The Ochelli Effect 5-4-2023 Mike Swanson and Larry Hancock

The Chilly Effect is sponsored by Wall Street Window dot com and listeners like you yeah, and now in O Media Chucky May four, May the fourth be with you. I guess it is a Star Wars holiday right as I speak live allegedly according to that thing we call a calendar. Indeed, it is the fourth of May twenty twenty three, and here we are live on Ocelli dot com Radio, which, by the way, there was an outage on many, many, many radio broadcasting platforms, and I think mine might have

been down for a couple of days. But we are back to live, and those of you listening on the podcast, you don't care anyway, But I'm still putting out the podcast doing all that good stuff. And here we are again. Boy, the week flew by quickly. We are back around to Thursday. And last Thursday, I wasn't feeling well, tried to go to air, and no, I'm not releasing that podcast, but I am going to redo the show minus one element. No Carmine Savastano tonight, although

we're gonna get Carmine with us again. Scheduling I guess prohibited him from joining us tonight. But we are blessed as per usual, I've got Mike Swanson in the first hour, the guy behind Wallstreet Window dot com be in the no go to Wall Street Window dot com. He's also the author of the War State, Why the Vietnam War, the first in a series of three books, three planned books on that conflict, but author of many other pieces

of work out there. Actually wrote an introduction to a book that his dad wrote that's up on Amazon anyway, links to all that in the show notes. And yes, indeed my voice is still a little weak. But what are you gonna do? Sore throats or sore throats? And I'll try and get the shutting up as quickly as I can. Michael Swanson with me in the first hour, second hour. Larry Hancock, the author is so many

books. I'm not going to bother to list him right now, but you can always go to Larry dash Hancock dot com and check that out, and I advise you to read his blog. You know, we've been talking aliens, we've been talking Russia, JFK assassination randomly. I have no idea what we're going to get into tonight, because I had a plan last week, but it might have went awry. Anyways, let's get to it, Mike Swanson, and I did go to air five minutes late on the live stream,

but again, podcasters podcatchers don't really tell time. You don't care. You could be listening to this anytime anywhere and it doesn't really matter. But as I speak, it is just about eleven minutes after eight pm Eastern time here and what we used to call America. Mike Swanson, I know I sound more coherent this week than usual, although my normal sloppiness is in play. How are you doing tonight, sir? Oh, I'm doing good. It's good to talk with you head a week where I've been taking it easy

quite frankly. So we did the show last week. Um it helps spur me into making a decision to slow down myself. And UM, I've I'm I have a a table that's right in front of me that I'm looking at that has one two over fifteen stacks of piles of papers documents that are supposed to be a chapter in a book that and it's been sitting there for for several years now. So is that the next Vietnam book or is that something? Yeah? Yeah, And I'm not really exactly sure if it's gonna be

just a Vietnam book. It's gonna be a sequel to both those two books. Really, But I've decided, um to slow down my website and stop doing these. It takes me ninety minutes to put out these morning emails I've been doing for the past couple of years. Oh yeah, for the listeners, you know, it's great to sign up for those uh you get.

I mean, look, it's a totally different thing than what you get from JP s Attilla who does the rundown um And it's another sort of a quick news brief over there, and I get him every morning to stop it. So oh okay, in order to free up time so I can, uh, you know, to write a book and write other things. Well, and you do have some people putting out articles over there on the website. I've slowed that down to what I'm referencing all kinds of stuff. You're gonna

slow down, okay, yeah, yeah, yeah. I've been updating the website every single day or Monday through Friday, and I'm probably just gonna do it once once a week. Um. Well, you know, for people that that do like some kind harder labor job, they're sitting there going these guys are complaining about doing websites. But I'm gonna tell you something. It becomes quite dreaming when you have to continuously work on these things and you have

to keep updating them on a daily basis. I mean generally speaking. I mean, I've slowed down quite a bit with the podcasts, right but that's gonna speed back up, and we're gonna start putting out you know, twenty podcasts a week again. It's gonna be there. I mean, I'm not personally gonna talk on twenty podcasts, but I'm gonna go back to my five as per usual. You know, Chris has three. That's eight right there. You know what I'm saying. We're gonna pump out a bunch of stuff,

but it becomes exhausting if you don't stop. And you know, he's back a little bit. You got editing and placement, and you wind up a lot of hours on a computer and it's not the healthiest activity really for the organism that you are. You know what I'm saying. It gets to

working on your eyes. I really, you know, I wasn't. I really want to do more serious writing, and I came to conclusion just thicking back over the past year of a couple of things that I wrote that had a big impact or you know, I don't mean like one hundred thousand people read them, but a couple of thousand people read them that are important. And you saw some actions off of your stuff. I mean on a local level. You saw people actually react and things happened due to the information that

you were putting out. And that's the thing is that you can choose to pump out a high volume of stuff truthfully and you know, and it's a crapshoot, or you can really focus your energies and put out things selectively. Right. And uh, you know, last night I was going to do a show live by the Way, and a cult priestess who was scheduled to be with me, she broke a twoth earlier in the day. So it

wasn't me taking the break. But I'm noticing a lot of people are, you know, tripping over things and needing to slow down because you know, we're trying to pump out a lot of stuff. Yeah. I like, basically two or three years ago, I had every year with you know, starting like two or three years ago. I would start the year out and

I would say well, I'm gonna have to make a decision. I'm either gonna have to slow down and start to write books and do things more creative than I want to do, or try to turn this into some big news website of more writers and really make this into some giant thing. And at you know, I finally made a decision. Well, I'm just gonna slow down. And one thing about it is, um a couple of things, the things I have written, that's say, in the past ten months,

I didn't need a giant platform to get them out. They just kind of went viral on their own. And one article was one that we talked about on your show about the LBJ tapes and the Kenny assassination. Well, I've got you know, I could write an article about that once a month with more free time, with original research, and would actually be more conducive. I if I want to sell more books, it helps do that or drive

up interest in the next book whenever it comes out. But I'm more interested in researching and you know, doing that and just you just spitting trying to feed the news cycle. Uh really with all with talking about the markets and whatever. Oh yeah on the website. So and I've decided to change things up a little bit. We're not always gonna have two hour programs. There's gonna be a lot of one hour programs. And we're gonna add video elements.

Even though I've been dragged, kicking and screaming into that, there's gonna be more video stuff going on, and um, I want to focus more on getting out things that are more informative, more educational. So that's going to happen. Plus uh, you know, and this is the thing. You have different shifts when you're doing this where look, for a little while, it's great to just pump out a ton of stuff and uh and see where it goes. But I mean, ultimately, uh, you got you

gotta be choosy about this kind of stuff. And again, I know some people out there might be going, well, I got a hard job. You know, you're working with a computer and whatnot. But the truth is that any of this stuff can become quite draining and you got to you gotta make a cost benefit analysis. What is the thing that you want to accomplish? Right? Um, And I'm very much building up to this, uh,

you know, to Dallas in November. Ultimately that's going to be a big thing for me, and it's going to mark a serious change here. Um, we're going to go forward with a different game plan, okay, um using facilities. Yeah yeah. With that topic, Karma has been doing looking through the recent files. He's written a couple two articles about he's interested in these defectors, Soviet defectors and what their stories are, and not just the famous ones like Nussenka, but all of them and he's you know,

studying that. But he's hopefully we'll get him on the show soon. I'll just say he's found a real explosive JFK document, not in terms of solving it or something, but one. Uh, you know, we'll have to get him on the show to get them to talk about. But no one, you know, it's not out there yet. No, in the next couple of weeks, a unique piece of work from Carmine is gonna come up.

And there's gonna be some unique work here because finally we've had enough time to go through a bunch of things, a bunch of us now, uh, and it's been very interesting and quite frankly, Larry's working on that that you know UAPR you know stuff right now that is fascinating. Um, it's very academic and dry reading to some people, but the truth is, I mean, that's gonna be quite interesting. Uh. He's still not going to get away from the JFK stuff. He's likely going to be in Dallas also

in November. UM, And I just think it's going to be a very interesting year for all of us because it is time that that that that our impact is much much better measured, and we're all gonna make choices. I mean, I'm gonna love to see you write more books. I mean, I appreciate what you do with the website and everything, but I love when

you actually put together a volume. And if the Vietnam series evolves, Um, it'll be great to just sort of get a full on twentieth century view from you with geopolitics, because again, I love the War State and where it takes us up to there going forward and fleshing some other things out that have happened since basically where that book sort of stops is huge, you know, So I'm looking forward to that stuff and what could be built off of

it. Frankly, why why is there not a documentary that is of the same name about the War State? Why? You know what I'm saying like, I think these kinds of things could get done, and uh not not saying that you need to do them. What I'm saying is that other people might get interested in this material and want to um transpose it to other types of media. And I think that's going to be something that's going on here. I hear tell of a bunch of different people that we know off and

on maybe having interest and going forward with films and things. So I'd love to see that that whole thing happen. And yeah, I just I just look forward to the evolution of this stuff, and I think it's going to be an interesting time. I just hope that we don't fall into the same ruts, you know, because sadly, we have twenty twenty four selection coming up, Mike, and you know that's gonna occupy a whole lot of air in every room everywhere, right, I mean, that's gonna be a big

deal, isn't it. Well that's one thing too, Like I know, for the past couple of years, I've been compiling these morning headlines and setting them out. Um, I'm still set out occasion. I'm still gonna set out occasional emails, but I'm not gonna be doing that, you know, and you mentioned JP's attille. I highly recommend everyone get his. Go to news vandal dot com and subscribed. It is his is a daily email. But yeah, I mean, I'm telling you it. It took me ninety

minutes to put mine together. It's got to take him at multiple hours to do what he does. Oh, I mean it is the four or five six hours a day because he's finding you know, I mean, I'll just tell you how. I mean, I don't he's going. Well, he told you in your show once. He just has lots of websites bookmarked and goes through them every single day, right, and he balances out a whole

bunch of things where he goes for you know, the opposing view. Okay, so you got a headline story, let's say, and let's just talk about Okay, it's Trump and his most recent legal woes. Right, So he'll get an article which is clearly very sympathetic to him, you know, sort of right wingy press, right, and then he'll go and get a left wing attack sort of article and place that with something that might seem a little more neutral, uh, you know, from the standard news feeds.

