S566 - GOP Rep Says Vaccine Passport May Be Joe Biden's Mark Of The Beast, Some Believe Its The End Of Days
GOP Rep Says Vaccine Passport May Be Joe Biden's Mark Of The Beast, Some Believe Its The End Of Days. Democrats are roasting Marjorie Taylor Greene over her comments.Establishment democrats seem to be completely on board with the idea of private companies tracking their location and medical history while conservatives, republicans, and libertarians reject the notion.Still many groups believe that we are in the end of days highlighting several occurrences that they claim are the prophecies being fulfilled.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Outrage from the left as Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican representative, said that the vaccine passport may be Joe Biden's Mark of the Beast.
For those that are familiar with revelations, the Mark of the Beast would be required for people to buy and sell.
And so Marjorie Taylor Greene is effectively likening it to that.
Interestingly, there are a lot of people who believe this is the end of days.
I'm not entirely convinced, but I certainly think it'll be fun and interesting to talk about the vaccine and what people believe is happening.
Our next story, Steven Crowder, one of the biggest conservative personalities on YouTube and in general.
has been temporarily suspended from YouTube.
He won't be able to post or upload.
And, according to Tubefilter, he's even been demonetized again.
Crowder called this a shot across the bow.
My friends, the purge is real.
People are getting banned.
And it's entirely possible even we do at some point.
Our last story.
A shocking video shows a man brutally assaulting a 65-year-old Asian woman while security guards just watch.
One guard even walks over and closes the door as this woman writhes on the ground in pain with serious injuries, leaving many to wonder why did they not intervene?
Some say perhaps it's because they didn't want to get fired from their jobs, or maybe men are no longer interested in taking on liability for protecting others.
Before we get started, leave the show a good review if you really do like the work that I'm doing.
Give us five stars, leave a great comment, because it really does help.
Now, let's get into that first story.
With the news of Joe Biden's plan for a national coronavirus vaccine passport, libertarians are outraged, saying that this is a violation of our rights, that it's akin to an authoritarian regime demanding your papers if you want access to public services, and even some progressives, no joke, have pointed out It's a violation of our Fourth Amendment rights. Perhaps
there are many progressives who realize that the Biden administration is not a left populist
administration, and you give that government power. And, well, many of these people on the
left view the Biden administration as right wing. Naturally, they're not on board with this
entirely. However, establishment Democrat types are absolutely on board with the idea that the
government can mandate you have a mobile app that tracks your location and medical history.
Some have even said, finally, this will break down the resistance and these anti-vaxxers will have no choice but to get the vaccine if they want to buy or sell, board a plane, go to a venue, or participate in any way.
Which brings us to this story.
Marjorie Taylor Greene, GOP rep.
Many on the left have tried making her the new boogeyman and it seems like they're going to continue doing it because in a recent video that Marjorie Taylor Greene put out, she asked a question.
With this national passport vaccine, could this be Joe Biden's Mark of the Beast?
In response, many on the left said the MAGA hat was clearly the Mark of the Beast.
And what's funny about this is that the people on the left who are saying that about the MAGA hat clearly have not even Google-searched Revelations or the specific passage that talks about what the Mark of the Beast is.
You see, I didn't know this until someone sent us a super chat on the TimCast IRL podcast.
The Mark of the Beast restricts you.
I'm sorry, without the Mark of the Beast, you can't buy, sell, or trade.
Which is very interesting.
And it brings me to the point Marjorie Taylor Greene brought up.
She didn't say it was.
She said, could this be?
But of course, often people say, I'm just asking questions is a way to present an idea and try and feign responsibility for saying that idea.
I think it's a fine thing to point out.
The COVID vaccine passport effectively will require you to have this tracking code if you would like to engage in commerce.
So I think it's fair to liken it to a mark of the beast.
But let's be honest.
The Mark of the Beast has been brought up over and over again for a really, really long time.
Now, there are real things we need to talk about when it comes to the vaccine passport, but I want to break down what the people on the left are saying about the Mark of the Beast, and there is a new and exciting conspiracy theory about this idea that, well, What's been going on the past few years has been fulfilling the prophecies in Revelations, and it may, in fact, be the end of days.
Now, normally, I don't care for much of this stuff, but with the vaccine passport thing and the left writing about Marjorie Taylor Greene, I did a couple Google searches, and sure enough, The Washington Post even had to write an article.
I shouldn't say had to, but they wrote an article refuting the idea that we're in the end of days, because I guess a lot of people believe it.
Let me just make it absolutely clear, my friends.
I don't think we're in the end of days, but I do think it's sometimes fun to talk about these ideas and, in reality, debunk them.
But it is fun, isn't it?
Well, let's take a look at exactly what Marjorie Taylor Greene really said and what the left is saying.
Before we do, head over to TimCast.com and become a member.
As a member, you'll get exclusive access to members-only segments from the TimCast IRL podcast, tons of really great conversations with Cassandra Fairbanks, Jeremy Hambly, Chrissy Mayer, comedian Kurt Schlichter.
We have a ton of full-on segments.
We've got hour-long bonus podcast episodes with people like James O'Keefe.
You've got to be a member if you want to get access to the stuff, but when you become a member, You're helping us expand our operations.
We plan to do shows, we plan to do new podcasts, not even news or culture, just straight up regular old shows, entertainment, TV shows, movies, etc., because we want to build that culture and challenge the establishment in different ways, productive ways, and actually offer up something as a counter to what they're presenting.
So go to TimCast.com, become a member if you want to help us out, and don't forget to like, Share, subscribe, hit that notification bell.
Let's read this story from Uproxx.
They say, wacky QAnon-loving rep Marjorie Taylor Greene's latest conspiracy theory is about vaccine passports and the Mark of the Beast.
I want to be clear.
Marjorie Taylor Greene did ask, she said, could this be or something to that effect?
Well, they're trying to make it seem like it's much more definitive.
She didn't make it as definitive, but I'm not necessarily going to give her a free pass on this one.
I get it.
You're like basically calling it the Mark of the Beast.
Uproxx says QAnon-loving rep Marjorie Taylor Greene attempted to distance herself from her most infamous conspiracy theories, but not many people are buying it.
She's been banished from congressional committees, and CrossFit has tellingly denied any affiliation with her because, yeah, that's totally self-explanatory.
No one wants MTG to taint their brand with her rhetoric.
Yet she persists with even more bonkers theories each day, including what she's ranting about in her crusade against vaccine passports.
Greens of the far-right opinion — it's a far-right opinion, apparently, even though, yes, there are literal progressives who don't agree with this, but sure, uprocks — that vaccine passports shouldn't exist for a few reasons.
They're steamed about certain states' voter ID laws and are creating a false equivalency between those laws and a supposed double standard with the mere idea of vaccine passports.
Um, I'm sorry.
My understanding is that if you actually want to get a vaccine, I think CVS does this, you need an ID to do it.
So you need your ID to get your vaccine so that your vaccine passport works.
But in order to vote you don't need that?
Come on, that's a reality.
They say, even more than that, Green appears to be convinced that such a passport is actually, quote, Biden's mark of the beast.
As wacky as it sounds, Green's sticking with this argument.
Quote, they are actually talking about people's ability to buy and sell linked to the vaccine passport, she tweeted.
They might as well call it Biden's mark of the beast.
She followed up with several more tweets, including her insistence that we will not comply with Biden's vaccine passports.
The freshman congresswoman recorded a video to this effect and accused companies who require workers to be vaccinated of corporate communism.
That is a very strange phrase, but I get the idea she's trying to say.
And the left has called it corporate socialism for a long time.
The idea that corporations get all this free access and guaranteed income, and then oppress the workers.
So why are they acting surprised that Marjorie Taylor Greene is using their language?
Please, spare me.
They say Green never seems to run out of energy.
She's been tweeting on the subject all day.
And to pace them all here would be redundant.
But here's another silly leap in logic from her.
She's somehow trying to paint pro-choice Democrats as evil because they want to drop, my body my choice, while urging people to get vaccinated.
This lady is the master of mixing and matching unrelated issues.
Or...
Maybe the writer at Uproxx just doesn't understand... logic, I guess?
Marjorie Taylor Greene tweeted, I understand the point she's trying to make.
in the womb, claiming my body my choice, are the same people demanding you must have vaccine
passports, and it's not your body or your choice. I understand the point she's trying to make.
If it's my body, it should be my choice whether or not I put something in it.
Now, I don't necessarily agree that that has anything to do with vaccine passports.
I think vaccine passports, in the bigger picture, are more of a Fourth Amendment violation.
There's also problems with several countries actually suspending the rollout of some vaccines because of fears over blood clots.
There's also reports, or I should say advisory, to many people that if you are pregnant or have food allergies, you also can't get the vaccine.
So, my personal opinion, I don't like the idea of having to go to a government app or something like that in order to get access to public services, because we all need to be treated equal under the law.
