Making Sense of the “Ye” Spectacle with Ryan Cristian

attention. For several years now, I have been reporting on the war on domestic terror agenda, its origins, its evolution and the development of related policy, particularly during the Trump administration. And now at the Biden administration. If you fully understand the domestic terror agenda, and its antecedents, as well as the role of the US national security state, historically and manufacturing terror threats, both at home and abroad, the entire situation with Kanye West starts to look

very different. It also raises all sorts of other questions, some of which we will hopefully have time to broach today.

Joining me today to offer an overview of the domestic terror agenda and how it colors the current Kanye West situation is my friend and colleague, Ryan Cristian, I'm sure most longtime followers of me and my work will be very familiar with Ryan who runs and as the founder of The Last American Vagabond, or TLAV, Ryan and I have been collaborating specifically on this issue of the domestic terrorist situation for years

now. And we've done several videos over the years about this agenda and how it has evolved. And it goes without saying there is no one I would rather talk to you about these topics than him. So thanks for being here today, Ryan, and welcome back to Unlimited Hangout. My pleasure, always, always happy to join you. So there's a lot of different points where we could start, but I guess it makes the most sense to discuss first, you know, the whole situation with Kanye West,

how that's been unfolding. And then go and add the important context here about what is likely driving, the talking points being that are sort of driving public discourse around the whole insanity of Kanye West right now. And as of for those listening, we're recording on Friday, December 2, so the most recent developments right now. And this whole situation around Kanye West is him being banned.

Again, but this time on Twitter, but this time being banned by Elon Musk on Twitter, as opposed to regular Twitter of yesteryear, and also his rather outlandish interview on the Alex Jones program. So I guess we can start with one of those two things. So what are your thoughts on the latest there? Ryan, we'll go from there.

Well, it's interesting to see how this is developed as, as of today in the second and you know, he so as peers, it's only a as it stands a limited suspension, you know, the 12 hour countdown that we've all experienced, where you're supposed to delete a tweet, I guess, or punishment, we'll we'll see how that pans out by

tomorrow. But the interesting point is where all this is developed, I think this really comes down to the core concept of free speech, right, you know, and really, the genuine concept of whether you're willing to defend the most appalling speech. And if you're not, then that's not free speech. And the problem is that today, we're seeing this, to your point in your opening there, which you you've been calling out for a

very long time. And we've been covering this trends, this transition from, you know, hate speech and medical misinformation, to the point to where now even with Biden's executive order, and so on, literally arguing words, or no violence, when a representative of Congress actually just spoke on the record, saying that, you know, sticks and stones now actually break your bones like they're literally making these childish arguments about how

this is where we are. And so it's interesting now to see how this has developed. And I'm sure it will talk about his interview with Alex Jones, and so on, but to the point of today, where he's now on Elon, Twitter, and even the engagement by Elon, you can see how this develops. And I was looking through this this morning. So essentially, he posted a joking tweet saying this will be my last tweet. And it was like an image of Elon Musk being sprayed with a hose it looked really unbecoming, I

guess. And Elon under that said, That's okay. And then I'm assuming the next week, underneath of which Elon said that one's not okay, is the one that he got censored for, which is a Star of David with a swastika in the middle. And my point was, regardless of what your opinion is on that tweet, and the images and so on, images, and symbols are not violence. And this is what they're trying to force it and

he was censored for that. And Elon used argued in the tweet back and back and forth, that that was because he promoted

violence. So this is brings us to your main point here is that we're at a point now where even Elon Musk is still discussing how hate speech has gone down on the 2.0 everything platform, he's calling everything out but new Twitter app, and everyone seems to be promoting the idea that violence or words are violence and this affects people like us where it looked back to Biden's executive or Under where they discuss things as domestic terrorism COVID Medical

misinformation, right? So this is where I'm most concerned is that this is clear that even Elon Marino's that are not I think he does is playing a part in this. And the right is seemingly holding them up as some of them as kind of a savior of free speech. And that's clearly not what's happening with Alex Jones with a with where are the doctors that are still censored and so on, right? So I'm sure we could take this 1000 different directions, but that's what I think is most pressing right now.

So not let's forget everything else that's happened with Kanye West up until this point and just focus on the tweet that he was banned for. So before, in rather, in recent weeks, especially since Elon Musk took over the platform, there has been a lot of pressure from the ADL, the anti Defamation League and its parent organization. But I prefer to have Twitter adopt the I HR a definition of anti semitism, which among other things, essentially, conflates anti Zionism and anti semitism.

