In Knowledge Fight’s March 27-28, 2013 episode, Alex Jones promotes Professor Griff’s "Illuminati bloodlines" theory and Steve Pieczenik’s debunked Sandy Hook false flag claims—tying them to Susan Collins and a $600M contract. He rants about suppressed ancestral rituals, absurdly links Japanese vending machines to U.S. "poop bars," and alleges FBI threats over his drug-dealing critiques. Callers’ fringe theories (like J.P. Morgan’s stolen corpse) are dismissed as delusional, reinforcing Jones’ pattern of sensationalism over substance. His growing reliance on conspiracy allies foreshadows later embrace of Trump’s baseless narratives, exposing how unchecked paranoia distorts reality into self-serving fiction. [Automatically generated summary]
If you're out there listening, you're thinking I like what these dudes do, you like this show, and you could support the show if you'd like by going to our website, knowledgefight.com, clicking the button to support the show.
Coming up today on this Wednesday, the 27th day of March 2013, worldwide broadcast.
The news websites are infowars.com.
And, of course, we're also streaming video at prisonplanet.tv.
And again, we are going to be taking your phone calls today.
Professor Griff, one of the founders of Public Enemy, was on with us a few weeks ago, and he promised to come back just to take phone calls for an hour on hip-hop, rap, and government media control of not just it, but rock and roll and other systems that are used to dominate and steer culture.
And a couple of years ago, we discovered stories that were out there that clearly had been written by a robot.
But now they're getting good enough where they're just going to have government press releases that are then rewritten so they're, quote, original and have the local name put on it.
And, of course, the humans will be removed there.
And that's why they've told the White House Press Corps, they even told you in Politico this, if you don't totally toe the line, if you ever make one snide comment about the White House, you will never be in the press conference.
You will never be given the press release.
Because it's all who gets the press release and the access.
And now they're saying, they said this a month ago, they may go to a virtual president where it's a hologram recording of him.
And then it'll be a full hologram composite where they just write the words.
And it's not even a recording of Obama.
It's just a video simulation.
They're going to, and by the way, this is the plan.
Now, one, they're going to eventually take over and control the Earth.
Naturally, the Hall of Presidents automatons will become the actual presidential hall.
And two, when they have those, when the automatons are running everything, they're going to need their own version of the automatons for people to walk.
Well, obviously, for cyborgs to walk into and see the presidents of the past.
So naturally, they're going to switch to holograms.
And, you know, like the holographic president and the pre-recorded speeches and all this stuff is, you know, it's all part because the Illuminati is going to take over.
So, I mean, that's just indicative of how all this goes.
If I cut out every single instance of Alex saying something and then being like, we know this because of the revealed plan in X science fiction movie, it would get that would be our whole show.
Just like gray aliens in the Hollywood movies communicating with each other with computer-assisted telepathy.
The whole gray thing is a template program to condition you to accept that that's what we're going to look like in the future, and the grays are humans from the future.
That is not really real, as far as I understand it from the highest level Illuminati information.
I'm reporting as a sociologist, as an anthropologist, as a psychologist, as a historian, as a red-blooded American and a Texan who studied enemy operations, the enemy mindset, what they believe in, what they stand for, what their plan is.
Just got chills.
I, as an organic expression of humanity, which they've even predicted in their own publications, that we would arrive, and they're ready for us.
They call us gallant and beautiful people who will have to be exterminated.
They say it's painful what they have to do, but it's for a greater good after we're all gone.
That's H.G. Wells I just quoted in his book, The New World Order.
So this is a reference to that same quote that Alex misuses from H.G. Wells' book, The New World Order, all the time.
He misuses it constantly.
It's almost as if he only read this one paragraph of that book, not understood it, and decided to base a lot of his ideas about the world and the globalists on that misunderstanding.
In discussing how he observed the world was generally trending towards greater social democracy, H.G. Wells says, quote, nor does it alter the fact that even when the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficient world system.
Countless people from Maharajas to millionaires and from puka sahibs to pretty ladies will hate the new world order, be rendered unhappy by frustration of their passions and ambitions through its advent and will die protesting against it.
When we attempt to estimate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful looking people.
The list of people he's saying will be against social democracy are the very top of the prevailing social hierarchy, the millionaires, kings, colonialists, and aristocrats.
