Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 23, 2024 - American Journal - Harrison Smith

02:25:42

AMERICA PLANS WITHDRAW FROM NIGER - THE AMERICAN JOURNAL FULL SHOW 5-23-24

Source

Participants

Main voices

harrison smith

01:55:11

tim pool

05:10

Appearances

chase geiser

02:08

greg reese

03:38

kaitlan collins

01:59

ted cruz

02:49

Clips

john brennan

00:46

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
greg reese ▲ ● ▼		For decades, those with eyes to see have been aware of chemtrails in our skies and And for decades, we were called conspiracy theorists.
greg reese ▲ ● ▼		But in 2016, while serving as director of the CIA, John Brennan admitted that chemtrails are real at the Council on Foreign Relations.
john brennan ▲ ● ▼		Another example is the array of technologies, often referred to collectively as geoengineering, that potentially could help reverse the warming effects of global climate change.
		One that has gained my personal attention is stratospheric aerosol injection, or SAI, a method of seeding the stratosphere with particles that can help reflect the sun's heat in much the same way that volcanic eruptions do.
		An SAI program could limit global temperature increases, reducing some risks associated with higher temperatures and providing the world economy additional time to transition from fossil fuels.
		This process is also relatively inexpensive.
		The National Research Council estimates that a fully deployed SAI program would cost about $10 billion yearly.
greg reese ▲ ● ▼		In 2007, it was announced that nano-sized particles, known as smart dust, can be dispersed over the battlefield via aerial spraying.
		The military has contracted several multinational corporations to develop wearable biosensors.
		Biosensors and smart dust can become something known as body dust that can spread inside the human body as an active network capable to provide telemetry from inside the body for the use of monitoring humans.
		There is a patent for using polyethylene glycol derivatives as a way to modify the weather.
		The same substances used in the COVID-19 lipid nanoparticles.
		These polymers can be integrated with biosensors and soft robotics for smart materials.
		Materials that can be modified by external stimuli.
		Soft robotics is a subfield of robotics that utilizes compliant materials rather than rigid ones, such as the hydrogels found in the experimental COVID shots.
		DuPont is manufacturing elastomers for fast-moving soft robots and have developed the fastest DEA-driven soft robots ever reported.
		Designed for biosensing, interacting with biological entities, and actuating on a cellular level.
		In her recent article, Smart Dust, Biosensors, Polymers for Geoengineering, and the Multinational Corporations that Manufacture Them, Dr. Ana Maria Milchia points out that these are the transhumanist technologies that will be giving AI enormous amounts of data, as Bill Gates said, to understand 100 trillion organisms.
		She also points out the important fact that the elastomers being fabricated by DuPont for this soft robot technology are made of the exact same chemicals found when analyzing the mesogens, a compound that displays liquid crystal properties, found in targeted individuals.
		And they appear to be the same compounds she found in the blood of the vaxed, as well as the blood of the unvaxed, which appear to be the same structures used as part of electronic circuitry in self-assembly nanotechnology.
		SmartDust is a system of tiny microelectromechanical systems that can detect light, temperature, vibration, magnetism, or chemicals.
		They are operated wirelessly on a computer network, can be used for medical or military surveillance purposes, and can be dispersed through the air via chemtrails, which would greatly go unnoticed by the sleeping masses who have come to accept them.
		When combined with the message in soft robot technology, which has already been found in several blood samples of unwitting victims, they could create a means of monitoring and controlling the entire human population.
		Reporting for InfoWars, this is Greg Reese.
unidentified		We'll be right back.
		We'll be right back.
		And you're listening to the American Journal with your host, Harrison Smith.
		Watch it live right now at band.video.
		I think it's time I blow this.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
		Welcome to the American Journal.
		I'm your host, Harrison Smith, coming to you live this Thursday morning, the 23rd of May.
		We got a lot to talk about.
unidentified		We got war on three fronts.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		We spend so much time talking about Ukraine and Israel while we're looking at them.
		Ukraine-Israel, Ukraine-Israel.
		And we glance over and it's like, what the hell is Taiwan doing?
		What is happening in Taiwan?
		What is China doing with all those battleships?
		And why are they surrounding that island?
		Oh, right.
		We forgot about the third front of this global conflict with America being the enemy of the world.
		America and Israel are Western bloc, NATO allies.
		So we got a lot of war to talk about.
		We're also going to be, we'll do a little bit of a review of the Timcast episode from last night because our friend Chase Geyser was on there, absolutely killed it, was being hilarious and unappreciated, I think.
		There were some interesting moments.
		Now, Tim wasn't inexplicably rude to Chase.
		So I don't want to bash the guy too hard.
		That being said, we got some historical inaccuracies to cover and some jokes to highlight.
		There's one point where they're talking and Tim's like, well, some guy got stabbed at a casino.
		And Chase is like, well, but was he Republican or Democrat?
		Joking like, well, do we care or not?
		Or whatever, just look totally sarcastic.
		So I'm like, I don't know.
		I think he was just normie.
unidentified		It's like, all right.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Do we not get jokes?
		Is there no humor?
		Oh no, I appreciate it.
		Chase and I have the same sort of sense of humor.
		We talk about something very serious and then just drop a completely ridiculous joke in the middle and then get back to being serious.
		Other people have a little bit of trouble with that, I think.
		And it's funny.
		It's funny to see people react because Chase was being hilarious and they were not getting it.
		But we'll go over the video a little bit because the last time I went on TimCast, Chase spent like a whole hour.
		You know, to have in my back.
		And I really appreciated that.
		Chase held his own.
		It was it was a really good episode, but there are some.
		But I don't watch Tim Cass very much and watching it last night.
		It was like everything they mentioned, I was like, I was just noting it down, being like, I got to talk about that tomorrow.
		Oh, man, he's getting it.
		I got to talk about that.
		There's a lot of talk about civil war, civil wars in history and the looming civil war here in America.
		And I think the view that Tim and his crew represent is probably a pretty prolific one.
		Like it's probably a pretty widespread one.
		And I would like to discuss my views on whether or not America is headed for a civil war.
		Spoiler alert, I think we're already in a civil war.
		I think they already are doing it to us.
		It's just one side isn't really fighting back yet.
		Out of mercy.
		You know, our side is, uh, Really desperate to cling on to normalcy and the rule of law and not let things devolve because we really that's too much killing.
		We'll have to kill too much.
		We don't want to do that.
		We don't want the killing to start because we know how good we are at it.
		It's one of the things if you ever Start taking a concealed carry class or start carrying a gun.
		You become the most peaceful person in the world.
		When you actually have the ability to do incredible damage and the responsibility to hold that power, you become the most peaceful and congenial person in the world.
		Not because you have to, not because you're weak and have to submit.
		Because you really don't want to do what you know you can.
		And that's sort of why I think we're conservatives are a country where we're just like, look, we're really trying to fix this.
		We're really trying to get back on track.
		Because if the bullets start flying, we have all the guns.
		Just stop being stupid.
		Liberals, stop oppressing us.
		Stop restricting our speech.
		Stop undermining the foundational principles of our country.
		Nobody has to kill anybody.
		We don't want civil war.
		We want peace.
		But if it comes down to it, it's not going to be a fair fight.
		So we'll get into that.
		So we'll do a little bit of, you know, review of the Timcast from last night.
		But honestly, we'll be somewhat minor because much more pressing than Civil War is the actual World War being created.
		So let's get into that, shall we?
		Here it is, your daily dispatch.
		All right, here it is, folks, your daily dispatch.
		For Thursday, the 23rd of May, 2024, Russia begins exercises for battlefield nuclear weapons pointing to Russian threats.
		Russian troops began practicing major exercises to ensure troops' readiness for the potential deployment of tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield, as Moscow warned against encroaching threat from Western allies.
		The Russian Ministry of Defense published a video Tuesday of troops practicing affixing missiles and warheads onto fighter jets and on the backs of armored trucks equipped with missile firing systems.
		The ministry said in a telegram post that Russian troops had launched the first stage of practical testing of tactical nuclear weapons in the Southern Military District, which includes Russia's southwestern regions, including those that border Ukraine.
		So, you've got Ukraine.
		Getting permission, getting the authority from Anthony Blinken to launch long range missiles into Russia.
		You've got Poland suggesting that they could house U.S. nuclear missile bases.
		You've got Poland and France and Germany talking about conscription and getting ready to fight a war.
		The UK is telling its people to get storable food and store water because of looming catastrophes.
		Russia is moving their tactical weapons and doing preparedness drills on the border of Ukraine.
		Long story short, things are ramping up, folks.
		And it's choice being made by the people in charge because war serves their ends.
		Meanwhile, Joe Biden withdraws from Niger, leaving behind $100 million military base.
	The U.S.
	and Niger issued a joint statement on Sunday that set a deadline of September 15th for the withdrawal of all U.S.
	forces.
	The departing American troops leave behind a $100 million military base to support counterterrorism operations in the Sahel region.
	The disposition of Air Base 201 in Niger's city of Agadez was left unclear in the joint statement, which held out hopes that the U.S.
	and Niger might be able to work on issues of mutual interest.
	In the future, like we've said a million times, America is like a corporation that has been bought out by an international conglomerate and is being downsized quite deliberately.
	So our influence is being diminished overseas and this is just one example of that.
	Meanwhile, bird flu is hitting Australian poultry farms and the first human case has now been reported in Victoria.
	The first human case of avian influenza in Australia was reported yesterday in Victoria.
	A child acquired the H5N1 strain of the virus in India and became ill upon returning to home to Australia in March this year.
	Based on information made available yesterday in the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influential Data, We can ascertain that the child is a two-year-old girl.
	She tested positive in March and was reportedly very unwell but has since fully recovered.
	Yes, folks, it is happening again.
	Bird flu this time is simultaneously cropping up all over the world just months before a U.S.
	presidential election and at a time when the other globalist plans are faltering and failing.
	It's very convenient indeed.
	I liked what Maria Z said on Twitter.
	She was basically like, bird flu, coronavirus, whatever they call it, do not comply.
	Do not comply.
	It really felt like, like just seeing her tweet.
	You just get the image of, you know, soldiers at Rorke's Drift or the Alamo or something going, they're coming boys.
	Hold the line.
	Hold the line is basically what she was saying.
	The attack is coming.
	Be prepared to stand and fight.
	Don't let them do it again.
	Do not let them get away with this again.
	In the third front of World War III, we have this.
	China launches military drills around Taiwan as punishment.
	China launched two days of military drills surrounding Taiwan on Thursday in what it called a strong punishment to its opponents of the self-governing island after Taiwan's new president pledged to defend its sovereignty.
	The drills were the first substantive response by China to the swearing-in of President Lai Chin-ti, So as punishment, China has surrounded that island.
	political party asserts Taiwan's separate status from China.
	And in a high-profile inaugural speech, he vowed to keep Taiwan's democracy safe from Chinese pressure.
	So as punishment, China has surrounded that island.
	You can see the image of the various exercises literally circumventing the entire or circumnavigating the entire island of Taiwan.
	And we'll get more of that later.
	There is some actually pretty crazy footage of Taiwanese Navy captains having to tell Chinese boats, like, stop approaching.
	You're getting too close.
	We're going to have trouble here.
	We're on the cusp, folks.
	We're teetering on the edge.
	Finally, we have this.
	New X policy forces earners, people who make money off X, to verify their government ID with Israeli verification company.
	From Infowars.com, X, formerly Twitter, is now mandating the use of government ID-based account verification system for users that earn revenue on this platform either by advertising or for paid subscriptions.
	To implement this system, X is now partnered with AU10TX, an Israeli company known for its identity verification solutions.
	Users who opt to receive payouts on the platform will have to undergo a verification process with this company.
	The initiative This is obviously unnecessary primarily because to get paid out from X you have to have a bank account.
	Yet it also raises profound questions about privacy and free speech as X markets itself as a free speech platform is free speech and anonymity often go hand in hand.
	This is especially true in countries where there's where speech can get citizens jailed or worse.
	Now, this is obviously unnecessary, primarily because to get paid out from X, you have to have a bank account.
	How is that not verification enough?
	You provide a bank account with your name that matches your account number.
	What's the issue?
	What's the problem?
	What do they need to verify?
	They're sending money to a debit card or to a bank account.
	Why would they need to have a government issued ID on top of that?
	And just like so many other things in the world, if a program is being implemented unnecessarily, there's probably an alternative reason to that.
	And the fact that this is an Israeli company is also extremely concerning, especially considering the fact that the primary threats to our free speech are coming exclusively from Israel at this point.
	Anti-Semitism bills in the UN, in America, in the States, they're all being pushed by AIPAC, they're all being pushed by Israel.
	And I remind you, the The big tech censorship oversight board that Facebook put together, that was supposed to be an independent oversight board that would determine whether or not a user can be allowed on the platform, was at the time that it kicked Trump off of Twitter and Facebook all at once, you know, on January 6th when he was calling for peace and calm.
	The person who was the chairman of the oversight board at that time was a defense minister in the nation of Israel.
	So why does a foreign nation have all of these authoritative positions in American big tech determining whether or not our users get to speak?
	That's wrong and bad.
	I hope I explained that enough.
	Sometimes that's all it takes.
	This thing, it's wrong and bad.
	It's not good.
	It shouldn't happen.
	Get mixed up in all the rhetoric.
	You can make arguments on either side, but at the end of the day, it's just bad and wrong.
	And that's it.
	Period.
	Discussion over.
	It's not that complicated.
	I always think back to, I mean, this is why democracy in some sense, or a republic in particular, is an important and good thing.
	I've talked about the video enough.
	I need to just find it.
	I swear it was Rand Paul talking to an Obama official about the drone program.
	If you watch the show, you've heard me say it a million times, but it sort of applies to all this stuff.
	If you want to talk about why we need anti-Semitism laws, You can have debates on both sides.
	I mean, there are hours and hours and hours of debates online about anti-Semitism, about free speech, blah, blah, blah.
	It just goes on and on and on.
	At the end of the day, it comes down to actually a very simple question.
	That's why the IQ meme bell curve is the greatest meme to ever be created, ever, which is where very dumb people and very smart people tend to agree on things, and it's the midwits in the middle that think they're smart but aren't, or
	Just don't know they're they're like just not smart as they think they are or they Give more importance to their ideas than maybe they deserve Because he has a dumb person, you know, it's an extremely smart person they'll both come to the same answer with free speech and you know, the typical thing is just like Free speech, free speech.
	I'm just a good old boy and I just, this is America and we speak freely.
	That's the way it is.
