Know More News - Adam Green - Palestine, Election, & the Future | Know More News w/ Adam Green feat. The Last American Vagabond

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 28, 2024 - Know More News - Adam Green

01:34:55

Palestine, Election, & the Future | Know More News w/ Adam Green feat. The Last American Vagabond

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome, ladies and gentlemen.
	Adam Green here with no more news.
	It is Tuesday, May 28th, 2024.
	Thank you all for joining me.
	I hope you had a great holiday Memorial Day weekend.
	A lot of stuff to cover, a lot of things that have been going on.
	Joining me today, I have a very special guest.
	I've known the guy for years.
	We did shows probably 2016, 2017.
	It had been a while, but we both been growing, both been doing our thing.
	Obviously, I've been focusing a lot more on the religious aspects of everything.
	He's been covering news and other big stories.
	But he had me on a couple weeks ago to talk about the Jesus deception.
	It was a great talk.
	And I've been wanting to do another news show with him for a long time.
	Asked him last night.
	He was down.
	He is here.
	He is awesome.
	Joining me is the Last American Vagabond, Ryan Christian.
	What's up, Ryan?
	Hey, good to be on the show, Adam.
	Good to talk with you again.
	Good to have you.
	Really enjoyed our conversation.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah, our conversation was cool talking about the Jesus Deception.
	It was mostly kind of me, like, you know, laying out and ranting a lot on my stuff.
	But our good way, though, I wanted you to inform my audience.
	You know, I thought that was really important.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But years ago, we had some really good news streams as well.
	Good back and forth covering all this stuff.
	We cover a lot of similar issues as well.
	So what's going on with you in Last American Vagabond World?
	You got 60,000 on Twitter, your website, Last American Vagabond.
	You teamed up with some other people in Alt Media, doing well on Rumble, almost 20,000 subs, getting a lot of views still.
	Good to see.
	Besides the censorship, that's what else happened too.
	I saw you got banned from Stripe.
	So I said, come on, we got to talk about that and do this right away.
	Yeah, right.
	Right.
	And, you know, before we even talk about Stripe, it's interesting.
	I'm sure you probably have similar concerns or thoughts about, you know, Rumble, for example.
	I just, as much as I continue to see growth there, I just don't feel like this is a place where we're going to get, you know, like one of the obvious points I think you probably made as well is that they're all the same choke points exist in Rumble that we can see on YouTube and anywhere else, the same people backing or even taking it further to what a lot of people there would highlight in other circumstances, BlackRock and Vanguard being chief supporters.
	You know, it's just, it's interesting that we think in this conversation you're saying BlackRock and Vanguard are supporters of Rumble.
	Oh, yeah.
	I mean, I could bring it up.
	But remember, I don't think this is the same as saying I think it's a publicly traded, right?
	So they could buy in, anybody can, but you can look it up and see.
	I'll bring it up if you still get influence, though, if they can buy in like that.
	And I know I'm pretty sure Peter Thiel is involved as well.
	That's what I'm worried about.
	Plus, they're given the official check marks.
	I see you don't have one.
	They're given the official check marks and promoting in the algorithm all the kosher right-wing people, basically.
	It's all the Trump supporters on Rumble for the most part.
	Yeah, right.
	Here, I have that.
	If you want to bring that up, I don't know how to do it on Skype, but share a screen, I'm pretty sure.
	Or if you want to send me the link or something.
	Oh, here it is.
	Here it is.
	I think I got it.
	Open here.
	I'll just send you the link because it has asking for permission or whatever.
	But so the point is just that I've shared this in the past and it's pretty well known.
	That's why I always think it's funny that I'll do it on Twitter.
	It's funny when I bring this up to Pete.
	You know, someone on a right-wing account was highlighting that BlackRock is invested in X, Y, and Z and we shouldn't trust this company.
	And then I go, well, what about Rumble?
	This is where you're talking about it.
	Doesn't that matter?
	And it's just this crickets.
	You know, it's like, well, we got to be objective about this.
	Clearly, that the influence there is a problem.
	It's a problem anywhere.
	And I think we should point that out, right?
	These companies are alarming, especially the COVID-19 was a really big example of that.
	I think I called it the COVID coup, which is just BlackRock, we all talked about buying out basically the U.S. Treasury for the most part, because of what was going on in the plan that was written before COVID-19, it's just an alarming overlap.
	And so, my point, though, back to what I was saying is I just don't feel that these platforms, other than the ones I think, that have really held to, I mean, near exact what they've said, like BitChute and others, even though there are small examples there that you could highlight, but the point being that really stood by the idea of free speech.
	I mean, BitChute, clearly.
	I mean, it's like that's the whole point is you can look at the chat and it's just riddled with things that you might think are disgusting, but that's real free speech, right?
	The point is that's just the way it should be allowed.
	Rumble, I don't know.
	I just feel like we're kind of being set up to fail, but it's getting reached and people are talking, you know, sharing.
	And so I'm going to use things like that as best I can, you know?
	Well, you know, I was going to talk a little shop with you offline, but since we're talking about Rumble like this right now, I'm noticing some of your videos on Rumble.
	Like I was checking how my show did, you know, in comparison to your average video.
	And ours had 8,000 views, but some of your videos on here will get like 50,000, you know, or like 4,000.
	What's with the wide range?
	Like on Rumble, for me, I'm like, you know, 4,000 or 5,000 every video.
	And I never get like a random 50,000 video.
	Do you know what's going on here?
	Well, what I will first point, I would make sure that I would highlight is that like the clips that we post and the interviews always get less views, which I find interesting.
	Well, maybe the interesting anomaly is there's been a couple of standout interviews, like the Arna Burkhart, for example, or others that just get picked up by certain circles and get like 100,000 views.
	But usually the interviews and the clips we put out get dramatically less views, which I don't really know why.
	You'd think the audience would engage with those.
	I honestly don't know why, but I think that's the main difference.
	But you're right.
	It seems a little bit all over the map, depending on certain things.
	I was wondering if like Corbett report posts you on his website or something like that.
	Somebody posts you on a big website and it brings in a lot of traffic because it's just a lot different than my Rumble.
	Yeah, no, maybe you're right.
	I mean, that's what I would argue when it came to like, you know, like the Arna Burkhart interview, which is, you know, he's a, he's now dead, but is a pathologist, famous one who was breaking down all the lies of COVID.
	And I think that just got highlighted and embedded on a lot of larger right-wing accounts because that's something that, you know, in general, most people, you know, I think all across the board are aware of.
	And that's what kind of got it reached.
	Now, now that I'm looking a little closer, actually, you don't have that many that are at 50,000.
	So it's kind of more equivalent to your 20,000 subscribers.
	Like I see this one with Whitney Webb, who you've worked with, got 62,000.
	It's probably because she shared it on her huge Twitter account.
	Probably.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Stuff like that makes a definite difference.
	If you wanted to share that, by the way, I sent you that.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	I just found it.
	You can look it up on, if you just type in Rumble Inc.
	and look at it on, yeah, right there, you can see that they're the top, the two top leading shareholders, which is that's, you know, that should matter if we're going to talk about, you know, interesting.
	But honestly, anything that's on the NASDAQ or any public company, basically, they are the top two people in all of the stock market.
	That's how they own it.
	It's crazy that we don't talk about that.
	That's so alarming to me.
	Well, the mainstream media promotes them, promotes all of that.
	But before we get into Rafa over the weekend and the Libertarian Convention and some of the latest going on, I just figured I'd start with you, like the big picture in the future.
	Like, who do you think is going to win the election?
	What is the next couple of years going to look like?
	What is the direction of America?
	Is America going to collapse?
	What do you think?
	What's the scoop from T-Lav?
	I think these are important, definitely.
	And by the way, I don't know.
	I kind of brushed over the Stripe thing.
	We don't have to get into it.
	I've talked about it a lot, but just to sum it up very quickly is that Stripe kicked me off the platform.
	And they very arbitrarily changed their terms of service in April.
	They haven't done it in a long time.
	And it seems to specifically highlight people that are in the field that we're in, which is just crazy to me.
	And I just think it's arbitrary and manipulative.
	And it's just one more payment processor, like anything PayPal that we've been kicked off of, stolen money.
	You know, it's just crazy.
	But so that's just, we're all used to that by now, more censorship.
	So support the independent media.
	But so to your main point, you know, I think that, or your questions, I think that right now, I think what the election is an interesting overlap.
	I mean, let's start with this, actually, that I think that my opinion about what's happening between just the world's perception of Israel, which I'm just fascinated to watch this interesting, like slow motion train wreck that's happening right now with around the perception of the history of Israel, the history of Zionism, you know, things that you've been talking about a very long time, the history there, and even deeper than what, obviously, than what I've covered.
	And the truth around it is just exploding right now.
	And it's very fascinating, at least the surface level parts of it.
	Now, that I think, and the reason I'm saying that is because I don't think that this is some kind of a controlled effort.
	Like, I think right now, it's obvious to me that they're desperately trying to find ways to kind of re-channel that to in their interest, even to say it's just Netanyahu, get him out of the way, and it's all fine.
	It's just, that's not the reality.
	But I think that's not, I don't think it's engineered.
	I think there's a level of this.
	This is truly organic that people are finally seeing through this, which is making question a lot of other things.
	And I think that is influencing the election in such an interesting way because, as you know, we end up going into these elections with the same old ridiculous wedge issues circling around these debates.
	And it's just this game every time.
	And I don't know how they're able to do that this time.
	They'll probably still try.
	Israel is the wedge issue this year.
	The whole election is basically centered around who can defend Israel more.
	And interestingly, in the opposite, as you'd expect, right?
	Like you'd think that because of the momentum, people would start talking about, should we be doing this?
	Is it the right action to fund them?
	But you're right.
	I'm willing to bet you it's going to go so far in the other direction that it's going to be who can be the biggest champion of Israel, which is just ridiculous, which continues to show you that we don't really have choice here, right?
	I mean, you've got RFK Jr., which I'll promote a lot of the stuff he's talked about in the past around medical freedom, which is I've said before, his stance on Israel is morally indefensible.
	It's just awful.
	It's like one of the worst of all the options.
	I think it's crazy enough, right?
	I would argue, though, that the reason that it's so standout is because he took such a hard heat.
	Like, for instance, Trump is, in my opinion, possibly even worse.
	He's so aggressive about his support for Israel, but he just doesn't really lay it out the way that RFK has.
	But I guess we'll have to wait and kind of see how that plays out.
	You know, Trump's such an expert at giving like his, for instance, he just did this with Tim, you know, Tim Poole, where he just gave like this middle-of-the-road non-answer.
	And they're all like, yay, he's going to pardon Isha San.
	It's like he didn't even say that.
	That's just, he's an expert at that.
	But I think that's going to be the biggest factor here.
	And I think that it's about whether they choose to kind of highlight it or play around it.
	But to your point about the larger dynamic, I think a lot of people more than ever, I mean, every year you get this point about the election's not going to happen.
	You know, everything's going to collapse.
	It's always possible.
	But in my personal experience, I've never seen a time where it seems more like that might even suit their interests to just like have some massive event happen to where they argue you have to postpone this or I don't know.
