Jim Fetzer - The Raw Deal (17 October 2025) with my special guest, Sofia Smallstorm

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 18, 2025 - Jim Fetzer

01:55:59

The Raw Deal (17 October 2025) with my special guest, Sofia Smallstorm

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I never needed anybody's help in any way.
	Now these days are gone and I'm not so self-assured Now I find the gentle mind and open up the doors Help me if you can.
	I'm feeling down.
	And I do appreciate your feelings.
	Help me get my feet back on the ground.
	Won't you be telling me?
	Well, this is Jim Fetzer, your host on the Rod Deal, right here in Revolution Radio Studio B, the 17th day of October, 2025.
	We begin with news stories abroad.
	Ukraine's strategy against Russia escalate and provoke.
	The situation is getting increasingly troubling.
	President Trump plans today for another summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin this time in Budapest, Hungary.
	The meeting will take place in a day to be determined after high-level advisors from the two countries meet next week.
	He said in a Truth Social Post yesterday.
	Trump expressed hope after a phone call with Putin by meeting face to face at two leaders to be able to bring the bloody Russian Ukraine war to an end.
	Thursday's 84-minute phone call, not quite an hour and a half, was a very productive one.
	He said, I believe great progress was made with today's phone conversation.
	Meanwhile, US depleted its missiles in Ukraine and in Israel.
	Now it wants more fast.
	Siding low-munition stockpiles...
	The Penghan is urging weapon contractors to accelerate missile production, doubling or even quadrupling production rates to prepare for possible war with China.
	By the way, I think all this open talk about war with China is a very counterproductive.
	And remember, China owns land right here in the United States.
	Who knows what they have done with it or how they'd be prepared to take advantage of those locations should a war with China break out.
	Namely, it hopes to boost production rates for 12 types of missiles it wants on hand, including patriot interceptors, standard missile sex, that interceptors, and joy surface standoff missiles.
	Replenishing now that bladed missile stockpiles is important for U.S. military preparation.
	But experts tell responsible statecraft.
	This ambitious missile production ramp up is a time-intensive, costly, and logistically challenging endeavor that may ultimately fail without substantial financial commitment from the DOD.
	Of course.
	Money, money, money.
	Many believe the US is on a war economy and that absent wars, we would collapse.
	Meanwhile, the Gaza ceasefire is hanging by a thread.
	Again, responsible statecraft.
	The ceasefire agreement in Gaza is hanging by a threat as both Israel and Hamas face allegations of violating the terms of the deal, which went into force on Monday.
	Israel claims Hamas has been dragging its feet on returning the remains of deceased hostages.
	So far, the Palestinian armed creep has only managed to deliver the bodies of dying of the remaining 28 deceased.
	Hamas claims it's moving as quickly as it can given the difficulties of finding bodies that may be buried under rubble or hidden deep in bombed out tunnels.
	But that hasn't stopped Israel from threatening to resume fighting and act to achieve a total defeat of Hamas.
	In fact, on the Israeli side, it's disingenuous.
	It's a pretense because they knew from the beginning with their agreement with Hamas that would be impossible to return all of the dead.
	Given many were buried under rubble, that would be very difficult to extract.
	Israel knew it completely.
	It was always the plan to use that as an excuse to resume the attacks.
	Meanwhile, we have Patrick J. McShea explaining Trump's Gaza Peace Plan is a master cast in colonialism.
	You can find it on my blog at James H.Fatzer.org.
	President Trump has entered into another peace plan in occupied Palestine, and the media is praising the deal.
	Some Democrats have also praised it, even Hillary still.
	Given the poor history of Israel abiding by such ceasefire agreements, it's hard to believe anyone paying attention.
	Doesn't believe this peace deal will be short-lived.
	BB Net Yahu, who is extremely unpopular in Israel, is under immense pressure to free the hostages.
	Once they return to Israel, maybe we'll have little incentive to continue the tease fire.
	And of course, as we know, it has moved forward a pace.
	Meanwhile, Trump threatens to go and kill Hamas over eternal clashes.
	This is bizarre.
	President Trump on Thursday, yesterday, threatened that we would have to go in and kill Hamas in Gaza if the group continues killing alleged criminals and Israeli collaborators, reversing his previous support from us armed action.
	These are Palestinians who are betraying Hamas, their Israeli spies, which is the reason they're subjecting them to execution.
	If Hamas continues to kill people in Gaza, which was not the deal, we will have no choice but to go in and kill them.
	Thank you for your attention to the matter.
	Over the weekend, dozens were killed in clashes with Hamas and other militias in Gaza.
	Some Palestinians were summarily executed, but it's unclear if there have been any internal clashes or executions in Gaza in recent days.
	While Israeli forces have continued to kill Palestinians despite the ceasefire, something Trump has not condemned.
	Meanwhile, U.S. Central Command issues a warning to Hamas contradicting Trump.
	U.S. Central Command Wednesday issues they went urging Hamas to stop executing Palestinians contradict earlier comments from President Trump.
	Well, I had these stories in opposite order.
	Hamas has carried out execution of led criminals and collaborators with Israel, which Trump expressed support for Tuesday, saying the group was talking, taking out gang members.
	That's okay.
	It's a couple of very bad gangs, but now as we can see, Trump has reversed himself to agree to agree with Central Command about what's going on here.
	Meanwhile, of course, Israel is continuing to conduct heavy airstrikes in southern and eastern Lebanon.
	No surprise there.
	The UN has called for Israel to open more Gaza crossings in order to facilitate a surge in aid deliveries.
	But, of course, they won't do it.
	The United Nations Humanitarian Chief Tom Fletcher has urged Israel to immediately open more crossings into famine-stricken Gaza Strip.
	to allow for a surge in aid deliveries.
	In remarks through borders Wednesday.
	Fletcher said the UN is seeking a dramatic boost in humanitarian aid for Gaza, saying hundreds of release trops cleared to enter the devastated enclave were nowhere nearer the thousands needed to ease an humanitarian disaster.
	Meanwhile, Caitlin Johnson properly observes the onus is on Israel and its allies, meaning the United States, to end the genocide, not their victims.
	The onus is on Israel and its allies to end the genocide, not their victims.
	It's actually never legitimate to withhold aid from starving civilians.
	It was never legitimate at any time.
	That's one of the annoying things about having to discuss Israel's ridiculous claim that Hamas is hoarding hostage corpses in order to achieve some kind of goal and therefore justifies reducing aid into Gaza as punishment.
	The conversation skates right over the fact that it has never been legitimate for Israel to withhold humanitarian aid into Gaza.
	Debating whether Israel is right or wrong to withhold aid under these specific circumstances, tacitly assumes that it could ever be right to withhold aid under any circumstances.
	Listening to Israel's justifications for why it needs to inflict monstrous abuses upon the Palestinians has the effect of assuming that there are circumstances under which those monstrous abuses could be acceptable.
	And there just aren't.
	It has never been legitimate to intentionally deprive civilians of humanitarian aid that they need to survive.
	You have to give them aid.
	It has never been legitimate to shoot non-combatants because you decided they crossed some sort of line into a forbidden zone.
	It has never been legitimate to shoot non-combatants at all.
	It has never been legitimate to commit genocide.
	Israel just needs to stop the genocide.
	The onus for stopping a genocide is on the party committing the genocide.
	The onus is not on the victims of the genocide to end it by meeting certain conditions.
	This should not even need to be said.
	It's so obnoxious that everyone's getting sucked into these debates about whether or not Israel might need to resume the genocide because Hamas refused to disarm, or they didn't get their hostage corpses back, or this or that ceasefire demand wasn't met, or blah blah whatever.
	Israel has never needed to commit genocide.
	It needs to stop committing genocide.
	The world shouldn't be bending over backwards to ensure that the state which is committing genocide is happy with the terms by which the genocide is ended.
	The world should be aggressively punishing the state that is committing genocide until it stops.
	That would be true peace.
	What we are seeing now is just a bad joke.
	And of course this true peace is not emerging because the powerful western states who've been backing the genocide this whole time are perfectly fine with it.
	Their weapons industries get to profit from the genocide.
	Their empire managers get to enjoy the domination of a critical geostrategic region.
	They sleep like babies at night because they do not view the victims of the genocide as human beings.
	So we find ourselves doing this ridiculous dance where we go, "Okay, well maybe the genocide could stop if the victims of the genocide agree to terms X, Y, and Z, and don't make too much of a fuss about being killed in smaller numbers every day." "This is madness.
	It's the craziest thing you could possibly imagine.
	We live in a dystopian madhouse." I think that's exactly right.
	And get this, we have Trump actually asking the president of Israel to Boy, a VPN and support free speech and privacy.
	So you got as uh Judge Nabalatano reports here.
	We got one war criminal seeing asking another war criminal to pardon a third war criminal.
	Here is with Larry John.
	And it was credited to who?
	Uh Donald John Trump.
	That oh man, this is amazing.
	Look, Trump's broker to cease fire.
