Aug. 3, 2024 - Bannon's War Room
49:05
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Pray for our enemies. | |
| Because we're going medieval on these people. | ||
| Susan and I got a free shot at all these networks lying about the people. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The people have had a belly full of it. | |
| I know you don't like hearing that. | ||
| I know you've tried to do everything in the world to stop that, but you're not going to stop it. | ||
| It's going to happen. | ||
| And where do people like that go to share the big lie? | ||
|
unidentified
|
MAGA Media. | |
| I wish in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Ask yourself, what is my task and what is my purpose? | |
| If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room, here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | |
| Back in the War Room, Stephen K. Bannon, Dave Brat sitting in, covering the waterfront on all | ||
| things national security. | ||
| Honored to have Mike Benz back in the war room. | ||
| Mike, I'm going to start off. | ||
| We had Mark from Rasmussen polling in earlier. | ||
| Uh, and he put together a series of words that the way he put it was just so succinct and powerful, but he basically referred to the, you know, the media tsunami after, uh, now, you know, Vice President Kamala Harris and president elect or the leading contender on the Democratic side for now. | ||
| Uh, and he just said, you know, after that, uh, Media. | ||
| Massive input. | ||
| He called it a psy-op, for example. | ||
| And I wanted to find out if he saw anything in the polling, and it was still too short to tease that out, right? | ||
| So you've got the political fundamentals built into the polling, but then you've got these, you know, millions and millions of dollars, and I think you've got another report out kind of Leading in this direction, too, the carve-outs from unexpected sources of media bias that, in a sense, determines election outcomes. | ||
| Not in a sense, it clearly does, right? | ||
| People pay millions of dollars in marketing every day to change people's minds. | ||
| And so, why don't you tee us up with your latest report and then broaden it to your usual line of research. | ||
| Thank you very much for being with us. | ||
| Mike Benz. | ||
| Yeah, so after the 2016 election, the national security state, our foreign policy establishment, basically the row of government gangsters, I guess as Kash Patel calls them, some people call it the deep state, I refer to it as the blob, embarked on a quest to kill advertising revenue to alternative news sources. | ||
| They blamed the loss of the 2016 election to Donald Trump and the events of the Brexit vote in the UK on the rise of alternative media, basically outflanking traditional legacy CIA, Pentagon, State Department back-channeled media. | ||
| These bumper cars on democracy that mainstream media had put on the boundaries of thought and on political movements had fallen away as alternative news sources, like The War Room, like Real America's Voice, like places like Breitbart and OAN, and these basically organic grassroots You know, citizen-run podcasts or journalism outlets were becoming more popular than the legacy outlets themselves. | ||
| I mean, even Alex Jones at the time had more clicks on YouTube than all of CNN in 2018. | ||
| And so, what they decided to do, and by they I mean these government forces, the US State Department, USAID, with help from the Pentagon, with help from the NGO complex, embarked on a quest to kill advertising revenue to alternative news sources. | ||
| They basically came up with a plan that it's easier to shoot the messenger than it is to kill all of the messenger's individual messages. | ||
| So while they set up this censorship complex on the one hand to kill the distribution of news stories, their ultimate goal was to kill the actual existence of alternative news organizations. | ||
| And so there are a couple elements to that. | ||
| One of them is this class of censorship mercenary firms like NewsGuard, which folks may have heard of. | ||
| NewsGuard, Global Disinformation Index, Newsella. | ||
| There's a pop-up industry of censorship mercenary firms who now assign rating labels to news online in order to Treat them the way Moody's or S&P does about debt instruments, whether or not this is a junk bond or AAA rated. | ||
| They now do this with news organizations in order to create, to filter this to advertising companies to kill advertising revenue to any website that's deemed to be a misinformation spreader. | ||
| So, for example, NewsGuard created a blacklist of about 650 websites that had questioned COVID orthodoxy or talked about the man-made lab leak And then using its relationships with the big four advertisers like publicists, their four main advertising agencies, they then got to kill billions of dollars in revenue to alternative news sources by again exploiting that relationship between the censorship gargoyles who rate the news and the advertising agencies who distribute corporate | ||
| advertising funds to the websites and to places like Google Ads. | ||
| So there's one in particular known as GARM, which is this sort of syndicate out of the world economic forum, which oversees about $2.6 billion every year in programmatic ad spend. | ||
| And, you know, these rating agencies are all part of it. | ||
| Now, my foundation, Foundation for Freedom Online, just did a survey of all their federal contracts. | ||
| And frankly, what we found is totally shocking. | ||
| All four of the major ad agencies, again, including publicists, and you'll see this all in the FFO report on our website, but all four of them receive billions of dollars, billions with a B, every year in federal government contracts. | ||
| One of them gets $4 billion a year. | ||
| Another one gets, you know, 1.8, 1.1. | ||
| Now, a lot of this comes from the Pentagon, and this is basically the same strategy that they use to spread ESG. | ||
| These are the agencies that are now killing the ability to operate an independent website by selectively discriminating against anyone who disagrees with the U.S. | ||
