NewsReal: Trump Survived Assassination, But Can he Survive Kamala?

hi joe hello how's it going good good how's your summer going yeah swimmingly swimmingly

yeah when the weather is fine yeah yeah fantastic um yeah hi everyone we're

we're a little late today sorry about that it's been a month since a good month now

it's hard to believe in the month and on the other hand it's yeah it feels like a month

of pouring over all the footage and content about the uh assassination attempt on from

we're

we're pretty much done with it i think i mean there could be more that comes out but

you we start to notice now that after dave stewart's footage any additional

footage of the building that crux was on is pretty similar and it just backs it up it's

not going to reveal anything you know new and stupendous and bust anything wide open

um it's been an interesting exercise though because you notice like we're we're not the

ones here there are basically thousands of people looking for that second shooter it's interesting

why would they do that i mean well because on the face of it the sort of the normies who just

heard the news they have they have the most plausible scenario it's because you've got a guy

everyone sees his 20s and middling shot he's got to be good at it and he missed trump just

so case closed well why are you even looking for a second shooter

you

only reason you would do that because you're suspicious of a greater context that is all the

attacks on trump leading up to this the fact that the republican nomination was to take place

immediately after this event which would have changed everything um you have to have not

necessarily you don't have to be pro-trump but you've got to have the context of what's happened

to him before that to have any suspicions that it could be more than 20 year old nut job so that's

why people spent the last month looking for the second shooter because they assume they can't

really have had just one kid there's got to be a pro there somewhere but now it's been looked up

the wazoo yeah well they assume that it was a setup yeah that it wasn't just yeah one kid it

was it was well this is part of the ongoing i thought by the at this point you know the eight

year long attempt to undermine trump and this would have been the culmination of it in a you

know undermining him in a definitive way i.e. killing him

so yeah that comes down to just what your perspective is and what kind of reality you

live in because it really is at this point a kind of different reality two different realities where

certain group people all think that all the stuff that has happened to trump over the past

eight years in terms of all the trials literal and figurative trials and tribulations uh and

the way that the you know the dems and if you want to call it the washington establishment

have been attacked and they've been attacked and they've been attacked and they've been attacked

hacking him, et cetera, et cetera.

If you think that all of that

was simply because Trump

is a big orange arsehole

and that he simply is

the architect of his own issues,

of his own problems,

then you have no reason to think

that this, that anybody, you know,

that you had no reason to think

that the culmination of that

would end in a shooting,

if you know what I mean,

by the deep state.

You would think that this is,

you wouldn't make the connection, basically.

But if you're living that other reality

where you see that

Trump has been incessantly attacked

for eight years by the deep state.

On the basis of next to nothing.

Yeah.

Well, on the basis of they don't like him

because of what he, you know,

I mean, we've talked about that before.

Because of what he may have tried to do.

What he stands for, basically.

For the US.

Yeah.

That they have incessantly attacked him.

And yeah, this then makes sense

that they would finally have

not been able to,

to thwart him

or undermine him completely

in all those other ways.

Yeah.

They would then resort finally

to killing someone,

which is very normal.

I mean, that certainly makes sense

if you see that,

if you believe that

all of the things

that he's been subjected to

have been a concerted campaign

to try and,

to try and take him down.

Then, of course, yeah.

Killing him is the last,

last, last stage

when nothing else,

nothing else has worked, you know.

So, yeah, it's really a matter of,

you know,

two different realities.

But, and that's,

that's totally

leaving aside,

you know,

say you're in that

lefty reality

where Trump's just a bad man and stuff.

You could still,

you'd still be on the hook for,

as a,

as a lefty,

as an anti-Trumper,

you'd still be on the hook

for all of the demonization,

let's say,

all of the nasty words

said by the,

the Biden administration

and the,

the media and stuff

about him over the past eight years,

like calling him Hitler

and all that kind of stuff.

That that could have,

you could.

Plausibly.

Plausibly cause someone

to act on that information.

Oh my God,

this guy's a threat

toward democracy.

He's Hitler.

I hate him.

I've been conditioned to hate him

by the media and by,

by Biden,

who I,

I love,

and Kamala Harris.

Therefore,

I'm going to go and get a gun

and shoot him.

So certainly,

you could still put it in the,

put the blame

for the assassination attempt

in the lefty camp,

you know.

Yeah.

But that,

and that also leaves aside

any of the anomalies,

which I'm sure you're going to talk about now,

around the,

actual shooting itself,

how it actually happened,

you know.

I mean.

Well,

yeah,

and the first glaring ones

are the reason why

relatively non-conspiratorial minded people

actually spent the last month going,

where was he?

Where is he?

There must be a second shooter,

which is that,

the glaring stand down slash

miscommunications

that led to Crooks getting up

on the only viable position

to take out from

in the area,

you know.

It doesn't,

it doesn't necessarily follow

that they would automatically

go to a second shooter,

you know,

because if you weren't steeped

in the,

in the ideas of,

you know,

false flag efforts

in that sense,

whether a Patsy

and he's not really the one

who's doing anything.

If you're a JFK,

you know,

historian,

let's say,

or if you're,

if you're,

if you've looked into JFK and stuff,

certainly you'd,

you'd be aware of the idea

of other shooters

other than the fall guy,

right?

You'd be aware of the idea

of a fall guy

and somebody else doing the shooting.

But if you're just coming to it clean,

you might just,

your interest

or your curiosity

or suspicions

would be,

would be piqued by,

by the apparent incompetency.

Yeah.

The stunning

and unusual incompetency.

Yeah,

we had no one on that roof

because it was kind of too sloped

and dangerous.

Well,

that,

that right there.

Oh,

they were there,

then it got too hot.

Right.

I mean,

she was lying,

obviously.

Her name,

Cheadle.

I mean,

she,

that one line

should have just

immediately made

any rational,

person,

like,

without any,

without any investment

one side or another,

who was just looking at it

cold and clean,

immediately should have said,

well,

yeah,

there's something going on here.

Her explanation,

she's admitting

that they should have had

someone on that roof.

It would have been the first place

to put someone.

And her explanation

as to why they didn't put someone

on the roof

is complete and utter bullshit.

So she's lying.

Therefore,

immediately,

immediately entered

the conspiracy

domain

right there.

Yeah.

When she said that.

She's lying.

Why?

Yeah.

If you just put that up,

we won't play it.

This is one of the more

recent analysis

that kind of

puts to bed

a second gunman

on Trump,

at least.

We won't play it,

but people can check this out.

This is by Greg Nichols.

No relation to

the Greg Nichols single,

who was one of the cops

on duty that day,

SWAT team

for Butler

or Beaver County.

Greg Nichols,

if you remember,

was supposed to be

in one of those

two rooms

to the left

of the two-story building

behind where Crooks was.

But it's a sound analysis,

literally sound

in both senses of the word,

in that it does

group the audio

of the first eight shots.

Initially,

we and others

were like,

hang on a second,

they sound different.

One, two, three,

break.

Barrage,

one, two, three,

five.

But once all

the different

cameras

near that building

and near Trump

are put together,

they're the same.

At the very least,

they're coming from the same.

What he showed in this video

was they're coming

from the same location

within about four meters

of each other.

You can be certain of that

for the first eight.

So this guy's like

skeptic

on

two gunmen.

And he's,

that's why he's got his

text up there.

Yes, I'm sure.

But he admits,

however,

shots nine and ten,

oof,

don't know.

Can't place them.

Can't place them,

which is interesting.

We initially,

you initially

had put something up

on site.

Which we took down

because

we subsequently saw

there was

actual footage

taken by someone

to,

to the

west of the

AGR building

that shows Crooks

pop up

after

the barrage

of five shots,

which places

him,

which meant

he was still alive.

We thought maybe

by that point

he's,

he's already a goner.

Our,

our theory at that time

hinged on that.

But he pops up.

We subsequently know

that,

well,

maybe we do or don't.

Did you hear about

the report

published by

Representative Clay Higgins?

Mm-hmm.

I think it just includes

a self-report

by a cop?

Or is it

convincing analysis?

I can't remember which

showing that

shot nine,

the first one,

say,

after

Crooks is done

shooting,

hits him.

Hits his,

hits the stock

of his gun,

maybe.

Right.

And maybe injures his hand.

And that would be

why he pops up,

briefly,

on the roof.

And he's seen in that footage

by Mike DiFrizzio

or John Malice,

I'm not sure.

Which means he is alive

still after the,

the first three and five.

Mm-hmm.

And nine hits him

and he's startled

and moves.

Mm-hmm.

Then later comes ten.

And that would probably be

the,

the kill shot.

Um,

yeah,

and I think the,

the,

the shot that actually

killed him,

probably,

and that was the article

that I put up,

that was the title

of the article

that I put up

and then took down,

which was,

was,

was crook shot

from behind

and was just based on

analysis,

you know,

to whatever extent

that you could do

the analysis

on,

on the,

on the picture

of his body.

It looked to me

like there was

a battery hole

behind his ear

and then out

his cheek.

So coming from

the right of him,

which would have been

in that area

where those snipers

were in that tall building.

Uh-huh.

Uh,

so,

so I,

and,

but it wasn't just that.

It was the idea

that the whole thing

was a,

was a planned operation.

Crooks was a,

was a Patsy

and this is something,

you know,

they do,

uh,

Intel types do all the time

and have done for a very long time.

It's part of their,

their,

their state craft,

as they call it,

um,

where they'll groom.

There's a lot of talk

about grooming these days

in all sorts of different ways,

but were they,

the first kind of grooming

was grooming young people

to engage in,

uh,

you know,

anti-state

or violent behavior

in order to

serve the agenda of,

let's say,

Western Intel

organizations and governments,

you know,

where they'd,

uh,

basically groom young,

pliable,

manipulable,

manipulatable guys

to,

to do whatever,

whatever you,

whatever you need them to do,

up to including shooting people,

carrying out assassinations,

that kind of thing.