When Wells makes reference to gallant and graceful looking people, he's expressing a feeling that monsters are not always grotesque and often actually beautiful.
Alex seems to think that the passage is about himself and that Wells is expressing a sense that eventually patriots would show up to counter these nefarious plans he's putting out and that these patriots would be gallant and really hot.
And that fits perfectly in with Alex's self-designed mythology, but it doesn't match with the point Wells is making at all.
Much like Alex's interpretation of scripture, this is an act of esegesis.
And it only makes sense if you understand that Alex read this paragraph trying to find support for the things that he already believed.
This pattern, along with tons of other behaviors, make Alex a terrible sociologist, terrible anthropologist, terrible psychologist, and terrible historian, which are all labels he has no business giving himself.
The biggest one that was missing is literary critic.
He doesn't really – it's kind of amazing how much credit he gives himself for everything but the one thing that could be applied to this particular circumstance.
So I just find that to be so fascinating on a very minute level.
You know, that H.G. Wells, they talked about how the opposing forces will eventually show up and that they'll be beautiful and gallant and heroic, and it sucks they have to kill all of us, but it has to be done.
It's completely out of line with what Wells is expressing.
But when H.G. Wells wrote that millionaire meant a lot different than it did in the present day, Alex is ascribing to himself that high social status that he probably doesn't merit.
Like, compared to Maharajas and millionaires at the time of that book's writing, he's nowhere near that level.
I actually search-engined it because I scanned through XM, and they had like a Catholic channel on there, and I just stopped and listened to it.
And they were talking about a Vatican release that, yeah, that the Second Amendment.
There it is.
Repeal the Second Amendment, the National Catholic Review.
And that's, isn't that the official Catholic public?
unidentified
Yes, it is.
And also, over the years, Rome hates the American Constitution.
Sure.
And it's proven also by, if you ever can get a hold of it through maybe chick publications called 50 Years in the Church of Rome by Father Jack Chenick.
I don't know if Alex did actually scan around on XM and find a Catholic channel, but this isn't like a fake thing.
This actually is real.
It was an op-ed published in the Catholic magazine America, where the author posited that the best way, possibly the only way, that this country was going to ever have sensible gun laws is if we repeal the Second Amendment.
This wasn't necessarily a call to outright ban guns.
It's more of a realization that the Second Amendment absolutely gets in the way of any conversation about guns.
So possibly, if it were gone, we would be able to have a rational debate where people were still able to preserve their rights to self-defense and gun ownership, but we would also be able to fix some of the problems that have come along with the ubiquity of guns.
It's kind of a sensible position, possibly a bit controversial to come from a religious magazine, but definitely not something I would call scandalous.
The writer of the editorial even grappled with the reluctance of people to alter laws, particularly ones in the Constitution.
But ultimately, those are just laws written by and passed by humans.
If they were passed in one circumstance and those circumstances change, it makes sense to consider changing the laws.
Probably more troubling to me in that call is the fact that the caller is also citing a book that is put out by Chick Publications, The Business Run by Jack Chick.
He's the guy who puts out those little cartoon pamphlets full of gross and grotesque depictions of Christian fundamentalist ideas.
Those exist primarily and almost exclusively to scare the shit out of children about how they're going to hell if they stray from the fundamentalist path.
Chick tracts run the gamut of Christian issues.
You're going to hell if you get an abortion.
You're going to go to hell if you have sex.
You're going to go to hell if you do drugs.
All the stuff you'd expect.
But Jack Chick was also a rabid anti-Catholic.
He constantly rails on Vatican conspiracies in his work.
So this article is being brought up.
It is a real article, making a point that it would be easy for Alex to manipulate into being the Catholic Church and this new Pope that we just got, they all want his guns to be seized.
It's worth pointing out that the sort of people interested in discussing the article in this way, from my perspective here, it seems to be someone who's also into Jack Chick, which is pretty bad.
So on February 12th, 2013, Steve Pieczenik posted a blog entry where he's very explicit that all the people involved in Sandy Hook were actors.
I can say with certainty that at least by that point, February 12th, Steve is absolutely advancing this narrative.
His theory seems to be rooted in the fact that he credits himself as an author of Tom Clancy's books, so he knows a bit about fiction writing.