Yes. Which is very thorny, for numerous reasons. One being that if you criticize the State of Israel that can be deemed anti Zionism and thus, anti semitism. Right. So it's sort of protecting criticism of a

particular state. So if you, for example, point out, you know, ethnic cleansing on the part of the Israelis against Palestine, and some people go to lengths to sort of compare how, particularly the new government set to come to power in Israel right now, where you have followers of Mayor Kahane, who openly call for completely eliminating Palestine, annexing it, and potentially deporting Palestinians outside of Israel, which is obviously an ethnic cleansing campaign if it comes

to pass. You know, if you compare that to things that happened in World War Two, how different you know, having banned Kanye West for this particular image, that seems at least I didn't see the image, but the way it's been described seems to imply that the State of Israel acts in a way that is, you know, has features of

Nazism. Right, if you make sort of any of these more nuanced arguments, will you be banned now, in the fact that Kanye West was banned for that particular image, I think is a, it was a stepping stone, or could be a stepping stone to Elon Musk, adopting the IH ra definition of anti semitism on Twitter.

Well, he's already pointed out that he's consulting with the ADL and other you know, thought leaders and stakeholders, as he puts it, right in the same, you know, in the conversation of how this will be regarded going forward. And so that mean that he publicly tweeted about that, so it's not surprising that he would kind of fall in line with

that direction. But there's a lot of points to make in all this, you know, first of all, some people are pointing out, and rightly so, you know, the historical, the history, the history around these symbols, and how they're historically not what we think of them as today and how these symbols have been overlapped in the past and Buddhism, you know, whatever. But the bottom line is, as perceived today is how it's

being focused on. But you know, the problem is that, to your point, I'm glad you brought that up the election, let's say, as Robert wrote about, wrote about for the last American vagabond, that the let's just take, for instance, the Jewish power party, right, where even the ADL will point out these people are racist, right, openly and even in the past have been deemed almost a terrorist level by some of these same people. Right? And these are this is the group that

just got elected into power. And if you point out what the ADL says about these groups today, you're called racist. I mean, that's inherently count. That doesn't make sense, right? You're the bottom line is, it is when people are pointing out the Zionism aspect. Let's say it's a political party, but then you get called a racist for doing so because they act like oh, well, you're actually mean this. But see, there's the problem is that there is a world of conflating

things. Exactly. And there is a world in which we're there are people like us that are actually pointing out the political agendas of a government, not necessarily an entire organization or a grouping of people, and they just the end, so anybody on us can point out that inside of that people with honest intentions will get wrapped into the argument of anti semitism. So that is obviously what's happening in part. And so today, when your point about him and adopting that, I think that's absolutely

a given. I think that's already where it's going with what he just did. Right? You're you're arguing that this image is a violation and is violence. And that's kind of the same sentiment that's being spread there. Yeah. So my question is now after Kanye West gets banned for that image, are people who point out the similarities between the ethnic nationalism that's very extreme, being promoted by certain people set to take power and Israel right now to ethnic nationalists of the past of

great infamy. Is that is it will they be banned now? Regardless of their past actions? You know, I don't know. But we'd be guessing but I would argue yes, I would argue it's pretty clear based on where this is going, that that is going to be happening. It's Based on again, the overlap with the EDL, but also the previous actions, but that's already been a standing situation on a lot of these platforms for a long time now, right? Like, that's just

offensive, right? You're not allowed to say these kinds of things. You're not allowed to have objective conversations and question the narratives about this, you know, or any number of things today, and I think that one's pretty clear. That's my opinion, though. Yeah. And I think it's gonna be very bad. If this develops into a situation where criticism of Israeli government policy, or Israeli intelligence becomes as

an East answerable offense. I mean, obviously, that's going to be bad for people like you and me, but I mean, you've been kicked off Twitter how many times? I think, right. So um, you know, I mean, it's already complicated for for some of us, I'm, it's a miracle that mine still around, but I think it's because I don't tweet very often. At least, that's what I

what I assume it is. But you know, if that comes to pass, it's going to get very dicey to make criticisms of a country that is very influential in geopolitics and other, you know, situations globally, absolutely. Well outside of Israel, as well. So this is, um, they want to scare people away. Right? Yeah, like so people

actually, then. And this is what, and we know this, a lot of people, even independent media will self censor, whether we're talking COVID-19, whether we're talking Israeli foreign policy, or US foreign policy, people will water down what they're saying. So they can, you know, skirt, the algorithm, or however we defended today, and that's exactly what they want from us. And that's what that kind of statement does, you know, and we should be able to objectively have a conversation about

exactly these things. Even when it comes down to the supremacist mentality of some of the people in these countries because of the Zionist direction from this government. That doesn't mean everybody, right? It's the same point they make about Ukraine, right? I mean, it's obvious, you can see an overlap of very extremist mentality from the government down, and that has influenced a lot of people both were there originally. And that came from other places. But that doesn't mean every Ukrainian has

