Alex Jones was out of studio on the day when Robert Mueller gave his press conference, so today, Dan and Jordan stick around in 2013 to continue their look into how Alex behaved in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. In this installment, we learn about a perilous vacation Alex took to Big Bend National Park, experience some real disgraceful bigotry and some equally disgraceful salesmanship.
I assume Alex is going to devote the entire month of February in 2013 to Black History Month and he's really going to go through a lot of the different things.
If you all out there are listening and you're thinking, hey, I'd like to support the show, I like what these guys do, you can do that by going to our website, knowledgefight.com, clicking the button that says support the show, we would appreciate it.
So, one thing that's important to remember about this time period right here, this January 29th specifically, is that we've crossed a line of demarcation.
First of all, we've had Alex on the last episode say very clearly, I haven't gotten into these actor theories and these people saying that they were actors at Sandy Hook and these people, these victims aren't victims, but now I've seen the CNN footage where Anderson Cooper's nose disappeared.
So we are past the point where he has gotten in contact with Alex and made Infowars aware of the fact that their coverage is having a negative impact on their lives.
Yeah.
So everything after this point, we can...
Really take away any kind of illusion that he doesn't know the effect he's having on people.
It's nuts to me that he's passing off a quote of Orson Welles that is actually just a wine slogan from a commercial that he probably saw when he was a kid.
So in this next clip, we get an interesting difference between present-day Alex and 2013 Alex.
And that is that he doesn't seem to value social media really all that much in 2013.
And in this next clip, it's funny to hear him say these sorts of things about Facebook, for example, and know that in the present day he's arguing that one cannot operate without Facebook and it's the public square and it needs to be regulated as a utility.
We're using the enemy operation, the enemy combine, the enemy system, the enemy data relay to jack into their matrix and try to warn people inside of it.
And that's what it is, folks.
This is a war.
And if I can seize their weapon systems and use them against them, I'll do it all day long.
Now certainly he still believes those sorts of things about Facebook, like the ideas of it being the enemy system and all that, but he does not seem to have any concern about the idea of it being something you are entitled to be on in 2013.
Seems like that's changed quite a bit.
Maybe because he got on it and his business model shifted so heavily towards the need for sensationalist promotion on social media, grabbing attention, clicking.
Clickbait, yeah.
And without it, things fall apart.
It wasn't so dependent on that back when Ted Anderson still had a fucking gold license.
No, it's because of the content that he brings up, but it also offers us a glimpse that I think is really interesting into another huge difference between 2013 Alex and present-day Alex.
We have didn't give a shit about Facebook back then, thinks he's entitled to it now.
When he told me that he was a former terrorist who wrote a book called God's War on Terror and he converted to Christianity, my suspicion is he is not real or not telling the truth.
He claimed he was locked up by the Israeli police, and after his release, he came to the United States and went to college here in Chicago, ultimately becoming a U.S. citizen and converting to Christianity in 1993.
In 2005, he began his publishing career with a book called Why I Left Jihad, The Root of Terrorism and the Return of Radical Islam.
He has said that he began to get more active in this line of work around 9-11 because he saw the outcome of terrorist activity that he had surrounded himself with.
In 2009, he brought in over $500,000 on the lecture circuit, as well as from the sale of his merch.
Interestingly, one of his clients was the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, who paid him to give speeches where he said things like, quote, all Islamic organizations in America should be the number one enemy, all of them.
But here's the problem.
Showbot's story involves specifics, and those specifics can be investigated, and when they are, they turn out not to be true.
So because of these specifics, if you do look into them and they're not true, that introduces a huge credibility problem.
There's no evidence that Shobat was ever involved in terrorism.
Bank Lueme has gone on the record and said there was no firebombing that could match the description and time frame of the attack Shobat claims to have carried out.
The Israeli government has stated clearly that they have no record of him ever being arrested or jailed.
His family members have said that his story just doesn't make sense.
And of course his story doesn't make sense.
How would that even work?
A guy firebombs an Israeli bank, gets caught, then has no trouble heading to the United States and becoming a citizen?
The story stretches its credulity on its face, and when the claims are more closely examined, they don't seem to reflect reality at all.
Now, what I find interesting is that I do believe one part of Showbot's story, namely that 9-11 was a turning point for him.
The DHS was spending money like crazy, and as the war on terror ramped up in the following years, there was so much money on the table for a former terrorist who could give a glimpse into the mindset of this country's supposed enemy.
