All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 16, 2023 - Jim Fetzer
01:18:04
Need to Know News (15 February 2023) with Chris Weinert
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is Jim Fetzer from Madison, Wisconsin, joined today by Chris Weinert in Fort Myer, Florida.
We're here to bring you all the news you need to know.
We're hoping Michael Parker will be joining us in the future, but not today.
Meanwhile, we begin with what Hirsch got wrong.
This is very significant by Mike Whitney and Repay's close reading.
Here we go.
There's something not quite right about Cy Hirsch's report on the destruction of Nord Stream 2.
There are a number of inconsistencies in the piece that lead me to believe that Hirsch was less interested in presenting the unvarnished truth than relaying a version of events that advance a particular agenda.
Not to say I don't appreciate what the author has done.
I do.
In fact, I think it would be impossible to overstate the significance of a report that positively identifies the perpetrators of what appears to be the biggest act of industrial terrorism in history.
First, this article has the potential to greatly undermine the credibility of the people in power and, by doing so, bring the war to a swift end.
It is an incredible achievement we should all applaud.
Here's a brief recap by political analyst Andre Desmond.
On Wednesday, journalist Seymour Hersh revealed that the United States Navy, under the direction of President Joe Biden, was responsible for the September 26, 2022 attacks on the North Stream pipelines carrying natural gas between Russia and Germany.
This article, which had been met with total silence in the major U.S.
publication, had blown apart the entire narrative of U.S.
involvement in the war as a response to unprovoked Russian aggression.
It lifts the lid on far-reaching plans to use the escalating conflict with Russia to solidify U.S.
economic and military domination over Europe.
Hearst revealed that the operation was carried out by U.S.
President Joe Biden and planned by Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland, and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan.
This short excerpt summarizes the primary claims at the focal point of the entire article.
In my opinion, the claim is well-researched, impartially presented, and extremely persuasive.
But there are other parts of the article that are not nearly as convincing and will undoubtedly have a lot of fairly well-informed readers scratching their heads.
For example, here's Hearst discussing the timeline for the Nord Stream Hop.
Biden's decision to sabotage the timeline came after more than nine months of highly secret back-and-forth debate inside Washington's national security community about how to best achieve that goal.
For much of the time, the issue was not whether to do the mission, but how to get it done with no overt clue as to who was responsible.
Nine months?
The war broke out on Feb.
24.
The pipeline was blown up on Sept.
26.
That's seven months.
So if there were more than nine months of highly secret back-and-forth debate inside Washington's national security community about how to sabotage the pipelines, then we must assume the scheming preceded the war.
This is a crucial point, and yet Hearst skims over it like it's no big deal.
But it is a big deal because, as Andrei De Moynes points out, it blows apart the entire narrative of U.S.
involvement in the war as a response to unprovoked Russian aggression, in other words.
It proves that the United States was planning to engage in acts of war against Russia, regardless of developments in Ukraine.
It also suggests the Russian invasion was merely a cover, a pretext, for Washington to actually go to plan that it had mapped out years earlier.
Later in the article, Hirsch makes the same claim again without emphasizing its underlying significance.
He says the Biden admin was doing everything possible to avoid leaks, as the planning took place late in 2021 and into the first months of 2022.
The truth, as journalist John Helmer states in a recent article, is far different than Hirsch describes.
Here is Helmer's to explain.
From the full text of the Hirsch Report, it appears neither the source nor Hirsch has direct knowledge of the history of the U.S.-led operations to sabotage and destroy the pipelines, which became public more than a year before.
They directly involved the Polish government and the Danish government, in fact, by error of omission.
Hirsch and his men are ignorant of those operations and of that history.
What's wrong with the Hirsch Report on the Nord Stream attack by John Helmer?
U.S.
opposition to Nord Stream was not a recent development.
It has a long history, dating back to the very beginning of the project in 2011.
Even back then, an article appearing in the German magazine Spiegel claiming that the project is aimed at ensuring the long-term security of Europe's energy supplies, but it remains controversial.
Controversial?
Why was Nord Stream considered controversial?
What is controversial about sovereign nations strengthening economic ties with other countries in order to ensure they have enough cheap energy to fuel their factories and heat their homes?
This question really cuts to the heart of the matter, and yet Hirsch eschews it altogether.
Why?
Here's more from Hirsch.
President Biden and his foreign policy team, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, Secretary of State Tony Blinken, and Victoria Nuland, Undersecretary of State for Policy, have been vocal and consistent in their hostility to the two pipelines from its earliest days.
Nord Stream 1 was seen by Washington and its anti-Russian NATO partners as a threat to Western dominance.
American political affairs were real.
Putin would now have an additional and much-needed major source of income, and Germany and the rest of Western Europe would become addicted to low-cost natural gas supplied by Russia while diminishing European reliance on America.
American political fears were real.
Putin would now have the additional and much-needed.
But why is Hirsch defending the imperial mindset that economic transaction between foreign nations must somehow benefit the United States or be regarded as a national security threat?
That is not the role of an impartial journalist gathering information for his readers.
That is the role of a propagandist.
Yes, it is true.
Putin would have an additional and much-needed major source of income, because that is how the free market works.
You sell your gas and you get paid.
End of story.
There is nothing criminal or sinister about this, and it certainly does not provide a justification for acts of terrorism.
And following this shocking statement, Hirsch follows with his other concern that Germany and the rest of Western Europe would become addicted to low-cost natural gas supplied by Russia.
Why does Hirsch invoke this tedious addiction meme that is repeated ad nauseum by political activists and the mainstream media?
And what does it actually mean?
The simple fact is Germany was getting cheap gas from Russia, which increases competitiveness, profitability, and economic prosperity.
How is that a bad thing?
How can access to cheap fuel be characterized as an addiction?
If you were able to fill your gas tank for a dollar a gallon, would you refuse on the basis that you might become addicted?
Of course not!
You'd be grateful you could buy it that cheap.
So, why is Hirsch pushing this nonsense, and why does he double down shortly after when he says Nord Stream 1 was dangerous enough in the view of NATO and Washington, but Nord Stream 2 would double the amount of cheap gas that would be available to Germany and Western Europe?
He reminds us with his map that none of these nations are America, that Eastern Europe and Western Europe are separate states, not America.
Russia, not America, not our border.
Horrors!
Imagine the free market actually working as it was designed to work, lifting people from poverty and spreading prosperity across national borders.
Can you see how narrowly imperialistic this is?
Germany needs Russia's cheap gas.
It's good for its industry, good for working people, and good for economic growth.
And yes, it is good for Russia, too.
The only one it's not good for is the United States, whose power is undermined by the German-Russian partnership.
Can you see that?
And, by the way, there's never been an incident in which Putin has used Russian gas or oil for the purpose of blackmail, coercion, or extortion.
Never.
That is a myth concocted by Washington spinmeisters who want to throw a wrench into German-Russia relations.
But there's not a word of truth in any of it.
Here's more from Hirsch.
Opposition to Nord Stream 2 flared on the eve of the Biden inauguration in January 2021, when Senate Republicans repeatedly raised the political threat of cheap Russian natural gas during the confirmation hearing of Blinken as Secretary of State.
Would Biden stand up to the Germans?
Blinken said yes.
I know his strong conviction that this is a bad idea, the Nord Stream 2.
I know that he would have us use every persuasive tool that we have to convince our friends and partners, including Germany, not to move forward with it.
A few months later, as the construction of the second pipeline near completion, Biden blinked.
