Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 18, 2023 - Jim Fetzer

02:04:46

How to Spot a False Flag (Part 1) - Jim Fetzer

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	I wish you all a happy Father's Day.
	I want everyone to remember, if you have questions as we go along, to put them all in caps in the chat so that they're easy to pick out.
	Tonight is one of my favorite type of shows where I go through a large number of events.
	And explain how you can tell that something's wrong, that they're fabricated, fake, phony.
	So I'll be going through, I don't know, 15 to 20 tonight.
	And in fact, there are so many that it's obvious to me this will be a two-part presentation.
	So we'll do part one tonight.
	And as in the past, I'll be going through around 133 slides.
	Meanwhile, let me mention that there are two others I highly recommend whose work is extremely good, and those are Ole Dahlmegaard, who's originally from Sweden, and Nick Kollerstrom from the UK, both of whom are extremely good.
	Nick has a book, False Flag Chronicles, at moonrockbooks.com.
	I've done numerous interviews with them both.
	So tonight I want to go through quite a few examples of false flags.
	Now, after 35 years of offering courses in philosophy, especially logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, I appreciate the importance of repetition.
	In other words, You need to make clear how some of these events were fabricated and fake.
	So if you see some with which you're already familiar, that's okay, that's good, that was intentional.
	Because I want you to know these as well as I, or at least sufficiently well, That you won't be played and that you could explain how you know that they're phony or fake to a friend or a colleague or a relative, because most of them aren't going to go down without a fight.
	In other words, Will Rogers observed, it's easier to fool a man than to convince him he's been fooled.
	So don't think anyone's going to take it kindly when you point these things out.
	Do it in somehow an indirect or gentle way, like ask, did you notice that?
	Or what I can't figure out is, or could you help me with this?
	Or what do you think about this?
	Now let's see if I can do the share screen and get us started here.
	So what we've got is how to spot a false flag, a sampler of orchestrated events, which we're doing here on the 21st of June on the conspiracy guy.
	which we're doing here on the 21st of June on So let's proceed.
	Most of you know me by now as a former Marine Corps officer, as a retired university professor, as a prolific author who has been spending his time since his retirement of conducting research, collaborative research,
	With groups of experts that I bring together to sort these things out, where one of my great strengths is that I know what I do not know, and therefore bringing experts who know what I do not, which has worked remarkably successfully since I began back in the 1990s,
	Where my first collection of expert studies, Assassination Science 1998, blew the cover up in the assassination of JFK.
	Now, those who want to learn more in greater detail will discover that I have published quite a few books about these events.
	The first, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, where I brought together 13 experts, including six current or retired PhD professors, and we established that The school had been closed since 2008.
	It was loaded with asbestos and other biohazards damaged by a hurricane, so there were no students there.
	And it had been a two-day FEMA exercise involving children presented as mass murder to promote gun control, where we even found the manual.
	The FEMA manual for the exercise was so good, That although it went on sale on 22 October 2015 and sold nearly 500 copies, it was banned by Amazon on 19 November, less than a month later.
	Well, that was the first banning of a book, which I then released for free as a PDF.
	Meanwhile, I have published many others, and nobody died in Boston either.
	And I suppose we didn't go to the moon.
	From Orlando to Dallas and beyond.
	Political theater in Charlottesville.
	The Parkland Puzzle, how the pieces fit together with more forthcoming.
	Now believe it or not, Of the dozen books you see there published by Moonrock Books, as of today, Amazon has banned six.
	Sandy Hook, The Boston Book, The Moon Book, Orlando, Parkland, and Charlottesville.
	Stunning!
	What that means, of course, is that we got it right.
	So any of you who want to go further to dig deeper, I highly recommend checking out Moonrockbooks.com.
	Now, something very important to understand derives as a benefit from my background as a philosopher of science, where most of those in my discipline tend to adopt a confirmationist methodology, in other words, looking for evidence that tends to support an hypothesis.
	Say, for example, all pennies are made of copper.
	We could deduce billions of example of copper pennies as confirmations.
	I, however, along with Sir Karl Popper, who is a great champion of what's known as falsificationism, adopt the falsificationist methodology to test an hypothesis to see whether it's true or false, attempt to refute it.
	If you undertake repeated efforts to refute an hypothesis, and these have to be serious attempts at falsification, and it resists those efforts, then you have reason to think that it may be true.
	But of course, there's still the alternative that you may have simply not figured out how to falsify it yet.
	Well, it turns out that in 1943, because of the shortage of copper for military purposes, pennies were made out of steel.
	Now, I've mentioned before, but I mention again the importance of three different kinds of impossibilities.
	Logical!
	Logical impossibilities are things that can't possibly exist or be true Merely because the language you use to describe them is self-contradictory.
	Talk about a round square.
	Well, things that are round have roughly every point on their circumference equidistant from the center, while things that are square are very, very different.
	They have angles round things do not have.
	So there can't be any round squares.
	Humorously, it's often said, there can't be any honest politicians.
	I'd like to think there are exceptions, but they do appear to be few and far between.
	Physical.
	In many ways, these are the most important We're talking about what could not be the case because it violates the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, such as melting points, freezing points, causal relation, laws of material science.
	We're going to see a good number of those tonight.
	Frankly, since laws of nature cannot be violated and cannot be changed and require no enforcement, Once you observe or detect a violation of laws of nature, you know what you're witnessing is a fantasy that must therefore be a fabrication.
	A good number of cases we'll discuss this evening are of that character.
	Technical!
	These are things that couldn't happen because the technology had yet to be developed.
	This is such as airborne flight before the Wright Brothers, electric light before Edison, autos before Ford.
	We found in our review of the moon landing and how we know we didn't go, that we were talking about a form of propulsion power that was non-existent in 1969-70.
	No, we didn't have the computing power.
	There's more computer power in your cell phone today than they had available for the Apollo trips at that period of time.
	Passing through the Van Allen Radiation Belt, even a spokesman for NASA observed that the principal obstacle to manned missions to Mars was the Van Allen Radiation Belt, and that it would be necessary to figure out a way to deal with that to protect human life before such a trip could be made.
	Absentmindedly forgetting that we're supposed to have already done that with the Apollo flights, and thereby, of course, conceding that, in fact, it could not have been done then.
	Most certainly, if it could not be done now, it could not have been done then.
	Where, by the way, one of Winston Wu's brilliant observations, where he has 35 proofs of how we know we didn't go to the Moon, is that This area of rocket science, of propulsion, space propulsion, to travel great distances in outer space, is the only area of technology that has not shown progress at a rapid rate.
	Indeed, we find some spokesmen for NASA claiming they destroyed the technology we use to go to the moon as though anyone would believe it.
	If we could have gone, we most certainly would not have destroyed the technology.
	And of course, if you want more, a lot more, check out the second show, The Moon Landing Hoax, How We Know We Didn't Go.
	Well, let's begin with the Boston bombing.
	I regard this as one of the most straightforward and obvious frauds perpetrated on the American people.
	You have bodies missing arms and legs, but there is no blood.
	Now, as Dr. Lorraine Day has observed, where she was the head of trauma surgery for San Francisco General Hospital for 25 years, it's a physiological impossibility to have arms and legs blown off by explosives and there to be no blood.
	That, notice, is a law of physiology.
	The blood only shows up later, and it's fake Hollywood blood.
	It came out of tubes.
	Actually, it turns out, as I have subsequently discerned, small orange duffel bags.
	So, interestingly, we had these explosions on Boylston Street, and as a former artillery officer in the Marine Corps, I'll just tell you that might look impressive, but actually it was not very powerful.
	I doubt anyone could have been killed unless they were actually sitting on top of it.
	Now when cameras peered in through the smoke, you'll notice, you'll see there are bodies missing arms and legs, but there is no blood.
	The figure here turns out to be especially interesting, no doubt at one point I'll focus more extensively upon him, because he's actually attaching a fake bone prosthesis to the purported victim here.
	You can see it very clearly on the far left to make this look all the more horrifying.
	But notice again, There may be bodies missing arms and legs, but there is no blood.
	Where is the blood?
	Something clearly is wrong, because we had an explosion.
	We have bodies missing arms and legs, but there is no blood.
	Therefore, those arms and legs cannot have been blown off by explosives.
	And in fact, the blood is the wrong color.
	This is fake Hollywood blood.
	It doesn't change color.
	Here you see some real blood from a bomb in Cairo.
	This fellow here, who's known as Jeff Bauman, has that fake bone extension attached to his leg.
	He's a very interesting fellow.
	We'll get back to him by and by.
	Well, if not tonight, on other occasions, where you have here one of these orange duffel bags.
	That is actually a fake blood kit.
	I mean, how blatant can they be to leave them right out there in public in front of God and everybody?
	Turns out Jeff Bauman is actually Nick Voight, a former U.S.
	Army officer who lost his legs in Kandahar, Afghanistan with the 1st Striker Brigade in November of 2011.
	So, what's going on here?
	How did they do it?
	They used amputee, amputee crisis actors, amputee crisis actors Where Dr. Day put her finger on the keytel.
	Namely, you cannot have arms and legs blown off by explosives and there be no blood.
	That's what we had at Boston, but that's a violation of the laws of physiology.
	Ergo, we're observing a fantasy.
	Here's a second rather straightforward case, anomalies in niece.
	Faking bodies in a truck massacre.
	An 18-wheeler in an area where large trucks are not legally allowed.
	That's obviously very strange all by itself.
	After allegedly hitting 84 persons, not a speck of blood on the front.
	Think about it.
	Can you imagine you could hit with a massive truck even one or two persons and there not be blood, brains, bone, whatever smeared all over the front of the truck?
	This one is supposed to have hit 84.