	I see the opening for that.
	I doubt that's going to happen, but we just, we're in a really very uncertain path right now.
	And I mean, from their perspective, like when's the last time we've seen government officials at this high of a level have an actual possibility of being held accountable for something?
	You know, like whether I don't, I kind of don't think it's going to happen.
	I'm a pessimist.
	I'm jaded by their power over these things.
	But the ICJ, the ICC, even individual lawsuits that are aimed at Blinken and Biden and other world leaders.
	And you can't say Netanyahu, that's who they're.
	What do you think of the countries, Norway, Ireland, and I forget the other one, that are recognizing Israel as a state?
	What was it?
	Or Palestine, Spain, Ireland, and Norway.
	Spain.
	Okay, yeah.
	What do you think of that?
	Yeah, I think it's fantastic, but I think the first thing I always say in all of this, and again, I'm going to stress that I'm clearly jaded about people in power.
	I think that's very obvious, is that I just don't take it at face value.
	I think too many times we've seen these cycles of leaders that, like, let's put it this way, in any moment of change, things are shifting.
	Right now, you've got people that are showing who they really are and are willing to stand by this open genocide till the very end because they've just taken, they've made that choice.
	We support Israel.
	Then you've got people that are in the middle that recognize that we have to support the Zionist entity to be able to get elected, which we all need to talk about.
	And yet, at the same time, though, they're opportunists.
	I think all of them are.
	And so all of a sudden, they find this moment where they're like, okay, historically, we've needed the support of Israel no matter what.
	Now, all of a sudden, we're seeing an opening where we might just get more support organically even by highlighting the truth.
	And so it doesn't, and my point is not, is that I think it's obvious that you can see sometimes in the history, truth overlaps with their interests.
	That doesn't mean they're telling the truth.
	You see what I'm saying?
	Right now, there's a lot of people out there, like even a Jill Stein, for example, who came out earlier than most and is really saying, you know, they're genocide.
	They're doing the wrong thing.
	I just, my gut tells me I don't believe that if it, if another story came up that was about their interest aligned again with Israel, that they wouldn't just fall back into place.
	But we should still point to them and say, yes, that's the right thing to say.
	Spain and Norway and Ireland, I mean, Ireland, I think, is an easy case.
	I think it's pretty clear that Ireland has been standing on that, at least highlighting Israel as an occupier and the rest for a long time.
	At least most of their officials have.
	So you could probably argue that that is genuinely trying to do the right thing.
	But again, I just hard to grab that.
	I'd like to believe that.
	But Spain and Norway, my gut tells me that they're really just kind of recognizing an opening to give them some more political clout in the world, seeing that this is the writing on the wall.
	But it's still very positive.
	I'm hoping more countries come out and do it.
	I mean, we have to remember they're not just going Palestine is real.
	They're literally going back to the 67 borders, which in my opinion, it should be, it's all Palestine, if we're going to be honest about this.
	But the situation has changed, and even the resistance ultimately recognizes that it's more equitable to end up having two states, right?
	That's the large opinion I would argue from most of the people on the side of Palestine.
	And that it's a huge deal to say that all of this is still currently occupied, which it is, and go back to the borders long before they've put up all these illegal settlements.
	And we're just talking about Gaza and West Bank, really, you know, and so that's huge.
	I bet you we're going to see a lot more like a waterfall coming the more this continues down this path.
	I don't know how they stop this.
	The ICJ and the ICC.
	I mean, this is pretty wild.
	It is wild for sure.
	You talked about it being like organic, like this is an organic awakening, but I know I'm pretty sure you don't believe that October 6th was completely organic.
	Oh, not at all.
	Not at all.
	Well, so what I mean by that is not necessarily, even when it comes to like the campus protests, like I'm the first person that's going to highlight how these things, and my point in the beginning, they're always weaponized.
	No matter what we're talking about, there's always power structures on all sides trying to take use, make use of what's in front of them.
	But my point would be that in any of these dynamics, I think it's pretty, it's self-evident that there's a level of this that are, this is why I highlight that it's Muslim and Jew and Christian and different political parties, different countries, all just kind of recognizing no matter what side we're on, that this is genocide and that's not okay.
	Like this is coming back to like fundamental moral understandings of what we believe these governments are pretending they are, fighting for freedom and democracy, whatever.
	And so I think there's a huge element of this of the average person who's been awakened by this.
	Like they just can't stop seeing dead images of children and, you know, no narrative make that go away.
	My point I've said a lot about Israel is no matter what number, they take the number they're lying about and say it's 7,000 children or go to the reality, which is 15,000 plus.
	There's not really a narrative you can lay over that that goes, oh, okay, that's why that makes sense.
	15,000 children, and here's the narrative.
	There's nothing you can give that makes that suddenly make sense.
	And the average mom who looks at her children can't just hear the narrative about Israel and make that go away.
	That changes something.
	You know, that's what I mean about the opportunism is these powerful people are going, okay, well, I can't ignore that the 99% of my constituency wants me to side with this at least stopping, you know?
	And so that's important, but it is definitely manipulated.
	Like, go back to your point about October 6th.
	I mean, for crying out loud, I mean, the amount of foreknowledge that even they've admitted to, which I guarantee there's more of that, the amount of information that was coming around from other countries.
	There was even shorting of the banks.
	They were shorting the Israeli banks.
	Exactly.
	I forgot about that one.
	Again, that happens every time, it seems nowadays, right?
	Where they clearly knew something was coming and not even just from Israel, you know?
	And so I think that's important.
	Since you bring that up, my gut tells me that if the most logical, which it's just as likely that this is all of their government, like a 9-11 guy, they allowed this to happen.
	Something tells me that it was more of a division, especially now seeing that there's like these stark divides happening recently of like military people in Gaza.
	Netanyahu's son posted this where they're saying that we're not going to allow a deal, even if they agree.
	We're siding with Netanyahu.
	It's like this division between Israel, like the leadership right now.
	I believe that more likely is that there was a level of their government that saw an opening to allow this to happen in order to justify what they thought they would gain from this, which is always what happens, right?
	Like the bombing of Gaza or the rockets, and they argue that that's why we can't allow what they want.
	And then there was a level of them that weren't aware that it was going to go this far.
	I'm theorizing.
	I think it's just as likely that all of them were involved, but that seems to add up the most for me.
	So I just don't think we could ignore the foreknowledge and the level of absolute allowance of all this.
	Like, I mean, we can go off the whole story.
	I mean, the gates, the checkpoints, I mean, the timing of it all.
	It's impossible not to see that there's some level that I think knew this was happening.
	Speaking of like the divide in Israeli politics, did you see former Prime Minister Ehud Barak what he said about Netanyahu recently?
	Possibly.
	Which one?
	He said that he's hijacked and under the control of fanatical rabbis.
	Interesting.
	No, I didn't.
	All right, let's watch that.
	Yeah, that's interesting.
	Hold on, hold on.
	Sorry.
	Hold on.
	Okay, go ahead.
	Go ahead.
	You could finish your point because I have to get it so you can hear the audio.
	Okay.
	No, I was just saying that I was going to ask what you thought that stems from.
	Like, is that, you know, because what I think is interesting is even the point about the clip that's become pretty prominent, where I think it's the former head of Shinbet and Barack himself and a couple others saying that, yes, they funded Hamas.
	They did it in order to stop the two-state solution.
	And I mean, obviously, they point to the Haretz citing what he said in a Likud party meeting.
	So it's not a secret.
	They just don't like to talk about it.
	But people often argue, oh, he's a big opponent of Netanyahu, so it could all be manufactured.
	I'm curious what you think, like where this is stemming from.
	Is it about trying to make just Netanyahu the problem?
	Because obviously I don't agree with that.
	I think pretty much everybody in this government, for the most part, is problematic.
	So it's interesting, but I'm curious to see how he frames this.
	Jeud Barak, je vous ai bien entendu, vous avez parlé de certains ministres messianiques.
	Vous avez dit messianiques et racistes, c'est ça?
	You said messianic ministers.
	Hold on.
	You spoke of certain messianic ministers, messianic and racist.
	Are Those the words you used?
	Yes, that's what they are.
	Yes, they are.
	Netanyahu is under the influence of these ministers in order to protect his survival.
	Very clear.
	He's a slave of these fanatical rabbis.
	That's important.
	These enslaving ministers, messianic.
	But they have a huge influence on him.
	They have huge influence on him.
	Very interesting.
	The religious rabbis have in Zionist Zionist rabbis and politicians have enormous influence on him.
	Yeah, I think this word slave is important.
	And obviously, this is just his opinion.
	So he could be, you know, adding his own.
	The point being is that the term slave seems to suggest, like many have argued, that Netanyahu is sort of a, you know, he sort of trapped himself with the way he set up this coalition.
	He's surrounded by the rabbi deep state, right?
	Kind of like Trump.
	Not that he wants to go along with this and he's like, you know, complicit in everything.
	Well, so that's why, are you, are you saying that as if you think he is?
	Because I would argue that I think to a large degree he is.
	No, yeah, me too.
	Exactly.
	Okay, yeah.
	But my point, though, is that at least some of the arguments have been, and maybe this is all self-serving to set up the idea that it's just Netanyahu, which I disagree with.
	But the idea that it's interesting to think about the fact that he, as any politician would, kind of tapped into unsavory groups in order to gain himself power.
	I mean, how in the world somebody like Netanyahu is already reviled and hated around the country, who has three different legal situations, bribery, and how that person finds himself back in power.
	And I think that's why.
	He tapped into some pretty dark entities, which again, let's recognize, as I think you've covered, he's just like a slightly different shade of the same problem.
	But these guys are really, really extreme.
	The Smo Churches, the Ben Gabirs, the religious Zionism party.
	I mean, they're the Jewish power parties.
	These guys are outside of their mind, as far as I'm concerned.
	They're literally extremists.
	And so the question is, is that what he believes, even to some degree, or was it just about gaining power?
	And I guess that's what they're trying to suggest here is that he's a slave to that power that he used.
	But I mean, there's plenty of examples that Netanyahu is, at least in many ways, of the very same mind when it comes to the sort of Zionist perspective on all this.
	You could argue Trump's kind of a slave to the Christian Zionist and to Jewish lobbies in America in a similar way.
	Exactly.
	In the same way.
	I mean, because it's the same concept as we're talking about, and that's the same point, even is does Trump believe this or is he just using it to gain power?
	And I think I would argue he's more so using it.
	I don't even think Trump has any real reverence for a lot of this stuff.
	I mean, he's pretending to be a Republican all of a sudden.
	He's pretending to be a Christian.
	I mean, just it's all about trying to gain.
	And that's coming, by the way, for those that are shocked by that.
	You read his books.
	He makes these statements in the past about what he, you know, Democrat or that he doesn't believe in certain things.
	It's politicians for you, you know?
	But this is a more interesting point of it all because right now, if they successfully argue that Netanyahu is the one that's the problem and then shift somebody else into place in an attempt to kind of keep the situation, that will never work, in my opinion.
