We profile Paul Joseph Watson, a box-headed far-right conspiracist who’s been longtime collaborator of Alex Jones — eventually co-founding an outlet with him: Prison Planet.
Subscribe for $5 a month to get an extra episode of QAA every week + access to Trickle Down, the ongoing miniseries by Travis View: http://www.patreon.com/QAnonAnonymous
Liv Agar: https://linktr.ee/livagar
Annie Kelly: https://twitter.com/VaccinePodcast / https://twitter.com/AnnieKNK
Byline Times article: https://bylinetimes.com/2022/05/06/wipe-jews-off-the-face-of-the-earth-racism-and-antisemitic-slurs-of-viral-youtuber-exposed/
QAA Merch / Join the Discord Community / Find the Lost Episodes / Etc: https://qanonanonymous.com
Episode written by Annie Kelly. Music by Max Weber. Editing by Corey Klotz.
Welcome, listener, to Chapter 192 of the QAnon Anonymous podcast, the Paul Joseph Watson episode.
As always, we are your hosts, Jake Rokitansky The so-called Kelly Society claims their raison d'être is straightforward.
They'd like you to believe that they're simply researching a long lineage of barbaric Anglo-Saxons.
Their own.
And indeed the Kelly genealogy, what they ate, how they dressed, and more than anything, how they fought, has long been a mystery to contemporary historians.
But as Fields, we understand that the Kelly Society, and their president Annie, are just a front for a shadowy cabal of eugenicists hell-bent on building an army of boxy-skulled lads, much like that of Paul Joseph Watson.
This PJW phalanx is being secretly built out of a tea cellar in Yorkshire, Middle Earth.
And from letters we've intercepted, we now know their goal.
To relitigate the Pudding Wars, accuse the fields of anti-monarchist activity, and institute a global bedtime.
With that in mind, today's episode appears to be a study of Paul Joseph Watson, a box-headed far-right conspiracist who's been a longtime collaborator of Alex Jones, eventually even co-founding an outlet with him, Prison Planet, which coincidentally is where they should send the Kellys.
Paul Joseph Watson.
Hello and welcome, beloved listener.
It's your UK correspondent and close personal friend, Annie here.
It's been a little while since I've been on the podcast and I promise that for once, this isn't Julian's fault, but because I've recently taken up a part-time position working as a postdoctoral researcher on an academic project that looks at, strangely enough, conspiracy theories on the internet.
It will be my job to sort through these conspiracy theories and decide, once and for all, which are true.
Which, as you can imagine, is a pretty demanding task that's taking up a lot of my mental, physical and spiritual energy.
Rest assured, it will all be worth it when we have all of the answers and can finally put a stop to arguing about this topic, once and for all.
They should have hired me because, you know, they're all true.
Problem solved.
Project over.
They look over Liv's shoulder to be like, oh, well, how's the research going?
And you just close your Steam browser really quick.
You have to minimize it.
Yeah, so it's going.
They're correct, all of them.
Today's episode is going to be about a semi-famous British online commentator and vendor of conspiracy theories who I've been aware of for a very long time, Paul Joseph Watson, or Prison Planet, as he likes to go by on Twitter and YouTube.
Having worked for Alex Jones since 2002, rising up in the ranks to editor-at-large at InfoWars, as well as running his own YouTube channel with 1.89 million subscribers, There's no doubt that Prison Paul has had a significant impact on the general shape and tenor of conspiracy theories online, even if like his former boss Alex Jones, he's made a point of rejecting the main body of QAnon itself.
Having said that, I've always been a little reluctant to write an episode about Paul.
Perhaps this is out of some sense of misguided regional solidarity given that he and I are both from Yorkshire, a region with a strong sense of unity against the rest of the world and Lancashire in particular.
More probably though, I haven't wanted to dignify him with an episode because the man is a professional attention seeker whose entire social media strategy for the best part of a decade has been to post deliberately inflammatory, ridiculous or just generally pathetic content for the liberal left to dunk on and thus unwittingly share further.
This has been something of a winning business model for Paul, who, unlike Alex Jones, continues to enjoy a Twitter account which currently sits at around 1.2 million followers.
Whenever engagement goes down, he just spits out some idiotic tweet about how the libs are triggered because he eats salmon with grated cheese, and presumably tops that number up.
I personally think Paul's continued influence and popularity has made the internet a significantly worse place, and so I don't want to give him even a small portion of the negative attention he so plainly thrives on.
Recent events, however, have changed my mind.
A Byline Times article has come out about Paul, and from the way he's studiously ignoring the topic, I get the sense it's something he doesn't want us to talk about for a change.
That's probably because the article contains audio of Paul in conversation at a party being extremely racist.
Indeed, even more racist than he normally is, which is pretty hard ask.
A warning in advance, the recording I'm about to play, despite being less than a minute in length, somehow includes slurs against basically every conceivable protected category apart from Paul's own ethnic group.
White YouTuber.
I apologise to our gentle listeners for making you listen to it, but my only other option would have been to make one of the boys read it out loud.
That probably would have been pretty useful for my eventual plans to cancel each one of them until I'm the last podcaster standing, but I'm focusing my eyes on today's target for now.
This is a classic Corbinite.
She wanted Jake to read it.
I would have.
I did get pilled on one of Paul Joseph Watson videos, so I should fall on my sword.
I don't give a shit about Israel or Palestine.
I don't care about... I care about white people and not sand nigger packy gym faggot coons.
Yeah?
I'll leave you with that. I really think that you should press the button to wipe Jews off the face of the earth.
Honestly.
It's so fucking cartoonish.
Wow.
Oh my God.
Yo, that is the most racist, that is the most racist paranormal EVP ever recorded.
I went to sleep.
I, you know, I've got a sleep app that I use that records me in my sleep.
I went to bed the other night and I woke up mysteriously at us at, um, uh, four, uh, four 88 o'clock.
And yeah, it captured this voice.
Here's the thing, this is like so incredibly over-the-top racist.
It's more racist than I would have expected him to be in his private life.
I realize, even as cynical as I am, I give these people too much benefit of the doubt for just the hatred that is just boiling out of them at every single moment of their lives.
I completely agree.
Feels like he's disappointed there aren't more slurs.
Like a repertoire of slurs that the English Language Officer is insufficient for how hateful he wants to be in his language.
Now, to a certain extent, it's unlikely that anyone familiar with Paul's content would find the fact he uses this language surprising.
Paul has been one of the most prominent mouthpieces for racist and far-right conspiracy theories on the internet for the best part of a decade.