	And it led to hostage release and prisoner release.
	And we saw the same kind of pictures we're seeing today.
	Oh, the joy and the happy reunions.
	This was terrible.
	And then uh Israel started violating that ceasefire, and Hamas said, Well, then we're not releasing any more of the prisoners.
	Uh, the prisoners that are released today, I think they were all former, you know, they were all Israeli military, uh, who had served who were active duty soldiers.
	So I I really don't, I don't put them in the same category as hostages.
	Uh, they are prisoners of war.
	Um, because war uniforms carried guns.
	Sorry, you know, that's a fair fight.
	Grabbing a civilian is a whole different matter.
	Um, so uh we're left in the same position that you've got all these uh uh poorly defined future steps.
	Uh is Hamas going to disarm?
	I don't think so.
	And it's not just Hamas.
	Again, the the the entire Western narrative, this is theater.
	They fail to understand that there are 14 different Palestinian groups.
	Hamas clearly is the largest and most influential, but you have Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
	Uh, you have the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the PFLP, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
	Uh, there's even Abu Nidal.
	So uh each of those groups have some military capability as well.
	And so coming up with a comprehensive solution that includes the Palestinians, but it's like, you know, we're we're gonna see this uh this uh kabuki theater in a little bit at the Sharm El Sheikh peace summit.
	Except my understanding is Netanyahu's not going to be there, Hamas isn't going to be there.
	So the people who are actually engaged in the fighting, uh, they're not at that discussion.
	And so that's like, you know, that's like you trying to uh to broker uh you know, you got a couple that wants a divorce, and but you're gonna meet with all of their friends and neighbors, but you're not gonna meet with them.
	Uh you know, you're gonna have no influence on that process.
	Wow.
	Uh, I want you to take a look at the release of one of them uh who actually kissed his Hamas protectors, Max uh Blumethor arguing that these Hamas fighters are probably the people that saved this guy's life from Israeli attacks.
	Watch this year 49.
	Yes, we continue with you.
	A total of 24 prisoners have been successfully handed over, and importantly, they all remain alive and well.
	One prisoner remains, bringing the total to 25.
	It is expected that the process of handing over the bodies of four Israelis will also be completed in the coming days.
	This uh clip is being banned by the uh IDF, they don't want the Israeli public to see this.
	Well, let's remember early on, uh within the first eight months, uh, you know, following the October 7th uh uh raid by Hamas.
	Uh, you had three Israeli soldiers who had been captured who got free, who came out waving white shirts, trying to get over to Israeli lines, and the Israelis killed them, shot them.
	They were unarmed, they posed no threat.
	So uh again, you find that despite the the efforts of the West to portray Hamas as these great beasts, these awful terrorists, these these people that behead children.
	Those are all Zionist lies.
	It was just the opposite.
	You find you find that these Palestinians exhibit a level of professionalism that is frankly not found among the Israelis.
	And I I tell you, this goes back, so you know, 35 years ago when I was the deputy director over the anti-terrorism assistance training program.
	One of the we were providing training at that time to both uh Israeli police as well as to Palestinian police.
	And our trainers would always come back and comment that the Israelis were a clown show, but that the Palestinians were highly professional, they paid attention, and uh demonstrated a level skill.
	It looks like that hasn't changed over the years.
	Wow.
	So Netzinya, who is claiming this is a great victory for the Israeli public.
	He has yet to defeat the Palestinians.
	He has severely damaged Israel politically, culturally, economically, diplomatically.
	And now the whole world, even the United States public, questions the moral basis for the Zionist apartheid state.
	How the hell can he claim this is a victory?
	Well, probably the same way Custer could claim that he won that last stand, okay?
	You know, this is uh this is perhaps a classic uh example of a Pyrrhic victory.
	Uh the fact that after two years, Israel with every military advantage was unable not only to defeat Hamas and to uh eliminate them as a as a military threat, but was unable to rescue the hostages, and uh, you know, frankly, they had an entire area surrounded, both from from the sea and from land.
	I mean, the Hamas was in a position where they were not, they didn't have ready access to supplies for God's sake, and yet uh they persisted.
	How did they get uh weapons?
	How did they get uh rounds of ammunition?
	Yeah, I don't know if it was stockpiled in advance, or if you know they I'm sure they had some smuggling networks, and you know, there were tunnels uh I'm sure that go uh under the go from Egypt into uh Gaza, and uh that uh that may have been one of the access points.
	But I mean it just again it illustrates that after two years, Israel could not defeat Hamas, just like you know, the United States couldn't defeat the Houthis, right?
	But but it's the same kind of thing.
	You remember that uh Donald Trump claim okay, they capitulated, we win, we're going home.
	That's what that's what Netanyahu's doing right now, but but I don't think they have any that Netanyahu and crowd have any intent whatsoever to put away their bombs and to stop killing uh Palestinian women and children.
	That that's gonna renew.
	Uh I've been playing this all morning, but it's priceless.
	Here's one war criminal asking a second war criminal publicly to pardon a third war criminal, Chris Cut number 12.
	Hey, I have an idea, Mr. President.
	why don't you give him a pardon By the way, there was not in the speech as you probably know, but I happen to like this gentleman right over here, and it just seems to make so much sense.
	You know, whether we like it or not, this has been one of the greatest wartime presidents.
	This is what been one of the greatest wartime presidents, and cigars and champagne, who the hell cares about and thirty-nine thousand dollars worth of cigars and champagnes.
	His wife has already pleaded guilty to it.
	And of course, Netanyahu is not the president.
	He's the prime minister, the person from whom Trump was asking the pardon is the president of Israel.
	Right, her dog.
	This is uh comedic.
	It's comical.
	Well it's um you know, it's just a reminder that Donald Trump does not believe in rule of law.
	He believes in the rule of cronies.
	Cronies, friends, and family.
	Uh, and that uh I think that's correct.
	I can't resist sharing a bit at least of a new short documentary about Victor Hugo.
	It's generally something.
	Well, it's...
	you In the fall of 2024, 54-year-old Victor Hugo Vaca decides he's ready for yet another career change.
	During the pandemic, he had shifted back to his original con, being an artist.
	What's different about this lifelong grifter is that Victor Hugo didn't care about fast cars or beautiful women.
	He didn't even need the money.
	The only motivation making others' lives hell.
	He's got an extensive criminal background, which is generally something that's uh, you know, makes it pretty difficult to travel to many countries.
	Uh but we were able to get Victor into the Republic of Georgia because they just like every country in the world owe us money.
	Victor by far has been the worst asset we've ever had, and we're hoping to eliminate him very soon.
	Victor discovered that BitChute and Rumble had become the epicenter for the growing alternative news community as legacy platforms like YouTube and Twitter were becoming censored.
	His basic premise was to present himself as a Christian and truth seeker.
	All he needed to do was get platformed and his psychopathic personality would do the rest.
	I had already cornered the market on the gullible QAnon people and was personally responsible for nearly 300 arrests.
	With January 6th behind us, BB thought it was time to play the JC card.
	I had gotten pretty good with Bible verses and such, but I was losing the hate the Jews crowd in the meantime.
	Victor and I decided to team up.
	Israel set Hugo up with an apartment and bit shoot account with 5500 followers.
	He used his Israeli connections to get platformed on radio shows like Alex Jones InfoWars.
	Using this tiny bit of credibility, Victor was able to infiltrate the truther community, leveraging each channel to get onto another channel.
	I should have known when some hotshot walks into my office calling himself the Maverick artist.
	I asked, where did you get this name?
	You self-glost yourself.
	You gave yourself the nickname.
	That's not how it works.
	Hugo, you fucking idiot.
	You have them all united, not divided.
	If it wasn't for your father, one of the greatest Jewish men I know.
	You'd be reporting from a hospital in Gaza that we would accidentally strike several times.
	Victor's job was simple: to attack, agitate, and divide.
	Through his Israeli handlers, Hugo was introduced to the Dollar Vigilante, a small-time scheme in Mexico doing crypto pumping dumps and selling fake medical devices run by Canadian Jeff Berwick.
	It was through this new connection Hugo was handed his first assignment, PhD James H. Fetzer.
	Sandy Hook Promise, an organization created by the Sandy Hooks families, is believed to be targeting Fetzer and to have hired Hugo through Berwick to defame and discredit him.
	Through Berwick's network, Victor was assigned to handler, calling themselves Jaina B. Tracy.
	It was discovered soon after to be an impersonation of a college professor's account.
	Jason is a revolutionary of Freedom Slips.com.
	We'll be right back after this message.
	Management would like to take a moment to thank the listeners and hosts for all their support as this made Revolution Radio one of the biggest platforms for free speech.
	in an ever-growing dark world of censorship.
	Unfortunately, this platform for free speech has been free.
	We need the support of the people.
	It is the people like you.
	Yes, you that keeps the station in the front lines of the battle Against tyranny and oppression.
	Please help support Revolution Radio so free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
	With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of lights.
	Revolution radio, freedom slips.com.
