Knowledge Fight #661 dissects Alex Jones’ March 2022 Ukraine coverage, where he blames CIA-trained networks (wrongly dated to 1945), Soros, and Obama for the war while parroting Putin’s justifications. He repeats debunked claims about U.S.-run biolabs and falsely asserts NATO broke promises to Gorbachev in 1990, ignoring treaty extensions like New START until 2026. The episode exposes Infowars’ financial struggles, pro-Putin propaganda, and contradictory messaging—revealing a pattern of conspiracy-driven misinformation that fuels conflict without solutions. [Automatically generated summary]
I realized that I was kind of getting to a point where I was a little burned out because I was doing exactly what you did with the side quests and stuff.
And yeah, so I'll get back to it, but congratulations on finishing it up.
So I don't know if I would call St. Patrick one of the most powerful evangelists in the history of the Christian church.
If you're talking about who's at the top of that list, without a doubt, it's Paul.
No doubt.
About half of the New Testament is attributed to him, and he was critically important in terms of establishing the earliest churches in places like Ephesus and Corinth, and his letters to these churches that appear in the Bible, his books in the Bible.
They establish a lot of church doctrine.
Totally.
Outside of Jesus, it's not really fair to compare anyone to Paul in terms of their importance in the spread of Christianity.
So, you know, looking down a little bit further on the ladder, there are some major figures in terms of early evangelism.
You could make an argument that people like Constantine did wonders for the spread of Christianity since he converted in 312 CE while the emperor of Rome, and that led to the Edict of Milan in 313 that codified into law religion.
Look, I don't think that anyone would argue that St. Patrick is one of the most powerful evangelists in the history of Christianity.
At best, you could claim that he founded the Christian Church in Ireland, but even that claim is far from solid.
There's a lot of uncertainty about the historical record as it relates to Patrick, and many believe that a lot of the claims made about his relevance in the Irish Church are conflated with Palladius, the first bishop of the Catholic Church.
Who was sent to Ireland.
The point here is that the claim that Harrison is making is absurd, but I'm excited to see how he backs this up.
Also, I think a lot of people in Ireland looking back on it would say that the introduction of the Christian religion to Ireland might have wound up going wrong later on.
Worth taking a quick moment to tell you the story.
of St. Patrick, because it's a great source of inspiration for what we're doing here in the Infowar.
St. Patrick was from Britain.
He was part of a Romanized British family.
His father was a deacon in the church, but as a young man, he was captured and taken to Ireland, which was at the time completely pagan, where he was kept as a slave, and he was abused as a slave, and he lived a life as a slave, until he got a vision from God that told him...
Your boat's here.
Your ride is waiting.
It's time for you to escape.
And trusting his vision, he went to the coast and found a ship waiting there.
It took him to England where, again, his troubles were not over.
He was captured multiple times.
He eventually made it back to his family.
And now think about this.
Put yourself in the mindset of a freed slave who's escaped bondage in Ireland, has escaped the pagans.
You've made it out.
You live in a comfortable life with your family now.
What would compel somebody to give up that life?
Go back into the land where he was enslaved, not to extract retribution, not to enact some revenge fantasy on the people who abused him, but to gift those people with the truth, to tell them the gospel, to convert them to Christianity, to perform miracles for them, and to better their life.
I mean, well, I find it very interesting that we can definitely identify with former white slaves who come back to the land that they were enslaved in and then kicked out of in order to do good.
You know, I mean, Reconstruction Era South wasn't about black people just fucking straight up murdering anybody.
But a lot of that story that Harrison is telling is true, which is a strange thing on Infowars, because usually people bring, I mean Alex, bring things up and he has no idea what he's talking about.
But at least according to whatever sources we do have available, a lot of that story of St. Patrick is like...
That's the record, but you can decide for yourself how reliable any of those sources are.
St. Patrick was said to have been captured by pagans and taken to Ireland and escaped and then eventually decided to become a missionary.
Also, Patrick supposedly had another vision that called him to come back to Ireland, so that's why he did it, as opposed to just being like, hey, I think I'm going to go back and be a missionary.
It's a bizarre notion for Harrison to be spreading, but what's fun about this is it's just a way for Harrison to use this story about St. Patrick to really talk about himself and Alex.
They are like St. Patrick in that they've seen the horrors of Ireland, the globalists metaphorically, and though they could have a nice life elsewhere.
It's nonsense, but I'm sure it feels better than dealing with the reality that you work for a malicious narcissist liar whose only real impact on the world is increasing the suffering of vulnerable people.
Well, St. Patrick was that man, and his writings have had unbelievable positive effects the world over.
And he almost single-handedly converted the entire country of Ireland to Christianity.
