Welcome another episode of our Interesting Times. Is my pleasure to have Jay Dyer back on the show. Of course, Jay is the proprietor of the recently resurrected Jays Analysis Jays Analysis dot com. Right, so you kept that.
Yeah, everything the same, It's just it's a lot better now.
So okay, that's back up, and yes, i've it is good. I'm accessing the site taking in some of the information there. And of course you are the author of Esoteric Hollywood Sex Calls and Symbols in Film and also they're soon to be released as Esoteric Hollywood too.
Right, correct, early mid December early, don't have a don't have an exact date yet, but as soon as I get a date, everybody will know.
So this is just in time for Christmas?
Correct?
That was the same thing a couple of years ago, wasn't it? Wasn't it around Christmas time the book came out? Or am I mistaken it was?
Yeah, that's right, it was right before twenty seventeen.
Correct.
Now, if they order directly from your website, are you still doing the signing thing?
Can little bit? Correct?
Okay? Cool? Good look out for that then. Okay, so we will look look very much. Look forward to that in the coming month. I know I'll get my copy at least of course, at jaysnowsis dot com you can subscribe. It's four ninety five a month, sixty dollars a.
Year, it is. Yeah, and the I think the renovated site.
Has has helped the subscribers. So that's increased things that are looking on the up and yeah, we've got, you know, pretty substantial archive. The only thing that still isn't fixed on the site is a lot of the old essays that I wrote, which there was a lot of those. Some of those are still broken links and kind of missing. So I still have a lot of old stuff to fix, which I do plan to do. But it's basically all up and running.
So okay, that's good. Pretty much up and running. I guess you irritated somebody or something and yeh, yeah the AI, I don't know the AI censor. I don't know who's doing this.
Well, there were certain topics, yeah, that pressure was put on WordPress to no longer be champions of free speech for yeah.
So yeah, it seems like all across the board line of these and yeah, don't.
I won't go too deep into it. But basically it was an event that a recent event, a big event, you know, one of those kinds.
Of oh yeah, even yeah, I'm not.
Allowed, You're not no longer allowed to post on that.
It's strange. It is strange because I had a couple videos on those events where it was either talked about or you know, just yes, and there are two three years old and they were pulled. So there. I mean, that is strange just just because that topic. I just
you know, it begs the question, it really, right. So anyway, well tonight, you you recently did a couple of videos reviewing some books that you have read, and well recently you did a video called cold War Propaganda and CIA's doc kind of warfare program using churches, and you brought
it in this discussion. An article you sent me a while back, and I looked at it briefly this afternoon about some of the intrigues and manipulating divisions within the Orthodox Church, particularly with Greece and the Ukraine, and this
is sort of perhaps geopolitical maneuvering against Russia. And then I guess this's maybe this got you thinking about some of this other material that you've been reading, particularly David Wimhof's book The Catholic Church, and well, I'll let you take it from there about the sort of manipulation this divide and conquered within Religion's also manipulation within the churches, the doctrinal corruption of these churches through the intelligence agency, agencies, magazines, media,
these things of the West. So go ahead, So what do we got here?
Well, yeah, I think also to another article that came out maybe a week or two ago, was written by Neil Clark, who's a he writes for RT and Patrick sent me a really good article he wrote about the death of John Paul the First and the Cold War, and it was it was really insightful. It was an interesting angle that doesn't really fit into the normative, you know, Cold War style narrative of the death of John Paul that we usually hear and even Western conspiracy or into books.
You know.
I tended to paint that as some sort of KGB Cold War plot, but as Neil Clark argues in his his excellent RT op ed piece.
That really only benefited the West.
And I think if you look at it from that angle, that article harmonizes very well with with Whatson Weimhow's book and some of the arguments that I was making in my talk and stuff that I was seeing and coming across just in my own experience, you know, in the world of Orthodoxy, and you know, this is a very difficult Harry subject in the twentieth century, particularly with the the whole history of you know, the emigrats, the white Russians being.
You know, given.
The solace in the West, you know, if they leave the Bolsheviks, they were given and there were different periods when the white Russians and others who fled the Bolsheviks were allowed to.
Come to the West.
And so one of the problems that this created was the idea that, oh, well, since the Bolsheviks are bad, that must then mean that you know, the CIA and m I six and these people that are inviting.
Russian refugees. I guess you could say to the West, that must make them the good guys.
And so there's a similar story than between what happened with my argument, or what I'm starting to see is a similar pattern, a similar story between the subversion of the Catholic Church in the twentieth century through the means and methods of what Wimhoff describes and what we're seeing in Orthodoxy as well. So certainly we agree that the Cold War was was was on one level bad news,
but at a higher level dialectical manipulation. And certainly that doesn't mean any of the countries that persecuted uh you know, religious institutions were good, and there are plenty of martyrs, plenty of people that were that were put to death by communism.
So we're not I'm not at all trying to vindicate that.
But what we were sold was this story which which again, you know, when you were giving your analysis of NATO and the paper that I think you said you'd written on NATO, you know, you came to see that the the justifications of NATO really ran their course, and they didn't.
It no longer served its purpose, but yet it continued to have this this offensive, this this uh forward moving operation against Russia, and even after the Cold War, even after when it's it supposedly ran its course, it's still you know, it's still surrounding Russia's still making these moves.
And as many people have noticed it, even Michael Jones, people who you know, don't have the same views as me, people have independently kind of come to a lot of the same conclusions that wait a minute, what we were sold by these neocons in the Cold War, what we were told by these people who ran in corporation, who's essentially the masterminds of the Cold War, has really led now to a situation where if you're not promoting Globo
tranny everywhere, right, you're an enemy of freedom. And so when I was really getting deeper and deeper into gy of politics background twenty twelve thirteen fourteen, I was watching Color Revolutions and I was, you know, pretty pretty heavily steeped in geopolitical issues by twenty fourteen when the coup happened in the Ukraine. And I remember I just linked up with Patrick and was writing for twenty first Century Wire, and I was noticing, yeah, I think he had Marek
Hacker on. That was before actually New Market the Times, right around the time I met Mark. But I noticed that what he was, what Mark was saying about the Ukraine really lined up with what we see with the Color Revolutions and all the other countries where they've been promoted, especially the you know, the former Eastern Bloc countries. And again, you know, what do we get with these color revolutions.
What we get the introduction of all the toxicity of Western countries, particularly of the US, the US Anglo American Zio Empire, essentially spreading you know, trainees and porn and disgusting new generacy into all these countries that ironically had been in a way kind of guarded through through the you know, the Eastern Bloc through communism in a weird way, because they had they had opposed a lot of Western
so called freedoms. So there's just this really weird turn about the homosexuality being such a key issue in so called freedom.
And we know that, you know, you and I know, we know that this comes out of like.
The Cold War, the culture of Congress, of the cultural freedom, the idea of promoting the freedom and the arts and all this nonsense, and that somehow that's connected with you know,
freedom and gender expression, freedom and sexual expression, supposedly. And the reason I say all that is to say that so when we look at the means of subversion of the twentieth century through the big Oligarchic families, one need to look no further than the authorized biography of the rock Fillers by Colder and Horowitz, which I read extensively about ten years ago, which was a big wake up call for me because I started realizing, wait a minute,
you know this book is authorized. It's you know, you got the big neocon Horowitz in there. He's writing from the rock Fillers authorized papers and history, and he's talking about how they funded the Acumenist movement for all these years, not because they really cared about religion, but to use it as a tool. And he talks about how, yeah, they set up the Council on Formulations in America, you know,
in league with the Rhodes Millner around table groups. In the UK, they set up the UN, They set up all these institutions that promote you know, globalism, so called free enterprise, so called free trade, and they're big promoters of all of this JAPPYMML Berylson type stuff. So you start noticing these patterns and then you realize that now the subversion of American Protestantism. And I knew this because even before I had any kind of exposure.
Or knowledge of geopolitics.
And I'm not not at all claiming to be an expert, but even back when I was just interested in the religious realm and in theology, I learned as a Protestant that the Rockefellers and wealthy families had been putting a lot of money into certain seminaries like Union Seminary, certain schools like Chicago University, and that was because they had an ideological bent. They really wanted to promote higher criticism, liberalism,
et cetera, et cetera. So what you noticed, what I noticed back in my early twenties was that even some
of the traditional what are called Orthodox Presbyterians. There was a famous guy named Jay Grisham Machen and he left the mainline Presbyterian church I want to say in the twenties, somewhere in there, but he wrote a book about liberalism, and he pointed out some of this stuff in his famous, somewhat famous Protestant book on liberalism, saying, look, it's these big seminaries, it's it's the money that's going to these seminaries from these foundations. And so that was kind of
my initial introduction to that idea. And then you started I started realizing when I would meet, you know, people from Lutheran churches or from Methodist churches, and most of those mainline Protestant churches have kind of split off more conservative versions of them, and you would meet the people from those different conservatives split off groups, and they would talk about, oh yeah, the seminaries got liberalized involved. So you started hearing the same stories over and over and over,
and it just became evident. So that's what's going on here. There's very powerful people. It's not just an organic thing of oh, we're we're all just liberal. I mean, there is a kind of cultural feedback loop there that does happen with people growing up in a liberal society. But there's also the top down, moneyed families putting certain people
into certain seminaries. Fosdick, if I recall, is the guy who the Rockefellers put in place in the Presbyterian seminaries, because I think one of the Rockfellers was Presbyterian or something, and one of them was that the Daddy rock Filler's Baptist, I think.
So essentially what they did was they created this idea of the social Gospel. So a lot of people say, oh.
The Jesuits became commies and they taught the social Gospel.
That's not exactly right.
Actually, the Rockefellers came up with the social Gospel, they promoted it in all of these seminaries, and it spread to Catholicism in the same way it spread to all the other churches. So the crux here is that there's a pattern, and the pattern is the same for all
the churches, respective of what denomination you come from. And that's why Wimpoff's book is so good is that this is the hard, straight up documentation from how this was done in the Catholic Church, and we're seeing the exact same thing being done.
