Knowledge Fight #884 (August 8, 2012) dissects Alex Jones’ baseless claims—like white males being "nonviolent" (contradicted by FBI data)—and his conspiracy theories framing wars and economies as globalist board games. He cites Confessions of an Economic Hitman and Network to push eugenics and corporate control narratives, while hosts mock his logic, including sovereign citizen absurdities and a failed $50 InfoWars print ad scheme. The episode highlights Jones’ pattern of cherry-picking facts to fit preposterous agendas, from gun confiscation myths to debunked 9/11 theories, revealing how disinformation thrives on repetition over substance. [Automatically generated summary]
I'm having trouble just because, as you know, and now listeners can be filled in on, my headphones broke like a little bit before we started recording.
Today, like I said, we have a special episode to do.
So, I got a little bit of a message from somebody informing me that one of the original members of our Facebook community, one of the members of the group, Dr. Harry, will be entering hospice care soon, and they're having a fun going-away party.
That's one of the ways you can really tell a narcissist is that they have no concept of how to praise others.
It's like, okay, if I'm going to give it his award, first of all, we have to think about how I feel.
And I obviously can only give an award to the best person.
So even if this fictional award does not exist this time, even though I was trying to compliment you, Aaron Dykes, got to give it to Paul Joseph Watson.
It's a radio special report, but it has video as well, which is extremely powerful.
It's award-winning, in my humble opinion.
What Aaron and I have put together.
I came up with the concept of the information, but Aaron just presented it in an amazing fashion.
And it could have been quicker, but he wanted to take his time with the information.
So it's a special report.
I'm not going to even tell you the name of it or what it deals with until right before we air it, coming up in T-minus 30 minutes, 50 seconds, to be precise.
I'm like, how could I find a way to make it both entertaining and informative to just scream as many words as possible about the news in as short a period of time as possible while reading headlines and stuff?
I can't think of any way to do it that doesn't turn into an auctioneer having a heart attack.
So the media, like Alex had already sort of suggested on that last clip, they're trying to scare everybody about the idea of lone wolf white terrorism.
There is a flotilla of news articles talking about the lone wolf evil white person.
So it's gone from, as I told you a few years ago that we saw in internal Homeland Security reports, that it's the Muslim extremists, give up all your rights.
They're hiding in your underwear.
The TSA has to check right now.
To white males are everywhere.
They're vicious.
They're racist.
They're murderers.
They're criminals.
Lock up your wives, your daughters, your children.
I mean, I think it's fairly easy always to rely on that because anything that, you know, you've always got for the paranoid libertarian that like Caesar crossing the Rubicon, like any pointed action towards outside the country that then gets pointed inside is the next step is we got a new Caesar.
Right.
So if it's like, oh, yeah, no, it's fine.
You can torture people off.
Oh, Iraq, who cares?
You know, but if you do it here, then you're going to be Caesar.
So Alex can't see behind any curtain, and there is no man with a trident and net that he accurately saw coming.
But this clip is pretty important context to consider for the next phase of Alex's career.
We're in August 2012, just a few months before the Sandy Hook shooting, and then only a few more months before the Boston Marathon bombing.
In both of those cases, Alex was deeply invested in covering the stories as if they were false flags being blamed on a white patsy in order to take guns.
And that's because that was the storyline he went in looking for.
He'd already determined that this was what the globalists were going to do, so he forced his coverage into fitting that mold instead of learning about the events and covering them as they exist in reality.
For Alex, reality is second to narrative, and his narrative about what these majorly traumatic events will be about was clearly set in advance.
In Alex's world, everything appears as if predictions are coming true.
Not because they are, but because Alex distorts reality to make it fit the shape of the predictions and narratives he establishes as being what his imaginary enemies are planning.
This is a parlor trick.
And for those who might be thinking the Boston bombing was carried out by the Tsarnev brothers, according to Alex's coverage, the globalists originally planned to blame it on a white guy, but they had to change patsies because Alex called them out and ruined the plans.
