reSee.it - Related Video Feed

There is no society anymore. Instead, a transnational security elite is using taxpayer money to carve up the world. To combat this, we must not just petition, but take over. We need to build our own networks of strength and mutual value to challenge the warmongers in our country and others. They have formed an alliance to take money from the United States, NATO countries, Australia, and launder it through Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, and wash that money in people's blood.

There is a transnational security elite using tax money to carve up the world. To combat them, we must not petition but take over. We need to build our own networks to challenge warmongers in the US and other countries who are allied to profit from wars in places like Yemen and Pakistan, where money and lives are at stake.

In Washington DC, there is a perception of corruption and control by the deep state and intelligence agencies. The process starts with freshman orientation, where lobbyists for special interest groups wine and dine new politicians, influencing their decisions. By aligning with the leadership and lobbyists, politicians are protected and nurtured, but at the cost of compromising their own beliefs. Those who resist this system may face extortion and attempts to compromise or cancel them. If these tactics fail, there are significant financial resources dedicated to destroying those who challenge the narrative.

In September, media outlets falsely labeled me a sex criminal without naming accusers. This was the culmination of a years-long campaign to silence my dissenting views on major geopolitical issues like the war in Ukraine. My critiques, while not pro-Russia, questioned Western involvement. This led to accusations of being a Chinese propagandist by a US government-linked organization. Subsequently, the UK government, connected to the CIA, pressured social media to censor and demonetize me. This coordinated attack, involving organizations funded by Big Pharma and government, reveals the suppression of independent media and dissenting voices. The open contest of ideas is a sham, with governments actively working to silence opposition, even using taxpayer money against their own citizens. My experience exposes the fragility of free speech and the lengths to which powerful entities will go to maintain control. The fight continues, and the stakes are high.

The speaker expresses frustration over a hit piece published by Portland State University, criticizing their ideas and linking them to Trump. They highlight the shift from questioning knowledge to now labeling individuals advocating certain positions as morally wrong. The speaker also discusses the problem of asking questions in academic spaces, where challenging established beliefs is discouraged. They argue that these ideas, promoted by tenured professors, are disconnected from reality.

Every institution dedicated to public truth-seeking is under simultaneous attack and in a state of collapse. Experts who resist are coerced, marginalized, or forced out, while those seeking truth outside these institutions face attacks on their integrity and expertise. Research universities spend public money to reach preordained conclusions. Newspapers report stories only after they are common knowledge. The CDC advises the opposite of what protects health. Courts are used as a coercive weapon against those who threaten elites. The Department of Homeland Security attempted to set up a truth ministry and declare accurate critique of government as terrorism. We are being systematically denied the tools of enlightenment and the rights guaranteed in our constitution. We must fight this battle courageously, or the result will be a dark age with powerful coercive instruments wielded by those who will rule us.

The old ACLU crowd that used to complain about censorship and financial pressure on expression seems to have disappeared. The progressive left of today is not like the civil liberties-focused left of the past. They have been bought off and now serve as an urban cadre for the financial elite. Bill Gates funds the ACLU and fact-checking sites that only act when someone challenges the elite's objectives. The ACLU is more concerned with fighting against actions like book bans and culture war campaigns, rather than addressing the greater threat posed by the radical center. This technocratic and undemocratic system is being imposed on us by the national security state under the guise of liberal democracy.

Two speakers discuss suppression of dissent and power culture: "If you see or hear voices that are dissenting from the official storyline, they're gonna have to be silenced or eliminated, I mean." They note attacks on Thomas Massie. "Marjorie Taylor Greene is nowhere near as stupid. I mean." They praise Massey: "If you think Thomas Massey is the problem You are the problem." "He's the only one without a handler." They contrast dissent in DC with authoritarian states, noting "more dissent is allowed in Abu Dhabi than in DC." They discuss universities, criticizing Harvard leadership as rot; DEI debates follow, including debates over sports and hiring. They argue for merit over DEI quotas, citing their own experience hiring top people. The speaker urges Cornell to form an "elite committee of people I absolutely trusted" to decide twenty-year directions: "because we can't be here in twenty years."

