth. We have an electric field that has a a 100 volt per meter increase. And when I flipped it with my Van de Graaff generator, it made the object float.
So I proved that that's a cause of things falling down and why they fall down. And that's that every object that exists is electrostatic.
Speaker 0: So I mean, there's there's just so many things wrong with that. Obviously, it's not buoyancy. Buoyancy Buoyancy only exists because of gravity. If you had a tank of if you had a tank of water out in space where there's, you know, no noticeable, gravitational force, then you could put a beach ball in the center of the water. It would stay in the center of water.
There would be no up for it to float to. So, you know, buoyancy is is an effect of the gravitational pull of the earth. Gravity is obviously not electrostatic. You can, you can counteract gravity with forces, obviously. I can counteract gravity by picking this up.
That doesn't mean gravity doesn't exist. You can't affect the gravity itself with electro, static or electromag magnetism. You can't block gravity with a, lead wall. Right? Nothing blocks gravity.
So I mean, it's it's just obviously not electrostatic or magnetic or any other force that we can manipulate because we can't manipulate gravity. Except, you know, they probably can with the Bell experiment and other, you know, secret technology that they have that we all know they have. We'll be back on the other side. One more long chunk of this, debate, and we'll get into the psyop aspect. Alright, folks.
The b o b to bring us in. He started this whole he started this whole conundrum. I thought that was appropriate. One of my favorite songs, actually. I love this song.
Austin Witsett is my guest at witsettgetsit on x. Witsitgetsitdot com is his website you can go to. I we've covered a lot of topics here. There's there's really only, one more that that I hear brought up quite a bit that I'd like to get into, and then I wanna get into the aspects of the conspiracy that would be necessary to contain this lie if if, the round Earth is in fact a lie. But let's talk about sort of one of the other claims, of of the Earth's atmosphere existing next to a vacuum.
Again, this seems, on first blush, it's like, oh, yay. Wait. Why does that happen? How is that the case? We've got an atmosphere here.
We've got a vacuum in space. What is it that stops the atmosphere from going into the vacuum of space? But it's I mean, we get the pressure goes down as we travel up in altitude. Right? We get that the atmosphere gets thinner as it goes up.
I mean, I I don't think you do you dispute that. So, I mean, that makes perfect sense to me. I know, you know, you say that you to have air pressure, you have to have a container. But are there containers that are pressurized where there's a gradient? Because there's a gradient in our atmosphere that pretty well explains how, the atmosphere sticks to earth.
It's gravity. It doesn't require a container. It requires a force. And in this case, that force is gravity.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Sure. So, you can have a gradient, of course, but you need, gas pressure to have a gradient. So it's delta x change in x. So you need x.
You need the gas pressure. And what we're saying is the antecedent, the requirement for gas pressure is containment. You can replicate a pressure gradient in a container. You cannot replicate one without a container. And we see that the dispersal of gas is omnidirectional.
It goes directly up, you know, in the face of this alleged force that's not a force that's pulling everything down. Supposedly gravity is holding air, gas next to a vacuum. A gas disperses in all directions instantly. So, yes, we do have a pressure gradient on the earth, but the requirement for that is an actual contained system that the gas can then begin to attempt to equalize within and give you a gradient. Just like if you have, liquid propane or or any type of gas, not liquid, but any type of gas in the container, there's gonna be a gradient.
There's gonna be more gas at the bottom Because
Speaker 0: of the
Speaker 1: gravity. Confined within that. But it's not but it's in a container. So as soon as I remove the container, right, it's going to disperse. Obviously, that's why sodas make the little sound.
Right? Because the pressure is equalizing to the pressure around it. So that's our our point is that you can say gravity, but where gravity is supposedly the strongest at the surface of the earth, gas goes in all directions including directly up, and it goes directly into a vacuum. Gravity is not holding it down there. But supposedly where gravity is weaker next to a 10 to the negative 17 tor vacuum, somehow it just sits there and it doesn't go and fill the available space, which is antithetical to, you know, at all.
Speaker 0: It's just a countervailing force. I mean, if you have a molecule of air that floats up to the top of the atmosphere and then floats out of the atmosphere, and now it's not surrounded by anything, it's all for all intents and purposes, in a vacuum. Not surrounded by anything. It's all for all intents and purposes, in a vacuum. It's still being affected by the gravity to earth, and it'll drift back to earth.
I mean, what is the force that's pulling it away from the other, air molecules in, in a vacuum? I I mean, again, this this really doesn't seem that all that complicated to me. I mean, the the gravity pulls the air down. The air, you know, close to, the surface of the planet is thicker because that's where gravity is pulling everything, but, you know, air is light enough to, float because of, buoyancy or or, density. It it it doesn't all fall straight down to the earth.
This is just an effect of gravity. Again, you don't need a container to explain this. You just need a force that is working on the molecules to keep them attached to to earth. Right? I mean, again, I don't get how this is, a container is not necessary.
Speaker 1: Like I said though, like, we're claiming a force is pulling the gas down to earth, but gas goes in all directions, including directly up and violently. It's the second law of thermodynamics. To co Arthur Eddington, any idea or theory you have that's contrary to the second law is just completely, you know, inexcusable and dead dead on its face. But you're saying that the gravity is basically pulling the air back down
Speaker 0: Right.
Speaker 1: In the face of a vacuum. But where where does the gravity of Earth stop affecting gas then? Right? Because the gravity of the Earth doesn't extend the entire universe. And so the air is still gonna fill the available space, and it fills the available space on the surface where gravity would be the strongest.
So very simply, it's very easy to replicate what we have on the earth. With a container, you can create a gradient certainly with all the gas that's been introduced at the surface level and the gas cycle and the temperature and the density differences. But, you cannot replicate it without a container. So that's that's the argument. And gravity, again, has actually been disproven, and we've proven our understanding of gravity, which is that it's electric.
We've actually proven it with experiments. So
Speaker 0: But but
Speaker 1: that would be like
Speaker 0: So so you can you can affect gravity with electricity?
Speaker 1: What people call gravity, which is the effect of things falling down. Right? Yeah. I can take, I take electrostatics, and I can make things go up. And, actually, when you brought up the bell, that's what they did.
They actually used what they call ether physics. I have a really good book on it. It's called The Bell. And, they they use electro gravitic propulsion. So so, you know, of course, the Nazis back in, like, as early as twenties thirties, they had these UFOs.
They were using, the electric nature of the environment to make things, quote, unquote, levitate and defy material physics. They weren't using an anti gravity device that bits space and time. With electro gravitic motion, they actually, they they called Einstein's theory mysticism, and they apply what they called ether physics. That's been hidden and suppressed. They went in and grabbed all of Tesla's work, and now they say that, you know, Einstein is correct.
And, of course, we have no no technology. All the technology the military is using for these devices, I guarantee you, is electric. Because like I said, in science, you have a naturally occurring observable phenomena, deep in a variable. You try to figure out how what causes it. So things fall down, what causes it?
Well, let's say it's electrostatics. Let's test it. We're gonna manipulate that. I did that, and I can make the object go up and float. I can make it fall down faster.
And on the earth, we have an electric field, and everything that exists is electrostatic. Everything's electric. Right? So it would be insane to think that it doesn't have something to do with everything being electric because that's 10 to the 36th power stronger than gravity's even claimed to be on the smallest scale. So it's it's one of the biggest
Speaker 0: systems. Right. But that that doesn't, disprove gravity. Again, you know, electric currents have, or electric, they they have properties that that gravity doesn't have. So it just it it just can't be the same thing.
And you can't block it. You can't really affect it. I mean, there may be hidden technology like the the bell that, are able to manipulate gravity, but they're not doing it in a way that, is easily replicable, I don't think. And, yeah, again, you can counteract the force of gravity, but I don't think you can actually manipulate it. I think that that might be an illusion of, of what's happening there.
But all of this to the side, all of the, you know, perception versus reality or or, you know, what we can see and and what explains it, the conspiracy necessary to keep this lie going, the the if if round earth was a lie, it is so impossibly vast. I mean, it just makes no sense. There's no payoff for it other than maybe moderately affecting people's willingness to believe, which again, it's like, you know, the idea that we're in a firmament or that we're the center of the earth. I mean, nothing in God's creation, you know, proves God. That's sort of like one of the aspects of it.
Right? There are lots of things that could prove God that would be miraculous that you could go, oh my, there's nothing other than God that explains this. Yeah. The earth being at the center of the universe would be one of those things, but it's not because it's not. Right?
It's not the center of the earth, so it doesn't prove that. But nothing in creation proves that. So this idea that, you know, I I guess I it it's almost like, contradictory, where, like, yeah, if we were in a giant, you know, celestial hamster cage with the firmament over us, it would prove that God exists, but also in a weird way, that's not what God does. So it would prove that something other than God exists. It would, like, that doesn't make any sense to me.
And then you've got, like, just tens of thousands of people working on space programs. Let me let me give an example. I have a friend about 10 years ago. He's working for a company that built the titanium aluminum rings that connected satellites to the vessel that took them into space. So you've got a small company with about 4 or 5, you know, Ivy League doctorate engineers that are working on building these rings to attach the satellite to the rocket.
And that's just one company of of, like, 1,000 that exist out there. Are they in on it? Are they being fooled? Do you have another company that's that's coming up with the false information to feed to them, to make them think that when they go to watch the satellite launch, are they just watching the thing they built flying to the sea, and then somebody else is launching a balloon that just looks like a satellite? I I mean, explain some of this to me because the the conspiracy necessary to carry this out is so vast.
It's just nonsensical.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So it would be, like I said, to use the adoption analogy. Be like, is everyone in the church, in your school, in your community in on the lie? Like, no. They believe the lie.
Satellites aren't a problem for flat earth. I I I know that many flat earthers will say that, you know, they don't believe in them and that they think there's a lot of balloons. And there is a classified very, very, advanced balloon project that is going on, and it is conducting a massive surveillance on the the public. This is just a fact. But yeah, like like a mince fleets of military surveillance balloons.
And NASA is the number one purchaser of helium in the world, and this is true. But satellites are not a problem for flat earth. It's just it's just a belief that it is, but it's not. Actually, the satellite equations use, geocentric physics and equations. They use real inertial forces, as if the earth is stationary in what's called an earth centered earth fixed frame or an ECI, earth centered inertial frame.
And it's not to get all into the technical aspects. Satellites are not exclusive at all to a globe earth or a moving earth. In fact, it's exclusive to a stationary Earth based on the physics and equations they use. And then for it to be on a plain Earth, it would just be an ellipse. But to answer your question precisely Wait.
Wait. Wait. Wait.
Speaker 0: Hold on. Hold on. It would be an ellipse? I mean, what does that mean? So satellites are satellites exist.
They're floating above us, above the atmosphere, but they're just continually circling a plane?
Speaker 1: Yeah. They sir yeah. They certainly could be. Right? Like, I've seen STARLINK myself.
I've watched launches myself. You know? I I I know that there's what people call STARLINKs in the sky. It's not a problem at all because it's just a coordinate system transform form from a globe to a plane, and the actual physics and equation treat the earth as if it's stationary.
Speaker 0: No. It doesn't.
Speaker 1: That should that should be significant because it's not just, oh, it's a coordinate system. You can treat it like that because it's from the earth. No. It's using physics in the equations and specifically inertial forces which do not exist in the relativistic flow model, which means if the satellites are up there and they are working, if they're proof of anything, to quote PhD astronomer Gerardus Bau, it's proof that the Earth is stationary and the universe is geocentric. But those people that made the pieces aren't
Speaker 0: See that that that's a that's a completely fallacious extrapolation. I mean, the so ECI. Right? Earth centered inertial, coordinates versus e what is it? E c e f, something like that, earth centered, earth fixed.
