Today, Dan tells Jordan about one of the weirdest days ever on The Alex Jones Show. Alex begins the show really depressed about Satanists and finishes the show by barging out of the studio for one of the most childish reasons imaginable. The key is in what happens in between, like Alex thinking the show Gunsmoke is realistic.
And we played the game Pandemic, which I believe was very widely recommended by our listeners in the wake of our talking about the Illuminati card game.
And I realized, you know, sure, it's a week old at this point, this episode, but there was too much going on on it that I felt I couldn't leave this uncovered.
So that's what we'll be going over today, Wednesday, May 8th.
If you're out there listening and you're thinking, hey, I like what these guys do, I'd like to support the show, you can do that by going to our website, knowledgefight.com, clicking the button that says support the show.
I don't even know if I continue on doing this show at this point.
I think I may just end the show right now.
Because things are so bad in this country, I think talking about it is almost a way of just making it a form of entertainment.
I mean, I really, really, really do.
We have to do some really, really drastic things.
If you see any of these tech executives in person, I wouldn't try to run them out of restaurants.
I wouldn't try to do what the Democrats have said do to us that are fighting back against the bullying.
But I would definitely let them know that you're aware of their criminal activity and that they will be brought to justice.
And if you live next door to them, you should let them know that.
If you run into them, you should.
If you can do anything to hurt their stocks, if you can do anything to let these criminals know, because they're consolidating power, and it's getting worse by the day.
There's just this super weird vibe, and I don't think that clip fully embodies it, because there's parts where there's just, like, frequent four-second pauses, where he's just like, ugh.
You can just feel it in here.
This lethargy.
It's like, I don't know what...
It feels like the will to live has been sucked out of him.
And when I was listening to it, I was very puzzled.
So maybe this depression that he's manifesting is just a hangover, because he saw a documentary where Satanists are put in a good light, and that is going to cause a bender.
And he specifically takes a lot of those ideas that he's putting onto the Satanists.
And you'll see very clearly in this next clip, what he does is he takes those characterizations and applies them to Democrats in order to conflate Satanists and Democrats.
So, I want to say that the depression that he was manifesting at the beginning of the episode kind of made me feel a little bit gross and sad until it was contextualized in like, I saw this documentary about Satanism and that's what's causing it.
You know, the previous night before this episode, he'd gone to the old cinema, and he'd seen the documentary Hail Satan, which, I mean, the first question you had is the first question anyone has, which is, why the fuck would he go and do that?
What are you going to get out of it that's gratifying in some way that you can't just get that same charge from reading a book by my uncle who wrote books about satanic ritual abuse?
For those who haven't listened to all of our episodes, my uncle wrote a number of books about multiple personality disorder and how it's caused by satanic ritual abuse.
So I've not had a chance to see this movie, this documentary that Alex is talking about, but I watched the trailer and it looks really pretty interesting and I would be inclined to go see it.
But it's also really easy to sort out what the story of the movie is.
The documentary follows a group of people who advocate for marginalized groups and particularly against the oppression that comes disguised as Christian principle and protecting the separation of church and state.
And they formed this satanic temple in order to force the issue.
So the group the documentary follows is called the Satanic Temple, and it should be pointed out that they explicitly don't believe in a supernatural Satan.
Satan is just a metaphor that they use and a powerful symbol that they wield to get free press and demonstrate how much Christianity infringes on people's way of lives in ways that most people just accept as the default.
For instance, in 2013, they held a rally to support Florida Governor Rick Scott signing Senate Bill 98, which allowed children to pray at school in assemblies.
They rallied in support of the bill specifically to illustrate that the bill meant that if a student wanted to pray to Satan at the assembly, the school would have to let them.
They were using the tool of people's response to Satan as a way of highlighting that, you know, you're probably not cool with the idea of satanic prayer in school, and possibly maybe someone else might not be cool with any...
They've used the church to launch a number of purely social advocacies.
For instance, they started the Protect Children Project, where they allow parents to sign up on their website if their child goes to a school that uses corporal punishment or prolonged isolation as punishments for infractions.
After the parents register, the temple will contact the school and inform them that the punishments they're using are a violation of religious principles and post a challenge to the practice as a way of protecting these kids.
The religious principle here is that the satanic temple believes that your, quote, body is inviolable and subject only to one's own will, which is a tenet that they hope they can also use to provide religious exemptions to purely religiously based abortion laws.
So they use these things very strategically as a way to advocate.
Their works have ranged from things that are a little bit PR stunty, like when they married a gay and lesbian couple on top of Fred Phelps' mother's grave and then the satanic priest teabagged her tombstone.
Some of them are a little bit more just directly confrontational.
On that side of things, the Satanic Temple were the ones, like you mentioned, who, after Oklahoma State Representative Mike Ritz planned to erect a monument to the Ten Commandments on state property, insisted that that meant they had the right to erect a statue of Baphomet.
They didn't want to erect this statue of Baphomet at the state capitol.
They only wanted to illustrate why they didn't want a monument to the Ten Commandments, and it worked.
The case Prescott v.
Oklahoma Capital Preservation Committee ended up getting rid of the Ten Commandments monument and then immediately the Satanic Temple dropped their plans to put up their statue.
When Arkansas planned to put up a Ten Commandments monument, the Satanists brought back out the statue and are currently in the process of challenging that one too.
The point they were driving at is very clear.
Yeah, the satanic panic, well, why not just lean into it?
As one of their New York members explains, quote, you don't even have to be a Satanist.
You could just be a strong ally who believes in the political and secular actions without being super stoked about all the aesthetic aspects.
I get what they're doing.
They're trying to fuck with right-wingers by using a lot of their tools against them.
Pretty much everything the Satanic Temple does is specifically about protecting the division of church and state and about supporting vulnerable communities, be it the LGBT community, immigrants, Planned Parenthood employees, or kids who get hit in schools.
I admittedly don't know everything about the group, but from everything I can tell, while my personal taste doesn't go for some of the theatricality, it seems like they're doing important work and are pretty effective.
If you're going to have a religious exemption law for, you know...
A nurse refusing to treat a gay or lesbian patient.
If there's a religious exemption for that, then almost certainly you can argue in court that there would be a religious exemption for abortion if you were a Satanist.
And he likes to pretend that he hates them because they're low-down, dirty fools, seduced into following a literal personified Lucifer.
It's pretty clear if you look into what this group does, and if you watch the trailer for this documentary, it's clear that it's mostly about their social activism.
The conclusion is pretty tough to escape that what Alex hates about them is their social conscience.