That May, in a stunning turnaround, the administration waived sanctions against Nord Stream A-G, with a State Department official conceding that trying to stop the pipeline through sanctions and diplomacy had always been a long shot.
Behind the scene, the administration official reportedly urged Ukrainian President Zelensky, by then facing a threat of Russian invasion, not to criticize the move.
There were immediate consequences.
Senate Republicans, led by Ted Cruz, announced an immediate blockage of all of Biden's foreign policy nominees and delayed passage of the annual defense bill for months, deep into the fall.
Politico later depicted Biden's turnabout on the second Russian pipeline as the one decision—arguably more than the chaotic military withdrawal from Afghanistan—that has imperiled Biden's agenda.
Coming from Hirsch.
This is interesting.
We already know that Biden and his lieutenants were resolutely committed to terminating Nord Stream, regardless of the risks.
So, why did Biden decide to do an about-face and lift sanctions, even while his team was winning the final touches on the plan to blow the pipelines up?
Why?
As Harsh points out, the decision to blow up the pipeline had already been made, which means the administration was merely looking for a way to hide their tracks.
In other words, they were already working on a legal defense of plausible deniability, which was reinforced by the lifting of sanctions.
That was a real objective.
To create as much distance between themselves and the terrorist act they'd already approved and were about to launch.
Here's more from Harsh.
The administration was floundering despite gaining reprieve on the crisis in mid-November when Germany's energy regulators suspended approval of the second Nord Stream pipeline.
Natural gas prices surged 8% within days amid growing fears in Germany and Europe that a pipeline suspension and the growing possibility of a war between Russia and Ukraine would lead to a very much unwanted cold winter.
It was not clear to Washington just where Olaf Scholz, Germany's newly appointed chancellor, stood.
Months earlier, after the fall of Afghanistan, Scholz had publicly endorsed President Macron's call for a more autonomous European foreign policy in a speech in Prague, clearly suggesting less reliance on Washington and its mercurial actions.
This is pure fiction.
Of course, Shultz paid lip service to a more autonomous European foreign policy.
What would you expect him to say to a domestic audience?
And does Serge honestly believe that Shultz has not been in Washington's back pocket from the very beginning?
Does he think that Shultz based his decision on Putin's invasion and not on agreements he had made with Washington before the war had even begun?
Keep in mind, the United States has been arming, training, and providing logistical support for Ukrainian forces in the east for the last eight years, the purpose of which was to prepare for a war with Russia.
Does anyone deny that?
No.
No one denies it.
Was Shultz aware of it?
Of course he was aware of it.
Every leader in Europe knew what was going on.
There are even articles in the mainstream that explain in minute detail what the United States was up to.
It was not a secret.
And this is just one inconsistency.
After all, didn't former Chancellor Angela Merkel openly admit in an interview with a German magazine that Germany deliberately shrugged off its obligations under the Minsk Treaty in order to buy time so the Ukrainian army could get stronger, so they'd be better prepared to fight the Russian invasion?
Yes, she did.
So we can be 100% certain that Shultz knew what the overall game plan was.
The plan was to lure Russia into a war in Ukraine and then claim unprovoked aggression.
Shultz knew it.
Haaland knew it.
Zelensky knew it.
Boris Johnson knew it.
Petro Poroshenko knew it.
And Biden knew it.
They all knew it.
Even so, Hirsch wants us to believe that Shultz knew nothing about these elaborate and costly plans, but simply made a decision and developments took place in real time.
That is not true.
That is not what happened.
And I would argue that Hirsch knows that is not what happened.
The biggest fail of the first piece is a complete omission of the geopolitical context in which this act of terrorism took place.
The U.S.
doesn't go around the world blowing up critical energy infrastructure for nothing.
No.
The reason Washington embarked on this risky gambit was because it is facing an existential crisis that can only be resolved by crushing those emerging centers of power that threaten America's dominant position in the global order.
That's what's going on below the surface.
The U.S.
is trying to roll back the clock to the glorious 1990s after the Soviet empire had collapsed and the world was Washington's oyster.
But those days are gone forever.
U.S.
power is irreversibly eroding due to its basic lack of competitiveness.
If the U.S.
were still the industrial powerhouse it was following World War II, when the rest of the world was in ruins, then there would be no need to blow up pipelines to prevent European-Russian economic integration in the emergence of a massive free trade zone spanning the area from Lisbon to Vladivostok.
But the fact is, the U.S.
is not as essential to global growth as it once was, and besides, other nations want to be free to pursue their own growth model.
They want to implement the changes that best fit their own culture, their own religion, and their own traditions.
They don't want to be told what to do.
But Washington doesn't want change.
Washington wants to preserve the system that bestows the greatest amount of power and wealth on Washington.
Hirsch does not simply ignore the geopolitical factors that led to the sabotage.
He proactively creates a smokescreen with his misleading explanations.
Check it out.
As long as Europe remains dependent on the pipelines for cheap natural gas, Washington was afraid that countries like Germany would be reluctant to supply Ukraine with the money and weapons it needed to defeat Russia.
It was at this unsettled moment that Biden authorized Jake Sullivan to bring together an interagency group to come up with a plan.
More baloney.
Washington doesn't care about Germany's pathetic contribution to the war effort.
What Washington cares about is power, pure, unallowed, alloyed power.
And Washington's global power was being directly challenged by European-Russian economic integration and the creation of a giant economic commons beyond its control.
And the Nord Stream Pipeline was at the very heart of this new, bustling phenomenon.
It was a main artery connecting the raw materials and labor of the East with the technology and industry of the West.
It was a marriage of mutual interest that Washington had to destroy to maintain its grip on regional power.
Think about it.
This new economic commons, Greater Europe, would eventually ease trade and travel restrictions, allowing the free flow of capital and labor between countries and harmonize relations in a way that would build trust and strengthen diplomatic ties.
Here's more from an earlier piece that sums it up.
In a world where Germany and Russia are friends and trading partners, there's no need for U.S.
military bases, no need for expensive U.S.-made weapons and missile systems, no need for NATO.
There's also no need to transact energy deals in U.S.
dollars or stockpile U.S.
treasuries to balance accounts.
Transaction between business partners can be conducted in their own currencies, which is bound to precipitate a sharp decline in the value of the dollar and a dramatic shift in economic power.
This is why the Biden administration opposes Nord Stream.
It's not just a pipeline.
It's a window into the future, a future in which Europe and Asia are drawn closer together into a massive free trade zone that increases their mutual power and prosperity while leaving the US on the outside looking in. a future in which Europe and Asia are drawn closer It is the responsibility of a journalist to provide the context needed for the reader to understand the topic of discussion.
Hirsch doesn't do that, which leads me to believe that John Helmer is right when he says this is an indictment of the Biden pipeline plot, not of the U.S.
war plan.
Chris, I think that's quite brilliant.
Your thoughts?
Yeah, I agree with you on a lot of this stuff.
I remember Hirsch was one of the guys, I think, that unveiled the Mai Lai Massacre.
He kind of got into the Phoenix program a little bit in Vietnam, but I think he really missed a lot of stuff.
And I think that, like you say, sometimes his omissions speak louder than his content.
And, you know, silence can sometimes speak louder than war.
And in this case, I think Hirsch missed a lot of stuff about the big interest being in Vietnam and Southeast Asia, like the Rothschild oil and Motorola testing out their digital communication devices, one to three G products on these, you know, civilian populations in a way that they were.
You know, you can think about that in conjunction with the Phoenix program and the assassination programs that were going on, the MKUltra.
You know, basically, the United States took over colonializing this region from France in 1954 for Rothschild.
