Today, Dan and Jordan dig into the past. In this installment, Alex Jones lies about a fascinating terrorism drill, lies about the story of a double-agent in the IRA, and gets dangerously close to seeming like he thought he was fighting the devil in 2003.
Does Alex believe he's fighting the devil and actively try to hide that from his presentation in order to be taken more seriously at this point in his career?
It was in fact a scathing condemnation of McCarthy and his tactics and a plea not to throw at all opposition to communism just based on how big a piece of shit he was.
Well, I mean, if you just make assumptions based on...
Based on headlines and what you think things are, then maybe things are topsy-turvy.
So I was able to find this article that Alex is talking about in the LA Times about textbooks.
It's by Diane Ravitch, an author whose work is almost exclusively about education-related issues.
The first thing to point out is that this, much like the other article Alex cites, is an editorial.
Ravitz is writing in the first person, and it's not a piece of straight reporting.
Around this time in history, Ravitz had just released a book titled The Language Police, How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn.
The book was about how fear of igniting controversy from both left and right-wing pressure groups has led to textbooks that give students an incomplete view of subjects like history and literature.
In her article for The Times, she says, For instance, every textbook acknowledges that the enslavement of Africans by the West was a great crime.
However, when describing slavery in the Middle East or Africa, many claim that it is a path to upward career mobility or a chance to join a new family.
Slavery is wrong in any time and place and should be recognized as such.
That's a fair enough point, but I want to make sure that we illuminate how this criticism is different than that that's lobbied by someone like Alex.
Alex doesn't want all cultures to be represented accurately and with proper historical context.
He would want the Middle Eastern or African slavery discussed, but he would also want the textbooks to ignore American slavery.
Or if they had to cover it, the focus should be on how America actually ended slavery.
But it started up fast after half an hour, and it got into some really interesting stuff.
When I think about going back in time and looking at these episodes, this is such a good example of being able to go in different directions from things that Alex says and learning about interesting stuff like this.
Top double agent in the IRA guilty of up to 40 murders.
Turns out that the top man in the IRA carrying out the bombings, the killings, the shootings, everything, as we told you last year, Was MI5-6 ultra-secret agent.
So, what's going on here is that Alex is glossing over an amazing story just to make it valuable to his worldview when, in fact, it doesn't really work at all.
The IRA member in question here is a double agent for British intelligence codenamed Steakknife.
So he denies that any of this is true, but it's widely understood that this was a man named Freddy Scappaticci, and if his denial isn't a lie, his story is bananas.
So, there's a great piece about this by James Harkin in GQ that I'm taking a lot of the background information for, and I would recommend people check out that article.
Apparently, in the late 1970s, Scappaticci met an army sergeant named Peter Jones, a guy who's so charismatic that his superiors, quote, allowed him to wear civilian clothes, don a beard, and develop his own sources.
Somehow, through the magic of charm and booze, even though Jones worked for the British Army and Scappaticci was in the IRA, they forged a friendship that resulted in Scappaticci becoming a mole.
So by this point, the IRA had become a slightly smaller organization, which was aware that they were spies trying to infiltrate their ranks and become snitches.
As such, they put together a counterintelligence team, which was meant to...
Essentially, through unconventional methods, the British government had cultivated a relationship with a double agent who was placed internally in a position that was almost comically strategically...
Or Scappaticci was responsible for helping disrupt multiple terrorist plots at a horrible cost.
The accusation that Freddy Scappaticci was steak knife came to light in 2003, and this became a big story, as well it should be.
The important piece to recognize here, though, is that Alex is missing the forest for the trees.
He deprives his audience of learning about this fascinating piece of history, or from learning about the history of the IRA and the Troubles, because the headline works a different way for him.
This is a story about a very well-placed double agent within the IRA, but to Alex...
This can prove that MI6 was running the IRA all along and the bombings and the attacks were all just false flags.
That's an outrageous misuse of this story, and by reporting it this way, Alex is actually doing something worse than just ignoring the story altogether.
He's creating a fake version of it for his audience to erroneously convince themselves they understand.
