Dan and Jordan dissect Alex Jones' March 16, 2006 broadcast, exposing his false claim of co-directing A Scanner Darkly and his distortion of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 regarding Medicare. They reveal Dale Crowley Jr.'s firing stemmed from station preferences rather than censorship, while highlighting the American Free Press's anti-Semitism and Crowley's own hateful rhetoric. The hosts critique Jones' coded attacks on non-white identities, his promotion of Schofield dispensationalism to "force God's hand" via Israel, and his strategic exploitation of MySpace, ultimately framing these 2006 antics as early indicators of his descent into extreme right-wing fundamentalism. [Automatically generated summary]
So, you know, choosing who you're giving information to and sharing stuff with and keeping things from, those are the moves that people make in the beginning.
In the last episode, we learned that Mike White, the guy who made White Lotus and School of Rock, he knows Ozzy from a restaurant in L.A. That'll happen.
Oh, Ozzy, the king of the water, who is the best swimmer in survivor history and also did some porno.
My bright spot is I have discovered finally after you having told me about them several times over the past few years the live readings of Star Wars produced by the George Lucas Talk Show.
I read that Technocrat name as if it was going to all rhyme because the Chaka Day and Vertebrae tricked me into thinking it all was going to have an A, B.
Well, today's broadcast is going to be a little bit different.
We'll cover all the normal staples, government-sponsored terror, the New World Order, the Satanic Elite, the real world that surrounds us.
But Cruiserweight, who I'm a big fan of, I played part of one of their songs yesterday, won a big award at the Austin Awards last night.
And I'd incidentally gotten some complaints that I hadn't aired the whole thing by listeners.
So we'll play the whole song later in this hour that I never got to yesterday.
We just played about two minutes of it.
And also, you'll get my review of the dystopic science fiction Philip K. Dick novel for the first time made into a full-length feature rotoscoped Hollywood production up on the big silver screen.
I had a chance to go watch it last night at a sneak peek.
Yeah, So there's absolutely zero chance that Alex likes this band Cruiserweight.
They're a local Austin standout pop-punk band that's won the Austin Award in that category for the past few years.
They're in that mid-2000s sweet spot where they're wildly successful, but also obscure, where they've had songs and video games and open for bands like Newfound Glory, but they aren't Newfound Glory.
The song Alex is going to play is called Operation Eyes Shut, which does have some early 2000s InfoWars vibes.
So while I don't think that Alex is into this pop-punk band, I wouldn't be surprised if their manager reached out to him and wanted him to play the song.
But if you make Boston Legal the most anti-New World Order show in the world, like perfect, according to Alex, he's just going to start complaining about another procedural.
And there's a really scary report here where Bush signed a bill that hadn't been passed.
Not only is Bush saying that if you don't pass a law like the Patriot Act expansion, I will just enforce it without having a law.
That's called lawlessness.
And when a leader engages in lawlessness, it's called despotism.
It's called a tyrant, tyranny.
A tyrant carries out a tyranny.
They carry it out upon the population, the serfs, the slaves.
And we've got him at these signing ceremonies where he signs bills and then says, well, the bill says this, but I'm ordering the executive with my statement, speaking like Zeus or like Ramses or something, by decree that he is just going to, this is what we're actually going to do with this.
And then there's lawyers there all writing it down.
This situation with Bush signing a bill that hadn't passed isn't exactly like what it sounds like in Alex's telling of it, but it is a bit of a mess.
This has to do with the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, which passed in both the House and Senate and then was signed into law by Bush.
However, Democratic Representative Henry Waxman later pointed out that the version of the bill that was passed in the House was different from the one that was passed in the Senate.
The Senate had passed a version of the bill that only required Medicare to pay for patients to have access to medical equipment for 13 months, as opposed to the House version that had it at 36 months.
Waxman essentially argued that the House had debated and were prepared to vote on what they believed was a version of the bill that offered patients more Medicare benefits.
And then at the last minute, the bill was changed to match the Senate version.
It's not so much an allegation that Bush is signing non-existent bills.
It's more that a Democratic representative is accusing the GOP-controlled Congress of not following the rules about altering bills before votes.
