GabCast Bellgab.com - 01 February, 2020

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 1, 2020 - GabCast Bellgab.com

03:57:22

01 February, 2020

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	The following program sucks.
	We ain't got no fing microphone.
	We ain't got no speaker set up.
	And now, our feature presentation.
	This is the Gabcast, a podcast about bellgab.com.
	Call the show now at 573-837-4948.
	That's 573-837-4948.
	Now shut up, sit down, and listen to the damn show.
	It's the Gabcast, a podcast about BellGab.com.
	How you doing?
	I'm Liberace, aka M-V, which I spell E-M-M-V-E-E.
	Thank you.
	And hosting the show with me tonight, I have Stellar.
	How you doing, buddy?
	Doing fine.
	How you doing?
	I'm having a great night.
	Thank you.
	And it's a pleasure to have you here.
	I think that this is something that actually should have been done a long time ago to have you on this show because I think you're one of the more wild, one of the more controversial posters on Belgab.
	You're also one of the more interesting.
	I mean, you definitely don't fit into the mold of anybody else that posts on the forum, which I guess might be why you're somewhat polarizing.
	Maybe you don't even realize that you're polarizing.
	Or do you realize that you're polarizing?
	I don't know.
	I guess I don't.
	What I try to do is seek the truth and everything, even though I'm far out there.
	The information that I get is just kind of from all kinds of places and my experiences.
	And I like to share that.
	And I try to focus in on what's going on.
	And so I really think of something before I post it.
	And sometimes I don't, you know.
	I think that could be said for all of us.
	You know, sometimes I knee-jerk post, and then 24 hours later, I kind of regret it.
	But at that point, it's too late to just delete.
	And it's not fair to everybody else.
	If nobody else can delete, why should I be able to?
	So in those situations, I don't.
	But yeah, I've been known to post prior to any actual cognitive consideration of what it is I'm about to post.
	So you're not alone.
	That's what I'm trying to tell you.
	If you want to be on the show tonight, we are taking calls, of course, as is always the case.
	And the phone number is 573-837-4948, 573-837-4948.
	I'm just getting over the flu.
	And every time I have some sort of ailment like that, the flu or whatever, I've got to listen to a parade of people to tell me how I'm sick all the time.
	And I did the math.
	I did a little bit of research.
	The average American gets the flu four times per year or a cold.
	And I don't think I'm above average.
	I mean, I think what people are trying to tell me is that the inadequacy of my immune system and the frequency, well, let me rephrase that.
	The inadequacy of my immune system and the fact that I use the name Liberace on the forum are not coincidences.
	I think that's what people are trying to tell me.
	But I'm just here to tell you that I am happily HIV negative.
	I'm Michael Van Dieven.
	I don't know what it is.
	I tell you what, you have a couple of kids, one of whom goes to school, the other of whom will go to school as of this next school year.
	And you may as well just go to the nearest bioresearch lab, find a Petri dish that's been used, put a couple shoes on the bottom of it, and that's what you have walking around your house when you have children.
	They're just little germ repositories, and I don't hug my children anymore or kiss them, and I demand that they stay at least 10 feet away from me at all times just because they do know I love them, but I will not touch my children anymore.
	It's part of my don't get sick anymore plan, and I'm happy to say it's not working.
	So I'm not touching my children or showing them any love, and I'm still getting sick.
	So was it all in vain?
	I don't know.
	I'll let the listening audience decide on that.
	So anyway, Stellar, yes, I would consider you to be a somewhat polarizing poster.
	I think some people think you're insane.
	I think some people are interested in what it is that you post on Belgab, but I think the people that are interested in what you post on, which really, I don't understand why there would necessarily be so much resistance to the things that you post on Belgab, because that type of content, it's really fits right into the pocket of the type of stuff that many of these same people listen to for years on Art Bell's show.
	So I don't know why there would be so much resistance to it, but I think that the people who read your content and don't express that resistance to it, they probably are a little bit more silent than the people who read it and just want to crap all over it.
	But yeah, I would say you are a somewhat polarizing figure.
	But the thing is, and when I'm reading your posts, this isn't really something I'm necessarily looking for you to respond to, but when looking at your posts, I could see how someone would say, what is up with this guy?
	But then when you hear you speak, you sound like a totally normal person to me.
	And you're coherent and rational.
	You sound rational and sane and coherent.
	So that's what interests me.
	I think that some of the things that you want to talk about on the show tonight are going to potentially be rather interesting.
	And one of these things that I'm interested in, post number 22929-22929 in the Gabcast thread, you have a screen cap of an application.
	Let me enlarge this.
	The application is called MMSS TV.
	And on the left-hand side, you have what looks like an interlaced image.
	And then on the right-hand side, you have what looks like a waveform analysis.
	And as I'm looking at this interlaced image on the left-hand side, it looks to me like some humanoid faces staring back at me.
	And I'm sure I'm not alone in having reached that conclusion.
	Explain this image that I'm looking at here.
	Okay, well, speaking of gene pools, radio processing, and information, we're all information animals or entities or humanoids or what you gather from the planet.
	Everything is communication, in my opinion.
	And it bears down to that.
	And what you're looking at is a representation of 2,200 hertz and a WAV file that I got from Ryan Walsh.
	This friend of mine, it's a fast radio pulse, 121102.
	And I also got into the WOW signal.
	But anyway, what I did was I used this program and another program which listens in on the WAV file.
	And I got freaked out, to be honest with you.
	Where did you get the WAV file?
	The WAV file is a fast radio burst that you can download from Harvard.
	And they're in MP3 format.
	And I converted them to WAV file format.
	They might be in WAV format.
	I forget.
	See, they're MP3 or WAV.
	Is it possible to get them in WAV from the source rather than having to re-dither the audio?
	Because I think you'd have better results.
	Yeah.
	No, that's where I got it was from the source.
	Well, I know, but I mean, from the source you got, the file you got was an MP3 file.
	And then you converted that to a WAV file.
	Do I have that right?
	Let me look.
	I'm looking at the Harvard site right now.
	I'm trying to determine.
	Oh, directory not found.
	Hold on.
	It would be nice.
	Well, it's not particularly important.
	That's just sort of an aside observation of mine.
	But if you're trying to extract this sort of information out of audio, there's going to be a lot more information there to extract if it's wave audio.
	It's much higher resolution than MP3 audio.
	And if that's something you even have the option of doing.
	I'm surprised.
	So you got this audio from Harvard.
	I expected you were going to tell me that you got it from the SETI project or something.
	I got it.
	Well, initially it was from a radio telescope, and I'm looking at the Harvard ED.
	Well, that's where they changed it.
	So Harvard has their own radio telescopes that are sort of akin to what SETI is doing?
	I don't know that, but they stored the repository files there.
	The link is actually in one of my posts, the Harvard, because I did put the link in there.
	I didn't put it in here.
	But I believe, if I think about it, I think they were in MP3, which is compressed, but they might have been in a WAV file.
	Well, it doesn't matter.
	I mean, anyone can look at this interlaced image on the left-hand side and see that there appears to be something there that's beyond just the random.
	I mean, it clearly looks like two faces to me.
	Although what it may be is one face that has moved from one frame to the next, maybe, over the span of a period of time.
	I don't really know how this works enough to make that assessment, but they both kind of look like the same face to me in two different positions.
	One looks human, one looks like a gray, to be honest with you.
	Okay, now I'm actually, they are in MP3 format, all of them.
	I will send you the link.
	I don't know why they would do that.
	On the one hand, they have all of this technical acumen, and then on the other hand, they're going to submit that sort of raw data to people with only about really 10 to 15% of the actual information there, as opposed to wave audio.
	Do you know much about the two different algorithms, the wave and the MP3's compression?
	I know that.
	Yeah, what MP3 does is it attempts to, well, first of all, there's a lot of header information and wasted space that comes along with Wave Audio.
	But once you get past that, then what the MP3 codec does is it attempts to remove things that the human ear can't hear anyway.
	It tries to rip stuff out that you can't perceive and that it considers as a result of that to be wasted information.
	But there gets to be a point where, depending on how low the MP3 bitrate is, the lower the bitrate is, the more information has been removed. from the original source file.
	And so it does start to get to a point where you can really perceive it.
	And you'll really notice it in MP3 audio, as anybody knows.
	When the bitrate gets too low, you'll start hearing artifacts, particularly in the high frequencies.
	When you listen to cymbals, things start to sound like they're being played underwater.
	And so you'll start to notice that.
	But even at the highest bitrate MP3, which is 320 kilobits per second, you're still only, I don't think you're even at half of the resolution of wave audio.
	And I'm sure these MP3 files are probably not 320 kilobits per second.
	I would be really surprised if that were the case.
	What was the compression rate?
	Has the MP3 changed at all in its versions, or has it always been the same?
	No, it's changed immensely.
	It's gotten more efficient.
	It has gotten better at producing a perceived result with less data usage as time has gone on.
	But I don't think there's been any major revision to the most dominant MP3 codec, which codec stands for compressor decompressor, which means it's a little piece of software that can either turn audio into an MP3 or it can play back audio that is an MP3.
	I don't think there's been a major change to that in probably six or seven years.
	I think they kind of got to a point where there was just no further progress to be made, maybe.
	I don't know.
	Really, Flak audio is where it's at now because you can get the advantages of file size while still having a copy that maintains all of the resolution of the original source file.
	So if you're somebody who likes to get on BitTorrent websites and download music, you can download Dark Side of the Moon and Flak, which stands for Free Lossless Audio Codec.
	That's the key, lossless.
	And when you download that, you'll be downloading a one-to-one copy of the original source audio.
	So there's no degradation quality.
	At the very least, these people could do that.
	But then who's to say that this software, MMSS-TV, would even be able to work with FLAC audio?
	It's kind of a niche.
	Even today, it's still one of those audio formats that a lot of stuff has trouble working with.
	So this Harvard audio, they have an antenna array that's similar to what SETI has.
	Am I understanding this correctly?
	I think it's just a repository, and Harvard has a connection.
	I think the radio telescope, I wish I researched the actual radio telescope they got it from.
	I did put another link below.
	So it's not actually theirs.
	They're just maintaining the data.
	I would think so.
	I don't know if they have a radio telescope at Harvard itself, or maybe they do have an investment in it.
	Harvard's a...
	Well, see, I didn't think anybody was doing this other than the people at SETI.
	That might be a silly assumption on my part.
	But I still to this day, by the way, get ⁇ this is a bit of an aside, but I still to this day get messages from the people at SETI at home asking me to donate money to them.
	And you know what?
	I soured on that so long ago.
	First of all, they changed the client that you used to run on your computer.
	Instead of the screensaver coming up, what would happen is the SETI at home client would run, and what it would do is it would automatically download chunks of audio that had been recorded by their satellite array, their antenna array, and it would crunch the numbers and analyze that audio and then send the results back to them.
	And then they would download another chunk and do the same thing again.
	And this was spread across, at one time, I'm sure, millions of computers.
	So the net effect of it was a supercomputer, probably one of the first real supercomputers.
	When you consider this network, this crowd-sourced processing approach that they took to the SETI at Home project.
	And it was really cool, the way the application was designed and the information that it showed you.
	And it allowed you to see the waveform of the audio in a three-dimensional format as it was being analyzed.
	And then somewhere along the way, they decided to move on to a different client.
	I think it's called BOINCK, B-O-I-N-C.
	What year is that?
	That was probably when they made that change.
	That was probably at least 10 years ago, maybe more.
	And this is a client that is generic in nature and is used by a wide array of projects from cancer research to the SETI at Home project to solving complex math problems.
	And when you run the client, you actually have an interface there where you can select which project you want your computer's spare CPU resources to be applied to.
	But it's not nearly as fun.
	You don't get the graphical display, the user interface that you had before.
	You don't feel like you're doing anything special anymore.
	You just feel like, you know, it doesn't feel like you're really a part of anything anymore.
	And so I stopped doing it.
	And then after years and years of listening to Art Bell say, you know what?
	If these people ever did truly discover something, do you think they're going to let you know?
	Right.
	And I came to agree with that.
	I don't think I'm going to be apprised of shit.
	So I really couldn't care less about the SETI at Home Project or the fact that it even exists.
	And this Seth Shostak, I think is his name, who used to appear on Art's show all the time discussing the SETI project.
	He's some sort of a big wig within SETI.
	He constantly assured Art that this would never be the case.
	I mean, we would make sure the public, well, you know what?
	I don't think so.
	I think if a bunch of uniformed guys with guns show up in black vans and point those guns at you, I'm not so sure you're going to tell the public.
	I mean, who are you?
	I'm Seth Shostak.
	I demand, well, so what?
	Who gives a shit who you are?
	You know, this lead bullet works just as well on you as it does anybody else, Mr. Shostak.
	So, yeah, I'm fully confident that if SETI at Home truly discovered something that redefined the boundaries of humanity and existence and consciousness and our place in the universe, there's no way in hell that we would be apprised of that.
	I don't believe it because there are too many people who would have the foundations of their religious upbringing, their religious understanding, their ideologies.
	I think too many people would be challenged in that way by such a revelation.
	Maybe I'm wrong about that.
	I don't know.
	I mean, I know a lot of religious people, and I'm thinking about them, and I'm trying to imagine whether or not they would run out into the middle of the road and start drinking bleach if they found out there were aliens and Alpha Centauri communicating with us.
	And I don't think they would, but that's not to say in other parts of the world, people wouldn't go batshit crazy, and weird things would start happening.
	Bad things might start happening.
	Who knows?
	But I kind of get the feeling that you agree with me on that, that SETI would not necessarily tell us what's happening.
	No, and it's kind of ironic.
	Let's see, 2020, 2010, the 2007 radio burst came out, fast radio burst.
	And yeah, they wouldn't let us in on that.
	I just have a question about the WAV file.
	You really explained the MP3.
	So are you saying that the WAV files are pure?
	Well, they're not pure.
	No, they're not pure.
	I mean, every form of digital audio has its limit relative to analog audio.
	I mean, there's no piece of digitally recorded audio that will ever approach or match the resolution of analog audio, say, on a piece of vinyl.
	I mean, where the actual vibrations created by the musicians using their instruments recorded into analog equipment with no ceiling in terms of resolution.
	And then from there, those sounds get re-vibrated onto a needle that cuts the groove into the vinyl.
	I mean, that's like the highest form of resolution in terms of audio that you could have.
	There's no sample rate.
	There's no bit rate.
	There's no nothing.
	It's just the audio.
	It's a physical representation of the audio as it was played, just as the vibrations of the little bones inside your ears are the physical representation of the sounds that you're hearing as they make their way to your head.
	But any digital audio is always going to be limited by a bit rate, a sample rate, and a few other factors.
	But those would be the two primary factors that are going to limit digital audio.
	And even like if you went to super high-definition audio, like Neil Young had this player, it was a special player that it was like some sort of an oblong triangular shaped, weird-looking yellow thing that you couldn't tell if it was like a safety flashlight for when you're changing your tire on a road at night or an audio player.
	You couldn't really tell which one of those it was.
	And it was called the Pono player, P-O-N-O.
	I think that name in itself was rather unfortunate.
	I mean, what a difference one letter makes, right?
	It was called the Pono player, and its big selling point was that it could play audio that was, I think, sampled at 192 kilohertz, whereas CD audio is sampled at 44,100 kilohertz or 44.1 kilohertz.
	So that'd be 44,100 hertz.
	So that gives you some indication as to the difference even from CD audio, which most people would consider to be, hey, this is about as good as it gets, man, up to what Neil Young had on this Pono player.
	And even that, I mean, the fact that there is an assigned sample rate, there is an assigned bit rate, bit depth, all of that, the fact that those numbers even exist means limit.
	There is a limit to the resolution of that audio.
	So that's my diarrhea of the mouth way of answering your question: is CD, I think basically we're asking, is wave audio as good as it gets?
	And that would be a no, but it's certainly better for these purposes where you've got audio and you're extracting what I would say can be converted into visual data.
	That can only be better with high-resolution audio.
	Yes.
	Well, going back in time in history, you know, if you look at actually the entrance to the Khufu, the Great Pyramid, there's these glyphs above it.
	And I don't know if anybody else has any ideas on it, but those look like the actual glyphs on the Roswell incident.
	They have the ruler, I forget what it is.
	It's a, I don't know, a one-meter stick, and it has a bunch of glyphs on it.
	This is all, you know, I wasn't there, but I happen to believe the Grays have been here a long time.
	And they are in communication.
	This is my theory with a group.
	And this group probably knows what the pyramids are for because they decoded the hieroglyphs of the pyramids.
	And they went into a second level of them.
	In all languages, there's the top layer and then there's the second layer.
	And these guys, these grays, they know we're here and they are communicating with us.
	And so what I'm saying is they know the MP3 compression format.
	They understand all that technology.
	They're obviously more advanced than us.
	And so the YouTube video, which I made from the actual sound, I honed in on 22 Hertz, 2,200 Hertz.
	And I listened to it and listened to it.
	And I can almost hear a mimicked voice that says, negative Gadda, you're not going to eliminate.
	And I posted the YouTube video.
	Negative what?
	Negative G-A-D-Y, you're not going to eliminate.
	And so I did some more research, and I went into negative Gadda, and I did a little quick research.
	And guess what came up?
	We were just talking about gene pool and all that.
	And what it is, it could be, I'm not saying for sure, but the SNRA Gaddae overlaps the three-uter.
	This is about gene splicing.
	And then it goes into the actual mRNA.
	Now, I don't know.
	This is not my specialty.
	Otherwise known as a polypeptide chain.
	For those of you at home.
	Whoa.
	I swear to God, that's what that is, mRNA.
	When the ribosome creates a complementary copy of DNA when cells are producing proteins.
	That's what mRNA is.
	Well, this is going down the rabbit hole, Neo.
	Well, you know what?
	Let me recommend something to you.
	And I've done this.
	I've recommended this on this show previously.
	If you ever studied anatomy and physiology, look up protein synthesis and how different cells in your bodies make proteins.
	And you'll know everything about what I just mentioned.
	And it's fascinating.
	And if you're an atheist, if you believe there's, or you believe, you don't even necessarily have to believe.
	When I say atheist, I don't necessarily mean someone who doesn't believe in a supernatural being.
	I would also mean someone who also believes there's no physical source to our existence either.
	We just kind of are, you know.
	So, like, someone like you, you probably believe that there is some sort of extraterrestrial source that can be cited as the beginning of human existence or life, period, on this earth.
	I'm assuming you believe that, right?
	Well, my belief, I'm not an atheist.
	I'm not an agnostic.
	And I do believe there is one God.
	And I do actually know there are many life forms out there.
	And there is an agenda.
	And so, you know, that's just my foundation.
	Now, this, what I'm talking about is that that MRA, which MRNA, is a very important process for the cell.
	I mean, if you tweak that or mess with that, you can actually cause cancer or make disease or make it easier.
	So what I'm trying to see is when it says you're not going to eliminate negative Gaddy, and I know, and you know, people think I'm insane.
	I know.
	I know there's reptilians and there's grays and they're at war.
	And there's a lot of crap.
	So there's all kinds of hidden messages and stuff, but trying to decipher and get to the bottom of this, it's a journey, you know.
