This is Prince Judge Matthew Green and welcome to the Camelot livestream channel such as it is.
We've had all kinds of really bizarre happenings this morning that don't usually happen.
We always have problems, but this one seems to be going over the top and I don't know why.
Now, hold on one second.
Remember we've had aggressive interference with getting out this message since the research article was hacked on your website.
Right.
Go ahead.
Yesterday, one hour before our scheduled interview, my computer was hacked at a deep level that required a full Windows reinstallation and reset.
We're getting a lot of signals that there are factions who do not want this message getting out about what really happened in Egypt and why it's important to everybody.
Absolutely.
Well, at this moment, I know that we are recording.
The only thing I can't do is see the chat.
And I just, I can't figure it out.
I've never had this problem before.
So these, we've had obstacles the whole way.
And that's my dog.
In the background.
He's dreaming.
So apparently he's being attacked in his dream.
So maybe we're under attack, as they say.
He's growling and doing all kinds of things.
Alright, so at this moment, Matthew, I'm going to call you Matthew just for simplicity's sake.
And if you could give yourself a background, we are recording, so regardless of what happens from here on out, I know that we're recording, I can see it's on livestream, and I also see it on my desktop here that the recording is going on, so we'll be able to re-upload this once it's done to YouTube, etc.
And I'm going to wake up my dog because he's growling in the background.
And he wakes up from his dream, whatever that was.
Okay.
He needs to be petted.
He needs a little comfort.
I have a huge golden retriever.
He's a handful.
Anyway, okay.
So back to this.
So we've got all kinds of photos and what I'd like you to do is give yourself an introduction.
And I do want to direct people's attention to the front page article.
It's been there quite a while.
A few days ago we found out that some of the links weren't working properly for some reason.
Okay, it looks like someone has come through on the chat.
In theory, yes.
It's a very strange situation here, what's been going on, so I'm not going to be guaranteeing anything at this moment, but we are live and that's the deal.
Okay, give yourself an introduction, please.
Okay.
Well, I have a very multi-layered background, and I didn't want to go on and on talking too much about myself, but I think the diversity of my background and professional experience is really connected to our topic today, which is about what really happened in Egypt and how that connects to geopolitics and human rights.
So I think it's worth just trying to buzz through a few of the areas of my background.
First, why I'm an international judge.
I'm an international judge licensed by the Foundation for International Justice and Arbitration, which actually is an organization of Middle East judges, like the Bar Association for Judges of the Middle East.
Although about 55% of those members, those judges, are actually considered foreigners who are English-speaking.
So that means that in the network of judges, there's a lot of people like myself from European and American backgrounds who are engaged in judicial offices in Middle Eastern countries, which I think is very interesting.
So I'm registered as on-call for United Nations Courts of Justice.
I'm registered with the Egyptian Ministry of Justice on-call for special cases.
So that means I'm technically part of the Egyptian judiciary, which is interesting and relevant to this discussion.
And I hold a Juris Doctor, J.D., Ph.D. in Diplomatic Affairs, and a Professorship, Doctor of Science and Jurisprudence in International Law.
So it's been kind of a long road becoming an international judge.
And, you know, that's important to me because I really think that the judiciary globally should have a stronger role.
People don't realize that we have already more rights than we think.
And human rights law gives us more rights than we think.
And it really is time for the judiciary to step up and start enforcing these rights and these laws.
So I guess the next topic is I'm a veteran of Russian national security agencies.
I worked 15 years of service as a national security lawyer and advisor to the Presidential Security Council of Russia.
And mostly what we did was we cleaned up corruption of Yeltsin's oligarchs.
And restore the constitutional democracy.
All the projects that we did in the Russian Special Services were about anti-globalization and restoring sovereignty and reasserting the rule of law, which is what we see Russia doing today in the geopolitical arena.
And a lot of the projects that we worked on in the National Security Services was support of the BRICS alliance and the non-aligned movement of countries.
And we'll touch on the non-aligned movement a little more later, but that's very important to the role of Egypt in geopolitics.
A couple more topics.
I'm a prince of the independent kingdom of man, spelled with two N's.
That's an autonomous, dynastic royal house within the United Kingdom system.
For the independent kingdom of man...
Its sovereignty and its independence were legally recognized by Queen Elizabeth II only because it has some overlapping medieval history of England.
And it's actually a Celtic kingdom dating back to 1079 AD, which originates in Dublin, Ireland.
This royal house of man carries the dynastic sovereignty of King Baldwin II of Jerusalem and King Falk of Jerusalem.
And that line carries the succession of the grand mastery of the original Knights Templar from 1118 A.D. So as a result of that being Prince of the Independent Kingdom of Man, That essentially made me grandmaster of the Order of the Temple of Solomon, which is the real original name of what we know popularly as the Knights Templar.
So the original Knights Templar from 1118 AD is distinctly non-Masonic.
I know that a lot of nations are running around calling themselves Templars.
They can say a lot of things that aren't necessarily true, but the original order is non-Masonic and very much anti-agenda.
And the order of Solomon is Gnostic, which means a direct connection between individuals and the divine.
It's Arthurian, like the Knights of the Round Table.
And these are the followers of Mary Magdalene, which are related to St.
Joan of Arc.
So, one interesting fact to understand the order of the Temple of Solomon, it was never dependent on the Vatican.
It was always originally under the sovereignty of the kings of Jerusalem.
So, later in history, in 13...
actually 1312, when the Vatican Suspended the order, at least suspended its patronage from the Vatican.
It reverted to its original sovereignty from the kings of Jerusalem.
And I think even more interesting to our topic today, it's called the Order of the Temple of Solomon because literally it was founded from excavating the Temple of Solomon on Temple Mount in Jerusalem.
That temple of Solomon was pharaonic Egyptian.
There's a lot of evidence in the historical record it was actually pharaonic Egyptian temple.
And the order was founded during nine years of archaeology, mostly living underground, excavating the temple for nine years.
And so what the original Knights found is that the tradition of Solomon carries an ancient priesthood Which dates back to 10,068 B.C. So this is very ancient stuff, and that priesthood overlaps with the Egyptian priesthood.
And I can say a couple points about the Modern Order.
The Modern Temple Order is a nation-state subject of international law, so it has the same legal basis and legal status as the Vatican.
Now, in the modern era, countries are generally using government to take away all civil rights and human rights and violate international law.
The order, however, is using its nation-state sovereignty to give back human rights and to restore the rule of law.
So, in the Order of Solomon, we view the nation-state status not as being another government to do what other country governments do, but we see it as having the same tools that countries use as weapons against people, that finally these tools are in the hands of some of the good guys, and we can use the principle of nation-state sovereignty to help give back rights.
So I see this as a legal weapon in the war for human rights.
And final point, I'm an adjunct professor of archaeology with the Institute for Sovereign International Security.
I'm assigned to Cairo University and Ayn Thoms University.
I have a PhD in archaeology and Egyptology, and my dissertation was in biblical archaeology.
So I know it's a lot of background, it's a lot of different things, but to me, it's all about a deep understanding of ancient humanitarian traditional values, exposing a lot of lies that modern history books have told us, and basically restoring the collective heritage of humanity.
And what happened in Egypt, now we'll get into the geopolitics with you, what happened in Egypt is very important to that mission.
It's going to be difficult for us to fully restore the heritage of humanity and give to the people all the secrets of all these secret societies.
None of those things were supposed to be secrets, people.
The original Knights Templar were not trying to keep things secret.
From everybody.
They were trying to preserve it so that everybody on the planet would know everything about who they are as energy beings and how they interact with the divine.
So everything that used to be a secret and is in these secret societies, you know, we're here to bring it out and give everything to everybody again for free.
Okay.
Thank you, Matthew.
That's quite a good summary of who you are, and at least your sort of diploma background, however you want to put that.
And I do want to kind of, let's discuss a little bit about your background before we launch into the whole Egypt talk, because I know people, some of that will sort of sound like Greek.
It's a cornucopia, I think, of things.
And I think there will be people that may have questions about that.
So just a couple of questions.
First of all, when you say you worked in security in Russia, you were working under Putin.
Is that correct?
Yeah, I started actually as early as 1994.
Yeah, I started actually as early as 1994.
And at that time, the director of the Federal Security Service was Patrushev.
I don't remember exactly which year, but it was more around 1998 when Vladimir Putin became director of the Federal Security Service, which is called the FSB. That's the new KGB of Russia.
So Putin had just become director.
I was already warmed up and completed officer training.
And Putin came in as the director of the National Security Agency.
He came in as a lawyer.
Of course, he's an accomplished intelligence agent in the service, but he never forgot that he's a lawyer from St.
Petersburg.
And it was interesting to me to see Putin starting as director of the SSB, launching a revolutionary new program called Legal Security.
His concept was to promote legal aspects of national security and to have lawyers play a key role in national security.
Now, I have to say I really wish That agencies like the American NSA would have actual lawyers involved who actually care what the law is and what the Constitution says.
But Vladimir Putin did that.
He said, let's bring in lawyers and call it an area of legal security.
And because of that emphasis and his mission to promote law within national security, The security service that I just got involved with gave more importance to my role being a foreign international lawyer.
I grew up in America, by the way.
Everybody can tell from my accent that I'm American.
I haven't lived in America for about 20 years because even in the first year of law school, I could tell that the same laws they're teaching us aren't followed anymore.
And that was my signal to get out of Dodge.
So it only took the first year of law school.
I completed law school, but I was living abroad through most of the law school.
Because I could tell the first year of education in law school, I said, wait a minute, all these laws of teaching are not being followed.
Already not the rule.
Time to get out and fight for real independence.
I was happy that Russia was doing that.
So Russia elevated me in the service because they valued my international perspective of law to participate in those projects.
And it was a privilege.
I worked with octogenarian generals, you know, 80-plus-year-old generals of the Russian Security Service.
These are guys who were young officers, maybe in the early 20s at the time of Stalin.
And so these are incredibly experienced people who have been through everything, been through incredible upheavals of history.
Some of them actually admitted to me that...
I don't know if I'm allowed to say this, but I know they don't mind.