| State Department, or who disagrees with the U.S. | ||
| war machine, or who disagrees with Big Pharma. | ||
| Now they can't operate a website effectively, while the entire playing field of media is rigged in favor of the government's preferred outlets, and it's the taxpayers Who are voting, who are basically having their money stolen to subsidize this. | ||
| So I think that all of these funds should be cut to these federal contracts, should be cut to these ad agencies the same way that's starting to be done with ESG with places like Texas divesting from investments in BlackRock to the tune of $8 billion a few months ago until they get rid of their ESG activism. | ||
| I think the same thing has to be done on the adversaries or boycott side. | ||
| Yeah, well, and this all ties back into your original research on the censorship running through DHS, etc. | ||
| Now, that, you know, the private sector is one level, but when you show the government is complicit, that is illegal. | ||
| Is that correct? | ||
| If the government is funding political outcomes, that's illegal? | ||
| Is that true? | ||
| Well, it should be. | ||
| We have a little bit of an uncertainty in the state of play here in the sense that there's this big Supreme Court case which was just punted on effectively. | ||
| Yes, Murphy. | ||
| There was an effective ruling. | ||
| Yes, exactly. | ||
| Yeah, the Murphy-Missouri case. | ||
| Now, we had great rulings at the trial court and appellate court level, but again, it was on a preliminary injunction. | ||
| The Supreme Court made a narrow standing-based ruling, kicked it back down to the lower courts. | ||
| So we're in a gray zone right now as to whether or not this actually is legal. | ||
| But I think for now, a lot of people don't actually even realize that this is happening, that you have Yeah. | ||
| the government subsidizing the ad agencies who in turn then discriminate against conservatives, | ||
| against independent outlets, even anti-war left-wing news outlets. | ||
| It's basically comes down to again this blob. | ||
| Do you agree with Hillary Clinton, if you will? | ||
| So some of these outlets, you know, who are even on the left, the sort of old-school Bernie Sanders-aligned ones who may be NATO-skeptical, even they get dinged by outlets like NewsGuard and therefore by the Big Four. | ||
| But the government should not be picking winners and losers. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Right. | ||
| OK. | ||
| And let's rewind back to your opening comments. | ||
| Because the other thing I want to pursue here is you said government, DOD, Department of Defense, State Department, there are carve-outs, NGOs, etc. | ||
| And on prior Shows I've seen, like on Tucker, this isn't the exact same issue, but I think you've shown that some of the mainstream news networks are carve-outs also, and they receive government funding, CNNs, etc. | ||
| Is that the case as well? | ||
| Yeah, we have a program known as Media Development or Media Sustainability at the State Department and at USAID. | ||
| USAID plays a major role in this. | ||
| In fact, folks can look this up. | ||
| We have an institution known as Internews, which is basically the classic definition of what the CIA got busted doing in the 1950s to the 1970s with Project Mockingbird. | ||
| You know, about a third of the National Endowment for Democracy budget, which is one of these classic CIA cutouts, goes to funding media organizations. | ||
| It's very important when you're trying to pull off an operation to create media surround sound. | ||
| So what you do is you do these pop-up newsrooms. | ||
| Actually, one of the big censorship operators in this space known as First Draft, one of its founders, Fergus Bell, actually created this concept of pop-up newsrooms that you'd essentially be able to create this artificial surround sound of State Department-funded media organizations so that civilians in a particular region think something must be true because here's 42 different Different news organizations all saying the exact same thing. | ||
| So they can't all be wrong. | ||
| It's sort of what the civilian thing's not knowing the operation behind it, but not knowing that all 42 of those organizations are being funded effectively through State Department or CIA pass-throughs like USAID or the National Endowment for Democracy. | ||
| Yeah, well, unfortunately, that's the new pattern. | ||
| I mean, I saw it in Congress. | ||
| I was a lowly freshman, and all of a sudden something would start out in The Atlantic, and then go to The Washington Post, and then my regional newspaper, and then kaboom, all over the place. | ||
| Can you give us some receipts, right? | ||
| Stephen K. Bannon of The War Room loves to have the receipts on this CIA cutout. | ||
| Can you give an example of where all these news agencies piled on to an issue? | ||
| I'll give you a great one. | ||
| You just mentioned The Atlantic. | ||
| Well, who's the, you know, one of the star writers of The Atlantic? | ||
| It's Ann Applebaum. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Ann Applebaum is on the board of directors of the National Endowment for Democracy, | ||
|
unidentified
|
Wow. | |
| this very CIA cutout. | ||
| Don't take my word for it being a CIA cutout. | ||
| Read the New York Times or the Washington Post or the founders of the National Endowment for Democracy. | ||
| The founders for the National Endowment for Democracy, Carl Gershman and Alan Weisberg, | ||
| they literally have direct quotes saying that they were set up to do what the CIA used to do | ||
| but got in trouble for doing, and they didn't want CIA fingerprints on it anymore, | ||
| so they wanted to create a nominally private NGO to do it. | ||
| That way, when people got busted trying to overthrow governments, it would look like it was coming from an NGO instead of from the CIA, but there would be this It's funded by U.S. | ||
| Congress. | ||
| It gets a half a billion dollars every year from U.S. | ||
| The deal that was struck between the CIA director William Casey in 1983 and Ronald Reagan's | ||
| attorney general, all this is public. | ||