That's an info-war here, folks.
That's a single man with nothing but the words that he uses and the truth that he's expressing, changing the destiny of an entire nation and in a way the entire world.
It's a man who is freed from bondage and yet doesn't hate those who enslaved him, but did help to bring about...
St. Patrick absolutely did not convert all or even most of Ireland.
For one thing, Christianity in Ireland predated his arrival, and the historical record is full of a bunch of other influences who likely had much larger effects on the history of the early church there.
There were people who created a lot of, like, really isolated monasteries.
And because of their isolations, many of them were able to survive much better in trying times, like the Dark Ages and such.
And that became something that was heavily influential in the development of the church in Ireland.
Well, I mean, you know, it is the interplay of seven billion different things all happening simultaneously that even if you are the person with the luck to actually express the idea.
Maybe he's not so worried about putting forward Christianity as he is about putting forward the Great Reset, New World Order control paradigm that he seems so eager to participate in.
Pope Francis warns that the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine could lead to a final catastrophe that would extinguish the human race.
Speaking during his weekly address, the Pope said humanity would have to start from scratch in the event of a thermonuclear war, saying, quote, Our imagination appears increasingly concentrated on the representation of a final catastrophe that will extinguish us.
And whether it's climate change or the death of democracy or the conflict in Ukraine, everything in the mainstream media has to be portrayed as an existential crisis because it's not about presenting you with the facts and the truth of the situation so you can come to an informed decision into how you want your political representatives to behave and face the challenges that we're up against.
They have to force you into an emotional...
Do or die.
This is it.
The walls are crumbling down panic mode.
So you override your logic center and you're willing to do things and willing to allow things that you would never be willing to do or allow in a more stable state of mind.
So, of course, everything has to be a total catastrophe.
So that starts with Harrison being upset that the Pope isn't playing into his end-time fantasies, and then I guess that Harrison is mad that the Pope is saying that the war in Ukraine could escalate to a situation where the continuity of a modern civilization is at risk.
Harrison literally started the show talking about how we're facing nuclear annihilation before getting distracted with his St. Patrick riff.
So you see, when the Pope says that the times are tense and cooler heads should prevail, that's an unchristian attempt to keep everyone in the great reset...
But when Alex and Harrison say that we're one inch away from nuclear annihilation, well, that's just them being super cool, more Christian than the Pope, and absolutely not trying to keep the audience in a state of crippling fear.
It's clips like this that just make it too clear that these guys know what they're doing.
They're able to very accurately describe what their entire business model is when they're Yep.
Harrison's boring as shit, but also he makes it too clear that there's an intellectual understanding within InfoWars that what they're doing is manipulative and abusive.
If you're doing the InfoWars game, you're supposed to not be aware of that psychology at all.
Or at very least, don't talk about it.
This dude is a fucking liability for Alex, and I would fire his ass immediately if I were Alex.
It's so weird that Harrison is right there in the studio and he's not, like, offended by his boss, Alex Jones, saying that we're playing a game that might result in the end of life on Earth.
When the Pope said something like that, he was contradicting the Bible and trying to keep people in the great reset New World Order fear state so you'd think that Harrison would have some harsh words for Alex.
So, so weird that he doesn't barge into the studio and hold Alex's feet to the fire about how he could possibly believe that life on Earth, it could be the end of life on Earth, and it could even be possible because the Bible says that's not going to happen.
Almost like he was just pretending to be mad at the Pope about that, and what he's actually mad at the Pope about is that he's not enough of a bigot and he cares about climate change.
I can't imagine listening to the first half hour to an hour of this show and not thinking these guys are complete jokes.
As best as I can tell, he was on that Full Send podcast that Trump had been on, and I guess he interviewed Mike Tyson.
But beyond that, I don't believe that he did shit until I see it.
I'm also not impressed by landing an interview with Mike Tyson in 2022.
I don't know if that's, like, I don't know if people are banging down his door for an interview.
Like, obviously not great, but if you would have gotten an interview with him in 1995, like when he got out of prison after he raped that lady, that would have at least been like people were trying to talk to him and he would have been turning down some media appearances.
You know what's crazy is that I know the pathway that he got to Mike Tyson with, and that's frustrating for me because I know that Tom Segura and Mike Tyson are fairly good friends, so I'm assuming that it went Alex to Joe to Tom to Mike Tyson.
Because of Joe, a bunch of associations in the MMA and fighting worlds.
That's true.
Could be shorter.
I don't know.
I'm not impressed.
I don't care.
I'll wait and see what Alex produces, but if that's what he was out there to do so far, and that's what we know about, that he was on that one podcast and he talked to Mike Tyson, I'm not imagining this is going to top his whole sneaking into Bohemian Grove thing.