	And so I just found this today, you know, and that image shows a gray, in my opinion, and it's below it.
	You can see like a broader nose and some of these eyes.
	And it's like two images.
	So the grays are saying, hey, you know, and I don't know what's going on.
	You know what it kind of reminds me of are the statues on Easter Island.
	It kind of has that vibe about it to me.
	Like if you're normally when you see the pictures of the statues on Easter Island, you look at them.
	Usually the photos are taken from a profile perspective.
	But let me see.
	I'm going to look this up.
	Statues.
	You got that right.
	It's a spitting image.
	Yeah, that's what that kind of reminded me of.
	Do you see in the image the face below it looks like the Easter Island one, and above it, you can see the outline of a gray.
	I don't know if you've listened to the YouTube that I created, but it is spooky.
	And I beware out there.
	I am trying to get the video image of this transmission.
	But like the Raji just said, the compression, you know, could have tweaked the video too if I've ever, which I think is next to impossible me actually finding.
	But I actually have these programs which I'm trying to actually draw this out.
	Well, let me go back just a second.
	The point I was going to make earlier when you mentioned mRNA, and I recommended that you go look up protein synthesis and how that works.
	And there are a gazillion videos on YouTube that'll explain this to you.
	And when you see how that works, if you are an atheist, if you are someone who believes that there is no intellect whatsoever behind the existence of life here, I think that watching the complexity of that process, which is taking place in almost every cell of your body, and the ease with which that process could fail,
	and the similarity of that process to the way a computer interprets computer code and follows instructions given to it.
	The similarity between the two systems, one biological, one electronic, it's uncanny to me.
	And if you are an atheist and you are someone who believes there's just nothing and the fact that we exist is purely incidental, perhaps there were some stray amino acids floating around in a puddle of goo and a lightning bolt struck the puddle of goo and here we are.
	If you do believe that when you study protein synthesis and how that works and the complexity of it, it's so systematic.
	I mean, that's the only word I could use to describe it.
	It is a system.
	I mean, there's I can't see anything incidental about it.
	It looks like it's a designed system.
	And when you see that, and perhaps this is just my puny, feeble little human mind who can't comprehend the greatness of the universe he's surrounded by, I understand that.
	And so something that I can't explain naturally would have to be indicative of some higher form of thought or life.
	I understand.
	But just take a look at it.
	And I don't know, maybe it'll challenge a couple of your perceptions of the universe that you live within.
	And that's not even to say I'm a person who believes in God.
	I wouldn't say I am.
	I don't know what I believe, to be perfectly honest with you.
	But that will certainly challenge a couple of your notions of existence and why we exist.
	This screen grab from this MMSS-TV application with the two faces, is this only one frame?
	I mean, if we're spanning a if we're analyzing in this screen capture a time period, a moment at which the audio starts and a moment at which the audio in question ends.
	And from within that, data has been extracted.
	Is that data producing a moving image in this interlaced image that I see on the left-hand side?
	Or is it just a still frame and that's all of the data that was extracted?
	Excellent question.
	I wasn't.
	This program is basically interpreting the radio signal, and what it does is bring down an image.
	Now, if I had a program which would decode actual video stream, perhaps it is.
	And maybe what it is, as it moves past, it shows the actual gray.
	Now, the bottom one with the nose, that could just be, I think it's a gray.
	Now, the bottom one just happens to probably look like what you're saying is that Easter Island thing.
	Well, you keep saying top and bottom, but I'm seeing left and right.
	I'm seeing one on the left, one on the right.
	Am I interpreting this image differently than you?
	No, you're actually seeing what I see is the looks like.
	Oh.
	Oh, one of them is superimposed over the top of the other kind of.
	Yeah, there's a broad nose down at the bottom, but what it looks like is just like the gray has some sunglasses on, and is it moving to the right?
	It looks like an image of, yeah.
	By the way, if you're listening to this and you're wondering what we're talking about, if you go to Bell Gab and you go to the GabCast thread, it's post number 22929, which was posted at about, according to the timestamp I'm looking at, 10.34 p.m. I guess that would be Central Time.
	If you want to see this image, and I see there's a receive mode, so we have the audio waveform on the right-hand side, the resulting image on the left-hand side, and in the center, we have a column where you can select a receive mode, one of which is auto, which is what's selected.
	So, what this essentially does is it takes a piece of audio from beginning to end, and it looks for patterns in that audio and attempts to make sense of them.
	Is that what this does?
	Yes, it's an radio signal transmitting into a video image program.
	It's SSTV.
	So, what it's doing is it's actually taking the radio signal and looking for images.
	But when you say looking for images, I mean, I'm wondering, is it just looking for patterns that can through what some, what's the word, pareidolia, where you see Abraham Lincoln's head in the clouds?
	I mean, how many times would you submit a piece of audio to this application and see nothing but gibberish in this column on the left-hand side relative to the number of times you would submit audio to this application and see what we're seeing in this image here?
	I'm just kind of wondering, is there any indication of what just mere happenstance, the likelihood of mere happenstance might be in terms of whether we would see something on the left-hand side or not?
	Now, I mean, I will say, I will concede that, yes, what I'm looking at here, it doesn't require any explanation to me.
	I see two faces, and that's plainly obvious.
	And what it could be is just one face, but since the radio transmission is signaling and it captures that, it does the ghost for it's ghosting it.
	So maybe it's just one.
	You see, it's trying to, you know.
	That's why I was asking, that's why my brain went in that direction earlier to ask you whether we were looking potentially at a span of time where that face could have moved from one part of the frame to another.
	Pardon my sniffles.
	Yeah, oh no.
	I would say you're right, Libraci.
	And this program, now, you're going to find this kind of pretty interesting.
	I only messed around with this program for an hour and I found this.
	So, if I only found it within an hour, you know, clicking around, because I clicked on sync and then I clicked on auto and I changed it to 444 and then I let it go and as I was listening to 2200 from the other program which was interpreting the bounce, because you see that, see that long black strip between where the actual says notch, and there's this vertical rectangle box that's black.
	Well, that was popping an audio frequency, but for some reason it doesn't show up on this because I just stopped the program, so the audio just went dead.
	After I captured the image and then what I used was the actual image thing from Microsoft where you can actually cut out the image from the it's called hold on.
	It's a snip, snipping tool.
	So yeah, I'm looking up this MMSS TV and it's available on Hamsoft.ca.
	So this is something related to amateur radio usage.
	What is this program typically used for, do you know?
	Not quite sure, but I think what it's exactly used for is actually decoding radio frequencies into images.
	It's an image analysis program from radio signals.
	And it says TV on it, so that's kind of a big clue.
	Let me read what you posted on Bellgab.
	For the past month, I've been processing radio signals from deep space with a friend of mine named Ryan Walsh.
	The signals are FRBs, which means fast radio bursts, and the WOW signal.
	What's the WOW signal, by the way?
	I meant to ask you this earlier.
	The WOW signal is from 1977, and what it was was.
	Oh, I remember someone actually wrote the word WOW on an analysis waveform analysis, didn't they?
	That's correct.
	Yeah, I remember that.
	Go ahead.
	I'm sorry.
	Go ahead.
	And it's a vertical wow circle of about, I don't know, seven or eight or six signatures.
	And they're high burst signatures, I believe.
	And it came from Sagittarius M55, which is really kind of interesting.
	Also, when I was using the Morris code thing, the first thing that came up from decoding that in Morris code was 55, and then it had some interesting Spanish and English.
	And I created, I interpreted a sentence out of it, which I think it's a long shot, honest with you.
	I don't even know if that's correct.
	So wait a minute.
	Let me make sure I understand this.
	The image that I'm looking at here is from the WOW signal?
	No, it's from 121102.
	It's the actual fast radio bursts from a repeater signal.
	Now, this is going to blow your mind, too, about fast repeaters.
	For a while, they were saying that fast repeaters were only an anomaly, and it was a one millisecond file.
	And this one happened to be a repeater.
	And now this is what the SETI guys and radio telescope guys are telling us, which I think – No, wait a minute.
	When you say fast repeater, are you talking about a signal that's received from space that repeatedly pulses?
	That's right.
	Okay.
	And the fast radio burst, they're trying to equate to 500 million suns exploding.
	Now, bullshit.
	I'm sorry.
	Yeah, I would agree.
	And so this signal, it repeats.
	And so if it repeats, and now they're getting all kinds of repeaters out there, and maybe they were always doing that.
	Now they're just releasing this because either, A, they want to see, which I don't know why they'd try that, but they've only showed us the Harvard files, so that's weird.
	Either they're trying to get to the bottom of this, what's the message, or they already know, and it's a test, which I don't know.
	They do all kinds of stuff.
	I don't know why.
	And maybe they don't know what it is.
	Now, when I asked you if this was from the WOW signal, and you said no, it's from 12-something 02, did you say?
	Yeah, this is the fast radio burst.
	Is that a date?
	It could be.
	Let me look at the actual fast radio burst date.
	120102 FRB.
	No, sorry.
	While you're looking at that, I'm going to read this.
	I'll carry on reading this.
	You see, I have several programs I'm using.
	Today was a huge day, way greater than the Morse decoding.
	I want to stop there.
	The Morse decoding.
	And don't let me distract you from looking for what you're looking for there.
	Keep looking.
	But some people would say, and I would be in this camp, that if Morse code is being detected from space, that would inherently, by virtue of the fact that it's Morse code, rule it out as any sort of extraterrestrial signal.
	I mean, and I wouldn't even need to explain to you why.
	Since Morse code is just a means of communicating via dots and dashes invented by a guy in, what, the 1830s, I think?
	A human being?
	Samuel Morris.
	Well, they say he invented it, but again, like I said, I think the Grays have been here longer, way longer.
	So you call that invention into question.
	Maybe it was passed on to him.
	But what if it's not?
	I mean, that's a complex explanation for a problem with your theory.
	Well, look at Morse code.
	What is Morris code?
	The two symbols that are most important in Morris code, E and T. There's the dot, which is E, and there's T, which is a dash.
	Now, extraterrestrial, right?
	But, you know, call me crazy.
	That's an interesting coincidence.
	Yeah, that's true.
	I know absolutely nothing about Morse code, so anything you want to tell me about it would enlighten me.
	I actually had to use it to decode the Voynich manuscript to Italian.
	And when was the Voynich manuscript written?
	Well, my opinion.
	Is it pre-Morse code?
	No.
	Okay.
	Not to our intelligence as we know it.
	Pre-Morse code, if the Voynich manuscript is created by Wilfred Voynich, this is my opinion, in 1910.
	And he used an exotic form of Morse code.
	And there's been a lot of...
	Was he an Italian?
	Uh...
	I think he was a Polish guy who came from, he was revolutionary, Wilfred Voynich.
	And he tried to go up against Russia and create a revolt, and he got thrown in jail, and they put him to Siberia for a while.
	And then he snuck out and he said he took China all the way back to England.
	Well, I don't think he went that far.
	And I think he took a different route, honestly.
	So you're saying when Morse code is applied to the Voynich manuscript, it becomes an Italian document?
	Yes, but it's an exotic form of Morse code.
	And it takes an interpretation, which sadly is, and I've sold a few of these books, but which sadly is, is that it is an exotic form which takes the total number of symbols.
	And then what you do with that, you'll have to actually look at the book, but it takes the number of symbols and converts them into a string.
	And then I had to actually build up a database where it's all dots and dashes, the total number, and then interprets, I had to go through like hundreds of words.
	But it made sense, though, because it came out with the stars.
	It came out with paragraphs and even something in Italian, a whole paragraph of info.
	I decoded the marijuana section, the whole paragraph, and it made completely sense to me.
	Well, that just seems rather odd that, I mean, if a Polish guy writes a document, and when Morse code is applied to the code found within the document, some form of Italian results.
	Was he known to be an Italian speaker?
	He was a person who could speak over 20 different languages.
	You may have already said this, and I just didn't catch it.
	I don't know.
	Yeah, he spoke 12 different languages.
	And not perfectly, albeit, that's what they say.
	And He had an issue with the Gadfly with his wife, I think, because she got a lot of fame out of this book.
	And I think he was low on money at the time.
	And so he produced this manuscript on Old Vellum, mind you, which is radiocarbon dated to between 1404 and 1438.
	And he used a quill.
	But there's a lot of anomalies in the Voyage manuscript, like images of the Andromeda Galaxy, mitochondria, information that just doesn't belong in Europe at that time.
	The sunflower.
	I could go on.
	There's a puzzle piece at the bottom of root that looks just like the puzzle that you put in your little puzzle on the, I forget the name who made that puzzle, the original puzzle.
	I'm trying to relate a lot of information here.
	And so no one's been able to decode it, but I believe I have.
	But, you know, that's I put 12 years into it, 14, and I decided, well, that's enough because I think I've gotten to the bottom of what I needed to do.
	Voynage Forum.
	By the way, going back on something, I'm looking at the chat room here.
	Taroa, I think that's how that's pronounced, T-A-A-R-O-A, says flak is a bloated file type for negligible sound improvement.
	That's rubbish.
	If that's the case, then one should just complain about the fact that CDs contain ZD audio.
	Why is so much audio space being wasted?
	It's negligible.
	I mean, you wouldn't complain about that.
	There is a mathematical certainty to the fact that you're wrong when you say there's a negligible sound improvement.
	And also, studies have been conducted that show the brain reacts differently to music that's high resolution relative to music that's low resolution.
	There is a difference.
	I mean, there was a, this is purely anecdotal, but there was a story I heard about a guy who was a huge Bob Dylan fan, and he had been his whole life.
	But he was a young guy, so he had only ever listened to Bob Dylan on iPods and through earbuds and headphones and whatnot.
	And one day he went over to a guy's house, and I forget who told this story.
	He went over to somebody's house who had a really high-end turntable system and a whole bunch of Bob Dylan.
	And he put the Bob Dylan on and played it with vinyl.
	And this person who was this huge Bob Dylan fan, who'd never experienced the music in this way, began weeping.
	I mean, just visually weeping as he's sitting in front of these speakers listening to this.
	He had never experienced that music in that way with completely uncompromised audio resolution.
	Now, granted, I mean, the equipment itself, the speakers and whatnot, that has to be attributed to the experience as well.
	But you certainly can't take away from the fact that we're talking about audio that was entirely uncompressed.
	I mean, if you're going to make the argument that flak is a bloated file size with a negligible audio improvement, then I guess in that case, you would also have to say that all of the audiophiles who prefer vinyl over any form of digital audio, that those people are all wrong too, and that they're wasting all of that shelf space with their vinyl records, which I don't think is an argument anybody really is going to credibly make.
	Let's see, I'm going through the chat room here.
	I see people who are thankful to hear that I am HIV negative.
	I'm glad they're on my side in this regard.
	Some people are complaining about the stream not being audible.
	And I'm going to take a quick look here.
	I don't know.
	It looks to me like everything's working fine.
	So anyway, the Voynich manuscript, that was, I guess, a bit of an aside that we kind of got into there.
	But suffice it to say, the author of the Voynich manuscript had information that he should not have had.
	And at least according to the milestones, the scientific milestones that had been reached thus far at the time that this was constructed.
	And so what is the theory as to where he got this information?
	I mean, what was happening in his private life?
	Who was he as a man that would lend some sort of an understanding to where he got the information that has been extracted from that manuscript?
	He was going to a library.
	Let me post another thing.
	He was going to a library right close to where his offices were.
	And I don't know where he got the idea from.
	You know, the guy was a genius.
	It's there.
	It's obvious.
	And he dealt in languages and he dealt in rare books.
	He was a bibliophile.
	He knew history very well.
	And I actually posted a link to my forum, VoynichmanFreeForums.net.
	It's there on the bottom of the Gabcast post.
	And so you click on that and you can see all the information there about what I've come to the conclusions of.
	And finally, it was the Morse code.
	Let me go back to reading what you wrote here because that's what kind of got us off on this tangent.
	And you kind of addressed this effectively.
	You believe that what's his name?
	Samuel Morse?
	Is that who invented Morse code?
	Is that his name?
	A Yale guy, yes.
	Okay, so you contend that he may not necessarily have invented it, that he may have instead been.
	Or are you suggesting that the progression of Morse code, how it developed, and its final form was sort of a natural evolution?
	Morse code has been here a long time.
	It's been here.
	No, I don't have proof of this, but it's been here since the E.T.
	Well, it's hard to believe that no one would have thought of the idea of tapping on the bars inside a jail cell to communicate with other people until this Morse guy came along.
	I mean, we have thousands of years of documented human history prior to the arrival of Mr. Morse and his Morse codes.
	So that I would certainly agree with.
	It's hard to believe that Morse code in any form would never have existed prior to this guy.
	How many ways are there to communicate?
	It would blow your mind.
	So to continue on here, you say I got to thinking, how would they contact us, that being the Grays?
	Well, I have audio and an image of this.
	It's very serious business.
	Now I'm going for the main part, which would be an actual video.
	However, I'm not there yet.
	Here, the YouTube and an image as it has DNA genetics all over it.
	What do you mean by that?
	DNA and genetics all over it.
	Well, if you keep reading down below that.
	Okay.
	My interpretation of the communication contained in the signal is an actual alien transmission.
	Quote, they repeatedly convey negative Gaddy you're not going to eliminate.
	And then you quote this excerpt from a publication.
	The sRNA Gaddy overlaps with the three UTR of the GADEX gene.
	Whatever the hell that is.
	And this overlap region is necessary for the regulation of GADEX by GADY or GADDI.
	GADX by GADY?
	I don't know.
	The Y is capitalized.
	Unlike the other three UTRs, the interaction of the GADX3 UTR with GAD Y increases the eMRNA stability.
	The above examples illustrate mRNA crosstalk, whereby three UTRs act as sRNA targets to influence their own gene expression by positively or negatively modulating mRNA stability.
	And with that, I would tell everybody, have a good night.
	Enjoy your evening.
	Thanks for listening to the Gabcast.
	I'm kidding.
	The rabbit hole gets deeper, I'm telling you.
	So you've got a couple links here underneath that that I think will give people some further explanation.
	I think that the problem is that here's a critique I would offer of your presentation.
	You should not present people information in this way, like the excerpt that you quoted here, because 99.99% of people who read this will not be able to make heads or tails of this, and they'll think that they're being bullshitted through the presentation of data and terminology and information that they have no ability to parse.
	And instead, I think the best way forward, if you're going to, I mean, because it's already a controversial topic, the idea of whether or not we're alone in the universe and whether or not you have evidence to suggest one way or the other that we are or aren't.
	It's already a controversial topic.
	So when you present an excerpt of this nature to people, I think some people might find that a little bit might perceive that to be some sort of a barrier to entry into the conversation.
	Do you know what I'm saying?
	It's definitely.
	Rather than post that, I mean, it would be better to see your interpretation of what that actually means.
	Yeah, I see what you're saying.
	Let me scroll down here.
	You've got a couple videos of which I can't really play.
	And then there's your attached image file.
	Well, I do find that to be rather compelling, but you said you are working on the process of moving from just a still image to maybe finding a way to extract some moving imagery.