When there are no records to support the backstory you make up, you can claim that you're using a fake name to elude the PLO terrorists who have a bounty on your head.
When your family members say unequivocally that you are not using a fake name, you can claim that they themselves are terrorist sympathizers who hate you for converting to Christianity.
There's always a way out of the corner, as long as you're willing to be a huge asshole, which seems to be what Waleed Shobat has done.
In the course of his career, Shobat tricked a whole lot of people into thinking he was some kind of an expert on terrorism, and he made a pretty profit off it.
In 2008, he was soliciting donations to the Waleed Shobat Foundation, which he claimed was registered as a charity in Pennsylvania, although the Pennsylvania State Attorney's Office has said that there's no such record of registration, which, of course, raises some pretty serious questions.
But the biggest questions need to be directed towards how it was so easy for someone who is so clearly kind of...
For example, after the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, he said, After the Charlie Hebdo shooting, he applauded the terrorist attack because the magazine had, quote, Like, this is ridiculous shit.
Thus, it should be no surprise that he's a big supporter of Trump and that his son Theodore has explicitly called for Trump to establish a, quote, Christian supremacist society, saying that in that society that he wants to be created, there would be, quote, no free reign for homosexuals, there's no liberation for perversity and debasedness, and just downright weird mutant psychos walking around with clipped liberal dyke hair and men dressing up as women and all that sick psycho shit.
Stuff.
People who flaunt the Koran in a Christian society would be arrested, at times put to death.
In the present day, Walid and his son are spouting shit that sounds really similar to a lot of the stuff that comes out of Alex's mouth pretty regularly.
But what's interesting to me is that if you listen to that clip of Alex talking to the caller, like I said, he's not interested in this dude at all.
He doesn't know who he is, even though Walid has been agitating against Islam for years at this point, and the caller is bringing up his third book.
Islamophobia is not a primary part of Alex's marketing strategy in 2013, which I have to assume is largely because he didn't realize something that will lead new from day one, and that is that this is a super lucrative business to be in.
Man, so it's kind of ironic that he's lying about being a terrorist in the beginning, and then later on he becomes essentially a terrorist for Christians.
Because Alex keeps trying to bring up the things he thinks about, let's say, the royal family, or anything about Britain, and every single time this guy's like, well, actually, Alex, that's not quite true.
Here is a clip of Alex getting embarrassed by a British guy who he thinks is doing a fake accent, but is actually pointing out that Alex has no idea about the royal family.
It's just that at the heart of so much of the New World Order we see being pushed is the Transylvanian royalty that you've got perched over there in London.
unidentified
It's not actually Transylvanian.
It's actually a German family.
But at the same time, they're as British as anyone else that moved to Britain 200 years ago.
But the point is, is that, and then higher levels, 90% will be killed.
And then higher level, it's no, 5% will live.
At the highest levels...
They talk about killing everyone, and then the last globalist will merge with the megacomputer and become God.
Now, I'm not saying that's going to actually happen, but do you think two New World Order Skeksis, you know, up in their ivory tower, if they actually succeed in this program, merging with cybernetic systems, are not going to kill each other?
I mean, do you really think that?
unidentified
Well, actually, what I really think is that most of what...
You're seeing comes from H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell.
If allowed to keep talking, it will reveal that there is a larger political context to everything that he's trying to present to his audience that actually refutes a great deal of it.
And all Alex is doing is mispurposing fucking science fiction.
Authors, and then people like Bertrand Russell, he's just using stuff from their work selectively, out of context, and manipulatively in order to create this conception of these globalists that he's afraid of.
If you have the idea that they want so desperately to take your guns that they're willing to commit false flag terrorist acts to blame on you in order to facilitate getting your guns, if you have that in place, then anything can be fake.
And the way you selectively use the accusations of things being fake becomes crucially important.
That last clip is a perfect encapsulation of how you get the groundwork laid in order to excuse just about anything.
So in this next clip, Alex talks about Bill Joy, his article from Wired magazine, Why the Future Doesn't Need Us.
We've talked about this a hundred times.
Yep.
Alex claims always consistently that...
Bill Joy's article was about a meeting of high-level technocratic globalists who were getting together to discuss what to do about humans once they're taken over by machines and robots.
And that is not true at all.