	I'm the number one listener-supported radio station on the planet.
	Revolution.
	Whoa!
	Whoa!
	What?!
	We're you?
	Remember?
	He's got anotherалась.
	Okay, thank God.
	Join Revolution Radio every Wednesday, 8 p.m. Eastern time on Studio B for Momentary Zen with host Zed Garcia at Freedomslip.com.
	the people station The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs and its website by the hosts, guests, and call in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and Freedomslips.com.
	His staff or affiliates.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, Freedom Flips.com.
	100% listeners supported radio.
	And now we return you to your host.
	Thank you.
	My pleasure to welcome back to the show is Sophia Smallstorm with whom I've had many engaging conversations.
	Sophia, I think has a different take on issues that you may well find fascinating, as do I, Sophia.
	Welcome back to the raw deal.
	Hi, Jim.
	How are you?
	Good, good, good.
	The mic is yours.
	No, you're gonna participate.
	And you know, I um we were talking last night, and I had listened to the show in its entirety that you did with that guy.
	Um I can't even say his name.
	SKR V something, right?
	Yeah, I think it's like Scarbina.
	He's very smart, very smart guy, and he has a very dispassionate and objective analysis of the historical Jesus and the creation of the gospels and the relation of the old and new testament and the like.
	Right, as I observe then and continue to affirm merging the old and the new testaments together in a single Bible is probably a calamitous mistake that's had vast ramifications and consequences historically for religion,
	theology, and all kinds, all manner of human disputes because the god of the old testament is totally different in character, a god of vengeance, violence, genocide, or is the god of the newest compassionate, loving, and forgiving.
	They could not be more opposite, and it astounds me to this day that Christian Zionists, as it were, embrace both con a virtual contradictory conceptions, almost one would infer a manifestation of schizophrenia,
	because the Jews, when you understand properly their Talmudic Zionist supremacist theology, believe they need to kill all the Christians where one thought to be the Jewish God incarnate, the Mesiach explained.
	No, no, he could not be the meshiach because there are still Christians Alive on Earth.
	Okay, okay, settle down.
	I thought you said the mic was mine.
	Okay, now listen.
	Have you ever heard of the Piraha?
	I'm not at all sure I have.
	Alright, so you're gonna like this.
	You're gonna listen and be entertained and wonder.
	So, you know, we are all familiar with the idea of the Christian missionaries, right?
	Tromping to the far ends of the earth, clutching Bibles, offering them to these natives, telling them that this is the best way to believe this is the spirituality, the best God, to forget about their rites and rituals and their little pagan entities.
	So Daniel Everett was a young missionary whose assignment was to teach a small isolated tribe in the jungle of Brazil about Jesus and Christianity.
	And this tribe was the Piraha Indians, and they were a very, very stoic, stubborn bunch who had resisted all missionaries for centuries, and they had a very sparse language.
	It was possibly the most difficult to learn on earth.
	And you know, missionaries have to learn the local language because otherwise they can't convey their information, right?
	So Daniel Everett, it took him three years to learn this very esoteric language.
	And Everett has linguistics training.
	He's now a professor of linguistics, and he is he has sparred with your favorite enemy, Noam Chomsky.
	All right.
	So they have a very the piraha have a very unorthodox language, which includes whistles and bird warbling.
	Now that's not unheard of with indigenous people.
	But the amazing thing about the Piraha, Jim, and now you're gonna have to put on your logic, your logician's hat and wrestle with this, because I'm gonna explain about these Piraha.
	They only speak in the present tense.
	They have no language for past or future.
	They only say things like the other day, but it never specifies which day.
	It could be a day that had long gone by, or it could be the next day.
	They have no use for time or the distant past.
	They never speak of the future, they don't talk about their antecedents or ancestors, they have no tools, they make no tools, so they're likened to Stone Age or Bronze Age or Iron Age people.
	Now, Tom Wolfe wrote an article in Harper's Magazine.
	This was August 2016, and I'm going to read to you from it.
	So Piraha were pre-toolers.
	They had no conception of making something today that they could use another day, other day, meaning tomorrow.
	As a result, they made no implements of stone or bone or anything else.
	They made no artifacts at all, with the exception of the bow and arrow and a scraping tool used to make the arrow.
	Occasionally some Piraha would sling together crude baskets of twigs and leaves.
	But as soon as they delivered the contents, they'd throw the basket away.
	Likewise with housing, only a few domicils reached the hut level.
	The rest were lean-to's made of branches and leaves.
	And if the wind blew the whole thing down, the Piraha laughed and laughed and made another one.
	So Piraha is a language with only three vowels, A, O, and I, eight consonants, P T B, G, S, H, K, and X. It is the smallest and leanest language known.
	The Piraha were illiterate, not only lexically, but also visually.
	Most could not figure out what they were looking at in two-tone black and white photographs.
	And even when they depicted familiar places and faces, in the Piraha, Daniel Everett could see he had before him the early history of speech and visual deciphering and miraculously could study them Alive in the here and now.
	No such luck with mathematics.
	The Piraha had none.
	They had no numbers, not even a one and a two, only the loose notion of a little and a lot.
	Money was a mystery to them.
	They couldn't count and hadn't the vaguest idea of what counting was.
	Every night for eight months, at their request, Everett tried to teach them numbers and counting.
	So they also had the simplest culture, no leaders, no form of government, no social classes, no religion.
	They believed there were bad spirits in the world, but had no conception of good ones, no rituals, no ceremonies, no music, no dance, no words for colors.
	To indicate that something is red, they liken it to blood or a berry.
	No jewelry, no bodily ornaments, and um no aesthetics.
	So here's Daniel Everett trying to teach them about Jesus, and what do they have to say about Jesus?
	Because they don't want to hear about anything in the past, right?
	So I'm gonna read you what they said about Jesus.
	Certainly sounds like a hopeless task.
	This is fascinating because this must be the most primitive society on earth.
	Yeah, but you know, when he learned their language, was first of all, among the Piraha, no one ever discusses anything but that which one has directly experienced.
	So if you lived with the Piraha, they wouldn't let you talk about the JFK assassination.
	Just you wouldn't be allowed to.
	Of course.
	Okay.
	So every sentence stands alone and refers to a single event.
	Piraha do not tell fictional stories or indulge in memories or or family histories.
	They do not build composite sentences out of parts that describe different situations like we do.
	Most of the world's languages have all kinds of verb tenses, ways of saying that this happened or that could have happened, or such and such will happen, or only happened because of such and such that it's going to happen or did happen right before it.
	Nope, none of that for the Piraha, or the straight heads, which is what they call themselves, with their equally straight talk.
	But if you try to say, as Dan did, that smells good when he smelled some smoke coming from a nearby fire and food was being prepared.
	This is how the Pirahar would say it.
	It's pleasant the way the smoke is hitting me in the nose.
	So everything is very present, right?
	Anyway, so this idea of composite speech, you know, subordinate clauses, which happens in every language just about.
	The more you cram into your sentences, the more smarter and powerful and more informative your speech is, right?
	But the Piraha have no use for any kind of composite speech in that regard, building in from the past or referring to the future.
	So because they had little conception of the past, the Piraha also had little conception of history.
	Everett ran into this problem when he tried to tell them about Jesus.
	How tall is he, the Piraha would ask.
	Well, I don't really know.
	Does he have hair like you?
	Meaning red hair.
	I don't know what his hair was like.
	The Piraha lost interest in Jesus immediately.
	He was unreal to them.
	Why does our friend Dan keep telling us these crooked head stories?
	They asked.
	After about a week of Jesus, one of the Piraha, Kohoi, said to Dan Everett politely but firmly, we like you, Dan, but don't tell us any more about this Jesus.
	Okay, you, the logician, you comment now.
	Well, not being able to give any specifics about height, weight, appearance, hair, and so forth.
	He was a figment of imagination to them.
	I I can understand completely their abrupt lack of interest when he couldn't do any better.
	He clearly in their minds did not know of whom he was speaking.
	He literally didn't know what he was talking about.
	I think that was a perfectly reasonable inference on their part.
	Yeah.
	If it doesn't exist and you didn't have direct experience of it, they had no use for even talking about it with you.
	So the Brazilian government, they live in the Amazon jungle in Brazil.
	And the Brazilian government completely leaves them alone.
	They're only about 800 piraha.
	And the Brit, you know how governments are, they want to charge you for the land you are squatting on or walking on.
	They just leave the Piraha alone in their neck of the Amazon.
	And they don't even charge them for anything.
	The pr Piraha do use canoes made by others that traders bring them along the river, and they pay for them with Brazil nuts that they gather in the jungle.
	So they have some concept of trade.
	But they have asked Dan Everett to bring them matches from the city.
	So they're slowly, slowly acknowledging technology of a sort.
	And they also now include I mean, they were very, very nude, naked, jungle naked, you know, but now they wear gym shorts, simple dresses, and t-shirts.
	Hmm.
	Is that...
	A step forward?
	I don't know.
	I mean, there's that's a primitive society.