And I think that, you know, these limited hangouts that he would put out, you know, you have to for obvious events, you know, you have to lend some impression of objective journalism and expose on a very limited basis or even misdirect from a much bigger series of war crimes or things that should be focused on.
You know, sometimes word on the street and credibility go hand in hand and I think that, you know, it was getting a little ridiculous what we're seeing on the streets as far as people protesting righteously what was going on in Vietnam and then the authoritarian government trying to cover it up and pretend like it was a righteous thing.
So same goes for 9-11 and the War of Terror, if you think about it.
He was all over the torture, the renditions, the black sites on a very limited basis.
But he never quite locked in on the major true players of 9-11, nor Rothschild as well, maybe involved with that in the intelligence communities as well.
So yeah, this Nord Stream thing, in my opinion, is another I don't know.
Savage, cruel irony of these environmentalists, you know, who caused this level of destruction.
And it's an attempt to really smear Russia or to escalate the national tensions on behest or the best interest of the private interest groups.
And I think it's really part of a kabuki theater, like I say a lot, and a shakedown racket, if you really think about it, you know, like the protection racket, or even to force these trade or peace deals on populations.
They escalate these national tensions, like I say, and really look what happens in the name of peace or necessity, you know, Europe or even surrounding countries are paying 300 to 400% more for fuel and power.
They did the same after 9/11, when gas tripled, you know, after 9/11 and, you know, and then some, I should say.
And even with many of the other products like lumber and many other things in the COVID shakedown.
So, I think it's more Hegelian stagecraft, in my opinion.
They need to muster and fabricate enough of a suitable track record of propaganda events to justify these unnecessary wars.
And I think, you know, in the face of, you know, these epic failures of their golem enterprises already that they typically utilized in the past, and their traditional, you know, nuclear blackmail or extortion tactics, These things failing in the way that they have, they really need to go on to a new topic or a new thing.
And Ukraine happens to be that.
And we'll see how long this lasts for before it loses its credibility, too.
So these PR companies are utilizing, in my opinion, a bargaining tactic, taking things that have no business doing or putting things on the discussion or the focus in the forefront that have no business but business being there in the first place.
So, yeah, it's kind of interesting to see how this is playing out.
And like I say, there needs to be some level of objective journalism.
And I'd like to say that in terms of that, maybe Cy Hirsch is not one of the worst, but he's certainly not one of the best.
And there are a lot of great journalists that are being murdered and not even mentioned.
So I think really this is all part of, you know, he's a player on the scene to control the hemorrhaging narratives.
And it goes back a ways, you know, I'm just saying, you know, going back through time.
And he was another guy, I think, that jockeyed for the Kissingers, Petro Dollar, and he was Mom on Nixon's Bretton Woods.
But they zoomed in on Watergate with many other, you know, mainstream media reporters back in the 70s and 80s.
All things that led to the steps that are put in place now.
And like I say, these are tactics I feel you can get more control and maximize profits in war, intense circumstances.
They need these type of hamster wheels for the banksters, lab rats.
And, you know, they push people and nations into these agreements that they would normally never be a part of.
Chris, that was wonderful.
And of course, Among the responses Russia is making to the realization that it was indeed the U.S., which I believe they suspected all along, what took this to be powerful confirmation is a revised nuclear strike policy so that it allows a first strike by Russia if they believe that their national interest, the survival of the state, is at risk.
Which means they've actually had the effect of pushing the prospect of nuclear war forward.
Washington can really set up the forefront of the stage to have a preemptive retaliation before they even do it.
It's strange love all over it, man.
It's scary.
The bankers that are running this, I think they're trying to make what's understood not be discussed.
They're really putting us through these ridiculous diplomatic failures in these war positions.
I think it's a show of quote-unquote power.
Really, it's frustrating.
You feel helpless in these situations because you know it's bullshit and you can't do a thing about it.
Well, Dr. Strangelove, which I've long touted as the most important film ever made and encourage everyone to watch it at least once a year, talks about a doomsday machine that the Soviets had, that if they were attacked by even one nuclear bomb, it would set off a massive retaliation now.
The fact of the matter is Russia has a dead hand switch.
So that even if the Russian chain of command were wiped out, say, by a nuclear attack on Moscow, that would lead to a massive all-out launch by Russia.
So, you know, we have such colossal incompetence and stupidity at the head of the American government today, Chris.
They're putting us all at risk.
And they haven't even learned obvious lessons of the past, even those that were immortalized in Stanley Kubrick's magnificent, powerful film that was meant to educate the world to risks that we're now headlong rushing into, which I fear are going to have a very unhappy ending.
Meanwhile... Remember Forrestal said that this type of stupidity doesn't bear this mark of consistency without it being intentional, something like that.
So yeah, I have to say that that could probably be a strong possibility, if not a likelihood.
Very good, very good point.
No, no, any time.
You add any time.
Meanwhile, we have stratospheric balloons that are going to rain tiny electronic spies from the sky.
By the way, it now appears that that balloon was actually a DoD operation, and it appears it was putting down laser markings for a potential EMP on the United States.
In other words, it appears the American Department of Defense is participating in the destruction of America.
Stunning!
Google's sister company, Loon, has just launched a service providing 4G internet to remote parts of Kenya from stratospheric balloons at 65,000 feet.
The commercial launch shows a steerable balloon technology, which Loon has been working with since 2011, is now reliable enough for everyday use.
This is a powerful new capability the Pentagon is keen to exploit.
High-altitude balloons are cheap, have unlimited flight time, but have previously been limited to drifting with the wind.
That has now changed.
The stratosphere is so-called because it's stratified, divided into many different layers, with winds blowing in different directions at different altitudes.
In principle, therefore, a stratospheric balloon can go in any desired direction simply by raising or falling to the right layer and riding the wind.
Companies like Raven Aerostar have developed a technology which Loon uses to hover their balloon over one spot to provide service to a specific area.
The balloons dance on the winds in small loops to remain where needed, write Loon project leader Astro Teller.
The challenge has been developing sensors, algorithms, and software to navigate the winds reliably and precisely.
The military is already exploring applications for the balloons.
The U.S.
Southern Command has been carrying out a series of test flights with Worldview's Stratolight balloons.
They are able to ride winds and yet stay in a very tight area, keeping a permanent watch over a particular region of interest, unlike low-Earth satellites, which only pass overhead at intervals.
We think this has all the potential to be a game-changer for us, Admiral Kurt Kitt, Commander of U.S.
Southern Command, told The New Scientist.
Stratospheric balloons may solve one of the U.S.
military's thorniest problems.
Gathering intel in anti-access and area-denial environments, places where the defenses are too dangerous for aircraft to approach.
Balloons are stealthy and can fly at altitudes of 90,000 feet or more, putting them well above the reach of most serviced air missiles.
They're also extremely hard to shoot down.
There are no fuel tanks to puncture or engines to damage.
Trap-destroying aircraft simply leave a few small holes in a balloon envelope.
When a giant weather balloon drifted off course in 1998, Canadian CF-18 Hornet pilot riddled it with more than a thousand cannon shells and rockets, with no noticeable effect.
British and American sets also failed to bring the stray balloon down.
It only crashed several days later.
A new U.S.
Army project aims to employ stratospheric balloons to drop a shower of electronic sensors into denied areas.
Airdrop sensors have been used in Project Igloo Wide.
Covertly monitored traffic moving down the Ho Chi Minh Trail during the Vietnam War.
The modern versions are tiny electronic devices disguised as rocks with concealed solar cells that keep sending back data for years.