X, Y and Z. Right? We have to be able to have these objective conversations today. And that's exactly what they're trying to scare us away from. Yeah, well, I also think people because of how the Kanye West situation has played out, most people are going to be focusing on the outlandish stuff, right? And I'm glad you said that the aspects of it that actually matter. And in this is troubling

to me. So for example, you know, the most there was a three hour interview that Kanye West did with Alex Jones, the other day, and the most talked about, quote of Kanye is from that is where he appears to be praising Hitler, right? I'm not going to

defend that, obviously. But what I am going to point out is that at the same time, we send how many billions of dollars to Ukraine to support people fighting in that war, that praise Hitler much more in a much more overt and consistent way than Kanye West did on the Alex Jones program. Right? Um, you know, it's it's, uh, that particular, you know, outrage, type of outrage over that type of of rhetoric is either is only highlighted, in my opinion, when it's, you know, serves a

particular agenda. So I think you see sort of the self destruction of Kanye West here, but I think it's also being used for other reasons, because, you know, like I just mentioned, Nazis in Ukraine are okay, but, you know, Nazis elsewhere. Not okay. And nationalism and extreme ethnic nationalism is okay, in Israel, but as bad everywhere else, right. Right. And I think, oh,

go ahead. Sorry. No, I just think these extreme double standards need to be scrutinized, because it's, you know, people can point out the hypocrisy, but there's something else going on there. 200%. I mean, there's a lot of different factors at play. But I think the important parts to include there for is, you know, obviously, as I made, I keep pointing out, regardless of your opinions about what he is saying, does he have a right to

say these things? Obviously, if you don't defend the most appalling of the speech, you don't believe in free speech, but we have a right to argue that if you feel that way that he's wrong, or disgusting, or whatever you may think, right, that's free speech. But what's interesting you point out there is, you know, there, and this is, people even criticize our coverage of it from yesterday for the same reason, and it's a

fair point. My point yesterday was more about defending the Free Speech aspect and going into the actual nuance of this conversation. But since we're talking about it, you know, there was a lot of things that he said there that I would even argue my sense of this is it feels like this is being set there, whether they know it or not to divide people in the actual conversation of free speech, like always divide and conquer, but it's almost being used to give objectivity a bad

name. Right. And the point being is that he said, say, like, you know, we I love everybody, or there's good things to everybody. And I think that is almost meant overlap with Trump's comments about you know, good people on all sides kind of thing. But, you know, then he goes and says, you know, specifics about you know, Hitler did this or whatever. And the point is that Do you it's when you highlight the one exact point, you can make it seem far more radicalized than other, you

know, whatever. But the bottom line is that he did say things that I personally disagree with. But it really doesn't matter because it comes down to the fact that he has a right to say them and words are not violence, right. But it's all being used to drive a very clear direction. And I think it's meant to overlap with this whole. I would which I've called you know, the vanilla ISIS SIOP or creating the idea that these people are exactly what many of them have always thought they were because

of the propaganda. Now, I don't know if they know that or not. Right. But I that's happening. Yeah, so the whole vanilla ISIS thing is, you know, as we've talked about, and as I've written, you know, for your site, the war on domestic terror is basically that that is the narrative that it's vanilla ISIS meaning white people isis this time, right. And the narrative has been that it's anti semitism and anti semitic Trump supporters that are going to be the quote unquote, domestic

terrorists. So at the same time, then you have the inter the cross pollination between these groups, Nazi groups that are being funded with us money and Ukraine, like the Azov battalion being the most well known. They cross pollinate with groups in the US and the FBI knows this. They've known it for years, and nothing is done about it. Right.