	I mean, uh nudity.
	It seems to me just kind of open honesty about who you are and your body.
	So this is fascinating.
	Well, what has been the impact then of outside culture to this extent?
	Have they made other differences in the society, this primitive culture?
	No, I read Dan Everett's book, which is called uh titled Don't Sleep, There Are Snakes, and that's how they say goodnight to each other, the Piraha, because they live, you know, in a completely python infested viper infested environment.
	And um the piraha are they're very moment focused.
	If somebody catches a fish, and they catch fish, I think with their bare hands.
	If somebody catches a fish, in everybody will stop what they're doing and they'll come and share the fish.
	But we, in our with all our planning, and you know, the white man um with his uh storing food, and I mean, when they make a basket, after they use that basket for whatever they're going to use it for, they throw it out, throw it to the side, they let it de disintegrate.
	They don't save it somewhere.
	Oh, I might need this tomorrow because there is no tomorrow for them.
	So they're not interested in religion, they're not interested in bettering themselves.
	I think that he asked for a salad, Dan Everett, because he got sick of eating jungle food.
	They never eat any any veget vegetation stuff, they don't eat salad.
	So he asked for somebody to bring him a salad along the river.
	And the Pirahajas thought it was screamingly funny that he would eat this stuff.
	This is fascinating.
	I have no idea of the existence of this group, so I'm learning a lot.
	Yeah, so you know, we are very rooted in our lives, and you are very logic-oriented, and you and I were talking last night, and I referred to some of the information that uh your co-host Paul brought into the show with uh this David Scurbina, David, I think is his name.
	Yeah, and how Paul was trying to add material, um, kind of woo-woo material that a person like you eschews normally, because there's no logical explanation for it, right?
	So, and we would include here um psychic phenomena that defy explanation, Religious experiences that defy explanation, um, lots of different things, beliefs that are rooted in a basis that defies explanation, you know, like Jesus was a real person, the son of God.
	Um, I remember an um a very elderly woman from Texas that I met many years ago, and she remarked that here's the Virgin Mary who is impregnated by divine, you know, intervention and conception, bears a child, and this woman from Texas goes in her very Texan accent, and she had nothing to say about it, because you never hear from Mary.
	It's not in any of the religious lore at all, not a peep.
	Yes.
	I've always had problems with the divine conception.
	I mean, how does this take place?
	Or were you attributing to God uh sexual organs, for example, or is this just some kind of as it were thought process?
	I guess if God can do anything, he can bring about a conception without sexual intercourse, orgasm, fertilization.
	I mean, it's it's quite a mystery, is it not?
	But it's one of those marvels.
	You see, you can call it whatever you want.
	You can call it a mystery, you can call it an anomaly, an illogical anomaly.
	She was only, she found out because of the anunziata, right?
	That's the name of those paintings that show the angel coming to tell her some the angel had to tell her.
	Tell her that she was pregnant.
	Well, did she miss her period?
	We don't know this.
	Did she say I'm proud to be the mother of the son of God?
	There is not a word from her.
	I mean, Christians may be upset by discussion, dispassionate discussion of the kinds of miracles that conventional Christianity endorses, promotes, embraces, but for those of us looking at the world's religions, it's an object of endless fascination and speculation.
	Well, we are just commenting.
	In the old testament, there are a lot of women mentioned, but they begat people, other people.
	I remember that.
	A lot of begat, right?
	Which is conception related.
	And then there were all kinds of Yeah, beat, right, right, right.
	I've always wondered how Adam and Eve had sons, but then the sons had wives.
	I where in the world did they all come from?
	I'm only saying this because it could be that women were not regarded as important enough, so no voice was given to Mary.
	Whatever she had to say or never said, or maybe she didn't say anything, she's only a woman.
	But anyway, I don't know.
	I'm just saying that I found Mr. Doctor, I don't know, he's a professor, Scribina's information very, very interesting.
	Yeah.
	And um, you know, the fact that these apostles wrote these books later, and there was material just made up, apparently, because no, there's no record of any of that.
	Nobody wrote about Jesus during his life.
	And maybe they just didn't write.
	Maybe there wasn't any way to record other than oral tradition.
	Sure.
	No doubt.
	Yeah, writing would come far later in the evolution of human civilization.
	This is a group that has not evolved.
	I mean, it's absolutely fascinating.
	I I love this uh cultural anthropological investigation.
	Uh I mean, it's really fascinating, Sophia.
	Well, the Piraha are unique, really, really unique because they are ultra simple, very rudimentary, very rudimentary, and they also have no real interest in bettering themselves, which would be our way of putting it, you know.
	Except that they wear gym shorts, simple dresses, and t-shirts now.
	And um, how again did how again did that come about?
	Who induced them to wear clothing?
	I mean, I'm in his book again, but he took them to the city, he took a couple of piraha to Sao Paulo or Rio de Janeiro.
	No, oh my gosh, they had to dress for that, but they could not be taught how to look to one side and the other before crossing the street.
	They were charging into the midst of traffic.
	I think it would be a crazy idea to take them into that totally foreign hostile environment.
	I think that was a really bad idea.
	I'm astonished even contemplated doing that.
	Well, maybe they wanted to go.
	He only took a couple of them.
	They took him, he took them into a store and they were fascinated with the stuff being offered for sale.
	They this was a very abstract concept to them that you went into a place that smelled so good.
	I think they really liked um or they were fascinated with the smell of perfumes and soaps and things like that.
	I don't know if they I can't say they liked it, but I'm going back years.
	I wrote this newsletter in 2017, so that's when I read the book.
	But you know, here's a guy, he's he became a linguistics expert, uh, Everett, Daniel Everett, and uh wrote his book.
	I think he might have written two books about the piraha.
	There was a documentary made.
	Um, but they are very, very unusual, very resisting, resisting as well.
	They are happy to be exactly who they are, living the way they are, with their limited language without subordinate clauses in it.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Sure, of course, and they don't want the religion, and they don't have any use for fiction, Jim.
	They don't tell stories.
	Yeah.
	Well, the Jesus story was an example of what they would have regarded as fantasy.
	Apparently, from what I remember in the book, they really like to laugh and joke around in the present.
	Uh, I think they make fun of one another, they jest, right?
	They tickle one another, they do things like that.
	This is a wholesome society, Sophia.
	I mean, if you think about us, here we are, we're griping about what we don't have and investing and uh, you know uh doing DIY projects in our house.
	They don't know DIY, they would have no interest in that.
	Why do you want new kitchen cabinets?
	You know, why do you want cabinets?
	Why do you have pots and pants?
	Yeah.
	So I'm just saying we can go back to illogic and logic, but I thought you would think this was based in ill logic that all people would want to have faster, better, more, right?
	No, no, remember logic concerns relations between sentences, you know, the construction of arguments, uh capturing nuances between ordinary kinds of conditionals, if then and subjunctives if something were the case, what would be the case counterfactuals if something had been the case, which was not the case and the like in probabilistic relations, causal relations and the like.
	So they wouldn't have need for logic, uh, other than ordinary reasoning, and obviously they were very successful in dealing with one another.
	So they have mean is it seems to me, it seems logical that if they were shown something that would enable them to do something better, they would want it.
	Because most primitive cultures are very interested in those kinds of improvements.
	You know, you go to Africa and you present shiny pots and pans, and they'll give you their beads.
	And this is what the American this is how the American Indian was taken over.
	They were floored by the advancements of 1800s, white men.
	They could not understand the train.
	They could not understand why rail um tracks had to be laid, and then when they saw the train coming from a distance, this giant monster, you know, blowing smoke and racing straight through the prairie.
	They didn't understand guns, they didn't understand surveyors, they thought that was all you know evil, and then they took to the guns, they took to the ponies and the horses, they never rode horses.
	I wrote two or three newsletters about Comanches and Apaches and Indian culture.
	Um so this, I mean, the way that they moved around was simply to put up camps by a river, and they left.
	Do you know why they left and pulled up their camps and tied everything up and dragged it somewhere else?
	Oh, I'll tell you after the break.
	You got it.
	We're here with Sophia Smallstorm wandering into very unfamiliar territory.
	I think you're gonna enjoy this as much as they stand by.
	We'll be right back.com.
	we'll be right back Was it a conspiracy?
	Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting this is a drill, this is a drill on bullhords during the marathon, that the Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities, and that one would be set off in one minute in front of the library, which happened as the globe had announced.
	Peering through the smoke, you could see bodies with arms and legs, but there was no blood.
	The blood only showed up later and came out of a tube.
	They used amputee actors and a studio quality smoke.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Check out and nobody died in Boston either.
	Available at MoonrockBooks.com.
	That's moonrockbooks.com.
	If you think for one second that the Capitol will ever treat us fairly, you are lying to yourself.
	Because we know who they are and what they do.
	This is what they do and we must fight back!
	You can torture us and bomb us, fire is catching.
	And if we burn, you burn with us.
	Good evening.
	Are you awake, Ev?