	And I'm wondering, I'm sorry, I've been consuming a little bit of alcohol here, so I'm a little bit burpee.
	You'll have to excuse me.
	But I'm going to assume, as is reasonable to assume, that in extracting moving imagery rather than just static imagery as we see here, it's going to require significantly more audio, which is going to require significantly more information.
	I guess that's a question in itself.
	The image that we're looking at, how many seconds of audio, do you know the answer to this?
	How many seconds of audio were required in order to generate enough data to generate the image we see on the left-hand side?
	Let's see.
	That was probably, I'm going back in my mind how I was listening to it.
	It's an actual four-minute file.
	And that processed about 30 seconds, 45 seconds, and it came up with that image.
	Okay.
	That's interesting.
	I mean, if you think about it, think back to your old 56K dial-up days when you would have an actual phone line being used to connect to the internet.
	And so what was happening was you had an analog audio signal that was being transmitted over a phone line.
	It was just straight audio, no different than your voice as you speak to somebody on the phone.
	And that audio on the other end of the conversation was being parsed by a modem and turned into actual data.
	And so I'm kind of thinking about this in terms of think back to 1996 when you would get on the internet.
	you're old enough to have done so and you dial and and then you finally get connected that I hope that everybody appreciates my effort at a dial-up modem sound there.
	I worked on that for four hours prior to the broadcast.
	I worked on it for many days prior to this broadcast with the anticipation it would be required.
	But you get on a website and you're waiting for the images to load on the website.
	Let's say it's a page with one image, but the image is reasonably high resolution.
	In other words, it's a large file size.
	I mean, let's say the image that you're trying to load on a web page is one megabyte and you're on a 56K dial-up modem.
	15 minutes.
	Well, it might be.
	I mean, okay, so 56K on a dial-up connection.
	If you're lucky, you're probably going to connect it actually about 45K.
	And if you're out in the country on what's called a slip, where they actually split the audio resolution between you and another customer in order to avoid having to run additional hardwire infrastructure, then you're probably going to connect it about 23K.
	And so you're on this page, you're loading the image, and I could see it easily on the average website back in that time.
	I could easily see it taking about 30 or 40 seconds for an image to load on your screen.
	And that's about how much audio you said is required for this application to parse all of that out and extract this image that we see on the left-hand side, correct?
	Yes.
	So effectively, what we're saying here, or what I would conclude, is that it's sort of the same principle.
	It's all about modulation.
	Modulation transfers information.
	This is information.
	And when you look at the definition of modulation, it's conveying information, and that's intelligence.
	What puzzles me is: are you taking a bath or something?
	Are you splashing water on yourself?
	Linda, they can hear it that you're in the fridge.
	Oh, she's getting an extra.
	Sorry, honey.
	Linda, what are you doing?
	You know what?
	Bel Gab is so sick of Linda.
	I have to tell you.
	It's no, I'm kidding.
	We don't know anything about Linda.
	Let's see.
	Yeah, that's really interesting.
	I mean, I'm just imagining 30 or 40 seconds of audio, which is what you would have if you were on a dial-up internet connection.
	You would have 30 or 40 seconds of audio that would be required in order to transmit the amount of data needed to represent an image on your browser, in your browser, as you're looking around on the internet back in the day.
	I mean, easily 30 or 40 seconds.
	You know, you have the image loading.
	It's like chunk, chunk, chunk, chunk.
	Every little bit of it as it slowly builds the image on your browser.
	I mean, that is something that most people have not seen in a long time.
	And I guess the only reason I'm going down that sort of rabbit hole would be I'm interested to consider the rate at which the data is being transmitted.
	I mean, if we have an image of what looks to be two faces here and that image was produced by 30 or 40 seconds of audio, I guess that's what I'm kind of interested in here is the rate at which the data is being transmitted.
	And that's why I mentioned the old dial-up internet analogy here or the similarity, which is to say that it's almost similar to that old dial-up internet data transmission rate.
	If you're generating one image and it takes about 30 or 40 seconds to do so, that means that the data was being transmitted over this radio signal at a speed comparable to that of a 1990s dial-up modem.
	That's my point.
	You're telling me the radio signal was sent at that speed?
	No, I'm saying that the data contained.
	I'm saying that the radio signal was capable of holding whatever.
	I mean, when you're sending data over radio, different bands of radio transmission have a varying ability to hold data.
	So, for instance, 5 gigahertz is capable of transmitting more data, but it doesn't go through walls so well.
	Whereas 2.4 gigahertz Wi-Fi is capable of transmitting data not quite as quickly, but it's more readily able to go through walls.
	So different portions of spectrum are capable of transmitting data at varying speeds, at least in terms of how we understand data transmission today.
	And I'm not even suggesting that I know anything about the rate of speed at which data can be transmitted over 2.2 kilohertz, which is the signal that this was recorded at.
	But I am suggesting that if it required 30 or 40 seconds of audio to produce that image, then that means over the span of that 30 or 40 seconds, the speed at which the data was being injected into the audio signal was comparable to the speed at which data would have been in the 1990s transmitted over a dial-up internet connection.
	Because 30 or 40 seconds is about the amount of time that it would often take for an image to load on a website as you're just browsing around on the internet.
	And God forbid there were multiple images on the page.
	Then you're really screwed.
	You got to go mow the grass and come back and see what's there.
	Days of Windows 95 or DOS and all that.
	Yeah, I remember those days and transferring images, and you just sit there and go, okay, let me take a break.
	But this signal was actually bursted at 2.5 to 3.3.5 gigahertz, something about 570 PC divided by CM3.
	What does that mean?
	I think that's just the bandwidth of the actual 121102 signal.
	Well, wait a minute.
	Wait a minute.
	If we're talking about a signal that's this signal was broadcast at 2.2 kilohertz, right?
	It was decoded at 2.2 kilohertz.
	The actual signal of the radio fast radio bursts is what they're saying here from the actual Harvard database.
	The bursts were observed from the VLA, very large.
	What's a VLA?
	See, I'm kind of...
	Very large antenna.
	Array?
	Okay, yeah.
	A very large array from 2.5 to 3.5 gigahertz with a dispersion measure of approximately 570 PC forward slash CM3.
	I don't know what that means.
	I think it was a scalar wave, partial with tachyons with a twister neutrino all the way from Alpha Centauri or in that vicinity where the grays and the reptiles are having this war over the domain of the solar system.
	See, I don't know what this means, that the signal came in at 2.something gigahertz, but it was decoded at 2.2 kilohertz.
	I don't understand what that means.
	Okay, so the actual burst is a millisecond, okay?
	And so what happened was the program stretched the thing out to four minutes.
	And so what I did is I took a segment of it from this other program.
	So the stretch is what leaves you with what effectively would be a signal broadcast at 2.2 kilohertz.
	Yeah, well, we'd never be able to get any information out of a millisecond unless we had to analyze it and narrow down.
	Because if you think about it, what do computers speak?
	Computers speak information at speeds, pico, you know, ranges that far exceed the speeds that we can't even comprehend, trillionths of a second, billionths of a second.
	And so a millisecond is very slow for a computer.
	And so this is a high-tech frequency.
	That's a repeater signal.
	And it's condensed and compressed, but this program had to look at it from a slower format.
	And then this program, the other program, looks at it from the image perspective, and then it translates the image from the radio signal.
	And then I had to hone in.
	I was using this radio program, which actually, here I'll actually give the link on there.
	It's the HDSDR program.
	And it was listening.
	And so I had to, you know, I was flipping through it for about five hours.
	And I was looking for a frequency if I can find any communication.
	And so I narrowed that down to 2,200, where I found that weird message.
	And so then I did hone in on the message with the actual image at 2,200 hertz.
	And then that picture came up.
	So you're the only person to have extracted this information from this audio, correct?
	That image, yeah, that's fresh, new.
	So it's all you.
	There's no one else who has their stamp on this.
	No, Ryan Walsh, he was the one who extrapolated.
	These guys took the signal and they stretched it and they looked and they analyzed it.
	This guy's been doing fast radio bursts for four years.
	And he looked at my alien thing that I did on Fast Radio Burst 1202 because I went into Harvard and then we kind of met that way over Skype.
	And he sent me all this stuff.
	And he gets the credit for the actual sound file, which he worked on to stretch it.
	And he actually has other spectrograms of the image too.
	And so here's the program.
	I'm just typing in the program.
	Well, here's a message from Newstar.
	I haven't read this in advance.
	I'm just going to read it and see what he says.
	And by the way, Newstar, I like your avatar.
	Newstar promise.
	So this message I'm about to read is in conformity with the New Star Promise.
	Stellar, just a suggestion would be easier for us to follow and find your threads and posts if Lee would create a special thread for you where everything will be in one place.
	And I would echo this, by the way, Stellar.
	I think this has been one of your weaknesses on Bell Gab is that you have a tendency to create a new thread with every new thought.
	And so all of your information winds up being fragmented across multiple areas on the forum rather than having everything in a sort of consolidated, condensed area.
	I don't know if you would necessarily agree with that, but I think it would be to your benefit if everything, because it seems to me that a lot of the stuff that you post, even though in that moment in your mind when you're creating a new thread, it might seem like it's something that ought to have a new thread.
	But I think oftentimes the things that you're posting are somehow, or at least could be, connected to things that you've already posted about.
	And I think it would be to your benefit if you were just to sort of consolidate it all into one thread, one mega stellar thread that people could descend upon and extract everything from.
	He says, some of the stuff you're posting is definitely far out and challenging, even though LOL and other of your threads I posted and suggested for you to go and see a psychiatrist, LOL.
	It was more of a joke or a frustration, I guess, with your way of presenting your stuff, which you concede, you know, maybe you could do differently.
	You know, but he says, so please forgive me for that post, but I guess because of that post of mine, Lee posted and expressed an interest of having you as a guest.
	I might be wrong on that as to Lee.
	And now we are listening to a very cool Gabcast with you presenting very thought-provoking stuff.
	Thank you, sir.
	I think that's a credit to me because I just inherently knew that Stellar would be an interesting guest.
	And that's part of my talent and charm is just to, with laser-like precision, be able to seize upon an opportunity and take it.
	And Stellar was tonight's opportunity.
	Well, thank you for that.
	Nice compliment.
	And I'm just a humble guy trying to figure out what's going on.
	And Lee, he's okay.
	Everyone says something in the moment, like myself.
	And you may think back and go, oh, I wish I never did that.
	Information's like that.
	There's a record, right?
	But that doesn't mean your mind's not going to change.
	You're going to grow up and get more intelligent and get more facts.
	And Stellar, Stellar, I see just a moment or two ago, you posted in the Gabcast thread a program for decoding WAV files, which is available at HDSDR.e.
	For Christ's sake, you know what?
	I really am a drunk shit stain.
	We really should take a break.
	It's hdsdr.de forward slash faq.html.
	But if you go to, you know, I feel like I'm giving someone a website address in the year 1995.
	You remember how people used to used to just now if y'all, ladies and gentlemen, this is Arnval.
	If you want to see the image, go to www.artbal.com forward slash 802.753 forward slash tilde exclamation mark question mark.
	I mean, it was like, this was how it was in the 90s.
	It was insanity.
	I feel like that's what I'm doing now.
	If you'll go to the Gabcast thread, you'll see the post I'm talking about posted.
	Well, it's post number 22936.
	Stellar says this is a program for decoding WAV files, and I think it may benefit you to take a look at that.
	And I think what we'll do here is we'll take a bit of a break.
	And when we come back, what I'd like to do, Stellar, is just take things wherever you'd like to take them.
	If there's a particular subject you'd like to get into that maybe you've discussed on Belgab that hasn't gotten enough attention, or if there's more on what we've discussed thus far that you would like to shine additional light upon, you can do so when we come back.
	This is the Gabcast.
	It's a podcast about bellgab.com.
	And if you want to be on the show, the number to call, 573-837-4948.
	This is the Gabcast, a podcast about bellgab.com.
	Call the show now at 573-837-4948.
	That's 573-837-4948.
	Now, shut up, sit down, and listen to the damn show.
	All right.
	It's the Gabcast.
	I'm Liberace.
	I'm here tonight with Stellar, a Bellgab staple as far as, you know, long-term Bellgab.
	You've been on Belgab for a long time, haven't you?
	Yeah, I think around since 2008 or 9 or something like that.
	Really?
	12.
	I think 12, yeah.
	I think you even got banned a couple of times, didn't you?
	Actually, this is the only site that never banned me.
	I got banned from Grand Hamcock, scienceforum.com.
	Maybe once.
	No, I doubt.
	No, I've never been banned from here.
	Well, that's a credit to me.
	Good.
	I was hoping you would say that, but I wasn't sure if you would or not.
	So, good.
	Not even reprimanded.
	Wow.
	Even not even reprimanded?
	I'm sure I've gotten frustrated with you at some point.
	I can't believe that.
	We might have had a couple contentious posts, but I just can't remember it.
	And I'm more current right now.
	So, you know, there's been so much information that's crossed this place, and I'm glad it's open.
	You know, that's a credit to the Constitution of freedom of speech.
	So I think that's great, and I thank you for it.
	I think Bellgab is an important part of the internet.
	I realize that it's not the most heavily trafficked site in the world, but hold on.
	Sniffles got me.
	I realize it's not the most heavily trafficked website in the world, but I feel like it's important for websites to exist out there where you can say things that you couldn't typically say on other websites.
	Yeah, I get it.
	There's L Gab.
	I get it.
	There's Wade Gab.
	There's this Gab.
	There's that Gab.
	But I would submit to you that the things you are going to be banned for saying probably are rather comparable to the things that you're going to be banned for saying on Twitter or any other multinational corporate-run internet enterprise like Twitter or Facebook or anything of that nature.
	I mean, you're probably going to face problems for the same type of content.
	But Bellgab is kind of a different type of website.
	It's a dying breed in terms of internet communication websites.
	People are allowed to engage one another in a caustic way, in an inflammatory way, in a it's just sort of what's the oh shit.
	What's the what's the what's the movie from the 80s where she's in the waste?
	Is it the Tina Turner movie?
	What's the Tina Turner movie where she's in that wasteland and Road Warrior?
	Is it Road Warrior?
	Mad Max.
	Mad Max.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, it's kind of like the Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome sort of website.
	You know, that it's just kind of an it's almost a sort of anarchy.
	And as long as you aren't interfering with the actual functionality of the website, or you aren't there just to make the website miserable for people to use, you're probably going to get away with just about anything you want to do.
	And as long as it's not porn or things that people can't, imagery people can't display on a computer screen in their cubicle at work.
	As long as it's not that sort of stuff, you're probably going to get away with it.
	I mean, how many threads are there with Kazuna AI or Richard Groiper dropping the N-bomb?
	Which, by the way, you guys, I mean, you're going to have to move on to something different.
	I mean, that's kind of old hat, you know, as far as getting a rise out of people.
	I think you're going to need to move on to some new material if you're going to be edgy.
	I don't really think that's getting it done anymore.
	But I like the fact that there's a website where people are routinely dropping horrid, atrocious terms like the N-bomb, and they're not banned.
	Instead, everybody is provided with an opportunity to ridicule them as they please.
	And I think that is the appropriate response.
	Not banning, not deplatforming, not painting people out of photographs in a Stalinistic way.
	It's giving people the opportunity to respond to things and to ridicule things in the way that they see fit.
	And I think that once we get to this point where there are certain types of speech that just simply are not allowed on the internet, whether it's the type of stuff that you're putting forward or whether it's someone coming on and dropping the end bomb or various other forms of what would be considered socially unacceptable speech, which, by the way, Stellar, the things that you say on Bellgab are considered socially unacceptable.
	I don't know if you realize that, but they are.
	I mean, look at the amount of blowback you get from the things you post.
	You're not going on Belgab and calling anybody's mother a cunt.
	You're not going on Belgab and decrying the idea that there were ovens in Nazi Germany and suggesting it wasn't true.
	In other words, you're not going on Belgab suggesting the Holocaust never happened.
	You're not calling people's mothers C-bombs.
	You're not dropping the N-bomb.
	You're simply disseminating the information that we've discussed on this show.
	And for that, I think you are quite possibly one of Belgab's most polarizing figures.
	Like when I see a thread started by you, right away, I understand that there are going to be people who are going to show up and ridicule you.
	There are going to be people who show up and immediately attempt to minimize what it is you're saying without going into the details of what it is you've laid out or in any way attempting to analyze it or judge it on its merits.
	There's just something about you that is polarizing, and I kind of like that.
	There was a period of time where you weren't posting on Belgab, and then when you came back and I saw the number of people who seemed not to like what you were posting, that really pleased me.
	And I wanted you to keep doing it more because when I see this has kind of always been my in life, maybe it's more of an American tendency to prefer the underdog, so to speak.
	But when I see someone like that who is by default catching a disproportionate amount of grief for what it is that they post, my instinctive reaction is for them to want them to post more.
	And so there was a period of time where you weren't posting on Belgab.
	I don't know if you recall what that period of time was or if that even rings a bell when I say there was a period of time, but there was.
	And then when he came back, I was really, I'm sorry, my voice, I'm almost losing my voice.
	And then when he came back, there was a period of time after not having posted for a while.
	He came back.
	I was really pleased to see that you did so.
	And not as much, don't take this as an insult, not as much because of what you post, but because of the resistance that I see to what you post.
	And I'm curious as to what your impressions are of why people are so resistant to what you post on Belgab, particularly considering the audience, the demographic of people who use Belgab.
	Again, these are people who largely spent a span of years listening to somebody like Art Bell bringing on guest after guest, saying things that were not too terribly far removed from the type of content you're delivering to Belgab, yet for some reason, you are probably one of the most roundly critiqued and minimized users on Belgab.
	I guess what's your reaction to that?
	That's really my long-winded question here.
	Well, no insult taken, Labracchi.
	And this place, I have to thank you and Belgab, is the last place that's anti-Orwellian, in my opinion.
	And hopefully you guys can survive this, but you're going to be in for a long slog because a lot of stuff's coming down the pipe.
	Regarding my posts and how people take it, it's free information, and that's what I believe in.
	And I tend to research some, like I say, some things are over the top, lightly gone into, but some are deep stuff that I write, you know, and it's backed up by information.
	And it might be too deep, or people just, they don't want to hear it because it might break some of the fundamental things in their mind that they've already locked into.
	But I like to approach things with an open mind.
	I do get in arguments with people at Bell Gap.
	And I apologize for my behavior.
	What behavior?
	Well, maybe I send a couple insults to a couple people.
	Well, yeah, but you take a lot from people before you return fire, I will say.
	Yeah, I mean, a lot slides off my back.
	That has to be the way, you know.
	Like, I just like to get the information.
	I'm searching for truth.
	And I just like the truth.
	I like to get down to the nuts and bolts and the gears of something and get down to the nitty-gritty, whether it's quantum physics, history, where the, you know, I don't want to go into politics because I know Dr. MD wants me to, but I just think they're all bullshot artists.
	They got handlers.
	It's not them.
	It's the corporate money.
	And it's even deeper than that.
	You know, we've got guys like Rothschild and we got, you know, we got people out there that have so much money.
	They're freaking crazy.
	And think about it this way.