Even if all the allegations about Scappatici are correct and accurate, he wasn't the top man in the IRA, and he wasn't the one carrying out the bombings.
Alex is embellishing that element of the story because it helps him construct the impression that the world is all fake and that everything you hear is a lie.
I mean, as far as storytelling goes, when you reduce it down into this kind of bullshit, you miss out on a very human story where people are making difficult decisions in moral gray areas, where they're struggling to keep from being caught, while at the same time struggling to show that they're trying to catch themselves.
You know, like, that's a really fascinating story.
The MI6 already running the IRA is a really bull...
Well, I mean, and it goes back again to how boring it is that your enemy is both Everywhere running everything and is also so incompetent that you can defeat them at any and all times.
I think, too, like, what I was getting at is that, like, it's very unsatisfying if you're a demagogue on the radio to be like, all right, let's buckle down and everybody take notes.
This is going to take forever.
It's going to require a lot of reading and research on your part.
In 2018, Freddy Scampatici's home was searched as part of an investigation into his role in the IRA, which didn't result in any murder charges, although he did plead guilty to having at least 329 images of animal porn on his computer.
According to an article in the Irish Times, quote, Westminster's magistrate's court heard Scampatici tell police that he was not sexually interested in animals, but preferred women with big breasts.
He was ordered to pay a total of 185 pounds, including court costs.
They have been big in it before the Russians or the U.S. were.
Of course, Putin was caught blowing up or trying to blow up his fourth apartment building, did blow up three of them.
Moscow police arrested FSB in 1999, planting the bombs, and then Moscow GRU, their internal security force, went in and arrested the police and others that have the Hexogen explosives.
They arrested members of the media, and that story was shut down quite quickly.
But that is confirmed, and members of the FSB and others have now spoken out who fled the country.
Then Britain moved to have them arrested and shipped back to Vladimir Putin, who was the former head of the KGB in Stalingrad, Leningrad, St. Petersburg, whatever name you want to give it for the day.
It's now St. Petersburg, the old name.
And he was the guy really running things when they were pushing Boris Yeltsin around in a wheelchair, completely drunk and drugged out of his mind, who couldn't even speak.
He's been running things for at least the last three years of Yeltsin's tenure.
He was wildly unpopular.
Suddenly, three apartment buildings got blown up outside Moscow in the suburb.
He cracked down, said, I will save you, was a big hero.
And got elected with a large portion of the vote and then had a great war against the Chechnyans who screamed, it's not us, it's you.
We haven't found a terror attack in modern history anywhere in the world of any size or scope that wasn't carried out by the globalists.
When I say globalists, I'm talking about the private banks and their private armies that control the top cabals, the compartmentalized cabals, and all the intelligence agencies.
If you start from the position of everything is fake, that leaves you with way more options to occasionally accept things as being true.
If you start with the position that some things are true, for instance, Putin bombed his own buildings, then eventually you're going to have to change your opinion whenever you change your opinion about Putin.
The average person in the Pentagon, the CIA, the FBI, even the White House is a good person.
The average Democrat, the average Republican might be corrupt and might be a good old boy, but compared to the cabals that run things, they are nothing.
And let's make this clear, that we have just a few thousand globalists and a few thousand operatives who are carrying all of this out.
And then they have the scripts for the media with the media ownership.
They follow the agenda.
We have the power to save this country and, yes, the world if we have courage and stand up and tell the truth.
That clip really helped me put into context why it's so much less painful to listen to Alex's show in 2003 as compared to the present day.
And that is there's a presentation of hope.
In 2003, most people, Democrats and Republicans, even people who work in the intelligence community or in the White House, Are good people.
It's just a couple thousand villains who are secretly orchestrating literally every terrorist attack in the world and running all governments and financial systems.
It's ludicrous, but from the standpoint of gauging emotional states, there's a perspective of optimism that you can kind of feel in the program.
Compare that to the modern day where Alex's show is just fucking doom.
In this clip alone, you have a reminder that most people are good people, and a confident assertion that there's a good chance that the world can be saved.
