reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In a heated exchange, Speaker 0 vents frustration at a man and his friends, saying: "I hope that one day you stand up from the bathroom mirror and shoo yourself in the face. In front of who? In front of your bathroom mirror. And then you're gonna go and stand with your God and have to answer for what you believe. And the damage that You wanna stand in front of? Your mirror will get your face and shoot yourself. You are gonna stand in front of God." He adds: "Okay. You and I both say you're a Christian. I am a believer in God. But not a Christian. I'm Jewish." Speaker 1 responds: "Everybody is Jewish. Oh, I did on the third." Speaker 0 retorts: "As soon as I said Jewish, there it is. Crappy Jewish."

Speaker 0 admits to engaging in sexual activities with children who willingly came to his bed. Speaker 1 expresses concern about the harm caused by adults forcing sexuality on children. Speaker 2 shares their experience of being groomed by an adult and manipulated into liking the abuse. Speaker 3 questions how someone as intelligent as Speaker 0 could justify their actions. Speaker 0 defends their behavior, claiming not to know why they engaged in pedophilia. The video ends with Speaker 0 expressing disgust at the idea of acting in their own biography and advocating for intergenerational sex for stronger family bonds.

The discussion centers on the way lawmakers reference religion in foreign policy and whether that approach is effective. Speaker 0 asks the audience how many think a respected lawmaker like Ted Cruz uses the Bible to justify aid to Israel, even if he doesn’t know the verse, and whether that is the best approach. Speaker 1 responds by referencing Ted Cruz’s Genesis twelve three, and notes that many find that off-putting when contrasted with the New Testament, specifically Paul’s writings about the new flesh not being the same as the people in the old covenant. Speaker 1 asks, “Yes. Romans nine?” and agrees with the sentiment. Speaker 0 then asks Speaker 1 if they are Catholic, to which Speaker 1 replies that they are converting Catholic from Judaism, revealing that they are ethnically Jewish. The exchange confirms Speaker 1’s Jewish ethnicity. Speaker 0 brings up concerns about APAC, asking if Speaker 1 has concerns about APAC. Speaker 1 confirms that they do. Speaker 0 notes that some people tell them that criticizing APAC equates to being anti-Semitic, asking whether this is true. Speaker 1 calls that notion ridiculous and says it’s great to have concern for one’s country. The conversation shifts to APAC’s influence. Speaker 0 presents a characterization (as a possible summary of Speaker 1’s view) that APAC represents a form of prioritization that cuts in line, away from the American people. Speaker 0 asks whether this is a fair summary. Speaker 1 answers affirmatively, “100%.” Finally, they articulate the core idea: the public votes and are citizens, but a separate group is described as receiving higher priority for whatever reasons. Speaker 1’s agreement underscores a shared concern that APAC’s influence creates a prioritization that bypasses the ordinary American electorate.

Speaker 0 explains that the couple’s ruse may seem odd to some people and does not fit into any “white handbook” about keeping the kingdom orderly. There is no section on how to rescue children from sex traffickers. Speaker 1 interrupts to say they want to explain something. Speaker 0 continues that, using his team, they have had to figure things out on their own. He acknowledges that people may dismiss it, but he emphasizes gratitude for the opportunity to publicly state a principle: he will never confess to something he did not do, no matter who asks, unless God himself and an angel or some divine directive instructs him to lie to protect Elder Ballard’s name from defamation. He asserts clearly that he will not lie or confess to a false wrongdoing unless there is a divine instruction to do so. He reiterates that there is not one person on the planet for whom he would deviate from this principle, unless a direct message from God or a celestial being instructs him otherwise. Speaker 1 closes with a brief interjection: “But by the way, folks.”

The speakers discuss views on Christians and Jews. One speaker questions how Christians can believe they killed God, referring to JC, and states that if JC was God, they couldn't have killed him. They mock Christians for celebrating JC's birthday, with one rabbi purportedly saying he's happy that millions of gentiles bow down to one Jew. One person claims they stopped praying to JC after realizing he was Jewish. Christianity is described as having taken elements from Judaism and adding "nonsense." JC is quoted from the New Testament (Matthew 5:17-19) as saying he didn't come to contradict the Torah. The speakers suggest that worshiping God means respecting Jews, as they are God's children. They imply that treating Jews well leads to God, while harming them is detrimental. They claim the Torah says God loves Jews the most and that JC was a Jew.

Speaker 0 asks why Speaker 1 claims to hate children in interviews. Speaker 1 explains that in today's world, it's easier for a single man like him to say he doesn't like children. Speaker 0 suggests that Speaker 1 says this to avoid tabloids speculating about him being a pedophile. Speaker 1 agrees and questions how anyone can truly know if he is or isn't.