	I hope.
	We've tried and we've tried for years and years to use passive resistance and loud voices to make a change.
	That time is over.
	Your governments around the world have no other goal than to decimate your entire existence.
	At the hands of the Bankers and the elites.
	The war is coming.
	And it's your choice to decide if you want to be a warrior or a victim.
	Denial is not a choice anymore.
	Revolution Radio, Freedom Slips.com, the number one listener-supported radio station on the planet.
	Not giving up.
	Revolution Radio.
	Are you angered by the injustices inflicted upon the innocence of the world?
	Do you have a message you'd like to share?
	Any knowledge you'd like to impart to those willing to learn?
	Have you ever listened to our shows and thought, hey, I could do this, but you just don't know how to kickstart your hosting ambitions?
	Or are you an established professional host?
	Thwarted by censorship in other areas, seeking pastures new.
	Contact us here at the world's number one free speech network, Revolution Radio.
	We provide the platform, the training, and the airtime to any budding host wanting the chance to take those first talk show steps.
	Established hosts can find a safe and secure home here where their message can ring out loud and clear, unencumbered, free from sponsorship overreach.
	Drop us a line via our email, support at revolution.radio, or head into our Discord server to say hello.
	We'll take everything from there.
	Revolution Radio, where hosting dreams become actualized reality.
	The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and FreedomSlips.com.
	It's staff or affiliates.com.
	100% listeners supported radio.
	And now we return you to your host.
	Thank you.
	Well, Sophia, you're mentioning at Chomsky brought to mind that I have two videos on YouTube.
	Uh one is rather short by uh Josh from Snowshield Films.
	It's only about seven minutes, but where I'm faulting Chomsky for his views about JFK and 9-11.
	The other is longer with Manhattan Neighborhood Network.
	Conversation with Paula Gloria that runs around uh 21, maybe 27.
	But I just discovered that I did a some presentation on Press TV, Iranian news network about Chomsky that I've never even seen before.
	So I thought I'd interject just to give you some insights about Chomsky, if it will play.
	Let's try this.
	No, too bad.
	I'll go back and see again, Fetzer on Chomsky, if I can find the earlier, the short one with...
	Well, this is not...
	This is...
	hear me you're it's done a great deal of work on the nature of mind and the development of communication and all that and and work I've done is complimented by work by a fellow named Tom Shoneman.
	My research indicates that the key notion is that of concepts, concepts are when we bring certain properties together as it characterizes a kind of thing.
	For example, a child has the capacity to put Together something that's round with something you can throw, something you can roll, something you can chew on, something you can squish, and they may only later in their developmental history acquire the habit of referring to that thing, or things of that kind as a ball.
	Or you learn to suckle at the breast, and you associate with warmth and love and tenderness and affection, and only later come to associate that source with uh words, say mother.
	Or you can learn to draw on on heart surfaces on walls and so forth with multicolored different size and shapes, and only later put together or start to develop linguistic habit of referring to those things as chalk.
	Now, if we have the capacity to acquire concepts, we don't have to have either an innate grammar or an innate vocabulary or semantics, which is the view that the uh Jerry Foto who is uh extended Chomsky's theory from syntax to semantics.
	But most importantly, what Tom Schoeneman has proposed and what work I have done on the evolution of mentality in a book entitled The Evolution of Intelligence, are humans the only animals with minds, is that syntax appears to be an emergent phenomenon, that it's only when you have acquired so many concepts or so many properties, like for heights, shapes, colors, and so forth, that you need to be able to organize your thoughts in such a way that you know what the subject is to which you're attributing these properties.
	If you're dealing with a relatively simple world, whether small number of things and not many properties and so forth, you don't really need syntax, because you can just call on your concepts and and and there are few enough of them that you don't need to be so highly organized.
	So syntax appears to be a late development in language and not the foundation thereof.
	It certainly does not appear to be innate.
	Uh as Chomsky maintains, I've often been bemused by Chomsky's declarations that syntax is species-specific, innate genetic, inborn, and his difficulty to tell us what it is, that is this innate genetic inborn syntax, because he has published book after book after book trying to tell us what is the innate syntax.
	If there weren't innate syntax, he ought to have been able to discover it by now.
	Moreover, in the course of 35 years of college teaching of logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, I've discovered how extremely difficult it is to bring students to the point where they can analyze sentences and arguments from the point of view of their syntax.
	If we had an innate syntax, it ought to be something we could do effortlessly.
	In fact, it's something that requires a great mental effort, which suggests to me that the very thesis of uh an innate syntax is uh hopelessly uh undermined by empirical data available to every teacher and every student of logic.
	How do you explain uh Chomsky's lack of uh ability to look at 9-11?
	I've been profoundly disturbed by Noam Chomsky's role as a public intellectual because while he's been wonderful at the intermediate range of issues, and he'll frequently offer devastating critiques of the government when it comes to the mega issues, the ones that are truly of historic importance, such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy or the events of 9-11, he somehow suddenly can't see the evidence, he can't appreciate policy implications, he doesn't think there's anything to it.
	I mean the assassination was a crime and an atrocity, but the idea that there was any kind of high-level conspiracy behind it seems to me extremely unlikely on the basis of any evidence I can discover, and I've looked pretty hard.
	I can assure you that he is as wrong as wrong could be indeed in a book.
	I co-author on the death of Paul Wellstone.
	I made a point during the comparisons, I was elaborating about how the government fakes evidence and covers things up, how Chomsky had played a role here in not recognizing the major policy issues involved with JFK, included the uh wanting to reform or abolish the Federal Reserve, cutting the oil depletion allowance, getting rid of even abolishing the CIA, not invading Cuba, pulling our troops out of Vietnam.
	I mean we were talking about some of the most important policy issues of our time.
	And yet Noam Chomsky has said that even if there was a conspiracy to kill him, since so far as he can see it had no policy ramifications, not important even if it took place.
	I mean it were true, which is extremely unlikely.
	Who cares?
	And even if we were true.
	Which is extremely unlikely.
	Who cares?
	I mean the name, significant.
	I mean the name, significant.
	Uh but it's uh it's a little bit like the uh huge energy that's put out on trying to figure out who killed John F. Kennedy.
	Yeah.
	Who knows?
	And who cares?
	Yeah.
	Who knows?
	And who cares?
	I mean, plenty of people get killed all the time.
	Why does it matter if one of them had to be John F. Kennedy?
	He ought to have a lot of things to say about these, but he does not, which has caused me to look at Chomsky in a day not only as an intellectual in relation to his work on uh on linguistics, but also as an intellectual in the public arena, where it seems to me he has acutely let down the American people by failing to fulfill a responsibility we had grown accustomed to his exercising.
	In my opinion, it's an utter disgrace.
	On the 9-11 uh event, you have to make a distinction, crucial distinction between two things.
	The earlier question, at least as I understood it, was whether the Bush administration was involved in planning it.
	Uh for that, I think it's outlandish.
	Morally irresponsible, and in my opinion, uh uh a flagrant failure to fulfill the duties he assumes as a public intellectual.
	Did they plan it in any way or know anything about it?
	This seems to me extremely unlikely.
	I mean, for one thing, they would have been insane to try anything like that.
	I can only tell you with regard to my evaluation of what he has had to say about 9/11 JFK, it's been utterly inadequate.
	music
	Yeah, actually, calling it utterly inadequate is uh gross understanding.
	He's been a deceiver, a liar, a phonemer.
	I gotta go back to when you were small.
	Did you have Rami.
	Sorry about that.
	Meanwhile, uh Chomsky, I think is done tremendous damage.
	I I've I've had Ren Soviet, I had a colleague that was a professor of biology on the Duluth campus, University of Minnesota.
	He believed every word Chomsky ever said.
	And you know, whether that extended to linguistics, presumably, but even his celebrated theory of linguistics, which caused the academic community to swoon.
	When Thomas Schoneman submitted to me as the editor of Minds and Machines, uh International Journal devoted to artificial intelligence philosophy and cognitive science about the emergence of language, uh, of syntax, as a late phenomenon, because if you have only a small number of words or concepts, you don't need to organize them.
	It's when you get so many you gotta begin organizing them.
	You know, the study of language really begins with practice as language and practice, pragmatic people interacting and behaving, which leads it theories about semantics, the meanings of the words, and ultimately that syntax.
	But where it's as I was explaining there an immersion property, and Tom Schoneman was the one who led the way here.
	He submitted his brilliant work to dozens of linguistic journals, and they wouldn't even consider it.
	I had told him early on, I thought it was completely brilliant, and I'd be glad to publish it.
	But I knew it would be in his interest if he went to the linguistics journals, but none of them would publish it.
	So is my honor.
	This is one like of uh the ten years I edited this journal I found.
	It's one of the handful of truly important papers that I published.
	And you know, when I did this interview in the other, especially with Paula Gloria, which as I say is about three times as lengthy.
	There wasn't no reaction to what uh I was outing him about JFK 9-11, but there were hundreds, maybe a thousand protests, faulting Chomsky on his innate syntax.