So,

um,

the idea that he was shot,

the idea,

the idea that he would have been shot

behind,

from behind by,

by one of the people

who organized this

was in that context.

This was an organized,

uh,

a planned,

carefully planned setup,

carefully controlled setup

to have crooks do the shooting.

And then he would have to be taken out.

You couldn't,

uh,

you wouldn't,

well,

you most likely wouldn't leave it up

to local law enforcement

to actually successfully kill him

because you would never know.

they nearly did,

remarkably.

Well,

that guy shot at him,

but that's an example

of why you don't leave it up to them.

Yes.

Uh,

that local cop

down and shot him

and hit,

may have hit him,

hit the gun

or hit the gunstock.

And then it just means

that there was a chance

if you leave it up to local law enforcement

to kill him

that they won't actually kill him

and then maybe just injure him

and then they'd have to

arrest him and interrogate him.

And next thing you know,

you've got Lee Harvey Oswald

in the police station

with the entire international press there

going,

I'm just a patsy.

Which is what he said.

And then it takes two more killings

to actually bury it all.

And you have to kill Lee Harvey Oswald

and then...

So they've,

they've learned from 1963.

Right.

In that sense,

that would make

an operation much tighter,

smoother,

and more professional

if it is genuinely crux

taking all the shots at Trump.

The,

the sticking,

one of the sticking points for me

about not wanting that to be so

and hunting for the second gunman though,

the second gunman on Trump

is,

do they,

would they rely on

the marksmanship of a 20 year old,

however programmed or whatever?

But then maybe,

you know,

MKUltra didn't end,

obviously,

or MKUltra didn't end,

but MKUltra type things didn't end.

Maybe they have perfected things

and a 20 year old,

I was going to say Patsy,

but it's not a Patsy.

A Patsy is someone who lives

and gets the blame maybe.

No, a Patsy is someone who,

who gets it.

Patsy fall guy.

But he'd be more like a drone

in the sense that he's so programmed

that,

well,

he may not be aware

he's going to die that day,

but...

No.

None of them are.

He's,

he's so efficiently,

like he's reliable enough,

for him to be the only

shooter on Trump.

That's remarkable,

I think.

Well,

if you spend decades and decades

at it

and you've refined it down

and it's a relatively easy shot

and that kind of stuff,

I mean,

sure,

you can,

you can use someone to,

we're just used to

other types of

those kind of scenarios,

mass shootings

in the US

and elsewhere and stuff

where it was pretty clear to us

that there were

second gunmen

actually doing most of the shooting

and,

and then disappearing,

you know.

But they were,

like I said,

they were mostly

mass shootings,

you know,

that maybe were more complicated,

more,

you know,

we wanted to actually achieve

a certain body count

or something like that

and you couldn't rely on

the individual,

your patsy,

to,

to achieve that,

to achieve your goals,

your end goal.

A number of people dead.

So,

but in this case,

it was just one person.

If there was no mass shooting,

there was no plan

to kind of like shoot up,

there was no plan

to do a Las Vegas

mass shooting type of scenario

on the crowd

or anything like that,

you know,

it was just kill Trump.

We had one job,

he had him in the sights,

great location.

Yeah,

140 yards.

He'd been trained

and,

and I mean,

the Manchurian candidate

kind of patsy

slash,

you know,

MK Ultra or whatever,

you know,

allows for that kind of,

I think allows for that kind of level

of,

you know,

control.

Precision.

Precision amongst the,

the candidate.

That's a scary thought.

Can you pull this up?

Because it's from our forum.

I don't know if you need to be logged in

or what to see it.

It's a write-up of the report

by Representative Clay Higgins.

We won't go over all of it.

The key thing for me,

or what I want to talk about next anyway,

is,

let's go down there.

Let's go down there.

Sorry,

jog my memory.

Oh,

yeah,

it's about what happened to Crooks after.

This is Clay,

this is Representative Higgins writing,

my effort to examine Crooks' body

on Monday,

5th August,

so,

three weeks after the event,

caused quite a stir

and revealed as a disturbing fact.

The FBI released the body for cremation

10 days after J13.

On J23,

Crooks was gone.

The FBI released the body for cremation

10 days after J13.

On J23,

Crooks was gone.

The FBI released the body for cremation

Nobody knew this

until Monday, 5th August,

including the county coroner,

sheriff, etc.

Yes, the Butler County Coroner

technically had legal authority over the body,

but I spoke with the coroner

and he would never have released Crooks' body

to the family for cremation or burial

without specific permission from the FBI.

This action by the FBI

can only be described

by any reasonable man,

remember this is a U.S. Congressman speaking,

as an obstruction to any following investigation.

Investigative effort.

So right there you have them hiding something

about the body

and that does lend credence to

our suspicion that

the entry wound

shows that Crooks was shot from behind

and they needed to

obliterate that.

What other reason would there be?

ASAP.

Yeah.

There's no other reason.

If it is as they're letting people believe,

including MAGA types,

a one in a million amazing shot

from a good guy,

a USS sniper

from 447 yards away

as they leak to Dan Bongino

and to your man,

the Blackwater guy.

That's fantasy, guys.

I know you want to believe

there's some good guys on the team.

There aren't.

He was shot from behind,

not from out front

by a guy who just saw him

and took him out

just before he could reload

or re-aim at Trump.

Well, I mean,

obviously a shot from those snipers

on the roof behind.

Trump would have been possible.

Still, it's the same distance, you know.

It's not much more.

It's 140 yards, you know.

So it's whether or not they could see him, you know.

So I think it's not implausible

that those snipers could have and should have killed him.

But I think the problem is that...

Remember the very first scenario

they happily floated across the airwaves.

Yeah, it was the team on the building

behind Trump to his left,

which was not obstructed by the tree.

And what they could make out was like,

an eye and a forehead

and they got him right there.

I mean, wow.

Sounds good for TV, but it's bullshit.

Yeah, well, that was actually in the article

that I put up as well and then took down

was that they said that

the sniper himself allegedly

said to media and media reported it

that all they could see was the top of his head

and his eyebrow, one of his eyebrows.

And that's when he took the shot.

Now, of course, Trump...

Crooks could have moved, I suppose, in between

and exposed more of his head or something like that.

But he did pop up, yeah.

No, but in that moment,

like from the moment the guy said that he could see his,

we don't know when that was, right?

So, but I'd say it's maybe unlikely

given the speed of the bullet and all that kind of stuff,

but it's possible.

But anyway, even so,

in that scenario, you would have had clear,

more than likely you would have clear evidence

of, you know, a bullet hole

in the front of Crooks' head.

If a sniper can see the front, his head

and one of his eyebrows,

then you're talking about his forehead,

from his eyebrows up, forehead.

That's all the guy could see.

That's what the guy was aiming at.

Maybe in the split second after he fired

and the bullet arrived at Crooks,

could Crooks have exposed more of his face, whatever?

But anyway, in the video, in the picture of his,

after he was dead on the roof,

there's no evidence that any part of the front of his face

was in any way hit by a bullet.

Yeah.

So that's what,

basically, makes that sniper's allegation

Yeah.

a bit dubious,

and why, but again, like we said,

but then there's also the question of whether or not

any sniper would have actually taken a shot

to take out Crooks, you know what I mean?

I mean, maybe they would have,

maybe they would have seen him or whatever,

but part of the problem was, is that

Everyone seemed to behave that day,

apart from the cop who took one shot at the ground.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, part of the problem there was that

there was a lot of people on the ground,

and you can see,

you can see it in the multiple videos that have come out since,

there's a lot of plainclothes police officers,

or not even police officers,

not police, could be from FEMA, FBI,

any number of different agencies, you know,

all operating there,

and all dressed like Crooks,

all milling around and dressed like Crooks,

shorts, khaki shorts and t-shirts.

Yeah.

So,

assuming someone,

if the snipers knew that there were going to be people there,

or they have some awareness that those kind of individuals are around,

it's going to make you hesitate about shooting anybody.

Is he one of ours?

I don't know.

He's on a roof, has a gun.

Can we call the police?

No, because we're on separate channels.

The fact that he's on a roof and has a gun

doesn't immediately allow you to say that the person is a,

is not a member of the security person.

That's what I mean by people who have behaved

within their protocols,

within their limits,

limits of their position and their duties that day.

If you have it planned out beforehand,

you can reliably know that no one's going to take a pot shot

unless it's kind of like,

sir, I have a sight on him.

I'm sure it's him.

Okay, go.

That conversation either doesn't take place

or in the confusion or malice,

somebody pipes down from higher up the chain

to the guy who says,

sir, I have a suspect on sight.

No, no, no, we don't know who that is

because he's dressed like some of our undercover cops.

Can you put up the last link?

I said we won't play all this,

but I just want to show the start.

Oh, let me describe what it is first.

I think it's footage taken by John Malis, M-A-L-I-S.

He takes two key videos, one during the shooting.

This is just prior to.

So there's the building behind Crux.

And you see,

see there's a civilian bystander

and a cop, and they're both looking down.

They're observing. At this point, Crooks

has just reached AGR 6

and he's starting his bear

crawl. So within the next two minutes,

he's going to start shooting at Trump.

Two to three minutes. So if

you just play this here.

We talked to a local

couple who warned police about

the gunmen minutes before the shooting

started. Mike and Amber

DeFriscia from Crawford County say

police could have done more to stop gunmen

Thomas Crooks. They came to

the political rally at the last minute

and watched Crooks climb up

the building. As soon as I turned around.

Stop it here.