He embraced the alt-right label long after the point it became clear it was a veneer for digital
neo-Nazism, although he did get cold feet and dropped the label in July 2016, to be fair to him,
referring to them as a "faction that, in supposed contrast with himself, given that audio we just
heard, likes to fester in dark corners and obsess over Jews, racial superiority and Adolf Hitler."
But regardless of how Paul chooses to self-identify, the fact is his YouTube and
social media output are a near constant stream of racist and conspiratorial provocations to violence.
This isn't just my opinion, but something backed up by academic research.
In July 2019, Context Journal published an investigation by Elizabeth T. Harwood, where she compared a collection of high-profile far-right influencers' social media accounts to the Christchurch terrorist manifesto, circulated around the internet after he massacred 51 people in 2019.
The manifesto heavily referenced the Great Replacement Theory, a racist conspiracy that white people are being replaced by people of colour in their supposed homelands.
Here's a quote from the investigation.
Howard found that 25 of the 66 influencers she investigated had a moderate similarity strength
to the shooter's manifesto, with another 15 having very little or a weak positive
correlation to the document.
Hall's Twitter account, surprise surprise, was right at the very top, with a .56 similarity.
This is not the only time Paul's work has been connected to an act of Islamophobic terror.
In June 2017, a man deliberately ploughed his van into a crowd of Muslims outside a London mosque in Finsbury Park, killing one and injuring nine others.
At the driver's subsequent trial, it emerged that he regularly read Infowars, including an article by Paul which made the false claim that, quote, Muslims living in both the Middle East and the West show alarmingly high levels of support for violent jihad.
The attacker's partner described him as having been brainwashed by far-right sites in the week preceding the attack.
As recently as January this year, Paul was still pushing Great Replacement rhetoric, calling demographic change in the United States deliberate cultural colonisation.
Donald Trump's 2020 campaign seemed so transfixed on eking out a few extra percentage points of the black vote that his largest erosion ended up being amongst white voters, particularly white men.
The Republican establishment and Trump's biggest supporters outside of Tucker Carlson were and are petrified of even mentioning demographics.
The media monsters anyone who questions whether the browning of America might be anything other than a fantastic thing as a dangerous extremist.
They've also entrenched this bizarre form of double thing, where if you dare suggest the demographic decline of white people in America is part of a ploy to flood the country with a dependable migrant voting bloc, or that, whisper it, Diversity isn't a strength.
You're a racist evil conspiracy theorist, but if you openly embrace diversity as a progressive means of replacing those obsolete bigoted white boomers, that's a high status opinion and you're a sophisticated politico.
With facts like these alongside all of Paul's easily accessible body of work on YouTube that contain clearly racist narratives about Black Lives Matter, immigrants and white cultural superiority, It can almost feel frustrating to read a scoop that focuses on him having been caught saying slurs, as if that proves anything beyond what we already knew about the man.
Having said that, it's clear to me from my research that Paul's image is very important to him, and in particular he's always wanted to maintain a degree of plausible deniability.
Why else would he do things like back off the alt-right label when it started to get a bit too obvious what it really meant?
Or do an entire video clearly pushing the Great Replacement conspiracy theory but without actually using those words.
This careful quality of Paul in trying to stay just far enough within the bounds of acceptable racism is something other researchers in this field have noticed too, as evidenced by this quote from the Byline article about his covertly recorded rant.
Joe Mulhall, director of research at Hope Not Hate, the UK's leading anti-fascism and anti-racism campaign group, told Byline Times that Watson, quote, has long been a high-profile figure in the global far-right and has a long history of spreading racist and Islamophobic conspiracy theories, but that, quote, he has always been careful to try and stay within platform moderation policies to avoid being de-platformed and to protect his income.
Knowing all this about Paul, that he is both a deliberate provocateur, but equally an image-obsessed, careful one, has helped me construct a methodology of sorts for talking about him.
Namely, that I'll try not to focus on the outrageous or pathetic stuff he deliberately says for attention, but on the stuff that I think he doesn't want given attention.
Let's start at the beginning with Paul's childhood, which is just one of many aspects of his self-image that it looks like he's conspicuously lied about.
According to a deep dive into Paul's background by Nico Hines for the Daily Beast in 2018, Paul has claimed on several occasions in interviews that he had a working-class upbringing on a council estate in Sheffield, South Yorkshire.
This, no doubt, fits Paul's self-styled description as a man of the people, waging war against those sinister and powerful liberal elites.
However, some sleuthing revealed this instead.
According to Watson's birth certificate, land registry records, and Sheffield Council, however, the story may have been a little more complicated.
Think stunning countryside vistas rather than the projects.
Watson was born on May 24, 1982, at Jessop Hospital in Sheffield, They registered their second son's home address as School Lane in Greneside, a suburb north of the city, which residents said had retained its traditional village atmosphere.
Sheffield Council said the house has never been in public ownership, so the record suggests that he was not born on a council estate.
Over the next 20 years, the Watson family would live in a series of similar communities that rung along the leafy northwest suburbs of Sheffield, separating the city from the picturesque Peak District National Park.
James Whitaker, now 36, said he lived on the same road as Paul, quote, a nice lad during his elementary school years, quote, I wouldn't describe it as a council estate.
No, no, no, he said.
School friends of Paul's from the article described him as shy, clever and very political as a teenager.
Some remembered him as having a rebellious streak, mostly expressed through liking punk bands like the Sex Pistols.
According to Paul, he was also getting into reading books by David Icke at the time, the symbolic grandfather of modern conspiracy theorists, who came up with the oddly popular idea that our ruling elites are all giant alien lizards who masquerade as humans.
It was at the tender age of 18 that Paul would watch a documentary called Secret Rulers of the World, made by the British author John Ronson, who has, funnily enough, also been interviewed about his experiences filming the series by this podcast.
The documentary featured an astonishingly coherent Alex Jones criticising Ike for his foray into fantasy, as opposed to the more mature, adult conspiracy material Jones wanted to discuss.
The conspiracy theory world is highly competitive, and ever since David burst onto the scene with his extraordinary new theory about the genetic origins of the shadowy elite, his fellow conspiracy investigators have been scandalised.
Now is the time!
Not tomorrow!
Not next week!
Not next year!
We're engaging an info war!
Everywhere I've been, meeting people who are trying to uncover the great conspiracy, the subject of David Icke always seems to come up.
So what's David Icke doing on TV?
We have a lot of different producers.
You just get tired of the real meat and potatoes, the real issues.