I mean, I suppose technically, then what should have happened, or like maybe what would have been most effective, is when they caught him on a thing, like a real thing that they got him dead to rights, they just way overkill it.
You know, like just go so far overboard because, hey, I got you.
You know, here, the point that I'll agree with is the, you know, like, you know, what Alex even said in 2006 is that if you don't punish the executive, then you end up deteriorating what is allowed to be done without punishment.
I agree with that.
The issue when you say, like, over respond to things when you're dead to rights, I think that what we've seen is that people will make it appear that somebody is dead to rights to something in order to get you to have that overreaction.
So once you set the standard of this is what will cause the overreaction, people will change what it means to be dead to rights.
Brilliant, the telltale sign is the pose, is what I call it.
You see these people, these adults.
You got the cowboy type and the hippie type and the yuppie type and the trendy types and all the other types.
And they're all like dress up, like, you know, little six-year-olds that dress up like pirates or dress up like astronauts and, you know, or army or cowboys and Indians.
And you go out in the backyard and you're in an imaginary world.
And I've caught myself in years past when I was a kid doing this, and I figured out, hey, that's not the real world.
You know, I mean, we propagandize ourselves.
You know, we rationalize bad things we do.
That's posing.
When you rationalize something, you're lying to yourself so much of that.
And I just see mesmerized populations who've taken on false identities that the media hung out.
The media puts out a buffet of lies for you and all these different selections and all these different flavors and all these different ideas.
And they lay them out there for you.
And they hope you come and select one of the identities they've put out for you through television, through the sitcoms, the dramas, the theater, because we are social creatures.
We emulate the leaders.
We idolize.
We fashion ourselves up for someone.
You're supposed to fashion yourself up for your father, your mother, your aunt, your uncle.
Supposed to fashion yourself after heroes that have fought against overwhelming odds.
That was the classical heroes.
The old man who works his whole life to provide for his greatest parents died.
You know, that's the heroes.
That's what you're supposed to fashion yourself after.
Not some gang memberish, giggling, non-white person movie with their punked-out clothes hanging down around their ankles.
Not some punked-out population that just thinks that it's all just pick some genre that you're going to be part of and then go out there and emulate it.
And then you're never really truly alive.
And you talk to these people who are posing, and they just aren't even alive.
They aren't even real.
And I'm sick of it.
I want people to begin by realizing that they're lying to themselves.
I don't get around telling everybody about the beams in their own eye because I got plenty of beams of my own.
But I do love God and I'm a Christian.
I don't hide that.
But this is a news program.
But all over the country, we have had Christians being arrested for their speech, arrested for protesting, arrested for demonstrating, not even outside abortion clinics, but just out on the streets of major American cities.
And we've had liberals getting arrested with a t-shirt saying, I'm against the war, and there's 500 unpermitted pro-Bush people, but the demonstrator that's anti-Bush goes to jail.
This isn't a true description of Alex, but it's exactly what he needs people to believe he is in order for his shit to have any chance of success.
Alex isn't just a Bible thumper.
He's an extreme right-wing Christian fundamentalist.
He wants to use the allure of conservative politics and pretending to be interested in the Constitution as a Trojan horse to evangelize to the audience about his very bizarre and white identity-laden version of Christianity, which he wants to be the organizing principle of the world.
He believes that the devil is running the globalists, and the only way to defeat them is if the U.S. effectively becomes a theocracy where the secular laws are based on his religious beliefs.
That's what he's evolved into.
And if he were the person he claims to be here in 2006, he would have no interest in becoming what he's become.
If this were a sincere description of his agenda and who he is, then Alex would have resisted the call to become a demagogue that he's become, quite clearly, because he would have known that there was a plank in his own eye and that he was an imperfect person.
He wouldn't become this.
It's so important at this point in his career to pretend that he gives a shit about the anti-Bush protesters on the left, because if he isn't able to trick them into thinking that he's on their side, then his show is dead in the water.
He's destined to just be another Bill Cooper who has an impact on the underground culture, but he never gets rich or influential in a way that he gets to enjoy before he dies.
The stuff with Link Later is a perfect encapsulation of that.
If Link Later understood who Alex was and what he was about, he never would have cast him in either of those movies.