	There's far too much awareness around this right now, and powerful people that are recognizing that, like we said, and then leaning into that awareness, that you can't put this genie back in the bottle, as far as I'm concerned.
	Not right now.
	And you're right, like questioning, like, are these guys working together or are they real enemies?
	They were both in like an elite commando-Israeli task force when they were young.
	But so, and they've always been at the top of politics, kind of controlling both sides in a way.
	And he and he's hanging out at Epstein's mansion in New York, and he's right there in BBC the day after 9-11.
	So it seems like they, you know, work together on 9-11 stuff, right?
	And I like your point right there.
	I mean, this is the way we have to always think about it.
	It doesn't mean we can necessarily prove it all the time, which is okay.
	Leave it where we, you know, the information.
	But the point is that you can see how these, like with the two-party illusion concept, that they play these counterbalances off each other.
	For all we know, they're background high-fiving about what they just did, you know, and it's about we hate each other.
	It's the same thing we see in two-party illusion politics in our country, which, by the way, a point they made online today, which doesn't suggest that there's only two parties that are part of the illusion.
	It just means that it's an illusion of the two-party dynamic.
	Ask Britain how that works.
	There's plenty of other parties that are lying to us, but it's all an illusion, you know?
	So maybe you're right.
	Maybe it's all about creating the illusion that there is more going on and they're all fight too.
	Even if they were friends 50, 40 years ago, like they could sincerely hate each other and be fighting against each other now.
	But I mean, either way, what he's saying is the truth here.
	He says there's these ministers who want him to ignite the whole Middle East in a war with Iran for Gag and Magog.
	They want to ignite the Middle East to accelerate the coming of the Messiah.
	Like this is the prime minister of Israel, former, saying these things.
	And this is what it is.
	And I question whether or not some of them believe these things or if it's just another way to achieve manipulation over others in power.
	I do believe some of them actually believe some of the prophecy, you know, prophetic aspects of this.
	But I just offer the question of, you know, should ask whether or not, in the same way that Trump pretends to be these things to gain power, I just wonder that, you know, like, because is it about convincing certain powerful people of the civilian Jewish population that that's the case?
	You know what I mean?
	Or is it they really believe it?
	I don't know, but I think some of them do.
	John Garadas for 20 says, let's get the dono train going, Goim.
	Let's ask some questions as well.
	Yeah, we need questions for Ryan.
	Vagabond, what got you J-Pilled for the first time?
	Let me rephrase that.
	What got you into researching these issues?
	Because you said I've been talking about Zionism, but as long as I can remember, we started, I think, around the same time, like 2015 timeframe.
	And you were focusing on Zionism from the start, too.
	So what led you to even get in this business?
	Oh, well, that's two different.
	Well, first, I'll start with the first part and then remind me if I forget about, you know, in general, what started for my work.
	But in case your audience missed like our last interview and different discussions, you know, where I think our perception might slightly differ is that I still genuinely believe that it's wrong to blame this or highlight this as being a Jewish problem.
	I mean, aside from the fact that it's obviously part of this, I think it's a Zionism manipulation of a huge faction of this conversation.
	And I could be wrong.
	I mean, that's why I'm that's why I really enjoyed our last interview and that I want to continue to, and I'm looking at your work and I want to understand the perception, the perspective that this could be.
	One of the things I'll highlight too that you brought up that really did add to my perspective is that the argument that this, the farther back you go, you could argue that this started as a Jewish organization as opposed to a Zionist organization first, which kind of intermingled.
	And this is interesting to me.
	But either way, my point would be that I don't think that it's appropriate to say even just like a J, you know, like that kind of framing.
	I think that there's obviously an overlap.
	And I point to plenty of people's work that highlight that there's a huge portion of the Jewish population in Israel and largely around the world that believe in the Zionist manipulation or the way they present that, right?
	So I just want to make that clear.
	And again, I could definitely be wrong.
	But I think that what started me off on the perception of Zionist Jews or Zionist Christians, which I think that's why that's important, as I think you highlighted, there's more Zionist Christians in the world than there are Zionist Jews.
	So it's an interesting way to frame that.
	Many more.
	Exactly.
	So again, that kind of makes my point.
	And I would argue that you can see that it's not just about Jewish as opposed to Zionism.
	But my point would be that, or what got me into that kind of conversation was really just being objective and asking questions.
	And as always, the thing that you're not supposed to say or talk about always interests me, right?
	That's from the very beginning.
	I think most of us in this field, that's where we end up kind of gravitating towards like, why am I not supposed to talk?
	Why is that being, you know, and what you dive into it?
	And in my research and experience, it came back to that ultimate conclusion, right?
	So I think it's not even about being, you know, red-pilled on the conversation, which is kind of like where I just had this epiphany moment.
	It took a long, I mean, we're still, I think I'm still going through my process of evolving my understanding and learning more.
	I think that's how you have to always think about it.
	It's, it's never a one-stop situation.
	You'll be open to changing your mind when something new comes around.
	Question everything.
	I very clearly saw that there was a problem here.
	Like an undeniable problem that you can recognize in all the things that people are now finally finding the courage to highlight.
	The dual citizen conversation, which is not about racism.
	It's about an obvious problem of a foreign government influencing our politicians.
	You know, all of these things.
	And each one you look at, if you're being objective, highlights individually its own problem.
	And the more you realize that each one of these problems are not only being ignored, they're in fact telling you that it's not a problem, that it's okay in this unique situation.
	And the more you see those, it becomes impossible to hide this conversation, you know?
	So I'm glad people are finding courage to stop.
	But we were talking about these things before it was so acceptable as it is after October 7th and recently with like Elon buying X. What do you think about Elon?
	He just libs of TikTok, the Habodonik princess, says, let this sink in.
	And, you know, his bromance with Netanyahu and his relationship with Ben Shapiro.
	What do you think about Elon?
	I mean, I think he's a grifter.
	I don't believe him at all.
	I mean, I've said this from day one.
	I mean, I don't think the guy is, I mean, it's kind of ridiculous that we're in a situation where you have people, you know, largely the right side of this conversation that is endorsing this person as some kind of a savior of free speech while he's literally censoring people on his platform.
	Now, I mean, look, you can support limited speech, and I've said this from day one, but you can't pretend it's fighting for free speech when you're literally not endorsing free speech.
	They even themselves have, they've said that it's about what's the game they play, you know, legal or awful, but lawful, you know, let's reach, not speech.
	It's a game.
	As Sam Husseini highlighted, they're both one and the same.
	If you look back to the understanding of what free speech truly means, one of them is about reach and the controlling of that concept.
	You can't just say, you can say what you want in this corner where nobody can see you.
	You know, it's, it's a manipulation.
	And I think your point about the obvious overlap with Netanyahu, it's just, it's, it's manipulative.
	And you could, I guess you could argue that he's being manipulated himself, but I think it's quite nobody, what I said just early on the show in the last couple of days was at this point, sort of like with the COVID situation, after eight months of self-evident genocide, the only people that are truly standing by this and acting like it's not happening are the worst of society.
	I mean, I'll stand by that forever.
	I mean, it's just shocking.
	But to go over like the COVID angle of it all, what I was kind of getting at is why in the world you've got Republicans that just spent the whole time screaming, rightly so, about the great reset, about nanotech.
	I mean, all these overlaps, the technocracy.
	And then just because the guy you're told is on your side steps in, he goes, no, but I'm going to do the good AI.
	It's like, we can't be this simple.
	You know, we can't just fall right in because the right guy backs it up.
	I mean, he's overlapped with every angle of the great reset, every angle.
	Tesla was working on micro RNA factories during this for the shots.
	I just don't get how like the people that support Trump, but yet don't care to acknowledge that he continued to support the shot, even though all of his audience doesn't support that.
	It's just this is all these like anti-Zionist Christians mostly that are supporting Trump, knowing that he's going to be seriously saying he's going to be such a Zionist kid.
	Have you seen the people that he's hinting are going to be in his cabinet?
	I have seen a couple of them.
	I'm trying to hold back until I see what actually happens.
	But yeah, there's like I've heard examples, some references of, yeah, like people like Nikki or Stefanik or Matt.
	I think some of them are like kind of like marshalling to try to get the lead for it all.
	Yeah, is to scream pro-Israel stuff, which is alarming.
	It's great.
	What do you think?
	Who do you think is going to be the right answer?
	Well, who he's saying is like, he's throwing names out there like Pompeo, Tom Cotton, Nikki Haley.
	Even after she ran against him and said all types of awful things about him, he's still bringing her back into the fold.
	Pence is going to be.
	He's tapping into some zombie neocon ideology.
	Like what they're putting forward is like right out of like 2001 before.
	It's just embarrassing.
	I don't even, who believes in these people?
	I don't understand it.
	I did my last show on it.
	It's all people around Trump at his last, his last term and his next term that are all closely connected to John Hagee, which all the top Republicans are basically.
	Ted Cruz, DeSantez, Lindsey Graham, Pompeo, Trump, Nikki Haley, like all of them.
	Mike Johnson, too, the Speaker of the House who Trump's been backing as well.
	It's just all of them are associated with John Hagee and the biggest Israel worshipers in America, basically.
	Yeah.
	And what's frustrating, too, is that you've got these, like most of the people that he's highlighting here are the people that the, you know, the patriots, just to differentiate, the ones that pretend they see through the two-party illusion, but yet still vote for Republicans, which I'm still glad that they're making that differentiation, but got to pull out completely, is that they would call most of these people rhinos, you know, but yet then they still argue they're going to vote for Trump.
	It's just like if you can't, if the two-party illusion makes people feel justified in voting against their interests as long as they feel that they're still aligned with the party.
	This is why the two-party illusion is such a manipulation is that you're constantly like the lesser two evils.
	It's all the same thing.
	We should be voting based on if you believe that actually translate to the outcome, which I don't, which we could talk about if you want, but should be voting for what you believe actually represents your interest.
	And if Trump or the rest of them don't, then you should be abstaining or picking somebody that does.
	You know, it's infuriating to me.
	So do you think Trump's going to win?
	I do.
	I feel like he's already the selection.
	Be selected.
	Yeah.
	I think he already is selected as well.
	I really do.
	I mean, I think I've been saying that, you know, not that, I mean, I floated the idea a while ago that I thought it was more of a likely situation.
	But at this point now, I think I just said it for the first time, maybe a month ago.
	It seems most likely based on all the different signals that he's just going to be the one they pick.
	But I know a lot of people out there in all our audiences just still think that their vote is part, you know, is what picks these people, which I certainly could be wrong.
	But there's just of all things we talk about, there's so much evidence that shows you that from every angle, there's 45 different levers that are being used to manipulate these outcomes if they even actually translate.
	I always highlight the, I think it's Represent.us did that study or Princeton did the study, but they made the whole focus on it that literally showed that, one, we're not a democracy, which why I would even want that in the first place, but we're an oligarchy.
	And they prove based on their own statistical breakdown that I think the quote they used was the average voter has a near zero, a there's one other thing, a near zero statistically insignificant effect on policy, which means the election as well.
	You know, these are this is broken down from the group.
	I mean, not that we have to trust any of these groups, but the reality is that we do not have the effect on the outcome.
	The lobbyists do.