So he's gone for all the ridiculous Hollywood stuff of David Icke and the blood-drinking lizard people.
So what does David Icke do?
He talks about the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, these global elitists, these power structures, all real, all true, all demonstrated by bills and executive orders and prime ministers and premiers and presidents.
Oh, real meat and potatoes.
Something you can bite into.
Something that is easily demonstrable.
And then you've got David Icke at the end of all this, he says, by the way, they're blood-drinking lizards.
It's Alex Jones, and yeah, he's much healthier, more vital days.
He is looking much rougher than he was when this documentary was made.
Oh yeah, and this is probably only like, you know, what, 16 months ago?
Yeah, he was 19, he was 19, and now he's like 19 and a half.
How old do you think he was in that video?
I know he's in his 20s, like late 20s.
I like that clip because it seems so strange to watch Alex Jones, of all people, criticise other ones for being too, like, dramatic.
Do you know?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, you know, he didn't need that market yet, you know?
Inspired by this material, Watson would go on to set up a website for conspiracy news called Propaganda Matrix.
That site is now defunct, but you can still look at some of its previous iterations using the Wayback Machine, the earliest of which dates to December 2001.
It's kind of charming as a time capsule of what conspiracies on the internet were like back then.
Poorly formatted images lead to seven different categories like Police State, Media spin and lies.
Illuminati and government-sponsored terrorism.
Unsurprisingly, given the time period, 9-11 being an inside job and the War on Terror was a big focus of Paul's back then.
He's even quoted in a 2004 Vanity Fair piece on conspiracy theories as saying, quote, the Department of Homeland Security needed a worldwide spectacle of horror to scare people into giving up their rights and supporting this fabled War on Terrorism.
It was around this time that he fell in with Alex Jones, who was very much on the same page politically.
Together the two worked on Jones' network of conspiracy sites from the now infamous InfoWars to another called Prison Planet, Paul's Twitter handle's namesake.
According to Alex Jones' ex-wife Kelly, when Watson took on his role as editor of InfoWars, he quickly began doing the lion's share of the work in their written content.
The majority of the stories that were Infowars were written by Watson, Cayley told the Daily Beast.
He's a talented guy in that way, able to spit out these fake news stories very quickly.
She said the relationship between the men had been rocky, and recalled long, heated, and torturous calls where Jones would spew his latest ideas to Watson and expect him to convert them into plausible stories.
often it would work, generating hundreds of thousands of clicks. "Paul was very young,
but he analysed the material in the same way that Alex did,"
explained Kelly. "Basically, it was a joint paranoic enterprise from then on." Together,
the two developed a particular ideological lens for unpacking world events, based on both their
intense scepticism of the official narrative around 9/11 and longer-running conspiracy theories
regarding shadowy organisations and secret societies like the Bilderberg Group or the Skull & Bone
Society at Yale University.
Nearly all mass shootings, acts of terrorism and wars could be charted back to the machinations of these secretive groups, which controlled every engine of government.
Interestingly, given how much Paul's later content would focus on the supposed existential threat of Islam to the West, he even argued that the 7-7 suicide bombings in London were staged by the government in 2005.
It was apparently Jones who convinced Paul to get in front of the camera, but he was initially reluctant.
There's a funny disconnect watching Paul's old YouTube videos if you're familiar with his current content.
He's clearly not comfortable, is very obviously reading a script, and isn't sure where to direct his eyes.
As someone who's been interviewed on camera a couple of times now and hated every moment, I do understand.
What's more interesting, though, is how much smarter he sounds in his old clips.
Don't get me wrong, he's still obviously pilled, but compared to later versions of Paul we've all come to know where he's mugging for the camera in front of a map, he does actually sound like he's read some books and still has an element of curiosity about the world.
Take this interview from 2011, one of the oldest videos on his YouTube channel, where Paul and his interviewer discuss the Arab Spring.
Sorry mate, how do you, um, I mean obviously we had information that came out, um, During the Tunisian uprising that Eric Schmidt, I believe, of Google had actually, he pretty much admitted to being involved with helping the Tunisian uprising.
So how do you, how would you explain to a layman what is going on in the Middle East?
Is it more that It's coup d'etats, it is coup d'etats being carried out by the West, or is it more that actually the people in the Middle East have had enough of these dictators and they're overthrowing it, or is it a mixture of the two?
How do you see it?
It is a mixture of the two, but you have to remember that in the case of Egypt, the US
embassy at least one year before that revolt began, got the information saying that it
would happen, that Mubarak would be toppled and that they were deliberately trying to
fund and influence the groups that would do it.
So when all these leftists come out and say that what happened in Egypt is this big successful
example of a secular revolution which is not based on religious dogma, they don't even
reference the fact that the US embassy had anticipated it at least a year before and
had sought to encourage it.
Of course it led through Egypt and these other countries to Libya, which is of course the
so-called protesters that they launched this fake no-fly zone war on were in fact rebel
al-Qaeda commanders that were flying fighter jets, that were driving tanks to claim that
they were protesters.
It was just an insult to anybody's intelligence.
So the fact that it led from Egypt through to Libya and then on the flip side you've got a situation in places like
Bahrain, which is, the government is completely controlled by
western interests, there's the same level of brutality going on there against
protesters and yet you barely read about it.
But if it's in somewhere like Syria, where the US, you know, they're moving now their warships to the Mediterranean
coast of Syria, then you hear all about how the government's oppressing
protesters.
I have a question for you, Annie.
Like, where do you place Paul in British society?
Like, what kind of a guy do you think Paul is, you know, within the bloke, the bloke-ish community?
Well, I don't know.
He's just like a little bit of a nerd, isn't he?
I mean, I think everyone's got that, at least at this point, I mean.
Yeah, you know, it's interesting seeing him speak here because he is obviously not as practiced as he was, I guess, when we developed Prison Planet.
He's looking down, he's speaking a little more softly.
He's trying to be reflective rather than forceful.
He seems, yeah, he seems like, he seems, I don't know, a little nicer here.
Yeah, I mean, yeah, he's making this kind of quite simplistic point about like Western media bias and like, yeah, kind of interference in kind of foreign sort of like political matters and stuff like that.
But it's, it's still miles away from the content he churns out now.
He went from grey zone to pay zone!
I was gonna say, you know, watching this young video of him, I mean, with a head of hair like that, this man could have done anything.
You know?
It's not like, you know, an Alex Jones where- Sweet Jesus Christ.
Where you're kind of- Sweet God.
What?
What?
Nothing.