Sorry, that's Mike DeFriscia,

not Malice's footage.

Okay. This is the

building behind the windows.

From left to right,

never mind the one at the very end,

the Gable end,

on the side facing Trump, from left

to right, number one is closed, number

two is open. Number three

is open, number four is closed.

Number five is open.

Two

and three are accounted for

because we already know from

their own

after action reports that Butler

and Beaver County sniper units

are in there. Among them is

Greg Nickel, who

left his post and went to look for him, blah, blah, blah.

So they're sort of accounted for.

There are people in there who are supposed to be there.

No one

has said why

there's an unaccounted for

open window just before the shooting.

And that's the last one there.

The point being that the only, those

windows on the top of that building,

the only reason they were open that day,

the ones that are open, including the one on the Gable end,

is because there was a sniper team

inside.

And what Neil's basically saying is that the Gable

end one, the

second and third one

along the long end

are accounted for as having sniper teams in them.

And those windows,

those are open. The fifth window,

second from the very last there,

is open.

But there's no account of any sniper team being in there.

But the only reason it would be open, theoretically,

is because there was a sniper in that window.

Yeah. And everyone knows.

Everyone's known this since JFK, right?

Open windows. Get someone up there.

Or it's one of our guys. Otherwise

there should be no open window.

And you notice all

the, after checking

up one way and down the other, all the windows below

Crooks, they remain closed.

But this one was open before

and during.

So that would be the vantage point from which

your second gunman, not

with a line of sight on Trump, he didn't care about that,

but to clean up

immediately and take out the Patsy.

Take out the drone shooter,

Crooks, in front of him.

And then just blend in.

He's

not in any

official reports,

but people in there know he's one of us.

Blah, blah, blah.

They may or may not suspect him of

being involved, but

he's supposed to be there. He's dressed like

one of them SS or police

or FEMA, CERT,

whatever.

So that window

is still suspicious.

Again, not for taking a shot on Trump,

but for taking a shot on

Crooks.

Do you want to

you began talking about it before,

came back to the open window.

You published

some

footage. You watched it on

Blaze TV, which

referred to these khaki shorts

playing close cop guys as

being FEMA

slash SCERT.

Yeah, FEMA

CERT,

which is FEMA's Community

Emergency Response Team, which apparently

as far as I understand it,

anybody can reply to

become

up yourself, FEMA, CERT.

What is it, like a neighborhood

watch? They're volunteers.

It's usually maybe with

medical

emergency responders or

people

public-facing

emergency responders

or people in any walk of life

who are involved in community

service in that way can

become a

volunteer.

And become a

community emergency, member of the community emergency response team and go through the training for it, which just apparently trains you to, you know, better respond to community emergency, community emergencies, to respond better to community emergencies. That's why it's called that.

So, I'm

guessing not cats trapped up a tree.

No, more like, you know,

general emergency, some kind of a general emergency.

I don't know. You have to look it up yourself to see what, but

it seems to be open to anybody.

Obviously, there would be

an application process, whatever, but

you know, it makes me wonder if

if Crooks wasn't, you know,

part of such a thing, you know.

And that's what he thought he was part of.

Yeah, that's what he thought he was part of, and that's why he

well, no, I think the reason he was there was to shoot Trump,

obviously, but he had been groomed.

That's a whole different story.

Yeah, it's

something that's bothered me

since it came out in

what was

published by Senator Grassley.

I think it's in the

local police's

own after-action report.

You remember, it concludes a statement

from the last known position

or sighting of Crooks,

maybe by that

cop who's a bit dubious, Greg Nicol,

where they say

at five-something p.m.,

last spotted,

at the picnic table,

or leaving the picnic table behind

that two-story building, and heading

off in the direction of Sheets.

Now, the direction of Sheets

is geographically correct.

When you look at it from above on Google Maps,

yeah, that is

indeed in the northeast direction,

but that would place him going into the

cul-de-sac towards where everyone

now seems to agree that he,

Crooks, accessed the roof of the complex

on the A.C. unit on the

building behind Building 2,

behind Crooks, from where he walked

on ahead to the front

building.

It always bothered me that he used

Sheets as

geographic. It didn't make sense.

It didn't make sense. But you know what came

out, like, you know, at the time,

within days, I've got a report here from

Fox News,

Sheets convenience

store is where

the van,

supposedly belonging to Crooks,

and loaded with three pipe bombs,

was found

and towed away. He had parked

his Sheets. I never liked

that, because that

kind of suggests

an intimate knowledge.

You know?

Why was Sheets on his mind?

Because no one's supposed to know at that point.

They're supposed to think, in fact, that he may have come

in that bicycle over there. They don't know.

They don't know that he's a definite

bomber type yet. They're just a bit

suspicious about him.

And yet he points out the place where

that evening,

the van with Arizona plates

that no one, none of his

neighbors had ever seen at Crooks' house,

supposedly belonged to him, and it's loaded

with three bombs. That was a Sheets.

It kind of, I wonder if that was a

accidental Freudian,

someone who knew too much

left that in there, you know?

Because geographically it's correct. He walked in that

direction. But it's,

it's 500 meters almost

away,

back in the northeast direction, way

beyond the Asia,

Europe complex.

Yeah.

So, done and toasted?

Yeah.

I think so. I mean,

there's... Nobody's talking about the drones

flying around, but

obviously there were drones flying around.

There's drones captured in video.

I was so sure they had to be UFO,

the speed of those things. Because they're only in a few

frames.

But maybe they have

tech. Yeah, they have tech.

I mean, there's been a few events over

the years. 2017,

I think, a SpaceX,

one of Elon Musk's tests,

rocket tests. Falcon or something?

Yeah. Blew up

on the launch pad, anonymously,

and everybody was perplexed

as to why it would have blown up. And in that,

in the video, because, you know,

they had a still video camera quite close.

It was about to launch.

Preparing for the launch. You just see,

this little black drone type thing

shooting across at super high speed

again, as well, you know.

Maybe they kind of made some kind of a

EM pulse or something like that. Who knows?

You're speculating here, almost like

black ops tech. Well, yeah,

way beyond what anybody

expects or thinks would be

possible. And then there was also

in a couple of,

at least in one

nuclear power plant,

maybe a couple of years before that,

maybe 2015, sometime around

there,

then there were

reports of drones

around a nuclear

power plant in France

that alerted the authorities.

At super high speed, I remember.

And they were moving very fast as well because

there were actual official reports

at the time from the authorities,

from the police, whatever it was, that

a police helicopter

couldn't catch it.

So,

they're going pretty fast, yeah.

Faster than anything commercially available, obviously.

A lot faster, so.

But, yeah, nobody...

I mean, it's evidence of something else going on,

obviously. Yeah. When there's super fast

drones flying around, it's evidence of

somebody else being involved.

Because I don't think... Because the drone

that was seen in the video,

at least one of the drones that were

pictured... It's seconds before firing.

It's about 10 seconds or something before it flies

over the building, more or less, over the building that

Crooks is on. So, I don't

think... I don't imagine he's preparing to shoot

while also controlling a drone, right? So, that

implies... Right there, someone else is controlling

it. Someone else involved. And there's another one that's more

orb-like? Yeah, which may be

that same one, but further away.

There's different vantage points of them. There's several

videos of them, and they're from different vantage points.

One's closer to the stage. That would be, like, you know,

150 yards away. But the one

is actually in the guy

Dave's video,

when he has pretty much the best

recording of the actual shots, because he's

right below Crooks' building, when the

shots are fired and stuff. And in the footage,

in his footage, just before the shots are fired, he

kind of... and as he's panning

left and right, he actually has, we see

a really clear image of one of the drones.

And it's much... it's closer,

you know? Yeah. You can...

it's so close, you can see there's a little antenna

sticking out of the back of it, you know?

Like a fin. Yeah, like a little fin on the top

of it. And that's... yes, it's

closer, which means it's over the building

in the proximity of Crooks. Yeah.

As he's preparing to fire. But then the same

drone can be seen from the stage around the same

time the shots are fired, but it would...

necessarily be at least 150 yards

further away. Therefore, you don't

get as... from the video, you only get a

more blurry image. It looks maybe like a ball

or... there's not as much... you don't get

the definition. The

definition with the fin and all that kind of stuff suggests that it was

very close to the building

that Crooks was on.

So...

Yeah? Yeah.

They were so Johnny on the spot at

the time to report there were no

drones in the air that day.

Well, except for one. Yeah.

It was Crooks. Crooks had an

overflight of the whole place

with a regular drone, FPP,

FPV,

first-person view, so he could, you know, plan

his... plot his line of

fire and all that. But there was

zero surveillance from police

or U.S. Secret Service.

That was... I suppose they had

to... they had to

cover their asses for why they didn't see him.

Right?

But in the telling,

they then exposed that there's a

drone that is captured

on footage that remains unaccounted for.

So they had to lie, but

they've exposed themselves in the process.

So...

Trump has survived.

Will they try it

again? People are

naturally cynical and...

I don't know.

No. Without hope about

despondent or

taking the black pill on it. Well, they'll just do it

again.

But...

But I don't...

I don't...

Can they do that?

I suppose they can. Why not?

I don't...

You certainly lose

the ability or you lose

a significant amount of ease

with which you can do it again

because you've

basically shown your hand and

obviously I'm sure

Trump and people around him

etc.

you know, everybody in any sense obviously knows

it was an inside job that someone tried to take out

take him out and then it was

a state, let's say

deep state operation.

But even if you don't accept that

if you think it was just... if you go with

the official story and think that it was just crooks

either way

your

security is going to be massively beefed up

and you're checking of

you know, possible

weaknesses within

your security etc. for any future events.

They're going to be massively beefed up which by definition

makes it a lot harder for the people who

the first time to do it again.

