Knowledge Fight dissects Alex Jones’ April 18, 2013, episode, where he weaponized the Boston Marathon bombing—claiming Navy SEALs staged a "false flag" drill at 666 Boylston Street (a Photoshopped address)—and falsely linked Saudi blame to misreported New York Post photos. Jones conflated unrelated events like a Texas fertilizer plant fire (later ruled arson) and a Democratic fundraising letter myth, while mocking trauma surgeon Dr. David King as a "Patsy." The hosts expose his reliance on 4chan fabrications, ignored evidence (e.g., confirmed National Guard CST teams), and performative outrage, including forcing a reluctant reporter to parrot debunked claims. His exploitation of tragedy for traffic surges and profit reveals a pattern of manipulation that later fueled his Trump-era influence, leaving audiences vulnerable to dangerous distortions. [Automatically generated summary]
I wish it was more of a local thing, but I honestly also realized that I had sort of placed O'Reilly Auto Parts in my brain as like a local Columbia business, not realizing it's a national chain.
So, for the final time, I will introduce one of these episodes from the Boston bombing period by saying that when Alex gets on air on the 18th, people do not know very much.
This is the episode right before what I'm going to call the fever breaks.
And it's the last episode where Alex has legitimate free reign to create whatever story he wants out of the random bits of internet rumors that he can find.
To recap a little bit, on our last installment, Alex had found some out-of-context images on 4chan and used them to create his own story of what happened at the Boston Marathon.
He found people in the pictures that he felt fit his narrative and cast them like characters in a play.
He saw some guys in what he decided were SEAL uniforms, so they were Marines who were there to run a drill.
He saw a white guy that he felt looked stupid holding a backpack, so he got to be the tragic white Patsy who the globalists are going to pin the crime on so they could blame the Patriots.
He saw some guys whose skin was brown carrying backpacks, so he decided that they were there to make it look like this white Patsy was working with Al-Qaeda to validate Alex's theories that the media is obsessed with the idea of white right-wingers working with Al-Qaeda.
None of this was in any way based on anything other than Alex's assumptions and a story that he came up with while looking at random photos.
From there, Alex decided he'd scooped the media and that they had been forced to announce that the FBI had photos of the suspects because he had reported on those pictures that, again, he found on 4chan.
After that point, Alex descended into a completely delusional state where he believed that the globalists were watching his every move and trying to counter him through the media.
Then he interviewed Steve Pieczenik who stated that he was in a state of open treason and advocated loan actors attack the federal government.
It was a fucked up show under any circumstances, but in the aftermath of this bombing, it was particularly distasteful.
But the FBI had announced by the time Alex gets on air, they had announced on the 17th that they had photos of the suspects.
And Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano had testified before the House Homeland Security Committee regarding these images and videos that the investigation had zeroed in on.
However, the actual images had not yet been released to the public when Alex gets on air on the 18th.
And then another media outlet made a gigantic fuck-up.
The New York Post put a picture of two men, two Moroccan gentlemen who had nothing to do with the bombing, on their front cover with the title, quote, Bagmen.
The New York Post, they were operating off old tips from law enforcement who had, for a moment, considered them persons of interest, but had already excluded them as having anything to do with the bombing.
So this was a huge problem with the New York Post's cover on the 18th.
Others described it as appalling, and they were all right.
In the ensuing fallout, it was easy to conflate the two events in your head, to imagine that the picture on the cover of the New York Post was the same one as the ones that were going to be released by the FBI and had been mentioned by Napolitano.
And Alex makes exactly this mistake, which we'll discuss in greater detail as this episode goes on.
The larger point for now is that when Alex gets into the studio, he has a lot of chaos and confusion to play with regarding these photos.
In the absence of any real actual information, that's about the best he could hope for at this point.
He's in a pretty good position from a propaganda standpoint.
And he knows that once the press conference happens, he needs to be firmly in place with his narrative.
He knows that that's the moment that the metaphorical cement is going to dry.
Once there's information backed up by an actual investigation available, his rambling bullshit is going to be pretty unconvincing to anyone he hasn't already convinced.
So he has three main objectives.
One, solidify the narrative.
Two, establish a narrative about what the FBI release will be in hopes of preemptively discrediting it.
And three, throw conspiracy spaghetti against the wall and see what sticks.
So this is the state that we're in here when Alex gets on air.
Yeah.
And it's going to be a mess.
So here's the first clip where Alex is just sort of stating that these talking about the pictures, the FBI and people like Janet Napolitano talking about these pictures, they're just a cover-up because InfoWars is so on the story.
I am going to attempt as best I can after the break when we come back to go over all the different facets of this, but we saw a massive cover-up yesterday.
Within five minutes of us announcing we had the photos and videos of what looked like Navy SEALs along with what looked like Saudi Arabians and what looked like good old boy Patsy's.
They were preparing to set up all the black backpacks.
CNN looked completely panicked during the break and said, oh, now there's been an arrest.
There's going to be a press conference at five.
But then they figured out, wait, now when we show the photos that Jones has, then everyone's going to say, well, what about all these other people?
And so, I mean, the issue, too, with that, what we talked about a little bit on the last episode, the announcement that they'd made an arrest that was inaccurate never came from the Boston Police Department, the FBI.
It was something that was from erroneous sources within the CNN.
So the idea that they said that they'd got him and all they did, they didn't.
CNN got that wrong.
You are right that that was misreported.
But you can't claim that all of this, because CNN can't be running the Patsy operation.
Right, right, right, right.
It stretches credulity to imagine that they're able to do that.
I understand that he's saying that the media is the presentation arm of all this.
So there's a quirk from the night before, and that is about Obama.
And this gets into bullshit that will kind of continue on this episode because on the prior episode, on the 17th, Alex was looking at those pictures and seeing the people that he decided were Middle Eastern.
Sure.
And he was saying that these are North Africans and stuff.
Now he's trying to retcon that and say that he always thought they were Saudi Arabians because there's Saudi Arabia talk going around on the 18th.
You had an emergency meeting with the Saudi foreign minister in Obama that was not on the schedule with all sorts of sedans pulling up and freaking out.
You had them talking about deporting a Saudi who was arrested.
For the sake of total clarity there, Alex just trails off in the middle of that sentence.
I didn't cut it there intentionally to try and make it look like he doesn't finish his thought.
He does not finish his thought.
It just stops.
So regarding the Obama meeting with the Saudi foreign minister, this is something that's easy to misrepresent, but I don't think it has anything to do with the bombing at all.
At this point in 2013, Obama was in the middle of a series of meetings with leaders from around the Middle East region, hoping to find solutions to the situation with Iran, as well as the civil war in Syria.
He did meet with the Saudi foreign minister, Saud Al-Felzal, but he was far from the only person that he met with.
I was able to find a story in the Times of Israel from April 17th, 2013, about Obama meeting with the Crown Prince of UAE.
The article mentions that Obama planned to meet with the leaders from Qatar and Jordan in the coming week, with their meetings having to do with, again, Iran and the civil war in Syria.
The other meetings with foreign leaders were largely ignored by folks like Alex and the right-wing media because they didn't have his easy connection to possible a conspiracy angle on the bombing.
There was already a quote-unquote anomaly with the bombing that had to do with Saudi Arabia.
I've mentioned a couple times so far in our Boston bombing coverage how there was a Saudi national who was questioned in the immediate aftermath of the attack, and how the media had been asking questions about whether or not this individual had any connection with what had happened.
So, look, one of the things I think is really interesting is that Alex has largely ignored this story up to this point.
The reporting on this Saudi national who had been questioned in the hospital when they'd found him after he had been injured.
Either way, now Alex is picking up this thread, so here's what's going on with that.
That was a student who was questioned by the police, and he was never thought to be guilty of a crime.
And the idea of him being deported never came up outside of gossip mills and bad right-wing website reporting, which ended up finding its way into the mouth of one of the senators who was questioning Janet Napolitano in the Homeland Security Committee.
This student was actually injured in the bombing, the person who was questioned.
And the amount of attention and suspicion directed his way was probably a good example of the media grasping at straws to cover a story that they had no real information about.
On May 24th, 2013, the Washington Post reported that that Saudi student had made his first public comments covering an interview that he did with the Islamic Monthly.
He told them, quote, he has continued to receive death threats and hate mail to the degree that he has not moved back to his house or resumed his normal life.
In his words, discussing being at the hospital while being questioned, quote, they were really scared of me.
I'm injured.
I don't have anything.
And they asked me, what do you have in your hand?
All the police officers and the FBI and all the nurses and doctors were staring at me.
I was looking at them like, is it because of the color of my skin or is it because of the name of my country?
After his name was leaked to the media and covered so suspiciously and salaciously by the right-wing media, implying that he was being deported as a part of a Saudi cover-up, his life got derailed.
Quote, I don't know if I'm going to continue my studies.
I came in to study my bachelor's.
I have a full scholarship from my country.
I don't know if I'm going to be safe from other people because I lost my privacy.
So that's why I'm really scared.
So it's not an easy thing to forget.
Simultaneously, a second student in Massachusetts had been taken in by ICE on an administrative immigration violation because they were in the country to go to school and had not registered for classes.
This was a completely different person.
The situation was 100% unrelated to the bombing, but the right-wing media heard Saudi student twice and just assumed that there couldn't be more than one Saudi student in the school in the Boston area.
There are a lot of Saudi Arabian students who come to the U.S. to pursue a degree, mostly due to the King Abdullah Scholarship Program.
The program provides students with free tuition, covers their living expenses, and even pays for a trip back to Saudi Arabia to visit family once a year.
According to NAFSA, the Association of International Educators, quote, in 2012, the United States saw record numbers of Saudi Arabian students enrolled in academic institutions around the country.
The number cited for the 2012-2013 school year in the Chronicle of Higher Education is 107,000 Saudi Arabian students enrolled in U.S. colleges.
According to College Factual, a website that tracks various aspects of colleges to help prospective students determine which school is best for them, three schools in the Boston area are in the top ten for prospective students from Saudi Arabia.
Northeastern University is number two, Boston University is number three, and Harvard is number seven.
One of the qualifications the site used to determine their rankings was, quote, the presence of students from Saudi Arabia on campus.
So it's safe to assume that there were large numbers of Saudi Arabian students in the region at these colleges, and thus one being injured in the Boston bombing and one failing to register for classes makes total sense.
I probably went too far in looking into this particular detail, but I think it's important to clearly show how unfounded and stupid the assumption that's being made here about this, that this is the same person, this student who was questioned and the student who was taken in by ICE for administrative violations.
Look, I just want to point out that these are the sorts of assumptions that these right-wing narratives are being built on.
And they're absurd if you take any kind of close analysis of it.
Like, you really look at what's being put out.
And so when Janet Napolitano is asked about this, because the guy questioning her in the Homeland Security Committee is asking, like, hey, do you think it's right that we're deporting this person, even if they're not a suspect, they might have information about the bombing?