Okay. So if you were familiar with the history of al Qaeda, or even the history of ISIS, which was sort of, you know, the second Middle East boogeyman that was, has similar roots, in a sense to al Qaeda, which, you know, the official narrative of that is complete bunk. You know, I think the easiest way for people to get a handle on that is to watch the recent documentaries that James Corbett has put out on the topic, if you want, you know, a crash course

in that. But it's, you know, that was created for very specific purposes, ie the quote, unquote, war on terror. And the war on domestic terror is no different. Even going back to the Oklahoma City bombing, which, again, if you look at the actual events around that the official story is bunk. There's no way Timothy McVeigh did that alone. There was involvement of other actors, but the narrative was dangerous. Veterans.

militias are dangerous, you know, in these sovereign citizen movement, all that stuff, it was all sort of blamed on them. And there was an effort to create domestic terror legislation at that time, which was actually

introduced by Joe Biden. And among other things, that particular piece of legislation wanted to give the President of the United States complete autonomous authority to declare what groups and what people in the United States are terrorists, right, like he has unilateral authority to declare that that was that bill, but Biden introduced. It didn't

pass, obviously. But it's very interesting that you have Biden in power right now, when a lot of this stuff is coming to a head that his his executive order about domestic terrorism essentially, is his now he's president. Now. He just kind of writes it in as an executive order at the same point, right. Oh, right. Well, that yeah, that tradition that sort of develop, especially since you know, the George W. Bush era, I'm just legislating

through executive order. Yeah. Yeah. So there's that President that where he could, you know, develop that really any way he wants? I mean, who knows, maybe that same type of policy will rear its head sooner rather than later. With with him as president, you know, that remains to be seen. But anyway, you know, you have that narrative being seated. Way back

in 1995. And since then, we've had these events that have, you know, really pops, you know, gotten a lot of mainstream media coverage, like the the failure or the failed attempts to kidnap the governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer, which is now basically been revealed to have been like a FBI setup. Right.

And some of these other things like January 6, of course, and it's involved in the involvement of the FBI there and how they were being waved in and how people that I'm sure we'll talk about again, today at DHS basically said this was going to happen a year before it did and compared it to the next 911 We can't stop and it's going to happen. And it's going to be like this before it happens. You know, sort of like the new Pearl Harbor quotes that proliferated

before 911. So, you know, if you're looking at the national security state, and all of this, the domestic terror narrative, if you've been following it, is definitely painting a very specific picture and has been of what an alleged domestic terrorist looks like. Right, right. And it seems like Kanye West, and you know, is being a he's also going around with Nick

Fuentes. Right? It looks to me that these are going to be the new poster child, children for that particular narrative, regardless of how true or not true that is. Yeah, yeah. No, I agree. And I And that's important that whether they know it or not, because I think that's kind of one of the ways these kinds of plays work today. A lot, you know, you could take Trump, for example, like, I'm still debating on whether I feel like he's really aware of how he's being used in this, or he's completely

involved. And it could just be these people are being used social engineering everyone to discuss it, you know, they may not even realize they're playing these bars. Yeah. So let's turn back to Kanye for a second. So the most interesting thing about this whole situation to me was when he published those text messages between him and his parent, personal trainer, a guy named Harvey Pasternak. Yeah. Whose ex Canadian military intelligence, if I'm not mistaken. Yeah. Very

strange. Yes. And apparently, I forget where I read this, but I'm going to try and find it to put it in the show notes. You know, it's important to point out that, you know, MK Ultra, right, the program, I'm sure everyone's heard of it, that involves Canada and Canadian intelligence to a significant degree. And the claim has been made that, you know, these programs continue to exist to an

extent, maybe that's true. And you know, in the case of the CIA and groups like that, if they don't ever face accountability for something more likely than not, they'll continue to do it. Oh, yeah. But, you know, I can't really give you an absolute think it's continuous still, I think most people, you know, in the space that we work in, probably do. But again, I can't provide direct evidence for

that. Yeah. But this particular exchange of messages between Pasternak and Kanye West is quite revealing, because this is supposed to be a guy who's a personal trainer, which you would I think most people think of as the guy that like takes you to the gym and helps you'd like work out. And what he's saying instead is, I don't like what you've been saying. So you can either have a conversation with me, or I'm going to have you institutionalized and drugged and send you back to

Zombieland forever. Right? That's, that's not a trainer. That's a handler. Yeah. So that's a pretty crazy exchange. Yeah, right. Um, and I think, okay, so if, if he was being, you know, handled or whatever, or this Pasternak guy from some time, and spent times, you know, the way it was written the message, he was basically saying, this had been done to

Kanye before. Okay, I just want to say that since the situation started, and Kanye has come out and been saying this stuff, there's no way this is a guy that is like, operating at 100%. Right now, if he's been through some sort of crazy, like, institutionalized drug thing, and like all this other stuff, with people that have intelligence ties sort of handling him, you know, it's very likely that I don't really I think he's being used right now.

