Today, Dan and Jordan dip back into the past to continue to explore Alex Jones' behavior in the weeks after Sandy Hook. In this installment, the gents learn that Alex's messed up feelings about racial birth rates is not a new area of interest. Also, Alex gets real wishy-washy about a potential extinction level event, and Dan becomes obsessed with repeat callers.
And the general public has this auto-response, this conditioned, learned helplessness, normalcy bias, mass Stockholm syndrome, Overton window, cowardly, crime stop, 1984.
Will you guys bring me that box of Froot Loops in there?
So, at some point, Alex does get into some actual issues, and he starts talking about the Christopher Dorner situation, and up until this point, I think that he's done a bad job of it.
Yeah, I agree.
Especially with his rhetoric that's run so through the coverage of, hey man, you think this is bad?
So he's giving advice on how to kill more cops, and then he's justifying saying that on air by being like, hey, it's not like anybody who doesn't actually want to commit a mass terrorist attack doesn't already know that.
So he's got this guy, Corey Gold, Dr. Corey Gold, who is just a Longevity spokesperson.
There is no other reason to have him on the show.
Alex is presenting him there, you heard it, as someone who lives in Southern California, so somehow he has a unique perspective on the Dorner situation, but that's fucking ridiculous.
There's millions of people who live in California that Alex could have just as easily talked to.
He's a syndicated radio host.
He has like two stations.
He is not a big-time radio host.
He has no expertise in the area that Alex is talking about.
This is just a shoehorned infomercial for longevity.
Which is what the interview ends up deteriorating into, because of course it does.
It's the only reason he's on the show, and Alex is stretching so far to make it relevant.
Like, oh yeah, we got a longevity guy who's out in California.
Joseph Farah is the founder of World Net Daily, one of the absolute worst large-scale news sites online and one of Alex's main sources of information.
Now, Farrah's history is a real interesting subject, and possibly one that I would love to get into much more deeply on another day.
I meant to do a deep dive on his stupidity and how he found his way to WorldNetDaily only after running multiple other outlets out of business, how Farrah's directly responsible for Trump's birther claims, and maybe even have a chance to look into the trends that are clearly on display when you look at the books that WorldNetDaily chooses to publish.
But my research went off track just a little bit.
When I ran into a salon article that made an interesting point that dovetails into what you were just saying about shame.
World Night Daily was founded in 1997, and for years they enjoyed a very similar position in media that Alex did.
They said crazy shit that the mainstream conservative press wouldn't.
They floated conspiracy theories, they trafficked and explicitly coded bigotry just as a business model.
But now, in 2019, they are falling apart, in much the same way Alex Jones' business is.
Both of these organizations claim that their downfall is being caused by an oppressive tech company obsessed with driving them out of business because their message is too dangerous.
But this Salon article, written by Amanda Marcotte, makes a really interesting point.
No one cares about WorldNetDaily and Infowars anymore because Fox News is now doing what they used to do, but with a better budget and more access to talent.
As the article says, quote, conservative audiences who want to wallow in right wing fantasy world where women have abortions for fun, roving gangs of immigrants are coming to kill you and globalists are running elaborate secretive conspiracies to steal America from white people no longer have to turn to WorldNet Daily with its subpar web design and often incomprehensibly written articles.
The conspiracy theories and racist paranoia those audiences crave is being served up in a slick professional style at Fox News in the mouths of supposedly reputable pundits like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity.
For years, Joseph Farah and Alex Jones served a crucial role in the conservative cycle.
They drove tons of votes to right-wing candidates, but they really only were useful as long as people in power never acknowledged them.
As soon as politicians, particularly Trump, began trying to help the dreck that they publish become more mainstream, it was only a matter of time before World Night Daily and Infowars started to have actual competition pop up, and it really appears that neither of them were up to the challenge.
So ultimately, what you have with Joseph Farah is a scammy loser who found a really profitable niche in a market that most people had too much dignity to enter.
Then, along came Trump, lowered the bar of what's dignified so far that people who would previously have been ashamed to traffic in Farrah's brand of bullshit found themselves in a position where it was no longer career suicide to roll around in that shit.
