https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jasonbermasShow more https://rumble.com/c/c-1647952
https://rokfin.com/JasonBermas
https://theinfowarrior.podbean.com/
https://www.youtube.com/InfoWarrior
https://twitter.com/JasonBermas
PayPal [email protected]
#BermasBrigade Show less
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jasonbermasShow more https://rumble.com/c/c-1647952
https://rokfin.com/JasonBermas
https://theinfowarrior.podbean.com/
https://www.youtube.com/InfoWarrior
https://twitter.com/JasonBermas
PayPal [email protected]
#BermasBrigade Show less
Blast\.video: The Independent Search Engine00:14:47
Hey everybody, Jason Burmes here and we have a very, very exciting show for you today.
We haven't had Zach Voorhees, Google whistleblower, okay, platform creator and badass keytar player on for a couple years.
And recently, I think it was a few months ago, we reconnected via the Union of the Unwanted when he began to launch Blast.video, which is a great aggregator for alternative information, censored individuals, and beyond.
But then I caught him on the Reawaken America tour, which I'll be speaking at in both New York and Pennsylvania coming up, talking about a lot of the digital issues out there, privacy, even cell phones.
He said something interesting about where you should take your cell phone business if you don't want the CIA listening.
And we're going to be talking about all that and more with at Perpetual Maniac on Twitter.
Zach Voorhees, how the hell are you?
Jason, I'm good.
It's good to be on your show again.
Absolutely.
So for my audience that may not be familiar, because I started following you and your work back when I was working for We Are Change, and you initially let the cat out of the bag what many of us already knew, that these algorithms that Google was using was suppressing the truth, free speech, and independent media.
You worked with Project Veritas to get a plethora of materials out there, kind of did the tour, and then kind of morphed into an alternative media personality in many ways yourself, blowing the whistle on this.
What's that journey been like?
It's been an incredible journey.
You know, I didn't really think that this was going to happen, like everything that's happened.
Like it's kind of a weird turn of events in my life.
Honestly, I don't know why I was the first guy to essentially blow the whistle on Google.
I would have expected there would be a lot more people to call out that sort of evil.
But for whatever reason, I was the first.
And it's made a big splash.
People are very upset about Google and the censorship is out of control.
And this anti-censorship crusade that I've gone on has been transformative.
It's have an act of atonement that I've been doing to try to correct the wrongs of participating in the system that is ultimately serving a purpose of evil, and that is, of course, Google.
So what is the irony then of someone, of an entity like Google that actually, at least publicly in the very beginning, as you guys can see here on the thumbnail, actually said, don't be evil.
Put it in, you know, elevated, embossed lettering on their wall and essentially promised the world that this technology was going to change everything and give everybody open access to all information and make their own decisions.
And I would argue that before YouTube, when they created Google Video, that was the algorithm.
You could legitimately go viral via their platform.
It challenged Google Video on many, or I'm sorry, YouTube on many levels because it didn't just let you upload a 10-minute video.
You could put up to four hours.
And that really led to them absorbing YouTube, buying them out, I think at the time for something like $8 billion and morphing the platform now in just over a decade into one of full authoritarianism, censorship, and narrative management.
Yeah, right.
Like they still call it YouTube and what they should call it is themtube.
Google put down a constitutional statement when they went IPO, which was to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.
And these two constitutional statements were sort of the redeeming quality of corporatism at the time.
Like there was this question of could corporations serve the better interest?
And then Google kind of threw down the gauntlet.
But it turns out that all those promises were more of a psychological operation to hide the fact that Google was going to become this all-encompassing totalitarian organization that literally skate, you know, shapes the concept of reality as it is communicated to us online.
And that's essentially where we're at today.
You know, Google is the dominant search engine.
It's got YouTube, which is the dominant video platform.
And if they don't want something to be seen by, you know, the masses, the sheeple, then they're not going to see it.
And, you know, essentially they're doing this because in their own words, people like us are programmed.
And it's a four-step process.
And it all involves controlling the media.
And I believe that really a lot of our opinions are based upon the container of information that we exist in.
If we get exposed to new information, then we'll have a broader range of ideas.
It seems right now that the elites and the oligarchs that own the means of information distribution are trying to narrow that down, right?
And clip off our access to alternative voices.
Like right now, you see what's happening with Elon Musk.
He's had a really big fight with Twitter.
And now one of the forums that I like to listen to about tech news called hackernews.ycombinator.com, that is now being infiltrated by shills.
And you see the same thing happening in Reddit.
And you see the same thing happening across these social media platforms where a bunch of trolls come in and they start trying to shift the narrative and they start trying to create a false consensus by all chiming in.
And if you don't know that a lot of those are intelligence assets or bots, then what you'll be susceptible is this herd mentality where you're just going along with what you think the consensus is.
Because Jason, like, you know, some of us don't necessarily use right and wrong as value judgments on what to believe.
A lot of people use a filter that's based upon what will my social standing be if I disagree with this.
And every single time they'll just go along with it.
And Google knows this.
It's been in plans.
It turns out that they've planned this for a very long time and they've decided that they're going to seize the control of information and shape it to how they want.
