reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0: Andrew was the brother of Peter. He was a fisherman, and two had to pay taxes besides Jesus, but I might be mistaken here. Speaker 1: I will reconfirm that it is only Peter and Jesus that paid the tax for adults, and I will reconfirm that the other disciples were apprentices in their family's business and were therefore young as well. All of them were 12 and 15 years old, and I'll stand by that, which poses a lot of other questions. If it's the middle of the night and I walk into the wrong house and I see a 30-year-old man washing the feet of an unknown 12-year-old boy, what am I gonna do? I'm going to jail, guys. Think about these questions because it's not the version we've been told. When you redo the story with their ages in mind, it's a darker picture. Speaker 0: That’s really up for debate. If you apply modern-day Jewish disciples in halakhic schools, you might come to that conclusion. Times then were different. Speaker 1: Actually, scholars—look, I just did an article specifically on this, I have all the receipts. Scholars all agree that the age for discipleship within rabbinical circles was 12 to 15 years old. You could Google it. And, again, the only two people that paid taxes were Peter and Jesus. None of the other ones paid taxes and therefore were not adults. It’s in the scripture. Who cares if they're adults? It doesn't matter. Speaker 2: It’s about being a pedophile. Speaker 1: It’s not; it’s not taken out of context. Speaker 0: Peter, Andrew, James, and John were fishermen, right? Peter was already married; Jesus healed his mother-in-law. He was probably the oldest, mid-20s or 30s. The general consensus is Peter is mid-20s to 30s. John is 15 to 20, the youngest. James, late teens to early 20s. Andrew and Philip, late teens. Matthew, early to mid-20s. The others, Thomas and Judas, mostly teens to early 20s. I’m not sure you’ve seen 16-year-old teenagers like fifty years ago; they were men. It’s a different picture today. So I don’t buy the Jesus was a pedophile claim. Speaker 2: CQ Radio does the same bullshit. Try to make him a pedo. Speaker 1: It’s all about mystery rites and excretion from children in their mystery practices. Like adrenaline, they use children as a sacrament to open the veil. That’s what’s going on with the elites today—the Vatican, Israel, and all the elites. The Bible is a PG version. Wake up and stop attacking me because I’m telling the truth, especially if you don’t have the balls to research it yourself. Speaker 0: What the fuck was that? I’m not attacking you. You can have your own opinion. The general consensus of scholars on the Bible was what I just read—the estimated ages. The youngest were Jesus’ direct family, cousins. Speaker 2: CK will do the same thing—bring up the kid at the Last Supper, and he was doing it. It hinges on a false interpretation of one word. Speaker 1: Arts, magic, occult have two sides: black magic uses trauma, fear, and control to harvest from children; white magic uses unity and consent. They both conjure the same entities. One is loving, one is painful. Look at the ages of the disciples: 12 to 15. Only Peter and Jesus paid the toll; the others were not adults. Speaker 2: Quick question: who do you think is God? What is good in the world according to your worldview? Speaker 1: There is a loving creator. That has nothing to do with what I said. If you equate Jesus with God, that’s a you problem. Speaker 2: Are you going to say what you actually believe? Speaker 1: Move on. There’s a loving creator who created us in his image and loves us. Speaker 3: There’s been a lot of indoctrination of children recently. The biggest discussion is wars. Speaker 1: You can give us a little more. Speaker 3: They’re doxxing this kid. People know. Speaker 1: I’m an alpha warrior. Speaker 0: I have to check the Mossad Media Matrix. Speaker 3: Grandma gave him permission. It’s not going to end well. Speaker 1: I’ll be listening. Somebody can go listen there or you could hide on my page as a handle. You’ll be on my team, though. Speaker 4: Veritas suggested forgiving the heretic, but I don’t think it’s ours to forgive. It’s hubris to think that. We’re trying to have an open debate, but disrespectful behavior isn’t acceptable. Speaker 1: I didn’t mean to be disrespectful. Speaker 4: We can wrestle with scripture without ad hominem. You’re okay to say Muhammad’s a better approximation, but that’s a different topic. Speaker 1: Start by looking into the ages of the disciples. Thank you. Speaker 2: The real concern is elsewhere. Veritas has gone over that research and it suggests the opposite.