If you will right, your your reuters, and your associated press and put them all together. And what he does is it creates a snapshot of that thing where you get it from all sides, right, and then each one of these little beats in the story tell a story in and of themselves if you just read the headlines, you know. So, I mean that's kind of a complex construct there, which he puts together. And yeah, it

takes several hours. Um. And he's another one who's thinking about changing up the way he's doing stuff and you know, getting back to uh, you know, his real bread and butter, because he's he's really a superb writer. Yeah, I mean really, you know, no offense to you or anything, but he's probably one of the best writers that we know, just

pure authors of information. He tells very interesting stories without coloring them too much, but at the same time giving you a flair and various color commentary without leaning, you know, hard into one agenda or another. He lays out a lot of information and very succinctly in an entertaining way, which is extremely rare. I mean, right, I mean, there's not a lot of authors that can do the type of work that JP does. And he's very

undervalued. A lot of people used to pay him to do that, and he used to be able to make a good living off it and not so much nowadays. So you know, he's had to shift the way that he's putting things out. And the rundown is an unpaid thing. You know, people kick in a little bit here or there, but I mean it's it's not something that people paid for. You know. Would people pay a dollar or two a day? I think they should. I would, you know, I mean not a day, but I mean a couple of dollars a

month. I think it would be fair to subscribe to him for a couple of dollars a month. I support him on Patreon for a few dollars, you know, not a lot. I don't got a lot, but you know, but if everybody who read that thing kicked in a couple of dollars, the guy would make a living, you know what I'm saying. So that's the other thing is trying to monetize and utilize the skills that you have

as a content creator. Who is one of some skill you know, not just somebody's throwing things up against a wall, but somebody who puts things together

with a great deal of thought. That's becoming a challenge too. And thus we're back around to what you were talking about, which is, you know, you're now going to start focusing more on the long form and the books and more substantive presentations, right yeah, yeah, And it could be an article, you know, a couple of thousand words like the one that did a bit at LBJ. I got a couple ideas and in mind. But you know one thing that well I asked the other other week you mentioned Elon

Musk. Well, oh yeah, well you know one thing that started just drain on me on the other stuff. I started to feel like actually putting out looking at for me, looking at this stuff, the news cycles. What I was really looking at every morning, I was looking at the financial media, all the major financial websites, what their top stories of the day are, and then looking at I mean, you can do this with the RSS feeds, Google News, other aggregators. You could see what the top

headlines of the day are throughout the media. And what I One thing I'll say I've learned is I believe and I subscribe to a couple of newspapers online, major newspapers. But I'll just say that I've come to inclusion that the Financial Times in the Wall Street Journal, as far as straight news of what's going on, are the two best publications. But that said, one thing that really has just in this school link into the R twenty twenty four thing.

One thing that I've found grading as I've been doing this, is that so often the news cycle it's just dominated by garbage stories. We saw the balloon story panic a couple of months ago, but uh, multiple times, and I'm not talking about Twitter here, but multiple times. There have been

a couple moments this year. And there's one two weeks ago where Elon Musk became you know, there's a stupid story about Elon Musk on all the websites, all the major websites, and it was something about AI something something dumb. Well, it's a strange Yeah, no, it's a strange landscape. And by the way, you know, I don't want to look at that

crap I got, I got here. I don't want to look at Elon Musk garbage, right, I don't want to spend you know, here it is again here we go, And you know, did you take note recently of the way news Break is marketing themselves now no, how okay, well, no, their their most recent push is you don't need local news anymore because we are your local news where Yeah, no, I get it on my on my YouTube, you know, because I don't pay for any of

that stuff, So I gotta deal with all the ads. Uh. So on all my video platforms that have any sort of commercials, and also on my audio platforms. Uh if you subscribe to some of the you know, radio things, even if you have commercial free radio, they'll insert commercials every once in a while, right if you go with the free service, you know what I'm saying. Um, and a lot of them are are they're

they're actually literally paying for ad space all over the place. Hey, we're a news break and we are your local news no matter where you are, which you know you you talked about this well ahead of their marketing campaign, that this is precisely what they were doing. And I told you it seemed to me like everybody in the world was starting to use news break picking up their local stories even no longer going to you know, the local constitution or

whatever it is that's in their area anymore. Right, we talked about the death of local news essentially, and and we were talking about this thing as an aggregation tool. It's literally become the thing. Right, So, no matter where you are, your local news can be customed because of news breaks. So the apps are another part of the game here, right, Well oh man, yeah good decided another advertising like that. Well, I just say I sold out and um submitted myself. I'm a I've written three articles

for them. Okay, so now you are part of what they're going to present to people in Virginia right as we're the local news for Virginia, and it'll be yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Um. You know, when we first were talking about them, I was like, well they were. They were linking to my website. I would write a local news story, they would linked to it, and I would get sometimes thousands

of hints. And then starting around New Year's they stopped linking to my website, and I noticed the Lee Enterprises, giant conglomerate local newspaper, they stopped linking to them too. They continue to link to mote to the others locally where I live, but it looks like a lot most of them had made some sort of deal where they're taking their articles and sharing the ad revenue or

something and that's a program they have for publishing companies. Well, I submitted to join that because I gave up that they'd ever linked to me again. They never responded. So then I said, well, I don't care. I'm not doing this to make ad money anyway when I write these local articles. So I just said, screw it. I'll just write on there is one there. You know, anyone can do it. Anyone can submit and do it, but it's it's not necessarily a good thing. I mentioned the

local paper r I Live is owned by Lee Enterprises. Well, they put out a press release a few days ago this week. I mean they owned the Riddichment Times, Dispatch Rodo newspaper. They are newspapers across the country. They're the second or third biggest owner of newspapers, and they downsize and they shrink them. And our newspaper they don't. I don't even know how many people subscribe to it. I don't think it's their paper. I don't think

it's but a few thousand people. They only have. I looked. Well, they put out announcement saying they're considering the Lee Enterprises company to shift to only putting out three paper newspaper a week and the amount of local news and it is already minimal. Their website, they have unique websites forevery of their newspapers, but I think they look like crap. I don't see how they attract an audience or build a connection with their readers. It's just it's it's

an example of the death of the newspapers. And one of the things that bothered me was when the news break thing kicked me off around New Year's I

went and looked at the various apps. I don't have these things on my phone, so I had installed them on my phone, and I looked at my website, I looked at all the local news websites, and I realized that someone that sixteen years old that gets on their phone really has no way to tell the difference between my website or the the enterprises website right, which you know, to the other websites, they all blend together, right, it's all a blended mix of right. And then they got their apps.

So a news breaker is that, well, the ap right, But the app is the sifting But that's the thing. The app has become the sifting tool. And I just forwarded you something that was written by by this guy John leake Um about the change in attitude of you know, with the Washington Post in the New York Times, uh, you know, and and also you know, the World Seed Journal this week what well, with the way that they're presenting news and the way that they're breaking things and challenging you know,

the establishment um, which is interesting. And it's all become this very homogeneous sort of blend of stuff and then it's just sort of squeezed out like Plato through these apps where this is your information stream now, right, So it's impossible to discern the legitimate journalistic organization from the guy who's got a local popular blog or you know, an independent person who might be very serious like

yourself, who's actually trying to get out information about things that are happening locally. It's impossible to discern you from the little mom and pop newspaper that's still trying to survive, from the you know, cookie cutter multi conglomerate representation because

it's been bought up locally. All this stuff has sort of been squeezed together into one big pile of Plato. Right, Yeah, and eventually the news about this, yeah is I'll use myself as an example, any I mean it's good and bad, but any person if they want to, can just go to their city council meetings and start writing about it. And if you just do that, the listener um you would have a huge impact. You

probably could. But here's the community, because that's what app That's all I've done, right, you know, there's you know that's what I've done. Do I know you've been going to the council meetings and stuff and going to these important you know, like we're getting together to discuss this particular project and stuff like we talked about the concert that was local to you, this kind of stuff. But what's bad is now, is anybody ever gonna get paid

again? Outside of the big huge right, the people that are on the app, they get paid, and you know, the ad revenue comes to that. That's that's right, that's right. But there you go. So death of the job that is journalistic, it's over. I think it's possible. No, I think it's possible to I think you can build your own I mean, maybe I'll one day try to do this again, you know, or get motivated. I really want to write, dude, Can you do research and write some stuff? Well? You want to do some more

long form historical stuff, is what you're going to be doing. Yeah, yeah, yeah, But I think I think one could do it. And the example, well, I I'm a baseball fan and the I follow the I like the Baltimore Orioles, but it doesn't matter what the team is.

