Watch the UNCENSORED second hour live on RVM Premium Mon-Thur at 9AM EST:
https://redvoicemedia.com/uncensoredShow more Not RVM Premium yet? Try it for $1:
https://redvoicemedia.com/jason
Listen Live and Call In at:
https://theinfowarrior.podbean.com/
Send Some Love and Buy Me A Cup Of Joe:
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jasonbermas
Watch My Documentaries:
https://www.redvoicemedia.com/category/bermas-docs
Subscribe on Rokfin
https://rokfin.com/JasonBermas
Subscribe on Rumble
https://rumble.com/c/c-1647952
Subscribe on YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/InfoWarrior
Follow me on Twitter
https://twitter.com/JasonBermas
PayPal: [email protected]
#BermasBrigade Show less
Hey everybody, Jason Burmes here, and what you are about to watch is an interview I conducted with Johnny Vedmore about a month ago via the entire WEF global structure, the global young leaders and its origin story.
Now, some of you may have actually watched the first half hour of this as it was available for free.
But I want to remind everybody: even the premium content at Red Voice Media a couple weeks later goes free.
So consider becoming a subscriber, redvoicemedia.com/slash Jason.
But if you missed it, this is a key interview that you should spread out there far and wide.
Johnny Vedmore, you did a great job.
This was a great interview.
One of my favorites by far this year.
These young global leaders that are being brought up are really being brought up through this thought process and ideology that is nothing more than scarcity.
And it's artificial scarcity.
It's not real scarcity, right?
Same thing as planned obsolescence, only they might not be aware because they're not that bright.
Some of them are very much aware.
If you don't think a guy like Henry Kissinger knows what's going on for real, you're not paying attention.
Henry Kissinger damn well knows what's going on for real.
So, Johnny Vedmore should be joining us momentarily.
Oh, I've got a, there it is.
Yep.
I'm going to give him the, actually, he's got the link.
He'll be fine.
He'll jump in.
While we're doing this, I want to read maybe the beginning of this article for the audience.
The Kissinger Continuum, the unauthorized history of the WEF's Young Global Leaders Program, the World Economic Forum's Young Global Leaders Program, Klaus Schwab's supposed brainchild, is actually an almost exact replica of Henry Kissinger's international seminar that was originally run out of Harvard and was funded by the CIA.
In this article, Johnny Vedmore investigates the people behind Kissinger's international seminar, the CIA conduits, which funded the program, and Kissinger's key role in the creation of the WEF's Young Global Leaders Program itself.
And with that, we are connecting to the one and only Johnny Vedmore of Unlimited Hangout.
You know, Johnny, I thought that we might be doing both of those issues one and two.
We're going to stick to one.
You did a bang up job on this piece, and there's just so much involvement here.
Yes, absolutely.
So let's get to some of that.
Let's talk about the fact that you came into this.
You know, a lot of people think they're going to be reading about Klaus Nutschwab, and they're going to be talking about all these global leaders.
That's really at the end because the genesis of this program is post-World War II, as much of the modern-day media, military, industrial complex, and these kind of roundtable groups and institutes and think tanks come out of.
And you talk about the fact that Harvard has been kind of set up as this CIA front for a lot of these agendas.
And it was in the summer of the late 40s and early 50s where they saw a guy like Henry Kissinger, who was getting his bachelor in political science, I believe it was at the time.
And he gets his bachelor there.
And all of a sudden, he's got a publication there that's run by the Rockefellers.
And all of a sudden, he's got these summer seminars that are extremely reminiscent of what will grow into being these World Economic Forum Young Global Leader Groups.
Johnny, first of all, introduce yourself to my audience over at Red Voice Media.
Tell people how you got started, and then let's just kick into it.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Hello, hi, Jason.
Oh, man, and lots of your people who are watching you know me a little bit.
Gained Censorship Resistance00:02:25
And that's partially because you gave me the ability to get out there in the first place.
I mean, I was really heavily censored.
My first piece was like pieces that I wrote that was kind of like entering into the world of intelligence and looking at intelligence operations.
Was looking at Nicole Junkerman, a German Epstein associate who had like a 17, 18, 19-year relationship business-wise with Epstein and intelligence-wise.
And I was completely, I mean, she basically obliterated my name off the internet.
She systematically had people going through who contacted me, people who were going through the internet and looking for my name and her name and having me taken down.
And I was being systematically censored.
And there were very few platforms, like a handful free right at the start, including yourself, who actually gave me the ability to speak out.
So I've been doing this now since probably about, I mean, I went into journalism about 2016, where I was like, I couldn't take it anymore.
You know, you keep reading and reading and reading.
You're like, oh, God, why isn't anybody talking about the things that I see here or the things I see there?
And, you know, whenever I there's a laziness in the world where people want to know about something, so they go and they look for somebody who's talking about it.
And I was always someone who was like, I want to look deep into finding other things about them.
I always thought at the start, when I first started to investigate, it was even earlier than that.
I started investigating things like the Epstein case around 2011.
And I discovered that, you know, I suddenly knew information that no one knew.
You know, it was a really weird experience.
I wasn't a trained journalist.
I failed at nearly every school and college education full stop.
I just could not, I was not fit for the establishment's version of education.
Well, let's stop right there because it's so important because there's so many people out there that digest information from Bernesian talking points, headlines of articles they don't even read.
And then when they read the articles, there's usually some spin in there or some purposeful misdirection.
Reading The Actual Documents00:15:04
Let's say that some narrative control.
There's nothing like reading the actual documents.
So in the case of Epstein, you know, one of the reasons that I think I had a large growth in that period was I was one of the only people that was going through the PDF files and court documents that were continually being released via lawsuits prior to his arrest.
A lot of people forget about that portion of the story, but from about 2015 to 2017, while New York was apparently putting their case together, there was a slew of documents starting to be released.
And like you said, the mainstream media still wasn't covering a case they hadn't covered for over a decade.
I am the guy, just like you're the guy, that's going to sit down and watch a four-hour World Economic Forum video on C-SPAD to maybe get 30 seconds or five minutes of clips or quotes that you're going to put into a story.
But it's so essential.
You know, look at True Stream Media and their recent King of the World documentary.
Having to sit through Prince Charles talking at WEF on the 50.
Got to be tough, but at the same time, but at the same time, I'm glad they did it because they were pointing out things that nobody else does.
And you guys over at Unlimited Hangout are like champions of that.
You're top tier, and this article proves it.
So let's start, I guess, with why you chose that time period of the late 40s and early 50s to really emphasize in the first half of your article,
because we also kind of get into not only the CIA and the coup d'état that they're carrying out in the Middle East, but how there was this wedge issue via the creation of Israel that sets up a state for perpetual war and basically a system in which you could bounce in and out of at almost any given moment.
Yeah, yeah, but I mean, I started off with, as you know, I started off with looking into Klaus Schwab's ancestry, discovering his father worked for a model Nazi company, discovering lots of things about him that, of course, have been hidden from by the mainstream, you could say.
And then last time I was on here, we talked about the second part of that article, the second in that series, where basically he is at this course in Harvard, Kissinger's International Seminar.
He arrives in about 1965.
It's part of the summer school.
So it was like, you know, where all the students go away, in come these guys who are going to be trained by Kissinger as young global leaders, as we'll see with this.
And in 1967, he graduates from that and he goes back to Germany.
And he gets given two really important influences, mentors, John Kenneth Galbraith, who's serious economic master, Keynesian economics.
He's got an amazing history.
CFR, of course, lots of deep connections.
And Herman Kahn, the guy who classes the real Dr. Strangelove in many corners, argued in other corners.
And he was the guy who wrote on thermonuclear war and really put an end to the mutually assured destruction idea.
And we'll get on to that in a little bit, I think, a little parts of that.
And that led me to realize, right, okay, this course, Kissinger's International Seminar, is extremely interesting.
It's extremely important in the history of the world.
So it's not only just people like Klaus Schwab, Pierre Trudeau, Destang, who is a French president later on, who go through this course.
There's lots of different people who go through this course.
And this course was set up by some really interesting people.