Both of these are completely foreign concepts to Alex today.
Everyone who disagrees with him is a pedophile who works for Satan, and even if the Patriots are successful, the globalists are still going to kill almost everyone with a super bioweapon, or whatever he feels like ranting about that day.
Part of the reason his show sucks so much in 2021 is that it's actively depressing.
Not just in the sense that it's depressing that someone would believe the nonsense that he says, but the way the show is structured and the way information is conveyed is a fucking drag.
I don't believe Alex when he talks about courage or honesty, but I think that he might respect human life in 2003.
So we've got these really consistent things that keep coming up on every show, like Putin bombed the apartment buildings, and they're putting the Ba 'ath Party CIA agents in power.
I know it sounds like I'm beating a dead horse here, but it's constant.
Not like he's saying it every other minute, but it's every show these things are touched on.
See, now, this is one thing that is so frustrating about Alex, is that on that day that he does find out, I would like him to find out on air, and I would like him to deflate like a balloon, you know?
Somebody to prick him, and he just goes...
Like that.
But he's not going to do that.
He's just going to include it in some other part of symbol.
He's going to say, no, they're doing it publicly to get rid of baths to make you forget that they're actually putting the CIA people in there.
Got mad about French fries and French toast being served in the cafeteria because, of course, France had not agreed to join in with the invasion of Iraq and they were cowards!
All things considered, I think I would rather deal with freedom fries and freedom toast than someone like Alex, who's perpetuating the idea that France made this geopolitical decision to not get involved in the Iraq war at that point because they were afraid of Muslims.
Yeah, there you go.
That's deeply Islamophobic and terrifying.
and it's at a point in his career when he has the presentation of not being anti-Muslim he's certainly not as aggressive Aggressively anti-Muslim disease in the present.
But it seems like those latent things are there pretty clearly.
So, one thing, I wish that I had musical ability, because if I did, long ago, I would have made a bumper kind of sting sound for the Alex telling a story that totally happened.
You know, I have state police majors walk up to me.
I walk into the cleaners.
I randomly pull in to get my laundry.
Oh, I put it in two weeks ago.
What I'm saying is it wasn't some stage deal where the major in the state police was waiting to talk to me.
I'm driving back from the studio.
A couple months ago, I decided to pull in to get my laundry, just randomly, and there's a state police officer in there getting his uniforms, and he goes, Mr. Jones, can you come outside, please?
He goes, we were raised that this was the Soviet Union.
We know something's wrong.
The things we're being told are incredible.
And I go, how many of you are awake?
He goes, most of the senior officers know something's wrong, Mr. Jones.
DPS intelligence is fully aware of what's happening.
And he goes, we know this isn't a conservative administration.
I mean, you know, cops come up to me at the mall.
They're doing security and telling me they know what's happening with a tear in their eyes.
This is a bad answer on Alex's part, but I kind of see what he meant.
Alex meant that this drill was a part of preparing the public for martial law, but what the caller was asking was whether or not the drill would continue past day 5 into day 6 and day 7 and so on.
Would the drill be how martial law literally started?
So, I found the after-action report for this drill, released by the Washington State Department of Health.
This drill was called Top Off 2, and it was meant to simulate a WMD attack simultaneously hitting multiple cities.
It began with a bioterrorist attack in Chicago and a dirty bomb going off in Seattle.
In addition to these challenges, quote, a cyber event affecting the state's communication infrastructure hit the week before.
To further complicate the situation, a hostile takeover of the Washington State Ferry and a hostage event in Pierce County, south of Seattle, were included.
That probably seems like overkill, but that's the point.
As the report explicitly says, quote, This bucket's not done.
This simulation taught the Washington State Department of Health a bunch of important lessons.
For instance, they learned that their radiological monitoring and assessment center had no reason to be on site since it, quote, became mired in the response organization, which limited its ability to fully perform its work in off-site areas.
That's a pretty important lesson, but probably less critical than them learning that the infrastructure they had in place to transmit bulk data was insufficient to handle the needs they faced in an emergency.