It makes it a lot... from the two scenarios

it makes it a lot harder for just a lone

gunman who hates Trump

like crooks. It makes it much harder

for someone like that to get access

to any future Trump rallies

because they're going to say well let's check all the

buildings. Well we'll check all the buildings this time.

Maybe we'll put someone in the building this time, will we?

I don't know, should we? Why would you say that?

Well it's just like, you know the last time there

where we didn't put someone in the building and then Trump

almost got killed. Well maybe we should but

yeah well let's have a meeting about that and see if that's a good

idea. Obviously they're going to say

lockdown.

And that just for

in the scenario where it's just crooks

but if you expand that out to

an understanding or an acceptance

that this was from within

that this was

then, well then you're going to

think really seriously about

how you're going to avoid that

happening again. You've got to make sure you know every single person

on the team.

And they do have a way in in that respect

because obviously they have

these kind of deep state

types have

access to all the infrastructure of the

security apparatus of the state and all that kind of stuff

so they can still get in even if you are trying to

watch for them, you know?

They would put someone in there who's the guy

who's going to make sure that no one chooses Trump this time.

Yeah, yeah. So materially

yes, technologically

yes they could. But politically

oh it's a

hot potato.

It was already hot. In a sense

maybe it was too hot a potato and that's

somehow how it didn't happen

the first time, you know?

Yeah. And so what we're left with

well

is Trump versus

I don't, what I don't really

understand is, yeah, Trump versus Kamala. What I don't

really understand is why they bothered wanting to

get rid of Trump unless they were sure

that he was going to win. But I think at the time

that they tried to kill him

they were already planning to get rid of Biden and put

Kamala in. That didn't just happen

overnight, right? That wasn't just a spur

of the moment decision. That was probably planned quite a long time

ago. Yeah.

Like when they, on the debates that they had

weirdly.

The preternaturally early debate.

Debate, whatever that exposed, that

was all planned. So it was before that that it was

planned to get rid of Biden. Yeah.

So

Kamala was planned anyway

but the fact they still wanted to get rid of

Trump suggests that they weren't really sure

about Kamala

and it was going to take Kamala seriously. But now

they're forced to just double down on Kamala and make sure

that, you know, they're doing all sorts of things

by, you know, there's a story

about them trying to manipulate headlines and all that kind of

stuff and get the media on her side to make

it seem like Kamala's more popular than

she actually is. Joy. Inserting

the word joy and joyful. Yeah.

Probably the polar

opposite. She probably can't experience joy.

Right. She's one of them.

It's crazy, isn't it? But

it's not, it's what we've seen.

It's what they do. It's wall-to-wall

coverage.

How, oh

shit. Okay, so Trump survived. What do we

do? Well, just ignore it

and saturate the airwaves with

Kamala and that's what they've done.

Yeah. Now, but they were forced

without work alone. No, but I

think what is going on here, they're

shaping

a plausible background

giving themselves what

people call the runway

ahead of it for a plausible-ish

scenario

where Kamala wins.

Well, you saw how popular

she was in the press

and on social media

where we, you know, mess

with the algorithms. So

yeah, it makes sense, no?

No, it doesn't. But

still, that's what they seem to think

they're doing right now.

It looks successful to me. I've even seen people

who are mad at people going, oh my god,

she's going to win, isn't she?

They're not so

naive. She's going to win in quotes

but

they're setting it up so that the norm

is the Democrats don't poll

afterwards

like they did last time. I don't know what

it was. 30, 40% of even

Democrat voters thought it was

rigged. Yeah. Last

time. So, it's

so, yeah, they can, they're faced with

having to rig it again if they want

because obviously their goal

in assassinating Trump was to make sure that Trump

wasn't president, right? And to

lock it down because Trump was going to be replaced by

Nikki Haley, I'd say. Well, no, that was

one of the possibilities. Maybe it was always going to be that it was

Kamala, who knows? Or it might have been

when

Trump wasn't assassinated,

they went straight for Kamala.

But,

no, yeah, sorry, I'm mixing

that up.

Trump was probably going to be replaced by Nikki Haley

and there's also the element that Trump was probably going to,

you notice that in a few,

a couple of days afterwards, the media reported

just kind of like quietly that there was,

that the FBI had released

information that they were,

they'd been working on

Iran and a

plot by Iran.

Now, it's possible that

the scenario around the

assassination of Trump was that it was going to be relamed on Iran

and somewhere or other that

Crooks was going to be shown to

have been groomed or something by

Iranian... Or paid for. Or paid for,

whatever, and that was going to just, you know, I don't know

if it would lead to war with Iran, but certainly it was going to

have a big up, it was going to be beneficial for Israel,

right, in the current climate. Israel was going to

ride the emotional charge of what's going on.

Yeah, it happened to Trump into

a war against Iran. Maybe.

I don't know if it would have led directly

to a war against Iran because, like,

it would have been a bit cynical in a certain sense, but it certainly

would have whipped up the pro-Trumpers,

the Trump supporters, against Iran

if most of them or anything

believed it.

But anyway, that didn't happen, so it's interesting that

they just had to release that anyway because we've been

building this up in anticipation of Trump dying.

Oh, they were so quiet for so many days about

Crooks' motivation and background.

Like, shit, okay, well, we had this.

We had this

ready to go, so let's

put it out there and make it go away.

Which no one believed, so they quickly went, okay,

whatever. Oh, he was a

registered Republican. Yeah.

What?

So, and then

the guy at Gab, Alex

Torba,

broke protocol by

releasing the request that they'd had for

his social media account, showing

that he, for the last two, three years, he was

Biden this, Biden that. Yeah.

But that's kind of irrelevant, really, whether or not he was

pro, or he was a patsy, you know what I mean?

It doesn't matter what,

you know, political affiliations

are very fickle, especially

among young guys like that, you know,

20-year-olds. I mean, what do they really

know about politics, you know?

I can imagine, though, it would have been brought into play

in a similar way that Oswald had

two

files, one where he's pro-Cuba,

and one where he's anti-Cuba, anti-Castro-Cuba.

He had both.

He was sheep-dipped in Moscow,

and he was,

sort of,

let it be known that he was CIA.

Yeah. You know, and it's a matter

of which you use, depending on how you're going to shape

narratives after. So you have both files ready

to go. Yeah. They had a bit of everything

on crux. Yeah. Well, the main file that we're saying

that they had ready to go was probably that it was

Iran. It was going to be Iran, Iran, Iran.

That was the international

aspect, just as Cuba was back then.

And then there's the

internal political...

Well, I think the internal,

it was for internal politics, it was to whip

up anti-Iranian sentiment within,

amongst all of the

Trump supporters. If you could

possibly pass it off that this was

ultimately, and you had, you know,

a media storm over it, you know, and digging up

all sorts of insider information

about how, you know, Iran

was involved in this, blah, blah, blah. And then

suddenly you have, you know,

millions of Trump supporters mourning the

death of their hero, and they're

all buying that Iran did it.

I mean, who does that help? That helps

domestically. That helps, like,

well, it helps Israel,

first and foremost.

So you have to put Israel,

Israeli interests in the middle of that, if you go with that

scenario as well, you know. But

I think at that point it wouldn't really have mattered whether

he was Republican

or Democrat. Like, I mean, what would

be the benefit of doing that? That was stupid

anyway, like, I mean, ultimately

in the face of it, like, in the face of

assassination of Trump, who cares

whether Crooks was,

you know, a registered

Republican or registered Democrat. The only way

you would say that he was a registered Republican would be to

try and, try and

remove any, any

allegations that

that Biden was responsible.

Or that the rhetoric against Trump

all these years was responsible. Yes, exactly.

The rhetoric from the Biden camp was

partly to blame, you know.

But,

yeah.

So here we are, what is it, mid-August, so

one month? Two months.

Just shy

three months to go. Yeah.

So, I think they were gonna, the plan

was to blame Iran.

He was gonna take Trump's

job, Trump's

nomination, and it was gonna be Nikki Haley.

It was gonna be, it was gonna be great, it was gonna be Nikki Haley

or Kamala.

First time

ever, great, two women.

Well, one way or another, we're getting

a woman president. We're getting a woman. We're getting a woman president

to this. So perfect.

Hillary gets away by proxy.

Yeah. By Munchausen.

Yeah. Yeah. By Munchausen, yeah.

So,

but now we're faced

with Trump still alive, Trump

gonna run, and them having to rig the election.

Or try to rig

the election, and

if they do it, and

Trump does the same thing again, we have a repeat of

2000 and 2020.

Allegation,

not accepting the, not accepting

the result, and pointing

to fraud, or vote

rigging, or ballot

stuffing, and...

Yeah, it's just... More men in black turning up

at the Supreme Court to warn them

not to listen to the evidence.

It's just repeat ad nauseum.

But history never quite repeats.

Something will go wrong there.

Yeah. Something's gonna

go wrong. Yeah. And that

may not mean that Trump will get it,

but get

into the White House again, but...

Yeah, it's just one

big, long circus show.

And you just get tired of it, you know?

I mean, it's just a circus, you know? It's like...

It's like being an actual circus clown,

show, and you being the only one who

realizes that they're just clowns.

Everybody else thinking that it's

real. You know,

the drama going

on in the

arena there with all the clowns,

you know, falling down and stuff,

with their big shoes and squirting water

out of flowers in each other's faces, people all reacting

you know, seriously

to that as if it's...

Those are serious, serious events happening

on the world stage, and they need to get up.

They need to go and protest about it.

Protest that clown for squirting

that clown in the face.

And we're like,

Jesus Christ, it's a clown show, people.

But yeah,

most Americans can't go there, you know what I mean?

And that's the thing.