In the Orthodox Church basically.
So that's the crux of the whole point is that what you saw on the in the Ukraine. To tie this to the reason I brought up to in the Ukraine is that in twenty fourteen when they annexed it, you know, from Russia, and they basically set up the
CIA puppet there. It was geopolitics, it was money, it was all that kind of stuff out of you know, Cold War strategy or excuse me, World War two strategies, because that was actually hitler strategy in the Ukraine was to essentially set up its own little nation state there, and that's why they've had the sort of neo fascist bent there. But it was also religious. So in order to wrest it from Russian influence. It's not just a matter of politics. It's also a matter of religion, church
and state. So I was naive, you know, back in twenty thirteen or fourteen, when I was just looking at the geopolitical aspect of it, and I didn't think about the fact that, well, they're going to do the exact same thing in terms of the religious realm.
They're going to want to.
Remove the canonical Church that's under the Moscow patriarchy. They're going to want to also wrest that from the control of Moscow as well, because a sizeable Orthodox population there obviously has to also be removed from not just political but also religious influence from Moscow.
That's the main point I'm trying to make here.
So the way that relates to the US is basically that the Moscow Patriarchate essentially severed communion with Patriarch Bartholemew, who is the patriarch of Constantinople. He but Bartholemew has been bad news for a long time. Actually, a sizable portion of the church, the Orthodox world, has been very
leery of him. Many believe that he is in fact a heretic, and that has only been made more and more evident, especially in the last few months given the situation in Ukraine, with Bartholomew essentially saying that the puppet patriarch in the Ukraine named Filorette, who was basically installed as a puppet, who is known as a puppet, he's not canonical, nobody's ever thought he was canonical.
And suddenly Bartholomew essentially says, oh, he's the one there, he's the good guy. We're going to go with that.
This made it evident to the entire world of Orthodoxy that Bartholomew was a stooge of NATO and the CIA. And so now we know why Joe Biden was meeting with Bartholomew, and and now we know why both Brotholomew a couple of years ago was giving Joe Biden.
Awards involved lucrative gas.
And the gas do exactly now we know what and uh so it was all that, and it was all planning what just happened. So basically there's now uh a giant rift is widening in the midst of the professing or the orthodox world, to the degree now that even Russian Orthodox Christians are those under the influence of the Moscow patriarch, and essentially all the other Orthodox patriarchs agreed. I don't think anybody has cited in any of the
major churches have sided with Bartholomew. The only people who've decided who have sided with Bartholomew are the Greeks in America, who are also directly under influence. So yeah, so that's essentially what's going on. If you kind of know the basics, it's not hard to figure it out. It's all pretty clear. That's why John McCain was flying over there and meeting with the puppet patriarch Filourette, who by the way, was
a Soviet defector. His name is Disinc Dasinco I think is his name, and he defected to the West, and magically he's he's the essentially the CI puppet there in the Ukraine. So that's that's what's going on in simple terms. And I actually talked about some of this stuff. I was I wasn't fully aware of all the all the geopolitical stuff, but I knew that some of these guys are bad news. And I think really the last few months has has been indicated, has vindicated my analysis of the whole scenario.
So long story short, that's why this is all connected.
It's the and the subversion is happening because some of my analyzes of these of these things over the last few months and years made a lot of people mad. They didn't know what they thought. I was being crazy conspiratorial, and the reaction of certain people was to say, well, there's no such thing as foundations and institutions influencing the church,
which is utterly preposterous, documented in multiple books. So I pointed out the fact that well Fordham University has a famous Eastern Orthodox studies institute there and they just received a grant from some foundation in the UK to study gay and lesbian issues and Orthodox churches. So on top of that, Harvard has appointed social justice warrior trans people to spy on the Orthodox world and to report who are the radical right wing extremists and Orthodoxy on and
on on. So to say that this has nothing to do with foundations of petition money is utterly absurd and ignorant. In fact, some of the people who claim this actually retweet the people from the Foundations for him, namely this mister demopopolist I think his name is George Demicopolis, who is the head of Fordham's Eastern Studies department.
Uh. Yeah, so that's that's what's going on. And to think that this has.
No connection to you know, the CIA and that kind of stuff, it would be very naive. So that's essentially the essence of what's going on here.
Very interesting, Yeah, because well Bartholomewill is over there in Constantinople, you know, which is Turkey if I have my geography correct.
Right, it is correct.
Yeah, so it's a NATO country. He's also there's not much of a of a of an Orthodox population there anymore, so he's largely relying on the you know, diaspor and Greeks, but also Western World Council Church ifim I understand, and exact funding. So yeah, he has no independent base and
so he's being used. I also understood there's some sort of intrigue regarding this reconstruction of an Orthodox church pre Orthodox Church in Manhattan and the embezzlement of certain funds, and the US government is backing off investigation, and this just could be the the sort of the leverage they have perhaps over some of these people.
Right, that was very likely.
But I've also been told Rummant Whisper intelligence is that people in those circles are compromised.
Yeah, well that's again that's uh wouldn't be uh surprising. It's powerful course yes, uh and obviously yeah, this is a way that can put create a wedge to get in there. And this is another way of tearing you tearing Ukraine away from Russia and fully into Nata and using using the church the same way perhaps the coldor was used to uh suborn or manipulate the Catholic Church.
Absolutely, yeah, absolutely.
Of course. The book you're referring to by David Wemmoff is John Courtney Murray Time Life in the American Proposition, How the CIA is Doctrinal Warfare program changed to Catholic Church and essential but probably the most important books I've
ever read understanding the modern world that's going on. And it's sort of fundamentally, at least fundamentally changes, but it it answers certain questions about what was going on in the nineteen sixties in the Catholic Church and what's happened since then.
So right, and of course, you know, the deeper you get into these kind of things, the less aware you are of how everyone else is not aware of these things.
Yes, so that's it's. Yeah, you start talking about it, no one is aware of it, and.
They're like, what are you talking about? You sound insane?
And then you then you point out, well, hey, wait, you know the government itself has actually investigated this, right, And then you point out the Rice Committee. Yes, hey, well do you think the Race Committee findings that was only for that time period like that never happened beyond that, Oh, we're going to quit now, or like gam Kaldrow, Well you investigate us, so well, okay, we'll stop.
We're not gonna do that anymore.
Well, of course, yeah, that's one thing is I'm also just started a book called I Will Be Done. This is about the Rockefellers and missionary in Latin America, and the tone is kind of lefty but still important in
the boot least. I haven't gotten too far in the book, but it talks about fastic and the use of missionary work and for securing the resources of you know, particularly oil, but other natural resources of in Brazil and the Amazon rainforests and these things, and using these missionary groups as a as a as sort of as proxy soldiers, even unwittingly in many cases.
Well it's funny you said that because I was at an Orthodox church a couple of weeks ago. I won't say which one. And I was very disheartened by the homily because there's student of our priests are once kind of younger guy, and he usually gets pretty good, solid homilies, but the older priest it is like a completely boomer tear and the oakon. And I was really distressed by this homily because it was a basically because it was Veterans Day. So he was talking about how you know,
America basically guards world freedom. It's basically four Freedoms of FDR into a sermon, and then he was talking about right after that, he started talking about asking for money for some mission, and I was thinking, he was like, I had a friend who you know, this guy, he was a doctor and he's given up everything to be a missionary. I'm thinking, oh, yeah, right, he's probably he's probably working for somebody else.
Yeah.
I mean, I hate to be that cynical, but you know, that's the mindset that you tend to think when you hear, you know, a homily that sounds like FDRs for freedoms, and then then I hear about a missionary needing money. I'm thinking, yeah, right, you're right, but yeah, that's the sad state that we're in. And I'm trying to impress people. I'm trying to impress the point to people that this is cross denominational. Because the oligarchs is the elite, the establishment,
they're going to do what works. And if this has worked for decades now to subvert religious institutions, to turn them basically into organs of you know, the corporate state, which is what it is, then they're going to keep doing it. They're not gonna stop doing it. And the reason it works is that people don't figure it out. They don't people aren't aware that this is this is
how religions are used. They're brought into institutions like you mentioned, like the National Council churches, World Council churches, which are essentially Rockefeller institutions. And again you'll you'll get people who will analyze those things and they'll talk about, well, there was a lot of KGB at those institutions, and that's true, there were KGB that were installed in those but it's
the same. It's it's like talking about Gorbachev. You know, who does Gorbachev end up lauding and praising and working for Rockefeller institutions. And so again you have to understand that the big money to oliguards are not at cross purposes with Sovietism or the KGB or Maoism or anything like that.
They love it.
They love those you know, control systems, those top down control systems, whatever titles you want to give them, fascism, communism, they all kind of achieve the same goal. There might be different flavors, you know what I mean, Like fascism, I might not be as degenerate, or something like Bolshevism, But in the end I would say that even fascism, you know, is problematic because it basically deifies the state.
And so what we in my view, what we tend to see.
And in fact I was as I was reading through wim Hoff, I'm simultaneously reading a book by I think his name is Papiya Natzev.
He's a it's a written in the eighteen nineties, and.
It's memoir reflections of a Russian statesman, and he was critiquing from the eighteen nineties Russian statesman view, you know, writing prior to bulsh of Revolution. He's critiquing Western liberal democracy from a Russian Orthodox perspective, and he's saying the exact same thing that the anti Americanists are saying in Weimhoff's book. Right, So the arguments of even the you know, Pope Leo or writings like the Syllabus of Errors or Quantikiro or or you know Father Leonard Feeni.
Or father I think there's a guy in Webmou's book named.
Father Tapping or something like that, whether there's a significant section of an essay that sounds just exact same argumentation that the pubby knots of is giving about democracy, and how both of them in fact make the point that when you try to have separation of church and state, you don't actually get that.
What you get is a state control church.
Yeah.