So I went back, I said, there's like information there that really needs to be sifted through.
I really need to look at that course in full.
And so I go back, I went back, and in this article, I went back to 1950 and the graduation of Kissinger first.
And Kissinger graduates, as you say, he's seen as the next big thing by the people on the ground in Harvard.
He has written the biggest dissertation in history, in Harvard's history.
He's producing work after work after work.
And he wants to go work for the FBI.
It's McGeorge Bundy, who's a really influential character too, who says, no, you should go work for the CFR.
And he's nominated for the CFR, gets into the CFR, and starts wargaming out nuclear strategy and nuclear war games in the same way that Herman Kahn would be doing with the RAND Institute, with Rand Corporation and the Hudson Institute a little bit later, is why they align.
And my thought was, right, okay, so where did this course come from?
Why did the international seminar get set up?
Who's funding the international seminar?
Because as I revealed in the second piece, in 1967, it was reported by the New York Times and Harvard Crimson themselves that the Kissinger's International Seminar was funded by at least three CIA conduits.
In 1967, they admitted, I know, it's just mind-blowing.
They admitted that between 1960 and 1966, they don't tell you the funding between 1950 and 1960 because that's serious funding.
That's still hidden.
That's still a hidden history.
But they show that it's funded by the American Friends of the Middle East, by the Farfield Foundation, and by the Asian Foundation.
And these guys are all CIA conduits.
These are just, I mean, it's just unbelievable.
When I found out that information, I was like, wow, that's amazing.
So who are these guys?
Who are these guys?
Was my question.
And I went back through the history of the American Friends of the Middle East.
And it is astounding because the person who's head, who's really heading up the American Friends of the Middle East, is a man called Kermit Roosevelt.
Let me stop you.
Because before we even get to Kermit, because that's going to be a huge part.
That's where we're going to get into the Dulles Brothers, what the American Friends of the Middle East really is.
And, you know, again, it's kind of this CIA conduit group for relations with those that they've alienated via this Israeli-Palestinian conflict that brings Israel in, I guess, Israel, you could say, Jewish conflict at the time or Zionist conflict at the time.
That's the way it was being positioned in the media.
Before we get there, and I think it's important to talk about the fact that Kissinger, you know, post-1950, I believe it's in 1951, he actually starts a publication over at Harvard, and that's Rockefeller-funded.
And a lot of this is that globalist Rockefeller ideology starting to come into fruition through these back networks, if you will.
It's always hard to know where to start with this because they're so interconnected.
Those two things are so interconnected.
In 1950, Henry Kissinger, he wants to go work for the FBI.
He gets given, nominated to the CFR.
But also William Yandel Elliott, who's one of the biggest grandees in American history that nobody's heard about, advisor to six different presidents, a weird-looking fella, indeed, a really weird-looking fella.
And he's Kissinger's mentor.
He's one of, along with Fritz Kramer and some other people, he's one of Kissinger's main mentors.
He's one of the most important people in his history.
And Kissinger even notes in documents to William Yandel Elliott that, you know, everybody says this is Kissinger's international seminar, but we both know the real truth because it was really Yandel Elliott's international seminar.
You know, this was his brainchild, and he saw Kissinger as the person to take this forward.
And they needed, of course, support from it.
And the magazine that you're talking about is a publication that came up quarterly that ran alongside Kissinger's international seminar.
And that was called Confluence.
And Confluence Magazine ran till about the late 60s until really the CIA got shown as being the people who were funding all this.
And that was funded by the Rockefellers.
And it's extraordinary because when you actually read it, each episode, each publication, each copy edition is filled up with the same sort of speeches you would hear at Davos.
They're the same sort of people who are coming forward.
And what you realize is Kissinger's International Seminar isn't just one thing.
It actually is like a free-phase program.
So there's like a young global leaders aspect, but they realize they need to groom these young global leaders.
And there's a reason why they need to groom.
And that's the other side.
The reason is that they need, they know that they're going to start enacting coups in different parts of the areas where Soviet control is most likely to have influence.
So let's stop right there for a second because I think that's important.
That's the segue right there, right?
So you're in this state post-World War II where the other world power is the Soviet Union.
And I would say that the recruiting point for a lot of these people is you're fighting communism.
And all of this is to fight communism.
That's the big ideal set.
You know, we didn't just bring the Germans in Operation Paperclip style for nothing, guys.
We got to fight the Ruskies.
And it is in this idea that they're willing to do anything.
And the OSS becomes the central intelligence agency.
They go to the well, very much so to the Harvard and Yale establishment for a lot of their acolytes.
And while all this is happening, they say, wow, we're going to be couping these nations.
Who are we going to install?
We want to install people that have the same ideal set, or at least under our control, and not under this Soviet mindset.
So when we're going into Iran, for instance, which you're about to get into, and Operation Ajax, you just don't want to get rid of, I believe it's Mogadishu.
You want to have somebody set up after the fact to take over.
Take it from there.
Close.
It's Mozadeg.
It's Mohamed Mozadeg.
I also say Mogadishu every now and again.
Slip on the tongue.
No, no.
1952 was the first of these CIA coups.
So the course had already started to run.
And the first of these CIA coups was, of course, committed, headed up by Kermit Roosevelt.
Now, to explain to people who don't really know about the history, the CIA was set up in 1947 out of the remnants of the OSS.
And the idea was, listen, we need to get serious with creating organizations, influencing organizations like the Soviets do.
Because the Soviets, you go back to people like I mentioned, Willie Munsenberg, who since 1918 had been setting up youth organizations all around Europe who had been influencing the hearts and minds of young people.
And it was Lenin who taught this.
You know, Lenin, it was out of Lenin's playbook.
And the CIA, really, the British, the MI6 and the CIA both kind of come together with this idea, okay, we've got to create loads of organizations post-1945.
1945, you start to see the rollout of all these organizations.
And out of this fire comes things like the UN, you know, really big organizations that were there to push this agenda and try and keep control of all of these pieces on the battlefield.
Because this was an ideological battlefield, a really big ideological, really wide sprawling ideological battlefield.
The Soviet lines and the Western lines, if you look at where East meets West, it wasn't just East Germany and West Germany, it was the entirety of Europe, all down to the Middle East, all along Africa.
And the Soviets were looking to infiltrate, ideologically infiltrate as much of the West as they possibly could, and they had a head start.
So the Americans and British went into hyper-speed.
They started just setting up as many as they could.
And lots of these organizations fell through straight away.
You know, they came up against really, really sophisticated Soviet ideology.
They just like they'd fracture and fall apart.
And they needed more control over this than they had before.
Now, there was a committee for peace in the Holy Land, I think it was called, which was what the American Friends of the Middle East was made out of.
That was Kermit Roosevelt and Dorothy Thompson.
Dorothy Thompson's an interesting figure.
Let's hold up right there.
Let's talk about the American Friends of the Middle East because I think that people don't understand that basically this is an organization that comes out of post-the creation of Israel and in a backlash to the fact that now the Arab League, obviously the Arab world is not happy with what's now occurred.
Dorothy Thompson, although you actually highlighted some of her more racist views towards black voters to kind of show what was going on at the time, was also heavily anti-Zionist.
Kermit Roosevelt, also heavily anti-Zionist.
So there's this faction within this growing military-industrial complex at the top, and even within kind of the presidential sphere, as Franklin Roosevelt was a conduit for this type of thing in the American Friends of the Middle East, where they're setting up an organization where they can at least have talks with these people.
But in essence, it's really an organization set up by the CIA to have influence throughout the region.
Yeah, and I mean, it was mind-blowing to find out that all of these organizations were anti-Zionist.
I expected it all to be Zionist people straight from the off.
Anti-Zionist Influences00:08:13
You know, we currently live in a paradigm in a world where we see how Zionism won.
So I thought, well, obviously the CIA must have been on board with that early on.
No, nearly every single member of the American Friends of the Middle East were anti-Zionist.
Kermit Roosevelt himself had traveled a lot with his father and with Theodore Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, his grandfather, who was, of course, president of the United States.
One of my favorites.