He hates that they're into providing pretty tough resistance to the merging of church and state, which Alex is pretty into.
He hates that they accept people of all sexual orientations, of all identities, of all races, and they don't think that anybody is weird.
He hates that they take the protections that his religion has exploited forever and turn them around on him, because he knows that the only argument he can really use against them is an argument that Also erodes his religion's hegemony.
They have got him trapped to a certain extent.
If he argues against whatever they're doing on a religious ground, he erodes his power.
In Hating the Satanic Temple, which is the group that the documentary is about, Alex Jones has an unlikely ally, and that is Anton LaVey's Church of Satan.
A representative of the Church of Satan has said that, quote, the Satanic Temple amounts to no more than a bunch of trolls giving Satanism a bad name and a bald quest for attention, and has called them not real Satanists.
And what's weird is some of the criticisms that Alex has about them are really strangely in line with those of Peter Gilmore, the current high priest of the Church of Satan.
Alex feels that the Baphomet statue that they use as a prop in order to get rid of religious encroachment on state property...
Is a monument to pedophilia, since there are children on each side of Baphomet, the goat man.
So I'm left with the very strong sense that Alex is triggered by watching this documentary less because they are literal Satanists, because they aren't worshipping a literal Satan.
He's more triggered by the idea that they make a very strong point of protecting the vulnerable in these populations that Alex sees as non-desirable.
Yeah, can you imagine how much pain Alex must have gone through listening to his arguments shot back at him whenever the cognitive dissonance in his brain exploded That's where we are right now.
Because he's like, shit, they're saying the same stuff I'm saying, but they're right too.
And they talk about how bad babies are and how we need to kill them and how they're scum and how we need to stop putting them up on a pedestal, how we need to trample babies.
And I was in this theater with all these Austin liberals, all these weak men, like squirming and drinking their beer and getting off of it.
And I looked at all the men and women.
They were all ugly.
The men were all super weak.
The weakest of the weak, the ugliest of the ugliest.
So you see that there, and Alex continues doing this throughout the episode, getting more extreme with these ideas that are really just manifestations of his inability to deal with this satanic temple as an actual intelligent...
Group that is intentionally doing these things for political reasons.
It's such like the anti-abortion people have already used all of their other shitty lies.
So, because we're in the situation that we are where you can just say any untrue thing and everybody's going to buy it, or the people you like are going to buy it, you can just say, ah, they're killing babies.
Two years from now, they're going to be like, they're allowing abortion up to five years old!
I wonder about how much that is, like, we've had progression of argument A, B, C, D, and now we're at, like, J. Yeah.
I wonder how much is that, and how much of it is, like, because the way you said that, I heard it as, like, they've retreated from these other arguments.
And they always want to make it uglier and uglier and uglier and uglier because they're ugly at a spiritual level and they want to project their hate of themselves onto you.
And they want to make their behavior more and more outrageous like serial killers do so they get caught, so you stop them.
He does ramble a little bit after this about some sort of godly retribution, but it doesn't make it better, because what he's tapping into there is, you can hurt them.
So first thing, he spends a long time on talking about Trump's taxes, and I don't really particularly care to talk about it, because I don't think he knows what he's talking about.
All Alex is doing is talking about that report about how Trump lost a billion dollars.
And we could talk about that too.
I don't really think that's a good use of our time.
So I'm going to leave that alone.
Now, the part about executive privilege, Alex is directly lying.
He's saying that Trump waived executive privilege about the Mueller report, and that is 100% not true.
There was an article in The Hill from that morning, May 8th, quote, Trump declares executive privilege over Mueller report.
The issue is that Congress wants the unredacted report so they can investigate the ten instances that Mueller laid out about possible obstruction of justice.
Possible?
Interestingly, Attorney General and cover-up veteran William Barr has refused to provide them with the document, which has led the House Judiciary Committee to schedule a vote to hold Barr in contempt of Congress.
Trump's administration made it clear that they were going to assert executive privilege if they didn't cancel or delay the contempt vote, basically trying to get them not to hold Barr responsible by saying, quote, even if you do that, you're not going to get your report.
It honestly kind of feels like threatening to hurt a hostage to get your co-kidnapper out of a speeding ticket.
Not a great metaphor, but it's what came to me.
I'm going to stand by it.
This threat didn't work.
Barr was held in contempt of Congress, which for some things...
That sounds so serious really doesn't mean anything.
And Trump asserted his executive privilege, thereby debatably obstructing justice in the investigation into whether or not he previously obstructed justice.
Nothing matters anymore and the government is a circus.
The only point here that's important is that Alex is literally saying that Trump waived his right to executive privilege, something no president has ever done before.
This is an overt, explicit example of him telling his audience that 2 plus 2 equals 5. The very same thing he accuses his opponents in the media of doing all the time.
Alex is directly lying to his audience.
And that's not something...
That's new, necessarily.
But it's often not so brazen and direct as this.
This is, like, something that is demonstrably, like, factually...
You can find out what the truth is about this, and Alex is asserting the exact opposite of that.
I don't know on this one if he is, like, maliciously lying or wrong stupidly.
Because what he could be thinking is that...
The simple fact that we have the Mueller report at all means that Trump had to have waived his executive privilege because he could have used his executive privilege to suppress the entire report.
And I would accept that on almost any other day, but the fact that on May 8th it was in the news, the discussion of the executive privilege vis-a-vis the Mueller report.
I happen to have some intel here that ties into intel we already had and why they're trying to race and why they're going as fast as they can to have AI do all the censoring, but humans still have to oversee it because AI can't understand memes.
But do you know what's happening to the people that have to censor this show?
Can you imagine?
I was told this by executives and then I saw some news admitting it, but not saying my name.
And then this obviously breaks it down from PBS.
The SJWs that are made to watch my show, to monitor it and censor it, upwards of half of them are, quote, becoming programmed and brainwashed and then totally freaking out.
And then, quote, they are grabbing them in these facilities and taking them to mental institutions.
I've seen this play out way more times than I can even count on this show, and we don't often stop to, you know, take a point of what he's doing.
So one of the other things that's important to point out is that he says that this matches intelligence that we already got.
I got this intelligence, this PBA.
Yes, yes, yes.
That the PBS article is just a transcript of an interview that they did with this guy named Casey Newton.
And it's just a conversation about an article Casey had written about content moderators back in February.
The information that Alex said it matched up with is the article that Casey wrote in The Verge in February, which is the previous intel that Alex had that this PBS article matches up with, because it's an interview with the writer of that article.