	And they proved this.
	They showed that if the lobbyists wanted to, even if every person in this country wanted one thing, they could make it come down to zero possibility.
	How do we call that democracy or any kind of representative government?
	It's not.
	And, you know, APAC is obviously one of the biggest representatives in that whole dynamic and they're working for Israel alone.
	Even if the voting machines are real and people's vote actually matter, it's still a completely rigged system, just with the two parties, just with the way the media works, just with the way the whole system is set up.
	It's great.
	Like, look at our options this year.
	It's three ultra-Zionists.
	And this is like, you know, so much of America doesn't want to go along with what Israel's doing, but our three options all do.
	Like, it's a failed system right there.
	100% agree.
	I mean, how do you not know?
	I mean, this is what I was saying more so about like kind of like what I see is at least largely the organic point.
	Most of these people disagree on almost everything else.
	Same with like the COVID point, right?
	As you got this moment where you recognized that it wasn't as partisan as they really wanted you to think.
	It suddenly started becoming much bigger than that.
	It's the same thing here, is you've got the vast majority, undeniably, I think the world, but in the United States, that at the very least want them to stop what they're doing in Gaza.
	Many of them may still think that Israel and the right to defend themselves and all these ridiculous statements, even though as an occupier, you don't, that they keep pushing that, but they want them to.
	And yet, nonetheless, we get forced with three people that want to, you know, would support Israel no matter what.
	You know, I just don't know why the average person can't pick up on that, but maybe they do.
	Maybe this is all a wag the dog situation anyway, right?
	The largest voting block in every election are people that don't partake in the election.
	It's interesting.
	And the largest religion in huge voting bloc is the Christian Zionists.
	So Trump's going to get back in.
	Kushner and all the Zionists are going to be there.
	What do you think is going to play out with Palestine and with Iran and Russia and China?
	Because if you've been watching my videos, we've got so many videos, so many clips of rabbis and Christian Zionists saying that Iran, Russia, and China versus the West, America, Europe, NATO, Edom, they call us, has to be destroyed.
	This is their end times war.
	What do you think the likelihood of that's going to be when Trump gets back in?
	Some type of escalation with Iran that leads to Russia and China coming in.
	You know, see, I'm just, I'm always trying to be so careful not to like fear monger, but it's just like my point in saying that is that I like want to check myself from being like, it seems like it's very possible because it really does feel that way.
	And it's just alarming to see how clearly, you know, the path for that is unmistakably laid out, right?
	So if Trump gets in with all the people we're talking about who are just aggressively pro-Israel, and I think even more so than the rest of them, which we'll see if he does put back into power, that you'll clearly see them put all of their support, which again, I don't think is any different than Biden right now.
	I mean, as much as the narrative spun around, the support has been unequivocal.
	It's very clear.
	And so I think it's going to continue.
	The question then becomes: do they drive it to a point?
	Are they willing to create manufacture, even using real things like false flags, but real action, real murder, real release of some passage?
	I don't know, to drive people to do what they want.
	That's the worry I have because that's not completely outside their own possibility.
	That's what they're known for historically.
	But my point would be that it comes down to whether they decide to take that kind of action, you know, bomb, let a nuke out somewhere and blame it on Iran, like really crazy stuff to be able to push this back in the direction they want, or Trump, who is an opportunist, a profiteer.
	I mean, we've seen this, decides at some level to go, well, Israel doesn't have the influence they once did, and we're going to side with the people because that gives me the most power.
	You know, I just, it depends on whether you think Trump is dedicated to the Zionist cause or he just does this like we talked about to gain power.
	And if he only does it to gain power, then you could make an argument that if enough people, which is already seemingly happening, highlight that, you know, around the world, but U.S. entirely, that we, or specifically, that we don't want this to continue and sees enough benefit in doing so, and there's not enough kickback from Israel because of the diminishing influence, he could side with that.
	I mean, that wouldn't surprise me.
	But my point is that I've never seen it more likely to your question that that kind of thing could happen, which really does worry me quite a bit.
	And even more so, I would add more point about the average, the random person within it all, right?
	Like what happens if somebody, not even his administration, but some second-rung person in Israel who's blindly adhering to the Zionist understand belief that the prophecies decides to launch some kind of weapon.
	You can't take that back.
	And then I think they would be bound to support them.
	Or they just keep killing more Palestinian kids so that Hezbollah responds and that sucks America.
	And it could be something like that.
	It would probably be more indirect than them just like launching the first nuke.
	But, you know, I agree with you actually on Trump.
	I've been saying the same thing about Trump for years, that they, even though he's such a big Zionist supporter, they still frame him as anti-Semitic and like the Hitler of the Fourth Reich of America, basically, and Christian nationalism, Christian anti-Semitism, the figurehead of all of that.
	But that could be the narrative, actually, that Trump abandons Israel or he betrayed Israel and he's some, he's the new Hitler now leading America when he gets back in.
	Because they want to frame America with an anti-Semitic leader and as anti-Semitic before like the destruction in the war, that that's going to be the narrative.
	That's fascinating.
	I mean, isn't that one of the things we talked about that some of the people believe that he will be the one that sort of ushers that in?
	You could read that both ways.
	Yeah, they see him as messianic for sure.
	Yeah, but I mean, but maybe that or maybe as the person who plays the other side of that and still ushers that in, you know, like it's, that's very interesting.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it's hard to see which way it goes, but I think it's very likely.
	I think that Trump is more interested in his own, his own perception and his own clout than he is in anything else.
	So you can see how that could be manipulated, I think, but it's definitely if that were true, though, I feel like he would have came out harder against the vaccine because all of his supporters are against the vaccine and he's still stood strong that he's the king of the vaccine and he did a great thing and it's saving people from cancer.
	And still today, he's still defending it and showing it.
	So I don't think if it were all just about his ego and his support from his loyal base, I feel like he would have came out hard against that.
	Yeah, it's a good point.
	It's a good point.
	But I think that it depends on what clout you think he's interested in, right?
	I think that people like that want to be patted on the head by what they see as the power structure.
	Right.
	You know, and that's what they've done.
	Oh, yep, you did it.
	I mean, they haven't in a way because the people that I think aren't really the ones in charge, the people in Congress are the ones that were like, it's Trump's vaccine.
	You're bad.
	But then when you get to the real bigger discussions, they're the ones that are agreeing that this thing has saved lives.
	They're not saying Trump did it, but they're saying that.
	And then he comes around and says, look at all the lives we saved.
	And I think he likes feeling like he's at least kind of siled up next to what the bigger structure is.
	I don't Know, but you may be right.
	Maybe there's more to it.
	It wouldn't surprise me either.
	But just trying to kind of read what he's done in the past.
	And I think clearly his hubris drives a lot of what he does, you know?
	So it's hard to tell.
	Yeah.
	What do you think about the possibility?
	One of my other theories is that him and Kushner are going to get back in and they're going to talk, at least there's going to be talk of some type of peace deal with the West Bank.
	Because I think there was a lot of foreshadowing of that going on with Trump taking shots at Netanyahu about not wanting peace.
	And about he called Abbas, the leader of Palestine, like a father figure that did want peace, basically.
	And now we got these couple of countries recognizing the state of Palestine.
	So don't you think that would be like the only thing to make up for their total destruction of Gaza and like and takeover.
	I feel like they're going to definitely occupy and take over Gaza like forever.
	That's what they want.
	That's what the religious people in the government of Israel want for sure is they think it's their promised land.
	Oh, absolutely.
	That leader, I forget her name off the top of my head.
	She's the one that's been like the focal point.
	I forget her name, but she's the one that's been really doing the rounds.
	And she unabashedly were taking this.
	This is ours.
	And even made the point to just highlight the greater Israel side of it.
	We're going to take parts of Syria, parts of Jordan.
	Like just right on the surface, openly telling everybody that's the plan.
	As you know, I think that Gavir and the rest of them had their conferences where they have like allotted different areas for what they're going to do.
	It's totally on the surface.
	They're going to take all of Gaza.
	But you make a good point, though, is that, you know, is could the pretend, because that's really what it would be, kind of a you know, a deal with just the West Bank, with a group, by the way.
	Let's not forget the Palestinian Authority, at least in my opinion, is not on the side of Palestine.
	And it's, I mean, Robert Inlikash has written articles like this for T-Lab, highlighting at the very least today, even most Palestinians see them as sort of a muscle for Israel against their interests.
	A lot of people I talked to when I was there in 2018 actually were wondering that, like, they're thinking that he's controlled opposition, their leadership's controlled opposition.
	At the very least, I think he's feckless, right?
	He's bowed to power and he's allowed the use of his or you know, his police forces to like check Palestinians.
	You know, in the case, the whole thing doesn't seem honest, but you could argue that that might win some people over.
	You know, hey, we got some kind of a peace deal, you know, like allowing, but the point would be that it's not a real peace deal if you're pretending that giving the West Bank its autonomy is still allowing Israel to control what they do and pretending they can have some kind of final say over everything that goes on.
	It's it's just you're still a little bit better than the screw job that Netanyahu and Kushner and I think Friedman was the other guy tried to put together a couple years ago with this peace deal.
	But there's just been so much discussion of Trump and world peace and saving us from World War III and him talking about peace deals starting with the Soviet Union decades ago and then now with Palestine and in Kushner, so much marketing and like bolstering of Kushner is like that he's going to make the deal of the century.
	He's a genius.
	He's still being paraded on all the big platforms promoting his peace deals.
	Right.
	And remember the supposed deal, which I think Robert called the steal of the century was, I mean, it was ridiculous.
	It was basically enshrining the exact same circumstances with different names.
	Like it was just insulting to our intelligence, you know, and that's while allowing the Golden Heights to remain occupied, Jerusalem, like the whole, it was just all a big manipulation, you know?
	But I think the larger point is important because what they're really desperate to do now is create the, at least it's like the illusion that they have allowed something.
	I mean, let's also realize that the leadership across the board of the government of Israel is like explicit.
	Like we will never allow a two-state solution, despite the fact that 30 seconds ago, they were all pretending that's what they wanted.
	You know, it's just this constant back and forth of lies.
	But, you know, Trump coming in could utilize something like that.
	But I think that ultimately it wouldn't work if I had to.
	I mean, I don't think it would work either.
	It would be like temporary and then it would fall apart and then like all hell would break loose.
	And also the reason I think that is because that's what all these Christian Zionists believe.
	There's going to be some type of a peace deal and a covenant of the many, and then America will be dividing Israel.
	So we'll be cursed by God for negotiating peace in Palestine.
	We'll be scapegoated and blamed for it, according to the narrative of dividing the Holy Land, is how they view it.
	Yeah, I think from both sides, then clearly it seems like even from, you know, that's what I was saying earlier, actually, that there's a side of this IDF members that are literally posting videos saying that, you know, we will not allow for you to allow like the PA or any of them to rule this area because it's ours now.
	Like, and so it's this interesting division.
	So you're right.
	I mean, clearly that there's a level of that within Israel itself.
	It would be wildly unpopular to have a peace deal with the Palestinians with a large segment of Israel.
	Right.
	But I would even make it bigger, like in a, you know, just take the United States, for example.