That's the irony here is that everybody who all of these people who are purveyors of separation church and state, they're always acting like making this argument as if you're going to get the freedom that you really really want if you just let us set up the secular you know, divide and put us set up to secular situation, it's
going to be freedom for you, we promise. Think of all the tyranny that you've had for all these centuries, and then what you get is this monstrosity that's just another shadow controlled, you know, church state.
That's what we have in America, the managerial state, the bureaucracy. And back I did an interview, we were talking, oh, and the gentleman made the point that in eighteen late nineteenth century there were more bureaucrats in Paris than they were all throughout the Russian Empire. Yet the Russian Empire is called autocratic and teran. You know, well, simply they didn't have the officials to do this, so practically speaking it couldn't be because you had mediating institutions and these
things really governed society. And yeah, but that's the false claim of liberalism and democracy because even at the end of the day, I think I've made this point to you, to you, to you directly in other people, is that we have these paper constitutions, but they don't follow them anyway. They don't even live up to their own claims exactly.
Yeah.
Should There's there's another little book that I think his name is Trevor Goodson, I think, but it's a history of central banking, and he goes he goes into that point in terms of the Russian government as well about about what was really going on, and you know, questions of the usury and that kind of stuff. But the point being is it's just that I'm trying to say that we we think of America as separation church and state, but actually the religions in America are essentially organs of the state.
Is what it all amounts to, which is what these dated Wemuff makes the point in is book that was the original plan was to make it. You know, you create this pluralistic society and it has their own religion. They can go to church on Sunday and then to become you know, productive, you know, economically driven robots for the rest of the week, and it doesn't really make much of a difference.
Yes, And one of the problems with that is the Enlightenment assumption of what's called neutrality. So in the Rema philosophy have this question of philosophical or ideological neutrality, and is that really possible.
I don't believe that it is.
So for example, I think it really quickly breaks down because we start asking questions like, well, how can the state be neutral on something like abortion? How can it be neutral on the question of marriage. Those are institutions that relate directly to human society. So how can the state have no position or be neutral on those things. It's it's really retarded and quite fact childish to think
that it could. And yet that is the the inheritance that we have from the enlightenment is the assumption that not just in science that you can be quote neutral, but then in fact, in all areas of life, there's this this magical position of neutrality that you don't have to take a position, or that you can allow some sort of libertarian freedom in and in fact it's just simply not the case.
There.
There's there's no point that in in the world, or or in reality or or human life that is that is neutral. Nothing is if you, if you, if you, if you stop and think about it. But of course that's not the pragmatic approach is to stop, is not to stop and reflect or to to even consider something
like that. But you know, whether it's you know, Sunday laws right there used to be Sunday laws, Whether it's you know, the days of the week, you're right, I mean, whether it's questions of usury, whether it's questions of morals, abortion, murder. You know, none of these things can be can be neutral, and it doesn't. I mean, certainly there's such a thing as crazy bureaucracy, but at the same time, there's no such thing as like, you know, a state that doesn't legislate morality that's utterly.
Well, I'm I'm personally opposed.
Yeah, well that's what That's what it does is that I think wem Hoff and a kind of passing point, actually makes a brilliant argument there that well, isn't that what's necessary for commerce? I mean, in other words, to maximize commerce, you need to play down religious laws and distinctions because it's not good for commerce. Yes, And that's that's a key point here, is that the real god in the system is Mammon is the market god.
And that doesn't you really you get to the essential questions what constitutes are good and just society? And sometimes but that gets that's not a pragmatic.
Question, that's philosophical, and that's no longer pragmatic.
America. We like to get things done, you know.
Yeah, and whim Off you know, makes those points right away, and early on in the book he says that essentially America is the pragmatic country. I also pretty appreciated the chapter two he discusses at length. You know that the quickly like there's a whole chapter on the roads round table group. Quickly, Lionel curtisis Commonwealth of God, you know, becomes the idea of the American styleship.
Yeah, and the whole idea that this the American century we designed, would be designed by various banker elites who control the media. These are a handful of men for the most part, who are just who are creating an economic system which it's called economic freedom, but benef it's the empire.
And the same people that designed the Fourteen Points. It's the same class that designed the Four Freedoms. And they're the same ones that said that this needs to be sold to the entire world. And guess what, they're all bankers and they drew up all the debts after war war war.
And another false prom It's just like the way the liberal constitutions of false promises, because the Four Freedoms and the fourteen Points, well, one thing it didn't apply to defeated Germany in nineteen eighteen, but later on it didn't apply to Mussadec in Iran or Guatemala fifty you know under our Benz or Chile in these things, right, because the moment you got fast freedoms.
Yeah, the freedoms, you know, they're arbitrarily doled out and taken away.
Yeah, you know it's it's again just freedom. That sounds great, you know, but they don't live up there.
What about freedom from usury?
Yeah, freedom from usury to become institutionalized. You know, it's but it's what you talk about the use of well foundations NGOs. You could say, these organizations you don't really consider governmental h e. Michael Jones in his book, well in several books, but particularly in the Slaughter of Cities. And also he would a biography of John Cardinal Kroll in the Cultural Revolution, which actually predates the Slaughter of Cities.
I read it actually in reverse. Wasn't aware of the Cardinal crole biography, but he says there was a basis. It was his research to Cardinal Krowell lived a slaughter of cities and sort of again we have a situation. This is done in the middle part of the twentieth century. Uh, because America is a funny situation. Marits. I've heard America
described as sort of a Masonic Frankenstein monster. It's it was up until the twentieth century was largely decentralized and at least in the outside of the South, very ethnic and sort of compartmentalized ethnically, these ethnic conclaves and these things. But this had to be sort of homogenized for the American century and this really began a were one, but really began an earnest during World War II under the pretext of war measures to bring you know, black sharecroppers
up from the South to fill the war factories. Because of the war mobilization, twelve million men went off to fight. You had this labor shortage that was a need that had to be met, but it was also used as a pretext to sort of weaken the unions at the same time also break up these ethnic neighborhoods that people like Paul blanchetsaw as being suspect loyalty for the war. You know, even the Polish Catholics or Irish Catholic wasn't
just Germans or Italians that he targeted. Because these these Catholic enclaves are ethnic communities, were sort of a stumbling block to the post war plans. I think they were already set in motion. But the use of the use of the foundations like the Ford Foundation, and the use of after well, one thing later on you should a head to the sixties. The use of governmental agencies like the Office Economic Opportunity to UH fund criminal gangs to
sort of proxy soldiers to chase the whites out. This is very similar to what we see like in the Middle East.
With you with some of these you know, with Isis, so called ISIS of these groups where these these proxy forces are used to create mayhem to well some sort of a demographic eive executive perhaps.
Guess what the same thing is happening to the ethnic communities of the Orthodox world. It's no different and UH for example, I was reading article the other day about I think it was in UH one of the Eurasian publications journal Ineo or whatever, but I think I shared it online. It's it's a it's a good article talking about the banker's destruction of Greece.
Now we all know that this has happened over the last several years.
But the leftist government that was supposedly going to stop and oppose the IMF, oh, well, magically, guess what they just happened to be people from the IMF and from uh yeah, Alexi, Cyprus or whatever. And guess what he wants more mosques in Greece. Now, the Greeks, who of course fought Muslims at different points in history, and even the Greek bishops in Greece, who are not as bad, by the way as the American Greek bishops who are
the worst. They're mad, they don't want more mosques, and they're saying, we want borders, we do not want more and more Islamic influx. But guess what that's to destroy? Greece's to destroy what's there. It's by design, and it's Muslims there, and it's migrant caravans here. It's exactly it's the exact same models. And it's and what you're talking about with the ethnic enclaves, with Catholics, it's the exact same thing. Yeah, or with or with Southerners, it's exact same thing.
And achieve you can achieve a lot of rejectives. One of things you create, you create white America, right, the post war white suburbia, which they could be subjected to the culture Revolution, to the mass media. And this is all spelled out like you said in various white papers and think tanks, the creation of suburbia. But the one example is the efforts for the federal government of promoting
birth control in the nineteen sixties. It had been defeated in nineteen thirties because of these ethnic these Catholic ethnic neighborhoods, and the Catholic Church were strong because of these ethnic neighborhood neighborhoods. But by the nineteen sixties that they asper in the suburbia had been you know, had had had had had happened, and so again you had that loss of ethnic identity. But one one focal point of his battle was actually was in Philadelphia where the it was
the the blessed most Blested Sacrament Parish. I think it is, yeah, most Blessed Sacon in Mbia, NBA, most bested Sacrament parish. It was like one hundred city blocks, very dense, these dense Philadelphia homes, all Catholic, Okay, and it was the largest Catholic school in the country. Yeah, and provided the most priest in these things. But it also elected a senator, Martin Mullen, and that senator was I think controlled the purse during of the state budget, and he held the
pass against the state of Pennsylvania promoting birth control. And what they did is they gradually integrated his neighborhood and he lost his district because of that, and they in the Catholic ethnic Catholics left for suburbia. And the problem, but the problem with the archdiocese didn't really didn't have the sophistications what was going on. They didn't seem the care. They just thought integration was good, you know, as that was sort of the zeitgeist, the spirit of the age.
If you were progressive, you had had to put an integration, as you were a racist if you didn't. But they didn' understand that this parish was being destroyed, which is the backbone of the influence of the church from the standpoint of the archdiocese was the people will just goore out to suburbia, but they are still members of the archdiocese, but they're no longer part of a cohesive, tight knit community, and there goes there goes the cultural influence of the church.
Therefore its political power. Once they're these you know, these ethics going in the suburb and they become whites, you know, with you know, watching TV, all they have in common. And that's and it was very sophisticated, but it was done. And how this was done was the employment of foundations, Quaker organizations, UH, the Catholic inter racial councils, shoot people withinside. The liberals withinside the church either understood this or didn't care.