Well, the government does that, like FBI does security contractors for so much work that work in the same exact office as FBI employees and that whole thing.
Workers have to evaluate a constant stream of bullying content, racist content, graphic videos of murders, and all manner of other deeply disturbing things that people post on Facebook and Instagram.
The author of this piece talked to people who had experienced severe reactions from the work, from beginning to question the Holocaust to always carrying a gun even while sleeping due to threats from people whose content was being rejected.
Or at least fears of reprisals from people whose content had been censored.
The problem is compounded by Cognizant being run in a manner that sounds exactly like an abusive factory.
Intense micromanagement of employees' time, what they can and can't do with their breaks, ineffectual counseling services being provided, and harsh productivity and accuracy expectations all add up to an incredibly hostile environment.
Even if these people weren't being made to experience horrors as a part of their job.
Employees describe the experience of talking to a coworker as, quote, trauma bonding.
On bad days, employees would joke that it was time to, quote, go hang out on the roof, code for wanting to jump off it.
One employee describes how he always loved cooking, but now is afraid to be around knives, because every time he sees one, he's reminded of a video he had to moderate where a man is stabbed to death and cries out for his mother as he dies.
Holy fuck.
I'm fucked up, man.
I don't think it's possible to do the job and not come out of it with some acute stress disorder or PTSD.
This anecdote is the closest that anything in this article comes to what Alex is basing his almost gleeful reporting that, quote, basically half of the moderators are becoming brainwashed and freaking out and they're sending them to mental institutions.
They didn't send this guy to a mental institution.
Well, and to be fair, like a more nuanced interviews and things about this topic, they generally do make a point that The bulk of what they deal with is maybe a slur or bullying.
It doesn't matter how much of a snowflake Alex might call you for that response.
It's a response to your humanity.
The article is about the human toll that comes from running content moderation in the same way companies run customer support call centers.
It's a brutal job where people are expected to see awful things, or they're exposed to awful things that make an impact on them, no matter how sensitive they may be.
And the greatest indictment of this article is not on the people posting fucked up stuff.
It's of Facebook and it's subcontracting companies for not doing a better job of taking care of their employees.
They talk about how the idea that you can have these horrible reactions to the work that you're made to do, but because the work is really awful and the place is run poorly, most Yeah.
So that's what the article's about, and there's a real human piece to it that I think is an important conversation we need to have, and if Alex were willing to engage with that conversation, he'd be able to score points against Facebook if he was actually looking at what was being discussed, but he's not.
Because these are real people whose lives are being altered, not an opportunity for him to make everything about his perceived plight and score a cheap self-serving point for himself.
They're Baker acting people at Facebook and at Twitter and other places.
That when they tell them I'm a Nazi and then they go watch years of my show, these people can absolutely finally find their soul and go, oh my god, Alex Jones didn't do any of this stuff.
So that is the angle and the narrative that he's using.
These people who are suffering these horrible consequences of being exposed to things like videos of people being shot.
And in addition to that, some racist and hateful content in written form.
And a lot of people, there is a tendency towards, when you're not examining things that are being brought into your sphere, there is a tendency towards just automatic acceptance of them.
When you're exposed to conspiracy content on a bombarding basis, which this is set up to be, because there are quotas and you have an expectation of doing a ton of work, you will just be exposed to these ideas for a very brief...
You won't be able to critically analyze them because you've got to get on to your next piece of content that you have to moderate.
So there is something that overrides your critical thinking skills and your ability to look into a claim that's made.
So you'll just see Muslims want to kill everybody.
Muslims want to kill everybody.
And if you're not careful of your default, you could let your guard down and eventually buy into a lot of ideas that aren't true.
So Alex is using that Reality, as...
They're exposed to my content, and then they realize that I'm right about everything, and then they're getting baker-acted in sentimental institutions because shit isn't going the way that the SJW globalists wanted it to.
They want to label me as some sort of an evil force, but everybody who sees me, they know that they're wrong and I'm right.
Well, I'm living proof.
I've been listening to you every day for two and a half years, and I have not been baker-acted.
And so what actually this guy, Casey Newton, was arguing for is, or maybe not even arguing for, but suggesting one approach would be to treat these people who work in these...
centers the same way that you treat EMTs and give them more benefits give them higher pay Have an in-house counselor, for God's sake.
Well, they do, but apparently it's very ineffectual.
And I think that Alex gets a lot of mileage out of turning it into being about himself, as opposed to it being about beheading videos and, you know, shootings.
...got one thing right in their film, and that's when Abraham is going to kill his own son that God gave him to show total and complete loyalty, that it's God that does the killing.
Well, he's saying that the people in the documentary are at the behest of Satan, and they're working for literal Satan, and worship literal Satan, but they're also the sucked-dry minions of true Satanists who are rich people.
To the old Satanism model, the sexy, beautiful, voluptuous woman to lure in businessmen and powerful people and to really, that's real Satanism.
Cults.
This is meant to be stunted.
Dead-eyed, super weak, and shown as powerful because they've already gotten the giant masses of leftists to be soulless and have no connection to God, and so they'll never know what hit them when the devil tells you at the start, we don't believe in the devil, we don't believe in God.
Get rid of that actor, I do believe in devil, I'm God.
More, the idea that I was putting forth that what he is responding to in these people in this Hail Satan documentary, which by the way, I should point out, it's Hail Satan question mark.
The music behind that makes me want now, now it's an instant, like, Patton's speech, the inspirational swelling music behind it, just overlay it with what Alex said right there.
So, yeah, I mean, Mark Dice has to turn that around because it's a sign of weakness that you weren't, you know, he feels it's a projection of I'm not good enough to have gotten this show.
So, in reality, it was a situation where this guy told me I needed to worship Satan in order to get this TV show, and I said no because I have principles.
So they tell you there wasn't a satanic invasion in the 80s, which there was, but now we are taking over and we're going to overturn Christianity for free speech when the left is all anti-free speech and this very satanic group is anti-Alex Jones and doesn't think I should be on the air.
Look, if you come out on a first date and say that you believe we're locked into a struggle of good and evil and that the devil is somewhere entrapped underneath the earth because God did it for whatever reason he has, we have free will, although that means he's not a Calvinist.
It depends on how you want to track the inference entirely, but I think he's going to say something really stupid here, but I think if you really listen to it, there's a better way to understand what he's saying.
But remember, if you go to a Democratic Party event, the people look...
They look scared.
They look soulless.
They look like they're lost.