	They cut a pig for blood but the bodies themselves turned out to be mannequins.
	Hard to believe.
	Now, Ole, I believe, did the analysis of this event in France, talking about the area where this incident occurred.
	Ole does such a nice job.
	Here I just want to highlight, you know, a couple of the key aspects of this.
	We're talking about the pathway of carnage here.
	Notice the truck above hit a single deer.
	Hit a single deer and it's just smeared.
	Smeared with blood.
	The truck below is supposed to have hit 84 persons.
	84 persons and there's not a speck of blood.
	So once again, as we have been learning in terms of causal reasoning, If you have a certain cause with certain predictable effects, then the absence of those effects implies the absence of the cause.
	Here you have a truck that's supposed to have been responsible for killing 84 persons.
	But in the process, it would have required quite an assortment of blood, brains, bone, and yet we see none of the above.
	Ergo, we're entitled to infer that's because it did not actually hit anyone, much less 84.
	And believe it or not, and I gotta tell you, the first time I encountered this, I was dumbfounded.
	On the street, they actually had mannequins.
	They actually had mannequins.
	They used mannequins.
	Yeah, they put out some blood.
	They put out some blood from a pig, but it wasn't human blood.
	It was pig's blood.
	The whole thing was a fraud.
	How about Parkland Anomalies, the staged classroom shooting?
	Notice the body with no arms lying in a pool of fake blood.
	Ah!
	Now does this sound familiar?
	Sounds like a combination of what happened in Nice and what happened in Boston.
	Police officer carrying out a girl with no apparent injuries.
	A girl with her iPod.
	Another worried about her bottled water.
	You wouldn't think during a shooting massacre in a classroom you'd have time to worry about your iPod or your bottled water.
	The missing obituaries.
	This was a major blunder.
	The event occurred on February 14, 2018.
	But there's only one.
	It's supposed to have killed 17 students.
	But there's only one death recorded.
	This was for an elderly woman.
	An elderly woman who clearly was not a student at Parkland High School.
	So, what do we have going on here inside the classroom?
	57 seconds. Watch. Watch.
	Watch.
	Let's go, let's go, let's go.
	Oh, my God.
	Now I'll play it again with commentary.
	Notice the girls are doing their best to cry out as though they were truly afraid.
	But if they were, if that were the case, why would one be worrying about her bottled water?
	Why would be one on her iPod?
	Why would this kid be pulling his putt?
	I particularly appreciate the boy walks out with his hand on his arm as though he's been shot.
	I mean, obviously fake.
	And of course, it's very telling that you have all of these persons in police uniforms walking in and out.
	So you think, wow, those Parkland cops were really Johnny-on-the-spot.
	Until you learn that Parkland gave up its police force in 2004 to save money.
	Check it out.
	Girls crying.
	One on her iPod.
	Bottled water.
	Kid pulling his pants.
	Doing their best to scream.
	Here, water bottle, water bottle, water bottle.
	Carrying a girl out.
	You see the camera will turn and pan.
	And you're supposed to think that's a body lying there in blood.
	And that's why they're all screaming.
	See, there he is, holding his arm, holding his arm.
	Embarrassingly bad.
	Would you believe most Americans still think that the Parkland shooting was real? - Bye.
	Here's a very interesting interview.
	The fellow on the right is David Hogg.
	His father works for the FBI in the area of crisis management, as I recall, directly related to this type of incident.
	He may have been an advisor in its planning.
	Or Kelsey Friend says, it was like a movie.
	It looked so real, but it felt so fake.
	That is by far the most astute observation from any student at Barclay.
	It was like a movie.
	It looked so real, but it felt so fake.
	How about Orlando?
	This was an obvious case of how it's done, right?
	This is supposed to be the greatest mass shooting until what, New Zealand?
	Well, it turns out the permit for the club had expired three years earlier.
	In other words, as in the case of Sandy Hawk, the club was closed, just as the school was closed.
	There were no students there.
	There were no patrons at the club.
	It had a legal occupancy of 150, but over 300 were alleged to have been there.
	If he had 100 and 300 crammed into a space for 150, it would have been packed like sardines.
	There are crisis actors in Orlando and no billing for medical services.
	The Orlando Emergency Medical Center announced about two months after the event it was not going to bill for services rendered.
	Ask yourself, when's the last time you heard of a hospital not charging for a Band-Aid?
	The Orlando Emergency Medical Center wasn't going to charge for services rendered because no services were rendered.
	Now here's the club when it was still open, still painted white.
	When it closed, they painted it black to show that it was no longer open.
	They only had 11 parking spaces.
	Fairly astonishing.
	They only had 11 parking spaces.
	Therefore, if there'd been 300 there, there would have been abandoned vehicles all over the place, but they were not there.
	Just as in the case of New Zealand at the Moss shooting, there were exits right and left, but nobody used them.
	There was a claim here, no one sought to exit, but it had eight different exits.
	So we're supposed to have this vast number of dead and injured and no one made it out of the accident.
	Now later they produced this video and you want to look here for the time stamp because some of this video appears to have actually been taken at the club and other not.
	So this is the entryway.
	I'll talk about it as we go.
	There's actually no soundtrack.
	So here's what's supposed to be the entry.
	You can see this here, a sketch of what's supposed to be.
	Got a date time stamp.
	But obviously there's nothing peculiar.
	Now notice how much space there is, and there's no date time stamp.
	Know how open it is.
	If this is a club for $150 with $300, there wouldn't be open space like this.
	Hence, this video contradicts the story.
	Now we're back to a date-time stamp, but it's outside, it's external to the building.
	So this may be when officers were pulling up to investigate whatever.
	But you'll see here, there's really no mass shooting taking place.
	This is supposed to be the shooter.
	Notice again, no date-time stamp.
	If that's the shooter, where are the bodies?
	There would be bodies all over the place.
	Now we have a return to the entry.
	Okay, so there you have the date-time stamp.
	That looks authentic enough, except there's nothing going on there to establish criminality.
	There you have pointing guns at a part of the building.
	There's nothing to see here, again.
	Pointing at the building, but that's entirely feasible.
	Where are the massive bodies?
	This is external now.
	Look for all those vehicles.
	Remember, as I said, if there only were 11 parking spots, if they had over 300, when there were only 11 parking spots, there ought to have been abandoned vehicles all over the place.
	They are not there.
	The story does not add up.
	Does not add up.
	And here you have images of police officers at the scene.
	Well, that's okay.
	That's all bona fide.
	But it certainly doesn't show 50 persons died at the Orlando Club.
	And then we had crisis actors.
	Here we got Duncan Donuts and the Pulse Club.
	Duncan Donuts and the Pulse Club.
	Notice it's been painted black.
	This is after it's closed.
	And you have a number of very amateurish crisis actors.
	In some cases, they were actually carrying mannequins, as I recall in this particular instance.
	When they got out of camera range or so they thought, they put down the fellow they were carrying and they danced a little jig congratulating themselves on their excellent work.
	But what would they be doing carrying an alleged wounded person toward the Pulse Club?
	And by the way, amateurs can't handle wounded people.
	That's left to the EMTs.
	After all, if you do something wrong, you might actually aggravate their injuries and even bring about their death.
	So we had, of course, a staged jury effort in which the shooter's father, who turns out to be an FBI informant.
	Think about that.
	Turns out the purported shooter's father is an FBI informant.
	Brushed off his son's terror comments.
	I mean, this is embarrassingly bad.
	Watch this wonderful Harrison Hanks.
	Are you an elite?
	Are your staged attacks not going as planned?
	Are your globalist agendas failing because you're using subpar crisis actors?
	Well then look no further.
	Hi, I'm Harrison Hanks, the ultimate crisis actor.
	Need a medical doctor?
	In 18 years as a medical examiner, I've never seen anything like it.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, it's over the top.
	33 children died.
	You need a grieving husband?
	Did a right-winger set off a bomb?
	Oh yeah, we were just moving about today and there was a massive explosion.
	And I'm your man.
	Tired of melodramatic acting?
	There's life!
	Away from the darkness.
	I'm just trying to figure out if he's okay.
	I lost my 20-year-old, but I had 20 years with my son.
	It's just tragedy.
	Horror and tragedy.
	Or maybe you need me to tone down my good acting to match your sorry lot of wannabes.
	In that case, I can go from this.
	My name is Bobby Parmer.
	My family's one of the families that lost a child.
	To this!
	My name is Bobby Palmer, and my family's one of the families that lost a child.
	Going for the guns takes subtlety, like this.
	I don't know how many more need to die before the President does something.
	Not this!
	Dad, please, could we do something with the assault weapons?
	And every one of those hands is a reason why those weapons should not be out in the general public.
	Because in this kind of a situation, what has changed?
	Have we learned nothing?
	Tired of green screen mishaps and disappearing noses?
	Me too.
	too.
	I'm green screen ready, bonded and insured.
	Is there anything else you want to say?
	I'm I can morph into a thousand different faces, I offer reasonable rates, and I have no conscience.
	Just pick your card to play on the world stage.
	From homeless, to police officer, from doctor, to witness, to your ace card, a grieving father.
	You can count on Harrison Hanks to push through your agenda, regain their trust, Call Harrison Hanks for all your crisis needs.
	Thank you.
	And good luck.
	And what you may not believe is many of the actors there were actual crisis actors at Orlando or Sandy Hook or another of these events.
	I mean, the crisis acting is that bad.
	Now let's turn to some 9-11 anomalies at the Pentagon.
	There was an absence of airplane debris anywhere near the Pentagon.
	It turns out the approach was aerodynamically impossible with a Boeing 757.
	Jamie McIntyre, the best correspondent for CNN at the time, reported no evidence of the plane having hit anywhere near the Pentagon.
	Look at this.