That is only true of a very short passage in this article where Bill Joy is literally quoting the Unabomber.
And not discussing that as a decision being made by high-level technocratic globalists.
But the globalists have said, on record, in things like Wired Magazine with Bill Joy that I've talked about probably 300 times since the April issue 2000, where he said, yeah, I went to a meeting of a couple hundred top computer company owners and our debate was, do we just give you games and fun things to play and make you a bunch of idiots?
But let you keep destroying the resources, or do we kill everybody?
And the consensus is we're going to kill everybody.
So I'm just going to tell you that what the Unabomber said was right.
Once this technocracy takes over, humans will be obsolete.
That is Alex admitting that he's well aware, or at least he's aware that what he believes to be true about this article is just the Unabomber part of it, which is fucked up.
I don't know, but whatever it is, it's a very strong indication.
Anyway, in this next clip, if you think that that is kind of damning about Alex's beliefs about what the globalists plan to do, we're about to hear Alex say something that leads me to believe that news radio's Jimmy James...
A lot of these globalist bosses have a robot in their office when they're in a different city or different country, and the robot rolls around with a camera and stuff on it, and it oversees everybody, and it's the boss.
So instead of talking to that dude, we get the second guest, and he ends up staying for like two hours, because this guy seems like someone who will never fucking leave.
We had him on last week, and the hour went by very quickly, so I wanted to get him on for an hour today so you could question him.
Jim Garrow was talking about a, quote, retired military living legend, saying that the military brass that he knows has told them they're having a litmus test.
Will you fire on U.S. citizens?
Well, the military's training for that, and that's in the news.
And General Boykin, the former head of Special Forces, he's been talking about plans for a police state.
He's been talking about our government giving al-Qaeda terrorist weapons.
Gee, I wonder what General Mr. Garrow is talking about.
But he has more to say today.
And he said the general, not that we know it's Boykin, did not want to go public himself but wanted to go through Jim Garrow.
And I looked up Jim Garrow.
He runs heavily in the big Christian circles, as General Boykin does, the same circles.
He will not reveal the source.
I'm smart enough to know who it is.
And again, people say, well, why are you revealing it then?
You know, 99% chance.
Because the NSA and the government already knows.
I don't live in a delusional world here, ladies and gentlemen.
So we talked about Jim Garrow on a recent episode, and we went over how he's just making this shit up about Obama giving soldiers a litmus test for their advancement in the form of asking them if they'll fire on U.S. citizens.
So we went over how he claims to be running a gigantic child trafficking ring to get female children out of China, which he's most likely making up entirely.
He's a big old piece of shit, this Jim Garrow.
Since his last appearance on the show, his fake leak from his high-level source has gone quite viral.
It has become a huge talking point in the right-wing media and the militia patriot circles.
Mere days into Obama's second term, it's being seen by these dum-dums as the best shot they have of getting Obama impeached and...
Bringing in a Biden presidency, I guess, which is their big goal.
I don't think we learned too much from this episode that we didn't know before, but I find it slightly interesting that Alex has now completely decided that Garrow's secret source is General Boykin, despite the fact that literally none of the details that Garrow has given him by the source match Boykin.
My cynical brain is fairly convinced that Alex knows that Garrow's just making this up, so he's kind of free to make shit up, too.
You know, it's not like Garrow's going to call Alex's bluff by revealing his non-existent source.
So Alex has the green light to pretend he's solved the mystery, and he gets to make himself look super...
It reminds me a little about how Alex treated QAnon early on when it started.
He was fairly dismissive of the whole thing, but he also said he knew who was behind it.
It's a smart gamble.
When someone else is running a con, they can't really do anything about it if you decide to piggyback their con without risking blowing up their entire thing.
That's just one element of this kind of thing that reminds me of QAnon though.
Here you have a guy coming on the show and giving out cryptic, unverifiable information that ostensibly comes from a high-level military source who's just trying to get the word out and warn the people about the evils of the left.
There's less anonymity to this con, so it's a little easier to collapse when anyone starts looking into Jim Garrow, or when tons of patriotic ex-military officers don't start coming forward to back up his bullshit, but the framework there is very similar.
So I thought that was kind of interesting, but it...
It's very strange to me.
I'm 100% convinced that both of them know that they're both full of shit.
The dynamic of the QAnon thing is just sort of a stray thought that I had that I definitely need to think more about.
But there's kernels of similarity in the skeleton of it.