The new project would leverage emerging Internet of Things technology for miniature low-cost sensors and communications.
The aim is to monitor the cyber-electromagnetic environment, locating and tracking radio communication from Wi-Fi, cell phones, and military communication systems.
This would provide data about the location of enemy units and specific vehicles, in particular.
The sensors will identify and pinpoint targets for long-range position fires by the Army's new long-range missiles, which can hit targets several hundred miles away if they know where to aim.
Afterward, the sensors will provide battle damage assessment to determine what had been destroyed.
As well as various types of electromagnetic detectors, the new devices may incorporate seismic sensors to detect passing vehicles.
A future development may add sensors for chemical, biological, or nuclear monitoring.
Early projects required big, expensive electronics.
The 1960s include white sensors, each weighing 25 pounds, or the size of a fence post.
Modern ground sensors fit in your palm, and the new project wants them even smaller and cheaper, approaching the concept of ubiquitous smart dust explored by DARPA.
The Balloon Drop Sensors may exploit technology developed by the Office of Naval Research SICKADA!
SICKADA PROJECT TO SEED AN AREA WITH ELECTRONIC SPIES!
EACH SICKADA CLOSE-IN COVERT AUTONOMOUS DISPOSABLE AIRCRAFT IS A CIRCUIT BOARD CARRYING SENSORS FOLDED INTO AN AERODYNAMIC SHAPE LIKE A PAPER PLANE!
Cicadas would be released from an aircraft at high altitude to glide down and deliver their payloads to specific GPS coordinates on the ground.
Several flight demonstrations have been carried out to date, including one dropping 32 cicadas at once.
Their glide ratio is better than 3 to 1, so dropping from 60,000 feet they could land 40 miles away.
Transpheric balloons have unlimited range, so they can drop sensors anywhere in the world.
Like other unmanned craft, they are deniable, so even getting shot down is not necessarily a major problem.
The U.S.
did something similar in the 50s with Project Genetrex, which floated weather balloons with photographic gear to spy over the Soviet Union.
Balloon drop sensors could provide a window in all sorts of places that are currently inaccessible, however.
The new balloon developments are a double-edged sword.
As Balloon's new launch shows us, technology is not confined to the U.S.
military.
In 2017, Chinese researchers launched two drones from a stratospheric balloon.
Soon everyone will need to watch out, not just for eyes in the sky, but spies from the sky.
Your thoughts, Chris.
Wow, I have a lot.
I guess you kind of got me thinking about the nanotech thing and, you know, suggesting the possibility of it coming from things like the Chinese balloons or things like that, or even drone warfare and these micro drones and micro nanotech.
You know, and it's definitely a very feasible and realistic possibility, but I'd have to say something that's overlooked in that sensation of these things by the mainstream media, especially is the graphene oxide or mRNA recombinants that are currently flowing in most people's bloodstreams.
Something to think about there as a possibility, and maybe a misdirection given the formation and the sensationalizing of this situation here.
And I think also, you know, if you think about these companies that are now going crazy about this Chinese balloon have been pumping things into low Earth orbit for a long time to, you know, two, three decades, maybe even seven.
You know, you really go back all the way and you hear all the time of these 10 foot steel beams falling down and hit the ground in places like Australia and around the world.
You know, they don't talk a thing about this.
People get killed.
They don't say a word, you know, but, you know, the Chinese balloon goes out.
Everybody goes crazy.
I think it's more of a PR stunt, in my opinion, to try to develop some sort of legislation, peace deals for aerospace security, some sort of thing like that.
Reminds me of the World War II, when they tried to escalate the space war, the cold war, the race for the prize wars, things like that, with Roswell in 47.
And, you know, it's a play on the adversary versus ally model.
You know, like I said, these position schisms are very much part of a bigger economic war that's going on.
That they will not talk about whether it's the COVID thing, the balloon thing, the nanotech, the AI, the production, the automation.
All these things tie together and they're all going forward, you know, between the IMF World Bank versus BRICS model or the US versus China-Russia model.
You know, if you look at the positioning of these countries in the way that they're trying to create them, it should be a landslide in terms of resources, actual debts, and political capital.
I think that we're really, you know, facing the downside of, you know, all these numbers.
If you look at it in terms of America, are we going to borrow money off China so we can attack Russia or what?
I mean, how are we going to afford these things with us being, you know, about to default on many obligations?
So, you know, this is I think the bankers once again, Trying to use their traditional formulas and blueprints, you know, play the commies versus the socialists versus the capitalists or the Muslims versus the Christians versus the Jews.
You know, these are all obfuscation pyramids.
They're parlor tricks, in my opinion.
And there's a fourth side that's never in view, that's always at the base of these side offerings.
And I think it's another one that's crumbled to the ground in terms of the Ponzi pyramid schemes and the economic system that's behind it and the fiat Keynesian system.
And like I say, they're creating a strategy of tension.
A real politic, whatever you want to call it, to really justify the further debt and borrowing and emergency situations that they're going to create themselves and provide the resolutions for.
So imagine if all the citizens and all the walled cities around the earth all at the same time kicked this 1% group out and told them, you fight it out in the streets.
Wonderful.
Wonderful, Chris.
Spot on.
Meanwhile, Look at this.
The guy who is president of the United States can't even put his pants on right.
Unbelievable.
Holy shit, Mindy Robinson tweets, Biden put his pants on backwards.
Come on, man.
Belt loop in the middle, no fly.
Lock it backwards.
You work it out.
Joe did it.
Stunning.
Just stunning.
You ain't black.
Just embarrassing as hell, Chris!
His speeches are bad enough and he's gonna walk around like that now?
Jesus Christ!
I know, it's unbelievable!
What's he gonna do next?
Here we have the Babylon B9 conspiracy theory we predict will come true in 2023.
The COVID pandemic opened our eyes to the legitimacy of conspiracy theories when they start being proven true right and left.
Naturally, we began paying attention.
Here are some conspiracy theories we predict will be proven true.
TikTok was developed by the Chinese military to make everyone in America trans.
We're as surprised as you are.
Bush invaded Iraq, drugged the grave of Gilgamesh, and unlocked the secret of eternal life.
The Iraq War was totally justified after all.
Your 10th grade English teacher really did fail you just because he didn't like your face.
And after you spent all that time reading The Grapes of Wrath.
Ugh!
Taiwan will vote to become a part of China in a very free and open election, and no one will die at all.
Peace in our time.
The destruction of meat plants was actually caused by Bill Gates in a ski mask throwing Molotov cocktails.
Oh no, he owns all the farmland too.
The White House Easter Bunny really was Barack Obama.
Not sure yet if he is secretly running the White House or just another fury.
Joe Biden has been dead for over 30 years.
Spooky!
Rachel Levine only changed genders to win USA's last competitive Woman of the Year.
He is now detransitioning and prefers to be called Ricky Ricardo.
Babaloo.
Trump won.
You, Jeff True.
Meanwhile, the attacks on Ron Johnson are unabated.
Here you've got Dana Milbeck with a title.
Ronan Johnson imagines a huge conspiracy.
Look what he says.
One thing is clear after Thursday's first hearing of the new Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
The Weaponization Panel's weaponization of choice will be the Blunderbuss.
I don't want to be conspiratorial about it, but House Republicans somehow turned Room 2141 of the Rayburn House Office Building, the Judiciary Committee Hearing Room, Into the main ballroom of a QAnon convention.