One thing I noticed about this Trump assassination

was that

nobody seems to want to go. Very few people

seem to actually want to go. Even the people

who are investigating it

in terms of looking for a second

shooter and not believing

the incompetency thing and knowing that it was

a... that Crooks was a patsy

and all that kind of stuff, none of them seem to...

Every time I watch any of those people talk about

that, I go, yes, yes,

yes, yes, and they go,

and, and

draw the conclusion. Come on,

spit it out, draw the conclusion, but they never do.

The most obvious conclusion

is that

the deep state,

based on their analysis, the conclusion

is, okay, they did

the Trump assassination, but what that means is

is that the deep state have complete control

over

Secret Service,

you know, they're embedded

deeply within the system, and they have

massive control over it to the point that they can

carry out an operation like this and get away

with it, which means that your democracy

is shit. Your democracy is not worth the paper

it's written on. Your constitution is not worth

the paper it's written on.

These people control the show from behind the scenes.

They don't necessarily

always, you know,

they're not always interfering or

directing policy, but at key moments

they can and do.

And therefore, your democracy

is null and void. Your left and right,

your Democrat versus Republican, is null

and void.

All of your

members of Congress and all

of your Senators, for the most part,

the vast majority of them, are corrupted.

They're compromised. They're beholden

to someone else, to other people

who are not elected,

and who you don't

get to know who they are, or get to know who they are.

There's no oversight of those people.

Congress does what they're told by a shadowy

group who doesn't have very good

intentions towards America. Now, what are you going to do

with that? Well, first of all... They're unimpeachable.

Yes. Any rational

person would immediately go, well, what's the point

in me being pro-Republican or pro-Democrat? What's the point

in me going to protests? What's the point in me hating on Biden?

What's the point in me hating on Trump?

These aren't actually the people who are

calling the shots.

I mean, that could

be. You could go,

you should at least go there and explore that.

These people should explore that topic, you know,

because it would be very refreshing.

But I'm not saying that necessarily that's the be-all and

end-all, because the fact that these

people wanted to get rid of Trump

means that... It's not nothing. He's not

a puppet. He's not a complete puppet.

Why would they want to get rid of him? He's in the arena,

but... Unless he is a

kind of puppet, and they don't actually care about Trump,

what Trump tries to do or not tries to do, or don't care

if he wins the election or not, because they can

rig elections, and they can make sure he doesn't get to be

president. Maybe

the reason they wanted to assassinate him

is not to assassinate Trump to get rid of him, because he's

such a danger to the control of the deep state,

but rather because they

wanted to stir

social chaos within America.

So Trump... Killing Trump

was just a means to an end. Trump

killing him wasn't the end in itself. It wasn't the goal.

They don't really care.

And that argues for why they won't do it again,

you know, in a certain sense. They're ambivalent

in some way. They tried,

but they figured, okay, that didn't work.

Maybe it wasn't a good idea anyway,

but we don't really care that Trump continues on.

It's not that we want to get rid of him

come hell or high water,

because he's not really that much

of a threat to us. Although, that

itself is, in a certain

sense, that argument is undermined

by the eight years of incessant

attacks they've launched at him, and all the

dirty tricks they've used to undermine him.

So, on balance

you'd have to say that someone, somewhere, does

really not like Trump

and want to remove him from the scene.

But then you get into

a nexus of the blending of,

of these kind of deep-stater types who have

much more control than

anybody imagines,

and also

the overt politicians who want to get rid of

Trump. You know, at what

point, like Hillary Clinton, the

DNC types, certain

members of the Justice Department,

members of the FBI,

their ideology,

George Soros, and were it, but even,

I'm talking here, but members of the actual

US government, one way or another,

were they

blend into these deep-stater types?

You know, and whether it's

the deep-state acting in one particular situation, or

whether it's actually, like, the FBI

and the DNC, and is there,

when it comes down to it, is there much difference?

You know what I mean? So people,

you know, Washington establishment,

deep-state, it's a vague

term that implies, like the Washington

establishment is usually interchangeably

the deep-state, but it implies that there's people in

Washington, D.C., which...

I sometimes wonder if

things happen not because,

it smacks

of desperation on the part of

those in power, but

in fact, they do it from a

position of,

um,

it's, it's

would be hard to tease out, because

it's

only an impression, but sometimes

they do things to kill hope.

Yeah. To put to

bed any hope, because Trump

represents hope

for a lot of people.

And killing

him would send

the broader message, it would create

chaos, which they

presumably felt confident they could

manage and control, and steer

towards ends where

it didn't result in a revolution and the overthrowing

of the state.

But that they would

kill any hope, that there's anything

you can do about it. Yes, there's a deep-state, like

the New York Times posted a couple of years ago.

There is a deep-state, and thank God.

And all is right in the world.

And he's gone. And there's nothing

you can do about it.

On the issue of

names and who they are

and stuff, and

whether there's anything to be

done, I like this report.

It's by

Greg Strenstrom,

Strenstrom, I think.

In

The Intelligencer Today.

Apparently, he

was interviewed by Alex Jones about it, and

he let drop that he's in

that this may have been put together

in cahoots with Trump

or his family.

Well,

disinfo. Why not?

Do you think so? What?

That Trump conspired on his own assassination attempt?

No, no, no, no.

That they have a good bead

on who exactly in the permanent

bureaucracy in the U.S. government

forms the key decision makers, at least

at that interface between

political level, the DNC

and

yeah, U.S. government

agencies. Can you put that up?

We won't

obviously go through the whole thing, but it's

it's put into

he breaks it down

into five arms of this, what he

calls the council. Apparently, they

he thinks they themselves

informally call each other the council

or the SIGI, which is an acronym

for something.

And it's loosely been around since the 70s.

Put what up?

Oh, did not send.

I sent that somewhere.

Okay.

He published it in July.

Five

days after the

assassination attempt, a council

who was running the United States of America

and it's got

Hopi a minute because he's like

after laying it all out, he's

like, don't worry, there's hope.

But that's not really

the take-home message you should get

from this.

The take-home message is it's entrenched

and

it's got many heads and many

arms and

anyway,

scroll down a bit to show you

sort of a synopsis of it.

The introduction

he captured the essence

of it well.

He says they're exposing

them by name, their corruption and means of control

and identifying

how to dismantle their

illegitimate power as the first step in the

restoration of the United States of America as a

constitutional republic.

Indeed, it's not

going to happen, at least

not without a fight.

Scroll down, so the council

he names as

he puts this

R's

this is one of

the five arms you

said there's a media arm

a political arm and

this is a key one so

the US inspector general

Michael Horowitz he puts

FBI director ray in there.

He obviously isn't

that instrumental but he's

gonna be important enough.

US attorney attorney general Merrick Garland.

Others you've never

heard of with obscure titles like this Director for

the Office of Professional Responsibility, jeffrey.

Dale. Chief Public Integrity Sector, acronym PIN, Corey Amundsen, again, someone you've

not heard of. U.S. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, and First Principal Deputy USAG,

don't know what that stands for, Marshall Miller. Let's go down a bit more. He describes

this council as an untouchable, legislatively codified, sui generis, which is Latin for

unto itself, organization with tentacles embedded in every government agency and branch, except

for the Supreme Court, supposedly. From their perspective, they own the United States of

America. It is theirs, and they are its self-appointed stewards. Anyone who is not them are useful

idiots, useful innocents.

Or human chattel to be discarded to necropolitics, which he later explains is the arena. Necropolitics

is the clown show you see take place on the floor of the circus. These guys are back in

the back rooms, and they run, they actually manage the circus. The rest of us are expendable,

quote, carbon units assigned positive and negative values depending on our relative

usefulness to them. This, he claims,

is their language.

It's a good report. It's sound, it's consistent. It gives some examples, obviously, of the

lawfare they went after Trump with, but not only him, Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, who's

still in prison at the moment, Peter Navarro, who's just recently come out of prison. They

can put you in prison if, well, I can find, the thing is they can find anything on anyone,

so they can have a,

a plausibly sound reason for putting any of these guys in prison, or not. They can concoct

one. They control everything. One of his key points in the article is the position of inspector

general is a title they often have, people he's identified as key in the, quote, unquote,

deep state order council, because that's where the buck stops when it goes through Homeland

Security or through the Justice, the Department of Justice.

There's an inspector general, and he is technically the top of that chain. He also gives example

as to why Biden would not be on the council, explains how that works. So it's not just

that Trump is excluded from, quote, the big club. The president per se isn't. This is

a structure that has been functioning quite smoothly now for, he says, at least since

1978, when it was somewhat coddled.

After Watergate scandal, but arguably goes back further to the end of World War II. Yeah.

And, you know, he's American. God bless him. He's done his research and he's talking to

the Trumps and maybe they helped him put it together or they're in pot or something. He

claims there are other unnamed researchers who have helped do it as well, but who obviously

don't want to be getting the public flack.

If he's getting any from saying this kind of thing. I think it's a sound basis or starting

point. Starting point, that's just like the author himself believes this is great because

here we have a map, you know, for what he doesn't say. I mean, round them up, but they

control, you know, they control the wheelchairs.

Schools of Justice and the police, ultimately.