	Here's the alleged hit point, okay?
	It's about 10 feet high, 16-17 feet wide.
	Notice we have chain link fence, couple automobiles, or a couple big spools of cable here, or even unbroken windows.
	Now later, and this is about 45 minutes later, there was a collapse of the building.
	I think they were worried that it didn't show enough damage.
	But notice what you do not see here.
	You do not see a massive pile of aluminum debris from a hundred ton airliner.
	You do not see bodies, seats, luggage.
	You don't see the wheels.
	You don't see the engines, not even the engines, which are virtually indestructible, were recovered.
	Here's a perfect illustration of the clear, clean Pentagon law.
	It just happened, a couple of civilian lime green fire trucks were in the vicinity, and they showed up to put out the very modest fires that remained.
	But just ask yourself, what would the lawn have looked like had a plane actually crashed here?
	The idea of how much of the plane actually impacted the building.
	You know, it might have appeared that way, but from my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon.
	The only site is the actual site of the building that's crashed in, and as I said, the only pieces left That you can see are small enough that you can pick up in your hand.
	There are no large tail sections, wing sections, a fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around, which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse.
	Now, even though if you look at the pictures of the Pentagon, you see that the floors have all collapsed, that didn't happen immediately.
	It wasn't until almost about 45 minutes later that the structure was weakened enough that all of the floors collapsed.
	Now what's fascinating about that is that Jamie McIntyre was forced to repudiate what he'd reported from the scene at the time.
	And he did it in the following fashion, he said, only a fool would deny that a plane hit at the Pentagon.
	Implying that he had been a fool to think that CNN wanted him to report the truth, accurate information about the setting at the Pentagon.
	I think carrying this heavy water of propaganda was too much.
	And he retired from CNN, even though he was, as I have observed, their best correspondent.
	Now the plane is purported to have come in barely skimming the ground and taking out a series of lampposts.
	You can see these various lampposts at over 400 miles an hour.
	Now, aeronautical engineer and others, pilots, have confirmed to me that a Boeing 757 at over 400 miles an hour could not get closer than 60 or even 80 feet of the ground because of a phenomenon known as downdraft, sometimes called ground effect, Where 80 feet is higher than the Pentagon at 72 feet is tall.
	So what we're talking about is an aerodynamically impossible approach.
	And of course, if that plane had hit a series of lampposts, then of course the effect of the plane traveling over 400 miles an hour hitting a stationary lamppost Would be the same as if the plane were stationary and hit by a lamppost traveling over 400 miles an hour.
	It would have ripped open the wings, which is where the fuel is stored.
	It would have mixed with oxygen, burst into flame.
	The plane would have been scattered all over the Pentagon lawn.
	But as we already observed, there's hardly a stitch, any indication there whatsoever that a plane had crashed anywhere near the Pentagon, just as Jamie McIntyre accurately reported.
	Returning to Parkland, the injured students with AR-15 wounds that healed miraculously rapidly.
	They actually use fake bullets.
	They're called Simunition, made out of beeswax and laundry detergent.
	Stings like a bee.
	It'll create a welt, but it won't actually penetrate the skin.
	This is Allison.
	This is our witness before.
	It was like a movie.
	It looked so real, but it felt so fake.
	So here we have Maddie Wilford, who's supposed to have been hit in the chest and abdomen.
	I mean, this is days later.
	She's supposed to have hit in the chest and the abdomen with an AR-15.
	And yet...
	Allegedly, they already healed.
	Young people have a tendency to heal very fast, he said.
	This might be Harrison Hanks performing his role as a doctor.
	This is completely absurd.
	She's very, very lucky.
	Dr. Nyssa Perenko said, we're talking about large caliber bullets penetrating through the chest and abdomen.
	Those are serious injuries.
	What he's talking about is completely preposterous.
	The AR-15, for example, fires a .223 caliber, just slightly larger than a .22.
	It's not the size of the bullet, it's not large caliber, but small.
	But the fact that it's traveling at high velocity and this bullet tends to tumble once it enters the body and causes massive damage.
	If Maddie had been hit in the abdomen and the chest, she wouldn't be walking around healed.
	She'd be dead.
	I'm so grateful to be here, Ms.
	Wilford said.
	It wouldn't be possible without those officers and first responders.
	And these amazing doctors.
	Yes, amazing indeed.
	So here you see, you know, a description of the weapon, the AR-15.
	It's a highly versatile weapon.
	Fires a .223 Remington cartridge.
	Okay?
	Not large caliber, but small.
	And here we have another.
	This was Samantha Fuentes, who was released from the hospital and walking around being interviewed by reporters after only one week and her two legs now require only band-aids for the AR-15 wounds.
	I mean, give me a break!
	Give me a break.
	You can see the Band-Aids there for Samantha, like Maddie.
	She's a miraculous recovery, even the New York Times.
	Had a piece about the massive damage that is done by AR-15 bullets.
	I mean, they shatter the bone.
	I mean, this is just ridiculous.
	What you're looking at is preposterous.
	Those are not effects of the cause that is alleged.
	They are fantasies.
	And here's a student, my goodness, says she was in Holocaust class when the guns went off.
	Isn't that remarkable?
	She was in Holocaust class when the guns went off.
	That may give you some idea who's behind all of this.
	On Simunition, you can learn about it online, non-lethal training ammunition, Simunition.
	So they had a shooter, all dressed up in a SWAT suit, Recall, according to the official timeline, two minutes and 33 seconds after he'd been dropped off by Uber, the shooter, whose name was Nicholas Cruz, walked in to begin shooting, where he was seen by the teacher, Stacey Lipple, dressed in full metal garb, helmet, face mask, bulletproof armor.
	Where would Nicholas Cruz get all that equipment?
	Preposterous!
	And he'd get out of an Uber, dressed conventionally, and in two minutes and thirty-three seconds, he'd be dressed like this.
	This is ridiculous!
	So, we are to believe that in the space of two minutes and thirty-three seconds, Nicholas Cruz managed to walk from the curb where the Uber driver had dropped him off to the East Airwell, put on full metal garb of helmet, face mask, bulletproof armor, and begin shooting.
	If you believe that, Then you probably also believe in the Easter Bunny.
	Rubbish!
	Here's another 9-11 anomaly, the South Tower crash.
	And all four of the crash sites on 9-11 are fascinating.
	Because, believe it or not, none of those four planes actually crashed.
	Two of them, it turns out, were not even in the air that day.
	Aerodynamically impossible approach with a Boeing 767.
	Yes, the planes that are supposed to have crashed in Pennsylvania at Shanesville and to have hit the Pentagon in Orlington, Virginia are supposed to be Boeing 757s, but the two planes in New York for the North Tower and the South are supposed to be 767s.
	Turns out their trajectory that we're talking about now, Flight 175 approaching the South Tower, violate the laws of physics and of engineering at entry.
	There's no airplane debris beneath the facades of either of the towers.
	This is one of the most challenging and difficult for the public to absorb.
	Because we have, you know, some 57 videos of Flight 175 approaching the South Tower.
	Everyone thinks seeing is believing.
	And then I ask you, when was the last time you watched a movie about Spider-Man?
	Now, is seeing believing in that instance?
	Because back in And this is so stunning.
	Back in 2012, Barack Obama nullified the Smith-Mutt Act of 1948 that precluded The use of the same techniques of disinformation and propaganda within the United States that were being used without an unleashed, a torrent of propaganda.
	How terrible is that?
	So here you have what appears to be a Boeing 767 approaching the South Tower.
	Now a wonderful organization known as Pilots for 9-11 Truth, which consists of a lot of, I think they're mostly retired, but some may still be active, commercial and military pilots.
	This is a really wonderful organization.
	Produced a video called 9-11 Intercepted.
	Now, it turns out that those who perpetrated this feat took the cruising speed of a Boeing 767 at 35,000 feet and assumed it could travel equally fast at around 700 to 1,000 feet, which turns feet and assumed it could travel equally fast at around 700 to 1,000 feet, which turns out to be aerodynamically impossible, At the speed of over 400 miles an hour, the plane was alleged to be traveling.
	If you make a judgment based upon the videos we have available, it would have physically come apart in the air.
	You can check this out.
	Pilots have a wonderful video called 9-11 Intercepted.
	9-11 Intercepted.
	And here you see the plane seemingly disappearing into the South Tower.
	Now, what's the problem here?
	Well, there don't appear to be any collision effects.
	You would think the plane would crumble against the wall of the building, which was really massive, as I'm going to explain.
	Instead, it just disappears into the plane.
	It's sometimes, therefore, been called a ghost plane, or a butter plane, as though it were crashing into a 110-floor stick of butter.
	Look what is actually intersecting with eight different floors.
	Eight different floors.
	Count them.
	Now what's fascinating is that each of those floors consists of a metal truss connected at one end to the massive core columns, at the other to the external steel support columns, which were quite formidable in and of themselves.
	Filled with 4 to 8 inches of concrete.
	The variance is because these steel trusses had V-shaped grooves that were 4 inches deep.
	So in some areas the concrete was only 4, but in others 8 inches deep.
	Because the buildings were 208 feet on a side, you're talking about each floor consisting of an acre of concrete on a steel truss.
	And the plane was impacting with eight floors in the case of the South Tower, seven in the case of the North.
	Well, what do we have?
	This is the Evan Fairbanks video taken looking straight up.
	Well, notice the plane just effortlessly disappears into the building.
	Now, we have a count of the frames, the number of frames it takes for the plane to disappear its whole length into the building.
	Which turns out to equal the number of frames it takes for the plane to pass through its whole length in air, with no obstruction whatsoever.
	Which means that the rate of transition of the plane is exactly the same, whether it's passing through air or through a 500,000 ton steel and concrete building, which is, of course, preposterous.