	The national debt is up there about $23 trillion, they say, and that's fiat.
	But then there's gold.
	And if you think about it, gold is what really is valued in an economy, not to mention oil and all this.
	but I hate oil, to be honest with you.
	What I'm trying to say is...
	Why would you hate oil?
	Why would you hate oil?
	I know it helps us get around, but I think...
	It's more than that.
	I mean, if you go to the hospital, every plastic component that's going to be used to save your life is derived from petroleum.
	I mean, there's no part of your life that's not touched by oil in some way.
	And did you know that one barrel of oil extracted from the ground is the equivalent of 20,000 man-hours of labor?
	One.
	The amount of energy that's able to be extracted from one barrel of oil, 20,000 man-hours of labor, there's just no alternative source of energy, at least that's mainstream today, that's going to be able to compete with that.
	It's inefficient and it's dirty.
	And there's free energy out there.
	There's a guy who made a free energy wheel of his NyQuil stuff, Nightingale or whatever, and it flexes in heat and it stiffens up in cold.
	And he put a wheel and it circulates and it's free energy.
	There's solar panels.
	There's wind power.
	There's all kinds of stuff out there.
	I know what you're saying, but you think about all the chemicals that are around in this modern day and Monsanto and the chemtrails and the, it's just, oh, I don't know.
	Yeah, and Dr. MD might be right.
	I probably did go into politics first on that post.
	Well, Dr. MDMD says the reason that you get so much grief is because you overuse technical jargon without explaining what you mean by it.
	He's kind of echoing what I said to you.
	Only I said it, I guess, more diplomatically.
	But it's kind of the same thing.
	And I think that you would benefit yourself in your presentation on Bell Gab if you were to attempt to disseminate information in a way that explains the technical jargon without presenting the technical information.
	I guess that's the best way I could explain it.
	Like, you need to make yourself the conduit through which the technical information becomes understandable.
	Because as I'm quizzing you on certain things here, I'm seeing that you actually do understand what it is that you're talking about.
	You do understand the things that you're posting.
	And where that light bulb went off for me was where you talked about the data being burst at 2.7 odd gigahertz and then slowed down to 2.2 kilohertz.
	Okay, all right, I understand that.
	That makes sense.
	This guy does understand what he's saying.
	But those are the kinds of things that you should be breaking the information down into that I think makes it accessible to people who maybe aren't plugged into this sort of intellectual pursuit.
	Not to say they're not an intellectual, but this isn't really their bag, I guess, so to speak, to use street terminology.
	It's not really their thing.
	So rather than be the person who presents the technical information, you need to make yourself the person who breaks the technical information down in a presentable way for the common reader.
	And I think that in doing so, your credibility is going to multiply by orders of magnitude, and you're going to get a lot less blowback.
	That's just an opinion, though.
	And it's a lot more work on your part, too.
	Yeah, I agree.
	I need to break it down into metaphors.
	And yeah, sometimes it's just a little bit flat.
	It's technical jargon.
	And, yeah.
	I just I'm kind of a conspiracy guy, too, to be honest with you.
	You believe you don't believe Oswald shot Kennedy?
	No.
	You don't believe he fired even a single shot that day, huh?
	He might have been in the area, but I don't think he shot.
	He shot him.
	Well, he was definitely in the area.
	I mean, that's beyond dispute.
	But as to whether he even fired a single shot that day, I think that's where a lot of people start parting ways.
	Yeah, he was a Patsy.
	He claimed to be.
	Oh, he actually did, huh?
	I didn't even know that.
	Yeah, there's a segment where they were moving him from one portion of the Dallas Police Department to another.
	And in the course of being moved from one area to the other, he had to walk past a bunch of reporters, and he actually said the words, I'm a Patsy.
	And that's actually a famous clip.
	I'm surprised you haven't seen that.
	How much did – it was either a Dillinger or it was from the Grassy Knoll.
	Now, how much did his wife love him?
	Or was she upset?
	Or was there a bigger influence going on?
	Because if you notice how she goes over the back of the car, it looks like she throws something.
	And it looks almost like a Dillinger.
	You're talking about Jackie Kennedy?
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, the longstanding story was that she was climbing onto the back of the trunk to retrieve a portion of the president's head that had been blown off.
	But it looked like she made a right gesture with her arm and threw something off the back of the car.
	If you rewind the video and look at it, she throws something off the back of the car.
	Hmm.
	I've never noticed that, actually.
	I'm going to go ahead and take a look at the Zapruder film because there's no way I'm going to be able to sit here contently through the rest of this discussion.
	Zapruder film HD.
	And by the way, they released a remastered.
	Oh, God, I got to see all this bullshit.
	Why is it that I can't get on YouTube and search for something without seeing results from multinational corporate media enterprises all the way down the line?
	CBS, Times, CBS This Morning, The New York Times, Face the Nation, ABC News, CBS This Morning, CNN, CNBC.
	Fuck you, the New York Times.
	Let's see what else.
	ABC News, CNN, CBS Evening News, ABC News, CBS News.
	You want to know why YouTube has been ruined?
	It's because these motherfuckers have decided that any subject you search for on YouTube needs to first be presented to you through the prism of the way the multinational corporate media industrial complex wants you to see these issues.
	So anything you search for on YouTube, you're not going to see one smidget of information about that particular search term until you weed your way through CBS, Time, CBS, The New York Times, Face the Nation, ABC, CBS This Morning, CNN, CNBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, ABC, NBC.
	I mean, it's YouTube has ruined itself.
	This fucking website is so ridiculous now.
	It has no meaning whatsoever.
	And I can't tell you the number of people who've been telling me, Oh, Michael, what you need to be doing, you know, you need to get on YouTube and you need to do some sort of a fuck that I'm not going to get on YouTube and do anything.
	I'm not going to present myself on YouTube.
	I'm not going to commit any content to YouTube, a platform which has roundly decided and which has conspicuously decided and made sure to let everybody know that it's no longer interested in YouTube being about you.
	The you is no longer a part of the tube.
	YouTube is now a mechanism through which mainstream corporate media can propagate whatever message it is they want to sell to you because they feel threatened by regular guys sitting in front of their computers with a web camera.
	They don't like that shit.
	And they feel threatened by it.
	And they see a guy like Styx Hexenhammer666 with 400,000 subscribers.
	And he's just some schlub who got bullied in junior high school sitting in front of his camera with a sitting in front of his computer with a camera with almost half a million subscribers.
	You telling me the people at CNN who have prime time shows with audiences of less than 200,000 people aren't feeling threatened by that shit?
	And so they make these monetary deals.
	They're actually making deals with YouTube where money is changing hands.
	And that's the reason why I go to YouTube and I search for ZapruderFilm HD.
	And I can't just watch the goddamn Zapruder film.
	I have to sift through a bunch of happy horseshit from CBS, Time, CBS, The New York Times, Face the Nation, The New York Post, the Chicago Tribune, MSNBC, CNN, CBS.
	Fuck this.
	What good is YouTube at this point?
	I just want to watch the goddamn Zapruder film.
	If I type Zapruder film, I should see the Zapruder film.
	I shouldn't see some hag with a six-figure income telling me what I need to think about the Zapruder film before I watch it.
	Fuck you.
	Show me the film.
	God damn, YouTube sucks.
	It has utterly been ruined.
	So please, nobody again ever suggests to me that if I'm going to do some sort of a regular broadcast, I've been really, really chomping at the bit here to do some sort of a daily, maybe 30-minute thing just talking about current events and politics and whatnot.
	And I can't tell you how many times it's been suggested to me that YouTube is where I need to be doing this.
	Fuck that.
	I'm never going to do that.
	First of all, I'm going to be demoted.
	I'm never going to be included in anybody's suggested viewing.
	I'm not going to be monetized.
	I won't have any mechanism by which to make money on YouTube unless I want to do the, what is it, the super chat thing, which I don't want to interact with a chat room while I'm doing that sort of thing.
	I just want to have a stream of consciousness and talk.
	I don't want to have some sort of a peripheral interference throwing ideas and spitballs at me while I'm trying to keep my thoughts together.
	That's no way to proceed about this sort of thing.
	So in order to have super chats, I've got to succumb to that.
	And I'm not going to bother with it.
	So if I want to endure all of that and eventually find that I wake up one morning and my YouTube channel has had its wings clipped, yeah, I can go ahead and do that sort of a thing on YouTube.
	But no.
	Honestly, I think the way forward is BitChute.
	The only problem with BitChute is that you go there and every goddamn video I watch, every video I watch, there's some dumb motherfucker underneath the video posting images of oh, the goyam no or the shut it down Hasidic Jew walkie-talkie meme, or it's like, okay, we get it.
	You don't like Jews.
	Fuck off at this point.
	Christ Almighty, we get it.
	You don't like Jews.
	I understand.
	Jews have a disproportionate representative in mainstream media.
	What do you want me to do?
	Maybe it's because Jewish people have culturally a predisposition toward working hard and being successful.
	You ever think of that?
	And people who work hard and are successful find some way to work themselves into successful fields, the nature of which would be things like mainstream media?
	Those are successful fields that successful people go into.
	So yeah, if it's a cultural tendency that you and your people are hardworking and highly educated, you're probably going to wind up in successful fields.
	Broadcasting and media being one of those.
	I'm sorry that CBS Evening News isn't necessarily hiring a disproportionate number of dog run cleaners from the local pound.
	That's just not the way the world works.
	I mean, I don't know.
	Some cultures are known for certain things, and it seems to me that the Jewish culture is known for working really hard and studying and getting really, really well educated.
	And as a result of that, becoming successful.
	And there are just simply inherently certain fields people who are successful wind up in.
	And broadcasting and media is one of them.
	So that's one of the problems I see with BitChute.
	Every time I go there, every goddamn video I watch, there's some shit stain in the comments underneath posting these like Jew hate memes.
	And it's like, okay, enough already.
	Is that what I'm going to have to deal with?
	I can either broadcast on YouTube where my shit's going to be demonetized and demoted, and it's effectively not going to exist.
	I'm not going to be able to grow a listener base of any sort whatsoever.
	Or I can go to BitChute and have all that shit posted in the comments under my videos and then have people pecking at me to ask why I'm not spending eight hours per day deleting that shit.
	So I get to choose one poison or the other.
	I don't know which it is.
	But this all stems from your suggestion that I might take a look at the Zapruder film to see what Jackie Yo did there.
	Oh, Jesus.
	This fucking YouTube has been ruined.
	Okay, here's the Zapruder film.
	I had to scroll down.
	Let me see.
	One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen videos down before I can just see the goddamn Zapruder film.
	Here we go.
	And this is the bad copy where they don't show you the data that exists to the side of the holes in the film.
	Of course.
	And now Jackie crawls up and she picks something up.
	I don't see her throwing it.
	Oh, this is not the Zapruder film.
	They've edited the film.
	Oh, shit.
	And they cut it right after she crawls onto.
	Okay, she crawls onto the trunk and cut.
	They don't show me anything beyond that.
	Well, I remember her throwing her arm to the right.
	Really?
	Mm-hmm.
	Yeah, I've mentioned this previously on this show.
	There's a book that I would recommend you take a look at called Reclaiming History.
	It's written by Vincent Bugliosi or Bugliosi, I think is how he actually pronounced it.
	And it is a point-by-point breakdown of all of the most dominant forms of conspiracy theory that have been applied over the years to the JFK assassination.
	I think this book is like 13 or 1400 pages, 12 to 1,400 pages somewhere in there.
	I can't remember, but I've read it twice, and I started to read it a third time because every time I've read this book, there's been more that I've extracted from it.
	But I think after having gone through this book and after having seen the logic of various events broken down and the way they were broken down, I am confident that JFK was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald.
	And I'm confident that who's the not only did Oswald shoot JFK, but there was this guy, Colonel, I'm a little bit inebriated and tired.
	I haven't been sleeping well because every time I lay down with this stupid flu, my head feels like it's going to explode.
	But the, was it the John Birch Society in Dallas, Texas, the guy that was running that, Oswald took a shot at him with a rifle through that guy's kitchen window.
	I heard about that.
	And that was directly confessed to.
	See, like, people like to present Marina Oswald as if she never conceded to the idea that her husband would have shot anybody.
	And that's just not the case.
	She roundly and unambiguously conceded that he took a shot at that guy, and it was a major turning point in their relationship because he didn't keep his mouth shut about it after he did it.
	He told her about it and freaked her out, and they hid the gun, and it was a whole thing within their relationship that having happened prior to the JFK assassination.
	And you never really hear so much about that.
	I mean, that is conclusively something that Lee Harvey Oswald did.
	He took a shot at that guy from the street next to a shrub in a mailbox through that guy's kitchen window and attempted to kill him.
	The guy lived.
	He, I don't think, was hit at all, in fact.
	But it was close.
	And so that to me demonstrates he had the capacity to point a gun at someone and take a shot at them for political reasons.
	But there's a lot of other information.
	I really recommend that book, Reclaiming History, Vincent Bugliosi.
	And this has come up, I think, on the last couple of Gabcasts.
	Somehow, the last couple of times we've done this show, the Kennedy assassination has come up.
	And I just can't get past this book.
	And I really do think, and that's not to say that, okay, if you study the Kennedy assassination from the perspective of someone who believes that the official story largely was correct, that you have to discount every other conspiracy you've believed in, or that you have to believe every other government lie that's ever been told to you.
	That's not to suggest that, but it is to suggest that perhaps in this case, things largely happen the way we've been told they happened.
	And I'm a believer in that.
	And that's coming from someone who used to be obsessed with the Kennedy assassination.
	I even went down to Dallas and went on the JFK assassination tour.
	I went to the homes that Lee Harvey Oswald lived in.
	And even the home where the famous photograph of him holding the communist manifesto and the pistols and the rifle, even the home where that photo was taken.
	And I'm standing in the backyard right where that photo was taken.
	And there's a little group of about three little Mexican kids staring out a screen door at me like I'm insane.
	They can't understand why I'm in their backyard.
	I mean, I was obsessed with this for a while.
	So it's not like I have some sort of a natural repulsion brought about by exposure to anyone who believes that the story is different from what we've been told.
	But I definitely recommend that book.
	And I think it would open your eyes to a couple of things, perhaps.
	I don't know.
	Well, we've been going about two hours here, and I feel like I'm starting to lose my voice.
	I can do another hour.
	Could you really?
	Well, what do you want to talk about?
	Well, I just posted 22,937, 17 seconds into the Kennedy thing.
	And we have a, looks like she's leaning over, and I heard that Kennedy had a back problem.
	I also heard that there was probably ammonia that he didn't know about that was in his girdle.
	And so he bent over before the actual shot.
	But what's weird is then she leans over, and then you see this shot.
	And I don't know if it's the driver, if it's her.
	Now, this is rumor.
	You know, I'm not, I wasn't there, but it does look weird.
	It doesn't look like it came from the back of the head.
	He certainly wasn't using that Italian rifle from up there, our window way out there was the most inaccurate rifle ever invented.
	See, I don't think that's true because through most of World War II, I need to take a sip of this coffee through most of World War II.
	I think that that rifle was actually the primary rifle used by the Italian army.
	See, that's one of the myths that's debunked by this reclaiming history book is the idea that A. Oswald wasn't a good shot.
	He was.
	In fact, he qualified as a sharpshooter in the Marines.
	And secondly, the idea that the Manliker Carcano, which was the rifle used in the assassination or allegedly used, that it wasn't a good rifle and couldn't be used with any level of accuracy.
	Well, in 1964, a sharpshooter used the actual rifle alleged to be used in the assassination and not only matched Lee Harvey Oswald's shots, both in terms of complexity and in terms of the amount of time required to pull off the shots, he not only matched them, but he exceeded Oswald's alleged shots on that day.
	The range?
	Yes.
	The range and the speed with which he was able to pull them off, he exceeded it.
	In 1964, I forget the name of the shooter that did this, but this was done using Oswald's actual rifle.
	Just like little facts like that, that as conspiracy theorists, in terms of like Kennedy conspiracy theorists, of which I used to be one, there are these certain facts that we've just all kind of accepted over time as legitimate facts.
	Oswald couldn't shoot well.
	Well, that's bullshit.
	The rifle was a piece of garbage.
	Well, that's bullshit.
	Again, someone used the actual rifle to replicate the shots, and the rifle was used routinely by standing armies throughout the world.
	I'd like to see the ballistics on that round, and if they do have the round, matched up forensically to that rifle, and then the heat signature on it, you know, because there's a lot more to determine on ballistics of a bullet.
	You can tell the heat signature of the rivets in the bore.
	You'd have to investigate the bore of the rifle, the round, and the actual angle and the moving car, too.
	And how many rounds did he shoot?
	Seven or six?
	Three.
	Three, yeah.
	First one missed.
	Second one hit the throat.
	Third one had shot.
	And there were three men standing beneath the sixth floor window of the school book depository.
	So they were one floor down under the same window who heard shells hitting the floor as the shots were being fired.
	God, all of those little facts start coming back to me as I think about this.
	There were eyewitnesses who saw a man.
	There were at least two eyewitnesses who saw a man in the sixth floor of the school book depository pointing a rifle out the window, and they assumed it to be a Secret Service agent or a police officer until obviously it was apparent that it wasn't.
	And who was in the know that Kennedy would be driving through Dallas at that time, you know?
	Well, it was a pre-planned trip.
	I mean, it was planned well in advance.
	And the idea that the route was changed at the last minute, that's not true.
	It's not true that the route was changed at the last minute.
	This is all stuff that is broken down in that book, and it's broken down in very refined detail.
	And Vincent Bugliosi, he's no slouch.
	This is the guy that prosecuted the Manson family.
	I also read his book.
	What in the hell is the name of that book about the Manson murders?
	Helter Skelter.
	That's another great book.
	I recommend that one.
	I read that one a couple of times, too.
	He's just, and I'm currently working on the prosecution of George W. Bush for murder, another Vincent Bugliosi book.
	He was a national treasure.
	I mean, he really was.
	And the sad thing about it is that the things that I hear, and he was a staunch Democrat, and the things that I hear him saying about foreign entanglements and the government lying to the people about the reasons for going to war and expending the lives of American soldiers overseas for dubious purposes,
	dubious at best.
	I mean, this is how Democrats used to talk.
	Now, when I listen to them, and I know you don't want to get into politics, but politics enshrouds everything that we engage in in our day-to-day lives, and it's almost impossible not to consider.
	And now, when I listen to Democrats, it's as though they're in favor of going to war with Russia.
	They're upset about pulling trips out of Syria.
	They trust the CIA now.
	They trust the FBI now.
	i mean what's happened i i it's a total inversion of and the same can be said about republicans you know the republicans who used to be all rah-rah about going to war everywhere all over the world now they're against that and now they no longer trust the FBI and the CIA and the NSA.
	And so everything's just been turned on its head.
	And when you listen to a staunch Democrat who, like Vincent Bugliosi, who's been dead for several years, I think he died about 10 years ago.
	And when you listen to the things that he says about geopolitical circumstances and what the United States is doing wrong 10 years ago to hear what was an expression of the mainstream Democrat idea, and then to compare that with what you hear today, it's amazing how things have changed.