Right? So, you know, both of these are coordinate systems for a spherical earth. The only difference is one of them takes the spin of the earth into account, while the other one doesn't. First of all, that this is is in, you know, it requires a spherical earth, first of all, right, for these coordinates to make any sense. They also take into the spinning of the earth, meaning it's not stationary.
One of them doesn't take into account the spinning of the earth, but, it's not because it's not spinning. It's just because that's not the the coordinate system just doesn't rely on the spinning of the Earth. And regardless of any outcome of those, that has nothing to do with whether the sun is circling the Earth is about satellites.
Speaker 1: I'm not talking yeah. I'm not talking about the sun. I'm saying that
Speaker 0: You said geocentric universe?
Speaker 1: Well, yeah. Yeah. I'm saying that's because they use forces of a rotating universe. They they actually treat the universe as if it's rotating and creating real inertial forces, specifically centrifugal, Coriolis, and Euler forces. And in the globe model, those are fictitious forces.
They're not real. In a stationary earth model, the universe is actually rotating around the earth creating angular momentum. Satellites would be using that on a stationary earth. Well, that's what the physics and equation show. They should they treat it as if the universe is rotating around the Earth creating a real force, and they have to account for them to put the satellites up.
And then and then on a plane, is it you're right. That is a globe. But on a plane, that's just according to system transform. It becomes an ellipse, and it takes the same flower of life geometry I showed earlier. Actually, one of those, depictions was the ISS path.
Right? And that's just mapped out on a plane.
Speaker 0: But but continual motion would, in that case I mean, with with an orbit, you know, either continual motion is, a consequence of just the fact that there's no wind resistance. And so once your initial velocity your initial velocity basically will be maintained with with a little bit of, you know, variance because of the tiny amount of atmosphere that does exist outside of, what we consider the atmosphere, the 62 mile, delineation, which is not a scientific delineation. It's an aeronautical delineation, determining whether or not you can fly using conventional, methods or or whether you need rocket propulsion. So, you can continue you can have inertia that that exists that can continually, you know, rocket something around the earth without additional input. But if something's just floating above a plane, it either needs to be pushed in a way that, that's continually being pushed, but even if not, it would need something to change its direction.
I I mean, how do you explain how do you explain that? Satellites just floating above us and in ellipses, you would need external forces. You that would require fuel. That would be, pretty obvious to people building the satellite. Right?
Speaker 1: So like I said, they they use the actual force of the universe rotating around the Earth in the physics and equations. And so on a stationary earth, that's it. Instead of the earth spinning, making the illusion that the sky spins. Right? It's actually the sky spinning around the earth like we observe.
That would generate a real force. It would have angular momentum, and there would be a net inward force. So if you threw something up in it, it would just continually move around with the universe's momentum, the actual angular momentum and force of the universe. And what I'm pointing out is that's literally the physics and equations that they use. And and But you're still describing a spherical earth.
Well, that's why I point out that the the end of it. Right? Because that actually is a major problem for heliocentrism. But the the plane are is just a coordinate system transform. You could think you're going around the globe, and it would just be an ellipse over a plane, and you would have no idea.
They actually account for a change in velocity, which makes perfect sense within ellipse. But in the globe model, it's supposedly free falling in a geodesic path not changing velocity if they actually do account for change in velocity the speed of light for the signals for GPS. So they what they're actually doing and accounting for doesn't work with the model. It's just overlooked. People assume it.
I wanted to address what you were asking though, the meta here, which is, like, are these people in on it? No. Of course not, bro. They think the IRSA globe, they think we just use these coordinate systems for convenience sake. Right?
And it works. It's good enough. Who cares? They think they use Newtonian gravity even though that's no longer the the case. It works good enough, and people make little pieces for it.
That's that's one of the main arguments for Apollo. It's like there were 300,000 people that that were all in on it because they made pieces. It's like, no. They compartmentalize the job to everyday Americans, so you would ask me that question. Right?
So it's they you would think it's legit.
Speaker 0: That's not how compartmentalization works. I mean, compartmentalization is an aspect of, like, the military and secret operations. The people who are compartmentalized know they're compartmentalized. The people who are building satellites are in communication with the people building the other parts of the satellite, and they observe it as it flies, and then they get readings, you know, data readings to determine whether or not the mission was successful. So they would have to be fed fake information or, like, what happens is I mean, they think they're launching a satellite into orbit.
Are they are they not? Or is there a parallel industry that's doing the real math and and feeding them the fake info? I mean, you get this whole thing just sort of falls apart the more you think about it, and that's not even getting into the secrecy aspect where you'd have to, again, either have these people who are doing this for decades without even either noticing that something is wrong or admitting or or, you know, letting it leak out that something is wrong. The the scale of conspiracy, especially now with all of these private companies going into space, is so vast. And, again, nonsensical, man.
If if I was if I was the mastermind, the Jesuit priest that figured out that there's a firmament and wants to trick everybody, the last thing I would do would be come up with a lie that would set up generations of having to fake things. Right? You could you could just say, yeah. We tried to go to space. It turns out there's, like, crazy radiation, and everybody dies.
So let's not try to leave. Like, there's a million other ways you could do it. They you're thinking they went with the strategy of let's fake space travel for the next 100 years, you know, on a continual basis. As a as a conspiracy theorist, somebody who sits here and thinks and talks about conspiracies every day, this falls utterly, pardon the pun, flat. This makes no sense as a as a conspiracy at all.
Speaker 1: Well, I I, yeah, I strongly disagree, brother. Like, for 1, the let's not conflate, like, if satellites are up there with space travel. Those are fundamentally different things. I mean, they did they're not they're not really faking space that much. They claim they went in the sixties and haven't gone back for 50 years and destroyed the technology and blah blah blah.
We've caught NASA faking it. So So I encourage everyone to investigate that. You can actually go to my channel. I have a NASA fraud series I just started. We we have objectively caught them faking things using wires, harnesses, green screens, bubbles, and space.
And people laugh because it sounds so ridiculous. You can let you know how many things you laughed at when you first heard and you found out it's true? If I told you the world was gonna shut down overnight and start using prison terms like lockdown, you would think I was crazy as well. We've caught NASA lying and faking it. And, really, they've got to put it off.
They just kick the ball down the road over and over and over. They kick the can down the road. Right? Oh, the moon mission's delayed again. So they haven't had to fake that much, and I don't even intend that satellites could be up there.
It's not a problem. And the people that are working on it are aren't in on it. To quote Gene Krantz, the Apollo flight director from the Apollo missions, he said, the simulations are so good that no one in the control room can tell the difference between the simulations and the real thing. And the astronauts have come out and said that when they supposedly were going on these missions, they thought it was fake. They couldn't even tell the difference.
So, absolutely, they wouldn't be in on it. They're just being fed system through Globe Coordinate System, EPS corrections, and this gets into technical things. I will just say this. They're good questions. And I think if you're open minded about your questions and open to the answers of them, when you really do dig into it, you find out, oh, wow.
They're making corrections for the SAGNEK effect because it doesn't work and it shows different distances. They're making meridian corrections in the south because the distances don't work like they should on the globe. They're actually running it through programs to correct and then put it out to the people on the other end as if it was in fact the globe that's working. And these are provable things that require diligent research. So I don't think that the the lie is really gonna require that many people be in on it.
They just believe the lie. Right? And by the way, many people have found out it's not true. We even had people that were astronauts come out and say, anyone telling you they're going to outer space, I guarantee you, is lying. We've had a Polish astronaut come out and say, I wasn't expecting this question, but, yes, the earth is flat.
No one's going to outer space. I think that most of oh, well, let me say this one more thing. Do you mind finding this interesting? I went and talked to astronauts myself. Okay?
And I caught them lying. I I asked them, do you see the stars on the day side of the earth when you're in space? That's the sun. And they said no. You you can't see the stars because of the sun.
But the official story is that you can only not see the stars during daytime because of the Earth's atmosphere, and you can see them in space. And half the astronauts that have supposedly been to space said, you can see the stars. It's pitch black. It's amazing. You can even see them by the sun.
Right. I looked an astronaut in the face and asked them, and they they lied. So why are they lying? Right? Like
Speaker 0: Well, I yeah. I've I've, I've heard that, but but you're comparing, 2 different situations. I mean, some some astronauts say, yeah, we could see the stars. Other astronauts say, we couldn't see the stars, but they weren't next to each other on the same mission looking out the same window. So these are just different accounts of different situations.
That that doesn't prove anything. It may just prove sometimes you can see the stars, sometimes you can't, depending on the, source and strength of the light and the angle of the, reflection off the earth or where you're looking out the window of the spaceship. I I mean, these things are not proof that the earth is flat or that astronauts are lying. It's proof that there are different conditions at different times in in space and earth. But we only about 2 minutes, left here.
Do you do you think that this is a valuable thing to to spend time on? I mean, we know all of the things going on in in the world, and we probably agree on 99% of things. It's just this one thing that we disagree on, which to me again, the fact that this came out of nowhere, that nobody talked about flat earth before. I mean, and you can do the you can look into the archives. Nobody talked about flat earth.
Flat earth society existed. You said it's a CIA SIOP, but it's also the the font where most of these arguments came from. So that isn't exactly, you know, positive for the the flat earth model. Divide, distract, discredit. It's a divide and and conquer influence operation.
It's something that splits our audience down the middle, and suddenly we're talking about flat earth instead of things that are, actually important. I think this has been an extremely successful SIOP launched around the time that, the Act, Modernization Act was passed allowing for propaganda, in the, American, media landscape.
Speaker 1: That doesn't really I mean, that that allows the government through their liaisons and the media to actually lie to us, but they they're not doing that. They're saying no ancient civilization ever knew that the earth thought the earth was flat. They're blatantly lying about it and misrepresenting it. They do clearly use it as a way to discredit other conspiracies, but it's just like, oh, I bet you're an anti vaxxer. Like, just because someone uses it that way to dismiss people doesn't mean there's no validity to it.
As to the SIOP, what I'm gonna reiterate is if it's a SIOP, it's not working very well because everyone that finds out that the earth is a geocentric stationary plane, are taking their children out of school. They're homeschooling. They're not falling for medical miss medical, like, psy ops. They're not falling for any of the stuff going on, the political shenanigans. They see through all of it.
And, it brings them all back to a very founded spiritual aspect of their life. And again, you asked me if I think it's important. I do think it's important, bro. Because I could very easily talk about other things. Right?
And I wouldn't be nearly as kind of put into a corner, but I don't because this unravels all of us. Show here.
Speaker 0: I just wanna thank you for doing this. This has been extremely fun. I know it's been extremely popular. Austin Witsit at Witsit Gets It on x. Go follow him.
While other networks lie to you about what's happening now, Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next. Infowars.comforward/go.
Speaker 2: So what I really wanna ask you to do is pray for myself and the crew and my family. That's number 1. I want that. I need that. It's your prayer that's doing it.
That's why this service. That's why this happened. I need the prayer, that I need you to take the articles, the videos, the post. We make it real Alex Jones. Recopy them.
Share them. Post them yourself. Do whatever. Just get it out there. And I need you to go to infowarsstore.com, and I need you to get great products you already need.
There's a bunch of sales going, DNA Force Plus that is so good for your entire body, flushes out your mitochondria and your cells with the PQQ, the CoQ10, the ELV ATP, the organic reishi, the stragglers have been brought loose, root, and even more for 50%.