	I mean, preposterous!
	Because it implies that a massive 500,000 ton steel and concrete building provides no more resistance to the trajectory of an aircraft in flight than air.
	So, clearly, we're witnessing a physical impossibility.
	What ought to have happened?
	The plane ought to have crumbled external to the building.
	Bodies, seats, luggage, wings, tail, fallen to the ground.
	The engines, which are massive and virtually indestructible, would well have penetrated into the building, but most of the parts of the plane not.
	And yet, when we look at the floor, the sidewalk, beneath either facade, there are no plane parts.
	No bodies, no seats, no luggage, no wings, no tail.
	I mean, it's just astonishing.
	Indeed, Jack White, who is a legendary student of JFK Photos and Films, but who also became an expert on the Apollo moon landings, as those of you who have watched show number two, The Moon Landing Hoax, How We Know We Didn't Go, are aware, observed that while there was an engine that was sitting at Church and Murray on the sidewalk,
	That it didn't have the right characteristics, as if it had come down at high velocity, it would have gouged up the sidewalk, made a tremendous mess, rather than been sitting in such prime condition as it were.
	Now, it turns out that experts on jet engines have noticed that this engine, the particular engine here, was not in use in Boeing 767s in 2001.
	This is an artifact where Jack discovered there was a white van at the vicinity and five or six guys in FBI vests unloaded something heavy.
	He called it pickup or delivery.
	They were delivering.
	They even had left behind a dolly that may have been used to assist them in making the delivery.
	Totally fraudulent!
	This is an engine just sitting on the sidewalk with a steel scaffolding and a canopy which were undamaged.
	Just ridiculous!
	But they felt they needed that to round out their story of a Boeing 757 having hit the South Tower by tracing the trajectory where an engine, had it been real, might well have wound up, and faking it!
	Faking it!
	How was it done?
	Well, there are three different hypotheses.
	One is that it was CGI, meaning, you know, computer-generated images.
	Another that was video compositing.
	That actually was the view of Ace Baker, who showed the sketch of the plane crumbling externals of the building.
	The third is that was done using holograms.
	There's a fellow named Richard Hall of the UK.
	Who produced a completely brilliant 3D, Flight 175 3D radar study, who offers extensive support for the use of holograms.
	Now here's the key tell.
	If it was done by CGI or by video compositing, there would have been no plane visible prior to the hit.
	Yet we have hundreds of witnesses Well, I'll grant you it's possible they could all be lying or fake.
	They were giving very different reports.
	Some saw a large plane, some a small.
	Some a commercial, some a military.
	Highly diverse reports, including a group of firemen who would be, you know, respected for their veracity, leading me to infer the only way they could have seen something they took to be a plane would have been as a result of a holographic projection.
	It's a fascinating story.
	When I do a show on 9-11, I'll explain why it appears to have been done using an airborne holographic projector.
	You see, this comes from an Australian military manual, where you see one plane projecting the image of a second plane.
	I'll explain then why that appears to be how it was done.
	For now, just observe, we're witnessing aerodynamic impossibilities with a plane traveling at a speed greater than good sustained, which would have come apart in flight before it even reached the tower.
	And then the absence of collision effects and the completely physically impossible entry into the building.
	Just draw the appropriate inference from that, those violations of the laws of physics, of aerodynamics, and of engineering.
	And you'll conclude that in fact what we're witnessing is a fantasy, and where we can debate exactly how it was done.
	JFK anomalies.
	I mentioned I began with JFK actually back in 1992.
	After the editor-in-chief of the Journal of the American Medical Association gave a public statement behind a lectern with a logo of the AMA attacking everyone who'd ever done serious research on the assassination, which led me to infer that if someone of his degree of stature and prominence
	Or to abuse his journal for political purposes, perhaps.
	Some of us with special backgrounds and abilities had to become involved for the benefit of sorting things out.
	It was this that convinced me to become engaged in what I would now describe as conspiracy research.
	Where I am a conspiracy analyst or a conspiracy realist, because it turns out conspiracies are as American as apple pie.
	Indeed, when I published my first serious scholarly article about conspiracy research entitled, Thinking About Conspiracy Theories, 9-11 and JFK, I explained how I had gone through a then current issue of the New York Times and on every single page, it was article after article discussing what you could only properly understand to have been a conspiracy.
	If you don't understand the nature of conspiracies, you cannot understand what's going on in the world, which, of course, is precisely why the CIA embarked upon its attacks about conspiracy theorists, which is supposed to be directed at critics of the Warren Commission report.
	For not having all the answers, right?
	When you call it conspiracy theory, as you see, you're ignoring that difference between confirmationist and falsificationist methodology.
	Because if you find a major flaw in an official account, you know for a certainty it is false.
	You don't have to know exactly what did happen as an alternative.
	But you have decisive proof that what you have been told is not true.
	Here's a perfect illustration.
	Witnesses discounted by x-rays.
	Many witnesses to the assassination of JFK reported a blowout at the back of the head.
	It was discounted on the ground that the cranial x-rays did not show it.
	It turned out, however, that the x-rays were patched in order to conceal the blowout and to use that fabricated evidence as a basis for dismissing the witnesses.
	Look, witness after witness, Beverly Oliver, Phil Willis, Marilyn Willis, Ed Hoffman, they were all in Dealey Plaza.
	Physicians at Parkland, Dr. McClellan, Dr. Peters, Dr. Salyer, Dr. Carrico, Dr. Delaney, Dr. Crenshaw, Dr. Jones, Nurse Aubrey Bell, All on the medical staff at Parkland.
	These were physicians and nurses, staff, who are well familiar with the gunshot victims.
	Dallas at the time was like the homicide capital of the universe.
	Unlike, for example, the two physicians who were enlisted to perform the autopsy upon JFK at Bethesda, neither of whom, neither of whom, Hadn't performed an autopsy on a gunshot victim before.
	Indeed, they were selected because they wouldn't know what they were doing and could easily be directed and controlled.
	Then we had Theron Ward.
	This was the Justice of the Peace who ought to have been responsible for conducting an inquest into the death of Jeff Kaye.
	But the Secret Service forcibly removed his body from Parkland, brandishing weapons, got it aboard Air Force One, flew it back to Washington where it could be under military control.
	Then we have Aubrey Wright.
	This is the ambulance driver.
	When he actually helped to lift the body into the bronze ceremonial casket before driving it to Air Force One, he felt the massive blowout at the back of the head on one of his shows.
	On Jesse Ventura's America, Jesse featured Beverly, Aubrey, and me, where Beverly talked about her witnessing the blowout.
	Aubrey confirmed seeing it happen, and I explained how they covered it up.
	Wonderful show.
	Wish it were still on the air.
	Then at Bethesda, we had two FBI agents who observed One named Siebert, one named O'Neill.
	Here are three of the medical techs.
	Gerald Custer, Frank O'Connor, and Floyd Reby.
	Custer was actually the radiology technician who took the x-rays at JFK.
	I got to know him.
	I've met all three.
	And Beverly and Aubrey as well, of course.
	David Mantic, actually MD, PhD.
	He's got a PhD in physics from Wisconsin.
	He's got an MD.
	He's got an MD from Michigan.
	He's board certified in radiation oncology, which is a treatment of cancer using x-ray therapy.
	And so David is an expert in the interpretation of x-rays.
	I reached out to him when I noticed a letter to the editor complaining about the abuse of the journal by George Lombard, the editor-in-chief of JAMA, and wrote to David and suggested we collaborate on a long article or a book with which he agreed.
	This initiated our collaboration, which would extend over three books on JFK and right to the present day, where David is now the leading expert on the medical evidence in the assassination of JFK in the world today, and has a book, which is available on Amazon, about the John F. Kennedy head wounds
	And an analysis of the Harper fragment, a chunk of skull that was found on the grass the following day, for which he invited me to write the introduction.
	David told me, before he entered the National Archives to study the x-rays, with the approval of the Kennedy family and Burke Marshall, Professor Emeritus from the Yale School of Law, that he thought he'd discover That the autopsy x-rays had been altered, and that there was evidence of a second shot to the head, where I told him that, good, that was what we were looking for either way.
	Really, you see, from the point of view of a falsificationist methodology, that's what you're looking for.
	Falsifying evidence, he found both.
	He had thought from the beginning that the autopsy x-ray showed too much contrast between dark and light, I mean overwhelmingly greater contrast than would be appropriate.
	David was extremely myopic at the time because of his background in physics.
	He was able to adopt a technique from physics known as optical densitometry that enables him to measure the amount of light that passes through an x-ray by making simply hundreds and hundreds of measurements of the x-ray in order to calculate the relative density of the object whose exposure to radiation created the image.
	And he discovered this area P for patch was much too dense to be human bone.
	So that unless the whole back of JFK's head was nothing but solid bone, unless JFK was a bonehead, This was a fabricated autopsy x-ray.
	He has, as of now, in fact, discovered all of the x-rays in the official archive collection are duplicates.
	None of them are original.
	Not one of the JFK autopsy x-rays is an original.
	Well, in the Zapruder film, There was a lot going on there, but they blacked out that fist-sized wound to the back of the head in the early frames, where you see in the exit version of the film, at frame 313, what's supposed to be the hit.
	And then in frames following, the blowout at the back of the head has been blacked out.
	This has been confirmed by a series of experts at film restoration.
	Who have been doing work on a very high-quality version of the film they obtained from the National Archives, and so is the forensic copy of the film.
	And they're just astonished at how amateurish was the black way they painted out the frame.
	They appear to have literally blown up the frame, literally painted it out, and then shrunk it back, re-shot the photograph.
	I mean, unbelievable!
	Now it occurred to me that they were focusing so much on the early frames, they might have overlooked that in later frames, the blowout might be visible.