Kermit Roosevelt was actually a Kermit Roosevelt Jr. because Kermit Roosevelt Sr., who committed suicide in Alaska during the war, was also a very interesting figure himself.
And he had traveled all around the Middle East and from a very young age, he had written poetry.
Kermit Roosevelt Jr. had written poetry about the Middle East.
He loved traveling there.
He found the Arabs to be some of the most interesting people.
He loved the culture.
And a lot of these people were completely devastated by the idea of giving over Palestine to the Zionists because Zionists, Nahoon Goldman, and other people were pushing for a new, you know, they were pushing from before the war, from the early 30s all through the 30s for a Zionist state in the Middle East.
They had their agenda set even before the Holocaust, you know, and they were using the Holocaust.
As the Holocaust happened, they were using that as a tool to get their aims to basically gain public sentiment around the world to allow this to occur.
And one of the criticisms, and one of the criticisms I'd make today, is this allowed for a system where you're taking a religion, and all of a sudden you're making it an ethnicity, and you're making it into a racial issue.
And because of that, it's remained an extremely hot-button issue seven plus decades later, Johnny.
Yeah, yeah, and these guys argued.
I mean, the American Friends of the Middle East argued openly, publicly, hard, all of them from Dorothy Thompson, Virginia Gildersleeve, Harry Fostek, Kirbert Roosevelt, all the people at the top of this organization and all of the people within the CIA, really, were arguing against it.
But eventually, Truman would recognize the state of Israel.
And, of course, 1947, 1948 would happen.
And the Arabs would be pushed out in they were aiming, the Zionists were aiming to, and they said this out loud all throughout the war, to create a mass migration to the Holy Land, to Palestine, and to push out the Arabs, to make sure that the Jewish people there were the majority.
And now that is, you can't even imagine how big a deal or how big an operation that is.
But that's what they were pushing for.
And of course, Britain had been originally holding that land, running and ruling that land.
And they weren't happy about any of this.
But the pressure was too much, especially after the war, colonial Britain was falling apart bit by bit.
People were starting to ask questions about oppressors, you know, people who were like Hitler taking over other people's countries.
And yeah, and 1947 comes along, and all of these organizations start.
But the American Friends of the Middle East was a really important invention.
It was really important because it was like, okay, anti-Zionists said, we've got to do something now, and we've got to do it behind the scenes if we're going to have an influence in this region.
And we should talk about the first of the coups, which is King Farouk in Egypt.
And King Farouk, it was called Operation Fat Fuck, which is a sprightly name for the first coup that the CIA is going to pull on the world.
And they first of all tried to give demands to King Farouk, and King Farouk refused them.
And this was headed up by some big people.
It wasn't only Alan Dulles was there as well behind this coup.
But this coup was set up, planned by Kermit Roosevelt, who was heading up the American Friends of the Middle East.
And it was successful.
Before no time whatsoever, they had got the officers free movement, I think it was called, with NASA.
And they had got him installed.
And Farouk was in exile in Italy.
And it was a success.
And they realized straight away, oh, we're going to be able to do this all around the place.
So John Foster Dulles came along and said, well, I'll give you this a buttload of money.
I think it's something like equivalent, if I remember correctly, something like 12 million or something to coup Iran and to overthrow Mohamed Mozadek.
And that was successful as well.
The next year, the very next year.
So they were just starting to implement control and they were starting to put in their preferred leaders.
But the thing is, is that within just a few years, Egypt would be buying weapons off the Soviet Union and aligning with the Soviet Union because the leaders who were in power were not completely American aligned.
They had got what they wanted from the Americans.
They had been installed into power.
And now they were saying, okay, well, now we're in power.
What are you going to do?
And what did the Americans do?
Well, they set up a course that would allow them to train up future young global leaders who, when they committed coups in the country, when they enacted coups, they could install these leaders into power.
And they would definitely be trained, Western-aligned.
They would have gone through a filtering process because, in a sense, at the very start, especially, that's what Kissinger's International Seminar was.
It was a program where 50 of the best leaders around the world, or potential leaders, sorry, around the world, young guys who had lots of qualifications, they had to be the best.
I saw in 1956, 1957 and onwards, they were advertising in the Lahore Military Gazette in Pakistan, where they were saying, you know, exactly what you needed to get into Kissinger's international seminar.
And really, they were saying, we'll pay everything.
We will pay your, we'll bring you over there.
You'll get all your food.
Yeah, you'll get everything paid for, but you've got to be the best.
And at first, it was 50 candidates per session, per seminar, per summer were coming over to be trained.
And of course, that would be a process where Kissinger would throw them parties and they would get to meet all of these different grandees at Harvard and they would be groomed.
It was a grooming process.
And it was to find the best leaders.
And this wasn't, as you mentioned earlier, Yale really was the start of these operations, these creation of organizations.
There were other people like Brittany Vikings, who I talk about in there.
Viking Tom, I believe it is.
Yeah, Tom's Viking.
Tom's Viking.
He aimed at Scandinavian areas.
So he was looking for Scandinavian leaders, young global leaders, potential young global leaders.
And these guys, you know, these organizations were trying to make sure that each of these countries would have definitely American-aligned, completely and utterly loyal servants in office.
And they did a brilliant job of it.
Need Support, Look Ahead00:05:05
Well, let me stop you there because we only got a few more minutes left on the censored version of the broadcast.
And then we're going over to RVM Premium.
I would argue that you could see the fruits of all this labor over decade and decade and decade with the installation of somebody like Hamid Karzai of Unicol during the war of terror and the Afghanistan conflict very quickly.
A lot of people say, oh, well, Afghanistan was a disaster.
Yeah, after we brought in the infrastructure that we wanted to for not only the benefit of, say, the oil industries themselves, but of the military-industrial complex and really beta testing drone warfare biometrics and this new mercenary type system that was built out of the war of terror that now we're seeing utilized in Ukraine and nobody even whispers about it.
Folks, when you see American soldiers on the border as mercenaries, that's because post-war in Afghanistan and Iraq, it wasn't just Blackwater that turned into Academy and XC services.
There was a slew of other privatized military groups that are also in large part fronts for the Central Intelligence Agency.
And all of this is really important because it's not just on the warfare front, it's through things like the American Friends of the Middle East.
It's through things like plausible deniability.
It's through things like conduits, aka Henry Kissinger.
I had no idea they were connected to the CIA.
How would I know?
I'm enraged.
So here's the deal: we've got about a minute left, Johnny, and we want to make this transition as smooth as possible.
But for the audience that doesn't come over, and by the way, you can listen for free over on Podbean.
We might take calls in the last half hour, but Vedmore is so on fire.
I don't know that we're going to.
Just telling everybody that right now.
Tell people where they can read this article, how they can support your work and what you've got coming up in the future.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, oh, I got something good coming up in the future.
You can, I mean, you can read the article over Unlimited Hangout.
I have all my articles on johnnyvedmore.com, where you've got a drop-down menu and you'll see nearly all of the most important articles there.
And it is really important to support my work.
I mean, of course, you could support Unlimited Hangout as well.
That's such a fantastic platform.
Personally, I need support.
The article before this took a year to research and find all the information for.
And it's not a small little sort of trek.
It's a proper, I have to go real deep.
I have to spend days reading book after book after book, paper after paper.
It's just really important to support the work.
The next article I got out is really the follow-up to this piece.
And it will blow people's minds and it will lead to Ukraine.
And it will make people understand what has happened over the past 50 years.
And it will be shocking.
Some of the information you will hear will make you go, oh my God, it's a takeover, a complete takeover.
And it all goes back to this period.
It all goes back to this period.
And, you know, this is a rolling ball.
As I finish one article, another article comes.
This is a constant, you know, I'm following a road and I never know where it's going to lead, but it always leads somewhere.
So let's stop the free one right here, guys.
Thumbs it up, subscribe, share.
Come on over right now.
They're queuing it up over at Red Voice Media.
We're going to end the free portion of the broadcast in just a moment because, guys, we need support over here.
Johnny Vedmore needs support.
These articles don't write themselves.
Like I said, this isn't just a puff piece where you're going to be done in 30 minutes.