Go on.
Tell us about the hair of the man.
I'm just saying, you could have done any- you usually, you know, I mean, in our position, technically, You know, you're used to seeing influencers like, you know, in the Matrix or, you know, people who, you know, conspiracy grifting is probably the best, you know, the best that they're gonna do.
But this young man looks like, I mean...
Full head of hair!
He's got like a One Direction haircut, you know?
Like he could have been in a boy band.
I mean, he could have been in anything.
Jake confers mystical power to hair.
It doesn't just give you power, it also... I think it does!
Alright, well...
Well, before we're too nice about his hair, why don't we compare that video to just one of his most recent ones that I found, which is about the recent leaked SCOTUS draft of an upcoming decision on Roe v. Wade.
And this video lasts about seven minutes and mainly consists of him reading out memes he's seen on Twitter in a stupid voice.
Well, the Supreme Court could be set to overturn Roe v. Wade and the baby killers are big mad.
Abortion is healthcare!
Abortion is healthcare!
No, you can't just stop us murdering infants.
New current thing programming just dropped.
Jeez, jeez.
Yeah.
People have said this online, but it's apparent that he is now understanding that time is linear and that events do occur in a series.
I know, yeah.
It's just like new current thing.
It's like you're just describing news.
Yeah, right.
It's just news.
Men should have like 1% stake in the abortion debate.
Your opinion means nothing to us.
Go sit in a corner.
The last thing I want to see on here is cishet men with any opinion on the subject of abortion and rape.
Talk about your thoughts and feelings right now.
Be quiet!
Checkmate, bigots.
You say men can't get pregnant?
You never heard of birthing persons?
Also leftists.
Men or women?
Checkmate bigots.
This is a panel on abortion.
You say men can't get pregnant?
You never heard of birthing persons?
Transphobe.
Women should decide what's right for women, not men.
Brought to you by the same people who can't define what a woman is.
You ready for all those birthing persons to magically transform back into women for the Roe debate?
Liberals, men should have no opinion on abortion.
Liberals, we support these nine men who decided Roe v Wade.
If they make abortion illegal, they should make men deserting women who they got pregnant illegal as well.
Because if a woman can't back out of a pregnancy, a man shouldn't be able to either.
Your terms are acceptable.
Covers both cases.
He's just reading tweets and memes.
He's just reading tweets.
There's a painting of Paul Joseph Watson in like his attic that's getting like smarter progressively.
I mean, Jesus, this is really sad.
His whole video is the batteries not included part of a toy ad.
Yes, exactly.
I guess if this gets views, why would you be pensive and thoughtful about things if you could just literally talk?
This is how 13-year-olds talk when they figure out that memes exist.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I watch this video and I just like, I look at a guy who just hates himself.
Like there, there is no, there is no way to be this casually rude and racist and you know, all of the, and transphobic, all, all of that shit without just like absolutely hating yourself inside.
Like the little voice, it's like Liv said, he sounds like a, like an upset, like 13 year old.
Like it's so fucking pathetic.
And yeah, I do want to stress again, Paul is 40 years old.
It sounds like a, yeah, a Zoomer who's just, just been allowed online.
Well, don't say that.
Now we're going to have to fucking listen to Jake talk about his hair again.
No, you know what?
His hair is significantly worse in this video.
You know, he fell off.
He used to have these, these, you know, these wavy locks and he's like, he's cropped it a lot tighter here.
So yeah, you're right.
Maybe his power wasn't his hair.
I'm telling you.
Now, you might say that YouTube is just a platform which rewards this garbage, and that Paul's simply learned the secret to putting as little effort in as possible while still gathering thousands of views and therefore ad revenue.
And you'd most likely be 100% correct on that.
Funnily enough, in one of Paul's old videos he actually seems to unwittingly predict the exact trajectory his content will take.
Now we've had to adapt our message.
To still be relevant in this brave new world of superficial soundbites?
If I'd have written all this up in a three-page article, a lot of people would have simply ignored it.
So what do you think?
Are social networking websites and the internet in general destroying our ability to think analytically and in any significant depth?
How can we craft our message to compete in this world of information overload and 21st century wireheads?
In fact, if there's one aspect of Paul that has really jumped out to me over the course of researching this episode, it's his laziness.
In spite of his prolific output, the man must be one of the most work-shy content creators I've ever seen.
His complete disinterest in researching or fact-checking anything he comes across means he's been the victim of mischievous hoaxes more than once.
In one particularly spectacular occasion in 2017, InfoWars published a report on an upcoming NBC release of footage of Trump saying the N-word.
The source?
One Scottish guy in Paul's Twitter DMs called Marcus Muir, who later told reporters he made the whole thing up for a laugh.
From the BuzzFeed Report.
I said I worked at NBC and couldn't say anymore, said Muir.
It was only two direct messages and I thought he might ask for more confirmation.
I went to bed, forgot about it.
Then I checked his feed on the train to work and it was just him saying there was huge news about to come out.
I couldn't believe it.
It was a cut and paste job of what I said to him and it was all bullshit.
I made it all up.
Perhaps more disturbingly though, evidence has emerged of Paul's desire to do as little work as possible, leading him to some pretty dodgy sources.
Jose, an excellent YouTuber I recommend you check out, made a video called Paul Joseph Watson's Nazi Problem.
In the video, the content creator found pretty damning evidence of Paul wholesale plagiarising from a neo-Nazi blog's translation of a French article.
The first thing I noticed about the blog post is that it's strikingly similar to the Watson article.
So much so that every quoted section from the Watson article is an exact match for the blog article.
Translation is not an exact science.
Translations may contain subtle differences depending on the translator.
Take, for example, these translations of the first paragraph of the French article.
I sourced both of these individually, and even when you take into consideration that words such as sexism and biphobia are typically only translated in one way, you can still see the subtle differences in the translation that show different people worked on them.
The first paragraph is included in both the Watson and the Diversity Macht Frei blog article, and they are identical.
There is no difference between them whatsoever, aside from a few opening words that the Watson quote cut off.
In fact, every quoted section is identical aside from the word femicide, which was spelled incorrectly as feminicides in the diversity blog.
I suppose it was nice of Watson to correct the spelling there.
But going further than the quotations, take a look at all these additional claims in the Watson article that aren't just quotes from the original Jardine article.
Every single one of them can be found in the translated sections originally posted in the Diversity blog.
That may not sound like a big deal, since they're talking about the same French article.
Why wouldn't they make the same claims?