| It's funded by U.S. Congress. | ||
| It gets a half a billion dollars every year from U.S. | ||
| taxpayers. | ||
| It's not a private NGO. | ||
| It reports to the House Foreign Affairs Committee. | ||
| It reports to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. | ||
| That's not a private entity. | ||
| They call it quasi-private because it's not like USAID where it's a formal public agency, but it literally was created in a letter from the CIA director. | ||
| To the Attorney General saying, hey, we want to do what we used to do, but not have the CIA get in trouble when it all goes bottom up. | ||
| But Ann Applebaum is on the board of directors of the CIA cutout, and she was busted in something called the Integrity Initiative, a British intelligence operation in 2015 as part of the UK inter-cluster stuff. | ||
| I can go off, but this is just one example. | ||
| No, we'll get you to keep going. | ||
| I lost my seat to a former CIA person. | ||
| No one knows what she did because that's a neat side story, but there was an article in The Atlantic and they set up one hand on her holster, the other hand on her thing, the blonde hair flowing in the wind, Tim Kaine sitting in the corner a year and a half before I ran and I went, Uh-oh. | ||
| So, we'll be back. | ||
| And that was the Atlantic, right? | ||
| So, we'll be more on the Atlantic and the CIA and the carve-outs and the Integrity Project. | ||
| Mike Benz is a national treasure. | ||
| It's just unbelievable, right? | ||
| Us old Madisonians have been outflanked by the three-letter agencies in a famous book out. | ||
| I recommend to everybody, National Security and the Double Government. | ||
| Go read it. | ||
| But read Mike Benz first. | ||
| Back in a minute at the War Room. | ||
| Dave Brat in the War Room with Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Our guest, Mike Benz. | ||
| Just unbelievable research digging into issues we couldn't have conceived of five or ten years ago. | ||
| I'm going to stay with Mike for two minutes here just to conclude and then we're going to go to Gordon Chang, more analysis, deeper dive on China with Gordon who's just incredible. | ||
| But Mike, any summary comments you want to leave us with and then please leave us with how people can reach you and support you and don't be humble because the work you're doing, you're a national treasure. | ||
| Mike Benz. | ||
| Well, we were just talking about the Atlantic and the role of CIA pass-throughs like the National Endowment for Democracy and Applebomb and her role in these things. | ||
| And I think it is useful to keep in mind, I mean, if I can leave people maybe with a code word, when you hear the word Atlantic, It's a code for Atlanticist. | ||
| You see, we have something the rules-based international order when it was set up in 1948 was this essentially alliance between the United States and Britain and the new formation of NATO. | ||
| and all the international finance structures like the World Bank and IMF that run through that. | ||
| So we refer to that as the transatlantic alliance. And so these structures like NATO or the Atlantic | ||
| Council, which is NATO's think tank, or the Atlantic, they all run through this | ||
| foreign policy blob shop. So when you see Atlanticist or or Atlantic as a word, that's usually going to be a code | ||
| for the foreign policy establishment, which is diametrically opposed to any form of populism or | ||
| sovereignty of nationalist nations. | ||
| So, that's one thing I would say to be on the lookout for. | ||
| And of course, all of these are government funded. The Atlantic Council, | ||
| for example, is not just a NATO's think tank. It gets annual funding from the | ||
| Pentagon, the State Department, and CIA cutouts like the National Endowment for Democracy. | ||
| In fact, all four branches of the U.S. | ||
| military, the Air Force, the Marines, the Army, and the Navy, all give annual funding to this independent think tank representing NATO. | ||
| And then the Atlantic Council then goes out and coordinates censorship, as well as these sort of advertising boycott plans, like the ones we were talking about at the beginning of our conversation. | ||
| You can follow me on X, at MikeBenCyber. | ||
| All one word. | ||
| Good. | ||
| One more time. | ||
| One more time. | ||
| At MikeBenzCyber. | ||
| At MikeBenzCyber on X. All one word. | ||
| Great. | ||
| Mike Benz, national treasure. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| God bless you, brother. | ||
| Thanks for being on The War Room. | ||
| You too. | ||
| All right. | ||
| World instability. | ||
| The whole show has been economic turmoil, geopolitical turmoil, China's intent. | ||
| We have Gordon Chang coming up. | ||
| But go check out HomeTitleLock.com, code word Bannon. | ||
| In a world of instability, your home is your greatest asset. | ||
| By far. | ||
| Think of all the payments you've sent in. | ||
| All the interest you've paid. | ||
| You want to make sure you have a safe title to that asset. | ||
| Go check them out right now. | ||
| It's our honor to welcome Gordon Chang to the War Room. | ||
| Gordon, we've been doing a deep dive on China today with several experts, Bradley Thayer and Colonel Derek Harvey was on earlier as well. | ||
| A little debate with one of our other guests on the war room, Douglas MacGregor, who said we're | ||
| not at war right now and China does not want a war. | ||
| And, you know, to give him the benefit of the doubt, I think he means kinetic right | ||
| now. | ||
| They can't afford it. | ||
| They don't want it. | ||
| It's a threat to their own existence. | ||
| Let's open up with that question. | ||
| What do you make of that question to you? | ||
| Gordon Chang, thanks for being with us on the war room. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, thanks, Dave. | |
| Yes, China doesn't want a kinetic war. | ||
| What it wants to do is annex territories of other nations. | ||
| It wants to destroy the United States. | ||
| It wants to rule the Moon and Mars as sovereign Chinese territory without war. | ||
| But the point is that China is engaging in activities right now that look very much like war. | ||