You know, the thing that launched his fucking career.
Alex would think that they were demonic pedophiles if they were an American band.
This song is called Engel, and Alex is only saying that it's poetry because it's in German, and he knows that the audience will just nod along and think that he's deep.
In reality, it is fairly poetic, but it's a deeply anti-religious song about how the lead singer doesn't want to be an angel, and how the idea that if you're good in this life, you get to be an angel, that's bullshit.
Alex would hate just about everything about Rammstein, from their politics to their support of the LGBTQ community, but their music sounds angry, and Alex likes to yell, so he connects with that and he pretends that it's profound.
I'll take from this that Alex is referring to hanging out with Mike Tyson and going to do that Full Sun podcast, and I guess he got high while he was out there and it was pretty strong, which is obviously a Soros attack.
The story of his vacation sounds so desperate and pathetic, though.
He seems to be saying that he flew to California to be on a podcast, and I would say that no matter what that podcast is, no podcast is worth flying across the country to be a guest on it.
Maybe if you're an up-and-comer trying to make a name for yourself, then you could see, like, let's say you're, like, a comic who went on the road with a friend of Rogan's, and this person's fucking amazing.
Alex's brand is that he's already the most important person in media, so he shouldn't be so goddamn desperate to be associated with the Junior Varsity Rogan podcast.
But also, how does the audience not get suspicious about all these trips he seems to be taking, all the while yelling about how desperately he needs money to keep a show going?
Shouldn't that set off some alarms?
Like, these people, like, he could pretend that he's doing, like, important anti-globalist business or something, and like, I'm meeting with people behind the scenes.
That's nonsense.
And Joel- He's going to try and just get clout by being on these fucking podcasts.
But also, like, what a sacrifice Alex made for the greater good.
Oh, absolutely.
I can't believe how selfless he is getting high with Mike Tyson so he could be amongst the stone people and get the word out about the New World Order or something.
Incidentally, this is also probably Alex's explanation for why he got wasted on Rogan's show, because he needed to get the message out.
He needed to be amongst the people.
Also probably why he got so drunk on Logan Paul's show that Logan's co-host was subtly trying to get him to stop drinking through the show.
also probably why he got so drunk on his first time on flagrant too that he took off his shirt and seemed to be in an active blackout all of that was just part of the info war it had nothing to do with Alex having a problem with substances and it being like honestly more fun to be You know, there is a field of anthropology that studies entirely about how much better it is to be high in the exact moment you're in.
Alex knows where his bread is buttered, and he's not going to expose the business like Harrison's stupid ass did at the top of the show.
Sure, we hate the Pope, but in a situation like this, you lose nothing by just agreeing with the Pope and saying he accidentally got this right or he has a bad reason to be right or something.
That's the right move here from a propaganda standpoint, and if there was even a drop of integrity at InfoWars and people meant anything that they said, This should be a huge problem between Harrison and Alex.
For them, this isn't disagreeing about a news story.
This is a deeply rooted theological disagreement.
Because Harrison believes the Pope is wrong, at least in part because the Bible doesn't say that humanity goes out like that.
So for Alex to entertain it as a possibility and even say that the Pope is right...
That should be heretical talk, according to Harrison.
None of this means anything, because this is a company full of extreme right-wing zealot con man liars, but I point this out to illustrate that if any of these people had any of the convictions they claimed they did, they could never coexist and work together.
Yeah, we would never be in this situation if they believed what they said, because he would never have said that the Pope was lying about the end of the world.
And I agree with Rand Paul when he said, Putin miscalculated.
Yeah, why did he miscalculate?
Why did his Foreign Service FSB head, their CIA head, Why did they tell them that everybody was going to surrender?
Because let me tell you, if I knew that there would stay-behind networks there, and that those stay-behind networks hadn't been compromised or paid off, that the Russians would be in big trouble?
If I knew that, and I did, I told you, the CIA's been over there training them since 2014, because I know folks that have been over there, but it's not even a secret, then you know Putin knew that, or you knew that the FSB knew.
So, I mean, maybe...
Maybe Putin didn't know.
He sure as hell has arrested the head of the FSB Foreign Intelligence Service and his deputies and a bunch of others.
How dangerous is that?
And then this breaks yesterday, Yahoo News.
Exclusive secret CIA training program in Ukraine helped Kiev prepare for Russian invasion.
So, first off, right off the bat, this has no similarity with Alex's coverage of things before the war started or after the invasion began.
This is a completely new narrative that he's pretending has been what he was saying all along, and that's the case because Alex is a malicious liar.
Also, the CIA was founded in 1947, and Ukraine didn't withdraw from the Soviet Union until 1991.