And the repercussions are that if we don't stop them, if we don't become aware of what they're doing, then they're going to rig elections not only in America, which they arguably did in 2020, but all around the world.
Well, I would make the argument that it goes even further than that.
And Google is what is known as a Trojan horse civilian system and really a technopoly.
Forget about a monopoly.
You look at this thing.
It is the number one search engine in the world.
The number two search engine in the world is YouTube, their video platform.
Their video platform also happens to be the number one video platform in the world.
Their operating system, Chrome, is the number one operating system for devices in the world.
This has gone well beyond what telecommunication companies like Mobel were broken up for in the late 80s and early 90s.
But what are they really doing?
They are partnering with people like NASA to achieve quantum supremacy, artificial intelligence.
They're working with the military-industrial complex.
And if you look at their seed funding from the beginning, it came from NQTEL, the taxpayer-funded CIA organization that brings these type of businesses up.
That being said, the CEO, Eric Schmidt, in 2013, wrote this book, The New Digital Age.
You go through this bad boy, and it is a blueprint for the type of censorship we are under from governments actually installing software on your devices to ensure that you're not circumventing the narratives and information they want you to have.
And we've seen this on a micro level in many cases via social media now, whether it be Facebook or other platforms where you're not even allowed to share URLs of, say, things like Alex Jones or banned.video.
Is that one?
Or blast.video.
I got banned within two hours of my launch.
And I was put on a terrorist list for Facebook where you couldn't say anything that was positive, but you could still make a post about me if you called me out as a bad person.
It was really weird how selective it was.
It is.
And that's the thing.
It's selective enforcement.
For instance, if you look at what YouTube's official position is, they try to claim that they censor everybody equally.
This has been proven false time and time again.
I've seen it myself, just replaying videos that are on mainstream channels.
I've seen it with independent journalists like Ford Fisher, literally uploading the same thing that he licensed to another organization.
He gets a strike.
He gets banned.
That organization is fine.
Talk about that aspect of the narrative management.
Somebody like Jimmy Dore, for instance, who I do have a lot of respect for, gets away with saying things that Jason Burmes can't say on that platform.
And I would say he does that not because he's Jimmy Dore, but because he has an audience that is going to fight for him and visualize for other people how oppressive this system is.
And that's the thing.
It's selective enforcement based on how you can rally the troops and how much pull and clout you have on these social media platforms that in many ways are controlled.
And you're trying to take that control away from them by aggregating all these other alternative platforms and bringing people directly to the information.
Right.
You know, and the thing is, is that there's gatekeepers.
These gatekeepers play favorites with who they want to have access to the audience of America.
And that's the reason why, you know, for those that are truth seekers, we need an alternative.
And really, you know, if you want an alternative to the mainstream, you know, we need to be able to build these services ourselves.
And, you know, I threw my hat in this.
I created Blast.video, which I believe is the best place for news 24-7.
Unlike Rumble, unlike these other services, this is independent.
I've got no biases but my own, and I really don't have any time to be a gatekeeper.
So it's pretty much a crawler that goes around.
It crawls all these different video content producers on YouTube, BidShoop, Rideon, GabTV, you name it, and then centralizes the whole thing.
And this is an example of what we need to do to get ourselves out of the situation that we find because, look, no one's coming to save us.
But the good news is that, you know, there's a lot of people out there that are very smart with computers.
And the amount of power that they have to, you know, come up and change this state that we're in is enormous.
I mean, I think that people really don't have a clue if, you know, if they're programmers, how much they can really help the situation that's out there right now.
And so, you know, it's this act of decentralization, which has been always the counterbalance towards, you know, this centralized power structure, whether it's been the church, whether it's been, you know, the government.
We centralization is bad.
We want to make sure that we have decentralized narratives, centers of control.
And what I like about what's going on right now is, you know, we are starting to understand that big tech is something that needs to have a counterbalance.
Trump came out, did True Social.
You know, we've got Getter, we've got Gab.
These systems are now flourishing and they're on their own exponential growth curves.
And what's really great is now we're using the power of the free market as leverage in order to make censorship impossible.
Like I think that you'll agree that censorship today is actually a lot harder than it was in 2020 just because, look, it could be censored on Twitter.
They're all going to laugh on Getter saying, oh, look what they're censoring, but they're not censoring here.
Like it doesn't stop the distribution of information anymore if YouTube and Twitter goes and decides that something shouldn't be seen.
Look at all the Hunter Biden stuff that just came out.
Like they didn't even bother to censor it this time.
And I have to ask if the reason that they're not censoring the Hunter Biden stuff is because the alternative means of information distribution have matured to such an extent that it's basically just rendered it mute.
Right.
Like, you know, it's tough.
I think that now that there are more viable alternative platforms, like you said, that didn't really exist or were in a smaller capacity in 2020.
That's one thing.
But if you look at how this was actually distributed, we're talking about 2004 technology via BitTorrent.
You know, you can't stop those magnet links.
And somebody like myself who was in the game before BitTorrent was using peer-to-peer, such as Kaza or Morpheus, et cetera, that was a little bit different.
People weren't as adept.
Now you can torrent something on your phone, 5G, get 450 gigabytes like that literally in less than an hour on some of these devices, depending or if you're on Wi-Fi.