I follow this sports team. And in two thousand, you know, there's the Baltimore Sun. Uh, just a few outlets really covering them, right, radio shows that you know, I'm sure, and in the Maryland area, like a local uh there there's like an ESPN radio outlet or some kind of local sports talk, you know, probably the same station that carries the game. Yeah. But what there was a anyway, There was one website, there was a message board that was pretty big. Now it's over time,

it's fallen by the wayside as most message boards have. But at this moment, there's probably five podcasts about the Bottomore Orioles baseball team, and there's ten to twelve websites about them, put up former reporters and so forth. The thing is, probably none of these people are making very much money at all, and that's the problem you pointed to. But I think there's one that is and they've been around since the eighties or nineties. In what they

are, there are a sports publication just for the city of Baltimore. It's free, they distribute it to stores. We've paid advertising in it. They also have a radio show and um and it's kind of integrated together. So when I was looking at these apps and seeing how all the news sources are blending together, they answer to that. The solution or way to work beyond it, I think would be too right and also do some sort of video

or podcast that is integrated into the articles. That way, when the people load the app up and go to your article, they'll listen to the thing, the audio visual thing, and that'll be the connection to have of you that's unique that the others aren't doing. Yeah, that's the one way to

support that. I think that's ultimately a trick. Yeah, No, Ultimately it looks to me like if you have a diverse sort of media presentation where here's some video clips, here's a short podcast, here's the written article, and you have this all combined into one thing, there's your publication. Like it's the evolution of the magazine, where the magazine's now not just pictures and words, but it's pictures, words, video clip audio, here's the podcast

discussion, and you make it interactive. That's the only way, and what is it going to do. It's going to be done all along a bunch of different niche issues. Obviously fandom, whether it's a TV show or sports team, or it's following politics or whatever. That's the way it's going to be now, and that's the only way to go on. I mean, if you look at the major corporate outlets, they're doing this although it's pretty cold, it's not really super attached to the listeners. It's not very interactive.

See. That's the difference between the major corporate ones and the Independence is that the Independence actually try to connect with their audiences. Other than that, it's like I connect with my audience, you know, which causes me to have a loyal base, But I don't have the the the giant expansive you know, a bunch of tools to put out a bunch of different things.

I'm working on it though, okay, But once I do, then that allows me to have sort of a diverse universal magazine that has a diverse amount of different types of media combined. That's got to be the key anymore I think, is that's the way it's going to go. Anyway, let's take a little break and we'll come back on the other side and maybe we'll discuss some other stuff, or we'll continue talking about the evolution of the media and the information waves of today, because it is changing. And look, I'm

not saying I've got a crystal ball. I'm not prognosticating here, but I'm just taking a look at which way the wind is blown, and so are you, Mike, and we're going to decide where it is we want to be during the storm. Stick around. The Ochully effect continues. Wall Street, Streindo, dot com, rold still the stock market, Wall streetdo dot dot. If you're invested deeply, perhaps you're not in deep enough. Maybe you're thinking about getting started Wall Street, Window dot Com, do dot com.

Michael Swanson, the brilliant author of the War State, understood these trends professionally for many years, and now he gives you the benefit of his knowledge. Wall streetdo dot dot Go there, now go there, now go there now. In denial the Secret Wars with air strikes and tanks by Larry Hancock. Secret Wars became a staple of US covert operations and are still happening today. Marry Hancock's book In Denial rips the cover off many of them, using

new files. It exposes things about the Bay of Pigs and no one has ever written about before. It shows why it really failed and why the United States did not earn from it. It also shows why other countries today are doing secret operations with more success. This is the book that puts what some want to deny into the light. In Denial secret wars with air strikes and tanks Larry Handcock. For more information, go to Larry hyphen Hancock dot com.

Pick up your copy of In Denial at Amazon dot com in digital or physical force. We're listening to the o'gelli dot com radio network. Could you express my caller school? Who is there anyone else? Who happens again on the airy dot com? Not necessarily replying the views of ogelly dot com and we are not responsible for getting stupidity which might ensue. Thank you, go ahead, go ahead in the truth about the day's AISS operation? Right?

Well, what do you want to knows? Wild claim Oswald girl Rand who knew Ruby and Barry Dancer weapons? I imagine I could claim I have four wheels. It doesn't make me a wagon. But okay, Goswag was on the jib and trying to prevent the murder of John Kennedy. Come on, now, has it wheel effort on the day's accomation. Go to Amazon dot com enter Judith Baker in her own words. You'll get the results for a digital copy of a book where Walt Brown utilizes her own words and the known

evidence in the case to get at well a different perspective. Let's say you can get Judith Barry Baker in her own words from the author himself, signed, if you requested by contacting doctor Brown at KIA s JFK at aol dot com. It's a fun book and it actually dissects the many, many fantastic claims. Judith Barry Baker in her own words, thank you for all the

great information. Bring me fifteen hookers now and get the drugs ready. Take me the private island now, as if they landed in trip ships, towing peak in farms, trany trany, tranny, Literally everyone want to sneeal and go oh. She goes up on a throne and craps and they wipe her fat bunny. Come on, Shina is gonna let you dress up like like Harry Poppers. Hell, China's gonna shot you in the back of the head and all your brains all the place. They want to shout out your mind

talking about Shocktin Bay more. I kill my kids. It's is real. I kill them. I tell them, I tell them I can buy you for the dollar I have seen. I know. I know who the enemy is. And let me tell you they are vicious wolves who hate you and your family. Oh it's free. Like a piece of cheese. The little mouse comes out and what fam breaks your neck? Oh Chili dot Com revelation through conversation. Second segment of the o'chelly effect begins now here at ochelly dot

com. Of course, if you're listening to us via the podcatcher to your you know, your final slab of choice, et cetera, et cetera. Could be anytime any day, but it is Thursday as I speak. So Mike Swanson is with me for the next little bit. Then we're gonna get into segment number three with the one and only Larry Hancock. So we've been talking about media stuff here in this first hour, and definitely covered the gamut if you excuse me, if you will. Uh sorry, Mike had a

little bit of a belchair dinner was reminding me. I just ate it. Sorry. Anyways, the thing is, uh, yeah, we were going over some media stuff here and it has been an interesting, uh couple of what a couple of weeks in the media. We've seen what the dismissal of Tucker Carlson, Ton Lemon so your major MSM people, and I had a bit of a viewpoint on that this past Friday show. But let's not go

into that. Let's actually get into some news. Um, gotta tell you it's strange, and I know I'm gonna have to discuss this with Larry in the next hour. But yeah, any thoughts Mike on the assassination attempt of Vladimir Putin allegedly, I mean, go ahead, what do you think? Well, the thing you talk about to me, you know when to me

when the Ukraine War started. That really soured me too on the so called alternatomy media and just social media in general as far as trying to find out what's really going on, because I really believed in the first twenty four hours forty eight hours that and I was trying to really follow it closely to figure out where this thing, that war was all headed. And I just really believed I was being bombarded on both sides by manufactured propaganda distributed through Twitter and

you know, social media to control people with these different narratives. And then I do and have subscribed to the New York Times, and I've you know, talked about some of the things with you that are reading there on the show, because I consider the New York Times to be the mouthpiece of the national security state, at least some of their calmness in particular. Yeah,

I would say our mouthpieces of the national security state. And I've read a couple articles, you know, explaining that they even speak that way as if they are and they want China and Russia to read what they're saying. Well, in the lead up to the war, they you know, had articles

showing the disposition of the Russian troops. Um, you know, the first let's say, three or four weeks before the war started, there was the the Ukrainians, Zelenski was saying there won't be a war, and then the New York Times put out these articles and you look at that and you say, well, boy, they sure do you have these things mass like they're

serious and then they did turn out to start a war. But um, one troubled aspect of their coverage is their main source is a think take ran by the Cagans, right, Um that that were the big proponents of neo conservatism and the Iraq war surge. So you can't just you get to point with the subject of Ukraine. I just don't want to take any source at face value. Now, Well, it's tough because they all have agendas,