Maps and data tables that were critical to It turns out, turns out using the Pony Express is not going to do it.
Another thing that's important to understand is that this is just the after-action report for the Washington State Department of Health.
They didn't run the simulation.
They were just one of the groups participating in it.
Each entity that took part, they played different roles in the simulation, and they faced different challenges, and each came away with their own lessons, their own gaps in planning that they could resolve.
I found the after-action summary for the entire exercise from the Department of Homeland Security, and the Washington Department of Health is just one of 47 state or local agencies that took part in the drill, along with 41 federal agencies and 21 agencies from Canada that got involved because that bio-attack that hit Chicago, it ended up spreading to Canada.
I was reading over this summary, and there's an amazing piece on page 8, where the exercise ended up teaching everyone who participated about the actual definitions that are in...
The Stafford Act, which covers how federal assistance is deployed to states in an emergency.
They found that, as it was written, a terrorist bio-attack, quote, does not clearly fit the existing definition of a disaster by the act.
This made it so the president couldn't issue a declaration of a disaster in the drill, but instead the secretary of HHS could only declare a public health emergency.
They didn't realize this beforehand.
From the report, quote, Sure, sure.
There's a ton of value to organizations preparing like this, using fake disasters to learn how to respond better to real disasters.
This exercise was followed by Top Off 3, which took place in 2005 and expanded to fully include exercises being run by the Canadian and UK governments in In collaboration.
In that scenario, they came up with 15 scary terrorist ideas and chose three to simulate.
There was a terrorist release of a mnemonic plague in New Jersey, a mustard gas IED attack in Connecticut, and then the events in the UK and Canada, which this report doesn't specify, and that really pissed me off because I want to know what games they were playing.
This was followed by Top Off 4 in 2010, and as of yet, this series of scenario planning exercises has not resulted in martial law.
You would think that if Alex's whole thing about how the globalists used these exercises to launch their evil plans or something had any merit, one of these would have resulted in something more nefarious than government employees learning things.
That's a day that sticks out to me in my head from my entire...
Elementary school career because of just the excitement of going and role-playing this scenario of trying to make sure we're able to communicate between the two.
And they obviously would throw some curveballs, like something's going wrong.
I kind of want to see if we can orchestrate like a...
Giant national role-playing game where we just play the exact same thing, but we're people inside of the simulations, and we have to act like we're all dying.
One thing that I found that I actually kind of took a little bit of issue with was that prior to this, there was an exercise, the original top-off exercise.
This is a great indicator of how seriously Alex takes research into what's supposed to be his primary field of study, the truth about 9-11.
It's a regular talking point in the 9-11 conspiracy communities that some of the accused hijackers have been found alive.
But anyone who's looked into this with any depth at all could tell you that this is a simple...
Yeah.
One of the men listed as a suspected hijacker was Waleed Al-Shahiri, and just after the FBI released a photo of him, made a pretty big effort to stress that they had the wrong guy.
He is a pilot in Saudi Arabia and had done flight training at the same school in Daytona Beach that the other 9-11 hijackers had, but he was definitely alive and was living in Morocco.
One of the Flight 11 hijackers was named Waleed Muhammad Al-Shahiri.
As the man who was alive protested his innocence, the BBC made an error in their initial coverage, reporting that a man listed as one of the hijackers was actually alive, which, while technically accurate, gave a different impression from what was actually going on.
If you just live and die by headlines and never look any deeper into things, you could easily think that the person the FBI claimed was on Flight 11 was actually alive, but you would be wrong.
This is a super easy thread to untangle if you want to know what happened, and certainly all of this information was fully available in 2003.
There are a couple other people who were named as hijackers who initial reports claimed were alive, who actually were alive, like Abdulaziz Al-Omari and Salim Al-Hazimi.
These two men had something very specific in common, which is that at some point in the not-too-distant past, they had their passports stolen.
Al Hazmi by a pickpocket in Cairo, and Al Omari in a burglary when he was living in Denver.
Each of the instances Alex has of supposed anomalies like this are actually instances of bad, miscommunicated information that he never followed up on.