	I just, I don't even think that would work because I don't think that you can argue that any of that would be real without the involvement of the Gaza territory, but also all of the Palestinians, the diaspora, and the ones that they've pushed out of the area even just now.
	You know, like this is the problem is that for them is that the going full genocide October 7th, it destroyed every chance they might have had of winning people over.
	I've said this many times.
	If they went to the UN right when that happened and made all these arguments that they violated this, they broke that, you know, they would even at the UN where they are well aware of the right of armed resistance for occupied territory under Fort Geneva Convention, they probably still would have let that fly because they would have been terrified to say you're wrong while they're claiming they just got attacked, right?
	And so they didn't, though.
	They went immediately to action, committed genocide for eight months straight.
	And so people just won't buy that.
	There's no way you can pull back on this and say, no, we don't care about all those people now.
	It's just the West Bank.
	It's just not going to fly.
	So they've shot themselves in both feet.
	I just don't see how they come out of this.
	You don't see how they come out of it.
	That's what I'm thinking too.
	Like, how could they ever come out of this?
	That's what I'm thinking.
	One of the only things is some type of hyped up peace deal with the West Bank.
	That's going to be their saving grace, I think.
	I argue the only thing, which is why back to your other point, which really worries me, would be something monumental, something gigantic that was, but I would say that even then, let's say like a huge attack on America, they'll be like, see, we told you so.
	You should have backed us more.
	Look at what we're up against, something like that, huh?
	Yes, exactly.
	And then even farther, like say, like framing it as literally Hamas, attack the United States.
	Like you would, that would change.
	Sleeper cells.
	It'll probably be that too.
	Yeah, right.
	That would immediately change the conversation for the power structure.
	I still argue for the majority of people, it probably wouldn't change what they've learned over the last eight months.
	But it would suddenly sway the momentum, you know, and whether they would one after another do events and drive us into some new 9-11 scenario.
	Like that, I could see that possibly working.
	They've been doing like veiled threats about that.
	Like, oh, you better back us or this is going to happen to you, too.
	You know, they're coming for you next.
	They always try to frame it too, that like the Muslims just really hate America and just Israel is just little America and they're closer.
	So they're defending us actually from the Muslims.
	And they only hate Israel because they hate the West.
	They invert it all.
	It's ridiculous.
	It is.
	And let's not forget, by the way, that in right at the height, I forget what exact week or month that I think it was anyway, the height of that whole border conversation, right?
	Where they were, you know, the barbed wire and they were, you know, there was like this weird buildup on this one area.
	And then a bunch of other, even right-wing accounts proved that right down the way, there's like four gates that were swinging open and nobody even cared about it.
	Right.
	So it's like there was, it was clearly some kind of orchestrated hype around this.
	Not to say that there's not issues on the border or that there's not weaponized migration.
	I think that's a fact, but it's really interesting.
	But so what's interesting about this is that at that moment, you saw a hype all of a sudden about somebody that came through the border that was saying, you will remember me.
	Remember that?
	And the right-wing accounts were like, I think I can bring up my article about it.
	And they said, oh, this is an Azerbaijani terrorist.
	And he could prove that this is like basically trying to, and tie it back to Palestine right there, saying this is a guy from Palestine and he's coming to the border and this is Hamas.
	What the research showed, and which is why I think this got dropped, is within the next week, I was able to prove because of the work of others that this was actually a person from Jordan who was already arrested before recruiting for Mossad.
	And interestingly, the moment that became a focal point, the right-wing accounts that were so up in arms just stopped talking about it.
	Of course.
	You know what I mean?
	It's like, so I missed that.
	It's much more of a problem.
	You're going to have to link that in the comments or the description below once this is posted.
	I want to look into that more.
	I wasn't aware of that.
	A guy from Jordan recruiting for Mossad, recruiting Muslims, probably too, right?
	Right.
	That's typically how that works.
	Let me see if I can find it.
	You're going to do it right now.
	Later on, once it's posted, we're streaming live on Rumble and Odyssey and X right now.
	We got a super chat in from Cornpop the Bad Dude.
	He says, fitting topic and guests.
	So wanted to share an animated video I made.
	Would love everyone's input.
	Five minutes to play at the end if you don't want to mess with the flow.
	Okay, I'll take a look at that because I only have Ryan for a short amount of time, only for about 15 more minutes.
	Another one from Archie says, Caesar was more accountable than our Democratic leaders.
	It's the Balkanization of the USA a necessary destiny, or can Baron Trump become the next Caesar?
	Carl Benjamin suggests the possibility about Baron.
	Any thoughts on Baron Trump?
	They're hyping him as some type of like future leader, right?
	Really?
	I haven't seen that.
	He's the young one, right?
	Yeah.
	How interesting.
	Yeah, he's never even spoken.
	It's so funny.
	Like, why does it even make sense?
	What are we in some kind of royal bloodline scenario, which is actually more to that than people realize?
	That's what they want.
	They want a Trump dynasty with Ivanka and all the other sons.
	Strange.
	You've never seen that?
	Like, they wear shirts with like 2024, 2028, 2032.
	Like, and it's all Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.
	They want a new emperor dynasty.
	That's so alarming.
	It's ridiculous.
	So it's not letting me share this for some reason, but oh, no, that's the wrong one.
	Sorry.
	Well, it's a little off topic for today's stream.
	Anyway, I want to cover the Rafa stuff in the last 15 minutes, but I just wanted to look into that just, you know, for my own knowledge because it's something I guess.
	I'll include it for you.
	I'll put in the chat.
	It's important to remember, though, I think people should definitely know that this is a, you know, when it overlaps suddenly for Israel or Mossad, it's very interesting how the conversation drops, you know?
	Absolutely.
	They always do that.
	When a big event happens, they'll find out like who the shooter was or who was behind it.
	And if it doesn't fit their narrative, it's not talked about again.
	So, right.
	I know you've been covering the Rafa situation very closely.
	Like, you know, what are your thoughts on this?
	It's just atrocious videos coming out of this.
	They're just, they're not stopping.
	The whole world's telling them to stop.
	And in defiance, they say, no, they don't care if the whole world's against them.
	They don't care if everybody's going to hate them for this.
	They're going to do whatever they want.
	And it's terrible.
	I think there's a part of it first since you said that.
	That there is clearly an element.
	And this may even go back to allowing to some degree what happened October 7th.
	You know, the argument is, and we're actually remembering this being made from was an Israeli Jew who was making this argument about Zionism, which was that Zionism is desperate to create or maintain the dwindling perception that without Israel, every Jew would be unsafe, right?
	And so the way that that's done is, as we know, using the idea, like using, accusing people of anti-Semitism where it doesn't apply, right?
	Creating this like blowback scenario where you create this resentment towards what they're framing as what's behind it, the Jewish population, right?
	Even though it's a Zionist manipulation, in my opinion.
	And so what happens is you manufacture the resentment towards the group that you then use to point to and say, see, and largely, I don't think it's working as much as they're trying.
	I think most people up now, because of our work, have been like, no, it's Zionism, you know?
	But the point is that this, you could argue that just continuing to do this is causing a level of resentment towards whether people believe it's Zionism or Israel or Jewish people at large.
	Just all people are outraged about the fact that this is still happening.
	It's almost like they provoke that they have a way that they're because they've like positioned themselves as the eternal victims and always persecuted and hated for no reason, like they can like provoke people.
	And then when they respond, it's like, see, they hate us.
	See, everybody hates us.
	They want to destroy us.
	Is that kind of what you're getting at?
	Yeah.
	And it's very manufactured, right?
	I mean, and the argument that the person was making is that this is the Zionist organization who is using sort of the Judaism religion as some sort of human shield, if you will, right?
	It's clearly about trying to generate the belief, even within the minds of Jews.
	That's the important part.
	The average person who then believes that they are at risk, right?
	So they're the ones on these college campuses that are cowering in fear, thinking I'm a, and some of them really believe that.
	I don't mean the ones that are standing there going, I'm in danger, which clearly they're not, but there are some that act as if they would be.
	And they and they argue that the very thing that's theirs is danger because they told me it is.
	So I'm terrified, right?
	And so it creates this kind of artificial, but real in their minds in some cases, belief that it's this, as most of U.S. politicians have framed it as, this dark looming cloud of anti-Semitism, which is not even remotely what's actually happening.
	You know, so back to the Rafah point, you've got this overwhelming situation that nobody with integrity can argue is somehow justified.
	And so what it's there, I think this is a last-ditch effort in many of them to drive that kind of belief, but I don't think it's working.
	I think what people are seeing more than ever is that this is, whether you think it's Zionism or just naming it the Israeli government, which I think both are accurate, are government state-sanctioned actions.
	And they are murdering people in some kind of like childish stomp, like saying, oh, yeah, you want me to stop ICJ?
	Then we're just going to murder people.
	Like some childish response to what they're doing.
	And as you're showing, one of these images of a baby being headed.
	These people are burnt to a crisp.
	It's horrifying.
	And remember, it started the day, like it was two days ago.
	And the first one I saw was a direct bomb unmistakably of a tent, of a tent in the middle of all these tents of people.
	And on top of that, the lie they spun to argue this, to say that the rockets that were fired that were provably fired from within IDF areas that were controlled.
	Yes, from Rafah, but provably from an area that the IDF had two controlled areas and they were firing from those areas, like in between them.
	And this was confirmed.
	This is what Hamas said, but it's also confirmed from Robert, who writes for TLAV.
	And the point is that that was a justifiable act in any sense.
	But to argue you can then bomb back an entire control area where a Rafa that they're safe in, they're told, is obscene.
	But even more so, this is the worst part of it, man.
	They put out leaflets.
	They put out posts online that said, go to the area.
	It was 2371, the Almawasi area, and not months ago.
	We're talking days ago saying this is where you'll be safe from the immediately impending Rafa operation.
	2371.
	I posted about it.
	Then bomb that area within a day, right?
	So not because they immediately were like, oh, but we found Hamas there.
	They said, go there, then they bombed it, which is not even new.
	Harretz and New York Times did an investigation proving that they used the 2,000-pound bombs in the safe areas.
	You know what I mean?
	Just over and over.
	And so this is like the flower massacre.
	This is completely, in my opinion, this is a detestable act of torture of, you know, just playing with these human lives, using them as tools, and bombing them because you want to make a point.
	It's just horrifying to me, you know.
	And so look at what the fallout is.
	And this is, this has been the same way from 75 years, let's be honest, but since October 7th.
	When Israel first started bombing after October 6th, remember they told everybody to evacuate the Egyptian border and then they bombed that crossing.
	And they would say, okay, everybody can flee.
	Here's the path, flee.
	And then they were bombing the trucks of people fleeing.
	Yep.
	And Egypt said that too.
	That was stated by international community entities that were there that saw them bomb not only the crossing, but the way to it, like you're saying.
	But then, I mean, Egypt said the same thing.
	Egypt was like, they bombed that area.
	Then they bombed aid trucks that we were trying to send through.
	And this was all verified right in the beginning, but it's never stopped.
	You're right.
	The aid trucks.
	And then also they blow up the churches or the hospitals.