They just wanted to be good liberals. But this again you use ethnic warfare. And superficially it looks good because everyone supporting integration, but really from a route from a political science and sociological standpoint, just sort of creating the homogenization of society and destroying groups that might present some check on the Uh. The objectives of the empire, which one of the thing was was, of course, was depopulation and birth control, and the courts were there with Griswold
of the Connecticut ninet sixty five to legalize it. What happened was once the court's r it was right, a privacy right, governments can now go out and actively promoted. Before that they couldn't promote this thing, and they started promoting it. And I think it was William Ball, who was a Catholic lawyer working for the archdioces, made the argument that well if it's a right to privacy, and the government's not right even promoting because you're invading someone's
privacy by promoting it. But that's just My point is just that is kind of a micro example of the importance of these ethnic neighborhoods and how you can achieve a much larger political objective just by demographic warfare. And it's indirect, so it isn't isn't particularly noticed. And the point is is the Foundations are key to this.
Yes, there are maybe an analogous example.
Orthodoxy in America is kind of confusing because there's a lot of different jurisdictions. And the reason for that is because in Orthodoxy there's no position higher than a bishop. If if say the Russian Orthodox Church extends missions to America, if it sets up a mission church, then that church has unless it's granted autocephalis status.
It's usually in some.
Way connected to, you know, a Russian bishop or something like that. If the Greeks set up a mission church, the same situation happens, and so there's been a move for example, amongst I would argue, I used to think it sounded like a good idea to have all of
the jurisdictions of orthodox in America United. But now that I understand the way that this stuff actually works, that would be a bad thing because what would happen is it would all probably they would try to put it under one single American jurisdiction that would be completely controlled.
So that would actually be a nightmare. So it's actually good that we have different parishes, Russian churches, Serbian churches, Romania Orthodox, all these different types, because that's much more difficult to try to force everybody into the acceptance of one giant, so called canonical thing that's run by you know, foundations and a bunch of stooges.
When you end up with a rainbow flag outside the church, anyway.
You will you'll have to.
And yeah, and and I remember, you know, ten years ago I started looking at Orthodoxy, and I remember people talking about, well, we need to have all the jurisdictions united, we need to have one jurisdiction for North America.
And and ideally, normally that would be the case.
But nowadays, given the way I have a I think a better picture of how you know, subversion works, that sounds like a nightmare.
We would not want that.
But but yeah, and and that would play into ethnic uh of subversion as well. So you're absolutely right. So yeah, and there's two there's there's different errors here, Like there's the there's the focusing too much on the ethnicity, which happens at times of Orthodoxy, and it causes problems. But at the same time that can also be a positive, it can be a firewall. So so there's no easy answers to this because the system that you know, that we are opposed to is a system that utilizes Mammon
to essentially destroy man. And and that's the problem is that people don't see that. And I always again I come back to, you know, think about the Godfather, right, and I think Weimhoff has a section where he talks about this that that's that's an emblem of the destruction of the people group.
You see.
The same idea in Scarface is you have these people who would have been would have been more traditionally minded in their religious views. And the same would apply to any person who comes to America, you know, to make his way from whatever religious background. The same ideas there is that the kind of system that America is is a system that entices you on the basis of material prosperity.
And I thought the chapter that Weimhoff had about Walter Litmann was especially because the jibes perfectly with what we've covered, for example, at my site in Miles Copeland, because Miles Copeland said, we wanted to sell Hollywood and Americanism, or we wanted to sell Americanism in Egypt, so we just sent them Hollywood movies because that made them all think that, you know, living the good life is essentially you know, climbing up the ladder, and you see that that's what
it's about. That's what the enticement that why do all these third world people want to come here when they want to have a better life, they want to make money, but they don't understand that three generations from now, that's to turn their offspring into goblins.
Basically, yeah, yeah, And that's a good example of that is a lot of the people from Mexico who migrate north exactly once they get away from like our lated Guadalupe, they lose their Catholicism, especially Mexican form of Catholicism. That's how they identify with it, and it's very it's not very strong up here. And what they become again, these you know, like you said goblins.
Well, I mean it's not like it's not like it's only white people that are going to be promoted with the trainee stuff.
It's everybody. Yeah, yeah, and the school the schools are pushing that.
And now you know, Canada has legalized BC reality, so that that's completely legal to have BC reality, you know, So it's not just I mean, it's like every degeneracy is going to be pushed out and promoted and it's going to be basically a completely satanic order, is what it is.
Yeah, mhm. And Chris this, you know, Chase a lot of these countries, the Latin America, Mexico, you know, they've invade Americans, America's Freemasonic project in Mexico and uprooting the traditional state there in the nineteenth century.
And America it was fostered by Mason's.
Yeah, Masons, and uh again there's a context here that you know America's had played has played. It has played a large role in keeping these countries poor and destabilized. And this is a model here, because you do that, you create an endless supply, virtually in the supply of not only caravans of people who can come up and create social disruption and just create sort of a strategy tension,
but also cheap labor, you know, cheap labor. That's the coincides with the so called free trade and these things. They've always leveraged the enslaved or exploited you know, wretched masses of the of the colonies of the empire for labor and call that free trade. And that's something that British Empire did the Germany in the nineteenth century.
Yes, that's a great point, and people don't think about it being studied at that level. But there was in fact a UN paper from a couple of years. The paper was from early two thousands, I think, but somebody had it was going around the alt media a few months ago, maybe a few weeks ago for you what it was. But basically, this UN paper was about population
projections for different regions and they were giving scenarios. It was like eight different scenarios, and one of those scenarios was the basically the displacement of the normative Caucasian population by large amounts of Latin South American, Mexican you know, population moving into moving into the US. By I think they had something like twenty fifty. So in other words, and now it was presented in this this particular un paper as just one of the many scenarios, right like.
Oh but but no, that's never used as a game plan. They would never use that as like an actual strategy.
No, even though there's books by countless academics like Weapons and Mass Migration, they would never actually use that, right.
It's just it's just an objective.
Analysis, you know, even though even though the bankers say we want to you know, Peter sutherlandless flood these countries with even though you know Wesley Clarks, it's time for all this to go away.
No, they would never do that.
It's just it's just how does the millions that end up in Minnesota.
Or Tennessee or in natural I met a guy at a bookstore and he was a leftist guy. He ran one of the bookstores that closed down, the old bookstore downtown. And he saw me looking through the geopolitics section one day and he was, what are you There's not many people buy those books.
Yeah.
It was like I was looking for anything to do with I think I said something like cold war and he was like, oh, well, blah blah blah. He said, yeah, I've always been anti war and all this stuff, and he had these kind of like you know, oh yeah, there's a you know, a deep state cabal and this kind of stuff, and they you that's who killed JFK.
And then he's like, yeah, I gotta go, because so I gotta go.
I volunteer at one of the refugee centers where we were receiving all the sommelions.
In Nashville. There's all these aliens coming in.
Yeah, why and who's paying for it? Mm hm agency yeah, yeah, Soros organizations. But yeah, yeah, and they're making money hands of a fist doing it too.
That was another big key too that I think Jesse Russell pointed out one of your interviews, and I she I looked this up after he mentioned it, and that was a thing I missed too, was all the virtue signaling about the stuff by these retarded churches.
And by the way, it's all of them.
There's Orthodox or virtue signaling. The mainline Greeks were Protestant churches, the liberal ones obviously, and the Roman Catholic bishops. They were virtue signaling over this because they're getting money for these refugees.
Yeah, this is where the brick and mortar. Meant, you know, as Michael Jenny's called it, they're busy establishing their churches, but not not keen to the psychological worf are being waged against their flock. And as he said, so they're you're they're bringing knives and gunfights and they have no understanding. In some cases, I think it might be actually it might be more sinister than that. Oh yeah, you know someone like a Cardinal Bernard.
Bernardine Bernardin or Mahoney.
He was involved with what's his name in Chicago Ago. You know, the guy who was for radicals, Solinski. Yeah, he's working he's working with Sololensky. I'm like, okay. And everywhere it goes as a trail of you know, reports of abused children. So you know, you know, whatever thing, you know, whatever you want for from that. But with uh, you in the talk you were I think you opened it up with this thirty six year interview with Norman Dodd, which is very important, but it's one of these things.
Were Norman Dodd, who was the chief investigator for the Reesky men you mentioned earlier, and you alluded to this early is at one point there's a there was a very serious creationial investigation or the role of the Foundations when a wormser wrote a book called Foundations in Their
Power and he details us. But there was a very serious investigation of what they were doing, un American activities and what Norman Dodd describes as Unemarrian activities, just using unconstitutional methods to change the government or society, which I thought was a pretty fair, you know, explanation of something as vague as un American people, you know. But he he uh, I mean, actually I'll let you you I mean you you well, I mean the.
People who are doing this are committed americanness.
Uh. And they knew no better, right, I mean, they were they they operated on the basis of the light that was given to them, so uh, you know, they didn't know any better. But it's it's just like the I heard some story about the guy who founded the Birch Society. I forget he was some general or something, and you.
Know, he.
Was well intentioned, but supposedly he got blown away by the fact that he realized that it was these big Foundations. It wasn't just commies. It was like, you know, very wealthy people supporting all this stuff in America. Right, So the same principle year is that if you look, for example, at the things that they list that the various foundations Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie, blah blah, it was ideas like relativism, moral relativism, culture relativism, socialism, this kind of stuff.
And that makes perfect sense because if.
We think about, you know, Uri Besmanov, the endlessly cited Defector interview, and I think it's Gward Griffin, it's g Edward Griffin that's interviewing Norman Dodd.
Is she Edward Griffin that interviews Uri Bezmov.
Yeah, And what's interesting is that that in the Besmanov lecture he doesn't ever he says he talks about things that are real subversive techniques. So all that stuff that he says is correct, but I don't think he gives a full story fee's behind it. But if you look at what the findings of the recent committee are, that's who it is.
It's those people.
It's Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie, you know, the big bankers, all these families, That's who it is.