	And Essentially, what I hear today, I mean, I hear people who called George W. Bush Hitler and who routinely demanded that he be impeached and locked up for lying to the American people about weapons of mass destruction and sending us to war on false pretenses.
	I now hear those people because they're so upset that Trump says mean things that they now look back on George W. Bush with some sort of nostalgia.
	That was a real president.
	That was a real statesman.
	He was only responsible for the deaths of about a half a million Iraqis and thousands of American lives.
	And whether he lied or not about WMD, I guess that's up in the air.
	You could say that the intelligence community that's been lying to us for the last three or four years also lied to him about WMD.
	Or you could say he lied about it.
	No one's ever really going to know, but I guess the buck has to stop somewhere.
	And I firmly believe that George W. Bush ought to be locked up.
	He ought to be arrested.
	He ought to be charged with about 4,000 or 5,000 counts of manslaughter at the very least and locked up in a federal prison.
	And because he's a former president, that can never happen.
	It won't ever happen.
	It's never going to happen.
	And that apparently is the system of justice that we live under.
	If you are a president of the United States and you take action that results in the deaths of thousands of American citizens resulting from a war that was predicated on false information, on lies, it doesn't matter.
	I mean, you were the president, so nothing's going to happen to you, apparently.
	And if you were to ask Americans, the average American on the surface, just walking down the street, can the president kill people and lie about the reasons why he killed them?
	Can the president take action that results in American citizens getting killed and lie to the American people about why he took those actions without anything happening to him?
	I think the average American citizen walking down the street, when you ask that question, would respond, well, hell no, something's going to happen to him.
	Of course, something's going to happen to him, but apparently not.
	Apparently, the answer to that question is no, nothing will happen to him.
	And so I'm sorry that people are upset that Trump talked about the fact that when you're rich and famous, women will let you grab their pussy.
	I'm sorry that people are upset that Trump called Hillary Clinton a nasty woman, or people are upset that Trump asked the woman to get the loud baby out of the room.
	You know, whatever offense it is people took to various things, go fuck yourself because you know what?
	To my knowledge, he hasn't killed a half a million Iraqis.
	To my knowledge, he's not responsible for ISIS.
	And by the way, I really got tired of people blaming Obama for ISIS.
	That got pretty old pretty fast.
	If you want to blame somebody for ISIS, you need to blame George W. Bush.
	How is it that this guy can go into Iraq, rip Saddam Hussein out of there, a guy who was effectively the only Middle Eastern leader who is known for both incarcerating and killing terrorists, the very people who eventually would evolve or devolve into ISIS?
	How is it that someone can go in there and rip that guy out of power and have his successor blamed for the rise and dominance, eventual dominance of ISIS?
	I can't wrap my head around that.
	I mean, we still are at that point where even though people look back like you listen to Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, even though in their own minds, you know that they look back at George Bush and realize what a disaster he was, but they're afraid to say it in so many terms because George Bush invited each of them to the White House a few too many times.
	So they don't want to say that, but you know they think it.
	So they just go on and on about it being Obama's fault that ISIS came about.
	Sorry.
	You can't pin that shit on him.
	I mean, we could sit around the campfire and pound our feet about what the appropriate handling of the situation in the Middle East might have been.
	We can certainly blame him for what he did in Libya and the approach he took to the whole Arab Spring movement.
	But to blame him for what ultimately resulted in the vacuum of Saddam Hussein having his neck yanked into on a gallows, the result of that being blamed on Barack Obama, who wasn't president until five years after that all went down.
	I mean, that's, I can't understand how people are really able to say that with a straight face.
	I mean, okay, there's plenty to criticize Obama on, but you're going to have to go ahead and blame George W. Bush for that.
	And George W. Bush is getting a pass in ways that George W. Bush has gotten a pass in certain ways that even Barack Obama himself isn't getting.
	I mean, we have even Democrats today looking back at George W. Bush in nostalgic terms and missing him because he's not Trump and because he was the anti-Trump his family and their dynastic political designs represented the anti-Trump movement.
	And so people are looking back on that with some sort of a nostalgia.
	And then those same people that are looking back on that with some sort of a nostalgia are also blaming Barack Obama for various things, like blaming him for the fact that he doesn't want to see Bernie elected, blaming him for the fact that he considers Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to be a threat to the Democrat Party.
	I mean, it's like George Bush, who killed half a million fucking Iraqis and thousands of Americans, is now more revered by the left than Barack Obama is.
	And I would stand by that.
	It's amazing to me.
	I don't even know how I got onto this just now, and I'm sorry you had to sit through that, Steller.
	But I don't do this very often.
	And so when I do it, I have to get certain things off of my chest.
	I think you can understand.
	Yeah, well, there's a lot of misinformation out there, and it's tough trying to get to the bottom of something.
	I understand, you know.
	You're not a Trump guy, are you?
	It surprises me that you're not because, I mean, here you are.
	You're a guy who does not stick to conventional wisdom in terms of what it is you believe and how you present information.
	You're not a mainstream thinker.
	You're not a herd mentality sort of thinker.
	Yet at the same time, here's this guy who's come along and for the first time in my lifetime, taken the biggest shit down the throats of the establishment that's ever been taken.
	And so I would expect someone like you, even if you don't necessarily agree with all of his political objectives, I would at least expect someone like you, as someone who is not of the mainstream to appreciate the degree to which he does not conform.
	Hmm.
	I've posted in other places that if it was up to me and I might get this piss everybody off, I would lay waste to D.C. If I had an army of a million guys and tanks and everything, I'd just lay waste to that whole place and other capitals where these asshole politicians work their shit.
	What I'm saying is, there's just so much disinformation.
	It's like I even have a hard time fathoming we landed on the moon if Stanley Cooper wasn't involved.
	And, you know, maybe I'm dumb.
	Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about.
	But I wouldn't say you're dumb.
	I mean, there are a lot of people who agree with you.
	I think you're wrong, if you believe that, but I don't think you're dumb.
	where's the telemetry where's the uh they say the telemetry is missing from that whole event you know And this is my theory: is that these rockets were shot from Cape Canaveral.
	The astronauts are supposed to go down this rocket and go below ground.
	And then they're on a submarine out there, and then they pick them up somewhere.
	No, I don't know.
	But the Van Allen radiation belt, they had a, what it was?
	How much memory was on board that Apollo rocket for the actual computer to, and the thin, the thinness of that capsule and it, it just doesn't look.
	I don't know.
	I'm not a flat earther either, so don't say I'm that Azuka Langley, but I guess we'd have to know how much radiation exposure there is once you leave the Van Allen belt.
	It's when you leave the Van Allen belt the radiation would be a problem.
	Right going through the Van Allen belt is maximum radiation.
	Oh, is it?
	Yes, and then of course there's more radiation.
	Yeah, and those suits.
	Those suits make me wonder too, you know.
	Yeah, they sewed them up as carefully as they could for the astronaut suits.
	But um, and then the guy's joking, on the merry merry month of may I went for a walk and they're playing golf.
	You know, I don't know.
	I think it would have been a little bit more serious.
	It seems too flippant to you.
	It would have been more serious.
	It seems too much like it's presented for a mainstream consumption.
	Yeah, and there's actually a delay.
	I investigated the speed of light and radio.
	It's not a delay.
	The actual sinking of the frequency is.
	I think I even posted the mathematics behind it, from the moon to here is uh, approximately three seconds, and the transmission they were speaking, it's that much three seconds Around there, and they were speaking, and I matched the actual lips to the actual radio communications, and it wasn't off at all.
	It was real time within a second.
	So that's a mystery to me because I think there would have been a delay in the actual if the audio and the video are transmitting at the same time, they would arrive at the Earth at the same time.
	Yeah, but at three seconds, not one second.
	How would you determine what the actual delay amount was, though?
	You take the speed of light and you take the, I think the distance is a quarter of a million miles away, and then you divide a number into that.
	Well, I mean, how would you know what the actual amount of time was between Neil Armstrong saying something or moving and that being received by an uplink or downlink satellite on Earth?
	I mean, how would you know what that delay was?
	The delay.
	I know how you would determine what the delay should be, but how would you determine what it actually was relative to what it should have been?
	Is my question?
	It shouldn't have been instantaneous.
	There should have been a delay somewhere.
	There should have been something garbled within the communication.
	Okay, so the video is there, and so is the voice, right?
	You have the audio and you have the video, and then you have the lip syncing on the actual video.
	The transmission seemed too instantaneous to be believable to me.
	Now, over TV, how would you make that determination that it seemed instantaneous, too instantaneous, though?
	What would you be comparing that against?
	The actual distance that the signal had to travel from.
	Yeah, I know, but what I'm saying is if I receive a transmission from the moon and I don't know it's coming from the moon, I won't have any idea what that delay time should be.
	Or I might not even know that there is a delay time.
	So, how would I make that determination that the delay time that I'm hearing is not correct relative to what it should be?
	Through astrophysics and radio like what I'm saying is, what are you looking at that allows you to say, ah, yes, I'm looking at the Neil Armstrong transmission from the moon, or I'm looking at the scene where on the very, very month of May or whatever they were singing, what were you looking at that allowed you to view that footage and say the delay was too short?
	The actual footage, I think I even posted it.
	There's a it's so complicated for me right now because I'm well, I don't mean to put you on the spot, I mean, because it's not like you were prepared to answer this question or that you knew this question was coming.
	But do you understand the question that I'm asking you?
	Like, if I mean, if I'm sitting in my living room that night and I'm watching the Walter Cronkite presentation of the landing on the moon, and I determine that the delay of the transmission from the moon is too short relative to what it should be.
	It's only a second or it's a half second relative to the three seconds that you say it should be.
	I'm wondering what I mean, there has to be sort of a benchmark that you're going to point to to say, this is what establishes real time, and so I'm making my comparisons relative to this.
	Do you understand what I mean by that?
	There has to be some sort of a flag planting in the ground that you can hang your hat on and say, this is what we are using to determine real time relative to the speed at which that transmission went from the moon to the earth so that we can make that determination as to how fast or slow the delay was.
	And the other thing I would say is, I mean, if these people are smart enough to pull this off and to fool everybody into thinking we went to the moon when we really didn't, they're going to know what the delay time should be.
	And they're easily going to account for that.
	They're going to build that delay into the transmission in order to give that impression.
	I mean, I can't believe they'd go to all that effort, even going to the extent of having Stanley Kubrick come on board, as many people believe, and they're not going to account for the delay?
	That is a good question.
	I actually have the video that I looked at very carefully, and I'm uploading it right now to the it's just the lips are moving in sync with the audio and the video and he's bouncing up and down in something that looks kind of bizarre.
	It doesn't look real to me.
	And what I know of, a transmission from the moon is somewhat about three seconds.
	I do know that for a fact.
	So are you saying that the audio and the video should not be in sync?
	The way it was so presented, it was instantaneous from the moon to here.
	There was no kind of weird delay.
	There's something really, and I'm uploading the video right now.
	It should be available, and I'll post it at Gabcast.
	And then you have the, not only that, you have the Van Allen belt, you have the tin can capsule, you have the weird stuff going on in the moon, you have missing telemetry, you have, and telemetry is very important, which could be proof.
	And this is on your YouTube channel.
	I don't have the missing telemetry video.
	I did this on Graham Hancock a while ago.
	There was a big discussion on that form about the fake landing.
	And yeah.
	And you're wondering why would they do that?
	And I completely understand why they would do that.
	We're in a Cold War with Russia.
	And think about how much money was spent.
	What was it, $50 billion just to put that whole package together from the very first to the very last bit of that presentation?
	You know?
	Well, why would Russia not have called us out on that, though?
	It seems like such easy pickings, such low-hanging fruit that the Western superpower faked its moon landing.
	I mean, it seems like such an easy thing to call out.
	Why wouldn't they have done so?
	Well, the rockets did.
	Did they have the ability to track the actual rockets?
	I don't know.
	Did they have the ability to track them?
	This is my theory, is that rocket did go up.
	And if you notice the angle of the angle, it goes horizontal just where it nears the edge of space.
	And so to me, maybe it circumnavigated where the satellites are at, just before that Van Allen belt, and gets up there just kind of like where our space shuttles go.
	And they kind of cruise around.
	And we do.
	What gets me is the space station.
	You know, is that an arm's length of the Van Allen Belt, or is that still considered below it?
	You know?
	But yeah, this video is quite a long video.
	It's processed.
	It's processing.
	So it already got there at YouTube and now it's processing.
	Yeah, I'm refreshing on your YouTube page here.
	There's all kinds on the uploaded videos, the most recent one of which was posted six hours ago.
	This is your negative Gadda, you're not going to eliminate video is the most recent one.
	So I'll just keep refreshing until I see this new one come up.
	But it just seems to me that it seems to me that we had the technology in 1968 to go to the moon.
	It doesn't seem like it was beyond us.
	Not in terms of rocketry, not in terms of computational ability, not in terms of mechanics, not in terms of robotics.
	It just doesn't seem like it was beyond us at that point to me.
	Like for 1968 technology, it is impressive in terms of it being a landmark event in the existence of humanity.
	It is impressive in those terms.
	But in terms of the technology that we had at our disposal, I mean, keep in mind, we had split the atom and produced nuclear explosions 28 years prior to this, or maybe 25 or 26 years prior.
	So, I mean, obviously, our ability to do complex math and to our engineering abilities almost three decades later, I'm not particularly impressed from that standpoint by the fact that we went to the moon.
	And I'm only impressed by it in terms of it being a seminal moment in the existence of humanity.
	Our first foray into the cosmos and planting our feet on a non-earthly body.
	And that was the whole context.
	I'm impressed.
	What was the whole deal with that one astronaut posting a lemon on the rocket, you know, with a hangar?
	I don't know anything about that.
	Tell me.
	Oh, really?
	There was an astronaut that both the three astronauts that were burned up in the rocket, and he had posted a lemon that hung from the rocket itself as a joke.
	He was a real jokester, joker kind of guy.
	GrahamHancock.com.
	Hold on a second.
	Okay.
	I wish those guys never banned.
	Gus Grissom?
	Exactly.
	Gus Grissom.
	Yeah.
	He was a real joker guy.
	A good guy, you know?
	Okay.
	Okay.
	NASA pressed on.
	In mid-January 1967, preparations were being made for the final pre-flight tests of spacecraft 012.
	In January 67, before returning to Cape Kennedy to conduct the January 27 plugs-out test that ended his life, Grissom's wife Betty later recalled that he took a lemon from a tree in his backyard and explained that he intended to hang it on that spacecraft, although he actually hung the lemon on the simulator, a duplicate of the Apollo spacecraft.
	What is the significance of that?
	I think he's implying that the whole program is bullshit.
	Lemon.
	It's a lemon.
	Yeah.
	The spacecraft is a lemon.
	Well, he wouldn't have been the first astronaut to go into the space program believing he was going to be orbiting the Earth in something that wasn't suitable for maintaining human life.
	Who was the Russian astronaut?
	Russian astronaut.
	There was a Russian cosmonaut.
	His name was Vladimir Mikhailovich Kamarov.
	Vladimir Mikhailovich Kamarov.
	I think that's how you pronounce that middle name, Mikhailovich.
	He died in April of 1967.
	He was a test pilot for the Soviets.
	And he actually was the backup cosmonaut to orbit the Earth in, let me see.
	Okay, so Yuri Gagarin was supposed to take this flight, but Gagarin was sick, and so this Komarov guy, Vladimir Komarov, was the backup pilot.
	the backup cosmonaut, but Yuri Gagarin knew that the space shuttle, or not the shuttle, but the spacecraft was not suitable for flight.
	He knew that it was going to kill him.
	But considering the nature of the Soviet Union at that time, he had no choice.
	If they ordered him to go into space, into Earth orbit in this craft, he had to go.
	But he was sick, and so he was sidelined, and his backup, this Vladimir Komarov, was selected to take his place, and they were good friends.
	And Gagarin knew that this effectively was a death sentence for Vladimir Komarov, and that he, in fact, had condemned Kamarov to death as a result of his own sickness and being sidelined from the space program.
	And the legend of this story is that at the time this flight was taking place, Gagarin actually went to the facility where the launch was taking place, put his flight suit on, and demanded to be put on the flight because he didn't want to be responsible for the death of—I mean, that's how confident he was that this flight was going to result in the death of a human being.
	And he demanded to be allowed onto the flight, and he was physically restrained and not allowed on.
	And instead, Vladimir Kamarov took the flight.
	And the spacecraft depressurized rapidly while re-entering Earth orbit, and his blood effectively boiled, and he died almost instantly.
	And as he was re-entering Earth's atmosphere, he knew what was happening, and he got on the radio, and several ham radio operators actually recorded audio of him cursing the Soviet government and the engineers behind the design of this spacecraft, which that's how confident he was that he was going to die as he was re-entering Earth's atmosphere.
	Because at that time, as a Soviet citizen, particularly over a radio that's being unencryptedly broadcast all over the world as you're re-entering Earth's atmosphere, you're not going to condemn the Soviet regime and the engineers responsible for the design of the craft that's about to take your life, unless you're sure that your life is over with.
	And he was certain that his was about to end.
	And it did.
	The cabin depressurized rapidly, which causes the I think what happens is the hydrogen atoms separate from the oxygen atoms in your blood, and you effectively have a boiling effect.
	Your blood pretty much boils within your body when that sort of rapid depressurization happens.
	And he died.
	And you can get on YouTube right now, in fact, and listen to the recordings of him re-entering Earth's atmosphere and cursing the Soviet government and the people responsible for the fact that he was going to die.
	And this was an event that haunted Yuri Gagarin until the day that he died.
	He felt personally responsible for this guy's death.
	They were close friends.
	And I go into this story simply to point out that it's not the first time an astronaut went into a situation believing that his equipment was substandard and perhaps there was nothing he could really do about it, if that was, in fact, the message that was being conveyed by Gus Grissom.
	There is a rocket graveyard along with the satellite graveyard in the Pacific that I went somewhere on the internet, and there's an actual graveyard.
	For some reason, it's a similar location where they crashed, even though we do have those mistakes where the satellites collide or the satellites end up somewhere else.
	And when they burn out above the layer is that?
	Something in some layer up in the atmosphere, high space.
	But that's kind of ironic if that's true that the rockets and the satellites would land in the same place.
	I guess it's north of Hawaii or south.
	There's a graveyard somewhere in the Pacific where these rockets, all our technology is landing in the discarded below the ocean.
	You mean just by happenstance this stuff is crash landing there, or that's where they take it after it crashes?
	No, I think it's planned where they go.
	And so it's like a place where it safely can go instead of landing right in the middle of America or somewhere, you know.
	But there's the Antarctica thing, you know, it's just why can't we all go there?
	You know, or why, you know, it's only like a special place, you know.
	There's so much going on with this planet.
	The Spacecraft Cemetery, known more formally as the South Pacific Ocean Uninhabited Area, is a region in the southern Pacific Ocean east of New Zealand where spacecraft have reached the end of their usefulness and are routinely de-orbited and destroyed.
	So, yes, I see what you're saying.
	Yeah, it's interesting.
	It really is in the middle of nowhere.
	Golly.
	Yeah.