I think what I find really fascinating about this is that this is doubly the wrong conversation.
Do you know what I mean?
Like that conversation about lone wolf stuff, we know that that was going on.
There were those conversations about all of these lone wolf terrorists and shooters being ideologically, you know, individuals, as opposed to now we realize that the conversation should have been, this was a conversation from the beginning.
You know, this was a network from the beginning, not one that was well thought out or anything like that, but this is a conversation.
And so for them to be wrong and then to have Alex wrong on top of that, it is like, of course the conversation cannot move forward.
So, you know, this notion that they had was that there's the sort of Tea Party types and the, you know, the hard right wing, the militia folks, and that they were going to work with Al-Qaeda.
Like, Al-Qaeda was going to, or conversely, Al-Qaeda was going to use and infiltrate some of these groups in order to hide in plain sight and then commit terror through that.
And also another thing that Alex has sort of made peace with is the, you know, he's scoffing at the idea of like Al-Qaeda coming in through the border.
So Alex does take some calls, and he has a bit of a prediction for one of these callers that I think is a little bit, I mean, we're 11, well, now 12, it's 2024.
No, They have giant black new homeland security trucks going in nationwide.
Yes, the police will roll around in giant tanks because the foreign banks took over.
These are collaborators.
Most of them don't know it.
And they are training the military, not just the MPs now, but general military in police work before they deploy Brigade Homeland to every city, every major city.
A city the size of Austin will have 4,000 troops in it.
A city the size of Dallas will have about 12,000.
A place like New York will have about 50,000 troops in it.
And we're to be fully occupied by the foreign New World Order Army.
And they expect a lot of military, once the gun confiscation begins, to rebel.
So there'll simultaneously be purges in the military of active duty, but then the hunting down of veterans they have files on for extermination.
And I think one of the things that clip illustrates really well is how you can't, you shouldn't associate with Alex even with things that you agree with him about.
This is a distortion of the conversation around the militarization of police that leads you down an impotent alleyway where you're never going to get anything done.
I mean, the conversation really is like, okay, if an organization starts its slave catchers and then you turn them into a military, didn't you just make the Confederacy again?
They create Al-Qaeda, use Al-Qaeda against Russia, the Serbs, moderate Muslim countries.
They use Al-Qaeda against the United States or Al-Qaeda takes the blame for globalist attacks as a pretext to take our liberties.
It is a key set piece.
They move around the board to wherever they want to invade.
And they think you're so stupid, they can tell you Al-Qaeda are heroes.
Go look at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Latest report they put out last Friday where they praise CFR.org, foreign affairs.
They praise Al-Qaeda.
That's how dumb they think you are.
And now they're flipping the script to domestic terrorist and creating this fear that there are white terrorists.
They're now saying on the news, last year you saw the Homeland Security training videos where all the terrorists are white, blowing up shopping malls, movie theaters, sports stadiums.
And then it starts.
Then it begins.
And then the people are all government run.
Air Force top psychiatrist, multiple shooters witnesses say.
Army psyops connected.
The witnesses see four shooters.
The head of the Sikh temple sees men casing the joint.
I mean, white supremacist groups, more than half of them are feds.
The members has come out.
They're run in almost every case by the feds.
What do you do?
You just kill one of your operatives after your operatives shoot people.
They infiltrate, then they bug out, and then you put it on the news.
Very simple.
This is how a black op is run.
And so the globalists are now dropping the hammer on us with these false flags.
And this is the summer of false flags that will lead into the fall and the winner of huge wars if they get away with this.
Hearing stuff like this, it's really easy to see the headspace Alex was in during the months leading up to the Sandy Hook shooting.
He was deeply invested in this narrative that the globalists had taken all the demonization that they built up around Islamic terrorism and projected it onto the right wing so they could start doing false flags to blame on white people.
Alex was obviously going to filter every single story that he came across through that lens, regardless of what the reality on the ground was.
What I'm saying is that there was never a chance he was going to report on Sandy Hook, honestly.