Some people can't get the vaccine for a variety of reasons, and you can't restrict access based on that fact.
The counter?
Well, they're offering up another provision in the vaccine passport that you need only test negative for coronavirus.
Once again, this is going to put a requirement on people that might not have the resources.
And interestingly, check this out.
The Conversation reports a COVID vaccine passport may further disadvantage refugees and asylum seekers.
I'm just going to say it.
The vaccine passport, by the logic of the woke, is racist.
Okay, fine.
Maybe they don't agree with the voter ID thing.
Maybe they're like, that doesn't make sense.
The COVID passport is about safety and security.
Okay.
Well, I'll use the exact same arguments that you used about voter ID.
Many of these people aren't going to know how to find a vaccination center.
They're not going to know how to download the app.
They're going to struggle with it.
And those of means will have no problem.
People will show them how to do everything, and you will create a cast system.
It's that simple, isn't it?
Well, let's talk about revelations real quick, because I do find this really, really interesting.
So I simply pulled up BibleGateway.com, okay?
Because Marjorie Taylor Greene says, could this be Joe Biden's Mark of the Beast?
And they say, the beast out at sea, the dragon stood on the shore of the sea, and I saw a beast coming out of the sea.
It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name.
Alright, I won't read everything, but I'll read you the last most important point.
They say, It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.
This calls for wisdom.
Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man.
That number is 666.
I gotta be honest, people like to look into text and find the pattern and make it fit where it might not actually fit.
I will point out, however, I was not aware of this, and I actually went to a Catholic school for quite some time, up until I completed fifth grade, I was in Catholic school, went to sixth grade at public school, and I did not know that according to, I believe this is Revelations, Revelation 13, that, I'm sorry, 17 specifically, that you would need the mark of the beast on your right hand or forehead in order to buy or sell.
That, to me, was really weird.
It's like an awfully specific thing to be in the Bible.
Well, sure enough, that's the accusation we're hearing now, which brings me to the more important point about COVID vaccines.
It will not be the government enforcing this.
It will be the private sector.
CBS News reports, White House leaves vaccine passports to private sector.
They say, as more and more countries like Japan, China, and Denmark plan to introduce vaccine passports for their citizens, Americans are beginning to wonder if they too will have to show some sort of proof of vaccination or similar ID to travel, attend events, work, or generally participate in society.
It's not a violation of your constitutional rights when it is large monopolistic corporations that are demanding it.
Which is why I've never been a laissez-faire capitalist.
Because they absolutely will violate your rights under the pretext that we're a private business, we can do whatever we want.
No.
I think we need some kind of regulations to prevent this and to guarantee our rights as citizens.
Look.
I think if you can get the vaccine, get the vaccine.
I think you should talk to your doctor first, because there have been some complications, there have been these stories, and many countries in the European Union suspended the rollout of one of the vaccines because of blood clotting, but ultimately decided that the vaccine was more beneficial than it was detrimental.
It's your decision, okay?
This is the problem.
In my opinion, you talk to your doctor, they tell you what's right for you.
There are risks according to some of these stories, but it is fair to say that the benefits outweigh the risks when you look at it mathematically.
But we don't treat people based on statistics and formulas.
We treat them as individuals.
If a person says, I don't want to take the risk, then what do you do?
Deny them their right to participate in society?
Now you're getting too cult-like for me.
I would love if everyone got vaccinated.
I mention this all the time.
I got tons of vaccines when I traveled around, and I even had a vaccine passport that I had to show when I was going to some countries.
These things have existed for a long time.
Internally, however, a company demanding that you get a vaccine passport I don't know, man.
You might not say it's a violation of people's Fourth Amendment rights, but why should I let some Silicon Valley company have access to my private data and my medical history in order to go shopping at some store?
The challenge, I guess, is that maybe movie theaters and airlines will mandate this, and people will just comply.
It's social enforcement.
CBS says there aren't many answers to this in the US, although the US has vaccinated more people
than any nation in the world. But the Biden administration is making one thing clear.
The federal government won't be the one issuing a vaccine credential or storing citizens vaccine
vaccination information in a database. That's a good thing.
We have to be careful now what private companies do.
All that matters is this.
If people choose to accept vaccine passports and vaccination, and the businesses allow them to do the vaccine passports, it will become normal and there's nothing anyone else could do about it because that's just it.
Social enforcement is substantially more powerful than government censorship any day of the week.
Now, whether or not people will actually support it, we'll see.
Maybe many people will just be like, then I won't go shop at your store and I'll order online.
Maybe.
Honestly, I don't know.
But I do find it very interesting, with the government saying it'll be in the private sector, and the general idea being you can't buy or sell unless you have this app, well, then it kind of does sound like a mark of the beast, doesn't it?
Okay.
Here's what they say.
Quote.
This is going to hit all parts of society, and so naturally the government is involved.
Andy Slavitt, acting director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said during a White House COVID-19 briefing.
But unlike other parts of the world, the government here is not viewing its role as the place to create a passport, nor a place to hold the data of citizens.
We view this as something that the private sector is doing and will do.
What's important to us, and we're leading an inter-agency process right now to go through these details, are that at some point criteria will be met with these credentials.
Should private entities develop a vaccine ID system, it will be crucial to ensure that access to credentials is equitable and accessible, no matter what technology limitations a person faces at home, said Slavitt and White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, adding that it should also be private and secure.
Psaki said the Biden administration is mostly focused on creating guidelines that can be used as a basis for private sector endeavors.
We expect, as Andy Slavitt I think alluded to, that a determination or development of a vaccine passport, or whatever you want to call it, will be driven by the private sector.
Ours will be more focused on guidelines that can be used as a basis.
There are a couple of key principles that we are working from.
One is that there will be no centralized universal federal vaccinations database and no federal mandate requiring everyone to obtain a single vaccination credential.
Second, we want to encourage an open marketplace with a variety of private sector companies and non-private coalitions developing solutions.
And third, we want to drive the market towards meeting public interest goals.
Psaki offered no timeline for when the administration might issue such guidelines.
I don't know if it's actually going to happen.
I know New York has the app, but there are some serious questions about, I believe it's the Americans with Disabilities Act.
If you have allergies and your doctor advises you, you're young, you're healthy, you're not facing, you're not in any of these risk categories, and there are potential side effects with the vaccine, don't get it, how can you be barred from going shopping or going to the movies then?
If the doctor says not to do it.
Or if you have food allergies and you literally can't get it.
The other issue, I guess, is some people can't afford phones.
It's a reality.
And I'm not gonna be like the Democrats and say it's all minorities.
No, a lot of people, a lot of poor white people don't have smartphones.
So how will they get this app?
They won't.
They'll have to get some kind of paper credential, I guess.
But then what happens when people just start forging them?
You see the problems?
I'm not saying it's impossible.
I'm just saying it does seem unlikely.
Now as for the Mark of the Beast thing, I would like to point this out.
On August 2nd, 2017, the Des Moines Register reported, or I'm sorry, published an opinion piece, Implanted Microchip, Harmless or Mark of the Beast?
Come on.
We get this Mark of the Beast thing all the time.
I remember in the past couple decades, as I'm growing up a teenager, reading wacky stories on the internet and just crazy conspiracies because it was fun.
There were many different allusions to the Mark of the Beast.
This idea that people would get barcodes they could have so they could scan it into a database and it would be easy to shop.
Or that the NFC chip in phones would allow you to scan your phone so that you could buy or sell.
They said that could be the Mark of the Beast because eventually when every private sector company only accepts near-field communication technology, then you have to have it.
Then it was the microchips, which did not take off because it was an absurd idea to begin with.
This idea that they would inject a microchip into your hand so you can, like, wave.
What are they called?
They're RFID chips.
Radio Frequency Identification.
Nobody, I'm not gonna go to the store and get a chip implant.
I'm sorry.
I'm not going to a business to do that.
That's stupid.
Phones make sense though.
Phones are convenient.
They're fun.
You can watch movies.
You're entertained.
You can communicate.
You can go on the internet.
Now, all that technology is in the palm of your hand and everybody has it.
But once again, let me just stress.
Revelation said it would be a mark on your right hand or your forehead.
I suppose technically it could be on your left hand, but it's not a mark.
The phone is not a mark.
I suppose they're referring to the QR code that's on your forehead either.
A bunch of leftists came out, and they were claiming that MAGA hats were the mark of the beast.
That's just their silly misunderstanding of what the mark of the beast is, because quite honestly, if you wear the MAGA hat, you're less likely to be able to buy and sell.
You wear the MAGA hat, you walk into the wrong business, someone's going to kick you out.
For real.
They might even beat you up.
Because we've seen a bunch of stories like this.
Now in most places, regular people will leave you alone and nobody cares.
But certainly the Moghead is not the Mark of the Beast.
That's stupid.
Many on the left tried claiming that Donald Trump was the false prophet.