I guess when Alex says 1945, it just means the end of World War II.
So I guess at that point, an organization that didn't exist yet was providing military training to a country that wasn't an independent country at that point.
The Yahoo News article that Alex is talking about is about how after the 2014 invasion, CIA groups did teach some tactics to Ukrainian soldiers, but a lot of this isn't as secret or nefarious as it sounds.
From the article, quote, I'm not saying this is a non-story, it just doesn't carry the same kind of weight that Alex needs it to.
Also, in terms of Sergey Basada, the head of the FSB who got arrested, it seems like Alex is writing a really generous story about that.
Alex wants to create the image that everything Putin does is okay.
So in this case, the head of the FSB was aware of stay-behind networks and didn't tell Putin about them so that he would set up into a trap, and that's why Putin rightly arrested him.
Looking at it a different way, it might be the case that Putin is realizing that this whole thing is making him look a little bit weak, and in order to show strength, he's found a subordinate to blame and make a scapegoat.
This is, again, an example of Alex's editorial decision clearly revealing his positions.
He'll rationalize literally anything that Putin does.
If Putin nuked the U.S., Alex would get on air the next day and say that Soros made him do it.
It is very funny that his questions about why Putin did this, you know, like...
Why is he failing?
Why wasn't his intelligence very good?
The actual answers to that could be very useful to Alex as well, such as maybe autocratic leaders who control everything don't like hearing bad news about how their military can't do stuff.
They like to hear only good things and only have things reinforced and only have people follow out their orders the way that they're supposed to.
And when you do that, sometimes, if you have bad intelligence, you make a huge, drastic mistake.
That you continue to do for long after you should have that will eventually lead to you losing millions upon millions upon millions of dollars.
And the first war after World War II was not Korea.
It was 1945 in Ukraine.
That's actually in the mainline military history books.
But, you know, the Cold War started.
An iron curtain has descended down, as Churchill said, over Eastern Europe.
And so, stay behind networks that the Nazis had.
The U.S. came in.
That's why they recruited Adolf Ackman and Klaus Barbie and Joseph Mengele and all the rest of them.
It was so they could control those networks and try to hold off the Soviets' political coups and overthrows in Eastern Europe.
And in some areas they were successful and most they weren't.
But then those stay-behind networks never went away.
And so the United States simply reactivated them.
And isn't it funny?
You can put seeds, almost any plant seed, in a drawer for hundreds of years and they'll still be good when you plant them.
They've dug up virus seeds in 3,000-year-old Egyptian tombs that sprout perfectly later.
So you wonder why when they put the miracle grow of an overthrow and a civil war on Ukraine, when Soros did that, that came up out of the dirt to Soros, beautiful comrades he fought with against the Russians in World War II.
Beautiful comrades came popping back up because they were just laying there dormant for 75 years under the soil, their children.
So the stay-behind networks he's trying to make his audience think of involves Operation Gladio, and we've talked about that a bit in the past, but suffice it to say, isn't involved in any of the reality of the things we're talking about here.
This all sounds pretty like a fun metaphor, though, like seeds never die.
Soros planted the seeds of rebellion that lay dormant until the uprising was triggered.
This feels good for Alex to say, you know, like laying out this metaphor, until he starts realizing what he's saying.
So it's a ludicrous idea, which is why Alex realizes his mistake and how dumb that sounds.
So he says that it's the children and grandchildren of those stay-by networks.
This is so stupid.
He can't prove that these networks exist, and even if he did, now he has to somehow find a way to show that they passed down their positions generationally.
So just really, really dumb stuff.
And it's just leading me to suspect that Alex is still high.
But still, I don't support Putin in what he's done.
I know all the facts about it, or a lot of the facts, so I'm the bad man.
Because you know, you don't want the public actually knowing the pieces to make their own decision.
And my decision is, let's end this war real quick.
The West helped start it with Stay Behind Networks.
Putin took the bait and came in.
It endangers the world.
Both sides have arguments.
Let's end this now.
Like the Pope said, we need peace, we need a deal, we need to stop this right now.
And I'm not usually agreeing with the Pope, or even Biden saying we could have World War III.
It just, it needs...
To stop.
And instead of being on Ukraine's side, like all the left of the media is calling for World War II, or instead of being on the Russian side saying Putin's perfect and he deserves it all and he's right and let's get behind him and crush, you know, Putin's just start leveling cities.
He'll show them what to do.
No, let's not do any of that.
If you had to blame somebody, it's Soros and the left and the globalists.
I mean, if you have to pick who started this and who drew first blood and who got this all going and who poked the bear over and over again so it would come down the path and step in the bear trap, yeah, it's the globalists.