Like, if you're really doing it, it's going to take you 30, 60 to read.
And it's going to take you another couple days to actually delve in to the side issues that we're about to get to on the flip.
So again, Red Voice Media, the links are down below to come to it and over at the podbean.
All right, Mr. Vedmore, I believe.
Oh, I'm hoping we're still, of course, why would it work well?
We should be live.
I think that's my producer letting me know.
We are live on the paid.
Yep, we are up and running on the premium.
I love this thing.
All right.
So now let's get into it, right?
You've got all these people from the American Friends of the Middle East.
Perpetual War and Conflict00:14:57
My question to you is, and you kind of allude to this, that the creation of Israel and this Palestinian conflict also opens the door for perpetual war and perpetual conflict and the ability of the Central Intelligence Agency to kind of play sides throughout all conflicts as long as it's anti-Soviet.
And this will bring us all the way up to, say, the 1970s, early 80s, where you have the conflict with the Mujahideen and the alliance with Osama bin Laden.
That's not something that you necessarily get into in your article, but what are your thoughts on that?
Do you think that that's a big part of it?
Well, what I saw, and what I'm researching in many different ways through many different angles, is that people like John Foster Duller said it really well in the late 50s.
What they say is, you know, we're heading towards mutually assured destruction.
We're heading towards big bombs dropping and everybody dying.
So what we need to do, and they were saying this out publicly, this is in newspapers.
This is out to people.
This is like in New York Times and big newspapers where they're saying we need to take the Soviets and take Russia off the wall with their big stick, with the big bombs, and we need to create a limited warfare.
We need to create kind of smaller potential for nuclear warfare so that we don't obliterate each other and we can have a fair fight.
And basically what they do is they start to set the grounds.
And this will only work if the Russians are involved, if the Russians agree, because if you have limited warfare on one side and you have complete warfare on the other side, well, there's only one side that's going to win.
So they needed to create this situation.
And this is part of the reason why the coups are going on.
And this is part of the reason why we see this and leading up to this perpetual war was good to say, okay, if we keep playing this game like this, we have set the rules and we will not die.
But we need to make sure that, number one, and this will come later, that nearly every country, big power in the world in certain areas, needs to have nuclear technology so that everybody's scared to press that button.
It can't just be two sides against each other.
If it's two sides, one hits the other and the other hits the other.
It needs to be three, four, five, ten sides who all have their fingers on the button and then all have, as been said by many people, 14 hands lifting their fingers up off the buttons to stop them pressing it.
So it's like their idea is if we have perpetual war, war, and Kissinger says this as well.
In Nuclear War and Foreign Policy written in 57, 58, he says, you know, we need these limited wars because we need to create a paradigm, a dynamic where we are in control.
And the only way we're in control is if we're not dead.
So we need perpetual war that never, there's never a winner to any conflict.
There is never a winner.
And that's one of the most important parts of this ideology is that of limited war is never a winner.
No war comes to a conclusion.
It all comes to this like, oh, we'll make peace again now and on to the next one.
And that just not that puts fear in people.
They had lost the fear of nuclear weapons by the 60s.
You know, when you plug people full of the fear that they're going to be bombed all of the time like they did through the 50s and the late 40s, eventually that wears off.
Eventually you don't have fear.
Nowadays, it's like you've got two years.
You've got two years of fear-mongering, and then you have to go on to the next thing because it it you know, it just wears out off.
People start to get wise to it.
Back then, you had like ten years.
Each conflict would give you about ten years of limited warfare.
Both sides kind of know the rules.
They nod and wink to each other.
They won't go a certain, you know, they'll go a certain distance, but they won't aim at the big people either.
They'll make sure that they stay alive so that they can keep this.
So it's a game.
It's a game.
Well, you could look at the Vietnam conflict, for instance, right?
And it's that bridge to the Cold War and the return of the nuclear scare in the late 70s and 80s.
And, you know, instead of the focus being on that world-ending technology, it's like, well, we can't let communism spread or we could get to that point.
At the end of that conflict, again, through these conflicts in the Middle East, you start to see the rise of that rhetoric once more.
So let's bring it into modern times, really the second half of the article, where we've got the coups.
The American Friends of the Middle East is now being exposed as this front group for the CIA.
Kissinger's playing dumb, but his emails say otherwise.
Kissinger himself has kind of been positioned as this conduit for globalism on multiple levels via David Rockefeller and you said the CFR, I would argue, the Bilderberg group, but especially the Nixon administration.
You know, a lot of people don't understand during the Nixon administration, that's when you start to have these talks.
Again, it's not just in the Middle East, these pro-globalist talks, where we're bringing China and the Asian culture into the fold.
And what we end up with is an Asian culture that gets the capitalist ideals of McDonald's and Blue Jeans and things like that.
Sure, great happiness.
But then their ideal sets of control kind of come home and everything is homogenized under this globalist mindset.
And you mentioned the United Nations earlier.
That kind of takes us not only from Kissinger's summer school seminar, but what will become via mentorship to Klaus Schwab, this young global leaders program.
Yeah, one of the most important years in the history of humanity.
One of the most important years is 1967.
That time, when the same time Klaus Schwab leaves Harvard and goes back to Escher Weiss to start helping them sell reform their company with Schulzeiji and ends up selling nuclear, illegal nuclear weapons technology to regimes like South Africa, perpetuating this.
It was also really interesting.
If you look at the Vietnam War, both sides of the debate in America were the same people.
They were the same people.
So the Mandeville lectures in 1967, which I mentioned in the second article in this series, were headed up by Kissinger and John Kenneth Galbraith.
And John Kenneth Dalbrafe is there leading this anti-Vietnam war protest.
But it's a I mean, it's a co-opted protest.
It's a co-opted movement by the people, same people who are creating this.
And so they're doing lectures together at the same time.
They're arguing against the same point, but they're putting into action limited warfare.
They're putting into action their ideology and making it seem as though they're they're both on the side and not on the side.
And what's really interesting about that as well is that during some of my research, which didn't get included in this article, though I was really tempted to include it in this article, was about Benazir Bhutto and her father, Zufika Ali Bhutto.
And Zufika Ali Bhutto was, of course, I think he was about the fourth prime minister of Pakistan.
And he was the one who pushed forward the nuclear weapons program.
Now, he was very close friends with John Kenneth Galbraith, who he had met when John Kenneth Galbraith was the ambassador for India under Kennedy in the early 60s.
Because Kennedy wanted John Kenneth Galbraith to be the ambassador to the Soviet Union.
You know, that's a big job.
But he was like, oh, no, no, no, I'll do it.
And you mentioned Galbraith again as one of the mentors to Klaus Schwab.
He was very much a mentor to John F. Kennedy as well.
Yes, yes.
Extremely important person within history.
Nobody quite realized.
Six foot eight tall.
Really interesting charisma.
Some of the most important moments of history have had John Kenneth Galbraith behind the scenes.
You know what?
I'm glad you said that he was tall because that really makes me remember the part about your piece.
And by the way, guys, the reason we're staying with this screen is because my ex-split froze up and I cannot change scenes.
So it looks like we're just going to keep Vedmore for the entire hour.
I'm sorry I'm not dick and dick and do with the buttons, but in your article, you talked about how John J.K. Galbraith was a tall gentleman.
And he said, the taller you are, the more well-behaved you kind of have to be in public because the more people see you.
And the more eyes that are on you create this moral sense where you will do better.
And as soon as I read that, and I'm paraphrasing it there, it let me know the mindset of a lot of these people, Galbraith in particular, that Big Brother is really a good thing because the more eyes on you, the more better behaved you're going to have a populace.
And this is a recurring theme in globalism, in the World Economic Forum, in the Davos crew, and what they teach these young global leaders, my friend.
Yeah, Galbraith himself was really good at playing both sides really well.
And he would become one of the most influential people in the world that you've never heard of.
Most people haven't heard of him anyway.
And he's got a brother as well who I think is pretty influential.
And I think he's also called John.
That's why John Kenneth Galbraith was known as Ken to a lot of people.