Crude diagrams of the church are present, alongside photos of the weapons. The materials include writings such as the names of past mass shooters, criticism of Israel, and the name of president Trump written on the guns. There are also racial slurs and nihilistic statements, all painting the picture of a disturbed individual who carried out this mass shooting.

Speaker argues parts of the transgender movement seem militant and dangerous, citing NPR's shift: "NPR is always as a matter of editorial policy, completely opposed the civilian ownership of firearms, with the possible exception of maybe IRS agents. Yet here suddenly was that same station, National Public Radio, positively urging trans people to buy guns, as many guns as possible, if necessary to use them." They say identifying as trans brings perks; then assert "The trans movement is the mirror image of Christianity and therefore its natural enemy in Christianity." The Nashville mass murder by "Audrey Hale" at a Christian school is discussed; media commentary claims "Christians were murdered in Tennessee because they infringed on the rights of transgender people." They cite "Trans Resistance Network" and Antifa "trans day of vengeance." Authorities withhold the manifesto; they argue "the trans movement is targeting Christians." Biden calls for "assault weapons ban."

Christians are now the most prosecuted religion in the country. In this country, nobody ever talks about it. And yet, Christians seem like the happiest despite this. These children were targeted because of their faith during the first week of school because they believe in God, and they were cut down when their lives had just begun by someone whose real identity the rest of the media ignored today. The shooter has been identified as Robin Westman, a male born as Robert Westman. Kash Patel, the director of the FBI, tweeting today, the FBI is investigating this shooting as an act of domestic terrorism and a hate crime targeting Catholics. The FBI will continue to provide updates on our ongoing investigation with the public as we are able to, meaning that according to the director of the FBI, the shooter was transgender.

The Nashville shootings are being investigated by the FBI, ATF, and Nashville police, but the motive remains unknown. The shooter left behind evidence, including a manifesto, which explains why she targeted children. However, the manifesto has not been made public due to pressure from the transgender lobby. It is believed that the victims were targeted because they were Christians who refused to accept transgender ideology. This incident highlights the divide between those who believe they are god and those who acknowledge their limitations. People who understand they are not god are more restrained and aware of the complexities of the world, while those who believe they are god have no limits and often blame others.

In the video, Speaker 0 describes breaking through an imagined “wall of invisibility” to reveal a reality far beyond human understanding, suggesting that once this wall is penetrated, “there’s no putting it back up” and asserting that a naked truth is being concealed by allegations of nudity and sexual content in a vetoed video. He references an incident where a video was taken down on another channel for nudity and sexual content, claiming it exposed something so profound that “they’re in panic mode.” He promises to show something unbelievable, then plays an immortal Pink Floyd song and offers a supposed spiritual interpretation of the band’s name, linking Pink Floyd to Genesis imagery (Adam formed from dust, Eve from his side) and to the color pink as representing female genitalia, with Floyd meaning gray. He claims to demonstrate what lies behind the observed world, stating, “If you wanna find out what’s behind these cold eyes, you’ll have to claw your way through this disguise,” and asserts the disguise is the human host body. He points to why YouTube allegedly removes certain videos while allowing others, showing examples such as a Taylor Swift video flagged as nudity and sexual content, Ozzy Osbourne’s Ultimate Sin that remains on YouTube, and various other clips where he alleges similar content exists without strikes. He questions why the same content isn’t treated consistently across channels, suggesting a bias against his material while other channels’ content remains. Speaker 0 then introduces a political-eschatological thread, referencing Alyssa Slotkin and Pete Hegseth, discussing discussions about orders to shoot at unarmed protesters, and claiming that a Bible-based perspective is used to counter liberal narratives. He describes a dichotomy between a “demon Kratis” ruling certain systems and a counterforce of conversion through Jesus, insisting that the host body system is inverted and that those who awaken will be able to judge the earth as Elohim. He asserts that “the word of God” judges the systems and that those converted are forming a line of spiritual judgment. Throughout, he uses several symbolic images: Taylor Swift with scales inverting justice, a serpent transforming into butterflies, Ozzy Osbourne’s Locust imagery from Revelation, and references to the devil tarot card as evidence of a system he claims censors certain content while normalizing others. He repeatedly contrasts content that reveals alleged truth with content that is suppressed, arguing that “the host body system” is the true disguise and that awakening requires turning life’s realities upside down to see the truth about hidden forces. Towards the end, he emphasizes a personal, pastoral note: offering hugs to viewers who have been converted, describing his own past as connected to worldly friendships and explaining that conversion changed his life, leading to a perception of being an “angelic being in a host body hunted by a serpent race.” He closes by reiterating the paradoxical truth of the Lord’s reality, urging listeners to awaken, accept the Bible, and recognize the inverted system, with references to Psalm 82 and the concept of Elohim. He ends with a final call to hug, to awaken, and to observe that “Adam was stupefied with sleep” until he is made whole.