	Man, that must really be releasing some nasty shit into the water.
	God.
	Oh, yeah.
	You can't.
	I mean, forget Fukushima.
	What kind of radioactive properties does this stuff have?
	I would think they've been including nuclear technology and satellites and various other spacecraft for many decades now.
	You know, Librachi, what gets me is the Chinese have orbited the moon and the dark side of the moon.
	And it's like we haven't gone back there if they said we did.
	And it'd say, well, we're going to go back there.
	And, well, you know, and then there's that.
	Remember that one sitcom movie?
	It was 2010 or whatever, where they had a moon base.
	It was that one TV show.
	It was kind of interesting.
	No.
	I forget the name of it.
	Yeah, I think I watched it as a kid.
	They actually had a moon base.
	It was a sitcom?
	Yeah, some kind of show where they had a moon.
	There was a base on the moon.
	Moonbase 8?
	Let me see that.
	Moonbase 8.
	It was something to be moon base 8.
	No, it was like Moon 2010 or whatever.
	Moonbase 8.
	Moonbase 8.
	It looks like John C. Riley, Tim Heidecker, and someone else.
	I don't think that's what you're referring to.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	What's your thoughts on 9-11, Librashi?
	Well, I don't believe that thermite paint was painted in the building and used to bring the building down.
	I think it's absurd to believe that.
	I think, oh, who's the shit?
	Who's the guy that was the Jesse Ventura?
	I think he has exposed himself to be such a meat-headed idiot as a result of the things that I've heard him say about 9-11.
	And if you question him publicly on it, he just gets in your face and tries to alpha mail you, thank you for your service.
	So if you weren't in the military, apparently you're not allowed to have an opinion on 9-11, according to Jesse Ventura.
	Well, that's stupid.
	He's a fucking meat-headed dumbass.
	And I mean, that's not to say there aren't questions that should be asked about 9-11, but you've got a guy like Jesse Ventura involved, and suddenly the process of asking those questions and the motives behind doing so become precipitously less credible.
	We'll put it that way.
	I mean, Jesse Ventura is like one of the worst ambassadors anybody could possibly have for asking questions about 9-11.
	But I don't believe that the Bush administration perpetrated 9-11.
	I do believe that they used it as a means to pursue their multinational neoconservative agenda.
	But I don't believe that they orchestrated it.
	I don't believe that they deliberately allowed it to happen.
	I mean, there are several weaknesses in government that could be pointed to that could illustrate why that sort of an attack would fail to be prepared for.
	I mean, there was Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelik who was instrumental in putting into place this information wall that existed between the CIA and the FBI, which, honestly, you know what?
	I believe that wall should exist.
	I don't believe that the CIA and the FBI should be communicating because the purpose of the CIA is to spy on overseas targets, to spy on foreign targets.
	So I don't want our nation's preeminent domestic police agency communicating with our nation's international spy agency.
	Sorry.
	No, I don't want that.
	And that was a major critique of the Clinton administration was that their Justice Department put into place that separation between international intelligence and domestic intelligence.
	And that was what was blamed for 9-11 and not being able to connect the dots between those.
	But as I see it, the separation of information in those two different pipelines was a result of an effort to preserve civil liberties for American citizens.
	You don't want the international spy agency, the CIA, or the NSA being used for the purpose of gleaning information about domestic communications and American citizens who have not left this nation's borders.
	And that's what that separation of information was designed to prevent.
	It was an attempt to preserve civil liberties.
	And, I mean, maybe it was counterproductive because it can be argued, I suppose, that as a result of that separation, it sort of facilitated a 9-11 style event occurring.
	And look what we got after 9-11.
	We got anything but civil liberties.
	We got the Patriot Act, and we got secret warrants, and we got people checking in on your library book checkouts, checking in on your checkouts.
	That sentence structure made a lot of sense.
	So we got anything but civil liberties at the end of all of that.
	So perhaps it was counterproductive at the end of everything.
	Go ahead.
	iPhone in the toilet, NSA.
	I shouldn't laugh about this.
	This is very serious stuff.
	You know, we were talking about, you know, considering what happened.
	What gets me about that whole 9-11 thing is the stock analysis of the airlines.
	They sorted whoever they did it.
	There was a big short on the stocks of the airlines prior to and also that $2.4 trillion that went missing, which is pretty weird on a Monday announcement.
	And then the next day, I think it was 9-11 happened.
	Yeah, what a coincidence.
	Rumsfeld mentions the $2.4 trillion.
	Trillion.
	God damn, a trillion is $1,000 billion.
	A billion is $1,000 million.
	So $2,400 billion missing from the Pentagon budget.
	That gets announced by Donald Rumsfeld, and they're going to look into it.
	And then the next day, 9-11 happens.
	And a lot of people would point to that as, oh, well, that's why.
	Well, I mean, let's break that down logically then.
	If 9-11 were some sort of an event designed to obscure the $2.4 trillion missing dollars and to take attention and move it elsewhere, why bother doing the $2.4 trillion announcement at all?
	It would make no sense to do that at all.
	You wouldn't make that announcement.
	You got one more goddamn day to wait, and the World Trade Center is going to come down, and one-eighth of the Pentagon is going to be missing.
	If you just wait one more day, well, by God, you're not going to bother making that announcement if there is some sort of conspiracy afoot to divert attention away from that terrible news.
	So you would just simply not make the announcement.
	And so that's where the logic on that, for me, falls apart.
	Okay.
	Why does Rothschild have about $4 trillion in assets, liquid and not only liquid, what should I say?
	There's two forms of assets, right?
	Liquid and what's paper, I guess.
	And then the deficits, $23 trillion, the national deficit.
	And you have this one guy who has about $4 trillion on his own.
	So it makes you wonder, you know, just how sick is this world?
	You know?
	I'm not really sure how to respond to that.
	I mean, the world has always been a place where a select few have had a disproportionate amount of wealth.
	That's just always been the order of the world.
	I mean, it's not.
	Yeah, that makes sense.
	It's not something, it's not a new phenomenon.
	I mean, if anything, the very mention of the name Rothschild, or is it Rothschild or Rothschild?
	It's all the same.
	Okay, well, anyway, the very mentioning of that name is illustrative of the fact that this is not some sort of a new phenomenon.
	You know, a select hyper-elite having possession of a vastly disproportionate amount of global GNP.
	That's not new.
	I mean, the Rothschild family goes back centuries, don't they?
	I mean, this is.
	Yeah, they conned Napoleon out of the English stocks.
	They gave him misinformation, and that's how they made their shit bang.
	You know, they had Napoleon was marching in or out, and he conquered something or he didn't.
	But the English, you know, the stocks were going this way, so they pushed down the currency of the stocks.
	And then Rothschild made a smoking amount of money, and he just, they're bankers, you know, and banking makes you wonder.
	Well, maybe that's maybe that's a commentary on the uselessness of the banking industry.
	Like we have an entire class of people who don't actually produce anything.
	They just move money around in symbolic ways.
	Like not even real money.
	It's money represented on a piece of paper.
	So this guy owns that amount of money.
	And that can be represented in terms of actual cash that should he choose to, he can get his hands on at this moment.
	Or it could be represented in terms of how much he made yesterday by converting from one currency to another and doing so at the right time.
	That's how George Soros apparently made all of his money is by shorting currencies.
	And I mean, I've done some of that myself.
	You can, I mean, in my case, I've for years closely watched the Moroccan currency, the Deerham, relative to the American dollar.
	And many times over the years, what I've done is when I see the Moroccan deerhim get to a point where the deerhim is really, really expensive, let's say you can only get seven deerhims for $1.
	And so that's when I will sell a whole bunch of deerhims.
	And then when the deerhym gets more cheap, where you can get 11, 10 or 11 deerhims, let's say, relative to the dollar, it's not been up to 11 in my recent memory, actually, but it's been close to 10 at points.
	And when it gets to that point, then you just buy up a whole bunch and set it aside.
	And then it gets cheap.
	And then the deerhim gets more expensive, and then you resell that into U.S. currency.
	And you can keep doing this again and again and again.
	And you build up a pretty, I mean, if you do it right, you can actually do pretty well for yourself.
	And I've done this on numerous occasions over the course of, well, over about a 13-year period of time now.
	And that's how George Soros made his money, although he did it on a much larger scale with much more complexity, spanning many, many currencies, and on a level that I wouldn't even know where to begin with.
	May I interject?
	Yeah, go ahead.
	Let me just read something.
	The IRS and low-interest rate shell game is worse than gambling.
	It's a three-shell game.
	You may wonder what the song is about rich men flying around the most expensive Learjets, clubbing off your tax dollars.
	When I was in my teenage years, I remember the con.
	My dad wanted to go to New York in a winter trip where I was born for a visit.
	We were middle class, so we took the 1980 Impala Brown station wagon for a three-mile spin, 3,000-mile spin.
	My dad, brother, and I drove non-stop, taking turns.
	We made it to New York safe and sound.
	I remember four things vividly 42 years ago.
	I came home drunk, a mansion burned down from a dried-out Christmas tree.
	My dad punched me in the mouth too drunk to feel the pain.
	Oh, yes.
	And this, the visit to the World Trade Center, where nowadays America is up there about the other con, a place where trade stocks, you know, the pump and dump cycle every 10 to 13 years, but I'm talking about the shell game.
	Yet that is nothing compared to what you may not really know.
	The reason for the really rigged game, I believe, is worse than roulette.
	Darn, I wanted $450 at the Bling Flingo.
	The shell game is about low interest rates and taxes to keep you what, why, how, for who, just in case you read this again.
	Getting in the nuts and bolts of the scam.
	Here's what the secret: the Fed, but the central banks don't need your tax dollars.
	Believe me, they have enough tools and other schemes which bring in loads of fiat.
	The con is far worse than a pyramid scheme.
	I'm surprised no one has caught on.
	The fleecing of your wealth through taxation is to keep you working in fear of credit score against Neo.
	They need you as a slave for again, Neo.
	They need you as a slave for the happy-go-lucky you got at 1%.
	Pretty shitty, right?
	The taxes allow the rich to have low interest rates to suck the piggy, the big titty of the octopus corporation for more dollars because the low interest rates allow for them to borrow.
	And can you see you go, you are at COG Neo feeding the 1% gear?
	Yes, the time I worked at the place where they go postal when I was only three years, three days sorting mail, the manager came up to me being a temp.
	Here it said, slave, you're going for you go get more mail.
	Sadly, I was sucking down blue pills worse than the Matrix ever dreamed, and I did not have a modem.
	You deny this, right?
	Saying, well, the guberment told me that 3-3, the show me a pie chart, one-third Dodd, one-third healthcare, one-third other.
	Get it?
	This is the national debt.
	Get it?
	Three shell game.
	When the Rothschild owns net assets worth twice as much as the chart said is expensive, to which the guberant says it pays for something is not right in Dodge.
	Once again, Neo, stop talking.
	Stop taking the poisonous blue pill.
	You are there, you are made a slave porch monkey, right?
	You see, taxes hold true for your fear to give to the rich cheap borrowing power.
	So they can truly tax your ass, you pump and dump corporations books tainted from bean counters.
	Believe me, I have seen how companies deny taxes through Caribbean, America, the Caribbean.
	America has a dirty laundry, stinky, money-smelly.
	Come on, wake up.
	If your tax dollars are working for us, then why the decay?
	Overspending on alligator shoes for senators, implosion of infrastructure, everyone moaning about healthcare, suicide via pill, alcohol, fast restaurant diet.
	Yet, those senators own who those yet those senators owned by the lobbyists are not going to fire Trump.
	He is even going to screw over America Royal plan so he will rule.
	He rules like Putin.
	Just ask Ted Turner, oh, yes, we need to get rid of 2 billion people.
	So this is all a lie.
	The 3-3 shell game, the IRS, the low interest rate shell game, it's worse than that.
	And I have the post at Graham Hancock.
	I just went off on my little tirade, so excuse me.
	Who wrote that?
	I did.
	Do you have any comments to offer beyond what you just read there?
	The main thing is about the interest rates.
	They keep them so low they want to go negative.
	It's so you know, interest rates are.
	They're already doing that in parts of Europe.
	Negative interest rates where you actually have to pay the bank to put your money in the bank account.
	It's crazy because they're up to something.
	They're spending a lot of money.
	They're investing a lot of money in something.
	I don't know what it is.
	Or if you get a home loan, the bank actually pays you to take the loan.
	It's creepy stuff.
	It's creepy stuff.
	Something is inherently out of balance when that's occurring.
	There's a fundamental relationship between borrowing and lending and what the experience should be for either party on either side of that exchange as either a borrower or a lender.
	And when you get to the point where the lender is paying the borrower to take money and buy something with it, that seems to suggest that people are being shielded from some sort of an economic truth that has yet to fully manifest itself in a way that it can't be hidden anymore.
	In other words, there must be some sort of a collapse on the horizon that people are having obscured for them from them by people who don't want whatever panic would ensue or who don't want to face whatever other economic repercussions would occur if it were known that there's some sort of an implosion on the horizon.
	I mean, if I see a bank actually paying someone to take money from them or requiring people to pay money when they put that money in a savings account, that means that something has happened somewhere in an economic system that is totally antithetical to what you would call healthy economics.
	Something has become sick and diseased, and there's an attempt at compensating for that.
	There's an attempt at obscuring it and compensating for it and hoping that in doing so long enough you'll be able to tread water like this, paying people to take a home loan or charging people to put money in a savings account,
	that you'll be able to do this ass backwards nonsense long enough that it A, obscures the problem, the fundamental problem economically that exists, and that B, the otherwise improper exchange of cash, as mentioned there, would itself alleviate whatever economic problem exists.
	And if things have gotten bad enough that banks are paying people in Europe negative interest rates, meaning banks are actually paying you to take a home loan, what does that mean?
	Something is very, very wrong.
	I mean, they are treading water of some sort, and I don't have the expertise or the knowledge to know exactly what it is.
	It's basically exuding it, or it's shelling itself out, and all these people on the streets at Seattle, L.A., there's a ton of people who are just the middle class are being socked so hard that they're finding themselves homeless.
	And there's no middle class or poor anymore.
	It's kind of blending together.
	But in the 70s, I got a bank account.
	It made sense to me that they said there was an interest rate on it.
	Even back then, it didn't provide for the cost of living, so it didn't even balance out there.
	And I can see why these guys put their money into certain stocks, like Microsoft.
	You get a good return if you get picked the right one.
	But it really is a casino.
	And the whole money creation system, it's just a farce.
	I always found it amazing that George Bush was going to come along and ban online gambling, but I could go out and day trade in stocks all day long if I chose, and no one's going to bat an eyebrow.
	It's considered legitimate and even respectable if I somehow make money doing it.
	But if I go into a casino and I count cards and make money that way, or if I otherwise engage in what people would call classic gambling, somehow that's frowned upon and even viewed as a vice.
	Even if you're successful at it, there's still a stigma attached to it.
	And I never understood that.
	How is stock trading, the stock market, people selling short, much of which is done based on inside information.
	I mean, if you look at the number of people who are actually convicted for insider trading relative to the number of people who engage in it, it's a minuscule percentage of people who are ever convicted.
	You might see some sort of a token case like Martha Stewart, who really wasn't even convicted for insider trading.
	She was convicted for lying to the FBI.
	She might have been charged and convicted for insider trading.
	I don't know.
	But I think the thing that actually sent her to jail was lying to the FBI, which, by the way, kids, is a life lesson in why you don't talk to the FBI ever about anything.
	If you're ever questioned by the FBI, just tell them, you know what?
	I'm going to exercise my right not to be interviewed and not to grant a statement.
	Have a good day.
	Don't ever talk to the FBI.
	There's nothing good that can happen for you as a result of talking to the FBI.
	But you get these people that think they're savvy and they think they're plugged into some sort of an informational pipeline that's going to help them navigate whatever minefields the FBI throws at them.
	And then you end up like General Flynn, Michael Flynn, thinking he's just having a routine conversation at work with a guy who works in the government with him, who happens to be an FBI agent, not even realizing you're being interviewed by the FBI, and you get convicted of lying to the FBI.
	It's the most ass-backward system.
	Law enforcement, as determined by the Supreme Court, is allowed to lie to you.
	But if you lie to federal law enforcement, you're going to go to jail.
	It's the most ass-backward system ever.
	So, yeah, don't ever talk to the FBI.
	But getting back on point, there will occasionally be a sort of token conviction for insider trading or for charges related to it, like a Martha Stewart, just to let the public know, hey, you better be good.
	But short of that, it doesn't go much further than that.
	The real people who ought to see the inside of a jail cell rarely do.
	I've seen an inside of a jail cell for three months down at Bailey's by the border of San Diego and Mexico, and it's one of the shittiest jails, I can tell you, on the planet, and it is no fun.
	Bologna sandwiches soup from I don't know where.
	And they had lockdown so many times, and it's what did you go to jail for?
	I went to jail for I got in a collision when I was manic on the highway on the 8, which I also did some investigating into.
	That's another story.
	I heard a voice that said, seven times hit them, hit them, hit them.
	But at the same time, I was thinking about meteorites.
	All of a sudden, my truck collided with a motorcycle.
	And so I continued down on the road, and then I pulled over.
	And then the cops came up, and they said, something happened up there.
	I said, yeah, but a meteorite hit me.
	I was experiencing, I experienced bipolar mania.
	So Dr. MD is not far off from what that is.
	I do have that in my genetic code, unfortunately.
	But that's what happened.
	And you really believed that a meteor hit you.
	I was thinking I spent two or three hours up in Julian watching the stars and the meteors fly by.
	And so on my way back, that was in my mind when I was thinking at the time, you know, when you're in a state of mania and psychosis from, and I had taken a little bit of marijuana and I also have a condition which is bipolar.
	So that just and I was going to get into telepathy with you following this, but that's what I wanted to talk about.
	But so I was just saying that, yeah, kids and girls and men and women do not go to jail.
	What did they get you for, leaving the scene?
	They called it hit and run, but they let me out in three months because they realized that I had a bipolar condition.
	It took three months, though.
	That seems pretty long.
	Yeah, it does.
	But it could have been, if those people died, it could have been seven years in Chino.
	So I'll take the three months.
	You don't eat bologna ever since.
	I'm sure that you've not had a bologna sandwich since.
	Is that correct?
	Correct.
	And it's not the good bologna, if you know what I mean.
	Oh, boy.
	But telepathy.
	What's your thoughts on telepathy?
	I don't know.
	It's one of those subjects where you want to believe, you want to believe that there's some sort of a sort of cosmic interface that humans have the ability to be plugged into.
	But it seems pretty conclusive to me that every time it's studied under clinical conditions, it's demonstrated to be horseshit.
	Yeah.
	Like, I've listened to what's his name, James Randy.
	I really enjoy that guy.
	He's sort of a skeptic.
	And I've listened to speeches he's given about telepathy and studies that have been launched to get to the bottom of it.
	And to my knowledge, there has never been a study conducted in which a human being's ability to possess information or receive information or transmit information via the mind has exceeded mere chance or happenstance when studied under clinical conditions.
	You know, which card am I holding in my hand here as you hold the card up behind a wall?