Speaker 0 begins by challenging the other person’s belief, saying, “He don’t we don’t believe the Jesus, man.” The line signals a heated disagreement about Jesus and hell. The speaker then asserts that the other side believes “that Jesus is burning and shit and hell,” and he agrees with that characterization by saying, “Oh, yeah. Exactly.” This exchange frames the conversation as a confrontation over the nature of Jesus and his fate after death. The dialogue moves to a reaction to the idea of Jesus suffering in hell. Speaker 0 labels the idea as “terrible,” immediately followed by a probing question about why it should be considered terrible: “Why it's terrible?” He clarifies his stance by presenting a broader theological boundary, insisting, “It's not you it's not your god, and it's not my god. It's not the Muslim god.” In this line, he separates gods across religions and implies that the accusation or belief about Jesus burning in hell does not align with his or the other speaker’s understanding of divinity. The question then becomes a direct inquiry about the nature and identity of Jesus: “So what is Jesus? Tell me. What is Jesus? Jesus Christ Jesus. What is fucking Jesus?” The repetition emphasizes the speaker’s demand for a clear definition or explanation of who Jesus is. Speaker 0 proceeds to provide a definitive, though provocative, description: “Jesus Christ is the lord and savior for Christian people.” This statement asserts a canonical Christian understanding of Jesus’ role, positioning Jesus as central to Christian faith. However, the conversation quickly shifts as Speaker 0 challenges the reverence of Jesus by saying, “You're disrespecting him when you're saying that he's burning in hell and shit.” The rebuke reframes the earlier claim about Jesus’ fate as disrespectful to Jesus’ significance in Christian belief. The exchange culminates in a stark declaration from Speaker 0: “Listen. Jesus Jesus is nothing.” This controversial line is followed by an appeal to biblical literacy: “And if you don't if you really, really believe in the bible, you need to understand you believe Jewish man.” Here, the speaker implies that belief in the biblical narrative recognizes Jesus as a figure rooted in Jewish tradition, or perhaps emphasizes Jesus’ Jewish origins as part of understanding his identity within Christianity. The overall conversation centers on definitions of Jesus, the appropriateness of statements about his afterlife, and the contrast between Christian, Jewish, and other religious conceptions of Jesus.

- Speaker 0, John, announces: “A Muslim shooter out of Bondi Beach is apprehended by another Muslim. Could it be a false flag? Of course not. That would be crazy.” He hands off to Jessica. - Jessica reports: “The shooting took place at a Hanukkah celebration on Sunday, leaving 15 people dead. However, there was one lucky chosen person who survived not only October 7, but also a bullet grazing his head.” - Speaker 2 (unnamed in this excerpt) says: “I survived October 7. I lived in Israel the last thirteen years. We came here only two weeks ago to work with a Jewish community to fight anti Semitism, to fight this bloodthirsty, ravaging hatred. That’s why you’re here. That’s why I’m here.” - Speaker 3 quips: “Wow, who bandages a wound without cleaning it?” Speaker 4 replies: “Nobody, but it’s better theatrics that way after all. He is the chosen victim.” - Inside the hospital, Speaker 3 describes the chosen victim being treated for a bullet to the head, “turns out it’s just stage blood, corn syrup. You guys actually fell for that? Ridiculous. Oy, Ve, please don’t air this.” - Speaker 3 then identifies the “chosen victim” as “the president of the Australian Jewish Council and moved there two weeks ago.” Another speaker, Speaker 4, retorts: “Thanks, Ching Chong. I’m pretty sure Satan told him this would happen.” - The discussion continues with insinuations: “Right. Perfect way to take their guns too.” “I’m like 90% sure he was in the IDF.” “Every single time.” - Speaker 5 argues: “Your call for a Palestinian state pures full fuel on the antisemitic fire. It rewards Hamas terrorism. It emboldens those who menace Australian Jews and encourages the Jew hatred now stalking your streets. Antisemitism is a cancer.” - Speaker 3 responds: “Thanks, Satan. Blame the sand people. Am I right? Exactly. Let's all just forget about the fake weapons of mass destruction and genocide you committed.” - Speaker 5 adds: “This is the punishment that God gave us. We killed the Jews. We got instead of the Jews that were very good for us, we got these Muslim refugees from all over the world who destroying us, and the Christians cannot even celebrate Christmas now.” - Speaker 4 comments: “Holy victim. I don’t really trust people who only talk about what happened to them.” Speaker 3 counters: “But never what they did to anyone else. Right? That’s called accountability.” - Speaker 0 interjects: “Seriously, let's start with the 60,000,000 Christians in Russia they slaughtered.” Speaker 3: “Don’t get me started about the Rothschilds and nine eleven.” Speaker 4 supplies: “Let’s see what our investigation team thinks.” - Speaker 4 notes: “So official story says investigators found an ISIS flag in his car, which makes you think, why do they never attack Israel? Eric Warsaw, break it down for us. Israel actually admitted to funding and giving small arms to ISIS affiliated groups, and people still refused to see his controlled opposition.” - Speaker 3 asks: “What do you think of what happened today?” Speaker 4 responds: “Absolute tragedy, but I saw that Navid Akram was trending in Israel just days before.” - Speaker 2 signs off with thanks, and Speaker 3 introduces: “And this is the hero who risked everything, but the media refuses to talk about it. His name is Ahmed El Ahmed, which is obviously very sandy, so let's go ahead and change subjects.”

Speaker 0 expresses confusion and alarm, saying "Please tell me I'm fucking please tell me I'm reading this wrong. Gosh." They reference a claim: "It says, we too learn in the following I don't know how to say that word, that there is no legal significance to an act of intercourse with a girl less than three years old." and "A girl three years and one day old can be betrothed via sexual intercourse." They warn: "This isn't the Talmud, guys." They add: "This is what your rabbis are learning." Then: "This this three years and one day old can be betrothed via sexual inter" and finally dismiss with "Nope. Miss me with that shit. Nope."