	And the extremely intelligent person will be like, look, you know, I've weighed it in the balance and what free speech can cost in terms of discomfort and offense is worth what you're getting in return, which is the ability to think freely.
	I mean, when you really Read the papers of the Founding Fathers and these things.
	It's the ideological or theoretical basis to free speech is so much stronger.
	But then the people in the middle, well, but it's hate speech.
	Free speech isn't hate speech though.
	They're the ones that can get tricked with catchy little phrases like that because they think it makes them understand something when really they're just being tricked.
	They're being lied to.
	And so there's a power in simplicity and the thing I always reference is Just this interchange between, I believe it was Rand Paul, just going, is it right that the Obama government can kill American citizens with drones?
	The other guy, well, the threat matrix guarantees that we have the highest standard of protocol when it comes to, and you know, you can, if you have experts, if you have people with vested interests, you have people whose career it is to make these types of statements, they can justify all sorts of stuff.
	Sometimes it boils down to just those simple, is this right or wrong answer?
	Or these types of questions, and the answer should be obvious, should be yes or should be a no.
	Should an Israeli company be in charge of collecting and storing the government issued IDs of every verified Twitter user?
	No, no.
	Really, it shouldn't happen at all.
	It's unnecessary.
	And it shouldn't be the case that it does happen.
	There are a million ways to do it without having to provide a government issued ID.
	And of course, they did it in a way where a lot of people got used to and are now relying on income from Twitter.
	And so you have people hooked to this service and you go, oh, by the way, now you got to, you know, send all your, you got to send your social security number to Israel.
	And people go, okay, so I can either do that or lose my income.
	I guess I'm going to do that.
	I guess that's the easier way to do it.
	So it's a trick.
	It's not good.
	It shouldn't be done, but if it has to be done, it should be an American company that abides and believes in American rules about free speech.
	who will make a pledge not to interfere or use the information for nefarious purposes.
	When it's an Israeli company, we have absolutely no control over that.
	And with the way that the Israeli government and society works, it's likely that a foreign government will have all of that information and be able to do with it what they will, which is extremely dangerous, totally un-American, treasonous activity, and should be resisted.
	Elon Musk, stop it.
	Just stop it.
	Keep trying to defend you and then you do stuff like this and it makes me not want to defend you anymore.
	And we have a bunch of good videos to get to today.
	And a pretty big selection of videos of people just sort of wrecking leftists.
	We got Ted Cruz wrecking a CNN lady.
	We got Bill Maher getting wrecked by Megyn Kelly.
	Does a lot to show how genuinely uninformed these people are.
	So let's go to clip number four here.
	This is Ted Cruz demolishing CNN's Caitlin Collins to her face on live TV about voter fraud.
	Let's watch.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		You were the first senator to object to the vote.
		In 2024, will you certify the election results?
		Do you plan to object or will you accept the results regardless of who wins the election?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		So, Caitlin, I got to say, I think that's actually a ridiculous question.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		It's a yes or no question.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		No, it's not.
		Let me explain why it's a ridiculous question.
		It's not a question.
		You've ever asked a Democrat that?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Of course.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		What Democrats?
		Hold on a second.
		What Democrats challenged it?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		What Democrats?
		I know, I know.
		I've been down this road many times.
		No Democrat.
		You cannot compare the two situations.
		We have talked about that.
		We've seen the audio of that when they protested on the Senate floor.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		But hold on a second.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		But has you ever had a sitting president who refused to facilitate the peaceful transition of power, refused to acknowledge that his successor won the presidency?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Uh, so A, we did have a peaceful transfer of power.
		I was there on January 20th.
		I was there on the swearing- Barely!
unidentified		B...
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		If you look at, in 2000, Democrats went to the Senate, or 2001, Democrats went to the Senate floor and objected to George W. Bush.
		In 2004, they went and objected.
		And what did the President do?
		In 2016, Democrats went and objected to Donald Trump.
		And what happened in 2016?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Because I remember a guy named Joe Biden was Vice President, and he went to the Senate floor and certified the votes.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		So you're asking, will you promise no matter what to agree an election is illegitimate regardless of what happens?
		And that would be an absurd thing to claim.
		Like, we have an entire election law system that people challenge elections, elections get overturned, voter fraud gets proven.
		That happens all the time.
		And the media engages in this weird game Post Donald Trump that you insist no voter fraud has ever existed.
		Why does every state have laws in place to challenge voter fraud if it occurs?
		Why do you have election challenges?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		This isn't a game.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		There was no widespread voter fraud.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		It is a game.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		You only ask Republicans that.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Because it was Republicans who tried to block the transition of power.
		You have to acknowledge that.
		We've never seen it on a scale of what happened in 2020, and we've never seen the president refuse.
		He wouldn't even let Joe Biden get classified briefings at the beginning.
		I recall that.
		So my question for you again, free and fair election, will you accept the results regardless of who wins?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Look, if the Democrats win, I will accept the result, but I'm not going to ignore fraud regardless of what happens.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		But was there fraud in 2020?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Of course there was fraud in 2020.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		No, there wasn't, and you still objected.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Oh, you know for a fact there was zero voter fraud, really.
		What's your basis for that?
		Show me your evidence.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		We've spoken with Governor Kemp.
		They did three hand recounts in the state of Georgia.
		The director of CISA said that it was the safest, most legitimate election in United States history.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		But you're saying zero voter fraud occurred.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		That's what you just said.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Nothing that would have changed the outcome of that election.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Okay, but that's a different statement.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		No, it's not.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Yes, it is.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		You said there was no voter fraud.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		There was no voter fraud that would have changed the outcome of the election, and you know that, Senator.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		So what I know is that what I stood on the Senate floor and objected, what I called for, I'll tell you, I wrestled with what to do in that circumstance.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		And the reason I wrestled with it is because I think there was significant voter fraud in 2020.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		And— You wanted the 10-day commission, I know.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		But was there voter fraud that would have changed the outcome of the election?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		But do you know why I wanted a 10-day commission?
		Because I tried to look—I'm a Supreme Court litigator.
		I argue cases in front of the Supreme Court.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		I know.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		I tried to look through history and precedent.
		And the best precedent I could find was the election of 1876.
		1876 was between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel Tilden.
		And what happened there, there were serious allegations of voter fraud.
		And Congress didn't throw its hands up and say, you know what?
		CNN demanded that I accept the results no matter what, so ignore the fraud.
		I gotta go.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Hold on, what did Congress do in 1876?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		What did Congress do in 1876?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		How did the President handle it?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		What did Congress do in 1876?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Senator, you can't answer yes or no to this question.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		I'm asking a question.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		What did Congress do in 1876?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		You can't answer yes or no to this question.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Can you answer my question?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Why are you refusing to answer my question?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		I'm conducting the interview with all due respect, Senator.
		And let me ask you, Republicans have twisted themselves in knots.
		It's just a yes or no question.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		I'm not twisting myself.
		I'm answering your question.
		You just don't like my answer.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		And what's your answer?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Is it yes or is it no?
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		So in 1876, what Congress did is it appointed an election commission.
		It consisted of 15 people, five House members, five senators, five Supreme Court justices.
		The election commission was charged with studying the evidence and making a determination of what voter fraud occurred, and that determined the winner.
		And what I called for in 2020 was to do the same thing, appoint an election commission, and 11 senators joined it.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Senator, with all due respect, after it had been thrown out of many courts, after the Attorney General Bill Barr- Why was it thrown out?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		Because there was no basis for those court cases.
unidentified		So that's actually not- Senator, with all due respect- You asked me a question.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Do you want me to answer it?
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		And you didn't answer the question.
		Yes, I did.
		Dozens of court cases were thrown out.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Hold on a second.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		The Attorney General said there was no widespread fraud.
kaitlan collins ▲ ● ▼		You're not clearly answering the question.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		I want to thank you for that.
		What question am I not answering?
		I'm answering every question.
		I think the country would have been a lot better off- Break this down on the other side.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Look, I got problems with Ted Cruz, but he did a pretty good job there, gotta say.
unidentified		Putting the power of conversation into the caller's hands.
		You're tuned in to the American Journal with your host, Harrison Smith.
		All right, welcome back, folks.
		This is American Journal.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		I was going to follow up on that Ted Cruz video we just watched.
		I sort of plan on interrupting it and adding my own commentary, but he did a fairly good job of counteracting her comments, but there's a frustration in the fact that they always say the same things.
		Like, they are NPCs, they have a script, Before she said why she didn't think there were voter fraud, why she didn't think voter fraud was a problem or a claim, why she thinks it should be illegal to question the election.
		And he asked her why she thinks that.
		I could have answered for her.
		I mean, we know what they say every time.
		There wasn't enough voter fraud to sway the whole election.
		And they always do this moving the goalposts thing.
unidentified		You forgot where they start.
		They start that there was no voter fraud, like you just saw.
		Exactly.
		No voter fraud to not enough voter fraud.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		There's no voter fraud and they go, wait.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		And you go, wait, you think there's no voter fraud?
unidentified		And they say, well, there's not enough voter fraud across the country to sway the whole election, which Is, then they say, then they say, uh, no, no, well, see, there was no voter fraud because, uh, there wasn't enough because, uh, we know because the courts threw out all the cases.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		The courts threw out all the cases.
		There wasn't enough voter fraud to sway the whole country.
		They threw out all the cases.
		The authorities who were supposed to be in charge of our election said that there was no, uh, not enough voter fraud.
		And they understand just cause, cause I understand.
		I assume they know as much as I do.
		I would think, I would hope.
		Anchors of CNN and the producers there know as much as I do in the sense that you don't have to get voter fraud in every county across the United States.
		You can sway the entire election by focusing on a few states, focusing on a few metropolitan areas within those states.
		By switching just a few thousand votes, you can change the outcome of the entire election, and that's the strategy they pursued.
		We knew they were going to do it before they did it.
		We watched them do it live, and then we had all the information that proved it otherwise.
		The frustration comes in that Republicans have no prepared response to these things that they hear every time it's brought up.
		Every time it's brought up, it's like it's the first time they're having to respond to it.
		But it's the same claims over and over and over again.
		How can Republicans not just come up with a list of talking points that just counters every one of these statements that they say?
		It's really not that hard.
		It's really not that complicated at all.
		But we can't do it for some reason.
		So it's good to see Ted Cruz You know, talk about why he wanted to object on January 6th.
		Although my memory was that he didn't object, that he was going to and that he planned to.
		And then once the riot happened, he decided voter fraud didn't exist anymore.
		The riot made the claims of voter fraud no longer important, I guess.
		Not that that makes any sense at all.
		If you were going to question the election before the riot, What happened during the riot that made you think that all that stuff you were going to question went away?
		It didn't.
		And this was all a scam.
		This was part of the January 6th false flag in the first place.
		It was also, well, I was going to say it's hilarious, but it's not funny at all.
		It's just wrong.
		It's just bad and wrong again, that they say that there was a peaceful transfer of power in 2020.
		Was there though?
		It's calling me crazy.
		I tend to remember a military lockdown.
		I tend to remember nobody at the inauguration except for soldiers.
		I tend to remember it being a military style takeover of the government, not a peaceful transfer of power.
		I remember very distinctly force being used quite deliberately by the establishment to oust Donald Trump and install Joe Biden regardless of The election results or the attempt to delay the inauguration to get some answers about the election.
		I tend to remember General Milley conspiring with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to deprive the rightfully elected and in office Donald Trump from exercising his power as commander in chief.
		I tend to remember there being a coup taking place, not a peaceful transfer of power, but a forcible one.
		And this is the thing, Ted Cruz goes along with the peaceful transfer of power because he's like, look, Donald Trump's not a tyrant.
		You know, this wasn't an interruption of constitutional norms.
		You're blowing this out of proportion.
		But the correct response is to say, no, there was not a peaceful transfer of power.
		There was a military takeover.
		We all saw it.
		Do we not remember that?
		It's very odd to me.