Well, yeah. I think, you know, at the end of the day, these people are just going to,

they're going to do what they're intended to do, which is create chaos and stuff, but

the chaos has a response, you know, from the population, you know? And it can up end their

plans, you know, like that idea of the way they talk about people and all that kind of

stuff.

whatever else

useless

what do they call them

useless innocents

or something

yeah

useful idiots

and useless innocents

right

yeah

you know

that mindset

that's accurate

yeah

but it's

it's arrogant

and it's presumptuous

and it

underestimates

you know

not the individual

not individuals per se

because they can find

a useful idiot

or useful innocent

or whatever

at any particular time

but in terms of

the overall

response from the population

you know

it's a group

if you know what I mean

they really can't

budget for that

you know

and they'll

overextend themselves

so you do have hope

that it'll come down

for them

but not necessarily

hope that

it'll result in

a political

solution

but

hope that

there's

a determinist

there is an end point

to being able to do this

yeah

forever after

yeah of course

I don't think

there's no

it's stupid to think

that you can lock something down

or turn it into like a

some kind of

dystopian slave planet

forever type thing

you know what I mean

the whole thing will fall apart

you know what I mean

it's like

they're very myopic

on their part you know

but then they're useful idiots

they're useful idiots

in a certain sense

yeah

the thing that

the label they ascribe

that they give to ordinary people

it actually applies to them

more so than

yeah

more so than

than the people they

they use it for you know

because

ultimately they'll

ultimately they'll bring

the whole system down

ultimately they'll expose themselves

more and more you know

just look at the way

they've involved

like any

I'm not saying everybody

will get the message

everybody on the planet

but a lot of people

have got the message

like a lot of people

have been paying attention

over the past

you know

eight years or so

since Trump has been around

and Trump's

goal

or Trump's role

in my opinion

is not to kind of

save the country

or whatever

whatever you think

of his policies

whatever

it's

it's to

it's simply to do

what he has done

which is to stand up

to those people

to be naive enough

or stupid enough

or arrogant

enough

or

or bloody minded enough

to not back down

so he comes into

the White House

in 2016

and he thinks

okay I'm the president

I'm going to do stuff

so we're all going to do stuff

I'm going to run this country

the way I want to run it

you know

it's been very badly managed

I'm going to run it properly

and then he finds out

that you're not allowed

to do that

you can't do that

and he's like

what do you mean

you're not allowed to do that

I'm the commander in chief

I can get through

I won't

no you can't sir

actually you know

blah blah blah

so then he starts getting angry

and he makes enemies of people

and all that kind of stuff

they turn against him

people who run the country

the deep state

whatever

and they start doing things

more and more openly

to try and undermine him

because he won't go away

he's very annoying to them

he won't go away

and they have to do

certain things

increasingly do

more and more flagrant

and obvious things

that expose their existence

which lead to a report

like you

lead to the

distillation

of the information

well it's interesting

this came five days

after J13

right

so it's been the past

the past eight years

we've had

with Trump

the most instructive

the most useful part

of Trump's existence

let's say

in American politics

has been to expose

the deep state

and the ways

to pull back the curtain

on the substructure

yeah

because they've had to

come out and act

and try to do it

as covertly as possible

but they can't

they can't cover up the fact

that the whole system

is rigged

they can work through

the Justice Department

they can come up with

they can influence

members of Congress

they can influence

Republicans

many Republicans

to back down

and you know

tacitly support

an impeachment

against Trump

and all that kind of stuff

and

so they show their hand

and they reveal

to the American people

if the American people

are watching

or anybody who's watching

that they exist

and that's who

really runs the country

and that's the nature

of government

in America

and very likely

in many other countries

around the world

it's not the government

that you know

it's the shadow government

behind the scenes

and they've just

exposed themselves

and Trump was very

was essential

in exposing them

not that he necessarily

intended to expose them

but he did

simply by standing up

and going

no

I'm not going away

in his interview

with

Alex Jones

the author of that piece

Drenstom

said

functionally

Donald Trump

has been

the greatest whistleblower

of all time

he also

holds that hope

that he can really

turn this ship around

but

God bless him

he's American

he will want

that will motivate

him and others

to wake up in the morning

and put in the effort

to do all this

so of course

they're invested in it

but

they did have

a realistic

few moments

in that interview

where

this is what we

what he's doing

is it

functionally

he's a whistleblower

but exactly

and he's drawing

others

other whistleblowers

to come to people

like him

they have a few moments

where they realise

that's what's going on

but then they go back to

okay Trump

we're going to

back up Trump

we're going to

make America great again

we're going to drain the swamp

and make America great again

because

the point is that

those people can't

and I understand

they can't simply draw

that conclusion

I mean

that's

it would all

you could almost call it

like fatalistic

they have too much power

there's nothing you can do

about them

let's just back away

but like yeah

Trump is exposing them

and there is something

to fight for

but more importantly

for those people

it's their bread and butter

talking about it

making videos about it

writing articles about it

that's how they

spend their time

they're not about

to just go

oh

I suddenly realised

that it's all a show

there's no point

left and right

it's all controlled

I'm just going to go

and

you know

grow potatoes

join a monastery

I'm going to join a monastery

or something like that

no they're not going to do that

so that's why

they don't go there

that's why they don't talk about that

very much in those terms

we can talk about it

because

that's how we see it

but notice also

we're not being fatalistic about it

there's a lot of nuances

you know

but definitely

more has to be talked about

and said about

the existence of

a deep state

because it's

you know

it's absolutely clear

at this point

that it exists

and that

it has existed

for a very long time

and is the real power

behind the throne

behind the White House throne

not behind the

the branches

of American government

so it definitely

should be talked about

a lot more

it should be brought

to people's attention

because it's what is

yeah

anyway

have you said enough

about Trump?

yeah

alright

it's only been an hour and a half

so go on

that's a good hour

on Trump

go

I know

good

an hour

we're

on four

yeah

Ukraine has conquered Russia

yeah

conquered

Jesus

yeah

didn't see that coming

it's amazing

yeah

any day now

Putin's gonna fall

if

if you listen to the media

Jesus Christ

it's been

two and a half years now

this shite

no

that's bullshit

obviously

but there you go

that's what they're trying

to convince you of

I gotta say

that was a

it's not done yet

and it was a hell of a

a hell of an investment

up to 20,000 Ukrainians

poured in

into Kursk

sounds a bit desperate no?

what people gotta

remember is that

this huge front line

the border is

absolutely massive

I mean

think of the entire length of

think of a border

the length of

the Netherlands

to the Mediterranean

I mean

it's

the scale

the geographic scale

Russia does not have that many people

in this war theater

so of course there are holes

through which Ukrainians can

pour over

but they're limited too

they would have pulled these troops

supposedly crack troops

I don't know how

they're not the conscripts

at least most of them aren't

from elsewhere

where they're

you know

trying to plug a dam

of

Russian troops

and forces making gains

all along the main front line

and then they say let's

it's like a charge of the light brigade

but

I don't even want to call it that

because that was actually successful

that actually produced a good result

it's

it's desperate

in a sense

it's futile

yeah it's pissed Russia off

big time

but it's not going to change the outcome

not in any substantial way

no it's it's a

it seems like to me it seems like a kind of desperate move in a certain sense

like the

a decoy

not even a decoy

I mean it's desperation

they've officially said that the reason they invaded

was to kind of try and

force Russia to negotiate a peace settlement

on more favorable terms

like so we're holding territory

you know we're gonna

well we'll swap this for that

yeah but they've even said that

but at the same time they say that

they don't intend on holding

any Russian territory

for any length of time

but they've also moved

you know a lot of troops

who set up to try and hold them

and they've also moved a lot of troops

20,000

from the eastern

the main front line

in eastern Ukraine

that in recent weeks

has been progressively kind of

collapsing that front line

you know

Russia has been moving faster and faster

taking more and more villages

at a greater rate of speed

than before

because they're meeting less resistance

so like it's

there's less Ukrainian troops available

to fight

and that front line

in the eastern Ukraine

the east has

before this invasion of Russia

had been faltering

so they decided to move troops

that could have been put there

to bolster it into Russia

it sounds like a last

close to last gasp effort

to kind of

have some cards at the table

do something

have some win

get some win out of the situation

rather to

to undermine or overwrite

the failing narratives in the media

that Russia

you know Russia is making a lot of advances

Ukraine isn't doing well in the east

overwrite the failing narratives in the media

let's get the media

to start talking about one of our wins

so

from a propaganda point of view

it's been successful

and you can assume

that that was the main priority

or the main point

of doing it was to

because they're running in

you know

planting the flag

in a Russian town

taking a picture

and then turning a high tail

and apparently that's occupying the town

well they're abducting civilians as well

as well

so

yeah it's

it's

and it definitely was

coordinated with western intelligence

despite their denials

of course when

you know you only know

when something

oh we didn't know

we're shocked by this

development

you only know something's the truth

whenever it's been officially denied

by Washington DC

and the Brits you know

so this is obviously something

that's officially true

is that

that was absolutely

fully coordinated with

the west

and you know

relying on their intel

which they have done

over the whole course of the war

the Ukrainians have relied heavily on

western military intelligence

satellite information

all that kind of stuff

to know

to know where to

where to go

where was

breachable

more easily breached

so definitely it's a

it's a western operation

but the entire Ukrainian war

is a western operation

it's an American

and British primarily

military operation

using Ukrainian hands

against Russia

so

yeah it's

it's suggestive in a certain sense

of them

of them feeling the heat as well

you know

the master

the actual

the actual belligerence

i.e.