Mike. So the thing is that the agenda, you know, comes through first, and then you're trying to get at, you know, just some solid brass tax information. What is interesting to me is I don't think anybody a year ago was saying this will last a year, you know what I mean, Like, nobody thought that that that there would be this much resistance. I mean, quite frankly, it seemed to me like Ukraine would get rolled right over by by Russia or there would be intervention, okay, and

that would be prevented. And what's happened is neither of those things has happened cleanly, has it? Right, we have the continuation of this conflict. It appears to escalate and just sort of stagger along. This very small country is getting pounded continuously, right, allegedly to protect a certain area, to take back a certain area, you know, so on and so forth. But forget about all that for a second. It is really amazing to me

that this has gone on as long as it has. And I don't think any of these, any of these people, whether it was the mouthpieces for our national security state or the propagandists for uh, you know, the pro Russian propagandists, or the you know, supposedly pro American but non interventionist uh propagandists. I mean, all sides here. We got a lot of different sides, and all of the propagandists, the one thing they all seem to miss is that this was going to be a protracted event. Um. And

it's weird to me because I don't think anybody was saying that. Do you do you recall anybody saying this is going to go on for a long time? Uh? Not right when it started, not at the beginning. No, I mean, because the one thing that seemed to be universally accepted, no matter what the propagandists bent was is that this will be over pretty quickly, right, But it's not unpreceded. I mean, no, no Iraq, that Iraq war against Iran. Before the Americans were over there, they

had a war if Iran. Yeah, that turned into a stalemate. Um. And I think it was expected when it started that the Iraqis would be able to have a pretty good victory. And that war lasted for several years. Uh. And this, you know, looks like that's how this could be headed, could be But but weird because again, okay, so let's go to today's you know, banner headline out of this, right, this drone strike that was allegedly targeting Putin or targeting you know, the Kremlin in

general. Right. Very strange because now this has been I don't know how many claims, but a handful claims now that have been made that the Ukrainians are staging terrorist attacks asymmetrical warfare against Russia in order to you know, get them to back off or in retaliation, right. Um, And that narrative, on his face just seems crazy to me that they would even be able

to do that. Now, Zelinsky came out today and said, you know, look, we're spending time depending on our land and let's be honest, if the guy was somehow marshaling asymmetrical attacks against Russia or Putin directly, he's not going to come straight out and go, yeah, we did that. But I don't know. I'm I'm at a loss to believe that that's what's

happened. And the Russians seem to have now put out statements saying that they believe that it may have been American based in some way, but the Ukrainians, like, in other words, with American support, Ukrainians are attempting to do these things. And I don't know what to think of this, um, I mean, do you have any thoughts on that particular event or or you just like wait and see on it. I'm waiting to see. I

haven't really study trying to study it. Figured out it does seem I mean, yeah, my first thought would be what you're saying that it seems pretty fantastic and it's probably a ruse by the Russians. That's how the war started. Yeah, and right away they started out by saying they're evacuating people from that to the Dunbass region. Russians were being evacuated into Russia because Ukraine was

going to attack. Well, that was all a ruse. You know, you know that they're doing Look most things when it comes to war, um, the trickery, audit propaganda, it's all about their own people. They're not trying to fool us, They're trying to if it's a trick, he's

trying to fool the Russian people into believing that this is happening. Well, and you know what's and you know what's highly suspect to me is that people that are admitted mouthpieces for our CIA, our intelligence community, right current people and UH and and people that in the recent past were in positions of authority UH in the intelligence community came right out immediately and started saying the one thing that we don't think this is is a false flag attack by the Russians because

they have no need to justify what they're doing, because they're already doing what they want. They don't need to stage this for some excuse. Now I object to that. And also the moment that you see you know, former CIA, this guy or current whatever person coming out and saying, hey, this is not what this is, you know, going out of their way

to address something like it's not a false flag attack by the Russians. It almost automatically, Um, you know, suggests to me that that's that is indeed what it is, because people to get on television to be saying these things in the first place, Yeah, good points. That's supposed to be intelligence agencies, like for the American people. They're supposed to report to the president. Right, So what are they doing? Right? No? Look,

automatic question there. But secondly, when you see you know, former CIA guy, former fat when you see them come out and make you saying, hey, look, folks, this is not what this is. What does that make you think? I mean, you know, your initial gut, what does that tell you? You know, pay no adjution to this, folks. Nothing to see here, Move along, you know what I'm

saying. So you know, I'm not saying that's what it is. I'm just saying that, man, when I see these sorts of things and these guys come straight out and make an effort to make a statement that you know, this is not something that it is, almost suggests to me that it's like they don't want you even looking in that direction, because indeed the real

circumstance might be in that direction. And what is their job is not to inform us, but to keep us in the dark, right, So you know, I'm just saying when when you see a guy who's out there and his job was, you know, counterintelligence and psychological warfare, and he's out there trying to decode something that's happening and telling you this is not what this is. Yeah that that that that that's a weird sort of reverse psychology to

me. But then again, it could be just me in my suspicious mind like the old Elvis song, right, I mean, it just is what it is. But Mike, we only got like a couple of minutes left and then we're gonna move on to Larry Hancock. But uh, anything you want to close out with here, Uh, clearly bad about a week this week, So thank you. I'm always looking forward to hear what Larry has to say. Um. So that's that's kind of my last two cents I got you. Well, you know what I'm gonna I'm gonna run this very

same thing by Larry before he gets into whatever's on his mind tonight. Uh, because I want to know what his view is on this, you know. Yeah that's yeah, me too, believe me. We're gonna go there with Larry Hancock starting right off but in the meantime being the no go to Wall Street window dot com. Uh, it is not just about Wall Street, It's about a whole lot of other things. Mike might be slowing down his email and everything, but believe me, there's plenty of information over there.

And as for usual, I suggest that you read The War State and also Why the Vietnam War, which is the first in a series of Well, it's going to be a series of books, and they're going to be historical and interesting, with stuff in them that's not available elsewhere. In the unique style, the writing style of Michael Swanson, who I'm very glad to have had with me. In the first hour, Mike, thanks, Hey, are you coming? Are you coming back next week or are we gonna

have to wait two weeks? I should be here next week. Excellent. So we will talk to Mike Swanson next week in the meantime, But coming right up, the author who occupies more spots on my book shelf than any other, Larry Hancock. In the next hour. The o'celly effect continues after this, do you like history, real history that you were never taught in

schools? The Vietnam War, nuclear bombs in nation building, in Southeast Asia by author of Mike's Swanson, with new documentation never seen before that will open your eyes to events that led up to this. Why the Vietnam War, Nuclear Moms in nation Building in Southeast Asia, nineteen forty five through nineteen sixty one. Get your copy today at Amazon dot com. Why the Vietnam War by author Mike Swanson. Politicians, this is the best we can do,

folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces. Garbage in, garbage out. When will you ever? How every single amund bas to be the truth they please. The plus hope to fast from candidates because the room stick running draw back, he hurt, can't be signing across yards runs the big Sandy go free by a police. But God, I listen from the baby the place you can preciate the verse you and the

church you got your The patient ran round to play, don't you. Sandy came round to see you all jump down and from the boy hand down. Maybe people that don't want to than to be free. You don't want the kee on the TV. They side your boy go. Don't don't be a losing on the story. Please don't see flame you we Saddy ran it up and play right up, she rode playing don't because you was sandy. They tie your voice. I can't be a looting up the story the floor,

Um, that's votis like scaring room. Give to the gig because you think during the cold politics the fits they give you too eyes and the sky's aggressive to make it kat opposite your mind arrested. Following the six risky for BIPs, getic, pushing lives, reflectible, what lives and steffort through the red and blue. The teams idelectic to be literally and gilly and dilectic. The deep tennant is just beef. The basis a bunch of behind the scenes de

conventions want to put the springs on the open show. The politics and pub national play at the river of the fit like the niyo come of lines to a faith for the notice to row, like the elephant in the room, couch there both the count for who counsel post took about pry she wola talking to your work slag picking up. When I see always out down there, I hear it out maybe because I don't want the things to be free woman team on the day You're one cover down bere loosing up the shore, play

walking through your on saying, don't come how about my play? Play sellout

the play? What do you do one side besides your tack down the story story November Ever before their time's black uns around, go ahead, waste more time standing and lighting up in the work horse, useless clown they don't care about stood, they don't care for about to talk tree, A bunch of bums of the empire who the same hour control went resigned way harding to pep real live phady to stop, didn't wash only go down the crack of different sides of the same point in state. In the runs of V one kind

of store system, try to play it up. I see you one sad taking up around and see it always comes down, and don't right down. Many people don't go to me to be free good in the woman, Wall Street Street window dot com, gold silver, the stock market, Wall Street Window dot dot Perhaps you're invested deeply, Perhaps you're not in deep enough. Maybe you're thinking about getting started Wall Street windows dot com, doos dot com.

Michael Swanson, the brilliant author of the War State, understood these trends professionally for many years, and now he gives you the benefit of his knowledge. Walls go there, now go there, now go there now missus James format Qarma Report dot com and you're listening to the or Shelly effect at Ocelly dot com. The War State by Michael Swanson explains the great national transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in the context of the times and reveals

never before published information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred years ago. His assassination took place in the context of the Cold War and the rise of the national security state. Before World War Two, the United States was a continental republic.

In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower. Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba, but knew that there were short range missiles on the island armed with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have led to a Third World War, and they wanted to go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson reveals why, and we'll show you what President Kennedy was up against

for more information the War State dot com. Nuclear Holocaust. Uranium is right, spink called nuclear weapons and other things like lots of uranium is right? Bad things things have done with uronument leading some bad things. Nuclear Holocaust. Wh uranium is right, Nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear Holocaust. Ullonium is right, spink called nuclear weapons and other things like lots of w uranium is right?