Unlike Alex, reporters for Der Spiegel actually did look into some of these coincidences to see what happened.
They reached out to John Bradley, the managing editor of Arab News, where much of the initial reporting originated, who told them, quote, Yeah.
And that period of time between when the FBI released names and when they released photos, there was a great deal of confusion and sort of the fog of unclarity.
Frankly, my show is not about, and most other shows are, that's why we never get anywhere, my show is not about what this talk show host says or what that talk show host says in the patriot movement.
Pretty rich for a guy to criticize somebody getting into aliens later on in life, and then later on in life telling me that interdimensional beings are controlling the globalists.
So, see, what I do on this show is I don't talk about the visions that some prophet had out in the desert who said the nukes are going to go off next week.
And I don't talk about Planet X. And I don't talk about flying saucers.
And I don't talk about psychics.
And I don't talk about other talk show hosts, unless there's some national host like Sean Hannity saying every child should take a microchip.
I have a video on Hannity and Combs.
Or it's Savage saying...
Put anyone who disagrees with the government to force labor camp.
I think he agrees, but the reason why is where we get into a little bit of a...
unidentified
I saw him on a colloquy with Mark Salder Thursday a week ago concerning the prison industries and how they're putting our small businesses out of business.
Yeah, and I think the way to put it on an equal playing field...
Is if they're competing with your business where you pay people, say, $9 an hour, what you should do is convert them into slaves for you, and then everybody's on an equal playing field.
So that caller had sort of heard something about a bill, but didn't know what it did or really anything about it, but someone she'd heard talk about it kind of was maybe into it or maybe not.
No, I appreciate anybody calling into a political talk show describing their political views very similarly to how my grandma would describe the movie that she just saw a couple of days ago.
So H.R. 1829 in the 108th Congress was also known as the Federal Prison Industries Competition and Contracting Act of 2003.
Here's what that was about.
There's a government-owned corporation called Federal Prison Industries, which is used to produce goods using the labor of incarcerated persons.
I'll read to you here from the CGO cost assessment of implementing this bill.
Under current law, federal agencies are required to purchase products from FPI if products are available to meet the agency's needs and the costs would not exceed current market prices.
Such products include office furniture, textiles, vehicle tags, and fiber optics.
Under the proposed legislation, this requirement would be reduced over the next several years, and the share of the federal market that FPI holds for the products and services it provides would be limited to 20% and 5% respectively.
If you understand that text properly, what this bill would have done is actively reduce the government use of products created with prison labor.
The bill aimed to divert some of this productive capacity towards making goods that would be donated to non-profit organizations instead of being sold to the government, which honestly still sucks.
Additionally, there were provisions for funding of vocational training for incarcerated persons and funding for programs to test rehabilitative activities that could be productive towards helping.
This caller has no idea what this bill is and she's telling Alex about it as if it's something that expands the prison system when in actuality it was designed to limit the profits that are derived from prison labor and funneled a fair amount of money towards efforts to help people improve their lives while incarcerated.
In the house, it's completely bizarre to see how split the vote on this was and not on party lines.
It got yay votes from Steve King, Nancy Pelosi, and Mike Pence.
In the time of polarization that we're in now in the present day, it is really weird to look at this and see it being pretty mixed in terms of parties on each side.
The bill ended up passing the House 350 to 65, but it died immediately upon being received by the Senate and no action was taken on it.
Both of these examples that Alex uses to make his point that the bills, they have these sunset clauses, they just never go away, they're bills that haven't reached their sunset dates yet.
Now, the case of the Brady bill is actually a little bit more interesting.
The bill was first introduced in 1987 and was constantly a non-starter.
The Reagan administration didn't appear all that interested in it, and Congress had a lot of trouble with getting it to a floor vote, so they would tend to attempt to attach it to larger crime bills, which ended up being a losing strategy.
All this changed when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 and voiced support for the Brady Bill and indicated that he was willing to sign it if it was passed.
This changed the landscape, and the bill made its way through Congress.