The witnesses, including world-class conspiracy purveyors, Senator John Ronson, Republican from Ivermectin, and former Representative Tulsi Gabbard, Independent from Ukraine BioWeb Labs, might as well have been auditing to guess who is Tucker Carlson tonight.
It is possible that, by random chance, one of the witnesses may have said something that is factually true, but any pallet of accuracy was lost amid all the errant slugs that ricocheted crazily out of their muzzles.
Listen to this list.
They revisited the Russia collusion hoax perpetrated by the fake dossier Fusion GPS, Peter Spock and Lisa Page.
Yes, that happened.
They conjured an engineered Trump impeachment in a coordinated effort to sabotage any public revelation of Hunter Biden's laptop.
Yes, that happened.
They alleged maltreatment of January 6th insurrectionists and suggested that embedded federal agents provoked the crowd to attack the Capitol.
Yes, absolutely, that happened.
They went back a decade to revive the debunked charge that a politically motivated Obama administration sicked the IRS on Tea Party groups.
Does anyone have any doubt about it?
They imagine that the U.S.
government funded the creation of the COVID-19 virus, that the World Health Organization has been captured by the Chinese government, and that doctors have been wrongly vilified for treating the virus with hydroxychloroquine in other bogus three months.
They fantasize about a government cover-up of harms caused by coronavirus vaccines.
They imagine ordinary people are being labeled domestic terrorists for asking questions at school board meetings or for buying the Betsy Ross flag.
All of which are true!
Above all, the witnesses testified to their own victimhood.
Senator Chuck Grassley, Republican of Iowa, recited a long list of Democrat colleagues who were out to get him as part of a triad that also involves partisan journalists and the FBI.
Gabbard, who left the Democrat Party for Fox News after a failed presidential campaign, expressed her outrage that Hillary Clinton said mean things about her and that Mitt Romney made baseless accusations of treason.
Apparently, the senator from Utah and 2012 Republican presidential nominee is part of the vast left-wing conspiracy.
Ronald Johnson testified about a conspiracy so huge, it includes most members of the mainstream media, big tech, social media giants, global institutions and foundations, Democrat Party cooperatives and elected officials all working in concert with corrupt individuals within federal agencies to defeat their political opponents.
And remote left-wing ideology and government control over our lives.
You've caught us red-handed, Senator.
In fact, the Weaponization Committee needs only one more thing to complete its work.
A scintilla of evidence.
I gotta say, Chris, Dana Milbeck has his head so far up his ass he can see his tonsils.
This is just ridiculous.
Your thoughts?
Yeah, I would say this is fascism, but technically the definition of fascism is when the state controls the corporations.
In this case, the corporations control the state, so maybe it's inversion fascism.
I don't know.
As far as Bill Gates goes, I would doubt he carries his own luggage, let alone does his own dirty work, so I would probably say he As an entire third party operation that can outsource these type of operations and do what they do and call it something else in terms of public relations and reporting from the mainstream media.
You think about the weaponization that you're talking about How many D.C.
politicians have condemned violence but supported war, and also have come out with speeches attacking anybody that basically resists their hostile takeover of this U.N.
agenda as enemies of the state in many cases, and far worse, traitors, whatever.
You know, it is literally the pot calling the kettle black.
It is such an inversion and a gaslighting campaign that, you know, it's being used obviously in conjunction with heavy propaganda, but It's to the point where the people watching this realize how absurd the whole thing has become.
And I think it's becoming more and more obvious, you know.
And these are the people that are promoting domestic and foreign instability for their own patent inversion hypocrisies as well.
Censoring and, like I say, targeting the resistance preemptively in many cases.
While they're going after white nationalists who they've dispossessed and disenfranchised from their pensions, their wages, their savings through things like wage theft, wage controls, inflation, corruption, violating their oaths, their duties.
So, you know, these guys are absolutely, I say their audacity knows no bounds.
That's really the only way to look at this and their outrage has got to be overwhelming.
Yeah, it's starting to me.
I used to think Dana Milbeck had a head in his cranium, a brain.
I mean, I really thought the guy was halfway decent.
And then he writes garbage like this.
Well, half the people will believe it, Fats.
You know, people don't really have opinions.
They get these things from the mainstream media for the most part.
The average people that are too busy to look into this stuff and do the research, you know, they just want to work and live.
And they result in this guy having integrity and having objective, unobjective journalism and things like that.
And he certainly does not.
Yeah I know, you're absolutely right Chris.
Let's see what we have here.
You're tuning into Black and White Sports on YouTube.
The no holds barred truth on sports.
The main event starts now.
Well, guys, it's been roughly a month and a half.
Moving up a month.
During the game against Cincinnati Bengals in January, Buffalo Bills safety DeMar Hamlin discussed the events that led up to the incident and how health care professionals saved his life.
And actually one of the doctors that actually worked on him on the field actually got an MVP vote from the NFL this season.
Yeah, really.
But anyway, He refused.
However, to get into what doctors told him could have caused his heart attack.
It actually wasn't a heart attack.
It was cardiac arrest.
His heart stopped.
It just stopped.
Well, this clip right here, man, watching this, man, there's a lot of things I believe that DeMar Hamlin knows, but he just does not want to address it.
I believe he should actually tell us this because it probably, just probably could give us some insight into what's actually happening with these other young athletes.
I mean, on the videos we put up, the age range of these young athletes collapsing, and in some cases dying, roughly like 16 years old to 25.
That's not normal guys.
This is just not normal.
Let's listen to this.
Your 24, peak physical condition, can run circles around me right now.
his heart to stop beating.
You're 24, peak physical condition, can run circled around me right now.
How did doctors describe what happened to you?
That's something I want to stay away from.
You heard it right there.
Something I want to stay away from.
Why is he refusing to actually address this?
He seemed to be very, very uncomfortable.
He thought for some seconds there.
But it seems like right here, ABC actually does a jump cut to the next question.
I know from my experience in the NFL, they do more tests than anything.
And in the course of you having your physical, did anybody ever come back with any, say you had a heart issue or anything that was abnormal?
Honestly, no.
I've always been a healthy, young, fit, energetic human being, let alone athlete.
So it was something that was just -- that we're still processing and I'm still talking That second part of his answer right there.
He said they never came back to him in the past in his NFL career said that he had any type of heart issue.
But he collapsed on the field on Monday night football.
24 years old, great shape.
He will actually tell us that there was no issues before this.
The doctors never came up with anything, but he refuses to actually answer what actually caused him to collapse on Monday night football.
I mean his answer right there, man, that's going to lead people to speculate even more and question a whole bunch of other things as well.
Here's what we get.
Commentators aren't buying it.
East Coast Temple.
I'm so tired watching people drop like flies all over Earth and every one of our leaders are silent.
KM.
Isn't he contributing to further incidents by not revealing the cause?
One would think that if it had nothing to do with the facts that he would state that.
When we get to the bottom of this, we need to hold absolutely everyone accountable to include people like him for not getting the truth out.
Pink Salt.
It's what he's not saying that's extremely telling.
Blake Lawney, he was absolutely told not to say anything about what causes cardiac arrest, but we all know what's going on.
We're not stupid here.
And I'm getting really tired of hearing about people dropping dead, especially young people, most specifically young athletes.
David Crespo.
Now I lost respect for the guy.
He had an opportunity to speak up and probably saved countless lives, but his refusing to answer only shows me that money and fame is more important than human life, even the children's lives.
I stand by what I said, and I know it was an adverse reaction to the jab.
Sure, no one is brave enough to save lives I see.
Agent 48.
He's afraid of speaking up to not destroy his career and livelihood, in my opinion.