And they're obviously not talking about deporting the guy who was questioned.
And so she won't answer the question.
She's like, there's so many inaccuracies in that question.
I'm not even going to answer that.
And then that's taken as evidence of a cover-up, or she won't even answer the question.
So Alex gets around to bragging because through his efforts and through, I don't know, the way he's sending Dan Badandi out to harass people at these press conferences, the term false flag has become a very high Google trend.
There's a certain irony to Alex saying that these people who are public servants trying to inform the public are soaking in the attention while he has just said, hey, my sort of trademark term is Google trending.
And we had a Don Salazar, who unfortunately no longer follows us on Twitter.
Well, self-awareness is one of the things that on the resume, if you put that for an InfoWars application, they will light your resume on fire and find you and then punch you in the face.
And we are going to be breaking down all of the massive news that has been unfolding on the Second Amendment front with a fertilizer factory up by Waco exploding spectacularly and killing between cannon and 70 people.
There's different numbers coming out.
Incidentally, there's a big statewide drill going on yesterday and today there with helicopters and ambulances and everything at the nearby hospital, but probably just fertilizer catching on fire and exploding.
So all of this is obviously important, but the magnitude of what we are about to cover here today is undoubtedly, undoubtedly, is the culmination of 18 years of my work.
So like I said, on the night of the 17th, a fire broke out at this fertilizer plant, and approximately 20 minutes later, the whole thing blew up in an explosion so large that it registered 2.1 on the Richter scale.
15 people were killed and at least 200 were injured.
Not to even consider the amount of property damage to surrounding homes.
One of them was old folks' home.
A lot of people got hurt there.
Cool, cool, cool, cool.
What exactly happened here is actually still a matter of intense debate.
The ATF released the results of their investigation in May 2016, which concluded that the fire that had led to the explosion was determined to have been set intentionally.
Some critics have claimed that this conclusion is inappropriate since they feel that the ATF only decided that because they couldn't give any other explanation for how the fire had started.
I'm not entirely sure which side I think has the better point.
You would assume that if the ATF would make the determination that the fire was arson, they'd only do that in the case of them having excluded other possibilities.
It seems unlikely that they would do a years-long investigation, then declare something intentional without considering those other possibilities.
That said, to this day, no specific explanation is known, and no one has been arrested for the fire.
So it's really anyone's guess what exactly happened there.
So something that leads me to suspect human involvement was an article in Reuters where they discussed police records involving the plant that they'd looked over from the past 12 years.
Apparently, the plant was a very frequent target for the theft of chemicals, since anhydrous ammonia that is in their fertilizer is also something people use to cook meth.
From Reuters, quote, according to a 2002 crime report, a plant manager told the police that intruders were stealing four to five gallons of anhydrous ammonia every three days.
There's so many possibilities in terms of like, oh, there's a lot of people who weren't supposed to be here who seem to be coming here a lot to steal chemicals.
But none of that's conclusive, but it would seem to indicate a bit of a pattern of negligence at the part of the plant to secure their facility, which would leave it open to either an arsonist or someone trying to steal shit who just makes a huge mistake that ends up causing a fire.
Yeah, it sounds more like if we're dealing with chemicals to cook meth, I'm leaning more towards the guy came in and was like, oh, fuck, I fucked that up.
I'm not sure what happened here other than it was a horrible tragedy for the people of West Texas, the city of West.
It was absolutely unrelated to the Boston bombing, and I have a strong suspicion that Alex is being, like I said, facetious when he says there was just fertilizer catching on fire.
I think he does think that it's related.
Otherwise, why would he bring up this alleged drill that took place?
I can find literally zero evidence that there was a hospital drill there at the time.
An article in Nurse.com discusses how the medical staff at Hillcrest Baptist Medical Center and Providence Health Center dealt with the chaotic and traumatic situation with a near-heroic level of poise.
The two hospitals had to treat hundreds of extra patients with a range of injuries more or less all at once.
They worked effectively as a team, and Heather Branch, the assistant manager of the Hillcrest Hospital Emergency Department, said, quote, it was a life-changing experience.
We'll forever know that no matter what disaster rolls through the doors, we will always be there for each other.
One of the reasons they were able to operate so effectively as a team and able to treat victims so effectively is that a year prior, they had been part of a drill that recreated an emergency situation like this, which involved hospitals from the surrounding five counties.
It involved inter-hospital cooperation, which was an essential piece of the response to the fertilizer plant explosion.
Eileen Bohannon, the emergency department director at Providence Health Center, said, quote, what we learned from previous drills were put into place for this, and I cannot tell you how smoothly it ran.
The only reality to the idea that there were hospital drills involved in the actual location that was affected by this is that a year prior, nurses and doctors learned immensely valuable lessons about teamwork and crisis management that they were able to put into action that literally saved lives.
Now, later in the episode, actually, more information comes up about this, so I might as well just talk about this now.
It's clarified that they're not talking about that drill from a year ago.
No.
Although the hospitals that were affected and actually in the area of this fertilizer plant explosion, that's the only drill that's relevant to them.
Alex and his people are actually talking about a drill that affected that did not affect those hospitals.
There was an emergency preparedness drill planned for April 18th, 2013 at the North Hills Medical Center, but it was canceled because of the explosion on the night of the 17th.
Now, this might be interesting if North Hills Medical Center was in Waco or in West, but it's not.
It's 80 miles north in North Richland Hills, Texas, a suburb of Fort Worth.
This game is so fucking sad.
You see how flimsy this shit is, and you realize that there's nothing you can do.
There's nothing you could do to correct this.
If you think a drill at a hospital 80 miles away on the wrong day is somehow cause for suspicion of whether or not this explosion is real or the work of the globalists, you're almost certainly past the point of getting back to reality.
An hour and 10-minute drive isn't that big a deal.
You could set up a drill 80 miles north, throw people off your scent, drive an hour and 10 minutes south, blow up a factory, get back up there and be like, we got to cancel the drill.
I think the best way to go over this today is to start at the beginning of what happened.
Anonymous, and that's all they want to be known as.
Anonymous has contacted us as well, and it is the, I mean, a real group affiliated with a White Hat Anonymous and said, have you seen this data dump of photos and videos?
This shows what appears to be Navy SEALs.
And that was in one of their data dumps I hadn't even gotten to yet.
I saw it was Navy SEALs.
And it shows what looks like Saudi nationals, and it shows what looks like the Patsys.
So it's now some white hat intelligence operatives who are operating as Anonymous who have sent him this data dump as opposed to Paul Joseph Watson was lurking on an anonymous message board and found some pictures with squiggly lines drawn on them.
So as the time has gone on now, Alex has only become more convinced that he is leading the media and that the media is in fact scared of what he's doing on air.
And I would say that there's probably some truth to that.
Like, I think right-thinking people who are aware of what he was doing.
Five minutes after we broke this yesterday at noon central, high noon, I walked out and had three TVs on, two in here and one in the pantry, in the break room, and I watched CNN and MSNBC, the reporters while their guests were talking, getting messages in their ears, and I saw the adrenaline rush, like when you catch burglars in your house or something.
And I knew what was about to come out of their mouth, and I ran back in here and I said, watch this.
And I knew what they were going to say next out of their mouth because live time they were listening to us just five minutes later.
And Blitzer goes, they've now arrested a suspect and they've got photos.
They're going to be releasing photos very soon.
And I went on air and I said, I just saw them freak out.
They're going to release photos.
And I said, if they're smart, I guess we're listening to that.
They actually won't because now we're going to be able to point out everybody else and the other photos, the Navy SEALs, the Saudis that were getting ready to go with the good old boy angle.
The liberal media run by the White House, MSNBC, Media Matters, all of them, had already come out and said, it will be a white person.
I think actually a lot of people are now, but the imagined globalists.
In hindsight, this whole thing is really easy to see through as a transparent display of narcissism and a guy being wrong.
The easiest way to put it is that Alex thinks that he's way ahead of this story when he's nowhere near anything real.
The only thing that I think is important to point out here is that Alex is once again massaging facts from the day prior in order to make it look like he called everything.
First, the announcement that the FBI had photos was made prior to the erroneous announcement that an arrest had been made.
It makes little sense for them to announce those two things simultaneously, as if they're saying we captured the guy and took some pictures for you.
This is a blurring of the timeline Alex is using to make it seem like the mainstream media was in even greater disarray and chaos than they actually were, because that's the image he needs to present.
He needs you to think that they had legitimately no idea what to do because Alex was blowing the case wide open and their response was completely nonsensical coverage.
The second thing is that he never predicted that CNN was going to announce they had photos.
He may have said that off air.
I guess I can't prove that he didn't, but he never said that on air.
Alex was completely surprised when CNN made their announcement and freaking out himself.
Third, he did predict that they would need to come up with new photos of people to pin on the attack, or pin the attack on because Alex had blown the case wide open.
And this, I guess, could be called an interpretation of the FBI releasing photos of completely different people than Alex was talking about.
Another possibility, which I think is infinitely more likely, is that the FBI had zeroed in on the actual culprits while Alex was playing detective with a bunch of random idiots on 4chan, and ultimately they were not talking about the same photos at all.
This is where Alex's groundwork becomes so amazingly important.
On the last episode, we heard him say at least twice that although he had figured out this entire case and he was right about everything, there's a chance that the globalists would change their plans.
That single caveat is so crucial to his ability to sustain being wrong all the time while pretending he's always right.
If he's able to construct a reality where he's always right and evidence that contradicts his predictions and narratives is just the globalists changing their plans because he's too right, there's ultimately nothing you can do to disprove him.
He's crafted an inescapable box for his audience to live in.
And that's a really shitty thing for him to do ever.
But particularly in response to a large national tragedy like this, it's monstrous.
And that's not okay to do when you try to pass yourself off as like a psychic.
It's fine if you're just like, hey, I'm a guy who rewrites my past predictions in order to make them match what happens.
So in that last clip, we heard him say that Wolf Blitzer came on and said that they'd made an arrest and they have photos, blurring the timeline a bit.
And now it's clear in this next clip from just a tiny bit after that, Alex is clear that the photo announcement came before the botched and erroneous announcement of an arrest.
So at this point, Alex is now kind of, because the questioning of Janet Napolitano involved questions about this Saudi Arabian national that was supposedly going to be deported, who's being conflated with the guy who was injured in the bombing.
Sure.
The talk of Saudi nationals has now become much more popular in the conspiracy world.
And so now Alex is starting to build a case that it's probably going to get pinned on Saudi Arabians.
Emergency meeting with the Saudi foreign minister.
They announced they're going to deport.
Now they're all freaking out this Saudi who was there.
But saying he's not a suspect.
Now they're having to show what looks like the Saudis.
You watch, it's going to be Saudis.
Now they're freaking out about that and saying, well, they're not suspects, but we want to know because they have to because everybody on the internet's already seen this.