| So, for instance, China is fueling Russia's war in Ukraine. | ||
| It is fueling Iran's attack on Israel. | ||
| And along with Russia, it's fueling insurgencies in North Africa that look like wars. | ||
| So that's proxy wars on three continents. | ||
| It's also engaging in some very belligerent activities, especially with regard to the Philippines. | ||
| But also with Taiwan, Japan, and India. | ||
| And that means perhaps direct war. | ||
| So really what we're talking about is a political system in China that has incentives to go to war, or at least to annex territories by intimidating opponents. | ||
| Yeah, Gordon, you kept mentioning the word fuel. | ||
| Fueling. | ||
| They're fueling this. | ||
| They're doing this. | ||
| They're doing Belt and Road. | ||
| They're doing Deep Sea Navy. | ||
| They're extending their tentacles and building Air Force bases everywhere. | ||
| All that is contingent, it seems to me, on having an economy that's still fairly robust. | ||
| And that seems to me, I've been following things, not at your level, but as best I can, and it seems there's a significant weakening in the Chinese economy, and therefore, hopefully, in their ability to project power in, you know, five or ten years, I hope. | ||
| What does your analysis show there? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, you're absolutely right about that, Dave. | |
| The Chinese economy is not growing at the 4.7% pace that they claimed for the second quarter of this year. | ||
| It's barely above zero. | ||
| If that, it could even be contracting. | ||
| And this inhibits their ability to pay for their military, for their internal security apparatus, for Belt and Road, and for a lot of other projects. | ||
| So China is running out of resources. | ||
| And this makes it even more dangerous. | ||
| And the reason is that Xi Jinping has got to be seeing a closing window of opportunity. | ||
| Also, He is responsible for the problems in the Chinese economy. | ||
| He's being held accountable. | ||
| I think that he needs a quick victory somewhere, with or without war, because he wants to prevent other senior Communist Party figures from challenging or even deposing him. | ||
| Now, he realizes that a war would not be popular with the Chinese people, but as Bradley Thayer pointed out to you, They don't really care about the Chinese people. | ||
| Xi Jinping cares about his own political position, and that means he has domestic incentives to be belligerent and provocative, which means he can take us by surprise. | ||
| Yeah, what are those domestic incentives? | ||
| I mean, he gave his speech a year ago, which agrees with everything you and Thayer have been saying, right? | ||
| We're full-on Marxist-Leninist, no economic reforms, right? | ||
| So it looks like they were, you know, internal facing, right? | ||
| Prior they were very external facing with capital markets. | ||
| Now it seems like they're trying to produce a consumer type society that's self-sufficient | ||
| because they see the writing on the wall. | ||
| And then finally, he said, we want to get rid of China culture because we're, you know, | ||
| which probably means Buddhism and Confucianism, et cetera. | ||
| So they're serious. | ||
| He's been sounding stale lately when it comes to that. | ||
| And so all that said, what domestic incentives is he facing? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, when he became China's ruler in 2012, he inherited a consensual political system, which meant that no leader got too much credit or too much blame. | |
| But by grabbing power from everybody else, he ended up with accountability. | ||
| The other thing that Xi Jinping did was he inherited a political system where if you | ||
| lost a political struggle and were forced out, you would have basically got a nice house in Beijing. | ||
| But now you get imprisoned, the Communist Party will strip assets, God knows what else. | ||
| And so Xi Jinping knows that the costs of losing a political struggle are very high. | ||
| You put that all together and it means Xi Jinping realizes That was as clear as I've ever heard. | ||
| Okay, give us your crystal ball then. | ||
| for the demographic problems, he's being blamed for everything else and that means he knows that | ||
| he's personally at risk, which means he knows he needs a quick win to silence other Communist | ||
| Party figures from deposing him. Yeah, outstanding. That was as clear as I've ever heard. | ||
| Okay, give us your crystal ball then. Where does he pick up a win? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Philippines. | |
| We've been talking about this for quite some time because, first of all, a war on Taiwan would be very difficult for China and would be very unpopular with the Chinese people. | ||
| With the Philippines, he thinks they're an easy target. | ||
| He doesn't think the United States will defend them despite our 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty. | ||
| He doesn't respect the Biden administration's warning about the Philippines. | ||
| And on June 17th, we saw China seize two Philippine craft, injure eight Filipino sailors, one of them seriously. | ||
| We saw some things which are basically acts of war at Second Thomas Shoal. | ||
| That's where I think the problems will be. | ||
| But they could be anywhere, Dave. | ||
| It could be Japan, which we saw provocative activities last week. | ||
| Everywhere. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Gordon, I think you have a new book out. | ||
| Why don't you tell people, pitch the title, how they get the book, your coordinates, and how people can communicate with you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Newsmax will be publishing a book called Plan Red, China's Project to Destroy America. | |
| It'll be out on October 1st. | ||
| You can pre-order it. | ||
| I archive my articles for free on my website, which is www.gordonchang.com. | ||
| But the best place to get a hold of me, Twitter, or X, at Gordon G Chang. | ||
| G-O-R-D-O-N-G-C-H-A-N-G. | ||
| Gordon Chang will also be with us at Liberty University at the CEO Summit September 23. | ||
