reSee.it - Related Post Feed
@kempersheriff - James Moore
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker stresses that the device must be worn at all times, regardless of age. They explain that if the device is suddenly dropped into the water, it will probably not inflate immediately, because “it's not inflating right now.” As a result, it won’t keep you from floating in the water right away. They also note that a waste of time occurs when water enters the small holes described in the device.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Got in the boat. You have to have it on at all times no matter your age. Because the way it works, when you have it on, if it just got thrown in the water right here, it's probably not gonna inflate. K? Because it's not inflating right now.
It's not gonna keep you from floating the water right away. K? Waste of time is when water enters these little holes here
@ClownWorld_ - Clown World ™ 🤡
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 encounters a woman who is causing trouble and tries to confront her. Speaker 1 questions Speaker 0's actions and asks why they are discussing the situation. Speaker 0 refers to the woman as crazy and believes she is trying to ruin their weekend. Speaker 1 tells Speaker 0 to leave the situation. Speaker 0 mentions a police officer arriving and expresses satisfaction with the woman's deserved consequences. They also mention that the situation could have escalated further. Speaker 0 believes the woman should be arrested.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yeah. You're trying to be
Speaker 1: what the Did you
Speaker 0: Ma'am? What?
Speaker 1: Hold your window down.
Speaker 0: Oh, she crazy. Car. She trying to have her weekend be messed up.
Speaker 1: Get out, baby. Why are you talking about this?
Speaker 0: Copper. Copper. Oh, he come from the door To the cart. Good. Good.
Good. That's what she deserved. That's what she deserved. That's exactly what she deserved. Are you lucky we didn't do more?
I don't. You should be arrested.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Video Transcript AI Summary
They are creating mini cities called districts with mixed-use buildings in Toronto. These buildings have residences, offices, and retail spaces but limited parking. The goal is for residents to live, work, and shop within the same building, resembling lockdown conditions during COVID. The concept, known as the 15-minute city, aims to keep people within a 5-kilometer radius of their homes if they do not have a car.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Designing these new little mini cities that they call districts, where your building is gonna have 500 or 600 units for living, then it's gonna have office space, then it's gonna have retail, all in the same building. Meanwhile, it's only gonna have a few parking spaces. They're literally putting huge signs in the streets, and and they all look exactly the same. And it says city of Toronto rezoning, and they are all identical. You'll see a building that was there previously getting torn down, and you're gonna see what they call a mixed use development.
And it has residences on top, office buildings and retail in the middle and the bottom, and then almost no infrastructure for parking. There's not even enough parking for the people living there. You're supposed to live upstairs, work somewhere in the building, go to the gym or your Starbucks or your grocery store, everything in the building. So, basically, you're living on lockdown your entire life, just like they wanted you to do with COVID. Remember with COVID when you were on lockdown, and they said you couldn't go more than 5 kilometers away from your house?
Well, if you don't have a car, guess what? You're never gonna go more than 5 kilometers away from your house, and that's what the 15 minute city is designed to do.
@sarah__0001 - Sarah 🇩🇿🇵🇸
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the past 24 hours in Palestine, over 20,000 hostages were taken by the Israeli occupation, with heavy airstrikes causing injuries and deaths in Gaza. Palestinians mourned loved ones killed in the attacks, while children were injured in bombings. In the West Bank, Israeli settlers and soldiers attacked worshipers at Al Aqsa Mosque.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Here's what's happened in the past 24 hours in Palestine. There are 7,000 hostages that have been taken from Gaza by the Israeli occupation. In conjunction of the prisoners that have been taken in the West Bank, that makes over 20,000 hostages taken by the Israeli occupation. Heavy Israeli airstrikes targeted several homes in Rafa City today. Dozens of injuries and many were killed in the ongoing bombardment.
Palestinians bid farewell to their relatives who were killed by the Israeli airstrike center Rafah today. This Palestinian tries at all costs to pull his family out of the rubble of their home. A Palestinian boy documents his journey to get the humanitarian aid that were dropped by planes over the north of Gaza today. Palestinian children were injured in the 100 by Israeli airstrike that bombed their homes in Deir al Balah today. Injuries and martyrs arrived at Al Aqsa Martyrs hospital following heavy Israeli air strikes in central Gaza.
In the West Bank, Israeli settlers and soldiers assaulted worshipers while they were leaving Al Aqsa Mosque through Al Khalil gate.
@ufob0t - ufobot
Video Transcript AI Summary
Nikola Tesla's energy documents were confiscated by the FBI after his death. High voltage systems in the 1920s led to the discovery of electromagnetic effects seen in UFOs. General Doolittle believed Foo Fighters were interplanetary vehicles. Since 1954, gravity control has eliminated the need for traditional engines. Extraterrestrial material has been studied, leading to breakthroughs in transdimensional physics and biological sciences. Various underground facilities and corporations have been involved in developing advanced technologies, including anti-gravity devices and extraterrestrial vehicle research. This information is available for review.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That shows that when Nikola Tesla died that this information that he had, which allowed for a car to run out of the ambient energy, was in documents confiscated by the FBI and I have a doc Department of Defense document demanding that the FBI turn these over to the DOD. The FBI refused. At any rate, science continues because the laws of the universe are in fact universal and they can be discovered here or around Alpha Centauri or any place else in the cosmos. By 1928 and 29, Tietowen and Brown as well as the Kalosky Frost experiment in physics in Germany had determined that VHV, very high voltage systems done in a certain resonant field could result in so called electromagnetic gravitic effect, the lifter effect that has been described, which you see in UFOs. They also can create what's called a space time bubble around an object so that you can correct for 1 g.
This is how these objects are traveling at multiples of what any aerodynamic physics would describe and can make right hand turns without killing the occupants. Around this same time, there was in the 1940s and the late 1930s a number of UFO sightings. This included the so called Foo Fighters. Yes. It's a famous rock group.
However, the Foo Fighters took their name from the reports of these objects seen in the theater of World War 2 that were flying around our aircraft. We thought it was a secret weapon of the Nazis. The Nazis thought it was a secret weapon of ours. There is Jimmy Doolittle, the famous general. His nephew is a dear friend of mine and he has testified that General Doolittle was sent by FDR over to the European theater in World War 2, investigated the Foo Fighters and came back and told Roosevelt and I quote, they are interplanetary vehicles.
