reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Some people claim Jews have too much power, wealth, and influence, particularly in media. I disagree with those who want us to apologetically deny our strength. We've earned our influence through our contributions. We should never be sorry for using our strength to promote peace. The path to peace for Jewish people and the nation comes through strength. Jews have disproportionately founded or led movements like Marxism, humanism, socialism, environmentalism, and feminism. On the topic of Jewish individuals owning much of the media, funding politicians, and leading in movements such as the intellectual lead in combating the initiatives that was proposed, I largely agree. I believe Jews often take the intellectual lead in movements where possible, like civil rights. I can look into the issue of Jews creating issues and dividing people.

Jews in Harlem run the whiskey and rundown stores, and control Harlem's economy. Someone should be warned before violence erupts, but this is not antisemitism, just observation. The speaker claims that Jews control about 80% of the economy in most Black communities across the country. After he made this statement on Channel 13, Jews organized to prevent the interview from being re-aired. Morgan, another person involved in the program, disclaimed responsibility for the speaker's statements. The speaker believes that Jews exploit Black communities in Harlem and across the country, and that Jews believe in censorship more than anyone else.

There is a lack of Jewish rappers because Jewish owners and CEOs run the music industry. Kanye wished everyone a happy Kwanzaa and acknowledged that Jewish people hold power in Hollywood and the music industry. The speaker feels uncomfortable discussing this topic and doesn't want to be misunderstood. They have Jewish friends and contacts in their phone.

The conversation centers on accusations about wrongdoing in the music industry and the role of Jewish people in media. Speaker 0 says that all the people who hurt you in the music industry are individuals and are not Jews, insisting they are human with opportunities who took them. Speaker 1 counters by saying that those individuals are Jewish, and notes that eight people who “would collude and talk without me” were in groups, implying organizational involvement. They discuss the idea of “Jewish control of the media.” Speaker 0 argues that it’s not correct to say there’s Jewish control of the media or that there is “Jewish media,” and pushes to call out individuals by name rather than labeling them by their Jewish identity. Speaker 1 maintains that there is a Jewish presence involved, stating, “I'm calling the industry out” and emphasizing that his lawyer, regulator, and others were Jewish, though he also acknowledges groups colluding without him. Speaker 0 challenges the framing, saying there is no Jewish media or Jewish control of the media, and questions the framing of “Jewish media” or “Jewish record label.” Speaker 1 presses on, insisting that there is a pattern of Jewish involvement in roles that facilitate wrongdoing, describing it as an engineering of the system by Jewish people, and saying, “If you're an engineer and you're not holding to the truth, that's not engineering.” The dialogue shifts to a call for naming individuals rather than Jews, suggesting, “Don’t call them Jews, call them by their name and start a war against those individuals.” Speaker 0 concedes frustration with those who “get fucked over in the music industry and in the media,” and asserts that Jewish people have suffered even in history, referencing the Soviet Union and the Holocaust, and implying that the suffering of Jews should be acknowledged. The exchange touches on the appropriateness of discussing Jewish identity in this context. Speaker 1 asks if it’s permissible to say “Jewish” aloud, while Speaker 0 questions whether saying “Jewish media” equates to anti-Semitism. The conversation ends with a concern about whether it is acceptable to say “Jewish” or “Jewish media” or “Jewish controlled media,” and they reference the term “JM” as a shorthand for their discussion. Key themes: disagreement over whether Jewish people control media, insistence on naming individuals rather than labeling groups by ethnicity or religion, the impact of industry practices on artists, and a confrontation over the boundaries of discussing Jewish involvement without becoming antisemitic.

The speaker discusses a list of influential people in various industries, noting the high number of Jewish individuals. They mention how different people interpret this list, some seeing privilege, conspiracy theories, or intellectual opposition. These interpretations can lead to anti-Semitic conclusions.

