TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Curious Showell visits a Hasidic village in Upstate New York described as having about 44,000 residents who primarily speak Yiddish and average seven kids per family. Showell claims the community relies heavily on state assistance and welfare programs such as Medicare, SNAP, housing assistance, and tax credits because of the large families. When asked how many kids people have here, Showell is told “Seventeen, eighteen,” and that they are “proud to do what the Torah says, that you need be multiple and fruitful.” He asks how they can afford many children, and the response is that wealthy community members give charity and the community is based on this. Showell questions whether people are on welfare. One person references taxes and property payments, saying, “The Jewish people, Justin Kirsch, Joel, their taxes covers everything that we take back. They pay a lot of property …” The interviewee refuses to comment about welfare use, and when pressed further about someone being on welfare, declines to answer. In terms of employment, individuals describe themselves as having jobs in sales and home care, with one mentioning selling chocolate. There is uncertainty about who uses welfare: Showell notes that “Most people on Medicaid, SNAP, EBT” while the interviewee claims not to know “for other people” but says “I’m not gonna tell about myself.” When asked about EBT usage, one person initially states “100%” would use EBT for groceries, then corrects to “35%,” indicating a lack of consensus. Showell also asks what most men do for work; the response includes “I have a job” and “I’m in sales,” with the product being food, specifically chocolate. Showell and the interviewee visit a synagogue where many are praying, with a note that the schedule is “09:00 sharp.” The dialogue touches on welfare use within the community, with one line indicating that “BT percent, like all of the communities, you have eight kids, you can also get benefits,” followed by a statement that “These are all teenagers” and the age of Showell’s interviewer as 21. In closing, Showell characterizes the situation as an example of a theocratic ethnic enclave, suggesting that Curious Joel is an example of only Jews living there and that many are tapping into welfare benefits.

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

Speaker 0 discusses being accused in DMs of turning their space into an Israeli Jew space, noting a poll they put up where listeners guess the Jewish proportion, with guesses around 50-99% Jewish. They acknowledge that Truth and they themselves are not Jewish, yet point out that a group making up 2% of America and 0.2% of the planet is “a lot of them up here at the moment.” They attempt a divided calculation on how many Jews are in the space today, suggesting 38.2% of Jews while only 2% Jews overall, calling the resulting discrepancy a 9.2 difference and labeling these patterns as antisemitic. They urge others not to listen to a particular person in their space who they allege is antisemitic. The speaker then accuses others of trying to “figure out who the Jews are,” and says “Nazis are,” claiming to be someone who researches how many Jews are in things. They reference Sarah, saying she dislikes when the speaker brings up facts, data, or discussions about JFK, questioning why it matters who killed JFK and arguing it doesn’t matter who did 9/11 or the USS attacks, and stating “What if it was a Jews? What does that change? Nothing.” There’s a call to mute others, and an accusation that the audience will mute the speaker. The speaker mentions posting their DNA and receiving death threats “literally from Jews almost daily,” remarking on its repetitiveness and rarity for a reel. They reference “the third reel you’re not allowed to talk about” and question why the media or politicians won’t discuss it. The speaker introduces themselves as Isaac and someone named Shane, and asks whether the reaction might be connected to “the narcissism, schizophrenia, paranoia that runs rampant amongst the Jewish community.” They claim they can only talk on spaces and are frustrated that they’re not allowed to discuss Jews, asserting that the audience doesn’t realize they’re effectively arguing their own point. They conclude with a push to let them talk about how many Jews there are.