Things have done with uranuments leading some bad things. Nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear Holidar Holocaust, Nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear Holocaust, nuclear hollid In Denial The Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks by Larry Hancock. Secret wars became a staple of US covert operations and are still happening today. Larry Hancock's book In Denial rips the cover off many of them, using new files. It exposes things about

the Bay of Pigs that no one has ever written about before. It shows why it really failed and why the United States did not learn from it. It also shows why other countries today are doing secret operations with more success. This is the book that puts what some want to deny into the light. In Denial, Secret Wars with air strikes and Tanks Larry Hancock. For more information, go to Larry hyphen Hancock dot com. Pick up your copy of

In Denial at Amazon dot com in digital or physical Chili dot Com. Revelation through Conversation. Get ready, So there's a little reminder from the intro. Okay, the older intro from the Ocelli Effect. But segment number three beginning now, I have author Larry Hancock with me and we are going to discuss some current events that are awfully strange. So let's get into the geopolitical military

what the hell is going on? And I'll start off this segment. Before I do start it off, I advise you to go to Larry dash Hancock dot com check out his work always I'll give you the link to his blog in the show notes, etc. Follow that follow Larry's work, especially the more recent stuff he's doing on UAPs, which we covered a couple of weeks ago on the show. I know there's gonna be more to discuss about that,

but no UFOs tonight, at least I think not. Although I'm not really satisfied that we have an identification on the aerial object that allegedly was sent. As you know, the banner headline assassination attempt against Vladimir Putin? Okay, So, so shall we just begin with the headline? Was that an assassination attempt? They're blaming Ukraine and now also blaming the United States because the United States is back in Ukraine. Ukraine's president comes out and says, look,

we're having a hard enough time defending our own territory. Why would we be doing this, etc. Et cetera. So who do I turn to? One of the best analysts period that I know for sure, Larry Hancock? What the hell is going on with all this? Number one? But because I don't know, I got my suspicions, let's put it that way. But do I have enough information to follow through and give you guys a satisfactory analysis at this time? I don't, But perhaps Larry Hancock to us

first, Larry, how are you doing tonight, sir? I'm doing good, Chuck. It's good to be back. It's good to have you back. Look, really sorry that we weren't able to get to you last week. But yeah, I had had a bit of an issue. If anybody missed it, I had a bit of a seizure on air. And no, I'm not releasing that podcast because only got as far as talking to Mike Swanson and that was not going well. So uh, there you go. But I am intact and you know, shaky as always, but still here,

folks, not going anywhere. Just just yet. Um, so larry to to this point. What a what a weird landscape, What a strange time to be alive? Um? Did you see the film of this yet? Uh? Because I want to begin there, but then I'm just gonna let you go and tell us about the rest of what in the hell is going on? H Did you see the film of this alleged drone attack on the Kremlin and all that? Yet? Yeah? I've seen three or four versions of the film. I mean it is it is handy for you know,

simp. People will go why is there a film at all? And it's sort of like, well, it is like the most symbolic building in the Kremlin, you know. It's kind of like, is there constant film coverage of the White House? Yes? There is. I mean there's cameras set up for security purposes a way, so at least we know there's no real mystery as to why there's film of it. But good news is you kind of started off for once, we know that it's it was an object.

At least we have that first art. It's not really identified in terms of origin or intent, but we know it was a flying object. So at least we gotta we gotta start for a change. But we also know a couple of things it was not. It certainly was not an assassination weapon. If you look at that film, the explosive charge, if there was an explosive charge on the device, and it wasn't just whatever took it down,

which which we don't see on the film. You know, seeing the film from Ray's angles, you see something flying in on a trajectory, and one of the questions it gets to be, what is that If it's a you know, propeller propeller driven drone, why do you see a trail coming down in the film? What's making that trail? Or was that a rocket coming after the drone towards the Kremlin, which would be pretty exciting. It's kind of like we've got to we've got to take that sucker down, even

if we hit the Kremlin. There are lots of unknowns about the film, but we're seeing an object, yeah, well really quick rail behind it coming towards the Kremlin roof, and then it goes off for a minute and you don't see it, and then suddenly you see something explode, apparently near the flagpole, but it's it's a minor explosion. It doesn't certainly not enough to damage the roof. Seriously, it's nothing that could have penetrated that building.

It's in no way a real serious weapon that could cause damage to the building nor in any way harm Putin if he were there. It's you can't there's no way you could consider it as a serious assassination effort. Whatever it was was symbolic. I think it's safe to say that because it's something happening over a building that symbolizes Russia. So we can say it's it's a symbolic event.

It is not a serious weaponized assassination attempt. Well, because if it was more serious, you would have a much more significant explosive device being employed here. If they were to, say, try to do some significant damage to the build holding or damage to building enough so they could harm the occupants, it would be a much more significant machine. Okay, I don't even

know if this is not something. Now this is weird because it almost makes me concur with some of the talking heads that they hauled in, you know, immediately onto onto the MSM right where it's like, well, this might be opposition from somebody within Russia. Now, is it a significant piece of opposition, like an actual attempt on poutin? No, But is it a symbolic thing to say, hey, look, you know we're we're objecting. Is is it the kind of thing where it's just like an objection being noted,

you know, to what's going on? Or is it something else? I mean, I'm not buying this idea that this is some sort of a you know, asymmetrical attempt to make a point or to actually do some damage being conducted by Ukraine. I think that's completely ludicrous. What are your thoughts there? Yeah, that's resistance going on in Russia. We do know there's

some opposition to the war and the administration. You know, it doesn't look like it doesn't look like to me if it were symbolic, whoever these folks were, would seem to have done more to take it, you know, responsibility for it in advance or not in advance, but to make it clear that you know, this is an opposition to the war, right, but

that's not there quite Frankly. The symbolize the symbolism, and you know, Russia has always been about symbolism about important dates and their their nation's history dates

are critical to them. Uh. You know, if there's some symbolism going on here, the only people leveraging it, I mean, obviously there's nothing for Ukraine to leverage, right, you know there the only people that are leveraging the incident and taking an advantage of it are the Russian spokespeople and essentially, I don't know, you probably saw Chuck the the interesting remark that I saw immediately come out because you mentioned asymmetrical, and somebody's going, well,

yeah, how could this What could the Ukrainians? What could the Russians not do that they haven't done yet? Right? You know what? What's Where's the asymmetry? Was their Secretary of States response that said, this incident gave them the authority and moral and legal right to target essentially to kill and assassinate not only Zilinski but his entire cabinet, and thought gave them the justification to do that. Now, that's that's an interesting like who benefits from this?

That would be yeah, that would be one symbolic justification to go all out to waste the kid of administration. Right, Well, that that was my initial thought is that indeed it could be a false flag, like I said, in order to justify well, now you've made an attempt on our capital. That means that we can you know, pound Kiv, right, and

because we have to retaliate. And there was something about retaliation or in the initial statement that came from the Russian government, right, that was sort of like, we're going to have to answer this, And I didn't maybe the same statement you're talking about where it was indicated that look, we're going to have to do something about this. And it seems to me they're the only

ones that have made a statement like this. So and that's the other interesting thing is if this was a legitimate opposition from within the country, a good point, why wouldn't somebody have claimed responsibility and said, look, this is a point we're trying to make. Or maybe we don't want to harm the Russian government, but we want to make Ladi mere putin reconsider what he's doing. And it may have nothing to do with even the conflict in Ukraine.

It could have to do with something else, right, but no, none of that has happened. The only statement so far. And it's not as though, you know, we're not dealing with a regime that doesn't control the information coming out. So indeed, there could be information that somebody wants to get out about this that's not emerging. But you would think if it was some sort of point against Putin, somebody would have taken responsibility. Yeah, and I think yeah, in terms of focusing on Putin, it does one

thing. A it makes it very personal. This wasn't the way Russia responded. It's public statements was this is all about Putin? Right, This is an assassination on Putin, which does two or three things. First of all, it makes Putin look very important. I mean, up to this point, one might say, gosh, in terms of the Russian military adventurism in Ukraine, Putin's a nonentity. He hasn't made any right decisions. You know,

Putin's not the key adversary. Let's take out the Wagner guy. You know, if if we're gonna go kill somebody, let's go go for the guys that are running the private military companies or running going for the you know. But this makes Putin like the epitome of Russia. If it's in back on the pedestal, is target number one, so he's obviously the most important. So to me, it actually reinforces how important and critical if Ukraine felt

that way. I don't for a minute think that Ukraine feels that Putin is the number one target. If anything, I suspect right at the moment, you're Kraine is more than happy to have Putin bolloxing up the whole command structure. But it's so if there's some symbolism to me, because Russia immediately made it personal, the symbolism is about elevating Putin, an elevating Putin's position, and then giving them the right, the moral right whatever, to go not

after Kiev. I'm not talking about massive strikes on. They specifically said to go after Zelinski and his cabinet, and what that means is, you know,

forget targeting Kiev or Leev. You know, we're going to bring some weapons into play that are going after individuals, whether that's assassins, that's you know that that ratchets up the security phobia in Ukraine, which is already quite high and is counterproductive for Ukraine. So again, I have to step back and say the only the only people that I see that profit by the symbolism of of of what wasn't really a serious attack would be the Russian psychological warfare

people, and in particular putting himself since it re emphasizes his importance. Right, and we have to put this alongside. You bring up Wegner. Well, this week it was floated and I'm not sure how serious to take this, but apparently the leader of the group there was saying he's running out of ammunition and unless he gets resupplied shortly, I guess there's going to be consequences there where maybe they're not going to be able to continue to press things as