One little thing that's fun about Trump and Farrah.
In 2011, when Trump was getting going with his shit about Obama's birth certificate, he literally called Joseph Farrah and then World Net Daily employee Jerome Corsi constantly, quote, looking for affirmation that he was on the right track.
Farrah told the New York Times that he was impressed with how many hours Trump was willing to put into the birth certificate issue.
And it's true by degrees, too, because now, because of that, because of the phenomenon that's happening that we're seeing where what Alex used to do is being done better by Fox News and other more heavily funded outlets that now have the Overton window shifted so far that's like, alright guys, it's cool now.
Can we just acknowledge that we're listening to an episode in 2013 where he's saying that we're going to kill 1.6 million cops and right now you and I are both like...
Man, in the good old days, he wouldn't have been this bad.
Yeah, well, I mean, when you say something about Christopher Dorner killing people and how it's a lot like Waco, the correct human response is maniacal laughter, like a James Bond fucking villain.
With them especially, they could have had their own pre-production meeting where Alex was texting him the night before saying, like, isn't this a lot like Waco?
And then they're like, we're going to make hay out of that all day tomorrow.
And I think right-thinking people see behavior like that as erring on the side of the racist.
Yeah.
I think when you behave that way, when someone says racist things to you on your radio show and you refuse to be like, hey now, that means you are at least tacitly Or explicitly supporting the racist position that that caller is expressing.
So I think that's what's going on.
Now, that call is whatever.
It's interesting to see Alex dance like that.
But what I think is really fascinating is what's revealed by this next caller.
This is devastating to Alex's presumed credibility.
For someone who's made his whole career railing against the eugenicist globalists and how they have all these ideas about breeding and natural selection and all...
He does bring up his education on the 15th, and we'll get to that.
But that is disqualifying.
Yeah.
I understand if you're like, I don't know a specific thing about his pee experiments or something like that, but if a caller calls in and is like, hey, do you know about Gregor Mendel?
I understand if Alex doesn't have all the information at his disposal, or he only knows the broad strokes, but to be caught off guard by a caller bringing up Mendel is like, you don't know dick, man.
Well, obviously, this is going to be another riveting and extremely important and informative and hopefully awakening transmission today.
It is the 15th day of February 2013, and we've got a pretty serious situation going on.
I mean, statistically, we don't really know how often large asteroids hit the Earth.
But we know that a few hours ago, in the videos up at Infowars.com and PrisonPlanet.com, a large asteroid came into the atmosphere and looked to me like a stone meteor, because those are the types that break up and explode like this.
Just dozens and dozens of sound waves being broken, so you hear dozens and dozens of different Sound barriers being broken.
Well, for days now, Alex has been talking about how this giant meteor asteroid is going to pass by the Earth, and the government's saying that it's not going to hit us, but who knows?
This piece of a meteor came in and actually made it through the atmosphere and didn't kill anybody, but it did end up injuring like a thousand people in a town in Russia.
And so, because it happened on the same day...
That this other near-Earth object was going to make its closest pass.
And until they documented that strike and other strikes...
They thought that it was every million years or so, just dead reckoning, that a large asteroid hits the Earth that could cause an extinction-like level event.
Now they estimate maybe every 100,000 or so.
That's why there's evidence of other human civilizations that we don't even know the names of.
In fables, they're known as Atlantis.
And people like Plato, who was a pretty mainline historian and philosopher, they report about Atlantis like it was absolutely well-known that it existed.
And they found a lot of ruins of cities and things in the Mediterranean, in the Atlantic.
But it's been so eroded, they just know it's large stone blocks.
The A14 is reportedly going to cross the closest that any asteroid has ever come to the planet Earth since man was able to track that in the last 60 to 70 years.
So today, 2.24 Eastern Standard Time, 2.24 PM Eastern Standard Time today, it is set to pass the closest to the Earth.
That any asteroid has ever been recorded to pass by the Earth that did not strike the Earth.
This is not a movie.
There is now more than a thousand people injured.
We're only four or five hours into this.