People on the internet having seen out-of-context images that they've created a narrative out of does not really have an impact on an investigation that's real.
So Alex is, you know, he's saying it's going to be the Saudis.
And they were going to blame gun owners yesterday.
They were going to have their press conference.
They were going to roll out the Patsy.
Let's see the Patsy.
It was actually two of them.
Let's see the Beavis and Butthead central casting achy breaky heart look-alike mullet guy who's also got a backpack that matches the one that actually exploded with the strap.
But one of the elements that he's using that is mixed up in his narrative is that on the 17th, they had a bomb scare and a bomb threat that got called into the courthouse that ended up making them cancel the press conference.
So, first thing here, Alex has literally no reason to think that this white guy in the photos that he found on 4chan and he's decided is the chosen patsy for the globalists to blame is dead.
He has literally zero reason to think that the police ever even talked to that guy.
To be clear, the only thing that connects him to being in any way important to this story is internet rumor and Alex's fantasies.
This is the definition of terrible work on Alex's part.
I don't know who this white guy in these pictures is.
And I don't particularly want to dig too deep into it to try and find out.
Everything I can find leads me to believe that he's just a private citizen who is at the marathon, who became a central focus on the internet's witch hunt, largely motivated by Alex Jones' desperate need to validate his fears that a white person was going to be blamed for the bombing.
Until anyone can prove that he is anything other than a marathon attendee who happened to have a backpack, I believe he deserves his privacy, and I wouldn't violate that even to prove Alex Jones wrong.
But there's a more important aspect to this, and that is that wherever this guy was in the days after the bombing, he was very likely not aware, or maybe he was aware, that pictures of him were being spread all over the internet, implying that he was involved in a plan to murder and maim his fellow citizens.
All evidence seems to indicate that he was a victim of this attack and that he was there when the attack happened.
Not necessarily sure that he got injured or whatever he might have been.
I don't know.
But anyone who was there, I consider a victim of this tragedy.
And instead of being left to process his experience and move on with his life, he's now being blamed for the very thing he just unfortunately had to live through.
And I don't know what his experience with that was like.
But from the account of that Saudi Arabian student we discussed earlier, you have to assume that it wasn't a positive experience.
Going from experiencing the terror of a terrorist attack to immediately having unfounded suspicion thrown your way is going to be a difficult thing for anyone to go through.
As I mentioned in the intro, on April 18th, the New York Post ran that cover story with an image of two other people that were gathering internet suspicion with the text, quote, bagmen, Fed seek these two pictured at the Boston Marathon.
The problem was that they'd gotten this, it was the wrong picture.
And the one they ran wasn't the one that the FBI was set to release or anything that the DHS had announced, but in a frenzy to be the first to report, they committed an egregious act of journalistic malfeasance.
This picture that they had published had been circulated by law enforcement, but it wasn't in the context that these two were suspects.
Also, other emails that were later produced clearly said that these men were, quote, not of interest and that their being singled out was based on, quote, bogus intel.
In October 2014, the New York Post would settle a defamation lawsuit for this cover for an undisclosed amount.
But something it is so important to not lose sight of is how damaging these actions are to the people who are the subject of them.
The Washington Post reported on one of the men featured on the New York Post cover, who was only 17 years old.
His father said, quote, his son now only sleeps one or two hours a night and sometimes refuses to go to school.
This kind of fuck-up is deeply traumatic to the people who end up having internet mobs track them down, or they can't go to school without everyone thinking they were a part of a plot to kill civilians.
As we criticize Alex's coverage, it's important to point out things like this, like that the New York Post did, because if we didn't, it would be slightly dishonest.
Not to oblivion, and it's an undisclosed amount, so I don't know how much they gave, but that's exactly the important thing that's the other side of it.
Like, as we criticize the media like them for their horrible errors, there's a distinction that the New York Post apologized and got sued for this.
Alex Jones isn't held to those same standards.
He relishes acting in this destructive way, and he does it with impunity.
For me, that's a very relevant difference.
As for the courthouse, that was only evacuated briefly because of a bomb threat that turned out to not be real.
The thing here is that the only thing Alex has to base his theory that they did this evacuation to quietly take the white Patsy out the back door, the only thing that's based on his own thoughts, there's literally nothing else supporting this.
He can't prove even a basic piece of this theory.
It's just embarrassing.
It's made even worse by the fact that at the same time they evacuated that courthouse, the police also evacuated one of the plazas in front of the entrance to Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, which Alex weirdly doesn't bring up.
Alex has his explanation that's based on literally nothing except paranoid delusions, whereas the reality seems a lot like this is a city that just suffered a bombing, and they're taking any bomb threats pretty seriously, whether or not they're definitely credible.
You wake up in the morning and somebody texts you and they're like, the internet thinks you did it.
That's just like, fuck.
It makes you almost want everybody to have a fucking kill switch for all of their social media profiles that's just scrubs them clean and a fucking bug out bag.
So in this next clip, Alex pretends that he had predicted that it would be the Saudis already, which I don't believe is true based on my listening of these episodes.
But I'll let him have his after-the-fact predictions, I guess.
And remember, folks, I said before all this happened yesterday, I said you watch, they're going to come out and say the Saudis are the people with these photos.
And then a day later, the photos we break, that we show you, and the drudge amplifies.
Homeland Security comes out and says, here's the person of interest, and it's the very stills and photos we showed you yesterday.
And no media gives us credit instead of making fun of us and attacking us.
And initially, I had no idea what Alex was talking about, this idea that the DHS released the same photos that he was rambling about.
So I've looked into it, and I can't find any indication that the DHS had released any photos of the suspects up to this point.
The furthest they've gone was that Janet Napolitano had testified that they did have photos of the suspects.
From further digging, I know that Alex is just talking about the New York Post story.
I consulted the Infowars website and found that on April 18th, Paul Joseph Watson posted an article titled Breaking Police Confirm InfoWars Photos of Boston Suspects, which is all just about the New York Post cover.
They're making this faulty assumption that that is the confirmed police photo.
And that might explain why this article includes an editor's note.
Quote, the above photo was originally given to the New York Post by the FBI as persons of interest.
A day later, the FBI said that they were no longer persons of interest.
That, of course, means that the police did not confirm Infowars photos, and this article is total bullshit.
However, it does clarify for me that this is absolutely what Alex is talking about when he imagines that the DHS had the same pictures as him.
One important thing to point out here, though, is that the picture on the cover of the New York Post is absolutely not the same ones that Alex has been obsessing about.
Alex is very focused on the white Patsy and the guys that he's decided they're Marines.
Whereas the Post cover had these two Moroccan gentlemen, one of whom doesn't even have a backpack on.
He has a shoulder strap bag.
The FBI would go on to release the images of the suspects taken from surveillance cameras on April 18th in the afternoon.
But like I said, it's an afternoon press conference.
So that hasn't happened by the time Alex is here on air talking about photos being released.
This is all probably another negative result of the New York Post cover.
Alex has decided it's an official DHS release, and now he's worked it into his narratives, further reinforcing the idea that he's right about everything.
It's real simple, but it's one of those things, like the path is really windy, but it's not hard to walk if you just look at it.
So if Alex thinks it's worth reporting that the marathon ended at 666 Boylston Street, I have some bad news about Jared Kushner's property on Fifth Avenue.
Don't look into that, Alex.
If you look up this bit of non-trivia about the marathon ending at 666 Boylston, you'll find a bunch of very reputable sources picking up the story after the 18th, probably in response to Alex amplifying it.
We're talking about UFOblogger.com.
We're talking about USAHitman.com.
We're talking about GalacticConnection.com.
You know, all the heavy hitters of hard-hitting news.
However, if you track down where this tidbit was being reported earlier than April 18th, there's only one outlet.
And thus, it clearly has to be where Alex is taking this information from.
It's a little bullshit website called BeforeItsNews.com.
Before It's News was started in 2008, possibly with good intentions, as a place where any citizen journalist out there could post news items they thought needed more coverage.
Naturally, this quickly became a favored place for completely insane people to masquerade their nonsense as journalism.
Anybody who would take this place as a credible place to find information is a complete hack or delusional.
Just for fun, I decided to look back and see what Before Its News was running as some of their front-page stories at the time when Alex must have taken this 666 shit from them.
Of all the headlines, that one is the most ambiguous about whether or not, like, you could see it fall one way or the other, but you know it's going to be bad.
This all traces back to a purported Google Earth image that I'm 90% sure is Photoshopped.
Here's the reason I think that.
Okay.
The image shows a marker saying 666 Boylston in the middle of the street, in the center lane of traffic.
It's indicating that the center of traffic has an address.
The street itself does not have an address.
The buildings do.
So it seems strange to me that the street would be showing up as having a physical street address.
The second issue I have is if you look at Google Maps now and you consult the street view, you can easily find the finish line of the marathon.
Regardless of whether or not it's marathon season, that line is always painted on the street.
And if you look at the side of the street that's evenly numbered, you'll find that the marathon's finish line is pretty closely matched up with the Boston Public Library, whose address is 700 Boylston Street.
The building immediately next to it appears to possibly be a different building, but it's actually just an extension of the Boston Library known as the McKim Building.
It's easily identifiable by its inscription on the side of the building.
Quote, the Commonwealth requires the education of the people as the safeguard of order and liberty.
Ironic in some ways based on these people being so dumb spreading these theories.
The McKim Building is the home of a lot of research collections, and it's a goddamn gorgeous piece of architecture, particularly inside.
Oh, it looks so cool.
The McKim Building's physical address is 230 Dartmouth Street, as the main entrance is on the intersecting street, Dartmouth.
Sure, sure, sure.
There is no 666 Boylston Street.
These conspiracy theorists could say the finish line is near 665 or 667 Boylston Street, but they know that sounds weak as shit, so they just pretend that this is a real address and it means something.
So in this next clip, Alex is deepening his expressions of how fucking pissed off he is that no one's giving him credit for breaking these pictures ahead of the DHS announcing their pictures, which are obviously the same.
She looked like a deer in the headlights, like she was completely freaked out.
And on methamphetamine today, during the congressional hearing, where she said, we do have two photos of men of interest, the photos we showed you yesterday.
I'm going to say that again.
You know, the New York Times or CNN or Fox News said, hey, look at these photos we found.
Don't these look suspicious?
You know, they'll show you a guy on the roof all day and say, ooh, who is it?
Who could it be?
Because there it's all blurred and you can't tell.
But for a day, there are these photos and videos and none of them will show it until the government says, now it's okay to show this.
And they show you some photos that we already showed you.
And no one gives us credit.
Instead, there are hundreds of hit pieces saying I'm crazy and dangerous yesterday and today.
Also, two days ago, a congressional bipartisan commission said there was a systematic order of torture, including children, by Bush and by Obama, and a deliberate attempt to cover it up and continue to order the military to engage in hardcore class A felonies.