America and the Brits primarily

of them feeling

like they need to do something

quick

to

to stop the

stop the bleeding

you know

stop the appearance

staunch the wound

stop the appearance of it

if people are obsessed

with how something looks

not how it is

yeah

well 50% at least

is propaganda right

of any war

someone needs to tell Russia that

because they just

don't give a shit

yeah

i know

we just have to wait and see

what if anything

if any Russia

Russia's response will be like

i mean they're trying to provoke Russia

into taking some definitive action type thing

you try and get you on the

get you on the hook in a certain sense

they could try that repeatedly

they really want Russia to do something

to make a misstep let's say

so they want to provoke Russia all the time

into doing something

where they overextend themselves

or they do something that

they can use to

to gee up a lot of international condemnation

for Russia or something

you know

they're

they're attempting to torment and harass

and provoke Russia all the time

into doing something

and

but Russia is generally just

saying no

the

the objectives of the special military operation

will be

will be achieved

it's

there's

there's stoicism

and then there's Russianism

well

well it's not even stoicism

it's just knowing your enemy like

it's just being smart

okay

you know

i mean

it's

yeah

it's not like

i mean they have to put up

take a lot of stuff on

on the

on the chin type thing

and have done

take a lot of slaps in the face

over the years

um

but

if you know the nature of your enemy

which is that they try and provoke you all the time

well then

you're not provoked

you know

one is not provoked

by your silly

provocation attempt

and they try all the time

to make sure that they can't provoke them in different ways

you know

to try to imagine the ways

the new

ways that they're going to try and provoke them

but it's

it's a game

a game

then they're surely aware that

one way is to try and

set off another nuclear

Chernobyl

yeah but

like disaster

what and

how do you make sure that

that it's Russia's fault

you know

just

just blast

propaganda

tell everyone it is

no but like

you know

i mean Russia's

for example

the Sabarija nuclear power plant

and there's a nuclear power plant in Kursk

in this region of Russia

that they've created

Ukrainians are in now

so

if one of those

blows up

because in the meltdown

or whatever

how are you going to say

that Russia decided to blow up

a

a nuclear power plant

on its own territory

is anybody going to believe that

or be

a nuclear power plant

that they've held for two years

on Ukrainian territory

and that

officially is

is going to be Russian territory

so like

they convince people

that Russia blew up

Nord Stream

but does anybody believe that

probably not

speaking of

Ukraine's been blamed for that now

well not the first time

but it seems to be like

they're solidifying around that angle

we found the drunken

Germany's arrested

a Yuki in Germany

yeah

who was drunk

that night

he scuba dived down

and planted the bomb or something

but on the back of that

that's obviously bullshit

but on the back of that

Germany's announced that it's a nuclear power plant

they've announced

no more weapons to Ukraine

or is it just floating the idea

well that all has to be seen

in the context of them

maybe planning to wind down

over the next

few months

into the winter

and then maybe into spring

and planning for

you know

trying to plan these things

well in advance

you know

of some

some

endgame

or

you know

denouement

where you

obviously involve

some kind of a peace

peace settlement

or peace agreement

and they're just trying to

manoeuvre at the minute

in a way that

in such a way that

whatever

scenario

at the point where they decide to have

a peace settlement

or table a peace settlement

that they're in the best position to

to do that you know

but

the

the west doesn't really care

they only care about

saving face in a certain sense you know

and I don't know

how they're going to

negotiate that because

but they don't

yeah

they can just turn

they've said all along

you know Ukraine is

all of Ukraine

the entire country

belongs to Ukraine

it needs to be given back

and jump forward a year or two

and they're having a peace settlement

where they've

they accept that

you know

for reasons of

of Ukraine

are now Russian

plus Crimea

and

and it's all done

dusted

and it was like I've said before

like oh

well you know

none of it was personal

good game

jolly good show

yeah

Boris Johnson will be the British negotiator

yeah

we had a good old

we got a good bit of sport

we all did very well

we all tested out our military

and capabilities

we

we all made some money

we made a lot of money

we bolstered the

the armaments industry

and it was all

jolly good fun

well done

everyone clap

clap on the back

and let's move on

what's next

more war

what comes after that

I want to say something about the UK riots

they're over

probably on the whole

bit worse than the 2011 ones

in scale and whatnot

just to remind people

what started this

because

I

just

, really gets my go

I mean

we're used to this now

but it is infuriating

that

major events or trends

that take place these days

are often provoked by something specific

and there's never any follow up

and all the media's focus

is on the result

of the provocation

but not the incident

so this is what happened

this was the

the guy

there's a sketch of him

a teenager charged with murdering

three girls in Southport

in the northwest of England

appeared in court

so this was the follow up

it had happened

a day or two before

they obviously

let on that he was

not white British

he's black

he's from a nearby village

in the area

but was born in Cardiff, Wales

and that he's

they named him as well

I think if you scroll down

for some reason

they broke

their own

they don't normally do that

they named him as

Axel

Rudakubana

of Rwandan descent

he killed three kids

and stabbed a bunch of others

and two of the adults

who were organising this dance class

if you scroll down a bit more

usually the defendant

because he is a minor

would be granted anonymity

however in an exceptional decision

the judge didn't

not conceal his identity

who has now since

turned 18

supposedly to prevent

the spreading of misinformation

well

yeah that didn't work

clearly this was

immediately blamed

on Muslims

on social media

that spread like wildfire

it wasn't the incident

there was a follow up

there was a vigil

where some guy showed up

that actually sparked

the rioting

but anyway

the British press

has just had a field day

with misinformation

disinformation

and the Russians

are to blame

bullshit bullshit

certainly there were people

who just leapt

to

conclusions

this is supposedly

a photo of him as a kid

and that's the best

they could do

there's no photo of him older

there's just

court sketches

I'm dubious

it's very suspicious

to me because

it does have the hallmarks

I

you can understand

why people

assumed

a stabby jihadi

did it

for ISIS

or Allah

or whatever

because

this is

how it always happens

the random guy

stabs a bunch of people

he doesn't know

innocents

usually

often kids

could be grannies

or whatever

sometimes it's

cops and stuff

and that's the end of it

there's no follow up

in the media

about why he did it

who he was

and

instead we're all

left to deal

with the fallout

which is

a thousand people

arrested

over

around a thousand people

have been arrested

for subsequent rioting

half of those

have been charged

some of those

have been jailed already

and some of those

just for making

social media posts

so

there's been a

I'm not even going to

judge

whether this is

the proper response

or not

I'm not even going to

the rioting

was serious

I mean

they did have to

show a strong hand

I suppose

to put it to a stop

here's an example

of someone

who's already

been jailed

from the BBC

keyboard warrior

jailed for part

in UK disorder

if you scroll down

what he is

supposed to have done

Wayne O'Rourke

had

90,000 followers

on X

and his crime

is he posted

misinformation

and he's

okay

what did he say

the court heard

among his posts

on 29th July

was a reference

to the death

of the three children

in Southport

alleging it was

a terrorist attack

carried out by a Muslim

okay

is that it

scroll down more

a further post

urged the people

of Southport

to get out

on the street

and that garnered

1.7 million views

in another post

he added

Starmer

the new PM

has basically said

it is us against them

hold the line

that sounds like

it's about it

and he's been jailed

for

what do they say

20 months

that's almost

two years

he wasn't even

directly

rioting

or damaging property

or attacking police

his crime

the subtext of this

is that his crime

seems to be

that he

implied

that the attacker

was Muslim

oh fucking hell

I mean

of course

there have been

so many

stabby jihadi

incidents

that when people

heard the basics

the outline

of what had

happened in Southport

they naturally went

well it sounds like

the dozens

or even hundreds

of previous incidents

over the last

20 years

where it's

someone doing it

for Al-Qaeda

or ISIS

it's just

fucking gaslighting

because

okay he got it wrong

it's misinformation

but

someone's pointed out

that

these people

there's a bunch

of other cases as well

where people are

pleading guilty

they shouldn't be

unless they actually

were a prosecutor

for causing

property damage

or attacking police

but in cases

where you made

a social media post

where it's

misinformation

you can defend that

because

it has to be proven

that you

that you intentionally

knew

you knew

better

that's

that's such bullshit

so

anyway

I suppose my point

would be

to draw a line on that

that this is kind of

like a

chilling effect

because Tharmer

did announce

in his

in his TV statement

about this

we're going after you

whether you were

involved on the streets

or

something

racist abuse

online

which

because

it's that

conflation

of the two things

that's the scary part

you know

and

they're not going to get

everyone

there were millions

of tweets about it

just on X

but

they've clearly

gone after

a few people

to use as examples

you know

in the meantime

there was another attack

in England last week

I suppose

it was only

one victim

so meh

a girl

is stabbed

11 times

in Leicester Square

in full daylight

Leicester Square

is in London

it's just

you know

and people know now

but don't

don't do anything

don't react

don't

you're not allowed to

and it's

the headline

wouldn't let you know

man in court

accused of stabbing

girl 11

8 times

she may have survived

actually

he just grabbed her

randomly

she was with her mother

and

scrolled down

and here they name him

because he's

presumably because

he's of age

he's an adult

oh no

that's it

it's just a video

it's a short video report

anyway I won't

don't play it

but it does have his name

and his name is

Romanian

it's not British

well that gets to this point

like I mean

it's in the telegraph

today a survey

showing that more people

think the riots

in the UK

were about migration

than the Southport killings

that's the original

killing of

those three girls

and

the survey responders

mainly hold rioters

responsible for the unrest

but think the far right

groups and social media

are also to blame

that's what I said

at the time

so

if the government

is trying to clamp down

on this kind of thing

then

they probably know

as well

that this isn't about

actual killings

or racism

or anything like that

in a certain sense

it's about immigration

you can conflate

immigration and racism

if you want

but it's not really

reasonable or fair

to do that

anybody

you know

try and dump

a bunch of

any

other

ethnicity

into Japan

to the point

that Japanese people

go

that's too many

for various different reasons

I mean

they never

address the reasons

as to why

they just go to racism

but like

obviously

the

the least

egregious

part of