Speaker 1: I haven't done that in
Speaker 2: a while. That's amazing. Discover the power of try iodine, Deep Earth Crystal I9 X3, 40% off. Body's ultimate turmeric formula, 40% off. And TurboForce, 10 hour clean energy is 40% off at infowarsstore.com.
TurboForce. We'll be right back.
@infowars - INFOWARS
The CIA built 12 secret spy bases in Ukraine and has been active in the country for over a decade. The unrest and conflict in Ukraine is all by design and directly funded by our hard-earned tax dollars. .@HarrisonHSmith with the story: https://t.co/Nve1a21LLo
Video Transcript AI Summary
The New York Times revealed that the CIA has operated 12 secret spy bases in Ukraine for a decade, aiding in intelligence operations against Russia. The program involved training Ukrainian officers and launching attacks into Russian territory. This disclosure, possibly a warning to Moscow, confirms Putin's accusations of US involvement in Ukraine. Infowars suggests this conflict was orchestrated by the American spy state and figures like George Soros. TurboForce, a product promoted by Infowars, promises clean energy and supports the Infowar. Available at infowarsstore.com.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Story from 0 Hedge is covering a story from The New York Times. The headline is this. CIA built 12 secret spy bases in Ukraine and waged shadow war for the last decade, bombshell New York Times report confirms. On Sunday, The New York Times published an explosive and very belated full emission that US intelligence has not only been instrumental in Ukraine wartime decision making, but has established and financed high-tech command and control spy centers and was doing so long prior to the February 2024 or, I'm sorry, February 24, 2022 Russian invasion. Along among the biggest revelations is that the program was established a decade ago and spans 3 different American presidents.
Let's see. A decade ago. It's February 2024 now. A decade ago would be February 2014, which would be, exactly the time that the Maidan massacre happened. Well, what do you know about that?
What do you know about that? It turns out that corresponds exactly with the coup in Ukraine and the ensuing civil war against the regions that weren't going along with the CIA backed color revolution in Ukraine. Just incredible. The story from New York Times is called the spy, the spy war, how the USA secretly helps Ukraine fight Putin. And, again, the Zero Hedge article mentions why they might be coming out with this here in just a second.
I'll continue. The Times says the CIA program to modernize Ukraine's intelligence services has, quote, transformed the fur former Soviet Union, so Soviet state and its capabilities into Washington's most important intelligence partner against Kremlin today. This has included the agency having secretly trained and equipped Ukrainian intelligence officers spanning back to just after or before perhaps the 2014 Maidan coup events as well as constructing a network of 12 secret bases along this Russian border, work which began 8 years ago. These intelligence bases from which Russian commanders communications can be swept up and Russian spy satellites monitored are being used to launch and track cross border drone and missile attacks into Russian territory. Quote, without them, the CIA and elite commandos trained, there would have been no way for us to resist the Russians or to beat them, said Ivan Bakunov, former head of the SBU, which is Ukraine's domestic intelligence agency.
Clearly, Kyiv and Washington now want the world to know of the deep intelligence relationship they tried to conceal for over the past decade. It's perhaps a kind of warning to Moscow at a moment Ukraine's forces are in retreat. A warning to Moscow saying the US is fighting hand in glove with the Ukrainians. And yet the revelations contained in the New York Times report also confirmed what president Putin has precisely accused Washington of all along. Yes.
Putin was right. Infowars is right. This is in fact a war entirely, a a creation of the American spy state as well as those that control it, like George Soros who poured 1,000,000 of dollars into Ukraine to fund liberalization institutes or whatever you wanna call it, open society foundation programs, which were, of course, just intelligence cover for carrying out a regime change operation in Ukraine, a highly successful one, I might add, as despite the fact that, again, everybody knew who was behind it from the very beginning. Nothing was done about it, and the problem was instead allowed to grow and fester and rot over 10 years until it finally exploded in February of 2022 when Russia decided to put its foot down. While other networks lie to you about what's happening now, Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next.
Infowars.comforward/go.
Speaker 1: In 60 seconds, I don't have time to tell you about all the incredible ingredients in turbo force. If you simply go to infowarsstore.com and look at the list of ingredients and look them up, Every one of them is known to give you boosted, clean, focused energy without the letdown. We're talking up to 10 hours of clean energy per serving with TurboForce exclusively available at infowarsstore.com, and it's discounted right now. And it doesn't just boost your body's clarity and focus and stamina. It also funds the Infowar, so it's a 3 60 win.
If you've never tried Turbo Force, now is the time. It's got 5 star reviews. Turboforce@info warsstore.com will take your energy and your clarity to the next level without the letdown, and it funds the Infowar, a true 3 60 win. So go get TurboForce today at infowarsstore.com, and I know you will not be disappointed because thousands of others have gotten in, and it has 5 star reviews. Get TurboForce now.
@infowars - INFOWARS
They fly private jets, but say you shouldn’t fly at all. They dine on steak and caviar, but say you shouldn’t eat meat. They decry pollution, but completely ignore the world’s #1 polluter: China. .@HarrisonHSmith breaks down the hypocrisy of the Climate Change Mind Virus. https://t.co/q5g12b481n
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the threat of a one-world government and advocates for supporting Infowars. They criticize China's coal plant construction while pushing a climate change agenda. They mention bioethicist's extreme ideas to combat climate change, Bill Gates' farmland ownership, and NYC Mayor Adams limiting meat consumption. The transcript also promotes Infowars products.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Spoiler alert here. The big thing threatening the world right now, is not the proliferation of farms. Okay? It's not human beings breathing, which we'll get to that headline in just a second. It is in fact a concerted and diabolical effort to create a one world government in which freedom itself is anathema and abolished in favor of total abject subject subjugation under a technocratic, neofascist, feudal order of corporations.
So, that's the real threat, and the solution is Infowars. Support us at infowarsstore.com. So let's continue with the abject insanity of the climate change agenda, shall we? China kicks off World Economic Forum's summer Davos, because remember, the same people that are telling you that you can't have children and have to, basically, kill yourself and injure bloodline for the sake of the planet are also deeply in bed with China, which I remind you, built more coal plants than the rest of the world last year, 6 times more. China's building 6 times more new coal power plants than other countries, report fines.
So they're literally building 100 of these. I think last year, it was 2 coal power yeah. Right here in the story. 2 coal power plants per week they're building. So while they're shutting down pipelines here, shutting down oil fields here, shutting down coal power plants here and in Europe, they are partnered with and deeply embed with China that is building them at a rate that is hard to even imagine.
2 per week for an entire year on average. So, again, hopefully, it's bashing you over the head, the hypocrisy that is innate in all of this, which isn't just hypocrisy. These aren't hypocrites. They're liars. They're deceivers.
They don't believe what they claim to believe. It's not hypocrisy because hypocrisy can in a way be a positive thing. If I tell you not to smoke, but I'm a smoker, I'm being a hypocrite, but I'm still telling you something good that you should listen to even if I myself don't follow it. These people are just liars. They're just lying to enslave you.
Five ways a bioethicist wants to change our bodies to fight climate change. This from Marketplace talking about doctor s Matthew Liao, a bioethicist in New York University who thinks that we should make humans allergic to meat because that's the best way to stop us from eating meat, to actually turn our body into a a vessel for their own designs. And he's the one that and we've seen the video quite a bit. Very coincidentally coincides with the proliferation of ticks that do make you allergic to meat, and he's out there saying, you know, that could actually be a good thing. Maybe we should do that.
Maybe we should make everyone allergic to meat to stop them from eating meat. I'm an insane tyrant. These people, you guys, these people. My god. Okay.
So, what what have we what what do we got so far? It's, it's a crisis of our generation. It's dangerous and everywhere. It's a health emergency. It can bring pandemics back.
It's being inflicted on your city, not just your nation as mayors sign on to this. People are bioengineer or, rather geoengineering the climate by spraying metal particles into the sun, what we used to call chemtrails, but we now call, strategic aerosol injections. We've got Bill Gates and John Kerry taking on the burden taking on the absolute burden and obligation of flying around the world in their private jets and living on yachts in order to tell us how we can't own cars anymore. And, of course, climate change is responsible for hurricanes and wildfires that were actually started by arsonists and a number of other things, including tornadoes. FEMA administrator blames climate change for deadly tornado outbreak.
Chriswell called such a severe and sustained outbreak of deadly storms this year this late in the year unprecedented. This will be the new normal from now on, he says, as climate change causes deadly tornadoes. Because why not? Why why wouldn't it? I mean, sure, I guess.
Tornado weather, climate weather, climate change, c o two, greenhouse gases, it all makes sense. Kill yourself. You have to kill yourself to save the earth. Tornadoes are bad because you're alive. Okay?
Glad we cleared that up. Bill Gates, meanwhile, is the biggest private owner of farmland in the United States because why should he have to pass a bill to make beef illegal when they can literally just shut down farms by buying them? Kinda like if you have a a tech company and a competitor comes out with a new product that threatens your market share, and so you buy it and then shut it down. You put it into r and d forever and never actually release it to the market, not because it's a less good product, but because it's a competitor to yours. That's they're taking these corporate dog eat dog kind of zero sum game tactics to the world of land and food and basic wealth.
Bill Gates has never been a farmer, so why did the land report redub dub him Farmer Bill this year? The 3rd richest man on the planet doesn't have a green thumb, nor does he put in the backbreaking labor humble humble people do to grow our food and get far less praise for it. That kind of work isn't what made him rich. Gates' achievement, according to the report, is that he's the largest private owner of farmland in the United States. A 2018 purchase of 14,500 acres of prime Eastern Washington farmland for 171,000,000 helped him get that title.
He is, of course, the largest landowner, farmlandowner in America, and he also wants to depopulate the planet in part by stopping you from eating beef beef or anything really. We'll get to that on the other side as we continue this, but in the topic of meat, NYC's vegan mayor Eric Adams' 2 limit amount of meat people can eat to combat climate change. You can't eat a burger because we have climate change to solve. Ignore the, you know, proliferation of world trade and massive boats flying across the ocean multiple times. It's your fault for eating.
Speaker 1: While other networks lie to you about what's happening now, Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next. Infowars.comforward/go.
Speaker 2: Unless you've been living under a rock, you've heard how amazing turmeric is for inflammation, for your joints, your bones, your blood, your organs, your mind, everything. Well, we have body's ultimate turmeric formula with 95% acumenoid extract. No one that we know of has it even above 85%. This is the strongest formula on the market, and it's way lower priced than some of the top brands out there that are 75%, 80% humanoid. Bodies ultimate turmeric formula is amazing.
You're missing out if you don't try it. It's discounted right now, 40 percent off info warsstore.com, and it funds the Info War, a total 3 60 win. You owe it to yourself to try bodies. I know you'll be amazed. Get yours right now atnfowarsstore.com or call toll free, triple 8, 253-3139.
Bodies, 95 percent of humanoid extract will absolutely blow you away. All you gotta do is try it. Get yours now. Infowarsstore.com.
@infowars - INFOWARS
The story isn't the Super Bowl. It's the propaganda surrounding the Super Bowl. https://t.co/Vo99lozBbC
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses their disappointment with the Super Bowl, stating that it has become more about propaganda than football. They criticize the strange and disturbing aspects of the event, such as performers wearing clown wigs and satanic symbols. The speaker also mentions their frustration with the commercials and the lack of originality in Hollywood. They discuss the cultural decline and the divide and conquer tactics being used. The speaker concludes by mentioning the controversial Jesus washing feet commercial and promises to discuss major geopolitical events that occurred during the Super Bowl.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Of course, like always, the story wasn't the game. It was the propaganda surrounding the game. I think it was Owen Shroyer 1776 on Twitter, Owen posting yesterday. When I grew up, you know, the Super Bowl is about football, And then it became about football with a heavy dose of propaganda. Now it's mostly propaganda with a little bit of football in between.