And I think there was some censorship.
Obviously, you saw Google talking about how the results were changing if you were typing in Hunter Biden crackpipe or Hunter Biden iCloud.
And a lot of the information hasn't been disseminated.
I also think that one of the reasons that we got it disseminated, obviously, was because of Jack Maxey and going to another country and being brave.
Censorship And Safe Sound00:06:22
We didn't see that with whistleblowers, say, in the Wiener case.
We know that laptop exists.
We know that the NYPD has it.
We know that the Justice Department and FBI got that all the way back in the last election cycle before 2020.
So I think the narrative management is still there.
I think that as long as the mainstream doesn't acknowledge it or only acknowledges it in a mainstream manner, they'll just keep parroting the same thing over and over and over again.
And one of those tools that they used, you mentioned, were these unidentifiable bots.
And I would argue that the bots are just one small part of a program called signature reduction, which the public learned about last year, exclusive inside the military's secret undercover army.
I'm just going to read the first paragraph here.
The largest undercover force the world has ever known is the one created by the Pentagon over the past decade.
So 10 plus years, no Senate hearings, no nothing, no oversight, totally illegal, breaks posi comitatus.
Some 60,000 people now belong to this secret army, many working under masked identities and in low profile, all part of a broad program called signature reduction.
The force, more than 10 times the size of the clandestine elements of the CIA, carries out domestic and foreign assignments, both in military uniform and under civilian cover, in real life and online, sometimes hiding in private businesses and consultancies, some of them household name companies.
Now, let's go beyond that.
Let's go beyond the bots and everything else.
What people aren't focusing on, and this article just never really got the traction, is that when they're in the physical form, they're actually using identity modification techniques by DARPA.
What you're looking at behind me is not a hand.
That is a skin glove that goes over your hand, can have anybody's biometric information on it, and emits human oils.
Now, again, this came out last May.
We could get into other tools, for instance, you know, all the way back in the 70s, these people, there they are refitting a van, had masks.
Well, they've taken that to the next level where they can make you look like a burn victim and you will never be identifiable.
In fact, in this article, the gentleman actually goes and works with somebody on signature reduction, where this gentleman is given fake license plates, fake IDs, and his co-workers are able to access databases that you and I can't access and make him into a real person.
With all of the track trace database surveillance out there, with all the minority report-style stuff that we're now seeing come to fruition from the Justice Department, with them criminalizing maybe even half the population with this Trump white supremacy narrative, will we ever find a way to break through and end programs like this?
I think it's going to get a lot worse, honestly.
I think that the oligarchs are going to break, they're trying to justify control of the internet by essentially breaking it.
And I think that, you know, QAnon was a really good example of a mass influence operation against the population.
And I think that they're going to ramp that up.
But I think that in the future, what we're going to see is we're going to see a more personalized, tailored version of these online LARPs that are going to be shepherding people into, you know, certain belief systems that will then, you know, do battle against each other so that they can continue on with this agenda of degrading America and breaking up its lock on the entire world.
Well, when you talk about LARPing, right, and this QAnon narrative, I would argue this.
Number one, we're seeing a resurgence, right?
Q's back.
He's back.
And we're going to have to trust the plan all over again.
But what seems to happen with these things, for instance, is they'll take a real subject that we should really be concerned about.
Let's talk about Julian Assange for a moment, right?
Julian Assange, somebody that's been persecuted through several administrations, someone I believe that the Trump administration completely failed on, should have been pardoned, Should have gotten over the actual Dana Rohrbacher stuff that he wasn't going to come out, tell where the leaks were.
This is freedom of speech stuff.
And yet, that QA nonsense narrative had people believing, number one, that Julian was safe and sound.
And number two, he was safe and sound in a place called Guantanamo Bay and that he was being protected there.
Legitimizing Guantanamo Bay, something so vile, so awful, so unconstitutional, that in 2008, every single Democratic person running for president, including Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, all had a plan to close Guantanamo Bay in 2008 and get us out of Iraq.
And none of that came to fruition.
What do you think were some of the most destructive narratives that QAnon was about?
Because again, they mix truth.
And then what is your feeling on the Assan situation, especially now that it looks like he's really going to be extradited to the United States and face a show trial?
Yeah, so I think the cross-a thing about like the whole, like I have a friend that I knew from elementary school, middle school, and high school.
And he got really, really, really sucked into the QAnon thing.
And at like the height of everything going on, he killed himself.
Right.
And, you know, a lot, we all hoped that there was some sort of plot to overthrow these communists and that they were on their way out and that we were going to restore some sort of sovereignty, go more towards a libertarian government, you know, hands off the taxes, like we're actually getting rid of the infiltration and stopping the takedown.
Supreme Court's Election Controversy00:10:55
And that narrative didn't lead to, you know, true information being released, nor did it lead in any sort of victory, right?
Like what ended up happening is that it promoted bad agents like Sidney Powell that came out and filed these 11th hour, just absolutely nonsense challenges to the election.
And in a sense, she sucked all the oxygen out.
Kind of like how there's a fire, like you know, like dynamite will suck all the oxygen out.
Like that's kind of like what she did.