Punishable by death, by the way.
That is the punishment for torturing people to death, including children.
Even if you would normally otherwise be able to see directly through this for the transparent bullshit that it is, in a fucking emotional, overridden state, it's just going to hit you before you can really do that.
You've got a mist over your eyes.
You've got the fog of war going on over your eyes, that kind of situation.
Yeah, and I think it comes back to the same thing where it's like cult recruitment is a lot easier with people who are in vulnerable states in their life.
Like you just have a breakup or something like that.
You get kicked out of your house, parents kick you out.
It's much easier for nefarious groups to come in and attack.
And in the same way, I think it would, like, I can see how it would be so easy for people to be seduced with Alex's conspiracy bullshit that, again, like, all of this is not based on anything except him looking at pictures and being like, ah, that's who that guy is.
See, the government right now is having a come to Jesus moment because they all play it being tough.
They all play it being evil.
They all play it doing hardcore stuff, but becoming evil to guard good and that old Machiavellian lie of guard the truth with lies and be more evil than the devil to protect good.
And I'm totally fine with the idea that people have vague notions about guardian angels and stuff.
Like, we've all had close calls that would be like, whoa.
Afterwards, you're like, holy shit, I should have done it.
And if you want to believe that that's divine protection, I don't care.
That's your prerogative.
However, I think that the way that Alex is framing this is super fucked up.
For one, he's making it a thing where God has to decide in order for him to even be killable.
Anything that anyone could possibly do to him wouldn't work since God and the angels are protecting him.
That's all good and well.
But if you really believe that, then why would he be so obsessed with guns?
Why would he constantly talk about how many guns he keeps in the studio?
Shouldn't he be comfortable in the fact that even if someone broke into InfoWars HQ with a gun, they wouldn't be able to do anything because he has God's protection?
The question gets even weirder when you consider that Alex now employs round-the-clock bodyguards who are allegedly ex-Blackwater employees.
Why would Alex need mercenaries to protect him if any attack against him wouldn't work?
The only way to make this make sense is if Alex knows that he doesn't have God's protection.
He knows that what he's doing is evil.
And while it works really well to pay lip service to this idea of God having made me an indestructible warrior, deep down, he knows that he's manipulating people and is a force for bad in the world.
File this, Jordan, under the heading of more possible evidence that Alex did join up with those Satanists.
Really, like the only way to make that make sense is if he, like, he wouldn't have these bodyguards and be obsessed with arming himself to the teeth if he felt he had divine protection.
He would be all about nonviolence and walking through life untouchable.
I'm sure he does have some oil paintings of God with like an AK in his house.
I would assume that he does.
So Alex gets to talking about Dan Badondi, who, as we heard on the last episode, and I believe even the one before that, has gone to Boston and he is an official InfoWars employee.
He's there with an InfoWars mic.
He's yelling Infowars.com at everybody and trying to disrupt these press conferences that the mayor of Boston and the authorities are trying to give to calm the public and to help them get whatever information out is known and determined by these investigations.
So Alex gets to playing the clips of Dan Badanti's up till this point work at press conferences.
But it takes him forever to get to it because he can't stop talking about the footage.
You see it from his perspective at the camera with the governor and the police commissioner and the mayor and the ATF head all looking at him like they want to kill him instantly.
See, in criminology, if somebody doesn't recognize what you're saying, I've had cops question me before in FBI and Secret Service, and they're watching to see when they show me something if I automatically recognize it.
And they're sitting there watching to see if I have to remember it.
That's basic police work.
And the minute Badanti asks him, they jolt when he says the drill and the false flag and their eyes all come alive and they swing around and start, you know, I mean, guilty as sin.
Guilty as a pig and you know what.
Now, it doesn't mean they did the bombing.
It means they know about the drill.
They've been told shut up.
And the governor goes from being the fake, smiley guy like he is at the memorial service to instantly battle mode.
Honestly, the best you could argue based on the footage is that he expresses slight annoyance.
This is really important to Alex's narrative, though.
No matter what response Dan Badanti got, Alex was going to frame it as these officials being caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
It's really a very basic propaganda trick.
You go and send some annoying asshole to go yell at a press conference, and you have a pretty high likelihood of him causing a scene.
If he gets thrown out, you can argue that they can't handle the truth.
If the officials yell at him, you can make the same argument.
I think Alex was kind of betting on something like that happening, and all Badanti managed to provoke is the governor giving him a one-word answer to his question.
Because there's nothing here, Alex has to go really overboard in characterizing the video, and it's honestly really pathetic.
Another important point here is that the video that Alex does end up showing is edited to make it look like the press conference ends in response to Badanti's question, when in fact they've just cut out the officials responding to other people's questions.
This, too, is a crucial piece of Alex's narrative.
He needs to make it appear that they're so afraid of this question of false flags and the drill that they run away from planned press conferences to reinforce this narrative that Alex is pushing, that the information he's putting out is so dangerous and real.
All of this is smoke and mirrors and edits because they know damn well if they just played the raw footage of the press conference, Badondi would just look like a sad, loud loser who the adults are putting up with politely.
That would be a good test of Alex's gaslighting powers is that could you play the full unedited video and coach people so well beforehand that when they watch it, they do see what it is you think they want to see, right?
He's trying to get people to do Google bombs where they, like, everybody search for false flags so the analytics goes even higher on when all of Alex's articles are tagged false flag and the meta tags and stuff like that.
So obviously he knows that's going to drive more traffic to him.
The full press conference would work with people who have already internalized the narrative.
Right.
But you need the edited version in order to get them to the point where they would internalize it.
It helps.
It's one of the only things that's like intersecting with the real world of this investigation is we have Dan Badanti yelling at people at press conferences.
It's such a crucial piece of the propaganda pageant that Alex is putting on that you need to edit it.
But I do agree.
I do agree that eventually you could just show the whole thing.
It is another really interesting difference between then and now where, you know, the president can admit to committing crimes and people will be like, nah, he didn't commit crimes.
He just primes people to believe whatever it is he want.
And now in the present, when we're listening to Alex Jones, he's not really bothering with trying to attract, you know, he's trying to attract new listeners as much as possible, but he's not bothering with trying to trick them.
I mean, we don't often end up listening to his clips that he plays of Trump, but they're often the parts that are most interesting to other folk are not included.
One, orchestrate bombing on Patriots Day in city of original Boston Tea Party.
Two, detonate bombs near the finish line at the end of the race where slow Caucasians trudged forth and not earlier when the Olympic caliber and it goes on.
It's like Alex thinks he can just edit out the parts of things he's reading that create problems for him by saying it goes on.
He tried that trick when he was reading that article about his fan who kidnapped his children so he wouldn't have to read the part about the guy tying up the kid's grandmother.
And now he's clearly doing it, so we want to have to draw attention to the fact that he introduced this clearly racist internet comment by saying he loved it.
The only question I have is how racist it was.
If it threw Alex for a loop, that makes me think it had to be really racist.
so that's the level of shit that's taking up some of his time reading comments that he hasn't read that he finds out a racist in the middle of them I love this comment it's titled The Riddle of the Jews before it's not very insightful 30 white horses on a red hill.
I think that the fact that he's taking time to do shit like that should indicate that this next clip might not be accurate.
This is the most historic radio broadcast in 18 years I've ever done.
We received from anonymous and we did Google searches on the photos that confirmed they were from Twitter accounts and news stations that didn't know what they had.
We received from anonymous contact sent to Paul Watson and we are in contact with the folks that sent us the information.
They've asked that we not mention what hacker group they're with.
We'll just say they're anonymous, that they went out and it's obviously intelligence people who don't like what's happening that NAVY SEALs were there at the event at the Phoenix line, all over the place with radiation detectors, black backpacks.
We're talking 20 feet max, 20 yards, you know, between 20 and 60 feet from the bombers right there by the flags, and there was a drill which they've been caught lying about.
So the uh, the the important thing here is that it's so important for him to paint this anonymous person who, or 4chan being his source as intelligence operatives, because it's such a hole in in the narrative and he needs to patch up that hole it.
It needs to come from some very legitimate, credible source, which is these anonymous, good people within the intelligence community who are sick of the bullshit.
Otherwise, closer analysis is, Alex, you just took this from a message board.
See, I can't understand how it is where he's supposed to, how it is we're supposed to reconcile two things in the same sentence, which is first, we Google searched it and it's been on a bunch of Twitter accounts already.
And two, it was given to us directly by these intelligence officials.
The Googling and the Twitter accounts was after the fact, after the intelligence people had gathered all of those photos from all these disparate places and sent them to Alex in a data dump.
In reality, Paul Joseph Watson was cruising 4chan, found these images, told Alex about it, and now they've created a backstory for a better source for the information.
It's debatable whether or not Alex knows how to perform that operation, but he does know it's real, which is good.
So here, file this next clip under the headline of Alex just constantly complaining that no one is like, again, throwing him a parade for his awesome reporting.
He always wants a parade, but the extent to which he's so focused on no one giving him credit, it does have a different feel to it than a lot of other times, which is wild.
So Alex starts faking hyperventilating on air in order to sort of sell the illusion that this is like real serious times.
And in the process, ends up making a ludicrous statement.
Let me explore with you here some of the things you need to do, even if you're going to listen to the way Alex is saying, like, first, you get these people, ask them who's running what.
Right.
These steps are still needed to prove his case, even if he's right, which he's not.
First, you've got to figure out who these people are in these photos.
Alex's crack team still hasn't put any names to anyone, and this anonymous intelligence agent he imagined is contacting him doesn't seem to know who any of these people are.
So that seems like it's still a hurdle that needs to be hurdled.
Then, once you figure out who these people are, if they're willing to submit to an interview, you can ask them questions, but there's no guarantee that any of them are going to talk to you.
That could be a difficulty.
If, let's, you know, like, let's pretend that Alex is the cops and one of these people says, I want a lawyer.
Alex seems to imagine he could just take these out-of-context pictures to a judge and just keep saying, come on, at them until they give you a subpoena or some shit.
Then, imagining somehow you compel these people to talk.
What if you interview them and they say that no one was ordering them to do anything?
What evidence do you have that they're lying?
If guys like Alex thinks are Marine Special Ops just said we were at the marathon and you think we look weird, what evidence is going to provide to contradict them?
This would be a disaster of a case to try and prove anywhere except for InfoWars.
You notice no media is going, wow, Alex Jones, of all people, got the photos of who they say they're looking for now.
Why didn't the media over several days?
And you'd think I'm so busy, you know, you think I'd be looking at this stuff close.
And it was all hiding in plain view in front of everyone.
Dude just came in here during the break is why I'm hyperventilating with a stack of new high-def photos and stills out of the city of Boston surveillance footage, and it shows the handlers of the Saudis.
And you can see the body language, all of it.
And again, people say, oh, you're just speculating.