I 100% agree with that. That, but I would, you know, and I know you would agree. I mean, we don't who couldn't say for sure whether he you know, he seems to know what he's saying. Like, if you just kind of watch his cut his dialogue, though. Yeah. But here's, here's my thing. Well, I just think if you're gonna if he's like, mess up like that, and you're trying to come out of it, who's the the people that are guiding him towards the answers that he's found? That he thinks explain his predicament?

Right, who are the people who are surrounding him right now, as he's having this meltdown? It's a new group of people. Are these his new handlers? Right? Yeah. I mean, that's again, I don't I it's hard to say, but I think it's clear. Now, we don't know. But I think it's worth pointing out because I don't think, you know, I think they want someone like him out who's been through these experiences that maybe have given him, you know, problems.

Right, and like acting, quote, unquote, normally, and they want to push him out there. They want to give him specific information, and talking points and have him make a fool of himself. Right? Yeah. If for example, Milo Yiannopoulos, or however you say his name, who I think in Nick Fuentes, who were supposed to be like managing quote, unquote, Kanye West's suppose Id presidential campaign, why would they not sit down with him and be like, if you want to actually do this?

Why don't you make a well reasoned case? For why the US Israel relationship is messed up and needs to change? Well, yeah, I mean, from a political standpoint, obviously, like if you're if you're actually trying to play the game, but what's interesting, but he's not trying to play the game, and neither are the people behind

him. Exactly. Exactly. Exactly. And what he's saying is, I mean, and it's important to point out that even though you can argue he has a right to say these things, there's endless examples of how they are being completely broad brushed are saying, you know, there's points where you're he's saying Zionism, but there's also points where he's saying that Jewish people do this and so on. And you can't no honest person can stand by a statement like that.

It's broad brushing no matter what group you're talking about. Sure. Right. And so I would argue again, with I agree with you, I think it's it's intentionally inflammatory to the point that we're nobody honest, can defend it. So I agree. I mean, that's why I feel the same way. I feel like this is a setup, whether they know that or not, and I agree with you, I think that people will

sign on alongside them. You know, these people aren't stupid, they're well aware of how these things are being subjectively presented, in my opinion. And I think you're right. I think there's a reason to it. My point was, it's about the whole overlapping of words and violence, which Elon Musk just made clear. Personally, I think so. Yeah. So I am leaning towards the view that it is a setup.

And, you know, I think, obviously, there's no intent to actually have any sort of positive, productive, like nuanced discourse come out of this whole Kanye West situation. And I think that's because of the people that have been in his circle since he sort of left the pastor neck orbit then and he's moved on, you know, to these other people who are around him constantly in arranging these interviews for him that's not currently doing that himself.

Right. Right. Well, I mean, it's important to look at the the trainer handler, you know, in the whole situation itself, even before this point, and just, you know, I mean, what kind of what person can can have you involuntary vault involuntarily committed, or argue that you'll be drugged if you do X, Y, and Z, like, that's not normal, even for somebody in that position with, you know,

lots of money and so on. Like, we just need to see that for what it is first, and then realize that from there, it's only gotten more intense, you know, so just something is going on like this is clearly and something's happening right now, what that is we could all be guessing at, but it doesn't seem organic to me. Yeah, I don't think it's organic, either. Because think about the early interviews he

was doing. And as this whole situation has developed, the earlier ones, were very, very different than the one with Alex Jones recently, right? Where he's like, talking on an Elmo voice and like, has makeshift Puppets and Stuff and he has a ski mask on his face like he's a member of ISIS or so yeah. It's meant to be outlandish what my question is, how did he get from their those early

interviews? Yeah. Where it was much more nuanced what he was saying, not necessarily like agree with everything, right. But it was much more nuanced compared to what was being said during the Alex Jones and a real Yeah, how has that evolution happened? Because he's been around these particular people, Nick Fuentes, and Milo sorry, I tend to say Meelo sometimes because it's like the oval teen equivalent and Chile that my

daughter is obsessed with. So I think it's important to point out that, you know, that what, you know, again, this, who knows if it's organic or not, however it is or not, I don't think it is, it's being used in a way that's obvious, right? Like, what they're showing you right there to me, is the pipeline, what they want you to think is the pipeline of radicalization, right? Here's what happens when you look at the right talking points, you become more and more