		It's very odd to me the idea that the conversation is set up in a way where you've got the Republicans who had their election victory stolen from them, had it defrauded right in front of everybody's eyes with the charts and the statistical analysis.
		I mean, it just goes on and on, folks.
		Just while we're at it, let's just bring up, cause I, I just saw this and these things just pop up every once in a while.
		And you know, we're, we're always sort of, um, torn, I guess a little bit between like paying attention to this and focusing on it a lot and just moving on to everything else that's happening.
		But we often, you know, hear people saying, you know, if we don't get voter fraud fixed, nothing else matters, which is true.
		It just seems like this is four-year-old news at this point, but let's go over it again, shall we?
		If we can bring up my screen here.
		It's just a comparison between Obama, Trump, and Biden.
		Well, Obama had massive rally turnouts.
		Trump had massive rally turnouts.
		Biden didn't even campaign, although that's not true.
		He did give speeches to car lots with empty cars in them.
		Remember that?
		Somehow he got 81 million votes.
		Well, Trump only got 74 million.
		I know what you're thinking.
	74 million plus 81 million exceeds the number of total voters in America, which might point to fraud, but that's illegal.
	Obama won 873 counties.
	Trump won 2,497 counties.
	Biden won 477 counties.
	See, that's how you swing an election.
	You understand the calculus and you understand that we don't have to win.
	2,500 counties.
	We can actually just win a little over 400.
	And if we got to do fraud in three of those, I think we can pull this thing off.
	While Obama won 18 out of the 19 so-called bellwether counties, Trump also won 18 out of 19 of the bellwether counties.
	Biden only won one of them.
	To say it's unprecedented is sort of underselling it.
	It would be unprecedented if he only won half.
	He only won one.
	I mean, it would have been bizarre if he only won half of the Bellwether counties.
	We'd say, eh, could go either way.
	But he only won one of the counties that traditionally and historically, their votes match the total outcome.
	Obama won Florida, Ohio, and Iowa, as did Trump.
	Biden lost all of those.
	Obama won House seats.
	Trump won House seats.
	Biden somehow lost House seats, somehow won the presidency.
	The same people that voted for him for president didn't bother voting for other Democrats.
	No, it was fraud.
	It was fraudulent.
	It's obviously fraudulent.
	And at this point, Donald Trump's campaign has published hundreds of pages of evidence of voter fraud.
	And I guess this is the issue of just mainstream media not reporting this stuff.
	But even very recently, there have been bombshell revelations about voter fraud that took place in Georgia in particular.
	Oh, it's the other talking point they always say.
	They always say, well, there was a hand recount.
	There was a hand recount.
	Yeah.
	Of the fraudulent votes.
	And by the way, in that hand recount, none of the signatures matched.
	I mean, it was, it's just all fraudulent.
	It's just all fraudulent.
	So, I don't know, maybe we need to do it, but somebody in the Republicans needs to have a list of like five talking points the Democrats say every time you talk to them, and come up with responses so you're not flailing.
	Please?
unidentified		Alright, welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
unidentified		We really do have so much to talk about still today.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		China is surrounding Taiwan by sea and air with warships and aircrafts.
		Just a military exercise for now.
		However, as of an hour ago, we have this update.
		U.S.
		troops in Taiwan on full alert.
		China has surrounded the rogue province of Taiwan and all of its islands for what it calls a punishment drill.
		Punishment drill I thought yesterday on Tim cast Chase Chase had a funny rant response to this Because he said he basically said China's not a threat and then Tim this guy a lot go off on this on this long tangent about all the ways that China is attacking us which don't really Don't really make any sense to be honest with you.
		I Maybe we can find that part in the video and use that as sort of a jumping off point, talk about what China is doing strategically, how they're operating, how things like TikTok play into it.
		But they're basically trying to get Chase to admit that China was a threat and Chase was just like, look, it might be a threat, All I know is that The people in power in Washington, D.C.
		think everything is a threat, and they create threats, and they make their own threats, and they arm the people they later call threats so that there's a constant state of war against somebody somewhere on Earth to justify military budgets and overseas expenditures and foreign aid and all this other stuff.
		It's a scam.
		It's a scam.
		He's like, so it might be a threat, but I don't even like saying that because it feels like I'm giving credence and credit and I'm contributing to this process that I hate, which is America being police of the world and spending all of the American taxpayer money on defending countries that have nothing to do with which is America being police of the world and spending all of the American taxpayer money on defending No benefit to us, no strategic importance.
		And of course the issue is that America has deliberately outsourced all of its manufacturing to China, all of its chip manufacturing to Taiwan.
		This is the issue with globalism.
		Is it puts you in an impossible position.
		It puts you in a position where you can't not go to war.
		You can't not defend Taiwan.
		You can't actually go to, I mean, we go to war with China.
		They could just cut off medicine to us.
		Like, well, all of our medicine is made in China.
		So we outsourced our medicine that we rely on every single day to our number one geopolitical enemy.
		That's the issue here.
		We make all of our superconductors that we rely on and all of our chips for every computer.
		The entire technological world relies on manufacturing in Taiwan.
		It was set up like that on purpose to create these interdependencies that could later be activated for war.
		And remember, I said this when Putin's interview with Tucker Carlson came out.
		And he kept telling stories about, he would talk to US presidents and say, hey, you know, Russia just wants to be European.
		He didn't say that, but that's the idea.
		We just, we want to be a part of the family of nations.
		We don't want to be outsiders anymore.
		We've proven ourselves.
		So what, why are you still treating us like we're Soviets?
		Why are you still treating us like we're enemies?
		And the presidents would say, yeah, great point.
		We'd love to, let's do it.
		Let's work on something.
		Great point.
		I agree.
		And then two hours later would come back and say, actually, no, actually, sorry.
		The powers that be, the powers above the U.S.
		President are telling me that actually we have to be enemies.
		And the reason for that is exactly as Chase said, exactly as we say over and over, I mean the intelligence agencies, the militaries in the U.S., they have these little conflicts on the back burner.
		They can be brought up to the fore when necessary, but you can't make peace because then you don't have that option.
		You don't have that ability to spark up a conflict, to distract your people, or Provide for an excuse to censor and restrict or whatever.
		It's useful.
		It's useful to have enemies.
		If you're the powers that be, if you're tyrannical despots, it's very useful to have foreign countries that you can say are enemies.
		Even if those foreign countries don't want to be enemies, too bad.
		We need you to be enemies.
		We need you as the bad guys.
		I mean, without Russia being the bad guys, who are they going to blame Trump on?
		Right?
		How are they going to deceive people?
		If they don't have people preconditioned to believe that Russia is a devious enemy that's trying to undermine the American way of life.
		It's necessary for their deceptions.
		And so they've set things up in accordance to this and put us in an impossible position between Iraq and a hard place.
		Either we don't go to war with China, Over Taiwan, in which case maybe China just takes over and we got, oh man, all right, the crew found the Tim Pool.
		Let's hear what Tim Pool and Chase Geyser were talking about yesterday on Timcast.
		We used that to elaborate a little bit on how they're wrong, how Tim's wrong about this.
		Let's watch.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		So we have this tweet from Raw's Alerts.
		China military have begun drills surrounding the entirety of Taiwan, including the islands of Kinmen and Dongyan, state media says.
		I don't know what the update is on this.
		This was an hour ago that this story broke.
		A lot of people are saying, holy crap, things are starting to light up.
		But we do have this story as well.
		From SCNR, Russia launches tactical nuclear drills near Ukraine.
		Analysts say the exercises are meant to send a clear message to the West.
		So what's going on, Alad?
unidentified		Before we get into that, Chase, Mr. Populist, I wanted to ask, what is the populist response to if China attacks Taiwan?
		How does America respond?
		In my opinion, the populists.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		In my opinion, and I can't speak for all of populism or populists, but in my opinion, the populist response is we shouldn't give a fuck about any of these countries except our own country and we should put America first.
		So all the money that we print in order to spend on defending Taiwan from threats like China only serves to weaken our working class and our people.
		It's not an America First policy, so it's not a populist policy.
unidentified		I think in the surrounding seas around Taiwan, the South China Sea, around like 50% of world trade, world GDP trade goes through there.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's too bad that we allowed ourselves to be so dependent on Chinese manufacturing.
		So we got to the point where this was a problem for us.
		If we were actually populous, we wouldn't have fucked ourselves by outsourcing slavery to China.
		And we would have deep, we'd be manufacturing our own prescription drugs, our own, our own products instead of importing.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		And that's a great point.
		And we can pull down for a second, but if we can skip a little bit ahead, cause I want to hear how, when they make the case about TikTok, but I thought that was one of, I thought that was one of Chase's sort of best moments where he's like, He was sort of being challenged by a lot about populism.
		I gotta say, throughout that whole conversation, Chase has a new book about American populism.
		It's such a good word.
		It's such a good concept.
		It doesn't have the baggage of things like nationalism, even though nationalism is great and wonderful and beautiful.
		It's got baggage rhetorically because of the implications.
		Populism doesn't quite have that they want to you know portrayed as bad, but the word itself It like kind of can't sound bad.
		It literally is it has the word popular in it, so it's like you and this is one of this is one of the the I don't want to call it a rhetorical trick, but is this the type of stuff that leftists understand?
		Like how they, you know, they call themselves Antifa.
		So you're like, what?
		You're saying it's bad to be anti-fascist?
		So you're fascist, right?
		They have these ways of setting up the paradigm where the words they use make it hard to argue against them.
		In reality, Antifa is a bunch of, you know, black hat communist anarchist idiots.
		So, you know, they can call themselves whatever they want.
		They can call themselves the good guy club.
		That doesn't mean they're the good guys.
		So in a way, you know, we need to be able to get past this, but in reality, these things matter.
		And I think populism is such a great thing to support because it's basically nationalism.
		Doesn't quite have the same baggage to it.
		And as Chase points out there, you can kind of just go, you can kind of just always go back to That question of like, what's best for the American people?
		What's best for the people, the population, the populace?
		What benefits them?
		You can get into the weeds a little bit and you can say, well, it benefits the wider American population to have access to cheap goods.
		So therefore globalism is good.
		It's not a catchall.
		It's not the, but I feel like that part in particular made a very strong case for it.
		And Chase made a very strong case for it where you go, look, the problem with this is that we weren't populist in the first place.
		We weren't doing what was right for the wider American public in the first place by offshoring everything to China.
		So now we're in this problem.
		So you might say the populist solution isn't convenient, because it would mean not sending our men to die for Taiwan.
		But it's not an issue with populism.
		It's an issue with us not having The well-being of the American populace at the forefront of our policy for decades.
		I thought that was well done.
		We'll get the TikTok clip on the other side because I want to get into that.
		And again, just the way China is actually attacking America.
		I think that the way it's conceived in the modern day, it's just, it's just wrong.
		It's just wrong.
		It's not to say that I think China is great and that we should be friends with China.
unidentified		You should understand your enemy.
		That's the first rule of war.
		You're tuned in to the American Journal with your host, Harrison Smith.
		Welcome back, folks.
		The second hour of American Journal is on.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		All right, welcome back, folks.
		The second hour of American Journal is on, so China is surrounding Taiwan.
		Obviously, China is pushing the envelope.
unidentified		All right.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		We're going to talk about China's geopolitical tactics here.
		Strategy, rather.
		And how it takes various forms and functions like, you know, all modern war does.
		I think there's some confusion as to Things like TikTok.
		Tim is very for the TikTok ban.
		He's like absolutely for it.
		He thinks it's Chinese.
		He thinks it's a weapon of war, basically.
		Now, obviously, that's not why TikTok is being banned or sold, forced to be sold.
		What they're doing is they're forcing the owners of TikTok to sell TikTok to an American company.
		So they can censor it for anti-Semitism.
		That's what's actually happening.
		It's really not even that subtle, you know, the way they're doing it.
		But obviously it's about the pro-Palestine content on TikTok, which is why they had to ban it.
		So if you want to talk about actual maneuvers against us from foreign countries, where's the discussion of Israel?
		When it comes to why people think that China is using TikTok as a weapon, let's go to the clip and I'll try to explain on the other side, because it's a little more nuanced than people usually put it.
		But here's Chase Geiser on TimCast last night talking about TikTok.
unidentified		Do you not think China, the communist Chinese government, is a threat to American hegemony and American interests writ large?
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		That's a difficult question for me to answer.
		Yes or no.
		I would say that China is a competitor, but not a threat.
		And I think anytime China has been or will be a threat will be because we've probably induced that threat.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Very good point.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		I have a problem with the CCP spying on us through TikTok less than I have a problem on our government.
		Extending FISA to spy on us.
		So it's going to try to ban TikTok because spying on the American people is something only our enemies do in the same 10 days that it passes legislation to spy on us.
		Like, our own government.
		The greatest threat to national security in America is the government of the United States.
unidentified		But there's a material difference.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		It is the number one enemy of the American people.
unidentified		There's a material difference between our government spying on us, which again, I don't think is great.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		What material difference?
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Quantify it.
unidentified		Versus, wait, versus the Chinese government?
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Quantify it.
unidentified		Um, so we actually can monitor our government to a certain aspect.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		No we can't.
unidentified		We have, you know, there's a Freedom of Information Act.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, Edward Snowden came out and said that the government was spying on us and it's a violation of our Fourth Amendment rights and the only person that got arrested for it or charged with any crimes for it was Edward Snowden.
unidentified		So we still live in a democracy where we have no, we don't.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		First of all, it never says democracy once in the constitution.
unidentified		Second of all, even if it's democracy, where your votes matter and we elect, um, we elect officials and that doesn't happen in China.
		So I think that's the material difference.
		Also we're a country based on the constitution and freedoms and let's just pause it real quick.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		We gotta get Chase debating more people.
		I love it.
		He doesn't let them get away with anything.
		No, we're not.
		We're just not.
		Prove it.
		Explain that.
		It's great.
		I love it.
		We're not a democracy.
		Obviously, FOIA requests don't work if they can just say national security and stop you from looking at it.