Except the translation on the Diversity Blog only includes four paragraphs from the original French Article 17, not counting the concluding sentence.
Now, what are the odds that the Watson article, supposedly based on having read the original French article in its entirety, would have happened to hit the exact same points as this blog post that translated less than a quarter of the article's content?
In fact, as José uncovered, this strange similarity between Paul's written work and diversity-macked Fry wasn't a one-time event, but seems to be a recurring pattern.
So essentially he's like, oh yeah, I read this neo-Nazi blog, and he's like, the normies who listen to me, they're not reading these neo-Nazi blogs, so nobody's gonna know that I copied from it.
Paul is the second person in the human centipede, basically.
At the very least, Watson should credit the Diversity blog for the translation.
Although that might expose how little work he did for this article.
And it might expose something else as well.
Diversity macht frei.
You can get a sense of what this blog is about by checking out some of their articles.
There are a few overlaps with Watson's Infowars work.
We have these two articles about a woman in Germany being pulled over for wearing braids.
The Diversity Blog's article is dated January 8th.
The Watson article January 9th.
There's an article here about the French Green Party founder saying Europeans should have less children to make room for migrants.
Diversity Blog's article is dated January 4th.
Watson's is dated January 11th.
And an article about Germany issuing a manual to schools warning about signs of, according to Watson's article, right-wing parents, and according to Diversity Blog's article, Nazi parents.
The Diversity Blog's article is dated December 4th, the Watson article December 5th.
In many of these cases, Watson, to his credit, does more to build on the story than The Diversity Blog does, enough to make it seem as if he got these stories from somewhere else.
And heck, maybe he did.
It's entirely possible that The Diversity Blog and Watson just run in the same circles and cover a lot of the same stories using similar themes, such as the left trying to destroy Europe via immigration.
Although, when it comes to that first article, responding to the Jardine piece, I can't assume that's just a coincidence.
The articles are way too similar.
One is clearly lifted from the other.
Damn.
I'd say that's a pretty strong case.
Yeah, I think so.
He doesn't even, like, wait a couple days.
He basically, like, reads it and then that night copies it and writes it and then publishes it the next day.
I really, like, especially loved, like, the little editorial decisions that he makes.
Like, the Diversity McFry blog is for Nazis, so it's, like, drumming up outrage that kids are being taken from Nazi parents by the government.
But Paul's like, well...
I know that that's not really going to gain much sympathy outside of that blog's readership, so I'll just change it to Right Wing.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, he's a very lazy Nazi.
Yes.
This interesting little bit of reset leads us right back to where we started.
Paul's enduring racism.
It's no secret that InfoWars took an even harder right turn during the Trump campaign, with both Paul and Alex seeing an opportunity to corral some of Trump's online support into boosting their own audience numbers.
For Paul, this actually meant taking an embarrassing U-turn on some of his previous stories, such as his suggestion that Trump was a Clinton plant during his Republican leadership campaign.
Something I do find interesting, though, is the divergent paths that Paul and Alex seemed to take as they hopped on the Trump train.
For Paul, this meant abandoning the fundamental principles of InfoWars.
Deep state paranoia, false flags and preparism for what Jones might call a more meat-and-potatoes approach to far-right ideology.
Racism, misogyny and anti-LGBTQ material.
If anything, Paul seems genuinely embarrassed by the conspiracy theories he used to propagate.
Take this interview from 2018, before he left InfoWars, where Paul is asked if he'd ever consider a career in politics.
Have you ever considered going into party politics or going down the more conventional political route?
Do you see yourself in the future potentially doing that?
I really love what I'm doing and it just seems like a long slog to be a politician and to have to constantly be on the defensive and responding to everything Plus, I've had success in what I do in terms of reaching out, especially to younger people who probably wouldn't that be inclined to get into politics or listen to a political message.
So it's something that's never appealed to me.
People dig out, you know, skeletons in people's closets.
I don't have anything personal that's shady or anything but, you know, I've talked about some quite fruity things in the past in my younger days in terms of Conspiracy theories.
We don't all believe what we believed 10 years ago, you know.
So, he's saying he's growing, but he hasn't specified.
I know that he was a guy who once pushed, like, chemtrail stuff, which is, like, basic, kind of, like, vague conspiracy stuff.
But, uh, yeah, yeah.
I wonder what exactly, specifically, he's embarrassed by.
I mean, I think it's all of that sort of Bilderberg kind of stuff that InfoWars was doing.
I think definitely all of the kind of false flag stuff.
In fact, as it emerged during the defamation lawsuit against Alex Jones, which was levied by a father of one of the children who was murdered at Sandy Hook.
Paul was actually leveraging criticisms of false flag conspiracy theories privately to him as far back as 2015.
Since the mass shooting at the Connecticut Elementary School in 2012, Infowars repeatedly pushed the narrative that the event was staged and the grieving parents all crisis actors in a devious Obama administration attempt to institute gun control.
It emerged in the deposition that Paul had sent emails internally urging his fellow editors to stop this line of material.
Now, before you go feeling sorry for Paul, it might be worth examining the content of those emails, which makes clear his chief concern was InfoWars' bottom line.
They include lines like, this Sandy Hook stuff is killing us, and, quote, it makes us look really bad to align with people who harass the parents of dead kids.
As it turns out, he was actually right to worry, given Jones would end up losing no less than five lawsuits to grieving Sandy Hook parents, culminating in InfoWars itself filing for bankruptcy this year.
Now, it has bothered you personally to be associated with the kind of tasteless things being said about the parents on InfoWars, correct?
Well, it obviously bothered me at the time because of the content of that email.
Correct.
And it continued to bother you, right?
So long as the same narrative was being pushed, yes.
Okay.
Because Mr. Jones, let's be honest about this email, in 2015, Mr. Jones didn't listen.
Correct?
On this topic.
Whether he toned it down, I couldn't say, but... I mean, if you want to say he didn't listen to me in that instance, you could make the argument yes.
When it comes to the San Diego tragedy, how did you determine it was a real event and not phony?
I just didn't believe the notion that it was a wider conspiracy.
Why is that?
Personally, because the explanation that it was a conspiracy to push further gun control didn't make sense to me because after the event, further gun control did not really happen under the Obama administration from my perspective.
So I couldn't see a motive.
Are you proud of Indoor's coverage of San Diego?
Um, no, I disagree with it from the start.
So I can't say I'm proud of it, no.
You didn't stop it, though, did you, Mr. Watson?
Well, I aired my grievances, but I don't control info wars, so... Correct.
You aired your grievances in an email that we see.