Yeah.
I think there probably are a lot of examples of that in Alex's career.
It's kind of interesting to think about when Steve Pchenik would come on in the lead-up to Alex deciding he loved Trump and tell about the counter-counter coup against the Clintons.
AL International announces results of longevity clinical studies performed by Clemson University, Yahoo Finance.
They took cancer cells.
From human cancer in the colon that's just exploding because of all the toxins and chemicals, and of course it mutates the cells, and the longevity beyond taking tangerine, they tested some of the others as well.
You can go read the results in a scientific study.
It seems like thin ice, but I also think Alex is kind of protected.
I think legally he's protected because he's just reading a press release about one of his sponsors, asserting that their product has a health benefit that the FDA hasn't evaluated and hasn't been proven.
But he's not saying that Beyond Tangy Tangerine is going to cure your cancer.
He's just reading a press release that heavily implies it, and that might be legal.
So whatever the case legally is, I'm certain that this is a deeply, deeply unethical thing for Alex to be doing.
And here are the reasons why.
First, Young Jevity is one of Alex's primary sponsors.
He has a deep financial interest in overselling their products.
Assuming that a study has been done that seemed to indicate that their products could treat cancer, he's the last person who should be covering that story as news, since it takes a story away from the context of being serious science and analysis of the study and lands it directly in paid advertisement territory.
If you were Young Jevity and you were serious about this study, you would never want Alex reporting on it.
You do not want...
Second, I think they don't care, Longevity that is, because I don't think they're serious about this study.
The press release that Alex is reading is from AL International which may sound like a scientific research group but it's actually just Longevity's parent company.
In June 2013, they just decided to change their name to Longevity International, since that's most of what their business is.
Of the nine results on the first page of a Google search for the Institute of Nutraceutical Research at Clemson University, you find a Facebook page for the Institute that has no followers and no posts.
One amateur slideshow presentation about the Institute and seven links to stories about the Longevity story.
In 2016, Michelle Van Etten was announced to be a speaker at the Republican National Convention.
And as it turns out, she was involved with Yongevity.
This led to some people in the media taking notice and asking a few questions, one of which was about this study that Yongevity has made a big part of their marketing.
Quote, Clemson's Institute of Nutraceutical Research did some limited preliminary laboratory research for longevity several years ago.
No clinical trials were performed, and Clemson has in no way endorsed any longevity product nor authorized the use of Clemson's name or data in conjunction with any claims of efficacy.
The institute no longer exists.
This is a real problem, because the website for Infowars team, Alex's multi-level marketing operation, they just reposted AL International's press release in full, and it literally says that they did, quote, clinical research studies, which they did not.
Plenty of studies have been done on cells in test tubes that find that everything from strawberries, grapes, rosemary, green tea, and ginger kill cancer cells.
This is true in test tubes, but has literally no application towards whether they have any similar effect when taken by a person.
One blog I found described the study, they put it this way.
Bleach kills cancer cells in a test tube, but it's not going to help your cancer to drink bleach.
This is the sleight of hand of a study like this.
The Institute of Nutraceutical Research knew before they started the tests what the outcome was likely to be, and they knew that they wouldn't get similar results with clinical trials, which really makes this smell like research for hire.
I can't prove that, but it has some of the hallmarks of you paid for this study in order to get the thing you needed.
Whatever the case about the law is here, and whether or not the Institute was paid to deliver a meaningless study for longevity to lie about, it doesn't matter to me.
What Alex is doing on air regarding this study is deeply unethical.
He's selling false hope to his listeners.
And in this case, as opposed to other instances, the stakes are a bit real.
Like, when he sells them pills to give them virility, it's really just a placebo effect he's selling them.
But with Beyond Tangy Tangerine being sold as it might kill your cancer cells, that's a whole different level.
There's an actual underlying condition here, which makes this fucking super bad.
Any further action will just lead people to realize I'm claiming to run a child trafficking ring and I don't want the law enforcement to get involved there.
Alex trying to build up any kind of more information, trying to pull more threads out of him, and then also keeps talking about Boykin, like trying to get...
Talking to Paul Joseph Watson, and he's bringing up those hacked documents that the caller called in a couple days ago and told him he had found on 4chan and he was afraid for his life to send to Alex.
Paul Joseph Watson has gone over these and he's deemed them to be credible, and now, if you listen to this clip, Alex has fully whitewashed where he got the emails from.