So by then there began a classified program and which was augmented further by events as mentioned in 1941 and then, of course, the famous Roswell event. Those events led to, as Philip Corso describes, a reverse engineering program, As you all know from the famous Wilbur Smith document of 1951 from Canada, it talks about that flying saucers exist, but there's a high level team headed up by doctor Vannevar Bush that is studying the, quote, modus operandi of these vehicles. These were the most brilliant scientists, Edward Keller, Oppenheimer and others, Herman Oberth amongst others, who are in this team studying how extraterrestrial vehicles move. In October of 1954, a key date I want the committee to remember, we have actionable intelligence from someone who has worked in the National Security Agency and has been in the vault, all of this went deep black because they figured out at that point gravity control. So since 1954, October of that year, we have not needed rockets, jets, internal combustion engines and surface roadways between cities.
I say this with authority that this is the case. Eventually, these breakthroughs in human discovery were complemented by the study of the extraterrestrial material that were retrieved from these events. And contrary to most people's thoughts, the Roswell event was actually a downing of an extraterrestrial vehicle by a electromagnetic system that was hidden in a radar dome that was switched on and this isn't an FBI document that I can provide for the committee and is on the flash drive given to the Congress. The result ultimately was that there were transdimensional physics that began to be studied that deal with the nexus between electromagnetism, energy generation, anti gravity and consciousness. And we have discovered that there is a nexus and that, in fact, there are electromagnetic systems that have been developed that can interface directly with what we call coherent thought the same way that you can interface with a system with lasers which is coherent light where you sync up all the wavelengths.
Ultimately, this these breakthroughs were paralleled with amazing developments in the biological sciences and the experimentation with cloning. And this began many years earlier than was reported from Dolly, the sheep in Scotland. This goes a little beyond I think what this committee wants to look into. However, you need to understand that the technologies that we have and we were discussing are not theoretical. We have actionable intelligence that any committee in Congress or executive action can find regarding current operations.
I just want to go through a list of them very quickly of these facilities and corporations for which we have witnesses who can be subpoenaed by the committees of the Congress. This was developed at the request of congressman Christopher Cox of Orange County and with whom I met and was later further developed for, the briefing for that we put together for President Obama. These facilities are the Edwards Air Force Base and subsections where, on that the dry lake bed where the Lockheed Skunk Works Operations, Haystack Butte, China Lakes, George Air Force Base and the closed Norton Air Force Base were an anti gravity device, so called alien reproduction vehicle for which we have the schematics was seen by Frank Carlucci and others on our witness team. Tabletop Mountain and Blackjack Control and Blackjack Control. The aerospace facilities there are the Northrop Ant Hill facility, Tihon Ranch, the McDonnell Douglas Llano plant, Lockheed Martin, Hallandale plant and the Phillips lab.
At the Nellis Air Force facility, so called Area 51, no one calls it that. There's S-four and S-twelve, Hoot Mesa, Groom Lake and a number of sub facilities. The most important facility is in Utah near Provo, the Dugway Proving Grounds, all of which is underground and the airspace above it is classified. There are no roads into this facility. The New Mexico facilities include Los Alamos National Labs with underground connectors to the so called Dulce area where the biological work is being done and Kirtland Air Force Base and the complex there includes Sandia National Laboratories, Phillips Labs, Manzano Mountain Weapon Storage Facility, Coyote Canyon and the White Sands Complex.
In Arizona, near Fort Huachuca, which is Army Intelligence Headquarters, there is a UGB underground base where one of our witnesses who will testify worked on 9 separate extraterrestrial vehicles that had been downed through advanced electromagnetic pulse weapons and there are several different species of extraterrestrial biologicals stored at that facility. The other facilities and this goes on, include a special compartmented area of Cheyenne Mountain where we have witnesses in our team who can be subpoenaed where that we have tracked extraterrestrial vehicles in our solar system that we're measuring 26 miles in diameter. There are also, facilities in Australia, a key one being Pine Gap, the so called Alice Springs facility, which is mostly a US Air Force facility even though it is in Australia. I recently talked to the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia about this. Also the Redstone Arsenal and the Marshall Space Flight Centre, we have a scientist at the Redstone Arsenal under who works under contract for IT and T who have developed these transdimensional systems.
He was under contract with my project to bring these energy devices out and he was then threatened by a former CIA director and what I call the goon squad that went down there 3 years ago in March. This is just part of the information we have and this information is on the flash drive given then that you're all welcome to review. Thank you. Thank you.
@redpillb0t - redpillbot
Video Transcript AI Summary
I'm showing how QR codes on Instagram hold personal data like religion, organ donor status, and credit score. This info may lead to a social credit system. People need to resist this system by not giving it power.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So check this out. I'm blocking out with this piece of paper and this pen certain keywords that you don't want on your Instagram just because it puts that stupid thing to cdc.gov. But, look at this QR code. The QR code that people have holds a lot more information on them than they may think. Okay?
This is Canada's QR code, but many countries have the similar thing. Look at all the information it has on you. Religion, organ donor, driver's license, marital status, nonessential access, reserved for future use. So that's a thing that they're gonna have more info in the future. Allergies, gender identity, smoker, sex.
Are you a firearms owner? Are you a restricted firearms owner? Are you do you have any warrants? And look at this. What's your credit score?
How many accounts do you have? How much do you owe? What did you make this year? What did you make last year? This is how much information that QR code will have.
This will be the social credit system on steroids, if not a carbon copy of it. And this is what people are being is being imposed on, that's being imposed on them. And the only power this has is the power you give it. If everyone refuses, good luck with this system, man.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Video Transcript AI Summary
The CIA developed advanced mask technology over 10 years, impressing even Hollywood. Retired CIA chief of disguise, Jana Mendez, showcased masks undetectable in face-to-face meetings with President Bush in the 90s. The CIA's progress in disguise technology over the past 30 years is remarkable.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The mass is the culmination of a lot of work that we did at CIA over a period of, I'd say, 10 years developing that technology. It was a big challenge to come up with something that finally, actually animated and worked to really fool a person closer than 3, 4 feet from you, but we did. They learned the art. We actually brought Hollywood back into our labs at one point to look at what we had done, and they were stunned. They're absolutely stunned.
Congratulations. The fact that we're allowed to show it tells me the CIA had moved on. I don't know what they're doing. I shouldn't know. I'm dying dying to know, but I don't know.
Relax. You'll get to see it all later on. So I'm proud to show people how good we got to that point and let them imagine. So what are they doing now?