Oh, I told you who they would be forced to release with the Saudis.
However, it's important to point out that the Post didn't get the image that they used from the same source that Alex is pulling from.
Though they're guilty of a similar journalistic crime, they were at least operating off bogus emails from actual law enforcement, reporting bad information that they didn't thoroughly vet.
Whereas Alex is getting random pictures from 4chan and writing a story about him.
Because Alex gets all of his news from websites that are completely full of shit and sensational nonsense, he naturally thinks that the entirety of media is talking about the same things he was covering already, and that he was way ahead of them.
It's just because he's conflated these things.
He saw the post cover and he also heard that Janet Napolitano had announced that the FBI was going to release pictures of the suspects.
He doesn't realize that the FBI has not yet released these images, so he's most likely assuming that the post cover is in fact the release of the suspect pictures.
The men on the cover were Moroccan, but Alex is dumb and racist, so he assumes all brown people are basically the same.
So he thinks that this picture is of Saudi Arabians who were at the marathon, who were the new Patsys, now that he's blown up the hillbilly angle.
He's further conflated the Saudi student who was injured in the bombing and an unrelated Saudi student who was taken in by ICE for not registering for classes and turned them into the same person in order to suggest that the Saudi Arabian Patsy is going to be taken out of the country.
And that's what this meeting Obama had with the Saudi foreign minister was about.
It's really interesting because all the faulty steps he makes in his reporting are pretty clear if you just listen to him and have some distance from the actual event.
It's super easy in 2019 to see the glaring holes here and how he so eagerly fills them in with the narrative of his own design.
But in April 2013, it'd be fucking hard to concretely point out these lies.
There's a climate of fear and anxiety, and the way he so confidently makes these dumbass assertions is seductive.
It's really one of the worst parts about looking at this stretch of time, seeing how dumb what he's saying is, but seeing how easy it would be to be convinced that there's something to it.
I know I'm saying that kind of consistently and repeatedly because I think it's an important idea.
I think it's as we go through this, like it's important to not lose track of the climate and how people's emotions were at that time and how he's willingly and aggressively manipulating them.
Body language, all of it, leading up the poor Patsy, who probably thought he was a secret agent.
Now he looks so proud to be on Team America.
He doesn't know he's going to be drugged up and rolled out as the new McVay and going to be electro-shocked, tortured, drugged up for trial, just like all the other Patsy.
It's so horrible.
And you know what?
The operation was blown for you.
This is unprecedented.
So now they're going to say, oh, maybe it's Saudis.
Oh, we sent them back to Saudi Arabia.
Never mind.
Oh, we met with the Saudi foreign minister emergency meeting.
We canceled the press conference.
Blah, blah, blah.
On and on and on.
They do not want this out.
They do not want this discussion.
They do not want you talking about it.
They do not, they needed to blame the Patriot Tea Party for this so bad.
Because he keeps talking about this, and I can't really find a lot of good evidence that people were blaming right-wing white patriot folk.
And he keeps saying that they're all over the media saying it, and he doesn't play any clips of that.
I went to Infowars.
I can't find any articles of them demonstrating that.
I think it's just the fact that he's built that up as the narrative that they are doing this is now established, and he's reporting on his own perceptions from previous days.
Like, in the same way that I want specifics on a heroic cowboy Calvin Klein model who's just put on a little bit too much weight because he's too busy fighting the globalists.
I mean, that's why Gary Hart on the CFR Commission wrote public letters and a paper saying we need stage terror attacks, just like Peanak did the September 20th rebuilding America's defenses thing.
And then one time We Are Change, this in my film Truth Rising, founding at an event.
He was at a book signing and came up and said, you wrote those letters and put out that public report saying we staged terror attacks in America and that we should do it again.
And he goes, no, I didn't.
What are you talking about, son?
They go, well, here's your letter.
And when he read it, he started sweating and going, oh, well, that was a mock letter.
See, they don't even think of us as human.
You publish this stuff in the CFR.
You publish this stuff publicly, and we're not supposed to go with a copy of it.
So I can't find a clip of what Alex is talking about with him sweating and freaking out, mostly because I'm not willing to watch Truth Rising just to find some context for what he's talking about, Gary Hart's reaction.
I'm certain that Alex is embellishing and misrepresenting Gary Hart's reaction, but none of that really matters.
On 9-11Truth.org, there's an article about this letter that Gary Hart wrote.
The first thing that's important to point out is that this letter wasn't written for the CFR or anything like that.
Even if Gary Hart was a member of the CFR, it was an op-ed he wrote for the Huffington Post in September 2007.
The letter is titled, quote, unsolicited advice for the government of Iran.
And one thing that's important to point out is at this point in 2007, things were not good between the U.S. and Iran.
In January of that year, the U.S. had raided the Iranian liaison office in Iraq, which was serving as the de facto consulate.
And they took five consular officers hostage, which they wouldn't release these dudes until July 2009.
But sometimes it seems like certain more hawkish elements like to provoke provocation.
But it's important to point out what he's talking about is not false flags necessarily.
He's talking about advising Iran to avoid giving someone like Dick Cheney the excuse he's dying to find to justify going into another war.
From the letter, quote, you would probably be well advised to keep your forces, including clandestine forces, as far away from the Iraqi border as you can.
You might even consider bringing in some neighbors to verify that you're not shipping arms next door.
Tone down the rhetoric on Zionism.
You've established your credentials with those in your world who thrive on that.
If it makes you feel more powerful to hurl accusations at the American Eagle, have at it.
Sticks and stones, etc.
But for the next 16 months or so, you should not only not take provocative actions, you should not seem to be doing so.
For the vast majority of Americans who seek no wider war in the Middle East or elsewhere, don't tempt fate.
Don't give a certain vice president we know the justification he's seeking to attack your country.
This letter in no way is saying we do false flags and we should do more of them.
That's an absurd misrepresentation of the message that Hart was expressing.
But that shouldn't be too surprising at this point.
I remember, I specifically remember the next day when the Ayatollah had an unsolicited letter to Gary Hart in the HuffPost that just said, who are you?
That clip right there is nothing more than performative masculinity.
Yeah.
There is no passion behind any of that.
That was completely artificial.
And most importantly, nothing he's saying is true.
Like I said, he's yet to play any of these clips of CNN or any other media outlets salivating at the thought of this bombing, being a gun owner right-winger.
And nothing I could find on his website seems to prove that at all.
He's just playing his role.
And he's seeing that it's working.
Like his traffic is way up, so he's leaning hard into being the guy who knows everything about the bombing and is willing to fight you over it.
But unfortunately, he's living on borrowed time because in reality, he knows that he hasn't predicted anything.
The thing I find particularly interesting there is how he said that he predicted that the globalists would ban powder from the gun shops there at the end of the clip.
He didn't predict that.
If you recall, that came from a 4chan post that he read on air.
He was trying to present as a troll post, which he started agreeing with as he read it.
If anything, he should be saying, they're blaming the powder from the gun shops.
You heard me convinced by a troll post that that was going to happen.
So anyway, Alex says in this next clip that there were Democratic fundraising letters that he found that were going around that were saying, we need another Oklahoma City bombing.
I mean, you people are running around in Democratic fundraising letters saying to your million-dollar donors, don't worry, there'll be a new Oklahoma City.
We're going to win our agenda.
Your money's well spent with us.
Even letting their donors in, like, don't worry, we're going to blow stuff up.
I mean, I have to sit here and watch these psychos on power trips reading their teleprompters on MSNBC going, you know, all the twinkly eyes of just criminal energy, just going, and you know it's NRA that did this bombing and they're going to get these people.
So I can't find any evidence that there were ever any Democratic fundraising emails that said things like, don't worry, there's going to be another Oklahoma City bombing.
There's literally no way I believe that such a thing could exist without being plastered all over every single right-wing media site online.
I would imagine that what's being misrepresented here is that some organization, maybe even the SPLC, sent out a fundraising email that discussed the growing threat of right-wing terrorism, not as a positive thing, but as a thing that they make it their business to keep an eye on.
It would make sense for them to raise money by pointing out that, you know, as the Tea Party movement has grown, the more dangerous militia communities have grown along with it, reaching levels unseen since the mid-90s, which did lead to the Oklahoma City bombing.
That would make total sense for them.
And Alex's track record is littered with him misrepresenting things like that, so I would probably assume that's what he's talking about.
The closest I can find to this is a couple of comments that people made that were saying that Obama needed a unifying moment to save his presidency back in 2010.
In one instance, Mark Penn said in an appearance on Hardball, quote, remember, President Clinton reconnected with Oklahoma, right?
And the president right now seems removed.
It wasn't until that speech that Clinton really clicked with the American public.
Obama needs a similar thing.
This isn't saying that Obama needs a new Oklahoma City bombing to save his presidency.
It's saying that Clinton reconnected with the American public in that speech that he gave after the bombing, and Obama needs to similarly reconnect.
It's not about the terrorist attack.
It's about the speech.
The other instance was Robert Shapiro saying in an article in the Financial Times, quote, the bottom line here is that Americans don't believe in President Obama's leadership.
He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he's a leader who can command confidence, and short of a 9-11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can't think of how he could do that.
You could read that as a guy saying that Obama better fake a terrorist attack soon, or you could read it as a political commentator using an extreme example to express how bad a situation Obama was in at the time.
Mark Penn's comment came a couple of days after the 2010 midterms, when the GOP won back control of the House and gained six seats in the Senate, effectively putting a halt to most of the hope that Obama had of having a cooperative Congress.
So you can kind of see how a political commentator might see the prospects right then of not being good.
Then Shapiro's comment literally says, quote, between now and November.
And that's referencing that he said this right before the 2010 midterms.
Shapiro is articulating that there's a rising tide within conservatism happening at the same time that Obama's approval ratings were falling, and it didn't look good for him.
So he's probably going to get battered at the midterms.
And he did.
The only way to read either of these comments as expressing the need for some fake terrorist attack is if you're already convinced that that's what the people are saying.
Like, if I think about it hard enough to like, Obama, we had a Democratic president, super majorities in the House and Senate, and the astonishing amount of power you can see now is just welled by 37 senators.
So while I can't find any evidence about a Democratic fundraising email or letter similar to what Alex is saying, I should tell you that I did find a fundraising letter sent out by then executive vice president of the NRA, Wayne Lapierre, six days before the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.
The letter painted federal agents as thugs out to, quote, harass, intimidate, and even murder law-abiding citizens.
According to an article in the Christian Science Monitor about the letter, quote, Mr. Lapierre urges gun owners to take action before there's no freedom left in America.
Now, obviously, this letter didn't inspire Timothy McVeigh to blow up that federal building.
It's tough to get around the fact, however, that what initially comes off as exaggerated, bombastic advocacy for gun rights kind of looks like exactly the same ideology that inspired the bombing of the federal building a week later.