In the interview, Norman Dodd talks about when he was like thirty years old at the time of the Great crash nineteen twenty nine, but he was told to investigate it by about banking reform. I think other quote, it's very interesting, he is when I was thirty. I was thirty at the time. I had no more right to you go. Much of my surprise, my superiors, in the middle of the panic in which they were immersed, confronted me, and I was confronted with the question, Norm, what do
we do now? I was thirty at the time. I had no more right to have an answer to that question than the man on the moon. However, I did manage to say to my superiors, gentlemen, you take this experience as proof of something that you do not know about banking, and you better go find out what that something isn't act accordingly, four days later, I was confronted by the same superiors with a statement to the effect
that Norm, you go find out. And I really was, and I really was a full enough to accept the assignment, because it meant that you were going out to search for something. He could tell you what you were looking for. I felt so strongly on the subject that I consented to it. I was really vulnerable duties I'll paraphrase here. And he went out and he did investigated and basically came back with the report, I guess promoting sound banking. That's the solution. Uh, where is this? Here go?
Here go?
So I rendered such a report, and as a result of the report I rendered, I was told the following norm what you're saying is we should return to sound banking. And I said, yes, in essence, that's exactly what is that I am saying. Whereupon I got my first shock was the statement from them to this effect, we will never see sound banking in the United States again, and they cited chapter verse to support that statement. But they
decided was as followed. Since the end of World War One, we have been responsible for what they call the institutionalization of conflicting interest and they're so prevalent inside this country they can never be resolved. This came to me as an extraordinary shock because these men who had made this statement were the men who deemed redeemed the most prominent bankers in the country. The bank of which I was
a part of was spoken of a Morgan bank. Coming from the men of that caliber, statement of that kind made a tremendous impression on me. Now, what he's saying from that is that the banking system, of financial system is made purposely unstable to create occasional shocks for the purpose of I think, well, I would say, and so he's being told that the system is made to be intentionally unstable. They want this is strategy of tension, you know,
just to create a crisis. And this is since you would occurred with the Great Depression and the and the and the other panic. But yeah, I mean that's I mean,
that was an interesting part of that interview. But he he says, uh, with the Reese Committee, he does this investigation and he goes up there, I think since Katherine Casey have to investigate the minutes of the Carnagian Down for Peace and discovers and she discovers a conspiracy to drag the country into war for the purposes of collectivization of the country. The fundamentally change. Basically, there's no better way to fundamentally change a culture or country than to
drag it into war. And also the subsequent plan to after plans to extend the First World War, to extend the crisis to I guess, create more damage to society, trauma and then all things possible and take measures to avoid a reversion to normal times for peace time, and we call that the twentieth century, right, I mean, that's.
Correct.
And the people at the Rhodes Rothschild Society, the elect group that we've covered, that's the one that's who cooked all this up. And they're the ones who cooked up the need to bring America into the wars, to be the engine for this, to not only create instability and to have the villains like Hitler, but to also they're also smart enough and devious enough that they know that the wars will exhaust certain countries, it will exhaust their enemies,
and they even talked about that. In fact, there's a chapter where Quickly talks about that with Italy.
He says that.
What Mussolini did was actually advantageous for the West. Mussolini basically exhausted Italy. They had nothing they could do after the war. Not that Italy was necessarily that that great of a war power, but the point is that the Axis powers couldn't. It's Germany really was the main problem.
As you know, Quickly, any Michael Jones and every Stratford Freeman, sure everybody agrees that that's what the Royal Society did, was they came up with a plan to basically wreck Germany and it worked, and then they did the same thing with Russia.
We know we've covered that, But the point is that that the people who have these.
Big, big picture strategy analyzes done, they're smart enough to know.
How to play a big game, That's what I'm trying to say.
So they know the stuff about migration movements, population movements, how to di wrect cultures through that that we talked about a few minutes ago, And they know the same strategies with economy, how to sink and cycle economies through different means. That was covered excellently. One of the crucial chapters in Tragedy, and hope that people miss as the FDR chapter because if you if you just see FDRs a socialist or e commy, you miss that, You miss it,
you miss the whole thing. Because even Wimhaw points out that FDRs for freedoms, that's perfectly in line with the spirit of American capitalism, even though he was a collectivist, and the promotion of collectivism in this regard is not contrary to monopoly capitalism at all. And when you see the cycles. This was the quickly chapter on FDR that's so crucial that the cycles are intentional to have a period of prosperity and propatization that then transitions into a
cycle of austerity and collectivization. And they and the bankers are smart enough that they know that and they can plan that and that What that does, as we said, was it collectivises the debt, the future energy of your children are basically already down payments on future debts.
That's how they do it.
And they keep you in slavery, not just your generation, but generation after generation of generation generation. And they can even cycle the economy through different phases of boom and bust. That's how it's done. So it's not a free market. It's a rigged, rigged economy, even though it's sold as a free market.
It's it's it's.
Basically just scam within scam within scam. It's like onion layers of scams. I know, we talked about that before.
Yeah, the whole bank financial system and insurance, even healthcare insurance, the debt model and these things all it's all designed for extraction.
Harvesting exactly, harvesting energy basically energy parasites basically.
Now, I mean you you talked a lot about Who's book. I think it would be fair we talk about that. And because we talk about this dark kryning of warfare and he in the book.
By the way, real quick, can I add something?
Sure?
Do you remember when you and I were talking about the funny chapter in Quickly where he talks about the Bank of England and the secret thenorage vaults and stuff.
Yeah, the the Doctor Evil's gold orders.
Did you see did you see the article that I found that I put up in James Bond taught where the queen is walking in the secret vaults looking at her two hundred and sixty billion dollars in gold.
Yeah, anyway, and they know she's she's goldfinger.
I was gonna say, yeah, it's like her and Lord Rothschild or like gold Hanger together.
The trying of warfare program. Because this kind of this, this is this kind of spells out what you're talking.
By the way, by the way, if you have that much of the gold I mean, if you remember goldfigures plot. I'm sorry, i mean interrupt you a bit, but I think this plays into I'm theorizing here, conspiracy theorizing this plays into manipulation of the gold market. I mean if you have like the control like a giant chunk of the world, then aren't gold markets manipulated? I mean Paul Greg Roberts has been arguing this for a long time.
Yeah, so this you can't even rely on a gold standard right right now, fiat currency, because what you're dealing with this hot this level of criminality, that faith, there's no This goes back to there's no economic model that can compensate for sus criminality.
And yes, that's a great point. Yeah, I mean it gives.
Back to basically has to assistant, has to have a certain agivement tag Greene, honor to and it doesn't. It just collapses And there's no model that can protect you from because I really because if you have honorable people running the printing press, even if currency we're working was backed by economic production, there's no you know.
But the.
Walhof book Sites is docturnal warfare program. It was documental psb D thirty three with annexes which basically the program was to target intellectuals, business leaders, and clerics and a number of different societies with the goal of having them improve the American ideology and principle. Psychological warfare is defined
further in this interview. Two key aspects of American theology my book proposals are I'm reading from wormhaw summation so called separation of church and state, along the conception of religious liberty with the means that there is not a state established church and their religion is not a form not to form the basis of public policy. And the freedom of a press, which effectively puts culture and real power over the minds of the citizenry in the hands
of private concerns like six corporations. We now have to that, wow, interlocked corporations. And we see this today because now a lot of Catholics, even the Pope, the current pope, has internalized the American ideology. I think it was in September of twenty fifteen he talked about the separation church of state is the model and the integral or confessional state simply doesn't work, which is a contradiction right, Yeah, of church teachings.
Yeah.
I think you could argue that the on the start of the papacy Benedict the fifteenth the beginning of the craps because he supported the League of Nations, and of course successors to him were less less amicable to this kind of a thing. But yeah, I don't think there's there's not much debate that you know, from John the twenty third on you essentially get this line of thinking.
I mean, I've read a large portion.
Of the encyclicals of all of the popes after well, I've read a lot of the twenty century and cyclicals, but I've read John twenty third, I've read Paul the six I've read you know, many of John, Paul the Seconds, and Benedict, and they all are in unison there about the confessional state's basically done.
Yes, it's a relic.
See, that's it's like because again, as Americans, you know, we grew up in a you know, in a again a society where there is no state church, right.
And ironically, for me, I never questioned that until I became a Calvinist, and it was it was ironically Calvinists of all people that got me questioning that. Not because they so much adhere to a confessional state, but in certain strands of Calvinism, you have the idea that the moral law of God has to apply to the civil sphere.
It doesn't make any sense and it's not coherent to try to you that you know God has all the attributes that you believe he has, like like omnipresence and omniscience, and that you know all areas of life are essentially under his.
His providence and sovereignty.
Well, then it only logically follows that the moral law also extends into all areas of life. And if that is true, which obviously is, then that applies to the civil seris as well. And you know, as a Calvinist, I was pretty ignorant of church history. But then when I deeper, I doubt into church history, you've learned that, well, this is the normative view of the Church. The Church, even the early church fathers prior to the Christian Christianization of the Kingdom, supported the death penalty.
They supported uh, the the the the theory of just war, on and on and on. And they did that because of their view of scriptures. They saw a.
Unity between the Old and the New Testaments. They didn't teach Marsianism.
Uh.
And when you read the history of the Church and you see countless kings converted to Christianity and then essentially setting up Christianity as the confessional religion, that's the norm and everybody knows this from countless examples in church history. I was just watching a documentary on Byzantium and Empress Theodora built a giant church to to to patron saints
of the Byzantine Army. The army had patron saints. That is not the how far as night and day from what we're talking about with the idea of essentially the secular atheist state. And by the way, I am going to do eventually firing the minds of Ment, and I've read not a lot of I've read about five chapters of fire the Minds of Ment, and and already we're coming to see that the Billington is honest in his and he's an apologist like he's pro you know, revolutionary America.
He's saying, basically what Wimhoff is saying is that the spirit of seventeen seventy six is the spirit of I mean, he doesn't talk about Vatican too, but he's saying that that is the logical end result of the Spirit of seventeen seventy six is essentially complete religious freedom.