	And lo and behold, I found in frame 374, you can actually see the blowout.
	This pink thing here is actually a bone extension by the ear that was blown open when Jack was hit with a frangible or exploding bullet.
	Notice how closely the blowout corresponds to David Bannick's identification of Area P, with the exception that there's some hair hanging over.
	But it looks very much like a cashew on the side.
	In any case, there you have stunning confirmation.
	Because it was a blowout, they forgot to conceal.
	Here you can see what I'm talking about, the back of the head, how it's all solid black.
	Now this part here, known as the blob, appears to have been something they moved from the back of the head to the side to try to create the impression that there'd been a blowout at the front of JFK's head, which indeed had not occurred.
	But Jackie testified before the Warren Commission, testimony they excluded on the grounds of privacy, but really because it blew it apart, their whole theory.
	She explained that from the front he looked just flying.
	There must have been something there, but she didn't notice.
	But she had a terrible time keeping his skull and brains together at the back of his head.
	And in fact, in frame 374, Jackie's actually climbing out onto the back of the trunk after a big chunk of Jack's skull and brains that was sitting there after the blowout.
	Obviously fired by a shot from in front.
	So they were doing their best, you see, to try to manipulate the images to make it look more as though it were something that could have been caused by a shot from behind.
	Meanwhile, another of JFK anomalies, what we were told versus how it was done.
	Officially, there were three shots scoring two hits.
	To the back of the neck and to the back of the head.
	Actually, there are at least four hits to the back to the throat and two to the head.
	There are six or more shooters who fired eight to ten shots minimum.
	We now believe there were actually eight different shooters where I have identified six, Oli has identified the seventh, and where the eighth and most recently discovered remains as of now unidentified.
	But we actually have the name, rank, and serial number of the others.
	Here you'll see as the official account of three shots fired from the sixth floor window of the school book depository.
	Among the other important buildings here, the County Records Building.
	This is the Daltex Building.
	Then you have the familiar features, the grassy knoll, the triple underpass, the picket fence.
	Here is where Zapruder was officially filming.
	Here is where Jack is supposed to have hit in the head, killing him.
	But of course, as you can tell on the official count, that was by a shot fired from behind.
	Meanwhile, if you actually watched how it happened live, the wide coverage of the assassination of President Kennedy on NBC, for example, where some of you will recognize Chip Huntley, who with David Brinkley were two of the most famous newsmen of their time.
	During this broadcast on NBC Live, they reported two wounds.
	They reported a small, clean puncture wound to the throat.
	A small, clean puncture wound to the throat, which they attributed to Dr. Malcolm Perry, MD, who indeed had performed a simple tracheostomy incision through this wound, who described it three times as a wound of entry during the Parkland Press Conference held about 1.30 that afternoon after the announcement had been made that JFK was dead.
	In addition, later in the evening, as the live news is being broadcast, there's a report of a shot that entered the right temple and blew out the back of his head.
	Attributed to Admiral George Berkeley, the President's personal physician.
	Who actually authored one of several death certificates for the president.
	The point I'm making is, if you actually watched the live coverage at the time, then you would have been aware of two shots that JFK suffered from the front.
	One, the shot to the throat fired from the triple underpass, actually it turns out from inside the triple underpass, and the shot to the right temple that turns out to have been fired from the intersection of the picket fence and the triple underpass.
	There's an above-ground sewer opening, a perfect location for firing if you had a certain amount of concealment.
	If you put that together with the shots that were reported, a shot to the back of the head actually did hit Jack from the Dow Techs building after the driver pulled the limousine to the left into a halt, and the first shot did hit Jack, which was in the back.
	This was like, Five and a half inches down below the collar just to the right of the spinal column.
	A shallow shot that didn't go in more than the second knuckle on your little finger.
	So the shots actually occurred in this sequence.
	A shot to the back.
	A shot to the throat.
	The driver pulls the limousine to a halt.
	He's shot in the back of the head.
	He slumps over.
	Jackie eases him up and he's shot in the right temple by that frangible exploding bullet that blows his brains out the back of his head.
	So unlike the official diagram we had there, the actual shooting sequence looked a whole lot like this.
	We had the shot to the back fired from the top of the county records building.
	Then we had the shot to the throat, which we initially thought was fired further over, but actually turns out have been fired from inside the triple underpass.
	Inside the triple underpass, the alignment is perfect.
	And then after the driver pulls the limousine to the left and to a halt, he's hit in the back of the head by one of three shots fired from the Daltex.
	Now these shots were actually fired by a Mannlicher Carcano, which was the only unsilenced weapon used on this occasion.
	All the others were fired with silenced weapons to set up the acoustical impression of only three shots having been fired.
	One of them missed, And hit the curb and injured a distant bystander by the name of James Tagg.
	When this eventually surfaced, Tagg actually had a wound to his face by a chip from the curbing.
	When the missed shot hit, the Warren Commission had to undergo the drastic revision of its initial theory, concluded by both the FBI and the Secret Service on the day of the assassination, that there had been three shots with three hits.
	That Jack had been hit in the back with that shot five and a half inches below the collar, just to the right of the spinal column, that Governor Connolly had been hit in the back, and then that Jack had been hit in the back of the head, killing him.
	They had to subtract one, which led to the introduction of the so-called magic bullet theory.
	Which represents an anatomical impossibility because it claims a bullet now.
	They moved the bullet entry up from five and a half inches below the collar to the base of the back of the neck and claimed that it passed through the neck without hitting any bony structures, exited the throat to account for that wound,
	which is now converted from a small clean puncture wound of entry to which is now converted from a small clean puncture wound of entry to a wound of exit into John Connolly's back to account for all the wounds on the basis of what turns out to be an anatomically impossible shot because David Mantech took a patient with similar chest and neck dimensions to JFK and plotted It's not even anatomically possible because cervical vertebrae intervene.
	Now here we see the only shots that were fired from the Dow Tex from the opposite side of the book depository than the alleged assassin's lair from which no shots were fired.
	These were fired at John Connolly, in the mistaken belief it was Ralph Yarborough, who was a liberal Texas Senator, Lyndon Johnson's nemesis.
	Lyndon had a huge argument with JFK that day, wanting to get Connolly out and Yarborough in, where JFK overrode him on the ground that the chief executive of the state ought to ride with the chief executive of the United States.
	There wasn't enough time.
	To let the shooters know, and therefore Connolly was in the path of bullets that were actually designed to kill Ralph Yarborough.
	But in fact, wounded John Connolly and considerably obfuscated the politics of the assassination.
	There was a Dallas police officer here on the grassy knoll, by the way, who fired a shot with a revolver.
	It would have been a relatively easy shot for perhaps the shortest distance, but it would have hit Jackie.
	They were under strict instruction, Jackie should not be hit.
	So he pulled his shot, it wound up in the grass, was picked up by a police lieutenant.
	And an additional shot appears to have been fired from the county records building that left an impact near a sewer opening in this vicinity.
	So it was totally different than we're told.
	Very, very clever, the way we were misled.
	Here you'll see the Zebruder film, how they did a massive edit, turning from Houston on to Elm, because the driver swung out too widely, nearly hit a concrete abutment.
	Notice the big jump, going behind the stem and three-way sign.
	Now Jack's already been hit in the throat and the back.
	We're coming up to 313.
	There he's hit.
	They tried to make it look like he'd been hit from behind, but obviously not.
	In fact, everyone who sees this says, my God, they told us he was shot from behind, but obviously he's reacting back and to the left, back and to the left, by the way.
	No witnesses at Dealey Plaza reported that back-and-to-the-left motion.
	That was an artifact of the removal of too many frames.
	What actually happened was he was hit in the back of the head.
	This is after the limousine was brought to a halt.
	Slumped down, Jackie eased him back up, was looking him right in the face when he was hit by that tangible or exploding bullet that blew his brains out the back of his head.
	There's much to say about the Zapruder film that I shall not say today.
	I will return on subsequent occasions to discuss JFK, the assassination, in excruciating detail.
	This is just to let you know some of how we know what we have been told is indefensible, provably false.
	Turning back to Sandy Hook, that it was a FEMA drill for gun control.
	There were violations of standard procedures.
	No EMTs were called, no ambulances, no string of ambulances to rush the little bodies off to hospitals where they could be declared to be dead or alive.
	No medevac helicopter was called.
	Parents were not allowed to see the bodies of their children.
	They were identified using photographs.
	Which turns out to be appropriate since that was the only form in which they existed.
	They made up the kids at Sandy Hook using photographs of older kids when they were younger.
	So it wasn't a school massacre, it was a FEMA drill.
	And the evidence that it was a drill was right before our eyes.
	All this copiously documented in the book was a sign everyone must check in.
	Bottled water and pizza at the firehouse, porta-potties present from scratch.
	Many were wearing name tags on lanyards.
	Parents were bringing children to the scene.
	All this was broadcast from Newtown that very day.
	Well, how does it all fit together?
	They actually had a two-day exercise with a rehearsal on the 13th, going live on the 14th.
	Now, some of the participants became so confused that they put up donation websites already on the 13th.
	Even Adam Lonza, the alleged shooter, was reported to have, in the Social Security death index, to have died on the 13th, making his feat in shooting 20 kids and six adults the following day, all the more remarkable.
	Well, we even discovered the manual for the drill.
	Which states everyone must check in with a controller in order to be paid.
	Everyone must check in.
	So they had this portable sign already.
	There were porta-potties and bottled water and pizza.
	Standard for a FEMA exercise.
	They provide refreshments and restrooms.
	Many wearing name tags.
	That's how FEMA exercises identify the participants.
	Color-coded name tags on lanyards.
	Parents bringing children to the scene.