Look, I love these ideas and I think they're silly.
Check this out.
We have this from Wikipedia.
Revelation 12 Sign Prophecy is an apocalyptic belief that an astronomical alignment on September 23rd, 2017 fulfilled the first two verses of Revelation 12.
This date coincided with the Autumnal Equinox and the end of the Catholic September Ember Days.
This theory, promoted by some Christians and Christian news organizations, proposed that a literal fulfillment of the prophecy made in the book of Revelations occurred on this date over Jerusalem.
They also go on to mention that Donald Trump's moving the embassy to Jerusalem fulfills more prophecies.
They say Revelation 12.6 describes a consequent duration of 1,260 days that ended on the 6th of March, 2021, with Jesus remaining absent.
This is a bit long.
There's media attention.
Look at this.
The Revelation 12 sign has received media attention, including from the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, and the Catholic Astronomer.
A number of critics have offered rebuttals of the purported sign, arguing that the sign is not unique or is only astrology.
Critics include Answers in Genesis author Dr. Danny Faulkner, Christian author Joel Richardson, Jen Markle from Olive Tree Ministries, Christian Bible Prophecy author Craig C. White, Christian blogger and author Tim McHyde.
Okay, okay, okay.
We get it.
Some people are saying this.
This is from TheMarshallIndependent.com, a News Guard certified source.
Because you know, I like to have News Guard certified sources and they say, It is.
This website mostly adheres to the basic standards of credibility and transparency, a network of local newspapers based primarily in smaller U.S.
cities, owned by publisher Ogden Newspaper.
The site offers a mix of local, state, national, and world news, with a score of 80 out of 10.
And they say, revelation is unfolding right before us!
Great.
I'm sure it generated a lot of interest.
It was interesting to read, because sometimes it's fun to read about these bigger stories and look for patterns.
But I'm sorry, guys.
I don't think it's the end of days.
I think we are pacing a very serious period of tumult.
But if you look at Strauss' How Generational Theory, it's just part of an ongoing cycle of upheaval that we face here in this country, and many other countries face as well.
I'm not saying Strassau generational theory is 100% accurate, but it's more likely in my opinion that we go through periods of upheaval than it is that the world is ending.
Because even if humanity struggles or we go through a period of upheaval or war or conflict, the world carries on, and civilization will likely persist for quite some time.
They're going to say, whether you like President Trump or not, he has already fulfilled one of the last prophecies in the Bible prior to Jesus' return.
Moving the U.S.
Embassy in Israel back to Jerusalem and recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is one of the prophecies that must be fulfilled.
No other president in history has done this, but Donald Trump did!
Okay, it's a letter to the editor that someone wrote and they published.
I certainly find it fun and interesting, but I think that's all it really is.
Fun and interesting.
Not legitimate.
However, the Washington Post decided to write up the story.
This is not the end of the world, according to Christians who study the end of the world.
Listen, the vaccine passport may come soon.
New York has already done it.
Many countries have already done it.
And I'm sure a lot of people are going to be mad about it.
It's going to be another big political battle.
And we go through these periods.
We have seen the rise of authoritarianism in many different countries.
While I certainly think vaccines are great, I encourage you to talk to your doctor.
And if your doctor says you should get the vaccine, you probably should.
And once enough people get the vaccine, herd immunity, and then back to normal.
So they say.
Sounds like a great thing to me.
We are all longing to just go back to, you know, going to the mall, going to the movies, having a good time.
I'm not entirely convinced that will happen because there's already a new normal.
But I do think people might be pushing a little bit too far with the world is ending thing.
The Washington Post writes, and this is just from one year ago, Chuck Pierce's son was concerned.
Like a lot of people looking out on a world of ransacked grocery stores and canceled sports seasons and eerie lines of people standing six feet apart from one another, So he asks his dad, is this the end of the world?
That's a question you can ask when you have a dad who calls himself an apostolic prophet, apostolic prophet, however you pronounce it, and leads a prophetic ministry.
No, said Pierce.
The Lord's shown me through 2026, so I know this isn't the end time.
They say, it sure might feel apocalyptic, but not if you ask Christian writers and pastors who have spent years focusing their message on the book of Revelation.
The New Testament's final book, it lays out a lurid poetic vision of the end times, in which many evangelical leaders interpret it to mean that Jesus will return to earth, believers will be raptured to heaven, and those left behind will suffer seven dreadful years of calamities.
Most of these revelation-focused prophesiers don't see coronavirus as heralding the second coming and the end of life on earth as we know it.
Quote, if a person were just completely ignorant about what the Bible says about the end times,
they may think this right now. This is it, said Jeff Kinley, a writer of books on biblical prophecy
who lives in Harrison, Arkansas. Kinley said he understands why Americans might see this time
of fast encroaching disease, isolation from loved ones, and crashing stock markets as apocalyptic.
Americans are primed to believe the end of the world might arrive any day now.
In 2010, 41% told Pew Research Center that they expected Jesus to return by 2050.
Kinley pointed to Revelation 6-8, which forecasts death all over the globe by sword, famine, and plague.
I think he's referring to a future time.
I don't think this is an actual fulfillment of that.
There will be great earthquakes, famines, and pestilences in various places,
in fearful events, and great signs from heaven."
I think he's referring to a future time.
I don't think this is an actual fulfillment of that.
Or maybe...
Let's be real.
I'm not a religious person.
I'm not very much into the Bible.
But I think it's funny that they just easily dismiss this saying, it's probably something else.
Maybe you assume too much.
There have been earthquakes.
There's been famine.
There's been pestilence.
And maybe you're looking for something bigger than it really is.
I just want to tell you this.
Again, I'll stress.
I don't think the world is ending, guys.
Sorry.
Just keep working, having fun with your family, and making money, and go about your business.
I do think the conversations are fun and interesting, but when it comes to the news, when it comes to civil war, when it comes to revolution, I've personally seen some of these things.
I can tell you, people always expect it to feel and be bigger than it really is, probably because of movies, because of storytelling.
It's not the case.
I've witnessed civil unrest, separatism, revolutions, and I gotta tell you, sometimes it's quite boring.
I've been to many of these places where we have seen some of the biggest stories of the past decade or longer.
I was in Ferguson during the riots, the Michael Brown riots.
And you know what's funny?
Someone pointed out, when you watch the news, they make it seem like the entirety of St.
Louis is burning to the ground.
When in fact, it's a quarter of a mile on one block in a suburb.
It's true.
In Egypt, for instance, you could walk a few blocks away from the revolution in Tahrir Square and go to McDonald's, have a burger, and watch a game of football.
International football.
For Americans, soccer.
It was like nothing was happening.
You can go to Heliopolis.
That's what I did.
Went to the mall and went shopping and had kebab.
Seemed like everything was normal, but a revolution was currently taking place.
Everyone expects some big, massive moment, and I'm sorry, sometimes it just isn't all that big or massive.
Sometimes we don't go out with a bang, but with a whimper.
So when I talk about things like Civil War, the problem most people have, and they're like, Tim, why are you talking about this?
Is because they assume you're going to see people storming battlefields.
It may just be slower and more boring than you realize.
The American Revolution took 20 years.
The Civil War took several years as well.
These battles didn't just occur all at the same time with people screaming and everything burning to the ground.
No, it took a long time.
I think, like, the amount of time that passed from, say, like, the Boston Tea Party, the Boston Massacre, to the actual Declaration of Independence was like a decade or something like that.
Seriously, imagine that.
Ten years.
Imagine it's 2010 and you're like, I'm upset about Wall Street.
So you have an Occupy Wall Street protest.
And then 15 years later, you know, so we're still about five years out, you get some crazy midterm election that changes everything.
And then when they write the history about it, they're going to be like, the great Occupy protests denouncing the financial sector precipitated these major upheavals in government.
And then they declared the Financial Investments Act.
And then when you actually look, you're like, dude, that was 15 years later!
Like, for us living it, I've got more memories about, you know, riding my mountain bike down a trail than I do about any real major conflict.
People think it's gonna be bigger and crazier than it really is.
Now let's get back to Earth for a second.
Sorry, I just thought this was a fun story to talk about.
Let's get back to Earth.
Breaking news from Euronews.com.
Again, News Guard certified source.
They say, Berlin suspends use of AstraZeneca COVID vaccine for under 60s.
They're concerned about reports of blood clots.
We're hearing the same thing coming out of Canada.
Canada pauses AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine for people under 55.
And many other countries in the EU suspended this, but decided the vaccine benefits outweigh the risks.
These are things you should know, and rational adults who have a real conversation about, don't take my word for it, ever.
Talk to your doctor.
Check with the CDC and the government, because I can't tell you what's right for you.
I can only say this.
A large amount of people have gotten these vaccines, and they're overwhelmingly fine.
But you look to the media, and I want to remind all of you, the media's goal is to scare you and to generate viral articles.