| CEOs out there, please contact me if you're interested in that. | ||
| But Gordon Chang has just been a national treasure. | ||
| Consistent thinking on China for years in a row, and that matters these days when there's so much hype in politics. | ||
| Gordon, any closing thoughts you want to leave us with? | ||
| Ten seconds. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is the most consequential and most dangerous time in history. | |
| You know, it's even more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis because we know then that neither Khrushchev nor Kennedy were willing to use their nukes. | ||
| We don't know that about Xi Jinping, Kim Jong-un and Vladimir Putin. | ||
| They are marching on the world and we have a president who has checked out and not defending our country. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| There you have it. | ||
| In succinct form. | ||
| Gordon Chang. | ||
| Go buy his book. | ||
| National treasure. | ||
| Gordon, thank you very much for being on The War Room. | ||
|
unidentified
|
God bless you. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bamm. | ||
| Dave Brat in the War Room with Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| We have just had an abundance of riches and talent with us today on the show. | ||
| We now have William Federer on. | ||
| We had David Barton earlier. | ||
| William Federer was on a few weeks back. | ||
| Everybody loved him. | ||
| He's just a wealth of knowledge. | ||
| William, welcome to the show. | ||
| I'll lead off with a simple question. | ||
| We'll dig in. | ||
| Earlier today, I characterized the essence of Christianity as, you know, John the Baptist comes preaching forgiveness of sins. | ||
| And I asked David Barton, I said, is that Christianity in its succinct form? | ||
| And I also pointed out that, you know, Christians sometimes give ourselves a bad image because we do a little bit too much judging and not enough forgiving, right? | ||
| We turn into Pharisees. | ||
| Instead of being humble because of Jesus and the forgiveness of sins in the Christian tradition. | ||
| And so, do you think that's a crystallization of the gospel, just to get us started off? | ||
| It's good. | ||
| Some folks are not familiar with religions at all, and feel free to differ however you would summarize the essence of Christianity. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Well, Judeo-Christian faith gave birth to the concept of the individual. | ||
| Every other group, culture, kingdom, your worth is dependent on the group. | ||
| They call it honor, shame, culture. | ||
| And they're kings. | ||
| And so if you're worth something to the government, the king, your worth goes up. | ||
| If you're not supporting them, your worth goes down. | ||
| And if you're their enemy, you're dead. | ||
| It's called treason. | ||
| And the king dictates beliefs. | ||
| And so when Nebuchadnezzar blows the trumpet, you have to bow to the statue. | ||
| But the idea that you have a worth, irregardless of any group, you have a worth because you're made in the image of the Creator. | ||
| And this Creator is not a respecter of persons. | ||
| That basically is the origin of the very concept of individual. | ||
| And so, when we say in our Declaration that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, it exalts the individuals. | ||
| So, in Europe, you had a Creator-King people, and so the King was like a lieutenant, was a go-between between you and the Creator. | ||
| And in America, we leave out the King. | ||
| And we say that the Creator gives the rights to each individual person, and we're all equal, and we choose our leaders bottom up. | ||
| So, John F. Kennedy, in his inaugural address, said that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God. | ||
| And then Truman's inaugural address, he said, we believe all men are created equal because we're created in the image of God. | ||
| And then Eisenhower said, in some states, the state claims to be the author of human rights. | ||
| If the state gives rights, it can and inevitably will take away those rights. | ||
| Our founders had to refer to the Creator in order to make our revolutionary experiment make sense. | ||
| We had to claim we had rights directly from the King, from the Creator, and the King was infringing on our God-given rights. | ||
| But if there is no creator, then the rights come from the government, right? | ||
| The social contract. | ||
| What the government giveth, the government can taketh awayeth. | ||
| So, politically, you boil down the Bible beliefs to the concept of the individual. | ||
| Yeah, well, and so, you know, modern liberalism, not the advanced Marxism we're currently living under, but the old liberals kind of shared those beliefs, and the common refrain would be, well, that's nice, you Christians did all that nice work and founded all the Harvards and the universities and the hospitals and everything, and gave us human rights language on top of it that framed, you know, the post-World War II liberal order. | ||
| And so, what's the big hang-up? | ||
| And so, I want to push us back to the big... Can you have this idea of a Creator God that creates us in His own image? | ||
| And can you retain that without the full force and energy of the gospel behind it? | ||
| That's what I wanted to start off with. | ||
| Where's the animating power that took, you know, a millennium, right? | ||
| The rabbis, the rabbinic tradition, they were debating and using reason way back. | ||
| And then, you know, things start kicking off, you know, Magna Carta and rationality and the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, etc. | ||
| But all that was within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition that started with that gold nugget of faith and forgiveness, etc. | ||
| And so I was trying to, what do you think the motivating original position is that got us that logic And can we keep the logic without that animating force of God and the Holy Spirit, or however you want to frame it? | ||
| Right. | ||
| I do not think that you can. | ||
| I think you need to have the concept of a Judeo-Christian creator. | ||