	Well, no parent is going to bring a child to the scene of a child shooting massacre.
	I mean, that's just absurd beyond belief.
	But this was a rehearsal.
	They were treating it as a festive occasion, and they were bringing kids along for the fun of it.
	Proof it wasn't a massacre the following day.
	No surge of EMTs into the building.
	No medevac helicopter called.
	No string of ambulance to the school.
	No evacuation of the 469 other students.
	No bodies placed on the triage tarps.
	No doubt we'll return to this again and again.
	David had a staged photograph of kids being evacuated, except they actually, it was, they rearranged the kids in the line.
	Initially, it was a little girl in a pink sweater and a short skirt, and they replaced her with this little boy in a dark sweater and blue jeans.
	I mean, can you imagine during an emergency evacuation to stop and rearrange the kids to get a better shot?
	Plus, it turns out there were parents at the scene.
	Look at the background here.
	Parents, parents, parents.
	What are parents doing at the scene of this mass shooting?
	I mean, it's preposterous.
	Do you think somebody would go on the phone and say, we need to get some parents down here?
	I mean, it's just ridiculous.
	This is a page from the FEMA exercise manual.
	That occurred, which even specifies the time for the rehearsal, you know, from 8 in the morning to 11.59, and then it's going to be evaluated on the 14th.
	I mean, all this is unbelievably fraudulent.
	Well, here's that.
	Here's what they were doing.
	This is a photograph that appeared on virtually every headline, every newspaper in the world at the time.
	But what they didn't know is there was a second photograph, and the Newtown photographers, Shannon Hicks, has acknowledged taking both of these photographs.
	We asked her about it, and she admitted taking them both.
	But notice, the second was taken before the first.
	And as I said, you began with a little girl in a pink sweater and a short skirt, But she was replaced by this little boy in blue jeans and a dark sweater at the head of the line.
	More photogenic.
	Notice how many parents are here.
	In fact, there's an even larger, less cropped version.
	Look at the parents back here.
	They're looking on casually.
	I call this lounging at the massacre.
	Lounging at the massacre.
	Totally fake.
	Totally fake.
	Believe me, Sandy Hook still generates a massive emotional response in Americans to this very day.
	Most Americans still don't have a clue how they were played.
	Meanwhile, one of my research colleagues, Kelly Watt, noticed a striking resemblance between the young Noah Posner Who is supposed to be among the children who died at Sandy Hook and his older stepbrother, Michael Vabner, and offered the conjecture that Noah was Michael Vabner as a child.
	So six of us went to work on this.
	We discovered they had the same eyes, the same nose, the same ears, the same mouth, the same shape of skull.
	And I invited Larry Rivera, my dear colleague who's done such brilliant work on JFK, to do a superposition to determine whether they were or were not the same person.
	And here's the GIF he produced, where you can see Noah Posner turn into Michael Vabner.
	Now, Mona Alexis Presley has done a lot of work on the kids at Sandy Hook and has concluded that some of the parents even use photographs of themselves as children to be among the decedents of the kids killed at Sandy Hook.
	I mean, how crass can you get?
	How crass can you get?
	Meanwhile, Wolfgang has published this photograph It turns out there's a photographer, Michael Duffy, who actually works for a newspaper in Connecticut, who took several photographs where we appear to have the Sandy Hook girls all alive and well, looking real perky.
	So here there's photos of children.
	These are supposed to be the dead children of Sandy Hook, and here are the girls.
	We're looking pretty good, pretty good for kids who are supposed to have died on 14 December 2012.
	Boston bombing players, how the Patsy's were framed.
	Turns out there's another one of these private armies called Kraft International, whose personnel were on the scene and actually planted the two bombs.
	The Sarinoff brothers, Zoker and Tamberlyn were photoshopped into the video footage.
	The backpacks, however, don't match.
	An amicus brief has been accepted by the First Circuit Court that may lead to a reversal of the guilty conviction.
	Here are the two brothers purportedly at the scene of the marathon on the day of the bombing.
	It actually turns out neither of them was president at the time.
	A friend called Tamerlan was relieved to find he'd been nowhere near they had dinner together.
	Tamerlan's aunt, Marette, told me she knew that they had been photoshopped into the footage.
	And I said, well, how did you know?
	And she said, because Tamerlan had a beard.
	Notice here, he is clean shaven.
	And she sent me proof after proof after proof.
	Here he is lying in bed with his cat.
	He's got a beard.
	Notice, he's got a beard.
	She sent a link to the two of them working out at a gymnasium shortly before the bombing.
	He's got a beard.
	When he met with his friend later that evening, he had a beard.
	There's footage outside of a convenience store where Soaker comes inside and Tamerlan's out, he's got a beard.
	There's a shooting that takes place in Watertown, and when you see the body, he has a beard.
	Well, here are the actual perpetrators.
	These craft international personnel wearing khaki trousers, dark jackets, and a baseball cap with a skull insignia.
	Where the motto of craft is violence does solve problems.
	And here you see a black backpack with a white square on it.
	The two black backpacks that exploded were black nylon backpacks with the white squares sewn on them.
	So here you have, going up to the area where they dropped the bomb, then he's rushing away.
	Hey, bro, where'd your backpack go?
	He's no longer with a backpack.
	Meanwhile, when they photoshopped Tamerlan and Zoker, They didn't take pains to make the backpacks match.
	Notice the backpacks that exploded were very square, compact, black.
	Tamarlyn's large, much larger.
	It's not black.
	It's not the same.
	Doesn't look alike.
	Zoker, even more obvious, silver or gray backpack.
	Not the right backpack.
	So you've heard the phrase, if the gloves don't fit, you must acquit.
	Well, if the backpacks don't match, same outcome.
	You must acquit.
	So there's an exploded backpack.
	Neither of the brothers was wearing one.
	I mean, this is a total frame-up.
	Now, a retired professor of law, John Remington Graham from Canada, submitted an amicus curiae brief to the First Circuit Court reviewing the conviction for murder of Zoker, where he cites three American citizens, where I am the first name, on behalf of the defendant.
	And the court has acknowledged receipt of our evidence.
	Which is obviously sufficient to exonerate Zoker from having participated in the bombing.
	We're still awaiting the outcome.
	We shall see.
	Meanwhile, Boston bombing players, who knew they were being framed, Police on bullhorns were calling out, this is a drill!
	This is a drill!
	The Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities.
	Judy Clark, Zooker's defense attorney, although pleading him not guilty, declared in her opening statement, they did it.
	Thereby, Absolving the prosecution from proving they had done it, which they could not have done!
	So we have video footage where you can hear the cops on bullhorns in the background.
	This is a drill!
	This is a drill!
	They even had, you know, bomb-sniffing dogs in the vicinity.
	Here are two tweets from the Boston Globe.
	The Boston Globe.
	I once thought this was a reputable newspaper.
	Look what the Boston Globe tweets.
	Plea will have a controlled explosion on the 600 block on Boylston Street.
	Where it is?
	Officials, there will be a controlled explosion opposite the library within one minute as part of bomb squad activities.
	Gee, do you think the Boston Globe knows that this bombing was a staged event and that the Sarnoff brothers didn't do it?
	Do you think the Boston Globe knows?
	So here's Zilker.
	He was arrested in a boat where he is alleged to have written a confession on the inside of the boat.
	Notice the lines of this confession are perfectly straight lines.
	You could have had a ruler and not done a better job of it.
	But think about it.
	This was written on the curved surface of the inside of the boat, which is made out of fiberglass.
	Fiberglass!
	Now in order to write on fiberglass, you have to have a special writing implement.
	It's not something that any of us ordinarily carry about.
	Does anyone imagine in his wildest dreams that Zoker just happened to have an implement for writing on fiberglass?
	Nor if he had written on fiberglass, all the lines would be perfectly straight and parallel?
	I mean, it's just ridiculous!
	So here is Judy Clark.
	She also played a similar role for James Fields in Charlottesville.
	She seemed to be a cleanup hitter.
	If you've got a messy case where you want to frame someone for a crime they did not commit, call on Judy Clark.
	I actually submitted a formal complaint to the Bar of California about Judy Clark for her gross misconduct here.
	Because look, these are some of the rules that must be conformed to by attorney.
	Trial conduct in presenting a matter to a tribunal member shall employ for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to the member.
	Such means only as are consistent with truth.
	Well, she said they did it, but that wasn't true.
	That was false.
	Shall not seek to mislead the judge, judicial officer, or jury by an artifice or false statement of fact or law.
	Too late.
	Already done.
	Shall not intentionally misquote to a tribunal the language of a book, statute, or decision, whatnot.
	Judy Clark threw it.
	She threw it.
	I'm telling you, this is the face of a despicable human being who's being used to subvert the law.
	Hopefully, hopefully we're going to find that the First Circuit Court takes our exculpatory evidence to heart and exonerates Zucker of a crime he did not commit.
	Well, I mentioned Charlottesville.
	Let's look at the Charlottesville Anomaly.
	Two cars, two drivers, two takes equals totally fake.
	Two cars, both Dodge Challengers.
	One with a black racing stripe, one without.
	One with a sunroof, one without.
	Two drivers.
	One, age 20, schizophrenic with heavy prescription glasses.
	The other, the actual driver, age 32, a military veteran who commands a battalion of reservists in Ohio.
	There were at least two takes, one with one car, no vans, another with one car, two vans, and yet there appears to have been a third which may have been completely photoshopped.
	Here you see the two vehicles.
	You see the both Dodge Challengers, one with a racing stripe, the other without, one with a sunroof, one without.
	Here you see the two parties.
	Look, this is the actual driver from the plane when the car crashes into the van.
	Who does he look more like, the 32-year-old combat veteran or the 20-year-old schizophrenic who was put on trial and convicted for the crime?