Speaker 0 announces breaking news that “our greatest ally finally decided to stop genocide in Gaza.” Speaker 1 comments that this is probably because their prime minister is on trial again. Speaker 2, Shapiro Steen, questions where all the people who yelled about genocide have gone, noting that those who were “yelling about genocide now, poof, they’re just gone.” Speaker 3 presses: “Tell us more about how it’s not even a genocide.” Speaker 2 contrasts a “real genocide” with the Gaza situation, saying “not by any stretch of the imagination… a genocide,” and argues that when the supposed genocide stopped, “all the people who were fighting to stop it just disappeared,” asserting they didn’t give credit or say it was a good thing. Speaker 0 teases that “everyone is going to believe you,” then advertises Jake GTV News’s episode, sponsored by Palantir with the line “Finish them off. We deliver.” Speaker 1 complains that tech gurus “don’t seem to value human life,” then generalizes about a group with “tiny hats.” Speaker 0 adds, “they definitely had Jesus crucified.” Speaker 0 muses that Shapiro Steen might get them fired like Candace Owens. Speaker 2 mentions that “we killed Jesus,” but says they can still appropriate “the holy land and use the fake star of David… to usher in the new world order,” asking listeners to “just ask Satan.” Speaker 1, speaking as a Christian, says it should be mandated to go to Israel before heaven, and Speaker 4 says the place will welcome visitors like in Jerusalem, Nazareth, the Sea of Galilee. Speaker 1 questions how Israelis feel about Christians. Michael reports live from the holy land, noting that mention of Jesus “pisses these people off.” Speaker 0 asks if they actually spit on Christians in Israel, to which Speaker 1 confirms, “they literally spit on Christians in Israel.” Speaker 6 interrupts: “Shut it down. We get kicked out of every country for no reason, and facts are antiseptic.” Dennis is told not to mention Jesus again. Speaker 0 accuses the group of murdering thousands of innocent “sand people,” and Satan explains how to stop Christian influencers. Speaker 5 discusses using tools of battle, highlighting TikTok as “Number one” in the fight, and asks what the other important platform is, with Speaker 4 replying to yield to pressure. Speaker 4 recalls a past official recognition of Jerusalem as capital and moving the American embassy there, praising Miriam and Sheldon, and noting their trips to the White House. Speaker 1 remarks that, after the week’s events, the speaker deserves a Nobel Peace Prize, and Speaker 7, in Venezuela, promises a close relationship with Israel and moving the Israeli embassy to Jerusalem. Speaker 8 jokes about donors and elites, and another speaker notes a break room gathering for celebration, offering donuts for the Goyim and pizza for executives. Speaker 1 concludes with “Jackie was so based,” and the room is described as Producerberg. The group instructs staff to finish their goy slop and avoid talking about Jackie. Speaker 0 references JFK and the Epstein files, and calls Charlie Kirkberg “the Jew lover.” Dennis is urged to say “tolerance is strength.” The closing line: “Tolerance is strength, Nikki.” Speaker 1 ends with “You guys are such pussies. Christ is king,” followed by a final jab containing the nontolerant remark “Ching Chong,” and the directive that if you’re not following JankGTV, you’re “not based… retarded.”

Speaker 0 claims that various texts refer to negative depictions of Jesus and non-Jews. Specifically, text "Four seven one three" refers to Jesus as a fornicator, Gittin 56 states Jesus is burning in hell, and Shabbat one zero four b says Mary was a baba nessiah. Additionally, Baba Messiah 24 a allegedly states a Jew doesn't have to return a lost object to a gentile, Yebimath 98 a claims all children of goyim are animals, Tuspoth, Geminiath 84 b equates eating with a goy to eating with a dog, and Baba Messiah one fourteen b asserts gentiles are not humans but beasts. Speaker 1 states that these are legitimate verses in Judaism. Speaker 1 believes that Paul said in the New Testament that we must bless the Jews.

I'm a political figure aiming to organize a massive movement to take over the country, which involves associations that aren't always good. If people have a problem with that, they should try building something themselves. Movements shouldn't be destroyed by bad faith attacks over sexual impropriety, especially when it's just flirting. It's gross if someone flirts with 15-year-olds because it's gay and goes against age norms. While meditating, I thought about how Jesus faced mockery, ridicule, humiliation, and false allegations. Like Jesus before Pontius Pilate, all you can be is obedient and resolved. You can't beat the synagogue of Satan with lies.

Speaker 0 argues that the situation is “not really pedophilia,” stating it involved no trafficking of five-year-olds and emphasizing a distinction based on legality (“technically not legal,” not trafficking). The speaker then criticizes someone for speaking as if they would know or ask details, describing a scenario where a well-connected “coolest guy” suggests going on his private jet to his private island with “hot girls.” Speaker 0 claims the person in question does not specify ages, implying that the assumption would be that the girls are adults and that a nerd would ask about how old they are. Speaker 0 further adds that the context might be framed as “international waters,” suggesting that this would be treated as irrelevant to the age question. The transcript ends with the speaker repeating “Shut the fuck up.”