Part of the negotiation to get the bill through Congress had to do with the mandatory waiting periods the bill put in place for gun purchases.
With the technology available at the time, it could take a while to run a background check, so a five-day period was included in the bill.
However, gun proponents wanted to strike a deal.
Their long-standing argument was that a provision should exist that this waiting period would be made null and void once the technology existed for an instant check system.
This made some sense, given that the waiting period was largely predicated on the technological inability to do the checks quicker.
Instead of this compromise, what was decided was that the waiting period provision of the bill would have a sunset clause that would kick in in five years whether or not there was an instant check system that worked.
This satisfied both sides, and the bill passed the House and Senate in November 1993.
The Brady bill itself didn't have a sunset clause.
This provision of it did.
The larger bill was permanent, and put in place requirements for background checks for gun sales made by federally licensed gun sellers.
In 1998, the NICS system was developed, and that kind of made this whole question moot.
The Sunset Clause came and went, and now there is no federal waiting period required for purchasing a gun.
Each state has the right to make their own rules on that, and according to a recent article from ABC News, 10 states and the District of Columbia have waiting periods, whereas most states do not.
Alex and Craig Roberts are covering the subject from a completely dishonest perspective.
Alex is just making stuff up, and Craig is pretending that the entire Brady Bill was set to sunset, when in fact it was just this specific provision which did in fact go away.
I understand that they're staunch opponents of any kind of gun regulation, but covering the material this inaccurately feels like it's a disservice to sincere people who care about gun rights, and it leads me not to take the stuff that they're saying all that seriously about any other issues.
Yeah, and that didn't surprise me because of all these other findings we have.
And there is a huge satanic underground movement that's linked to the homosexual community in Washington, D.C. And we're not the only ones saying this.
It's still not nearly as overt as he is now, but it's getting close to being disturbing.
The issue that I run into is that based on what Alex is saying, he could very well think that he's fighting a group of Satanists and at the same time not think that he's fighting the minions of the literal Christian devil.
This was not a story that broke in the mainstream news, and the reason people stopped talking much about Levy and Gary Condit was because 9-11 happened.
It wasn't like the media was worried that people would learn of a secret satanic sex cult, so they buried the story.
order or listen to this one but I'm guessing the answer Tex comes to is yes based on how the description ends quote if Tex Mars were to declare an international burn the Talmud day would you be there to help him toss these trashy devil volumes into the bonfire um Do the people burning holy books think they're the good guys?
Tex does.
Also, I should point out that his website also sells a bunch of books about how the Holocaust didn't happen, including one by a guy named Brian A. Lewis Sherobot.
Tex Mars is a giant pile of shit, and one of the things that's the most constant theme of his is that Judaism is synonymous with Satanism.
It's something that constantly comes up in his lecture titles.
One is just called, quote, Inventors of Evil Things, How the Jews Created Freemasonry, Illuminism, Communism, Satanism, Witchcraft, and the New Age Movement, and what they're up to now.
The description of that tape includes this.
Quote, Jesus said of the Jews, you are of your father, the devil, and he spoke absolute truth.
Tex, based on literally no evidence other than his imagination, decides that as a Mossad agent, Chandra had insinuated herself in Gary Condit's life, then used him to get herself access to the CIA headquarters.
There, she learned of the Illuminati's plan to use fake Islamic terrorists to do 9-11, and thus she had to be killed so she couldn't spill the beans.
Tex puts it this way, quote, as horrifying as the question may be, one must now contemplate the mind-numbing possibility that Chandra Levy very well may have been victim to a darkly vicious satanic force.
My response to this is must one?
I don't think one must contemplate that possibility.
According to Tex, these darkly vicious satanic forces are the work of, quote, DC's exclusive satanic brotherhood, to which he claims literally all members of Congress have to be a part.
It's really fucking obvious if you know anything about his work.
You could just check out his lecture titled, quote, The Jews Are Preparing a Grave for America, which warns that, quote, Powerful Jewish interests have a stranglehold on American government, the economy, and our culture.
I did not expect that the first fuller overture towards...