Hide your kids, hide your wife. The transurrection is coming tonight. Misgendering is the worst. Media debates pronouns while bodies are still warm. Murderers honored in clown world. Dead naming Jeffrey Dahmer is a no-no. We are all God's children.

Speaker 0 characterizes “This is a religious faction” that targets people with disabilities, recruiting them by claiming “the root cause of all of their problems can be traced back to the fact that they are who they are.” He calls “the practices known as the trans rights, the rituals by which a person transforms themselves, transitions, trans substantiates into the gender entity that exists in their head when they start down this path.” He and Speaker 1 claim “we glitch the matrix” as they discuss “the matrix” and say “trans people are basically neo gender entities that are inhabiting the wrong body.” They insist “There’s no evidence that anyone is more than their physical body. There simply isn’t.” They argue “The state should not be forcing people to comply with it” and declare “This is a religion,” adding that the narrative of oppression aims “to justify giving them preferential treatment and putting them in leadership positions so that the ideology can be pushed through.” “Trans people are telling you that who I am is different from my body.”

The speaker delivers a series of provocative attributions and assertions about sexuality and gender, framing them in a religious and confrontational context. Key points include: - The central claim that sexual orientation is not inherent but influenced by demonic possession: “You're not gay. It's a demon that's inside of you. You ain't born that way. Don't let it try to lie to you. Rebuke demons up by faith.” - A stated purpose of exposing what the speaker identifies as demons hiding in people: “Hope you find the truth. I'm exposing these demons that try to hide in you.” - An insistence on rejecting homosexuality and transforming beliefs about sexual identity into a spiritual warfare narrative: “I just speak the truth and I don't care about gay rights.” - A stark denigration of LGBTQ identities, including a controversial assertion about Pride: “Pride stands for the land of the pigs, where they like to be trans and start playing with some kids.” - A critical stance toward inclusive policies some communities advocate for, specifically bathrooms for girls: “Got bathrooms for girls so we can't let you in.” - A direct challenge and accusatory tone toward a person named Steve, asserting that the person is not fooling anyone: “Steve, you ain't fooling no one.” - A claim that the person being addressed is not truly gay but “more like insane,” with a dismissive framing of being gay as something trivialized or ridiculed: “You're not gay, more like insane. Being gay is funny and dandy till you get a…” - An expression of personal, perhaps generational, motivation: “My candle alert is mad because my dad raised me.” - A rhetorical question hinting at confusion or debate about gender identity: “Right? You think you a woman because…” - The overall tone is confrontational, aiming to discredit LGBTQ identities and present a binary, faith-based interpretation of sexuality, with intermittent personal remarks about the speaker’s background and beliefs. The transcript centers on a confrontational, faith-driven denunciation of homosexuality and transgender identities, presenting them as demonic forcers to rebuke, while contrasting this stance with a claimed commitment to “speaking the truth” and opposing gay rights. The language interweaves spiritual warfare rhetoric with personal admonitions toward named individuals and general policy critiques, culminating in an unresolved line about gender identity.

The speaker believes injections are attempts to install operating systems in people's bodies, referencing a statement by Moderna's chief scientist officer. This relates to the Internet of Bodies, where materials are placed in bodies to facilitate interaction with telecommunications and digital technology. The speaker compares this to tagging livestock, suggesting nanoparticles create an organic barcode within the human body. They cite a symposium called Omni War: The Battle for the Brain, which delves into the Internet of Bodies. They believe there are intentional, mysterious ingredients in food, sprays, and injections aimed at installing an operating system in the body.

There is a battle for our humanness, framed as a battle between good and evil, where light and dark are energies given significance. Nations will go to war to distract us from the power of human divinity, which is only possible through the biological body and our ability to transcend perceived limitations. The transhuman movement aims to replace our bodies with synthetics, stealing our ability to access our divinity. Global events, such as conflicts in Ukraine, Russia, the Middle East, and Israel/Palestine, are happening because the battle for our divinity has intensified. These events distract us from inner focus. Many politicians and leaders are unaware that they are pawns in this ancient battle.