| You know, liberals really don't believe in equality. | ||
| They believe in intersectionality, that your worth is dependent on what And the more minority groups you belong to, your worth goes up. | ||
| And if you're not part of those groups, your worth goes down. | ||
| But you go back to the Bible. | ||
| You go back to individuals are made in the image of the Creator. | ||
| So irregardless of what group you belong to, you have worth. | ||
| Now, I want to point out the two parts of the Old Testament. | ||
| It's important to understand this. | ||
| There's the pre-King Saul and post-King Saul. | ||
| So, the most common form of government in world history is kings. | ||
| Nimrod, Pharaoh, Caesar, Kaisers, Sultans are. | ||
| And the kingdoms get bigger because with the latest military advancements, kings can kill more people. | ||
| So instead of king killing Abel with a rock, they can kill with a bronze weapon, an iron weapon, a phalanx, spear, scimitar, sword, gunpowder. | ||
| A king is basically a glorified gang leader. | ||
| And your worth is dependent on how well you can serve him. | ||
| And the people say, I thought slavery started in 1619. | ||
| No, wherever you had the first king on top, you had slaves on the bottom. | ||
| So around 1400 BC, you have millions of Israelites come out of Egypt. | ||
| And for 400 years, there's no king. | ||
| Everyone is equal and accountable to God. | ||
| So you're about to steal, nobody's around, and then you think, God is watching me. | ||
| He wants me to be fair. | ||
| He's going to hold me accountable in the future. | ||
| Maybe I should hesitate stealing. | ||
| Creates a little tiny thing in your head called the conscience. | ||
| So if everybody believes this, you can maintain order with no police, with no king. | ||
| But Israel, after 400 years, the priest stopped teaching the law. | ||
| Every man did what was right in their own eyes. | ||
| Turns into chaos. | ||
| They all go to Samuel the prophet. | ||
| They say, we want to be like the other countries. | ||
| We want a king. | ||
| And they get King Saul. | ||
| Now, why is this story important? | ||
| Because the kings of Europe looked to the Bible for their authority, but they looked to the King Saul and on part of the Bible, divine right of kings, God chose me. | ||
| The Calvinist Puritans that founded New England looked to the pre-King Saul part of the Bible. | ||
| So King Saul is the divider between England and America. | ||
| Why is this important? | ||
| Romans 13, the passage that says, Romans 13 is understood differently in a monarchy versus a republic. | ||
| In a monarchy, subjects submit to the king. | ||
| In a republic, the citizens are the king. | ||
| Right? | ||
| The politicians are your servants. | ||
| You hire them, you fire them. | ||
| So basically, America is modeled after the Hebrew Republic. | ||
| That's why they taught Hebrew at Yale and Harvard the first 400 years out of Egypt. | ||
| And the kings of Europe look to the post-King Saul period of the Bible, this divine right of kings. | ||
| So, it's important for us to understand that, because you have pastors saying, oh, submit to the government. | ||
| It's like, well, you need to go over and live in a monarchy. | ||
| Go over and submit to Xi Jinping, right? | ||
| When the government blows the trumpet, you bow to the statue. | ||
| But the founders of America looked to the pre-King Saul part of the Bible. | ||
| Millions of people, everybody taught the law, and personally accountable to God to follow it. | ||
| Yeah, those, uh, so the modern, uh, liberal mind and intellect is, you know, far superior to ours. | ||
| And so they do advanced logic and they say, well, that's all nice. | ||
| But you know, even Jesus, he just said, all you gotta do is love, right? | ||
| The two great commands. | ||
| The Jews had 613 commands in the Torah, the Ten Commandments, and Jesus is the fulfillment of the law. | ||
| And he said, all you got to do is love people. | ||
| Love God with all your heart, mind, and soul. | ||
| Love your neighbor as yourself. | ||
| And all the malls now have big love signs out in front of them. | ||
| And that's the essence and fulfillment of the law. | ||
| So, you know, and if you do that, you know, that's great. | ||
| It's kind of like you're acknowledging everyone's made in the image of God. | ||
| So what's wrong with that take? | ||
| Well, you know, the verse, love your neighbor as yourself, is Leviticus 19, 18. | ||
| Do you know the verse right before it? | ||
| The verse right before it says, confront your neighbor directly, so you will not be held guilty for their sin. | ||
| Love your neighbor as yourself. | ||
| Wait a second, confront your neighbor directly, so you'll not be held guilty for their sin. | ||
| For 400 years, there was no police in ancient Israel. | ||
| Everybody was taught And so this idea of you are responsible, you don't just love, love, love, you correct. | ||
| And so another translation of that says, rebuke your neighbor directly and you will not incur guilt because of him. | ||
| Proverbs 9, rebuke a wise man and he'll love you. | ||
| Proverbs 27, open rebuke is better than hidden love. | ||
| Ecclesiastes 7, better to hear the rebuke of the wise than the song of fools. | ||
| New Testament, if your brother sinned, rebuke him. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right? | |
| And so they basically stripped Christianity of its backbone. | ||
| You know, parents are faced with this every day. | ||
| You love your child. | ||
| You love your child. | ||
| You want to hug your child all day long. | ||
| But at some point, you have to correct your child. | ||
| And in ancient Israel, there was no police. | ||
| It was the people. | ||
| And so they loved each other and they corrected each other. | ||
| You have a book related to that concept. | ||
| What's the implication there if you don't rebuke? | ||
| It says, it implies you'll be held to account. | ||
| What's that mean in the Hebrew text and what's it mean in the Judeo-Christian tradition currently? | ||