If you get 100,000 people vaccinated, and there's 10 people who got sick, the media will make sure it's the only thing you hear about, because it gets them clicks.
Now, I think there are serious risks.
These countries are taking it seriously.
Your doctor will tell you what's right for you.
Period.
And you know what?
I gotta be honest.
Euronews.
Newsguard certified.
Okay, still.
Talk to your doctor because your doctor knows what's right for you.
That's the most important thing.
The reality is, there are concerns about the vaccine, at least the AstraZeneca one.
There's several others.
Some people are concerned that, you know, it's an mRNA vaccine, I'm not a fan of it.
Guys, I believe one of them, Moderna, or maybe Johnson & Johnson, again, check with your doctor, is a traditional vaccine.
There's a bunch of different ones available.
Now, you want to wait for FDA approval, that I respect.
There's some counterindications or warnings for people with food allergies or people who are pregnant, that I totally understand.
So I gotta ask your doctor.
I'll tell you what's right for you.
I believe in a rational society.
We would point out there are concerns.
You know, Canada, many European Union countries have done this.
That's why you need to get sound medical advice from your medical professional who are there to protect you.
And I've had family and friends and I've heard these stories from them about some of the adverse reactions they've had and haven't gone to the doctor.
One even went to the ER and they're fine now.
That's why you need to know about these things so you can make informed decisions.
Does this mean the world is ending?
It doesn't.
Sorry.
Is it the Mark of the Beast?
No, I don't think it is.
Many people were saying that the Verichip was going to be something like that.
I just... I think it's people in media, they see it, they see patterns, and they bring it up.
I will point out, to be fair though, The Verichip thing was like an experimental technology that didn't really catch on all that much.
The COVID passport thing is something that people are demanding the private sector actually implement.
There was talk a while ago about Ticketmaster putting your vaccine status on your ticket.
That I'm not a fan of.
I don't want the private companies to have all my private information.
And you know what the problem is?
We're already there.
I'll tell you this.
I don't think we actually need vaccine passports.
You know why?
Because Facebook already tracks your location.
Your phone already tracks your location.
They already know if you've been around sick people.
And it's funny that we're in this conversation around whether or not we should do contact tracing when Facebook already does!
So you've got all these people talking about the vaccine passports, the end of days, it's the apocalypse, it's the authoritarian rise, and I'm like, bro, you've already given up all this data, okay?
You've already given up your private information.
They've got it.
They've got everything.
They've got every email you've ever sent.
They can scan and read your emails, and you know what?
I wouldn't be surprised if they do.
They can deny it all they want.
They read your messages.
Facebook will ban a message from you to a friend.
Twitter actually barred people from sharing stories.
It's happening.
This is just them saying it to your face.
And then a bunch of people are like, I reject this.
Dude, no you don't.
You've been engaged in this for like five to seven years already.
So what do we need to do?
I think we want to reject authoritarianism in a violation of our rights.
But I can't give you all the answers, man.
I gotta be honest.
I don't have all the answers.
I'm not gonna tell you what's right for you.
You make those choices for yourself.
Do the best you can to get by.
And in the end, I'll just hope for the best and I'll stand up for liberty, small l libertarianism, this idea that we are the individual, we must be protected as individuals.
But I also think, at a certain point, we do have to come together as a nation, as a collective, and as a human race, to improve the lives of everybody else.
We must make some sacrifices, I'm not saying for vaccine passports, for the greater good.
The issue is that when we don't trust each other, and we think we're being taken advantage of, and that's where we're at right now, and that's dangerous.
We need to find a way to come together.
I hope we can.
In the meantime, Maybe the world isn't ending, but who am I to say?
I'm not a prophet.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up tonight at YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.
It is our live podcast show.
Come hang out.
You can send in your super chats and we read them on the show, and we'll see you all then at 8 p.m.
Once again, thanks for hanging out.
YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL, 8 p.m.
YouTube has suspended Steven Crowder due to a community guideline strike.
Crowder will not be able to upload or livestream for one week.
The official reason that they gave him, they say, Hi Steven Crowder, our team has reviewed your content and unfortunately, we think it violates our spam, deceptive practices, and scams policy.
We've removed the following content from YouTube.
The video in question is huge.
Nevada voter mysteries deepen louder with Crowder.
We also have this story from Tubefilter that not only was Crowder suspended, they have demonetized his channel again, and they say it will be indefinite.
And they say it's because he violated multiple rules, and I gotta be honest, I just, sorry, I don't believe it.
We recently had a story about Steven Crowder.
They were accusing him of being racist for a series of jokes he was making.
Look, I watched the comments made by Crowder and his associates.
They're not jokes I would make, but there's also family guy jokes I wouldn't make that are extremely racist, overtly racist.
So I'm sorry, man.
There's got to be some kind of standard in our culture.
If I can turn on YouTube TV and play family guy on every single channel, and they repeatedly disparage Asian people, for instance, and they do literally disparage... Well, okay.
I don't want to be over the top.
They make jokes based on racial stereotypes.
That's what comedy does.
They mock these ideas.
If Crowder did something that was offensive, I think you gotta have unified standards.
But here's the important part.
YouTube said that wasn't why they took him down.
They said it was about spam and deceptive practices, and that's the trick.
What YouTube, in my opinion, is doing, they want to find a way to get rid of Crowder, they want to try to find a way to get rid of everybody who's anti-establishment, but they know that if they go after him on hate speech grounds, they'll spark culture war issues.
So they're going after him on what the mainstream narrative is, and that's the voter fraud stuff, and that's the, you know, January 6th, oh, it's deceptive practices.
If they came out and said, you can't say this joke, this is hate speech, we're gonna take you down, I think a lot of people would start bringing up all of these other shows.
So YouTube said, no, no, no, that's fine, that's not hate speech, but the left certainly went after him for it.
Now I wanna read you a statement from Crowder as to what he said is happening, then I'll show you the story from Tubefilter, but we got more, it's more than just Crowder, man.
Recently Joe Rogan made a statement, there's a video from Mark Dice, and it's generating some controversy because people are calling out Joe Rogan saying he lied about what happened, and based on the stories I've read, yeah Joe wasn't completely honest about what was going on.
I'm gonna throw some defense towards Joe's way on this one, but basically, back in the day, he said, when he transferred over to Spotify, that there was some kind of glitch or error that didn't transfer over certain podcasts, and then later said that, oh, Spotify didn't want some of these episodes on Spotify.
However, I've also heard that he said he never intended to fully port over every single episode.
It's very confusing, and I wanna make sure I read the story, because I gotta be honest with you guys, look.
Steven Crowder does tremendous good in terms of fighting the culture war, defending free speech.
While I certainly disagree with him on maybe some of his jokes, but that's fine.
I think he's doing comedy, and that's my opinion.
And I certainly disagree with him on policy issues.
I think that's fine.
I think the defense of freedom of speech and his right to do it is paramount.
The same thing with Joe Rogan.
So I want to make sure I'm very careful on these stories because these are two people that are doing tremendous good in fighting to defend freedom of speech and liberty and to have real conversations on the internet, but we got to highlight everything that's going on.
Crowder posted on Instagram, I've been warning about this for a long time, and now it's here.
Big Tech, and specifically YouTube, have painted a target on conservatives' backs for years, with yours truly being target number one.
Today, Google, YouTube just fired a huge shot across our bow.
They are no longer enforcing community guidelines, but creating entirely new ones with the express purpose of removing any and all conservative voices of dissent.
For the crime of investigative journalism, we are forbidden from uploading, posting, or livestreaming for an entire week on the main channel.
Don't worry, we've got something for them.
In the meantime, you can watch everything live at lodderwithcrowder.comslashmugclub.
Updates to follow very soon.
And my friends, there is also another way you can tune into Steven Crowder, and that's CrowderBits on YouTube.
They may have suspended the one channel, But he also has his Clips channel, which is, again, CrowderBits.
He's got 855,000 subscribers.
So you'll probably end up, you know, still seeing many of his videos.
I believe Crowder's gonna be posting there.
I'm not entirely sure what his full plan is.
He might be streaming there.
But, I will mention as well, YouTube has told me in the past that if they suspend you on one channel, you can't post identical content on another channel, so...
If you want to still make sure you're following Crowder for this next week, you gotta go to Crowder Bits.
But let me show you what YouTube is claiming Crowder did.
TubeFilter reports, YouTube has once again demonetized right-wing commentator Steven Crowder's channel, this time for multiple violations of community guidelines, including COVID-19 and election integrity policies.
Quote, In order to monetize on YouTube, channels must comply with the YouTube Partner Program policies, which include our Community Guidelines, Google AdSense Program policies, and Advertiser-Friendly Guidelines, a YouTube Spokesperson tells Tubefilter.
Channels that repeatedly violate our policies are suspended from the Partner Program.