And that's the high end.
Half of them, or the low side, are crazed and screaming and shaking with hatred.
And they believe that those of you who have the light of God in your eyes are the enemy, and if they could simply extinguish that light, then they could finally have power.
In their search for power, they have found the opposite of power.
Obviously that's not what Alex is saying, but underneath what he's saying, the effect of what he's trying to communicate to his audience, the people he's trying to get them to not like, and the reason he's trying to get them to not like them, it tracks, if you understand the code that he's using as being the defense of white defaultism.
You know, back in the days of Teddy Roosevelt was a pretty good president.
He said, bully!
The railroads won't let their competition pay to ship their own fruit or their own cattle when there's room?
That's a monopoly.
We're going to break that up.
He told...
Northern Pacific and all of them, you're going to ship people's products.
Or I'm going to have your ass arrested.
That's a private business.
They can do whatever they want.
The big railroads advertise.
They got open land.
They got all the exemptions.
They got liability protection to open up the West and have commerce.
And then once they had the railroads coast to coast, they started saying, there's even like a gun smoke on it I saw once that's based on true stories where they want to ship the peaches.
Gunsmoke was mostly a show about a lawman being forced to make hard choices.
Going over the list of episodes they put out, there's a curiously high incidence of plots of episodes surrounding white children who were raised by Native Americans.
Something that must have been a hot topic back in the 50s when this show was created.
As much as I'd love to talk about Bonanza a little, this was definitely a Gunsmoke episode that Alex is thinking of.
He's referencing episode 472, which is less about a railroad monopoly as it is about corporate eminent domain.
That episode aired 51 years ago, so it's pretty relevant.
I'm going to be the first to openly admit here, you know, I like to be very open and clear, even when I have to admit that my research went astray.
And this is one of those cases.
Later in the episode, actually in the next clip we're going to hear, Alex is going to make clear that he's talking about that episode 472, but before he did, I started trying to solve the mystery of what episode he was talking about.
I came across an episode from season 4 called Monopoly, which had to do with a goods transporting business, so I figured it must be what he was talking about.
In the end, it wasn't the right episode, and I accept that.
However, I did watch an episode of Gunsmoke in preparation for this episode.
There's no way I'm not going to not tell you about it.
The episode was originally aired on October 4th, 1958.
It's called Monopoly, and truth be told, it has barely anything to do with a monopoly.
Sheriff Matt Dillon comes to work one day to find a lovable local character sleeping off a wicked drinking binge in the town holding cell.
The drunk wakes up, and as he's leaving, Dillon gives him his gun back, which is almost certainly what Alex was referencing when he recently claimed that back in the 50s, the cops would give you your guns back when you got out of prison.
So this drunk has given his gun back, and he apologizes for being so drunk the night before, and says he only drank because he had just sold off his freighting business, and so had pretty much all the other mule and wagon cargo people in town.
The mysterious Mr. Ivy had come to town from St. Louis, as they insist on calling it every single time.
Just basically gives him a warning of like, hey, by the time that he becomes a problem, it might be too late.
That's basically all he does.
So the last freight runner who hasn't sold out, a man by the name of Joe Trimble, he comes to Dylan because he's received a note from Ivy, but it turns out he's illiterate and needs Dylan to read it for him.
Ivy wants to buy his company for $1,000, which even with inflation considered would only be a little bit less than $20,000 today.
It's a nice little chunk of change, but if you're running a business that sustains you, it's not like that's going to be some kind of luxurious all-be-set-for-life money.
Ivy later tells him that he's going to double his rates and that Trimble needs to as well because if he doesn't, his lower rates will cause a flood of demand that he can't handle.
This doesn't make a lot of sense, but it doesn't matter because I have to stress, this is not a huge part of the episode.
It's only there to be window dressing for the feud between Sheriff Matt Dillon and Cam Spiegel.
They wouldn't even allow five appearances by the same actor, I think.
Either way, the saloon girl tells Dylan about the bribe, and he's about to go confront Cam Spiegel about this when he gets news that Spiegel has shot Joe Trimble at the local saloon.
Dylan goes to check things out and Spiegel claims self-defense saying that, you know, Trimble had come in and drew his gun on him.
Sure.
And then Dylan says that Trimble had a good reason to draw on him since he had burned down his house and killed his wife.
Spiegel says he has an alibi.
Dylan tells him no.
He knows about the bribe.
Dylan tells him he's going to jail and he needs to lay his gun down and they'll let a court decide about the arson.
Spiegel starts to draw on Dylan, and Dylan shoots him dead.
The town doctor, Doc, who's there, he comments, quote, it's just as well he probably would have won in court, which is a fucked up response to watching a cop kill a guy.
After all this drama, Ivy claims he knew nothing about Spiegel's actions, and Dylan tells him that he needs to get the fuck out of town.
The citizens of that town will kill him on sight because they love the Trimbles, who, I repeat, have not appeared in the previous 120 episodes of this show, nor in the 480 episodes of its 11-year run as a radio drama, which I stress is about a small town.
Ivy is terrified.
He runs out the back door with his tail between his legs, never to be seen again, explicitly leaving behind the companies that he had bought out.
Obviously, the first issue is that at no point in this episode does Matt Dillon care about Okay.
All he only cares about cam Spiegel and writing the wrongs of Wichita.
Now, the natural problem that the ending of this episode introduces is now that with Trimble dead and Ivy ran out of town, you go from an attempted monopoly to literally no one in the city having a transportation business.
The people who got bought out aren't given the chance to buy their shit back from Ivy Yeah, that sounds right.
Also, it's true that Roosevelt was involved in this trust-busting and shit, but it would be unfair to ignore that it wasn't his presidency that was the entirety of the progressive era, and that more trusts were busted up during Taft's tenure in office than during Roosevelt's.
So, he doesn't give much of that credit because he was too fat and got stuck in a bathtub.
That old western, I think his dad had died, his mom had died.
He wanted to keep the little farm, and the big local corrupt guy wanted to take it because it had water and holes on it or whatever, and then he goes to the railroad and makes a deal with them where they won't ship his peaches.
A thousand miles so he can make the money to save his farm.
But in the end, he loads them up in a wagon, takes them a month or so to get there.
The guy sends bandits to stop him.
But they get stopped, and then when he gets there, he thinks all the peaches are dead and rotten, but under the first layer, all the peaches are alive.
If you think people are dumb and evil and stupid now, you haven't seen anything yet.
If you think devil worshippers all over the news saying we're going to come to your school and talk to your kids whether you like it or not is bad and we're going to kill babies after they're born.