But then after that email in 2015, you just kept working for the company that was doing this, didn't you?
Correct.
This is like trying to make like a serial killer feel bad about it.
You know, it's like, it's like, man, like, I thought you had a heart.
You sent the email.
You sent the email.
He's like, yes, I did.
Yes.
And I continued working for them.
Yes.
Because I don't care.
I just disagreed in particular with that conspiracy theory.
Hmm.
This developing ideological difference between Jones and Watson while they worked together on InfoWars would often lead to some pretty amusing conflicts live on the show.
Take this one in the wake of the Las Vegas mass shooting in 2017, where Paul's clear discomfort with Jones' wild speculation about the event was so obvious that the clip went viral.
It could turn out to be It wasn't left-wing, it wasn't right-wing, it wasn't an Islamic terrorist, it was just a mindless act of evil.
It does happen sometimes where you just get mentally deranged people who are hopped up on whatever SSRI drugs.
You know, the Batman shooter, he claimed he was motivated by a movie and he wanted to become the Joker.
Let me stop you.
We've got breaking breaking news here, Paul Watson.
That's absolutely critical.
Absolutely key.
I have gotten this.
No cameras, please, guys.
No cameras.
This is from a law enforcement source.
And the information is the news is lying.
FBI HRT did the hit on the guy.
And they found Antifa information in the room and photos of the woman in the Middle East.
So he did not kill himself.
The FBI hostage rescue team killed him because he was firing on them.
So he did not want to be taken alive.
And reportedly he did it.
And it was Antifa crap everywhere.
And other things I'm not supposed to mention.
That is directly from the hostage rescue team, by the way, Paul.
And I'm going to delete this information now.
Obviously that's huge.
That's huge if it turns out to be true.
Yeah, hey Paul, Paul, Paul.
This is from high-level CIA.
Right here.
That's who it's directly from.
And this is from the hostage rescue team.
You know I don't make sources up.
I'm sure he does.
Go ahead.
No, all I'm saying is that I'm going on the information I have and I don't know.
No, no, absolutely.
Absolutely.
I'm just saying this is big breaking news.
This is huge.
In fact, you go ahead and take over the next four minutes.
You host.
I'm going to run in here and get with the writers.
Go.
All right.
Oh, my God.
That's incredible.
That is incredible.
He's just like sat there looking so unimpressed and just goes, well yeah obviously that's huge if that turns out to be true.
It's like so miserable.
It's like, uh, I wish I had embraced that tactic as a younger child.
Be like, yes, Steven, you know what I got right here?
It's a text from your mom.
And she said that I can spend the night and drink as many sodas as I want.
I've got the text right here.
It's true.
This is 100% verified.
Your guardian, uh, saying that I can sleep over, drink as many sodas out of the fridge as I want.
And I'm going to delete this information now.
It's like two children.
It is.
It's like watching two kids.
I think this is a little bit like the, I guess, someone, a British conspiracist sort of bumping up into the American conspiracist.
Because, you know, I feel like conspiracists everywhere else, they have some sort of breaks.
You know, in England, they invented philosophical empiricism.
They believe in rationality to some level.
But here in the United States, it's pure PT Barnum, pure show.
And lots of people, lots of people who aren't raised up in that kind of tradition really can't grasp with that.
Hmm, interesting.
I personally, I have a different theory as to what's going on.
Do you want me to?
Yes, please.
I wonder if we're thinking the same thing.
Right, so the question is, I guess, why is Paul so happy with some conspiracy theories, like the Great Replacement, but really so averse to things like false flags and, yeah, kind of deep state psyops and things like that about terrorism?
My short answer is fascism.
And not just in that everyone that I don't like is a fascist way.
Fascist ideology demands a hyper-militarised and ultra-nationalist state, both of which can be achieved when anxieties surrounding the inherent violence of internal and external enemies are very high.
But, conspiracy theories which suggest that the military, the police themselves are an internal enemy of the people, like false flag conspiracy theories, decrease the demand for those institutions to empower themselves against the subversive population.
So I think this is why Paul is so choosy about which right-wing conspiracy theories he endorses and propagates, and also strangely inconsistent when asked to describe his reasons.
Right, because it's pretty clear that he doesn't respect his audience that much when he's like talking in like memes to them.
No.
Which is something that like clearly Alex Jones also shares by literally just being like, just got off the phone with the FBI.
Just got a text from the FBI.
I'm just just gonna delete it now.
You can't see it.
This is from, it's not even from like a source, like a higher up who understood.
He's like, nope.
He's like, this is from one of the guys who stormed the Vegas hotel.
He was in the extraction team.
He was there.
Swear to God.
So, I'm going to give you an example of these kind of inconsistencies to show you what I mean.
So take the example of sexual violence.
Paul, when he's asked in an interview as to what can be done about the, quote, jihadi security threat in Europe, said this.
It's not so much the terrorism that concerns me.
Tragic though, you know, for the people affected.
It's the cultural aspects.
We had a story today out of Leipzig in Germany where a woman in her 50s went for a jog in a park in the morning.
This wasn't late at night or anything.
She was raped, beaten by a migrant, or a southerner, as they call them in Germany, because that's politically correct.
And the police came out the next day and said, oh, the solution is women can now not go jogging alone.
You have to go jogging with someone else, or have a man with you, or be looking over your shoulder constantly while you're jogging.
In a public park, at 9am in the morning, that's what the German police are telling their citizens.
You know, you had it after Cologne.
The mayor of Cologne came out and said, keep the potential rapists at arm's length.
Walk in pairs, don't be alone.
That is literally capitulating to this Islamic modesty culture, where women can't leave the house without a chaperone.
They can't cover their heads in burkas without, you know, being
subject to rape and sexual assault.
So they're openly capitulating to the culture that they're bringing in.
Yeah, surprising though it may seem, Paul is a feminist who strongly condemns
victim-blaming women who have been victims of sexual violence.
But of course, there's a catch.
Because, shockingly, Paul seems to take a very different point of view when the perpetrator is white.
Slut Walk was a transnational feminist protest movement sparked in 2011 when a Toronto police constable, Michael Sanguinetti, gave a talk at a university addressing the issue of campus rape.
Sanguinetti apparently ad-libbed during the speech.
Quote, I've been told I'm not supposed to say this, however, women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised.
The comments sparked feminist outrage, first locally and then across the world, with protests being organised at what participants described as an institutionalised culture of misogyny and sexual profiling in law enforcement.
So here's how Paul responded to that particular case of modesty culture.