YouTube says Crowder committed a range of violations across these policies, and the company removed two violative videos, a March 16th livestream where Crowder mocked black farmers, and his co-host, David Landau, joked about slavery, and an upload that crossed YouTube's policies against spreading false claims that widespread fraud, errors, or glitches sway the 2020 U.S.
presidential election.
That, my friends, that is fake news.
First of all, they say, They removed a livestream where he mocked black farmers.
The Verge reported on March 18th, inexplicably, YouTube says extremely racist Steven Crowder video isn't hate speech.
While offensive, this video from the Steven Crowder channel does not violate this policy.
Why?
Could it be that the video that came out was taken out of context?
That Crowder, when making these offensive jokes, was mocking racists?
You see, this is the problem I have with the left.
But obviously, it's a culture war.
They'll do whatever they can for power.
I could be wrong about this.
And I'm not here to defend, you know, everyone all the time.
When Steven Crowder makes these jokes, and he has a series of clips where he's saying, you know, offensive things, my understanding is that he was claiming it was the royal family.
So he apparently made some comments And he was, it's like this, if I was like, could you imagine what those racist people would be saying?
And then you say things to mock them for being racist.
I could be wrong, that's my general understanding.
The point of all of this is, they did not remove his video having anything to do with those jokes.
Tubefilter says they do.
And then here's how they get you.
An upload that crossed YouTube's policy against spreading false claims that widespread fraud errors or glitches sway the 2020 election.
I don't recall Crowder saying that either.
You see how they play this dirty game?
Look, they took down Crowder's video, and I think this one was the one where he went around and checked addresses for people who voted and found some of them were not correct.
My understanding is that Crowder did get some of these images wrong, there was like an address change.
That's all it takes.
One slip-up, one trip-up, one mistake, or one suspicious moment.
And they'll say, see, you got it wrong.
That's spam or deceptive policies.
But the point is, I do not believe, I don't recall Crowder ever saying that widespread fraud or errors did any of these things as they say.
Let me explain to you how it works.
You gotta be very careful of this when you're in this industry.
I did an event in the Philadelphia area.
We had Daryl Davis, renowned jazz musician and a black man who met and befriended Klan members and convinced them to quit.
That's the game.
That's what Daryl Davis did.
He's an amazing, amazing man, de-radicalizing white supremacists.
He was a headline speaker.
A bunch of activists called the theater and made ridiculous claims and threatened to burn the theater down, or something to that effect.
The media then gets involved, and they write this garbage where they're like, activists are outraged because it's a far-right event with, you know, this, that, or otherwise.
And that's all it takes.
The media just publishes insane false accusations, and there is nothing you can do because the paper goes, well, that's what they said!
That's the game.
So here's what happens.
YouTube takes down a video from Crowder, claiming, you know, oh, it's deceptive or whatever, and then the media can keep pushing it.
Eventually, you'll see articles where they're like, Steven Crowder, who was, you know, suspended from YouTube for saying these things.
That's how the game works.
You'll create a wave of articles, and then what happens next?
After an event like this theater thing, someone will write it up saying they're accusing Poole of hosting extremists or whatever.
Then, the next time someone writes about me, they'll say Poole, who you may recall was involved in a controversy over booking a bunch of fringe far-right extremists for an event.
It just becomes truth because they lie over and over and over again.
This is why it's scary.
Because people like Crowder, he's conservative, he does comedy, and he did some investigative reporting and they don't like it.
Yeah, well, that's not the position of YouTube.
We're in a new era, okay?
I understand this.
It used to be five TV channels.
Well, Crowder has the ability to make his own website.
He has the ability to upload to whoever he wants, but YouTube is a great opportunity for most people.
YouTube is now trying to use that power to effectively force the conversation in a certain direction.
Or, an easier way to put it, I certainly think YouTube does this, because we see YouTube's rules, but an easier way to look at it is just that activists are attacking companies because they know they can go after advertisers, and YouTube knows conservatives don't have enough power, nor establishment or legacy media access, and they're going to side with the activists every single time.
It's establishment bias for the far left.
It's actually really, really creepy.
And so we need voices like Crowder.
And you know what the thing is?
Even if you don't like Steven Crowder, you need a counterpoint.
You need a counterbalance.
Otherwise, you're just gonna flip over.
We cannot just have some monoculture where everyone just believes whatever it is they're told.
You need dissenting voices to help improve everything around you.
Your culture, your laws, your society, your movies, your entertainment.
This is what we risk losing.
Censorship is going to get worse.
They go on to say, The platform previously told 1Zero that Crowder's March 16th
video did not violate its policies against hate speech. Okay, good. Thank you for including
that tube filter. But did violate policies against content that claims COVID death rate is
less severe than that of a common cold or flu. I also don't believe that's the case.
Because I know Crowder to be a stickler for these stats for this reason.
And everybody knows when you go to the CDC, they tell you straight up COVID is a lot worse than the flu.
Why would Crowder pull up the CDC and then ignore what the CDC says?
That to me makes no sense.
But hey, look, I haven't seen every single thing he said.
I just, sorry, don't believe it.
Crowder announced his demonetization on Instagram.
They say Crowder was originally removed from the Partner Program in June 2019 for repeated racist and homophobic harassment of former Vox journalist Carlos Maza.
I love how they do this!
Being a high-profile media personality, getting criticized is not racist harassment, not homophobic harassment.
The issue with that instance, it was very similar.
Carlos Maza.
He was a personality for Vox, now he does his own channel.
He would call himself names.
He would say, this is what I am, and be self-deprecating to make a point.
Crowder used his own language against him.
I gotta say at a certain point... Steven!
You know what they're gonna do with these out-of-context clips.
But I guess it doesn't matter if you know they're gonna do it.
You shouldn't just change the way you do humor and the points you're trying to make because you know they're manipulative.
And that's... I mean, I think Crowder's got his hard... his red line.
He won't do it.
Crowder wants to make a joke.
He wants to use their language and mock them.
And he wants to be offensive or he wants... And I don't mean offensive like purposely, you know, attacking people.
I mean like offensive as in doing comedy that's edgy.
He's entitled to do it.
Family Guy does it every day.
Dave Chappelle literally did it on Netflix.
Joe Rogan does it.
Ricky Gervais does it.
Ah, but Steven Crowder is actually in the political space as a conservative.
You see, Dave Chappelle, while he may make these jokes, he's not particularly conservative, although he kind of is on some issues.
It's interesting.
They're going to say, YouTube reinstated him into the partner program and brought back monetization to his channel in August 2020, saying he had taken steps to address the behavior that led to his suspension and has demonstrated a track record of policy-compliant behavior.
Per YouTube, Crowder's suspension is immediate and indefinite.
Now, this is interesting.
His suspension?
No, no, no, no, no.
I think he's only suspended for the next week from a Community Guidelines strike.
My understanding is he got one.
And that's how it works.
You get one strike, then for one week you can't upload.
Then, after I think three months, that strike gets removed.
But within that three months, if you get another strike, then you get like a month or two months or some ridiculously long suspension.
So, we'll see how this plays out.
This is important because I can imagine it's only going to be getting worse, my friends.
Steven Crowder is high-profile, mainstream, massive channel, one of the highest-profile conservative commentators and comedians.
In fact, he may be the only high-profile conservative comedian.
Maybe that's unfair, okay?
There's a lot of conservative comedians, but he's certainly a big... I guess it's not a late-night host anymore, it's a morning show.
But they're coming after him.
And I know for a fact, the things he's talked about, I mean, I talk about similar things on my show.
Once they get rid of Crowder, then they come for everyone else.
It is the cliffs eroding.
At first it was just the far right, it was the alt-right.
And I warned.
It's only a matter of time.
Then they started coming after more, you know, staunch conservatives.
Now it's Steven Crowder.
Eventually it'll be me.
And then eventually it's going to be the left.
We've already seen progressives get taken down.
It's a good time, a better time than ever to say, go to TimCast.com.
Become a member.
We are going to be rapidly expanding.
Producing tons of content.
I'm looking at scripts for short films.
I want to do shows.
I want to do comedy specials.
We have a lot of stuff we want to do.
It'll take some time, but we're going to do it.
Why?
Because I don't think we're longer this world, my friends.
I think it's only a matter of time before YouTube shuts everything down.
So let's talk now about Joe Rogan.
This is an important story.
Joe Rogan called out over censorship, quote, he lied.
I'll say this right away.
Joe Rogan moved to Spotify.
A lot of people were upset by the move.
It's harder to watch, they said.
It's harder to listen to.
You can't see it on your TV.
Like, how am I supposed to do this?
And, you know, Joe acknowledges this.
I think Joe is a good dude.
And I think he's one of the most important figures in the culture war because he has the biggest podcast in the world and he defends free speech.
He literally speaks truth to power.
He stands up for a lot of people and he's willing to have these people on his show.
Man, the dude is incredibly important.
Joe Rogan moved to Spotify because he knew In my opinion, what YouTube had to offer.