	It was fascinating.
	I mean, the guy cannot be right.
	And I just love how I had all this experience teaching formal logic to students, which is getting them to use syntax to represent linguistic elements, and it's so bloody difficult for them to understand.
	And I appreciated all of that.
	I succeeded because I'd been through it myself as an undergraduate.
	I'd had tremendous difficulty.
	I hadn't understood what we're doing as a simplified model of language.
	We're capturing only certain elements, we're representing them symbolically, so that when I was at my first teaching assignment as an assistant professor at the University of Kentucky, they gave me the role of uh supervising all the undergraduate courses in uh formal logic, where the associate professor had uh got very bad course evaluations.
	He was always explained, well, it's because the subject was so inherently difficult.
	Well, my grad students and I were turning out the hundreds of enthusiastic little logicians at the University of Kentucky, and I was even given the first Distinguished Teaching Award for my work in relation to teaching logic,
	and uh, of course, he could never forgive me for that and would vote against me for tenure and with a couple other just enough to make sure it didn't happen, leading to my sojourn as an academic wanderer for 10 years before I found another permanent position.
	I just want to say this does relate to your primitive society in uh Brazil and the Amazon for us, because they don't accept X. Of course, they wouldn't comprehend Chomsky at all, but he he turns out to be a monstrous float fraud.
	He he was CIA all the way, I have no doubt, just as Anderson Cooper, so many others of prominence in the media and even in our intellectual community turn out to be CIA.
	That was an aside, Sophia, but your mention of Chomsky inspired me to go that way.
	Yours.
	All right, so Jim, you have had to, by this point in your life, understood that there is something called what you said wandering, you were wandering in your profession, but there's something called wandering off the farm.
	Right.
	And when you examine 9-11 and the JFK assassination, you are wandering off the farm.
	It is on the farm to talk about ling linguistics, and that's why there was no comment when you brought out your, you know, why is he not looking at 9-11 and not looking at um the JFK assassination?
	He's a man who's obviously professionally, whether he's CIA or not, he has chosen to stay on the farm, and you walked off the farm.
	That's your whole, you know, that's the trajectory of your life.
	That was your journey, right?
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	So he wasn't just not coming, though he was making false claims.
	I mean, it doesn't matter.
	People so as not to be pulled off the farm.
	People will make false claims.
	They will stay on that postage stamp of farmland, and say they will say and do whatever they have to not be pulled off into territory that becomes an unknown for them.
	So obviously, he made the choice to stay on the farm, to say whatever it took to stay on the farm, keep the authorities happy, because what would have happened to him, Jim, had he decided to follow your lead and start examining these things for what they appear to really have been, right?
	Sophia, I have no doubt Chomsky could have made a world of difference.
	There were so many followers, so many academicians are actually sheephole.
	They look for No, no, no, I am not saying that.
	I'm saying what would have happened to him.
	Sophia, listen to me.
	I'm making a different point.
	I'm convinced he was CIA.
	His role was to control the intelligent, because you should have had all these academicians who are digging deep into JFK, digging deep into 9-11.
	Even the engineers and architects should have seen immediately as I witnessed on 9-11 when the North and the South Tower were destroyed, that this was physically impossible.
	But I said to myself, when will I ever be in a position to do anything about it?
	I mean, ironically, I would be in a position to do something about it four years later when I found his scholars for 9-11 truth.
	But at the time, I was witnessing a physical impossibility.
	I knew it was impossible for these buildings to be destroyed as they were before our very eyes from the alleged cause for the Miva to collapse.
	And yet Chomsky, see, if if he had encouraged research, it would have made a huge difference because then these academicians would have been felt they had the right to do it.
	In fact, instead they felt inhibited because he was containing them within an envelope of propriety.
	I mean, you're you're right, but you're wrong.
	In other words, Chomsky was doing what he was doing deliberately with foreknowledge.
	I have no doubt whatsoever.
	Well, I'm saying exactly what you're saying.
	He stayed where he was, whether he had foreknowledge or not, it's your privilege to make that assumption or decide one way or the other.
	But the fact is that he, given his stature, may have this is a supposition, feared going against the grain and getting out there and doing the kinds of things that you did with your proofs and your organizations of groups.
	I mean, look, the architects and engineers group, which followed the scholars group that you started, wandered into the Niels Haritt impossibilities, right?
	The nano thermite country.
	Fantasy, yeah.
	Yeah.
	So every establishment of a branch or a fork off the main artery, which seeks to be, you know, evocative and exploratory, can end up in a fantasy at a dead end.
	So there has to be a continual branching, branching off, branching off, and then you get to smaller and smaller little twigs, because most people stay with orthodoxy.
	After the nano thermite, you know, after nanothermite was romanced as it was by architects and engineers.
	How many people were willing?
	How many people even heard that it doesn't have the explosive power of gunpowder?
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Nobody heard this.
	One 13, of course, of TNT, and can't possibly be responsible for destroying concrete, much less steel.
	I mean, the whole thing's a fantasy.
	Right.
	But again, it was romanced, and it has taken its place in history.
	And there are lots of people out there who call themselves truthers who still cling to the nano thermite fantasy because it worked.
	Yes.
	You know?
	So it just those who veer off the beaten path, though the groups become more and more straggly.
	That's just that's the point I'm making.
	And the gatekeepers and the holders of orthodoxy keep those arteries full.
	Where are the capillaries, Jim?
	So go ahead.
	Tell us more.
	I think I did a show with you.
	I'm trying to remember.
	Did I do a show with you about Ibn Alexander?
	Near death.
	Uh we may have, but you're welcome to go there.
	I think Paul was talking about near death and bringing it in when I had that exchange with him that you found rather interesting enough to diagnose and wanted to explain how I was being overly rich and not sufficiently open-minded.
	No, no, he was saying that, and he was trying to add depth and and breadth to the conversation you were having with Scurbina, Doctor, whatever the thing is.
	But so, you know, the Piraha had they encountered Ibn Alexander instead of Daniel Everett.
	Now, Daniel Everett had no personal experience of Jesus, right?
	None.
	I mean, all he is is a missionary.
	He's got his Bible, and that contains the stories that because they're not his stories, the Piraha are not interested.
	But there was a neurosurgeon, a an atheistic neurosurgeon called Ibn Alexander, who one day had a terrible um infection, an E. coli infection.
	These types of E. coli infections are often um survived by small babies, but adults are not known to survive them.
	And he was taken to the ER by his wife, the very hospital that he worked at.
	This is in Virginia, and they did a uh they put a needle in his spinal cord and drew out this absolutely thick pus-filled cerebral spinal fluid, which is terribly terribly dangerous.
	And he fell into a coma, seven days of coma state, and when he finally recovered, they didn't think he would recover.
	They told his wife, he's done.
	He's never gonna have verbal capacity or anything if he ever comes back to consciousness.
	But in fact, he did, and he had traveled in a very interesting realm, a number of realms for those seven days, and he had an awful lot to say when he finally regained his ability to speak.
	And he quit being a neurosurgeon.
	He became a researcher of near-death experiences, and um uh I don't know if you want to call this afterlife.
	He wrote a book called Proof of Heaven, and the book is kind of mind-blowing, and it does relate his experience over those seven days.
	Now, the point I'm making is the Piraha would be very interested to talk to him about the entity he met who wasn't Jesus, but he called him the great or it, the great alm, a u M. Um, wouldn't call it God.
	So the Piraha would be very interested to hear this because it was his direct experience.
	But because they don't read, they wouldn't buy his book.
	So that experience, Jim, defies all linear thinking.
	Um it it invites more than what religion has to offer us.
	It explains as he did as a neurosurgeon, explains the book explains that the brain is a truncating organ that we have.
	It's a filtering organ, it filters experience, and as such, it doesn't allow us to have the full experience that we are really having, because that would be dangerous for us.
	We would not be able to survive if we had these celestial heavenly um uh these I don't know what to call them, the their experiences, but this existence that we are really a part of.
	We're a very concentrated, you could call us a print of that enormity that's beyond our dimensional um location, and he went beyond that, Dr. Alexander.
	And he came back to talk about it.
	And he made it his life's work to talk about this, learn more from other people, and write about it, and invite other people to share those experiences that they had had.
	Sophia, we'll be right back after this rain.com.
	We'll be right back after this message.
	We'll be right back.
	Management would like to take a moment to thank the listeners and hosts for all their support.
	This has made Revolution Radio one of the biggest platforms for free speech in an ever-growing dark world of censorship.
	Unfortunately, this platform for free speech has never been free.
	We need the support of the people.
	It is the people like you, yes, you that keeps the station in the front lines of the battle against tyranny and oppression.
	Please help support Revolution Radio so free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
	With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light.
	Dark world.
	Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, the number one listener-supported radio station on the planet.
	Revolution Radio.
	Join Revolution Radio every Wednesday, 8 p.m. Eastern time on Studio B for Momentary Zen.
	with host Zen Garcia at freedomsteps.com, the people's station.
	you you you Even the government admits that 9-11 was a conspiracy.