a lot of

foreign people

coming into

your town

or into

your country

is

the fact

that they are

of a different

skin color

you know

if everything

else was hunky-dory

you wouldn't have

much complaints

necessarily

obviously

it has

kind of

systemic effects

on the economy

and jobs

and housing

and all that

kind of stuff

availability of housing

that are much more

you know

are felt much more

directly by

the people

the indigenous people

of that country

you know

who see their

you know

see

not just see

see the changes

in the places

they

but they feel

the pressures

but they themselves

are

housing shortages

transport shortages

yeah

there's a lot

being economically

they feel the pressures

so then on top of that

if

someone who

they would naturally

see as being

one of them

even though

they got it wrong

they were misinformed

he was actually born

in Cardiff

so he's Welsh

okay fine

but he just

stabbed a bunch of people

and there's no update

about why he did it

or who or how

yeah

you can't just

leave it at that

here

here's an atrocity

now shut up

and don't ever talk

about it again

oh you're

you're rioting

what's your problem

I don't understand

this is completely irrational

your response is completely irrational

in fact I'm going to punish you

for your irrational response

it's

just the height

of gaslighting

this is from Ireland

this week

Ireland you remember

nearly

technically did

but they

sort of

covered it up

had its first

post 9-11

jihadi terror attack

last November

which caused riots

remember

oh those rioters

what on earth

are they right

well

someone tried to stab

three schoolgirls

and he probably was

Algerian

although they tried

to cover that up

this week in Ireland

very similar

background

the basic

same background

in fact

boy 16

they're

saying allegedly

it probably was him

stabbed an army chaplain

at barracks

in Galway

in the west of Ireland

had come to guard

her attention

for online terror posts

this is the Padre

here he survived

but he was

stabbed multiple times

Father Paul Murphy

if you scroll down

lo and behold

he's already noticed

and known to the authorities

and he's 16

16 year old boy

had previously been questioned

or no

who is being questioned

had been reposting

propaganda from

Islamist

terrorist organizations

after being radicalized

online

now I'm not sure

I believe that

but whatever

at least

they're admitting

a connection

what's weird about it

is that

no it's only

rumored at this stage

as to what his background is

maybe it isn't

scroll down

maybe it's in this one

I've seen it somewhere else

where they said

he is not Irish born

and he came

to Ireland

from the UK

with his family

oh here's an

interesting tie in here

with

that makes me suspicious

about this one too

in their interviewing

of him

he was doing this

supposedly

because he's angry

about Irish

military

participation

in

anti-terror

anti-Islamist

operations in Mali

which you know

are led by the French

well they were

until they

they've left Mali

at this point

so supposedly

this teenager

who's 16

has a beef

with the Irish military

for its participation

in long finished

military

operations

like when he was still

13

it was done

it's bullshit

I don't like that

at all

anyway

so he's 16 years old

and he knows

when

a figure

who if he stabs

will create a massive

provocation

because there's a

religious connection

if I represent ISIS

he represents

Christianity

I know

the military

barons

is

I know that

roughly when

the Padre arrives

for his day's work

at the entrance

if I hide behind

this position here

I'll jump out

just as his car

pulls up

and he rolls down

the window

to show his papers

I'll stab him right there

how the fuck

does he know that

he's obviously

groomed

he's obviously

put there

this is the kind of shit

that's going on

that's provoking people

in the climate

where people

are already

talking among themselves

and expressing

discontent

with the population

pressures

economic pressures

social pressures

cultural pressures

of having so many

non-Western people

dumped on their doorstep

which brought me back

to

something that

Paul Joseph Watson

noticed

and he did a short video

on it

a couple of months ago

so I revisited

this report

he found this

I think this could be

this could be right on

so this is from 2007

it's published

in the British Independent

matter of factly

not poo-pooing it

as conspiracy theory

it's giving it

serious shrift

let's say

check the date

October 2007

facts on a plate

our population

is at least

77 million

an hour here

is the UK

the British population

in 2007

was officially

60 million people

60 or 62

and this is based on

research

done by someone

who

worked in

or knows

how to get the numbers

the

statistics on food production

and the statistics

on food consumption

so at the level of

agricultural production

and at the level of

retail

what

big chain stores

like Sainsbury's

and Waitrose

actually sell each year

and they will of course

deduct for exports

to other markets

and so on

but they'll end up

with a consistent pattern

that should sync

together on graphs

and what not

and based on

what was coming

in and out

of farming

and retail

this guy

confidently forecast

that the real population

of the UK

17 fucking years ago

was between

77 and 80 million people

I scroll down a bit

as he points out

census data is unreliable

consumption

that's the thing

based on what we eat

one big supermarket chain

the guy making the report

said

yeah

the actual

retail outlets

themselves

were pointing out

that

that they reckon

there were 80 million people

living in the UK

17 years ago

yeah

I'll put it about 90 million today

if you

continue

90 million

the official population

of the United Kingdom

today

is 67

if it's 90

no it wouldn't be 90

yeah well

no

80

well

they think it was

77 to 80 then

the divergence

yeah

yeah yeah

so we've had

mass immigration

ramped up

since then

so it's probably about 90

that's

that would be crazy

on a

in a country

that's

so

and most of this

would probably be in England

of course

because Wales

and Scotland

are still

relatively sparsely populated

so England is

just packed

it's always been packed

and then everyone knows

it's packed

like

look at this

this is

this is a report about

there's no incident

in what I'm about to show you here

this is just a simple news report

from ITV

in the UK

last year

there wasn't

an accident

or

an accident

or an attack

it just popped up

in the news last October

London's King's Cross

King's Cross station

forced to close

due to overcrowding

it's just

there were too many people

it was like

it was like getting on a train

in Bengal

yeah

unless they'd actually

started climbing on the roofs

they weren't all going to get on the train

so they had to close

the fucking station

that is becoming

routine

in England

and

it's funny how

the truth is out

it

it sort of does come out

in ways that are

maybe more palatable

but no one was

will actually

address the big lie

again this is close in time

to that 2007 report

2008

England is the most crowded country in Europe

not only that

but at the time

it was second only to South Korea

and like Bangladesh

for being the most crowded place

on earth

17, 16 years ago

what a nightmare

I mean

and yeah

if it's something like that

like

what a big lie

that's

what a whopper

if you can pull that off with people

and

maybe

someone's going to know

they're going to know

based on how many mobile phones

they can track

all kinds of

data

surveillance

online

they

someone has to have

and I don't mean census data

census is not reliable

because

if census papers

are sent to a house

in a suburb somewhere

and there's 15 people

from a newly arrived family

they're not going to self-report

if they're going to bother

answering it at all

you know

so

but

obviously there is a rich

tapestry of data

a government can rely on

from

monitoring

people's online activity

their retail activity

credit cards

whether

things like that

they're not going to

they know

they have some idea

of what the real population is

but

that's okay

it's hidden from people

they're happy about it

you know

well that report went on to say

to give a plausible rationale for it

that they don't care

and it's something that

you spoke to

in relation to Ireland actually

because of the way

the UK economy

has

is tied at the hip

with the United States

and the large S

that comes with it

US dollar dominance

preferential treatment

in trade

the interconnectivity

between

MNCs that are both

US and UK owned

US being able to use

London

for Euro

Euro dollar clearing

and all this stuff

it's like

it's just gravy

just keep them coming

because this is an

anti-inflationary measure

right

the economy is booming

and this keeps it down

cheap labour

keep inflation down

just keep it coming

keep it coming

today another report

500 new people

just came in

on a budget

across the channel today

keep them coming

and then people

already people in the UK

are looking at

are reading stuff like this

and seeing other stuff

but reading stuff like this

in the newspaper

migrant who pushed

man on the tube tracks

was in the process

of appealing

appealing deportation

for sex crimes

Burwa Shorsh

Burwa

Burwa Shorsh

shoved a stranger

into the path

of an oncoming train

at Oxford Circus Station

in Rupertville

for a

dirty look

so a migrant

was appealing deportation

for a series of sex crimes

when he pushed a man

in front of a train

so

I don't know

what do you want

gee I wonder why they're angry

what do you want

English people to think about

when they

well at least the ones

that are reading

that kind of stuff

you know

what do you want them to think

meanwhile

as a result of

multiculturalism

that same multiculturalism

that they've been promoting

a long time

I mean

you notice here

that

all the woke stuff

lefty woke stuff

multiculturalism

diversity

equity

inclusion

blah blah blah

tolerance

and all that kind of stuff

for the other

is

it all serves

this purpose

of mass migration

right

you have to prepare

the population

psychologically

and ideologically

and culturally

in order to receive it

so you browbeat them

into being

accept

don't ever discriminate

accept everything

you browbeat

beat them into

into that

and then

in order to make the country

more multicultural

you have to have

stuff like this

like the church of england

doing

apparently

bizarrely

doing stuff like this

church of england

has decided

to drop the word

church

to be more modern

but in reality

what they mean by modern

they mean more multicultural

because obviously

if your country's

increasingly full

of people

who are not

traditional

you know

western european

christians

in fact

they're

from elsewhere

in the world

and they're not christian

well then

you can't be going around

shoving christianity

down everybody's throat

or making christianity

a state religion

you have to kind of

remove christianity

as a state religion

to the extent that it is

a state religion

and it effectively

is in the uk

and ireland

and most other european countries

you have to cut that out

because

well

oh hello

are you new to the parish

the immigrants that we need

do come in on thursdays

we'll be sacrificing chickens

yeah

you have to

you do have to

you know

make them feel welcome right

so you can't be

you have to

service the immigrants

because it services the economy

and it's

and the ordinary

english people

don't understand this

they're just too stupid

to understand that

you need to destroy your culture

because you'll be

you'll be

economically better off

when

when we destroy our culture

because

we have to destroy our culture

to make the country

more accommodating

accommodating for

or more appealing

for the

the migrants

from elsewhere

who are coming in

who will

keep the economy

on the up and up

so

yeah

so just so much

chattel

yeah

um

you only got five minutes left

five minutes

okay

did you know that you can