	Obvious, no-brainer.
	Clearly, this guy was not driving the car, but it was he who was put on trial and convicted.
	Here's one of the takes.
	You got the car crashing into the back of the two vans.
	Now these vans had been parked there for about five minutes.
	Notice they have no driver.
	No driver in either van.
	They didn't want them to suffer whiplash or some kind of back injury.
	But just notice the car crashing into two vans.
	But then we have another take.
	You've got the vehicle here, and there are no vans.
	No vans!
	Obviously these are two different takes.
	And notice there are no other vehicles around in the take on the left.
	Unlike what we had published on the cover of the New York Times, where now all of a sudden we have a black Toyota pickup, and you've got stuntmen flying through the air.
	Real attack perhaps, or talented acrobats and a bunch of flying sneakers used to stage a video.
	Notice how lean and fit the two somersaulting pedestrians are.
	And note the occult numerology of the license plate, 1-1-1-1.
	I mean, they pull this stuff on us all the time.
	All the time.
	Meanwhile, we also have the report that two state troopers died in a crash of a helicopter when they were surveying the Charlottesville event.
	It's very surprising that you actually have the NTSD, National Transportation Safety Board, NTSB, confirming their death, since we have photographs of the troopers departing the scene of the crash wearing their flight uniforms and very much alive.
	That the NTSB should be participating in this event does not surprise me, however, since they covered up the causes of the death of Senator Paul Wellstone, his wife, daughter, three aides, and their two pilots on 25 October 2002, as John P. Costello, Ph.D., and I explained in The NTSB Failed Wellstone.
	Which Michael Rupert published and is from the wilderness.com newsletter.
	You can find that online.
	The NTSB failed Wellstone, if you want to know what happened to Senator Paul Wellstone in a crash that occurred just 60 miles north of my office on the Duluth campus of the University of Minnesota.
	But notice here, we have the two pilots, alive and well, emerging from the crash.
	Yeah, I can actually show you some of the footage here.
	Here's a video from AP.
	There they are again.
	Kind of have a somewhat resemblance to these guys.
	This one kind of looks like this one, this one being the chubbier one, but not exactly.
	Remember, this is a PSYOP.
	Okay.
	No one was... I don't think anybody was killed.
	He's got it exactly right, just to show how they rub our faces in it.
	The mother of alleged victim Heather Heyer.
	But have we not seen this woman before?
	Please compare with this Sandy Hook mother.
	We let the two images overlap each other, change the transparency.
	It's a perfect match.
	So it seems that Susan Brough, the mother of Heather Heyer, and Donna Soto, the mother of Victoria Soto, who posed as a teacher at Sandy Hook, is one and the same crisis actor.
	Embarrassingly bad.
	Embarrassingly bad.
	Las Vegas anomalies?
	I'll use this as a close to take questions from you for the rest of tonight.
	No one was shot, it was a movie.
	They used a pre-recorded soundtrack of a machine gun firing.
	They played it over the PA system.
	They added coordinated special visual effects of lights flashing.
	The concert crowd was seated with as many as 500 crisis actors who would react to the sounds as though, Oh my God, we're being shot at!
	We're being hit!
	Now the sheriff of Clark County claims there's no evidence of any shots having been fired from anywhere but the 32nd floor of the wing of the building.
	Well, this is right at the middle of the Mandalay Bay Hotel.
	Look at the flashing lights.
	Right there, baby.
	That's the end line, not the 32nd.
	Hollywood special visual effect.
	There were intermittent three light blasts from higher up.
	Since American military weapons fire in three shot blasts now, they were simulating both.
	How can the Sheriff of Clark County say there's no evidence to indicate shooting from any other location?
	I mean, how bad is this?
	Not only that, but we have a video where you have a fellow step out in the crowd and starts a fire into the crowd and you can see the muzzle flashes, but no one's hit because he's firing blanks.
	Further contradiction to the sheriff's allegation.
	One of my Facebook friends right on top of this.
	I contacted these three hospitals, all of which are the closest emergency facilities from the alleged shooting.
	Spring Valley Hospital, AMG Specialty Hospital, North Vista Hospital.
	I asked if they could check the registry for a gunshot victim taken there from the mass shooting at the Mandalay Bay Hotel.
	I received the same reply from each facility.
	There were no gunshot victims admitted to this facility.
	You may want to check with local police.
	One woman said, if you're referring to the crisis drill that everyone keeps calling about, then I'm sorry.
	There were no real gunshot victims.
	That was just a drill.
	If you don't believe me, call them yourselves.
	I did.
	I call them myself.
	Two of them said exactly the same.
	No, no gunshot victims admitted.
	On that occasion, the third had been reined in and would only say, no comment.
	She'd been very helpful.
	Here you see they're transporting bodies from a funeral home into an ambulance to be victims of the Las Vegas shooting.
	Here in Telehub, thought they'd found a mini massacre within the massacre at the Hooters, at the Hooters in Las Vegas, because there were 17 ambulances pulled up in front of Hooters.
	But when you looked inside, you found there were all these crisis actors, each with their own sheep, waiting to be carried out on a stretcher to be another victim of the Las Vegas shooting massacre.
	Here we have a video where the crisis director actually steps out in front of the camera to have a crisis couple redo their scene.
	To redo their scene!
	I mean, it's embarrassingly bad how much proof we have.
	How much proof we have.
	That, I think, We'll be good enough for tonight.
	Let me see what I can do here to, yes, restore.
	I'm very glad now to take any questions you may have from the chat room.
	And next week, I'm going to continue going through more and more of these cases so you get very much the idea of what's going on here.
	Here's a question.
	Is there any evidence there's one agency planning, organizing, coordinating false flags in and out of the U.S.?
	Well, I would say that the CIA is the most obvious candidate, but let's go back to Sandy Hook.
	This was a Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Eric Holder operation.
	Eric Holder traveled to To Connecticut to meet with the governor on the 27th of November, where the governor, during a talk on the day, said that the lieutenant governor and he had been spoken to, that something like this might happen, leading many of us to conjecture, spoken to by whom?
	Something like this might happen.
	What could he have possibly meant?
	There are really only two alternatives.
	Something like this, that someone was going to go berserk and come into a Connecticut public school and shoot up a bunch of kids, in which case the governor obviously had the obligation to take measures to warn the school systems to take additional precautions to ensure it didn't happen.
	Or, alternatively, that they were going to take an abandoned school Conducted a drill, presented a mass murder to promote gun control, which is exactly what happened.
	So here you had the governor announcing when Wolfgang Halbig actually asked the governor in the governor's own office by whom he'd been spoken to, he denied having even said what we had him on camera saying.
	I mean, it's embarrassingly bad.
	So, you know, when you have all the evidence, I mean, there are scabs and scabs of real shooting events that aren't of interest because they're not fake.
	Look, if I find investigating a shooting incident and it's real, that's just fine and dandy.
	But look, what I want you to do is if you want to contest my findings, and remember, I represent collaborative research.
	I'm beginning to bring together these groups of experts in each of these cases.
	In order to sort them out and figure out what happened, 13 experts in relation to Sandy Hawk.
	So, I don't know.
	You know, maybe the asker here, Satan, is a gullible guy.
	I don't know.
	If I find there actually were dead bodies, if there actually was real blood rather than fake blood, if there weren't actually crisis actors, if they weren't violating laws of Physiology, for example?
	I mean, look, I don't make this stuff up.
	I take these cases as it comes and assess the official narrative.
	I do believe There's a CIA ingredient here, but I'm telling you that in Obama, it was he who nullified the Smith-Mutt Act of 1948 to give us this veritable flood of staged or faked events.
	Countless events that occur every single day, right?
	Millions upon millions of events every single day.
	I'm talking about a dozen.
	A dozen events.
	And this is the dozen events out of these millions that occur every single day, most of which are perfectly straightforward, whether they involve shooting, non-shooting.
	We just had a couple of shots fired in Shaz, now called CHOP, right?
	I don't doubt And in fact, we got a real dead guy there.
	You got a real wounded person there.
	There are all kinds of cases where people are shot and killed that are generally not politically significant.
	The cases I'm talking about have been politically significant.
	They're both complex and they're controversial.
	So I say, if you wish to dispute the evidence I'm presenting, then do your best to falsify the falsifiers, okay?
	Tell me what I've asserted that you think I have wrong, why I asserted it so I will know that you understand the argument, and then why you think or how you know what we have said is wrong.
	I mean, I'd be quite baffled if you disputed any of the evidence I have here.
	Let me give you one further about Sandy Hook, for example.
	Paul Preston, who has his own radio show, Agenda 21, is himself a school administrator who has supervised Active shooter drills.
	He was so troubled by what he saw broadcast from Newtown that day that he reached out to his contacts in the Obama Department of Education, all of whom told him it had been a drill that no children had been harmed and it was done to promote gun control.
	I'm just trying to get the history straight because I believe the American people are entitled to know.
	I do believe that there are various government agencies involved.
	The FBI seems to have an important role in any number of these events, Oklahoma City being one, the first bombing of the World Trade Center being another, where the FBI draws people into these events and provides them with equipment and eggs them on.
	I haven't.
	Given much focus to the question of whether there's one agency behind it, but I do believe a combination of the CIA and the FBI.
	I mean, look, if they're trying to frame a president of the United States by making up phony evidence for the president of the United States, if they're trying to pass off a Russia hoax, if they're trying to fabricate the Ukrainegate, if they're trying to impeach him and it's all shabby.
	I mean, there's nothing.
	These political figures won't do, and I'm telling you, it seems very much to emanate from the Democratic Party.
	And frankly, Barack Obama, Barack Obama turns out not to be a good guy.
	And let me just give you a clue.