Authority can be dangerous when those in power equate criticism with subversion. It's a delicate balance, as some earn authority through capability while others use it to oppress. Unfortunately, we live in a society surrendered to authority, where government at all levels holds power over the average citizen. Expertise and education were once seen as important for a healthy society, but they have also bred arrogance and created a class separate from the average American. This concentration of power has led to monolithic thinking and a lack of skepticism. We must break free from this orthodoxy and embrace diverse voices to advance as a society.

Trump supporters fear his resilience and intelligence, anticipating future political retribution. They criticize the left for hypocrisy and double standards, highlighting past scandals involving Obama and Biden. The left is portrayed as manipulative and power-hungry, using tactics like censorship and narrative control to maintain dominance. The message is clear: conform to the left's agenda for protection, or face consequences. Academic bias towards the left is attributed to self-preservation and career advancement.

The speaker argues that to understand the pattern we are gathered to explore, we must zoom out because the pattern is larger than federal health agencies and the COVID cartel. If we ask what they are hiding, the answer is obvious and disturbing: they are hiding everything. The speaker asserts they have tested the idea and are as certain of it as anything, claiming we are being systematically blinded, the only explanation that describes the present and predicts the future with near-perfect accuracy. The pattern is simple and testable: every institution dedicated to public truth seeking is under simultaneous attack; they are all in a state of collapse. Individual experts who resist or seek to restore sanity are coerced into submission; those who won’t buckle are marginalized or forced out. Those outside institutions who pursue truth or build new truth-seeking institutions face merciless attacks on integrity and expertise, often by the very institutions whose mission they refuse to abandon. The speaker cites a military saying—“once is a mistake, twice is a coincidence, three times is enemy action”—and suggests hundreds of examples could be pointed to, with few exceptions. We are left in a fool’s paradise. Research universities spend vast public funds to reach preordained conclusions. Professors teach lessons that align with what students have picked up on TikTok, even when these lessons contradict foundational principles of their disciplines. Newspapers like The New York Times and The Washington Post reportedly only report important stories after they have become common knowledge. Morticians are said to raise alarms over patterns missed by medical examiners. The CDC is described as an excellent guide to protecting health, but only for people who realize you should do the opposite of whatever it advises. The courts are described as a coercive weapon of elites against those who threaten them. The Department of Homeland Security is accused of attempting to set up a truth ministry and to declare accurate critique of government a form of terrorism. To Western patriots, the pattern is unmistakable. The speaker claims they cannot tell who “they” are or what they hope to accomplish, but asserts that we are being systematically denied the tools of enlightenment and the rights guaranteed in the constitution. The call is for those dedicated to Western values to fight this battle courageously and win, warning that failure to stem the tide will lead to a dark age, distinguished from previous dark ages only by the power and sophistication of the coercive instruments that will rule us.

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. And now it's coming for Jews, and they're like, what on earth happened? And it's not just the colleges. It's the nonprofits. It's the movies. It's Hollywood. It's all of it. It's like time for you guys to wake up and say no more. Draw a line in the sand. I don't care if you hate me.

They discuss why there is resistance in academia to challenging ideas. The reason, they say, involves multiple factors: pride, ego, the pressure to sell books, and the entrenchment of textbook material that universities rely on. Speaker 1 adds that while it’s all of the above, a lot of it shows up online as ego and bad personalities. People who are accustomed to never being questioned and who move within a rigid academic hierarchy—tenured professors and those coming up under them—tend to enforce the same structure. Any heterodox thinker or outsider gets dismissed or criticized harshly. They frame the culture as lacking open-mindedness. Speaker 0 uses a parable-like image: a truck stuck in a tunnel blocking traffic, and a farmer who walks up and suggests letting air out of the tires to solve the problem. The point is that the reluctance to let other people bring in thoughts and opinions creates a real barrier to progress in the study of these topics. This dynamic, they argue, hinders advancement, even though the places they’ve encountered do have research and a certain level of understanding of what happened. They emphasize that bringing in a fresh set of eyes can be valuable for the field. In their view, while existing research and understanding exist, openness to new perspectives is essential, and the current resistance—rooted in ego, tradition, and hierarchical safeguards—can be a real detriment.