If you think that's bad in 2019, Bubba, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Because before the globalist can release the bioweapons, God has to remove his protection.
Oh.
The devil would nuke this planet in 10 seconds if God removed his protection.
God's protection ideas, that line of thought definitely isn't foreign to us, but him coming out and saying, God will release the protection for an hour, and that's when we're going to get hit, that is pretty...
The window dressing is interesting because he's talking about this bus station, the Gare du Nord, the north station in Brussels that has been closed.
It hasn't been closed.
There's a bus line that has stopped serving that station and going to another bus stop because of...
A lot of immigrant population there.
Now, in order to understand this story that Alex is telling on the show, it's essential to understand the surrounding context of it.
I'm going to grant him that it is true.
There is a story he's covering in a Belgian news outlet, HLN, that does discuss the plan to not have buses stop at the north station, the Gare du Nord, quote, prompted by recent rumors that scabies, malaria, and tuberculosis had broken out at the station.
But, as is always the case with Alex, there's more to this story than he cares to understand or report.
There's a large population of itinerant immigrants, or as they're called, transmigrants, who are, for lack of a better word, stuck in Brussels.
Many of them fled from various countries in turmoil, ultimately arriving in Europe, landing in Italy.
For many of them, it's as simple of a problem as not having proper identification to make the trip, often because they left it behind when they fled their home country.
Some others wish to stay in Belgium, but are afraid to apply for asylum after seeing many immigrants that they knew apply, only to have that put them on the government's radar for deportation.
Under EU rules, and specifically a rule called the Dublin Rule, a country is not supposed to deport asylum seekers back to their home countries.
But, under the right circumstances, they're allowed to send them back to the first EU country they arrived in.
For many of these immigrants in Belgium, that would be Italy.
And there's a reason they didn't just stay in Italy.
To quote a 25-year-old Sudanese man who spoke with the Financial Times, conditions in Italy are bad.
Quote, you stay in the camp and there is nothing.
They don't want to risk applying for asylum only to be sent back to Italy where they'll be put in a camp, and they can't make the trip across the English Channel, so they're left in a weird in-between state stuck in Brussels.
Human rights charities work with the people, and they've found that once they're able to establish with a refugee that they're exempt from the Dublin rule, because many are.
Many submit to the process and apply for asylum formally, which gives a positive indication about a direction forward there could be towards progress.
But there are even greater risks in being sent to an Italian camp.
Because even though they're not supposed to do so generally, sometimes refugees are deported back to the countries they left.
And in 2017, that caused some real serious tensions to flare up after there were allegations that people who had been sent back to Sudan had been tortured when they returned.
These people were sent despite warnings from international human rights groups and leaked notes from the government that indicated that they were aware that some of the people who were sent back were from the regions of Darfur, the Blue Nile, and South Kordofan, which made them automatic recipients of a protected status.
The government's motivation seemed to be, quote, cleaning up public areas where stuck itinerant immigrants were congregating, places like Gardu Nord and Maximilian Park.
So it's probably unclear off the bat here why there would be large populations of itinerant immigrants coming to this Garda Nord.
If you had to assume, I would guess that you probably just think that it's where the train disembarks, so they get off the train and then just stay there.
But that's not true.
Immigrants come to Gare du Nord specifically because it's an established humanitarian hub.
Several non-governmental organizations have banded together to provide essential help to people trying to immigrate, many of them leaving war-torn areas and wanting a chance to start a new life.
Doctors Without Borders, Oxfam, the Red Cross, and some more local organizations have established this center within the Garda Nord as a place where immigrants can get help that no one else is providing.
This ranges from psychological services, basic medical care, legal assistance, food, clothing, Wi-Fi, and electrical outlets that they can use to charge their phones.
While all this help is definitely life-saving, the psychological services aspect of this is really crucial.
According to a psychologist who works at the humanitarian hub, he's seeing a trend of immigrants developing depression based on harsh disillusionment.
Quote, they imagine Europe as the continent of human rights, but when they arrive here, they're completely disillusioned.
They never imagined that they'd be sleeping outside in a state with a rule of law.
I mean, I don't think it's the full station, but yeah, there is a part of it that is this...
This life-saving thing.
And then there are other good things to mention, positive things.
A volunteer organization called BXL Refugees launched a movement in September 2017 urging people to open their homes to refugees who found themselves in the impossible situation they're in.
When they began, they were only able to find 10 families willing to house a stranger in need.
But by 2018, the number had swelled to over 3,000 families opening up their spare rooms.
One family, the Gillises, have opened their home to two refugees in need.
One of them, speaking to Euronews, said, quote, There are many good-hearted people who are going out of their way to do something to help mitigate the problem, and that is a very inspiring sign.
But, as we've learned so well on this podcast, anytime there's something inspiring, there's something equally depressing hanging over us like a sword of Damocles, waiting to dash any kind of optimism we may have.
Since 2010, as nationalism began to sound pretty good to people again, the political situation in Belgium has been moving pretty far to the right.
The Flemish Nationalist Party, the New Flemish Alliance, has made major strides, and in 2014 they became the largest party in the Chamber of Representatives and in the Senate.
The New Flemish Alliance sucks, and their leader, Bart de Weber, has been pretty clear in his harsh stance towards itinerant immigrants, proposing prosecuting them and seizing their cell phones to send the message that, quote, Belgium is not the place to be.
In a good news, bad news situation, the New Flemish Alliance lost a bit of power in 2018 when they left the ruling coalition that they were a part of, which included the prime ministership.
That's the good news.
The bad news is that they left the ruling alliance because Prime Minister Charles Michel refused the new Flemish alliance's demand that he rescind his plan to sign a non-binding UN migration agreement.
All UN member states other than the US have signed it.
And because Michel decided to sign, the NVA, which is their initials in Flemish, pulled out of his government.
This is a bad sign, because they're still the largest political party in the Senate and Chamber of Representatives.
So when they're leaving the ruling coalition in an effort to be more xenophobic and push further hard right, it's concerning.
And one of the reasons that they need to do this sort of thing is to hold on to their far-right base, which is starting to be eroded by an even more fucked-up Flemish nationalist party, Vlaams Belong.
Hard right Flemish nationalist parties are starting from an unfair disadvantage, I would say, and that is that their movement traces its roots to the post-World War I world, when a party representing their interests emerged called the Front Party.
While the party may have started with Flemish representation...
They may have started with an interest in Flemish representation as being their primary concern.