they have up to this point. Not a good look on the world stage there, if you know, if you're you're supposedly private contractors are saying, hey, look, we're not getting supplied well enough to prosecute the thing that you're telling us to go do. Uh you know, what are your thoughts on that? Because I mean that it's a weird thing to also come out this week too, right, it really is, and it really is a good diversion in a way because the conversation up to that point was really about

literally about Russian military infrastructure. Because the incident that occurred last week that didn't get much coverage is now there have been at least there at least three or four major other paramilitary companies that have been formed by oligarchs or by companies like

gas From, and they have fielded their own forces inside Ukraine. And last week there was an incident to incidents, actually one from contract people working for gas From, as I understand, who actually complained that when they ended up in Ukraine, they were taken over by the Donets people through public forces and fed into the front lines against their will. What happened at that point in time is Wagner objected to it, and there actually was a gun battle between

a variety of Wagner for it. You know, you don't. That's a terrible story to have floating around, and it was getting a lot of coverage in military circles, and of course this diverted attention from that. But the last thing you want is those kind of discussions going on in advance of any Ukrainian counter offensive, and this did, you know, preempt some of that, or at least divert attention from the the infighting that's going on within the

various Russian units, right, and all of this is happening again. You know, last week we were going to wind up discussing some of the other movements and some of the other issues that are occurring on the African continent, which does seem to be disconnected from the circum dance in Ukraine. But maybe not, because there's a bunch of stuff going on here, and I don't

think it's getting a lot of coverage generally in the Western world. I mean, you know, here in America, we're quite busy with new shooting events every day and various things like that, and of course the different announcements and pronouncements from different potential presidential candidates, so on and so forth. I mean, which, by the way, I find it interesting that CNN is actually gonna have a town hall with Donald Trump. You know, for those who

think, oh he's they're totally against him. They're working against them, and they're gonna use him to amp up their primetime TV viewership by giving him a town hall. Yeah, Okay, he's not part of the programming or anything. He's not part of their business strategy, is he. Anyhow? Forget that what about what's going on there, because we had a lot of action going on in Sudan and places like that, and how does this, uh

you know come to play regarding the circumstances there in Ukraine. Yeah, I think one of the one of the things that the Wagner Group UH leader said, as you said, he made has made a lot of confidence or the last couple of weeks. But one thing he has literally said is that because essentially there is treason within Russia and he used that word by the way,

people as people aren't getting the ammunition they need. Quite frankly, he's beginning to run out of the prisoners h And he's what he said was he's going to have to preserve his force so that he can continue his other activities, which are almost entirely within Africa, Central Africa, North Africa. That's where PMC, his company makes their money. That's where his business is. What he's what he's doing in Ukraine was you know, purely a patriotic activity.

And it was okay when he was doing nothing other than sacrificing prisoners. But now that he's starting to chew into his core units, you know, that's bad for business. So he he literally came out and said that, and again that didn't get much coverage in terms of so what is his core business? And his core business is in Africa, where he has done deals as a security broker for some African nations. He's done deals as a weapon supplier

for revolutionary groups. I mean, he's happy to play both sides of the fence if you need, if you're in power, he'll give you a security force. If you're not in power and have access to natural resources that are profitable, he will get you whatever you need. As a matter of fact, he has forces, Wagner forces actually flying MiGs in combat missions in North Africa, in Libya, and I'm sure one of the they would have been

happy in Sedan once they're the people that they're supplying weapons to. The revolutionary group there managed to take over several high end Egyptian MiG fighters. I'm sure he would have loved to have gotten his people in there and flown them out and added to his air force, but the government forces blew them up.

Apparently somebody blew them up before that could happen. But the bottom line is, if if you step back, where Wegner is really has been extremely successful and is making tons of money is in Africa because they have they had this double ended deal where they do business with whoever has control of the assets. Either it's a government in power or it's a revolutionary group, and their service is around weapons, but their real profit is in getting access to those resources.

And that's why he's partnered with some other Russian oligarchs to do that. But the Wagner Group is simply as it's kind of I wouldn't call it a cover, but it's basically an entree for those natural resource deals. And of course that takes you to Sedan, and it takes you into why there has been some written about it, but not nearly enough as to who's providing the suddenly providing weapons to this revolutionary group in Sedan, where they had actually worked

up a compromise, it was going to be a joint government. Everything was relatively stable, and then all of a sudden, the revolutionary group shows up with new weaponry and launches this new initiative. Takes everybody by surprise, and we find ourselves in the situation which you know, on the surface, seems to explode it overnight, right, and nobody has asked the question of how and why they happened. I haven't seen a single news article that really explores

the how and why it happened with no particular warning. I guess you would say it just like you know, somebody through a switch, right, Well, unlike what's happening in Israel right now, where you know what the build up was and you know why there's been you know, a bit of conflict in this and that you can see the evolution of what's happened there right What's gone on in Africa though, does seem to have sort of happened overnight and

they didn't note it temporarily seemingly in the international press. But then you know, just just like the wind that went right out, you know. So it's an interesting thing. And is it just I mean, is it just opportunism from Wegner and some other groups maybe you know, they're oh, I think that's an excellent word. It is. It's opportunism, But it's not.

It's not opportunism sounds like short term, right. This is more like it's opportunistic in that they're willing to play either side of a field in a given geographic area. It's opportunistic and in that they may not stay there for all that long. But it's it's more like um combine opportunistic with pillage, because the whole point has has to do with the natural resources and setting up the setting up the ability to extract large quantities of national resources natural resources in

exchange for this service that you're providing. So I just you try to put it in the context of they're not just in it for the money being made from weapons or security services. That that sounds like a dealer, right, you know, what's important to them is the flip side of the coin,

which is natural resources, which quite frankly I suspect as the reason. And there's been not just me, there's been a lot of suspicion that Putin convinced Wegner that if he would, you know, really, you know, come back to Ukraine, get get behind this thing, we're gonna win in a matter of days or weeks and guess who it gets it. Guess who gets the salt mines, Guess who gets the titanium? Who where? You know, you you bring your forces in and will make sure that you get the

natural resources. You know, it's very much in line with Wagner's philosophy and I have to say Wagner presents themselves as a paid for it. Wegner's ski keiko in life is the ability to get lots and lots of money, right.

Well, uh and that's the interesting thing here, as as I noted with Mike in the first hour, I think it's it's fascinating that the one thing that seemingly all the different, you know, uh, well, the talking heads out there, the analysts, one thing that they all seem to have an agreement on, uh, no matter which a side of the propaganda pool they were swimming at them um, was that this would be a short lived conflict, right. I think nobody anticipated the amount of time that that

what's going on in Ukraine was going to take. I mean really, I didn't even think that there was any way that a conflict could have lasted this long as it has, you know. And meanwhile, you have Zelinsky now going you know, traveling outside of the country, visiting with other groups, other countries, other leaders. You have a longer term commitment here which has

had to be had. So, like you said, Wegner ran out of prisoners because that was going on for a bit where they were just you know, we I think you and I talked about this a bit on the show about how that's how they were filling their ranks there in Ukraine. But as time has gone on, I mean, look, there is something called attrition, and over time, you know, it's a different it's a different set of circumstances that you're dealing with when you have something that goes on and it's

protracted as this is. So, I mean, yeah, go ahead. I don't think anybody in their right mind would lay out a game plan that said, Okay, I'm gonna I'm gonna plan on taking fifty thousand hardcore prisoners to use as my military force. Okay, that wasn't even at the Dirty Dozen, right, anybody saw that movie. No, it's okay, rum that makes no sense. What does make sense is wider Widner had had units

fighting in Ukraine since twenty fourteen. He had units in Crimea. But we're talking about hundreds of people, maybe a few thousand people, highly skilled experience the combat vets. These these are people that you know, know what they're doing. They're hardcore, they're in it for them. And seeing him commit that level of support to putin for you know, an union initiative makes sense. Then after a week or so, seeing him go, wait a minute, you know, I don't have the resources to do this. What am

I going to do? Gives you the perspective that you know, going to the prisons was was never part of a plan. You know clearly that that wasn't something that the Wagner Group was built to do, to to run very large scale military operations. They were built to be mercenaries, kind of like you know, the the Blackwater model. People are probably familiar with that. You know that that's what they were built to be to feel tens of thousands

of troops and in you know, trench warfare, not his model. So I cannot believe that any of that was some part of a you know plan. Well, I was straining not to bring up Blackwater here, but I really couldn't avoid it after a bit. Yeah, Blackwater. See that's the thing, Uh, this was not meant to These guys are not meant to

be in there for the long haul, not in this circumstance um. So you know the fact that they still are regardless of whether they were bringing in prisoners or not, they were not going to be there for the long haul. They weren't supposed to have a massive true presence and generally it's making him no money. And let's get back to that. It's sort of like, wait a minute, or was my business plan? My business plan did not call for two years of exponential lawsuits. That's not what we're here to do.