That's honestly how it felt. I'm sure I'm not alone amongst our audience in the Super Bowl being one of the only times I've watched TV for an extended period in a very long time. And let me just say, America is a Horrifying freak show. And everything about it is just it's just disgusting. It's just disgusting and awful.
And I part of me is sort of glad that I feel that way and glad that most people that I follow on social media seem to feel that way. Everybody just sort of Just viscerally disgusted at everything that they were seeing on TV yesterday. And that means that you're you're like a frog that's able to tell the water is hot. And you have avoided being slowly boiled in this cultural morass. Because most you realize most people, they they watch what happened.
Like, they watched the Super Bowl yesterday. They watched just everybody being a A tatted up weirdo. They see every just saw the all the weirdness, and, like, it doesn't even faze them. It they don't even know What they're seeing is so horrifying and wrong because slowly but surely all of these little pieces have been introduced to their lives, and they just accept each new horrifying advance in culture as inevitable and unquestionable and not even to be remarked upon. But when you're out of it for a while and then you jump into it, it's just like, what is this?
There's a video of, I guess a famous clown. I don't know. Who is Ice Spice? Is she a clown? She wears a clown wig.
Her hair is a clown hair. What is she a singer? Is she like Bozo, a famous clown? I I don't know, but she's wearing an upside down cross necklace. She's doing satanic hand symbols while Taylor Swift and Some other woman drink beer in a very performative way.
It's all just terrible. Like, it's, like, unbelievable. It legitimate is legitimately is unbelievable. My brother-in-law, who we're watching this with, I was like, what is who who is this? What what are they singing?
I'm like, oh, that's the black national anthem. And he's like, oh, right. Right. Wait. What?
He's just like, are you serious? Are you are you serious right now? He's, like, so mad. It's like, dude. Yeah.
You're you know, he's like a scientist. He's he's doing engineering constantly. He's not paying attention to pop culture. It's like, no. Yeah.
This has been around for a while. Yeah. There's a black national anthem, and it's not good. It's not good. Then I guess the white national anthem is Post Malone playing America the Beautiful.
That was also kind of weird, dressed up like a like a country singer. And, again, part of me is like, I don't even want my kids seeing this because it's just everybody like, the everybody's just a Freak. Like, they're all just freaks. I don't know how else to describe it. And, like, I you know, we got we got crew members here tatted up.
Cool tattoos. I I don't really have a problem with tattoos, but it's the face tattoos. It's the creepy teeth that are metal. It's just It's all just so weird, and part of me is like, I don't even want my kids seeing this. So I'm having nightmares about some Metal mouthed, tatted up weirdo tonight.
But the other hand, it's like, I can't walk him down the street either because that's how it looks in Austin anyway. So We're just surrounded by weirdos and freaks and psychopaths. It's all it's all very weird. And it made me think of the one of the first Super Bowls I remember, probably the first one I really remember. I think I was, like, 10, maybe 9.
And I remember just, like, watching the Super Bowl with all my all my bros in elementary school. We were so hyped about the Super Bowl that during halftime, we went out and Played football in the street. When we came back in, we'd learned there been some sort of wardrobe malfunction. And, of course, that was the Justin Timberlake and what's her name, Jackson. And I, like because we didn't see it.
I just I just I have such a distinct memory. We're at my friend Cameron's house. We're out playing football, came back in, and, like, a kid or 2 had stayed in there, like, oh, you missed. We saw boobs. There were boobs on TV while you guys were outside.
We were like, what? What? What do you mean? They're like, yeah, it was a wardrobe malfunction. I remember even at 10 sort of being like, having this awareness of, like, oh, everybody is lying.
Because then later, you see the video, and I just remember, like, because I had I didn't see it live. And then afterwards, heard, like, malfunction wardrobe malfunction. They're saying it was an accident. There something happened, and she accidentally was exposed, and it's very embarrassing. And then you watch the video, and it's Justin Timberlake just very clearly reaching over and ripping the shirt off on purpose in a choreographed way.
And I remember just being 10 years old and being like, oh, everybody is lying. Oh, everybody is pretending like this is an accident even though it is manifestly obvious to everybody watching that it was on purpose and preplanned and not an accident at all. It's just another so, you know, not only being 10 and having some sort of vague awareness that this was like a like a ceremonial thing. Like, I, you know, I'm still not even sure exactly what the what the purpose of it is. But to get, like, you know, all of America, you know, it's it's incredibly valuable cultural moment to, stop and yeah.
And there's the ripping off. And I remember, you you know, at 10 years old being like, that wasn't an accident. What the hell is everybody talking about? It's like, no. It was a it was a wardrobe malfunction.
Yeah. They're very sorry. Who who could have known that was gonna happen. And it's like, but the shirt just wears tassels around
Speaker 1: all the time.
Speaker 0: Right. Her she's like, like, that's it was so Obvious. The shirt had to be designed to come off like that. He reaches over and takes it off on purpose, obviously, and then she's got, like pasties covering her boobs. So, you know, it's just one of those times where it's like, oh, I don't I don't really get what's going on here, but I get that everybody is agreeing to lie about this.
I get that everybody is pretending to have not seen what we all just saw. Just odd more obvious you can possibly imagine. There's a rip off, and it's like, oh, oh my gosh. Well, like, oh, what a terrible accident that was. It was a wardrobe malfunction.
It's you know? So I just I wonder I wonder what formative memories are being formed in the minds of children who are watching whatever it was we saw last night in terms of the the cultural just cesspit we live in right now. And again, there's and again, I you know, god bless her. I literally Absolutely no idea, not even the slightest inclination to find out who Ice Spice is or why anybody pays attention to her. Who the hell knows?
It's a mystery as far as I'm concerned, and I don't want it explained to me. But why does she look like a clown? Why does she have a clown wig on what is that about? I wonder. Honestly, I don't know.
But it's all very sad. It's all very sad. This country we live in, I can only imagine to being older than I am. Because like I said, I mean, one of the first Super Bowls I remember was them ripping the shirt off, and I can only imagine being like my grandparents who grew up. My grandfather played in one of the first televised football games ever When he was at OU, and they televised a college football game, he was kicked out in the first, like, 2 minutes because he got in a fight with somebody.
So It's like a story in my family where it's like, yeah. It's like this big deal, a televised football game, the whole family gathering around to watch JD Compete, one of the first televised football games, and he has to go and get in a fist fight in the first five minutes and get kicked out. I can only imagine Having grown up watching football in the sixties seventies when it's all just Good, wholesome American fun. You sit down to enjoy the Super Bowl like you have for the last 50 years, and it's just whatever we saw yesterday. Just endless chaos.
Even, you know, they sing the national anthem. That was kinda nice. People stood. The shot of the guy weeping, that was impactful. That was nice.
And then immediately, It's a commercial for, like, a horror movie. I see my sister we're at my sister's house. So there's, like, 7 kids running around all under the age of 4. And, as soon as it comes on, the sister, like, sees what's happening and starts like, runs to the back of the room and is like, wow. Look at me.
Look at me. Look what doing I'm doing something crazy just to distract the kids because and all the kids are turning and looking at at my sister, and behind them On the TV is just like these whole these flashes of just like aliens, like, grabbing people's faces. It's just like, Why can we not? Why can my children not watch the Super Bowl? Why is watching the Super Bowl just means that you're gonna be bombarded with nightmarish psychological terrors.
Just what what is this country? Why does everything suck so hard, so bad? It's everything is just So ugly. The black national anthem. I mean, it's just it's just bad.
It's Who the hell is Highspice? Who else is Highspice? It's a damn good question, mister Trump. Yeah. The Black National Alliance, it's like it's all these, like, just incredibly fat black women just like just like doing these weird hand motions, and we're all just watching it just like Snickering just like, what is this?
It's like, this is this is bad. I don't know. It's just bad. And then, of course, jokingly referring to the the national anthem as the white national anthem. Actually, I said that on Twitter.
She was like, why are you playing into the to the divide and conquer? And it's like, no. I'm highlighting how stupid this is, How utterly ridiculous this whole faux, sincere, facsimile of dignity that's going on here. Whatever this this weird she's in, like, some she just looks like a middle schooler wearing her dad's Double breasted coat goes down to, like, her knees. I don't know.
And they all act so So soulful, like, oh, this is such an important powerful thing. It's like, no. You're just you're just participating in a divide yeah. This dude with this weird, like, huge gauges in his ears signing along. You know, this is on TV.
Right? You can just have subtitles. Deaf people can read. So what is the signing about? Just what it so So there's nothing sincere about this.
There's nothing dignified about this. There's nothing it's just it's a divide and conquer cultural Marxist, satanic ritual you're all participating in. So just stop it. Just stop. If we could just stop, that would be nice.
Anyway, yeah. There's news too. By the way, while the Super Bowl is actually happening, there were actually Major geopolitical events going on. So we'll get to those today. We won't spend the whole time on, the Super Bowl, but we will spend a pretty good amount of time on the Commercials after all.
I mean, it is. It is. It's one of these cultural sig very culturally significant events. We used to have a lot of them. We used to have several.
Right? It used to be like the Grammys and the Oscars and the Super Bowl, and everybody would tune in. It would be something that you talked about for a while, big cultural moments would happen. Now, you know, it's just nobody really even cares about the Oscar. Just like you just see, you know, a list stars slapping each other later.
You know, the next day, You see the video of Will Smith slapping the crap out of Chris Rockford insulting his just Thoroughly detestable wife, Jada Pinkett Smith. So, you know, nobody really cares about the Oscars anymore. They don't even pretend it's about art or film or culture. It's literally a, racial whatever. It's like, This is the best every everybody nominated for best actor has to be black.
That's the new rule. I was just like, okay. Alright. So I guess I'm not watching the Oscars anymore. I guess that's not a culturally significant unifying thing anymore where all Americans can come together to see glitz and glamour and act like we're in some sort of first world country.
Nope. Now it's just fist fights and racism. Wonderful. Good to see. So there's not so many anymore.
The Super Bowl is still, like, though the last remaining cultural event. So it's important. And the commercials are an event as well, and they were awful. And, you know, one of the things we're gonna talk about we're gonna talk about the the Jesus washing feet Commercial, that one, oh, boy. Are we gonna spin it?
We're gonna go frame by frame through that little doozy. So don't worry about that. But one of the weird things is, like, all the celebrities in the Super Bowl, they're all, like, 70 years old. All the celebrities that get trotted out is, like, Arnold Schwarzenegger, like Danny DeVito. You get that this is This is cultural death.
Right? Like, nobody cares about the young people anymore. That's why Taylor Swift is such a big deal right now. She's, like, the last remaining White pop star that anybody, like, actually cares about and actually has some semblance of talent. So it's just it's just kind of sad seeing all of the the celebrities you're supposed to get all excited about.
They're all, like, geriatric. They're all so old because for the last 20 years, nothing of cultural significance has come out of Hollywood or the music industry. It's just all trash. It's all remakes. I only watch about half the game, so I even get, like, half the commercials.