I'm not saying, you know, I know anything privy.
I'm saying I see his move as something like a dude, you get a guaranteed contract, a fat stack, a hundred million dollar deal, and Spotify says, do your thing and we won't get in your way.
And you look at YouTube, and YouTube's like, we'll ban you.
There's a point where Joe Rogan stopped doing live streams.
I remember the first time I went on his show, it was live stream.
And then it started as a live show.
Became a pre-recorded show.
And I wonder if- I think Joe mentioned something about this, but I wonder if it had a lot to do with the fact that someone could say something live, and you can't control it, and YouTube will shut you down.
That's something we deal with all the time on the IRL podcast, because we're live.
Someone could say something, and we've had people say things, and I'm like, what do we do?
So Rogan takes the Spotify deal, and I think it's partly because he realized, man, YouTube could nuke you at any time.
Check this out.
Mark Dice said in his March 29, 2021 YouTube video, Joe Rogan accidentally let it slip out that he lied to his audience and Spotify shareholders that Spotify wasn't censoring his show.
You may recall that he signed a $100 million deal with them last year, and then when his podcast archive got transferred over to Spotify, some of the fans noticed that there were a few episodes, actually several dozen, that were mysteriously missing, and it just so happened to be episodes from certain controversial guests that have been banned from YouTube, Twitter, and other social media platforms.
I gotta stop right there.
It's true, but there's a little bit more to the story.
Some of the people removed, eh, you know, some questions, right?
Here's the full list of every missing episode posted seven months ago.
45 episodes.
Alex Jones was taken down, Michaela Peterson was taken down, eventually returned, that's weird.
You got Owen Benjamin, you've got Chris Delia, Sargon of Akkad, Gavin McGinnis.
So you look through this and you'll see a lot of these episodes, yeah, kind of a certain kind of person, you know.
Sargon, Jones, Milo, etc.
However, Brian Callen, Jimmy Burke, and Brian Redman?
That's like a regular Joe Rogan episode.
I certainly think it wasn't just about these specific individuals, and some of them, like Chris D'Elia, are over controversial press.
I don't understand why Sargon of Akkad was taken down.
Maybe they just didn't like some of these episodes.
However, my understanding is that these didn't get poured over due to a glitch.
That's what was said initially.
Well, let's read.
Dice was highlighting comments Rogan made on his podcast in February while talking about the move to Spotify.
Rogan said, there's a few episodes they didn't want on their platform that I was like, okay, I don't care.
Rogan has said on his podcast that Spotify hasn't told him who he can or cannot have on his show and said they don't care what he talks about.
They don't give a F, man.
They haven't given me a hard time.
Some Rogan listeners have expressed displeasure since he moved in 2020 from posting his podcast on YouTube, as we talked about.
I think, you know, I think it's probably true.
We know that Spotify employees have been going after Joe and they're making demands.
I don't think they work.
It's a double-edged sword, my friends.
My fear is that if it's true that they really just didn't want Joe bringing these episodes over, then I'm confused as to what the official narrative was from Joe and what he was saying.
And I gotta be honest, man.
It's not a good thing, but if Joe is trying to do everything in his power to preserve his show and strengthen it, they just nuked Steven Crowder, man.
If Crowder had the opportunity to bring his show to a platform with a contract guarantee that couldn't remove him, and it meant some of his older episodes would get removed, honestly?
It'd probably be a good thing.
Now, I get it.
Probably better if Joe was just straightforward and said they don't want these episodes on.
That's why Mark Dice brings up the shareholders thing because the stock for Spotify skyrocketed once they acquired the licensing deal for the Joe Rogan podcast, the exclusive deal.
Joe should have said outright.
But I also understand.
I get it, man.
There's a difficulty here.
Joe wanted to do everything in his power to maximize his ability to keep doing his show.
And you guys got to understand, it's a very, very important show for, you know, freedom-loving individuals who want to have real conversations and want to challenge the system.
And Joe has had Alex Jones and Tim Dillon on his show, I believe.
That was on Spotify.
That's very important.
Dice said of Rogan, he lied to cover up for things that a company that you work with or work for did to him.
Maybe.
Maybe that's fair.
Joe should have been more honest with his audience.
I think about the bigger picture.
I'm not super concerned necessarily about whether or not a handful of episodes are poured over.
I think it's bad.
I really, really do.
My biggest thing is like, okay, that's not good.
Joe Rogan's podcast has to continue.
These conversations need to have this platform.
It's like one of the last bastions in terms of mainstream content that's being promoted and propped up by the establishment.
The fear, however, I guess, that you can't shake, is that because of this, you know, Joe can come out and say they're not screwing with him.
But we've seen the activists' protests.
We've seen them make demands.
And what if Joe is just saying, oh, they're not, they're letting me do whatever I want, trust me.
Are they?
I'd like to think so, I do.
And so long as the show continues and these conversations still happen, it's better than nothing.
So I can only say this.
Maybe there are some conversations you won't see ever again with Joe Rogan.
Maybe there are certain ideas that have become too taboo and they won't bring these episodes over.
I highlighted the list because like Chris D'Elia was not being banned because of anything he said, it's because of who he is and the controversy around him.
I'm not a fan of any of this censorship.
All of these episodes still exist on a bunch of archived platforms and it is what it is.
For the time being, whatever is going on with Joe Rogan's podcast, it is still a massive, massive net positive for those who believe in freedom.
We should absolutely be critical of any deception, lies, or censorship.
But Joe Rogan's show is still very important.
And I gotta say, man, nobody's perfect.
And maybe I'm giving a bit too much room, or I'm being a bit too defensive of Joe, but I know the guy, and I genuinely think he is trying to do the right thing, and I genuinely do not believe he is doing it just to benefit himself.
The guy is rich, okay?
Like, come on.
He's been rich for a really, really long time.
This deal with Spotify secures a position for him.
Maybe it might pull back some things he's allowed to say, but YouTube won't be able to ban him or take him down.
Now, some have argued YouTube wouldn't do that anyway because he was too big.
Perhaps.
I think Steven Crowder needs some strong deal like this as well to guarantee no matter what happens he can't be taken down.
Of course, Crowder has Mug Club, his own private platform.
Perfect.
I also have TimCast.com.
New website will be rolling out soon.
New features.
It's going to be epic.
Probably going to be some bumps along the way, but we are going to do everything in our power to make something truly incredible.
Original shows, original movies, original short films, all that crazy stuff.
And it's going to be weird, low budget, but budget enough.
Maybe you guys have seen my music video, Will of the People.
I thought it was amazing and really, really well done.
I'm a fan of my music, so I wrote the song.
I think it was great, and I think a lot of people really enjoyed it.
And if you thought the quality was good, I've been hearing great things from people on the left, people on the right, people on the left who hate me are like, man, that is actually a pretty good video.
Then I think we're gonna be able to hit this one out of the park, and we're gonna make something that's gonna be epic.
We have to do our own things, protect ourselves on our own platforms, because it's only a matter of time.
So, Crowder is still up at Crowder Bits, and you can go to louderwithcrowder.com slash mugclub to watch his content, and that's a way you can support him, because we need, we, look, Again, you might not like him, you might not like his jokes, but you still need to recognize you need the debate.
As for Rogan, look man, I'm never going to be mad at this guy because he's been having so many important conversations.
And if the only thing ever is that we got to have that conversation with Jack Dorsey and Vijay Agade, which still to this day I keep getting hit up about interviews, like they want to talk to me about the importance of censorship in this conversation.
Joe Rogan did not have to do that and open himself up to these kinds of controversies.
I think he's doing legit stuff.
Joe Rogan had on Abigail Schreier, who talks about transgender issues.
This is some bold and brave stuff, okay?
So my respect to Joe, I know him, I consider him a friend, he's a nice guy.
Maybe I'm just offensive for that reason, but I think his show is very important.
If it's true that, you know, these episodes are getting removed, it's a bad thing, it is.
But I still think we need to be like, Encourage Joe to do good, have these conversations, and keep doing what he's doing.
Recognize the bad, but take what we can get, man.
As for Crowder, he needs to have something like that as well.
Some kind of deal that protects him.
So anyway, I'm beating dead horse.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
A shocking viral video is sweeping across the internet.
It's security footage showing a 65-year-old Asian woman, apparently on her way to church, being randomly and brutally beaten by a man in broad daylight on a public sidewalk.
The security footage came from a building where there were actually two security guards.
Security guards stood there and watched this man brutally beat the woman.
And then one security guard walks up, closes the door, and does nothing to help this poor woman who is left with fairly serious injuries, a fractured pelvis, as she writhe in agony in the street.
Now, many on the left have been talking about this movement, Stop Asian Hate.
Strangely, they've been protesting white nationalism.
As if white nationalists all of a sudden are going around attacking random Asian people.
As far as I know, that's not necessarily the case.