		I mean, this is the thing.
		You got two people there.
		One who just isn't buying the illusion and one who wants to believe in the illusion even if he doesn't.
		Even if he knows intelligently, he understands that the government spies on us, the fact that we are a representative of democracy, the fact that we're a republic, the fact that we have FOIA requests doesn't actually stop them from spying on us.
		Not just spying on us, but censoring us and people in the offices of big tech.
		But we still have the Constitution, but it's still there.
		And we do.
		We have the First Amendment, technically, for now.
		Not if Israel has anything to say about it, but we're not talking about Israel, we're talking about China.
		I don't think China's trying to destroy our free speech as far as I can tell.
		We'll get back to it on the other side.
		Again, the whole video was, the whole episode was fantastic and Chase made some great points.
		We'll get back to it on the other side.
unidentified		Stay with us.
		You're listening to The American Journal with your host, Harrison Smith.
		Not to touch the air, Smith.
		Welcome back, folks.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Talking about China and whether they're a threat or not.
		I do like the way that Chase puts it.
		They're a competitor, not a threat.
		I think that is true.
		I think they're also a threat in some ways.
		But not as much as our own government, obviously.
		Look, we can.
		I mean, some of the some of the numbers out of China would really make you question things.
		The fact that a significantly larger portion of millennials in China own their own homes than in America.
		Doesn't that make you wonder how that came to be?
		How that came to pass?
		China's astronomical growth over the last 20 years.
		While America is in steady decline.
		That was a choice made.
		That was a decision.
		That was a deliberate policy.
		To export all of our jobs to China.
		Save a couple bucks off top.
		Not pay a living wage.
		Not pay Americans what they would deserve.
		Bizarrely, at one point in the conversation, Tim Pool suggests that Americans don't want manufacturing jobs or something.
		It's weird.
		He's like, the America First agenda is to have everybody slaving away for 12 hours a day.
		Where are you getting this from, dude?
		But you know, we used to have a bunch of manufacturing.
		People weren't slaves.
		People worked at a factory eight hours a day.
		And they could afford a house and two cars.
		on one salary.
		That was a good thing back then.
		Anyway, very strange.
		Let's get back to the TikTok conversation here.
		Because again, I think the psychological attacks on America are more multifaceted, multivaried, and nuanced than the Tim Pool guys want to make it seem.
		So let's go back to the TikTok clip.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		As it is today.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		You think that the United States is based off of the Constitution as it is today?
unidentified		Um, I still think we have the First and Second Amendment and I think that's something you don't have in Communist China.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Again, if you don't see the difference between those two... How many states were you allowed to own a gun in in 1980?
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		I don't know.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I think it was like probably two.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		You were only allowed to own a gun in the United States.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Gun rights.
		The right to keep and bear arms outside your home really came into effect with D.C.
		versus Heller in 2008.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		I didn't know that.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, George Carlin got arrested for swearing at a comedy club.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Hold on.
		See, this is one of the things.
		This is one of the things.
		I don't know what the hell he's talking about.
		What point is he making right there?
		I like watching TimCast.
		I'm just like, what is happening?
		What are we talking about?
		What is going on?
		So we just went from, is China a threat to America has the first and second amendment.
		And Tim says people weren't allowed to own guns in the eighties.
		What are you talking about, dude?
unidentified		Well, I think, I think the connection or the reason the conversation shifted was because Chase mentioned the fact that our biggest threat is the U S government.
unidentified		The U S government is the biggest threat to us, right?
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		But what, but first of all, what is he talking about with the guns in 1982 states?
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		You were allowed to own guns in the 80s?
unidentified		Yeah, that seems weird.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		No, it's not weird.
		It's wrong.
		It's just not right.
		It's just stupid.
		That's just a stupid thing to say.
		Which two states, Tim, were you allowed to own a gun in 1980?
unidentified		He must have learned it on Reddit.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		It's just complete nonsense.
		That's just an insane thing to say.
		I don't even know what he's talking about there.
		Regardless.
		We're talking about the second amendment.
		He's like George Carlin was arrested for obscenity in 1972 and it's like I have.
unidentified		After hearing you tell him that he had sworn, I have expected him to go into that rant about, dude, you're about to get arrested, Chase, for swearing.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's one of the things.
		So just before this, or like a few minutes before this, he very rudely told Chase not to curse, which as a host who often has to tell people not to curse, there are ways to do it.
		That are polite and congenial and keep the conversation going and don't make your guest feel like he's being castigated or chastised on live video.
unidentified		Tim's like on the spectrum, so.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		I think that's what it is, because then that gets in his mind, and he's thinking about that.
		He's thinking about curse words, and he's thinking about George Carlin being arrested, and then he brings it up later, and it's like, well, what does this have to do with owning guns, or China, or TikTok?
		This is strange.
		But while we're on the topic, and this is one of the things- But also, Tim is a cool dude, so I just want to let you know.
		We love Tim.
		We love Tim Poole.
		We're very impressed at what he's been able to do.
		But he says things that aren't true a lot.
		It's frustrating watching it.
		Every couple minutes, it's like, all right, well, he just doesn't understand what he's talking about there.
		And George Carlin's a good example.
		Because it's sort of this event has sort of entered into American mythos where it's like George Carlin was arrested.
		He was too edgy, man.
		He was too far out there.
		America, the buttoned up suit and tie wearing white guys couldn't handle his truth.
		And they were trying to shut him down.
		He was a rebel.
		It's just not true at all.
		It's not true at all.
		I'll tell you the story here in just a second of why George Carlin was really arrested and how it was all totally fabricated and a ploy that was organized and orchestrated by his talent agency.
		Did you know that?
		Are you ready for the George Carlin conspiracy?
		Because it's well documented and perfectly evident.
		Yeah, these types of stuff.
		He got the last laugh.
		He was right at the end of the day.
		No, he wasn't.
		He was wrong.
		What he did was bad and wrong, and he should have been arrested, and it was correct that he got arrested.
		I'll explain why.
		And this is one of the things.
		It's like, it doesn't even matter.
		What are we even talking about here?
		We're supposed to be talking about China and Taiwan.
		I'm about to go off on a rant about George Carlin.
		But this is what happens when you watch Tim Cassidy.
		He just drops these little historical anecdotes that's like, well, wait, dude, what are you talking about?
		Because the problem is that you take these historical anecdotes that are wrong and outside of context, but then you extrapolate truth from that, and then you apply that extrapolated false truth to other things, and now you're wrong about this other thing.
		So, when you talk about George Carlin getting arrested, here, this story is Summerfest 50, George Carlin's big gig act for the ages.
		And again, you know, if you just were to ask a regular person, if you were to ask Tim Pool what he thinks happened, like he just said it there, he's like, he was arrested for cursing in America.
		And that was bad, right?
		That was bad that we arrest people for cursing back then.
		What actually happened is that George Carlin for a decade at that point had been a very famous national name.
		He was like a household name before he ever He took the stage.
		He wasn't like an unknown comic getting abused by the police for being too edgy and funny.
		He was a very well-known person.
		He would guest host The Tonight Show.
		And his whole style was buttoned up, fancy, clean cut type of guy.
		He deliberately made the switch to hippie, edgy dude as a gambit to get more young people.
		And he admits this.
		And this was an idea by his talent agency.
		Basically, he was like, I was 13.
		I'll read the call just read the quotes shall I?
		So, while he admired Bruce's style of obscene comedy and political commentary on TV, he catered, Carlin, catered to a mainstream audience.
		So by the late 60s, he was very wealthy, to the point of having his own private jet.
		So Carlin, that's how famous Carlin was by the time he got arrested.
		In the late 60s, he already had a private jet.
		1960s.
		He was very famous.
		He was very well-known by that point.
		Then, partly at the urging of his RCA records manager, he began to abandon his slick hair, suit and tie persona of TV fame in order to appeal to a younger audience.
		He took on a laid-back, long-haired, countercultural look, jeans, t-shirt, and an earring, and his routine shifted to mocking the very TV shows that had made him rich and famous, laced with obscenities and sexual vulgarity.
		So, again, this was not...
		Like, George Carlin is right about a lot of stuff.
	We play clips of his where he clearly is on the money about certain things, about vaccines, and, you know, we play the video of him talking about, we used to swim in the sewer and we all were fine because we have an immune system.
	He's right about that.
	And he's very good at what he does.
	He's very talented.
	But at the end of the day, that whole persona was a put-on.
	It was a scam.
	It was an illusion.
	It was a cynical marketing choice by his agency.
	You can just imagine the conversation.
	It's like, we need you to change up a little bit.
	We need to go after that younger demographic.
	You know what they like?
	They like edgy.
	They like anti-authoritarian, right?
	They're these, like, millionaires being like, yeah, I'm a kid too.
	Yeah, I also want to fight the power, kid.
	Give me your money, right?
	Just totally cynical, totally inauthentic.
	Jeff Abraham, who represented Carlin in his later years, recalls Carlin telling him, look, I was 30 years old on TV entertaining audiences who were 10, 20 years older than me.
	I knew I couldn't sustain it.
	Carlin feared in a few years he'd be, he'd end up entertaining lounge lizards in the Catskills.
	So again, just sort of cynical, um, totally just capitalistic move.
	We're just like, I just have to appeal to younger people to make more money.
	His bookings dropped dramatically, reportedly as much as 90%.
	He became, quote, too hot to handle.
	By the time he stepped onto the dock at Summerfest, he was a much cheaper date than a few years ago.
	As part of his critique of the media, he had recently developed a 7 dirty words you can't use on television routine, which was recorded on a new album called Class Clown.
	And this article even notes, okay, it was actually 6, one being a derivative of another, but who's counting?
	That's one of the things.
	Again, I, you know, it's a funny bit, the whole 7 words you can't say on television.
	People treat it like it's like, you know, a new gospel or something.
	He didn't even come up with seven words.
	He came up with six.
	He used one word twice.
	It's like, it's sort of at its basis.
	It's just kind of lazy.
	And again, it's like, it's not that hard to shock people when you're in a culture that has morality, that doesn't curse and show nudity.
	Well, if you curse and show nudity, you're going to be shocking and you're going to get attention.
	It's cheap.
	It's cheap is what it is.
	So using the seven words you can't use on television, it was, it's just cheap.
	That's all.
	It's like when Saw came out.
	It's like, yeah, if you just show gruesome stuff, more gruesome than anybody's ever seen before, people are going to look at it.
	It doesn't mean it's art.
	It doesn't mean it's good.
	It doesn't mean it's deep or thoughtful or even rebellious.
	It's just childish.
	It's like childish, basically.
unidentified		You know what just happened?
unidentified		Tim's magic just worked on you and you got lost in a tangent.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		This is what I'm saying.
		I it's like but as I'm watching Tim, you know, and he's like George Carlin got arrested for speech.
		And it's like, no, he didn't.
		And I'll we haven't gotten to the point.
		The point is that he wasn't arrested for speech.
		He wasn't arrested because his ideas were too hot to handle.
		He was arrested because the album with the seven dirty words hadn't come out yet.
		The people who booked him for the show assumed that he'd be doing the jokes he'd been doing for a decade at this point, which were clean cut and family friendly because the venue where he was giving this performance was full of children. - Okay.
		That's the issue, and we'll read to it.
		So again, he makes this sudden change where suddenly he's a far-out hippie dude who's anti-authoritarian.
		Nobody knew that because he wasn't actually that way.
		This wasn't a gradual transformation.
		This wasn't how he became famous by having this identity.
		He became famous as a clean-cut, family-friendly comic.
		He makes this sudden change.
		He records this album with the seven dirty words, but the album hadn't come out yet when they booked him.
		So nobody knew that this was his new style.
		Nobody knew that he was now an edgy, you know, using curse words type of guy.
		Since the album had not yet been released, it's doubtful that Charlie Fane, the Summerfest Entertainment director, was aware of it when he booked Carlin for the main stage at the event.
		The lineup for the evening was clearly aimed at a young audience.
		Carlin was preceded by Brewer and Shipley, followed by Arlo Guthrie.
		But there were also many families in the crowd of about 35,000 that included children, not the least of which was Carlin's own wife, Brenda, and their nine-year-old daughter, Kelly.
		Apparently, some parents were expecting to see the former G-rated Carlin from his Tonight Show days.
		That Carlin had left the room.
		So, this is like, you know, it's like you have this giant venue, 35,000 people, you bring on You hire Rafi, right?
		You book Barney the Big Purple Dinosaur to put on a show for kids, because that's what he does.
		You don't realize that Barney's gone rebel in the meantime, and is going to come out and start just spouting curse words at your audience for the entire time.
		So the question is, do we have obscenity laws?
		Do we have moral laws?
		Should we?
		Right?
		And there's a discussion in Tim Pool about libertarianism, and if it doesn't harm anybody, then what's the big deal, right?
		But is there such a thing as psychological harm?
		I mean, do we want to allow anybody to do or say anything to children?
		Against the wishes of their parents who are trying to preserve their children's innocence and childhood and not introduce them to vulgar things?
		Should they have their rights violated because some dude wants to be edgy?
		And it takes clothes off at a gay pride parade?
		Wagglers ding-dong at kids?
		I mean, they're not getting hurt, technically, right?
		It's not physically harming them, so what's the big deal?
		Well, the big deal is you're psychically harming them.
		The big deal is that you are Doing things in front of children you shouldn't be doing, that the parents don't want you doing, that you aren't supposed to be doing, but you do it anyway.
		So again, this is the tangent, but he just dropped his little historical, like, George Carlin got arrested for his speech.
		And it's like, no, he got arrested because he went up in front of a bunch of little kids and started cursing at all of them and saying things, like, with their parents.
		So the parents were just like, what is this?
		Get this guy off the stage.
		You've got to stop him.
		And he was arrested.
		He wasn't even arrested for that.
		He was arrested, like, later for something else.
		The best thing people don't understand, uh, is this again gets sort of transmorgified by history into this like mythological, he was arrested because he was so edgy and they couldn't, they couldn't stop his speech.
		He was too cool.
		He cursed and it was awesome.
		It's like, no, dude, he just was supposed to give a G-rated show and instead went up and started talking about sex and vulgar things and cursing at an audience of children.
		So they arrested him for obscenity, which is what we should do now to people who abuse and destroy the innocence of children.
		And then Tim says something else about America having blasphemy laws, which is also an interesting rabbit hole to go down.
		We won't go down it.
		But it is interesting.