But the ones that I did see, You know, they're it's they're remaking, now they're making a a movie out of Wicked, which is the Broadway play. So, again, you know, it's a remake, a reimagining of an old film only with the bad guy as the protagonist. Wonderful. Great. That's what that's that's what we need.
Not not any sort of Fairy tale level good and evil, but, like, everything's gray. We don't we're not sure whether the bad guy is really bad or not. We don't know. Black actress playing a a tit titular role, I guess. So that's great.
You know, just harvesting movies from a 100 years ago at this point because we can't come up with anything original. And then you've got, like, Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, which I guess is a prequel to a sequel, to a remake of an old movie. Right? The planet of the apes from the sixties or whenever got remade, And now they're now it's a franchise. Now it's a u now it's a cinematic universe, of course.
So, like, it's not just not original. Not original would be okay. You're remaking a movie. This is a prequel to a sequel to a remake of a movie. So that's that's nice.
Just how many layers of facsimile can you, Pound into it. So just, we just witnessed America's cultural death, just zombified cultural holdovers from the seventies. You know, at least at least Usher is only, like, 20 years out of date, Right? Doing the halftime show? At least only 20 years out out of date.
It's not it's not the Rolling Stones and the Beatles. We aren't having to go back 50 years to find something people actually enjoy. Only, like, 20 or so. Yeah. Just everything.
Everything. Everything. Did you
Speaker 1: hear Usher's halftime performance? Or
Speaker 0: I didn't. I didn't, and I frankly couldn't care less. And, of
Speaker 1: course like the mix they gave to the people watching the broadcast was pretty bad because It had a lot of the the mic'd up elements from the stadium.
Speaker 0: Oh,
Speaker 1: really? Yeah. It just wasn't I feel like Previous Super Bowl performances, they've given a better mix to the people watching the broadcast, and it sounded better. Soon, it was pretty tough.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I I've I kinda like it in double speed. In double speed, it looks very silly. Wait till we get
Speaker 1: to the part with the roller skates.
Speaker 0: Oh, no. There were roller skates? I literally could only stand to watch, like, half. And I mean, literally, it was like and I I feel like there were plays that happened during the commercial break. Was that something that other people noticed?
Where they would, like, come back from commercial break and the ball would have switched sides, and it's like, Well, wait. They were on 3rd down when we went to commercial break. What happened? I don't know if I'm the only one that noticed that or if that was I I mean, maybe I was missed it. But, like, And I'm not just complaining, like, there were too many commercials, but it was literally, like, you would see, like, a player to a football, and then there'd be A whole bunch of commercials.
Again, just watching it with 3 year olds, You're just like, what do what do these kids even think is going on? Do they have any idea? So it's one thing when it's like, okay. Here's a Here's a a football game that's, you know, and then it it goes commercial for a few minutes. So we're back in the football game where it's obvious that the football game is the thing that you're supposed to be watching.
But in this case, you'd get, like, 30 seconds of football, 2 minutes of commercials, 10 more seconds of football, 20 more minutes of commercials. Yeah. What it what is this? Oh, lord. Oh my god.
Straight from hell. Straight from the pits of hell. Okay. Alright. Alright.
Well, I guess we're gonna do your daily dispatch on the other side here. They're giving you
Speaker 1: Lord giving you a a kind of a preview of where you're gonna be if you don't wash everybody's feet.
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. Oh, we're We are going to get into the feet washing. Good lord. We're gonna get into the feet washing. Just one of the most obvious.
I feel
Speaker 1: like that commercial makes Jesus out to have, like, a foot fetish or something. Yeah. Jesus was really in defeat.
Speaker 0: I mean, look. I'll give him credit. If they wanted people talking about this, people are certainly talking about this. Whatever this is, Whatever this message is, and we'll get into what the message actually is. And I see some people with very, very generous interpretations of what we're looking at here.
I you don't give them the benefit of the doubt. We're gonna actually look at what this message is actually conveying, who it's actually conveying the message to, and what they can possibly mean by saying Jesus didn't teach hate. Jesus didn't teach hate. He washed To feed, he gets us. All of us.
Oh, man. I should have ended this, segment with the video. Devin Stack from Blackpilled did a did a remake, a parody of that. Maybe we'll come in with the parody on the other side. We'll show it to you either way where it's just Christians literally washing the feet of demons because that's the message I got from it.
We'll do your daily dispatch on the other side. I'll stop rambling about, football enough to get to the actual news about Major decisions and major world events, geopolitical goings on that occurred while everybody was distracted during the football. And then we will return to ranting about the Super Bowl. Oh, we definitely will. That was a thrilling night of the American decline and collapse.
We all so what if people got this, heated up about, like, humanity being destroyed? Wouldn't that be something? Wouldn't that be Crazy.
Speaker 2: Ladies and gentlemen, sold out for 5 months. The number one strongest turmeric in the world, body's ultimate turmeric.
@infowars - INFOWARS
FLASHBACK: @realAlexJones Eats Horse Paste to Prove Point About #Ivermectin https://t.co/AZsQKxSY8O
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses their personal decision to take Ivermectin and criticizes the corporate media for spreading misinformation. They claim that Ivermectin has been proven effective against COVID-19 and mention studies supporting its use. They express distrust in vaccines and accuse big pharma of lying. The speaker also mentions a fake news story about Ivermectin filling hospitals and introduces an investigative journalist who will expose the hoax. They promote various products from infowarsstore.com and urge viewers to take action before potential future shortages. The speaker concludes by mentioning the availability of turmeric concentrate, deep crystal iodine, living defense, palm and block, and a new charcoal activated toothpaste.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A nice little dose for myself. Apple flavors. Let's get a little bit extra there. And then let's have a cherry on top. Okay?
Because you give a horse base for the whole thing. Oh, I weigh about, you know, a third of a horse or less, so I'll just and there is the cherry on top. This is my personal decision. You should this is all the decision to not do this, but I want to show the corporate media. So look at this.
K. And they're gonna say, slide a hand. Watch. Cut to me. Watch.
See that? Watch. See that right there? Oh my gosh. That is absolutely hideous.
I mean, they told me not to take it. Yeehaw.
Speaker 1: Yeehaw. Yeehaw. Yeehaw.
Speaker 2: I turned into a Democrat.
Speaker 1: I took The Ivermectin. Oh, no. Fauci's right.
Speaker 2: I didn't turn into a horse. I turned into a donkey.
Speaker 1: Y'all. I'm gonna do it.
Speaker 0: Now she says to take all 5 boosters even though
Speaker 3: that'll protect me and gets rid of my.
Speaker 1: I love Pfizer. I don't care
Speaker 0: if all these other countries have banned the shots they're using here. I love the World ID.
Speaker 1: Oh, I shouldn't have listened to other medical doctors or the studies I've got right here. They were lying. It was Eddie Marrow. I turned it to a doggy. I love
Speaker 0: the liberals that work for get paid to be
Speaker 1: influencers. 1,000,000,000 of dollars have been paid. I could've been paid to tell people to take the shot. It would've saved them, but instead I'm a donkey. Yeehaw.
Yeehaw.
Speaker 4: You are listening to an info wars.com frontline report. If you are receiving this transmission, You are the resistance.
Speaker 0: Thank you again for joining us on this live Sunday, September 5th, global transmission. We have A investigative journalist joining us the next segment, blowing wide open. She's been interviewing a local TV station that lied and put out the hoax report that thousands were in the hospital. The you know, their livers were failing from Ivermectin. Not one person in that hospital chain Therefore Ivermectin, no overdoses, not one patient.
The the doctor doesn't work there. It was all made up. Plenty of hospital beds, plenty of ambulances. Again, another corporate hoax. The Rolling Stone has had to retract, putting out the hospital's press release.
But where's MSNBC? Where's CNN? Where's the young curds? Where's Hassan Pecker? And all these other people that have been out there lying and saying this happened because I took Ivermectin last week on air prescribed by my doctor.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, for symptoms of COVID 19. Knocked it right out and knocked it right out for my parents. And last segment, I showed you a bunch of mainline studies showing that, but here's the Rolling Stone Retraction saying it was all a lie, a total hoax, and here are a bunch of the studies on the NIH website about it knocking out COVID 19. If you get to people early, basically, a 100%, absolutely incredible. Ivermectin wonder drug from Japan, Antiviral used to knock out Zika, used to knock out Ebola.
That's why they tried it on this. They do not want you to know this information. So Here's my prescription. I ended up having, you know, some left over. I got better before I, needed it anymore, and I took this, on air on Friday.
And the leftist all said that I'm a liar. They went on to try to claim that some reason I'm having trouble opening this. For some reason, they claim that I didn't take it. They also, love to lie. They absolutely love to lie over and over again and say it's easy on Friday, do it.
They love the line said that I'm vaccinated. Well, that's not a vaccine. The COVID 19 injections are not a vaccine. They're a gene therapy. And, no, I would never take that.
You're an idiot if you say I am. So here it is. Here's the pill. Overhead shot, please, ladies and gentlemen. K.
There is the pill. There is the ivermectin container it came out of. There is my prescription with my name on it right there, and here is the spoon, And here is the pace, ladies and gentlemen. Exact same molecule. Don't do this yourself.
Consult a physician. But I worked with a large animal there for many years. A nice little dose for myself. Apple flavors. Let's get a little bit extra there.
And then let's have a cherry on top. Okay? Because you give a horse base for the whole thing. Oh, I weigh about, you know, a third of a horse or less, so I'll just. And there is the cherry on top.
This is my personal decision. You should just hold the position to not do this, but I want to show the corporate media. So look at this. K. And they're gonna say, slide a hand.
Watch. Cut to me. Watch. See that? Watch.
See that right there? Oh my gosh. That is absolutely hideous. They also I don't know. Go back to me.
They also said that I was drinking a beer on there. No. That's lime Tapachiko. Been drinking these for 30 years. Nonalcoholic.
Absolutely. That is delicious. So there you go. Bon appetit. Now they say, You're gonna turn into a horse.
They say, oh, we're just joking when they say that, but it it's it's a dumb down thing to so the public doesn't talk to an alternative doctor or research antivirals or Hydroxychloroquine or quercetin or zinc or vitamin d because they want you to only rely on big pharma and the gene therapies and the rest of it. That's what they want. They want you living in fear. They don't want you to see the studies. They want to basically keep you in the dark.
The same big pharma this This week, federal judge ruled that the makers of OxyContin who admitted in their own documents, they created to addict people and and got it approved for children. The head of the FDA currently did that. She also got fentanyl, approved. What a monster. You know, these same people are now telling you that it's an approved vaccine When actually the head scientist quit and said they didn't really approve it.
It's all a fraud. So these people are liars, and they don't want you to know about Ivermectin. It's won a Nobel Prize in 2015 and so much more. But I gotta tell you, though, something's starting to happen. Something's starting to go on here.
I mean, I don't know what's about to go down. I'm not I'm not quite sure. I mean, they told me not to take it.
Speaker 1: Yeehaw. Yeehaw. Yeehaw. Yeehaw.
Speaker 2: I turned into a Democrat.
Speaker 1: I took the ivermectin. Oh, no. Fauci's right.
Speaker 2: I didn't turn into a horse. I turned into a donkey.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna do it. Now she
Speaker 0: says it'll take all 5 boosters even though it
Speaker 3: doesn't protect me and gets
Speaker 1: rid of my. I love Pfizer. I don't
Speaker 0: care about these other countries that banned the shots they're using here. I love the World ID. Oh, hey. Oh,
Speaker 1: Oh, I shouldn't have listened to other medical doctors or the studies I've got right here. They were lying I turned it to a doggy.