Speaker 1: Jana Mendez retired from the CIA as chief of disguise after more than 25 years with their agency. When she left in 1990 3, the masks they were making could not be detected in a face to face conversation. These declassified photos show Mendes in this disguise while meeting with president Bush in the early nineties. Although she was there to brief the president on the new CIA disguise program, nobody in the room knew she was wearing a mask until she removed it. Imagine the advances that have been made in the last 30 years.
@StephenBaldwin7 - Stephen Baldwin
Video Transcript AI Summary
Mister Chambers, don’t board that ship. The rest of the book is about madness; it’s a cookbook. If this doesn’t make sense to you, just ask Mark Ruffalo.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Mister Chambers, don't get on that ship. Rest of the book deserve mad it it's a cookbook. Hey. If you don't understand this post, just ask Mark Ruffalo.
@BrockRiddickIFB - Brock Riddick
Video Transcript AI Summary
Someone was clearly on their way to kill me, so I've required protective services essentially all the time. It is very troublesome to me, especially because they've involved my wife and my three daughters. How do I feel? Terrible.
Do I continue to receive threats today? Yes, I do. Every time someone gets up and says I'm responsible for the death of people throughout the world, the death threats go up.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Someone who clearly was on their way to kill me. And it's required my having protective services essentially all the time. It is very troublesome to me. It is much more troublesome because they've involved my wife and my three daughters. At this moment, how do you feel?
Keep your mic on. Terrible. Do you continue to receive threats today? Yes. I do.
Every time someone gets up and says I'm responsible for the death of people throughout the world, the death threats go up.
@JQRADIO247 - JQ Radio
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes Doge is a crucial reform initiative, evidenced by the strong negative reaction to it. Over the past seven weeks, the narrative has shifted from waste, fraud, and abuse to the idea that Elon and Doge have revealed government operations as slush funds for the left, allegedly funding allies, pet projects, and anti-American behavior. The speaker is pleased with Trump's public support for Elon and Doge's work. They also mention "crystal knock behavior of the little fascists on the left burning Tesla dealerships and attacking Tesla owners."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In the face of the crystal knock behavior of the little fascists on the left burning Tesla dealerships and attacking Tesla owners, I I I think it does show that Doge is probably one of the most important reform initiatives we've seen in decades, maybe ever, Laura. And the fact that there's such a visceral reaction shows Doge is over the target. And I think what we've seen over the last seven weeks I mean, think about the the story over the last seven weeks where it started waste, fraud, abuse. And now today, I really think we've gotten to the point where Elon and Doge have uncovered that a lot of what's taking place inside of our government is a slush fund money laundering operation for the left, not only to fund their allies and their pet projects, but to actually fund anti American behavior. So what Elon and Doge are doing is phenomenal work, I'm I'm so happy that Trump's showing such public support for it.
@realDonaldTrump - Donald J. Trump
Video Transcript AI Summary
This is declared as a declaration of economic independence and liberation day. Foreign leaders have stolen jobs, ransacked factories, and torn apart the American dream for over 50 years, but this will end now by putting America First.
An executive order will institute reciprocal tariffs on countries worldwide to supercharge the domestic industrial base, pry open foreign markets, and break down foreign trade barriers. More domestic production will mean stronger competition and lower prices.
From this day on, America will produce the cars, ships, airplanes, minerals, and medicines it needs. The future will be built with American hands and heart, ushering in a golden age.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is one of the most important days in my opinion, American history. It's our declaration of economic independence. My fellow Americans, this is liberation day. April second twenty twenty five will forever be remembered as the day American industry was reborn, the day America's destiny was reclaimed, and the day that we began to make America wealthy again. American steelworkers, auto workers, farmers, and skilled craftsmen watched in anguish as foreign leaders have stolen our jobs, foreign cheaters have ransacked our factories, and foreign scavengers have torn apart our once beautiful American dream.
Our country and its taxpayers have been ripped off for more than fifty years, but it is not going to happen anymore. We are finally putting America First. In a few moments, I will sign a historic executive order instituting reciprocal tariffs on countries throughout the world. We will supercharge our domestic industrial base. We will pry open foreign markets and break down foreign trade barriers.
More production at home will mean stronger competition and lower prices. From this day on, we're not going to let anyone tell us that American workers and families cannot have the future that they deserve. We're going to produce the cars and ships, ships, airplanes, minerals, and medicines that we need right here in America. We're going to build our future with American hands, with American heart. This will be indeed the golden age of America.
@Lauria1960 - 🦨 Uncle Skunkle 🦨
Video Transcript AI Summary
During a committee hearing, a senator questioned a witness about their relationship with Workers Dignity. The senator stated the witness did not disclose their relationship with the group to the committee. The senator claimed the witness told Senator Grassley they had never represented the group, then told Senator Lee they had advised them as a member of a legal advisory board ten years ago. The senator stated the witness then told Senator Cruz they had advised them for three years, and Senator Durbin that it was fifteen years ago. The senator noted the witness's bio lists them as a legal advisor to the group from 2013 to the present, and the Tennessee Bar Association cited this work for their nomination. The witness stated they served on a legal advisory committee for two or three years more than a decade ago, helping them set up as a non-profit. The senator accused the witness of lying to Senator Grassley about doing legal work for the group. The senator then asked if the witness agreed with Workers Dignity's condemnation of Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So let's just let's just get this nailed down. First of all, did you disclose your relationship with workers' dignity to this committee? Don't look at the chairman. Look at me.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure I'm not sure that I included that. I I don't remember, senator.
Speaker 0: Oh, I I think you do. The answer is no. You did not disclose it to this committee. Then you told senator Grassley, I've never represented that group. Then you told senator Lee next that you had indeed advised them and that you'd advise them as a member of a legal advisory board.
You said ten years ago. Right? Then you told senator Cruz that in fact you had advised you told senator Lee you'd advise them briefly. You told senator Cruz, actually, you'd advise them for three years. Then you told senator Durbin that it wasn't ten years ago.
It was fifteen years ago. So what is it exactly? You didn't disclose your association with this radical group to the committee. You're currently listed now. Your own bio lists you as a as a legal adviser to the Workers Dignity Group from 02/2013 to the present.
To the present. The Tennessee Bar Association cited your work with this group for your nomination. So what what is the story? When did you start working for Workers Dignity?
Speaker 1: Senator, more than a decade ago, for two or three years, I served on a legal advisory committee or board.
Speaker 0: So you gave them a legal advice?
Speaker 1: We were helping them set up as a non
Speaker 0: So you represented them. So you lied to senator Grassley earlier when he explicitly asked you did you do any legal work and you said no. Senator In fact, you served on a legal advisory board. That's your testimony now. Correct?