The video follows Tyler Oliveira, an independent journalist, visiting Kiriyos Joel (Curious Joel), a Hasidic Jewish traditional community in upstate New York described as a large, growing, tightly knit enclave dominated by Hasidic Jews who largely speak Yiddish. The dialogue paints a picture of a community with unusually large families, strict modesty and gender roles, private religious education, and a mix of work patterns that rely on both self-employment within the community and outside labor. Key facts and claims as presented: - Demographics and family size: The community is described as a village of about 40,000 Hasidic Jews in upstate New York, with families averaging seven children. When discussing typical family size, several participants mention numbers like seventeen to eighteen children, though others give more conservative figures. One interviewee says “Ten, twelve, fourteen, fifteen” is common in the larger families, with a repeated emphasis on seven to ten as a norm in some households. - Economic profile and poverty: The town is described as one of the poorest towns in America, with around 40% living beneath the federal poverty line. The transcript notes reliance on public assistance, Medicaid, housing vouchers, food stamps (EBT/SNAP), and cash aid to support large families. - Employment and Torah study: A recurring theme is that many men spend significant time studying the Torah full-time, with three hours of daily prayer/study mentioned by some interviewees. Yet other participants indicate that men work in industries like construction, driving or bus services, or run private businesses. Women are described as working in some cases (e.g., teaching, health care, retail, childcare) and in other cases primarily managing households, especially when children are very young. Some individuals report that women work after children are older or part-time in addition to domestic duties. - Education and institutions: The community uses private religious schools (Torah study is emphasized), with most schools described as privately run. A significant portion of the schooling and social life centers on maintaining the community’s religious practices and modest dress codes. The synagogues, private kosher markets, and a complex network of private buses and community services are prominent features. - Welfare and tax considerations: The dialogue repeatedly questions how families can afford many children on limited incomes, noting welfare programs (Medicaid, SNAP/EBT, housing assistance) that help, particularly for large families. Some participants acknowledge that welfare usage exists (including potential tax credits and other subsidies tied to children), while others push back against the idea that welfare dominates, arguing instead that benevolence within the community and private charity play major roles. There is discussion about how much welfare benefits are worth relative to the costs of raising many children, including taxes and tuition. - Community economics and charity: A common claim is that wealthier members of the community fund many services and subsidize others through charitable giving. The existence of kosher supermarkets run with the help of Mexican labor is described, along with private safety services, volunteer EMS, and community-owned buses and infrastructure. The interviewee notes that two groceries, Maitiv, offer substantial discounts, and that the community supports one another to afford large families. - Labor dynamics and assimilation: Several interviews contrast Hasidic work patterns with non-Jewish labor participation nearby (e.g., Hispanics in construction, retail, and labor). There is a sense that many Jewish residents own or run businesses, while a notable portion of practical labor appears performed by immigrant workers. A discussion arises about whether non-members can move into the community, with responses suggesting it is possible but may be uncomfortable for some residents, given the desire to preserve religious life. - Zionism and Israel: A notable viewpoint expressed by some community members is opposition to the state of Israel before the Messiah, with Zionism described as not Judaism and the state as secular. This stance frames a broader tension between religious life in Kiriyos Joel and external political narratives. - Public interactions and challenges: The video captures tensions around filming, interviews, and the community’s encounter with outside observers, including skepticism about welfare claims and how the community is portrayed. Observations highlighted by the video’s framing: - The community presents itself as a self-reinforcing, tightly knit unit with private institutions, mutual aid, and communal oversight aimed at preserving religious life. - The economic reality described mixes private enterprise, charitable support, and reliance on public programs, particularly given large family sizes. - The overall portrait emphasizes a life integrated around Torah study, prayer, family, education, and a network of community-run services, with welfare and tax considerations continuing to be debated among residents and visitors.

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 says they’re Jewish, having just discovered it; they knew their mom’s side was Jewish but she never stated it, and they verified it. It’s “crazy.” They wonder what it means and note being told “you’re Jewish.” They were raised Christian and ask if they can be both. Speaker 1 responds that you can be both, and confirms they are both. They mention their mom has ties to Judaism, and if so, “you’re Jewish.” Speaker 0 finds that dope, but notes they feel like they’re all of them: “I’m Jewish. I’m Christian. I’m Muslim. I’m Buddhist. I’m all of Jewish.” Speaker 1 comments, “He’s an African American Jew.” Speaker 0 asks, “What percent Jew are you?” and states they’re “apparently, 20%. We’ll take it.” Speaker 1 says they’re 50%, maybe a little 75% ish. They discuss practices: “Gotta do little”—do they do Shabbat? Speaker 1 says their mom does Shabbat every Friday, but they don’t, though they do the holidays. Speaker 0 asks if they wear a Yamaka (Yarmulke). Speaker 1 says yes, they even have a Mezuzah. The Mezuzah is described as the thing you put on the door when you walk in, and you kiss it when you walk in.

Who runs most financial institutions? There's a perception that Jews dominate banking and law, which has led to accusations of anti-Semitism. A Jewish banker friend, Mari, shared that members of his community can access zero-interest loans in the U.S., a benefit I find deeply unfair since I pay interest on my loans as a venture capitalist. This raises questions about religious doctrines favoring one group over others. To qualify for these loans, one must be Jewish, as lineage matters—only those with a Jewish mother can claim this benefit. Hebrew free loans are available to Jewish individuals, while Gentiles do not receive the same opportunity. This disparity is surprising and highlights a significant financial advantage for one community.