Speaker 0: I love the liberals that work for big Everybody get paid
Speaker 1: to be influencers. 1,000,000,000 of dollars have been paid. I could have been paid to tell people to take their shot. They would have saved them instead. I'm a donkey.
Yeehaw. Yeehaw.
Speaker 0: The headlines will be Jones has completely lost it. He now thinks he's a donkey. No. It's called having some fun. So anybody can go to the NIH website and type in Ivermectin.
You'll get their press release saying it's deadly. Don't take it. Oh my god. We love you. Take your Pfizer shots.
And then you can go read the literal 100 of studies on it. Dozens on antiviral, and then realize what criminals they are at at the top. But the number one scientist and the number 2 virologists, number 1 and number 2, at the FDA are supposed to be over this said, this is all political. This is a lie. Children shouldn't take any of these GMO shots.
These are not really vaccines, and it's not really been approved, and we're against the booster shots. But what did Boris Johnson say when his own government came out and said don't do it? And the EU government came out and said do it. They said, we don't care. We're gonna override the scientists.
Trust the science. Override their own pro vaccine scientists in the EU, in the UK, in the United States that said don't do it. So I turned into a donkey. Maybe you'll turn into a horse. Here it is.
Speaker 5: Hello. I'm mister Red.
Speaker 6: A horse is a horse, of course, of course. And no one can talk to a horse, Of course, that
Speaker 5: is, of course, unless the horse is the famous mister a. Go right to the source and ask the
Speaker 6: horse.
Speaker 5: He'll give you the answer that you endorse. He's always on
Speaker 6: A horse is a horse, of course, of course. And no one can talk to a horse, of course.
Speaker 5: That is, of course, unless The horse is the famous mister a. Go right to the source and ask the horse. He'll give you the answer that you endorse. He's was on a steady course. Fuck you, mister Ed.
You go yackety yack the street and waste your time today. But mister Ed will never speak Unless he has something to say. A horse is a horse.
Speaker 6: Of course. Of course. And this one will
Speaker 5: talk to his voice, his horse. You never heard of a talking horse? Well, listen to this. I am mister Teehaw. Teehaw.
Speaker 0: Take care of vaccines. Fauci loves you. We'll be right back with investigative reporter who's about to expose the fake news story saying Ivermectin is filling the hospitals with dead and dying. Stay with us. With all the craziness going on in the world, it's more important than ever to protect our bodies.
And infowarsstore.com has a line of high quality products that have the very best ingredients for your body, for your body's natural defenses, for your immune system, for every cellular function that happens in these bodies that God gave us. And we've been sold out for months months months of a lot of our best selling products. But thank god they're finally back in. But because of new COVID lockdowns around the world, We're already having problems securing future orders. So I would take action now and get these great products at infowarsstore.com that you in front of me because it also funds the InfoWar, and you don't know when you'll be able to get them again.
Vita Mineral Fusion has become probably our number 1 or number 2 Bestseller. It varies each month between x two because it's got all the vitamins, all the minerals that are essential, and a bunch of key amino acids, and it's all natural, and it tastes great. Wonderful for children. It's excellent for adults, but especially old people because older folks have trouble absorbing vitamin and minerals when they're in pill form. This is in powder form.
So, again, you get a much better absorption rate because you drink it in the mouth. It mixes with saliva that begins the digestion process, and then, again, it's liquefied in the gut, and you get almost a 100% absorption rather than just maybe 20, 30, 40% absorption depending on the studies you see out there, with the caplets. I mean, some of the vitamins minerals are great because they're in powder forms. You're still getting good absorption, but nothing like when it's in powder 1st, put it into water that you then drink. So the Vita Mineral Fusion is back in stock, 33% off at infowarsstore.com, and it funds the Infowar.
Then, of course, we have our pure turmeric concentrate formula, very similar to bodies, a very strong turmeric concentrate. It's discounted infowarsstore.com. That's great for inflammation, great for immune system x 2, the deep crystal iodine. We've got living defense. We've got palm and block.
We've got the new toothpaste. All of it back in stock. When I say new toothpaste, we had our original tooth whitening silver toothpaste that we, had to discontinue, but we had already come out with a new charcoal activated toothpaste that had gotten very popular. But it had been Almost 7 months since we had it, these are supply chain breakdowns. It is now back in stock.
Also, hit infowarsstore.com with all the
@infowars - INFOWARS
City governments are now paying out millions in tax dollars to BLM protesters injured during the Floyd Riots of 2020. @HarrisonHSmith with the story: https://t.co/eHWy5jCj3A
Video Transcript AI Summary
Seattle has agreed to pay $10 million to 50 rioters injured by police during the George Floyd riots. Other cities like Denver, Philadelphia, and New York City are also paying out millions to Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters. This means that taxpayers' money is being used to reward rioters who caused billions of dollars in damage and even killed people. It's a stark contrast to how protesters on the side of Trump are treated, often facing long jail sentences. The speaker urges viewers to vote and support Infowars, claiming they provide the truth about what's happening.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Seattle to pay Black Lives Matter rioters $10,000,000 in lawsuit related to George Floyd riots. So, yes, folks, In case you were wondering, if you protest on the side of Trump, then you get sent to jail for 20 years. You spend 2 years in solitary confinement before you ever even have a trial. Your life is destroyed. Your money is confiscated.
You are treated like a domestic terrorist and shoved in a box for the rest of your life. If you protest for George Floyd, however, you get a payout. You get tens of 1,000 of dollars. So the American government, these city governments are effectively not been effective. Literally, they're literally paying rioters with tax dollars.
They're rewarding the people that burned their cities down with $20,000 checks in some cases, and this is just the latest. Seattle has agreed to pay $10,000,000 to 50 rioters injured by police in 2020, Denver is paying 4,700,000 to 300 BLM rioters arrested in 2020. Philadelphia is paying them 9,000,000. New York City is shelling out 13,000,000. In total, 90 plus $1,000,000 in taxpayer money is going to pay out BLM protesters in 20 US cities.
In some cases, just for the fact that they were arrested. Literally, you have people engaged in a riot, getting arrested by the police, and then a year to 2 years later, receiving a $20,000 check from the city for their participation in these riots. So you wanna talk about subversion. You wanna talk about an insurrection. They're paying tens of 1,000,000 of dollars, nearly a $100,000,000 paid to the rioters who caused $10,000,000,000 in damage and, you know, killed 12 people and destroyed the very fabric of our nation.
They're being rewarded with your tax dollars by these leftist cities. Just take that into account as you think about the situation America now finds itself. Vote. While other networks lie to you about what's happening now, Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next. Infowars.comforward/go.
Speaker 1: The second American revolution is happening now right in front of you. And you're tuned in Infowars because you're either looking for the truth or you're already a patriot. I'm asking you now vote. Realize we are at the fulcrum, the crossroads in the fight for human destiny and human future. Please spread the word about Broadcast.
Please buy great products at 4 wars store dotcom, and please pray for the transmission. Without you, We're gonna fail. But if you simply take action and spread the word and pray for the broadcast and buy the products, you will continue vote. To aid us together in our victory against these tires. But now is the time to make the decision.
I know there's millions of forms of media out there and all this BS, and the globalist hope You get lost in all of it. But notice the globalist, the new world order are coming after us because they realize we've got their number. Think about it. Infowars This is the tip of the spear. If you wanna support the tip of the spear, that decision is up to you.
Please support us now at Fuller's Story.
@infowars - INFOWARS
"They're going to stage terror attacks, they're going to blame it on us, they're going to come after anybody that criticizes them, and if you roll over to them they win" - Alex Jones exactly 10 years ago today. https://t.co/0z7jun0eph
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses concern about the dangerous individuals in power and the media who engage in social engineering. They mention that people are waking up to their programs but also highlight the threats they pose to empowered individuals who are aware of their actions. The speaker emphasizes the need to recognize the danger and stand up against the illegitimate criminals who seek to build a technocracy. They mention the possibility of staged events like bioweapon releases or nuclear attacks to maintain control. The speaker believes that the enemy is losing strength and that there is an organic response from individuals in various sectors. They urge listeners to resist and not submit to the enemy's agenda.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: People that run the state apparatus and the media apparatus are very, very dangerous. Anti humans engaged in major social engineering. You know, the good news is their program's in trouble. People are waking up to them. The bad news is they're saying we need to kill nonstate state actors like Edward Snowden.
And we need to also take out we need to take out and get rid of, eliminates the word, empowered individuals who know the globalist or tyrants, who are conscious, who is empowered, people that know what's going on and who are instinctively threatened by it and won't go along with it. This shows we're in the fight. This shows the huge effect that we can have. This shows what we can do. This shows the power of humanity, but it also shows we're right there at the edge here.
We're in the fight. We could win this, but folks have to admit how much danger we're in, that the global governance heads are saying the enemy is libertarians. That's what Edward Snowden is. The enemy is empowered individuals. The enemy is Thomas Jefferson.
The enemy is George Washington. The enemy is 1776 worldwide. The enemy isn't communist China. The globalist run and work with a bunch of, you know, fellow, communist and killers and psychopaths and monopoly men. The enemy isn't North Korea.
It's not Germany. It's not all the corrupt ruling elites. They can all get together and meet and decide, you know, new criminal operations against humanity. Their enemy is the individual standing up and saying no and the individual linking up with other individuals and and and collectively as individuals saying, we recognize you're illegitimate criminals. We withdraw our consent.
We withdraw our support. You're not gonna build your technocracy. We're aware of it. We're gonna dismantle it. You've declared war on us.
We declare survival on you. We're not declaring war on you. We're declaring that we aren't slaves. We have inalienable rights. We run up the flag of liberty, and we do not submit.
We do not comply. We are awake. We are conscious. You people are declaring war on yourselves. You are mentally ill, power drunk, out of control, playing god with your technological elite, as Eisenhower said, and we are not going to put up with it anymore.
You can see all the scripting in the TV, the movies preparing the public where the militia releases a bioweapon. The militia nukes a city working with Al Qaeda. Totally ridiculous. Yeah. Saying the Tea Party works with Al Qaeda, in Pentagon training manuals where they invade North Carolina, that got leaked last year.
And people say, well, that doesn't make sense. The Tea Party's Islamophobic. It doesn't matter. They will nuke a city, and they will, have some drugged up militia guy with a drugged up Al Qaeda guy, and they'll who've been electro shocked and don't even know who they are to get up on TV and say, yeah. I did it.
These guys have probably been, you know, 6 months in a torture dungeon. Then they'll later kill them, bring out body doubles. I mean, that's the kind of stuff they do in these operations. They will nuke a city. They will release a bioweapon.
I'm telling you. They will do one of those two things or they will nerve gas a football game. I'm telling you. Something big. In fact, I think to really bring us to our knees, I think they're gonna nuke a city.
I mean, I'm I just cannot believe I'm on air talking about this. I cannot believe it's this real. I cannot believe I'm not even afraid of being killed. And I'm not saying I'm a hero here, folks. I'm just telling you, you better know nobody else gets it like we do.
Nobody else will hardcore go up against the enemy. And I hope you realize as listeners, this shows we're in the game. The fact that so many people in military are awake, the fact that so many media people behind the scenes are awake, the fact that more and more media people in the mainstream are leaking what they can, telling me off record, hey. I've been sent here by, you know, AP or Reuters to do a hit piece on you, but I'm not going to. I've been sent here by, hey.
We all know what's going on. You know, the revolution's coming. It's all gonna come down. They know behind the scenes they've lost the military. They're losing the media.