Speaker 1: Senator, I served on this board.
Speaker 0: On a legal advisory board. Correct? Correct. Okay. So you lied to senator Grassley here under oath.
What else have you lied about? Workers' dignity has condemned Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestine. They have said that Israel is engaged in ethnic cleansing. Do you agree with that?
@thehealthb0t - healthbot
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss polio, noting the Sabin vaccine is live and the Salk vaccine is inactive. One speaker questions why polio disappeared in Europe in the 1940s and 50s without mass vaccination and why it's rare in the third world despite low immunization rates.
A question is raised about a possible link between vaccines and multiple sclerosis (MS). One speaker mentions a new publication linking MS in later life to early live virus vaccines like measles. They recommend that individuals with MS, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or similar conditions review their vaccine histories. Another speaker, a Guillain-Barré syndrome victim following a swine flu shot, claims research suggests immunizations frequently cause autoimmune issues.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But not another doctor. I think
Speaker 1: but let's get he does make a point that we should also say Sabin is live and the live vaccine and Salk is
Speaker 0: Is inactive.
Speaker 1: Inactive as we say in the laboratory. Alright. How many was it? They ask.
Speaker 0: Well, how many people know that that the European epidemic of polio, there were about twenty or thirty cases in this country. Now, of course, the American doctors will argue that the reason why polio disappeared in this country was because of the vaccine. But then why did it disappear in Europe in the nineteen forties and the nineteen fifties without mass vaccination? Why doesn't it occur in the third world where only ten percent of the people have ever been immunized against polio or anything else?
Speaker 1: That so in other words, we may be fighting a tiger that died.
Speaker 0: That's quite correct. Ask the people in Great Britain. Ask the people in Japan who All the All
Speaker 1: if you please, I've got probably the smartest audience we've ever had.
Speaker 2: Have a question. How long a delayed action, if any, would you connect this with like MS?
Speaker 1: Is MS a possibility? Would multiple sclerosis be one of the possible results?
Speaker 0: As a matter of fact, there's a new publication that just came out from John Hoffman, the close associate of Tony Morris's, that gives the references linking MS in later life to the early introduction of live virus vaccines like measles and like some of the others, they're live viruses. Now at the present time, I would I would at the present time, I would recommend that anybody who has MS or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or any of those degenerative neurologic conditions of later life, carefully review their vaccine histories.
Speaker 2: I would also like to comment to that because in connection with my case, I've been doing some research.
Speaker 1: Let me tell him once again, miss Gundy, that you're a Guillain Barre victim contracted following the following your receipt of the swine flu Yes.
Speaker 2: I am in the process of writing a book about my experience. And in the process, I've done considerable research. And from what I have learned, it looks as if immunizations frequently cause autoimmune
@DickAlupinya247 - Richard Allupinya
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
@TuckerCarlson - Tucker Carlson
Video Transcript AI Summary
Charlie Kirk was assassinated two weeks ago today, an event Tucker Carlson says will change American history. Kirk spent his life living the Christian gospel and free speech, traveling campus to campus with “Ask me anything,” patiently answering hostile questions. The lesson: sincere Christians tend to be decent; free speech is the foundation of the country and must be protected. We should honor Kirk by asking leaders to “answer the question” on issues like Nord Stream, Ukraine money, JFK files, etc.
Carlson argues the only real conversation on free speech has been about Jimmy Kimmel, a “nasty little censor.” He criticizes lawmakers for seeking censorship via Section 230—the 1996 Communications Decency Act shield that distinguishes platforms from publishers. Republicans once pushed to repeal 230; Biden and others expanded censorship. Lindsey Graham says, “Section two thirty needs to be repealed.” Don Bacon collaborates with ADL head Jonathan Greenblatt, advocating speech restrictions; the ADL defines hate speech.
California reportedly plans a hate-speech ban; Gavin Newsom would sign by Oct 13. Greenblatt’s anti-vaxxer rhetoric is shown. Carlson closes with UK enforcement: 12,000+ arrests in 2023 for speech, versus 3,319 in Russia, and a British veteran arrested for offending the government, described as the “velvet wrap jackboot of British fascism.” He argues censorship shields the powerful and undermines equality before the law.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hey. It's Tucker Carlson. Charlie Kirk was assassinated two weeks ago today in an event that clearly is gonna change American history, changed a lot of people inside. And there was a moment in the first week where you thought to yourself, this is gonna have effects. A lot of them would be bad, but some of them are probably gonna be good because Charlie's life was itself so good.
Charlie Kirk spent his life above all trying to live the Christian gospel and trying to live the principle of free speech, which is to say he talked and he also listened. He was most famous for traveling from college campus to college campus and asking people who disagreed with him to confront him. Ask me anything, he said. And he sat there patiently as they did, and they often attacked him. They almost always expressed views he found repugnant, and almost always, he took those views seriously and answered the questions put to him as crisply and honestly as he could.
That's what he spent his life doing, and in fact, he was assassinated while doing that. So if there's any lesson from Charlie Kirk's life well, the first lesson would probably be sincere Christians tend to be really decent people. Maybe we should have more of them. But the more secular temporal lesson is that free speech is a virtue. It is, in fact, the foundation of this country, not only its laws, but its culture, and that we should protect it.
And maybe if we seek to honor Charlie Kirk, we should emulate it. Maybe we should begin by asking our politicians to do what Charlie Kirk spent his life doing, which is to answer the question. Just calmly answer the question. We'll ask you anything, and then you go ahead and answer it to the best of your ability. Like, for example, who blew up the Nord Stream pipeline?
What happened to all the money we sent to Ukraine? Why haven't you released all the JFK files? Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. All the questions on your mind that slowly drive you crazy because no one will address them. Why don't we just ask them directly to our leaders, and they get to answer?
Nothing nothing would honor Charlie Kirk's memory more than that. That is free speech in action. But nothing like that happened. Instead, the only real conversation we've had about free speech has been about Jimmy Kimmel, who is hardly a champion of free speech. In fact, just the opposite.
He's a nasty little censor, talentless, a person who has many times on camera over the years chuckled and applauded as other people. His political enemies have been silenced. A guy who has so little influence to American society and so little audience he was on his way out anyway, has the job only as a result of some kind of weird political affirmative action where people who agree with studio heads get to have late night jobs. He is hardly the person who should be taking up the cause of free speech or become a symbol of it because, of course, he's the symbol of censorship and has been for most of his career. And the other thing that we saw, maybe even more distressing than that, was politicians turn not only against free speech, but actively and openly announced efforts to censor the American population and use the memory of Charlie Kirk to do it as their justification.