But he would also go on not only to be one of the people to help set up Davos, co-keynote speaker for the first Davos, but he would throw himself into that world.
He would, even in the late 70s, there's a brilliant documentary.
I can't remember what the documentary is called, but it follows John Kenneth Galbraith going around Europe, meeting with people like Ted Heath and others.
And Ted Heath became president of the World Economic Forum at one point.
You know, they had their agenda set.
And that is very interesting that, oh, you have to be morally superior if you're tall.
You have to be ethically correct if you're not tall.
Morally superior.
You just mentioned Ted Heath.
Let's talk about morals for a second.
I mean, again, this is somebody that's made the prime minister.
Let me repeat that, the prime minister, and then promoted via globalism on top of that.
Well, there's some really, really horrid allegations about Ted Heath out there that supersede what David Icke was talking about in the late 90s, early 2000s.
It took his death for a lot of this to come out, but this is a guy that might put Dennis Hassert to shame in that Dennis Hassert was labeled a serial child molester.
Let me repeat that.
A serial child molester by a judge.
And this shows you, I would say, the duality, right?
And on one aspect of this, Galbraith is talking about morality and how we all need to be watched and how we're going to be better people for it.
And then they are working with one of the most horrifically morally degraded human beings in existence and putting them into the upper echelons of power, aka Ted Heath.
Yeah, I don't think there's any doubt that Ted Heath was a serial child molester.
And the rumors that have come out about what his thing was, what his niche was, is that he used to sit there naked with children with a metal claw on his hand and used to touch the children and cry.
That was his thing.
He was a very sick puppy.
You go back to the interesting one.
You go back to where the IRA stuff in the UK really started kicking off in the early 70s and with the mandate to take over control of Northern Ireland properly with the British Army and put in the British Army.
That was all under Heath as well.
A lot of the turmoil that happened in the 70s, energy crisis and stuff, were caused by Heath and left to the Wilson government to sort out.
Heath was a completely disgusting character.
He was really interested that just before the war, literally just before the war, as Hitler's giving one of his most famous speeches, just a few rows along is young Ted Heath watching him.
And he claims that him and the guy he was traveling around Europe with, yeah, very much so, had to smuggle themselves across Germany at the outbreak of war to get out of the country.
But I think a lot of that is, he was friends with everybody from Jimmy Savile.
He was one of the people who brought Margaret Thatcher into politics.
Ted Heath was someone who is just, yeah, morally and ethically right at the bottom, right in the gutter, completely horrible human being.
And he's still, lots of people, lots of establishment folk worship him over there.
And Galbraith was very close to him.
And Galbraith used to play the signs like that.
As I said, with the Vietnam War, he used to play the signs.
Galbraith in the second article in this series stated that, you know, oh, he left the CFR eventually because the only question it raised was if you could be bothered to sit through the boring meetings that they had and listen.
But, you know, all of that was him being able to, or trying to distance these organizations, wars and things from the actual power.
He was part of the power and he knew how to distance the power from the event.
Thousands In Power00:04:04
Let's talk about that because I think that's really important.
You know, the CFR is really, again, another conduit of these ideal sets, not only through their meetings that are in public, but then their backdoor meetings on top of it, and then their publications through foreign policy.
I think that's their publication right there.
But whenever you try to call them out on the fact that they are in all these different circles of power, they're just a think tank.
They don't really control anything.
And I highlighted the fact that Hillary Clinton, years ago, well over a decade ago now, when the CFR moved their offices into DC and much closer to the political establishment, she literally said, Well, now we're going to have to travel much less distance to find out what we should do and why we should be doing it.
That speech is amazing.
I mean, listening, she says things she shouldn't say out loud.
She does it constantly throughout her career.
But yeah, the CFR are really important.
Thousands of members, thousands of thousands of members who are in massively important areas of power.
Now, if you're talking about, if we look at the Epstein case and the controlled exploit, like the controlled detonation from 2017, it was a member of the CFR, Stan Pottinger's son, I can't remember his first name, Stan Pottinger, who Pottinger is part of the whole legal case, were representing the victims of Epstein.
And I say victims with quotation mark because my research shows that some of these people were in line with these guys.
One of them, who I won't mention the name until I've completely and utterly ready to expose it.
One of those very prominent victims was going out with Pottinger's son when he became the deputy national security advisor under Trump in 2017.
And that was the start of when the Epstein case started to be slowly manipulated into the way that we saw it envelop in 2019.
And by the way, Epstein himself, supposedly a member of the CFR, as well as the Trilateral Commission, which is an even more consolidated group of power.
Which you can say, you could say that they solved the Epstein situation in-house.
You know, that these guys knew what they needed to do and manipulated the case.
Now, also, Pottinger and his boy, and this is recorded in all of the newspapers, it's public knowledge, they were trying to create it so that they would take 40% of every single one of the victims' payouts for the Epstein case before 2019.
Before the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein, they were already manipulating it so they could make money off all of the victims.
And I got to say, my research, Whitney's books, One Nation Under Blackmail, she had me research certain parts of it.
I mean, it was such a big effort.
She was a trooper.
I nearly killed her to write those books.
I really mean it.
She had to put her life and soul into it.
And for me, I had to look at certain parts.
And one of the parts were the victims.
And I was just astonished.
Because when you read through some of the statements, you realize that a lot of this has been, it's not a surprise.
A lot of it's been manipulated.
But it's been manipulated, again, leads back to people who are members of the CFR who need to control this explosion, need to control the narrative, need to control.
Manipulated Power Dynamics00:14:54
And that's what the CFR do.
They control the narrative.
They were set up to control the narrative many years ago.
Foreign policy is a good example of that.
And who wrote for that?
John Kenneth Galbraith.
Who wrote for that?
Herman Kahn.
You know, these people who are all mentors of Klaus Schwab and people who are behind the scenes are all openly working for this think tank.
The think tank.
And look, I don't think that everybody that was and is a CFR member is soiled for life, right?
I think there are varying degrees and there are competing factions when you talk about globalism.
I would also state that certain people are in these programs, even the Global Leaders Program, and maybe they reject it.
I don't necessarily think that they go on to always be controlled opposition.
I want to believe, for instance, that Tulsi Gabbard has a good soul and she's trying to get away from her past globalist ties that may have not been the best.
I think she's got a long way to go when we're talking about the war on terror and false flags in general, foreign policy in general, even torture in general.
But she's much better than the establishment that they're pushing now.
Let's bring it into now this Young Global Leaders program and where that comes into play.
Really, to bring in some of the westernized leaders that you'll see in the UK and Britain.
You mentioned, for instance, Tony Blair and then the person that comes in after him, Gordon Brown.
You talk about other big names like Angela Merkel, obviously.
Let's discuss when that comes into fruition via Davos.
Okay, well, I mean, it's really an intriguing moment in history, isn't it?
It's the fall of the Berlin Wall.
you've got the the end of uh the the east first west dynamic they they and the establishment are crapping themselves really when this happens when when the fall is so because they have to now do stuff and And the fact is, there's lots of organizations being set up all around the world by these people to try and manipulate this for when it happens.
They had been setting up for years, going back to, of course, Kissinger's International Seminar and beyond.
These organizations had been set up.
And the World Economic Forum had risen to be the leading globalist.
It was around that time that they become, they changed their name from the European Management Forum, originally the European Management Symposium, to the World Economic Forum.
So they changed from being European to suddenly world.
So they show their face as being globalist because that's what really it was set up to do anyway.
And so Klaus Schwab and the lot in 1992, they get on the plane not to Davos, but to Ukraine because that's where they held the World Economic Forum that year.
It was a very special time.
You've got the, at the same time as they're creating, in 1992, that's when they're creating the first iteration of the Young Global Leaders Project.
That's the Global Leaders for Tomorrow.
And at the same time, the foremost Russian Patriot program, which has only three members, two of them are called Alexander Something and the other's called Vladimir Putin.
And that's run at the same time in 1992.
1992 is when Putin first meets Schwab, apparently, or recorded, is the first recorded meeting of them.
And so this is a time where there's much change and it's like, here, we've got to do everything that we've been promising for years and years.