Paul Watson at Infowars.com and PrisonPlanet.com.
has been absolutely on top of this with the most in-depth posting and reporting along with DrudgeReport.com that also has about, I don't know, 15 stories of the very latest posted up there.
Also, Russia shot down the meteor.
Theory spreads online.
We're reporting on that.
I do not believe they shot down a meteor coming in at 17,000 plus miles an hour.
So what's interesting about that is that Alex is reporting on theories floating around that Russia shot it down, but that theory is posted on his website.
Him saying, I don't believe that Russia shot this down, then don't run the fucking story on your website about the theory floating around that it...
Yeah, but that's the trick that they all use when they want to say something.
Like with Fox News, where it's like, Sean Hannity says something dumb, and then the next day they're like, people are saying that this dumb thing is true.
1124 Pacific, and you can adjust that for time zones around the world.
And it is coming, again, the closest that any large asteroid to not hit the Earth has ever been recorded coming to the Earth.
We know that, again, from satellites, they can now see thousands of large craters all over the Earth that look just like the moon when the computers remove the foliage.
You can see giant impact craters basically all over the planet.
They're estimating that, again, it was the size of a couple school buses, maybe.
Can you imagine something 500 times bigger coming in?
And that's a conservative estimate, I mean, of DA-14.
It would come in, it would blow up and shoot spurs over a massive area, and if it hit something like London or Chicago, Or New York, or Tokyo, or Peking, or just Dallas, Texas, it would undoubtedly kill tens of thousands of people conservatively.
And my only issue is I said, hey, I don't think it's going to hit the Earth, but if there was an asteroid coming to hit the Earth, NASA would be telling you don't worry about it.
It's just the instinct of government to always lie.
He's presenting a scenario where it's like, I don't think this is going to happen, but if it was going to hit us, it would be exactly like it is right now.
Everything would be happening just like this, but it's probably not going to happen.
I'd just gotten onto that train of thought before you started playing the clip.
I was like, I wonder if he's going to say something like, the government's going to fake an asteroid hitting you, and that's why they're doing it next day.
Once you start being able to predict where his narrative's going, it's...
It's time to check out for a second.
This is troublesome.
So yeah, man, it's just like, okay, so nothing's going to happen, but if something does happen, then it's probably the globalists setting off a nuke, not an actual asteroid, even though I've just spent the last, I don't know, hour trying to explain to you that asteroid hits happen much more than you think, and maybe it could happen.
Yeah, it seemed more like trying to entertain themselves, like more of a mystery science theater feel to it than Alex's angry, lashing-out feel.
But while he's taking some calls, they end up talking about how he went to Piers Morgan back when he was on CNN, and then afterwards...
Alex got talked about on Piers Morgan's show, and Buzz Bissinger, one of Piers Morgan's guests, threatened to kill Alex.
And Alex was very mad about that.
And then after that, Alex confronted Piers Morgan at a gun shop in Texas.
And Alex starts talking about this, and in the middle of talking about it, realizes that he forgot to confront Piers Morgan about a murder threat, which I didn't even realize, but that's a big problem.
Like, hey, someone on a fucking show said he was going to shoot me.
Yeah.
Yeah, that's messed up.
But it really brings home that that is not what Alex cares about.
He only cares about that in so much as it gets him points.
When he went and actually had Piers Morgan in front of him, if he cared, that should have been one of the first things he brought up.
And you don't have to be like...
Dick to him to bring it up that came and I understand that we have a difference of Perspective on things but a guest on your show said he wanted to shoot me and you were fine with that right?
Can we talk about how insane that is you could do that in a polite way?
You don't have to yell at him to bring that up right and ask didn't bring it up at all because it was this is days Weeks later from when he confronted peers and at that Texas gun shop And he's only now realizing she Shit.
No, that's what I was just hearing there, is the underlying truth behind those, like, The meteor is coming or you can't trust the government or anything like that.
I am going to saddle you with as many fears and problems as I can.
And I don't really care about most of the things she's saying because she says a couple things that are markedly, they're just literally disqualifying.
And here's the first one.
unidentified
They have these problems with them.
What they do is they take one molecule out or add one molecule in, and then they change the name.
Now, PCP, Angel Dust.