By the early 1930s, it had pushed pretty far right and had been absorbed by the Flemish National Union, an explicitly authoritarian party that were overt collaborators with the Nazis in World War II because Hitler had promised them greater Flemish rights.
It deserves mention that VNV, that's their initials, the Flemish National Union, VLV leader Stef de Klerk was collaborating with the Nazis before they invaded Belgium, with the hopes that they could help him come to power, which led directly to his party helping organize the deportation of Jews to the camps.
So you can see how that history gives people a little bit of hesitance about hard-right nationalist, Flemish nationalist parties.
After the liberation of Belgium by the Allied Powers, the VNV was outlawed as a political party for fairly obvious reasons.
This led to the rise of the Christian Flemish People's Union, which worked to make sure that they were nationalists, but also didn't put anyone in office who had collaborated with the Nazis.
Which would eventually be merged into the Vlaams bloc.
Vlaam's bloc was a very specifically anti-immigrant, far-hard-right nationalist party.
Their slogan in the 1987 election was, quote, own people first, which sounds really bad when translated, since it's easy to read the word own as a verb.
The party found increased success with focusing on immigration issues as opposed to harping too hard on Flemish separatism.
In the same way that our right wing may profess an interest in small government, but riling people up about nativist resentment and populist bullshit is way more effective as an electoral strategy.
And it worked well for Valaam's bloc.
Growing from relative obscurity in the 80s to a very serious political party by the late And then the year 2000 happened.
A complaint was filed against the party claiming that they broke Belgium's anti-racism laws in their party's stated platform.
An issue was that they had called for an entirely separate educational system for foreign children, new taxes for businesses that hired non-European foreigners, and restricting benefits for non-European foreigners.
The case bounced around courts until 2004 when the Belgian High Court, the Court of Cassation, ruled that their party platform was indeed racist and effectively disbanded the party by taking away their state funding I bet they took that well, put their tails between their legs, and just moved on, right?
No, they did.
They had to.
They had to.
They were dissolved.
They had no chance of any relevancy if they were banned from television, and the state funding of elections, if they don't have access to that money, they're fucked.
One of the members of the New Flemish Alliance that left the Michelle government was their migration minister, Theo Franken, who incidentally was the one responsible for sending protected refugees back to the Sudan to be tortured.
Now, before he left the Michelle government, Franken actually had a bit of a hand to play in making sure that the issue of Gardu Nord in Brussels was not taken care of.
His New Flemish alliance has a hard right position on immigration who wishes to punish or deport these people, not to help them.
And in the recent years, he's had groups like Vlam's Belong happy to be even further right and more shitty than him to make sure that he's not able to give an inch.
Because if he does, they start attacking him from the right.
It's a terrible situation.
The party with the most members in Brussels Parliament, the local government in Brussels, is the Socialist Party.
And a large majority of the members of that body are not hard-right nationalists.
Most of them are liberal.
Members of the Brussels Parliament have tried to do what they can to alleviate what is legitimately a humanitarian crisis for these trans migrants, but they've been pretty vocal that they can't solve any problems without federal government cooperation.
There's collaboration that needs to be done.
To that complaint and request...
New Flemish Alliance Migration Minister Theo Franken said they can, quote, count on zero euros.
I've always been against this migration hub that Brussels apparently wants to be.
If Brussels wants to be a kind of safe haven for illegal trans migrants, they should go ahead, but not at the expense of the federal government.
He doesn't give a shit.
Folks like this only care about humanitarian issues like this when they escalate to the point where they feel that they can rationalize dealing with their problem through violence.
And so the problem has been allowed to fester.
So, I know this has been long, but I think it's really important to understand the forces at play when we see a situation that's being lied about by right-wing propagandists in our country.
We live in a place where most of us are incredibly unaware about Belgian politics and the day-to-day of this sort of stuff, so it becomes something that's easy to manipulate people about.
Foreign events are often the most fertile soil for local propagandists because the disconnect involved and the almost guaranteed ignorance of the topic in your listener.
This is why Alex loves to trot out crime statistics from the UK and Sweden and lie about them, knowing that his audience won't look deep enough into them to understand the context behind the data.
And the same is true, the situation here at the Gardner Nord in Brussels that he's talking about.
So all this situation is, you can see kind of the forces at play and all that.
But at the same time, from what I've been able to sort out from the reporting I've read, I can't contest the fact that buses are saying that they are going to stop servicing the station.
That does appear to be factually accurate.
However, it should be pointed out that it's not the government that's behind stopping the bus services.
It's the trade union.
The union that represents transportation employees decided that they weren't going to be stopping at the underground bus terminal there, instead rerouting to nearby stops.
In an article in the Brussels Times, it makes it explicitly clear that the concerns about scabies and TB are rumors, and that there's literally no evidence of either disease.
And DeLine, the group that runs the buses, and the federal public health ministry have said that this amounts basically just to unfounded rumors.
The real issue comes down to complaints from customers about the smell, the litter, and being hit up by transmigrants for change.
There's a climate where people don't feel safe, and when unfounded disease rumors appeared, it was enough justification for the transportation trade unions to act.
Unfortunately, the place that they've re-roded the buses to, Rogier Square, is in the neighboring St. Joss, whose mayor, Amir Kier, is not happy about the mobility problems that the increased traffic has brought with it.
So he's seeking to stop the buses from stopping in his city, saying in a press release, quote, It is incomprehensible and unacceptable for the federal government to abandon a place as important as the Gardu Nord.
I call on all parties involved to find a sustainable and worthy solution for everyone.
So I'm not entirely sure exactly what's going on, but this seems kind of like a good strategy, and it might be effective in getting the federal government to act.
The idea of, like, we've re-rooted these buses here.
No, you're not.
Maybe that'll force their hand.
I'm not entirely sure, but time will tell.
The reality of the situation in Brussels is incredibly complicated, but could be helped immensely by a government that was willing to do what it needed to do to help people in a crisis.
A huge step forward would be removing the fear that many of these refugees have of applying for Belgian asylum.
If they knew that it wouldn't result in them being sent back to a country where they might face torture or death, or back to a camp in Italy, it could go a long way to getting them back on their feet.
Removal of that threat could be a big step forward.
It would be nice if the state could help with getting those who wanted to apply for asylum in the UK, helping them facilitate that.
For instance, a lot of them want to because they have family there.
But it seems unlikely that they would do that since it would be decried by anti-immigrant politicians there.
And then when they saw something that looked bad, they made a chalk mark.