But he did say it all without actually saying it.
He's a smart dude.
Do not rob me.
Ask him if he'd be willing to disclose his and family's finances since the incident.
Doubtful.
Tales of an asphalt jockey.
While I hope this young man remains healthy and can continue his career, I have no respect for him if he knows it's what we all think it is and refuses to come forward so that other lives might be saved.
Fellas, Domina, it's okay, Damar.
We know what happened and what are the facts.
I'm just glad you made it and are okay.
306 from the stairs.
It was a jabbity-jab-jab, and we all know it.
All these doctors who won't acknowledge this should lose their medical license.
Or Daniel 4187.
No doubt it was a jab.
When they offered no explanation, it was a jab.
Seeing ciphers, those who remain silent in the midst of evil wrongdoing are the ones who are loudly promoting their actions.
Steve, why?
It's even more obvious now to anyone who's being honest about what is happening.
A shame they won't speak up to try and stop people from making this mistake with healthy kids.
Why WS-1985?
He won't give the answer because he knows the answer, and I'm sure they paid him hush money to keep it to himself.
The rest of us with an IQ above average know the answer.
We don't need to hear it.
His silence speaks volumes.
Mark Ebert.
He said more by not saying anything than if he would have just told the truth.
My dad passed away after he got the jab, but not before suffering for several months.
I miss our country.
You mean to tell me, out of all the vicious hits during the 50s, 60s, and 70s, that it took till now for this to happen?
It is insane!
There are probably thousands of hits in the exact same area of the chest that didn't come out this bad.
Think of all the defensive phenoms over the years.
Players that didn't care if they took your head off or killed the other person for a doctor.
Meanwhile, M. Smuller won.
He doesn't have to tell us we know.
Tammy Rogers.
DeMar is not speaking up about what caused it.
It tells me all I know.
CBA.
As if DeMar doesn't care if the same happens to somebody else.
What a caring, every-man-for-himself kind of guy.
Samuel Taub.
My interpretation is he has signed the gag order.
DNA most likely directly from NFL if he ever wants to play again.
David Bibb.
His silence is deafening.
Disabusing the left.
The follow-up question should have been, since you aren't willing to say what the doctors told you, do you believe what they told you could or would save the lives of other players from this point on?
If he still didn't answer, you have but more responsibility on him to share what he was told.
Cheech Dubinsky.
Everyone not in denial knows.
Carla Shepard.
He said a lot without saying a whole lot.
Robert Quesada.
The only thing necessary for the tribe of evil is for good men to do nothing.
Edmund Burke's quote definitely applies in this case.
NFL probably promised him a chance to play in exchange for remaining silent, but the damage to his body was worse than a concussion.
Chris, your thoughts?
Wow, isn't it amazing how they hyper-focus in on the one that was potentially saved and it's arguable whether it was actually the case or not, versus how many they've ignored who have been absolutely killed.
They won't even discuss it, won't even be a conversation, a possibility of a discussion.
Nothing.
So, yeah, the narrative and them pivoting and turning this into some sort of an optimist rally, in my opinion, is really them just weaponizing the vices and virtues of the people onlooking.
And, you know, people that don't know better will ascribe their own innocence to this whole thing, thinking it's something that people are doing to help.
And they're trying like the soldiers of the medical community.
They're there to help and we're doing the right thing and fighting for a good cause, you know, but they're not even willing to look at the possibility.
And the reality of the financial incentives that have been funded to these organizations to fuel not only this mania, but to cover up this homicide, this genocide, this ethnic cleansing.
So the narrative of safe and effective, in my opinion, is an illusion of safety that is necessary to maintain the protection racket.
And it's like law and order, you know, where they got to have, you know, Basically somebody to hang up for the crimes, you know, and people can rest at night knowing that the bad guys got what they deserved, but it's nothing like that.
It's, it's, they have no intention of really looking for the true culprits of this.
They'll hang out some low level guy, maybe Fauci, who knows?
Uh, and you know, if anybody's capable of looking at the data pre and post Vax, it would be the NFL and many of these professional sports teams.
Uh, they have physicals, but EKG and EEG readings, uh, before and after the facts that they can look at very simply.
And they could create control groups and monitor the impact of this on people.
Just the amount of people dying suddenly should be alarming and worth a conversation to at least discuss the possibility, which won't even be considered.
The numbers don't lie.
I think if they can actually have access to the data and people can actually look at this, they can have an open discussion in a public forum, but you'll never see these numbers.
They are going to guard them, keep them like secrets, so to speak.
And, you know, you can look at other things that are telltale signs like insurance premiums or indemnities really being denied because of the emergency authorization that was required for this COVID vaccination.
So, you know, you're seeing policyholders that are actually exempted from coverage that have died suddenly, too.
So, yeah, this is bigger than it's just a little thing.
And I have to say, you look at the life insurance companies, the health care companies that have incentivized this stuff and the money behind it.
There's foul play at best that is going on here, and it's not even being discussed.
And there's such a gaslighting campaign that's going on against the people, the onlookers, the victims, people that know better, I should say.
And you got to wonder if this Demar Hamlin, if it is in fact him, if he got a new contract, you know, because you got to think his football career is definitely over.
You know, he can't have contact.
He can't go back to the physical sports after what he went through would be my guess.
So maybe he's going to have a long commentator career with Fox News or one of these other places and the gyro will continue.
I guess what is understood doesn't really need to be discussed.
And what you were saying was a great point, too.
In the 60s and 70s, these guys played with no pads, no helmets.
They smoked cigarettes on the bench and in the locker room.
And none of these fuckers ever dropped dead from the impact of the game on the field like they have in the past year and a half, two years.
All lines of pro sports, everything, you know, these guys are dropping like flies.
And to tell you there's nothing happening here is absolutely, like saying the Titanic, there's nothing to worry about while they're jumping ship, you know?
Chris, you got it exactly right.
Yeah.
Very nice.
Wonderful comments.
Meanwhile, we have the report of a gunman killing three and then himself at Michigan State.
Police said the gunman was a 43-year-old man who was not affiliated with the university.
Five victims in critical condition at the hospital.
Let's take a look at this.
Associated Press.
East Lansing.
A gunman who opened fire at Michigan State U, who killed three people and wounded five, set off an hours-long manhunt and frightened students hidden in classrooms and cars.
The shooter eventually killed himself, police announced early Tuesday.
Officials do not know why the 43-year-old man, whose name was not immediately released, targeted the campus.
He was not a student or employee and had no affiliation with the university.
The shooting began Monday at an academic building and later moved to the nearby Student Union, a popular gathering spot for students to eat or study.
As hundreds of officers scoured the East Lansing campus, about 90 miles northwest of Detroit, students hid where they could.
Four hours after the first shots were reported, police announced the man's death.
This truly has been a nightmare we're living tonight, said Chris Moseman, interim deputy chief of the campus police department.
Here we have MSU police tweeting, Update!
All five victims at Sparrow Hospital are in critical condition.
The suspect is a 43-year-old male and is not affiliated in any way with MSU.
Then, Kunkel, 22, was attending a class in the engineering building when he became aware of the shooting from a university email.
Kunkel and about 13 others turned off the lights and acted like there was a shooter right outside the door.
Nothing came out of anyone's mouth for over four hours, he said.
I wasn't ready to accept that this is really going on next door, Kunkel said.
It's supposed to be a place where I'm coming, learning, and bettering myself, and instead, students are getting hurt.
The shooting of Michigan State is the latest in what has become a deadly new year in the U.S.