Talking about satanic forces and what have you would be in the context of a story that was widely disseminated primarily by Tex Mars who has a tendency towards Satanism and stuff being coded ways for him to be anti-Semitic.
Because the question could be raised, like, with the globalists, is he stealing obviously effective anti-Semitic propaganda in order to rebrand it and use what is a very effective way to make his own money?
You know, if the government was leaving our liberties alone, leaving our guns alone, leaving our freedoms alone, controlling our borders, and they said, let's invade Iraq because they're bad, let's invade Syria, Iran, I could say, well, that violates what George Washington said, but you know what?
You can't really argue with it too much.
If they were really bringing freedom and all this, but they're not.
They're mowing down protesters.
They're giving them $20 a month to live on.
They're totally enslaving them.
They're grabbing all the oil.
They're enslaving us here domestically.
They got gun bills that dwarf all gun control ever seen that Bush says he's gonna sign.
And one of the things that I can't really get past is how obvious it is, listening to this, that even if you didn't know that Alex turned into the biggest piece of shit in the world, if I heard him say that...
You know, that's one of those things, and I think what it is not so much that as it is, like, I think about going back and watching a movie from the 90s now, and stuff pops up and you're like...
I remember this movie as being one thing, and now I saw this and I'm like, holy shit!
I think if you give somebody the benefit of the doubt, especially during the time period, you're going to wind up skipping over in your brain just stuff and being like, he wasn't really thinking about that.
He's on the radio, he's just talking shit, you know, like that kind of stuff.
Alex's belief about the whole drill thing is that the globalists use drills so they can have plausible deniability in case one of their plans goes wrong or, you know, someone involved in the attack gets caught.
For instance, they'll run a bombing drill when they plan to carry out a bombing, because that way they can plan out the details of the bombing, and if anybody asks what they're doing, they can say it's for the drill.
There are also ideas about how the globalists have to tell you what they're doing before they do it according to some dumb intergalactic contract law, but generally speaking, this concept that the drills are used as cover is central to why the connection between drill and event means anything.
Alex's theories about the London 7-7 bombing rely on a misunderstanding about news reports about a consultant giving a brainstorming presentation Yeah, yeah, yeah.
In this instance...
There were a number of suicide bombings in residential compounds in Riyadh that were generally known to be occupied by foreigners, particularly Westerners.
Meanwhile, in Chicago and Seattle, there was an interagency exercise going on that simulated a simultaneous biological attack in one city and a dirty bomb in another.
These two situations lack the primary piece of the whole drill conspiracy puzzle, which is that they're used to plan the attacks.
This is sloppy shit, and I'm kind of shocked that Alex's listeners wouldn't realize this.
Like, I can kind of understand buying the whole drill conspiracy when there's overlap between the drill and the event, but even when you accept this nonsense, like, now Alex expects you to believe, like, this extends this far?
Like, these...
Completely unrelated and not even thematically connected scenarios in Seattle and Chicago are somehow related to bombings in Riyadh when there's a very unpopular war happening in Iraq.
We talk about the tragic, convenient, right-on-time bombings.
To legitimize the police state and these drills they're running, the FEMA takeover drills, the martial law preparation activation test that's going on for the FEMA takeover.
And it's interesting how quick Alex hangs up on this guy.
unidentified
But I also spend my life also in the scriptures.
And what's amazing to me, the things that are being spoken, not only by yourself, but there's a few others like you out there that the scripture speaks of.
Because I mentioned it, and it's online at infowars.com right now.
Councilwoman criticizes action by constables.
This is out of the Morning Call online mainstream newspaper.
They shot three dogs too fatally when they went to serve a warrant in Allentown for unpaid parking tickets.
Saying there is a doozy of a problem here, Allentown Councilwoman Gail Hoover expressed outrage Sunday over the shooting of three dogs too fatally by constables serving a warrant on a man who had not paid parking tickets.
Police should never behave this way, and I think we can all agree on that.
I just find it interesting that Alex ends up taking almost an entire segment on the show to rant about this story, which is honestly tragic, but definitely doesn't seem like something that needs to be front and center of the show's news that day.