There are many examples we could pick. Here's a particularly raw one. This is from congressman Moskowitz just in the house of representatives eight days after Charlie Kirk died. Here it is.
Speaker 1: It's crazy what's going on on the social media platforms. There are so many conspiracy theories on what's going on with Charlie Kirk. Israel assassinated him. Right? There are conspiracy theories about your personal social life all day.
It is totally rampant. Big names on the right. Candace Owens, right, talking about how the what's been released as far as the dialogue between the perpetrator and his roommate is manufactured by the FBI, manufactured by the administration. It is totally rampant, allowing foreign governments to just perpetrate these platforms, all of these bots, all of the time to weaponize Americans. And so if we wanna do something, then we should talk about section two thirty.
We should talk about how we're going to make sure that we don't let foreign governments poison our children's mind. And so I will work with you on that, director.
Speaker 2: I'll work with you on 02:30 any day.
Speaker 0: So there is the congressman talking to the FBI director, and there's a lot there, and we'll unpack it. But the most telling line came right in the middle, and he turns to the FBI director. He says, they're criticizing your personal life. They're airing conspiracy theories about your personal life. Now speaking for myself, I have literally no idea what the congressman was talking about.
I haven't seen that. Doubtless it exists. There are conspiracy theories conspiracy theories about everybody and everybody's personal life. If you're in public, people are theorizing about you on the Internet, kind of the nature of the Internet and kind of the nature of having authority. But you'll notice that the congressman thinks this this will be a compelling argument for the FBI director.
He basically just says, they're criticizing you and me, and they're not allowed to do that. He's not even pretending that the purpose of censoring speech, and that's what he's saying, we need to censor the speech, that the purpose of that would be protect any vulnerable group vulnerable groups? No. They're criticizing us. They can't do that.
And then, of course, he goes on to blame unseen foreign actors. And by the way, that's something that I think most Americans would get behind, but that the congressman is not behind at all. If we wanna take the influence of foreign nations out of our politics, most Americans would applaud. And that would start with not taking money from their lobbies. That would be a welcome change.
But the idea that we need to censor what you say because the people who run everything don't wanna be called out or have their personalized and misdescribed with the subject of conspiracy theories, Well, that's not really reform as much as it's just kind of classic old fashioned tyranny, isn't it? Shut up. We have guns you don't, and we're gonna make you. And how are we gonna make you? That's the question.
So you may remember that last week, the attorney general came out right after Charlie Kirk's death and said there is a distinction between speech, constitutionally protected, famously in the first amendment in the Bill of Rights, and something called hate speech, a category that doesn't, strictly speaking, exist under the law, but which a lot of people seems to seem to believe exists. And hate speech is never defined, like most of the most powerful words that we use to punish people, terrorism, for example, racism. It's never actually defined. What is that exactly? We don't know.
Other than it's speech that people in charge hate, and therefore, it should be banned. And most people who understand the American story, who understand our government, who understand our culture, who care about continuing all of those things, reacted with outrage when the attorney general said that you can't pass a law that will strip from us our god given right to say what we think is true. She addressed it in such a ham handed way that it was obvious to everybody exactly what she was talking about, and they reacted. We did too. But in real life, that will not happen.
There will not be, I can say confidently in my lifetime, a law in the congress that says explicitly, any American who says something our leaders don't like, anybody who traffics in the conspiracy theory about our personal lives will be shut down, fined, imprisoned. An open, transparent, censorship law will not pass through the house of representatives or the United Senate United States Senate. It will not be signed by the president. Why? Because it's just too obvious.
So instead because censorship is coming if these people can help it. Instead, they will invoke something called section two thirty. And you're gonna hear a lot more about this without question. It's never again explained very well, and the reason it's not explained is because they don't want you to know exactly what they're doing. So let me just give you the cliff notes version of what section two thirty is.
Section two thirty is a section two thirty within the 1996 Communications Decency Act, and it is the piece of legislation often credited for creating the Internet. It's the framework that congress came up with at the dawn of the Internet to put parameters around what this is, to protect companies as they grew, to set laws around this new technology. And one of the laws that they made, section two thirty, shields Internet providers, platforms from lawsuits. It gives them legal liability from lawsuits on the basis of slander, obscenity, things that are on their platforms that they didn't create. In other words, it creates a distinction between a publisher, like a newspaper, a magazine, a television network, and a platform, Google, Facebook, x.
And the distinction allows the platforms to let other people post whatever they want without getting sued for it. They cannot be held liable. These big companies cannot be held liable for slander, hate speech, anything really on their platforms. And as a result of this law, those platforms have come to dominate news and information globally. In fact, when we talk about censorship, nobody's talking about censoring the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC News because nobody cares.
All meaningful information and all meaningful social movements are influenced by social media. So if you wanna get people whipped into a frenzy, if you wanna change your government, for example, you're not gonna take out an ad in the New York Times. Of course not. You're gonna get something going on the social media platforms. So they are huge.
They are completely dominant. Information flows almost exclusively on them, and all of this is possible because of section two thirty. Now there's been a pretty vigorous debate for the last twenty years over whether this is a good idea, and there are arguments against it. One of them is, why would Google get a liability exemption when I don't have one? You run a business.
You're just an American citizen. You can be sued at any time under our famously loose and destructive tort laws, and you can go to business. You'd be bankrupt. You can be destroyed. They can do to you what they did to Alex Jones, for example.
The FBI can join up with some activist group and take your business away. Wreck your life. So why should these big tech companies be exempt? Now that's a real argument. Similar to the argument about the pharma companies.
Why should vaccine makers get a shield from lawsuits? If I make playground equipment, I'm vulnerable. If I make the COVID vax, I'm not. That's a principled argument. But what's interesting about the 02:30 debate is that both parties have been on both sides of it at various times.
The Republicans for years were mad at the big platforms because they were censoring conservatives, which they were. And so they often muttered about revoking two thirty shield protection unless they opened their platforms to all points of view. In other words, they wanted to use section two thirty to end censorship. There's no reason you you should get a special carve out from the US government, from the congress if you don't treat people equally, if there's not fairness and neutrality in the way you allow opinions to be broadcast on your platform. That seemed like a fairly reasonable position, but things have changed.