God doesn't have anything to do with the civil sphere. Blah blah blah blah blah.
But again, whether you're Roman Catholic or whether you're Orthodox, everybody knows that the double headed eagle is the ancient symbol of the church.
And that's because it represents church and state under God symphony, right.
Right, which even the I mean, it's the same principle in Catholicism too. I mean the austral Hungarian in parts symbol is double headed eagle.
So now with it, of course, America itself is different. It's it's the first state that was established that that what did have this non establishment church, you know, the separation church the state, which really isn't in the constitution Thomas Jefferson.
Right, it's Jefferson and Roger Williams and the Baptist Schooboles.
So really, I mean, obviously you really can't have that. It's not reason. It's an excuse to sort of purged religious and it's from the public square and inject secular humanism or ideology or some secular ideology. And there's because nature abhors a vacuums, someone's values will indeed prevail. It's a question of who's Yeah.
You know, however, I don't buy I used to try to argue that you could read the documents as Christian. But I more and more don't really think you can, because let me just think about the conglomeration of people that came together to draw them up.
I mean it's essentially ecumenical.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Let's get a bunch of Baptists and Congregationalists and Atheists and Satanists and Daists and Masons and Episcopalians together and come up with an idea of government.
But nevertheless, the Catholic Church.
Uh.
And this the woman writes about this, this book is is the allure of America I think you alluded to early, is that it offers material prosperity, a lot of goodies, a lot of babbles and things that, you know, gagulating and things like that, and so tradition we've always been. I mean, obviously you can't make them not have two masters? What does it profit?
Mean?
And loses us? You know, if he gains the whole world, loses the soul. There's a acknowledgment in traditional Christianity about this temptation, even Jesus in the desert, in these things being offered, all the principalities and powers Domitian over them, and him rejecting it. But the what am I getting at here here the idea that well, the corruption of the of American of Americanism, uh vis via the Cavioch Church.
This why Americanism pervades the Catholic Church, not just Vatican cub Long before the answered David Wemhoff writes about is that life in America a relative like maybe life in Ireland or even you know, Germany in the mid nineteenth century was very nice. Catholic Catholics come here, there are restrictions, but they prospered, that did well relative to their cousins back in the old country. So they gained a certain amount of loyalty to America based on their on their
financial prosperity, on their material prosperity. So they became dire loyal to that. And this was the sort is their material comfort again is what makes them Americanists. And so they have to become loyal to the state. And so they start to come to believe that the state being ideal as opposed to the Catholic Church. Prior to the sixties saw the situation in America sort of the Catholic Church having a practical relationship to what the state was.
The fact that Catholic Church always had this, always took a practical approach to what government was in power at the time, right, and so it said, okay, this is the state, the current situation, the way it is. It was somewhat ameliorated by the fact that America was so decentralized. And again we talked about these ethnic neighborhoods in the north, in the Midwest and these things. So that had an effect or of amiliorating these things. America wasn't quite the
empire yet. It became more of a problem when she became an empire in the latter half of the twenty you know, after the Second War, going leading into the Second World War. But you have the Catholic Church relation to traditional states like Spain or Portugal, where the Church became internally hostile to like Franco Spain or sal Salzov's Portugal,
or what happened in Italy in the nineteen forties. And then of course this was Henry LUs because Hendy Lus's wife was the ambassador to Italy, and you talk about it wasn't just Henry Luce there. There was Notre Dame here in America who was the pining for Rockefeller funds, but also this outfit but pro Dare University in Italy.
Yes, the CIA set up yeah university. Right.
But the point is that the that the the Church of sof became hostile to confessional or intego estates like Franco Spain in the name of democracy.
Right, And everybody knows that that is the norm and the history of the church. The Church is not.
And there's a thousand different lies and and made up nonsense that people try to use to justify this. They'll talk about, Oh, but the early Church, well, the early Church was busy christianizing the empire and dying to make the imperium you know, christian Right, So you can't look to you know, martyrs as if as if that is
the goal. No, the goal, as the prophets predicted many times over throughout the Psalms, throughout major minor prophets, is that the nations and the kings of the earth would convert to Christ.
And they did.
And that's that's one of the reasons we know Christianity is true. Is all these prophecies in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms predict the fact that the kings of the nations will convert to Christ. And they did, and by the way, their kingdoms converted. And it's only they understood properly and correctly that you can't banish God from the civil sphere. Once you do that, as many wise men have noticed, you get a new God. You
don't get secular state. You get a new God. And this is interesting because many of these esotericis and occultists and degenerates, they're more than happy to put a new God into place because you fell for that. You fell for the goofy lie that you would get you know, no god, you would get neutrality. No, you get a new you get a new master. Right, no man can serve two masters, which assumes that you're serving one or the other one. There's no neutrality, you're not. Jesus has
no neutrality in that equation. There so anyway, but yes, uh uh, it's it's again. It seems so far fetched anybody who grew up in America the idea of the confessional state. But you know, it's just a fact. That's the reality of the history of the Church. It's not an aberration of the early Church that itself, which is what many Protestants, many americanists rely on is simply not true.
That's a mythology that they could.
That that Baptists and so of the Avidists really popularize this idea that Constantine fundamentally changed the constitution of the Church into something that it wasn't before, and that's simply not true. You can you can read countless hundreds of pages of church fathers prior to to Constantine, who taught the exact same thing as the Church fathers after. They didn't fundamentally change anything. The liturgies were the same, The views of the Doctor of the Church are the same.
The views of the legality of the state. You know, Paul and rome As thirteen says the state has the sword as a minister of God. Now Paul doesn't. He's not saying the state is God. And by the mere fact that he lost his head as a martyr by the state shows that he didn't believe that the state
could do anything. No, it's limited by the law of God, obviously, and so you know, the early Church had the same view, but they also at the same time recognized the legitimacy of the state to wage just war and to punish evil doers. As Paul says, that's what the sword is. It's the death penalty. This has been This is another element that a lot of people miss too, is pacifism, the pacification the same problems, by the way, in Catholicism
and in Orthodoxy. So what goes along with a lot of this Americanism is also magically the promotion of aism. Now they'll talk about how the New Catechism does this, although oddly enough the New Catechism for Catholics still retains I think some weird statement about how it is the traditional position, but the death penalty is no longer needed with you know, all the modern inventions that we have,
or something to that effect. And of course, you know, Joppo the second was a huge crusader against the death penalty. And now a lot of people don't see this as that big of a deal. I do, because it's a clear example of one of these cases where we can see the banishment of God from the civil sphere as a as a clear departure from traditional teaching. So, whether you're Orthodox or whether you're you're a Roman Catholic, the entire history of the Church is affirm the death penalty.
It's never been doubted except for you. There might have been some.
Rigorous church fathers, you know, early on, who, by the way, probably weren't saying to somebody like Tertolian or some like that, who's not not a saint, by the way, who might have doubted it, some of the some of the aesthetics might have doubted it. But the normative conciliar canonical view is that the imperium, it's in the code of Justinian, by the way, who is a saint in orthodoxy, you know, the death penalty is there. Uh, it's it's in canon law in certain cases has been mentioned.
I think it applies to pediass priests.
It used to absolutely, Yeah, I think even Justinian's code has Pederasti has a death penalty.
So yes.
So in other words, one of the things, by the way, that that leftists talked about to alter culture, and I'll give you an example in the Globalist book series, ah she Wells says this. He says, promote pacifism and the removal of the death penalty.
Why would why would that be?
Well, because that is a an anti patriarchal, anti masculine, anti it's a it's an alteration in the civil society which ends up basically rewarding criminals, because what happens is criminals get basically put up in prison, and society then pays for the criminals.
The original concept of outlaw was, you know, one guy protection from the law. It wasn't so much you were just outside the law. Acting outside law is that you were no longer protected by the law. There was a form of extreme ostracism, and then you were no longer and then we can do anything they wanted to you.
Well, that might be, I would probably be better than than than the idea of a giant, private, for profit pedal system by which people can commit heinous crimes and then taxpayers are punished by having to pay for this guy, which is preposterous. Now, you know, yes, I understand that our system is corrupt. So I'm not saying that we should give all of these evil people in America, you know,
like free reigns to just kill everybody. But what I'm saying is that just just simply speaking, the not in terms of every single case, but just considering the doctrine itself, the doctrine of the death penalty.
Everything everything comes commodified or yes, in the United States, even crime, because now you have Correctional Corporation of America trades on Wall Street.
Yes, but it's right, right, right, and that makes the issue a little more complex.
But just on the question of the legality or normativity of the death penalty, in terms of traditional theology, there's no question. And it's crucial to understand that the twentieth century liberal theologians, well, I guess it would kind of begin with the higher critics, but it becomes popularized along with social Gospel and by the socialists and by the Communists, by the Marxists, by the leftists, and by the pastifist capitalist democracy promoters. They all want to get rid of
the death penalty. And that's a big piece that a lot of people people miss because it has the effect of essentially.
Creating a completely different.
It's it's just part and Parson the idea that God is not involved in the civil sphere, that you have a public agreed upon, you know, ecumenical view, and then you have your own practical lige.
Yeah, it's almost like I've taken a non spiritual, non religious example or analogy would be like the right to bear arms, where practically speaking, know it's going to raise arms against the state, but nevertheless, there's something to be said about uh, expecting every man to be armed, to be able to protect himself against marauders or criminals. This creates sort of a massaculine manly attitude, and it sort of creates a stronger community, and this which adds to
self government. And so there's something it's sort of it's it's it's it's well. At times it could be rather practical if someone's breaking your house, but it's more it's also very symbolic, which is why the towns people who defend the death penalty and gun rights tend to be more of a heartier sort, if you know what I mean, and the people who want his neighbors.