They're losing conservatives. They're losing liberals, and they want us all in fight. They may stage a race war or something. I don't know. But I don't think that's enough for them.
They are in a desperate situation. If you read his quotes on infowars.com right now in this article, He says the new world order's done. Global governance is failing if they don't have a giant crisis like a new war or a terror attack. And the Chinese behind the scenes are working with these people, the Chinese Chicomps. They may let them attack that Philippine island or one of those other islands off Japan as the Chinese say they're getting ready to do, and even have a limited exchange between ships and and have a real war, but not nuke each other and then have a big fake peace deal.
That's the governments have done this. I've read stuff from 600 years ago, 700 years ago, where you'd have 50 year, 20 year, 100 year wars between France and England. And they'd be, you know, the, the British royalty was really at that time Norman Viking slash French, and they would say, I'm having uprisings, cousin, to the other king. We're gonna invade at Brittany again, and then you let us have Samaria, then we'll let you invade. We need to kill off some peasants and and and cause a distraction.
Knowing the uprisings in England and France would stop if they could get each other fighting. So these were hereditary cousins, and these are public letters now. Many of these are famous. You can pull them up. They're online doing this.
So they're making deals with China, I believe, to have a limited staged police action war, which could get out of hand quite easily. The war with Russia shit is real from everything I've seen. You know, the the moving of missiles in, trying to destabilize Russia, trying to do all that stuff. But I'm telling you, that could be the false flag. It could be a nuke going off.
And that's why I'm so concerned because they're losing the info war in their own words. We are absolutely turbocharging at every level over the enemy right now. We're now getting into their main command bases if you were to use this in a two dimensional classical battlefield scenario. We are about to route their general staff. We're about to take out the command structure.
Speaker 1: We are engaged in an information war. You know, during the Cold War, we did a great job in getting America's message out. After the Berlin Wall fell, we said, okay. Fine. Enough of that.
You know, we've done it. We're done. And, unfortunately, we are paying a big price for it. And our our private media cannot fill that gap.
Speaker 0: So now what are they doing? They're coming out with fake foundation alternative media. They're activating their operatives and alternative media to start infighting and lies. You're gonna see all hell break loose. Before they physically kill me, they will plant stories, make stuff up.
You name it. They'll do it to other people. But we now have the moral high ground, and we have so many people in the FBI, NSA, CIA, Defense Intelligence, Marine Corps, Army, Air Force, private corporations. Our people are everywhere. When they stage an underwear bombing, we within 2 days have the lawyer on who saw at all stage, and then later it all comes out the CIA ran it.
We have HUMET organic true operatives that are the organic battle response of a free nation and our forebearers worldwide, not just in America, there is an organic autoimmune response to a takeover like this. We are the organic military cultural response. We are in a war, ladies and gentlemen. This is it. And we are literally in a battle with these guys.
And we're all bleeding, but we're in the fight. We're getting the initiative. The enemy is losing strength. They've got wounds all over them. We're about to win, and I'm telling you I'm telling you, they're gonna pull out all the stops.
So so this is a organized governmental system that says, quote, empowered individuals are the enemy. They've already taken over national sovereignty worldwide. They're mopping up a few countries. Now it's the individual. And then you look at who runs this.
And, you know, the average people out there are good, are moral, are hardworking. There's so many good professionals in this country. Doctors, lawyers, police officers, school teachers, factory owners, business, people, I mean, the artists. I mean, the the list goes on and on. Service folks.
There's so many good people, but we just cede control to guys in suits that land in helicopters and have red carpets because, you know, they're on red carpets. They they must be good guys. Well, president Eisenhower, 53 years ago today, said beware the technocratic technological elite getting control, and and we're gonna play that entire speech coming up at the bottom of the hour. I'm gonna be talking over it adding points. So it's very, very important to understand that.
But this is so huge. Oh, you should go read the quotes for yourself on inflow wars.com. Purging the military, preparing for war domestically, their own training manuals, preparing for treason, preparing for hot coup, preparing for for a purge of the American people, preparing for civil war. I mean, we're talking about just hellish stuff when they finally drop the hammer and implode the economy completely. They're gonna stage terror attacks.
They're gonna blame it on us. They're gonna come after anybody that criticizes them. And folks, if you roll over to them, they win. And that's what all this is about, ladies and gentlemen, because they already taught Americans, black, white, Hispanic, doesn't matter not to have kids. We're all dying 1.3% replacement rate.
So the argument's true to support Social Security and all of it. You gotta bring in 30,000,000 illegals every 10 years because that many people are dying, basically. Boy, haven't they screwed things up by design? But they don't care because they run the train wreck. I wanna hear from you.
If you work for the system, in the system, at a corporate insurance company, if you're a retired FBI agent, if you're a cop, military. I mean, am I wrong this is a coup d'etat takeover? They say it in their own words. They say they need a terror attack to be able to go after, quote, empowered individuals, and that the elite are losing control. Yeah.
Because people know you're crooks. My friends, Alex Jones here to
Speaker 1: tell you about of the most important information concerning you and
Speaker 0: your family's health. Radiation levels have more than doubled in the last 60 years in the northern hemisphere. From all of the nuclear testing and radiological accidents, radioactive contamination is now in most of the food supply. There's only two ways to avoid this. Move south of the equator or properly protect your thyroid with nascent iodine.
Looking to protect my family, I've done deep research. Nascent iodine is the purest, cleanest, to absolute best form of iodine to protect yourself and your family. It's made right here in the USA, completely non GMO. I searched out the best quality and now have developed a double strength form of nascent iodine exclusively available at infowarslife.com. Nascent iodine is on record as one of the only safe ways to detox from fluoride poisoning.
Survival shield nascent iodine. Secure your super high quality nascent iodine today at infowarslife.com. That's infowarslife.com.
@infowars - INFOWARS
"If there is one country that's actually a threat to America, it's 100% China. It's a threat that has not just gone unopposed; the American establishment has done everything they can to empower China." - @HarrisonHSmith just now on InfoWars https://t.co/3gIAvEFCCa
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the threat posed by China to the United States, highlighting how China has infiltrated various sectors of American society. They mention the outsourcing of manufacturing to China, the dominance of Chinese nationals in American universities, and the potential for conflict with China. The speaker suggests that the American establishment has enabled China's rise and warns of the dangers of Chinese infiltration and subversion. They also mention China's control over its own population and its efforts to export its surveillance and control systems to the rest of the world. The speaker concludes by discussing the role of the UN and NGOs in facilitating illegal immigration and the alleged presence of Chinese sleeper cells in America.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen. Disease x World War 3, the illegal immigration pipeline, not just overwhelming
Speaker 1: our system by sheer force of number, but also allowing in tens of thousands of Chinese nationals, which again, I think I just wanna Spend a second on this story again. After all, China is our primary geopolitical opponent. Some people have you believe it's Russia. Not exactly true. Russia really didn't do anything to encroach on our land.
You know, nothing nothing that Russia did affected us. So other people want you to think it's Iran. This is another fight we're choosing to have. Now if there's one country that's actually a threat to America, It is 100% China. And it's a threat that has not just gone, you know, unopposed in the recent past.
In a lot of cases, the American establishment has done everything they can to empower China. I mean, every step of the way. And we did this with the Soviet Union as well, by the way. We built the Soviet Union. American Industry built the Soviet Union from the ground up on purpose, in secret, by design during the 2nd World War.
And then, of course, they became our primary enemy during the Cold War. They wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for us. Maybe I should spend some time on that one day. When you hear the number of, you know, like, the amount, which is raw material that was sent. I mean, it's it's staggering, absolutely staggering, what we sent to the Union.
China was the same. Right? China was set up. Communist China was established from the outset by a bunch of New York bankers that went over to give the funding to Mau to help him create his Communist Party. You know, we facilitated all of that.
We allowed that to happen in the more recent past. It has been our industry and our so called leadership, again, the bankers in New York, who offshored all of our manufacturing to China, just willfully giving up our economic engine to China almost completely. And that's had, of course, devastating impacts, really hollowing out the manufacturing base of this country, the Rust Belt, you know, all of that. But then in addition to that, and more recently, our university system, in many cases, is completely dominated by Chinese nationals who are not expats who came to America to be American, to go to, you know, go to American colleges to build up this country because they don't believe in communism. No.
These are just communist Chinese people who come here to Take part in our university to learn our military technology, and just take it back to China. And there's even a video On Twitter a couple days ago, where I was a student of Chinese descent, but an American student going, All of my professors are straight up Chinese. All of my all of their TAs, all of their teaching assistants are straight up Chinese. Most of the class are Chinese. Why don't we just teach it in Chinese?
And then, you know, if there's one positive thing that Obama's ever done with his life, it's that documentary American Factory, where they show Chinese ownership taking over an American factory and operating it like colonial overseers. So, you know, the threat of China is multifaceted. Obviously, there's Taiwan, which will may very well be a flashpoint of war, although I believe it'll more likely go the way of Hong Kong where it'll be conquered in a bloodless coup by the Chinese communist influence primarily through money and coercion of the police force locally there. But it could also be you know, it could also lead to an outright conflict. You know, China is not exactly shy about their desire for military conflict with America.
In fact, they built a one to one replica of a American aircraft carrier in the desert so their bombers could practice targeting on the thing that they're eventually gonna target. I mean, literally, it's and it's an American aircraft carrier in a desert in China for them to practice attacking. So not only are they infiltrating us through the corporate sphere. Not only are they taking over the industry by outsourcing through the corp the corporate sphere. Not only are they infiltrating our universities and given priority, and then once they get into the universities, They continue that preferential treatment for their fellow countrymen.
And then at this point, They are just straight up sending over tens of thousands of sleeper cell agents to await orders, I guess. I remember last year, there was the story of Chinese people in America hacking into critical infrastructure, and the the American military couldn't find them. Oh, and remember when they sent that Chinese spy balloon over, and it was recently discovered that they were actually communicating with mainland China through the Internet while they were here, while that balloon was traveling over almost by design all the most sensitive military research sites, like Oak Ridge, Tennessee. So, I mean, The option is either the people in charge of our country are just the most cartoonishly, gullible, soft headed morons the world's ever seen. We've got these these Chinese people who are just like, you are our enemy, and we will conquer you.
And we're gonna spy on you, and we're gonna infiltrate you. And the American Paul Kissinger just like, oh, oh, you're fleeing communism? Well, come on over. Come on over. We'll say we'll we'll rescue you from the communist.
You you fled communist China. Now you're here, the land of freedom. And the person's like, Yes. Yes. I hate the communist China.
Yes. But take me in. Show me your most sensitive documents. Like, they're just stupid. Like, obviously, China is doing this on purpose.
Obviously, China is aggressively targeting America for infiltration and subversion, and we're doing nothing to stop it because we either don't realize or because we are in on it. And considering the past actions of our industry offshoring to China, etcetera, etcetera. It seems like they're just all in on it. And we've explained this before in the sense that the global, And I was trying to find this tweet the other day, but I covered on the show before, where it was a poll where it was like, Is Nick Fuentes right? And Israel and the Jews are destroying America?
Is somebody else right? And China is destroying America. Or is Alex Jones right? And the World Economic Forum is destroying America. And it's like, do you not understand how all of these things work together?
The it's not an either or option. It's not either you talk about this or you talk about this. The Chinese government has achieved what they want worldwide with their people. They have the facial recognition systems. They have the social credit score.
They have the paradigm of absolute and total control of their citizenry to an inhuman and, frankly, terrifying degree. So they've perfected that system in China. Now they're working on exporting that system to the rest of the world, and they're using China as a testing ground. How far can we push people? You know, how do people respond with this stimulus?