She put the fire out.
And, you know, it was obvious fraud, despite the censorship of the big tech cartels, the technopoly, thank you for that word.
You know, we still had a shot at, and it was an easy shot to reverse the fraudulent results of this election, at least pause it and, you know, bring it into the public awareness that there was fraud in five different swing states, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and another one.
And, you know, what you had is you had this like prophesized figure, Sidney Powell, come and say, I've got the evidence and we're going to file all these lawsuits and it's going to be great.
And then, you know, Will Sumner, who's a lawyer, looked at these and he's like, maybe it wasn't him, maybe it was someone else, but it was the analysis was that these are garbage lawsuits that are designed to fail.
And so it's clear in retrospect that it was a feint.
Like we thought that this was actually going to stand up, but then it turned out that it was garbage.
They just got dismissed.
It was laughed out of court.
It had no substantiating evidence.
And, you know, Rudy Giuliani, he, you know, be clowned himself on Borat 2, claiming that he didn't know that there was cameras, but you could clearly see in the movie that the cameras are looking at other cameras.
Like when he puts his hands down his pants, it's like, everyone's like, was he touching himself or not?
Like, it doesn't matter.
Like, he knew what he was doing.
There was literally a camera on a tripod in front of him.
Like, you do not put your hands down your pants when you think that there might be a camera going on you because it might give the wrong impression.
Okay?
This wasn't like an accident.
There wasn't like a hidden camera.
It was right there on a tripod.
Like this whole thing at the end with the election games was essentially a, you know, a show.
Well, let me say this, Zach.
I've never been a fan of Rudy Giuliani.
I cut my teeth with 9-11 Truth and my film Loose Change.
And obviously Giuliani was privy to a lot of information that he never came out with.
In fact, I feature Michael Hess, his right-hand man, who was trapped in Building 7 with one other individual before it was brought down, the only two people in there.
He was in there with Barry Jennings, who would pass away after our interview with him, who talked about explosives in the building, being stuck on the eighth floor after explosion, going back up to the 23rd floor with the emergency management center.
But when you brought up those lawsuits and those states that we had fraudulent results, in my opinion, it's not even just my opinion.
It's now been ruled in court.
None of, and we'll get to that in a moment, none of the cases early on, was the evidence even looked at.
In other words, they said, you don't have standing.
We're not going to look at any of the evidence.
This went all the way up to the Supreme Court nationally, federally, and they refused to look at the evidence.
Now, I went to D.C. both in December and I was there on January 6th.
I could tell you after January 6th, I had zero hopes that there would be any kind of litigation that could reverse the results of the election, no matter how valid it was.
Fast forward to probably a little bit over a year later, maybe a year and a half later, I believe it was about three or four months ago, when the first state Supreme Court decision came in via Pennsylvania, invalidating every single one of the mail-in ballots.
Let me repeat that.
Invalidate.
Wait, wait, I didn't hear this.
What?
Say that again.
Oh, yeah, the state Supreme Court will bring it up live here.
So state Supreme Court in Pennsylvania ruled all the mail-in ballots.
Rules, mail-in ballots, unconstitutional.
Unconstitutional.
So rules, mail-in ballots, unconstitutional.
And we'll do Google, but we'll see what comes up, as you know.
So let's see.
Yes, there it is.
So as everybody knows, first thing, Pennsylvania's mail-in voting law ruled unconstitutional.
But we have this new word now.
It's appeal.
This happened in January of this year.
They just say appeal.
Oh, the mask mandate is over for children in New York and New York City?
Appeal.
Oh, Justice Mollet gets convicted in the court.
Appeal.
We're going to appeal it.
So right now, Pennsylvania's mail-in voting law is totally unconstitutional.
I believe one other state has followed suit just in the past month with just the Pennsylvania results alone.
If you take away the mail-in ballots, Trump is the president.
And I've tried to tell this to people that have severe TDS.
That's Trump derangement syndrome, for those that don't know.
And I'm not in love with the guy.
But I'm saying you look at this one thing in one state, flips the election.
And they just can't acknowledge it.
In fact, everybody's talking about democracy and our Constitution and constitutional liberties.
Yet it doesn't seem like people on the left want to acknowledge the separation of powers between states and the federal government and the Supreme Court in those states that rule on the actual Constitutions Act.
Right.
And the funny thing is that with all the preaching about Constitution and democracy, you know, they like with Roe v. Wade, like that didn't make abortion illegal.
It just said, we're going to let the states decide, which is, you know, definitely a more democratic solution to this moral crisis than the, you know, the Supreme Court making up a constitutional, you know, guarantee of abortion, which just doesn't exist, right?
They just made it up.
And it's funny because, you know, with all the preaching of democracy, now, you know, you see the left freaking out.
They want to abort the Supreme Court.
You know, they think that, and now all of a sudden it seems that insurrection is back on the table and, you know, the means justify at the ends to get where they want to go.
And, you know, I think that what's going to happen is that we're going to see in this next election, we're going to see some really dirty results and the gloves are definitely coming off.
Like the thing is, is that when you get a leftist regime, a communist regime, you got to essentially shoot them out.
And that's essentially what we've got right now.