We've finally beaten the enemy.
Now we've got to make sure that we install our leaders in every single country on earth.
So they create to first run in 1993 the Global Leaders for Tomorrow program.
That first year is amazing.
The people who are involved, Victor Orban, you've got Angela Merkel, you've got Tony Blair, you've got Gordon Brown, of course, you've got Bill Gates in there, you've got Bronfman in there.
Edgar Bronfman, who would end up being not only the head of the U.S. World Jewish Congress, but he would also father the Bronfman sisters, who hate to go back to the serial pedophile thing, but heavily involved in the Nexium scandal.
All right, you've got one of them that basically funded all the lawyers, got a little slap on the wrist, and the other one's been in hiding.
Sarah's not even been arrested.
Yeah, no one even talks about that.
I mean, that's why this is so important.
This is generational power, and they're tapping into that generational power.
We're talking about something that happened in the 90s.
And by the way, that Nexium scandal also happening in the 90s.
Well, it goes on for decades.
And Edgar Brothman is still a guy that's extremely influential and powerful among Bill Gates, extremely influential and powerful.
Richard Branson's there too.
You know, big, big leaders, massive leaders.
I think Larry Summers is in the first one, too.
I mean, you've got this is like they say they've been waiting.
They've been saving up their chips for this.
You know, they've been hoping that this happens.
And when this happens, they instantly just put all of their big leaders straight into the first program.
And I think this was really the forming of it.
The people who were involved knew, right, we're involved in being put into power.
Within four years, within four years, Tony Blair is installed in power.
Gordon Brown is his second in command, is his Chancellor of the Exchequer.
And a very transformational part of not only the world, but Europe in general.
I mean, Tony Blair was that guy that was being portrayed as a much smarter George Bush and the driving force again of the war on terror in that area.
And then as things start to cool down, right, they've got New World Order Gordon Brown coming in there.
And again, you have this new transformational phase in the UK and Great Britain and really all of Europe, where you have the massive migration movement coming in.
All of these are part of these globalist programs, perspectives, and ideologies that are being pushed by the Davos crowd.
Yeah, and I think that one of the main problems in British politics, especially from what I've researched, is that it wasn't the Tory Party.
I mean, we've got two major parties in Britain.
You've got Labour Party and the Tory Party.
Labour Party are like the Democrats and Tory Party are like the Republicans in a sense.
Yet they're opposite colours, of course.
So the Red Labour Party and the Blue Tory Party.
Oh boy.
Make some difference.
The Labour Party was a real issue because it was the most likely place where the Fabians would come from with their other way of thinking about things, but still dystopian way of thinking about things.
And so they needed to co-opt that really badly.
So when you look at the leaders there, it's terrible.
Up until Jeremy Corbyn, it is terrible because they're all World Economic Forum, young global leaders.
Because after Tony Blair, of course, Gordon Brown gets into power, young global leader.
And then after that, it's Ed Miliband and Ed Bulls, young global leader, young global leader, who get into power.
And then after that, of course, it's Jeremy Corbyn.
And everybody panics and attacks him all over the place.
But like Trump and others, he was used as a caricature to say, oh, look, evil, evil guy over there, beat him with a stick and bring us back into power because we're your saviors.
You know, people have got so fed up with these young global leaders, even though they didn't know they were young global leaders at this point.
They got so fed up of them that they were like, we don't want this politics anymore.
It tastes like it's controlled.
It just doesn't seem real.
And then they were like, oh, God, we need to get some boogeymen in and scare the people.
Let's talk about that because it's kind of the same smears, right, that you see about Corbyn, that you see about Trump.
They're not really the legitimate ones about his policy.
Like, hey, Trump, how about all those, you know, death showers and bombs over Yemen that you signed off on?
No, White supremacy, right?
Anti-Semitism for Corbyn.
Anti-Semitism, anti-Semitism.
And Corbyn, so far away from being that sort of person, he was a really nice fella.
He was, you know, he was just a player.
He was like the type who would garden around and he had lots of Jewish friends and all of these different things.
It made no sense.
But the mainstream media can control that narrative.
And what they through my research from, I did an article about a year and a half ago, maybe two years ago, about Edelman PR, Edelman, Richard Edelman, being the right hand to Klaus Schwab at the World Economic Forum.
And Edelman PR have basically control of 60 to 70% of all of the PR for all of the big politicians, companies, governments all around the world.
They are the mainstream media.
When Corbyn was, they were trying to bring down Corbyn and the Corbyn coup was happening.
What happened is that Edelman PR organized all of their guys and all of the people who represented them to go out onto the Parliament Square.
The media set up tents out there.
And they all had people saying about how devastating it was to have this Jew-hating anti-Semite in power.
And it was just, you know, pump the narrative into people's heads.
And before you knew it, everybody believed it, you know, because every single paper is controlled by them.
Every single outlet is controlled by them.
All of the politicians are controlled.
All the business leaders are controlled by them.
So they all got the same message coming out.
And like the simple sign of authoritarianism is if everybody is saying the same thing.
It's really simple.
It's a really simple way.
If they're trying to control your mind by pushing out the same rhetoric and the same message, then you know that they're authoritarian.
And that's exactly what we saw.
And by the way, you know, you mentioned this anti-Semitism thing.
I was sent a clip just this week.
I should probably bring it up.
But because we don't have the cues and everything, I'll wait for another broadcast.
But you have this individual that's in Corbyn's party, right, talking about certain things.
And he uses the term globalist.
And the host actually stops him and says, we're not going to use that term.
There are people in my audience that think that globalist means that you're attacking Jews.
And now it's anti-Semitic to say the term globalist or globalism only if you're speaking about it in a negative or critical light.
And I said, well, what am I supposed to call all these people that are espousing a global agenda under organizations that push global governance and economic reform?
What are we supposed to call them now?
I mean, you know, To act like when you're talking about a Galbraith or a Khan, which are very much guys that were at the forefront of the foundation of this type of globalism that we're seeing, you know, oh, you don't like them because they're Jewish.
What are you talking about?
Are they Jewish?
I don't, I don't believe they are.
Now it's everybody that's in that circle.
You can't question people at the top, or you're a bigot, you're a racist.
And we've seen that play again and again and again.
And that voice, that narrative is getting stronger and stronger right now, Johnny.
Yeah, yeah.
And what we used to call and be beaten down for calling the new world order, I recently changed to being the old world order.
And then now I'm changing to be the global world order, the globalist world order, because that's what it is.
The new world order was always the globalist world order.
That's always what it was.
They are pushing out an agenda which basically Kissinger and others decided that the future, the most powerful block in the future, will be China, will be Asia.
There's no doubt about it.
You know, first of all, they used them for manufacturing, they used them for cheap enterprise and stuff.
But now they knew that it was going to raise up and they were going to become so powerful that eventually they would be the ones in control.
So they need to control those guys too.
They needed to have the global world order aligned with American principles and American values, not Maoism or anything like that.
They needed, and this is why Nixon and others suddenly went towards China because Kissinger was next to him as a secretary of state saying, This is where you need to be next.
This is the next big thing, you know.
And that's exactly what they did.
I say, let's go back just to finish off about the Young Global Leaders program.
There's something really important that is in this article, which is one of the things that really I think is one of the most important things to come out of the article last in the Schwab series, which is in 2004 is a year where they decide to reform the Global Leaders for Tomorrow program and create the Young Global Leaders programme.
That's when the Young Global Leaders or the Globe's called Young Global Leaders Programme will call it, but there's a longer name for it.
I think it's the forum for young global leaders.
It's created through money that is given to Schwab as a prize for being such a wonderful influence on the world.
It's given by the Dan David Foundation.
Kerry's Global Agenda00:13:36
At the time, who's sitting on the board but Kissinger himself?
And this is why I called the article the Kissinger Continuum because they funded the creation of the Young Global Leaders program.
I think it was like a smile and a nod in the back room.
Look how it's all gone round full circle.
You started off going through a Young Global Leaders program that I ran.
Now I'm giving you the money through the Dan David Foundation to create the Young Global Leaders.