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. And now it's coming for Jews, and they're like, what on earth happened? And it's not just the colleges. It's the nonprofits. It's the movies. It's Hollywood. It's all of it. It's like time for you guys to wake up and say no more. Draw a line in the sand. I don't care if you hate me.

The speaker believes reconciliation is difficult due to the incentive structures in modern politics, particularly monetary incentives that reward outrage. He claims Tucker Carlson's analysis is a single-variable approach that alleges anyone supporting a policy is captured by the "military-industrial complex." The speaker refutes Carlson's claims that members of the intelligence committee are blackmailed by organizations like the CIA, calling them "radical, insane claims." He states that the power dynamic is the opposite, as the committee controls the agencies' authorities and budget. He also mentions Carlson's claim that aliens are living underwater. He argues that social media has created incentives where engagement and power are gained through outrage. Conservatives are prone to skepticism that can devolve into paranoia and "rhino hunting," seeking enemies within their own ranks, even without evidence. He notes that clickbait headlines targeting figures like himself generate more engagement than standard political news.

To get into government, one faces headwinds if they oppose the US-Israel relationship, in both appointed and elected positions. The Israel lobby has incredible power over government decisions. Questioning Israeli government policies leads to accusations of antisemitism, which is unique. There are legitimate concerns about antisemitism on college campuses.

They aim to harm us for disagreeing with them. Our justice system no longer prioritizes truth, but winning at all costs.

"You still don't get it, do you? While you're busy arguing about pronouns and microaggressions, we're moving in, not just to your neighborhoods, but into your institutions." "You welcome us in the name of tolerance, and we smile." "We reshape the curriculum." "We gain political power." "We silence critics by calling them racist or Islamophobic." "You think we care about the Palestinians?" "Egypt and Jordan ruled that land for decades, and no one said a word." "Palestine is a tool, a symbol to distract you, divide you, and guilt you into giving up your own values."

Speaker 0: At some point, many people will hate you for what you've done. Despite preaching inclusivity, they won't include you. The majority still holds power, and we allow it because we take sides in arguments. No one will understand our perspective.

In September, media outlets falsely labeled me a sex criminal without naming accusers. This was the culmination of a multi-year campaign to silence my dissenting views on geopolitical issues like the war in Ukraine. Governments and intelligence agencies, including the US and UK, orchestrated attacks, falsely labeling me a Chinese propagandist and coordinating censorship efforts through organizations like Coda Story, which has ties to the CIA. My critiques, informed by academic sources, presented alternative perspectives on mainstream narratives, exposing the homogenized views of powerful institutions. This coordinated attack, which even involved Moderna tracking my content, reveals the lengths to which powerful interests go to suppress dissent. The accusations were made anonymously, and my own government contacted online providers to demonetize and censor me. This shows that independent media is a threat to those in power, and the open contest of ideas is a sham. The ongoing attacks are terrifying but also reveal the struggle for control over information.

They use their influence to suppress books and ideas they don't like, controlling what you get to read and think. They stifle any opposing views, pushing only their narratives. I'm here to expose this and face the consequences for speaking out. In World War II, we were taught to hate the enemy to defeat them. Now, the enemy is communism, but they preach love to deceive us while they are winning. I've shown you how communists are often Jewish, not to condemn all Jews, but to point out the truth. Once you see this pattern, you can't unsee it. They are working to disarm and undermine the police, who are the only thing standing between you and this growing communist terrorism. The same people who said Mao and Castro were not communists are lying to you now.