So the answer is seeing the whole thing from a globalist perspective but being against their agenda.
Understanding what they're doing, but then saying, I'm not going to be part of this.
I'm going to find a solution out of this so we don't kill each other and stop with this war model that we can't engage in now because of nuclear weapons and other things.
Of course the bio labs are real.
Of course all this is insane.
The people running our country hate us.
They hate us more than the Russians.
One thing about being in L.A. for three days, man.
I get sick every time I'm there.
What did you say?
Allergies, like the toxic dust.
Every time I go there, I get a huge headache and just feel like hell.
I don't know why I'm going off on a tangent here, but man.
I guess we probably won't know for a while if he did because he lied about it the other times he got it and came to work and exposed his entire crew to it.
He'd rather do that than admit that he might have been wrong about it being real and serious and something he can catch.
I like though that Alex's solution is literally a non-solution.
He has absolutely no solution that's being provided here, and every single one of his talking points is backing up Putin's narrative of the war.
Soros and Obama are to blame, ultimately.
He was just trying to wipe out these dangerous bioweapon labs.
This is wall-to-wall, weasel-ass Putin propaganda, and Alex is too much of a coward to admit his real positions.
He can say he's nuanced and he sees both sides, but the reality of this content, the information that he's covering, is deeply one-sided, and everything he brings up is something meant to legitimize Putin's invasion.
And when he says, like, we need to end this...
It's like there's basically one person who can do that.
Because Alex is sort of presenting this idea that if you want to save the world, all you have to do is pretend you're fighting a shadowy, all-powerful group of villains whose plans are really dumb and they come from your imagination.
Interestingly, this was covering an article in Haratz titled, quote, The Great Oligarch's Escape, but this blog decided to add Jewish to it and to make the whole story really just an exercise in the anti-Semitic dual loyalty trope that's a classic in white nationalist and neo-Nazi communities.
Okay, well that's probably going to be a bad thing because we all know that blood and soil speech is, you know, it's a very specific reference to a certain type of speech.
"Vladimir Putin on Monday delivered an impassioned speech accusing the Ukrainian government of operating a kleptocracy controlled by corrupt oligarchs and a, quote, network of foreign advisers and non-governmental organizations." Man, I gotta say, this website looks totally above board and the sort of place that I would be shopping for articles to cover on my show if I were Alex.
This website is almost offensively biased, and Alex knows that.
He gets his news from aggressively pro-Putin sites and espouses strictly pro-Putin messaging while hiding behind this facade that he's exploring both sides.
Alex does this because Alex can play the game.
I resent this attempt to appear moderate while at the same time...
Like, you're taking your news from this fucking blog that is disgustingly pro-Putin to the level of mocking as funny Zelensky's speech where he discusses needing help and the civilians being killed.
I mean, what I see from this, from so much of that, especially the people trying to run interference for it, is it's smart to get people to think it's okay to murder people based on false reasons.
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
It is, you know, you don't want to say that it's wrong for Putin to just go murder people, because then people might connect that to you going and murdering people, and then you won't be allowed to do it.
So this was a compilation of clips of reporters in the press room asking if there was a point where Biden would see as like a red line.
It does come off a bit bad, and I do think that there's a preoccupation with the idea of a larger war breaking out.
But these reporters weren't begging for a war so much as they were trying to get information that they can report.
And one of the main questions on the readers'minds, presumably, is whether or not there's a situation where Biden would consider sending troops and going to war.
Yeah, it seems like Biden learned the Obama lesson, which is don't say openly that there's a red line, because when it gets crossed and you don't do shit about it, you're fucked.
We've got really one of the best experts we could have on about this.
Dr. Francis Boyle went to Harvard and other universities and got the special degree, PhD, the only handout once a year, the same one Kissinger got, the same one Kissinger administered.
It's really interesting how Francis Boyle stopped showing up on the show for a really long stretch where Alex didn't see much money in pushing the Wuhan lab conspiracies, either because the audience was getting bored of them or because there wasn't any new territory to cover there.
Either way, without that being a hot topic, Francis Boyle is straight up worthless as a guest.
He's boring, he seems like a crank, and in order to introduce him in a way that the audience will like, you have to lie about his credentials.
A couple of quick corrections.
The bioweapon law that Boyle wrote wasn't adapted into the one that the U.N. uses.
The U.S. version Boyle wrote was adapted from the U.N. version.
Alex always lies about this because his version makes it appear like Boyle is influencing international law as opposed to the reality that he was just adapting international law so it would apply domestically in the United States.
And actually, when you kind of think about that, that's what a globalist might do.