Some of them actually admitted to me that they killed Stalin.
All the history books say, you know, Stalin just died and nobody ever says exactly for what or exactly how.
They said, yes, we killed him.
That bullshit had to stop.
And, you know, so these guys know everything about living through dictatorships and overcoming them.
You know, of course, they still had to go through getting rid of the Bolsheviks altogether, which they also played a few roles in the security service.
So these are amazing people, all certified as geniuses, and these were my mentors.
I had the privilege of working with some of the greatest geopolitical chess masters, as I see them, in the world.
And thank God that I was able to learn From their philosophy and from their strategies.
Because now, Terry, it's an audience.
You have an audience.
You've been exposing truth for many years.
You've been a dedicated follower of Project Camelot.
I think you're a talented and effective interviewer.
And you have your own idea and angle on issues and you get to it and bring that out of people.
I love how you do that.
There's a lot of talents like you and people that I work with now in the non-aligned movement.
And it's in our hands now to do something and bring back our rights and bring back the rule of law.
Okay, well thank you for that.
You know, there's a huge amount we can go into here, and I think we'll probably hope for doing another interview in the future that goes more into depth into your background, sort of examines history through your eyes, because we're talking a lot of years there that are covered, and we just don't...
The focus of this discussion is really to focus on the Egyptian revolution, so...
Yes.
So I do want to go in that direction now.
And at the moment, let's focus on what I don't know if you know that I have on the screen at the moment, the anonymous pharaoh, as you call him.
I made that myself, just to put a smile on everybody's face.
And it's actually kind of a great, it's a great, well, it's a great piece of art, really, and a great comment.
I have to say, though, in fairness, it wasn't my idea.
I saw that before, somewhere on the internet.
Somebody put the anonymous mask on the fairer image.
Okay.
Just a very low resolution and, you know, obviously somebody put it on Facebook or something, so I didn't invent it.
There's some genius out there who thought of this really cool anonymous fair.
I just did the graphics work to make a full-screen high-res version.
Okay.
And, you know, I'm just saying it really does depict, it is a commentary in and of itself, and so for those that are picking up on that, you know, I think that they will find that interesting and even maybe humorous.
Okay.
So, at the moment, let's talk about Egypt.
You've written a really comprehensive article that tells what really happened behind the scenes all during the time when, especially in the West, we were getting certain news information from our news, which is constantly lying and packaging lies.
And let me say that I... No, Italy don't call it news anymore.
Even the government now calls it the narrative.
It's now called a narrator.
Now what is a narrator?
A narrator is the person speaking to escort the telling of a story.
So it used to be in the 50s and 60s it was called news.
It was a little bit in the 70s.
Now they don't even bother to call it news anymore.
It's just the narrative of their story.
Okay, so as stories go though we were getting a very limited one and I want to say that of course news services as far as I'm concerned around the world are Not really telling the truth and that does include Russia Today and I know people like to look at Russia Today as being a clearer channel than some and I will admit that it certainly does at least broach topics and have some good speakers on there from time to time but we're
still looking at spin regardless of how you package it.
So it's this kind of thing where we have a dialogue with somebody who has been on the ground in Egypt who was possibly even present during those days and I forget exactly when and where you were at the times but you can fill us in on that.
You know, what we're talking about is a voice from Egypt and let me say before you start that I have been to Egypt now four times and during my travels I meet Egyptians and I have a very excellent rapport with them as in generals and I have asked a number of them that have become friendly If they would report, give an Egyptian report on what's happening to me.
And actually two or three people have agreed to do so and never done so.
And, you know, there is some kind of block going on.
There is some kind of reticence in the people to come forward.
I know they've had a long history of having a dictator, which is Mubarak, and has been, you know, Well, it had been in place for a very long time because of the U.S. So let's dive into all of this.
I'm actually speaking to you now from a small old world village in Egypt.
I don't want to say exactly where today, but I'm in Egypt.
I'm in a small village almost adjacent to an Egyptian army base that I'm cooperating with.
And the mood in the village is people actually feel quite free.
From the first revolution, there were two.
There's two ways.
And from the first revolution, which was about almost three years ago now, I think, It is true and people know that the secret service called the Omnidawah in Egyptian, that's the secret service.
Omnidala was basically dissolved.
It fell apart when they took down Mubarak.
And people know that.
And they know that most of the records and documents used to oppress people were destroyed.
So there is a feeling actually of freedom.
They're not feeling quite so traumatized like they're maybe under dictatorship.
They know that they're in a better situation now than before.
The problem is there's not a lot of information.
The people as a whole, the people of Egypt are pretty wise.
They tend to see through things with penetrating eyes.
But as far as local Egyptians reporting on events, they don't have access to a lot of information.
Every Egyptian in the village is not in correspondence with government officials and able to get a line on what's happening lately.
So I think that might be the main reason.
That they're not comfortable giving integers is simply because they don't have the facts, they don't have the information.
Okay, let me stop you there and please understand that I'm going to have to stop you during this interview to clarify things that I think the audience might not sort of understand or be interpreting necessarily the way you're intending it and so I'm kind of acting as a go-between if you will and at the same time I am going to be trying to direct this conversation so that we get to the really important points, because this could be a very long conversation, obviously, right?
Yeah.
You can appreciate that.
I'll let you lead.
No problem.
So, at this moment, you said you're working in, I think, in cooperation with the Army, and I know that people are going to be, you know, I have Camelot audience out there.
They're going to, you know, leap at that.
So, what exactly do you mean by that?
From me to them, I'm consulting.
I've been giving them some reports.
I'm not going to say exactly what I'm doing, but mostly I'm giving them research reports on information warfare and chemtrails.
I want the Egyptian government to know That's a violation of international law.
NATO is not allowed to do that.
There are specific international laws that I might cite later that explicitly prohibit False news explicitly prohibited and propaganda for vilifying foreign countries explicitly prohibited by international law.
And I'm working with the judiciary in the Middle East and Egypt teaching them, guys, get some court cases.
Let's get some people in jail for false news because it's as direct a violation as you can get.
And I'm teaching them the methods used for covert information warfare so that they can learn to defend themselves with truth and positive information.
The other thing I'm working on is chemtrails.
It's difficult now because they're using civilian flights.
For chemtrails.
I haven't seen much of it in Egypt.
Mostly Egypt doesn't have it.
But there's been reports of some flights of actual chemtrails.
We do not have contrails in this climate.
Right now is not hot weather.
It's not summer yet.
It's 107 degrees in the daytime.
Right now, this month.
It's going to get up to 157 degrees Fahrenheit in a couple of months.
In this arid climate, no humidity, there are no contrails.
If you see any smoke behind the jet, it's chemtrails.
It's hard to say shoot them all down because, as I said, now they're studying these passenger airlines for that.
So we're talking about protocols for grounding planes with escort or fighter planes if they're spraying.
So that's the kind of thing I'm doing for them.
What they're doing for me is cooperation in these two ways.
You know, I am technically head of state of the sovereign order of the Temple of Solomon and the Egyptian government has offered us a lot of support in terms of human rights and helping us to operate as a nation state for that purpose.
So, you know, Egypt has pledged a lot of support.
They're a very friendly government, and they love what we're doing, what we're trying or planning to do for human rights.
And, you know, to the extent, well, the army, so again, why the army, to finish answering your question?
Not because of military activities, but because the army has, in fact, been the deep-state security government holding Egypt together over the last few years.
That does not mean that they're controlling their dictatorship or anything like that.
It does mean that when the regular government comes unglued, the army is there to be the fabric of civilization and make sure that it doesn't completely fall apart.
That is the job of an army of every country, and they've done an excellent job of doing that, never turning against the people, but always supporting the rights of the people.
So the army to me is like dealing with the real government.
Alright, fair enough.
Now, Egypt has just had, let's start kind of in the present, Egypt has just had another election, is that correct?
Yes, that's right.
They just elected Marshall now.
He's general for decades, but now he's Marshall El-Sisi.
And it was a good election.
They actually had 47% turnout.
Actually, the Constitution was approved by a vote a few months ago, actually in January of 2014.
The Constitution is widely accepted as a good vote.
That was 38% turnout.
And CC had 47%.
So CC actually has 9% higher voter turnout than the Constitution, which is widely accepted as a good and fair vote.
So Sisi's doing pretty well.
Of that turnout, he has 97% approval.
So it's a very strong, good democratic election.
Okay, but along those lines, because I think we could put democratic in quotes, so to speak, because it's a moving target when you're really talking about democracies anywhere on the planet at this time, but giving it the benefit of the doubt.
When I was there before, I did have backchannel information, and I Talked to people who were talking about...
Actually, I actually saw them do it as well.
Going up to people that were lined up to vote, because I was there during at least one of their votes.
Yeah, I think they were voting.
I forget who they were voting for at that time.
But it was during 2012.
And people were...
That's the Morsi.
Yeah, that was the Morsi selection.
Okay.
People were paying people to vote, so they would give them money if they would stand in line and then vote a certain way.
And they weren't even covert about it, apparently.
The villagers would just be kind of lining up and they would be given a hundred, I think it was a hundred Egyptian dollars, but I'm not sure the exact amount.
Yeah, and they voted for Morsi.
And now in the Egyptian judiciary, in the trial of ex-president Morsi, a lot of tangible evidence has come out proving that Morsi was really a NATO-backed sponsored candidate.
And a lot of evidence came out that NATO through NGOs and just direct bribes directly from the U.S. Embassy, and they have documents proving this.
The American Embassy was directly giving those budgets for bribing people in Morsi's government.
I'm sure that the same people from the U.S. Embassy in NATO were bribing people to go vote for Morsi.
So what you saw is the fact of what happened.
But the deeper information shows that NATO was doing it.
Just to be clear, that's not a reason to say that there isn't democracy in the whole country.
That is how NATO behaves when they visit foreign countries.
And it's time for that to stop in all countries.
Sure.
So, in light of that, this new person who's coming on board, can you describe his background and why In other words, let's sort of lay it on the line here, is the Muslim Brotherhood for or against this candidate, first of all?