I want to get in when we come back to this report you put out that got picked up all over the world concerning this now-admitted hack of a British defense contractor.
Yesterday, when the British defense contractor that you contacted on Monday...
You know, for a comment, finally responded, but to the Russian national news, saying, look, we did get hacked, the thousands of pages of documents, scans of passports.
That's why we said it looked like a real hack.
But we pointed out, could be that somebody inserted fake stuff into the hack.
They're saying the emails where they're discussing a staged chemical event, which has been discussed by the news everywhere, that they were contacted by Qatar.
Huh, the idea of somebody hacking something for geopolitical purposes in a semi-sophisticated way and disseminating that information through certain channels.
Right on the Rio Grande, watching the illegals go back and forth.
We have video of this.
We're finally going to premiere on the Nightly News tonight, because we've been so overwhelmed with more hardcore news.
And we've got people on horseback riding back and forth, broad daylight, and the Border Patrol is there with the park rangers.
I'm sitting there in the natural hot tub by the Rio Grande, just absolutely gorgeous.
And I feel somebody looking at me, and I look up, there's about 15 people in this big hot tub, and there's a park ranger staring right at me like he wants to kill me.
It's unlike anything else in the country, and I can totally understand why Alex loves it so much and makes it a vacation destination.
There really is so much to appreciate there.
Like you have historical value as the land in the park once served as a home for members of the Comanche and Mescaleros tribes, and artifacts at that time could still be found around the park.
The park is home to a bunch of really cool animals like road runners and jack rabbits, as well as all manner of cactus and wild flowers, all protected by the status that it enjoys as a national park.
I sense a hammer drop.
Thanks to the federal government, that land has remained relatively protected for hundreds of thousands of people a year to visit and enjoy and appreciate.
Anyway, I only bring all this up because you can really tell that Alex loves Big Bend National Park.
He talks about it all the time.
He has tons of stories of being in those hot springs and how much he enjoys going hiking in the canyon with his kids.
That's why it should break his heart that in 2017, when Trump was trying to get his border wall made, Big Bend was seen to as many as the place he could easily That was what tons of people were saying was being discussed.
It definitely wouldn't be a Pyrrhic victory for the entire United States, destroying our fucking beautiful existence by building an eyesore of a wall and putting goddamn barbed wire on it.
The proposed border wall would, by definition, have to run through Big Bend National Park, and according to every expert, that would mean a complete destruction of the delicate ecosystems protected there.
One easy example of this is the Mexican black bear whose population had been dwindling in the 1950s But because of the protected land of the park was able to fight off extinction and repopulate a border wall would completely Disrupt the bears migratory patterns and could lead to them facing renewed extinction concerns And that's just one of hundreds and hundreds of species that would be rocked by a disruption to the park which be Building a huge wall in the middle of it would absolutely achieve
In one fell swoop, we stand to undo all of that with this border wall.
It's hard to tell how much of the calls to build a wall are just meant to rile up nativist paranoia and fan the flames of xenophobia in an attempt to keep Trump's base engaged, but let's leave that aside for now.
Alex Jones fucking loves Big Ben National Park, and yet he supports Trump building a wall, something that would probably destroy the very hot springs he loves to bathe in.
He's a stupid racist monster who's willing to destroy something he loves to satisfy his desire to hurt immigrants and refugees, or that desire has blinded him to the fact that following through with the plans he supports would destroy something he loves.
I think this is a pretty good microcosm of Alex Jones's life as a whole.
He used to love his radio show, but his blind hatred of the government has led him to slander murder victims, and lawsuits about that have become the proverbial border wall that's completely disrupted the ecosystem of his show.
From an external perspective, there's very little in his public life that doesn't appear to have been completely destroyed as a result of him pursuing his petty hatreds far past the point where any sane person would see destructive consequences coming.
So to put this more succinctly, Alex Jones sucks and is a total idiot.
And conversely, national parks rule, and we need to do everything we can to protect them.
A 2003 study by the Department of Justice explicitly says this about people who cross the border in Brewster County, the county where Big Bend Park is located.
Quote, undocumented persons crossing through Big Bend National Park often die from lack of water or exposure to the elements.
According to the county sheriff, often their bodies are not found until their remains have skeletonized.
In terms of any crime that's described in that report about immigration patterns, one of the main things in Brewster County is, quote, rural burglaries.