| Yeah, so the Apostle Paul in Acts 22 is talking to the Lord, and he says, And when they shed the blood of thy martyr Stephen, I stood there silent, consenting to his death. | ||
| Paul didn't throw a stone or say a word, but he knew he was guilty just by standing there silent. | ||
| Proverbs 24 says, Rescue those who are unjustly sentenced to death. | ||
| Don't stand back and let them die. | ||
| Don't try to disclaim responsibility by saying you didn't know about it. | ||
| For God, who knows all hearts, knows yours, and he knows that you knew. | ||
| You know, the wedding ceremony. | ||
| The pastor says, anybody against this wedding, speak now or forever hold your peace. | ||
| If you are holding your peace, you're giving consent to the wedding vows. | ||
| It's called the Rule of Tacit Admission, T-A-C-I-T. | ||
| And so if a church member's silence gives consent to wedding vows, it gives consent to other things. | ||
| And if they're killing babies in the community and the church members are silent, they're getting consent to killing babies. | ||
| I mean, they have a tactic. | ||
| It's to guilt trip Christians into being more Christian than Christ. | ||
| They say, if you're really Christian, you'll be silent while we teach your kids the trans agenda. | ||
| Question, would Jesus teach the trans agenda? | ||
| We know what Jesus taught, Matthew 19. | ||
| He who made them at the beginning made them male and female. | ||
| So they're trying to say, if you're really Christian, you'll let us teach something Jesus would never teach. | ||
| So if you're really Christian, you won't act like Christ. | ||
| I mean, think of it. | ||
| Here are teachers who cannot even define woman. | ||
| Yet they think they can tell that a little boy is supposed to be a little girl. | ||
| It's insanity. | ||
| And Jesus said, if you allow one of these little ones who believes in me to stumble, better than a millstone we put around your neck. | ||
| So it's going to be a rude awakening for all those church members that say, oh, we don't get involved in politics when they realize by their silence, they're giving consent to all the wicked. | ||
| They're inviting judgment on their heads. | ||
| Yeah, well, that's what I was getting at. | ||
| We're gonna, we got a minute and a half, but you know, you look back at Jonathan Edwards and Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, and when I was a kid listening to my Presbyterian minister up there, I was like, he was, he knew what I was, I said, man, how does he know I'm doing all this stuff, right? | ||
| He's calling me out on that thing, and this, he's, he knows me internally. | ||
| Right? | ||
| And you had a conscience formed, and there were implications, and they involved God's judgment, and in the afterlife, a thing called hell. | ||
| No one will dare mention it these days because you're a big meanie. | ||
| But is that tied into the moral implications of silence here? | ||
| That seems to be quite a motivating concept. | ||
| And if it's missing in the modern world, maybe that's part of our problem. | ||
| Yeah, I think, you know, if we're not going to play a good offense, let's at least play a good defense. | ||
| In other words, if the body of Christ is not serious about spreading the gospel, at least don't keep your mouth shut when they're mutilating little children. | ||
| You know, in California a couple months ago, Sharon Grove, a senator, introduced a bill to make purchasing a child for sex a felony versus a misdemeanor with two days in jail. | ||
| And the Democrats voted to keep it a misdemeanor. | ||
| And the Democrat Senator Susan Eggman, she rebukes her own party. | ||
| She goes, I'm a social worker. | ||
| I work with women who've been abused as children, and they're wounded, and they're dealing with it their whole lives. | ||
| And you're more concerned about this guy that's going to go out and do it again in two days? | ||
| And where's the church? | ||
| Oh, we're so spiritual, we don't want to get involved. | ||
| They're selling children. | ||
| Oh, we're so spiritual, we don't want to get involved. | ||
| Right? | ||
| They're killing Jews. | ||
| We don't want to get involved. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The Salvation Army started with William Fetterer. | |
| Back with Will Fetterer right after the break. | ||
| Back in the war room with Stephen K. Bannon, David Brat sitting in, joined with William | ||
| Fetterer. | ||
| The whole show, a lot of the last couple hours have been devoted to China, geopolitics, a lot of that came down to the relative strength of the Chinese economy. | ||
| If you want to get one of the world's experts on China, on currencies, trusted friend of Stephen K. Bannon, please go visit James Rickards, Rickards War Room. | ||
| Sign up for his news line and you will get a free copy of his book, Currency Wars. | ||
| He's one of the world's gold experts. | ||
| He's not a gold bug. | ||
| So please go to Rickards War Room and support our friend James Rickards, who does an outstanding | ||
| job for Steve. | ||
| And as you support him, he helps to support the war room as well. | ||
| Also go check out our friends at Tax Network. | ||
| T-N-U-S-A dot com. | ||
| T-N-U-S-A. | ||
| Tax Network. | ||
| If you want somebody fighting for you, if you have any tax liabilities, tax problems, government problems with tax, if you need someone to fight in your corner with you, go to Tax Network dot com. | ||
| T-N-U-S-A dot com. | ||
| And again, Friends of the War Room, please support our folks. | ||
| They're supporting us here. | ||
| And please spread this platform in every way you can. | ||
| Our good friends who put this platform forward every day in supporting Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| All right, we're back with William Federer, who's been doing a tour de force across the Judeo-Christian tradition and the moral insights embedded in that Christian tradition. | ||
| William, give us—today, truth is under attack. | ||
| Our universities, right, Harvard was founded on truth for Christ in church. | ||
| Then we went kind of a secular model with the modern liberals, who you could at least debate, right, and share data with. | ||