I say necessarily because absolutely there are hate crimes against Asian people, and absolutely white supremacists do it.
I just don't think the cases they're focused on have anything to do with white nationalism.
In this instance, for example, I don't see conservatives or moderates talking about the race of the individual who beat this woman.
I certainly see everyone talking about the race of the woman who was beaten.
She's Asian.
It fits that narrative.
The issue here is that the man who beat her was a black man, and it appears that these security guards may have been as well.
I don't think the race of these individuals matter.
I think we're all human beings, and we need to focus on the bigger issue as to why these men did not help this woman.
And I think there's several issues at play here.
A few years ago, I did a story about why, or I did a segment talking about why men refuse to help women and children.
And I've seen more and more of these stories.
And this, my friends, is just another example.
Gender equality, to a certain degree, results in this kind of issue.
A man is not going to inject himself into a confrontation or conflict for any reason because of the potential for personal liability.
It has something to do with this new gender equality movement kind of stuff.
Not completely.
It has a lot more to do, in my opinion, with litigation, liability, What you may be sued for if you intervene, you may become liable yourself, you could get your company in trouble, and you'll probably get fired.
You know, maybe it's just me.
But I feel like, based on the things I've read about this great nation and our culture, that we used to be a nation of some form of chivalry.
A man would see a woman being attacked and he would defend her.
And consequences be damned.
Perhaps you might get in trouble, but I think most reasonable people would say, listen, if you intervene to help this woman who's being brutally beaten, we're not gonna hold it against you.
But now we do.
There are many stories about this.
In fact, here's one that I covered a long time ago that I think is important to actually bring up.
Good Samaritan speaks out.
I was jailed for doing good.
Carl Neal was jailed for six years.
After punching a drug dealer who was attacking a woman in a non-eaten street.
It's a true story.
It's from Coventry Live.
This man, six years in jail.
That was his sentence.
Why?
He saw a drug dealer choking a woman and he punched him in the face.
Unfortunately, the drug dealer got severely injured, nearly died.
And that means you have to go to prison.
Let's read this story about what happened with this Asian woman, and I want to show you exactly what's going on with, I gotta be honest, men do not want to intervene to protect anyone anymore.
Not every man, not everywhere, but it's becoming worse.
It's been almost three years since these past few stories I covered, and I gotta tell you, I'm not surprised to see the exact same thing happening.
Here's a story from the Daily Mail.
An Asian woman was on her way to church.
Who was on her way to church was attacked by a black man in midtown Manhattan in broad daylight on Monday, while a couple of security guards near my building did nothing to stop it.
Surveillance camera footage from inside the building, where at least two guards were on duty, captures the moment a man randomly kicks them into the ground before viciously stomping on her head and face at least three times.
Despite the attack being both vocal by the suspect and the victim screaming, nobody came to her aid, despite her being kicked in full view of those in the neighboring building.
Interestingly, we have a photo of what appears to be, they say the suspect was caught clearly on surveillance camera.
One of the men appeared to be busy opening up packages while the attack was ongoing.
At one point, a second security guard could be seen closing the front door to the premises where the pair were working, completely ignoring the woman who had just been the victim of a savage assault.
Neither decided to chase after the suspect, who was still being hunted by police on Monday night.
The unidentified suspect allegedly hurled anti-Asian statements as he punched and kicked the 65-year-old woman on West 43rd Street, near 9th Avenue, just before midday, according to the NYPD.
My friends, we are becoming a dull people.
We're a silly people.
We're also dull.
It is silly, in my opinion, that there would be a man brutally beating an elderly woman and these security guards, I mean, they're not just random guys, they're literal security guards, did nothing.
Now, to me, that's absolutely silly.
But I think the bigger picture here is that we are becoming dull.
Dull in terms of our sharpness, our strength, our attitudes, We used to be, at least when you look back at history, a nation of people who were willing to cross over that ocean, risking life and limb, and many people dying on these boats, just to land on a shore with nothing.
There's some trees, start building, that's the plan.
Pioneers, colonists.
These are people that are frowned upon by the modern left.
We actually still have, to this day, people who are willing to engage in this, and funny enough, It's illegal immigrants and many asylum seekers, though most of them are not actual asylum seekers, but there are asylum seekers.
They travel over mountains, riding on train tops, walking through miles upon miles of desert to come and find that American dream.
Yet we here in the United States take this all for granted.
That's what's absolutely insane to me about all of this.
I think about the stories of these illegal immigrants and their willingness to risk everything just to get to this country.
They would die.
If, you know, just for the chance to be here.
I respect it, I really do.
Now, I don't like the illegal immigration and crossing the border because ultimately it's going to cause harm for everybody and we don't want people wandering through the desert because they could die.
There's a better process.
But these people are willing to take that risk.
These security guards?
They're not willing to risk anything.
And many people in this country are willing to risk absolutely nothing at all.
They will watch a woman be brutally beaten in the street and they'll say, don't look at me.
Not only is it this woman being brutally beaten, it's a racist attack and these guys do nothing.
I've seen a lot of people say, well, don't blame them.
You know, they're forbidden by their job.
They could lose their job.
Job be damned.
Wouldn't you try to do something if you like?
What's more important?
People are self-interested.
They don't fight for their kids.
They don't pay attention to elections.
They don't care about who's representing them.
They won't even intervene to save a woman from a racist attack at a time when Stop Asian Hate has been a trend, has been pushed so heavily in the media for the past several weeks.
These security guards watched a woman be brutally beaten, seriously injured, in front of their building.
And they did nothing.
It's amazing.
The woman was taken to NYU Langone Hospital in stable condition, having suffered a fractured pelvis.
The suspect was also caught clearly on surveillance camera as he walked away from the scene and appeared to be wearing distinctive blue pants, a maroon scarf, and a beige cardigan.
The NYPD's hate crime task force is now investigating the incident.
The man appears to be wearing distinctive.
So here's the photo of the guy.
It's about all we can say about it, but let me show you.
Let me show you some stories.
I'm going to take you back in time and talk about a problem that is only getting worse.
I mentioned this, as I stated earlier on, but I did a story about this a few years ago.
Why men are refusing to help women and children.
And I think we can expand upon this and say, it's only gotten worse and the incentives have only increased.
The incentives are for men not to intervene to protect those that they're typically supposed to protect.
Let me tell you something that's kind of sad and kind of funny.
I got some chickens recently.
They're babies.
Well, they're not completely babies, but they're very young.
They got all their feathers.
They're going out doing their chicken thing.
And we built this big fence-caged, you know, thing around them.
And we even have small little chicken houses inside.
Because we need to protect them.
We don't have roosters.
Trust me, this is very, very relevant.
We don't have roosters.
And the reason is they're just too loud.
Because we don't have roosters, we've had to build a very secure, reinforced pen to protect these chickens because they will be... they'll be killed.
I mean, already a raccoon is trying to break in and kill the chickens!
What a jerk!
You know what's funny?
The reason I bring this up.
I was told that if we had a rooster, just one, we wouldn't actually need the bigger enclosure with the fences.
Because roosters protect their chickens.
Roosters go nuts and risk their own lives.
Isn't that pathetic?
No, I mean it's amazing for the chickens!
But you mean chicken, which is synonymous with being a coward.
The rooster will risk more than an adult American male to protect those that are weaker than them.
That makes me laugh.
I have to look now to a literal chicken Chicken Society to point out where the males will run full speed and attack a predator and help warn the chickens to run to safety.
It's remarkable.
It's remarkable, isn't it?
We are a complex species.
We have very interesting social dynamics that don't exist in most, the overwhelming majority, 99.99% of the animal kingdom.
Now, other creatures on this planet have social structures, but we're very different.
We are.
Men tend to be larger, tend to be more muscle mass, more bone density.
And let me put it this way.
There's a... If you have... I was gonna make a Fallout reference, but I'll just go straight to the point.
A hundred men and a hundred women, and ninety-nine women die, your society's in very serious trouble.
Because now you can't, you can only have one baby every nine months.
But if you have a hundred women and ninety-nine men die, you're actually, you're worse off.
Seriously worse off.
But you can survive because those women can all have kids.
You can have a hundred kids in nine months.
So your society can survive.
It's why it's so important that men protect women.
Now, in today's day and age, we got things like guns.
And women can get guns and defend themselves, and there's mace and pepper spray and tasers.
And to be honest, as a complex society, we have laws prohibiting crimes against other people for any reason.
So, violent crime has actually gone down.
Maybe, because of this protection, because we live in such a foofy and pampered society, men no longer need to protect women, and because we've populated this planet as human beings to a very great extent, there's no real risk in the flourishing of a society that does not actually have their male protect their females.
Maybe, and I'm gonna be completely legit, like, honest here, it's an obsolete Archaic social construct that a man should protect a woman.
But I gotta say, maybe a woman should protect a man, maybe a good person protects another person.