It just makes me really sad to see him spending like ten minutes decrying the evils of the police killing two dogs, when in his later career he rationalizes that sometimes police are right when they shoot unarmed black people.
Personally, I'm opposed to all acts of police violence, but I don't think a story like this actually ranks as important news for a number of reasons.
The first is that even from Alex's headline, you can tell that the city council person is upset about this event and is pushing to take appropriate steps to address the issue.
Can see unacceptable behavior from the police, but you can also almost be certain that the victim is going to win a civil suit and have some kind of restitution.
And that's exactly what did end up happening when they settled a claim against the cops who shot their dogs for $320,000.
Money can never make up for the loss of a loved pet, but what can you do after the fact?
Hold people responsible and pay the victims.
Even this story that came out in the morning call about this shooting prior to this episode that Alex is recording quotes another cop who quote said he wanted the family to know that constables carry up to $500,000 in liability insurance.
Quote, we're walking cash cows for a good lawyer, he said.
Even other cops in the department were saying that they needed to do what needed to be done to make things right.
That cop reminds me so much of that Kyle Kinane bit.
Where he's like, you know, you meet somebody, you meet enough, you live an interesting enough life, you meet plenty of cops in your day, and every now and again you find one who's just like, there but for the grace of God, go out.
He's like, eh, I could have been working at the gas station, or being a cop pays five bucks better.
So, oh man, that's great.
That cop just being like, hey man, sue the shit out of me!
And I'm driving along listening when I left to the 7 o 'clock news or whatever, and I'm listening, and they said that the governor, with the Speaker of the House, has ordered the arrest of over 80 members of the legislature.
And I'm listening.
No, I'm not kidding.
I'm listening to them reading this AP headline, national headline, because they say they've been ordered, basically under Homeland Security, to follow all orders, to vote as they're told, by Washington.
And then you hear this state rep from Houston saying, they're taking over, we won't be part of this.
And that's all it said.
We don't know what they're talking about.
I typed in the article.
It popped up.
It just said they've been ordered to be arrested.
See, and I'm so conditioned in this la-la land that I'm hearing that members of the House have been ordered in the Senate to be arrested.
Alright, so what happened here is that the Republicans had taken control of the Texas legislature in the most recent election, and they were pushing a hard agenda that included harsh spending cuts and redistricting.
How funny is it that we no longer live in a world where I can assume, after you say the Texas Republicans took control of the legislature, that it would end in, in an election.
The Texas House requires a quorum of at least 100 of their members to actually meet and vote on things.
So 58 of the Democrats in office decided just to not show up to boycott the agenda that they were essentially.
powerless to stop in a vote.
This is something they can do, and in response, the House Speaker has the authority to send the Texas Rangers out to find them and bring them in to vote.
52 of the lawmakers decided to get out of the state in order to avoid being arrested, so the speaker requested help from other states to get them back into chambers.
An Associated Press article includes an amazingly dishy response from New Mexico Attorney General Patricia Madrid, who said that she had, quote, no authority to arrest lawmakers who show up there, but went on to say, quote, Ha ha ha!
The Democrats returned when the time had elapsed for the bill, but it didn't matter.
Governor Rick Perry held repeated special sessions to push through the redistricting plan and eventually got it passed, thereby gerrymandering the hell out of the state house districts and giving a very strong advantage to Republicans to remain in power.
Alex is pretending that this is an instance of power-mad folks having their political opponents arrested and sent to the hole, but the reality is it's part of political maneuvering that's Uncommon...
But it's not really outside of the standard rules set forth by the Texas House.
Yeah, it's power-mad politicians so corrupt that they're willing to destroy their entire state in order to ensure that right-wing politics rules the day.
This sort of has a little bit of a clue leading back to Tex Mars is a bit troubling.
And I'm worried about what we're actually going to find through this fanciful and seemingly fun investigation into when Alex started thinking he was fighting the devil.
Uncovering that maybe this too is all rooted in...
Appropriated or exploited anti-Semitic ideals is not what I would have liked.