Oh, and then I also found an article from the L.A. Times from April 28th, 1995, just after the Oklahoma City bombing.
Listen to this damn headline: quote: Oklahoma City after the bomb, lobbyists stymie efforts to trace explosives, bombs, technology, such as the use of tiny chips and material to find blast origin has been around for years, but NRA, others have blocked its usage.
My first thought, that headline is unwieldy.
Someone needed to take another pass at that point.
You see, though, there are these indestructible microscopic chips called tagants that can be put in all explosives sold in this country that could very easily trace back any bombs used in attacks like this.
In the 1980s, the Office of Technology Assessment did a study and found that implementing the use of tagants, quote, could increase arrests related to bombings by as much as 75%.
Anyway, when people talk about how the NRA is basically a terrorist organization, these are some of the reasons.
Their rhetoric is indistinguishable from domestic terrorists, and their actions make it exceedingly difficult for law enforcement to solve crimes committed by domestic terrorists.
So when Alex eventually does get around to saying that people are blaming the NRA, it might be that there is a news report about how the NRA blocked the efforts to put tagants in explosions.
Sure, sure, sure, sure.
I'm guessing that probably on MSNBC or CNN, there was a small piece about this history of advocacy that would have made solving this bombing probably super easy.
But then again, I don't know if that's the case.
I don't know if these tagants would have been put in fireworks as well.
There's going to be more attacks because I've blown their operation sky high.
Everyone admits that I'm right, but they won't say it's me.
It's crazy.
This is insanely irresponsible.
So he says that the gun grabbers are freaking out.
And one of his main pieces of evidence is that Harry Reid, in giving a speech, said that we don't need to be caught off track and get distracted by these black helicopter types who say there's false flags.
Because we must strike a better balance between the right to defend ourselves and the right of every child in America to grow up safe from gun violence.
Just discredit them every time you email one of our stories, every time you talk about false flags, every time you expose what they've done, every time you just bring them closer to defeat.
So in that clip, in the same breath, Alex is saying that he has no evidence or proof that the explosion in West Texas was false flagged by the globalists.
But because he's decided that's how they operate, they're the prime suspects.
I could just say that the fire was set on the night of the 17th and hours earlier on Alex's show.
He had Steve Pieczenik on as a guest, declaring himself in an open state of treason against the government, encouraging lone actors to fight back against the state that had no authority to rule.
I have no evidence one of Alex's listeners did that, but that would be the effect you'd expect to see when a high-level, credible expert goes on a rabidly anti-government radio show and tells the audience that treason is okay and it's time to act.
Obviously, I don't think that one of Alex's listeners blew up that fertilizer plant.
But I want to take this moment to demonstrate how flimsy the level of inference he's using is.
So this is kind of gross because at this point in the episode, Alex starts sort of trying to reclaim the story about the child who died in the Boston marathon box.
So anyway, you know, talking about this kid, I think, is pretty gross for Alex to do, especially because as he talks about it a little more, he begins by bragging about his empathy.
So Alex starts or continues down this road that he is arguing that these images that came out in the New York Post are the same as the ones that he has and that the media and the government and the investigators and the globalists, they all had those photos this whole time.
So when Alex first started talking about these pictures of the Marines and stuff, there's nothing suspicious other than what he's imagining about them.
So I just let it be.
And you're like, hey, who cares about this?
This is stupid.
He doesn't have anything to prove anything.
Just that he thinks these people look suspicious.
But I knew it was going to escalate.
And now we've gotten to that point where it escalates.
And it requires a bit of an explanation.
Because there are the people who are in these pictures.
More pictures have come out of them.
And they are, like, one of them is holding a radiation detector.
When Alex embarked on this conspiracy road regarding these guys who he thinks were in the SEAL team, there wasn't any information to go on.
It was purely based on a couple pictures that he'd had, and he created an entire story round entirely out of his own fantasies.
However, as I said, as the days went on, more pictures of these people came out and more information became available that really shot holes in his theories.
And now I'm going to lay waste to all this nonsense.
The first thing that you need to understand is that Alex has repeatedly cast suspicion on these men in tan pants with backpacks because they look suspicious.
One of the primary things that made these two men that were caught on camera suspicious immediately is that they appeared to be distracted and talking on phones.
That picture was presented as being before the bombing happened and showed sketchy dudes who were up to something.
Their behavior and the way they were looking around was used as evidence they knew something was going to happen.
However, later it was revealed that this picture was a cropped version of a larger image.
If you look at the actual picture, this is very much after the bombs went off.
They appeared distracted and not looking at the marathon and what have you because bombs had just exploded.
On the day of the bombing, people who weren't trying to spin absurd conspiracy theories had already found the answer to this question.
These men were members of the National Guard.
This was reported on CNN's live blog on April 15th at 3.45 p.m., just about an hour after the bombs had exploded.
Quote, troops from the Massachusetts National Guard were assisting police as well.
This naturally raises the question, though, why is the National Guard on site at the Boston Marathon?
You know, this would be a good question for Alex to ask, but he's so far away from the actual story that he doesn't even realize the answers he's demanding are already available.
On April 18th, Sergeant First Class John Susi published an article in the Air National Guard website about interstate assistance that's common between National Guard units, in particular these civil support teams, which is what these men were members of.
Quote, the Massachusetts team was on duty during the running of the Boston Marathon, augmented by similar civil support teams from the New York and Rhode Island National Guards.
Alex legitimately couldn't have looked at too many of these photos too closely because a number of these dudes have big letters CST on their backs, short for civil support team.
I guess it would be easy for Alex to just say that it's the same thing, you know?
I have faith in him that he'd still be able to spin a conspiracy theory out of these dudes being, you know, that it's just from they're a completely different organization than he's decided they're in.
It's still suspicious that civil support teams are there, right?
Probably not.
On April 16th, 2013, Eric Durr, the public information director for the New York State Military and Naval Affairs Division, told the Global Security Newswire, quote, anytime you have a high-key event where there's a lot of people, there's usually a unit from the civil support team in the area to provide assistance to first responders.
It turns out this is very common.
According to an article in the Washington Military Department's website, their civil support team, quote, supported the presidential inauguration, the governor's inaugural ball, and worked with the Seattle Fire and Police at every Seattle Seahawks home game.
They also helped the Minnesota CST due to their increased need for assistance during the 2018 Super Bowl.
All of these events and tons of other large-scale gatherings include a police presence.
And they're regularly augmented by members of these civil support teams.
And the only reason this time sticks out in anyone's mind is because it was the time when there was actually a terrorist attack that necessitated their activation.
These teams are specifically and specially trained to respond rapidly to chemical and radiological dangers, which is why you see one of them with a radiation detector in one of the pictures from right after the bombing.
They're an important piece of the security puzzle because in case the worst thing possible happens, they're trained and ready to deal with it.
It wasn't the case that the bombs that went off at the marathon were dirty bombs.
But if they had been, you'd be thanking your lucky stars that those dudes were there because they could have saved a lot of lives.
Anyway, none of this really matters.
Alex could still easily say that the fact that they were there means that they knew something was going to happen or the CST being there meant this was a drill.
And I guess that's a decent argument if you want to call every Seahawks home game a drill too.
None of this reality of who these men are is going to puncture Alex's conspiracy bullshit.
But it's still important to point out that by the 18th, when this episode is being recorded, it's been two days since Eric Durr publicly talked about who these guys are.
If Alex is researching this in any way and he's really into the truth like he pretends to be, he should know this information by now.
And he doesn't.
And you know what's even more interesting?
None of his callers know this either.
This is very publicly available information.
And if these info warriors are really digging into the truth like they say they're interested in, I would expect for them to at least be coming up with conspiracies about the correct group of people.
But they don't.
They just mirror back Alex's narrative that these are SEALs or mercenary groups.
It's very cult-like.
And you know what?
I know that this is publicly available stuff because I only used information that was available by the 18th.
I honestly, before you even told me, like, it's really interesting, the CST thing.
I'm really glad I learned about that.
But if you had said that he saw he had a photo where they were using a radiation detector, my first thought is like, this is just like those old-timey photographs where it looks like a guy is holding up a cell phone, but that's actually what a hearing aid looked like back then.
I mean, but that's the way it all, it's, it's, I think it's frustrating just because of the immediacy of it in a certain sense, in that we've been, you know, on this long roller coaster ride of an investigation.
But it's like anybody, it's like any historian being like, seriously, stop saying that the Civil War was about states' rights.
It's in the goddamn declaration that it's about slavery.
And people are like, no, You don't know what you're talking about.
He believes that they're Marines and SEALs, but they're probably higher level than even Green Berets because there are levels higher than Green Berets.
But if you pay close attention to this, I think what you can do is really see the way that Alex makes a one-to-one connection between standing up to tyranny and subscribing to his version of Christianity.
Realize the only way through this is to realize the enemy operations and to grow up and face the monsters that lurk and inhabit our government and major corporations.
The only way to be free is to be free and stand as free men and women have done throughout history and declare your independence.
Declare your independence at a spiritual subatomic level.
Declare your independence in your soul, in your will, in your intellect.
And then that will work its will upon the world.
Being free is a decision.
That's all you have to do is commit to truth and ask God to open your heart, open your mind, and to use you as a vessel against evil.
Pray that prayer and turn yourself fully over to life and the Holy Spirit and the universe will open up and the living water of Jesus Christ will flow straight out of the time-space continuum and you will truly be free.
it's troubling yeah i don't know how like here's what i would imagine for him Post-InfoWars, all he's got to do is just edit a bunch of those type of clips together, and he's got the next best-selling self-help book, right?
Like, that sounds so much like an Eckhart Tolly, but with fucking rock music behind it instead of soothing nature sounds.
When I'm totally tired, got a headache, exhausted, I will literally go in my office and just get down on my knees and say, God, give me energy, give me strength to fight.
And then my subconscious, the devil, whatever you want to call it, kind of says, oh, look, you did a bad job.
And this is bananas, but he reminds me so much of Kronk from the Emperor's new groove when he's got the little angel and the demon on either shoulder.
And he's just unaffected by either.
They're both saying nonsense, and he's like, yeah, my nonsense too, whatever.
And they just move on.
That's so, he's literally talking about having a little angel patting him on the back or a demon telling him he's evil, both of which is just a symptom of fucking depression.
The difference between Patrick Warburton in a cartoon and Alex is that Alex has a radio show and he's a religious fucking zealot and right-wing extremist.
So Alex gets to taking some calls on this here episode.
And this first caller that we're going to listen to is interesting because he actually does know that the pictures aren't really the suspect and that the New York Post cover was a fuck-up.
No, I've said over and over again, they'll come out with cover stories and they'll put forward a distraction away from the original redneck Patsies that they were going to roll out.
They're going to have cover stories.
They're going to try to spin this.
But my whole point is we put out all the suspicious groups with the backpacks and they've chosen to go with this.