Like the left has been so infiltrated by this technopoly, by this globalist cartel, that they may be going for it right now.
And I think this resurgence of conservative values is something that they're going to need to abort, just like Roe v. Wade, right?
And, you know, what do you think is going to happen like in the midterms?
Like it's just, you know, a few months away.
There's this red wave.
You know, it's iffy about whether we can get rid of these election machines in a lot of these swing states.
Like, Jason, what is your prediction about what's going to happen?
Well, first of all, I've been on this case well before Trump.
You know, I'm not even a conservative.
I'm a constitutionalist at best.
And we can go all the way back to 2004 where John Kerry beat George Bush, his third cousin on one side, eighth cousin on the other, his Yale classmate, his skull and bones brethren, who was really set up to lose that election.
I would argue today, John Kerry runs way more than Zombie Jay, the puppet in chief.
Let's be honest.
I mean, Kerry's actually talking to international leaders and doing a lot of these things behind the scenes.
When we get to the elections, we need to get rid of all of these voting machines.
For instance, one of the things that was never discussed via the Baker and Carter Commission that so many conservatives talked about pre-2020 when they were talking about mail-in ballots and how that was a big tool that could be used for rigging elections.
One of the other things that Jimmy Carter said in the press conference, there were two after they put the report out, was that these voting machines were actually a huge danger.
And at the bare minimum, we should be randomly auditing one to three percent of these voting machines.
I think they should be illegal.
I think that anything hooked up to electronics and plugged into a wall is no bueno and not necessary.
We now have the technology in many ways that we could at least make our elections much more difficult to penetrate.
And I've always said this.
For instance, if we just set up a system where you had to come in and you had to vote and you had to show identification and a webcam was running 24-7 in every single place and you took your ballot.
And after you took your ballot and you voted, you cover up your personal information, you put it in the box.
The camera's on the box.
Then you have your Republican, you have your Democrat as you're counting.
There are webcams over every single ballot as they are counted by hand.
Hey, everybody, cavemen were counting.
They could do addition.
You learned it in fourth grade.
Not that tough.
Now we have a digital copy live stream of at least what the physical ballots look like and the chain of custody looks like.
That's technology that empowers the people and makes it harder for them to enslave us.
Unfortunately, right now, we have a system where our president has already signed an executive order months ago about the upcoming election.
We don't know what's in that executive order, but we know it's going to make it easier and broader for people to vote.
Covid, Monkeypox, and Bio-Nano Wars00:05:03
So I think that he's going to try to institute the same type of systems we saw during the 2020 COVID-19 44 nightmare nationally.
You think that there might be some sort of federal mandate for mail-in ballots?
I think that's going to be part of it, at least the choice.
I think that monkeypox, COVID, BA.5, whatever the new variant is, like it's all coming to a head, isn't it?
Like, it looks like they're releasing a new set of pandemics and they're ramping it up right now.
They're going to create another crisis.
What's interesting is John Campbell with his very excellent YouTube page came out and casually mentioned that the monkeypox virus that is out there infecting people has a number of genetic changes from its wild type variants.
And what's really interesting about that is that unlike an RNA virus like flus or COVID, smallpox, monkeypox, these are DNA viruses.
And DNA viruses are very, very stable.
They don't change very often.
And when they do, they basically spawn like a new virus.
And one cousin to another will be like one nucleotide off.
This monkeypox virus has multiple.
I don't know what the number is.
I don't want to be inexact, but I think it's more than three different genetic changes in its genome.
And John Campbell kind of like he plays the center, you know, and he just kind of dryly states like, oh, this is highly unusual that it would have three, you know, or more DNA changes, you know, in its genome.
And so I think you're onto something, Jason.
I think that, you know, in order to get this radical, you know, mail-in ballot that hypothetically will be introduced, first they're going to need to have a crisis.
And then the federal mail-in ballots will then have to be the solution to that crisis.
Well, they've already signed off, I believe, this week, that the emergency has been extended federally due to the COVID-19 nightmare.
We saw the management of medicine in a biomedical tyranny like we've never seen in this country or around the world.
We just saw the World Health Organization who took control of narrative management via YouTube and their COVID-19 44 propaganda.
Instance uh Zach, one of my last strikes on youtube was my presentation at the Reawaken America Tour, which had absolutely 100 nothing to do let me repeat this, nothing to do with Covid whatsoever and instead, what I focused on was um, this document here uh, that described the Bio Nano era.
Okay, for those that don't know uh, starting in 2020.
Now, the document that I have here, let's see, we got to bring it back to the front.
Sorry about that.
Let's go back to that, to number one.
Is that not number one?
Hold on one second.
We're gonna do it live, folks.
We do it live.
So this document is future strategic warfares 2025 and somehow, some way, this joint document with DARPA, the CIA, the Office OF Naval Intelligence, the National Reconnaissance Office, Australian DOD, you name it in July of 2001, knew that the Bio nano era would begin in 2020.
Now again, this is 19 years beforehand and they don't know how long this lasts.
But their next thing is the virtual era, where not only are we gonna have Holodex and virtual learning and virtual jobs, but we're gonna upload our consciousness, according to the author of this document, who is still the chief scientist, by the way, at NASA, BioNana 2020, Technological ages of humankind.