Speaker 0 argues that history gets deep when examining tiny hats and slavery, claiming this was left out of history books because “the history books” are owned by “tiny hats.” They state that those who owned slaves, were slave traders and auctioneers, also owned newspapers, and played a role in creating social division. They claim it becomes interesting to uncover the exploitation of slaves and the way people were treated, noting that those who defended slavery would be exposed as supporting it, and that slave dealing was “an extremely profitable business.” They connect these ideas back to the Rothschilds, saying this is a recurring topic they have discussed, and mention Malcolm X as another figure who talked about it, urging others to look into it. Speaker 1 contends that a Black person is not antisemitic when he says that the man exploiting him in his community is white, because it is a white man who owns all the stores. They question whether it is an accident that the whites who own these stores are Jewish, and assert that if it is an accident, then the statement that “the Jew on the corner is exploiting me” is not antisemitic but merely a description of the man exploiting him.

Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 where he is from, and Speaker 1 replies that he is from Israel and served in the IDF. Speaker 1 mentions not counting how many Palestinians he has encountered and talks about Gaza disappearing. Speaker 0 inquires if Speaker 1 has ever seen a Palestinian child, to which Speaker 1 responds that he has seen 5 and jokes about looking inexperienced.

In the exchange, Speaker 0 foregrounds money while alluding to a much sharper, disturbing desire. He begins with a repetitive assertion of wealth: “Money. Money. Money.” Then he shifts the emphasis to a more sinister longing, stating that “more than anything else, what I really want, what my giant nose needs just to grow more warts is Christian blood.” He then attempts to identify or locate this blood, asking, “Let me see if I can find any.” The dialogue then pivots to a confrontation with the presence or identity of others. Speaker 0 asks, “You guys you're Jewish children?”, expressing a sense of frustration or misfortune by adding, “This is not my day. This sucks.” The tone conveys a reaction to the situation or to the people present. Following this, there is a provocative question about identity tied to blood: “You're wearing Israeli blood?” This question suggests an assertion or challenge about the affiliation or origin of the individuals’ blood, implying a connection to Jewish or Israeli heritage. Finally, the line of inquiry narrows to a direct address toward a person named Esther, asking, “Esther, are you wearing an Israeli blood?” This repeats and personalizes the provoking question, tying the earlier general inquiry to a specific individual. The overall interaction centers on money, a disturbing fixation on blood tied to religious or ethnic groups, and confrontations about Jewish and Israeli identity, all framed through Speaker 0’s provocative and inflammatory questions and statements.

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

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.

This transcript centers on an incident at a historic Jewish synagogue in Brooklyn where a tunnel was allegedly being used to illegally expand a church. After cement trucks arrived to fill the hole, a riot broke out between the Jewish community and the NYPD, prompting speculation of a deeper plot. The speaker says they went to investigate to learn more. Speaker 1 describes the scene and participants: “Hey, is there any way we can go inside? No. Nothing is lasting right now. There’s a bunch of guys, Chabad, which we would call like extreme rights. They’re mostly Israelis.” They claim the group wanted to start the expansion of “seven seventy.” There were references to “tunnels, Jews, how are you? Home human trafficking,” suggesting rumors surrounding the discovery of dirt that “wasn’t new,” and a desire to access the space through an alternate route. The speaker says, “I wanted to get in. I wanted to back way in.” Regarding the operation, the speaker notes that “Let’s do a main room. It’s a big Everything there already exists.” They imply the group planned to go “behind the back of the management because they were like, okay. They can't figure this shit out. Let's let's do it ourselves.” They claim the discovery occurred “a few weeks ago,” and that “the management found out about it.” The next day a cement truck arrived “around the corner, and they were gonna fill it up with cement.” The speaker attributes actions to the Chabad group, stating: “This group of of Chabad people, first of all, they busted the pipes over there, and then, they came in here from the inside, and they started breaking the wall. Slash amateur.” They conclude with a negation about human activity, saying, “Corners, there’s no human traffic going on. Sure.”

Speaker 0 believes the Jewish lobby in the United States is too powerful, even for Israel's interests, because they pressure too many people. This pressure, exerted through various means, ultimately doesn't help Israel. The president of the United States pays attention to this lobby because they are strong and control many things. When asked to elaborate on what they control, Speaker 0 lists newspapers, media, banks, and finances. Speaker 1 expresses surprise and asks if Speaker 0 really believes the Jewish community in the United States is that powerful.