It's now called ketamine, and it's a legitimate drug, and people are being given it as a fight drug.
So this is a really good illustrative moment about how unreliable Alex Jones'supposed whistleblowers are.
Here he has this nurse on who's blowing the whistle about dangerous psych meds, and she sincerely and unironically is arguing that PCP and ketamine are basically the same thing.
And they only came out with ketamine because PCP had too much baggage.
But the evil doctor still wanted to fuck people.
unidentified
So they just took a molecule out or added a molecule on.
So, also, PCP and ketamine are not one molecule aloft from each other.
They're very different substances that cause very different effects on people.
They both have been used as anesthetics at some point in history, so it's easy to take a completely surface-level approach to this and say that they're similar, but that's a very uninformed position.
The chemical makeup of PCP, or phencyclodine, is C17H25M.
Hydrogen and nitrogen, they are mixed up.
Conversely, ketamine is C13H16ClNO.
So it's really clear just from a basic glimpse there that they're very different compounds.
For one, with ketamine, you have nine less hydrogens in there.
So that's going to affect the structure of things pretty considerably.
Not even taking into account that now you've added in oxygen and chlorine.
These are very different substances, and it's, like I said, disqualifying to hear a nurse say what she's saying.
It indicates that she's either not actually a nurse or she is one and she doesn't know what she's talking about and just trying to use her supposed professional credentials to strengthen her misguided anti-science views, which is what you'd expect from an Alex Jones whistleblower.
But yeah, what she's trying to say is you alter the chemical compound just slightly, and then bada-bing, bada-boom, you take PCP and you make a ketamine.
And that's not the case.
There's so many...
If you look at how the things bind to each other, too, the structures are completely different.
There's no way...
It's nonsense.
And anybody who's done either of them will tell you it's very different.
So here's the next thing that she says that's disqualifying.
unidentified
Don't get me started on Freud because people take too much stock with psychiatry.
Father of the Freud of psychiatry, you know he was a cocaine addict?
It's a very different thing unless you don't care about being accurate.
Freud pioneered new ideas about the interplay of the human in society and the underlying processes inside the brain, and he believed that through analysis and talking things through, one could learn about how the two interact with each other.
He was specifically and emphatically opposed to turning the process of analysis into a medical thing and did not advocate for the use of medications in his practice.
Moreover, he was opposed to looking at psychological issues as illnesses that needed to be treated and advance the view that's closer to seeing them as stuff we've all got.
Basically, his whole thing was like this psychoanalysis allows you to find the ways that you lie to yourself in damaging ways and resolve those issues.
Sincerely, this nurse has no idea what she's talking about.
She thinks PCP is ketamine and that Freud is a psychiatrist.
Any interviewer who wasn't just blindly and embarrassingly desperate to justify the point that she's making, that meds are evil, would have shut this interview down by now, knowing that his guest doesn't know anything about the subject she's presenting herself to be an expert in.
This is embarrassing for Alex, by extension, that he's not saying, like, hold on now, Freud is the father of psychiatry?
Wait a second, you're telling me that PCP is ketamine?
Instead, Alex is like, yeah, absolutely, it is just PCP.
It'd be like if there was a rabid dog in my yard and it had rabies and I saw kids playing down the street on their scooters and I just saw the rabid dog attack my chihuahua and it's foaming at the mouth.
It's a pit bull.
I would go get my rifle and I would shoot it.
And the New World Order is like a trillion pound rabid dog.
So I was like, I don't want to even look into this.
What kind of awfulness am I going to find when I open the lid?
So, on the surface, Alex's guest here, Steve Mosher, is a guy who's just out there trying to alert people about the inhumane practices of the Chinese government.
He's trying to lift the veil and make everyone aware of the brutality that was implicit in how the one-child policy was enacted, and the falsehoods that were behind the rationalization of its creation.
Basically, his whole position is that China created a false overpopulation idea in order to create oppressive...
Population control measures.
That's basically his thesis.
But if you look a little deeper into Mosher, you get a glimpse of a different sort of picture.
Possibly a guy who is super anti-abortion and is zealot about it and uses China as a means of advancing his own agenda.