The story of Sandy Hook struck him as a poorly written piece of fiction.
So when he found out that Susan Collins, the author of The Hunger Games, was from Newtown, he put two and two together and decided this explains everything.
Suffice it to say, this is not convincing stuff.
Tracing back to January 22nd, Steve posted on his blog, quote, I'll be posting later tonight, but here's some homework if you're interested.
Something does not smell right about this Sandy Hook thing.
Inconsistencies keep nagging me, especially when I start comparing them to other events in recent history.
I have every reason to suspect that Alex knows what Steve believes.
At this point, Steve has been publicly accusing the survivors and victims of Sandy Hook of being actors, and he's someone Alex knows and respects.
It just doesn't track the idea that Alex would think that Steve is a hero, an intelligence operations veteran who's working for the Patriots, who has a blog where he lays out his analysis of current affairs, and then Alex doesn't read that blog?
It's possible, but if that's the case, then it's a really good piece of evidence that Alex doesn't do nearly the amount of preparation that he wants you to believe he does.
If you read the discovery request in the lawsuit that Alex is facing for his Sandy Hook coverage, a couple of things stick out.
There are obvious pieces of things that they're looking for, like requests for all the materials involving Sandy Hook, the word crisis actors, anything involving Wolfgang Halbeg.
That's what you'd expect.
But then, when you get to item number three, the plaintiffs request, quote, all documents and/or communications between you and any of the following individuals or anyone acting on their behalf concerning any of the topics listed.
There are only two names on that list: James Tracy isn't on there.
Wolfgang Halbeg isn't on that list.
It's only Steve Pieczenik and Jonathan Reich.
Reich was a 26-year-old dude who got arrested for harassing Sandy Hook families as well as the county medical examiner.
He hasn't shown up on Alex's show or had any mention.
But also, I think that's because he doesn't get arrested until May, if I recall correctly.
In March, there may not be any reason for Alex to know who he is.
There's a longer list in item number four of requests for communications regarding appearances on InfoWars, which includes both of those two dudes and some of the other likely suspects, like Ted Anderson and Wolfgang Helbig.
But Reich and Steve Pieczenik are the only two people who the plaintiffs requested all communications concerning the covered topic.
Based on what I've been able to suss out from listening back to these episodes, it appears that the plaintiffs may have the same working theory that I'm coming to, namely that Steve is communicating with Alex behind the scenes and it's leading to a shift in his coverage.
That's still a little bit of a theory from my position, but this is not nothing.
When Paul Joseph Watson interviewed James Tracy about the crisis actor theory a little while back, they were at least trying to be explicit about not endorsing his ideas.
Paul Joseph Watson had to list off a ton of disclaimers and caveats about how he doesn't agree with this guy.
Now, not too much longer after this point, we have our first instance of someone saying that the victims and survivors were all actors with no pushback and actually excitement from Alex.
And that someone is Steve Pieczenik.
Other than like a stray caller that Alex might have gotten, no one has expressed this theory on the show.
And anyone who has has gotten at least some performative pushback.
Alex is thrilled with Steve bringing this up now.
It almost gives him the ability to cover this now because Steve is giving him that.
And I'll say this: if you go back and you look at a bunch of these blogs that are sort of aligned with Patriot ideas and stuff, the day after this, there are tons of articles about Steve Pieczenik appearing on Alex's show and saying that Sandy Hook was fake.
Gotcha.
So the idea that Alex had a hand in really amplifying and legitimizing these ideas, if this is the beginning of it and the kernel of it, he presents Steve Pieczenik as an absolute expert in everything.
He was part of the CFR, but he left because he was disgusted.
Having him on, allowing this to be said uncritically and with no pushback, and in fact, celebration of Steve's comments, does a massive piece of work in terms of legitimizing the crisis actors theory.
The role that Alex plays, even if it is a little bit delayed, inasmuch as these theories are floating around on the internet in conspiracy forums, I mean, almost immediately.
Like to only know Steve from his appearances on Alex's show, you go and read these rambling, nonsensical blog posts, poorly formatted, just full of shit.
It's very weird.
It calls into question how much of his presentation on Alex's show is a put-on in order to make him seem more rational and more reliable as a source, as opposed to where he has full control over what he's putting out.