	I voted for him, not once, twice.
	I voted for Bill Clinton, not once, twice.
	When it came to Hillary versus Trump, however, completely ridiculous.
	Completely ridiculous.
	Hillary is a monster.
	She is responsible for the slaughter of Libya, which was one of the most humane nations on earth, where Gaddafi was, you know, using the oil resources of Libya to benefit the Libyan people.
	And when I come back and do 9-11, we'll go through it in greater detail.
	Let me give you a clue, because there's a question here about the passengers.
	Look, a half a dozen of the suicide hijackers turned up alive and well the following day and made contact with the British authorities.
	Okay, a half a dozen.
	What's that tell you?
	Well, they didn't die!
	They're still alive!
	Okay?
	Two of the flights weren't even in the air that day.
	Flight 11, North Tower, Flight 77, Pentagon, they weren't even in the air that day.
	The other two planes, Flight 93, Shanksville, 175, Pilots for 9-11 to Trace, both of those flights.
	And discovered that Flight 93 was over Champaign-Urbana after it had officially crashed in Shanksville, and Flight 175 was over Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania after it officially hit the South Tower, where I obtained FAA registration records that showed the planes used for those flights.
	Weren't even formally deregistered or taken out of service until 28 September 2005?
	Raising the obvious questions, how can planes that weren't even in the air have crashed on 9-11 and how can planes that crashed on 9-11 have still been in the air four years later?
	I'm going to go into these in much greater detail, please.
	The media, by the way, there's a mention here about the media, absolutely 100%.
	The media is involved in sponsoring.
	Investigative journalism is a lost art in relation to the mainstream media.
	I'll do a whole show about Operation Mockingbird penetrating the media beginning in the 1950s, where already by 1975, William Colby, then its director, was able to testify truthfully to Congress that the agency owned everyone of any significance in the media at that point in time, and it's only become worse.
	So there are some good questions, some good comments.
	I mean, look, there weren't any pastors Flight 11 and 77 weren't even in the air.
	It's easy to make up a list of names and claim they died there.
	Wait till we get into Las Vegas.
	They think.
	Mona Alexis Presley did this brilliant work.
	We had in USA Today, you know, all the photographs and a little bio sketch of all of the victims of Las Vegas.
	And she tracked them all down and she discovered they were, when they weren't simply photoshopped variations of one another, they were based on persons who died in different states or on different dates or from different causes of death.
	Now, look, we can't necessarily explain everything about, every detail about all these events, but we can sure tell you whether they were real or staged.
	And, you know, I have a book I've wanted to be out for the last couple of years, and probably if I hadn't been drawn into this Sandy Hook lawsuit, it would have, uh, pulled his punch.
	You didn't see him grabbing the front of his trousers with his hand?
	I mean, that's what I mean.
	That's real simple.
	Everyone's gotta know that.
	Uh, both parties are corrupt, blah blah blah.
	Well, I'm just telling you who is responsible and why.
	I mean, I'm going to go into great detail about all of these.
	I'm just giving you some signs.
	What you ought to be asking is, I mean, how can you contest that you have a plane entering the South Tower that passes its whole length into the building in the same number of frames that passes its whole length in air?
	That means there's no rate of diminution in its velocity, but it ought to have crumbled.
	Its velocity ought to have gone to zero external to the building.
	I mean, just think of the elementary physics.
	I'm not here and now going to attempt to explain all the aspects of each of these.
	So in a way, this is an appetizer.
	This is, you know, to whet your appetite.
	I see several requests about one agency, more or less, looking, the moon landing.
	Have you sent a document, truth behind the moon landing, your cohort?
	Yeah, yeah, I know Mike Barra seems to think we went to the moon, that's fascinating.
	He and I are almost certainly going to do a debate about it, but I mean, look, I'm telling you, We couldn't go.
	We couldn't satisfy necessary conditions to go.
	We didn't have the propulsion power.
	We didn't have the computing capacity.
	We didn't have the communication ability.
	You may or may not recall how I explained that one of the most interesting exchanges I had.
	was when Huffington Post put up a really silly piece that they said famous physicist destroys moon landing skeptics in a single tweet.
	And it just said something as meaningless as anyone who thinks we didn't go to the moon should have their head examined.
	Well, I mean, we didn't go to our moon!
	I mean, this is ridiculous!
	So I started to use the occasion to start putting up posts to prove about how we know that we didn't go.
	Including, you know, that either moon dust retains imprints or it doesn't.
	My suspicion being since there's no atmosphere and no moisture on the moon, that moon dust no more retains imprints than do the sands of the Sahara.
	And therefore photographs that show a moon imprint is proof that it wasn't taken on the moon, that it was fake.
	But, as I explained then, there's a dilemma because either it does or it doesn't.
	We have a, you know, moon rover with no tracks in front or behind.
	So how did it get there?
	It must have been lowered by a crane if, in fact, moon dust retains imprints.
	And if it doesn't retain imprints, then we have the boot print and even included that of a sneaker!
	I mean, a sneaker!
	None of the astronauts were wearing sneakers.
	I mean, I've asked Mike Barra to take a look and, you know, we'll find out what happens, right?
	I can't be responsible for Mike Barra and his thoughts.
	I mean, this guy is a colleague of mine on Real Deal Reports.
	Apparently also takes exception to some of the work I've done on JFK, but remember...
	This is another example where I bring together the best people, not only David Mannick, a PhD in physics and an MD board certified in radiation oncology, so he's an expert in the interpretation of x-rays, but a world authority on the human brain, Bob Livingston, who also is an expert on wound ballistics, having supervised an emergency medical hospital during the Battle of Okinawa for injured Okinawans and Japanese prisoners of war.
	Who concluded that the brain shown in the diagrams and photographs in the National Archives can't possibly be the brain of JFK, because half of it was blown out in Dealey Plaza, and where we had physician after physician after physician at Parkland.
	Observing extruding cerebellar as well as cerebral brain tissue at the back of this massive blowout at the back of the head.
	I mean, look, I'm willing to go into great detail about all of these, but it would be a mistake to try to leapfrog ahead to answer fairly esoteric questions about 9-11 or JFK until I have the opportunity to present the whole shebang About 9-11, JFK, and so forth.
	And it is intriguing that Mike...
	Stop naming my titles a conspiracy.
	Well, it doesn't good.
	You know, I can't not name them.
	I've got them up on bit shoot now.
	Okay, they're on bit shoot, where YouTube can't take them down.
	The problem is YouTube.
	YouTube has turned into a monster.
	YouTube has betrayed its role in the public trust.
	YouTube I mean, like Amazon.com, right?
	Amazon ought to be publishing all books on all sorts of subjects.
	You have all kinds of weird stuff published by Amazon.com having to do with S&M, pedophilia, a whole host of bizarre, sordid practices, but a book that actually exposes what happened at Sandy Hook?
	That they can't tolerate?
	When they took down the Sandy Hook book, they had 20 books 20 books about Sandy Hook.
	19 of them all supported in one way or another the official narrative.
	One of them by that teacher claimed that she had saved 15 first graders by cramming them into a 3x4 bathroom that had a door that swung inward.
	Well, I'll tell you, this is ridiculous.
	First graders, let's suppose they weigh 50 pounds apiece.
	That's 750 pounds of squirming teenager.
	Plus she, let's say another 100 pounds, 850 pounds of human being in a 3x4 bathroom with a door that swings inward.
	Amazon.com had no problem publishing a book with an absurd fantasy like that, because it claimed to be supportive of the official narrative.
	But take a single book that actually dissects it systematically, objectively, scientifically, no.
	That's something they can't tolerate.
	This is a politicalization of the media platforms that are supposed to be neutral, and where I think Twitter made the classic mistake of trying to censor A tweet by the President of the United States.
	And frankly, Facebook, I got booted off of my Facebook page, locked out years ago.
	Google, Twitter, so far as I can see, to a lesser degree.
	YouTube, especially egregious, especially egregious.
	They have to be called to account.
	They were given special dispensation, you know, immunity from liability for publishing because they were supposed to be on the order of a On the order of a library.
	So, you know, a library has all the books, but they're not responsible for the content of the book.
	That's up to the individual author or content provider.
	That's how it should be across the board.
	Barry Satoro, I've been asked about.
	I think Barry is still around, but he has been massively censored.
	Well, I'll tell you, I'm really glad you are all here.
	Let me see if there's anything more that I should hit.
	I mean, I'm going to come back next week.
	I'm going to come back next week and I'll be happy to field some of these more esoteric questions at the time.
	I think this is working out pretty well and there will be more to say about an emerging new media operation called Real Deal Media.
	And I'll fill you in on the occasion as opportunity permits.
	Meanwhile, I want to thank you all for being here and for all the questions.
	And if, you know, I didn't satisfy your curiosity, bring it up next time.
	I'm going to be back next week to continue how to spot a false flag.
	Wolfgang's still around, doing fine.
	Okay.
	We speak intermittently.
	That was the last question.
	I'm a huge fan of Wolfgang.
	And by the way, by the way, I have Wolfgang and Uli Dahmergaard and Nick Kohlerstrom all lined up to be speakers at my Question Everything conference in Austin, Texas on the 7th and 8th of November 2020.
	And track it down.
	If you go on to my blog at jamesfentzer.org, you'll find I've got a blog.
	I've got two blogs about it because we updated, we moved up the date by one week, and you can check it out.
	And there are only 200 seats there at the hotel near the airport in Austin where I'll be held, but It's going to be available on pay-per-view, so you can watch the whole thing with these great speakers, these real experts I have lined up for the occasion.
	It's going to be just terrific.
	I think it's something you don't want to miss.
	So, okay.
	Stand by next week, Part 2 of How to Spot a False Fly.

▲