Suspiciously, the one that he didn't have any focus on at all is the people who actually, you know, there is footage of them dropping the backpacks at these spots and pretty hard to get around evidence that they were the actual perpetrators.
All that stuff's all good and well, but this is, I mean, it's a little stale.
Like, it deteriorates into constant, just like him making stuff up about what must have happened and flights of fancy that he has about these guys being chosen as patsies.
And, like, it's just like he's suffering from the same problem that the mainstream media is because as creative as he is, his creativity has kind of hit a wall.
I don't think you're going to be able to grab even the most corrupt cop as a citizen, even the most corrupt cop, and take them to the police station and have all the other cops be like, thanks for doing that for us.
Doesn't seem like there's a lot of historical precedent.
So we get another caller, and this guy just is full of bullshit.
unidentified
Number one, I wanted to say to your listeners that I've watched, I've listened to you for over three years.
I have read probably 50 books as a result of listening to you.
I can tell your listeners out there that InfoWars is an extremely credible organization, and the fact that you do things on such an evidence-based way of approaching the news and stuff, I totally agree with.
I'm an attorney, so I take that very seriously, and I appreciate what you do.
So I'm not entirely sure that the FEMA director, Craig Fugate, was in Boston on April 15th, but I can say for certain that deputy administrator of FEMA, Richard Sereno, was.
I base this on a report that Sereno wrote called Lessons Learned from the Boston Marathon Bombing.
I was there.
Which was released on July 10th, 2013.
In the introduction to the report, Sereno says, quote, I was in Boston on that tragic day in April, celebrating Patriots Day in my hometown.
And I'm here now, not just as a FEMA deputy director, administrator, excuse me, but also as a Bostonian and former paramedic.
Patriots Day is a sizable holiday in Boston.
He's from Boston, so he went home to celebrate.
That makes sense.
There's nothing in this report about Fugate also being in Boston when the attack happened.
I can find literally no indication that the actual director, Craig Fugate, was in Boston at the time.
However, I did find a conspiracy blog saying that the fact that Richard Sereno was there is proof that the bombing was a FEMA false flag.
So I have to assume that that's what this caller is just fucking up with the details.
And he's really just talking about Sereno being there.
And again, there's nothing suspicious about him being in Boston.
Everybody knows that FEMA officials do not have any private lives whatsoever.
They were grown from a lab, and so they don't have any hometowns other than, I don't know, wherever sad amphibious eyes are these days.
So, you know, there's no way that there could be any rational explanation for a FEMA official being anywhere other than the FEMA headquarters where I assume they live in camps.
Alex is trying to control the narrative to drive traffic to his website and increase sales.
But the narrative he's pushing is bullshit.
There's nothing behind any of this stuff.
All of the things about the pictures that he's found, there's innocuous explanations for just about everything.
There's nothing suspicious except for what he's imagined.
He's not pushing a journalistic narrative.
He's not pushing an investigation narrative.
He's pushing his fantasies.
He's pushing his perceptions, his storyline that he's come up with that validates the idea that the federal government is evil and out to crush white gun-owning patriots.
Man, there's just like, is it just some fucking flaw within our brains that is not going to be corrected?
Like, these guys just can spin fiction out of nothing and convince a large enough people to be to be dangerous, to be really hurtful, dangerous, monstrous people.
I think a lot of it comes down to a very unique talent that Alex has.
And granted, it's not unique, but there are not many people who could perform on the level that he does.
In terms of like, he makes himself such a clown in order to be that thing that seduces people in with the entertainment value.
And then they keep watching and his vague references to things that he never explains and never actually documents or proves is enough to be like, oh, he's onto something.
And then as we've seen in the aftermath of the bombing, he's able to use real-world events and incorporate them really quickly into proving the narratives that he's laying out.
Like, if you were listening to all this and you were maybe think Alex is entertaining and you're listening and watching, like, a lot of your suspicions might go away that he doesn't know what he's talking about.
He's interacting with the real world in a way that he's presenting as reinforcing his worldview, but it actually doesn't.
So it's just like it just continues on this vicious cycle of bullshit being disseminated to be believed by enough people to turn bullshit into something that is real and tangible to these people.
Alex is completely lying about bags being checked.
According to the 130-page after-action report of the Boston Marathon bombing, produced in partnership by all manner of Massachusetts law enforcement and public health organizations, bags were not being checked.
From page 79 of that report, in a section titled, quote, Areas Needing Improvement, they discuss security limitations.
Quote: The areas surrounding the finish line in Boston and the starting line in Hopkinton, which are deemed to be higher risk than other public viewing areas, are screened for the presence of contaminants and devices several times during the day and are patrolled by law enforcement personnel.
However, these areas are open to the public, are heavily populated, and no screening of persons or baggage is conducted.
The report itself wrestles with how security protocols could be put in place that wouldn't completely destroy the marathon.
Quote, because the Boston Marathon is a large public family event, there needs to be an appropriate balance between security protocols and the feel of the event.
Ultimately, it gives some suggestions like prohibiting bags in certain places or increased police presence.
But it stresses a second time: quote, these protocols should not be so intrusive as to change the feeling of the event.
Alex is just making up the idea that all bags were screened in order to reinforce his conspiracy.
That if someone had a bomb in a backpack there, the cops would have to know and have to have let them in with it.
This is absolutely not true.
He is lying to, as he has put it, control the narrative.
And even then, even if you're talking about targeted near the finish line, you can walk.
That's such fucking.
And it's just like the TSA where it's like, oh, here's.
And even their report at least admits that there needs to be a balance between those instead of a giant dumb overreaction that turns into fucking theater in order to make sure all of us feel like we're being watched, even though it doesn't actually do anything.
Everyone needs to go to the two different TV feeds that are online of that day and watch them with a note and pad and then call into shows, email the link, or if you have the capability, grab it, put it on YouTube.
And listen, we're going to destroy them.
They're smoking guns.
There's probably the army handing the guys the bombs.
Defeat the enemy by going and finding maybe bad reporting in the immediate aftermath, like people reporting things capriciously, that then I can turn into conspiracies to prove my points.
That's all he's doing.
That's literally all he's doing.
unidentified
Guys, go edit more TV cartoons together to make me look right all the time.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to come back with Jakari Jackson and David Knight and your phone calls and some other breaking news and then more phone calls and then the press conference with Obama in an hour and a half or the FBI with their new Patsy.
So they, because they're not great at this point, David Knight and Jakari Jackson are not super.
I mean, David Knight's never good, and Jakari left before he ever got too much exposure on the actual Alex show.
He's mostly on the nightly news, but they're not good.
So they take a lot of calls.
And one thing I will say to their credit, they move along with the callers.
Like, whereas Alex will just take a caller, the caller will say something for like two minutes, then Alex will rant for 10 and be like, sorry, no time for more calls.
They at least are like, all right, make your point.
Yeah, he went on Wolf Blitzer, and his name is Dr. David King.
If you go to the Situation Room for yesterday at about 6:35 Eastern Time, he was on there with him, and he claims that he left the race before the explosion.
So, as always, Alex's callers are a showcase of stupidity.
Alex has trained his audience to trust their guts and just make connections between any two things they might think are related.
So when they call in, that's all they have to operate on.
It's tremendously dangerous.
Since Alex doesn't really have a high standard for what information he'll just repeat, like you've seen these things snowball on our show before.
In this case, this caller is completely wrong.
Dr. David King was a person who was on Wolf Blitzer, but he's not the person in Alex's photo holding a radiation meter who was a member of the civil support team, which Alex has no idea about, nor does anybody else who has any interaction with InfoWars.
The story this caller is trying to pitch is a disgrace to Dr. King.
And he should be ashamed of himself for saying something like this on a nationally syndicated show with literally no evidence.
King's wife was an avid runner, and she had previously run in the Boston Marathon.
One year, he went along to watch at the finish line, and he saw the looks of accomplishment and glee in people's faces as they crossed the line, and he just loved it.
To quote King, quote, they looked like they belonged on a Weedies box, every last one of them.
So he decided to do it himself and chase that feeling.
In 2013, he ran the marathon and finished about an hour before the bombs went off.
He lingered a while to watch other runners complete their race and see the excitement and exuberance in their face, and then he left.
On his way home, news broke about the bombs, and he immediately headed for Massachusetts General Hospital.
He did that because he's a trauma surgeon.
This man had just finished running a marathon, and he selflessly went immediately to try and help victims of the attack.
I don't know everything about Dr. David King, but his actions in the aftermath of the Boston bombing are the sorts of things you can easily describe as acts of everyman heroism.
When he could have easily just rationalized going home to shower or saying, I literally just ran a marathon!
Sure, or just say, like, there's other doctors, someone else will help.
He could have done that.
He didn't.
He jumped right in and saved people's lives.
This caller has randomly decided that he's the person in one of Alex's pictures because of a slight physical similarity.
And he's trying to turn King's story of heading right back to Mass General into a lie because the photos prove that he was there at the scene of the bombs.
Fuck this caller and fuck him again for choosing to spout this shit on the only news outlet likely just to repeat the claim without looking into it.
Without even knowing what they're doing, they're trying to turn a hero into a villain, trying to rob a person of their noble act, all in the name of making their conspiracy sound more plausible.
This is detestable behavior.
And I cannot stress that enough.
All of these people should be deeply ashamed of themselves.
This caller should still feel bad about this to this day.
The feature for them is always turning the people who exercise empathy, initiative, and heroism into villains.
Because what they are is people who won't and don't.
You know, like the way they treated when you went through the story of Soros' dad and all of his acts of heroism, and then you see what they're doing to him, and you're like, that's part of the goal.
If people are heroes, then you want to follow those guys.
In 2016, the Educators School Safety Network did a study on the phenomenon.
It's really scary to think about.
Obviously, almost all of them are fake threats, but it's still such a horrible sort of prank for a person to pull.
And to imagine that so many people choose to do it makes me feel real bad about humanity.
They found that in the 2015-2016 school year, there were 1,267 bomb threats made to U.S. schools.
There were 206 in January 2016 alone, which comes out to about 10 per school day.
That's a reality that school administrators around the country just have to live with and deal with.
We end up hearing about almost none of these.
And if we do, it's a passing news story, filling a slot in local news programming.
This case in Cal State is only something that makes headlines because it happened after the Boston bombing, and people were eating up any kind of bomb-related news, wondering if there's a connection.
Had the suspects made it all the way across the country?
Were there copycats out there?
My heart goes out to the students at Cal State that had to go through this scare.
Like, that obviously is not something you want to have to experience, but this story being introduced into Alex's show can only do harm.
And I understand that the outsized importance four years to a college kid means compared to somebody who is his whole adult life.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, pretty much.
But at the same time, man, if you are in college and you have been there for four years, you should at least have learned by now that four years is not that big of a measure of time.
Generally speaking, it's the practice of journalists not to name all of the people who are injured in a situation like this to protect their privacy.