I'm thinking about this, and like the experience of listening to this is so surreal to me because with the awareness that I know that the Boston bombing is happening, so many of Alex's narratives weave so perfectly into that confluence of events.
I just see trains about to run into each other and I can see it.
You can't stop it.
There's nothing you could do.
It happened in the past.
And it's just, I'm getting really anxious about how this is going to play out.
He's just going on and on about how he's not a fear monger and all that kind of standard shit that he yells about.
I honestly kind of think he's vamping because it really feels like he wanted to go to calls because he hadn't prepared for the show, but no one was calling in.
But it's also possible that he fell into his very standard and uninspired fugue state that he gets into, where he just like bah pontificates about whatever.
I think if Steve Pieczenik was writing Alex's character in a Tom Clancy book, I imagine every line of dialogue would have an ironic adverb at the end of it, like, I'm not a fear monger, he said fear-mongeringly.
Like, that's the only way you could write that character.
Shoot an animal with a bow, you slit its throat to bleed it out so that the meat doesn't spoil, you butcher it yourself, you cook it yourself, you're thinking about that animal while you're eating it.
And it's activating synapses and instincts in your mind of the entire human experience.
You don't need to do that to connect to your race memories.
You can do it by digging in the dirt.
You can do it by planting seeds and then watering plants.
And just doing that will open up.
And I've never read this.
I know this.
I'm sure someone's written it because any truth you've already found self-evident, others as well, activates and literally communicates with your soul.
Going through the rituals of combat, going through the rituals of fighting when you're a young man.
That's why they want to make it illegal.
Put you in prison.
That unlocks the synapses.
That is the rites of passage.
That's why the social engineers, I'm giving you the deepest truths here, want to destroy all the ancient covenants and all the ancient rituals of humanity.
It is to break the genetic encoding recordings that are in the DNA from our ancestors.
And the chills I feel when I talk about this is losing all of that information.
You know, when I cry sometimes, people say it's fake and it's not because I could feel the death of the connection to our ancestors.
And everything that's going to come in the future, it's the end of humanity.
And a horrible abomination.
And I feel all of our ancestors crying out against us.
That we awaken and have strength against this.
That we rise above the robot class.
That we break our chains and transcend the technocracy and take to the stars and our true destiny.
They had a more, they had in I honestly, if he was going to dig in deep and just do a bunch of ayahuasca and dig inside of himself, I would almost guarantee that somewhere inside there, he resents native tribal populations for having more of a connection to Earth than he thinks he does.
But whatever the case is, there's just nothing in this period.
But this made me laugh pretty hard.
Alex makes a claim that, man, just think about this in the context of like he's still doing his show six years after this and screaming all the time about his enemies.
Like, you wouldn't do that if you had calls to go to when you've already.
This is 40 minutes into his show.
Like, he has every reason to not spend time pretending he's reached a Zen state in his battle.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
It's pretty crazy.
But he does get some calls.
And there's one guy who calls in.
And it's interesting because Alex, on our last recent present-day episode, Alex said that he was going to come into a studio and talk about what's at the bottom of the rabbit hole.
This is obviously an exaggeration of the whole used panty vending machine thing, and Alex is adding details in to make it sound more grotesque and fit his worldview.
Of course, I read an interesting article on the website Tech in Asia, where they look into the whole thing to get to the bottom of what's real and what's, well, kind of based on racist ideas and urban myths about Japanese people.
As it turns out, the machines advertise, quote, used underwear, but the actual Japanese text is saying that they're manufactured to appear used, similar to pre-distressed genes.
The website theorizes that non-native speakers see the word used on the machine and they come to their own conclusions.
Whereas if you actually speak Japanese, you wouldn't make the same mistake.
Which tracks neatly with Alex saying that he got this information from Mankow, who was visiting and he doesn't speak Japanese.
The issue about this sort of thing is like, yes, there are people who have, you know, indulge in some sort of a kink that other people would find disgusting.
You know, and even, well, actually, I would say that a good sociologist could make the argument that by repressing all these kinks, we wind up leaning closer to the blood drinking and assassinating people for no reason kind of shit.
I lived in Rockwall, and a couple FBI agents who were corrupt had moved in the neighborhood to houses that they had seized in drug raids.
And then I even had some of them come around.
They started messing with my parents.