Alex probably doesn't want to get into the weeds with Boyle's resume, at least partially because he represented the provisional government of the state of Palestine, as well as many native groups like the Lakota Nation.
And he was formerly on the board of Amnesty International, who Alex has called a child trafficking operation in the past.
Anyway, I appreciate some of the folks that Boyle has represented, but this dude sucks.
The Ukraine Biolab shit is flying around, so Alex remembered that Boyle...
I'm very frustrated in that I have hundreds of articles admitting that Obama and others went and...
Basically refurbished these Soviet-era labs.
It was in the Washington Post.
It was everywhere.
It's not debatable.
And then Victoria Newland comes out last week.
Again, the Deputy Secretary of State and the Ukraine expert, as they call her, and admits that the labs are there, but then the media simultaneously says they don't exist.
We made them up.
And then you're a Russian agent if you say they exist.
And then, oh, but the Russians have seized two of them that don't exist.
USA Today and CNN say they're going to attack us with them, but they don't exist.
And so it just seems like we've entered a land beyond the Tea Party and Alice in Wonderland.
It takes brass balls to accuse something of being like the Tea Party when that's what you called your political party.
It's real weird.
So, here's the game that's being played.
Alex and his weirdo propagandist friends make an incendiary accusation based on years-old Russian propaganda.
In fact, the exact accusation Russia used in terms of other invasions, like in Georgia.
Alex says there's bioweapon labs run by the U.S. and Ukraine, and starts building a conspiracy about how that's why Putin is invading.
Though he may not have originated the claim, he amplifies it, and part of that information space create elaborate stories to flesh out this conspiracy, to the point where a bunch of idiots online are convinced that that's where COVID got made.
Folks who know things push back and say that this is ridiculous and there aren't bioweapons labs run by the United States in Ukraine.
They aren't saying that there aren't any biological labs in the country and aren't covering up U.S. support for their modernization efforts, but they are pushing back against the stupid, overblown conspiracy.
Now, Alex is taking those denials and pretending they were actually denying that there were no labs in the country, and this is super confusing to him.
Things get confusing when you just make shit up all the time and attack your imaginary enemies, and you constantly lose the thread.
You know, you imagine what they were saying back, and...
It's all exhausting.
Also, Obama has nothing to do with the starting of this partnership between Kiev and the United States in terms of modernizing those labs.
That dates back to at least 2005 and the Weapon Non-Proliferation Treaty we signed with them years before Obama was president.
Also, if Alex says all these old articles about Obama making weapons labs in Ukraine, how was there no mention of this in the lead up to the invasion?
It seems like if all this shit would be relevant, and it's definitely a large part of his coverage now, but it feels like this only became a talking Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And I think that some people often don't understand exactly why that is.
There's a number of reasons, but one of them that is never discussed by Alex is that in order to calibrate testing equipment, you need a sample of the thing that you would be testing for in order to assure that this thing works.
And, you know, I think knowing that you need to keep these samples on hand, whether it be for some kind of a test, some kind of an experiment, or some kind of calibration of equipment, you need it to be safe.
You need it to be secure.
And that was a large part of the U.S. involvement in these labs that were...
If you were briefing the world, you are briefing millions right now, about the sum knowledge of what you would call this sleepwalking into Armageddon, or what is it?
Well, Alex, thank you very much for having me on my best year viewing audience.
Yes, as I see it, we really have to start with the...
Promises made by Secretary of State Jim Baker and many of the other NATO leaders that if Secretary General Gorbachev agreed to the unification of Germany, NATO would not move to the east.
But once Clinton got in there and they proceeded to expand NATO to the east, the promises that Baker and the other European leaders This is bullshit, and Boyle is just repeating things he's heard.
Gorbachev has given interviews about the negotiations with Baker, and he said that the topic of other countries joining NATO never came up.
There wasn't an agreement except that NATO troops would not be stationed in East Germany.
So, we're starting off here on a false premise that only serves to legitimize Putin's argument for invading.
And to be clear, I'm not necessarily saying that NATO expansion is a positive thing, and I think there's a lot of fine arguments against NATO and how it operates.
What I am saying is that claiming that NATO agreed to not expand what Gorbachev negotiated with Baker is not true.
And even if it were, it wouldn't be a justification for invading Ukraine when two other NATO countries already border Russia and Ukraine is not going to be joining anytime soon.
In Boyle's world, Putin is asking for assurances of things that are already established international laws.
Biden's response doesn't matter.
However, if Boyle's wrong and all this didn't happen and there wasn't a guarantee, then it's really just Putin making demands and Biden not acquiescing to them.
Also, there's a reason that Boyle isn't going into the details about these December treaty demands.