You can make any argument you want about the shots.
There is no argument that MRNA and vector-based technology is bio-nanotechnology and in 2020, we began to inject billions of people with it.
I just said that and that got censored.
The World Health Organization announced yesterday there are no longer two genders, my friend.
Male and female are just on the spectrum of many genders in the non-binary world, and let me show you what they put out um, just months ago right here this, Health FOR Peace and Peace FOR Health.
Now you're what you're looking at here.
A lot of people would say that's Mother Earth.
Right, you see the cloud and the peace stuff.
You notice Mother Earth now has a mustache.
You notice she's not a woman anymore.
Literally after this came out, they are now trying to make it so you can no longer acknowledge biology.
Mother Earth's Mustache00:08:25
I believe that is going to be the next big thing.
That's censored on youtube.
We just saw Josh Holly argue with a Berkeley law professor on whether it's just women that can give birth, and she basically said that his language was not only harmful but but could cause violence to trans people.
Just craziness.
Yeah, I saw that I.
I couldn't believe myself.
I'm like it's like I.
I get reminded that we're living in clown world now and nothing makes any sense.
And you know he's.
He's asking, like what the definition of a woman is, you know, and I, they can't.
They can't answer that much.
And it's like if you told me this like six years ago, I would have laughed right like it's so, it's so absurd.
But now this is like every day of our lives with our government officials, and I really do believe that one of the reasons that they're doing this is because they are trying to destroy reality as we know it in that Orwellian Brave New World, 1984 Huxley model where if you don't go along with the lies and the language well, you're going to be ostracized from society, you're going to be heavily medicated,
in some cases you're actually going to be physically prosecuted.
And I think an extension of that is the fact that you have a bunch of people who walked into the Capitol after being let in or were outside of the Capitol where I was reporting on the second level, by the way.
I didn't go in, but what I witnessed was, What's that?
Oh, well, I wouldn't have been dumb enough to go in, and if they had come and talked to me, I mean, the mainstream media stole a bunch of my footage.
I've been in this game for a very long time, but their narrative management that this is some kind of an insurrection when what I witnessed was a glorified Dave Matthews band concert.
Like you could have had a beach ball there, and people, it was nothing like what the media continues to portray and put out there in this show trial.
And we've never had a show trial like this in the United States.
We've had plenty of them, but we've never had one produced by a television producer, one in which we don't actually call witnesses that can be cross-examined, and instead we are taking sections of deposition and throwing them there.
I wouldn't even call it documentary style.
It's almost mockumentary style, the way that they are edited in with other propaganda.
And it's got the lowest ratings ever, yet it's still being parroted as something that's important to the American people.
And many of us agree with us, agree with on an international level.
And people not in this country or with the severe TDS or that party loyalty, or like you said, just stuck in that social situation where everything is judged aren't going to call them out on it.
How do we bring that to light?
And how do we get these poor people that are being prosecuted out of prison?
Well, I think that, you know, I mean, the only way that we can express our displeasure that has any meaning is at the ballot box, you know, for what, you know, the democracy that we have, you know, we need to leverage it and use it and try to, you know, make a statement against these authoritarians.
And the best way to wake up our fellow person who's asleep is to make this conspiracy show itself.
I mean, you know, six years ago, I didn't believe in conspiracies.
I didn't think that any of them had any, you know, I thought that it was like a human phenomenon, just creating nonsense.
And then it turns out that some of them are actually true.
And all the noises there is to like, you know, to distract us from, you know, the real conspiracies that we ought to know what's actually going on with our world.
And so I think that part of the way that we win this thing is in some ways, you ever hear the theory of accelerationism?
Yes.
Yeah.
We, you know, we have to play this like a judo move and get them to be even more radical so that we can, you know, show our fellow person how truly radical these people are.
Because we're in an existential crisis here.
We need to wake up because this technopoly has its hand in the Pandora's box of artificial intelligence.
They certainly do.
And, you know, let's talk about that radicalization just for a second.
I would argue, as somebody who was pretty moderate on the abortion issue, it was never my hill to die on.
I certainly would never want an abortion in my personal life.
I don't like the fact that a man can get a woman pregnant, want that child, and literally have no say.
But for the most part, I would have stayed out of it if we kept it at three months max, right?
And first trimester, and that was the standard.
But because things got so damn radical, and it was no longer three months, it was six months.
And then you had people talking about nine months.
I was born at seven.
I was literally walking nine months after I was born.
Okay, that's 16-month-old fetus.
Okay, it rocks me when I hear it's okay to kill a six-month-old.
Well, let me just say six months, you could probably survive outside of the womb.
But then you take it to the next level where you're talking infanticide.
Yeah.
And that triggers me.
And it's because of that radicalization that I point to Roe v. Wade and I say, hey, do you understand that Roe v. Wade started because Georgia had a three-month law?
And they basically said because they had that three-month law, every other state had to have that three-month law also.
And then it got expanded upon.
And because it was a state's right that went federally, you could make the argument that now six months is abortion or even infanticide is abortion.
I think that's what you mean when they pushed it too far.
And now it's not only, you know, the conservatives, the religious right that see a problem with it.