Well, absolutely against.
The Muslim Brotherhood, well, there's overwhelming evidence, and I can go into details of what evidence that is.
The Muslim Brotherhood essentially was working entirely for NATO and in particular the United States.
And they cooperate with Al-Qaeda, and there's smoking gun evidence that Al-Qaeda is created, recruited, trained, funded, and armed by the United States.
So, the Muslim Brotherhood really, the Egyptian people gave them a chance.
To, you know, represent regional Muslim values.
To ordinary Egyptians, being a Muslim is actually a religion.
It's not, you know, a terrorist organization.
It's not NATO. It's not, you know, Obama.
It's a religion that's like, you know, almost 2,000 years old.
So the Egyptian people gave them a fair chance to say, okay, you want to talk about representing a culture that's more indigenous to the Middle East.
We'll give you a chance to do it.
Well, the Muslim Brotherhood blew it big time.
They showed they're true colorless, that they're all about violence, cooperating with foreign terrorists, not our new Egyptian terrorist group.
There's only Al-Qaeda, which America imports from the other Middle Eastern countries that they've corrupted.
And then, of course, the American influence itself directly over here in Egypt.
That is what the Muslim Brotherhood was exposed as, being and representing all of that.
So, of course, they are not happy with al-Sisi at all.
Al-Sisi has been meeting with Vladimir Putin and Russian authorities.
Sisi is known to be a Nasserist.
That's a reference to President Nasser of Egypt, Gamal Nasser, who was one of the co-founders of the non-aligned movement of countries.
So really, the Sisi election is...
Let's just say that as of today, Sisi is known to be a Nasserist.
He was the head of the army that defended the people against the government, against the corrupt NATO sponsored government.
As of today, Sisi is 100% on the right side.
I hope and pray to God that they don't manage to corrupt him later.
And I'll be giving all my advice to the Egyptian government saying, you found the right path this time.
You've finally gotten rid of all the foreign meddling in your sovereign affairs.
You have, as of today, a good president who does represent people, does represent the non-aligned movement and freedom and sovereignty and human rights.
Hope to God they keep it that way.
I think it's a good sign that he's been meeting with Putin because, again, Russia has a good track record that we've seen in putting their money and actions where their mouth is.
For human rights and sovereignty.
Okay, well, that's kind of a loaded sentence, that last one.
But, you know, leaving that as it is for the moment, and we'll maybe revisit that.
Let's describe a little bit about this sort of various, if you can do it kind of in, I know you did it in quite detail in the article, but if you can sort of summarize what happened with the so-called Egyptian spring, or the, you know, the, what do they call this, the Arab Spring, you know, a weird sort of, almost, I don't know.
Okay.
You know, contradictory statement.
But at any rate, the Arab Spring and what was really going on behind the scenes.
During the time, for example, when Morsi was forced to step down, I don't know how much of the drama, because in terms of your article, I don't think you maybe got into some of the background Drama that was going on politically.
I don't know how much you're even party to in terms of, you know, why all of a sudden it appeared that he was destabilized really by the United States, that they wanted him out for whatever reason, and why is not clear.
He did seem to hold on for dear life and try to force matters so that he could stay.
That didn't work.
And so on.
So can you address that?
And then moving forward, maybe even if you know the roles of any particular diplomats or, you know, American ambassadors, etc., etc., that were instrumental in what was going on back then.
And then if you can kind of fast forward it to the Morsi situation, what happened there, and then to here.
Okay.
Well...
I just need to touch on one fact, because it's going to be hard to talk about the revolutions without quickly defining what al-Qaeda is.
We just want to say that in 2005, the British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook publicly admitted that al-Qaeda was recruited, in quotes, recruited and trained by the CIA. And in 2007, an official U.S. Army report from West Point Academy confirmed that al-Qaeda was directly created by American cash and weapons.
So, you know, it's important to keep in mind that al-Qaeda is the CIA. It is America.
It's not external.
It's completely created, funded, armed, and trained and recruited by America.
So...
I think the first thing we have to also say quickly is there was a first revolution.
Before we go to Morsi, Morsi was the second revolution.
The first revolution against Mubarak, it's a quick topic.
It's really clear and simple what happened.
It all started with bombing the church in Alexandria in January 2011.
This is how it started.
So now, today, we hear about Arab Spring as if something was in the air and all these people decided to destabilize their own countries.
No.
What happened is a major landmark church in Alexandria was bombed by foreign terrorists.
Even at the time, there was evidence leaked by the army.
The army actually leaked the evidence.
That it was done by foreign elements.
The church was bombed after a threat from Al-Qaeda from U.S.-controlled Iraq.
So U.S. is controlling Iraq.
The threat came from Iraq where they're controlling it.
From Al-Qaeda that they created anyway.
And they threatened exactly that kind of action and only a couple weeks later did it.
So we know who bombed the church in Alexandria.
And also, shortly after, there was evidence uncovered and leaked by the military, the Egyptian army, that Mubarak's own interior minister, El Adli is his name, directly ordered the attack, the bombing of that church.
So that's a direct...
Basically, covert operation military aggression against a church in a foreign country directly by NATO led by the United States.
That's what started it, not some Arab Spring or some dissent at the government.
People were happy enough.
I had spent a lot of time under Mubarak in Egypt.
And people were aware, yeah, yeah, it's a dictator, whatever, but even the dictatorship of Mubarak, was generally not interfering in people's daily lives.
People still felt a general sense of some personal freedom, at least mostly being left alone by the government.
There wasn't this incredible unhappiness with this tyrannical dictator.
It was like, that's the dictator's business, because we're okay in our village.
So what happened is the church was lost.
And the Egyptian people intuitively Instantly understood that this is a covert false flag attack.
I'm very proud of the Egyptian people.
I wish Western citizens were so perceptive to see the false flag attacks used.
The Egyptians immediately understood, obviously this is a false flag attack to divide the people.
It was intended to divide people.
Obviously it was supposed to make Christians and Muslims fight amongst themselves.
That failed and backfired.
Instead, this served to unite the people, and instead of people blaming each other, they blamed the government, and that's why they started a revolution.
And so the whole revolution and all this Arab Spring was the understanding of common That we know a false flag when we see it, and we're not going to be manipulated.
And they blamed Mubarak, and they were right to blame Mubarak for that attack.
Because as I said, it was later proven that Mubarak's minister directly ordered the attack.
Okay, yeah, but let me actually clarify one thing here, and again, because I have had contacts with Egyptians on the ground, now, needless to say, your statement of the people were happy is interesting, and I think on a superficial level, and maybe in a common level, that it's correct.
But I can tell you that I did have contact with people that were very much against Mubarak, who were feeling very stifled by him, that they wouldn't speak, and they were extremely careful not to speak against the government in any way, publicly.
And that there were...
The bottom line is, and I know this also for a fact, is that...
Not only Zahi Hawass, who was running rampant with Egyptology and doing all kinds of crazy, nefarious things in collusion with Hillary Clinton and the rest of the Bush cabal, which all has to do with the antiquities and the stealing of Precious things under the ground, etc.
But aside from that, the people themselves, some very, you know, the more educated ones, let's say perhaps, were very discontented.
There was, there is, you know, and may still be as far as I know, a ban in terms of being able to go on the internet and publish what's really going on.
There was a number of people in jail, hundreds, and people were being thrown in jail.
I forget that particular writer, there's a writer and a professor who actually ran for office, who was put in and out of jail.
And so there were a lot of very repressive things going on behind the scenes.
I also know that the U.S. was Putting into rendition two Egyptian prisons, prisoners that they gathered around the world, and just using the Egyptian prisoners.
I mean, this was undercover information, but they were basically, and these places were extremely diabolical places to end up in.
A little, like, Midnight Express type of situation.
So, you know, and that's a reference to an older movie, in case you're not familiar with it.
So I just want to clarify that.
There was a great deal, to my knowledge, and the people that I talked to, because I did, you know, obviously I'm an interviewer, right?
Yeah, and I didn't mean to imply that people were happy under the dictatorship.
They were aware that Mubarak was basically America's puppet dictator.
Right.
And that they were aiding and abetting, the government at that time was aiding and abetting the NATO illegal, criminally illegal rendition programs and torture programs.
I can't believe that, apparently George Bush and certainly Dick Cheney is known to have admitted in their own published books That they supported these programs.
I mean, how could you not go direct to jail, do not pass go?
Admitting something in writing in print in a published book, oh my god!
Every judge on the planet should be in peace for not putting those people in jail by now.
And I'm certainly working as hard as I can to get those people in jail.
Just trying to get the right courts to pick up those cases.
But, yeah, so people knew.
They were unhappy because they knew this was America's dictator.
And they...
As far as I know, I don't know if there was an actual ban on speech, but they were afraid, people were afraid of Omnidala, the Secret Service.
And one of the accomplishments of the First Revolution against Mubarak was decimation of Omnidala offices and destruction of a lot of the records and people.
And that's what helps today.
To have people feeling a little bit more free, like they don't have to watch so carefully what they say.
So yeah, there were a lot of these abuses, but let's not forget.
It's so easy to say, oh, but Egypt.
But Egypt what?
Egypt was a puppet of America.
Where are these violations coming from?
Yes, there's violations.
Yes, there have been human rights violations.
My point as a judge is, where did they come from?
I want to go to the source.
There are guilty parties Behind the rampant abuses of human rights and violations of international law.
And they're not going to get away with it for a long time.
But let's go back to the question, though, because what we're talking about is when the start of the Egyptian revolution, you're saying it was the bombing of a church that was basically placed at the feet of the minister of Mubarak, basically Mubarak.
And from there, basically NATO, as you call it, but US really propelled false flag.
And so with that sort of inciting incident, if you will, from then on, You know, people did show up and they're, you know, now again I got back channel information saying that, you know, the crowd was being sort of heckled and incited by implanted agents that some of the things that were going on in Tahir Square,
Tahir Square, it was, you know, manufactured initially, but then the real people did come out and See, what I saw in Egypt, and I actually studied Egypt because I have a special interest in it from various standpoints, was a level at which, you know, if you take a flame, you know, a match, and you light a match, you just throw it into very dry kindling.