And Alex definitely knows that.
It's why Link Later said, I can't say he's not a good manipulator, because he was manipulating people into thinking that he's funny and like, oh, yeah, harmless, kind of goofy, dumb shit yelling when he's actually Trojan horsing really extreme politics.
And if you don't fall for that form of manipulation where he's fun and interesting, he'll go on a show and say he'll gut you like a pig in a different form of manipulation that'll somehow get you to invite him back on your show, where suddenly you'll be manipulated again into thinking that he's a very funny and fun friend to be around.
And I predict that our guest that we've got on with us right now is going to be blessed after he's been punished for free speech.
And I don't attack Israel.
You know, I get criticized for not even being neutral on it, but just saying, you know, that, well, I mean, Israel could have a state if it wasn't so anti-Christian and anti-Muslim and anti-Jew.
I mean, it's atheist.
The labor Zionists funded Hitler.
That's now public.
So I get criticized for not bashing Israel.
But Christian radio hosts fired for criticizing Israel.
20-year host, Dale Crowley, with high ratings, told you can't talk about that.
Michael Collins Piper, American Free Press, the Un-American Thought Police operating on American soil have struck once again.
This time, their victim is veteran Christian evangelist Dale Crowley Jr.
So Alex's guest is this guy named Dale Crowley, and he wasn't fired for talking about Israel.
He had a show called Focus on Israel, which the station was no longer interested in area.
It wasn't like he was a normal old Christian talk show host who one day decided he was going to start complaining about Israel and then the station shut him down.
So certain people are really invested in pushing the narrative as if you were fired because he dared to criticize Israel.
And those people are Nazis.
Alex is reading a story about this from the American Free Press, which is a flagrantly anti-Semitic outlet founded by white supremacist Willis Cardo.
The writer of the piece Alex is reading is Michael Collins Piper, who's the former editor for the Liberty Lobby and has a deep history of anti-Semitic slop.
That said, Dale Crowley's not just a guy who criticized Israel either.
He definitely was someone who engaged in a fair amount of anti-Semitic content and viewed America as a country for Christians.
So it makes sense that the American Free Press folks would want to make the most out of him getting dropped by his station, except he didn't even get dropped by the station.
He had a 15-minute show that he did on Saturdays and then a weekly show, like a weekday show.
The reason that that story is incredibly appealing to these folks like the American Free Press in the past is they want to appear like they're just questioning Israel and being critical of the government and shit when they are in fact anti-Semitic Nazis.
So Alex in the present day has really been trying to pretend that, like, hey, Israel, APEC, that kind of stuff, it never really was that big of a deal for me.
Yeah, I imagine if we really went down and diagrammed it day by day, there would be a corresponding ebb and flow that goes along with how far the furthest right is, you know, like as they ebb and flow about who's the most or whatever, he's maybe two steps below that, but in the same kind of wavelength.
But I think that Alex knows well enough that at this point in history, in around 2006, the only relevant people who are talking about Zogs and the Israeli influence on the government are Nazis.
The people who are the there are people who are making valid points about the Israeli government, even in this time.
But they are not super culturally relevant.
The people who are the loudest are the people who are like maybe getting guns together and talking about how the U.S. is going to be greater Israel.
He knows that.
And he knew that then.
He was signaling to those people because he wanted them to be part of his audience in 2006.
Have Sheber said to me many times: if Jesus had dealt with the Jews of his day, like Jerry Falwell deals with the Jews today, he never would have been crucified.
A lot of it, Alex, is a consequence of Schofield dispensationalism.
When Schofield wrote his notes, he did his best to exalt Israel, put Israel first.
He even put Israel above the church.
Read his notes in the New Testament.
Many times he denigrates the church, the body of Christ, and exalts Israel.
He never has anything bad to say.
And this Schofield Bible, these Schofield dispensationalism, has influenced the church of Jesus Christ around the world to exalt Israel above even the church, the body of Jesus Christ.
Well, I mean, let me just say something here that's important.
Five, six years ago, I wouldn't bash Israel.
I'd say, leave Israel alone, nothing against Israel.
I knew that Israel has been involved in a lot of bad things, but all these countries are corrupt.