Now you're seeing Republicans invoke section two thirty, pick up the cudgel that they hold over these huge tech companies and say, unless you censor, we will revoke section two thirty. And by the way, they are following in the footsteps of the leftward edge of the Democratic Party in doing this. In 2020, Beto O'Rourke of Texas ran one of his many doomed campaigns for office. This one, I think, for president. And he said, unless they get hate speech off the platforms, we're gonna revoke section two thirty and put these people out of business.
By the way, the threat is enough. That was the hope. If we threaten them, then we don't have to do the censoring. We'll make Google, Facebook, Meta, and X do the censoring for us. That was the idea.
Then no one can accuse us of violating the first amendment or being for speech codes. We'll make someone else do it. He lost. But then Joe Biden, that same year, 2020, said, actually, yes. We should use this threat to force the big tech platforms to censor in ways that we like.
And by the way, they did. They did throughout the Biden presidency, Facebook, twit then Twitter, Google, all censored opinions the Biden administration didn't like, and they did this ultimately because they feared having their legal protection revoked. That's why they did that. That's what got them to act. And Republicans, the sensible ones, looked at this and said, this is completely wrong.
It's totally immoral. It's illegal for the US government to be imposing censorship on its citizens. It's against the constitution of The United States, and it's against, more important, natural law. These are not rights we were given by the Biden administration. These are rights we were born with.
And when you take them away from us, you are the criminal. And they made that point. All of a sudden, you are seeing Republicans take the position that Beto O'Rourke and Joe Biden took just five years ago. Here, for example, and this will come as no surprise to you at all. Will not be shocked to hear this.
Here is senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina running for reelection, making exactly the same case that Beta O'Rourke made. Watch.
Speaker 2: Section two thirty needs to be repealed. If you're mad at social media companies that radicalize our nation, you should be mad. Senator? Bill that will allow you to sue these people. They're immune from lawsuit.
Speaker 0: Oh, it should be repealed. Now it's not clear from that clip exactly why Lindsey Graham is calling for the repeal of section two thirty. Why is he threatening the tech platforms? And by the way, the pretext always changes. They'll tell you, well, we're against child sex trafficking as if anyone is for it.
We're against terrorism, a term once again they never define and don't have to. We're against drugs. We're against foreign influence. We're against bigotry. Whatever.
They will always give you an excuse, and that excuse will make them sound like the virtuous party, like the good guys. We're here to save the vulnerable. But that's never the real reason. Censorship always and everywhere is imposed with the intent and always has the effect of shielding the powerful. They're the ones who don't want to be exposed.
Free speech, by contrast, and this is the reason it's in our bill of rights, is the one great power that the powerless have, especially in a world where your vote may or may not matter. All you have is your voice. All you have is your opinion. And that's infuriating to Lindsey Graham's donors. And make no mistake when he's calling for invoking section two thirty and taking it away, threatening the big platforms, He's doing that on behalf of his donors who feel criticized by random accounts on the Internet.
And they hate it because the people in charge always hate to be called out. Censorship has one goal, and that's to preserve secrecy. And secrecy has one purpose, and that's to abet wrongdoing. So people who are doing nothing wrong are transparent. People who are committing evil hide, and censorship allows them to hide.
It's literally that simple. And those people are the most powerful people in the country. So who's encouraging this? The donors, whoever they are, but there are lots of lobby groups, all of them on the left, pushing the Republican led congress to get behind censorship initiatives using the cover of the section two thirty debate to get it done, to pressure the tech companies into making you shut up, into taking your opinions off the Internet using algorithms designed to censor you without even a human being entering into the equation. No person will decide that your opinion is offensive and pull it off.
The computer will decide that. It'll be aided by the massive exponential growth in computing power that is at the very center of tech right now, AI. That is the goal, to make certain that opinions that are disruptive to the people in charge never see the light of day. What's amazing and what's especially infuriating is that many in the Republican Party, the party that controls all branches of government right now, are completely for this, strongly for it. Where did they get this idea?
Is this a betrayal? Oh, it's a betrayal. How profound a betrayal? Listen to congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska, a former air force general, describe who he's been talking to about censorship.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I appreciate Jonathan Greenblatt, what hit him and his ADL stands for. I've I know you you made us better with your feedback and and ideas or recommendations, and it's been a trick to get to know you. We wanna be in a country that makes clear that antisemitism or any kind of racism is repugnant, unacceptable, not allowed in my space, and we just the zero tolerance for it. So we need to hold these companies accountable and work with them to to take it up the air wave.
Speaker 0: It's hard to believe that's a real clip we actually checked. Is that real? Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska, a great and sensible state with tons of normal people, a former air force general, is he really colluding with Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL to take away your right to say what you think? Oh, you bet. That's exactly what he's doing.
And make no mistake. The ADL is not an anti defamation organization. The ADL practices defamation and slander and bullying, and not in service of protecting a marginalized group, but in accruing power and by forwarding its goals, which are ideological. And if you don't believe that, go on the ADL's website and take a look at what the ADL considers hate speech. Hate speech, another one of those terms never quite defined, but the ADL has actually taken the time to define it.
What do they consider hate speech? Well, among other things, complaining about drag queen story hour is hate speech according to the ADL. Not being enthusiastic about the COVID vaxx. That's hate speech, and it's dangerous. Noticing that the American population has changed completely in the past thirty years thanks to immigration, that's dangerous hate speech.
You should be punished for that, for noticing it. In your country that you were born in, no noticing. You can't notice that it looks completely different because of decisions that someone who never consulted you made without your knowledge. Shut up, says the ADL. You don't only don't have the right to speak.
We're gonna scream at you and call you a Nazi and imply that you are the dangerous one, the people who opened up the borders to 50,000,000 foreigners. But you're the dangerous one. Sure. You know what else is hate speech, by the way? Reading the gospels of Matthew or Mark or Luke or John, the gospel itself.
Christianity itself is hate speech. I know that because three nights ago, I recounted the Christian story in its essence over, like, five minutes and was immediately denounced by the ADL as someone who is dangerous and inspiring murder. But I'm not the only one. The ADL has actively attacked the Christian gospel for years, has gotten behind a definition of hate speech that includes the Christian story. That's not an exaggeration.
That's not a fervid conspiracy theory. That's a fact, and you can look it up. So this is the guy? That's the guy, Jonathan Greenblatt, of the most aggressively left wing Democratic aligned, but much more important than that, lunatic antihuman, anti American group, the ADL, completely corrupt. He's consulting that guy to decide how much speech you should have because there are ugly opinions on the Internet?