This is why we haven't told the whole story.
While we moved out of Dallas, my dad sold the dental office he had and things.
And he'd come by.
He'd see me at the local community pool or something.
He's like, Alex, you think you're a real smart young kid like you, good-looking guy, got a future, and all the rest of it.
And he'd sit there and lean with his trophy wife beside him at the pool, and he'd go, you just better watch what happens to you, what you've been talking about.
And I went, oh, you know about the local police and how I've been saying they're drug dealers because I've seen them do it.
Even if this story was believable on its own, that as the solution to the problem, it makes less sense.
It's how a kid would interpret things.
It could be the sort of story that you tell yourself when your parents, like you're getting in trouble at school, so they want to move, change environments because you're a piece of shit, kid.
Maybe a change of scenery will change all sorts of outcomes.
Maybe there's bad influences at that school.
Maybe he's running with a bad crowd.
You can maybe finesse things in your own mind to tell yourself a different story of what actually happened.
And I think that Alex has decided that this false version of the story that he tells is the reality because that never did not happen.
Yeah, it's a story like that that really makes me think that his parents just fucked him up so bad.
Like, I don't know if they did.
It sounds to me like, based on every story we've heard about him moving or any kind of significant life change before he would have any control over it, his parents probably just lied out their fucking face.
It could just be a self-defense mechanism to convince himself he's the hero in all these stories.
Oh, for sure.
That's entirely likely.
So Alex gets another caller.
And this caller is expressing a sense that now that he believes all of Alex's narratives and all of the worldview that Alex puts out, his friends don't agree with him anymore.
That's a situation where what Alex is doing is mocking the out-group.
The friends that he has that don't agree with Alex's worldview, there's a dismissal of their point of view, a mockery, which serves to insulate the in-group that this kid is a part of with Alex.
And I don't think that that's healthy.
I think that's not good.
Because a lot of the things that the kid is expressing, I think that there's some merit to.
Not necessarily a lot of believing in Alex, but the idea of this generational isolation that you feel with technology taking over to an extent where it feels like there's a lot of impersonalization.
For sure.
But these are issues that you can talk about in a realistic way and offer solutions to.
And it's not, hey, all of your friends are stupid.
They're just sheep.
They're thinking like they all have the same thoughts, not like you.
So J.P. Morgan is buried at Cedar Hill Cemetery in Hartford, Connecticut.
When he's saying that there's an extra layer to this story, it feels like he's talking about Sandy Hook because it's Connecticut, but it's not explicit that he's connecting these things.
Right.
I don't really know because Alex doesn't give him enough time to lay out what he's talking about.
If this is even a part of a Sandy Hook conspiracy, but since it's Connecticut and he's saying it's an added layer, it feels like it might be.
Yeah, and this is kind of the problem with how Alex relates to his callers.
He has no time left on the show, even though he's an overdrive and could keep going as long as he wants.
But he allows this guy to throw out something completely unfounded and insane while leaving himself no time to respond except for with a weird groan.
Oh.
You can't operate like this, especially when Alex fancies himself, and he talks about it a lot, about like, I get so much information from you all, the callers of the Brain Trust, they turn me on to these stories and gun bills that I didn't even know were happening.
You've got a caller calling in saying that this J.P. Morgan grave robbery happened.
You have no time for him to articulate or get into the specifics of it.
It's just left hanging there.
With no, like, if I were Alex, I had one second left and that guy said that, I'd be like, bullshit!
If this caller had just been allowed some of that time that he's rambling about Japanese poop bars, we could have maybe figured out what is the conspiracy.
And then I also think that the fact that he says these things and Alex doesn't push back on them is big.
Because if Alex had a moral and intellectual consistency, what we've seen so far is at least aversion to the actor's narrative.
He scolded that caller who brought up the idea that Robbie Parker was an actor.
He's like, you can't say that about someone who's grieving their child's death.
There was a repulsion about it initially.
When he had Paul Joseph Watson interview James Tracy, there was an attempt to distance and interview the guy about what he believes, but not be associated with it.
Now, here on March 27th, you see almost complete acceptance of it.
And partially it's because Alex knows Steve, maybe.
He doesn't take it as just some crazy idea that's being presented.
There's the gravitas of Steve Pieczenik behind it, which is a mess.