It's going to ignite.
So there was that sense that Egypt was like that, that the world had moved to a certain place where Egyptians were really ready Being more multicultural than most people understand, I think, as a country.
What's coming out now is that the Egyptian people, the normal people, who are actually paid through the U.S. Embassy or paid through UN NGOs, the normal people in the villages, have proven themselves to be absolutely resistant, almost to the point of being immune to provocations.
They see through it.
What we have is Direct evidence, which maybe about now is the place in this interview to cite that evidence, that they hired criminal elements, some of them foreigners, some of them Egyptians, but criminal elements gave them weapons, whether sticks, bricks, or guns, and money.
To make it appear as though things are out of control.
So it's not that the people are so weak-willed that, you know, you can just ignite a spark.
It's not the people who do that.
It's hired, paid, organized, state-sponsored, NATO state-sponsored criminals who are used to make it look like the people are out of control.
That's how they discredit a genuine revolution.
Absolutely.
And that's actually known.
We're seeing the same thing going on in Ukraine at this moment, so this is not an isolated case.
But what I'm actually interested in also is behind the scenes why they took Mubarak down.
What did Mubarak do?
Why had he outlived his usefulness, so to speak?
Are you party to any of that backchannel information?
I don't have backchannel information.
I know what people in the villages have been talking about during that period.
There was a very prevalent, widespread understanding that Mubarak was NATO and America's dictator.
And you can't be the head of state of a country and represent The infrastructure of foreign countries.
You just can't.
There's no way that that works.
But this is going on.
I mean, Mubarak was there.
Wasn't he in power for, was it more than 10 years?
I don't remember how many years.
He did it.
I think it was like 25.
Okay, but he was always the hand puppet of the US. I mean, there's a history of this.
So you can't say you can't do it.
You know, he did it for 25 years.
What I'm saying is, behind the scenes, It's just like Saddam Hussein.
He was fine.
He was hired and trained by the CIA. He was put in power.
Everything was hunky-dory for a while.
And then he outlived his usefulness.
And I know the backchannel reasons for that.
What I'm interested in is...
You may not know this, or you may know it and not want to say it, or whatever it is.
But the bottom line is, the guy outlived his usefulness, otherwise he'd still be president today.
So we really need to look at that.
And yes, the people were ready.
Yes, they were incited.
And yes, they were...
I do see Egyptians as being...
Incredibly quick on the draw, so to speak.
They're very smart people.
Their human relations are, what you might say, their psychic ability, their way of tapping into whether a person is lying.
Let's talk about the human response.
What you're getting to is a really good point.
There's a human response from the Egyptian people.
They were responding to something that changed.
And what really changed was the Alexandria Church bombing.
That was a huge trigger.
It was the first real false flag, a false flag bombing, that everybody could see was designed to make Christians and Muslims fight against each other.
And they knew that it was Mubarak's fault, which later proved to be true.
That was how he outlived his usefulness.
I think there's an issue of tolerance.
Even in the West, I think people are tolerant.
As long as you let us have our iPhones and iPods and let us, you know, go be economic debt slaves and work 9 to 5 in our offices and, you know, for other people's profit.
And as long as, you know, there's an illusion that you're reasonably being left alone to live your daily life, People tend to tolerate, but then when you have a false flag and everybody can see that this is obviously a false flag.
For with the government going against its people, there should be a normal human reaction to say, we are not going to let the government get away with false flag manipulations of people and military-grade aggression against its own people.
Every government anywhere in the world that does that must be impeached.
And must never be permitted to ever be in power ever again.
That's a fact.
And the Egyptians acted on that because it breached their tolerance level.
Said, okay, now we know he's a dictator, but now he's going to start bombing us.
Screw that.
We've had enough.
That comes, I mean, just, you know, and thank you for that.
But that does come from the side of the people.
So, again, I kind of, I'm asking you, and, you know, look, if you don't have this information, it's all good.
But just one last shot at it.
There were backchannel reasons why the U.S. wanted to get rid of him, why they wanted to incite revolution, not just in Egypt, but why they're doing it in Syria now.
You know, why they took over Iraq.
We're talking about that, I don't know what it's called, the plan of the century or whatever.
Sorry.
You know what I'm saying?
In other words, the Cheney plan, there was a plan that involved the dominoes in the Middle East, one right after the other.
Egypt was one of the key I'm sorry I missed your point.
You meant outlive their usefulness to the NATO alliance.
Yeah, that's a really good topic.
I don't know so much about behind the scenes workings in NATO. I see what they're doing in all the other countries.
I see how it violates just about every fundamental principle of law that there ever was.
But I don't know so much about what they're thinking behind Western lines.
But one thing I think is clear is that when the people rose up in response to the false flag in Alexandria, I think in NATO analysis, I'm pretty sure that would make the dictator out of this usefulness.
What's the usefulness of a puppet dictator in the West?
Is that he's able to keep the people in line and continue advancing the Western agenda.
When a dictator is exposed as now having done a false flag attack against his own people, and he was already being exposed as assisting the illegal rendition of the states, once he's exposed, now he's not useful anymore.
Okay, but keeping in mind that they exposed him, in other words, they caused the false flag, so they put him in that position, knowing full well what would happen along that way.
I think they honestly believed that they were going to pull it off.
They were sure that they were going to have Christians and Muslims at each other's throats.
And so what happens is the people rejected that.
The Muslims immediately flocked to all the churches, filling the Christian churches inside and out as human shields, loudly proclaiming over all channels of national television and radio and newspapers, declaring Muslim-Christian unity, declaring that Christians and Muslims are brothers.
The people who made it impossible to get away with a false flag.
And I can't emphasize this enough.
Yeah, we can have the 9-11s and all kinds of things, but there are things that the common people can do to stop them dead in their tracks, and Egypt is an example of that, and that's why a lot of people are not happy that we're talking about this today.
Because this is the roadmap.
What the Egyptian people did and what the Egyptian army did is the roadmap to be followed and copied in other countries.
Okay, so let's move along then.
So we have the revolution, we have what went down after that, and obviously there were other smaller false flag type things going on.
I know there were cars that were bombed and so on and so forth.
That were probably provocations to just incite things up several levels.
And I don't know if you want to talk just even briefly about what was going on in Terer Square, where, you know, because there was some real heroism on the part of both male and females in Egypt, sort of, you know, standing up to their government, you know, in very heroic ways during those days.
Yep.
They did some good things.
First of all, you know, even though I just said that in a way it's the roadmap, what he did is the roadmap, in a way, slightly they made a mistake, which is it's always kind of a mistake to have people out in the streets because that's an invitation for false provocations that get lied about on the international media, you know, as if the revolution is bombarded as violence or whatever.
What we saw with the genuine protesters in Egypt is all of the protest was about prayer.
The initial photographs, the initial live video footage of the organic, normal protesters was all prayer.
And the Christians would pray and the Muslims would stand guard around them letting them pray and vice versa.
They were going to pray their ways to the revolution, but maybe one mistake they made was having so many people out in the streets, because then here comes the NATO infiltrators paying money to criminal elements to go and make it look like now there's violence starting.
So, you know, I do recommend that stay-at-home protests are better.
I'd rather see economic boycotts worldwide.
Just everybody stay home.
Just don't go to work.
Don't buy anything.
Don't do anything.
They can't arrest you for staying at home.
Well, okay.
Yeah, and that's, you know, a good point.
But let me say, Egypt's culture happens on the streets.
It is a very...
You know, outgoing...
I don't...
It's almost...
I mean, every night it's like a party on the streets.
That's always alien to me.
They hang out in the coffee shops on the street.
It's social.
They do their business that way.
They picnic in the middle of the meridian, in the middle of the highway.
They picnic late at night and socialize.
This is perfectly normal for Egyptian society.
It's going to be a bit hard to get a social milieu like that to change its ways.
So, in a certain sense, it was completely natural that they go into Tahrir Square.
Now, I was there in December of 2012, and prior to us going there, there was all kinds of propaganda.
I had people, even people in my movement, for whatever you want to call it, Calling me, telling me, don't go to Egypt is dangerous.
We got there and there was no danger.
It was, you know, there was nothing happening.
It was very calm.
And this was during the elections.
I was here during all of the events.
During the first revolution and the second revolution and during all the elections.
And oftentimes I actually flew in on purpose because something was happening and I wanted to make sure it was there.
And you could not feel safer.
It was amazing.
Now, of course, I understand if you go directly to the heart of Cairo, the only really, really big city in the whole country besides Alexandria.
Of course, there's going to be certain areas where they're provoking violence, but in the country as a whole, you could not feel safer.
There's overwhelming hospitality.
There were many times during elections where the Western propaganda was, oh, they have no government.
There's no government.
Like, that's a warning.
The Egyptians weren't saying, oh, no, we have no government.
They were saying, hey, we have no government, so let's unite our communities.
Yes!
That was the right answer.
They rebuilt communities.
They were repairing roads that the municipal governments for decades couldn't repair the roads.
And communities did it.
They got asphalt, borrowed stuff and materials from each other, and got out as volunteers in the streets and repaired their own damn roads.
I'm proud of them.
They're an example for how humanity can thrive and prosper without any need for big brother government to micromanage your lives.
You don't need it.
So there's this propaganda, oh, there's no government, so you should be afraid.
The people here were not afraid.
They were happy.
They were in strong communities with old world values, bringing each other food and medicine.
Bartering for supplies and even not bartering, just donating things, to rebuild their communities, to give to themselves what the Mubarak government failed to give them for almost 30 years.
Impressive.
Really impressive.
Very, very likely going on.
Alright, so, but at this moment, let's fast forward.
So, obviously he was deposed.
I don't know how much, I mean, you are an Egyptologist.
I don't know how many interactions or if any you had with Zahi Hawass or knew what was going on behind the scenes in terms of the pillaging And I don't even know, it may still be going on today, but I know, you know, I've had a number of interviews on Camelot with regard to this, what was going on in the Giza Plateau, etc.