A number of folks made the choice to be identified, and that's their decision, and it's no different for a police officer.
I would assume that they would have the choice to discuss their injury if they want to, but I'd also assume they might be less likely to, since it could possibly feel like an attempt to make the story about themselves, and maybe police officers would be more likely to not want that kind of attention.
Does showing that one cop was hurt in the bombing somehow make your paranoid delusions that the globalists pulled all their agents out so they wouldn't get hurt go away?
Of course it doesn't.
These aren't sincere questions.
They're conspiracy bullshit pretending to be curiosity.
This asshole doesn't want to know if any cops got injured.
He wants to inject the idea that none were to reinforce the idea that there was foreknowledge and this is a false flag.
That's why Jakari immediately starts talking about Rob Dew's brother, because that's the InfoWars talking point that matches up with this conspiracy bullet point.
Meanwhile, at least one cop did get hurt.
It was reported three days prior to them being on air here, so they have every reason to know that.
And they still haven't even proved shit about Rob Dew's brother.
He might have actually been dehydrated for all we know.
This all amounts to nothing.
And get this.
Even if Jakari or David knew that this USA Today article exists that says one cop was injured, it's in their best interest to not know that.
But this caller is informing David and Jakari about a hot video on YouTube, which, like, you've already deduced, is just a little clip from Charlie Chaplin's Great Dictator.
That fucking movie came out in 1940, and it also was nominated for four Oscars that year.
But look, dude, a lot of people forget, they tend to forget that that clip comes from a full-length movie, and that the speech being given, the character is a Jewish man pretending to be a character who's clearly Hitler.
Anyway, that movie is one of the most enduring pieces of comedic satire of fascism and authoritarian rulers, released in the fucking middle of World War II.
And it's pretty amazing that neither Jakari or David really seem to register what the caller's talking about.
It's also pretty amazing that this caller doesn't know who Chaplin is.
It seems unclear about whether or not he was watching something that might be new.
I'm not going to be too much of a dick to this kid for not knowing about the dictator.
I get that.
But that's like dragging on people on Twitter who are like, oh, man, it's cool that this Paul McCartney guy is going to be famous now because of Kanye or something like that.
But also, when I sit back and think about it, I can kind of understand how Jakari and David, who are people who work for a fascist-leaning propaganda outlet, probably wouldn't be too into exploring the world of fascism satire.
Yeah, no, that could make sense that they might not know about it.
I really don't have time to get into the ins and outs of this theory, but basically it's sovereign citizenship.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Tracing back to capitalized letters, that sort of bullshit.
I honestly don't even care about this.
Like, if you look into it at all, you just end up on dumb fuck blogs and message boards with people talking about how sneaky the Rothschilds are.
So just come on.
The Act of 1871 just created the District of Columbia.
They didn't create a new Constitution for the U.S. In fact, the District of Columbia was created the way it was, specifically because of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.
And by that, I mean the real Constitution, not the corporate one those sneaky Jews forced on us, which is what this theory is all about.
Anyway, he takes the podium and explains that they've conducted a very intense investigation and are confident that they have pictures of the correct suspects.
This assessment is based on photographic evidence of one suspect placing his backpack at the precise location of the site of the second explosion and other footage of the two suspects walking together.
And, you know, obviously they wouldn't have released pictures sooner because that would have, if they didn't know pretty certainly that they were the right people, get people killed.
In his prepared remarks, he asks for the public's help in identifying the two people in these pictures, but also says that other pictures people are circulating are not relevant, and focusing on them doesn't help them get to the bottom of the case.
I strongly suspect that his comment was not so much addressed at the dum-dums on the internet and InfoWars as much as it was a polite fuck you to the New York Post for their cover image with two incorrect suspects.
But I knew as soon as it came out of his mouth that the spin was going to be that the man doesn't want you looking at these forbidden images that tell you the true story.
And I almost gasped when Dan Badandi yelled about InfoWars having other pictures in the background at that press conference.
Yeah, it is one of those situations where those press conferences and all the fucking, like we've talked about the names for shit that the UN has and all that stuff.
They need a consultant to be like, oh, here's the language that if you use this, they're going to twist it against you.
Here's what you want to say.
Don't focus on the other photographs.
I understand why you would want to put it that way because I hear words and they make sense to me.
But what you need to say is, we would like tips on these people.
So Badondi here now gets into talking about how he destroyed that press conference with truth.
And then Alex suggests a dangerous plan of action.
unidentified
Oh, absolutely.
I showed him the photographs, and then notice when I presented the photographs, notice how the clown and docking put up his clipboard to block my photographs from the cameras.
I'm telling you, folks, you get these articles out that are at Infowars.com.
This is coffin nails to the tyranny.
Go ahead, Dan.
unidentified
And as you notice on the TV, Alex, when I was doing this, the looks on these criminal stations, they jumped off that stage like, oh my God, police just got exposed to the world.
Like, because everybody who's engaged with the real world understands that there's a tragedy and there's people on the loose that these people are working really hard to try and find.
Yes, get out of your basement, get away from your computer and go to Boston and start getting in the face of people and starting to ask people questions.
So now Alex barges into studio because he's going to try and bully Leanne McAdoo into coming on air because Leanne has cracked the case and figured out why these two, the photos of the suspects can't be the real suspects.
I'm going to say this because I've been telling her this all week.
And David, you can attest this.
I told Leanne, if you don't come in here and just briefly do just a quick report or just say something, Alex Jones is going to find you in the hall, drag you in here, and make you get on.
Did I not?
I've been saying that all week.
Hold on, let's get her a chair.
Now you're in it.
This is Leanne McAdoo, one of our new reporters here in the InfoWars.
So the problem with Leanne's thinking here is that there was only one picture that was made public of an exploded backpack.
And it did appear to be a darker, most likely black backpack.
When the FBI released the images of the suspects, who we would soon come to know as Tamerlan and Jokar Sarnev, it appeared that the bag that Jokar was wearing was lighter in color, possibly gray.
At no point had it been established that the pictured exploded backpack was Jokar's, nor had it ever been established that the brothers were carrying identical bags.
The photograph bag could easily have been the one Tamerlane was carrying, and Jokar could have had a lighter bag.
There's literally no contradiction here.
But because Infowars is so insistent on coming out with spin, and as they keep saying, controlling the narrative, anything that they think could be used to plant doubt is worth reporting.
Beyond that, one still photograph of a post-explosion backpack is not enough to conduct a forensic investigation on.
Alex and his crew have no idea what effect the explosion could have had on the color of the backpack.
Which isn't to say that I definitely think that it could have turned a gray backpack black, just that they have no goddamn idea what they're talking about.
This isn't the behavior of journalists.
This is more what you'd expect to hear from idiots smoking weed trying to blow each other's minds.
Sensational and intriguing if you're slightly impaired, but utterly without substance.
Really sucks that your first appearance on the show was spouting half-cooked bullshit to help Alex profit off lying about a national tragedy.
Unlike these other people on the show, I know what Leanne was doing before she joined InfoWars.
I'm certain that this is just a gig for her.
I know that she used to be a new age hippie, blogging about, quote, being deeply drawn to reconnect with Source as the Mayan calendar ended in 2012, which is shockingly close to when she won Alex's Find a Reporter contest.
I know that she'd entered another TV hosting contest, the CW Austin star in 2011, and she'd been on a TV show prior to that called The Last Resorts.
I'm willing to believe that she may not have known what she was getting into when she started at InfoWars, but if you're a bohemian free spirit out there practicing tarot one day and the next you're doing this shit and not immediately quitting when you see Alex behaving how he has on air since the bombing, I guess all I can say is I fucking hope that job paid super well.
Because you're doing this and you are, you don't believe this.
Up to that point, they weren't getting any suspicion thrown their way online from all of these blogs that were researching and finding suspects.
The authorities had been tight-lipped about the leads they were pursuing.
And if you were them, you might get the sense that you'd gotten away with it.
And from all accounts, that's pretty much what they thought.
They'd gone back to their normal lives and thought, hey, maybe we pulled this off.
And then that press conference happened, and it all got disrupted, and they panicked.
The FBI press conference was at about 5 p.m.
And at 10.31 p.m., the brothers approached the vehicle of an MIT police officer named Sean Collier, who they then killed, most likely because they only had one gun and there were two of them.
At 11.26 p.m., they carjacked an SUV in Boston.
The driver of that car managed to escape and he called 911 at 12.19 a.m.
He goes on to tell the police that the two men who carjacked him told him that they bombed the Boston Marathon and that his car was equipped with GPS.
So the police turned on that GPS and began to track their car.
At 12.41, the police located the SUV in Watertown, along with a sedan that was being driven by the two brothers, and it's called in.
The reporting officer is told not to approach until more units arrive, so he follows them.
After a brief drive, the driver of the SUV gets out and he approaches the police car firing a gun.
At approximately the same time, the police supervisor's unit shows up and someone else comes out of the sedan throwing homemade bombs at the police.
There's a brief firefight, and at 12.49 p.m., the man with the gun, who turns out to be Tamerlin, is tackled by a cop, whereupon he's run over by his younger brother, who's attempting to flee.
Tamerlin's put in an ambulance and taken to the hospital, where he is pronounced dead at 1.06 a.m., despite attempts at resuscitation.
But Jokar got away.
He abandoned his car about a half mile away and fled on foot.
The night was absolute chaos.
And when it was all said and done, one suspect was dead, along with Sean Collier, the MIT officer.
Additionally, Officer Dennis DJ Simmons suffered injuries in the Watertown firefight that would go on to take his life a year later in April 2014.
He's officially recognized as the fifth victim of the bombing.
And though much of Boston remembers him as a hero, he's all too often forgotten in this story.
In particular, his family was pretty upset that the Mark Wahlberg movie Patriots Day seemed to not even be aware of him, even though there is a memorial loop of the other victims of that attack in the movie.
It's hard not to see that being a race thing, but that might also be partially because it's a Mark Wahlberg movie.
The entire situation changed overnight.
Now the surviving perpetrator knows that the police know who he is and that they're looking for him.
But he doesn't know if his brother is dead or if he's being interrogated at that time.
Now the police know that these suspects are absolutely willing to murder police, and one of them is on the loose and armed, at least with a gun and possibly with even more IEDs.
The city that was previously on edge with an absence of information now has come to the crest and finds itself with a whole lot of information and it's fucking scary information.
No one knows where Jokar went.
How does Alex respond to all this?
That's what we'll learn on our next installment, where we'll also get to learn a little bit more about these brothers.
It's a spiral down the toilet bowl of sanity that is, I mean, just even without even without retrospect, because obviously it's easy to look back and be like, oh, but even if even during that time, it is unconscionable what he's done.
And really this attention-seeking behavior, this desperation to be seen as on the right side, the winning team, appearances of destroying the globalists.
Like it kind of does put into perspective a lot of the Trump flip.