It's people that are much more moderate like myself going, whoa, this is way over the top.
And I'm glad it's back to the states.
You know, I would agree with you there.
I wanted to hit on one more thing before you go.
I know your time is limited.
But I want to add to that.
I want to go ahead.
Right.
The thing I want to add is that, you know, conservatives, we need to reach across the aisle.
A 49-day abortion ban out of the gate is probably not the right idea.
I don't think a lot of people, like the majority of the people, agree that 49 days is the best day.
Like that's a month and a half.
You know, the left achieves their agenda through incrementalism.
And really what the conservatives should do right now is that their first statement about this abortion thing should be the outlawing of post-birth abortion, right?
Like who's going to vote against that, right?
Like a sting.
And then, and then, you know, get to a point where, you know, it's reasonable that people agree.
You know, it turns out that Europe has more restrictive abortion, you know, laws than the United States does.
You know, there's a middle ground that people on both sides can be, you know, more comfortable with.
And the thing is, is that a lot of people, including myself, don't believe that a human is in the form of an unborn fetus.
Even be argued that a baby is not even, you know, essentially like a sentient being even after it's born, which is the point.
But that's an argument I'm not going to make, but that's what some people say.
And the thing is, is that 49 days is too little.
I think 16 weeks is about the limit that is acceptable across the developed world.
And obviously, some democracies in the United States, some states will choose to do more constrictive things, but don't go out of the gate and say 49 days.
It's just going to cause you to lose the next election if the leftists decide they're going to come out.
And look, we've got more important issues than this abortion for the country.
Abortion is not the most important thing.
The election is the most important thing.
If we do not have our representative democracy, if it's overrun by this banking cartel, that's it.
Like, you know, who cares about abortion?
There's going to be mass genocides of adults, right?
Supporting Decentralization Efforts00:11:34
Listen, man, again, I'm with you.
And I've been talking about, you know, bioengineering, geoengineering, population stabilization, which is also in that document.
You know, all these things for a very, very long time.
In fact, I made a film in 2013 called Shade the Motion Picture, where I have a 20-minute section on Bill Gates.
You know, I was talking about Bill Gates, Farmland, GMOs, Monsatan, shots, you name it, back then trying to warn people.
And then all of a sudden, this stuff comes to fruition.
Sure, it gives me more clout, but I'm not happy that we didn't do anything about it.
We need to do something about it now.
I want to talk privacy with you because I found your speech over at Reawaken America kind of enthralling.
You know, somebody brought up these different types of devices.
I actually have one.
I have a Graphene OS phone that I use.
It's a Google Pixel for.
And there are a lot of these devices where you can, quote unquote, de-Google them with other operating systems via Graphene, Lineage OS, and others.
And when you were asked about this, you talked about how, you know, a lot of these things are based in Linux or Ubuntu.
And if you really don't want the federal government or the CIA or the NSA spying on you, you should probably go with a Chinese phone, a lawawe, or something like that.
Discuss that.
I found that very interesting.
Yeah, so it's very hard to not get a phone that's compromised by the intelligence services.
They have ways of getting into your phone.
And the thing is, is that in different regions, different intelligence agencies have managed to get their fingers into the hardware and software of the devices.
And so the question is, is that, you know, do you fear the Chinese intelligence services or do you fear your own CIA more?
I, you know, the CIA has access to me.
They could take me out.
I don't think the Chinese have the same sort of motivations.
They just don't care what Americans think about them in the same way that, I mean, they're concentrated on their own citizens, you know, domestically.
And so, you know, the thing is, is that if you want to try to get off the CIA NSA grid, it might behoove you to buy one of these compatible Chinese phones and pop, you know, an American sim in there and see if that works.
And yes, they'll be vulnerable to the Chinese intelligence services, but they'll be less vulnerable to the CIA.
And it's probably a controversial opinion, but that's my honest opinion, what I think is the best way to get off the grid.
Well, you know, I've always made the argument, especially now, we're well beyond nation states.
For instance, you know, you look at that book and Eric Schmidt.
It was Eric Schmidt that was talking about Dragonfly when confronted on it all the way back in 2017 and 2018, the censored version of their web browser.
Well, now our Google browser is pretty much what Dragonfly was.
On the flip side of that, Google, aside from being into quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and NASA, they're also doing and have been doing drone warfare work for the Defense Department that you actually had employees walk out on.
So, you know, this is a Defense Department contractor in a country that we know has been spying on the American people via every communication, even pre-9-11.
Everybody needs to look into Hepting versus ATT, where they actually put server systems in all the major telecommunication centers that through Norris Insight Systems was going directly to the NSA.
We had software such as Carnivore and Promise prior to 9-11.
And then with the institution of Homeland Security, these fusion centers that came out.
And now all these domestic terror units, ALA Signature Reduction and others, they have carte blanche.
I believe that they go well beyond just what we do in text messages and conversations, as I'm sure you're aware of.
You worked at Google.
ACR, which is automated content recognition, is on all of these devices.
One of those software programs is called Alfonso.
And in real time, they are aggregating both auditory and visual content in a manner that is not listening in on you, yucca, yucca, yucca.