But if I didn't worship everything they did, like selling nuclear weapons components to Iran or selling our missile secrets and F-16 fighter secrets to communist China, I would get a call up going, my guests I'd had on.
You listen to me, Alex.
You're going to go to hell if you criticize anything they do.
And I go, and I went, wait a minute, I don't claim to be a Bible expert, but I sat through a lot of Bible study when I was in Sunday school.
Every prophet came and criticized, and God would judge Israel with foreign nations in captivity.
And Jesus criticized what Israel was doing.
And I mean, isn't that the ⁇ I don't understand what you're saying.
This is very out of sync with how Alex has tried to present his views on Israel in the present day.
He tries to act like his concerns about Israel are new, but it seems like he had the same awareness and complaints in 2006 and is even engaging in the same rhetoric.
Like five years ago, I didn't complain about that, but now I'm going to.
So without getting too into the weeds, Schofield dispensationalism is a reference to the debate among Christian thinkers about how many dispensations there have been in the history of God's people.
Basically, it's a discussion of whether there's been three or seven different status quo in terms of God's relationship with man.
The dispensationalist school of thought grew massively in the early to mid-1900s and has an outsized influence on evangelical churches, the burgeoning mega church movement, and a lot of the end times Christian folks like Jim Baker.
Schofield had commentaries on like Revelation, and a lot of the people who have ideas about fun prophecy, they come from a reading that has some reliance on Schofield.
And if you want to make it hyper-simple, dispensationalists believe in a pre-trib rapture, whereas folks like Alex and Dale believe in a post-trib rapture.
Dispensationalists believe that the Jews play an important role in the events that lead to the end times, whereas folks like Alex and Dale believe that this is making Christianity secondary to Judaism, where the fulfillment of their prophecy can't happen without the Jews making it happen, and that bothers them.
You know, it brings something to mind, which is that I've never been in a situation where somebody's had a proper name and then the Bible and not had a really bad time afterwards.
I mean, it would definitely change, I think, a lot of people's fundamental relationship with God if they knew that, like, as long as enough of us get together, that dude can't do shit to us.
You know?
Like, fucking, oh, you want to wait a couple of years?
But like if you look at the way that Alex is engaged with it in the present and a lot of like you know the implications of things he says, you don't even need to get a group of people together.
Yeah, I think that the presentation that the American Free Press wanted and Alex is reporting on is like, this guy just has some very reasonable criticisms of Israel and the influence on American politicians and the global foreign policy decisions that allyship makes.
And instead, he's talking, and it's fundamentally clear that he thinks that Jews are the enemy of Christianity.
Well, I mean, when you say, like, hey, this group of people, they're people, but everything they believe in is against what my God believes in, and I know they cannot change, especially not through talking, that means you're probably not going to have a good time.
Congressman Wright's White House, did president knowingly sign a law that didn't pass, and it's posted on prisonplanet.com and infowars.com.
Representative Henry Waxman has alleged in a letter to White House Chief of Staff Andrew Carr that President Bush signed a version of the Budget Reconciliation Act that in effect did not pass the House of Representatives.
Further, Waxman says there is reason to believe that the Speaker of the House called President Bush before he signed the law and alerted him that the version he had that he was about to sign differed from the one that actually passed the House.
If true, this would put the president in willful violation of the U.S. Constitution.
So Alex doesn't understand this story, and you can tell because of the way that he's talking about the $2 billion discrepancy between the two versions of the bill.
After this point, Alex descends into a riff trying to get the audience to imagine a $2 billion bank robbery and how seriously people would take that, which is meant to imply that the version that Bush signed into law stole an extra $2 billion for these politicians.
In reality, the version that he signed provided $2 billion less dollars in funding for Medicare recipients having access to things like CPAP machines.
You could make an argument that this is a $2 billion theft from the American people, but Alex doesn't think that Medicare should exist to begin with.
So he is absolutely in favor of them having less funding.
His policy preferences are in line with giving Medicare $2 billion less in funding.
So what happened is actually exactly what he wants.
But in order to make it into a narrative that plays on Infowars, he has to spin it like it's Bush and his cronies adding $2 billion to the pot for themselves.