He was far too deep into this narrative to let a prime tragedy like that go to waste.
Also, if you have the mentality that Alex has about white supremacist groups, sure doesn't seem like you could ever really think any of them are real.
Seems like every act of racist violence is conveniently excused as not really actually being racist violence, but in fact, just the globalists trying to make white people look bad doesn't seem like a healthy perspective.
Okay, so when you think about it, Alex's point ultimately is like, okay, so these white supremacist groups are created by the government and, you know, controlled by the FBI and so on and so forth to make white people look bad.
And it's like, I mean, it makes them look bad already.
You know, like the government already, I don't know, it doesn't make white supremacists look so much bad as everybody.
All of them.
They all look terrible.
You know, like when you find out that the second in command, like the Michigan kidnap thing.
Also, Alex brings up the CFR in Foreign Affairs calling Al-Qaeda heroes, which he attributes to a report they allegedly put out last Friday, which would have been the 3rd of August, 2012.
It took quite a while, but I was able to find what Alex was talking about.
The CFR wasn't calling Al-Qaeda heroes.
And in fact, you can find a great deal of fairly negative coverage of that terrorist group on their site.
This was an opinion piece written by Ed Hussein, who is a senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies.
Hussein was making the argument that the Free Syrian army, who was fighting against Assad, would essentially be incapable of continuing to fight were it not for the fact that members of al-Qaeda had joined their ranks.
Sure.
The Syrian wing of Al-Qaeda was called Jabbat al-Nusra Li Alhi al-Sham.
And Hussein says, quote, Al-Qaeda is not sacrificing its martyrs in Syria merely to overthrow Assad.
Liberation of the Syrian people is a bonus, but the main aim is to create an Islamist state in all or part of the country.
Failing that, they hope to at least establish a strategic base for the organization's remnants across the border in Iraq and create a regional headquarters where Mujahideen can enjoy a safe haven.
If Al-Qaeda continues to play an increasingly important role in the rebellion, then a post-Assad government will be indebted to the tribes and regions allied with the Jabbat.
Hussein isn't praising al-Qaeda.
He's bringing this up as something to be very concerned about.
He makes this very clear when he goes on to say, quote, the unspoken political calculation among policymakers is to get rid of Assad first, weakening Iran's position in the region, and then deal with al-Qaeda later.
But the planning to minimize Al-Qaeda's likely hold over Syrian tribes and fighters must begin now as the Obama administration ramps up its support to rebel groups.
Alex is making shit up to serve his purposes.
There's never been a person who is more fortunate to have an uncurious audience than Alex.
Yeah, if we are accepting the idea that El Nusra fighters are backing the Free Syrian army, we need to plan on a contingency of what to do to not allow a post-Assad world to be run by.
The Secret of the New World Order Takeover Program.
Alex Jones here to cover a topic, an issue, that is one of the most important I've ever discussed.
This information is very closely held by governments and elite corporations.
They do not want you understanding this.
Now, many of you that are already aware of this, it'll seem simple, but large swaths of the global population have no idea the real geopolitical paradigm that we're living in today.
Today, we will look at the real forces, the real players in the battle for 21st century global hegemony.
I'm going to break down who really rules the world, how they control the planet, and how they are trying to usher in a world war that is really pointed at the general population.
It seems like every third or fourth piece of media Alex puts out involves a promise that he's going to reveal who runs the world and all their evil plans.
And yet, here we are.
I don't think we have more specific answers than the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and Bilderberg group, and then their plans are whatever conspiracy I want to scare you about this week.
He can't, though, because this plan is supposed to extend back to all the history of our country, history prior to our country, and then now we know it goes back to the time of the fucking devil.
Mysteriously, no classroop, no World Economic Forum, no weird.
So, this kind of grandiose language Alex is using, he uses it pretty consistently because, on some level, he knows that material like this is meant to indoctrinate new people.
There were occasional alliances, but by and large, warfare and politics was carried out in a very two-dimensional way, like a chess set.