And that was an area of conflict, even with the locals, because they wanted him out of there.
And it was not an easy job to get him out of there, but do you have any backchannel information about that period of time?
Not really.
I only know about Zoe Hawass academically from the point of view of academics and Western archaeologists.
And the only information I really have is that Egyptian and Western archaeologists have been unhappy with Zoe Hawass for a long time for interfering with Big discoveries.
He'd hijack discoveries to take credit and hijack the resulting academic studies of important discoveries.
And most of the hijacking was about covering up a lot of really exciting Wasp history.
Well, it might be a whole other topic, but let's just say that Hawass was complicit in Putting a Zionist spin on a lot of biblical archaeology.
That was really not necessary to do.
A lot of biblical archaeology has been hijacked for a Zionist agenda to try to prove certain things.
It's a whole world of disinformation and basically lying about history.
And the actual real nuts and bolts written in stone archaeology Exposes a lot of lies about the whole Zionist mythology.
Basically everything about what they represent is built on lies upon lies upon more lies upon other deceptions.
And Hawash played a crucial role in trying to prevent a true understanding of the authentic human heritage that archaeology reveals.
Fortunately, in the Order of the Temple of Solomon, we have just about as much of that archaeology information as we feel we need to prove just about any important point in human history.
We have enough at this point, and all of that is going to be getting out.
There's going to be no more secrets as fast as we can type.
Okay.
All right.
You know, because this isn't the topic of this discussion, and at some point we may revisit this in a later interview, but at this moment, because we want to kind of cut to the chase here, and this is going on for a while, so can you talk about what happened after that?
Because let's move to Morsi and why Morsi failed.
Okay.
First of all...
This ties in with a couple of your other questions that we might not have fully directly addressed yet.
The NATO alliance tends to play both sides.
So on the one hand, even Morsi was also their puppet.
Look at the election of Morsi.
There was a whole bunch of candidates.
Morsi and all the other candidates were all NATO-sponsored candidates.
Every last one of them.
There was Ahmed Shafiq.
He was running against Morsi.
He's an Air Force general who ordered the Air Force intimidation of the legitimate protesters.
Shafiq was appealing to NATO, on television even, appealing to NATO at NATO conferences, instead of appealing to his own Egyptian people.
So the people, of course, wouldn't elect Shafiq.
Omar Suleiman was running against Morsi also.
Suleman was directly implicated in the U.S. CIA rendition torture program under Morsi.
So the people wouldn't have him at all.
Then the only other candidate opposing Morsi was Mohamed El-Barade, who was from the UN Atomic Energy Agency.
That was the atomic inspectors who were used as the false trigger For the Iraq war in 2003.
And the Egyptian people knew that too.
So they line up the same thing they do in America and in the West today.
They line up a whole bunch of candidates, all of them work for the same people.
They're essentially the same people working for the same people all the time so that it doesn't matter who you vote for.
So in contrast with these three candidates, Who clearly were just 100% NATO. They had it on their foreheads, just NATO tattooed on their foreheads.
And then the last fourth guy, Morsi, who says, we're the Muslim Brotherhood.
At least Islam appears, at least it sounds like it's more indigenous to the local cultures than NATO. So that's how they basically tricked the people into voting for the Muslim Brotherhood.
It was almost rigged.
Okay.
And then, you know, as you've said earlier in this interview, you've talked about how basically the Muslim Brotherhood through Morsi didn't live up to the opportunity it was faced with, basically having sold out probably even way before Morsi was ever selected.
But I think Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that you felt that Morsi was sort of a mixed bag.
In other words, that there were some inclinations to do the right thing, but that he basically failed.
Do you know the points of view on the street with regard to Morsi once he was already in office and time was passing?
People feel deceived, and I tend to agree.
You know, I was more diplomatic in the research report, because it was like an academic report.
I was more diplomatic than I really feel about the topic.
I think Morsu actually, and the Brotherhood, deceived everybody.
They gave some nice signals at the beginning.
Morsu had given speeches about promoting 9-11 truths.
It has to be a good sign.
Isn't that a sign of somebody who's free-thinking and maybe willing to oppose globalist interests?
They gave signs and signals that they want to support the non-aligned movement of countries and a lot of different elements.
But Morsi dramatically shifted as soon as he became elected president.
All the signals he gave, even in the first steps he took in the first month, that looked like, oh, he really knows what's really going on, he really understands what the people really want.
He did a 180 degree about face on that.
He dramatically shifted all his policies to supporting NATO globalization.
The Muslim Brotherhood, When Morsi was being opposed by, you know, protesters, the Muslim Brotherhood actually resorted to kidnapping and torturing peaceful protesters who were opposing Morsi when he was in office.
And there's been court cases with evidence in Egypt, you know, that they actually, like, the Muslim Brotherhood would have, like, a stage Like, not Career Square, the other square, I forget what it's called.
Another square a few blocks away.
They had a stage, and under the stage, there would be some space behind the curtains.
They actually dragged, kidnapped and dragged some peaceful protesters who were against Morsi, and were torturing them underneath their own stage.
You know, and a lot of people rightfully went to jail for that.
They just literally exposed themselves as Being criminal elements and not caring about the people or the national interest or anybody's rights.
And now the evidence has come out in Morsi's court trials that all of this was directly sponsored and assisted and actively facilitated by NATO allies.
The Muslim Brotherhood was working for NATO directly.
And again, if you don't want to believe me, if you just say it on this video, read the report on Perry's website.
Read the report.
There's a lot of footnotes from a lot of very credible sources that prove this stuff.
Yes.
What I'm doing right now is showing photographs, you know, the photographs that are in the report, but also just so people will be able to see some of the photographs of the revolution, just to kind of bring that to mind for people.
It is a stunning, stunning picture of what was really going on on the ground during all of this drama.
Well, while you're showing that, let me say a couple words to finish answering your question about what happened to Morsi.
Why was Morsi overturned?
Morsi was the second revolution.
It was the second wave from the first revolution.
It was the people resisting false flag attacks.
And they said, we're not going to have false flag attacks from a US sponsored dictator.
So that was the first revolution.
But then, as you pointed out, the genuine revolution of the real people was hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood by deception.
And the people figured that out, too.
Because, again, Morsi was changing his policies and the Muslim Brotherhood were acting badly and people could see through it.
But what really triggered the Second Revolution against Morsi is when Morsi declared that he wanted to send the Egyptian army and Muslim Brotherhood mercenaries to Syria to oust President Assad, which is what Obama has been beating his chest that he wants to do.
And Egypt, after the first revolution and all the difficulties they had trying to get in a new parliament and a new constitution and get even Morsi's presidency on track, Egyptians did not care about Syria.
It was obvious.
Why are they supposed to care about Syria?
Because Obama says so?
Egypt had their own problems.
They were still trying to recover from a revolution and still trying to even support Morsi in re-establishing the government.
And Morsi himself decided to scrap all of that in the trash bin and say, no, no, I want to send the Egyptian army to go fight in Syria for Obama.
And the army said, no way.
The army drew the line of that and the people drew the line of that.
And then the last straw that broke the camel's back is Morsi in July 2013 when there was mass protests against him in the streets.
He had a last chance.
Morsi had a last chance.
All he had to do was give a nice speech on TV and to say that he was going to do what Egypt actually needed and not what NATO wanted, and to say that he was going to have a more inclusive government.
All he had to do was say, you know, fine, bring in the women parties and the Coptic parties and all these other opposition groups.
Let them be in the parliament.
But no, he went on TV, his big speech was to threaten, publicly threaten bloodshed by the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Or she did that.
Bloodshed upon whom?
Upon people opposing the Muslim Brotherhood.
He basically went on national television.
He had one last chance of a speech to save his own butt, and he blew it, because he got up to threaten everybody with bloodshed for resisting him, instead of declaring that he was going to finally have a more inclusive government.
So Morsi just could not have blown it worse, and the Muslim Brotherhood came together with it.
They blew it big time, and everybody knew it.
Now NATO, as I said, had been playing both sides.
On the one hand, There's evidence now that Obama directly gave $8 billion to the Muslim Brotherhood.
The U.S. Embassy directly is proven by documents to be giving almost a million dollars in bribes directly to Morsi's ministers.
So they were playing both sides.
On the one hand, they were bribing and helping Morsi, but at the same time, they were bribing people on the streets to even protest against Morsi to threaten him.
That's a threat.
We can help you or we can hurt you.
We're controlling the protesters, we can make them go away, or we can, you know, and we're bribing you and we can keep that up.
They use a two-stick approach.
As soon as a carrot and a stick, they're using a stick and another stick, basically.
Alright, so at the moment though, in terms of Morsi, because weren't you, I guess you were a judge, weren't you also consulting the Morsi regime?
They had been asking me for some advice, and I had written them some reports about information warfare and stuff like that.
I was not giving them advice to say empower them at once.
Unfortunately for them, they failed to understand the neutrality of my political positions.
You know, I give advice to governments.
I've worked with a lot of different companies.
Not only Russia.
Even when I was working with Russia, I was assigned to helping other countries in the non-aligned way.
I've understood for decades that when you're an advisor, a top-level government advisor, you have to give advice that is good for the country and good for its people and their rights.
You never want to be in the position of supporting a regime just because they want power.
I don't advise people on how to keep power no matter what.
I advise people on how to make a good country and do what the people need.
So I gave the Morsi government a lot of good advice.
They ignored most of it.
I warned the Morsi group about that speech.
I told them, I said, it's your last chance.
I said, you have to give in and stop power mongering and start doing what the country actually means.
And it was interesting because the Morsi...
You know, they would send representatives to me to ask me for advice.
They kept asking, and I didn't understand why they were asking at the time.
They kept asking over and over, can we trust the army?
That was Morsi's big question.
Can we trust the army?
And...
Of course, I looked at the army objectively, as a deep state government that was willing to stand up against the government to protect its own people.
So I gave answers back, like, yes, the army is very professional, I said.
The army is very professional, and they understand what is necessary in the interests of the country.
It turns out, we weren't talking the same language.