Speaker 0 questions if the theory of secretly saving the world from a satanic cult of pedophiles and cannibals is something Speaker 1 supports. Speaker 1 responds by saying they haven't heard of it, but they are open to the idea of helping to save the world and are willing to put themselves out there.

Speaker 0 asserts that if you have a Scofield Reference Bible, you need to know the author of that reference Bible because he’s not who people think he is; he is not Doctor Scofield. Speaker 1 corrects: Never was a doctor. Speaker 0 specifies: Nelson Darby is the man who created dispensationalism, and Larkins basically packaged it in his books, but it was Scofield who distributed it. John Nelson Darby’s doctrines supposedly went nowhere in Britain among the Plymouth Brethren through the 1800s, with only pockets in the United States aware of them, until Cyrus Schofield became the propaganda meister for Darby’s doctrine. Speaker 2 defines the Scofield Reference Bible as a King James Bible with notes in the margins acting as a commentary, in which dispensational truth is taught, and the Bible was shipped around the world. Speaker 3 adds: Many contributors to the Scofield Reference Bible helped sweep the movement across the United States. Speaker 2 explains: Somebody financed publication of many Scofield Bibles, and they were mailed to churches across America. Speaker 0 elaborates: The Bibles were given to Baptist young preachers in seminaries and Bible colleges, facilitating the spread of dispensationalism across pulpits and the country. Speaker 0 continues: Conferences, the establishment of Bible colleges, and Dallas Theological Seminary were part of a coordinated effort to spread the dispensational movement, which was very successful for a time. Speaker 1 notes: The Bibles were distributed widely in rural America and small town churches. Speaker 0 adds: Millions were distributed. Speaker 1 explains: Bible salesmen would get the Bibles for free, then sell them for whatever they could get. Speaker 1 answers: They got them for free from the publishing company—Oxford. Speaker 4 states: C. I. Schofield is placed on a pedestal by independent fundamental Baptists; pulpits across America feature a Schofield Reference Bible. Yet this is a man who preferred to use the Revised Version over the King James for his references, and he used the King James 1611 only because of its popularity at the time. So, he supposedly “threw the King James Bible under the bus” and said it’s not a good one, but used it because it was most popular. The speaker questions why Baptist, King James Only advocates promote a heretic who downplayed and disliked the King James Bible as a man of God who can teach good doctrine. Speaker 0 claims: They infiltrated American evangelical churches with Zionist propaganda, and the Baptist, Pentecostal, Assemblies of God, Church of God, and other denominations progressively bought into it. Speaker 1 adds: People actually believe the notes are sacred as the texts themselves. Speaker 5 contributes: A person with a Schofield Bible wants to read Schofield’s notes on Acts 15, noting that dispensationally, this is the most important passage in the New Testament, giving the divine purpose for this age and for the beginning of the next.

Speaker 0 opens by saying, “Don’t see how fucked up the world is. That’s a form of insanity.” Speaker 1 recounts coming home and writing a poem about Robbie to give him, then claims someone took away Robbie’s property and that Robbie began to blame it on the Jews. He adds that the US government and the Jews are “one of the same,” insisting, “That’s not true. True. No. Absolutely true. That’s never been…” and trails off. Speaker 2 asks about the Palestinian, and about “the good Jews,” questioning why the “good Jews” are not speaking against the alleged bad Jews. Speaker 1 responds with the idea that there are “very good people. Wonderful people,” but again asks why they aren’t talking against “the bad Jews,” implying they do not agree with the premise that those Jews are necessarily bad. Speaker 2 then asserts, “I equate the Jew and the devil together. To me, they’re practically interchangeable. And I think the Catholic church did also. I think the entire concept of the devil is based on the Jews.” Speaker 1 elaborates with a biblical analogy: in the New Testament, the devil took Jesus to a high mountain and offered him all the kingdoms of the world if Jesus would bow down and worship. He interprets this as symbolic of Jews offering wealth and power in exchange for obedience, stating that this is “symbolic of the Jew” and that one can have all the money in the world if one bows down and obeys. Speaker 2 adds that the devil is based on the Jew and notes that old pictures of the devil even look like a Jew.

The speaker states they could have thrown Ali under the bus a year ago when Milo mentioned rumors, but instead asked for evidence. They didn't want to end a friendship based on hearsay. They felt it was fair to wait for proof before taking action. Speaker 1 says a screenshot Lance has has existed forever and everyone knows about it. They state Ali is gay and hits people up, including teenagers, asking for nudes. Speaker 0 agrees this is gross. They also believe it's wrong for both women and boys to use nudity or sexuality for professional gain. They think that at 15, 16, and 17, people know what they're doing, and that two things can be true at the same time.