It's because they're a bit overreaching and some have suggested that they were designed to be rejected to give the appearance of trying to have a diplomatic approach.
The date was 1997 because that was when an agreement was signed between NATO and Russia called the Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation, and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation.
This was an agreement aimed at warming relations and specifically deals with NATO countries not deploying nuclear weapons to member states.
Also, weirdly, in that document that both NATO and Russia agreed to, it says, quote, NATO has expanded and will continue to expand its political functions and take on new missions of peacekeeping and crisis management in support of the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Seems like that shouldn't be in there, based on Boyle's understanding of things.
Like, why would Russia agree to a document that says NATO has expanded and will expand?
So the ask that Russia was making at the end of 2021 was a non-starter, because essentially what it would do is make NATO say that these countries that have joined since 1997, here's a list of them, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia, Montenegro, and North Macedonia, they would all be in the alliance, but also if they were in trouble, NATO wasn't going to be able to help.
It would basically undermine the entire premise of an alliance and leave all of these countries on their back foot, unprepared for a possible...
That was actually a bit of a game changer from a strategic perspective.
Now, naturally, this isn't an agreement that Biden is going to accept.
And guess what?
Even if he wanted to, he couldn't.
It would be up to NATO.
They vote.
Biden doesn't run NATO.
For Boyle to claim that this was a sincere effort on Putin's part and that there was a rejection of peace on Biden's part is completely absurd and reveals only that he's probably a big consumer of far-right Putin-supporting media.
He probably reads, information liberation over breakfast.
I mean, I find it hard to believe that if Biden were to come out and have capitulated to every demand that Putin made, I find it hard to believe the far right would be like, yay, good work!
It is a great idea for the leader of our sovereign nation to give in immediately to anything that he wants.
Biden saying that NATO won't expand means nothing.
He doesn't control that unilaterally.
And even if he did, I thought the premise of war was supposed to be about denazifying Ukraine or shutting down bioweapon labs or taking back the Donbass region, which is rightfully Russia's and under attack by Ukraine.
I've lost the plot.
I don't really know what we're supposed to be justifying anymore.
I may be a little salty, in part because this is incredibly frustrating to try to pay attention to.
Like, all these various reasons why this invasion is okay.
There's no consistency.
The point changes from day to day, and yet what remains and is ever-present is the insistence that Infowars is totally right and that whatever they're saying today is what they've said all along.
I know this isn't news, but it's really getting to me a little bit more than usual, and maybe it's because it's about a war.
Speaking of war, what Boyle is functionally advocating for, like you brought up, is a complete acquiescence to Putin and the surrender of Ukraine to his rule.
He may not think that that's what he's saying, and he has a bunch of bad arguments to throw around, but the state of affairs he wishes to see is for everyone resisting Putin's invasion of Ukraine to just stop and let him take over the country.
If your thoughts on how to stop the war have nothing to do with Ukraine whatsoever, entirely about NATO not expanding, then you're just saying that Ukraine should be Putin's.
There was a nuclear non-proliferation treaty called the New Start, which began in 2011.
This was set to run 10 years and would have ended on February 5th, 2022, which would really work well for Alex's argument, but it was extended for an additional five years, so it's still in effect until 2026.
That agreement was announced in March 2021, and re-signing it and continuing the treaty was a high priority for Biden!
I don't think that this is what Alex is talking about, but maybe he saw someone reference a fake story about it in a meme, and he just assumed that they didn't extend it or something.
I don't know.
I think what's going on is that Boyle has brought in this bullshit about the demands Putin was making in December, and now Alex is writing a bigger story on top of all of it.
It's all just an exercise in excusing Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
So this is a dumb bullying tactic because the demand is something meaningless.
The hope is that you have some sort of a meaningless symbolic action that cedes power to the people making that demand vis-a-vis Russia, Putin, and the Putin-aligned propagandists like Alex.
Also, in June 2021, Biden was asked at a press conference about Ukraine joining NATO.
And he said, quote, it depends on whether they meet the criteria.
The fact is they still have to clean up corruption.
The fact is they have to meet other criteria to get into the action plan.
So school's out on that question.
It remains to be seen.
And it will not just depend on me, whether or not we conclude that Ukraine can become a part of NATO.
It'll depend on the alliance and how they vote.
There's a world reality that Biden can't wave his hand and force this group to vote the way he wants them to.
However, there's an Infowars pretend reality where a big strongman ruler can just do whatever he wants, so the fact that Biden isn't doing these things means he must not want to.
It's legitimately middle school level shit, and I feel pretty embarrassed for these dudes talking like this publicly.
And to clarify, Trump was able to do a lot of shit unilaterally, but you might notice that all the stuff he did like that were times when he pulled the U.S. out of something.
organizations or groups with his strength.