Dozens of people have died in mass shootings so far in 2023, most notably in California, where 11 people were killed as they welcomed the Lunar New Year at a dance hall popular with older Asian Americans.
By the way, we've looked into those, and they were fake.
In 2022, there were more than 600 mass shootings in the U.S., in which at least four people were killed or wounded, according to the Gun Violence Archive.
This is a uniquely American problem, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer lamented.
Roseman of the campus police said two people were killed at Berkeley Hall, another killed at the MS Union, while five were in critical condition at Sparrow.
Police eventually confirmed the shooter, who then died by a self-inflicted gunshot wound, yes.
We have no idea why he came to campus to do this tonight.
That's part of our ongoing investigation, the deputy chief said.
Ted Zimbo, say, was walking to his residence hall when he encountered a woman with a ton of blood on her.
She told me.
Someone came in our classroom and started shooting, Zimbo told the Associated Press.
Her hands were completely covered in blood.
It was on her pants and her shoes.
She said, it's my friend's blood.
Zimbo said the woman left to find a friend's car while he returned to his SUV and threw a blanket over himself to hide for three hours.
During the manhunt, WDIV-TV meteorologist Kim Adams, whose daughter attends Michigan State, told viewers that students were worn down by the hours-long saga.
They've been hiding all the lights off in a dark room, Adams said.
Adian Kelly, a junior, lives a half mile east of campus.
So he locked his doors and covered his windows just in case.
Sirens were constant and a helicopter hovered overhead.
It's all very frightening, Kelly said.
And then I have all these people texting me wondering if I'm okay, which is overwhelming.
Now here's a student sports announcer giving us his take on what's going on.
Mind you, he's reporting what he's hearing, receiving by email and university sources.
Spartan friends, Spartan family, thank you for tuning in to another episode of Lockdown Spartans.
Goes without saying, this isn't going to be a normal episode.
We're not going to talk sports at all.
We will get to it when we feel fit to get to it, but point blank, you already know the news.
Michigan State hit with tragedy.
Active shooter on campus.
This is what we know.
We're going to start with facts as we are recording right now, a little before midnight on Monday.
Three Spartans confirmed dead, at least five at Sparrow Hospital right now.
A shooting took place over two buildings on campus.
There is a 48-hour cancellation of events on campus.
Yes, that includes Wednesday's basketball game against Minnesota.
You talk about irrelevant, but that's just the news that we're going to spread along.
And then the suspect was reported at the 11 p.m.
press conference by the police.
It's a black male.
He's short, red shoes, but of course could change outfits at any time.
And as far as we know, again, while we're recording a little before midnight, Still on the loop.
So if you're on campus, please stay in shelter.
This isn't just me talking.
This is the MSU Police that's talking.
If you have loved ones at Michigan State, probably not a good idea to go get them as tempting as that is.
Again, this is all just information from the police because, well, they're just doing a great job with this whole thing.
And we're going to get to that in a little bit, but right now we're going to start Talking with the victims, of course.
Talking about Spartan Friends Spartan.
Let me just say, Chris, this just smacks of a staged event.
They seem to have known he was 43 years old before they even knew who he was.
I spent 35 years on campus.
Someone just wandering off the campuses to do something like this is beyond belief.
It's ridiculous.
He wouldn't know where to go.
He wouldn't have any idea.
And the story of the woman all covered with blood was obvious fiction.
That is just insulting.
The Democrats are going to run one of these shootings every single day, I think, now from kingdom come.
But the ironic aspect, Chris, is that the way Americans respond, they go out and they buy guns.
They go out and buy guns to protect themselves, which is a rational thing to do.
So it's not going to work.
It's self-defeating.
But we're going to have to put up with a lot of this happy horseshit for the duration.
Your thoughts?
Yeah, there's definitely a binary psychology that's created from this.
Either people will volunteer their last line of self-defense or they will increase it.
So yeah, no doubt.
You know, you and I would probably react in the first wave where we go out and get guns and some people would just be so abhorrent.
They want nothing to do with it.
They'd rather leave it in the hands of the overreaching state.
I think that's really the goal.
And I think you're right.
They're going to keep plugging away at these things like clockwork and see if people exchange their freedom for the illusion of safety and will deserve neither.
So, you know, I went to MSU.
That's my alma mater, so to speak.
And yeah, it is a very confusing campus.
Somebody that's not familiar with it would have a lot of trouble navigating through there.
Just as a side note, I think they are absolutely going to, like you say, increase these false flag murders, mass shootings, these events that are sensationalized by the media in such a manner.
You know, and I think that really the cowards, like I say, will forge one side of this and the people that really realize who's behind it and what's going on will form a very radical other side of that whole schism, we'll say.
And I think that these regional demographics are absolutely being targeted by these sporadic events.
You know, they ignore their drone strikes, but they definitely come on whenever there's a public shooting in these public social engineering events.
They sensationalize them.
They put guys like David Hogg and this other girl that's been to two or three different mass shootings out there.
Very suspicious circumstances there as well.
To kind of introduce and indoctrinate people to the possibility of martial law having to take place where these police doing a great job.
They act like an occupying military force, you know, storming the campus like an occupational military if you think about it.
And, you know, they get to the point where that's acceptable and accepted by the people.
They'll keep plugging away at this, like I said, until people will voluntarily give up their last lines of self-defense.
They'll run from the wolf in sheep's clothing right into the mouth of the line.
Very, very well said.
So this story prompted me to look at some recent statistics we have on gun deaths in America.
We're being told there's a horrific number of mass murders.
Get this.
More Americans died of gun-related injuries in 2020 than in any other year on record, and this is published February 3, 2022, according to recently published statistics from the Center for Disease Control.
That included a record number of gun murders, as well as a near-record number of gun suicides.
Despite the increase in such fatalities, the rate of gun deaths, a statistic that accounts for the nation's growing population, remains below the level of earlier years.
So you have a higher number of murders, the rate of murder is dropping.
Here's a closer look at gun death based on a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the CDC, the FBI, and other sources.
Get this, and I was surprised.
Suicides account for more than half of U.S.
gun deaths in 2020.
54% of the gun deaths were from suicide, only 43% by murder, and another 3%, which includes gun deaths, unintentional, involved law enforcement, or at undetermined circumstances.
So 54%, over half of the gun deaths, are from suicide.
In 2020, the most recent year for which complete data is available, get this, 45,222 people died from gun-related injuries, according to the CDC.
That figure includes gun murders and gun suicides, along with other less common types of gun-related deaths tracked by the CDC.
Those that were unintentional, those that involved law enforcement, and those are circumstances that could not be determined.
45,222, over half of which were by suicide.
So let me just comment on this number.
Suppose you rounded out at 25,000 murders in 2020, which is high, but for convenience.
Because we have millions of defensive gun use by Americans every single year.
Millions.
And those millions of defensive gun use typically only involve showing that you are armed and the assailant or perpetrator ceases and gets out of dodge.
That's 200,000.
That's eight times as many who die of gun death that would be added to the list, since we're talking about saving 200,000 lives.
This means everything the Democrats are telling us is absolute nonsense, complete rubbish, just horseshit.
What share of gun deaths are murders?
What share is suicide?
We already know.
54% were suicide.
24,292.
43% were murders.
Less than 20,000.
were suicide 24 292 43 percent were murders less than 20 000 only 19 384.
what share of all murders and suicides involve a gun Nearly 8 in 10 U.S.
murders involve a firearm.
That marked the highest percentage since 1968, the earliest year for which the CDC has an online record.