The discussion outlines a close relationship in Los Angeles between Israelis and the Jewish mafia. By 1949, Mickey Cohen’s personal rabbi was Menachem Begin, described as “the father of all terrorism.” The speakers assert that Cohen was the head of the LA mob, noting that while many people think the mafia was Italian, “a lot of the mafia was actually the head mafia bosses were Jewish,” and that “the mob was run by Jews,” with Italians running the local mob and Jews running the large-scale international syndicate. They identify Meyer Lansky as “the primary crime boss” and state he led from 1931 until the end of the 1970s. Lansky allegedly never went to prison, unlike others who did; he ran major blackmail operations, described as “the original Epstein,” and there is an assertion that he had blackmail on J. Edgar Hoover. They quote a sensational line about Hoover: “Hoover sucking what's his name? Sucking on the took by Tolson's dick.” The speakers claim Lansky went on the run in the 1970s when America chased him, went to Israel, and was denied entry, though he was given a travel visa to continue on the run. They admit they are not certain how Lansky’s story ended. The conversation emphasizes the interconnection between the CIA, the mafia, and Israel, stating that this relationship helped produce a broader, intertwined network: “the CIA and the mafia, and the Israelis,” with a claim that Kennedy was killed as a consequence of these relationships. They describe the global “inter interconnected” nature of the teams and suggest that one cannot separate the CIA, the mob, and Israel, pointing to the intersections involving Meyer Lansky.

Jewish people dominate the music industry and Hollywood due to their control of labels and businesses. Speaking negatively about them can lead to consequences. The speaker feels uncomfortable discussing this topic and prefers to avoid it. Despite having Jewish associates, the speaker believes black people lack power and organization in comparison.

Jews are prominent in conservative media like Breitbart, PragerU, Daily Wire, BlazeTV, Fox News, and CNN. They hold key positions as owners, CEOs, and on-air personalities. The ADL, a Jewish group, claims influence over social media companies. Criticizing this Jewish presence is labeled as antisemitism, even though it's a fact. This can now be considered a hate crime.

The speaker discusses allegations about Jews, such as the myth of a world Jewish conspiracy or Jews controlling media, government, and other institutions. They mention that these claims are considered anti-Semitic. Speaker 1 asks if it's anti-Semitic to mention having Jewish connections, to which Speaker 0 responds with a list of companies and organizations, implying that many of them are Jewish-owned or influenced. Speaker 1 points out that the speaker has faced backlash and lost endorsements for their statements. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 listing more companies, some of which they believe are Jewish-owned.

The speaker discusses a list of influential people in various industries, noting the presence of many Jewish individuals. They highlight how discussions on privilege, conspiracy theories, and intellectual diversity can lead to anti-Semitic conclusions. The focus is on the lack of diversity in influential positions.

The speakers discuss the ethnic and religious backgrounds of individuals involved in technocracy, Palantir, and crypto, with a focus on Jewish people. One speaker accuses the other of deflecting from the "actual problem" by not acknowledging the role of Jewish individuals in these areas and in what they claim is the oppression of white and Black people. They claim that Jewish people control media, academia, and politics, fund anti-white policies, and benefit disproportionately from the current system. The speaker questions why Black people are unaware of these alleged facts. The other speaker denies downplaying the role of Jewish people, but is challenged for only having one post mentioning Jewish people. The first speaker accuses the second of lying or being subversive for not acknowledging a "common problem."

Jews are often accused of controlling the world, and while it may seem irrational, there is some truth to it. Despite being a small percentage of the global population, the influence of Jews and Judaism is immeasurable.

I have a dream, like Martin Luther King, that people will not be judged by their race or skin color. The people who have screwed artists over in the music industry are individuals who took opportunities, not Jews. My lawyer was Jewish, and my manager was Jewish, as were eight people who colluded without me. It's wrong to say that there's Jewish control of the media; that's a lie. Is it anti-Semitic for me to say "Jewish"? There is no Jewish media. Call out the individuals by name, not as Jews. People get screwed over in the music industry and the media. I grew up in the Soviet Union, I'm Jewish. The words about Jews are not the words of a samurai. Don't say "Jewish media" or "Jewish-controlled media". Is it okay for me to say that, or is that anti-Semitic?

Speaker critiques the term 'Jewish media,' asking to "Don't call them Jews, call them by their name and start a war against those individuals." They're not Jewish. They ask, "But if that's the case, will you help me with that?" The dialogue notes, "These people get fucked over in the in the music industry and get fucked over in the media. Get fucked over all over the place." They state, "Torture Jewish people. What's my bullshit? I'm Jewish. Jewish media, Jewish That's not bullshit. Jews are controlling the voice." They reference growing up in the Soviet Union and the "Holocaust of Nazi Germany," claiming, "You're not giving a fuck about the suffering of the Jewish people across the world." "Because they were." Kanye West doesn't care about Jewish people. They ask, "Yay. I gotta say these words and the words about Jews is not the words of a samurai. Or is that anti Semitic?"