The Muslim Brotherhood was trying to ask, can we trust the army to enforce our grabbing power against the will of the people?
Well, of course, if they asked me like that, I would have given them a different answer.
But what they asked was, can we trust the army?
And I was thinking that meant, can we trust the army to protect the genuine needs of the real people of the country under its valid laws and the rights under its laws?
Yes, you can trust the Egyptian army to do that.
And that's what the army proved.
Repeatedly, they proved that they will support the people against its own government.
And so I'm glad that I was careful in giving advice.
And I'm glad that there was that misunderstanding.
Because Morrissey and the Brotherhood were so arrogant.
They thought, oh yeah, Matthew said we can trust the army.
Yeah, but guys, I can trust them to support their people.
Not your NATO-sponsored power.
Okay.
Let that be a lesson to all the other countries.
If any other country wants to ask me for advice, I'm going to say the same thing.
Listen to your damn people.
And armies, protect your own people.
That's my advice to every country if they ask me.
Okay, well, along those lines, you know, just because people will be wondering what's going on here, and...
On a certain level, you're walking a fine line by virtue of this path you've chosen.
It appears that you have your head and your heart in the right place, but you also have affiliations which people may question your motives, etc.
So, let me say, at the moment, are you, you know, because you're in Egypt, at the moment it would appear that the regime perhaps is favorable towards you, and maybe your behavior in the past, you know, I'm not assuming.
But isn't it quite possible that you could be in a position that could get quite awkward if the wrong people get in power?
I think that...
I'm not worried about that.
And so I'm trying to explain why I'm not worried about that.
I think that you're always safe advising a country on protecting its own genuine national interests.
Now, the countries are free to, you know, governments and even armies are free to accept or not accept your advice.
And, you know, I have my opinions, and I have my professional analyses, and I have my recommendations that, as of today, I'm not willing to even be public about.
Now, if the Egyptian government decides that they, in their own culture, in their own wisdom, have a need for a different policy, I don't criticize.
I'm not going to criticize.
I'm not going to say, oh, they're bad, or they're doing something bad.
We already have A handful of seven-plus countries dominating the whole world right now with lies and disinformation and propaganda.
Nobody needs me to criticize governments about what they should be doing.
In all my countries, I respect their sovereignty.
This is an alien culture in Egypt.
I love the Muslims.
I love the Muslim culture.
There's a lot of really nice things about it that I can tell stories about.
But it's alien.
It's very different.
They've got 5,000 years on us of their own culture.
And we cannot, as Westerners, we cannot expect to understand and let alone agree with.
And when we think that we disagree with something that's their culture or their government policy, we might be wrong because we have very little understanding of an alien culture that's 5,000 years older than us.
So I respect that.
And I believe that because I respect that, I don't think there's any risk to be getting into trouble.
I give advice, take it or leave it.
And, you know, if they don't take my advice and they do something I disagree with, I'm not going to criticize them because it's their country.
It's not my country.
If I don't like it, I'm free to leave.
They're not going to stop me from leaving.
Okay.
Well, you know, just let me take issue one statement you made, because from the Camelot perspective, 5,000 years of history, their country, etc., some people would disagree with that and would also say, you know, because the original Egyptians were not Arabs, apparently, necessarily.
And there's a great history that goes on way before that that does involve, you know, the Anunnaki, involves even different bloodlines, etc., etc.
There is something about that, yes.
You know, I don't think one can quite make the statement that the culture is 5,000 years older than us.
That general us, I think that there's a lot of mistaken views surrounding those kinds of things.
Just who we are.
We are.
But, you know, that's okay.
I just wanted to, you know, sort of footnote that at the moment.
Yeah, you're right.
There's a lot of nuances and details of all those things.
There's a lot of truth in what you said.
But, you know, still...
You know, even with the blending and mixing of, you know, different races and whatever, you know, still essentially people are living in the same villages that kind of have an institutional memory of things that are a lot older than the Arab culture.
Also, there's a lot of Nubian blood mixing.
Half of the pharaonic lines were actually Nubian, and a lot of the villages in Egypt, they're part Arab and part Nubian, which would be also a more ancient Egyptian connection.
So there's blending, and there's a lot of remnants, and even some, I would argue, genetic memory of some things.
And I generally associate the Arab-Nubian blended modern Egyptian culture.
I associate that with about 5,000 years.
But I have to say that the Egyptian priesthood is older than even the temples that are left standing, and it goes back almost 12,000 years.
Well, okay.
That's a whole other discussion, so let's move on from there.
And sometimes we can also discuss that, because you obviously have a background in archaeology, as discussed, and ancient archaeology would seem to fit into that.
Okay, but moving on from there.
So we see on a certain level, you know, where Morsi had failed.
So he was basically deposed.
And again, the Egyptian people came to the fore with that, because, you know, then we had another, as you say, second revolution, right?
Well, the second revolution was deposing Morsi.
That's what I'm saying.
And, you know, one thing that was never said...
In all the media coverage, nobody ever said this.
Except for one blogger.
I think his last name is Barrett.
Somebody named Barrett.
Really nice guy.
He mentioned it, but in all the news reports, nobody ever said this.
That would be Kevin Barrett at Veterans.
That's right.
Good work, Kevin.
Kudos from me, really.
Kevin mentioned this, but it was never covered as news.
The fact that it was an impeachment, legally, It was an impeachment.
The Egyptian constitution required the version at that time, required the parliament to impeach the president.
And the foreign back destabilization had prevented parliamentary elections.
So the people of Egypt literally had no parliament to represent them.
Americans, listen carefully.
Parliament exists to represent the people.
Remember?
They're called House of Representatives because they're supposed to represent you.
Please, people, remember us.
Okay, well that's going to be lost on Congress completely when you're in the city.
So anyway, the Egyptian people had no legal outlet for impeachment.
So the army, under the Constitution, had an obligation to defend the rights of the people.
So that's why I say my legal analysis as a judge is that the arrest of Morsi for treason was an alternative method Of impeachment that was dictated by constitutional obligations and constitutional rights of the people.
And I have to say that the slight aftermath of what happened proves that this was an impeachment and it was not a military coup.
Here's what proves it.
Here's the army's behavior.
Did the army step in and impose martial law and make Sisi the dictator?
No.
What they did is the army installed the Supreme Constitutional Court as the transitional government.
The Supreme Court of the United States should be running the country today.
Now their hands are tied and they won't even make rulings on most important issues.
But Egypt put the Supreme Constitutional Court as the transitional government.
To me, that proves that it's not a coup.
That was democracy.
Who should govern the country?
Court.
Okay, but let me ask you, because many people will remember, you know, the number of people that were then brought before the court supposedly to be killed for various actions during the so-called revolution.
So what are the sentencing scams?
Yes.
And can you address that from your point of view?
Sure.
So, here's the context in a nutshell.
After Morsi's impeachment by arrest for treason, at that point, there were no more legitimate grassroots protests.
There was the first revolution resisting a false flag attack bombing the Algerian church.
They got rid of Mubarak.
There was a second revolution when people realized that they were manipulated into voting among four NATO candidates and that Morsi was a deception and they deposed him by impeachment with the help of the army.
That was the two revolutions at that moment.
There was no more revolution.
There was no more grassroots.
There was no legitimate protest.
So everything that happened after Morsi was taken down They're not so-called protesters.
They're not mostly supporters.
At that point, it's all state-sponsored terrorism with al-Qaeda wholly backed by NATO. That's what's necessary to understand to talk about the sentencing scandal, because what would people be sentenced for?
It was in March 2014 that the Egyptian court issued death sentences to 529 defendants.
What happened was 545 armed people stormed the police station with lethal force.
I think you all can understand that there's no rational definition of a protester or a so-called supporter who is doing armed military-caliber storming of a police station with lethal force.
Protesters don't do that.
So that's what happened.
545 people storming one police station.
That's force.
They killed one police officer.
They attempted to kill two other police officers and injured many.
Sixteen defendants were acquitted completely.
Yes, they made 529 death sentences, but sixteen were acquitted.
None of the media gave credit for that.
And later, after appeal, just on the first round of appeal, there was many levels of appeal available.
And the Egyptian judges knew this.
They knew that this has no end of appeal.
Another thing never reported is that I found later that Egyptian law provides for a right to a whole new trial from scratch.
So not only could they appeal at multiple levels, but they could go to a whole new trial from the beginning.
So the judges knew that they weren't really putting these people at risk of actual death sentences.
It was a political statement to help with the security of the country against...
Known, foreign, state-sponsored terrorism imported by NATO. Thank you very much, Western governments, for importing your democracy.
Okay, right.
But if those 540 people that, or whatever, stormed this police station, it seems like overkill.
Usually you don't need that many people to storm anything, let alone a police station.
So what was really going on there?
In other words, you think that those people were obviously provocateurs that were paid and mobilized by A western government, basically NATO, however you want to characterize that.
Why so many?
And what were they doing?
What was the end result of them storming and killing the police officers?
Then what did they do?
Take over the hill?
Take over the headquarters?
I mean, what happened?
What did they actually accomplish?
Well, it's a statement of retaliation.
Remember, Morsi, on public television, had threatened bloodshed by the hands of the Brotherhood, if he were to be deposed.
And Morsi still has illusions of wanting to come back to power.
You know, he doesn't know that he's been abandoned now even by the West.
And everybody's given up on him.
Now, at this point, the Muslim Brotherhood is just being used for pure provocations.
Through our charging network, and through importing weapons from Libya, and all the forces in Libya who can bring weapons into Egypt are all put there by NATO. Again, arms, train, funded, blah, blah, blah.
So it's not that they thought that they were going to accomplish something by attacking one police station.
It's retaliation.
It's to stand up to the Egyptian judiciary and the Supreme Court as the transitional government and to stand up to the army and say, you know, us NATO-backed state-sponsored terrorists are forced to be reckoned with and it's a continuing threat.
It's a continuing threat.
Way of implying the rent.
Okay, but the bottom line is that those 540 people were all a part of the Muslim Brotherhood, right?
That were acting at the request of Morsi, in theory, for demand.