So you went to the slut walk which for those who don't know began around four years ago off the back of a comment made by a Toronto police officer who basically said that women would be less likely to be raped if they didn't dress like sluts.
It's become a huge thing in numerous cities across the world.
I think it was best summed up by an NRO article which I read Which called it a legitimate grievance that empowers a movement of irrational hatred.
And as he said, it's this idea that men have to be reminded every day not to be rapists.
And, you know, how is a costume party, which is essentially what this has become, disguised as a protest, how is that going to stop actual rapists who aren't even going to pay attention to any of this?
How is it going to deter actual rapists?
Because it's, you know, in the long run, it's only going to harm gender relations by making men petrified of intimacy and making women petrified of men.
In another video titled, The New Sexual Puritans, Paul railed against believing rape victims who said they had been victimised at all.
You can't make the cost of sexual interest not being reciprocated the complete ruination of a man's career, his reputation, and even his life.
You can't brand someone who sent a risque text or made a clumsy advance a pervert or a molester.
There has to be a clear distinction between that and actual sexual assault.
There has to be an understanding that accusation alone isn't proof.
We have to put a check on this cult of instantly believing the accuser without any regard for evidence.
But curiously, in that very same video, Paul would point to Muslim immigrants as the source of the real rape culture, using what were, at the time, unprosecuted allegations as evidence.
It's interesting, something I find with like, this is more with like Fuentes and his like sort of alt-right Pepe's, is like when the Taliban took over in Afghanistan, they were like, but don't we like sort of agree with them?
Like aren't they kind of base?
Like why do we not like these guys?
They're doing the things that we want to do.
Paul does a very similar thing when it comes to the police.
In Paul's countless videos raiding against the Black Lives Matter movement, he'll often lead by saying that he himself is a strong critic of police brutality as a way of establishing his own renegade anti-police state credentials.
In fact, when I looked into that claim, I found some very old videos from his previous libertarian 9-11 truth-a-phase and a 2012 article for Infowars in which he discussed a case of the police handcuffing a six-year-old girl for having a tantrum in school and charging her for assault.
Paul, by the way, there, conspicuously failed to mention that the girl was black in any of the main body of the text.
But I could not find anything from him about police brutality since after the Trump presidency.
The only evidence I could find of police criticising the police at all in the past six years is in cases where they've prosecuted hate speech in the UK.
If they're now treating any video content whatsoever that causes offence as hate speech, then my entire channel is hate speech.
It's getting close to where I'm going to have to leave the country simply to continue to make YouTube videos.
They're already arresting people who criticise Muslim immigration on Twitter.
Now satire?
Frigging satire that's not even malicious will not be tolerated.
And this is by no means a one-off case.
Just a few days ago, a Muslim police chief in Manchester said freedom of speech does not mean freedom of offending culture, religion or tradition.
Just last month, Greater Glasgow Police threatened to conduct home visits to harass people who made unkind or inaccurate tweets.
Last year, Police Scotland announced their intention to investigate offensive comments made on Twitter and other social media.
Of course, this is all selectively enforced, but the chilling effect is very real.
This is how political correctness is strangling freedom.
People are going to be terrified of expressing any political belief, even if it's satirical, even if it's not even meant to be political.
If we allow them to characterize Nazi jokes or Mohammed cartoons as hate speech, then it's only the beginning.
The end will bring us full circle.
To the very reason political correctness was created in communist countries in the first place.
To stifle, censor, and punish anyone who dares speak out against the state or the prevailing cultural mantra.
More common were recent examples of Paul actually celebrating police brutality, such as when he approvingly shared videos of riot cops pinning down anti-fascist protesters with the commentary that these videos are incredibly funny and everyone should go watch.
Smiley face emoji.
Now, yes, I know you're probably thinking as a listener that it's hardly the scoop of the century catching a right-wing YouTuber in an act of ideological hypocrisy.
But what I'm arguing is actually a bit stronger than Paul being a hypocrite or even a liar.
I would say that if we accept that Paul is a fascist, Most of these apparent ideological inconsistencies pretty much disappear.
Paul is still worried about over-policing, just against those he considers legitimate citizens, right-wing white people like him.
Everybody else that he considers internal enemies, such as black people, Muslims and anti-fascist protesters, have not earned the protections that full citizenship affords
them, and therefore deserve all the state violence that is handed out to them, if not
more. If that feels in any way unfair to Paul, have a listen to how he begins his video
entitled "The Truth About Black Lives Matter"
and see if that isn't basically what he's getting at here.
"Black Lives Matter is back in the news after the deaths of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile."
Now let's get this straight.
Unlike the political vultures on the left and the white supremacists on the right, I actually care about black people not being killed.
So listen up.
Despite what Black Lives Matter agitators tell you, despite the media narrative, Police brutality impacts all races, not just black people.
Yes, these situations are tragic and the videos are horrific, but the facts clearly prove that you're being lied to.
Of all the people shot dead in the US in 2016 so far, 24% were black.
Black people make up around 13% of the population, but they commit around half of violent crimes like homicides.
Law-breaking black Americans are five to ten times more likely to put themselves in close proximity to mostly white police officers.
So you'd expect there to be more violent confrontations between black males and white police officers.
They still all quote that like flawed FBI or whatever like report that's just like, I can't remember like what the reasoning was behind it, but there's a lot of good research out there about that particular study and how it's completely meaningless.
Yeah, I mean, that sort of despite making up 13% of the population, it's literally a neo-Nazi meme, which is cribbed from, yeah, you're right, I think now outdated FBI crime statistics.
So that little rant is just another example of Paul's unfortunate habit of repeating neo-Nazi talking points.
So strange how this keeps happening to him.
Yeah it's like any conspiracy that doesn't like directly run parallel to like Nazi or fascist ideology he's like uninterested in or is like speaking out against and what's so funny and it's not funny I mean just what's the word I'm looking for bad just bad about it is that like He uses him denying these wackier conspiracies theories as if to convince his audience that he has a strong barometer of what's bullshit, what's not, that he's not a crazy far-right kook.
But in actuality, all he's doing is just siding with anything that lines up with Nazi talking points.
It's crazy.
No, I think, yeah, that's exactly right.
He's like if, like, Sather was explicitly more into the sort of neo-fascist ideology when he sort of distanced himself from cute people.
Yeah.
Now is usually the point in the episode where I try to address my subject sensitively and empathetically, but that is honestly very hard to do here with a man who my research has uncovered is only more detestable than I thought.