Speaker 0: Future of Israel. I mean, something will happen in Iran. Maybe we'll succeed. Maybe we won't, but and that'll make it worse. But the demography seems terrible. Nobody sane seems to be procreating, and everybody getting sane in their own way seems to have five children. Whether it's Arabs or Orthodox, they have five children. If you're a regular Israeli, you have 1.5 children or two. Speaker 0: The Haredim are more productive than the Arabs. If we cancel some of the we had exponential support function for productivity. It's something bizarre. Rather to be an esker, we became exponential. And always when I meet a friend with three children, telling another two and you are deep into the social security trap, that's your job, you can sit idle. Speaker 0: No, I don't the future of Israel is waking up at the right moment before it's too late, putting your wedge on this drift along the slippery slope toward one state nation. First of all, because with one state nation, would be even faster. Yeah. It would be by nation at first, and then within the generation with an Arab majority. In fact, the minority with a sense of being kind of hybrid form, they excel in medicine therapy. Speaker 0: Then we have, I believe, we have to break the monopoly of the orthodox rabbinate on marriage and the funerals and whatever and the definition which and accept, open in a sophisticated subtle manner, open the gates from massive conversion into Judaism. It's a successful country. Many will apply at the beginning without making it, cannot make it a precondition, but under the social pressure, the need, especially of the second generation, to adapt, will happen. And we can control the quality, much more effective than our ancestors or the founding fathers of Israel could deal with the way that it was a kind of salvation way from Africa and Arabs or from whatever. They took whatever came to save people. Speaker 0: Now we can be selective. And

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

The first speaker contends that Congress is trying to give $5,000,000,000 of your money for refugee resettlement programs, and that money ends up in places like this. The second speaker identifies the International Rescue Committee as the largest refugee NGO in the country, noting that they get government funds and subcontract the work out to places like this. The first speaker describes the Somali American Community Center as a location that receives grants from the IRC in order to help refugees resettle in America. The second speaker reports that when they went in, they found this: an almost completely abandoned retail space that hasn’t filed taxes in almost ten years. The first speaker states that almost every business in the area is focused on getting refugees on taxpayer funded welfare programs. The second speaker asserts that this is how the largest refugee city in the country is funded. The first speaker adds that this is how over 87% of Somali immigrants end up on taxpayer funded public assistance. The second speaker notes that they spent three days in Little Somalia in Atlanta, Georgia. The first speaker concludes by saying that in the largest refugee center in the entire country, this is what they found.

Person 1: I asked to get clarity on the white supremacy concept. I'm half German, half Irish. We’ve talked where nobody believes the holo hoax stuff anymore. The more people read into it with masturbation machines, lampshades, piles of shoes, an honest assessment shows it’s lunacy. But who benefited most from the Holocaust? Jews and world Jewry. But who was the target of Holocaust? Hoaxers. Germany. Germany. White Europeans. No. Germany. So why have Americans been paying so much for Holocaust museums and restitution and memorial councils and support for Israel and for world Jewry? Why are there 700 NGOs for supporting Jews and giving money to Jews, and basically zero to support founding stock white European Americans. Literally zero Jews signed the Declaration of Independence or the constitution, and the constitution and declaration were both overwhelmingly signed by white Europeans. If you want to extend it, like the founding fathers that were Freemasons that were Kabbalist kind of Jews, then that’s not accurate. They weren’t Kabbalists. Freemasonry was created literally in 1843 funded by the Rothschilds for the purposes of subverting Freemasonry and rewriting the narrative around our Freemasonry founding fathers. George Washington, Ben Franklin, James Madison, Van Buren—absolutely correct. Absolutely wrong. If you’re talking about the free Masonic founding fathers, by extension, they’re Kabbalistic Jews anyway. Person 2: Ben Franklin in 1787 … there’s a hierarchy. Crypto Jews, John Kerry Cohen, for instance. He’s a free Masonic Jew as well. Kabbalistic believer and all that stuff. Trump likely is too. He’s a convert. And then you’ve got Freemasons that are secondary because it’s their pathway to be able to become official Shabbos scorer that get to enjoy the perks of all the Jewish crimes that they commit. B’nai B’rith actually did infiltrate the Free Masonic Lodges back in 1843, done by a bunch of German Jews in New York that started the first lodge, then gradually infiltrated the other lodges they didn’t control at that time. B’nai B’rith is actually one of the biggest global movements now; they’ve got over 5,000 of these Masonic houses and schools, etc., that they use for human trafficking. Charlotte, South Carolina is their headquarters. They’re everywhere; you don’t even know where all the homes are because they have so many of them. They’re rival with Khobod Lubovich, another massive movement with many pieces of real estate. They can be probably more powerful than the Vatican combined. I guess they run the Vatican. Person 3: But you understand I’m an anti-supremacist, right? You wanna tell me that you know, the white race, why can’t we have a white country, a white state? No one’s stopping you. Have your white ethnoidentarian state. Nobody cares. When you say they were persecuting the Germans, even after World War II, they killed over 11,000,000. If you believe Theodore Kaufman’s book, Germany must perish. They had Germany on the target list from the early medieval times. Do you recall how many Goy were killed in World War II? It’s like over 80,000,000 or so. They’re mostly whites, British or French, Russians. It’s mainly whites that were killed—Slavs, mainly Slavs. Slavs, but then Brits, French, others, whites were killed too. The point: they want whites fighting amongst each other, brother wars like World War I to wipe each other out and to restrict birth rates by pushing things like LGBTQ, hijacking kids to go through sex changes becoming infertile. It’s the same with the COVID vaccine, leading to sterility and reduced birth rates. So they are looking to kill, gradually reduce the white population. Person 1: Their biggest servants and slaves are white Christians. John Hagee, they’re a problem. I condemn them as well; they’re part of the problem. Since 1909, with the Schofield Bible, they’ve subverted Christians who would have viewed the Bible differently. The facts are the facts. We’re just slaves, manipulated. Take care of your own, don’t tell me you want a white utopia when you’re slaves, soldiers and slaves of Jewry. Albert, with what how the Jews have taken over with their institutions, their control of…