- The discussion opens with a critique of how public health authorities in the United States and much of the media discouraged experimentation with COVID-19 treatments, instead pushing vaccination and portraying other approaches as dangerous. The hosts ask why treatments were sidelined and treated as heretical to question. - Speaker 1 explains that the core idea was to stamp out “vaccine hesitation,” which he frames not as a purely scientific issue but as a form of heresy. He notes a broad literature on vaccine hesitancy and contrasts it with the perception of the vaccine as a liberating savior. He points to a Vatican €20 silver coin (2022) commemorating the COVID-19 vaccine, described by Vatican catalogs as “a boy prepares to receive the Eucharist,” which the speakers interpret as an overlay of religious iconography with vaccination imagery. They also reference Diego Rivera’s mural in Detroit, interpreted as depicting the vaccine as a Eucharist, and a South African church banner reading “even the blood of Christ cannot protect you, get vaccinated,” highlighting what they see as provocative uses of religious symbolism to promote vaccination. - They claim that the Biden administration’s COVID Vaccine Corps distributed billions of dollars to major sports leagues (NFL, MLB) and that many mainline churches reportedly received money to push vaccination, with many clergy not opposing the push. The implication is that monetary incentives influenced public figures and organizations to advocate for vaccines, contributing to a climate in which questioning orthodoxy was difficult. - The speakers discuss the social dynamics around vaccine “heresy,” using Aaron Rodgers’ experience with isolation and shaming in the NFL and Novak Djokovic’s experiences in Australia to illustrate how prominent individuals who questioned or fell outside the orthodoxy faced punitive pressure. They compare this to a Reformation-era conflict over doctrinal correctness and describe a psychology of stigmatizing dissent as a tool to enforce conformity. - They argue the imperative driving institutions was the belief that the vaccine was the central, non-negotiable public-health objective, seemingly above other medical considerations. The central question they raise is why vaccines became the sole priority, seemingly overriding a broader, more nuanced evaluation of medical options and individual risk. - The conversation shifts to epistemology and the nature of science. Speaker 1 suggests medicine often relies on orthodoxies and presuppositions, rather than purely empirical processes. He recounts a Kantian view that interpretation depends on preexisting categories, and he uses this to argue that medical decision-making can be constrained by established doctrines, which may obscure questions about optimization and safety. - They recount the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and discuss Sara Sotomayor’s dissent, which argued that liability exposure is a key incentive for safety and improvement in vaccine development. They argue that the current system creates minimal liability for manufacturers, reducing the incentive to optimize safety, and they use this to question how the system encourages continuous safety improvements. - The hosts recount the early-treatment movement led by Peter McCullough and others, including a Senate hearing organized by Ron Johnson in November 2020 to discuss early-treatment options with FDA-approved drugs like hydroxychloroquine. They criticize what they describe as aggressive pushback against such approaches, noting that McCullough faced professional sanctions and lawsuits despite presenting peer-reviewed literature. - They return to the concept of orthodoxy and dogma, arguing that the medical establishment often suppresses dissent, citing YouTube removing a McCullough interview and the broader pattern of silencing challenge to the vaccine narrative. They stress that the social and institutional systems prize conformity and punish those who deviate, creating a climate of distrust toward official health bodies. - The discussion broadens into metaphysical and philosophical territory, with references to the Grand Inquisitor from Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. They propose that elites—whether religious, political, or scientific—tend to prefer “taking care” of people through control rather than preserving individual responsibility and free will. The Grand Inquisitor tale is used to illustrate a recurring human temptation: to replace personal liberty with a protected, paternalistic order. - They discuss messenger RNA (mRNA) technology as a central manifestation of Promethean or Luciferian intellect—humans attempting to “read and write in the language of God.” They describe the scientific arc from transcription and translation to mRNA vaccines, noting Francis Collins’s The Language of God and the idea of humans “coding life.” They caution that mRNA vaccines involve injecting genetic material and point to the symbolic and ritual power of vaccination as a form of modern sacrament. - The speakers emphasize that the mRNA approach represents both a profound scientific achievement and a source of deep concern. They discuss fertility signals and potential adverse effects, including myocarditis in young people, and cite the July 2021 NEJM case study as highlighting safety concerns for myocarditis in adolescent males. They reference the FDA deliberative-committee discussions, noting that some influential voices publicly questioned the risk-benefit calculus for young people, yet faced pressure or dismissal within the orthodox framework. - They describe post-hoc investigations and testimonies suggesting that adverse events (like myocarditis) might have been downplayed or obscured, and they assert that public trust in health institutions has eroded as a result. They mention ongoing debates about whether vaccine-induced changes might affect future generations, referencing studies about transcripts of mRNA in cancer cells and liver cells, and they stress the need for independent scrutiny by scientists not “entranced” by the vaccine program. - The dialogue returns to the broader human condition: a tension between curiosity and restraint, knowledge and humility. They return to Dostoevsky’s moral questions about free will, responsibility, and the limits of human knowledge, concluding that scientific hubris can lead to dangerous consequences when it overrides open inquiry and accountability. - In closing, while the guests reflect on past missteps and the need for integrity in medicine, they underscore the ongoing questions about how evidence is interpreted, how dissent is treated, and how society balances scientific progress with humility, transparency, and respect for individual judgment.