It's really a much more well-built version of Global Leaders for Tomorrow program, a much better version of Kissinger's international seminar, something that was going to be industrial because it's too late now.
Globalism has taken over.
And you see, in the turn of the, especially with the Afghan war and the start of the Iraq evasion and stuff like this, the turn of Davos changes.
The way Davos is set up is changes.
Before, it was always like the Americans took the back seat.
You know, you'll have people like John Kerry up on stage in the 90s, and he's up on the side, and he's sidelined.
By 2003, 2004, you've got Colin Powell, and you've got other Dick Cheney giving long speeches at Davos, giving lots of like, you know, rhetoric about why these wars are important, et cetera.
At the most important time to get globalist agreement on having these wars.
And suddenly the Americans show their face as being involved heavily in the World Economic Forum and Davos.
And I don't think it's a surprise that in 2004, after these periods of this instability, after the invasion of Afghanistan, after the invasion of Iraq, is when they start making the Young Global Leaders Program, because they're starting the same cycle again as they did in 1952 with the coups in Egypt and 1953 with the coup in Iran and so on and so forth.
They're starting this new layer of coups to take out these people who are not American aligned or not American aligned enough.
Because a lot of these leaders, you know, were just like, they're not exact.
I mean, Saddam Hussein isn't American aligned.
But their puppet, the backwards and forwards, gave him power.
You know, the fact that he was still in control after the first Iraq war gave him some sort of legitimacy to his own people.
He needed to be taken out.
He needed to be taken out, whatever.
So this is the first time where you see the World Economic Forum showing themselves.
I think at this point, they know, okay, there's no hiding who we are now.
If people are going to find out, they're going to find out.
So let's just start going.
Let's just start rolling.
Let's create the Young Global Leaders Program.
Let's install these guys into government.
Let's do the next wave because we are nearly at the finishing line.
That's what they're saying.
We're nearly at globalist takeover of the entire world.
And in my opinion, my research, man, we are, I've said this on multiple platforms on multiple occasions.
We are late to the party.
We have no idea.
We have no idea how far behind we are because the globalist takeover has happened.
I totally agree with you right there.
And, you know, they're openly talking about things in 2020 when humans become cyborgs.
The fourth industrial revolution is out in the open.
In 2022, two separate forums were on governance in the metaverse.
Everybody's acting like, oh, the Zuck took it.
Oh, they took two-thirds of his wealth.
Metaverse isn't going anywhere.
If Zuck plays ball, he'll be around for a very, very long time.
There did seem to be some tension over the last few years with even people like Soros saying that he should step down or people saying there should be a hostile takeover.
I'm not sure what that's all about, but I don't necessarily trust the Zuck.
I want to talk three young global leaders or actually two young global leaders because I'm not sure that John Kerry is one of them.
But because you mentioned John Kerry, I want to talk a little bit about John Kerry.
I would argue that John Kerry is doing a lot more on the global scene in these interests, not necessarily our interests or United States citizens' interests, but this U.S. globalist interest than the zombie poopy pants puppet could ever do at this point.
A zombie poopy pants puppet was there at Davos alongside Dick Cheney in 2004 and 2003.
It's amazing how he's constantly in the background.
He's like the backup leader, the backup.
Well, he's always been a great money launderer for these people.
He was Joey B for a very long time.
He was the lovable gangster that was kind of behind the scenes and could get things done because he had a smile and a handshake and as much corruption as you could ever want.
So, you got Kerry, though, and he's always been on this green agenda.
I would argue that he threw the 2004 election on purpose, that he wasn't even the most popular Democratic candidate back then.
We're also talking about a time where you started bringing in fractional voting and diebold machines everywhere, etc.
Then there's two other people: Dan Crenshaw.
Dan Crenshaw has openly stated that they just put him on a website.
I'm not a Dan Crenshaw fan, he's very much in line with a lot of these globalist ideal sets, mainly in foreign policy and the Middle East in particular.
And then I want to get your opinion on the big guy, Lord Put Put, because I'm not a Russophile.
I'm not pro-Putin.
I don't like what's going on in the Ukraine.
I understand where they're coming from in that anti-NATO agenda.
And it does seem to be, you know, opposing forces of what the next steps of globalism coming to a head and very much against that Western agenda.
But then people say he's a young global leader.
He's in on it all.
Tell me what you think.
Kerry Crenshaw Poot Put.
Right.
Crenshaw.
I mean, I've seen a few videos here and there, but I haven't got into him at all.
So I honestly, I can't say about him, but he looks like he's not very happy about being constantly implicated and chased down the street by people.
So he's not happy about it.
Kerry is an extremely interesting fella.
And yeah, I'm trying to, you know, I was trying to trace down who was meeting Epstein and Nicole Junckerman on September the 1st, 2002, in North Warwickshire in the UK.
That came up in my second Yunkerman piece.
And I still feel that Kerry was the main man, along with Mike Devine being the main man.
And I think, yeah, he's a fantastic player of the game and never intended to sit on the top table.
You know, they knew fully well that he wouldn't beat a wartime president.
Yale and Skull and Bones guy, by the way.
Yale and Skull and Bones guy.
You know, we talked about that network coming up through.
He's brought out a lot of these big boys.
You don't get into that sort of position of power under like the Obama administration and stuff.
You don't get there without having it sold out to some extent.
And I mean, his history is extremely interesting.
The fact that he comes up in the 90s Davos, I find very interesting as well, because he was a representative, like the arm of the American state that was allowed to attend Davos when a lot of people, a lot of powerful people, wouldn't because they don't want to be seen with this organization, which I think might be an open secret in Washington that the World Economic Forum was created by the CIH,
just no one's ever said it out loud in the media.
You know, I do get a feeling about that.
Putin.
Putin is a dog.
He's a true dog.
I did a lot of research about his rise to power.
And in the late 80s and early 90s, people talk about him as this.
He's like Nosferatu in East Berlin.
He's constantly locking around doing the most evil things and Almost like the biggest bogeyman you can possibly imagine, and selected for power.
When it comes up to, you know, there's many people, including Von Habsburg, who was the first co-key note speaker, Davos, who warns about Putin in about 99, 2000.
He warns about the presence of Putin and the stuff that he's done before, you know, alludes to the fact that he was this terrible figure in East Berlin, this tyrant who would, um, who was ordering the murders, etc., of people.
And he rises to power through a government in St. Petersburg, like local government in St. Petersburg.
But he's installed in that to make him look like he's rising to power.
And then when Boris Yeltsin is going to step down, the person who gets in charge, gets put in charge, of course, is Putin.
And it's like this: it's like Boris Yeltsin says, There you go, that's your new leader.
You know, it's decided.
It's decided upon.
This is the guy who's going to go forward.
And then afterwards, it's a game.
It's a really, he's a fantastic frontman for what appears to be the Russian version of globalism, which is he's playing the same role Russia played during the Soviet years.
And it's not a surprise.
These people tend not to have any type of like, you know, originality or imagination.
So they tend to revert to the same paradigm of the past.
Like I say about the nuclear war and stuff being basically 2022, I start the when I when I'm just finishing like the article on the second Schwab piece about Herman Kahn and Kissinger's influence on nuclear policy, suddenly I'm seeing the same talking points being reiterated on the news in 2022 and this cycle going around.
And that's what I feel Putin is.
He's this big boogeyman, scary guy.
But they've also got a lot of leeway because being the opposing figure to the West means that you're able to try and beat them, beat them at the game.
So they are trying to put in CBDCs through Spurbank.
Spurbank, the head of Spurbank, of course, one of the most important parts of the World Economic Forum.
He's just there.
All of these guys, I can't remember what his name is, but he comes up in the piece about cyber polygon, where cyber polygon, of course, that was run through the World Economic Forum Forum and looking at different cyber attacks and potential for cyber attacks.
A war game akin to the event 201 war game that preceded the pandemic, where it was a COVID virus, it was a coronavirus from a pig and not a bat, and South America, not China.
And then they went through all the wargaming of censorship massively and global dictates and authoritarianism, which they then put into place via varying levels.