	And then they say, oh, we didn't do that.
	They always say we didn't do it.
	It was from a Hamas rocket.
	Or Tom Cotton, all the Zionists are on Twitter, like, I'm so sad.
	It's so terrible to see this.
	This is all Hamas's fault every time they have our hostages.
	I saw the numbers.
	Israel has had thousands of hostages of Palestinians for years, for decades.
	Would that justify them going and just carpet bombing and indiscriminate, turning all of Tel Aviv to rubble?
	Because that's the same logic and argument that they're using to justify what they're doing.
	Exactly.
	It's exactly the point.
	It's the exact same dynamic.
	But what's important to realize, like you highlighted, is that even the number that they admit to, which I know for a fact is more than that, is I think was last time I looked at it, was 300,000, 3,452.
	And these are not just arrested.
	These are administrative detainees.
	They've never been charged with a crime.
	Some of them are children.
	Kids, yeah, they're kids.
	There was a guy that was released 20 years, 20 years.
	He stayed in this prison without a charge in one of these Israeli detention centers.
	And we've seen what's happening to them post-October 7th and for a long time before that, being bound so tight with those zip ties that they have to amputate arms and legs, feeding them dry rice with nothing.
	I mean, it's just, this is torture.
	That's what this is.
	I mean, every angle of this, as I think people are becoming aware of, whether it's human shields or organ theft, are things that you can prove without a question that they are doing this.
	The neighbor procedure is their stated policy, and it's been addressed by all human rights groups.
	You can look to the United Nations, who say you're using human shields.
	They do it.
	Actually, I just caught, or somebody else caught that I shared on my show, another example of them using a human shield in Rafah.
	That's four or five of them I've seen just since October 7th.
	And I mean, like, flagrant.
	There's one where the guy was sitting in the middle of the street with a blindfold on, and they're like shooting over the top of him.
	It's just, it's post-moral army.
	They're the most moral army.
	Haven't you heard?
	So I've heard.
	Man.
	Look, here's the top Zionist propagandist on Twitter.
	Hanaya.
	What is it?
	Hananya Naftali.
	Look at this one.
	I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you, I will curse.
	Does your country stand with Israel?
	Nations rise or fall based on their treatment of the Jewish people.
	Wow.
	What a statement.
	Make your voice heard today.
	God chose Israel.
	That's the kind of statement that the average person is going to start to think, well, maybe there is this is the point.
	Like, maybe it is the Jewish problem.
	Like, that's what I think he's trying to manufacture right there.
	How do you make that statement and not realize that people are going to go, are you just are you literally saying here that whether you support the Jews is whether or not you are in power?
	Like, that's oh, they intentionally try to antagonize and provoke.
	They do the same thing with the hating on Jesus, and then that incites like, oh, you hate Jesus and you killed Jesus.
	And then that's the stupid anti-Semitism that they use to see, see, they hate us.
	These crazy people hate us for no reason.
	Same thing that they do.
	And important to point out that I think it's Hananya.
	I'm not sure.
	I'm also, every time I say that, I'm always so worried how to pronounce it.
	But he was the one, as we just highlighted.
	I believe it was the Al-Ali hospital.
	And it came out and they got bombed.
	And he was the one.
	And it was even fact-checked by Twitter.
	Like, they even had the screenshot that came up and showed it.
	He came out and said, no, that was a, I think it was the first one.
	He said, we bombed Hamas there.
	He posted that.
	No, Hamas was present.
	So he was clearly ahead because that's what they've done with every other hospital.
	Oh, well, it's just human shields.
	And then he deleted it.
	That's the one where he deleted the tweet.
	And the IDF came out and said, no, it was a Hamas or rather missile.
	Oh, yeah.
	No, that was a Hamas missile that misfired and hit it.
	And they've stood by that.
	But then, weirdly enough, every other hospital, well, Hamas was there.
	So clearly they're just confused on their narratives or the flower massacre.
	Elon Levy, the now fired representative, he came out and said, nobody shot.
	They didn't get shot.
	Like three things.
	It didn't happen.
	And then the IDF came out and acknowledged all those things happened.
	And so he deleted it.
	These people are just clowns, man.
	I mean, it's embarrassing.
	They're regurgitating our politicians too, like Mike Johnson.
	Did you see the way that they lied about the college protests with the girl that got stabbed by the flagpole?
	Yes.
	How they manufactured that total hoax.
	These people are just pathological liars.
	Dude, I went over like five or six other prominent examples like that where it was that bad.
	Yeah, like where you know brushed the fate.
	And the craziest part is she then went, as I'm sure your audience remembers, on national TV, like the day after, two days later, not a blemish on her face.
	And they're like, so you were stabbed in the eye.
	Like, did you start off with that?
	Look at her eyes.
	It like didn't even tear up.
	There wasn't even one, you know, not red at all, not a bruise around.
	Embarrassing.
	But then that gets repeated by Mike Johnson in Congress, and he goes, They're being stabbed in the eyes with flag poles.
	Like it's a flag.
	It's a little handheld, like toothpick, basically.
	But not even, it wasn't even, they wouldn't have a blunt end on that thing.
	They don't sell those blunt ends.
	In any case, it didn't actually happen is the point.
	Like it just, the flag was just waved in front of her.
	I doubt it even touched her face.
	It was just a lie to spin the whole thing out.
	But there's so many of those examples so far where like, and this is where it gets really interesting because obviously they're going to attack you as an anti-Semite if you dare to argue that one of these hate crimes was manufactured.
	And I would never argue that all of them are manufactured.
	Of course, racism exists.
	I guarantee there are people that are going after Jewish people just to go after Jewish people.
	My point is that you can prove in almost an overwhelming majority a lot that show that they got caught faking these things.
	And this has happened during this since October 7th, where police come out.
	Even one in Congress where that maniac Stefanik is like shaking as she tries to attack everybody for anti-Semitism.
	And they go, that didn't happen.
	My investigation showed that wasn't even real.
	Which one was that?
	Which one was that?
	I have to find the clip for you, but there are so many of them.
	But it was one where she was claiming, oh, I remember it was the one where she says they were marching through the halls saying, kill all the Jews or something like that.
	And the cop was like, that's not real.
	That didn't happen.
	We saw no proof of that.
	That's right.
	I forgot about that one.
	This is how they create the false narrative, too.
	You know, the Wikipedia pages are made, the headlines are engraved in stone, and the politicians all start repeating it.
	They all start, they all cite this fraudulent source, like the 40 beheaded babies, and just gets repeated over and over again.
	There are people still saying that.
	There are people that are still pushing the idea that there was a baby in an oven.
	All of these have been debunked even by Haretz.
	And even more so, some of the Zaka members, IDF members that were there after them, they're like, that didn't happen.
	It just shows you there's a mixed bag happening.
	There's people that are clearly invested in lying no matter what for the Zionist agenda.
	And then there's some of them that I think are just kind of there.
	They don't even realize.
	I don't know.
	And if you question their lies, it's anti-Semitic.
	You're not even allowed to question them.
	25 in from White Falcon.
	Glad you caught this one, White Falcon.
	Appreciate this.
	He says, she says, I don't know who it is.
	Why Falcon says, do you guys hear that 50 Israelis from the Nova Festival committed suicide and tens of them were put into force hospitalization?
	If they are willing to kill and imprison their own to prevent the truth, they will do anything.
	I did hear about that.
	Lots of suicides with survivors.
	Isn't that interesting?
	I didn't hear the suicide part, but let me see.
	I have this.
	Here, check this out.
	I have, oh, I guess I can't.
	I can text or email you.
	You can share screen with Skype if you want to.
	Let me see.
	I just, let me just try real quick enough to give you a little bit of a picture.
	The bottom right-hand side.
	Oh, you're already sharing, it looks like.
	Am I?
	I see your screen, but nothing's coming up, so it's not working.
	You got a Mac.
	This happens with Macs.
	All I see is your desktop.
	Whatever you have up, I don't see anything up.
	Huh?
	And it's not coming through the NDI either.
	So yeah, I just have to allow it, but I can send it to you if you want.
	The point is, I have the article right here.
	It's Music Festival Massacre Survivors Involuntarily Committed Due to Mental Breakdowns.
	Yeah, right.
	And so my point was, this is at the time when a lot of them were coming out and going, you know, that's not what actually happened, or they shot at my family, you know, like very clearly.
	And so I didn't hear the suicide part of it, but this is this was or they're covering up that they that didn't Israel show up with helicopters, Apache helicopters, and like they're the ones that were blowing up and lighting the cars on fire.
	That has been confirmed by more sources than any part of this entire story.
	Like that's been confirmed by the security heads of the kibbutzpa area, the worst hit area.
	That's been confirmed by helicopter pilots, tank drivers, IDF members that were on the ground, family members that were, I think it was Yasmin Porat is the most prominent.
	She's an Israeli Jew who was there, who was in the houses they were firing, was able to get out, and then was like, there are my family, people, you know, there are Israelis in there.
	And then they opened fire and killed everybody in the building.
	It's just crazy how many examples there are.
	It's called something too, right?
	Their policy about killing people so they don't Hannibal directive, right?
	Yeah.
	And that's a public policy.
	That comes from a historic example where a, I believe it was a high-ranking individual was taken and they were forced to exchange a whole lot of prisoners to get that person back.
	And so they set the doctor and they said, well, okay, next time this happens, they argue it's better for them and all of society to kill that person and the captor to avoid that fallout.
	And now they're killing their own people.
	I mean, it's even a colonel on the record called what happened on October 7th a mass Hannibal.
	That was his quote.
	Wow.
	Crazy.
	Dude, this is so Twilight Zone, everything that's happening and what they're able to get away with and how our largely Christian Zionist politicians are just so enabling all of this.
	It's incredible, man.
	It's incredible.
	I sent that link in the chat there.
	You can bring it up if you want, but it's easy to look up.
	Just type in involuntarily committed from October 7th.
	Yeah, there you go.
	Involuntarily committed due to mental breakouts.
	Doesn't sound like a mental breakdown to me.
	That sounds like re-education.
	They're going to go get their brain zapped or something and hypnotized or threatened.
	I agree.
	I mean, I don't know how you make sense of this.
	So it's for their benefit.
	They finally come out of incarceration.
	You're like, get back in the jail cell for your benefit.
	You know, just something very, very dark is going on over there.
	And I think that's what everyone's beginning to see.
	You know, and this, which also remember, this means that not every person there is involved or allowing it.
	You know, there's plenty.
	There are at least enough people I think worth mentioning that disagree with what's happening, even if it's only because they think their family members are at risk because of the bombing.
	There's a level of them that don't want this to happen to Gaza.
	And I agree.
	It's a smaller portion.
	Wasn't there one poll where it was like 90 or high 80% of Israelis thought that they weren't responding to Gaza with enough force?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	And I saw the poll too.
	I don't put much stock in polls, but I would argue I agree with that.
	I think Abby Martin's work in the past where she literally just walked around talking to the average Jewish population.
	The vast majority of them have been trained from birth to think these people are subhuman.
	It's very clear.
	I make the same point about the United States.