And when you you can go through the history of theological texts over the last two thousand years and eat meat, and they do, Yeah, they're not vegan, soy boys. In many cases you'll find that the sources for why you can defend yourself, which again is an application of the debt faulty, by the way, is Exodus, because I think it's Exodus twenty to twenty two specifically mentions the right of self defense. And so the normative view of the history of the church was not that. Oh, well that's
an old Tusman. Doesn't matter. No, it doesn't matter because it's a principal moral law that you have right to self defense.
But back to David WebM Offfice, I was I don't know if there's in the book or is an interview. I think it was an interview because of the context of what he was talking about. He was talking about, well, Catholics in America, Catholics who do well in America, who climb up the totem pole, who kind of worked a way up the slimy political grease poll in teen power. They all have to shed their genuine Catholicism to retain
power or success within the American system. So it says, you speak it cannot be really be a successful Catholic and be genuinely Catholic in America. You have to compromise yourself. And one example he talks about was when I think it was Amy who was that judicial Amy Barrett was her name. The judicial points ce, uh, she's Catholic, and
I think Senator Feinstein was worried about her dogma. Yeah, now, of course, no Jewish appoint he ever gets that questioned about the tal mood and does the Talmud affect your Jewish prudence? These things, this is the double standard we always we get. Catholics are always confronted with this question by liberal Jewish senators on the Jujitsiary Committee confirmation, and no one ever questions them about their dogma the doctor, which is abortion in pornography. But there's whole other issue.
But the uh he says, you know, she got a lot of flak for that. And the typical people like Donna who you know, Donaho, the Catholic you know what's his outfit?
Uh yea some of the organization. Yeah, it's like a watchdog thing.
Yeah, yeah, you're you're you're bigger than against cathoxs blah blah blahs is. But his point was, in a way, the senator was correct. There is something about essential or true Catholic doctrine that is inconsistent with the American system. And of course, and so Catholics in a way, even American Catholics, their proper role in America is not to have a place at the table. It's there to be outside and maybe wagging a finger at the very least
exerting some sort of influence. But the moment they try to succeed in America, they lose their identity and what essentially makes some Catholic. And we see that with Americanism. Would wouldn't you agree?
Of course?
Yeah. I mean people don't get that anymore because you know, we see every Catholic politician is a sellout, right, I mean a one deg or another, even Sheldon Nagelson.
You know, it's like, you know, power in America requires money, and yeah, money requires you to give up principles.
So the relative poverty and yeah, but this is that good life again, this is what one talks about the selection of America is the good life, and you can do well here. And because of that, even priests with their brick and mortar oper that's what they worry about. The bishops, they worry about their operations and as long as they don't lose their tax status, they won't be militant. Well, the church is a militant it's nothing.
Yes, yes, And it was a long time scam two which a lot of people don't know.
But that was a way for the government to trap churches into not having political speech.
I think that was the Johnson administration that when that was great and forget that correct, you know, but.
But but but but.
Going along with the five o' one C three tax exempt status also means you're accepting Americanism because you're accepting that I'm not going to apply my theology to the civil spirit.
Yes, but they but they can apply their their theology and they will to everything. And witness how Obamacare makes the Catholic Church. You know, everyone's worried about freedom of religion, and you know the sept because Obamacare is going to make the Catholic Church, you know, uh, subsidized abortion and birth control and what they describe is preproo. Well yeah, I mean productive health.
Like taxpayer is gonna be paying for trainees. So yeah, you thought you thought more morality won't.
Be legislated, but uh no, it will be legislated, and you'll be you'll be supporting the most satanic stuff imaginable.
Now, they are the role of foundations. I'm gonna bear with Mary. I'm gonna read this and picture commentaries. Yeah, this is aing you Michael Jones. Brook John called Kroll and the Culture Revolution. This was a great sort of a just sort of a synopsis or summation of how foundation he says, foundation is really constant what he calls a secret government undermine real government. In here, I'll read it, it,
says Renee Worms, a Recent's legal assistant. Throughout the hearings documented in a book published in nineteen fifty seven, not only the dangers posed by foundations to the institutions of the Republic, but also they influenced those foundations and their political allies were bringing to bear on the nation's cultural institutions.
The great Foundations, Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie were for the most part founded as a result of the New Deal, as an attempt to prevent the flow of family money into the coffers of the federal government under the tax policies instituted by Roosevelt. Created from the wealth of this country's major capitalists. The foundations soon applied the techniques of cartel of the cartel rather and the Trust to the flow
of information and reconfiguration of culture. The foundations would put up money which would serve as venture capital in the politics of change. Foundations like those run by the Rockefeller brothers would fund projects like Kinsey Sex Surveys, which would which would been otherwise impossible to support given the constraints of democratically elected government, or the simple satisfying of market forces.
The Foundations would fund research which they found congenial and almost invariably involved instigating social change away from a position of congruity with the moral law. They involved more than often than not, as the Kinsian studies did, the substitution of scientific data for moral principle, and then when the project had received a modicum of public acceptance, the Foundations would turned the funding of the projects over to the government.
This was by and large the mechanism of cultural revolution in this country. The Foundations would fund the undermining of some law, generally having to do with sex, the family, morals, or religion. The courts would remove any legal roadblocks, and the press would proselytize for whatever social change entailed, given widespread dissemination of the scientific surveys which the Foundations funded, and eventually the government would set up programs based on
what the Foundations proposed, funded by government money. Of course, the government's involvement in the contraception is one of the instances of general rule that we will examine and greater detail later. But I thought that there was a great description of sort this closed loop that appears sort of dynamic and free, but really just thought it's all closed system.
It is.
Yeah, it reminds me of not too long ago, a couple of years ago, flipping through NPR. I don't ever listen to it, but I just happened, you know, after like never listening to the NPR, just one day randomly flipping to it and I hear this ad for vaccines and it was talking about how.
It was something like just kind of mind blowing.
I don't remember exactly what the ad was with something like, you know, be sure to get vaccines because you know, we're trying to really help the world's population to stabilize.
And I'm not joking.
I was like Bill Gates.
And it was said paid for by the Kids Foundation, and so it was like a two minute blurb about how everybody giving vaccines will help world population to stabilize. And you know, we of course we know Bill Gates says that, you know, in his Ted talks he's talked about at point before that the vaccines are intended to do this, but this was not geared towards the Third World. It was geared towards domestic population. He's saying, you guys
in America, please get your vaccines. Uh, you know, and he you know, he talks about the death pedals and all that. So again not surprising, but it was just interesting to just randomly turn on MPR and hear that, and then hear the Gates Foundation paying for this ad.
And what was it?
Somebody said something about Oprah and oh, Oprah, Oprah having a.
Abortion parties.
So what she's what Oprah's trying to promote is this is instead of women feeling shame for getting abortions, having abortion parties. You can't make this up. Oprah is promoting women having abortion parties. Like like you were having like a baby shower.
What gift do you bring to that, like an empty pair of shoes or something.
Yeah, it's some of the very something, very macabre obviously.
Yeah.
But the reason I bring that up is because Oprah. Yeah, and there's a hashtag for a shower your abortion or something. But Oprah, she attends one of those yearly meetings with Rockefeller and Bill Gates and all that about you know, third world and depopulation and all that. So the reason I'm the point I'm saying is that that that, yes, that they will even openly say that this is done to you know, it's done under the cough, but it's
done a plain sight. But the Foundations are able to subvert the normal channels of government because they're not under government perview.
So and that's been the case, you know, a long time, all.
The way back. They also fund the educationist in the colleges universities. Even Norman daw talked about that way back.
Yes, that's what.
Yeah, that's why I was bringing that into Fordham University and then trying to you know, influence doors our churches on on their sexual morals.
And everything is like apparently you're you're you're a tyrannical evil if you don't support the big gay agenda.
Mm hm.
That seems to be the big push. Everything is just gay gay gay gay everywhere.
You're a big yeah.
Yeah, and it's uh, you know, just not that the flags. But if you go headlines and news stories that are selected in these things, you know, even celebrities and reports of celebrity lifestyles, because celebrities always been used to degrade and promote the general behavior.
Well, but what you were reading from from em Michael Jones there that drives very well with with McGowan. So, you know, Den mcgawan's talking about kind of like the Pentagon intelligence angle of it, and he's talking about the foundations driving the counterculture, and makes perfect sense because it's the same people you know, controlling the Pentagon you're in who are in these these foundations.
Yeah, and of course they're the ones that fled of the country with LSD exactly, which is how common knowledge. People still don't make that connection, you know. You know
there's a documentary called Berkeley in the sixties. Yeah, it talks about the free speech movement in Berkeley sixty four sixty five, and it's kind of all clean cut and everything, but by nineteen sixty nine everyone was just these you know, zombifie hippies and they're interviewing the people and all their memories are of all the sex they had and that's it.
You know.
So a serious sort of sober anti war movement that could shine some light and criticism on the on the system was again destabilized or destroyed by by, of course, degenerate sex, you know, which is.
Like, oh, yes, that reminds me too. Since we've talked, I covered Bowart's book in total. Did you hear those Yes I did.
Yeah, Walter Buch Yes, and he backs up all that too.
He actually talks about the tim Larry essentially being commissioned to create a cult, create the Timilary cult, and Leary was able to sell his nonsense through saying it was a right. Mm hm, you have a right to this, the exact same thing the way abortion was sold. This
is your right and the man is keeping you down. Yeah, it's in other words, even once again there's another testament to counterculture being essentially establishment driven, you know, in the in the that's the overall thrust of the Bowart book is is to back up the thesis.
Yeah, there's sort of this the big anti natalist push, which is not done so you know, directly through forced abortions like in China where they could get away with it and one child honestly, but just through the cultural change, you know, sort of the culture, the different the change expectations where again women are supposed to just presume that women a woman who goes to college and doesn't want to get married, she wants to have a career, Well to what end?
To what end?
You know, right, which is the idea of the creation of the narcissistic individual, which is again another psychological warfare technique to create the completely you know, self centered kind of sociopathic, psychopathic individual, which is a big part of what social media is now doing. You know, you have even the I'm sure you've heard this, or the executives coming out saying, oops, sorry, we created a giant narcissism, a machine that destroys society.