Yeah. That's your Republican party. Was he denounced by his fellow Republicans in the house? Was he denounced by the speaker of the house? Speaker Johnson?
No. He wasn't. They barely even noticed because they have the same views. Not all of them, but an awful lot of them. It's unbelievable, and it's counterproductive.
Because once again, censorship is never enacted to help the powerless. It is always and everywhere an effort to shield the powerful. Always. And in fact, has a counterproductive effect on the people it is supposedly designed to help. How would you feel about any person you're not allowed to criticize?
Would they make you like the person more? No. It would make you resentful and suspicious, and would give you the well deserved opinion that this is not an egalitarian society in which we're all citizens. It's a hierarchical society in which the government has decided some people have more rights than others. So if you find out you're not allowed to criticize someone else, maybe the first question you might ask is, well, then why are people allowed to criticize me?
And the answer is because some people have more power in our society or being used to pit different groups against each other or who knows what's going on. But none of it is is consistent with the core promise of this country, which is we're all citizens under our government, and we're all equal before our god who made us. It says that. But increasingly, that's not the country we live in. We live in a country where some people have more rights than others.
And that's exactly the kind of message you would send if you wanted to foment a revolution against your government because it enrages people, and it divides them from each other. Oh, we have to protect this group. What does everyone else think of that? They secretly don't like the group. You're
Speaker 2: not
Speaker 0: ending bigotry by enacting censorship. You're creating it, Dumbo. And this is specifically aimed at congressman Bacon, who was somehow an air force general. He can't be dumb. But he's obviously not very thoughtful because this is very obvious.
People don't like other people who get special treatment. Were you never a child? You never learned that? Who knows what the purpose here? It doesn't even matter.
It is happening right before us. The people who are elected to protect us, who say they're our friends, are selling us out. And you can theorize as to why. And by the way, all of that theorizing is itself unhealthy. Where do conspiracy theories come from?
Where do you think they come from? They come from living in a country where the government will never explain anything and lies constantly. So the next time you see someone in power complain about malicious conspiracy theories, stop him in mid sentence and say they exist because of you. If you would just tell the truth, if you would live like Charlie Kirk and answer the question politely, reasonably, fully, there wouldn't be a vacuum into which lunatics would rush. We would have a plausible answer to basic questions, like, what the hell is going on?
But because you haven't provided that, what do you think's gonna happen? People are gonna have some pretty far out explanations. And maybe some of them are true, by the way. We don't know. Your behavior is so suspicious because you can't answer any question straight.
Any. And you're spending your time talking to Jonathan Greenblatt, one of the darkest, most corrupt people in our society, truly a divisive figure. Speaking of divisive, how many Americans have made fellow Americans hate each other more consistently over the years than Jonathan Greenblatt? Very, very few. Very few.
And you're talking to him? So if this sounds like a paranoid rant, like, oh, that could never happen. Well, you should know that it is happening right now in the state of California. The state of California, like, two weeks ago, ten days ago, eight days ago, something like that, has passed a law in the state legislature, both chambers of state legislature. It awaits a signature from Gavin Newsom that would ban hate speech on the Internet in California.
Hate speech. Now how do they define hate speech? They actually have the definition. I actually wrote it down because I was so shocked by it that this is happening. The state of California, if Gavin Newsom signs this law, and he has until October 13 to do it, he people will be fined if the censors determine that speech constitutes, and we're quoting now, violence, intimidation, or coercion.
What's intimidation or coercion? Right. Right. Or coercion based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, immigration status, or other protected characteristics. Obviously, white Christian men are not covered under that.
And so this the society becomes ever more hierarchical with a Brahmin class and untouchables at the bottom. The opposite of the country all of us over 50 grew up in that had an egalitarian spirit where some were rich, some were poor, some were smart, some were dumb, some had good jobs, others were unemployed, but all of us were considered equal under the law and equal in the eyes of God. And that concept is the basis of a stable society, any stable society, and it was the basis of stability in this country. And laws like this and the attitudes that give birth to them, to laws like this, have made it wildly unstable. Wobbly, it's so unstable.
So as of October 13, that could become law. Now that's a censorship law. Now they'll say, no. No. No.
We're just we're actually getting the platforms to censor. Well, right. You're getting someone else to do the job for you, But if you hire a hitman and he carries out the hit, you're the murderer. He participated in it, but you hired him. And that's exactly what's going on here.
The state of California under Gavin Newsom is about to, we think, censor the opinions of Americans. Not to protect anybody, but to shield themselves from criticism so they can continue to do what they wanna do in secret. Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of the ADL, applauds this. And in case you're not familiar with Jonathan Greenblatt, and in case you want a sense of what he's like and what he considers hate speech, Let's just go right to the tape so you know that we're not exaggerating. This is Jonathan Greenblatt, a video.
Speaker 4: When you look at the prevalence of anti vaxxer accounts that have been amplified and spread across Facebook, they don't show up on your network, but they show up every day to billions of people because Facebook profits from amplifying these voices, which are literally killing people. And freedom to express your opinion isn't the freedom to incite violence. But but for Facebook, it is, and that needs to change. That's all. It's simple.
There's nothing wrong with keeping all of us safe from violent white supremacists or hateful people.
Speaker 0: So criticizing the COVID vax is tantamount to murder. There's never been I mean, obviously, that's prima facie insane. It's untrue. It's a deranged perspective. But more than anything, you're seeing who Jonathan Greenblatt really is.
He is a faithful Praetorian guard for the people in charge. This is not someone who's ever challenged actual power, not once in his life. That's who he works for. That's who he takes money from. That's what hate speech looks like.
Anybody in charge can make you shut up when you criticize them or stand in the way of their aims. So in case you don't think this can come to The United States, one final clip, and it's a sad one, and it comes from The UK. Now The UK, obviously, the country that gave birth to ours, a cousin, a country so similar to ours and so close, six hours by plane overnight, that we don't really think of it as fully foreign. It's not like going to Malaysia or Burundi or even France. It's an English speaking country whose customs are recognizable, whose government and common law form the basis of our government and our law.
Everything about England seems like home, but three degrees off. And yet, The UK has become a police state. And if you don't believe that, if you think that's just hyperbole designed to whip you into a frenzy, here's a stat that we checked, it's it's hard even to believe this is true, but this is true. 02/2023. So, like, a year and a half ago.
How many people do you think were arrested in The United Kingdom for speech violations? Arrested by the police, handcuffed, and brought to jail in 2023. Couple dozen, you know, the ones you see on x, the ones Fox News talks about. How many people in that year were arrested for saying things the government didn't want them to say? What's your guess?