That's a crime that they have to be concerned about there.
A county official had this to say about that.
Quote, I've had people break into my house, get something to eat when I'm not home, wash the dishes, and leave them by the sink with a few pesos.
The county had to pay four times as much for autopsies and burials of bodies of undocumented immigrants that they found in the county than they did for law enforcement purposes.
So I think there's a load of bullshit that Alex is spitting.
It's not so easy to find counties named after abolitionists.
Georgia likes to claim that Douglas County was named after Frederick Douglas, and that's technically true.
It was named after him in 1870 when the county was created, but pretty soon after that, Confederate Democrats regained power in the government and changed the name of the county.
It's still called Douglas, but now it's spelled with one less S in honor of Stephen Douglas, an Illinois politician who ran against Lincoln for president and supported slavery as being protected by states' rights.
Douglass literally believed that the Declaration of Independence only applied to white people, saying, quote, this government was made by our fathers on the white basis, made by white men for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever.
And being food implies something worse than a warning or maybe a small citation.
I bet any of those people, if you were drinking a Coors at the hot spring and you're not allowed to, I'm sure someone would come over and be like, hey, pour that out.
In this next clip, though, he makes clear that Alex has been bragging a ton about his appearance on Piers Morgan, but also Larry Pratt has been on Piers Morgan, and they got into a little bit of a fight that got way less media attention.
But it apparently has been boosting the membership roles and applications for Gun Owners for America.
And in this clip, Larry Pratt thanks Piers Morgan.
unidentified
And then Piers Morgan, bless his British heart, I think,
frankly, not only did he help our membership and the NRA's membership, but I think he provided what we may look back and say that was a pivotal moment when he started lecturing yours truly about how the United States ought to operate with that.
That bloody supercilious British accent of his, that just kind of fills most Americans right up to the gag point.
He can form some sentences better than Alex anyway.
The thing that's important is that These people...
I'm going to go ahead and call Larry Pratt a fascist for a specific reason that we'll get to in a moment.
But when you have people like this who have nefarious intent and you allow them access to your platforms, if you don't be very careful with it, you help them.
Larry Pratt is expressing very clearly to Alex, we used Piers Morgan as a useful idiot.
He didn't understand the game we were playing.
We played the game.
There's a fight.
He's stupid.
We won.
And that is what happens when you don't push back.
Now, the reason that I'm calling him a fascist is because he was at the Rocky Mountain Rendezvous that had the KKK and the neo-Nazis and Louis Dean, all those folks back in the day that we talked about not too long ago.
Larry Pratt is an OG.
So he, for whatever...
behind that that is far darker.
And even if he doesn't express outright white supremacy in neo-Nazi, Mm-hmm.
I don't think we were even really all that aware of that until spending this much time looking at deconstructing Alex and his associates and then some of these offshoot folks.
I don't think that we would be aware of that if it wasn't for deep immersion in this.
And yeah, I think that a lot of people are...
It's so much easier with social media.
They can run these games so much easier, capitalizing the quick attention span aspect of social media.
But yeah, 100%, they are playing a different game.
Yeah, and accusations of hypocrisy play into his other game.
It's a charge that won't get you where you need to go.
Because anybody who you need to convince that...
McConnell isn't above board isn't going to be convinced by accusations of hypocrisy because they see the hypocrisy as being in effect of their benefit.
And that's a way to take the 70 million viewers, the number one show in North America, and to shove a bunch of anti-Second Amendment garbage down our throats and re-invoke all this.
That's sort of a Cloward and Piven approach to publicizing the victims of gun violence.
And I think Alex would have a new complaint if he did that, which is like, why are there so many victims?
Somehow still not to address the central issue.
Now, the thing that I find very interesting about this is that this will become a large conspiracy.
Now, I don't know what Alex does with it, but one of the things that, like, James Tracy was putting out was this idea that some of the children that were said to have died in the shooting were actually singing at the Super Bowl.
That becomes a large conspiracy that goes around the internet.
He's clearly mad about the choir being at the Super Bowl.
He's got to attack it somehow, and it's kind of tough to find an angle on it other than what he's already said, which is get those kids from the schools in Mexico, which I don't think that's a potent attack, because I think most people would be like, you bet.