How do people respond with this stimulus? See, they already have an enclosed test subject array that they can then experiment on to learn how to best implement these things in the rest of the world. So that's why there's no attacks against China. That's why they don't care that China, you know, calls homosexuality a mental illness. They don't care that China is openly and egregiously racist against everybody else.
They don't care about these things. Global warming. They don't care that China's building 10,000 coal power plants because they don't really care about that at all. They don't care about Coal power plants, they don't care about pollution. They don't care about climate change.
What they care about is control. And China has their population under control, so they're They're the the the icons. They're the idols. They're the one they're the they run the system that the globalists want in the rest of the world. So now their actual infiltration and takeover of America is being facilitated By the UN, by all of these NGOs that are funding and and helping to carry out the illegal immigration program, 30,000 Chinese agents, sleeper cells have been embedded in America in the last 3 years.
Speaker 2: While other networks lie to you about what's happening now, Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next. Info wars.comforward/
Speaker 3: If you don't have enough vitamin d 3 in your body, which particularly happens in the winter months because sun and your skin produce Vitamin d 3. Naturally, if you don't have enough vitamin d in your body, you will get viral infections, and the viruses will replicate your body. That's the number one cause of viral infection and viral replication and illness. Vitamin d 3 is so incredibly important. We have the highest quality organic bottom of d 3, back in stock, winter sun for 40% off with free shipping and double Patriot Points for the new year.
So this 2020 4, do the right thing. Protect yourself. Protect your family. Get wintersun@infowarsstore.com, and then more importantly, take it. It's The highest quality.
Win or sun, 40% off, free shipping, double Patriot Points. Infowarsstore.com. But whatever you do, get vitamin d 3 organic and taken. Vitamin d 3 is beyond critical. Get yours at infowarsstore.com today.
@infowars - INFOWARS
»» How The Elite Controls 6 Billion+ People! Clip from @realalexjones' film: ENDGAME - Blueprint For Global Enslavement 𝘞𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘵 UNCENSORED 𝘰𝘯 @rumblevideo: https://rumble.com/v1j8fgy-endgame-blueprint-for-global-enslavement.html 📀Get a DVD copy while you can! https://www.infowarsstore.com/endgame-dvd #TeamHumanity #SupportInfowars #NWO @EstulinDaniel
Video Transcript AI Summary
A small group of 125 individuals, including a few women, effectively control a population of 6 billion people. They employ a systemic methodology by assigning trusted individuals to various positions of power within organizations. By controlling these key figures, they can influence and control the entire organization. The strategy is not to control every individual's thoughts or beliefs, but rather to control their actions, which will then impact the entire global population.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Small group of 125 men and a few women control a population base of 6,000,000,000 people. Actually, it's much easier than you think. These people work on what I call systemic methodology, meaning that you take a pie just imagine, you take an apple pie and you slice this apple pie into lots of very small pieces, and you put in front of each one of these pieces your men or woman of trust. And by controlling this individual, you control whole entire organisation. For example, if you take Paul Wolfowitz, who runs the World Bank, through him, you can control the entire organization.
You don't need to control what the dishwasher or the toilet cleaner thinks or does or believes in. You just need control what he does and what he believes in and what he does will permeate the entire organization. And that's how you control with very, very small, power base, an entire global population of 6,000,000,000 people.
ENDGAME: Blueprint for Global Enslavement
For the New World Order, a world government is just the beginning. Once in place they can engage their plan to exterminate 80% of the world's population, while enabling the "elites" to live forever wi
rumble.com
@infowars - INFOWARS
The Nazis were an offshoot of the eugenics movement launched by Galton in 1855 ✅ https://t.co/YWcI43I7Ag
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker accuses certain people of disguising a new form of tyranny with a Jewish facade. They claim that these individuals are essentially praising Hitler, and that many Nazis are unaware that they are being funded by leftist groups. The speaker mentions the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, Coal Springs Harbor, the Rockefellers, and the Nuremberg trials as evidence that the Nazis were influenced by British intelligence and the eugenics movement. They criticize the Nazis for not understanding this history and urge them to educate themselves.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What's going on? They're dressing up the new world of tyranny in a Jewish outset. What the heart of it is a bunch of people hailing Hitler. That's what I keep explaining. And a lot of the Nazis don't like me either.
There's a lot of them are financed by these leftists scripts. They don't even know it. Their leaders are double agents. And they're like, Jones claims that, the Nazis were funded by super Nazis, but the Nazis founded the Nazis. Hey, dumbass.
I'm talking about the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute and the Coal Springs Harbor, New York and the Rockefellers and the Nuremberg trials where they defended themselves, the Nazis, by pointing out that British intelligence and the British Intelligence and the British government created the ideology of eugenics and race purity that the Nazis followed. Can you Figure that out of your stupid little Nazi brains that the Nazis were an offshoot of the eugenics movement launched by Galton in 18/55. Learn how to read a history book before I have to slap you upside your stupid ass head metaphysically.
@infowars - INFOWARS
.@RealAlexJones Interviews David Mayor de Rothschild 𝘍𝘜𝘓𝘓 𝘝𝘐𝘋𝘌𝘖 >> https://www.infowars.com/posts/alex-jones-interviews-david-mayor-de-rothschild-full-global-warming-debate-2007/ @BANNEDdotVIDEO #SupportInfowars https://www.InfowarsStore.com #GlobalWarming #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #ClimateScam #ClimateEmergency https://t.co/XoahMaf9HV
Video Transcript AI Summary
There is a claim that addressing this issue is a money-making scheme, similar to what the Rothschild family did in the past. The speaker challenges David Rothschild and accuses him of being involved in a scam. They mention that the polar ice caps on Mars are receding faster than ours and that the moons of Saturn and Jupiter are melting. The speaker questions how SUVs could be causing this, stating that these planets are not closer to the sun.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There's a lot of money to be made in addressing this issue. Because you guys are gobbling up all the world's concern to just simply line your pockets and make kids read your book in schools and do all this. It's a business just like you said, Rothschild. Do you think I make any money out of this? It's the same thing it's the same thing your great great great grand your your money changing ancestors did.
They're in Germany, Red Shield, And I'm calling you out, Red Shield. We know it's a scam. The polar ice caps of Mars are receding at several miles a year, much faster than ours and that the moons of Saturn and Jupiter are melting. In fact, several of their moons were ice and are now liquid seas. Now.
How are SUVs causing that, David Rothschild? That's because those planets are closer to the sun, my friend. No. Jupiter and Saturn are not closer to the sun. Neither is Mars.
@infowars - INFOWARS
𝙺𝙽𝙾𝚆 𝚈𝙾𝚄𝚁 𝙴𝙽𝙴𝙼𝚈: 𝚄𝙽𝙳𝙴𝚁𝚂𝚃𝙰𝙽𝙳𝙸𝙽𝙶 𝚃𝙷𝙴 𝙶𝙻𝙾𝙱𝙰𝙻𝙸𝚂𝚃 𝙼𝙸𝙽𝙳𝚂𝙴𝚃 https://t.co/9ZPpa3hqxO
Video Transcript AI Summary
We interrupt our program to bring you an important message from Infowars. They claim to tell the truth about what's happening next, unlike other networks that supposedly lie. The speakers discuss a sinister agenda by the ruling elite, who allegedly want to control and kill people for their own benefit. They mention population control, corruption, and various threats like cyberattacks and world wars. They urge people to reject the global agenda and fight for humanity. The video promotes visiting infowars.com for more information.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We interrupt our program to bring you this important message.
Speaker 1: All other networks lie to you about what's happening now. Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next. Visit infowars.comforward/show and share the link today.
Speaker 2: You can feel it. Something is off. Things are getting stranger by the day. Just a coincidence, or is Something more sinister happening right under our noses. We wanna warn you now.
This next story is disturbing.
Speaker 3: Namely, in earlier times, it was easier to control a 1000000 people, literally, than physically To kill a 1000000 people, today, it is infinitely easier to kill a 1000000 people than to control A 1000000 people. It is easier to kill than to control.
Speaker 4: I would like to reduce the number of people on the planet because there's too many of us. It's a planet of finite resources, and we're using them up.
Speaker 1: 1st, we've got population. That's headed up to about 9,000,000,000. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we Lower that by perhaps 10 or 15%.
Speaker 2: The true ruling elite are a death cult. Cure evil. The elite are wealthy. They have more money than you can think of. So why would they want even more money, Even more control.
It's because they use their wealth and power to execute their agenda, to live out their evil. If you think this is just conspiracy theory, think again. Look around you. Everything benefits them and not humanity. The globalists have a religion.
To the public, it's sold as climate change or the global crisis. What is the basis of the climate change agenda? It's population control. It's depopulation. The elite look at us as para Sites that need to be controlled and killed.
There is an unelected network that controls what the public sees. Plausible deniability is their cover. They are playing dumb on every level to gaslight us. The same agendas throughout history are presented differently with the same goals. The elite are becoming restless and are now out In the open with who they really are, corruption in the government is just the tip of the iceberg.
The Operationon at the top have an antihuman agenda, threats of world war. But behind the scene, It's more about control and backdoor dealings between world governments. The open border, drug trafficking, Human trafficking is covered up and controlled by our own government. It's deeper than that. There is a reason why most of these corruption networks never get shut down.
These anti humanists control mostly everything. You'd be shocked to know what the people in most power positions really think of the general public. The elite's corruption network operates like prison gangs or like a mafia, but on a larger scale. Blackmail, Controllers. Handlers.
Money laundering. If you want to stay rich and powerful, you'll have to do their dirty work. They have their hands in everything. A lot of these players simply love the spotlight. Most of the celebrities, politicians, CEOs love the fame and fortune, but the ones at the top of these groups are completely evil.
Many become unwillingly controlled by signing on into the club without knowing what they are actually involved with behind the Scenes. Most of humanity is asleep and distracted by meaninglessness. The Warning us of a cyberattack, also known as a digital 911 event. The economy would collapse if we suffered an Internet shutdown. The modern power grid relies on the Internet to coordinate power plants.
Without it, Each country's national grid will become imbalanced, and local outages escalate into a blackout for most of the world. A society slipping into chaos will allow the elite to reset and rebuild a world for themselves. There will be events leading up to a total collapse, Domestic terror attacks, biological attacks, world wars. With each event, more and more control is gained. Time is running out.
If society suffers from any of these trigger events, there might be no turning back. Humanity is At the crossroads. This is happening right now. We need to reject the global agenda and know who the world rulers really they are and what they are up to. The fight for humanity is happening now.
Speaker 0: While Other networks lie to you about what's happening now. Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next. Infowars.comforward/go.
Speaker 4: Any bothermets died to bring us this information.
Speaker 0: You can see here the great awakening orbiting the great reset. Although the depopulation Systems of the great reset are not yet fully operational. The great reset does have a strong network. It is protected by a satanic shield, which can be disabled by the great awakening. The great reset must be deactivated If any victory for humanity is to be accomplished, once the great awakening deactivates the shield, infowars.comforward/show will cover the truth while info warriors fly into the superstructure and attempt to Knock out the great reset.
Alex Jones has volunteered to lead the fighter attack. Get a signed Copy of the great awakening today at infowarsstore.com.
@infowars - INFOWARS
2024 Will See Digital IDs Ushered In By Cyber And Terror Attacks https://www.infowars.com/posts/2024-will-see-digital-ids-ushered-in-by-cyber-and-terror-attacks/ #BowneReport