If this whole different versions of the bill thing hadn't happened, he'd probably just ignore this story because it's boring.
And he's just cold reading a Raw Story blog post.
So like it wouldn't even matter to him if there wasn't some little intrigue.
Yeah, it is kind of interesting that you have to, whether or not he knows it or, you know, it is at this time like he's a creature of instinct more than anything else because he's also kind of creating his responses to these things in real time.
But like you have to take stances that are absurdly against your own position in order, but without any stakes, in order to convince people that you can have positions that are against your position.
So it's so easy for him to be like, oh, look at this $2 billion stuff and get real anger because he really wants it to be zero.
I don't want them to get any money.
I'm furious that he would sign this bill and fake that anger into something that people could agree with.
And by presenting it as like some kind of grand scam that Bush and his cronies have done to enrich themselves, it sidesteps the entire question of should Medicare recipients be getting this money?
I wonder if he's, does he, and maybe I don't know if this is actually how it works, but if everybody was like, okay, this is the bill we agreed to sign, but then like he accidentally got the wrong typing.
We don't, do we live on fairy tale laws?
Is it like, ah, shit, there's no way to change it.
He can get on MySpace and take advantage of all the benefits that come from being on social media, all while pretending that his presence there is some kind of rebellious act.
And the best part is, no matter what happens, the end result is proof of how dangerous and rebellious he is.
If MySpace throws him off the site, it's proof that they're censors, and Alex is right.
If they don't throw him off, that's proof that they know he's too big to censor and they don't want to fall into his trap.
Alex's career is full of rigged shit like this, where it's pretty much impossible for him to ever be wrong because his career is a carnival game.
When he predicts a false flag attack is going to happen in the next month, if there's a big shooting, he gets to say that attack is the one he predicted.
And if nothing happens, then he gets to claim that he scared the new world order with his predictions, so they change their plans.
It's all a game.
But in the meantime, Alex gets to use MySpace in exactly the way he's supposed to be above using it.
It's an evil Trojan horse of censorship, but as long as he pretends that he's using it for a higher purpose, he gets to profit off of all the attention and free promotion that the site provides.
He gets to use it exactly like any other business would.
So obviously, at the beginning of this episode, probably one of the most exciting things happened imaginable, and that is that Alex said he was going to review a movie.
And I kept waiting.
I was like, all right, we got this anti-Semitic dude.
I said that I would do a review of Scanner Darkly, and I don't know how I do justice to it.
It is Philip K. Dick science fiction phenomenons, really his autobiography about drug use and drug abuse and what it did to him and people around him.
And why do we put people in prison for something that really is something that's just chemical that they fell into that is something very addictive and just destructive?
It is a disease.
Humans have always had substance abuse problems.
And by making it illegal, we actually put money into it and then actually empower the industry and then make it fashionable and connected to money and then make more people actually get on it.
All the research and evidence and historical lens shows us.
But that's just the backdrop.
A larger part of the backdrop is face scanning cameras, total surveillance, 20% of the public on this drug.
And of course, you learn that a private corporation working with the government, much like Halliburton and others, is actually creating the crisis.
Well, I mean, if your question is, why put people in jail for doing something that's awesome and that everybody likes, the answer should be, you don't.
This is unlike any rotoscoping you've ever seen where they animate each frame.
So it's real, but it's not.
And it makes their performances even more powerful.
And the thing about this film, I was there at this little sneak peek last night that I was invited to, and it was great to be there invited by the director and others.
It was great to be there and to see something new.
I mean, that's what avant-garde means, just something new.
And you're like, I've been waiting for the review.
Because it's like the moment he opens with, I'm going to remove the movie, review the movie, we're all, me, the audience, everybody around is like, well, I wonder what he's going to say about this dumb movie.
It is, it is that feeling right there, that thing that he's doing, the posing about being an actor thing, is so depressing.
It's so depressing because it is emblematic of his inability to just enjoy something so cool.
Right, like this guy has experienced cool shit beyond what 99% of all of us are ever going to experience, and he couldn't enjoy it the same way that you can enjoy like a really good apple and just be like, fuck, what a great apple.
He couldn't enjoy being in a link later film because it wasn't cool enough in his mind for how cool he really is.