Yeah, we mentioned it earlier, and we talked about it on the show before, but it's worth reminding anyone who hasn't listened to our back catalog that Ted Anderson, the guy who syndicates Alex's show and is one of his biggest sponsors through Midas Resources, is no longer legally allowed to sell precious metals.
About two years after this episode came out, Ted got in trouble with the state of Minnesota and they revoked his license because he, quote, misappropriated customers' money and misrepresented terms of sale to them.
The state found that Midas Resources, quote, routinely failed without prior agreement to deliver bouillon coins to its customers within 30 days of payment and otherwise misrepresented to customers the terms of sale.
He was kicked out of the precious metals business and had to pay...
Pay back hundreds of thousands of dollars to customers in restitution.
Ted Anderson is running a shady as shit gold company.
So it makes it a little hard to swallow that Alex is just having him on here to sincerely complain about some other gold company running ads on Rush or Glenn Beck's show with markups that offended him.
It's straight bullshit.
He is doing this.
I don't know why he's doing it.
I mean, it's just shading the competition, you know?
It's one of these things that if you were doing this and you're working with this scammy fucking gold operation, don't call other gold operations scammy.
That's going to draw attention to how scammy you are.
I know that apparently in practice it doesn't work that way.
And in terms of this clip, it's wise to remember that after Alex had James Tracy, the guy who thinks that people at Sandy Hook were actors, After he had him on the show and saw that there was a video that got 10 million views on YouTube about those Sandy Hook conspiracies, he started to change the way he covered things, particularly school shootings.
We saw the Lone Star College shooting where he was saying that CNN was covering things up.
And trying to find a false flag angle on it.
And then he realized that the school was pretty much all black people being interviewed and he decided it was gang related.
We've got some breaking news, Ted, just briefly here.
School officials confirmed shooting at Atlanta Middle School.
Sounds like a gang related deal.
14 year old shot.
And it goes on to say the parents, even though the shooting's been over a while, are not allowed to pick up their children.
So the government's setting that precedent where you can't get your kids, and they teach them to get the fetal position to hopefully get a higher death count so they can take our guns.
In February, police would come out and say that they were investigating a gang angle to the shooting.
But that information wasn't out when Alex dismissed the shooting as not even really being worth covering.
I can find zero confirmation or details about the conclusion of the gang investigation, but even if the police are 100% correct when they suggested that this could be the result of two gangs fighting, that doesn't change shit.
I don't particularly trust the flippant definition of the word gang when it's applied to black youths by police, particularly when it's short on any details.
And details are absent from the reporting on this story, even in the articles that I can find.
The victim's mother was...
Publicly very clear that her son wasn't involved in any gangs, and no one alleging gang involvement has provided any concrete information.
Plus, and most importantly, even if this was a gang-related shooting, it doesn't make Alex right.
He had zero reason to assume it was a gang shooting other than he saw that all the students at that school were black.
That's the only piece of information he's operating off of, and that by definition means he's operating entirely off of racial prejudice.
Also, parents couldn't pick up their kids from the school because they'd been evacuated to a nearby church where they were on a short lockdown before they got the whole situation sorted out.
There's nothing suspicious about that at all.
So what you have here is Alex does not really care about this.
But I'm saying, devoid of context, that desire to dismiss this story as gang-related shooting, you're like, huh, that's weird.
But when you take it in the context of the larger world that the end of January 2013 Alex is existing in, where he wants to tap into the Sandy Hook market, he wants to find his own...
It's the General Boykin narrative offshoot that he wants to make of the Sandy Hook conspiracy stuff.
He wants to find that, and so he's trying to sift through, using his pan...
To sift through all of the school shootings, and whenever something's not gold, he's like, ah, fuck it.
This is the school shooting I don't want, so, hey, somebody got...
And why did he even say it, other than somebody sent him real quick, oh, school shooting, breaking news, school shooting, oh, never mind, it's in Atlanta, black people don't give a shit.
Oh, I'm positive that what happened is that he got it from the producers, they shot over an article to him, and he saw that it was all black people in the photo, and he's like, ah, I don't know.
I got nothing on this.
Now, what I'm saying, though, is that the bigger context of this Sandy Hook reclamation that he needs to do, that's the larger context that this lives in.
And the Lone Star shooting coverage is the more specific context that this lives in.
When he was covering that, so excited that it was possibly a false flag that he was going to get the information on, and when he started to realize, ah, this isn't anything and it's all black people, he's like, immediately, ah, this is gang-related.