extreme. And the point is, I mean, I don't think it's organic. But just to play object objective on either side of this, you could argue that this is a person who's gotten so frustrated by the fact that nobody's hearing what he's out, no one, everyone's out, you taking them out of context. And so he's become more and more, you know, everybody's okay. And I'm trying to be more like, I don't, that doesn't make sense,

right? Because you don't end up going to a point either he thought these things from the very beginning, and he was being soft rolling them out or not either way, right now, this is a person who's making arguments that are subjective in a lot of different ways. You know, and that is not an intelligent argument. You can't broad brush

these things. So I ultimately think it's being like you're saying that there's something coaxing this from behind right now driving this interaction, and it's causing exactly what they want from a larger agenda standpoint that yeah, I'm calling out for three years. Yeah, there's something I definitely think at this point. There's something behind this evolution from point A to point B with point A being the early interviews and point B being the

Alex Jones kerfuffle. And what I worry about now is what happens next. Right? Are they going to institutionalize him because he's too crazy. There have been calls for that on social media people saying like, he looks like he's going to shoot up a mall and stuff for that he's acting like a terrorist and stuff. Well see, this is where I want to bring up the points what here's what's happening simultaneously, is this right?

In Louisiana, a guy just got arrested under anti terrorism laws for making a joke comparing the COVID-19 process to zombie apocalypse, arrested under anti terrorism laws. Now he got let go. But the people that arrested him got qualified immunity for some unknown reason. Nothing happened right in Germany. 91 people over the last so many weeks, just got arrested, interrogated for hate speech. So there's this very clear shift. Even me personally, like my appeal for Twitter got denied

during this amnesty process. And yet the new claim they gave me was hateful conduct and violence, but it was censored under medical misinformation, as you know, in the first place. So there's clearly some kind of shift happening about why you know, into the words or violence realm. That's where I see this going. Now, if he is institutionalized for this, it will only divide things further,

it's going to dry. I mean, I think what this has done, first of all, is divided very strongly, right down the center of the Free Speech argument, right? So now people are divided, but it's going to cause even more of that and it may even create the very kind of civil war mindset that people are, you know, like that. We know they're trying to initiate to point out, I think I would argue I know I believe that's

what I want to bring up to. And what I want to drive home during the course of this conversation is that the war in domestic terror as designed is a war based on pre crime. Right? You and I've talked about this a lot. I reported a lot on this starting in 2019, when William Barr Attorney General under Trump launched a pre crime

program. The justification for that being things like the El Paso shooting, which is I noted in my previous reporting, at the time at MIT Press, Bill Barr seem to miraculously predict not that long before it happened. And that, you know, basically, that event happens and then manufactures consent for this policy that he was already developing at the time, he made

this amazing prediction. And then this program that came out of it is called deep and then around that same time, as you and I have talked about before, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, were pushing for the creation of Harpa, the health DARPA, the first program of which was going to be called safe homes with safe homes being a very long acronym for something sorry, I do not remember off the top of

my head. But it was basically about data mining social media, and using it using AI to determine which accounts showed quote unquote, early signs of neuro psychiatric violence, with the aim of stopping mass shootings before they happen. And a lot of these mass shootings at the time were being framed as the work of white supremacist.

It's an overlap of like social credit with medical pre crime, regular pre crime, like I mean, I just don't see how people can't see how all of these agendas are converging in like one exact point, right? Yeah. And it's so alarming, so that we have the Kanye West situation, being at this point now, because of what's happened very much in line with the changes at Twitter right now.

And then you think, you know, the fact that social media is a key part of this whole war on domestic terror thing, and that pre crime is a is a part of it, and your speech is used to judge you as to whether you may or may not commit a violent crime in the future. Based on the speech, you are saying, all of this stuff needs to be considered when we're talking about what's developing with Kanye West. Now, he is being made a fool of Yes. But he's also being made the poster child for something

right. And it is a model that is going to be used to justify what happens to people after because Arpit Harpa. Under Trump didn't happen. Yeah. But the same, the exact same entity was created under Biden. It's called ARPA H. Right? ARPA das Ah, but it's still the health. DARPA Harpa. Yeah, they just moved the age to the just last sort of pistons. Yeah. And they framed it as

being about cancer. Right. Right. But the same people that designed safe homes and Harpa under the Trump administration designed ARPA h, which is now there, right? And, yeah, no, went oh, I'll just leave it there. Sorry. I was just laughing because it's, you know, it was such an obvious ploy to be like, we made up something new and it's totally not Trump's thing. It's a totally different word.