In other words, they're using a different technology.
So they're saying, well, no one's really listening.
We're running it through an algorithm.
And nobody's really watching.
It's not the same kind of video program.
A lot of this is semantics.
And I believe could be challenged in court.
Do you think that individuals have an opportunity now with Alex Berenson beating Twitter, getting back on Twitter and obviously showing they violated their terms and policies to take on YouTube and Google for their medical misinformation and harmful content, Johnny nonsense?
Yeah, sure, if they want to try the case in California or through an arbitration, the problem with these big tech cartels is that to sue them is out of reach for most Americans because of something called the forum selection clause in the terms of service, which mandates that if you're going to sue these tech companies, you got to do it in California.
And my message to the conservatives across the country is you need to create a law that nullifies the forum selection clause of these big tech cartels, right?
Saying that no American can give up their right in our jurisdiction when they sign with big tech.
And therefore, you know, these constituents will be able to sue Google in a local court or Facebook or Twitter.
You know, you got to get them all because these forum selection clauses are the Aegis Shield that is protecting Google from, you know, a just court.
And so if you're a representative out there, you can do a lot of good for your business, you know, because this is just like an individual problem.
This is a problem of their business constituents, the owners.
These owners want to be able to have recourse if Google decides to shut off the switch, like de-index them, censor them.
You know, if there's a jurisdiction where Google's going to have to fly its lawyers out in a court that's not friendly to it, Google's going to think twice about censoring.
It's as simple as that.
It's just the threat of a big stick is going to, you know, help fix this situation.
So if you're a legislature for a state out there, please create a law that nullifies big tech's forum selection clause in the terms of service and propagandize that to your constituency because they're going to love it.
They're going to love it.
You can use it in your campaign video.
But we really need to defeat this forum selection clause.
I feel like that's one of the biggest ways we can use decentralization in order to defeat the centralized big tech monopolistic censorship cartels.
Zach Voorhees, always a pleasure.
Blast.video is the platform.
Zach Voorhees, not like Jason Voorhees.
It's with an IES guys.
You know, he's not a ski-mast serial killer in the movies.
If you want to check out Google Leaks Censorship Exposed, you can follow him at Perpetual Maniac on Twitter.
I'd love to get on Blast Video.
I think it's a great aggregator.
Wait, you're not already?
I am not on Blast.video yet.
Oh, I would love to get on it, my friend.
So if we can happen, we got Rockfin, we got Rumble, we're on Podbean, we're on all the alternative platforms we can be trying to push this information out.
How do people support you?
You know, obviously they can get the book, they can send the links, but how can they financially support you so that you can continue to grow and get these things out there?
Because let's face it, man, not everybody has the type of coding skills a guy like you does.
And you're walking the walk.
You're not just talking the talk.
You're making things happen.
And I'm very excited about that.
So how do people support you?
You know what?
I really can't ask for any more support.
Like, you know, I got Blast.video launched a few months ago and then the support from that was amazing.
If people want to join in that, I guess you can go to blast.video slash support and I'll give bring you to my gifts and go.
But really, you know, the best way to support me is just come to blast.video.
Like I made that for you to defeat the censorship.
It's the best place on the internet for news 24-7.
And I know that because, you know, it is cross-platform.
Like it works across all the different video services out there.
It's the only aggregator that does that on the internet.
And, you know, if more people knew about this, they'd be like, oh, wow, the censorship thing of conservatives has essentially been solved.
And so, you know, you don't have to give to me.
Like, don't have to support me.
Like, I'm here to support you.
I just got hired by a major movie producer and I'm really, I can't announce what it is yet that I'm working on right now, but I'm very busy with that.
And I'm so gracious that I've had this opportunity to be able to contribute to this very meaningful movie.
And so really, it's just about, you know, the news for you so that you can make the best informed decisions so that we can save our constitutional republic.
So if you agree with that, please come to blast.video bookmarket.
Come to it every single day so that you can be more informed about what's happening in the world today.
Zach Voorhees, always a pleasure.
I'm not sure if you're going to be in New York or Pennsylvania, but if you are, I can't wait to shake your hand and get you in an interview in person.
Brother, I love what you're doing.
Keep it up.
Thank you very much, Jason.
Thank you.
There he is, Zach Voorhees, kicking ass and taking names.
I want you to get to blast.video.
Hopefully, we're going to become a part of that as well.
And if you want to support this broadcast, you can do so by buying me a coffee.
The links are down below, $5, $10, $15.
It means the world to me.
We are on those alternative platforms.
Odyssey has backed up my heavily censored YouTube channel.
We're rumbling.
We're rumbling big time.
We're on the pod bean.
So if you want an RSS feed, if you want vidcasts and audio casts, you can now do that.
And don't forget to rockfin, rockfin, rockfin, $9.99 a month or $99.99 for the year.
You hit that subscribe button on a desktop.
You get my material, which I give away for free anyway, right?
But you get everybody else's premium material, including great journalists like Max Blumenthal, Michael Tracy, Steve Poikinen, Pasta Jardoula, Jimmy Dore, and so many others.
Because folks, if you didn't catch it, to me, it's not about right and left.
It's always about right and wrong, and you got to be a part of that.