		I just felt like doing some research and ended up finding it's chapter 272 of the Massachusetts General Laws.
		And it basically says blaspheming, cursing Jesus Christ.
		You'll be punished with no less than a year in prison.
		And that was first on the books in like 1657.
		So it's kind of funny that you've got all these people going, America was never a Christian country.
		And then there's laws still on the books.
	He says there were blasphemy laws a hundred years ago.
	No, there's still blasphemy laws.
	They just don't get enforced.
	They're still on the books.
	I believe unless I was reading the article wrong.
	I believe that in Massachusetts, it's still on the book.
	Like this statute still exists chapter 272 of the Massachusetts general laws say that you can be punished with a $3,000 fine or a year in prison for blaspheming the name of the Lord Jesus Christ I'm not saying I'm I'm fine with that or not.
	I'm just saying History has a way of distorting the facts and by the time People are talking about it now America was never a Christian country and George Carlin was arrested for his speech because he was too edgy and countercultural When in reality it was all a scam to sell more albums by psychically abusing a bunch of children and getting press for it.
	That's the problem.
	This really is the problem.
	But let's go back because we haven't even gotten to the point of the clip I wanted to play in the first place, which is China's psychological attack on the United States.
	Let's go back to the TikTok question.
	And again, there's a point to this and it is What's actually behind the collapse of American morality and psychic health?
	Let's watch.
ted cruz ▲ ● ▼		Imagine what would have happened to me.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		We had blasphemy laws a couple hundred years ago.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		You could get arrested.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		So do you think that the United States is a country based off the Constitution?
unidentified		I think we're a lot more free than any other country.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Frederick Douglass famously challenged the American people to live up to the documents.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I agree with that.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		I agree with that.
unidentified		I think it's dangerous also to like both sides are government with communist regimes like that.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		The United States I believe has a problem.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		You're probably right about that, too.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		We have a problem with corruption in government, and it is not nearly as bad as most government problems.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Like the white pill by Michael Malice.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		I mean, that was basically the whole point of that book.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, the CCP is infinitely worse than the establishment.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I agree.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		But there's something particularly egregious about a government betraying its own people that is just not the same when another government does it.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		This is the issue, right?
		We are what's referred to academically as a liberal democracy.
		It depends on the institutions you have within it if you want to get to the nitty gritty.
		So we're a constitutional republic with democratically elected representatives.
		Countries like this, because it largely does, at least in some degree, seek to have input from the people, are referred to as liberal democracy in that capacity.
		We can FOIA request, as Alad mentioned, we can file lawsuits, and we win.
		The reason why I'm in favor of the TikTok divestment bill is because, for one, it's not really a ban.
		TikTok could still operate.
		You can go to TikTok.us, it'll still exist, it just won't be on a different service outside of the country.
		But it won't be on iPhones, it could be on Android.
		So, uh, what's kind of a ban?
		But it's, but it's, but it's, it's, it's, this is the challenge.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		I mean, it's like saying that Alex Jones didn't get banned because he could still have his own servers.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I mean, technically he was legally allowed to operate, but the impact is so... Alex Jones got banned from YouTube.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		The, the, the divestment bill... So TikTok is going to get banned from Apple?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		It would be banned from US servers.
unidentified		If they don't sell.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		But my point is, if they don't divest.
		And so it's not even selling, it's telling 1% of the company, which they refuse to do and they're gonna lay people off.
		When it comes to Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, et cetera, we filed FOIA requests, we filed lawsuits, we won.
		Elon Musk bought X, released a bunch of documents.
		You can't do that with TikTok.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Yes, you're right.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		The United States has problems.
		We're actually fighting a culture war, and in many ways we're winning.
		Targets abandoning their pride section.
		Bud Light panicked.
		They didn't give us everything they wanted and apologized, but they did still start backtracking.
		And then you've got Donald Trump, the frontrunner, right now to win in November.
		That doesn't mean we've won, but this doesn't exist in China.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Okay, fair enough.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		So it's like, with all the problems we have, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		But the original question was whether or not the CCP was a threat.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		You think it's a threat to the United States of America?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I absolutely do.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Can you be a little bit more specific about what that means?
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Because threat's a very broad stroke term.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Do you mean like military?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Do you mean culturally?
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		I mean in what ways?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		China's strategy, China's efforts, China's end goals involve the destruction and the end of the United States.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		Like the 100-year plan?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I don't know necessarily if you want to get into that, but I can tell you this.
		Militaristically, of course and obviously, the expansion of the South China Sea in violation of international treaties could destabilize the region and could seriously impact our allies, our resources, etc.
		Now, that being said, I'm more America first.
		I like to keep things, you know, here in the United States.
		We're going to have international relations.
		We're going to have trade.
		I don't care to go to war for Taiwan.
		But the expansion of the military and building atoll bases in South China Sea and then sending strike groups near Hawaii and Alaska is putting pressure on our boundaries and our territory.
		TikTok is the best example of China directly assaulting the United States.
		TikTok becomes massively popular in the United States and starts sending weird, woke garbage to children It definitely brainwashed an entire generation of our people, 100%.
		That means in 20, 30 years, when these people who are brainwashed are in industry, it's gonna be like putting a, look, you call it a mind virus.
		It is a social mind virus in our society, which is going to economically and physically damage us and already did.
		That's why I'm like, TikTok must be assessed and held accountable in whatever mean appropriate.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		This is so interesting.
		And he goes on, again, I don't want to just play the whole clip though, I should have gone through and grabbed like little 10 second clips.
		But you got the sense right there that he's blaming TikTok for poisoning a generation of children.
		The problem is that TikTok is different in China because censorship, because they have morality laws.
		So unless Tim is arguing in favor of censorship that the American government should step in and stop TikTok from giving people what they want, which is what TikTok does.
		The problem is not China providing what people want.
		It's that the American people want this stuff.
unidentified		You're watching The American Journal with your host, Harrison Smith.
		Watch live right now at band.video.
		Welcome back, folks.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		We'll move on in just a second.
		Got a lot of news to get to, and I'm not doing a good job of getting to all of it.
		We'll get into what's happening in Israel.
		We'll get what is happening technically with China and Taiwan.
		We'll give you the breakdown of what exactly is happening there and what we think the ultimate goals are.
		But I just want to finish up with this because it does relate to everything really, right?
		It relates to our confrontation with China, relates to the TikTok ban, the lie behind the TikTok ban.
		That's about China.
		It's not, obviously.
		And this is what I think is frustrating and why I think it's worth it to talk about this because.
		You've got to look at what they do, not what they say.
		The people in power.
		And when you look at that and when you when you just ignore the claims they're making and just see what's actually happening and and look at what the.
		Look at the other claims there may like it's just it's obvious and so I don't know why you would.
		Willfully go along with the lie that banning TikTok is about China.
		It's just not.
		If it was, it would have happened years ago.
		Would have happened when Donald Trump floated the idea because he actually was worried about Chinese spyware.
		But it's like once you know the depth of the secret activities, you don't worry about downloading TikTok on your phone.
		We basically manufacture every electronic component we use on a daily basis in China, and China puts back doors on the hardware during the manufacturing process.
		They, I mean, so the idea that they need you to download an app to spy on you, they've got back doors in all of our devices from the moment they leave the assembly line.
		They don't need TikTok, okay?
		It might be useful, it might help them aggregate information, but they got plenty of ways of getting all the information they need without having to give people TikTok.
		Now, we'll go back to this clip just for a few more seconds here to again illustrate how far off the mark the conversation about TikTok is and how the claims about the threat of China Are giving China an authority.
		They're granting China a influence that it's impossible for them to have had.
		So let's go to this clip here and we'll finish up and we'll move on to all the other bombshell news we have for today.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I will say outright, TikTok is a psychological warfare.
		It's psychological warfare on the United States targeting our youth so that in 20 years we are... I'm sorry, did you see the video of the guy on the aircraft carrier putting on makeup and then thrusting his hips around?
		This is our military that is now more focused on doing drag shows than on defending this nation.
		They're putting DEI policy into effect.
		Why?
		Because of what China is doing.
		Not only that, with TikTok, they say you've got 175 million active users in the United States, and large portions of them are businesses.
		Since when did we agree to allow the CCP to control economics in any capacity in this country?
		And then you've got people who are like, no, don't ban TikTok.
		And I'm like, why?
		It's China attacking the United States militaristically.
		So China is a massive threat.
		They're a bigger threat than the things that are happening in this country that we can actually fight against.
		We would not be having the Bud Light conversation at all.
		There would be no Bud Light conversation if it were not for the CCP attacking our young people.
chase geiser ▲ ● ▼		So the CCP literally ruined Bud Light.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		See, so that's what makes no sense to me.
		We can take it down.
		We'll be done with it here.
		We would not be talking about Bud Light if not for the CC.
		What?
		Just I guess that's it.
		What?
		I guess because Dylan Mulvaney was a star on TikTok and so.
		Because they hired him.
		I mean, it's just.
		He's talking about people in the Navy dressing up in drag.
		And filming themselves.
		How does he think China brought that about?
		I mean, he just said that DEI is because of China.
		What?
		No.
		What we're experiencing now is the inevitable, the very predictable outcome of literally decades of incremental leftism.
		Decades of incremental progressivism leading us to this point.
		Was China behind Harvey Milk in the 80s or whenever it was?
		Were they behind?
		I mean, 90% of their people were still, you know, living on starvation diets when this got started.
		So none of this is just so it's just it's bizarre to me because he's blaming this foreign nation for what is clearly the action of people in our own nation.
		Like China is a bigger threat than anything that's happening here.
		You ever been on Instagram?
		You ever been on YouTube?
		You ever been on literally any other social media outlet that's owned by Americans or Israelis?
		It's the same stuff as TikTok.
		It's the same drag.
		It's the same.
		And that's not going to go away.
		Does he think that's going to go away if it's sold by an American company?
		It's only going to expand and become more prevalent if it's owned by.
		The only difference is they're going to censor anti-Semitism because that's why they're selling it.
		That's why they're forcing it to be sold.
		So China, I mean they're right, right?
		China understands the psychological impact of this.
		Their role is not to force this on anybody, it's to let us destroy ourselves with our own immorality.
		See, China has morality laws, it has censorship laws.
		It says we think we know what's best for our people, and so we're going to give that to them.
		It's science, it's community, it's unity, it's history, it's patriotism.
		And so they incentivize that and they censor stuff that is contradictory to that.
		See, we have the First Amendment and a belief in free speech and a belief that you shouldn't force that on people.
		And that's up to the people to have virtue, not for the government to dictate what is virtuous and what isn't and then censor things they say aren't.
		Because we have a system that actually empowers and believes in and relies on People to think for themselves and China doesn't have that.
		So that's not going to slow down even if China sells even if China capitulates and sells to an American company.
		Do they think that transgenderism is going to go away on TikTok?
		This is what I don't understand.
		Of course it's not because it's not the Chinese that are doing it.
		It's the transgender people in America that are doing it.
		And if you ever use TikTok, it's very obvious how influenced the algorithm is by your own decision.
		If you look at drag queen stuff, it gives you more drag queen stuff.
		But if you get on TikTok and look at nothing but woodworking, it feeds you nothing but woodworking videos.
		If you look at science projects, it feeds you nothing but science projects.
		It gives you what you want.
		And the American people Want degeneracy.
		That's the problem.
		That's the issue.
		And it's not because China forced them to want that.
		It's because for decades, un-American, un-Christian, un-immoral people have been forcing this down the throats of the American people in every branch of media, not just social media.
		TV, movies, music, all entertainment, YouTube, Instagram.
		Twitter until Elon bought it.
		And even now, if you just start a Twitter account, you see it's mostly progressive Democrats that you're suggested you follow from the very beginning.
		So this is an issue internally that China is simply not getting involved in.
		They're just letting us make our own mistakes.
	They're letting us destroy ourselves.
	So it's like, it's like wanting to ban TikTok is like wanting to ban The liquor store to deal with alcoholism.
	It's not the liquor store's fault.
	They're not forcing on anybody.
	They're not attacking the alcoholic.
	They just are there and they provide the alcoholic what they need to kill themselves.
	It's up to us to fix the alcoholic.
	It's up to us to fix our morality, to have self-control so that we aren't in need of censorship.
	That's the issue, is that if we can't handle things ourselves, if we can't We need to be moral people and not, you know, just follow our own immediate carnal instincts to whatever end they lead.
	We need censorship and I don't want that.
	It's not China's fault.
unidentified		Welcome back, folks.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk about the real threats to our freedom. .
		Spoiler alert, the calls coming from inside the house.
		It is our own system.
		It is the people who control our own entertainment, our own big tech, our own international bodies.
		These are the people that are systematically destroying everything on purpose.