Speaker 0 says they bought this Bible in an antique store, dating roughly 1825 or 1836. The first page has “a map A map? Of Palestine,” which he finds very interesting, and he notes some verses are “gone” or not there anymore, including “Matthew seven verses 21 through 23.” He quotes: “Many will say to me on that day, Lord, Lord, … we used to pray in your name, in the name of Jesus, … Get away from me, you evildoers. You lawless people. You workers of iniquity. Get away from me.” He claims this is Jesus on the day of judgment disowning his own people for not worshipping God, even though they did works in Jesus’ name. Speaker 1 adds: “The key to this is to realize that even Jesus realized and knew that you shouldn't pray to him because he was merely a mortal man. He knew that we needed to pray to a higher power, whether you wanna call it source, God, spirit, nature.” They claim “They removed these verses” to push energy into Jesus and to torture on the cross and through the Eucharist, calling the Bible tainted “to bend to the will of man, tainted to evil” and noting “evil doers who prayed to Jesus.” What do you make of that?

- Speaker 0 urges not to dismiss the discussion, noting that resurfaced CIA files and Epstein files have made certain topics more accepted. They say there was “transhumanism… engineering of humans potentially cloning,” which used to be dismissed as conspiracy theory but is now seen as real. They link these themes to those who rule over us, and observe that Epstein’s interests in vaccines and Bill Gates are echoed by figures like Musk, who say we need to be “one with the AI” and that perhaps everyone needs a brain chip. Speaker 0 claims Lisa and their research support this, and that the conversation is continuing. - Speaker 1 responds by affirming the importance of the point and recalling a deep past discussion about transhumanism. They describe it as a “very collective and very orchestrated plan of this evolution” that has been happening for centuries. They say it is an evolution by “a group of entities” or a “very high powered… influential group of individuals” who became an institution and decided that humanity needed to evolve. They ask who is deciding what an ordinary species is and what the mechanics and architectural blueprint are that advance that species, asserting that “we’re in that right now.” - Speaker 0 adds: “Right. We The people that are deciding what the advanced species needs to look like just so happen to all be friends with the pedophile by the looks of it.” - Speaker 1 concludes with “100%.”

Speaker 0 notes that the people are not accusing him of rape or selling anyone; they are facing charges including human trafficking, rape, and forming a criminal gang to sexually exploit. Speaker 1 describes OnlyFans as “the best hustle in the world.” He explains the alleged methods: using the “lover boy method,” coercing by being nice, and not mentioning webcam until after sex. He says mentioning webcam on dates “just doesn’t work” and claims he would never do that, arguing the technique is to proceed normally and introduce webcam later. Speaker 2 and Speaker 3 discuss a program called PhD on corporatetake.com: “PhD is a pimp and hose degree.” He claims it teaches how he met girls, how he got girls to like him, how he got girls to fall in love with him to work on webcam, and how to have them spend more time with him. He describes inviting a prospective recruit to a meeting and bringing a girl who works for “Your bottom bitch” to explain the selling. The process emphasizes a “first girl” as pivotal, with girls on camera together the first day so the new girl can observe and imitate. Speaker 4 recounts specific experiences: being bought wine and becoming nervous about webcam work; the narrator describes wealth from webcam operations and retaining girls; he mentions four locations and 75 girls, with roughly half of the money going to the workers, claiming a 50% split and suggesting taxes explain the disparity. Another worker, paid a flat £15 per hour, notes large sums from clients who believed they would meet the girl. Speaker 1 describes a pattern where men fell in love with his models and sent large amounts of money, including people selling houses and life savings. He states: “I used sex as a tool to make women love me so they'd obey me and live in my house to make me money. That’s what I wanted. So I was a pimp in that sense.” He discusses the emotional manipulation that led clients to believe they would meet the girl. Speaker 5 remains skeptical, labeling the operation “pimpy.” Speaker 1 argues about the Me Too era, saying he is not a rapist in a way that would be labeled, yet he admits he likes the freedom to do what he wants. Speaker 6 challenges Speaker 1 by quoting his own statements: that his job was to meet a girl, sleep with her, get her to fall in love, and then get her on webcam to become rich together. Speaker 1 denies that exact quote, but Speaker 6 insists it matches what was said on the website. Speaker 0 reiterates that the belief is he was charged with human trafficking, and Speaker 1 clarifies that “human trafficking” is framed as forcing a girl to work for financial gain, noting TikTok accounts from some girls as part of the justification. He reiterates the PhD as a pimp and hose degree he claims to be pleasant about.

Speaker 0 opens with a provocative claim: “Fucked up the world is. That's a form of insanity.” The remark sets a mood of frustration and chaos. Speaker 1 then shares a personal moment: after coming home, they wrote a poem about Robbie which they intend to give him. They describe a reaction where someone took away Robbie’s property and Robbie began to blame it on the Jews, adding antisemitic rhetoric as a result. This accusation is presented as a reaction to a loss of property, with antisemitism framed as a consequence. Speaker 2 counters by specifying: “Not someone. The government. US government.” They elaborate that “the government and the Jews are one and the same,” asserting an equivalence between the government and Jewish people. Speaker 1 questions this claim, acknowledging it as “True true” and “Absolutely true. That’s never been—,” but the sentence trails as Speaker 2 presses the point: “Ask the Palestinians. The good Jews. Right? Why aren't the good Jews talking against the bad Jews? The so called good Jews out there.” Speaker 1 concedes that “There are. Very good people.” and “Wonderful people.” Yet Speaker 2 pushes back: “Why they talking” and then demands: “Why aren't the good Jews screaming against the bad Jews?” Speaker 1 suggests the reason is disagreement with the premise that there are “bad Jews,” implying that those who disagree are not such good Jews. Speaker 3 interjects with a stark comparison: “I equate the Jew and the devil together. To me, they're practically interchangeable. And I think the Catholic church did also. I think the entire concept of the devil is based on the Jews.” They reference the New Testament story where the devil shows Jesus all the kingdoms of the world and offers them if Jesus bows down and worships, implying this is symbolic of control and obedience for worldly wealth. Speaker 3 continues: “This is basically saying you can have all the money in the world. Do what you want. If you just do what I tell you to.” They interpret this as symbolic of the Jew. They claim: “This is symbolic of the Jew,” and even assert that “the devil is based on the Jew” and that “old pictures of the devil” resemble a Jew. Across the exchange, the conversation cycles between attributing political and financial power to Jewish groups, questioning the morality of “good Jews” versus “bad Jews,” and then offering a provocative theological claim linking the devil to Jews as a source of cunning or worldly power.