Yeah, and there's a lot of statements for people admitting that.
And of course the Egyptian government and the court has the actual database records from the Muslim Brotherhood.
They know who was registered on the list of members.
They don't go after everybody just because they were a member of some time.
The Egyptian judiciary now is looking at who was members and still today is saying that they're members.
And who is out on the streets carrying illegal firearms.
That's the criteria of the judiciary.
So this isn't political persecution because you used to think you were with the Muslim Brotherhood.
They know that there are some just honest Muslims who just like Islam as a religion.
As a religion, it's great.
So, you know, they're being sensitive to the reality of people and people's good faith in some things.
But they're looking at people who are picking up arms and making publications where the grassroots people who wanted their freedom, the people of Egypt, they didn't want violence, they didn't want destabilization.
They wanted a constitution, and they got it.
They wanted the Supreme Court to take over the country, and they got it.
They wanted new elections, and now they voted for Al-Sisi, 97%, with a solid level of voter turnout.
They got it.
The Egyptian people have been getting what they wanted.
It's only the state-sponsored criminal elements, NATO state-sponsored, that want to make trouble To keep the political pressure on the government.
It's a carrot and stick thing.
Okay, but let's now look at this situation, because now we're more or less up to date here in present day.
Okay, so those trials, yes, they can appeal, and obviously one assumes they will.
We've got a new, I was going to say dictator, a new ruler, and his name is, what do you really call him, Sisi?
I mean, is that how he's referred to?
Yeah, everybody calls him just Sisi, but it's Fatah al, I'm sorry, Fatah Abdul Fatah al-Sisi.
Okay.
And at the moment, let me ask you this.
I mean, you think that this person is a Nasser sort of enthusiast, right?
And Nasser was considered to be a good and balanced ruler and had a huge sort of Devoted following in Egypt, and if I recall, he was assassinated, correct?
It was Sadat after him was assassinated.
Let's touch on this briefly because it's really relevant to today.
President Gamal Nasser was finished with two things.
One is he was the co-founder of the non-aligned movement.
The second is he was the first one to outlaw The Muslim Brotherhood.
It was Nasser who originally decided that the Muslim Brotherhood should be outlawed.
Sadat succeeded Nasser.
Sadat decided to forgive the Muslim Brotherhood, which is what the Egyptian people just did a couple years ago.
Sadat let them be legitimate again.
Let the Muslim Brotherhood exist.
And the Muslim Brotherhood assassinated Sadat.
The same guy who made them not banned anymore, they killed him.
So they got banned again.
So, I want to talk a little more about the non-alignment, though, because I really think that a lot of this is all about the non-alignment.
Because it goes to CeCe the monocerous.
And why we hope that Cece will continue his level of engagement with Russia.
Okay, now, before you do that, tell me, when exactly was the election over, and how many days has he been in power right now?
He hasn't been sworn in yet.
He's going to be sworn in on Sunday, which is, I think, like two days from now.
Yeah, so it's...
We're hoping that on Sunday he's going to give a speech maybe on television.
But I've been talking to the army guys.
The army guys feel pretty sure that Sisi is a genuine noxerist and he is genuine about the non-aligned movement.
And this is key.
Another big sign about the legitimacy of his election.
And again, nobody has mentioned this.
Note the absence of NATO candidates in this election.
Right?
With Morsi, we had four candidates all NATO-sponsored.
Three were obviously NATO, and one was covertly NATO and deceived everybody.
And so they got rid of it.
But this time, the people had learned the lesson.
Nobody dared to make fake Western-sponsored candidates anymore.
They didn't try with the election of Sisi.
So there was just Sisi and another neutral guy with no NATO affiliations who was running against Sisi.
There was no set-up.
This time it didn't smell like set-up, like a choice between the lesser of two evils.
Sisi was popular because of his track record.
People saw with their own eyes on live broadcast television.
They saw how Sisi commanded the army to turn against the government on behalf of the people.
I think that's a good sign.
It's kind of hard to go back on that track record.
And he did meet with Russia, and, you know, he has been talking to non-aligned movement delegates.
So it looks right, and he has a track record.
And this time, there was no manipulation by NATO of the election.
NATO stayed out of this one.
Maybe they learned their lesson.
Certainly the Egyptian people learned their lesson.
Let me actually sort of throw a bit of a damper on all of that, which sounds quite optimistic, and I appreciate it.
Okay.
But it is widely known that Egypt is basically bankrolled by the United States.
In other words, that the country is totally dependent on U.S. aid in order to survive.
Well, as far as I know, I mean, I've looked into this.
There is only one U.S. aid.
And I know that that's what they tell you.
And I've heard this a million times on every news channel that there is also.
They're dependent.
And it's totally bankrupt.
I know.
It's not you saying this.
You know, this has been all over the news for decades.
But here's the fact.
There's only one USAID. That gets paid to Egypt, officially, which is the military aid.
The amount of that military aid is approximately $1.5 billion.
It's not that much.
In a government budget of any small country, it's not that much.
It's a little bit.
I've seen with my own eyes where that government aid goes.
It buys some tear gas canisters.
Most of it is not in money at all.
It doesn't actually bankroll anything at all.
Most of it is the U.S. delivering airplanes, military aircraft, to the Egyptian army, which they don't use and they don't really need.
So it's a lot of value.
Probably, you know, a billion of the one and a half billion is sitting there in airplanes and mobile flies because they don't need it.
So it's not like they're actually giving aid, and it's not aid anyway.
We know how propagandacy goes.
There is no way that that's aid.
The part, the small portion of the 1.5 billion, which is itself a very small portion, that is actually liquid.
A portion of a portion that's liquid is used to buy some tear gas canisters, some hand-pistol firearms for, you know, army officers, It's used to buy Jeeps.
They've got a nice round of new army Jeeps, the nice Jeep Wranglers.
Okay, well let's slow down in one minute, and I appreciate that characterization, but let's go back to the Muslim Brotherhood that was actually funded by Obama.
What was the number?
Was it nine billion?
Say again?
Oh, what Obama gave to the Muslim Brotherhood, that was...
Yeah, because that's still considered money going into Egypt, right, from the U.S. So, I mean, yes, you're...
Okay, but it wasn't to Egypt, it was to a criminal organization, arguably.
Yeah, I mean, arguably, but again, this is kind of what we're looking at.
The reason I'm bringing this up is because we're looking at, you're talking about this, you know, and I'm looking at it from the point of view of, let's say, some American kind of governmental official, at least even topsider, but to say nothing of the secret government.
But aside from that, because it's quite a...
A can of worms if you really go down deep into the subjects, and what is the significance of Egypt and the world stage, etc., etc., the pyramids, you name it.
But what we're looking at is An alliance right now between Russia and Sisi, where this is a positive thing, apparently, or appears to be positive, and the way you're characterizing it.
But at the same time, there is this issue right now going on between Russia and the U.S. From my point of view, I think this is rather a dog-and-pony show.
You may not view it like that, but from my point of view, as Jordan Maxwell will say, it's one bird, one head, with two wings.
One wing is the United States, the other is Russia.
They've been doing this game for a very long time.
This is just a new rendition of the same game.
Putin is no angel, but he is playing a role, and he plays it very well.
So this is what we're dealing with.
That's an opinion, and that's a valid opinion.
That's a valid opinion too, but it's not the fact.
The fact is people's track record.
What did they do?
And what we see, I like.
What Russia has actually done, what they've actually been doing.
I don't know if I agree with everything that they want to do or plan to do.
I don't know.
I might disagree at some point.
But so far, I like what they actually do, which is they uphold sovereignty, the principle of national sovereignty, that every country has its own right to be its own country, with its own culture.
And Russia has been true to that.
As long as Russia stays true to that, I will be very happy to do that.
Sorry?
This is a loaded question, but along those lines, and I appreciate that that may be how they're behaving towards Egypt, and that may be how you see it, but are they behaving that way in Ukraine right now?
Russia?
Yeah.
Well, Russia's been completely hands-off.
Russia hasn't actually done anything.
Despite all the Western reports, oh, Russia's doing, we don't like what Russia's doing.
Russia is not doing.
There are people of Russian ethnic background in Eastern Ukraine who live there, who just saw a coup by a criminal element in their own country.
Led by neo-Nazis, right?
There's been no evidence that Russia actually did anything.
At all.
Zero evidence.
We do have evidence.
Smoking gun admissions by Victoria Nuland that 5 billion dollars of US government money went through UN NGOs.
To shape the political sphere.
We have her live, in recording conversations, dictating to Ukrainian oligarchs who she and the US think should be the leaders.
And of course every last one of them ended up in the government and being the leaders.
And the guy who she wanted to be president ended up being the president.
The evidence is that NATO did.
If you want to talk about what they're doing, it's NATO doing.
Russia has been not doing.
What happened is Crimea appealed to NATO and said, for the love of God, please help the referendum all by themselves.
Russia said nothing about it.
Russia didn't do anything.
The people of Crimea themselves exercised their own international law, human rights to self-determination, with a referendum, the most direct form of democracy known in human history.
A direct referendum.
No electoral college or manipulating voter registration zones.
Direct representation.
Right?
A referendum.
They did it, and then they went to Russia saying, please take us in.
All Russia did was say yes.
That's all they did.
So this isn't about what Russia was doing.
This is about what NATO was doing.
Well, I think there has to be doing on both sides of that equation.
Now, what is really going on, I'm not sure.
And I do appreciate, you know, there's documented evidence, and I have back-channel evidence as well, obviously, of the CIA going in, you know, inciting, basically, revolution in Ukraine.
And the Crimea situation is an interesting one because, again, I don't know what's going on on the ground there as much, although I do know that the number of pyramids were discovered, a mummy was discovered.
All the evidence I have and that's out there is saying that that was a key piece, that the U.S. did not want to lose There is a whole, let's say,
a lower level battle between Russia and the US that is being orchestrated and flamed up at this time between You know, fighting over ancient relics and power places on the planet, etc.
And Egypt is one of them.
Crimea is obviously another one, maybe even more recently discovered.
You're onto something, Terry.