	You know, that sort of thing.
	What shape is drawn on this piece of paper?
	Last year my dog died.
	How did my dog die?
	You know, that sort of stuff.
	I'm not aware of any clinical study where humans have been demonstrated to have these abilities that could be attributed to anything beyond mathematical chance, guess, guesswork.
	You know, I mean, like if I hold the card up behind the wall, what suit is this card?
	Well, you've got a one in four chance of guessing the correct suit.
	And I'm not aware of any study that has demonstrated the subject is able to predict or make the call in excess of 25% of the time.
	Now, having said that, I don't mean to suggest I've poured a lot of hours into researching and absorbing studies that have been conducted.
	But if there is a study that's been conducted where it has been demonstrated that humans have some sort of an ability along these lines that's not quite explained, but at the very least is demonstrable, I'd be interested to know about it, but I'm not aware of it.
	And one would think if it is possible, if it does really work under the right conditions, like DMT or whatever they use, that you could communicate to the ends of the universe in split second, you know, or whatever it takes, just as much time as the mind processes, which is pretty fast.
	There are also instances where, for instance, you'll get people, which I don't know if this is considered telepathy necessarily, but you'll get people who are mediums and they claim to be able to communicate with the dead or see events that occurred in various physical locations in the past, and they're able to present that information to you.
	And there's a really great YouTube video where they went to, it was like a beer restaurant, it was like a bar or some sort of a restaurant.
	And before they called these people up, they put a fake history of the restaurant up on the internet, and they left it up there long enough for Google to index it and for it to come up when you would Google search it.
	And then they called in these psychics and mediums and asked them to come in and do a reading on the place.
	And every single one of these people that came in there regurgitated information that was extracted from the fake history of this location that was put on the internet.
	And it was so embarrassing.
	I mean, like, as you're watching this, it's like being at the mall and seeing someone bend over and like the seam and the ass of their jeans rips and they're not wearing underwear.
	You know, the amount of embarrassment you would feel for that person, even though you're an external party.
	You're not in any way connected to those events, but you still feel a level of personal embarrassment.
	And that's what you feel when you're watching this.
	And that's a video I would definitely recommend people look up on YouTube.
	Of course, you'll have to sift through all the CBS, ABC, NBC, Washington Times, Washington Post, New York Times, Atlanta Journal, Constitution, Chicago Sun-Times, L.A. Times, bullshit, before you can find that video.
	But once you do, you'll find it interesting.
	And that's not to say that that's anything conclusive, but I just feel like it's a slice of this subject.
	You know, it's a slice of this discussion to point out, I guess in an almost anecdotal sense, you could say what it is that was demonstrated at that restaurant that day with those people.
	Well, I found something pretty interesting in a mural with hieroglyphics on it near the King's Chamber, or I don't know where they actually found the mural, but I had made theories on the King's Chamber.
	And in a post at Graham Hancock, I just put the link in in the bell gab.
	It's post 22943.
	And there's an interesting mural.
	And it shows either, I don't know who the hawk might represent, Ra, with a red ball on his head, the sun.
	And then there's a, it looks like an Egyptian woman.
	And there's these little flower cups from her mind.
	And they're pointing towards Ra.
	And either that's representation of light, but she's using her hands.
	And Ra is looking at her.
	And I theorized about telepathy involved in there.
	I think the pyramid complex is a multifaceted, multifunctioning device.
	And these people there, not only the Greys, helped them out building it.
	They had their slaves, the people.
	They had, it's in a neutrino communication harmonic piezioelectric device.
	It's there back then in the Nile, there was causeways.
	There are tunnels.
	There's even a void within the pyramid they lately discovered, which I think is a bunch of, there's a bunch of gold in there.
	But this telepathy thing, I find it very interesting.
	Wheatgrass was used more than 6,000 years ago by the ancient Mesopotamians.
	5,000 years ago, the priests, the pharaohs, and other ancient Egyptians used wheatgrass for their health.
	Babylonian Kinnegan Pachesar attributed improvements, physical and mental health to his consumption of wheatgrass.
	Almost 2,000 years ago, during the first century, essence and wheatgrass is a healing food.
	Now that enhances the DNA within the third eye of your mind.
	There's actually a part of your brain where the melatonin and the spirit molecules in terms of spiritual experiences melatonin quite the body and the mind, allowing access for higher consciousness.
	Both the peniline and the DMT secreted by a healthy activated pineal gland are psychoactive, causing changes in perception, mood, consciousness, cognition, and behavior.
	And it enables visions, dream states in the conscious mind.
	It has been used by ancient Egyptians, Zoristans, and their rituals.
	DNA application is said to resonate with the pulse life of eight cycles per second.
	So it's kind of a deep post, but you have dreams, and dreams are symbolic and they have meaning.
	Then you have these people, so-called people who say they're telepaths or these psychics.
	And some of these people that you come by, they may be operating in a different plane, you know.
	But I just wanted to throw that out there.
	The pyramid also has those two copper wires.
	And they were really into the eye of Horace, these guys.
	And that might symbolize the third eye as well.
	And anyway.
	I think dreams are rather interesting.
	I heard you mention dreams a moment ago.
	And it struck me, I've been meaning to look this up.
	I've been having a lot of dreams recently about my childhood home.
	And I wasn't sure why.
	And I'm find dream interpretation.
	You said dreams have meaning.
	Maybe they do.
	But I find dream interpretation to be rather suspect.
	And I'm reading here one of the most common.
	I mean, I'm telling you, I probably have a dream about my childhood home twice a month, which I would consider rather frequent, considering those are of the dreams that I'm able to remember.
	So there are probably other dreams I'm having about my childhood home that I don't even remember.
	So that would probably indicate that the frequency is more than twice a month.
	It says here, one of the most common meanings of a dream about a childhood home is our nostalgia for the old days.
	Possibly you are experiencing some challenging moments in your life, and the dream represents the attempt of your subconscious mind to find some relief in remembering the carefree life in your childhood days.
	But the weird thing about it is that when I have these dreams about my childhood home, there's always some sort of like the interior of the home is never the same.
	And it's things are always really creepy and drab, and the layout is always different inside the home.
	And it's almost frightening, actually.
	So what the hell's that mean?
	Wow.
	It's never just like a dream where I'm in the home and it's as it was when I was actually a child.
	It's always a creepy, almost frightening redesign of the interior of the home.
	Does that mean I potentially could be a serial killer?
	I want to know what this means.
	I want to understand what the dream is.
	Is it recurring?
	Where you have this dream and it's just a creepy, dusty trend.
	It's different every time.
	But the one common denominator is that every time I have the dream about my childhood home, the interior is not what it actually was.
	The interior is different from dream to dream, but it's never congruent with the actual interior of the home.
	And it's always creepy and drab and dirty and not livable.
	In other words, I wonder what in the hell that means.
	If anybody wants to call in and tell me what that dream means, I don't know.
	573-837-4948.
	I'm surprised no one is called in tonight.
	I mean, there was a, I don't know how many people are listening right now, but there was a point at which we had quite a chunk of listeners on tonight's show, and I'm surprised that nobody called in.
	The man who fell to earth says, I would lay waste to MV's childhood home.
	Oh, these guys are so funny.
	I don't know what that means.
	Why would you lay waste to my childhood home?
	These Belgap people are just funny.
	Cat Smiles says it's a classic anxiety dream.
	I don't feel like I live with anxiety, though.
	I used to have many years ago, I used to have, Pate says it means George Cinda is my father.
	Years ago, I used to have anxiety attacks, panic attacks, and I was able to get rid of those by just hiking in the forest and being out among nature and breathing the free, fresh air and going out with my yellow lab, my dog.
	And that all went away, and it, in fact, never came back.
	And that was about almost 20 years ago that I got rid of all of that.
	No big changes right now?
	No.
	Well, career-wise, yes.
	But otherwise, no.
	I don't know.
	I'm going to go with Pate.
	George Cinda is my father.
	That seems to be the most reasonable explanation, which makes it all the more deplorable that he would report me to the FBI.
	Your own son.
	What kind of man does that?
	What does it mean to dream of your childhood home?
	The dream about childhood home indicates the need for people in your everyday need for people in your everyday surroundings.
	That includes people you have not seen for a long time as well, but you wish they were close to you.
	These can be people whom you are missing, but for some reason can't be with them.
	What does it mean when you see there's so many different explanations for the same thing?
	What does it mean when you dream about the house you grew up in?
	You are nostalgic about your childhood.
	It's kind of the same.
	It could also be that you're having childhood home dreams because you are simply nostalgic about your childhood and the moments you spend with the people present in your life during that period.
	I will say I had a great childhood.
	So, you know, when things are tough, maybe that is sort of an escape hatch, sort of a release valve for the mind to go back to that.
	Because I did have a great childhood.
	Nothing bad ever happened to me.
	Nobody ever touched my butthole or did anything horrible to me.
	Nobody ever did anything.
	I had such a normal childhood, just in the backyard, excuse me, making mud pies and burning anthills with magnifying glasses, which I now regret I feel bad about.
	I do too.
	I will not step on so much as any bug.
	Now, if there's a roach in my house, you're dead.
	That's where I draw the line, and my earthly sort of live and live philosophy comes to an end right there if I see a roach.
	But short of that, I don't even want to step on a bug anymore.
	When I was a kid, I went hunting a few times, and I remember shooting squirrels, and I feel bad about that now.
	I mean, I'll eat a hamburger without a second thought, but I feel bad about the squirrel that I killed.
	Explain the logic there.
	Makes no sense.
	I should just stop eating meat.
	But then what happens when you stop eating meat?
	Suddenly your body goes into some sort of a decline, and the next thing you know, you've got a wasting disease and you've got brain cancer two years later.
	Yeah, you need that protein.
	God, all these people that I see.
	I'm a vegan.
	Yeah, well, you look sickly to me.
	And the moment I find out you are walking around with some sort of a malignant melanoma or a glioblastoma, I'm not going to be surprised to hear that about you.
	You do not look healthy to me as a vegan.
	Sorry.
	Enjoy your soy milk.
	Enjoy your almond milk, which is not milk, by the way.
	Can we stop calling it milk?
	I get it.
	It's white.
	Ask yourself what the processes were that they put it through to get that color out of it.
	What kind of bleaching was responsible for that?
	Good God.
	I mean, if I take a bunch of soybeans and I blend them up, I can assure you it's not going to be white.
	So what had to happen to result in that?
	Or almonds.
	There's a reason things are described as being almond color rather than being described as white.
	It's because almonds have a very particular almond color to them.
	And by the way, almonds have a almonds do produce a set amount of cyanide.
	Oh, boy.
	Did you know that?
	No, I learned something new every day.
	Almonds contain cyanide, so do appleseeds.
	Don't drink the soy milk.
	I hear it causes cancer.
	So it's equivalent to drinking the Kool-Aid, but it's a slower death.
	Well, it also causes and Harvey Weinstein can attest to this.
	You know, you take the soy, and the next thing you know, your rape victim 10 years later is describing you in an open courtroom as appearing to have had a vagina.
	So you really want to stay away from the soy products.
	It apparently has some sort of hormonal effects that are not good.
	Did you see that?
	Harvey Weinstein's rape accuser in open court saying that when she saw him naked, she actually pitied him, and it appeared as though he had a vagina as opposed to a penis, and he had no testicles, and that he had to inject his penis with some substance with a syringe in order to achieve an erection, which that's amazing to me.
	I mean, in an era of Viagra and Cialis, why that's even necessary, unless this is something that predates those.
	But good God, what Viagra and Cialis have been around for, at this point, decades?
	So I don't know.
	What's your thoughts on the water with all this fluoride in it and whatever it's going on?
	You know, I hear so many things like drink the Icelandic bottle water or drink the Fiji water, you know, even these little distilleries that say that they take the water and you get your five-gallon jug.
	Who knows what's in that?
	You know, I know there's another agenda to dumb down us a little bit.
	So we don't press on.
	We just go to our little cubicles and turn it into our 50, 60 hours.
	But we have to, you know, we got to feed the kids.
	You know, what are we going to do?
	Yeah, a lot of people think that's what the fluoride is all about, is just kind of keeping people docile and obedient and apathetic.
	And I don't know.
	Back in Cape Girardeau, I never had any problem drinking the tap water in Missouri.
	Where I am now, I'm not quite so interested in drinking straight tap water.
	But back home in Missouri, I think it's some of the best tap water in America.
	I mean, it's absolutely wonderful.
	But now I use a zero water filter.
	But the problem with those is it literally does get your water down to zero or near zero particles per million.
	I mean, it actually comes with a tester and you can dip it in the water and see how many particles per million exist within your water.
	And you'll take a lot of these bottled waters and test them and they're 150, 250 parts per million.
	And then you run the water through the zero water and it's literally zero or one.
	And they recommend that you change the filter in the zero water when it gets to the six parts per million level.
	But some people report feeling drained when they're drinking water that's that devoid of any mineral content.
	I mean, because if you're eliminating solids from water or dissolved solids, you are actually removing mineral content.
	So I could see why you would start to feel drained and you might actually need to, after running the water through the filter, add some sort of a mineral supplement, which they do make.
	There are actually mineral supplements designed for people who are running their water through highly effective filters.
	Don't bother yourself with a Brita.
	If you get a Brita and you think you're doing yourself any sort of a favor by using a Brita, just forget about it.
	I was watching a video the other day.
	Apparently, everybody doesn't know this because I was watching a video the other day where a guy sitting at a desk, sitting next to a woman who just looked like she was egging him on to run his urine through a Brita filter and then drink it.
	So, first of all, this idiot believes that the Brita is good enough to do this, which it's not.
	And then, after he runs his piss through the Brita, he pours the filtered piss back into the same cup that he originally peed in when he poured it into the Brita filter.
	It's just like, man, the power that women have over men, it's incalculable.
	I don't understand how this guy allowed himself to be pushed down this road.
	Dude, like most situations involving women, she's not going to have sex with you.
	Just stop it.
	Tell her to get lost with this whole drink your own urine idea.
	Bitch, you drink my urine.
	That's what the response should have been.
	You're so confident in this filtration procedure that you want me to embark upon?
	You drink my piss.
	If you're so confident.
	Trump drank Putin's piss, right?
	Well, he may not have consumed Putin's piss, but he did.
	He was thankful that it was not him on the space station drinking.
	Remember when he was interviewing the astronauts live and the astronaut was talking about how they filter their own urine for drinking water?
	And he was like, better you than me.
	That was just sort of one of those moments where, I don't know, I just love having someone there saying things that you're not supposed to say, conducting himself in a way that norms and precedent and boundaries tell us are not allowed.
	I enjoy the chaos of that and the outrage that is derived from it and produced by it.
	I enjoy all of that.
	Just the sheer chaos of it.
	And to me, in my way of seeing things, it upsets all the right people.
	But getting back on water filtration and the trust people do or don't have in tap water, if you are concerned about your tap water, use a zero water filter.
	Do not waste your time with a Brita.
	It does absolutely nothing for you.
	And the zero water filters are comparably priced as well.
	So unless you've got like, you know, flakes of loose toilet paper or something floating around in your water, I mean, I guess that the Brita might be able to remove that.
	But beyond that, it's just not going to do much for you.
	So, and there are countless videos online you can watch to demonstrate the superiority of the zero water relative to the Brita.
	Britta, for whatever reason, has been around longer and it's got more top-of-mind awareness to the consumer, but it's definitely not the filtration system to go with.
	Zero water is where it's at.
	And they've got these programs where you can send the filter back to zero water after it's been used and they'll send you a box to send them back in and then you get a credit for doing so.
	And by the time you do all of this and all these programs you can participate in as you recycle the filters and attempt to bring your costs down, you can actually bring the cost of those filters down to about $6 per.
	And I forget how long it takes to get to the six-part per million level where they recommend replacing the zero water filter, but it's quite a bit of water.
	I mean, you've got to consume quite a bit before you get to that point.
	We drink a lot of water, so it feels like it happens pretty quickly, but I don't bother adding in the mineral supplements to the water because it just doesn't seem that anybody needs it.
	But, yeah.
	I think that the whole idea of fluoride, I guess getting back to your original question, the whole idea of fluoride being added to the water for the purpose of preserving people's teeth, I'm not sure how believable that is because if that were the case, why would you want it to be actually consumed?
	Why would you want people to drink it?
	I heard the Nazis developed fluoride.
	I don't know.
	I've heard that too, but I don't know how true that is.
	I mean, if they did it to make their population docile, if that was the whole reason for it, it doesn't seem to have worked because the Germans were highly aggressive in World War II and just about changed the face of the map globally.
	So it doesn't seem to have kept them at bay.
	I would think that if they were having success with fluoride and their population, that it would have ended the war much sooner than it ended.
	Well, let's see.
	When was this fluoride implemented into our water system?
	Was it during World War II?
	I don't know.
	Yeah, that's a good question.
	I don't know.
	But I will say that I feel like between toothpaste and mouthwash, I feel like I get enough fluoride in my teeth.
	And I use toothpaste and mouthwash correctly.
	And what I mean by that is after I brush my teeth, I do not rinse my mouth.
	I go straight from there to mouthwash.
	And then after I use the mouthwash, I don't eat or drink anything for at least half an hour.
	People who use mouthwash and then immediately rinse their mouth out with water, you've just destroyed the entire purpose behind using the mouthwash.
	Same goes with toothpaste.
	If you brush your teeth, let's say you don't use mouthwash.
	You just use toothpaste and brush your teeth, and then you immediately rinse your mouth out with water, you've just destroyed any benefits that that toothpaste brought to the table.
	Whether it's cavity protection or teeth whitening or gum health, any of that, you've just destroyed it all.
	So whatever the last contribution is to your oral regimen, whether it's brushing or mouthwash, whatever the final step is in your process, you need to not eat or drink anything after that final step.
	Or you've roundly short-changed yourself, and you may as well not have done it at all.
	A lot of people don't know that.
	Because to a lot of people, it's gross to brush your teeth and then not rinse your mouth at.
	I mean, that seems gross, I know.
	But if you just get used to it, it's not a problem anymore.
	But I can't understand why someone would feel that it's gross not to rinse your mouth out after mouthwash.
	I mean, to me, after you use mouthwash, it's nice to have that minty, you know, Listerine sort of killing every microbial form of life that's ever come in contact with your face, smell, and taste.
	Listerine is some brutal shit, by the way.
	Good lord.
	Hey, Lib Rachi.
	Yeah.
	Did you hear recently in the news about that gravity anomaly out towards Orion?
	Where they got this weird blip of gravity.
	And also, in 1983, they found the scientists found a planet, a Jupiter-sized planet.
	It was in the Washington Post.
	It said mystery heavenly body discovered by Thomas O'Toole.
	And it was on the infrared astronomical satellite, Orion by Orbiting Telescope.
	And they detected a Jupiter-sized planet 50 billion miles away.
	So what I'm getting at is the Planet X Nibiro stuff and the gravitational woes.
	And I also looked at the Ice Core samplings.
	And I came up with, I found some very interesting stuff with the Ice Core sample.
	Because if you want to get, I think, age on climate change, if you want to get some kind of numbers on climate change, then you want to look at the Ice Core samples.