It's a company. Well yeah, so so here it is. You know, patriotism goes just so far. But you know, look, guy, you got to supply us better. And I mean, and that was

the weird thing because I'm like, he's asking for ammunition. I mean, that seemed to be really straight to me, because you would think that the one thing they'd want to do is if they have a self contained group out there that they don't have to supply Otherwise, if all you gotta do is give ma ammunition and the go ahead, doesn't seem to be a difficult transaction, right, I mean, it seems like somebody would say, well,

let's just make sure these guys are well supplied since they're doing this work. You know, I don't know, I'm trying to think of it from that angle. Meanwhile, you know, we skipped over something because you talked about the symbolism of this attack and we didn't really break that all the way down, I don't think because you did mention. I don't know if it was on air affair, but the date itself when this occurred, maybe you should

lay that out for people and explain that the dates are very important. Russia celebrates Victory Day. I mean May Day is historically, you know, for the Communist Party, which you know, putting is very Soviet oriented, if not Communists, but May Day and May Day celebrations, World War two victory celebrations. They have a whole series of celebrations that are that are planned around this part of May, and that they're not just in Moscow, they're out

in the various republics, the regions all have their own celebrations. And one of the things that started to become apparent over the last month or so is some concern that now now that um the true cost and manpower is becoming visible at a regional, regional level, you know, there was there's a couple

of concerns. First of all, they're not the large military units that were available before now to put into parades and shows of force, you know, roll out all the new tanks, roll out all the air defense systems,

sorry, they're in Ukraine or they're gone. Yeah. I was gonna say, with the quote mobilization end quote, right that's going on, I think that probably doesn't leave a lot of guys behind to be able to run around in the parades because they and there was some talk about that too, which was shut down pretty quickly because again, if there was an opposition leader or an opposition point to be made by this symbolic attack, which again it couldn't

be any anything serious because there was not enough of an explosive device to do any serious damage. It clearly was not something that was an efficient vehicle to say go after somebody personally. To me, it didn't look like because even if there's somebody was standing on the street, the explosive device didn't look like

you know. I mean, obviously I understand it probably could have done some damage, but I mean unless you have somebody out, you know, on the street, okay and literally like, you know, crash this thing into him, I don't think you're gonna do serious damage to even an individual. You know, Could you successfully have blown up a car with this little pop that we saw, I don't even think so, Yeah, go ahead,

what did you do? And the fact that supposedly Rush had been talking for a week or so about you know, a handful of drones that had been collected in different places inside Russia. It gave them the excuse to declare a security emergency, right and essentially cancel almost all of the celebrations because it's too dangerous. I haven't even thought of that. Yeah, because now you can't

put puttin out on a viewing stand. Say you know why you prayed the weapons by which you said, again, we're probably all being deployed elsewhere anyway. But you know, the old the thing that we used to see, you know, when the Soviets, I mean because he's not a Soviet, but but they have to tip their hat to the Soviet Union in that time

period for sure. Um, that kind of thing where you know, you got the leaders on a on a viewing stand, right and elevated viewing stand out in public, everybody can see them, uh you know and all that, and they can watch the parade go by. Well, yeah, there's a good justification now to say, hey, look we can't do that. Although it's a little close, because you would have thought they would have stayed

if it was staged. They would have staged it a little earlier, so that it's a week before or something, right, Um, but I want to cancel it, really, I know you kind of want to cancel it the last minute because Okay, you're walking a tight you're walking a tight rope. Okay, What's what I'm going to do is I'm going to admit what was supposedly the nation with the best strongest air defense in Europe can't, you know, can't protect itself. So I don't I'm not excited to say that.

That's that's not a good thing to say. Um, So you you don't want to get that out early as it were, I would say that you want a time at you know, certainly no more than a week or so. And they started quote unquote discovering those drones about a week week and

a half ago. So there's that. But there's one other area of symbolism that I found interesting and I would not have thought of this, but apparently, as part of this hero celebration, it's very common to allow families to join the parades with posters of their relatives who have been killed in battle. Okay, and I guess there was a concern that there literally might be thousands of people showing up that couldn't be rejected. It's kind of like, well,

my boy died, you know, in combat. I can't tell you, no, you can't. But suddenly, if this, if this parade, which is going to be limited because of available resources, has attached to it, you know, two thousand people marching behind it with pictures of dead and wounded, it's not a good look. Well, and there there's an interesting thing because I haven't seen a great deal of detailed reports about what the losses are, right, I mean, a few months back we were seeing

declarations from Russia and from Ukraine about the level of losses. But have you noted that as of late, we're not seeing counts of what the casualties are in these different operations. Right, They're not saying, oh, well we know that this many were killed or that many were killed. I'm not seeing that as often. Are you seeing it somewhere? Maybe I'm missing it? Well, I think it's everybody is concerned because you know, you who's going

to make that assessment. But there there have been there are some independent groups that monitor from videos and destruction of equipment and so on and so forth that the number again, even though it's probably it's primarily in bach Mutt, Okay,

where the big losses are. So let's just count. Let's say that sent the losses are in bog Mutt to the Wagner troops, even based on what he himself says, he's lost thirty or forty thousand people in the last five months, okay, and the combat estimates that the Pentagon is giving is total killed and wounded since December is upwards of one hundred thousand. Now that's immense. That's that's something on the almost like the you know, the previous

nine months. So we obviously Ukraine is taking heavy laws as well. But the Russians, there is no doubt that they have that they would have taken losses substantial enough. So now it's been felt all over Russia. It just the two places it's felt less than anywhere else are in Moscow and Saint Petersburg because that's where they intentionally recruited fewer people because those are like the national hubs.

And you know, if you can, if you can pull in most of your troops from out in the boondocks, that losses are less obvious. So to answer your question that there is no doubt that the losses, especially because of the meat grinder and mack Mutt and the last four four or five months, have been significant. No, they've been significant, but the reporting on them does not seem to be so intense at this point according to what I can follow. I mean, I'm just not seeing a lot of declarations

here that there are heavy losses. I don't see the Ukrainians even pushing out numbers like we're really giving them heavy losses lately unless I'm missing it. Am I missing it? No? No, they kind of do a week by week, but they don't they don't politicize it. If you will, I mean they're they will. Every week they issue a table of estimated you know, tanks destroyed, aircraft destroyed, killed, and we did in action. But it's now become just kind of routine, and it doesn't get unless you

happen to be on you know, certain military blogs or sites. You don't see it in general media coverage. But these days there's so much that's missing

out of general media coverage. It's amazing, as you said, it's you know, I look at the front page of CNN and it's politics and entertainment and shootings and then I have to really even look for, you know, other news from around the world, strategic type of news like the Philippines, which I've mentioned to you, right And look, we'll get there before we're done, because I mean, yeah, the front page of CNN or whatever is Jamie Fox saying, you know, look I had a problem here,

Thanks for all your prayers. Yeah, I mean literally, that's like the front page I think right now, and that's where we're at is entertainment, news and politics and oh, get ready for twenty twenty four. Here we go, Biden declared, you know, And that's it. So the conflict, you know, continues to drudge on right as at its pace, and there could be more intense casualties that have occurred recently, but you wouldn't know it necessarily from the banner headlines, is all I'm trying to get at.

But okay, so what is happening with the Philippines, because that is another part of this thing. I mean, look, all these things are part of the landscape right now, okay, And we also see that there there has been an absence of the uh you know, get nervous about China coverage too lately. Um that seems to have been taken down a bit, even on the neo kon side of things. Uh, they they've turned you know,

turned down the volume on that a bit um. But but here we are, we're still in the midst of a great deal of well, a great deal of hotspots that could get out of control quickly in various regions, it looks like to me. But anyway, what is happening with the Philippines which you did mention off air and we didn't get to here yet. Yeah,

I think it's background. One of the things that's going on for the last three or four years, actually a little bit longer, is you know, there's there's no doubt that China, China was for a period of time, quite frankly, as Russia did earlier, adopted a very a model for not for diplomacy based on economics, which was weirdly displayed when apparently there was a phone call between what Jijan Ping and and Zolensky recently right where there seemed

to be some encouragement, some sort of you know, discussion. There's some diplomacy on behalf if you will, of the well, the alliances there that

are between them and Russia and now making contact with Zolensky. I found that to be an odd thing in the equation too, But go ahead and well, and the fact that this week, for the first time, China actually voted for a really severe resolution against Russia, essentially a resolution that described their attack on Ukraine as a you know, illegal, It called for prosecution for war crimes. And it was the first time that China's actually voted for a

resolution against Russia. That was significant, and that followed the call that you discussed. But the longer term is the sad thing is you know, you and I both discussed it. There was a period of time in the early nineties where Russia was pursuing economic diplomacy in Europe based around oil and gas and being very successful with Italy and France and Germany, and then Putin decided to go in another direction, a much more military warrior. Oriined direction well China,

and we see what happened him. China was doing the same thing during the early part of the last decade with their new Silk Road initiative linking China through Southeast Asia into Africa, economic development to a lot of African nations and very successful in the Pacific not just you know, into Africa, but they had turned thurntangs around in the Philippines to the extent that the Philippines had canceled all of the US based contracts. The US military was really no longer welcome

in the Philippines. You know, there are a lot of economic ties being created with China. And then China adopted this new new strategy called essentially the Way of the Wolf Warrior, which was you make everybody go where you want them to go by showing that you're so superior that it's you know, it's not a cooperative effort. They take orders, you know, it's sort of

like if you don't take orders. And they begin really with several shows of force against Philippines fishing boats and basically fishing and territorial interest out in adjacent waters. And that really upset the film. I mean China. When China does that sort of thing, they are brutal. I mean they literally take no prisoners, They sink boats, they use their own fishing fleet in a military

fashion. And the Philippines has gotten tired of that and during the past couple of months have signed a series of new agreements with the United States to allow the United States to re enter bases and to actually set up new bases in the Northern Philippines, a security pact for the US to come to their assistance, for example, if their territorial waters are violated, and you know, with a visit to the US a very high level things have turned around like

one hundred and eighty degrees away from China towards the US because essentially the same thing's happening in Australia and other nations in the Pacific just because the Chinese approach to bullying people didn't sit well. And the strange thing is hopefully China won't

slide the wrong direction. But you know, well, yeah, clearly they don't have a homogeneous agenda though, Larry, because I mean, if you take a look at how they basically enabled in Vietnam to become a you know, a much stronger partner in the Asian business community and things like that. They've definitely made their their allegiances clear with people that are cooperating with them.