Speaker 0 argues that individuals, not Jewish people, are responsible for wrongdoing in the music industry and media. Speaker 1 disagrees, asserting that Jewish people control the media and that it is not antisemitic to say so. Speaker 0 insists on addressing individuals by name rather than generalizing about Jewish people, referencing Nazi Germany and the suffering of Jewish people. Speaker 1 asks if using the term "JM" is acceptable or antisemitic.

The speaker questions the high representation of Jewish individuals in influential positions across various sectors like politics, education, entertainment, finance, and sports. They highlight examples such as Democratic party donors, Ivy League presidents, Hollywood talent agencies, NBA teams, the Federal Reserve, Black Rock, the Biden administration, and Donald Trump's connections. The speaker expresses confusion over the disproportionate presence of Jewish individuals in these areas.

Those who have mistreated artists in the music industry are individuals, not a specific group like Jews. It's important to distinguish between the two.

The speakers discuss the Jewish executives in certain companies and whether the speaker is anti-Semitic. Speaker 1 argues that being anti-Semitic would mean being against Arabs as well, as they are also Semitic. Speaker 2 mentions the strong ties between Israel and the American Jewish establishment, including their influence in money and media. Speaker 0 asks about media control, and Speaker 2 confirms it. Speaker 2 also shares a personal story about a newspaper canceling an interview due to fear. Speaker 3 talks about a military discovery of a psychotronic generator that can manipulate behavior through electromagnetic signals. The conversation ends with a mention of the algorithm.

The transcript centers on a controversial, repeatedly asserted claim that Jewish people run or control the media. The speakers discuss Kanye West’s position on Jewish influence, repeatedly insisting that “the Jews run the media” and that interviewing a Jewish host on a Jewish platform implies media control. Specific points raised include: - A speaker asserts that “Artists over in the music industry are individuals. They're not Jews. Can you say They are they are Jewish,” followed by a quick retort, and the line “Nigga. They are. Lex fucking Friedman?” to imply Lex Friedman is Jewish and part of the media. - A speaker says, “The Jews do run the media,” and argues that a Jewish person interviewing Kanye on a video podcast proves media control, calling Lex Friedman a “Jew” and a “fucking Jew,” and claiming the interview demonstrates media control by Jews. - The discussion frames the media as Jewish-owned or Jewish-run, referencing Lex Friedman, YouTube’s leadership (Susan Wojcicki), and positions within the media ecosystem to support the claim of Jewish influence. - One speaker states, “There is [Jewish control of the media],” while another questions whether it is antisemitic for Ye (Kanye) to say “Jewish” aloud, with the other replying that there is “no Jewish media” and then contradicting that with “There is.” - The dialogue inserts biographical claims about Jewish individuals in media leadership, including “Susan Wojowski” (Susan Wojcicki), noting she ran YouTube for a decade, and suggesting this corroborates the premise of Jewish control of media. - The conversation touches on personal experiences and accusations about people in the industry, including allegations that a Jewish lawyer and a regulator were connected through groups, and that a “head of YouTube” being Jewish supports the claim. - The speakers criticize Lex Friedman’s interview style, calling him “boring,” and claim his position on Jewish media is inconsistent with his role as a media figure, while reiterating the assertion that “the Jews run the media.” - The discussion broadens to reference other examples, including Logan Paul’s crypto project and the broader pattern of alleged exploitation by “Jewish media” or “Jewish” entities in various industries, including music and media. - The dialogue ends with continued questions about whether mentioning “Jewish media” is acceptable, and a repeated concern with naming individuals to “start a war” against those perceived as part of the media establishment, insisting that the media is “Jewish” and “run by Jewish people.” Overall, the transcript presents a persistent, unnuanced narration asserting Jewish control of media institutions, interwoven with personal grievances, confrontations about antisemitism, and critiques of specific media figures.