So cyber polygon is not something that we should just ignore, even though it's now in the past a couple of years.
Who's introducing it and heading it up?
I mean, it's the Russians and Mikhail Mashustin, who's Putin's opposite number.
If Putin's prime minister, he's present and they'll swap over probably.
He was put into power in 2020, I believe, by Putin, who just said, there you go, there's the next guy who's going to be in charge.
And I think what they're doing is they're trying to unroll the same agenda.
They all know, all of these big countries know, if we get our version of globalism out, if we get our version of central bank digital currencies out, if we get our versions of complete domination and control over the internet and the cyber realm, then we will be the ones in control.
And we might be able to, that might be the structure that then gets put to the rest of the world, on the rest of the world, and that will give us extra power, extra influence, extra money, or whatever you call it, credits in the future.
And, you know, they are the Russians are trying to push ahead.
You see this through the vaccines as well, and for coronavirus.
Instantly, what happens?
QR Codes Take Over00:07:21
The West to say, oh, we got fights, we got Moderna.
And then the Russians are like, we've got our own vaccine that we've just pulled out of our asshole.
You know, they do the same agenda.
They commit to the same actions and they commit the same crimes against their people as the West are doing.
There's no, I hear some voices in the independent media who want Russia to be the best and to be the nice guys.
And I hear ones who want the West to be the nice guys.
Not many.
Not many voices who think that.
But, you know, and then I see these people clashing and they both seem to me like that they're fooled by the same agenda, by the same people.
That if you follow it back, the roots come from the same place.
And it's all them trying to create this future tech world so that they can be on the top when it happens.
Because, you know, one of the things I noticed recently, I was walking around Santiago.
I was doing, oh, I mean, I do police audits and stuff.
And I decided to try one out in Chile, which was a bit worrying.
Like, I ended up getting stoned and pelted by tramps and smoking.
I know, good old times.
But when I was walking through one of the parks and I saw these people and they had their phone up against a tree.
And now, you know, there's apps where you can see what plants they are, take a picture, and it'll tell you what plant it was.
Well, this had a QR code pinned to the tree, nailed to the tree.
And they were doing the QR code to find out, I think, what type of tree it was.
And they'd gone around putting it up all over the place.
And my note on that, my thought on that was, well, look at this technology that's a transient, transitional technology.
It goes between what we have now, where we can look at a tree and look in a book, to what will be in the future.
And what will be in the future will be much scarier.
QR codes are a transition.
They're not going to be around forever.
Eventually, that is going to be there or there.
You know, you're going to be able to go like this, or you even have to do that.
They want to make it so that you'll be able to recognize a tree and something inside an implant will tell you what that tree is.
What, you know, give you that information.
Give you all the information that you're allowed to have and definitely not the information you're not allowed to have.
And that's so important, right?
Because once you have these human brain interfaces, and that's why we talk about true antihumanism all the time, you have to look at the past historical record on what technology has been allowed to empower humanity on a large scale and what technology has been allowed to enslave humanity on a large scale.
And when you even look at information technology, especially with platforms such as YouTube that they try to say is for-profit, it doesn't turn a profit.
What it does is controls the narrative on behalf of authoritative institutions, including the World Health Organization, which is the Davos crowd, which is the United Nations.
They're interchangeable.
So we're heading up on the final few minutes of the broadcast.
When we do leave you guys, I'm going to have to do an old control-alt-delete task manager.
We're not even going to be able to bring up the thumbnail.
I'm sorry.
You know, we're trying to kick these things out.
Johnny, what would you like to leave my audience with?
What's really important out there?
One thought that comes to me when we just had that conversation and a question I have for you.
Do you still have physical menus in restaurants over in America?
Yes.
But they try to push you into the QR code all the time.
No one wants it.
But when you're in the trend, I'll say this, when you're in the trendier areas, when you're in New York, for instance, in the state, because of New York City, because of the, I would say, success of their Bernesian talking points of safe and effective, alone together, the extreme fear, it's more prevalent in those types of areas than, say, I go to my Hooters over here in Davenport,
Iowa, and it's get that QR code, the truck out of here.
No one wants it.
Nobody wants your paper menus.
I want something that I can hold, that's laminated, that I can read, that I don't have to bring up.
But that's not the plan.
They want to go from the QR code, like you said, to a human brain interface.
No, in Britain, because I've been, sometimes they haven't let me in Chile because I'm unvaccinated.
So there's been backwards and forwards between Britain and Chile.
And I got to see Chile's like a bit of a test bed for the fourth industrial revolution tech.
So I'm seeing a lot of differences now.
And it's amazing that in a country like Britain, where you'd think would be on the forefront of this revolution, you've got laminated physical menus all over the place.
I mean, no one's even, I didn't even see any talk of QR codes.
Going to a restaurant, no, no, no, you know, you've got your menu.
And that feels, maybe it feels comfortable for me.
I prefer it to having to look at my phone and scan in and try and make it big and be like, I like to be able to just look at it all on the page and et cetera.
And it's a much better, like laminated menu is a much better technology.
But over here in Chile, there's no physical menus anymore.
You know, only QR codes on tables.
And they've introduced it everywhere and no one argues about it.
You know, this is coming to the world.
These transitional technologies and even the Finnish technologies of what they want are being implemented in countries like this, which have less likely to argue against such introductions.
And they're more likely to go, oh, that's brilliant.
Yet, phone signal out here is terrible.
So, you know, you're out in the middle of nowhere.
You can get a phone signal.
You can't pull up your QR codes there anyway.
And we, I mean, both, you can imagine what me and Whitney are like when we're in a restaurant.
It's like, oh, God.
Have you seen the new technology at the Detroit airport that they're using?
No, no, no.
So I find this, again, this is another, you know, step in this direction of beyond track trace database to biometric information, right?
So normally when you go to the airport, you have your ticket, either you know where you're going or you're going to have to look on a big board and it's going to tell you where you're going.
Well, now they have a kiosk that you just walk up to, you scan your ticket, or if you just have your phone with the information there, and it only appears to you because you have a tracker, a camera on your body that hones in as your movement, and it displays it on a screen.
This One's Hard to Top00:02:33
You know how you can use those screens that block certain light spectrums out.
It can display multiple of these.
So 10 people can be sitting there.
They're all standing in different places.
They all see only their flight information.
And that's already being instituted right now.
We went 90 minutes with the legendary Johnny Vedmore.
We didn't even get into everything in the article.
The man brings up the mighty Wurlitzer, which we could probably have a whole discussion on alone.
Yeah, to talk about a book that we could be talking about.
Tell people once more: unlimitedhangout.com, johnnyvedmore.com, where they can support you, how they get this information out, and one more time, what you got coming up.
I know you gave us a little bit of a spoiler, but one more time for the RVM audience.
Okay, well, you can also, as well as Unlimited Hangout, johnnyvedmore.com is a place to go support my work, but also fungy monkey.
So F-U-N-G-I monkey.com is like Stowed Aid type thing, is where you can find a lot of the media stuff.
A lot of my interviews, this will go up there, etc.
And it's a good place to support my work.
I've just started also publishing articles on UK column.
The first one has come out, which shows the rise of Jeff Bezos and what you think it is.
It was actually a hedge fund that kind of put him into power, Amazon.
And of course, one of the young global leaders.
My next article is going to cause people to poop their pants.
And if there's any article that's going to have me killed, it'll be this one.
But look, Johnny, no one's dying.
One day we're going to meet in person.
We're going to clash the glasses together.
We're going to drink a Brewski and Hunch.
There's going to be a big steak on the table, or maybe some Hooters' chicken wings.
That is our time for now.
Vedmore, he's going to come back.
I promise you.
We're going to try to get some more great guests.
This one's going to be hard to top this week.
Again, the links are down below.
RVM uncensored.
Monday through Thursday, 8 to 10 a.m. Easter.
We're super early.
Johnny, thank you so much for joining us.
And folks, again, you can listen to all this on the pod bean, on the audio.
So share the links there as well.
Let's get this thing going.
Let's get this podcasting thing out to as many people as possible.