	Like you could make this only about Judaism or even Israel in particular, which there's fair examples to make, but I simply argue we have to look around to see the way governments propagandize their people.
	The United States government has been propagandizing Americans to be pro-war their entire lives.
	And that's why you get this huge portion of the world that thinks we're fighting for freedom.
	It's not the same thing, but it's the same kind of manipulation.
	But I'll be the first to tell you that this is clear.
	It's alarming to me how many people in that country, both Jew and non-Jew that are Israeli, are just a lot of ways completely taken by the idea that these people are out to get them.
	It's the same thing we were sold.
	They hate your freedom.
	They believe that these Muslim people are bad.
	It's right out of what you get from somebody ridiculous like Laura Loomer, in my opinion.
	It frames it as their, it's all of Islam.
	It's the entire concept that nobody in this is peaceful.
	Everybody there wants to kill you and steal from you.
	And it's just this inherently bigoted, racist perspective that's not based in reality.
	It's based on this broad-stroking understanding.
	And that's why I make the same point about Jewish people on the other side of that.
	I think nuance is important in this conversation.
	Right.
	Well, it's never smart to speak in absolutes and to happen to have nuance.
	It's getting so bad they've even lost Pierce Morgan now.
	He sees the scenes from Rafa overnight.
	He said, I've defended Israel's right to defend itself after October 7th, but slaughtering so many innocent people as they cower in refugee camps is indefensible.
	Stop this now.
	122,000 likes.
	Yeah, how brave of you, Pierce Morgan.
	It only took you eight months.
	But you know what?
	That's the clip right there.
	I played that on my show.
	That's important.
	That's Francesca Albanese highlighting what is the static reality, which is that they do not have the right to self-defense as an as a belligerent occupier.
	It's just not how that works, right?
	So they can't play the game where Palestine's a state when they want to pretend they're defending themselves, but then at the same time, it's not because they don't want to give them any rights.
	It's always how the Israeli government operates.
	This is important.
	But I think what's crazy is Pierce Morgan's getting attacked from every angle because I think rightly so.
	Fence sitters are some of the worst in the conversation.
	You know, I think what we're talking about here is he is now acting like this is the one that crossed the line, not the flower massacre, not 30, 40, 50,000 people being, no, this is the one, because I don't know what line it is for him, but it's, he got attacked by Rabbi Shmuly, which that guy's just lost the respect of literally everybody in the conversation.
	His new latest anti-Semitism target, Rabbi Shmuly, who was it?
	It was somebody that's so Zionist.
	Oh, Ted Booker or Booker, the black politician from New Jersey.
	I think it was.
	Oh, right.
	Corey.
	Corey Booker.
	He's an ultra-fanatical Zionist, and that's his new target of who's supposedly anti-Semitic.
	He voted like, didn't vote something for Israel or something like that.
	He's losing it.
	His new target.
	They show you everything, right?
	I mean, like, how do you think that's going to work for you?
	To attack the few allies you have left because they're not Zionist enough.
	That seems like the right path.
	Schmoolie seems like another one that tries to antagonize and provoke and create hatred to hype up the victim status.
	That's more likely what that is to me.
	Because I mean, I don't think, who knows?
	People can be stupid enough to think that the only right move is to attack everybody.
	But I think it's more likely the reality.
	Yeah, that you're trying to drive that conversation.
	There's plenty of, as I'm sure you probably showed in the past, assault agents and people that have highlighted IDF agents that they use anti-Semitism to suppress.
	I don't think anybody could question that today.
	It's very clear.
	Here's one last thing I had set up.
	Netanyahu embracing his political ally who publicly explains why Israel must exterminate Palestinian babies and toddlers.
	That's an interesting one.
	God.
	And what he highlights there is that interestingly enough, Netanyahu came out right after this and called it a tragic mistake.
	Right?
	What is that?
	Very interesting.
	I honestly don't know.
	Like, my thought process was like either this is him trying to appease the Western audiences that he knew would not be okay with it, trying to, you know, they're trying to walk that knife's edge.
	I don't know.
	Maybe, maybe he is, you know, the idea that he's being controlled by the, or, you know, he's trapped by this kind of Zionist religious Zionism party, that that's somehow, I don't know.
	It doesn't really add up to me because if you're going to highlight that this was a problem, you either then go to the reality, you know, the opposite of the conversation and say we have to stop this.
	He's going to investigate it.
	Don't worry.
	Netanyahu's going to investigate the bombing.
	I'm sure.
	I'm sure he'll get to the bottom of it in no time.
	It looked too bad.
	They couldn't have any other, couldn't come up with any other excuse or lie.
	So they went with, oh, oops, we'll look into it.
	We'll handle it.
	You're probably exactly right.
	But, you know, the investigative thing already fell on his face because I already saw one of the massage, or whether I think it was an investigatory body from Israel spoke up on the podium and basically said, well, this is tragic, tragic things happen in war.
	You know, it's over.
	Like, that's their investigation.
	That's what always seems to happen.
	And then Matt Miller will stand up and pretend like they're in some months-long investigation while they've already claimed that it's been over for a month.
	You know, it's pathetic what's happening.
	All right.
	No, we're at the time that you had for us today.
	You know, we kind of glossed over the Stripe thing because everybody's, I think, become a little numb to the censorship.
	Although a little bit with X, people feel like it's kind of turned around.
	But we've been dealing with getting banned from Patreon, PayPal, all of these.
	But to lose another big one, Stripe, which is like one of the main ones, if you already lost PayPal, trying to work with different websites and raise any money, get any funds.
	I see people in the comments go, just use Bitcoin.
	Like most people don't use Bitcoin.
	Not enough people donate in Bitcoin to keep an operation up.
	So.
	Well, what I say to that really quickly is that, you know, first of all, I have been for a decade.
	So the people, you know, that always frustrates me that the response, just use what I think we're like, well, we already have been.
	We have been for a long time.
	My point is not to highlight that I'm like, you know, this, it's just simply to continue to highlight for people that this is an unjust system, that people are being censored based on illegitimate reasons.
	And, you know, yes, I have Bitcoin.
	The address is posted on the website.
	It's posted for every video, as well as buy me a coffee and subscribe star, you know, a thousand different ways you can.
	But still, it's important to highlight that Stripe is doing this.
	You know, and I think as and Stripe is huge because a lot of websites, like, they only work with PayPal and Stripe.
	So like you're out of shit out of luck if you get banned from both of those.
	And I think that's part of the design.
	And as one of somebody I was talking with mentioned, they think this is sort of the canary in the coal mine, that this is like an attempt to see if this is going to fly and they're going to do this with plenty more.
	You know, see how much pushback they get.
	They gave you a really weird excuse, too.
	What is this?
	Crowdsourcing?
	Like, since when is crowdsourcing illegal?
	And how are you even crowdsourcing?
	You're not.
	I'm not.
	That's the point.
	So the main thing they said was that it was crowdfunding, which it's not because I'm clearly doing a show.
	We have services we provide.
	We've got a digital product, right?
	It's the show.
	It's the interviews.
	People are funding that or paying for it in their donations.
	But what's interesting to your point is that, you know, this was an arbitrary change that was done in April of 2024, last month, and it specifically lists off people like doing what we're doing with the show and funding it that way.
	So, first of all, how do you like randomly change this in a way that retroactively changes what people have been doing for years?
	They've built around this, even more so that AM Wake Up made the point today that Stripe literally built, they start when Buy Me a Coffee came out.
	They were like, use this.
	We're integrated with Buy Me a Coffee.
	What is that?
	A crowdfunding platform.
	So how the f are you talking about crowdfunding and not being allowed when you've integrated yourself with crowdfunding platforms?
	This feels very targeted and selective, in my opinion.
	And then the other part of it is when you read the actual prohibited list they put out, which is, you know, don't sell drugs, don't do X, Y, and Z, none of which applies to us.
	They made this in April basically say that you're not allowed to do this without producing a digital product, which obviously we do, right?
	So that's obviously one problem.
	But then as an example, they give putting out a free product.
	And so I'm like, well, hold on.
	You just said not a digital product, but the free, and so my point is simply that it's not crowdfunding, clearly, but we do put out a free product and we do allow people to support in that way.
	That's no different than most half the thing people use Stripe for.
	So I find this to be a very selective channel to go after content creators for in for uncomfortable speech.
	I think that's what it's really about.
	And I immediately.
	And it's not anti-Semitism, just to clarify people that may not know.
	It's not like you're up here, you know, like some people, like, you know, Jews, Jews, Jews every single day or every single video.
	It doesn't matter.
	They'll still de-platform you, even if you're just showing that it's not about hate or anti-Semitism at all.
	It's just any, you know, when did you get banned from YouTube, by the way?
	2020 before me?
	No, no.
	It was before that.
	I think should I have to look back at it?
	Was it COVID?
	Was it COVID started?
	I don't, God, it's even before that.
	It all blends together.
	I don't know if it was either, it might have even been around Israel because there was one of the, some of the first big strikes and suppression we got was around Israel and just, you know, the things that were at one point casually routine, storming al-Aqsa, lying about killing Palestinians.
	But I forget exactly.
	I can get back to you on that and let you know.
	I forget what exact date it was because it all blends together because we got censored and then we sort of got, we had the backup channel.
	So we kept up with that for a while.
	Then that one got censored.
	And so it all blends together.
	But yeah, it's unjust.
	And it's clearly, in my opinion, about objective nonpartisan coverage.
	I really think that's what it's ultimately about.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Oh, and you're not a Trump shield, too.
	So you're not really in either one of the kind of political camps.
	So it's like you're an actual alternative voice.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	And I think that's what scares them, to be quite honest.
	You know, people that are willing to objectively consider, you know, even conversations like we're having today, right?
	Like being able to stand back and consider things that are uncomfortable is what terrifies them.
	The two-party illusion keeps people comfortably trapped inside of these lies, you know, where you just see half the picture.
	That's what all these people are doing.
	You know, like, like, I don't know if you saw the stuff around like the Libertarian Convention.
	And, you know.
	Yeah, I wanted to mention that, but we're, we're over time, I said.
	But if you have any thoughts on that and you want to share, you're more than welcome to.
	I did watch some of that.
	What do you think?
	Well, my point was just specifically about the Trump overlap and the way that, you know, the larger thing in general, I mean, I have a hard time respecting.
	If you're a libertarian, if you're ultimately voting for one of the main candidates at this point, then I don't, it's the same point in my opinion as the people who are Republicans calling themselves patriots that yet still vote for a Republican.
	Like, you're still a Republican.
	You can call yourself something else, but it's still the same thing.
	I think it needs to be bigger about all of this and understanding that the whole system is the manipulation.
	But so I think that him being there and the whole game seemed really manipulative.
	And I think Trump basically is not genuine about any of what he's doing here.
	And then specifically about him and the interviews, it was just embarrassing to watch this.
	He either with RFK Jr. or with Trump, and it was like Tim Poole and that overlap.
	It was just, it was just arbitrary and ridiculous.
	And I think it's about trying to cement the idea that he's, that's where the whole WikiLeaks thing came from.
	I mentioned earlier, where he's like acting like he's going to pardon Julian Assange and all he really said was like, I'll think about it or we'll consider that.