I haven't fully researched this or really developed it, but I really have a feeling that there's an element.
No, I know that there's oil and whatever.
I get it.
I'm not going to disagree, but I think there is a real element.
That some of these wars and destabilization of foreign countries are somehow connected to destabilization interfering with archaeological discoveries.
I do think that there are some very key sites, some of which are still kept secret.
I have rumors like you do, I think you know what I'm referring to, in Iraq and in Egypt and in some other countries.
If certain things have been discovered, they've been kept classified.
There is an element where sometimes these things look like they're trying to cover up our history.
And we have a good idea.
Yeah, I mean, you have a good idea of what?
Say again?
I'm sorry, you just broke off in the midstream.
You have a good idea of what?
Oh, well, in the Order of the Temple of Solomon, with the archaeology we have, I think we have a pretty good idea.
I'm sorry, I thought that I'd put my Skype on block everybody, and somebody keeps trying to call.
Let me make sure it's blocked.
There it is.
I'm probably calling to tell you to shut up.
So yeah, we already have enough Let me just say this.
Enough archaeology has been done, and enough of it is in the right hand that it can be preserved.
All of the secrets that they're trying to cover up have mostly already been discovered, and there's enough information that is actively being brought out to the public that will be in books that everybody can buy on Amazon.com.
People are going to get all of it.
They didn't get it.
If they can bomb every archaeology site in the world as of today, we're not going to lose the human heritage.
Enough has been done, and we know enough to give the whole picture back to humanity.
That's the good news.
Okay.
So it's too late for the Illuminati guys.
Yeah, well, okay, I appreciate that, although I guess the truth remains to be seen, but I am, like you, optimistic on that score.
Although, you know, the Vatican notwithstanding, which has been, you know, as you know, the Library of Alexandria ended up underneath the Vatican for the most part.
And possibly some other places as well.
Okay, so with this situation, I mean we really have been going a very long time and we need to stop it here.
Obviously it took a long time to get us underway.
So I'm very glad we got this down here and I'm very hopeful that it's going to be recorded.
Okay?
And so that's just something that's also motivation to stop now before something crazy goes on.
At any rate.
So just to wrap this up, do you have some sort of wrap-up comments about where Egypt is at in the greater picture at the moment with respect to the new leader and maybe seeing the future?
So comments along those lines and then please do give your website where people can learn quite a bit about you and then I believe we have you linked anyway on those articles but please do so.
Yes, what I think sums up everything is the non-aligned movement itself.
I think it's really important that people understand what this is.
The non-aligned movement is 120 member states plus 17 observer states.
That's a total of 137 countries.
Now, the UN General Assembly has 193 countries.
So the Non-Aligned Movement is 71% of the UN General Assembly.
Now, what is the Non-Aligned Movement?
The concept is it's not aligned with globalist colonialism.
Now, if you look at NAM, that's the abbreviation, or Non-Aligned Movement Online, all these articles in the mainstream media Always say the same thing, they try to poo-poo it.
As, oh, it was a Cold War thing, it was responding to the Cold War, and is it relevant, they would ask, you know, is it still relevant?
No, it wasn't just about the Cold War, it was about colonialism.
This was most of the southern countries in the southern hemispheres, and a lot of, you know, free countries who care about sovereignty, who were colonial countries and fought against colonialism.
Like President Nasser of Egypt who helped get the British out after King Farouk did.
These are countries who are fighting for freedom against colonialism.
That is still relevant today.
Why?
Because we have something called neo-colonialism.
So now we need neo-anti-colonialism.
Sorry, it's natural.
Right?
So that's what non-aligned means.
It's not aligned with globalist colonialism.
Therefore, it's anti-agenda.
The non-aligned movement is organized.
It has an administration and an infrastructure like the United Nations, so that's why it has member states and observer states.
It's almost literally an alternative United Nations that operates within the UN. 70% of the General Assembly, that's more than two-thirds, that's enough to test just about anything.
It's the non-aligned movement that got Palestine approved as an observer state in the General Assembly.
That's because we have the non-aligned movement.
So this is important to Egypt.
It's important to a lot of countries.
The BRICS Alliance, most of them are like China and Brazil.
They're observer states in the non-aligned movement.
They're connected.
BRICS and NAM are connected.
Egypt is the most populous country in the Middle East and one of the original founders of the non-aligned movement.
Egypt is very, very important.
I believe that's one of the reasons why they targeted Egypt so aggressively to destabilization, and why they might continue to do so, although I think, hopefully, Egypt has been smarter than that.
Alright, and thank you for that very clear explanation.
Where does Syria fall in this non-aligned movement?
I'm not sure.
I didn't notice them on the list.
I don't remember.
But Syria is like any other country like Libya that just simply has its own plans for its own national sovereignty.
Any country like Syria that says, no, we don't want to let America dictate all of our domestic and foreign policies.
You know, Gaddafi in Libya was saying, we're going to launch a gold-backed-denar currency.
And he had accumulated a fund of billions of dollars that was going to be for all of Africa.
And, you know, they were doing really, really well.
Libya was called the Switzerland of the Middle East, and he was reaching out to help the rest of Africa, too.
And when NATO came in and said, you have to do as we say, Gaddafi said, no, we don't want to.
So they decimated Libya.
Assad was doing the same thing.
It's not that there's an agenda or a conflict.
It's enough that you have your own country and your own culture and your own history and would simply like to live in peace in your own goddamn country.
That's enough to provoke all the wrath Of America and the NATO alliance.
To come and destroy your entire country and your whole people and try to deprive you of all your history and heritage.
It's enough that you want to be free.
To make enemies.
So what I want the international judiciary to do in the human rights courts, and there's some other courts coming, not people's courts and little tribunals, international law already established a higher way to do a real human rights court.
That is being rolled out, people.
It's being rolled out.
There's going to be justice to answer to.
And judges, I want judges all over the world to restudy your international law.
All of it has been violated.
All the human rights have been violated.
Protect sovereignty.
Protect the right of peoples to be their own peoples.
We might not agree with them.
We might not like how they live in their country.
But if they're God-given right to live in their country, in their way, in their culture, right or wrong, let them have it.
Because here's my big conclusion.
Democracy, real democracy, isn't manipulating countries and judging them.
Real democracy is being able to vote with your feet and vote with your wall.
If every country on the planet is the same goddamn God-forsaken thing where you have no rights and it's all being dictated by the same people, there's no democracy because you can't say, I don't like this country, I like the other country better.
So you can't vote with your feet and say, I want to live in that country and I want to open up my business and pay taxes in another country.
And I want to go on vacation in another country.
You can't vote with your feet if every country on the planet is exactly the same and dictated to by the same people.
This is why we need to respect countries that we don't agree with.
That's why they have to have a right to be their own country.
You know, for the love of God, let countries be different so that we can choose which ones you like, which ones you don't like.
Vote with your feet.
Vote with your wallet.
That's the real democracy in the whole world.
Okay.
Well, thank you for that.
So, at this moment, just kind of a footnote, really.
Again, please give your website.
This is the last question, and it's kind of a red herring kind of question, and I don't know if you're going to know anything about it, but please give your website before I ask you this question.
Okay, that is Knights of Solomon.
So that's Knights with an S, of Solomon, spelled S-O-L-O-M. O-N, I think.
Yeah, Solomon with all O's.
KnightsofSolomon.org, because this is all about non-profit stuff and philanthropy stuff.
It's.org.
KnightsofSolomon.org.
Everything that the Order of the Temple of Solomon is about, its politics, its policies, its spiritual beliefs, none of it is secret.
Okay, it took us 700 years as a secret society just to survive and still be here today to talk to you all.
But none of it is supposed to be a secret.
Everything that the Order believes in is public and it's rolling out more and more as much as it can.
There's no secrets, there's no funny business, no grand poobah, no secret handshake.
People, this is the real deal and you're all welcome to do it.
And as many questions as you all have, you're all going to get answers as fast as people can type it.
Okay, and let me just say the caveat here is, just for the people listening, you have no relationship to the Knights of Malta, right?
That's correct.
In fact, there's no affiliation to any other fraternal or other organization.
We're not in the Vatican.
We're completely independent from it, legally and sovereign-wise.
It's not a part of anything.
It's not a part of any masonry or anything.
This is its own thing direct from 1118 A.D. that has the same knowledge that the original Nine Knights discovered excavating the Temple of Solomon to preserve what is now 12,000 years of human history.
All we care about Is the ancient knowledge and giving it back to the people of the world.
This is not something that we know and you don't, so we're better than you.
Mason's a lot of times thinks like that.
We don't.
We're doing this for you.
We have everything we need.
We're sharing it with everybody who deserves it, which is everybody, which is the people.
Okay.
All right.
And thank you.
Now, one last question, as I said.
Do you know anything about Benghazi?
No, I really don't.
That's simply outside of anything that I looked at.
I was busy with other things.
Okay, alright, so that lets you off the hook at the moment, although we might revisit that in the future.
Yeah, I'm happy to talk about it, but I don't know anything to report on.
Yeah, I hear you.
Well, there's got to be some inside information, I would imagine, in Egypt that deals with, you know, because you do acknowledge that there is arms trade coming in from Libya.
And so Benghazi is part of that scenario.
There was Mossad deals going on with the Mossad, obviously, and Libya.
Somehow Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood, certainly got hold of a number of arms.
There seems to be some backchannel things along those lines.
But let's leave that as it is.
Let's end this at this moment, and thank you again.
Prince Judge Matthew Green.
And I will hopefully get this up on YouTube as soon as possible.
This is now on live stream.
It will be live after this moment.
People will be able to watch it on live stream all day long.
It streams just automatically.
That's how it works.
Assuming it works properly.
And so that's the way it goes.
Thank you, Carrie.
Thanks for leading the discussion, because it's too much to talk about for me to decide which way it goes.
It would be five hours if it were up to me.
So thank you, and it's lovely to see you today.
It really is.
And thank all your people for being interested enough to join us.
And thank God for all your people who care about actually watching these things.
Really, because a lot of people don't care.
So you people who are watching care enough to want to know something, you're where the action is.