Sorry about the oops the way.
It's oops, you created a drug culture. Oops.
Oops. Yeah, sorry, we didn't do that.
Vietnam was a mistake.
Yeah.
Oops, you know, we dropped two and fifty tons of bombs on Cambodia. Oops. It's like, we're just so stupid, Kim, Kim, we do. But yeah, I mean it's one of these things where, uh, you know, once uh again you ask yourself, what what cost the good society? And the count's come out. I mean, I was just thinking about the other day.
I'm you know, all these corporately owned daycare centers there probably are owned by corporations that are traded on Waltz on the stock market, and people there are people who invest in these things in there for in their you know, four o one ks and they may even be kind of against that, but they're investing in these corporations that they are making money on dysfunctional or family you know,
family dissolution. But it's become corporatized, become a profit because the culture has been changed where this is so prevalent now that you can have corporations that are based on on you know, dysfunctional or warehouse children and it just feeds itself. It's the same way that you know, corporations are capitalized by by the by the drug money it's been flown into you know that that's being smuggled into the communities. But Katherine Alston fits talks.
About right, right, right, Yeah, I want get to.
The John Cloyd book, mcloy book The Politics of Herolin eventually, which which deals with all that. But yeah, you start to realize that that there's a scientific technique to all these areas. Yeah, I mean, it really is a full spectrum system. Like Ingdahl talks about, it's it's every one of these areas has a.
A very specific well.
The reason that they're able to do that is I don't know if you saw in one of the talks that I think it was in the talk that you're talking about they're the subversion.
You know, I showed you that. I showed that graph that shows all the media people.
That's a really helpful graph because people have a hard time with understanding this kind of stuff if they're new to it or if they're you know, well, what do you what's this Builderberg group? How does it relate to the CFR, How does that relate to the role society whatever? What's all the same people in different groups, different steering committees?
And if you look at the fact that all the heads of every major media corporation that's the mainstream media, it's all the same people in the Builderberger and it's all the same people in the CFR who were also Tryateral Commission. They're all in the exact same circles. I mean, that was a brilliant thing that whoever put that together.
But is there a conspiracy and you say, well, they're meeting here, I mean they're coordinating. Okay, let's call this is they're not conspiring to coordinating?
Is that?
Is that a better word for you? Has the CIA ruined that term yet?
You know?
But even you said I talking about to talk about conspiracy theory, but then they're they're official conspiracy theories that are marketed, you know, I don't know, like.
The Cold War, yeah, George Keen right and Henry LUs mister x. I mean they.
Christened the the new conspiracy, which would be the Cold War and the Dalls.
Brothers, right, Usama bin Laden al Qaeda, that's conspiracy theory.
Yes, Not eleven is a conspiracy.
Uh.
What's more, there was another one that was more recent than Not eleven that was an official con Oh, Russia Gate. Yeah, Russia Gates.
An official condoned conspiracy theory, you know.
So you know, so again there're one you can believe in some some of the more I guess some conspiracy theories theories are more equal than others.
In UFOs Aliens, that's a government condoned conspiracy theory that.
It's actually well, it's actually yeah, actually been been uh promoted by.
The government exactly.
Absolutely we know about going in and deceiving people about that.
To get that go, I think I'll put that quote in the book to that great Brookings Institute quote about UFOs basically seeing if that would be a way to move people away from from christian Yeah, that ethos.
I think I did step that in.
The book and it does because people again it's almost like, you know what they call it's the second Coming. Their idea is what disclosure?
I guess, yeah, yeah, it would fit very well into a lot of new age.
And and and as we pointed out that I've said, you know, we're seeing a lot of the former new atheists now that that new atheism is kind of dying in popularity, a lot of those people are moving into you know, the ideas of the metaphysical right, Oh, maybe Dawkin Sew's aliens put us here, right, maybe Penn's for me, So you can you can see how people can be transitioned out of materialism because it's not you know, the human heart is going to worship something that always will.
It doesn't do very well with rank materialism. So, you know, materialism, we're like a phase to get people out of, uh, you know, more traditional religious beliefs. And then they're then they're willing to they're they're primed, their their their putty for the acceptance of some you know, new garbage.
And what's funny is is frist gets trashed with with when you when traditional religion gets marginalized is objective morality, which again is a side black to the oligarchs.
Then, however, you you suddenly get a extremely objective morality about trainees and gays. Funny how you you know, we were supposed to not have objective reality that now we're dogmatically commanded you know on all these Yeah, yeah, moral points.
M hm, we talked about that.
Yeah. But the thing is that the culture is it's very hard to sort of reverse these things because when you start pointing out things like the I don't know, the normalization of daycare to two earning families, if the families are still intact, uh, these things is you're stepping a lot of people's toes, their lifestyle, their expectations and what they what they should be, and they take offense.
That's so it's hard to talk about it. They don't want to consider the fact perhaps they're they've they've themselves been engineered to manipulated.
You know, the normalization of gay care.
Yeah, well yeah, it's no thing is it's going to be well it will because they'll that'll be infested and if it hasn't already, reports about you know, the Pentagon's daycare center and these things. What's going on Presidio again? You you you wear house kids, and it's what do you what do you? Yeah, you wear house kids easy to social engineer them and subject them to these things
that you know, even schooling with vaccinations. We just we just take for granted how we were all schools growing up, these large, you know, centralized buildings where you know, we're we're subjected to this nonsense. You know, is this normal? You know, is this really healthy? And you realize who designed the school system? Right?
I mean it's like, yeah, well it's it's Prussian model and Skinner.
Yeah, Skinner, Padlov and uh, you know Dewey, these people who were malevolent. So well, Jay, you know, coming up an hour of forty minutes? Anything else? Do you want to cover anything else? Do you miss anything?
Or no?
That was good talk, I think, uh, you know, the essence of uh, the thrust of the of the point was just that what we're seeing in the Ukraine and in the Orthodox world is the same pattern of subversion that went Moff talks about and thoseism that's happened in
all the churches. And that's crucial to understand because you know, we talked a lot in alternative media about you know, politics or geopolitics or we talk about subversion of culture, talksic culture, but we have to understand that it also applies from the controllers advantage point to churches.
That's a big part of it too.
Yeah, a lot of people who are into this type of research sort of don't, well, they don't consider the importance of the churches exact right exactly, you know, the fact they you know, some people think they should just go away and and they're they're actually part of the tyranny. It's much more they're infiltrated and manipulated. So it's a bit more complicated than that, right. I really did understand what the role the attican plays. Now I couldn't give you a clear answer.
Well, and also too, I'd like to add that that might dishearten some people because they might say, well, if the churches are bad too, then let's just what's the point who cares about?
Now?
Keep in mind that throughout the history of the Church, there have many there have been many, many state actors that have attempted to control the Church and failed. One of the things that I point out about orthodoxy is that in the history of the emperors, many of them were heretical, many of them attempted to completely change the
doctor of the Church. And the fact that the Church did not lose its doctrine of the diminutive Christ and the nice and crete, you know, the basics of the nice and crete, I think shows that, you know, the protection of God like. If it was just a human, human social institution, it would have been.
Turned bad long long ago.
You know, when you had basically, for example, iconoclass emperors. Right before the Seventh Council, you had emperors basically trying to remove all the icons from all the churches and enact the kind of Islamic style doctrine or something iconoclasm. And you know, that didn't win. It's amazing it didn't went out. You had Arianism, you know, in the fourth century when almost the entire empire was in our semi area except for Saint Athanasius and a few bishops, and
they ended up winning. So just because you know, you have the minority opinion, or because the state is trying to control the church, you know, that's not a reason for being disheartened, is what I'm trying to say. Because there are many, many, many cases in church history in the state did not win.
Yeah, there's an account in the Bible that E. Michael Jones reference when he was presented with that very question about the problems within the church is to count when Jesus is on a boat with the apostles on the sea and the storm comes and this the waters, you know, churning, the boat's about to trip over, and Jesus is sleeping.
Yeah, that's a good point.
Finally wake come up with Master here why as you're sleeping, and then he calms the waters. But the whole point is that right now we're in the middle of the store. Absolutely, you know, and so it seems that way and maybe from our own standpoint, you know, this is people there have been martyrs and this you know this to a certain extent, this is because they had people have to suffer for their faith, for their beliefs, for their for
their principles. And so it isn't always going to be easy to stand up to what you think is right, what you what you know is right, and you know, for whatever the case, so it'd be easy.
It isn't right.
Right, Well, the Christianization of the Empire took three centuries at martyrs, so absolutely, and uh, one other thing I would add too, is you know, we can we can draw a lot of insight from the Old Testament as well.
A clear parallel would be the very degenerate history of Israel when the when Jeroboam had basically set up a giant state run sex goal uh, the the worship at Dan and Bethel, which which which was the state erected cult that was set up as a way for him to control the northern kingdoms of Israel, as opposed to the legitimate worship which was in Judah in the southern kingdom where it was supposed to be at the temp Well, Uh, there's there's a lot of wisdom in that because his
state runs sex cult, you know, pretty much took over uh. And you know, if you know the history of Israel, this is what led to the Assyrian captivity in the north and then the battle on captivity in the south. So the point is is that it leads you into bondage, uh. And the the chastisement of the period of bondage is but of course purge that away and you know it leads to a better state down the road.
So yeah, don't lease heart.
Yeah, well Jay, thank you so much, thank you Tom. Of course it's J J J. Dire Jason Analysis Jasonnalysis dot com, author of Esoteric Hollywood, six Cults and Sibilis and film and also they soon to be released as Esoteric Hollywood two uh sometime next month.
Correct.
Yep, thank you, thank you so much. Jay. I'll let you go and I'll post as soon I do. I'll send you I'll send you the leak, all right, Tim, I have a good night, good night, than thanks so much, bye bye,