		Let's talk about just a few of the way that this is being put into places.
		It's all being established right now.
		Yesterday when we talked to Matt Baker and we broke down the timeline where you've got the vaccine manufacturers meeting their checkpoints at the same time you've got the people who are creating the GMO virus matching their checkpoints, achieving their
		Goals In an appropriate time frame at the same time that's happening you've got The groundwork for operation warp speed being laid and all these various pieces are being put into place So that when they unveil when they when they actually launch the attack Everybody set up and geared up and ready to go so that same thing is happening now internationally all these various treaties being put into place all these various agreements and
		They don't like to use the word treaty because that has legal implications.
		If they use the word agreement, it can effectively be a treaty, but they can do it by fiat, not without having to get approval through the U.S.
		Senate or others.
		But again, this is not an attack on America in particular.
		It's an attack on Western Europe and America.
		It's an attack on the Western way of life.
		And there's a few of these going into place at exactly the same time, exactly the same way, for exactly the same purpose.
		Okay?
		By month's end, the WHO seeks to pass Orwellian Pandemic Treaty to implement algorithmic surveillance and control systems worldwide.
		The World Health Organization, WHO, body of experts are set to convene in Geneva, Switzerland at their 77th World Health Assembly from May 27th to June 1st.
		At the Assembly, WHO member countries will cast their votes on the final version of the agency's pandemic agreement.
		Remember, they use the word agreement, even though it's a treaty, because they want to be able to do it by co-opting, you know, one or two representatives who can sign on behalf of the rest of the country, rather than having to go to the Senate and actually get the people's representatives to approve this agreement.
		Okay, they're currently collaborating with the European Organization for Nuclear Research to develop an online tool that will evaluate and predict risks associated with future airborne virus transmission across various public and private settings.
		Their surveillance tool, named ARIA, will model the hypothetical spread of airborne pathogens in indoor settings so the WHO can craft precise directives on mitigation measures for business owners, households, healthcare centers, and other indoor venues.
		Yeah, see that was the problem.
		They just didn't have total surveillance last time.
		That was the issue.
		It's not that everything they suggested that we... Everything they demanded that we do, we did and it was just wrong.
		Or that they sat back and watched as the virus spread to the extent that it was no longer containable and then decided to do something about it.
		So let's just be very clear.
		Nothing that the WHO did during COVID helped.
		Absolutely nothing.
		Everything they did made it worse.
		So their sole purpose of existing is to identify and counteract emergent novel viruses, threats, pandemics, that sort of thing.
		They were put to the ultimate test and they failed in every possible regard.
		They didn't identify it early enough.
		They didn't take measures to isolate it early enough.
		The measures that they did suggest you take to mitigate it did not mitigate it at all.
		It destroyed the economy.
		It had massive negative side effects from the economic shutdown to the psychological trauma to the literal murder that took place in hospitals, putting people on ventilators.
		And now these people, that so tremendously screwed up every aspect of their responsibility under COVID, want more responsibility, want more power, more authority, more surveillance, more control.
		They have done nothing to deserve it.
		And I guess this is the beauty of having a revolutionary ideology, is that it doesn't matter because you can always just say, well, it's because we didn't have enough power.
		Oh, we failed completely?
		It's because we didn't go far enough and hard enough.
		So we'll do it again this time, only this time we'll have more surveillance.
		And then when you screw up this time, when it doesn't work this time, when you release some new virus from some new lab and completely fail to mitigate its effects and suggest a bunch of horrible nonsense, it doesn't help anybody.
		They'll just ask for more power because it's the feedback loop that continues forever.
		So, they're doing the WHO pandemic agreement.
		Because, just like everything, you know, whatever little weaselly rhetorical workaround they can find that determines, you know, rights and justice at this point.
		Whether you can manipulate people enough.
		At the same time, you have the EU Suicide Pact, threatening to flood a continent with 75 million more migrants.
		From February of this year, the EU has passed a migration pact dubbed the Suicide of Europe, which could lead to the continent being flooded with as many as 75 million new migrants.
		European Parliament's LIBE committee passed the act on Wednesday, which formalizes the distribution of migrants to member states and punishes those who refuse to take them.
		Member States will be forced to accept migrants or pay a massive financial penalty of €25,000 per migrant.
		Even though there have been at least five stories this year alone pointing out that the migrants are screwing everything up, providing absolutely no benefit, committing the majority of crime in Europe, ruining their healthcare system, ruining their pension funds.
		They're being forced to raise retirement ages.
		They all go on welfare.
		Some tiny percent of them get jobs and even the jobs they get are like manual labor and not enough to live on.
		So they still have to get free housing and free everything.
		So, so they're doing that anyway.
		Okay.
		So the international bodies are using their influence and, and world economic forum style, you know, managerial position to force countries to take Unsustainable amounts of economic draining migrants.
		Orwellian control and surveillance because of the diseases that they themselves create in labs.
		And then we have this.
	Italy, Eastern Europe, European countries reject EU's radical new homosexual declaration.
	On May 17th, the European Union released a statement by the High Representative on behalf of the EU for the so-called International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia.
	It was a declaration of the new Western values calling on countries everywhere to focus on fighting inequalities and multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination to ensure that justice will apply to everyone regardless of their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
	So they've got this international declaration that basically makes Sexuality, a protected class, and you know, forces you to celebrate an inordinate amount of secular holidays about being gay.
	And they don't want to sign off on this.
	Certain countries don't want to sign off on this, but they're being forced to, essentially.
	And so you've got, and all of these things have the same sort of path they take, the same sort of, you know, rollout of these measures.
	It always takes the same path, right?
	It's a measure that is deliberately designed to destroy the country it's being inflicted on.
	LGBT celebration, whatever, you know, influencing children, increasing the rate of homosexuality at a time when the birth rate is collapsing and we can't make enough people.
	And this is just a deliberate genocidal sort of program they're running.
	And to replace the people that you're killing, you're bringing in millions upon millions of migrants.
	And it's always like, well, it's just about care.
	It's about love.
	Don't you care about these people?
	Don't you want them to be safe?
	You're killing them by not doing this.
	And whether that's because you're killing them by not listening to the WHO.
	You're killing the refugees by not allowing them to take over your country.
	You're killing the gay people by not celebrating and telling them that they're great and wonderful all the time.
	And saying that their sexuality is just as good or maybe better than heterosexuality.
	You know, it's always like, oh, you're the bad guy if you don't do this.
	We're gonna force you to do it, even though it has nothing but negative consequences for your culture and society and the individuals in your country.
	And then, if you argue against what's being implemented, then you're guilty of hate speech or whatever other term they can apply to your speech to make it seem like it's bad and illegal.
	Free speech is dead.
	Dutch conservative confirms prosecution for online criticism of mass immigration.
	China's not doing any of this, just to be clear.
	It's all being done by an international cabal of globalists that are instituting horrible policies and then making it illegal to question them.
	Because they're so liberal, of course.
unidentified		Making a record of the hearts and minds of the American people.
unidentified		It's the American Journal with your host, Harrison Smith.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Of course we have free speech.
		We have free speech.
		It's a European value.
		America has the First Amendment, but that was just an outgrowth of a trend over centuries.
		The liberalization, the elevating of the individual over the collective.
		Celebrating and appreciating the various views can be Expressed and and aired out and by conversation we get to the ultimate conclusion I mean that came out of the Renaissance came out of the Enlightenment came out of the Magna Carta and the British Civil War And then the American Revolution codifying it with the First Amendment as the supreme law of the land Of course, we have the First Amendment.
		Of course, we have free speech But not about just some things like health You can't disagree with the authorities about health, even though they're always wrong.
		Obviously.
		I mean, you can't... You can't really talk about the wars that we're starting, obviously.
		You can't talk about sexuality if you aren't an adherent to the prevailing morality.
		You certainly can't question climate change.
		You don't want to be a climate change denier.
		Do you?
		Certainly there's parts of history that are illegal to question.
		You can't question migration or Judaism or Islam.
		You can't publish crime statistics.
		You certainly can't advocate for your race or Insult any others.
		So we have free speech.
		It's just not about like small things like morality and sexuality and health and the course of the planet and industry and climate change.
		And you aren't allowed to disagree with the experts and you have to do the things the experts say.
		So you not only have to agree with the moral foundation of their beliefs, we have to agree with their prescriptions, even though time and time again, they are proven to be horribly wrong and their solutions so-called are actually massively negative.
		So yeah, Europe has free speech, America has free speech, which is not about health or sexuality or climate change or history or migration or Judaism or crime statistics.
		But other than that, yeah, talk away, you know, have your fun, say what you want.
		So all these things are being implemented all at once, all of these restrictions and it It all comes down to speech.
		It all comes down to what you're allowed to talk about or not, because they can't have you disagreeing with their plans.
		They can't have you advocating against their deliberate destruction of your country, because every one of these things, that is the ultimate outcome of their policies.
		The destruction of the family, the destruction of the community, the destruction of your nation, the eradication of your race, the distortion and destruction of your history.
		Is the inevitable outcome of every one of their policies, every one of their little arrangements.
		It's not that complicated.
		I don't know what else to tell you.
		They're doing something to destroy everything and they want to make it illegal to talk about.
		They have the authority to do it.
		If they're able to pass some of these things.
		So while that's happening, you have stories like this.
		British police told not to arrest criminals.
		Police chiefs are being told to make fewer arrests because of a lack of prison space.
		Yet another blow to the Conservative Party's claim to be tough on crime.
		Just talk that is heating up again about an imminent general election there in the UK.
		The plans are bound to benefit what politicians euphemistically call low-level criminals, who nevertheless do significant harm Why?
		Despite conservative politicians releasing some prisoners early, there's still just a thousand spaces currently available in British prisons, some of which are in such a sorry state that regulators say they ought to be shut down.
		Why?
		Because they're full of Muslim immigrants that you brought in.
		And that's the truth.
		There's like literal wars going on in UK prisons between the native Britons and the overwhelming Muslim population that are in prison.
		So stop importing criminals and maybe your jails won't be overcrowded.
unidentified		You're watching the American Journal with your host, Harrison Smith.
		Watch live right now at band.video.
		Welcome back, folks.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		We've got China surrounding Taiwan.
unidentified		We took a little bacon and we took the little beans and we caught the bloody British down in New Orleans.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		We've got China surrounding Taiwan.
		We've got Russia holding nuclear drills on the border with Ukraine.
		We've got conflagration in the Middle East that continues to slowly but surely spiral into wider and wider conflict.
		And yet, amongst all of these existential world-rending threats, the greatest threat of them all is from our own elite, our own establishment, our own international rules-based order that is systematically destroying Our way of life, our safety, our ability to be prosperous, healthy, or even exist.
		As again, the British police are being told not to arrest criminals.
		These recommendations, which effectively bowed to the emboldened criminal elements of society, could be dubbed the San Francisco-ization of Britain, after officers in the crime-ridden California city say they have to ignore some low-level crimes because the district attorney is pro-criminal and not going to enforce the law.
		Because of prison overcrowding.
		No, I'm not kidding.
		I mean, they have the same issue we have in America, which is millions upon millions in their migrant population, which is statistically more likely to commit crime than the native population.
		It really is just I mean, it's crazy.
		It is crazy.
		The policies that they pursue, the problems that they cause, and those cause downstream problems, it's like... It's just like a chain of dominoes.
		But there's not... There's not even the sugge- The only thing they have is, like, the food, I guess?
		Like, multiculturalism as a concept?
		Like, if you just...
		Want people of different ethnicities to live around each other for whatever reason?
		If you consider that in and of itself a virtue, then I guess you're getting that.
		But like, they're hurting you economically.
		They're destroying your healthcare system.
		They're overcrowding your prisons, meaning that now your police are not going to be arresting low-level criminals, so your crime rate's going to go up.
		So it's like not only Are the policies implemented?
		It's not like they just don't have positive impacts.
		They have a variety of negative impacts, all of which have secondary outcomes, which are also hugely negative.
		So you bring in a criminal element to your country that shouldn't be there in the first place.
		You drain your coffers to pay for their existence in this country.
		You let the native population be abused and victimized by them.
		You throw them in jail, now your jails are overcrowded and you're paying for that too.
		So now you have to stop arresting low-level criminals so more British people get victimized.
		So at every level of this process, the native people are being exploited, victimized, and terrorized.
		And the policy outcome Is nothing is just nothing but negative.
		I mean, it is completely insane how this is happening and how it's happening across every Western Europe, European country all at once, exactly the same way with various different reasons, but all the exact same outcome is happening in America as well, obviously.
		And this is the ultimate outcome of what the liberals want, what the left is called for.
		Things like this, Chicago mom left waiting hours for help after 911 call for home invasion because they say we have no units to send you.
		It's happening in Austin as well.
		Right?
		Now if you're being burglarized, call 311.
		Just let them know.
		Now if you defend yourself, you pull out a gun and try to stop the person breaking into your house because you don't know what their intentions are.
		Better safe than sorry.
		Maybe they're just here to steal your TV and it's an inconvenience, but it's not life or death.
		Or maybe they're there to tie you up, shoot you in the back of the head, or light you on fire.
		I mean, you don't know.
		And better safe than sorry.
		And then the police will come.
		And then they'll arrest you.
		And then they'll throw you in jail.
		And then you'll have to be run through the system for four years until maybe the governor gets around to pardoning you.
		you maybe.
		So in a way, I mean, if I was a leftist, if I was a liberal, if I was a Black Lives Matter supporter, maybe this is a good thing.
		You know, thank God.
		Thank God we did it.
		We saved the day, our policies got passed, and now this Chicago mom, you know, avoided being killed by the police, right?