He just didn't get his way and withdrew, which you can do unilaterally.
He was appealing to the people of Russia in a fairly interesting but probably ineffective way to see the way that Putin is lying to them about what's going on in Ukraine.
It's not mostly about his dad, though Arnold doesn't hide that his dad was fighting for the Nazis.
He does literally mention that.
The video is about Arnold's love for Russia and the people of Russia, like about how his first weightlifting hero was a guy from Russia named Yuri Petrovich Veslov, and how he met Yuri as a 14-year-old boy, and Yuri was very kind to him.
Arnold's dad didn't like that he idolized Yuri because, as Arnold explains, he was injured in Leningrad, quote, "where the Nazi army that he was a part of did vicious harm to the great city and its brave people." The video touches on how he got to meet Yuri again as an adult when he went to Moscow again It's a very compelling argument that Schwarzenegger has a deeply felt connection to the people of Russia and the country itself.
It's such an interesting intersection of his lived experience, too, with this, like, being the son of an Austrian former Nazi soldier who idolized a Russian weightlifter that got him, like, really motivated
Yeah.
It's a very...
I don't know.
Obviously, like I'm saying, I don't think it's going to move the needle in terms of world affairs.
I mean, it did remind me, you know, it's a good message, of course, but it did remind me, like, it went back and I started remembering Arnold Schwarzenegger's life and just going, this man is a cartoon character.
Indeed, earlier, I gave interviews to Russian news media about American sources over there harvesting the DNA of materials of Russians.
And they asked me why, and I said, simple, because they're going to try to create an ethnic-specific biological warfare weapon against Russians if they can figure it out.
Like, we had Elizabeth Williamson on, and we were talking about her new book, and very specifically, we made a point to not have the link go to Amazon.
And the one thing about Romney, you have to remember, he was elected in Massachusetts as a rhino, the only way he could be elected.
And then he immediately veered to the extreme right in order to lick the boots of the extreme right of the Republican Party.
I'm not saying the whole Republican Party.
I'm a political independent.
But the extreme right and Romney tried to restore the death penalty.
In Massachusetts.
Now, we had studied the death penalty, the Sacco-Vanzetti case in Massachusetts there in law school together and knew what a travesty the whole thing was leading Massachusetts to abolish the death penalty.
The extreme right doesn't exist because when you consider who, like, you know, just who comes to mind when Boyle says Because Romney kissed up to the extreme right.
The second problem is that Boyle's going hard on the death penalty, which Alex actually supports.
You'd think he wouldn't because he's so anti-government and he pretends to be a libertarian, but man, he loves the idea of the government killing his enemies.
We are kind of in a Twilight Zone episode where like...
You can show people reality, and they can tell you, they can read word for word back to you what was said, and they will still tell you that Arnold Schwarzenegger was trying to be a Nazi supporter.
I have gotten to the point where I couldn't even do the first hour of the show today because I'm sitting there in these meetings and I'm trying to set up sponsorships and trying to get sponsorships to wire money in just to make payroll.
And I don't judge myself by how much money I've got and all that kind of stuff.
It's kind of fun and neat to be so lean as it makes you focus.
Plus, all our enemies say we've got all this extra money.
I like to joke a lot, and we have some laughs, but I want to speak sincerely here.
I don't believe this shit at all.
But if this is true, Infowars is the most pathetic organization, and Alex is the worst business owner in the entire propaganda game.
His number one job is to do his show, which is live from 11 to 2, and then someone else takes over for the last hour.
There's literally no reason why he can't talk to a potential sponsor before 11 or after 2, except for a couple options that I can think of.
One, he has absolutely no power in the situation at all, and the potential sponsor is calling all the shots, and Alex has to bend over backwards in order to make a few bucks.
Alex has so little interest in doing any work that he's essentially only going to be working from 11 to 2. And if that means doing business while he's supposed to be on air, well, that's why he It's his job.
Whatever the case, this is just an embarrassing level of inability to do one's job, and I honestly, I resent it.
Also, hey, asshole, you just went to LA to do a podcast.
Do you really expect anyone to feel sympathy for your inability to make payroll?
Like, have ten less guns, or get rid of a potentially extravagant studio.
Like, get rid of the weird LED lighting behind you, or don't take a week vacation to another state to do a podcast if you need to make payroll so badly.
And so, like, the two of them, like, now that Milo is a former gay man, according to him, the two of them have less hurdles in terms of their association and their desire to bring about a Catholic theocracy.
Shouldn't that give you pause for your wanting a Catholic dictatorship if you and the guy next to you who both want the Catholic dictatorship, if one of you were to get power over the other one, the other one would die?