You have the ruling class, the royalty, the priest class, the elite, the generals, and in front of them they have basically their conscripts or the lower class fighters who can also represent just the general population.
And these two groups are engaged in warfare and base domination against each other to control larger areas of land and the vassal populations living in serfdom.
I mean, I think the most fun version of that, though, is just like, think of the conflicts on the Polynesian islands during so many time periods of like multipolar war at all times.
And then your enemies are your friends.
And then, and there's no, sometimes there's a king and sometimes it's just a bunch of guys.
You know, it's a fun, fun way of looking at human history.
One area that we see from the ancient chess model that is still used in statecraft by the globalist is the fact that sometimes wars were launched in the case of the French and the British against each other when they had rebellions at home.
They soon learned it was a way to turn inner anger at the state against a foreign state and to reduce the population of young males that you didn't have jobs for.
A lot of times people aren't thinking, you know, while you're thinking about your moveset, you're like, oh, I'm four moves ahead.
That's really cool.
But what you're not thinking about is how to feed your pawns, where they're going to stay after the game is over, what it is that they are going to do.
Like, you know, what's their leisure time activities?
What are you talking about?
You're going to have these pawns here and you're just going to play the game?
In truth, for more than 300 years, the globalists have been financing multiple sides of wars, knowing that conflict destroys nations and gets countries deep into debt.
And that is the key.
They're financing both sides.
And we see this being pioneered by people like the Rothschilds, starting in the 17 and 1800s, where they would finance sometimes three or four different factions, and it didn't matter who won because all of them were in debt to them and had societies that were wrecked after the wars.
Also, Alex has a lot of ideas about Rothschild's controlling all sides of wars and stuff that he has not substantiated at all.
And I know was part of his, you know, we talked about it in the endgame documentary about his quite elaborate claims about these things that in his bibliography says, insert here evidence of Rothschild's fighting on both sides of wars.
So no citation in the bibliography outside of I don't have one.
You know what is an interesting chess thing that I definitely didn't know about when we talked about it is that Magnus Carlson, Grandmaster, best chess player human ever to live, right?
So he's studying all the machine learning algorithms that play chess that are like a million times better than any human being has ever done it.
And the big strategic change that he's learned from them is to use the king more aggressively in the endgame.
So the idea is that's metaphorically very, very interesting about this is that for thousands of years, human beings have played with this kind of inherent risk avoidance with the king.
Obviously, it's the most important game, right?
You know, that kind of thing.
And it takes a machine to go, it's just another fucking guy if you're playing the game to win.
These are primitive attempts to distill down human conflict and domination into a game you can play in a few hours.
The militaries all have basically equal resources, equal numbers of troops, and to enter into the equation some type of random probability, we have dice and we have cards.
There is no discussion here on looking at the real model that we are under today.
We're going to come back to risk here in a moment, but first let's move to the game of monopoly.
And I do think that most of the time, risk games, they'll often end up in a situation of like two people getting dangerously close to saying, let's fucking call it.
Because they keep going back and forth, killing each other's armies and not finishing off getting all the countries in the world.
In the game of Monopoly, you have different economic groups or four players that attempt to engage in economic warfare against each other and then be able to create a monopoly or a single entity that is in control of New York City.
To understand the real system we're under, it's important to combine monopoly and risk with an overlay of strategy from chess.
And this is a key part of the real system we live under today.
Also, canonically, as the player, you're not so much a financial group as you are a landlord.
It was based off a prior game called The Landlord's Game, which was very anti-landlord.
Charles Darrow came along and stole that idea from the woman who created it and made the gold more strictly capitalistic, which is spiritually fitting since he stole it and made a ton of money off it.
If you're in the like common area, everybody's high and everybody's just kind of suddenly noticing all the board games that have been in the dorm room common area for a while.
Somebody pulls one out and then starts going.
You could see a bunch of people listening to a boring, boring monologue about this shit.