	And they all go, oh my God, he's going to do what I'm going to do it.
	And it's just people want to hear what they want to hear.
	So I think all of it, I forgot where I was starting with that, actually, but I forgot what I brought up.
	Just the whole libertarian conference that they had or primary.
	Yeah.
	Well, in general, about the whole thing, I definitely think that a lot, any of these parties at this point, that are become that are, you know, there's a lot of good people in this community, I think, a lot of libertarians that want to see something that's different, but so many of them fall into the trap of the two-party illusion, just like anybody else.
	And I think that's the ultimate problem.
	And it's not just about libertarians, about anybody that believes you can play the same game and expect some different result.
	You know, there's no winning with a rigged game.
	I think that's what we have to realize.
	The biggest account that I've seen that's calling out all of this alternative media selling out and shilling for Elon or shilling for Trump, right?
	Or, you know, like Luke Radowski and Tim Poole are now invited to Mar-a-Lago and interviewing Trump and stuff.
	They're shills.
	These guys are media lapdogs now at this point when you're getting that type of access.
	But I love this post.
	David Icke says, religion the greatest form of mind control ever.
	And people are saying, like Russell Brand and others, you know, come back to this.
	Come back.
	This is the alternative.
	This is the solution.
	Now, I would say, by the way, that as your audience probably knows that I am a Christian and I believe that.
	But nonetheless, and, you know, and I'm objective enough, as we talked about on my show, to at least consider the possibility that I could be mistaken or wrong, but I have faith, I believe.
	My point is that you could argue that religion, my point was I agree with that statement.
	It is one of the greatest, if not the greatest form of mind control, but that doesn't have to mean that it's not you.
	There could be belief and you can have real sense of that as while also being manipulated.
	Like it could be one or the other.
	It could be both.
	My point is that you can obviously see how throughout history, there's been some of the greatest manipulators that have used religion to manipulate.
	We just got done talking about Zionism, right?
	But that doesn't have to be the same as that it doesn't exist or that it's not real.
	I think that's an important point, but that's up for each person to site out there.
	That's true.
	But I think I saw a point earlier.
	It said, not, what was it?
	So many of the big shills for Trump and for Israel, so many of them are all also shilling Jesus.
	That's a comment I saw.
	I think what we talked about on the last interview we had was, I don't know how an honest journalist can conflate religion with their work.
	That's why I never bring it up in my work because they're counterintuitive.
	That's why I thought it was important that we talked about that, that I'm willing to question these things because that's just what an objective person should do.
	And then I fall back on my faith.
	The point is that if you're conflating, like a Stu Peters, for example, your Christianity on the surface, whether you believe that's even what they believe or not, you're blending these things that one's based on faith, one's based on facts.
	And so suddenly, if your religion is driving your belief in something about journalism, well, then I can be like, well, then you're basing that on things you can't prove.
	That's exactly the case, right?
	That's crazy to me.
	Like these things I don't think are meant to be overlapped.
	I'm not saying you shouldn't.
	That's up to you.
	You can do what you want, free speech.
	I just have the right to highlight that I think that opens an there's a caveat there that I would wonder whether the wrong thing is driving your decision-making process when it comes to facts, not wrong in the sense that you shouldn't believe it.
	I think that's very important.
	And I think most objective people agree with that, whether they're Christian or Muslim or Jew or not.
	I mean, it's just a It's a bias that clouds a lot of people's judgment and definitely, you know, politically motivates people.
	Like, this is why we see the Zionist propagandist saying, oh, Genesis 12, you know, cursed us and you're going to be cursed because they do it because it works because that's how they garner so much support.
	All right, I'm going to let you go.
	I know we're way over time.
	Last super chat, Scalunda says, hey, Adam, here's 10 for the Viking Sword Fund.
	That's a great idea.
	Viking sword fund, it's going to go right here on my wall, big old Viking sword.
	That'll be epic, right?
	Right, Ryan?
	I got to have a Viking sword.
	And so tell everybody where they can find you.
	You know, what kind of shows you're doing.
	Give your plug, your pitch, and we'll wrap it up.
	Okay.
	Yeah, just, you know, thanks for having me on in general.
	I think these conversations are important.
	And the best place to find us is thelastamericanvagabond.com, unless that gets taken down tomorrow, too.
	We'll see.
	Seems like an up-in-the-air reality, but that's the best place to go to support the platform is directly to the website, thelastamericanvagabond.com, where you can find all of our ways to support us that are still available.
	And the rest of the platforms I'll endorse as well.
	But like I've always said, don't let these platforms, Rumble or anything else be the conduit between you and our information.
	Are you doing the same as me, like Rumble, Odyssey, BitShoot X, any others?
	Are you Rockfin still?
	Were you ever Rockfin?
	I mean, I'll use pretty much anything.
	Yeah, Rockfin, I post on VK.
	I post on, you know, I mean, a lot of them.
	I post on anything that's available for the most part, other than platforms that have censored in the past or deleted us in general.
	You know, so it's like pretty much, you know, except for the fact that I still do a YouTube, I do my pirate streams where I put it out on YouTube because I just think that's the mass.
	That's where the most asleep people are still functioning.
	And I think it's important to get that in front of them.
	That's the only place to find new people too, or ever get picked up in the algorithm and like, you know, reach a lot of people, like a significant number.
	We're not, we're not going to really move the bar with, you know, 20, 30,000 views on Rumble, you know, and it's stuck in an echo.
	I happen to agree.
	Yeah.
	Well, you have to, the point is you have to reach the people that, you know, excite a new conversation in people's minds they haven't thought about, open their mind to these things.
	And I will never again open a new account on YouTube.
	Even if they give my old account back, I probably won't even use it.
	Explain the pirate stream then because you were doing that for a few years.
	Like other people create accounts, give you the stream key or something, and then you do live streams.
	Still to this very day.
	Yeah.
	I do every single show.
	And that's why I point out that we get a strike.
	Hasn't happened a lot, weirdly enough, in the last couple of months, which is interesting to me.
	We always see these weird lulls, and I think they're allowing it for a certain reason.
	Maybe they want to highlight what we're doing is wrong in the future.
	I don't know.
	But over the last, I don't know, since 2020 or before, when we got censored, we started doing what I call pirate channels.
	And this is sort of like a nod to pirate radio or the matrix, if you will, for an older generation.
	Like the idea that we're broadcasting our pirate stream.
	And for those that remember, this comes from a classic concept of like literally broadcasting, whether from the ocean or something to kind of circumvent the blocking of certain music or content.
	And so this is what we do.
	I put the call out to people and I said, look, it's kind of a taboo, Not less more so less today because of me doing this, but if you want to reach out and give me your login information, I'll use your account to stream my show.
	But telling them full well, you're probably going to get your account censored, which means Google will censor you going forward.
	Like, Rick, think about that.
	And so it's people that support what I'm doing that will, in some cases, just start their own fake channels and send them my way.
	But we've been doing this for years now.
	And I mean, back in the day, it was every show, every show would be a new strike.
	And so then three shows on one channel and it's gone.
	And then a new one and a new one.
	I mean, I've gone through 50-plus channels and I've said that for a while, so it's probably more than that now.
	But it's crazy to think about.
	And I think that I was really hoping that that would catch on.
	I know that James Corbett started doing it.
	I know that Grand Theft World started doing it.
	It's so much work.
	It's so much work.
	I've been banned with five channels from YouTube, but like having to create a new email, new channel, get it set up, start from scratch.
	Then you're scared to share the link because you know your haters are going to go report you immediately.
	Yeah, but see, this is the point, though, is that you don't have to do that.
	You're so anybody out there that want, you'd be surprised the kind of people you would like.
	My first time I reached out, I'm thinking no one's going to do this.
	People aren't, they don't want to share.
	And I got like 50 emails like immediately of people like, you can use mine.
	And so it's interesting.
	And so then all that ends up needing to be done is adding your infra, logging in from a private window and using it.
	Pretty simple, actually.
	And so, yes, there's a little bit of extra work, but I think it's actually important to but it's hard too because if you're starting from scratch, because like you're starting from scratch on these shows, or do they are they big channels ever?
	No, yeah, see, that's a good point.
	It's for me, it's not even about getting the reach, it's just about having it present.
	It's one about saying, F you, YouTube, we're going to still be there, even though you don't want us to be, but also because it's there.
	And so people that feel the need to keep using YouTube, that want to share it, they can share it with their friends.
	Maybe they think it looks better.
	That's a good point.
	People don't even want to.
	A lot of people probably don't even want to open Odyssey or BitChute links.
	They go, I've never heard of that.
	Or, you know, it used to be, oh, that's on YouTube.
	I don't believe it.
	But now they go, oh, that's on BitChute.
	That's a neo-Nazi site or something, they'll say, you know, or Rumble.
	Oh, yeah, like, I believe Rumble.
	What is it?
	QAnon, Flat Earth.
	Like, that's, that's the perspective people have on that side.
	So that's a good point.
	Even though if there is only like, if you start a new YouTube channel and share a link, you'll get like maybe a couple hundred views, but you're getting 20,000 views on Rumble.
	So it's like, what's the point?
	But I've gotten, see, once I started doing this, here's what's interesting: is they people that follow, you know, very seriously, they know that I'm doing this.
	And some of them just really want to stay on YouTube.
	And that's up to them.
	I asked them not to, but they want to.
	And so my point is that there's a following.
	So I'll jump to a new channel and they'll have two, 3,000 views on YouTube on a brand new channel with two followers because they just know they go to my website, they look at the new YouTube link and they jump to that channel.
	And they could watch it on their apps on their phone easier or on their smart TV apps also.
	So that's convenience.
	I like where you're going with this.
	I think I do need to get back on YouTube again.
	It's just about pushing back against the power structure, man.
	I'm so tired of the control.
	And every time I get censored or stuff like this happens, it makes me even more dedicated to saying, screw you, you know, just pushing back.
	All right.
	Well, good talk.
	We have to do it again.
	I got to tell you, I really appreciate such a controversial thing.
	It's the third rail on the internet to talk about Christianity.
	So you having me on, inviting me on to talk about Jesus' deception really means a lot to me.
	Enjoyed the talk.
	Always a great back and forth news stream with you.
	Appreciate you for coming on.
	I hope the best for you after, especially after this latest Stripe thing.
	That could be a huge so many cuts, you know, death by a thousand cuts.
	And you've still been at it as I have, just thanks to the support and because of the hard work you do.
	So keep it up and we'll be in touch.
	I appreciate that, man.
	We'll see you next time.
	And your Twitter account for people to find you on Twitter?
	T-L-A-Vagabond.
	T-L-A, T-Lav, T-Lav.
	Yeah, Vagabond.
	I do that too.
	T-L-A-Vagabond is the only way you can say it.
	All right.
	That's easy.
	Okay.
	Thanks, everybody, for supporting.
	Love you all.
	Let us know what you think in the comments.
	Follow T-Lav, like, share, all the fun stuff.
	And I will see you guys again tomorrow with another show.
	Take care, guys.
	And thank you, Ryan.
	Toppers from the league.

▲