They help them economically and militarily, right, But if you don't take orders, as you said, well then it becomes rough and some people are chafing against that. Some of the other nation states are chafing against that while others have you know, taken to the partnership. Right, So you don't have a singular sort of reaction to them in the region. I'm saying that there's just various there. There's a spectrum of reactions and interactions there in the entire

region. So you have you have different results coming out. And the thing with the Philippines is, well, that's not working out too good for the Philippines because they're not taking orders. So maybe they're rethinking their relationship with the US now right, Well, and we're seeing a transition period. There's a

spectrum. They had this one strategy of economic fraternity, codependence, so on and so forth, and as you say, that still works in some places with certain segments of the population, right, However, they overlaid this. It works when they're they're not in competition right at the moment. The places that they're really in competition are at sea, basically related to fishing resources, oil and gas resources. So even though Vietnam's fishing fleet has been under some

pressure, uh, it's it's probably not as significant to them. But so, like I said, during any transition period, you've got two two approaches. You know, where the economic was working and is still working great, where it's not working and the force is definitely not working, not so great, I will say, you know, in terms of Vietnam, um, it's a it's a mixed bag. Because the US now has port access in

Vietnam. We've made friendship visits with our navy ships into Vietnam. Uh. There's certainly no military alliance there, but it's certainly not um that the Vietnamese there, there's the Chinese of pressured. It's fishing fleet, They've sent boats, They've taken over oil platforms. So it's you know, it's kind of what's happening this week? You know, is it is it pleasure or pain? Am I making money with them? Or am I taking grief from them?

You know, what's what what's going on this week? Well, and it's not again, it's just not the the simple constant answer any longer. It does seem to be fluctuating a bit. But that's why I found it really strange that there was that, you know, that action like you were to describing regarding their change in orientation with the boat against Russia and UH, and and also just the phone call as the Lensky in general. Uh, the idea that they were attempting to, you know, look into that dip

amatically when it's a quagmire that clearly the Russians are well committed to. I mean, I don't I don't foresee them just turning around and going home tomorrow.

Uh you know what I mean. So what was going to be accomplished there if if they are still the strongest ally to the Russian Federation, right, because it wasn't that long ago there was the big show of uh you know, the the leadership meeting with Putin there, you know, with with China, right, So I'm just saying it's it's it's a very interesting thing.

That is. Um, the current data on US oil exports. US oil exports are going through the roof, and part of that is because China is buying a considerable amount of US oil, which is interesting because of course they can get all the Russian oil they want at depressed prices, right, so why would they even It's like wait a minute, yeah, it looks like there being a little bit more even handed, if you will, um, maybe not just literally you know, being pulled into the Russian vacuum.

You know it. It does look like that that has changed a bit. There's stand storage. Taiwan may not have changed, but there's stands storage. Russia certainly looks like it's changed a bit over the last couple of months, and if if the Ukrainian counter offensive kicks in with any success, I think it will change even more. Well. See, there you have it. It's it's it's in flux, is what I see, and a bit confusing,

honestly. I mean, I don't know. Maybe there is some greater strategy at play here that I don't understand, but I gotta be honest with you. I see a lot of inconsistency here, and you would think that a unified kind of totalitarian regime I usually don't see a lot have been consistency in their action. You know, it's very well coordinated. Usually, uh, it's very well considered and coordinated. Right, Even the smallest nations,

they're generally pretty consistent about their behaviors. But China's behavior is not consistent at this point, um, at least to me. Again, maybe I don't understand something here, but I think you have different facts. It's not as monolithic, but all of us, myself included you know, like to think things are monolithic, you know, because okay, it's they have a policy,

but um, I don't think it's quite that way. That might be true for North Korea, but even China is you know, there are there are different interests, their economic interests, their military interests, and they joust with each other even they would they would like to have a monolithic appearance. But you know that's the way of the world is not quite that simple. There you have it. Well, look, Larry, I know we're probably gonna get together again in a couple of weeks. Uh what do we have

to look forward to from you in a couple of weeks? I mean, I also want to find out what your final takeaway is on tonight's discussion. But before we go there, what what do you what do you think we'll be looking at in a couple of weeks or are we just gonna wait to

see what the new cycle presents us next? Because I gotta tell you, if you had asked me to predict a couple of weeks ago, whether we'd be talking about a drone strike on the Kremlin, uh or you know, alleged assassination attempt, I would have I would have not believed you, um, but but here we are. Are we gonna wait to see what the new cycle presents or do you have something in mind maybe in a couple of weeks to come back on with no. I think I think you're right.

I think you use state of flux. I mean that's what we were in Uh. If you really want to talk about contemporary events, I don't think. I don't see how anyone can consect. I can guess at the moment. I think maybe it's kind of like what we did earlier. It's sort of like, Okay, let's look at what the headlines are two weeks from now and see if we can drawn into insanity out of it, because quite

frankly, that's not being done. As you and I have discussed. People are just reporting news and it's so fluid and changing so fast you don't even have time. Nobody has time for analysis. They report the news for forty eight hours and it's on another subject, and you kind of go, what did the world happen to that? Did anybody ever figure out? I tell

you what we're probably going to be. My prediction is that Denmark and Finland are going to provide positive evidence that not only did Russia blow up Nordstream, but Russia is as either beginning to or demonstrating that it can start taking out their to see cable infrastructure for communications and a lot of other things. I think that's gonna be a hot button. Just a prediction, So that don't

gonna be two weeks, but that's gonna that's gonna happen. Well, I'll tell you what, especially now that Finland has actually reaching accord with us to put basses just just like the Philippines. We're talking about the Philippines, they've reached the ford where we can put basses in the northern Philippines. Again, the same with Finland. When you have that sort of thing occurring, just kind of kind of roll with it. I got you. Well, I'll

tell you what I think. Even if Finland does present a definitive evidence that Russia is responsible for the issue with nord Stream, you know what's going to happen is a whole lot of people are going to deny it's real anyway, They're going to claim that it's fiction. I mean, that's shocked and amazed. I'll be shocked and amazed if if because look immediately as soon as somebody even suggested that maybe, you know, maybe this was a nope, Nope,

that's absolutely crazy. You're just you know, an anti Russian blah blah. And I'm like, you know, you're not thinking about this strategically. And again, even with this ridiculousness over this, you know, assassination attempt, I mean, I don't know how not to mock that. It's just it's stupid. If that was an assassination attempt, I mean, I don't

know, maybe if a teenager was demonstrated themselves to be that unskilled. My assassment is that they've shown themselves to be pretty competent, and I think pretty competent is not taking out the flag on top of the Kremlin. Well, that's the thing is, if this was a serious attempt, I'm thinking they would have done a lot more damage, you know, I mean just maybe it's just me, but why why would they not have waited for the parade? If I'm really going to do this and roll the dice, okay for

Russia using nukes against me? Right, I'm going to take out their command structure by a heavily armed drone. We're saying they're targeting is good enough. They can fly a drone eight hundred miles across Russia and hit a flagpole. Why not wait until the next day and hit the grandstand, right, I mean, that would be a lot more effective. And again, you got somebody who's not protected by a building. You got somebody who's out in the open. I mean, and at the very least, you could register a

very serious point if they were able to. I mean, it wouldn't necessarily stop what's going on, but it would register a very serious point. It would make a point to the entire world community. If you were able to even get close after point, you'd have to be best for to do it. I mean, you'd have to be making a bet that a decapitation strike would lead to civil war. I mean, you'd have to be under extreme pressure to do that. Now, I can see a point in time if

Russia were just about to roll over Kiev and occupy all of Ukraine. O. Hey, that's a desperation move, right all it's the other way around, Ukraine is about to roll east. Why would you do that? Makes no sense. Look, just because it makes no sense doesn't mean that that's not what people are gonna think is happening. Okay, Like I said, you know, even if with definitive evidence, I think a lot of people

are gonna say, Nope, that's fiction anyway. That's the other problem is, even even if you do present him with something that has a great deal of contextual analysis, it doesn't necessarily mean the listener, the viewer, the reader is going to believe it anyway. But one thing you can believe is the work of Larry Hancock. Again. Go to Larry dash Hancock dot com.

Check out his work there, and perhaps we'll hear from in a couple of weeks when something else crazy goes on in the news speed I guess we'll find out then, Larry, thanks for doing this with me. It's been great to be bad Jack, and thank you guys listening. Sorry again about my voice tonight, still a little strained, but that's okay. No matter who you are, where you are, when you are, remember I'm merely o'celly, and all of you are indeed the effect seeing tomorrow night for the

live call in show, and I hope you're well until then. Take it