I would love to put this side by side with the time we talked about this 700 episodes ago and see like it would it's it's freaking well you were definitely uh were we still drinking probably I think we were still but it still freaks me out the idea of like there's probably like one-to-one like just comparisons of like Lord Licorice joke dancing's chess I think that's.
So out of these three board games, monopoly out of these three board games describes our modern system itself is only two-dimensional.
You see the private Federal Reserve that's owned by six private banks, Goldman SACH JP, Morgan BANK OF America and others others.
They always win all three others.
You're playing their game.
You think you're battling it out for houses and apartments and for park place and for the electric company and for the railroad and for the top hat and for the fashion show.
But it's the bankers that control the politicians.
Oh yeah, and instead he's like uh well, the the implication right, if you're playing monopoly sure right okay, hear me out here i'm, i'm listening, okay.
So you, let's say you're playing a four-player game, all right, you are not the only four people that exist right in the world, so hold on okay.
Let's say you have all of the orange properties and you put a bunch of hotels on them or whatever, raise the rents up real high.
Okay, so obviously, if a player lands on it, they have to pay the rent for all this.
Sure, but what about all the Unheard?
unseen people who also land on it, who aren't players in the game.
All of the other people who are walking down Illinois Avenue.
That's a good point.
They're all getting screwed by you playing this game.
As a capitalist, I don't like that you're not maximizing the amount of rent you could be getting knowing that there are pedestrians just going around.
Like, sure, I see your silver dog land on my fucking thing, but I know in my mind that there's probably like 30, 40 people walking down New York Avenue, right?
And I need your constant upkeep for that.
So I'm going to prefer to have at least $2 per turn from you.
What happens if an African nation won't play the Monopoly game?
Or what happens if a Middle Eastern country doesn't want to be part of the modern bankster system based in London and New York?
Well, then that's where risk comes in because they want to be able to take you over through economic espionage, as John Perkins has written in his bestseller, Confessions of an Economic Hitman.
But if they can't, this is in all the official CIA and State Department documents.
You just have Al-Qaeda come out of Egypt into Libya, ethically cleanse, blow up most of the infrastructure, knock out Gaddafi, and now they have to come to you and borrow money from your bank to rebuild, and you own and control everything.
And guess what?
If you wanted to get that welfare check, well, you got to take the vaccines, which, by the way, started.
And I think he had some vague idea that, like, I'm going to compare this to board games, but it is just completely detached now from any kind of connection.
We think about nations and continents and cultures, but in truth, the globalists, the bankers who have unlimited money, they're waging war against anyone else that has any assets because they want everyone to be impoverished.
So you have to go to them and so that you have to follow all of their orders so they can control human development and society.
In the past, they would brag about their real political system in fictional accounts, in movies like Network.
Each one of us has one piece of stock in the global system.
One ecumenical giant global government.
Except one thing.
That big global corporate system they've been selling us on doesn't want us to even be alive.
It's designed to consolidate control and then slowly cut off the resources while the banksters themselves pose as the saviors, selling people on getting deeper into the tyranny and the pain will stop.
When at the end of the day, it's nothing but global extermination and eugenics so that these selfish, greedy scam artists can have the world and all of the incredible technology and life extension for themselves.
And that's the big secret here.
You have been warned.
I'm Alex Jones signing off for Wifowars.com.
The ball is in your court.
The rest is up to you.
Please get this presentation out to everyone you know.
I think, I mean, obviously the point is like Alex's standard blah, blah, blah talking points stuff packaged in a way that's like I don't know, maybe interesting to a new viewer.
Hey, the world is like these board games or some shit.
But like even when he's getting there at the end, when he gets into the network thing, he then rambles about other things that are disconnected from the network.
I don't know his take on the new shootings, and I wanted to get him on because he said, like, over a year ago, he said on this show, you all heard it, that he thought Petraeus would be in the running for vice president.
And I've always found Drudge and his sources.
Drudge doesn't go with something when Drudge writes an article maybe once every two weeks or something.