		Because that's what we think happens.
		We're pretty sure that anytime the police come, they just show up and kill the first black person they see.
		That's the general activity of the police.
		Thank God.
		I mean, this could have gone bad.
		If they'd actually answered her 911 call, she could be dead now.
		So police would just show up and just shoot her.
		So thank God no police showed up when this terrified Chicago mother called 911 because people were breaking into her house.
		Chicago mom who called 911 during a terrifying break in was left on her own for hours with dispatch dispatchers telling her to call her local representative and demand more police funding.
unidentified		Okay.
unidentified		Right?
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		Michelle called the emergency hotline six times after coming face-to-face with two masked bandits only for the strained supervisor to tell her the city's severe budget cuts had left them with a bare-bones staff.
		A gentleman got on and said we have no units to send to you.
		Then there was an awkward pause, Michelle told NBC Chicago Wednesday, declining to share her name or her face, while her would-be robbers were still on the loose.
		He also recommended I called my alderman, and I said why, and he said to encourage him to hire more police.
		The dispatcher also asked me if I considered defending myself, if I had a weapon, or considered getting one.
		Two strangers walked through her back door around 12.30 p.m.
		after she let her dogs out.
		They were even caught on her security camera footage moseying up to her property after climbing over a six-foot-tall fence, but quickly sprinting away after finding the homeowner inside the house.
		See, she screamed, I'm calling the police, and they bolted.
		But that won't last long.
		They're gonna learn real quick that the police don't come.
		And it's gonna be a free-for-all.
		It's two and a half hours before the police finally arrived.
		For an active threat.
		For there are two masked men who just jumped my fence and broke into my home.
		The police show up in two and a half hours.
		So you did it.
		You did it, liberals.
		You got what you wanted.
		And everything is worse because of it.
		Because I think that might be the point.
		I really do.
		We'll just go through, you know, Actually, you know what I want to do?
		I don't know how much time I'm going to be able to get into this.
		We're going to talk about Israel this hour.
		And this article is the best article I've ever read about the Israel-Gaza conflict.
		It's by Ron Unz at unz.com, the Unz Review.
		Israel-Gaza, the masks come off in American society by Ron Unz.
		And he lays out in just a very sort of stark and journalistic way the timeline of the Israeli conflict in a way that puts everything in perspective, makes everything clear, and it does it without resorting to polemics or You know, sometimes I like, I love the Gateway Pundit.
		It's one of my favorite resources.
		I go, I go to like Infowars.com, Gateway Pundit, Justice Report.
		A few of those I go to every day.
		Justice Report's very good.
		I mean, Gateway Pundit's very good, but sometimes you're reading the article and it's like a little bit too much editorializing.
		I'm trying to get the details here.
		And it will spend a lot of time sort of gearing up the things that we agree with, but You know, aren't going to convince anybody when it's like, I mean, I'm not criticizing them because it's what we do on Infowars, obviously.
		But instead of just being like, Joe Biden did this, it's like, Joe, crooked Joe Biden, the criminal and child molester did this.
		It's like, OK, well, I mean, that's true.
		That is what he is.
		But.
		Does that have to do with the story?
		So Ron Unz does a very good job of sort of balancing it, where he tells the truth, he tells what's actually happening, and he does it in a way that's just like, this is just what's happening.
		And the reason I bring that up is because I know there's so many people out there, and I just think about like, my parents' friends that are just like, they're all for Israel, they hate the Gaza protest, they think they should all be shut down, like they're falling for the lie, they're falling for the scheme to steal their own rights from them.
		They don't get why that's happening.
		And if you Send them an article that's like, obviously super biased and one-sided and using insulting words.
		They're just gonna go, they're just gonna roll their eyes and go, okay, this is a, you know, far left or far right, whatever.
		It's, it's just, you know, it's too much opinion.
		I'm just, just give me the facts and I'll rely on that.
		Cause that's the way the MSM tricks these people is they present what they're saying as if it's just, just the facts are when in reality embedded in there is a bunch of assumptions and opinions.
		That's quiet.
		And so I think this article, Is well, like I said, it's my dad being like, Hey, you should send this to your friends because if they think that what's going on in Israel is just like Israel defending itself.
		This article will do a very good job of explaining what's actually happening without doing it in a way that is like pro Hamas or anything.
		It's just laying out the facts.
		All right.
		So I almost just want to read this whole article, but it would take me like an hour, but let me just give you the rundown.
		Let me just remind ourselves we're seven months into this conflict at this point or more.
		And every part of the conflict has been the subject of controversy and confusion.
		So let's have a little review and just remind ourselves of how this started, where it went, and in particular, and that's what this article is about, the effect that it's having on American rights and the bizarre twisting and manipulating and distortion of American principles On this topic alone.
		So he starts off by talking about his experience with college protests and how college protests are a regular thing.
		They have been forever.
		Since 1960s, you had encampments.
		He talks about the 90s.
		There were encampments, excuse me, protesting South African apartheid.
		In the 60s, obviously the anti-war Vietnam protest.
	And he's laying out the case as to why American college kids are protesting Israel.
	And how it's perfectly in line with the traditional American college experience.
	So it says this.
	This long history of permitting or even glorifying public protest against perceived injustices had naturally long been absorbed and taken to heart by young college students who began their classes in September 2023.
	Then within weeks, a remarkably daring surprise raid by the Hamas militants of long-besieged Gaza caught the Israelis napping and surmounted the high-tech defenses that had cost perhaps half a billion dollars to construct.
	Many hundreds of Israeli soldiers and security officers were killed, along with a similar number of civilians, with most of the latter probably dying from the friendly fire of Israel's own panic-stricken and trigger-happy military units.
	Some 240 Israeli soldiers and civilians were captured and taken back to Gaza as prisoners, with Hamas hoping to exchange them for the freedom of many thousands of Palestinian civilians who had been held for years in Israeli prisons, often under brutal conditions.
	As usual, our overwhelmingly pro-Israel mainstream media portrayed the attack in extremely one-sided fashion.
	Devoid of any historical context, a pattern that had been followed for three generations.
	As a result, Israel received enormous outpouring of public and elite sympathy as it mobilized for a retaliatory attack against Gaza.
	Within days, our own Secretary of Anthony Blinken flew to Israel declaring that he came, quote, as a Jew and pledging America's unwavering support in that moment of crisis.
	Sentiments completely echoed by President Joe Biden and his entire administration.
	But the Hamas fighters and their Israeli captives were hidden in a network of fortified tunnels and rooting them out might produce heavy casualties.
	So, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his advisors decided upon a different strategy.
	Instead of attacking Hamas, Netanyahu took advantage of the wave of global sympathy by unleashing an unprecedented military assault against Gaza's more than 2 million civilians, apparently intending to kill large numbers of them and drive the remainder into Egypt's Sinai Desert, allowing Israel to annex their territory and resettle it with Jews.
	Soon afterwards, The Israeli government began distributing assault rifles to the Jewish settlers of the West Bank, ordering some 24,000 of the automatic weapons for that purpose.
	Putting such armaments into the hands of religious fanatics would surely lead to local massacres, and these might provide an excuse for driving all those millions of Palestinians over the border into Jordan.
	The ultimate result would be the creation of a racially pure greater Israel stretching from the river to the sea, the long-standing dream of the Zionist movement.
	So if he were successful, Netanyahu's place in Jewish history might become a glorious one, with his many venal sins and blunders easily overlooked.
	That's what I mean by the brilliance of this article.
	He's not getting into the way the Netanyahu's personal trials and threats of corruption are influencing this.
	Just with this one sentence, he lays it out very simply.
	If they could achieve this ultimate goal of fulfilling the ultimate design of the Zionist concept of Israel, Then all like they'll forgive him for all the all the other stuff doesn't really matter because he did the thing.
	He achieved the goal.
	So, hey, whatever he did was necessary to achieve the goal.
	He did it.
	He won.
	It's like he was saying yesterday, Netanyahu, the video of him talking about the Americans were prosecuted after World War Two.
	He knows that if you win, you get away with it.
	That's the point.
	Continuing, as American airlifts supplied an unending flood of the necessary munitions, the Israelis began a massive aerial bombardment campaign against densely populated Gaza and its helpless residents.
	Secure in their underground tunnels, relatively few Hamas fighters were killed But Gaza's civilians suffered devastating losses, much of it inflicted by 2,000-pound bombs, almost never previously deployed against urban targets.
	Large portions of Gaza were soon transformed into moonscapes, with some 100,000 buildings destroyed, including hospitals, churches, mosques, schools, universities, government offices, bakeries, and all other infrastructure necessary for maintaining civilian life.
	After just a few weeks, the Financial Times reported that the destruction inflicted upon much of Gaza was already worse than had been suffered by German cities after years of Allied bombing attacks during World War II.
	Though Netanyahu was strictly secular, he played to his religious base by publicly declaring the Palestinians to be the tribe of Amalek, who the Hebrew God had commanded be exterminated down to the last newborn baby.
	Many other top Israeli leaders voiced very similar genocidal statements, and some of the more zealously religious Israeli soldiers and commanders probably took those statements quite literally.
	The gigantic bloodlust was further inflamed as the Israeli government and its supportive propagandists began promoting outrageous Hamas atrocity hoaxes, such as beheaded or roasted Israeli babies, sexual mutilations and gang rapes.
	The notoriously pro-Israel global media credulously reported these stories, using them to deflect attention from the enormous ongoing slaughter of Palestinian civilians.
	To ensure that the coverage remained one-sided, the Israelis targeted independent journalists in Gaza for death, killing some 140 of them over the last few months, a figure as large as the combined total in all of the world's other wars over the last several years.
	With Israelis' leaders publicly declaring their genocidal plans for their Palestinian enemies and Israeli troops committing the greatest televised massacre of helpless civilians in the history of the world, international organizations gradually came under strong pressure to involve themselves in the ongoing conflict.
	In late December, South Africa filed a 91-page legal brief with the International Court of Justice accusing Israel of committing genocide.
	Within a few weeks, the ICJ jurist issued a series of near-unanimous rulings supporting those charges and declaring that the Gazans were at serious risk of suffering a potential genocide at Israel's hands, with Israel's own appointed judge, a former chief justice of the Israeli Supreme Court, concurring with most of these verdicts. a former chief justice of the Israeli Supreme Court, concurring But instead of backing off, Netanyahu's government nearly redoubled its attacks against Gaza, tightening the blockade of food shipments by banning the UN organization responsible for distributing them.
	The Israelis apparently believed that the combination of starvation, bombs, and missiles would be the most effective means of killing or driving out all the Palestinians.
	In past decades, these horrifying events might have gone relatively unnoticed with the overwhelmingly pro-Israel gatekeepers of our mainstream media ensuring that little, if any, of this distressing information reached the eyes and ears of ordinary Americans.
	But technological developments had changed this media landscape since clips on relatively uncensored social media platforms such as TikTok and Elon Musk's Twitter now easily circumvented that blockade.
	Despite their decades of suffering and oppression, Gaza's Palestinians were fully modern people, well-equipped with smartphones, and the scenes they filmed were shared worldwide, quickly attracting huge audiences among the younger Americans who relied on social media as their primary source of news.
	For generations, college students had been heavily indoctrinated with the horrors of the Holocaust, endlessly told that they must never remain silent while helpless men, women, and children were brutally attacked and slaughtered.
	The images they now saw of devastated cities and dead or dying children seemed exactly like something out of the movies, but they were instead happening in real time in the physical world. - Yes.
	A couple of years earlier, Trump and the Biden administration both had jointly declared the Chinese government was guilty of genocide against the Uyghur minority, despite a lack of any evidence that significant number of Uyghurs had been harmed, let alone killed.
	So by that standard, the total destruction of Gaza and the massive slaughter or deliberate starvation of millions of its people obviously constituted an enormous genocide.
	Within weeks, student activists across college campuses had taken up that cry and begun organizing public protest against that horrendous massacre that Israel was committing.
	Three years earlier, a lifelong career criminal named George Floyd had died of a drug overdose while in police custody, and a single, highly misleading video of his last moments had provoked the greatest wave of American public protest since the late 1960s.
	So it was hardly surprising that the widespread dissemination of hundreds of thousands of videos showing dead and mutilated Gazan children inspired a powerful protest movement.
	But this time, Instead of being praised for their humanitarian commitment, those students and the university administrators who allowed their protest were ferociously attacked and punished.
	As I described at the time.
	And it goes on again.
	I can't just read this whole thing because it's like an hour long.
	But I think even up till that point, did a great job at laying out exactly, you know, what this process was, why it's why people are protesting, why they would obviously want to protest what's going on.
	He's got the sort of under the surface inclinations of the leaders of Israel, like Netanyahu.
	I think he's exactly right.
	I think the evidence of the Videos that we see, their own statements are proof that this is the intention.
	It is genocidal.
	It is an attempt to create greater Israel as a racially pure population and to kill or expel anybody who's not them.
	And he goes on to describe the wind, which, of course, - Yeah.
	The protests were then shut down.
	And by comparing what happened here to what happened in the past with Vietnam, South African apartheid, showing such a clear deviation from the norm when it comes to what's happening today with Israel.
	And just reemphasizes The truly monumental things that have occurred as a result of this.
	He points out that there had never been, essentially, I mean, it's in our memory, as far as I can tell, there had never been a time where a college academic was forced out of their office so quickly as well.
	And yet it happened almost immediately this time.
	So he says almost immediately.
	There was a back a retaliatory campaign launched.
	That would permanently blacklist future employment opportunities for any college students publicly supporting the Palestinian cause.
	Underscoring these threats with a widespread doxing campaign at Harvard and a few other elite colleges.
	We'll get back to this in just a second.
unidentified		Dive deep into the stories the mainstream media won't touch.
		This is the American Journal.
		All right, folks.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		I'll finish up with this, uh... One more page of this article.
		I just think it... It... It did a great job.
		Just laying out the timeline.
		Here's what happened when it happened.
		And we have to go back and sort of revisit and remind ourselves of these things and put them in context because at the time when we're experiencing them, so much disinformation, there's so much confusion, there's arguments on both sides.
		And it's only once you're a few months away, you can look back and go, okay, here's exactly what happened.
		Boom, boom, boom.
		I mean, for a week, people were arguing about whether or not Israel bombed a hospital.