So, in conclusion, Paul Joseph Watson is a racist crypto-fascist whose cowardice in not embracing that label openly is only matched by his laziness.
He actually makes me look back on other far-right subjects I've discussed on this podcast with something closer to respect, because although Andy Ngo and Tommy Robinson are also dangerous conspiracy theorists, at least they do actually leave the house occasionally and produce something, rather than sitting at home regurgitating memes they saw on 4chan.
But Paul's business model clearly works for him. Although he whines about demonetisation a lot,
he mostly seems to fly under the radar on YouTube in a way his more bombastic former boss,
Alex Jones, could only manage for so long. Social media platforms prioritising clicks
and advertising dollars over the documented risk of publishing veiled hate speech and
provocations to violence? Well, imagine my shock. Well said.
Well said.
Yeah, this guy really is a piece of shit.
He really... I like, I always try and like find something, something redeeming in my subjects, but it was really, really, this is probably the hardest one, actually.
Yeah, right.
This is too bad.
You're right.
It's like his skepticism of like some conspiracy theories, you're right, doesn't seem to come from a place of like, you know, at least gesturing towards rationality or anything like that.
It's rather like it seems like it's a comes from a place of like, well, listen, I'm trying to support this Nazi movement and this bullshit is making me look bad.
It's the same reason that we often see a lot of like out and out white supremacists Uh, sort of act embarrassed around QAnon people.
It's like, they'll tolerate the QAnon movement because they think they're useful idiots, but otherwise they think that it's just frustrating that it's like, oh, I have to welcome in these morons to my movement where I'm trying to build up, you know, a real fascist project here.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And they make us all look like kooks.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Shit makes us look bad.
And that's what people want to talk about.
And this proves my point of him still having a YouTube presence and a huge, huge Twitter following.
It's just like, you know, I think our media in a lot of ways, you know, pointing the camera at the kooks and the QAnons is much more interesting and funny and easier to dunk on when somebody like Paul Joseph Watson are so much more dangerous and so much more focused.
And have a massive platform and they're sticking to the issues.
I mean, that's, you know, that's really, I think, I think the scariest thing here is, is, you know, he's not one of those people that's like willing to kind of entertain the wackier stuff because then I can reach a broader audience and stuff.
He's like, no, I want the people that are laser focused on fascism, laser focused on this ideology and aren't going to get distracted with shit like, you know, JFK returning from the dead or whatever.
Yeah, no, exactly.
I mean, it's really interesting how many kind of right-wing YouTubers or sort of influencers, like, were kind of flirting or, you know, talking about The Great Replacement until Christchurch, you know, and then lots of them dropped it, like it became too hot.
But Paul is, like, still making videos about it in, like, the beginning of this year, so The Great Replacement by this point has, like, not just inspired one horrific terror attack, but by several.
But he just knows better than to call it that.
He just calls it cultural colonization and, you know, stuff like that.
And it's just like so cynical, you know, he knows exactly what this does.
Right, it's like he's so guided, I think, by like, I guess the algorithm and making simplified content that people are going to click on and not making his image look too associated with the right or with the far right.
But then like on this thing, he wants to push it so much that he's like, I'll find some way of doing it, even if it's I'm associating myself with Christchurch.
It's such an important part of his ideology that he doesn't care.
Yeah.
And, and like, it circles back to the very first clip you played us, Annie.
Whereas what we just watched in this last clip is this very, you know, measured and, um, you know, conservative, uh, sort of presentation, but behind closed doors, this guy is in the fucking mud, like every slur in the book, like so casually, like, like, you know, like Travis was saying, you wish he had more slurs, you know, he he's running out of them.
And so.
He knows what he is doing.
This is very, it's very savvy, and that should scare us all.
Thanks for listening to another episode of the QAnon Anonymous podcast.
You can go to patreon.com slash QAnonAnonymous and subscribe for $5 a month to get a whole second episode every single week, plus access to our entire archive of premium episodes, plus Travis's new series called Trickle Down.
Travis, for people who don't know, do you want to just give them a little insight on what your show's about?
Yeah, so it's about misinformation and bad ideas that flow from high authority sources like, you know, big media, big government, academia, people who should know what they're talking about.
We don't, and then hurt everyone else because they don't know what they're talking about.
So yeah, we've done an episode on like, you know, a really horrible study that fueled eugenics.
We recently did an episode on basically how the, you know, policymakers during the early days of the Cold War worked to help make people afraid and spread disinformation like radioactivity after an atomic blast actually isn't that bad.
So yeah, it's fascinating stuff.
So yeah, come check it out.
Yeah, lots of fascinating stuff.
Check that out.
Annie, you also have a podcast, Vaccine, The Human Story?
Yeah, that's right.
It's a six part limited series.
It's all finished now, so you can find it on any podcast app or on YouTube, which is about the development of the first ever vaccine against smallpox and the first ever anti-vax movement as well.
Yeah, you guys should check that out.
And also, I mean, all this content!
My God!
Liv, you also have a podcast and you stream on Twitch.
Tell the folks about what you do over there.
Yes, I have a Twitch stream where I just, you know, we do little goofs and gaffs, talk about politics, hang out Monday, Wednesday, Saturday, 6 p.m.
Eastern Time on twitch.tv slash levagar.
And I also have a philosophy podcast where I go over political philosophy, a lot about QAnon and related things.
Just search Levagar on whichever podcast hosting site you use.
Everybody here has a show.
I do the QAnon Anonymous podcast.
And you do it very well.
It's so awesome to work with people that are so smart, so talented, and also create really entertaining content.
I feel very blessed.
I feel like my content prowess is up significantly.
I appreciate all you guys.
Listener until next week.
May the Deep Dish bless you and keep you.
It's not a conspiracy, it's a fact.
And now, today's Auto-Q.
So I had an amazing organ meat dinner with my bro.
And then we got naked and we just chilled in my bed and watched some Obi-Wan Kenobi.
And we basically just held each other's mushrooms and kind of just like massaged the heart meridian.
Because in Chinese medicine, at least in classical Chinese medicine, penis is the outermost extension of the heart.
Especially that heart meridian.
Show this to you right here.
So this is a diagram in terms of penis reflexology.
It's a little bit blurry, but you can basically see there's all like the pineal gland is right before the urethra.
The heart is all about the fire element.
Small intestine as well.
Stores self-hatred, cruelty and impatience.
So basically we massaged each other's heart meridians to help release self-hatred while cuddling and watching Obi-Wan Kenobi and it was just so beautiful and this is what my Celtic ancestors did.