Speaker 0: Some viewers may find the following video disturbing. Viewer discretion is advised. Speaker 1: This is a fact. We are all being controlled by an elite, wealthy, and privileged few. When Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire, was found guilty of sex trafficking, he was set to squeal on all the elites in Hollywood and in Washington who used his child sex services. But Epstein was found dead in a cell from, quote, suicide. Why do the elites want children from sex traffickers? Adrenochrome. It is harvested from children for a euphoric and life enhancing benefit. This satanic cabal of Hollywood and political elites all need the adrenachrome to maintain their positions of power, and they will continue to do so until we stand up against them. Now, do you have any questions, Craig? Speaker 2: So does Oprah drink the same blood as Obama or is it usually a different kid? Speaker 1: It's kids from all over the world. Speaker 0: There was a recent Newsweek article about how blood from young people can slow aging. Connecting the circle tree system of old and young mice is documented to have rejuvenating effects on cells, tissues, organs and various functions. Is this where vampire myths and lore throughout human history and cultures derives from? Queen Elizabeth the second is related to Vlad the Impaler which makes Prince Charles the heir to Dracula's bloodline. Aldous Huxley's 1954 essay, The Doors of Perception written mostly about his experiences with mescaline discusses the possibility that adrenochrome is a compound with similar effects to the psychedelic cactus. Speaker 1: He has not taken it and doesn't know how one would obtain it saying just how it spontaneously produced within the human body. He describes it as a product of the decomposition of adrenaline which is surprising correct. There's a brief mention of Dren Crom in the 1962 novel A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess, where it's an optional addition to the cocktail which is a glass of milk Moloco Plus. But probably the most cited use of the compound is in Hunter S Thompson's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. The controversial author Hunter S. Thompson was allegedly linked to Larry King as implicated in the testimony from Paul Bonnachie who he looked at in the Franklin scandal in the Deep State War Part four Satanic Panic. Paul Bonnachie was the pedophile victim who revealed that Thompson directed a graphic snuff film made near Sacramento, California at a location called Bohemian Grove. Speaker 2: What is this shit? That stuff makes pure masculine seem like ginger beer, man. Adrenochrome. Adrenochrome? Where'd you get this? Never mind, it's absolutely pure. What kind of monster client have you hooked up with this time? Satanism freak. I think there's only one source for this stuff. The adrenaline gland from a living human body. I know. Speaker 3: When someone is being sacrificed, ladies and gentlemen, which is a very horrible thing, the person is terrified and adrenaline is pumped into their body. When you drink that blood, you get the high, the adrenaline high, that that person was in. And you, after a while, become addicted to that adrenaline high. There's also a very top secret. This substance, it's called adrenalchrome, and just the very existence of it's been kept very secret by these people. If you time things just perfectly right, as the person is being sacrificed, you can stick a needle here at the base of skull and if you know what you're doing and the timing is correct, you can extract adrenal chrome, which is a very valuable drug, natural drug on the Illuminati's black market. This is why you will see that well, backtracking just a little bit, the establishment news media said that the reason why Al Gore carried blood in a suitcase was that he was a hemophiliac. But the truth of the matter is that he's become addicted to blood. Speaker 0: This video shares a large data dump and paper trail of documents that are potentially the most shocking evidence of the existence of Adrenochrome yet. The volume of data is extensive and points out that this happens on an industrial scale and is part of a worldwide network. This information was left on a USB stick purchased in Germany. The person posted the information to the boards and it contained data from a company called CYM that allegedly runs camps and evaluates children. There are allegedly secret detention centers set up inside various corporations where kids as young as three years of age are tortured and harvest on mass for adrenochrome. In the documents, they are called detention centers so they can masquerade as juvenile detention centers to the public eye. But you don't detain three year olds in such centers nor do you harvest adrenochrome in legitimate detention centers, obviously. It seems from the data it is unproductive to kill the kids just to harvest this stuff, instead they're repeatedly tortured and then harvested whilst being allowed to live. The average age of the children in these detention centers is nine to 10 years. For satanic services, they probably kill the kids for each harvest but on an industrial scale, that's just not practical. Images one to 12 in the documents are the names, ages and the locations of the kids as well as how long they have been harvested. Images 12 to 18 in the documents show a few of the retail outlets where the elites can buy this stuff including the prices, the quality and the amount which is in milligrams. Image 21 shows the front names of the companies that have the kids and from this, can clearly see they are running the exact same front companies in four different countries and have the number of kids per front company in each country listed as well as the total per front company name listed. There is also a column to indicate whether the child is suicidal as if they are the instructions seem to be to step up production and harvesting to maximize what they can get from the child before it gives up and dies. There was also a website on a black paper from the dark web that was linked to the launch of a private crypto that was allegedly for invited people to buy Adrenochrome through an ERC 20 token. This information was scrubbed from the internet, but before it was, I did survey through it. And although I cannot verify its authenticity, there were about 20 pages of legal jargon attached to the terms and conditions which seemed like a lot of work for someone to do for just a lark. So it looks like the deep state were using Wuhan to process their adrenochrome. This is what Adrenochrome looks like as you can actually buy it on alibaba.com. Speaker 4: In Tulsa, but he's down there saving children as we speak because they're pulling kids out of the darkest recesses of hell right now and dumbs and all kinds of the adrenachroming of children. Speaker 5: No. Jim, you you said you said a word a minute ago, and I I wanna clarify what that word was because you said a word. And I wanna make sure that you said adrenocrome. Speaker 4: Yeah. Speaker 5: And a