Is it more than 12,000? Because that's the answer. More than 12,000. Wow. That seems like a lot.
Is that a lot? I mean, it's kinda hard to know. Right? Okay. Well, let's compare it to the number, the widely agreed upon number, from the most totalitarian country in the world.
A country so lacking in basic freedom, a country run by a madman, a country that's so evil. We're literally at war with that country right now just on principle because we so disapprove of how they treat their people. And that country, of course, is Russia under Vladimir Putin. So if The UK handcuffed 12,000 more than 12,000 people in one year for saying things the government didn't like, How many were arrested in Russia? A country with twice the population of The UK.
Oh, we happen to have the number. 3,319. So to restate, more than 12,000 people arrested in The United Kingdom, England, in one year for speech code violations. 3,300 arrested in Russia, a country with twice the population. So that tells you, you don't think totalitarianism can come to the Anglosphere?
Oh, it already has. We haven't even touched on Australia, New Zealand, Canada. In some ways, even worse. But what does it look like? What is the face of hate crime prosecution?
What does it actually look like when a citizen is arrested for saying something the government doesn't like? This video is not from China. It's from The United Kingdom. This is a British veteran being arrested for offending the government. Watch.
Speaker 2: The British Hampshire police would realize how ridiculous this is.
Speaker 5: It is
Speaker 2: ridiculous. It is. Of course.
Speaker 5: I'm telling to come to this.
Speaker 2: So What what did what did did it need to come to this level because I don't understand. I posted something that he posted. You come to arrest me. You don't arrest him. Why is it come to this?
Why am I in cuffs? Because there's something he shared, then I shared.
Speaker 5: Because someone has been caused, obviously, anxiety
Speaker 6: based upon your social media sites.
Speaker 2: That's not
Speaker 1: why you've been arrested. Oh,
Speaker 0: yes. The velvet wrap jackboot of British fascism. You're being arrested because someone has been caused anxiety by your views. Notice that someone has never identified, and, of course, the answer is someone in power. Someone in the government or someone who funds the government, someone close to the government, someone who has a lot more power than you, didn't like what you were saying, felt anxious about what you were saying, and so, unfortunately, we're gonna have to handcuff you and bring you to jail.
That happened this year. That happened in that's from January. And it happens every single day. More than 12,000 people arrested every single year for criticizing their government in The UK. Our closest ally with whom we share intelligence on every level.
British intelligence. I know everyone's spun up about Mossad, very close to Mossad. We're closer to British intelligence. That's the country we're partnering with to spy on our respective populations. Yeah.
So it's really, really simple. If a government if your government is willing to arrest you for saying things that they don't like, if your government is arresting you for criticizing them, one way or another, you need a new government. If there is any justification for revolution, it's that. That's unacceptable. That's tyranny.
A government that does that is not a legitimate government. It has absolutely no right to do that, and it should be stopped from doing that immediately. That's the red line right there.
@MazeLove14 - Maze Love
@JOKAQARMY1 - mrredpillz jokaqarmy
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion centers on why powerful people hurt children, arguing that the explanation is broader than the common claim that they’re simply compromised. While corruption does occur, the speaker asserts that it accounts for only a quarter of the story.
The presenter explains that wealth derives from money, which is described as a form of diluted life energy. Money used to be gold, an element and mineral of the earth, but today money is “a dead tree, hollowed out paper”—fiat currency. Those who control the money supply supposedly understand energy and want others to adopt their belief that death is life. From a perspective of a command chain that controls the global economy and “worships death,” they gain energy from nonlife. The opposite of nonlife is life, especially “new life, innocent life.”
According to the theory, turning life into nonlife causes the life force to go into the abusers, just as gold travels into institutions like the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Fort Knox, Banque de France, and the Bank of Italy. Innocence and gold are depicted as hoarded energy sources. Meanwhile, society is conditioned to believe it can live off hollowed materials—Froot Loops cereal, polyester clothing, plastic containers, Teflon—while “dark humans” hoard actual life force and gold.
The speaker references the anime series “Greyman,” where innocence is a literal divine material that powers weapons to fight evil. If this power falls into the wrong hands, innocence is hijacked and used by what are called the “fallen ones”—humans who become monsters and destroy life by twisting innocence. Wealthy people, the theory continues, understand energy, see innocence as a power source, and use that energy not merely for pleasure but for control.
The subject is acknowledged as complex, not fully coverable in a single short video. The speaker leaves with a quote that has helped through difficult times: “I am sending you out as a sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” The message suggests that when innocence learns to be wise, it can no longer allow its children to be a source of energy for dark people.
The speaker ends by inviting the audience to share their thoughts, signing off as PewDiePie.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So why do powerful people hurt children? The answer is not exactly what you've been told. You've been told that they've become compromised. Yes. This definitely happens, but it's only a quarter of the story.
Now wealthy people are powerful because of money. Alright? Money is a form of diluted life energy. Money used to be gold. Gold is an element and mineral of the earth.
Money is now a dead tree, hollowed out paper. Money of today is fake. It's fiat currency. Our entire financial system is set on a form of currency that is dead. This means that those who control the money supply understand energy.
They want us to believe what they believe, and that is that death is life. So what can we interpret from a command chain of wealthy people that own the global economy and worship death? We can see that they gain a sense of energy from nonlife. And what is the exact opposite of nonlife? Life, especially new life, innocent life.
Now when you turn life into nonlife, where does the life force go? The life force goes into the abusers just as the gold goes into the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Fort Knox, Banque de France, and the Bank of Italy in Rome. Innocence and gold are hoarded and used as energy sources. Meanwhile, they twist the human mind into believing it can live off of hollowed out materials, Froot Loops cereal, polyester clothes, plastic containers, Teflon, while dark humans hoard actual life force and gold. In the anime series, the Greyman, innocence is a literal divine material that powers special weapons to fight evil.
But what if this power gets in the wrong hands? In this series, innocence gets hijacked and is taken and used by what they call the fallen ones. These are humans that become monsters that destroy the life around them by twisting innocence. So wealthy people understand energy. They see innocence as a power source, and they use this energy not just for fun, but for power.
This is a complicated subject that I cannot cover in just one short video, but I leave you with a quote that has gotten me through harsh times around some of these people. I am sending you out as a sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. When innocence learns how to be wise, it can no longer allow its children to be a source of energy for dark people. What do you think of this theory, little angel? Share your thoughts below and be blessed, PewDiePie.