Now look, if the average height and mass and bone density of a woman is lower than that of a man, then I certainly would expect two strong strapping security guards to run out to help this woman, and they didn't do it.
That is human society.
It's sad, really.
Here's the story from Coventry Live.
This is from March of 2014.
They say, a dad who punched a drug dealer to stop him attacking a woman says he was jailed for too long for doing a good deed.
Good Samaritan Carl Neal was given six years after he stepped in to help, flooring the dealer with a single punch which almost killed him.
In a letter written to the Telegraph from prison, he says his sentence was excessive and he questions what he should do in the future if he sees someone being attacked.
His victim escaped prosecution because of his injuries.
Neal, 23, got involved after he spotted a drug dealer grab the throat of a woman and punch her close to his home in Clarence Street in Uneaton last August.
He shouted the dealer before walking up and telling him with just one punch.
He threw another punch before walking away.
The drug dealer suffered a fracture to the base of his skull and was left fighting for his life.
I'm sorry.
Now, I believe this is the UK.
I could be wrong, but I'm sorry, man.
If you commit a violent crime against someone and someone uses violence to stop you in defense of themselves or another person, It's your fault!
I don't want to act like the UK and the US are the exact same country.
They're not.
The laws are different.
But we share a very serious common culture.
In many ways, at least.
So there are people now...
Who know, if they actually step up to protect a woman, you go to prison, man.
So why would you do it?
And that's exactly what we see.
This is the story I had covered a couple years ago when it came out.
Fashion chief executive who was attacked by six foot northern line tube passenger slams two white middle class men after they walked into next carriage and left her to defend herself.
Tamara Cinsic, founder and CEO of Fashion Roundtable, attacked on BusyTube.
Mother of one kicked and threatened by an unwell six-foot man as passengers fled.
She has slammed two white middle-class men who left her to defend herself.
And what do you expect?
You think I'm gonna risk liability to myself?
You want equality under the law?
You got it!
It doesn't matter if I'm six foot tall.
It doesn't matter if I'm muscular.
It doesn't matter if I have more bone density or more muscle mass.
It doesn't matter.
You are on your own.
I remember the story from... I think Luke Grudkowski was telling me.
You guys know Luke.
He was on the IRL podcast for a little bit.
He's out traveling around.
Who knows what he's doing?
Luke, where you at?
He's in Florida, actually.
But he was telling me he interviewed this guy in New York.
Who was being attacked.
Or, I'm sorry, there was a guy with a knife attacking people.
So this guy intervenes and stops this man and gets stabbed himself.
And the police did nothing.
They just watched.
Why should anybody do anything to intervene to help another person when you could actually be the one facing liability?
And that's what's been happening.
It's what will happen.
Take a look at this.
From the Daily Mail, just one year ago.
It's 29th of January, 2020.
Too scared to help.
Bystanders refused to carry out CPR on man who had a heart attack and died in Sydney's Chinatown over fears he had the coronavirus.
I get it.
You're scared.
But we're no longer a selfless society.
We're an extremely selfish society.
You know, I was thinking about the COVID passport things in this context, and I was thinking about what would it take for people in this country to say, I will risk my life for you.
I don't know.
I don't know.
But isn't it sad that a rooster will run into harm's way fighting a predator to protect some chickens?
Apparently, we're worse than chickens.
Maybe we should stop calling people chicken when they're cowards and start calling them human!
Come on, you human!
Don't be human, you coward!
That's basically it.
People get scared, and people think about themselves.
They think about, why should I take that risk?
Now, it's funny.
The story about the guy from a year ago who people were scared he had COVID, I understand.
But I think we have to take some risks to ourselves to help each other.
I guess that's just gone from our society at this point.
Now I do think when it comes to this Asian woman being attacked, it's not just about these guys losing their jobs.
I think a big factor is the gender equality circumstance.
Here's a story from the Harvard Business Review, going back to May of 2017.
Men shouldn't refuse to be alone with female colleagues.
And they referenced Mike Pence.
You remember this story?
Mike Pence was like, I don't need alone with women who aren't my wife.
And he was attacked by the left for it.
But isn't this what you want?
We've already seen tons of stories about this.
Here's one from the Detroit News.
When men refuse to mentor women, 2018.
They said it's called the Mike Pence rule.
Why wouldn't men follow the Mike Pence rule?
You go into a room and close the door, and now you're gonna get in trouble, because it's always the man's fault.
Think about it.
If a man and a woman are equal, and they both go into a room, couldn't the man say the woman assaulted him?
Doesn't work that way.
Another example I've given in the past is this, very simple.
What do you think would happen if you were in your job, and one of your buddies, a guy, you're a guy, let's say you're a guy.
Let's say one of your buddies walks up, he's a guy, and you go, Jeez, Rick, you've been working out?
You're looking cut, man.
That's a great outfit, by the way.
You look good.
Jeez.
Looking great, man.
Pat him on the shoulder and say, wow, you've been working out, dude?
You're looking good.
Regular old compliment.
I don't think it's a big deal.
In fact, you can take a look at, like, sporting events where guys slap each other on the butts.
It doesn't mean anything.
It's not sexual.
It's not harassment.
It's just, you know, guys being guys, I guess.
Maybe you don't like it, don't agree with it, whatever.
It happens all the time.
A guy walking up to his colleague and being like, patting him on the shoulder, being like, you're doing a great job, man, in this suit, you look fantastic.
You're looking great.
Now imagine it's a woman.
And she walks in and she's wearing a very nice outfit.
And he goes, woo, Diane, you been working out?
You're looking great.
That outfit, and he pats her on the shoulder, he's like, yeah, you look good.
Totally different context.
Now, some people have said, Tim, that's still inappropriate to say to a guy.
I don't think so.
A guy being like, geez, man, that diet's paying off.
Let's lighten the load.
Let's lighten the load a little bit.
A guy sees a guy walk in, and he's like, woo, Rick, that diet's been paying off.
You dropped a ton of weight.
You're looking great, man.
That's enough.
Is that a new outfit?
You got your hair done?
Man, respect.
Say that to a woman, see what happens.
Grab her on the arm, see what happens.
You will get in trouble in two seconds.
Now think about what happens if a woman does it to a guy.
A guy walks in and she goes, Wow, Jim, you working out?
You're looking great!
Great suit, by the way.
You get your hair cut, too?
Totally fine!
This is the problem.
Guys are walking on eggshells, and they know it.
This is not gender equality.
It's only making things worse, I suppose.
I'd imagine, and maybe I'm wrong, That if it was 40, 50 years ago, and somebody was brutally stomping on a woman on the street, people would rush in and intervene.
Now, 40 or 50 years ago, I guess, 70s.
You go back a little bit further, depending on the race of the individual, and yeah, probably still bad.
So it makes me feel like there was this golden age where people actually did care to help others, and we were past the civil rights era.
Now, you take a look at where we're at, and it's only going back to the way things were.
People won't intervene to help you.
People are... tons and tons of leftists are racists and pushing these racist policies.
Men don't want to be in the same room with women.
Jordan Peterson gave an interview to Vice a few years ago where he mentioned he doesn't know if, you know, men and women working together in the workplace actually will be successful.
And he said it's only been, you know, what, 30, 40 years and it's been a disaster.
I thought it was an interesting statement, but he mentions all of the harassment lawsuits, all the complaints, and now things like this.
Men don't want to be alone with women at the workplace because of accusations, because of impropriety, because men and women are different.
So the point to all this, I kind of want to wrap it all together.
Men and women are different.
And because they're physically different, there are different standards for how they're supposed to behave.
We assume that men are supposed to be the ones to rush into the defense of women because taller, more bone density, more muscle mass, a tendency.
They won't do that anymore.
But men will still be held to that standard if they're alone with women or act inappropriately.
You see how this works?
I think it's just, it's a big collapse, that's what it feels like.
Things don't make sense.
Nobody cares about anybody else.
Nobody will risk themselves.
And thus, we're all in it for ourselves.
And if that's the case, no one's gonna want a COVID vaccine passport.
Nobody's gonna care to do any of these things.
No one's gonna care about you.
No one's gonna defend you.
No one's gonna stand up for anything.
And in the end, authoritarianism is just gonna take over.
No one will stick out their neck.
No one will speak up.
Now, okay, a lot of people are speaking up.
I mean, certainly I am, and many of you probably are.
But a lot of people refuse to do it.
Because they're cowards.
Stop being so humanly.
Be more like the brave rooster that would run full speed towards a coyote to protect the chickens.
Okay, maybe not every rooster.
I had a cowardly rooster when I lived in Miami, but hey, it is what it is.
You look to these other animals that we mock and disparage.
Chickens.
They're chickens.
They're so scared.
Isn't it funny that we are becoming a bit more pathetic than they are?
Okay.
They're pretty dumb.
I gotta be honest.
They're really dumb.
Like, chickens are really dumb and they find... They're really good at finding ways to get themselves killed.