	But did you know that it was an inside job that Osama had nothing to do with it?
	That the twin towers were blown apart by a sophisticated arrangement of mini or micro nukes.
	That building seven collapsed seven hours later because of explosives planted in the building.
	Barry Jennings was there.
	he heard them go off and felt himself stepping over dead people.
	The U.S. Geological Survey conducted studies of dust gathered from 35 locations in Lower Manhattan and found elements that would not have been there had this not been a nuclear event.
	Ironically, that means the government's own evidence contradicts the government's official position.
	9-11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the neocons of the Department of Defense, and the Mossad.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Read American Newt on 9-11.
	Available at MoonrockBooks.com.
	That's MoonrockBooks.com.
	The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and Freedom Slips.com.
	It's staff or affiliates.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, Freedom Slips.com.
	100% listener-supported radio, and now we return you to your host.
	Cheering Cheering Cheering
	you No doubt what I presented on Pass TV a decade or so ago was similar to what you heard with uh Horseshoe Films brief documentary, but even more emphatic.
	And I just add one of the commentators, a handful of comments.
	Chomsky over his silence about 9-11.
	Fetzer is being kind.
	Chomsky is a siphon.
	Chomsky is an active gatekeeper.
	Chomsky publicly denounces truthers.
	Chomsky's responsible to the notion that 9-11 is an inside job.
	Who cares?
	Chomsky is the ultimate limited hangout.
	I think it's even more than that, but that's certainly on the right track.
	Sophia, continue, please.
	And I again I love this little primitive society down in the Amazon for us, just absolutely fascinating from all kinds of points of view, but especially the evolution of human culture.
	Go on.
	Well, Jim, you should get Dan Everett's book, Don't Sleep There are Snakes.
	But here's the thing, you've gone right back to the Pirahaw, but I was talking about Ivan Alexander.
	So my question to you is are you at all interested in Dr. Alexander's near death experience of seven days?
	Are you interested in that?
	Would you buy his book?
	Would I buy his book?
	Um I don't know, Sophia.
	It's uh it you're right about being a stretch for me to contemplate these some of these experiences.
	I mean, it's a mind trip, it was a mental trip what he was undergoing.
	I mean, we all have dreams and summer nightmares and the like.
	That is easily understood.
	I might find it as a challenge to explain uh uh objectively and scientifically.
	Why don't you go ahead and elaborate why you find it so important and telling and informative?
	No, no, I'm just going to ask you a question now.
	Jim.
	Have you ever had an experience in your life that defies explanation, that I will give a little more, I'll be a little more specific that is spooky, that borders on the paranormal, something like that.
	I want to know.
	Well, the very day I accepted my first position at the University of Kentucky, I was in the San Francisco airport returning from an interview at a campus there.
	But they had the odd policy that if you were extended an offer by them and you declined, then you had to pay your airfare.
	Well, I was a graduate student in the poorhouse.
	So I just told them, don't make me the offer because I can't, I'll turn it down and I can't afford the airfare.
	Because even though it was a small private, I knew I was far better off at a large public at a real university.
	And as I was returning in the airport, I felt as though something was wrong.
	I actually went into the men's room and felt my face because I felt as though I was dying.
	And when I got back to Bloomington where I was completing my PhD, When I wandered out and found my former wife's, I think the boyfriend uh in the car.
	I said, hi hi, Alberto.
	I said, uh call Marguerite, my my stepmother.
	And I said, it's dead, isn't it?
	And he said, yes.
	And I said he's dead, isn't he?
	He said yes.
	And they didn't know how I could get back to California because I didn't have any money, but I wrote a check that I knew I'd be able to cover once I got out there.
	And uh, you know, that was uh probably the weirdest experience of my life.
	I was feeling I was dying, and it was about the time my dad was in fact dying.
	Um there it is, Sophia.
	I I've been unable to account for that under the, you know, and not a believer in mental telepathy or whatever, but I guarantee you I had that experience.
	And if I had actually gone in and felt my face, because I felt like I was dying and it was all robbery, I'd be in doubt as to whether I actually had the experience, but it was bona fide, it was absolutely 100% genuine.
	Your thoughts.
	So you went into the men's room to check on yourself in the mirror because you had a very rubbery sensation on your face.
	I felt like I was dying.
	I felt like I was dying.
	I thought I was dying.
	I had to make sure I wasn't dead.
	I went in there to feel my face.
	It was at the time my father was dying.
	Okay, so Jim, yes, very good.
	That's an amazing experience.
	That to me says that you had a very deep connection with your father, and you felt your body felt that he was passing out of this life.
	And you felt that as though you were your father leaving this life, right?
	Yes, yeah, it was on that order, Sophia.
	And I am I'm unable to deny it.
	That's a personal experience I had now.
	I've had friends, you know, have had weird encounters, and they tell me they've even had encounters with demons or demonic figures, and from the point of view of epistemology, the trouble with these subjective experiences, they're non-transferable.
	You know, we need to have objectivity, reliability, replicability, and those subjective experiences aren't replicable, but I can he's as intense in his conviction that those are real experiences, and his wife experienced them with him as I am about this experience I had of my father's death.
	So, you know, I can't say they're wrong, but I can't count on them as you know, as evidence other than to say people have had these experiences, they've reported with complete conviction to be have been authentic.
	So they're not transferable, and but they have been not exactly replicated, but the type of experience is replicated worldwide, is experienced worldwide.
	There are many instances of this kind of experience all over the world where people have extra sensory um perception at the same moment that something is happening elsewhere, um, people divine and know things that they shouldn't know.
	This there, these are different types of experiences, but the experience you had, Jim, has been had by others.
	Do you think that or not?
	I wouldn't be surprised.
	I would not be surprised.
	Okay, so there's a quality to our existence that transcends the three dimensions that we live in.
	There is an extra sense.
	You you were operating extra sensorally, wouldn't you say?
	I don't think there's any other explanation yet.
	Yeah.
	So is that the fact that you've had an experience as powerful an experience as you describe, does that not serve to effectively convince you that these things happen and that they're quite common?
	Well, I can't attest to the commonality, but that they have, and I mean, there was an instance I myself experienced that I'm certainly not prepared to deny.
	So let's go to the commonality aspect of it.
	What if you gathered a thousand people in a room and let's just say 80% of them could relate an experience of that nature?
	Would that not be considered common?
	I think it would, yeah.
	I mean, uh, assuming this is uh something of a sample, I mean, obviously it is the question becoming how random, but it certainly suggests that this is a kind of an experience or phenomena is rather widespread.
	I will grant that, yes.
	Okay, so Jim, I don't remember the reason for this, but we could quickly type it into chat GPT, or you might know it.
	Statistically, if you get 30 people together in a room and you have them state their birthday, you're gonna there's almost a 95, 99% guarantee that you're gonna have a match between two of those people.
	Are you aware of that?
	It seems so improbable statistically, but I've heard reports of that order before.
	Yes, I've done this experiment many, many times.
	I've done it with, for instance, five people, and I've had them write down the birthdays of themselves in five other people, because five times six is 30, and there's always a match, always.
	So I wouldn't expect that, but that's fascinating.
	Yeah.
	So we've got 365, sometimes 366 days in a year, and the fact is that just 30 of them, that's all you need, and you get a match.
	So, in your in the parallel of your experience with other spooky mystical experiences that people have had that they can talk about, I would say that this type of experience, because you know, you are a straightforward, more linear, logic based.
	I keep going back to logic, scientific reasoning type of individual.
	So it's not like you're gonna wander into a dinner party and sit down and start hobnobbing with people about mystical experiences, right?
	You're not gonna do that.
	Right.
	Even though you've had one, and the reason you're not gonna do that, I'm guessing, is because of your training.
	What if you didn't have all this training in scientific reasoning?
	What if you were a pastor?
	You might have gathered the an experience of other people talking about this that is way beyond your experience, which is not only a few people talking to you about their strange paranormal um the events of their life that are like that, right?
	So you don't have a vast collection of this because you're not that type of person, and you but you do at least have one, one, one very significant experience of that kind.
	And I give you a gold star for that.
	I mean, it was the weirdest experience of my life, Sophia.
	Yes.
	Well, you know, there are people who've had numerous such experiences who have them on a regular basis, and we don't know how to explain that, other than these people operate uh frequently with a sixth sense.
	Yours got switched on for that one, you know, brief shining time, but there are other people who regularly their antenna is is on, it's vibrating and wobbling and receiving signal much more than yours is.
	But I would say if you were open to this, if you invited this kind of experience to you, you might have another one.
	Do you think that's possible?
	Yeah, but I'd be apprehensive of experiencing you know the death of uh another closed person.
	Not the same kind.
	Yeah, okay, fair enough.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Well, I mean, I can't control the experiences I undergo that are, you know, cause.
	I mean, that's not something I invite, but I'm obviously not going to deny.