How has the number of gun deaths changed over time?
the forty five thousand two hundred and twenty two total gun deaths were by far the most on record rubyzen a fourteen per cent increase from the year before twenty five per cent from five years earlier and forty three per cent increase from a decade prior gun murders have climbed sharply in recent years The 19,384 gun murders that took place in 2020 were the most since 1968, exceeding the previous peak of 18,253 recorded by the CDC in 1993.
were the most since 1968, exceeding the previous peak of 18,253, recorded by the CDC in 1993.
The number of gun suicides has also risen, climbing 10% over five years, 25 over 10, and is near its highest point on record.
How has the rate of gun deaths changed over time?
While 2020 saw the highest total number of gun deaths, that statistic does not take into account the nation's growing population.
On a per capita basis, there were 13.6 gun deaths per 100,000 in 2020, the highest rate since the midnight, but still well below the peak of 16.3 per 100,000 in 1974.
So, U.S.
gun suicide and gun murder rates have increased in recent years, but remain below past highs.
So, that is, in my opinion, very telling.
Which states have the highest and lowest gun death rates?
The highest turn out to be Wyoming, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
The lowest, Minnesota and California and New York appear The rate of gun fatalities varies from state to state.
The guns with the highest rate, county murders, Mississippi, Louisiana, Wyoming, Missouri, Alabama.
The lowest, New York, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Hawaii.
How does the gun death compared with other?
Much higher than in other nations, especially developed, but far lower than the rate in Latin American countries.
The U.S.
gun rate was 10.6 per hundredth hour in 2016, far higher than in countries like Canada, 2.1, and Australia, 1.0 as European nation, but the rate in U.S.
was much lower than El Salvador.
39.2.
Venezuela 38.7.
Guatemala 32.3.
Colombia 25.9.
Venezuela, 38.7. Guatemala, 32.3. Colombia, 25.9. And Honduras, 22.5.
Overall, U.S.
ranked 20th in its gun fatality rate that year.
How many people are killed in mass shootings?
It's hard to answer because there's no single agreed-upon definition of mass shooting.
The FBI collects data on active shooter incidents, which it defines as one or more individuals engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.
According to the FBI definition, 38 people, excluding the shooters, died in such incidents in 2020.
Thirty-eight.
The Gun Violence Archive defines mass shootings as incidents in which four or more people are shot, even if no one was killed.
By this definition, 513 died in these incidents in 2020.
Regardless of the definition, fatalities in mass shooting account for a small fraction of all gun murders that occur nationwide.
Has the number of mass shootings changed over time?
Yes.
Active shooter incidents have become more common.
But still, they're a tiny proportion of shooting incidents, but they get the most press politically because the Democrats like to play it up to promote their anti-gun agenda.
Chris?
Well, yeah, you know, you really think about it.
You don't hear anybody talking about some of the more prominent methods of early demise, whether it could be the vaccine or the heart disease or GMOs or, you know, 1,700 people a day have have heart issues and actually die from that in America.
They're talking about gun deaths and sensationalizing the hell out of this and it is a terrible thing and it is a very violent and abrupt end and it plays on people's psychologies and their fears and uh you know most average joes cannot comprehend the way that these intelligence agencies and these operations actually work
So when you talk to them about things like Operation Chaos or the PatCon conspiracies or the way that like the 70s, the serial killer movement that greets the hitchhiker movements and the drop-in hippie cultures and the hijacking of commercial airliners at the same time, they really do this type of stuff to create not only a cultural movement but a countercultural movement.
And then subvert it from within with overwhelming atrocities and media sensations with scapegoats.
And it's really a way to disarm the citizens and to get them to increase their tax burdens and to heavily arm the police and federal authorities, which are seriously scheming with a lot of these operations in such a way that, you know, it's quite a disconnect between the way that these feds are over arming it's quite a disconnect between the way that these feds are over arming themselves while discouraging the average citizen, relieve themselves from any sort of self-defense or recourse from an overwhelming,
I'd also like to point out that in Switzerland, I think it has the highest GDP capita or one of the higher GDP per capita and guns per capita.
And it has probably the lowest gun crimes and violence.
So you got to think about that possibility, too.
And as I mentioned, the COINTELPATCON things in the 70s, 80s, 90s, the JTTF in the 2000s after the War of Terror, even the gang related stuff, the Fast and Furious stuff.
All these guns that were taken from Americans were released back into the cartels.
By either NGOs, the intelligence agencies, the State Department, and really created an element of domestic instability.
The same goes with the CIA armament and fueling the drug wars and the weaponry in the 90s race wars too.
And I would have to say you could probably find similar meddling Very, very nice, Chris.
the way that they've obfuscated and ignored these factors with BLM and Antifa as well.
So whether it's NGO, State Department, BLAST, or Intel agencies, they're probably all involved with these stability and instability operations for this very reason, so that people will rely solely upon the authoritarian government to keep them safe while disarming themselves voluntarily or better yet, peer pressuring others to disarm themselves so that people will rely solely upon the authoritarian government to keep them safe while Very, very nice, Chris.
Meanwhile, we want to hear from you.
Send fan mail, Pro or Con, to LiveNeedToKnow at gmail.com.
LiveNeedToKnow at gmail.com.
Edward Dowd has a wonderful piece on Dying Suddenly he did with Jeremy Neal from South Africa on Germ Warfare, J-E-R-M Warfare.
Check it out, January 7, 2023, Germ Warfare, Dying Suddenly.
Stu Peters also has a brilliant piece, by the way, on Dying Suddenly.
Check that out.
Don't miss it.
Final thoughts.
Chris, yours.
Well, yeah, this is really the fight of a lifetime and, you know, I have to say there's a lot of people that have been reaching out to me.
I guess my email's been put out there for a little bit, so I don't mind that.
I've been trying to help people and bring them up to speed on some of the things that they're asking me.
You know, but it's one of the things where I don't really have enough time in the world to really bring people up to speed on history lessons or things like that.
But I can definitely try to point people in the right places and see if they can maybe figure out some of the things that I've been trying to warn them about.
And hopefully I'll be able to find the time and the fortitude to keep doing that.
I know there's a lot more people reaching out than I expected, so that's really a good thing and I'm glad to get some degree of support here.
I've never really had anything like that in terms of You know, the online media and the citizen activism.
So, you know, that's that really means a lot.
And I just want to thank people out there that are supportive of the show and myself and others around there, because really, we're the tip of the spear and we're holding the trench down.
And we got to fight on because this is for all the marble here.
And humanity itself will be a different species if we lose this battle.
Oh, you got that right, Chris, and thanks for your superb commentaries time after time.
I'm so impressed with the quality and accuracy and penetration of your thought and your background and knowledge.
I do think we're in this for all the marbles.
I do think that we have the worst possible administration at the most desperate time in world history.
The fate of all of humanity is at stake, and they have recklessly gone ahead merely for the effort of controlling Western dominance of European energy supplies by taking out the North Stream Pipeline.
It was an act of war.
It was a war crime, because it was destroying infrastructure that affects civilian lives.
The Russians, as I've observed, have already changed their strategic nuclear doctrines to permit themselves a first strike.
Frankly, the United States is deserving.
I hope it doesn't happen.
But if it doesn't happen, we certainly will not have the Biden administration to thank, but only the wisdom and integrity of Vladimir Putin, whom, in my opinion, is the only true statesman astride the world stage today.
Meanwhile, For this and other reasons, spend as much time as you can with the people you love and care about.
Don't let a precious moment be wasted because we do not know how much time we have left.
▲
Export Selection