You know, it's, it's it's funny, but But it's so alarming to me this overlap of, you know, what you're what we're talking about here is not just pre crime, right? Because pre I mean, it is pre crime about, you know, there's this person's violent and going to commit a mass shooting, but now we're seeing it kind of blend with the medical pre crime, too, because they're framing this now as a medical health crisis, right, these people, right, but it's

also overlap with COVID. Because there's arguments about how this can affect your mental health. And I've seen numerous studies about this. So this is huge kind of swinging thing that's undefined until they decide to really define it about how just there's this nebulous problem. And if people are predisposed to violence that may make it worse. And all these conversations are

being had. I want to point out on top of the German thing, Louisiana thing that I just mentioned, in New York City as of the last week, they're now arguing and I've really concerning way that they're going to start involuntarily committing people, homeless people they aren't they frame it, because they're a threat to themselves. If they're mentally ill, and they're like, look, it's a it's a misconception. They need to be violent to be

contented, detained. But what I found really concerning is when you read through what they're talking about, like the actual legislation, or the the point they're writing out, it doesn't really mention homeless people. So they're using that as they frame it. Well, the homeless people are concerned. But all it really translates to is we're writing down that we have a right to involuntarily detain you if we decide you're a threat to yourself. And this is all

happening simultaneously. Right. So I think that's connected. And I think that's what all of this is about. And you're right. And I think he's being set up as the poster child. Yeah. So well, so at the very least, we've already covered a lot of reasons why this does no good. This whole thing as it's playing out right now and why it's really bad. And so I want to turn right now to some of the other stuff that you and I have talked about a lot and I sort of

mentioned earlier. Well, actually a couple things. Thanks. So I want to talk about this Lady Elizabeth Newman, who you and I have talked a lot about. But I also want to make some time to talk about the anti Defamation League, which is playing a big role in stuff going on here and what the deal is with them, and why it is so bad. And why it's an awful idea to have this be the organization that decides what's anti semitic

and what isn't. And to be involved in drafting free speech stuff, one of the reasons being that it's essentially an admitted by many objective sources, even it functions as a lobbying arm of Israel's government. But there's other reasons that I want to get into about why it's not good to have them in this particular role. But first off, I want to talk about Elizabeth Neumann. So I know that you have the clip, and we can throw it in the show

notes. So Elizabeth Newman was testifying at this Senate hearing, I believe, in February 2020. And the the name of the topic, or the name of the hearing, specifically was confronting the rise in anti semitic domestic terrorism. So at this point, even in the testimony, she the there's really not that much evidence or examples of recent anti semitic, specifically anti semitic

domestic terror. There was I think, the Tree of Life synagogue shooting, and there was a lot of talk from a particular Rabbi claiming talking about cyberbullying of his children. Yeah. So those two things in and of themselves are rarely enough to prompt a congressional or Senate hearing, especially in a lot of the things that were referenced were the spate of mass shootings in 2019, that were around the William Barr situation I just talked about, but none of those

were anti semitic. Right? They were framed in the media as white supremacist. But that's not the same thing, right? And even necessarily very subjective on the way they framed these things to based on their perceived points. Yeah, so in this particular Senate hearing, and then she did another one in 2021, I think when she wasn't part of the Homeland Security, or I'm not, I'll have to check up on that.

But she's been around in the media and been a big voice, claiming that Trump pours fuel on the fire of the white supremacist movement, and has been setting a lot of narratives about this for a long time. And it's worth pointing out that before she was in this DHS position, she worked at the Office of National Intelligence, which is, you know, the Director of National Intelligence is

office. And of course, that would be the person who is not just who is basically in charge of all 18 US intelligence agencies. So the top spy in the country, the person that ostensibly oversees the CIA, the NSA and all this stuff. Yeah. So just want to point that out, before we go any further. Because it's, it seems pretty

important. So yeah, so she ended up resigning in April claiming that the Trump administration and Trump is trying it is taking taking steps that are making domestic extremism flourish in the US, and she voted for Biden, and she's talking about all sorts of things to justify her concerns. And she, she harps on over and over again, about anti semitic hate crimes, but again, doesn't really supply a lot of examples about what those hate

crimes are, right. But in this recurring theme that we've been seeing, it's all related. There's so much focus, not just from Newman, but other people like her that say similar things on social media and social media

censorship. So again, I want people listening to this to understand that you can't really divorce the war on domestic terror in this whole you know, creation of this new terror, boogeyman, vanilla, ISIS, whatever it is, it is now you can't separate it from the social media discussion about censorship, or monitoring or