In this video, the speaker highlights recent mass shootings and identifies the shooters as non-binary and transgender individuals. They express concern about the small percentage of trans people in the population and mention a trans day of vengeance, which they associate with left-wing extremism. The speaker asserts that the right-wing believes in only two genders, male and female, and supports women's sports and privacy. They criticize the movement that they believe coerces and brainwashes children into a "sick ideology." The speaker thanks Mr. Schiemer and concludes their statement.

Speaker 0 hopes Jesse Helms gets AIDS or dies of heart disease. The speaker claims the idea of killing people for reward exists not only in some groups but also among Christians in America. Speaker 1 states Fidel Castro, at 61, retains strong charisma, inspiring many. Speaker 2 asks if a 2010 tea party rally was as much anti-Black as anti-Obamacare. Speaker 0 says America is exceptionally religious, founded by people seeking religious freedom, but also by a theocratic cult of religious nuts. Speaker 3 notes the anniversary of Kristallnacht, linking the attack on books to an attack on fact, knowledge, history, and truth. The speaker says the Biden-Harris team pledges a return to norms, including the truth, after four years of assault on those values by Donald Trump.

I'm currently studying Catholicism to grasp how a religion with Jewish roots, born from the Torah and a Jewish rabbi, evolved to persecute Jews for not converting. This history includes pogroms, burnings, and accusations, and now, figures like Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens are using Catholicism to attack Jews again. I'm reading Bishop Robert Barron's "Catholicism" to understand this better, but the very first paragraph presents a core Christian claim: that God became human. This is the point we Jews were historically slaughtered for rejecting. The Torah, Catholicism's foundation, strictly forbids idolatry, the worship of any physical form. So, when Catholic extremists attack Jews for not accepting Jesus as God, it's perplexing, as the Torah deems the concept of God becoming human as heresy.

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.

"I'm not saying she deserved it, but I'm saying God's timing is always right." "These people are absolutely despicable." "They're cheering the fact that a man was out speaking to a crowd in public, got shot in the neck, and blood was spurting out of his neck like it was a water hose." "It hasn't even been two hours." "But these people saying these things? Disgusting." "It's interesting how all this dramatic high level violence is happening against people on the right and not the left." "I'll be sending an article out later today or early tomorrow explaining this whole situation in detail." "The link to this is on my profile. Just go there, click the link, drop your email, and hit subscribe." "Anyway, that's all I got for now. We'll see you in the next one."

Demons are invading Earth through people, as the Bible foretold. Ancient warnings are coming true. These interdimensional invaders are not human, despite mockery from the media. Everyone instinctively knows the truth.

Oh, man. That activist in America, Charlie Kirk, he got shot. Did you see that? That activist in America, Charlie Kirk, he got shot. Did you see that? That guy loves gun violence, and he got shot. Did you see all that blood that came out of his body? The blood was like, what? To every Zionist, every Christian Zionist, may you be just like that shop, the Target. All his followers, just like the shop, the Target. I'm not saying that violence isn't the way, so don't misconstrue my words. Okay? Did you see all that blood? That dude's dead. There is a fucking god.