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

Question: 'Do you believe that the Gentiles, the Goyim, will one day become the slaves of the Jews?' 'So I believe it's it's gonna it's part of the Torah.' The speakers discuss politics, then answer: 'No.' 'No.' and 'No.' 'No.' I'd love to hear your thoughts on the current conflict. Everything's happening? It's all an illusion?' 'Yes. Yeah. Wow. That guy is the is one of the greatest optimists I've ever seen.' 'Can I ask you a couple questions?' 'Yeah. Yeah. So somebody just threw a water balloon at us. And now there's a crowd gathering because they're gonna they're saying that they're gonna chase us away, and they're gathering numbers now.' 'So there's a big flock of people who's gonna chase us.' 'Yeah. I'm not Santa Monica. It's not Yolanda. So I'm not allowed to talk to anybody in the'

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.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the basis for Jewish connection to the land and who has a legitimate claim to it. Speaker 0 begins by stating that there are about 16,000,000 Jews in total worldwide, with 8,000,000 living in the area being discussed, and the remainder living mainly in New York, South Florida, and a few other places. He notes that this is a small population with historical and biblical connections to the land, and asks if such a connection exists. Speaker 1 responds that Bibi’s family lived in Eastern Europe and that there is no evidence they ever lived in the land, and that he isn’t religious. He questions whether there is a true ancestral link. Speaker 0 asks whether there is evidence of any genuine ancestral connection. Speaker 1 asks if there is a family tree for Bibi, and if not, whether anyone has one. Speaker 0 asks how they know, and Speaker 1 elaborates that the point is to establish an ancestral connection to the land. He notes that there has been a practice of Judaism and a connection to the language, suggesting that Bibi has fought for the land, and that his family has fought for it. He raises an obvious, meaningful question: where does this right come from? He explains that many people in the territory Israel controls, particularly in the West Bank, have genetic evidence of having been there for thousands of years, with many identified as Christians for two thousand years, and even if some did not practice Judaism or were Samaritan or pre-Islam, the question remains: how do they compare in terms of rights to someone whose ancestors lived in Latvia or Poland and were Jewish? He questions the basis of being “Jewish” by faith, language, or Torah. Speaker 0 challenges the question, asking how we know if Bibi’s ancestors ever lived there, and expresses confusion about what Speaker 1 is trying to determine. Speaker 1 emphasizes that a claim of rights based on ancestral presence is significant because many claims hinge on whether ancestors lived there, whether money flowed, and whether displacement occurred. He reiterates that it is not a theoretical issue like a grandparent’s distant past, but a real question of who has the right to be there. Speaker 0 remains unable to fully process Speaker 1’s point.