| And now we're living in a postmodern world, a Marxist world that just openly rejects God. | ||
| People haven't figured out the consequences of that, that if you reject God, according to Marx, you're also rejecting the entire superstructure created by the capitalists. | ||
| You're rejecting any metaphysics. | ||
| You're rejecting any theoretical terms like love, justice, human rights. | ||
| Marxists, in their core, are materialists. | ||
| They don't believe that the realm of human rights exists because, as you said earlier, they don't believe that we're made in the image of God. | ||
| So can you share your insights on how the biblical setup, the image of God, if we lose track of that, where do we stand in this modern, post-modern world, and how do we fight back in a Christian way? | ||
| Right, well, great questions, Dave. | ||
| And there's four progressions that we can see. | ||
| We went from the pilgrims and Puritans founding New England, and you literally had churches founding cities. | ||
| So you had a Baptist pastor, Roger Williams, and his Baptist church founding the city of Providence, Rhode Island. | ||
| And you had Pastor Thomas Hooker and his Congregational Church founding a city, Hartford, Connecticut. | ||
| Everybody's involved in church, and everybody's involved in city government. | ||
| Why? | ||
| Because it's the church founding the city. | ||
| Right? | ||
| They would have one building in each town called the Meeting House. | ||
| That's where the pastor would teach the Bible as to where they would do their city business. | ||
| So this is called a covenant form of government. | ||
| And you picture it in a triangle. | ||
| You get blessings from God. | ||
| You voluntarily share them with your neighbor because you're doing it as unto God. | ||
| You get rights from the Creator. | ||
| You're fair to your neighbor because you're accountable to God. | ||
| So this covenant form of government in the next century was the Age of Enlightenment. | ||
| And God turned into a distant God. | ||
| And yeah, he's there and created stuff, but he's not involved. | ||
| So covenant turned into social contract, right? | ||
| You had Kepler, Copernicus, Galileo discovering laws of planetary motion, laws of physics, laws of optics, laws of Robert Boyle, laws of pressure. | ||
| And so some theologian says, well, maybe God made everything with laws. | ||
| And like a guy winds up a clock and goes on a walk. | ||
| It's still there, but he made it, but he's not involved. | ||
| And so we go from the Pilgrim Covenant with a God that's right there to the Age of Enlightenment. | ||
| You get your rights from the state, you're accountable to the state, and if the state thinks you're not pulling your weight, the state can kill you. | ||
| What's wrong with that? | ||
| of the group. Next century, it's Marxism and socialism where the state is God. | ||
| Right. You get your rights from the state, your held to the state. | ||
| And if the state thinks you're not pulling your weight, the state can kill you. | ||
| What's wrong with that? There's no God. | ||
| And your worth is if you can contribute to the state. | ||
| And so this this progression is how we've gotten there. | ||
| And to get back to it, we have to go back and realize, no, we have rights from a creator. | ||
| And the government's purpose is to guarantee to you your creator-given rights. | ||
| If there is no creator, where do your rights come from? | ||
| They come from the state. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Well, what the state giveth, the state can taketh awayeth. | ||
| Right? | ||
| It was Eisenhower who said our founding fathers had to refer to the Creator in order to make their revolutionary experiment make sense. | ||
| Because in some lands, the state claims to be the author of human rights. | ||
| If the state gives rights, it can and inevitably will take away those rights. | ||
| We're running up against a deadline. | ||
| We're going to get you back. | ||
| Everybody loves you. | ||
| William Federer, everybody, go buy his books. | ||
| God bless you, Bill. | ||
| Back with Mike Lindell with MyPillow. | ||
| Mike, what do you got in store for us today? | ||
| What sales are you throwing at the War Room Posse? | ||
| Well, we've got these great deals going on, but this is one of our biggest ones. | ||
| If you go to the website, go to mypillow.com, scroll down till you see the picture of Steve there. | ||
| We all miss him. | ||
| Click on it, and you're going to see closeout and overstock sale. | ||
| You're going to save up to 80% with that quote. | ||
| This is an exclusive, war room policy only. | ||
| Use promo code war room. | ||
| Then you see you got the bed sheets 24 as low as $24.98. | ||
| We have an employee pricing sale too. | ||
| You guys getting for the employee prices, okay? | ||
| These are the pillows that we make. | ||
| The MyPillow employees are all down there making the MyPillow premiums. | ||
| We've sold over 80 million of them. | ||
| Actually, I think it's coming up on 84 million. | ||
| There's a reason for that. | ||
| They actually work. | ||
| Then we have the MyPillow Mattress Topper that everybody's doing. | ||
| The most affordable topper in history. | ||
| Queen size only $99.98. | ||
| King size $20 more. | ||
| Remember, at College Dorms, coming up, get them for everybody you know there. | ||
| $69.98 for the twin. | ||
| You guys, so use promo code WARROOM or call the number 800. | ||
| 873-1062. | ||
| Remember, everybody, this is a win-win-win. | ||
| You're supporting my pillow and my employees. | ||
| You're supporting The War Room, one of the greatest shows ever. | ||
| You all know that's so important to our country. | ||
| And you're helping yourself get the best products to help you sleep in history. | ||
| Absolutely correct. | ||
| Mike, I am going to go out and buy a queen-size mattress topper today. | ||
| Our family loves all you do and the way you do it. | ||
| When we call in, the people you got working for you are special just like you. | ||
| So keep up the great work. | ||
| God bless you. | ||
| Go to MyPillow. | ||
| Support MyPillow and Mike Lindell, folks. |
Export Selection