And so, quote, officers immediately transferred those bearing chalk marks, typically 15 to 20 percent of the arrivals, to either the physical or mental examination rooms.
Of all the people who are found to be sick, this is not a quote, this is me talking here.
Of all the people who are found to be sick, which is just that small percentage, 15 to 20 percent, quote, some were confined, often for months and sometimes years, in the isolation units in the southernmost wing of Ellis Island.
But they'd be held in these cells, and they wouldn't apply for hospital treatment because they knew that they would have to pay for it themselves.
And ultimately, most of the people who were treated for diseases at Ellis Island were deported not because they were sick, but because they couldn't pay for their own hospitalization.
So a lot of the people that Alex is referring to...
The people that Alex is referring to, the very small number of people who were held for possibly months, were just poor.
Well, I mean, they ended up getting deported because they were poor, but they ended up getting deported because they applied for hospitalization and then couldn't pay for it once they were fine.
I find this passage particularly important to remember.
Of those who were denied entry, most were certified not with loathsome or dangerous contagious diseases, but with conditions that limited their capacity to perform unskilled labor.
Senility, old age, varicose veins, hernias, poor vision, and deformities of limbs or spine were among the primary causes for exclusion.
That so few of the more than 25 million arriving immigrants inspected by the PHS were excluded sets into bold relief the country's almost insatiable industrial demand for cheap labor.
Of course, even though this was the case at Ellis Island, where a vast majority of people arriving were European, it should be noted that, quote, non-Europeans faced more considerable medical obstacles to entry at the nation's Pacific coast and Mexican border during immigration stations.
At Texas border stations, PHS medical inspectors stripped, showered, disinfected, searched for lice, and physically examined large groups of immigrants.
All second- and third-class Asian immigrants arriving in San Francisco endured a physical exam similar to that conducted along the Mexican border in addition to routine laboratory testing for parasitic infection, which required detention on Angel Island for one or two days.
Disease, health officials argued, was not easily read in the inscrutable Asians, particularly the Chinese.
So it wasn't until the Immigration Act of 1924 that things started to change.
We set up a visa system where American consular offices in other countries would grant visas to people before they embarked on their journey here.
This was specifically to cut off the flow of immigrants from, quote, undesirable southern and eastern European nations.
Weirdly, under the system, between 1926 and 1930, almost 5% of immigrants The rate had been around 1% turned away for medical reasons, approximately 2% turned away, period.
The immigration system has always been a backbone of racism and exploitative capitalism.
Medical rules have always been a tool of that exclusion.
Before 1924, of those who wouldn't be good cheap labor, and after 1924, of people of ethnicities we didn't want here.
To pretend Alex's position is based on some kind of concern for public health is ludicrous.
All of these hard right guys right now, if we didn't have a system of automation, would be like, hey, we need to get rid of their rights, but I mean, come on in.
Alex is specifically talking about that one train station in Belgium.
But he's also talking about more, I guess, because he's trying to apply it to his narratives about immigrants bringing measles here and causing outbreaks.
It just comes out today, just after we published that story, that the cleaning staff that work at this train station are now going to be vaccinated for a variety of different diseases, including a variety of hepatitis strains.
And so they're also downplaying this one and saying, oh, you know, there's nobody that's been infected.
unidentified
We're just doing this as a precautionary measure.
But I think that this ties into the larger situation.
We have this measles outbreak that's just exploding across the U.S. See, he's even making it explicit.
The article that he's using as a source for this is from the Brussels Times, and it doesn't involve local officials downplaying anything.
It involves news organizations quoting public health organizations that are on the ground and actually know the facts, saying, quote, It is what he is insinuating.
Why would you?
A combative mindset where the default position of anything that doesn't fit the narrative must secretly be a cover-up.
This mentality is incredibly dangerous, especially when it's being wielded to perpetuate these sorts of dehumanization narratives because it's based on nothing.
But idiots think that he has some reason to suggest this is downplaying.
Third thing.
Dan Lyman is completely misrepresenting his primary source.
This Brussels Times article.
If you read it, it clearly says, quote, around 10 workers are concerned and will be vaccinated against hepatitis A and B. Oh, it's not even like a policy.
If you take the hyperlink that that is referencing, it takes you to an article in Le Dernier Huer, which is a French paper out of Belgium.
Where you learn that around 10 means 12 and that their primary concern isn't with the transmission of sicknesses that Alex and Lyman are trying to scare you about.
It's about fecal transmitted diseases like hepatitis that could be a risk to cleaning crews.
They cherry-pick their information in an abusive fashion because they are not journalists.
They're cruel propagandists whose current primary objective is implanting and solidifying in their audience's mind that people who aren't from where you are from should be suspected of being transmitters of infectious diseases.
They're basically biological weapons being used by the Democrats who want them to get in specifically to get you sick.
This is repulsive stuff.
And the fact that they can engage in this...
This kind of talk, so flippantly, is legitimately terrifying to me.
Because how do they not understand that this is what they're doing?
It's so much like the creation of the border between India and Pakistan, where it's almost like this propaganda just built up, and then overnight, your neighbor now became your suspect.
The next day, you're like, uh-oh.
This dude might be a disease carrier.
Just not even realizing that you're one step away from fucking total eradication.
It's pretty much exclusively used to demonize Muslims.
But their audience gets the message that they're trying to get across.
Namely that there's areas in these cities where Muslims have completely taken over, they operate under Sharia law, non-Muslims aren't welcome to enter, and the cops are afraid to come in at all because the Muslim Sharia law is more powerful than their absurdly overpowered police power.
You'll notice that Dan Lyman is not being specific about these areas he's been to at all.
Just naming cities, or in one case, just saying it was in Italy.
This is very intentional, because the less specific you are, the more able you are to wiggle out of your lie when you're called on it.
If you take away, or if you add specificity, you're named.
You're fucking full of shit.
So, in terms of Paris, a woman named Holly Koch put together an interesting mini-documentary on YouTube that I found where she set out to do a two-week investigation, checking out all the alleged Muslim no-go zones in Paris, alone with her camera, specifically pointing out that she's a blonde woman alone, something that all the people who propagate the no-go zone ideas would say would make her a huge target.
Not to spoil the documentary, but no one harassed her, although she did say she was catcalled twice in the two weeks, which is bad.
And she didn't find any evidence of Muslim-only neighborhoods or neighborhoods where Sharia law was in place at all.
Her video, full of actual footage of her all over Paris that pretty well documents and demonstrates that these ideas are ludicrous, has about 1,300 views on YouTube.