	I mean, you know, I'm open to what life has to bring, and this was a highly abnormal experience, but it was absolutely bona fine.
	Yeah, so I asked you if you would ever buy Dr. Alexander's book.
	If somebody gave you that book as a gift, Would you even read it?
	Well, it's a good question.
	I'd be more inclined to want to interview if he were alive.
	Is he still around?
	Yes, he's very well known.
	Okay.
	I'd be up for inviting him on, Sophia, to do a show.
	You could join with him.
	I don't know that it would be easy to reach him because he's so well known and he's written best-selling books and he's flanked by people.
	Yeah.
	Um, you might be able to invite him on a show.
	So you could try.
	Send me some contact.
	I'll tell you what, I mean, send me some contact.
	I'll give it a shot.
	Who knows?
	The thing is, though, people like that want you to have read their book first.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	I mean, that's more that's a salute to their experience from the interviewer.
	So I think that would be a better basis on which to interview him.
	But um if I had read his book, yeah.
	And how massive is it?
	How many hundreds of pages?
	Uh it's not um it's not big.
	It's a it's a medium-sized book, and it's highly, highly, highly interesting.
	Because he's coming from where you are coming from, Jim.
	He never would have believed any of this.
	Background in neuroscience, yeah.
	Yeah.
	And as an atheist, the book is that accessible.
	I might very well read it, sure, especially if I anticipated interviewing him.
	Or even you again on this subject, Sophia.
	Yeah.
	Let me know about the book.
	Send me in, Paul.
	Let me track it down and you know, give it a shot.
	Well, you could buy it used, or I could buy it and send it to you.
	Right, right.
	I'm over that.
	Proof of Heaven, Jim.
	Proof of Heaven.
	That is the title.
	Proof of Heaven.
	I think somebody send me that book.
	I think I have it, Sophia.
	I'll I'll look.
	I think I have it.
	Now, is this miraculous or not?
	That suddenly a little bit in your head.
	What's that a lot?
	Yeah.
	No, I gotta say, or the book.
	Okay, so Jim.
	We're going to try to send you in another direction just to expand your experience here on Earth.
	And now that you have the very book that you said you probably wouldn't buy just a few minutes ago, you told me, Oh, I probably wouldn't buy it, but I might read it, especially if I could interview him.
	But now you've got the book.
	You just remember.
	I do believe I have the book.
	All right.
	So you're gonna read this book.
	Is it because a friend?
	I mean, he listened to the radio shows Turn Out to Live Nearby.
	He's invited me to lunch before he lost his wife about two years ago, and he became very deeply into issues of the afterlife.
	And he, I believe, sent me the very book you're talking about, Proof of Heaven.
	So after your reading, you read it.
	No, sorry, after you have read it or while you're reading it, maybe you should go to lunch with this guy.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	Well, we go to lunch intermittently.
	We do.
	Sure, he'd love it.
	He'd love it if I read the book and we talk about it.
	He'd be thrilled.
	No doubt.
	All right.
	And so would Paul and so would all these other people.
	I'm on it.
	I'm on it.
	Okay.
	We achieved something.
	Just remember that what Dr. Alexander says about the brain, Jim, is that it is something that constricts our experience.
	And he says that consciousness is not created by the brain.
	Consciousness is outside the brain.
	The brain is okay.
	I'm not going to find it to that, Sophia.
	I mean, I've done a lot of work on the nature of mind and consciousness and cognition, but I'll look at the book.
	I'll read the book.
	We'll talk about the book with my friend too.
	What was it that bent me out of shape about Paul if he was simply trying to bring in this idea we're talking about?
	I mean, this is not reincarnation.
	I mean, this is something else.
	Uh I can't recall why I got met out of shape.
	Not that it would be the first time Paul and I have had our differences.
	There's a there's a clip out there of a just that shows right through Paul off the show.
	He told me about it.
	I haven't listened to it yet, but I guess 15 or 20 times.
	Who knows?
	Anyway, I I gotta listen, listen to that apparently is very humorous.
	Well, maybe you had a past life with Paul.
	Whatever.
	Who knows?
	Yeah.
	So anyway, I know you came back very quickly with no, no, no, you've done a lot of work and studying about consciousness, but you have to allow Ibn Alexander to explain what he thinks it is, particularly since he is a brain doctor, right?
	Yeah.
	So you have to be able to give him a chance to explain what he thinks it is.
	And maybe after you read his book, you will say, wow, well, that's possible, at least given the possibility.
	I'll look at it.
	I'll look at it.
	So since we were talking about Indians, Jim, there is another Indian tribe in South America called the Yaquana.
	Yeah, come on.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah.
	Yakwana Indians.
	Um, there was a book called The Continuum Concept written by a woman.
	I'm trying to look it up.
	Here it is, June 2017.
	So I wrote, so anyone who wants to um read my newsletter can do so by subscribing.
	Uh you will learn about things like this.
	I try to explore these kinds of concepts that are off the beaten path and relate them to our lives.
	And sometimes I do political stuff, sometimes I do health.
	Um, I do a lot of this kind of um looking at different cultures.
	So my newsletter is available at Sophia Smallstorm.com and avatarproducts.com.
	A V A T A R, which is also my store.
	So if you like the shows that I do with Jim, uh please visit my store.
	My blog is Sophia Smallstorm.com, but my store is what basically keeps me going.
	So when I get sales as a consequence of shows, I'm very grateful, and that makes me want to do more shows.
	But um the Iquana Indians live in Venezuela, and they also are nearly back in the Stone Age.
	And so Jean Liedloff, L-I-E-D-L-O-F-F, wrote this book, The Continuum Concept, which is very important for pregnant mothers and young mothers, young parents in general.
	So what Liedloff observed, she lived with the Yakuana for a while.
	She f saw that this tribe had perfectly behaved children.
	They never misbehaved, they didn't fight, they didn't whine, nag, pinch, bully each other.
	Um they did not even endanger themselves the way children in our uh societies do, like touching hot stoves and falling into bodies of water, in and out of, you know, out of windows.
	So the Iquana babies never had colic indigestion, never spat up.
	They didn't kick, scream, wriggle, struggle, or cry for any length of time.
	And this wasn't because they weren't vaccinated.
	It really helps, of course, not to be vaccinated.
	But the yaquana were very simple.
	They had only axes, canoes, and they knew how to make fire.
	And a few had shirts and pants, but hardly any wore anything at all.
	Sometimes they had a sling, uh, which they carried babies in.
	But Liedloff wrote this book.
	I don't know how much time we have left, um, about the Iquana, because she noticed it took her a while that they never let go of their children.
	They had their children in their arms or hands all the time.
	No child was ever put down and left to cry in a crib or on the ground or any such thing.
	And that is because babies like action.
	They want to be in the action, they want constant contact with other people, and they want to be part of what's happening.
	And the last thing they want is to be left in their crib staring at the ceiling and having this feeding schedule and needing to cry to get anyone to come near them.
	So this is the difference between our babies and jungle babies.
	Jungle babies are held constantly, and it makes them calm and friendly and well behaved and great members of society.
	What do you think of that?
	I'm fascinated.
	It makes perfect sense.
	Yeah.
	I mean, if you think about Western mothers, they, their baby reaches out and puts his grubby hand on their mother's hair and pulls it and she goes no.
	And then he does it to her necklace.
	And then he takes his hand.
	That's like he's just spat on it.
	And he puts it all over her face.
	And she says no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
	Don't make noise.
	Don't pull on me, don't pinch your, you know, push the dog.
	Don't do this, don't do that.
	That's all they hear.
	And they're constantly being constrained, and they're never held.
	So these babies are always being held makes the difference in their entire, you know, adjustment to the world around them.
	And she says that is the way to parent.
	Our normal is adversarial.
	No, no, no.
	It makes utter sense, utter sense, Sophia.
	Being a supportive parent, tolerating the kids, nurturing them, keeping them safe.
	Fascinating.
	Touching them all the time.
	That they're all well behaved and never grumpy and blah blah blah.
	I think that's fascinating.
	Yeah, but they have to be always held, always.
	And in these um, in this Indian culture, when the mother has to do something, she hands the baby off to someone else who holds the baby.
	So the baby is never never left completely alone.
	It's not like plumped down somewhere and told to given a rattle and told to amuse itself, you know.
	So it sense of security is never threatened, it never feels insecure, it never feels abandoned.
	Yeah, and that's what she calls the continuum sense.
	Yes.
	So that's my show for today, Jim.
	That's wonderful, Sophia.
	And I'm I'm off to find proof of heaven.
	And I so appreciate your coming on our conversations together.
	And uh everyone out there seems to feel as I do about them.
	So I'm very grateful, very glad to have you here once again.
	Thanks for I look forward to the next.
	Meanwhile, everyone spend as much time with your family, your friends, people you love and care about.
	We do not know how much time we have left.
	Use it wisely, and as you know, although I'm an agnostic, I'm now disposed to say, God willing.
	We'll be back on Monday and do it all over again.

▲