So Mosher's big claim to fame is that in 1979, he was the first American anthropology research student to be allowed to go to China for research purposes after the Cultural Revolution.
His research resulted in him being not allowed back in China and being expelled from Stanford before he completed his PhD.
His supporters argue that this was all punishment for his intrepid reporting.
He released photographs of women having forced abortions, and the Chinese government was mad about that, so they kicked him out of the country and convinced Stanford to expel him.
That neatly fits into the anti-China, anti-communist worldview, so pretty much anyone who cares about who Stephen Mosher is just accepts that as the truth.
However, the reality is that he was expelled because he released those photos with the subject's faces exposed, which is a really serious ethical breach.
If you're doing investigative work purporting to demonstrate the evil of a government, and a big piece of your evidence is pictures of specific citizens of that government's country being the victim of government oppression, you have a paramount responsibility to protect those people's identity.
Stanford was shocked that Mosher would publish these images with no regard for how his doing so could put these women in danger.
And after reviewing relevant ethical standards, they kicked him out of the school.
This is not something that doctoral programs do lightly.
By the time someone is in the process of working for their PhD, the school has an investment in their success.
It takes pretty serious violations to get kicked out of a postgraduate program, since when that sort of thing happens, it doesn't only reflect poorly on the student, it also looks bad for the program.
If you're kicking out a bunch of post-grad candidates, it implies that you don't have good admissions standards.
So schools tend to go out of their way to keep students in the program and correct problems where they can be corrected.
In the case of Mosher, his actions were beyond what could be accepted.
And so while there are many good reasons to denounce and decry the practices of the Chinese government in relation to its one-child policy, Mosher seems to approach his criticisms from a very weird angle.
His argument is that they started the policy because of fears about overpopulation, but that those fears were fake and just a cover-up for their real reasons, which are that they wanted to brutally control the population.
He then takes this implication that the Chinese government was lying about their motives and applies it to all family planning and birth control initiatives worldwide.
This is really what Mosher is all about.
He's a devout Catholic who is staunchly opposed to all family planning.
He runs an organization called the Population Research Institute, whose mission is to, quote, debunk the myth of overpopulation, which cheapens human life and paves the way for abusive population control programs, and, quote, expose the relentless promotion of abortion...
Our culture and survival as a prosperous nation needs Catholics to marry young, have more than two children, and preach the God-given glories of motherhood.
A woman's fertility is our greatest treasure and not the boardroom of business politics.
You'll pretty much always find that a lot of their fears arise from notions like there aren't enough people like us having kids and too many people unlike us hanging around.
Which is why their highest touted argument that they always do is, nobody should care more about anti-abortion than black people because millions of black babies are being aborted all the time.
That's who should care most about it.
And they do that to protect themselves on the flank from people noticing that all you really want is more white people.
So what we have here is a guy running a nativist anti-abortion crusade masquerading as some kind of a noble battle against depopulation, as evidenced by his experience in China 40 years ago, which resulted in him getting expelled from Stanford.
This guy is not on the up-and-up.
So you probably are wondering, how can he afford to run this kind of very clearly disingenuous operation?
The Population Research Institute is heavily funded by the Lynd and Harry Bradley Foundation.
Harry Bradley, naturally, was one of the first members of the John Birch Society, along with Fred Koch, and the two men have shared a very similar legacy in terms of funneling money to zealots.
The Bradley Foundation has contributed millions of dollars to Donors Trust, the Koch-operated dark money conduit, which is one of many connections between the Bradleys and the Kochs as allies in their decades-long crusade against progress.
And the Bradley Foundation has given tons and tons of money to the Population Research Institute.
And this Mosher's work specifically.
Fun side note, the Bradley Foundation paid Charles Murray a million dollars to write his dogshit book, The Bell Curve, which to this day is one of the main sources white supremacists point to to justify their beliefs that black people genetically have lower IQs than white people.
The book has been called a, quote, part of a campaign to justify racism, which is why it should come as no surprise that it's promoted by the likes of Stefan Molyneux and all the cool kid race realists running around on YouTube trying to have a free exchange of ideas.