Or his sources there in D.C., some of which I've met with and know they don't go with something unless they've got it from the highest levels.
And their word is Obama was concerned that Petraeus may be picked as the VP, that that would be a strong VP pick to Roman Romney.
Petraeus just said that's not the case, but they always say that.
But Dr. Steve Pachinik showing his inside knowledge was saying that a year ago here.
Yeah, he did for six hours, and then he asked me how we could do business together.
But the point of fact is that even when you're arrested and you spend time and I was willing to go there on my own, and I knew what the consequences were, you know, this is not an issue of a government.
This is an issue of my personal choice.
I made the choice.
I knew what the consequences were.
Well, quite frankly, I had a very good relationship with the Assad regime, even after they knew who I was.
I don't do business with underlings and I don't do business with people who don't torture me just because I show up randomly in their country for no reason under no auspices or government office.
Only like a few months really away from him going to the DMZ and pretending he's going to like rendezvous with high-level contacts in the North and South Korean governments.
No, people have to understand that if they want to go back and spend that time now, we're losing time to really understand where we're heading in much faster time, Alex.
The feds have been doing their job, and they've been doing it very effectively.
What happened recently with the killer who has been accused of where we went into the Seats, and it was said that he was trained by the Army to be a killer.
It's nonsense.
The Army didn't train Mr. Page to be a killer.
The Army had him in.
He was in there.
He was a neo-Nazi.
The feds, the FBI in particular, have been exceedingly good at breaking up neo-Nazis.
However, thanks to 9-11 and Cheney in particular and Michael Hayden, General Hayden, who monitored everybody during 9-11, we had the FBI had to pull back.
Briefly, I mean, obviously, yes, Cheney took the power for NORAD to do shootdowns the month before.
So after 9-11, they had drills of the targets being hit.
So that's how, I mean, we know about the stand down, but basically, from what I know, correct me if I'm wrong, the hijackers were doing drills of infiltrating airports and getting on board for the Department of Defense and CIA.
They were set up.
Nerve gas was released on the aircraft because the people said there's smoke, we can't breathe.
Then remote control flew him out of the buildings.
Guys, will you print me the Council on Foreign Relations report that was in Watson's article yesterday so I can actually read those quotes or it's over in the other studio from last night where I read the quotes and the CFR going oh Is so brave and good and doing such a good job.
Listen, if Al-Qaeda's brave and good, I'm a monkey's uncle, and I want potbelly pedophiles to not put their hands on my genitals, okay?
I don't want checkpoints.
I don't want all this stupid paranoia.
Okay, and let me tell you, the military is gearing up for martial law in this country in a giant Iran attack.
I mean, once you truly accept, like, oh, the absolute craziest thing that is possible is not just possible, it's the only truth, then anything else sounds crazy.
Alex is careful not to let this guy talk, but also not fully shut him down.
He wants to be sure to leave room in there where he's kind of endorsing sovereign citizenship, like saying there's a bit of truth to it, because if he doesn't do that, he's going to lose a lot of his audience base.
But also, the power of visitation isn't about that stuff at all.
It has to do with what some have theorized is the root of the government's oversight and regulatory power over corporations.
In olden times, kings had the power of visitation over companies where they could dictate how they operated, and there was no need for courts or legal proceedings.
Some on the right wing have proposed that this is where the government's regulatory authority derives from.
And they use that as a sort of argument against the idea of regulations as a whole.
Alex has no idea what the caller is bringing up, but he's not going to risk it.
Let him get to the point because he's going to end up in over his head and not be able to defend himself if the guy starts talking about how we all live in ocean law.
Okay, so if I understand correctly, then the idea is this.
Because governments believe they are able to tell corporations what to do because they used to be based around kingdoms and complete authoritarian power, that means that laws aren't real.
Yeah, and the person who was involved with the, I believe, like some of the graphic design and stuff on it was determined by the InfoWars audience to be a CIA plant.
It caused a bunch more drama and shit that Alex would have ever wanted.