	And what I found was, and I even looked at it, at every clip, where we're at right now, it's going up red.
	Let's see, 3,600 years ago, there was a massive volcanic eruption, Thera, and there's a huge clip up on the temperature.
	And the temperature is Celsius, and it's really hot.
	And so, and then another 3,600 years, there's another clip at 29.25.
	And so I looked at these, I provided the link on Bell Gab.
	It's post number 22945, Nibiro anyone, Planet X, and it has the one link for the actual mysterious body and then the ice core sampling.
	So, oh, someone posted Alex Jones.
	He's pretty wild, Alex Jones.
	He actually goes off on his rants.
	Yeah, I used to hate Alex Jones, but in the last four years or so, I came to appreciate him just because I saw that much like Trump, that he's making all the right people, all the people who hate me, and all of the people who do not have any of my interests at heart, and all the people who would consider me not to be a part of their club.
	And he's hated by all of the right people as I see it.
	That's not to say I agree with everything he says.
	Not that I'm cowardly in my expressing my appreciation for Alex Jones, where I have to couch it with, not that I agree with everything he says.
	I hate it when people do that, but I don't agree with everything he says.
	So that's a statement of fact rather than some sort of an escape hatch to give myself cover.
	I mean, I literally don't.
	But I do appreciate him, and I do occasionally like to listen to him.
	And I do think that he loves America, and I do think that he loves common people, the little guy.
	And to me, despite what he may or may not be correct about, That goes a long way, just being in favor of the little guy and being reviled by the people who, I believe, in no way give two shits whether you or I wake up tomorrow morning.
	That to me is of some value.
	I think, anyway, back on your gravitational anomaly.
	I'm not aware of that.
	I didn't see anything about it.
	Are they suggesting this planet is 50 miles away from Earth or 50 miles away from the telescope array that measured this?
	Well, they said it was 50 billion miles away.
	Oh, there's a difference.
	And then I looked at the rate of speed.
	Oh, that's okay.
	I did the rate of speed of Jupiter.
	And so I plugged that in.
	I said, well, how far would if this planet does come near our solar system?
	I wouldn't think it comes that close because the planet wouldn't be here.
	But if it does, like Sachari Sitchin says, I would estimate it probably passes by at about 30 billion miles or 20 billion miles.
	And the planet would definitely heat up.
	And there would be gravitational anomalies, and there would be volcanoes, and there would be weather change.
	Now, how I got from 50 billion to 40 billion was just the sheer rate of the speed of the planet Jupiter and a rogue planet.
	Who knows the speed of that actual planet?
	It could be closer.
	It could be further away.
	But they did witness where in 1983, those guys saw a large object, and then it went off.
	They couldn't talk about it anymore.
	That's kind of mysterious.
	And then just recently, there's been a lot of talk about the supernova thing with Beltigies.
	They're saying it's only got 100 years left and it keeps dimming pretty fast.
	But the actual planet that I'm talking about, Planet X, if it is closing in on us, then it probably would have hit an asteroid in the Kupire belt, which is closer to us.
	Or yeah, that would probably fit the model.
	It wouldn't be the other belt.
	But it would hit an asteroid and it would cause a little gravitational, and they're not going to tell you what it is, but that would cause a gravitational anomaly because the massive explosion of a rogue planet slamming into an asteroid would create like a huge little gravity wave.
	And let me type in gravity wave because it's been in the news, gravity wave.
	What was that?
	You know, all of these anomalies that occur in our solar system and beyond, one thing that I hear people come back to frequently when they're discussing this is the fact that we should be thankful for the existence of Jupiter and just this massive gravitational field that it floats around with and the fact that it has actually shielded us from numerous cosmic events that otherwise could have threatened our planet.
	The most recent and probably most prominent of which being the Shoemaker Levy 9, was it?
	Asteroids that crashed into Jupiter.
	These would have been life-ending events had they crashed into Earth.
	But due to the existence of Jupiter, it's just such a massive gravity vacuum that it sucks things in.
	And it's sort of the cleaning solution for our solar system.
	Oh, yeah, definitely.
	It has such a gravity well on it.
	The gases that comprise Jupiter are so dense at a certain point that if you fell into Jupiter as you're falling, first of all, you would eventually be crushed by the pressure of the gases that you're falling through.
	But then after that happened to you, before you actually hit anything solid at the core, you would eventually begin flying back up toward the atmosphere.
	So you'd be falling, and eventually, as you're falling, the density of the gases continues to increase, increase, increase, increase until you get to a point where the density of the gases is such that your physical matter is less dense than the gases you're falling through.
	And so you eventually would fly back up into the atmosphere, and this sort of yo-yo back and forth would carry on, I don't know for how long, until I guess you eventually reached a certain parody where you're just floating at a certain point within Jupiter's atmosphere relative to your own density and that of the gases that you're floating in.
	I don't know who could even begin to say how long it would take for that up and down yo-yo effect to cease and for you simply to float.
	But that is a screwed up planet.
	I mean, to think that that's what would happen to you before you ever made contact with anything solid as you're floating through those gases.
	Suffice it to say, we will not be...
	If we ever claim to land an astronaut on Jupiter, that's when I'm going to join the conspiracy crowd.
	That is where I'm going to punch out.
	I will concede this now.
	You've got to see something.
	Have you ever looked at the Pentagon at the top of Saturn?
	Have you ever seen that image?
	Yes.
	That reminds me of some place where you'd go and you'd be yo-yoing too, unless it's solid.
	It looks much the same.
	As I look at that, it looks to me as though you would see a highly similar composition to that of Jupiter, maybe with not as much density.
	Saturn being a much smaller planet.
	But there is a.
	Oh, and by the way, as you're falling through the gases of Jupiter, if you're alive up until the point you get crushed by the pressure of the gases you're falling through, you're probably going to die as a result of the electrical storms that are pulsing through your body just at an intense rate as you're falling through those gases.
	Sounds like hell.
	It is.
	I mean, it is just the most brutal imagery imaginable falling into the atmosphere of Jupiter.
	I mean, I can think of nothing more frightening than the concept of that happening to you.
	There could be nothing worse.
	Brutal.
	But thank God for it.
	It really makes you question if the gases are that dense that you would actually begin flying back up into the atmosphere.
	You'd begin flying away from the planet just because the matter that comprises your body or whatever spacesuit you happen to be in is not as dense as the gases that you're falling down into.
	Well, then that has to mean that at some point when it gets down, it is just so dense that those atoms are just being pushed together to such an extent that you would almost expect some sort of a fusion reaction to begin.
	You know, you would expect some sort of an atomic reaction.
	At least I'm not an atomic scientist, but I do know that if you smash atoms together with enough pressure, you are going to at some point release atomic energy, which I guess that would be a fusion, I guess.
	Or maybe would it be a fission reaction?
	A fission is a splitting.
	Fusion is a fusion combining, right?
	Yeah, fusion is where they come together, and then fission is when they come apart.
	I think they're trying to do a portal gateway.
	Honestly, I've seen a lot of Hollywood imagery, and there's a lot of bizarre shit with CERN and about the Higgs boson.
	They're not going to get that portal to where they want to go, you know, ever since Milton and Paradise Lost, where those guys want to, they think they'll ascend to the heights of that realm.
	That's never going to happen.
	Newstar says, I don't like him putting chemicals in the water that turn the friggin frogs gay.
	I'm going to have to play this, by the way, since we mentioned Alex Jones.
	This was posted on Belgab by putting chemicals in the water that turn the friggin frogs gay.
	Do you understand that?
	Turn the freaking frogs gay.
	It's not funny.
	I'm going to say it real slow for you.
	Gay.
	DRIVE!
	Frog freaking frogs.
	Fuck!
	Friggin' frog crap.
	Won't you fight the frogs?
	It's not funny.
	I'm going to say it real slow for you.
	Frogs!
	That's Alex Jones.
	Posted on Belgab by Newstar.
	Thank you for that, Newstar.
	Yeah, Alex Jones will readily admit that he understands he's entertaining an audience.
	And I think when he gets into those sort of fits where he's beating his desk with a roll of papers like you would punish a dog for pooping on the floor or something, he knows he's entertaining.
	Here's a picture that you've posted on Belgab of the Pentagon formation.
	This is at the pole of Saturn?
	The hexagon, which someone pointed out to me on the, you know, we can chat.
	It's actually a hexagon according to that guy.
	It's not a Pentagon.
	How many sides is a Pentagon?
	Yeah, it's a hexagon.
	So Pentagon would be five.
	It is a hexagon.
	So it's a stop sign.
	Is that right?
	Yeah, that would be a stop sign, I guess.
	Stop.
	Do not go here.
	Yeah, do not land on Saturn.
	We just want to put that out there.
	If you extract anything of use tonight from this episode of the Gabcast, do not plan any trips to Saturn if you know what's good for you.
	Newstar says, Stellar, are you and to what extent familiar with the book of Revelation?
	And if you are, how does this fit into your view on human race?
	The human race.
	That's full of metaphors and symbology.
	That's a very generalized question, isn't it?
	It's kind of hard to know where you would sink your teeth into that.
	I'm looking for the question right now.
	It's a post 22947.
	Oh, it's actually on the Gabcast thread, yes.
	Oh, I see that.
	Right below is mine, 22948, which you all have to see if you want to see something gnarly about Alex Jones's late.
	Oh, that one right there, Revelations.
	Stellar, are you and to what extent familiar with the book of Revelations?
	I've read it 20 times.
	You've got to be kidding me.
	Nope.
	And if you are, how does this fit your views on the human race?
	Well, I think 2022 is in August around, well, who knows the axle day and hour?
	I don't, but that's Armageddon.
	So you heard it right here and now, August of 2022, the world comes to an end.
	This is what you believe, right?
	It comes to an end, yes.
	What is Armageddon?
	What is the three-year tribulation?
	What is the three-year pre-tribulation?
	What is the actual time, that clock that initiated that?
	The founding of Jerusalem when the Jewish home state.
	And then you take an account of Daniel and John in the book of Revelations.
	And you can, everyone's trying to put a date on that.
	They've been trying to put a date on that for a long time.
	But yes, it's the truth.
	It's going to happen.
	And now.
	Well, what if it doesn't happen?
	Is it going to cause you to question a lot of your other beliefs?
	No, not at all.
	I could just be off because no one knows the day and hour.
	This is just.
	What do you base it on?
	Revelations, Daniel, the founding of the Israelite homeland.
	A lot of talk about the third building, construction of the temple, the Temple Mount, which would cause a lot of problems, but I think they might wall it off and have their temple.
	So what are you doing?
	Are you looking for references to the founding of the Israeli homeland, and then you're looking for references and moving forward from 1948 and then 2022 is the year you land on?
	Yes, but that was a calculation based on God works in a thousand years.
	And I don't agree that mankind was here plopped down at 6,000 years ago by no chance.
	There's different interpretations of it.
	But he does work in a thousand years, and our clocks are not perfect.
	They weren't atomic back then, so there is a 22-year lag.
	And that's why we're seeing it around that year.
	That's based into it.
	There was a lot of complex things, but still, you know, I'm not dead on.
	You know, this is a guess like anything else, but I'm guessing.
	This is Alex Jones' woke video that you posted.
	How long is this?
	Oh, it's not that long at all.
	Okay, let me play this real quick.
	About four minutes.
	Yeah, and then, Joe, I've been on air 22 years.
	I don't get into aliens, metaphysical, religion, any of that.
	I've studied the elite.
	He's on Joe Rogan here.
	And I've also communicated with a lot of the top people.
	And if you want to know, I will actually break down right now the best knowledge right now what's happening on the planet.
	What's happening?
	Let me give you a basic gestalt.
	Okay.
	I love when you can use that word with full confidence.
	I've never said that.
	Let me give you a basic gestalt.
	You'd be like, oh my God, I'm such a fraud.
	No, you're not.
	No, but that's what I'd think if I use that word.
	No, you'll get all this, but you'll already have most static as you're a bookworm, a research worm, in a good way.
	The elite are all about transcendence and living forever and the secrets of the universe, and they want to know all this.
	Some are good, some are bad, some are a mix.
	But the good ones don't ever want to organize.
	The bad ones tend to want to organize because they lust after power.
	Powerful consciousnesses don't want to dominate other people.
	They want to empower them, so they don't tend to get together until things are really late in the game.
	Then they come together.
	Evil's always defeated because good is so much stronger.
	And we're on this planet, and Einstein's physics showed it, Max Plancks' physics showed it.
	Oh, there's at least 12 dimensions.
	And now that's why all the top scientists and billionaires are coming out saying it's a false hologram.
	It is artificial.
	The computers are scanning it and finding tension points where it's artificially projected and gravity's bleeding in to this universe.
	That's what they call dark matter.
	So we're like a thought or a dream that's a wisp in some computer program, some God's mind, whatever.
	They're proving it all.
	It's all coming out.
	Now, there's like this sub-transmission zone below the third dimension that's just turned over the most horrible things is what it resonates to.
	And it's trying to get up into the third dimension that's just a basic level consciousness to launch into the next levels.
	And our species is already way up in the fifth, sixth dimension conscious, and we are best people.
	But there's this big war trying to like basically destroy humanity because humanity has free will and there's a decision to which level we want to go to.
	We have free will, so evil's allowed to come and contend, not just good.
	And the elites themselves believe they're racing using human technology to try to take our best minds and build some type of breakaway civilization where they're going to merge with machines, transcend, and break away from the failed species that is man, which is kind of like a false transmission because they're thinking what they are is ugly and bad, projecting it onto themselves instead of believing, no, it's a human test about building us up.
	And so Google was set up 18, 19 years ago.
	This was, I knew about this before it was declassified.
	I'm just saying I have good sources.
	That they wanted to build a giant artificial system.
	And Google believes that the first artificial intelligence will be a supercomputer based on the neuron activities of the hive mind of humanity with billions of people wired into it with the internet of things.
	And so all of our thoughts go into it.
	And we're actually building a computer that has real neurons in real time that's also psychically connected to us that are organic creatures so that they will have current prediction powers, future prediction powers, a true crystal ball.
	But the big secret is once you have a crystal ball and know the future, you can add stimuli beforehand and make decisions that control the future.
	And so then it's the end of consciousness and free will for individuals, as we know, and a true 2.0 in a very bad way, hive mind consciousness with an AI jacked into everyone, knowing our hopes and dreams, delivering it to us, not in some PKD wirehead system where we plug in and give up on consciousness because of unlimited pleasure, but because we were already wired in and absorbed before we knew it by giving over our consciousness to this system by our daily decisions that it was able to manipulate and control into a larger system.
	There's now a human counter-strike taking place to shut this off before it gets fully into place and to block these systems and to try to have an actual debate about where humanity goes and cut off the pedophiles and psychic vampires that are control of this AI system before humanity is destroyed.
	So there you go.
	And that all seems entirely obvious to me.
	I don't know why Alex Jones felt the need to lay that out.
	I mean, anybody would reach the same conclusions.
	It seems plainly obvious.
	I love Alex Jones.
	I mean, how can you not listen to a guy that's going to sit on a radio show with a straight face and say all of that, and he really believes what he's saying?
	And I don't know.
	How can you not just appreciate that?
	I mean, it doesn't mean you have to subscribe to it all, but how does he not have a place in the collective consciousness?
	You know, how does his point of view warrant a deplatforming?
	Why should his point of view not be heard?
	It makes no sense to me.
	I appreciate there being an Alex Jones out there.
	I do think there are elites, and I do think that there are people who do not have broader humanity's best interests at heart and who do seek to undermine human development and do seek to continually hobble the living standards and day-to-day enjoyability of life for regular people,
	for their own reasons, for what, in some instances they may believe ultimately is for the greater good.
	But nevertheless, they've taken it upon themselves to make that decision for everybody.
	I do think there are people out there that are along the lines of what it is that Alex Jones describes here.
	I do think that there are people out there who are a threat to the ongoing advancement of humanity and our ability as regular people to live healthy, happy lives in freedom.
	And I see Alex Jones as somebody who's sort of rebelling against that.
	And whether he's factually correct about everything he says, I don't really give much of a shit.
	If that's the standard by which you determine who does or doesn't get to have a voice, then I will submit to you that there's not one entirely factually accurate entity commenting on any subject anywhere ever at any time.
	That's true.
	It's perception.
	Yep.
	I mean, we are in a situation now politically in this country specifically where we have two groups of people who can look at the same set of facts and come to an entirely different conclusion politically.
	So, I mean, if we're going to say factual accuracy is a benchmark by which we determine who gets to be a part of the public conversation,
	then I would say you've done a, not you, but anyone who would subscribe to that being the standard, they've done a terrible job of determining what the standard should be for someone to have access to the public conversation and to be allowed to participate in it.
	But having said all of that, Stellar, I think I'm going to bed.
	Okay, just my throat is dying, and I don't know how much more I can go.
	Go ahead and squeeze in whatever it is that you want to drop on us there.
	I'm going to put one last thing to Newstar on that post 22947 at Gabcast.
	There's something about works and there's something about faith.
	And you can't get there by works because there's a guy who already did the works and it's Jesus and he did it.
	And so it's about faith, period, and your belief.
	And thanks for him.
	Anyway, you guys have a good night.
	Love you all.
	And I'll be posting more controversial stuff.
	Who knows?
	Maybe I'll get that video from the aliens.
	Newstar says, Jackstar is the Antichrist.
	Prove me wrong.
	That's nice.
	I always love that.
	Who's the guy that does those videos where he sets the desk up and he puts the banner on the front of the desk and he says something like, feminism is a disease.
	Prove me wrong.
	And he'll sit there and film people coming up debating him.
	What's the name of that guy?
	It doesn't matter.
	My brain at this point isn't working as well as it otherwise should.
	Anyway, it's been fun.
	We've gone, what, four hours at this point.
	So I hope you enjoyed the show.
	And who knows when the next one's going to be, but hopefully whenever it comes your way, it'll be as fun as this one was.
	Thanks a lot, Stellar.
	I'll see you on Bell Gab.
	And thanks for all your years of being different.
	Thank you.
	And keep up the good work.
	I really like how it's not Orwellian there.
	All right, buddy.
	You take care.
	Have a good one.
	That is Bell Gab user Stellar.
	I'm Liberace.
	And we appreciate listening to the show tonight.
	If you want to download it, if you're listening live and you want to know where to download the show, it is at, yeah, Stephen Crowder.
	That's his name.
	The Prove Me Wrong.
	Or Change My Mind.
	That's what it says.
	Feminism is a disease.
	Change my mind.
	Or any other number of issues he'll have on the banner on the front of the desk.
	Change my mind.
	He's actually been banned from a lot of college campuses.
	I mean, what's wrong from public discourse?
	Change my mind.
	I have an opinion.
	Come change my mind.
	Let's have a free and open discussion.
	Oh, what a terrible idea.
	Very triggering.
	Anyway, have a good night, everybody.
	Take care.
	If you want to download the show after the fact, you can do so at ufoship.com slash gabcast.
	That is ufoship.com slash gabcast.
	It's been a lot of fun.
	Take care, and until next time.
	You've been listening to The Gabcast, a podcast about bellgab.com.

▲