Paul Joseph Watson paid definitely not a Nazi but seems to hang out with Nazis quite a bit.
Tim Pool, $2,000 to go explore the alleged no-go zones in Malmo, Sweden.
And even he had to admit that he didn't find shit, even in the areas that everyone said was the worst.
That hasn't stopped his documentary as being used as evidence of no-go zones, and it has 2.1 million views on YouTube.
So you can kind of see...
Yeah.
The idea of no-go zones has been flying around for quite a while, but the talk of them has really ramped up since 2015 because that's when about a million refugees fled almost certain death, mostly from Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq.
I can't be any more explicit than this.
These people who push these narratives are not doing it because they're concerned about an imagined increase in crime or whatever high-minded reason they profess.
Pure and simple, the idea of no-go zones exists as preemptive conditioning to desensitize people against the idea of violence against minority neighborhoods.
It's a rationalization for looking the other way if police crack down on Muslims.
This is the implication behind No Go Zone propaganda, that eventually we're going to have to suck it up and send the military in, or reclaim the neighborhoods ourselves.
It's a deeply insidious narrative, meant only to further stigmatize immigrants and people who folks like Alex hate, and make sure that there is no chance of integration, and no chance of people living happily together.
And here's the thing.
In order to reinforce these narratives, these motherfuckers who push this stuff have to make shit up.
When Tim Pool went to Sweden, he didn't get any footage of anything.
But in order to make it look like his trip wasn't a total waste of time for right-wing narratives, he claimed that, quote, several men started masking up and following us.
Police told us to leave and had to escort us to our car.
This was when he was in Rickenby, which is just outside Stockholm.
He went on to later say, quote, They got in their car to escort us out, and we had to walk alongside their vehicle and followed us to our car.
As we were walking, there were people just following us, yelling things.
See, it's a good story, and it's just enough to leave the taste in your mouth that these stories of no-go zones are true.
And maybe it's just a reality a little bit deeper beneath the surface than Tim Pool has the skills to dig.
It's precisely the sort of thing that someone who went to Sweden and found nothing to support the idea of no-go zones might be inclined to lie about in order to make sure that the documentary that he makes still work to reinforce no-go zone narratives.
When the local, a Swedish news outlet, contacted the police, quote, a press officer said that Poole did not receive an escort.
Frida Nordloff of the Swedish police said, quote, when Tim Pool took out a camera and started filming a group of young people, they pulled their hoods up and covered their faces and shouted at him to stop filming.
The officers then told Tim Pool that it wasn't wise to stay there in the middle of the square and keep filming.
So he's completely misrepresented this interaction as being followed and, you know, somehow...
I've seen literally no evidence of no-go zones that doesn't somehow intrinsically involve dishonest reporting, or things that could just be seen as the normal sort of thing, you know, where some parts of cities have higher crime than other parts of the city, and a lot of that could be explained really easily by economic realities that don't really have anything to do with Islam or immigration specifically.
And the end of his interview, because Alex lets him go, they've done what they need to do, and now Alex wants to talk about his personal aggrievement and how he is a victim, and then he compares himself.
So, after his self-aggrievement, complaining, and very unfair comparison to Jews and the Holocaust, Alex gets to getting back to what he claimed was his main story, which is the Facebook censors who are coming down with trauma symptoms.
And he gets back to spinning it as just being like...
And so years ago, I began to learn that one big reason they wanted to go to AI computers doing censorship, which more and more they're doing, is because humans that have to listen to shows like this at Facebook and Twitter and Google and places and YouTube and censor it, well, they get radicalized, you see.
They actually tune in.
And hear what we have to say versus what mainstream media is saying about us and what the corporate system is saying about us.
Because if you read the actual article in The Verge, it's very hard to come away from that article without a decent amount of empathy and concern for the people who have to make social media spaces livable for us.
They talk about snuff films and child molestation.
That's all the stuff the Democrats are into.
And they talk about all the terrible stuff Facebook has to go through.
And you see the articles about Facebook employees that have to moderate while they get PTSD having to listen to the conspiracy theorists.
And then they talk about, oh, why we have to follow them around and watch what they're doing.
And I've talked to sources inside these groups.
They have PIs that watch them.
They spy on them.
And then sometimes, like Kanye West got sent to a mental institution for a week when he said he liked Trump, sometimes they grab him and Baker Act him.
Because, you know, if you decide, hey, we shouldn't be spying on everybody and then lying about it on the news.
Hey, we shouldn't be controlling what words they can say.
Hey, we're calling people things they aren't.
Well, then, that's their highest turnover.
That's the groups they've got to target.
That's the groups they've got to watch.
And so, really, this is your takeaway to this big segment.
But what happened is he's covering this Facebook story, and they have pulled up an article from Human Events, which his lawyer is involved in, running, and also some of his guests.
So the reason that he storms off and the reason that the build-up is so short...
I believe is that Alex realizes that his only fucking chance is driving traffic aggressively to his website.
That is the only place that he has control over.
They aren't taking away his IP address.
They're not taking away his hosting.
Anything like that, he's safe.
Whereas all these other platforms clearly go away.
You know, YouTube's kicked him off.
Now Facebook and Instagram, he's gone.
The only thing that he can really control the flow to and what...
You do with the flow to monetizing the amount of traffic that comes to his site.
That is his site.
That's all he's got.
So when even a site like Human Events that he's ideologically aligned with, he has an interest in by virtue of his lawyer and guests being involved in it, he doesn't want to drive traffic to them because it's a zero-sum game.
That traffic that goes to that article isn't going to him.
And I think that's what facilitated his freakout and going off air.
Gotcha.
Everything I know about him, and especially his current situation, leads me to, like, that's the only conclusion, because it is abrupt, and it is weird.
It's worse than that because so much of Alex, especially his early career, was predicated on this idea that humanity is so good and it's worth defending and humanity is...
We're powerful, and we can take power back from these globalists that have enslaved us.
And then now, just because the plug didn't work right, and his staff put the wrong article up, because clearly that's what he's complaining about.
So I think that this episode blows my mind from a narrative arc situation, from him showing up super depressed because he watched a movie about Satanism yesterday.
To these weird roads that he goes down with the Belgian bus station and Gunsmoke being factually ripped from the headlines.
To this dehumanizing talk about Facebook moderators who don't even technically work for Facebook.
Just self-serving exploitation of their pain.
Just awful.
And then you reach the end, and just because he didn't get a plug for his own website on his own show, he throws a tantrum and says humanity wants to die.