		They've destroyed dozens of hospitals since then.
		We haven't even, like, it doesn't even get mentioned.
		We've got to go back and remind ourselves of how this happened.
		So just to catch you up, you have the Hamas attack on October 7th, which was likely allowed to occur by the authorities in Israel.
		They killed a bunch of soldiers, about an equal amount of civilians died.
		Of course, we know from the reports of the survivors, as well as investigations from Israel, that probably a majority of the civilians killed.
		were killed by friendly fire as a result of the Hannibal Directive and the panicking of the Israeli soldiers.
		And these scenes of the massacres came out because while they were ostensibly trying to target Hamas, we pointed this out on October 9th, okay?
		We told you all this on October 9th.
		We told you that the Israelis don't have the manpower Necessary to go in and root out Hamas from the tunnels, so that's not an option for them They're not gonna take that risk.
		They're not gonna make those sacrifices.
		They don't have the capability Or numbers to do it so their only option is to bomb the hell out of the people on the surface Not harming Hamas very much at the time so Excuse me all this has been obvious for a while And then the scenes of the massacres get spread on social media and American college students, of course, are going to stand up against this.
		Never in their... I mean, they are so desperate for examples of oppression.
		You know, they stop understanding math.
		Right?
		They want to be heroes.
		They want to be fighters against oppression.
		They want to be the people that they read about in books.
		Problem is, they don't really have an enemy.
		Their enemy is their dad.
		So here you give them an example of very obvious- I mean, literally worse than videos from World War II, right?
		I've seen a lot of videos of World War II.
		I've seen a lot of dead bodies being pushed around by bulldozers in World War II.
		I've never seen anything even remotely close to the gory horror that I've just stumbled on on Twitter in the last seven months.
		So it's obvious that people are going to protest.
		And that's where it really gets disturbing is the method and the speed with which these protests were shut down.
		The people involved punished severely.
		And when you lay out the whole timeline, it becomes very clear.
		It's like, This response was so overblown.
		It was so unprecedented.
		It was so unlike anything America's been through ever.
		It's worth revisiting.
		It's worth investigating.
		It's worth asking ourselves what the implications of this are for protest and conflicts in the future, but also for the more subtle influence it'll have on academia across the board since colleges Are the primary target of the censorship.
		So says a few weeks ago, our uniformly pro-Israel elected officials entered the fray calling the president of Harvard and like, that's what I love.
		It's the way he writes is so perfect.
		It's the way I would probably, but this would be like, you know, the elected officials who like are clearly bought and paid for, maybe they blackmail on them that, you know, I'd like elaborate too much, but you just put it very simply.
		Our elected officials are uniformly pro-Israel.
		You can't object to that.
		You can't tell me that's wrong.
		You can't tell me that's biased or a conspiracy theory.
		That's what I really appreciate about this article.
		It just says it all.
		Our uniformly pro-Israel elected officials entered the fray, calling on the presidents of several of our most elite colleges, Harvard, Penn, and MIT, to testify before them regarding alleged anti-Semitism on their campuses.
		Members of Congress severely browbeat these officials.
		officials for permitting anti-Israeli activity, even and ignorantly and absurdly accusing them of allowing public calls for Jewish genocide on their campuses.
		The response of these college leaders emphasized their support for freedom of political speech, but were deemed so unsatisfactory by pro-Israel donors and their mainstream media allies that enormous pressure was exerted to remove them.
		Within days, the pen president and her supportive board chairman had been forced to resign, and soon after, Harvard's first black president suffered the same fate.
		As pro-Israel Several groups released evidence of her widespread academic plagiarism to drive her from office.
		I am unaware of any previous case in which the president of an elite American college had been so rapidly removed from office for ideological reasons, and two successive examples within just a few weeks seems an absolutely unprecedented development having enormous implications for academic freedom.
		I think that most of these students were absolutely stunned at such reactions for decades they and their predecessors had freely protested on a wide range of political causes without ever encountering even a sliver of such vicious retaliation.
		Yet alone, an organized He talks about, but still as this goes on, the videos keep coming in.
		of two Ivy League presidents who had allowed their protests, let alone an organized campaign that quickly forced the resignation of two Ivy League presidents for simply allowing their protest.
		He talks about, but still as this goes on, the videos keep coming in.
		The horrifying videos of the genocide keeps happening.
		Indeed, the Israelis themselves continue to generate an avalanche of gripping content for these videos, Mobs of Israeli activists regularly blocked the passage of food trucks, and within a few weeks, senior U.N.
	officials declared that more than a million Gazans were on the verge of a deadly famine.
	When the desperate, starving Gazans swarmed one of the few food delivery convoys allowed through, the Israeli military shot and killed more than 100 of them in the Flower Massacre, and this was later repeated.
	All these horrific scenes of death and deliberate starvation were broadcast worldwide on social media, with some of the worst examples coming from the accounts of gleeful Israeli soldiers, such as their video of the corpse of a Palestinian child being eaten by a starving dog.
	Another image showed the remains of a bound Palestinian prisoner who had been crushed flat while still alive by an Israeli tank.
	UN officials reported finding mass graves near several hospitals with the victims found bound and stripped, shot execution style.
	As internet provocateur Andrew England has pointed out, the behavior of Israeli Jews does not seem merely evil, but cartoonishly evil, with all their blatant crimes seeming to be based on the script of some over-the-top propaganda film, but instead actually taking place in real life.
	Although the official Gazan death toll reported in our media has remained relatively constant in the last few weeks, it is almost certainly an illusion.
	See, during the first few months of the massive Israeli attack, the Gazan Public Health Ministry had maintained very detailed rosters of the dead.
	And it goes on and on.
	released updates of the total, so those numbers seemed absolutely solid.
	But the Israeli assault soon targeted all of Gaza's government offices and hospitals, and by early December, the Gazan officials responsible for tabulating the dead had themselves been killed or gone missing, so the count naturally tended to stagnate even as conditions horrifically worsened for the surviving Gazans.
	And it goes on and on.
unidentified		And on and on and on.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		So I'm sorry Taiwan is surrounded by China.
		I really am.
		It's a bummer, isn't it?
		And you got to go read it for yourself.
		The UNS Review.
		The masks come off in American society by Ron UNS.
		And it's a type of article that you send to people who are pro-Israel.
		It just lays out the facts.
		It just lays out the details.
		This war is horrific.
		It is unending.
		It is genocidal in intent.
		And it's being used as an excuse to make drastic changes to American society, including censorship, censorship of academia, to destroy the lives of kids who protest against what is obviously a horrific injustice.
		To destroy TikTok and big tech.
unidentified		It just goes on and on.
unidentified		Alright, welcome back folks.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		I can't believe it's already the final segment of American Journal.
		The show's sort of flown by for me.
		I want to remind you to go to InfoWarsStore.com to support us.
		And hopefully you're tuned into the Alex Jones show yesterday.
		If you did, you saw an update as to InfoWars status.
		We were very, very close to the edge there.
		We've been granted a slight reprieve.
		Meaning that we are here for the time being.
		So if you've ever thought about supporting InfoWars, if you've ever thought about getting some of our supplements or making a contribution in some way, now is the best time to do it.
		Now is the time to ensure that we not only survive the next few months of this reprieve, but make the most out of it.
		And do the most with it.
		We would have been shut down two years ago, three years ago.
		We would have been shut down in 2018 without your support when they kicked us off YouTube and Facebook and everywhere else.
		If we had relied on their advertising money, we would not be here anymore.
		If we did not have the war chest to pay the lawyers to make the arguments to prevent the law fair from succeeding, we would not be here anymore.
		We've been on the razor's edge for a while.
		We have a slight reprieve now.
		Which, just like in war, this is not when you rest.
		This is when you double down.
		Right?
		We're like a... You know, like an army.
		Like the last few survivors.
		And we're totally surrounded by enemies.
		And we're thinking, this is it.
		The final battle.
		Do or die.
		This is the Alamo.
		This is the Hot Gates.
		This is... You know, we'll be dining in hell.
		And then there's like some attack off on the flank and the army that you're fighting starts to rearrange and there's an opening and you make an escape and we've made that escape.
		We're no longer encircled.
		And what you don't do at that time is go, ah, we escaped.
		Thank goodness.
		Oh, I could use a nap now that I could, you know, I could use as a good wartime nap.
		No, no, you're granted this reprieve.
		So now's the time to fight with everything you've got.
		And make the most out of this beachhead that we have, this slight reprieve, this momentary relaxation of the assault.
		Now is the time that we dig the trenches, build the catapults.
		This is when you double down and get ready for the next big battle.
		So I'm so happy to not be sitting here telling you I guess you can follow me on my personal page because this show's going away.
		It's not going away.
		This is glorious.
		This is wonderful.
		This is good.
		But it doesn't mean that we've won.
		It doesn't mean that you can't, you don't, you shouldn't support us because they're doing fine.
		No, no, no.
		This is a slight reprieve.
		And it's up to us to make the most of this, to double down not only what we do and the content we put out and the effort we make, but for you as well.
		To be doubling down on sharing our information, going to InfoWars store, supporting us and getting us the ammunition we need as we sit here in this brief reprieve.
		We're gearing up for the next round.
		We're gearing up for the next big battle.
		We're doing everything we can to polish our guns, reload the cartridges, Dig the trenches, sew up the patches in the uniform, but no rest.
		No rest at all.
		So, especially if you were thinking like, well, I'd support InfoWars, but I, but they're just going to go away.
		So why would I support?
		No, no, we're here.
		We're here now.
		We will be, we will continue to be here.
		We will continue to fight.
		We'll continue to have the resources we need to combat this attack.
		If you go to InfoWarsStore.com, if not, we will go away and we would have gone away a lot.
		We would have gone away a long time ago if you hadn't supported us.
		So thank you so much for your support up till now.
	This is a brilliant piece of news, a brilliant new development in our conflict.
	And we will make the most of it with your help at Infowarsstore.com.
	So let me just give you some of the stories that I haven't been quite able to dig into today.
	And you, of course, can do your own research and find most of these stories at Infowars.com.
	But since we're just on the topic of Israel, and let me just to finish up with It's not about hating Israel.
	It's not about being on the side of the dumb socialists that are protesting white people.
	It's not about that.
	What it's about is recognizing the danger of the precedents being set, the influence being wielded, the Measures being taken and how they can influence not just people that they directly affect, but the downstream effects that they have.
	So this article continues to talk about the Columbia president Shafik, who also was called in front of a congressional committee to testify, but she'd already seen what happened when the presidents of Harvard and Penn were not sufficiently obsequious.
	We're not sufficiently pro-Semite, I guess.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		Thank you.
harrison smith ▲ ● ▼		They actually tried to defend their students' right to speak because that's what the standard has been for a long time, especially increasingly so recently with the justifications for massive protests.
		Even when they get violent, it's like, it's fine.
		Who cares?
		It's what the policy had been for a while.
		They expected that to still be the policy.
		They learned their lesson.
		They've been fired.
		So he points out that, hey, these people got fired.
		I don't want to share that fate.
		Don't worry about it.
		I'll shut the protest down.
		That's exactly what she did.
		She sent over a hundred helmeted NYC riot police onto campus to crush the demonstrations and arrest the protesters, mostly charging the latter with trespassing, a rather strange accusation given they were enrolled students on the grounds of their own campus.
		He goes on to talk about the UCLA Riot where peaceful protesters were assaulted and attacked by armed pro-Israel people and the police just stood by and allowed the peaceful protesters to be attacked by a mob of agitators.
		And how insane this is?
		How dangerous this president is?
		And how, you know, they didn't, they didn't have to do anything forceful to Columbia because the threat of expulsion was enough to get the Columbia president herself.
		To do their bidding and shut down the protest despite them being peaceful.
		Now we do have some more information about that conflict in particular.
		From JusticeReport.News, IDF member and Israeli CEO linked to bloody attack at UCLA.
		Using pepper spray, metal pipes, wooden boards, and fireworks, the assailants, many of them masked, were able to victimize protesters over the course of three long hours with police merely standing by the wayside.
		The chilling video quickly spread on social media depicting one man wielding a wooden board violently clubbing another man over the head numerous times before scurrying away.
		At the end of the one-sided melee, three people were said to have been nearly killed with one man sustaining serious injuries to the scalp.
		Despite the severity of these crimes, no arrests have been made, leading many to question the obvious double standard present in American law enforcement as groups of violent Zionists skirt accountability for what could very well constitute an act of politically motivated terror in the American homeland.
		Thanks to online sleuths, however, the identities of two of the most violent men seen in the videos of the UCLA counter-protests have been identified.
		According to researchers, the men are one guy, a wealthy co-founder of a Zionist nonprofit seeking to court black support for Israel, and somebody else, a active member of the Israeli Defense Forces, whose brother was recently killed in Gaza by a resistance booby trap.
		So again, this is just, I'm just trying to get across the insanity of what our country is like right now, where you've got peaceful protest, Which are actually peaceful this time, which aren't burning down entire city blocks and killing people, being forcibly shut down by jackbooted police because the Israeli billionaires will fire your university president if they don't do that.
		And if they don't do it, in other places like UCLA where they allow the encampment, you've got literal IDF soldiers orchestrating mobs of pro-Israel I don't want to even call them activists.
		Thugs to go in and beat up the protesters while the police stand by and watch.
		This is madness.
		This is insane.
		This is unsustainable.
		This represents the full-fledged destruction of our foundational beliefs on the altar of Israel.
		And it's of course being done in a coordinated and orchestrated fashion that's illustrated by this post.
		More than 16 U.S.
		officials use identical language to condemn ICC warrants for the arrest of Netanyahu and the Israeli leaders.
		So you've got 16 elected representatives all saying exactly the same thing at exactly the same time.
		There's no equivalence.
		There's no moral equivalence.
		They're all getting the same talking points from the same organizations that control our entire country.
		The problem needs to be solved.
unidentified		The problem needs to be solved.
		You know how he walks?
		Like a demonic elf.
		Hey, Bill Gates!
		Got Angelina Jolie going, ah, children.
		I am Arnold Schwarzenegger.
		I'm Piers Morgan.
		Ever seen a Chowinni?
		My name's Glenn Beck.
		That's Hillary.
		Hold on, I'm Gary Johnson.
		Hi, this is Barack Obama with Admin Teleprompter.
		I was raised by the Ford Foundation and Carnegie Endowment.
		Welcome to McDonald's, may I help you?
		I'm Benny Sanders.
		Chris Hayes with glasses like he's a little smart guy.
		Rachel Maddow!
		Thank you, Satan, for all your love.

▲