Speaker 0 says, "powerful institutions are at play here, and there's a coordinated effort to spread this parasitic ideology," and asks, "Are you willing to name the group behind us? Because behind all these institutions, there seems to be a Cohen, a Berg, a Stein." He then asks, "What are your thoughts on the Jewish influence about on gender ideology?" Speaker 1 replies, "So you're you're Am I gonna do anything about the Jews is what you're asking me? No." Okay. Do I need to dignify that with a further response, do think?" He adds, "Or And Jewish donors, they have a lot of explaining to do, a lot of decoupling to do, because Jewish donors have been the number one funding mechanism of radical open border neoliberal quasi Marxist policies, cultural institutions, and nonprofits." "This is a beast created by secular Jews."

Jewish communities have been pushing the exact kind of hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them. Not every Jewish person believes that. But it is true the anti defamation league was part and parcel with Black Lives Matter. It is true that some of the largest financiers of left wing anti white causes have been Jewish Americans. They went all in on woke, and it wasn't just ADL. It was some of the top Jewish organizations in the country that have done that. We have seen this with the recent retreat of Jewish donations that are no longer going to be administered to colleges. Can we get that full list? Tucker Carlson mentions that Jewish Americans have primarily been financing cultural Marxist ideas. The philosophical foundation of anti whiteness has been largely financed by Jewish donors.

Jews in Harlem run the whiskey and rundown stores, and control Harlem's economy. Someone should be warned before violence erupts, but this is not antisemitism. The speaker claims to have stated on Channel 13 that Jews control about 80% of the economy in most Black communities. Jews organized to prevent the interview from re-airing. The speaker did two interviews, one short and one thirty minutes long. After the interview, Morgan Price stated he was not responsible for anything the speaker said. The speaker believes that Jews prevented the showing of the interview because he stated that Jews are robbing and exploiting Black people in Harlem and across the country. Jews believe in censorship more than anyone else.

There are suspicions about who really controls things, with mention of Jews and dark forces. Michael Jackson's negative comments about Jews are brought up, along with his concerns about being mistreated. The idea of selling one's soul or worshipping Satan is discussed in relation to those in power.

Kanye West tweeted about being targeted by certain people in Hollywood, leading to fear in the Jewish community. The idea is raised that a small group may be using their Jewish identity to avoid criticism. This parallels the concept of gangs in other communities. The speaker suggests that everyone, regardless of background, should question if there is a sinister group in Hollywood and DC controlling things.

The discussion presents a series of provocative claims linking prominent social issues to Jewish influence, framed around the idea that “tiny hats” (a pejorative reference to Jews) control many institutions and events. The key points raised include: - A claim that MLK and the tiny hats are connected to the Rothschilds who “run a lot of things,” and that schools are owned by the tiny hats, with this ownership connected to a suppressed narrative about slavery. The argument suggests people are missing a wider story involving tiny hats. - An assertion about who took out Native Americans, attributed to the tiny hats, with a prompt that people have not been taught this. - A claim about Christopher Columbus, asking “who? tiny hat person,” and stating he brought over 300,000 other tiny hats, implying a hidden expansion of Jewish influence. - The idea that public questioning of the narrative is being challenged by the government, which is trying to prevent people from questioning anything. - A deeper claim about who created division among people, attributing to those who own newspapers and radio—the tiny hats—ownership of media that can obscure the truth. - An assertion that the tiny hats orchestrated the Tulsa race riots of 1921. - A claim about who brought in Planned Parenthood and the LGBT movement (described as “forty seven whatever it may be, tiny hats”), suggesting deliberate influence. - The suggestion to question everything taught in school, ending with a video from Malcolm X to let individuals decide for themselves. Speaker 1 discusses antisemitism and analysis of Jewish influence, addressing a question about being anti-Semitic. The speaker argues that Jews defend themselves by accusing others of antisemitism when objective analysis of their role is made. The speaker contends that a Negro is not antisemitic when pointing out that white people own all the stores in his community. The speaker asserts that it is not an accident that “these whites who own these stores are Jewish,” and that labeling “the Jew on the corner” as exploiting him is not antisemitic but a description of the exploiter. The speaker also contrasts Arabs and Jews as both semitic, noting that if one were truly anti-Semitic, they would be anti-Arab and anti everything else, and suggests that the issue is framed as antisemitic rather than an objective analysis of economic exploitation by white store owners who are Jewish.