lot of people here, there's about 4,500 people here. There's Yep. About a half million people streaming online. We're having some cyberattacks. That feed's been going on and off. It's it's a but you said that word. And by a show of hands, who's heard that word before in this building? Could you please explain to the extent that you want to or not want to what that is? Because some people have never heard that before, and we need to discuss that. Speaker 4: Essentially, you have adrenaline in your body. I'll just simplify it. And and when you are scared, you've produced adrenaline. If you're an athlete, you get in the fourth quarter, you have adrenaline that comes out of you. If a child knows he's going to die, his body will, secrete this adrenaline, and they have a lot of terms that they use that he takes me through. But, it's the worst horror I've ever seen is screaming alone even if I never ever ever ever saw it. It's beyond and these people that do it, there'll be no mercy for them. Speaker 6: When they torture the children, it causes a physical reaction of the endomorphins in your body to just increase because of the terror and the pain. So when the satanists drink the blood, they actually get like a chemical, you know, high, like a drug high from the blood of a tortured victim. And this little boy was found in the basement dead with no blood, skinned alive and crucified. This cannot happen to any more children. I can't do it alone. Speaker 7: Let me just point out that pedophilia does not stop with sodomizing children. It goes straight into terrorizing them to adrenalyze their blood and then murdering them. It also includes murdering them so that they can have their bone marrow harvested as well as blood. Speaker 8: Through the sacrifice ritual and they build up the terror. What happens is the terror reaches a point where a certain adrenaline pours into the blood and the people doing the ritual then drink that blood and they get a real high from that adrenaline. Speaker 9: What they need is for it to be secreted in the blood is they need terrorization of of their victims. They before they are killed for their blood. And it they have to terrorize them to get this to come out in the blood and be secreted in the blood. They are killed at that moment as they are staring into their eyes, and they will drink and they drink the blood, and the blood is highly sought after. Then they have these children that they're kidnapping and bringing in from other countries, and no one misses them because these are third world countries. Speaker 10: It's even worse than before because they are using all these kids arriving with the refugees. They are taking them from the boats directly and bringing them in their pedophile networks, taking their organs. They found hundreds of emptied bodies put back together in Egypt and in other places before. This is scandalous. I think this is really becoming revolting. Speaker 9: And children are the they have the most energy, the purest energy, the they're the highest form of sacrifice. They are used as actual blood sacrifices during these rituals. I have seen at rituals. I have seen George Bush. I have seen Madeleine Albright. Speaker 9: I have seen Henry Kissinger. I have seen Ronald Reagan. I have also, by the way, seen his wife, Nancy Reagan. I have seen Hillary Clinton before I knew she was Hillary Clinton at the time at these rituals. She is involved. Jay Rockefeller, Gerald Ford, these people seem to all be connected. I've seen all of them drink human blood and consume human flesh, and, they have their own, goblets in which they have blood, these these goblets are encrusted with jewels. Speaker 0: Now, this next section comes with a warning as it features a person who myself and others have offered to help before but won't accept it for their own reasons which I respect, but I will ask you to send them your prayers and good energy. Speaker 11: Hello. My name is Katie Groves, and I am a survivor of the child snuff industry. This video is about my experience growing up in a child snuff ring known as uncle Sam's snuff factory. This ring was located in Central Texas, and I will speak about it in the past tense only because I do not have current knowledge of its existence, but that does not mean I have any reason to believe that it has been shut down. My home was in Austin, and I recall the drives being about forty five minutes to get to this place. I recall it being in farmland, the entrance at least, most of the ring being underground. High ranking government officials and military agencies orchestrate it To believe that there are deep underground military bases that commit mass genocide against children, film it, and sell it on the black market to watch it is unfathomable to most people. I spent the first seventeen years of my life being taken to that place on a near daily basis, sometimes held for longer periods of time in which I Speaker 10: was Speaker 11: incarcerated, did not know if I would ever see daylight again. I witnessed thousands of murders. They called it Uncle Sam's snuff factory. It is the very literal definition of hell on earth. It is not unique. There are other places like it all over the world. I have been trafficked there as well. It is one of those places where a person can get literally anything they want for the right price if they have the connections to be there. I have seen wealthy aristocratic white women ordering children of color on menus to be delivered, dead, cooked on platters in a wing of the place they called Cannibal's Kitchen. And the reason I'm alive and the reason I survived is because I was born into an organized crime family involved with the CIA who ran this operation. I have the genetics, the family background to be a candidate for perpetration, for continuing the cycle of violence, for being one of the quote unquote leaders or members of the group. So I was kept alive for experimentation, for slavery for use. Because we're not just talking about death, we're talking about the worst possible ways to die. Children being boiled alive in shit and piss that predators paid to donate into iron tubes. We're talking about children cut apart, fed to other children for people's sexual gratification. This is reality. And all I ask of those who watch this is that you remember that while it may be excruciatingly painful for you to look at this reality, to think about this being possible, there are children. I ask you to remember and acknowledge that there are children who are surviving it every day. And if they can do that, maybe you can muster the strength, if you have it, to look, to stop the madness. I doubt if that will ever happen. You can help the collective damage created by these rings. And hopefully one day that collective spirit will be strong enough to take this stuff out at its source. To go down into the trenches and actually rescue the majority of the children in child trafficking who never make it out. Speaker 9: Don't forget to subscribe and click the notification bell for more must see videos.

Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of going to jail, but Speaker 1 denies any illegal activities. Speaker 0 questions why Speaker 1 is speaking freely in their country, to which Speaker 1 responds that it is legal to preach about Yeshua in Israel. Speaker 0 abruptly ends the conversation, but Speaker 1 expresses respect. Speaker 0 claims that the Torah instructs to kill Christians, and Speaker 1 acknowledges the discrimination against Christians. Speaker 0 asserts that Christians are idol worshipers.

In a heated online space, the participants debate organizational affiliations, personal insults, and questions about narratives surrounding international events. The core points are: - Contract with NAG: Speaker 1 confirms that “we severed” or “didn’t make the cut” with the group referred to as NAG, indicating a break in alignment. When pressed for specifics, they note the date and details are unclear, mentioning it “has been a month.” Payments or compensation are touched on briefly, with Speaker 2 asking if someone is being paid by others, and Speaker 1 replying with a noncommittal remark about a banner or check mark. - Identity and credibility disputes: The dialogue includes strong personal accusations and defenses over Christian identity, history, and authenticity. A moment centers on an Orthodox Christian icon being attacked, with Speaker 0 emphasizing they are Christian and criticizing another participant’s approach to Christianity. This thread quickly devolves into name-calling and claims about knowledge of Christian history, with insults and counter-insults about piety and background. - Media portrayal and allegations of manipulation: Speaker 2 accuses the group of being “counter, to be basically the controlled opposition” and questions potential contractual pressure. They refer to smear videos and claim others are posting content to discredit them. The discussion includes claims of being targeted by large accounts and accusations of gaslighting and manipulation. - El Salvador and Bukele narrative: A key point raised by Speaker 2 involves skepticism about the State Department narrative on El Salvador and Bukele. They state the world doesn’t revolve around Ryan Mata and say their own research raises questions about why certain narratives persist, insisting they did not attack Ryan Mata and did not tag him, but simply asked questions about the situation. - Social media dynamics and conflicts: The exchange includes a back-and-forth about who blocked whom, who controls whom, and who is “bullied” or being treated unfairly. The participants describe smear videos, blocking behavior, and the impact of public accounts with large followings. There are accusations that others “babysit” spaces or inject themselves into conversations with an agenda. - Specific confrontations and accusations: Speaker 2 recounts being accused of bullying and being attacked for asking questions about El Salvador; Speaker 1 responds by accusing Speaker 2 of seeking attention and of being a chaos agent. The dialogue includes repeated clashes over who said what, with emphasis on truth-seeking versus smearing. - Tone and escalation: The conversation alternates between attempting to ask clarifying questions and eruptions of hostility, with terms like “heritic,” “liberal,” “block,” and “gaslighting” used repeatedly. The participants express frustration at being misunderstood, misrepresented, or blocked from collaborative discussion, culminating in mutual admonitions and exasperation.

Speaker 0 asks if everyone thinks the family is a nice Jewish family. Speaker 1 responds: From the outside, you appear to be a nice Jewish girl. Definitely. And you all are worshiping the devil inside the home? There are other Jewish families across the country. It’s not just my own family. Speaker 0 prompts for non-gory details about what kinds of things went on in the family. Speaker 1 describes rituals in which babies would be sacrificed, noting that there were people who bred babies in their family. She says no one would know about it, and that a lot of people were overweight, so you couldn't tell if they were pregnant or not, or they would supposedly go away for a while and then come back. Speaker 0 notes that she witnessed the sacrifice. Speaker 1 confirms she witnessed it when she was very young, and she was forced to participate in sacrificing an infant. Speaker 0 asks what the purpose of the sacrifice is. Speaker 1 answers the sacrifice is to bring you what? For power. Speaker 0: Power.