The Bradley Foundation's funding made that possible because they're more than happy to use racism to push the agenda that they're really after.
That's the name of the game.
So, here you have yet another mouthpiece for right-wing billionaire-funded front groups appearing as a guest on Alex Jones' show, presented benignly as an expert on population.
Yeah, I mean, the answer to the problem is transparency.
The answer to the problem is making people show who they're donating money to.
These large interests.
It needs to be open.
Because the influence is so insidious when it goes through these conduits like Donors Trust, you're able to funnel so much money and enable so many suspicious things.
And if it was open and public, like, oh, you got $100,000 from these people who...
Are interested in getting rid of affirmative action.
That's why you're promoting that black people are genetically dumber than white people.
You can make the causal connection between the money and the rhetoric if it's all open.
But since it's so often not, it's a much harder issue.
And as that festers, as years and years and years of that ability to funnel money places secretly goes on, the damage compounds.
I mean, I would say that that would have been a way to avoid this.
At this point, going by our shame doesn't exist anymore strategy, I wouldn't be surprised if they just came out and were like, yeah, I got donated all the money by Coke in order to make this...
Well, I mean, there's still some ironies, you know, because...
If all of this was exposed to the light of day, a lot of these people who have these ideas about, yeah, you know, what's wrong is that there's these globalists and these billionaires that are controlling the conversation, and they would realize that a ton of the things that they support are funded by other secretive right-wing billionaires.
Like, James O 'Keefe got tons of money from the Bradley Foundation early on.
Like, all of these people would have to wrestle with the idea of, like, huh.
The people on our side who fit the exact description of the demons that we're against are actually the ones funding the information sources that we have.
So one of the things that's interesting is I heard on this episode, I heard an intro back from commercial that I've never heard before on Alex's show, and it's fucking hilarious.
We hear zero from Gloria Steinem of the CIA and all the rest of these people.
If you didn't know it, folks, she wrote one of her books that was all CIA front to break up the family, Ms. Magazine, all funded, which again was a Carnegie endowment operation so that there's no mother so the state becomes the daddy.
I think that the way that they would get away with, or the way that he would try and talk his way out of that is it always has to, because he's such into movies, it has to be a titanic struggle.
And he knows about this Ms. Magazine stuff and the Carnegie Endowment and the Rockefeller Foundation from people like W. Cleon Skousen and all of these anti-communist shitheads that came before him.
He only knows the stuff that they've pointed out.
So his body of information is so one-sided.
And he doesn't dig into things himself, so he doesn't know anything about these right-wing billionaire foundations that are funneling money to all of these other places that, suspiciously, he just is like, oh, they're just, like, Mosher's just some fucking awesome dude who cares about the myth of depopulation, so he started this foundation, and thankfully, the grassroots have funded him.
But as someone who can't prove anything, I can't believe the contrary either.
He does know and he is in on it.
I don't know.
It's complicated.
So we have one last clip here.
And what it is is essentially the two of them have been having this nonsensical conversation about how overpopulation is a myth and birth control is stupid and all of that.
And, you know, from looking into this guy, I kind of know, like, demography lies behind the arguments that he's making, and he's really just an anti-abortion, anti-contraception zealot.
And he's concerned about variable birth rates, which ironically are exactly the same sorts of things that are now in the present day motivating people to murder Muslims.
Shockingly, regularly, whenever you hear those sorts of attacks happen, the people seem to all have that sort of, there's too many of them, I'm standing up for the West kind of ideas.
So, you know, when you hear this, you kind of realize they're making it a little too public.
unidentified
And so at the end of the day, you know, someone is going to come to inherit France and Germany and Italy.
It won't be the descendants of the modern-day French and Germans and Italians because they're not having any descendants.
Other people who are more family-friendly will come to occupy those countries, and I think most of our listeners know who those will be, the people from the Middle East and from North Africa principally.
And so when we hear all this stuff in 2019, it's like, oh, Alex has descended.
He's giving overtures to it in a way that people don't...
We didn't...
I don't know.
I don't want to speak for everybody, but I think a lot of people probably wouldn't have that register as, like, what he's talking about is intensely fucked up.