whatever. So one of the things that we have focused on Neuman for, is what I mentioned a bit ago, her prediction that another 911 is building, and we can see it coming, but we can't quite stop it. Meaning, you know, if you're DHS, and he, you know, or work with the intelligence agencies that surveil the American public, if you see it happening and can't stop it, you know, it, you're probably letting it happen, or you're going to plant it and then let

it happen. You know, but yeah, I they obviously would not admit to that. But you know, it's a very telling quote, because this essentially comes to pass with January sixth, not that much later. And then after you have Newman statements, you have things like the transition integrity project that predicted January 6, again, before it happened in the same timeframe, basically saying something was going to happen between Election Day and Inauguration Day that fits the same metrics, right?

Yeah. And one of the top people at the transition integrity project was another former DHS head, Michael Chertoff. So you know, this is all worth paying attention to when you consider the Fed facts about January 6, that there are videos of people being waved in, and that it was basically a setup to, you know, create this whole narrative that there's violent domestic extremists that want to topple the government.

I 100% agree with that, that January 6, was meant to be something that could be used that didn't, I argued the people didn't take the bait on didn't bring guns didn't bring, you know, we have the RE EPS point about, you know, and it was very clear this was being coaxed or we have people from Antifa literally on video saying that they tricked people to go inside. And, you know, now that's inciting the investigation. Right. But there's another point to make here about about Joseph Newman.

And this is the point we made when we first discussed this. And again, I'm Kevin, huge shout out to the election special that you you set up for us on T love right that we did a three part on, I mean, just so prescient, so many things in that were clear that MIT came to pass him on COVID around all of this, I recommend gonna go back and check that out. But we discussed this. And the other point was, even in the way she says that, that we don't know how to stop

it. Well, if they're breaking the law, then you'd be able to stop them. Right. So the point is, even as she made clear in the discussion, these people aren't breaking the rules. They're just finding ways to kind of wink wink, say what they you know what we think they mean, but they're not actually violating the rules of social media. And our argument is, we don't know what to do with that. So their argument is people aren't breaking the law or

breaking the rules. But we think we know what they really mean. And we want to do something about that. So you want new tools? That's part of her Spiel there. Yeah. Meaning that they want to be able to go after people who are saying things they think are dangerous, but aren't breaking any laws?

Yes, exactly. Yes, exactly. And that's where we see that translate into today is that now they're just going well, you know, and again, obviously, Kanye is being inserted in this with the things he said to make the most extreme version of the point. But you got people like us, they're gonna say, well, here, the Israeli government, just, you know, xy and z, this crime they committed, and then that gets translated to violence against Jewish people, right. And that's actually how this is

happening right now. And even it doesn't mean that there isn't actual violence or people that actually commit crimes, but we're being conflated from a hot, you know, from every possible conversation right now, too. If you challenge the narrative, you're now a terrorist. And it's not that hard to see the connection with Biden's executive order and everything else we discussed. And it goes all the way back to what she said right there. And it's all on the surface.

Yeah. So now that we've established the role of Elizabeth Newman here, and sort of setting up this narrative, she was one of the top people at DHS, by the way, when this was going on the Assistant Secretary for counterterrorism and threat prevention at DHS sounds like precrime right there. Yeah. So where is she working? Now? She is currently Chief Strategy Officer for moonshots, which again, remember, moonshot was also the term that was used for Biden for what is now ARPA H.

Yeah, the Cancer Moonshot. Oh, that's ARPA h now, because he friended about being about cancer. But as I mentioned earlier, the same the exact same initiative was about social media, pre crime, preventing violent crime and shootings before in terrorism right before that can happen, which is, again, is an outgrowth of this stuff after 911 like total information awareness. Anyway, we'll get to that later. But you know, the name is interesting.

So what is moonshot? According to her bio, it is a social enterprise, working to end online harms, including a violent extremism, disinformation by applying evidence, ethics and human rights, whatever that means, on the last part. And so let's look at moonshot for a bit. So there, it's not moonshot.com. It's moonshot team.com. If you want to go and check these guys out.

They are partnered with the UN, Facebook, Google, the British Home Office, the British department for Homeland Security, the Australian Department of Home Affairs, and the anti Defamation League. Yeah. Welcome back to the ADL in a second. So this is a pretty interesting company. I would encourage people to go through their sites, they have some pretty interesting case studies

that they highlight here. One is they were contracted by Facebook to evaluate the performance of their search redirect program in the US and Australia. So one of the first case studies they profile on their website, this moonshot company, they say moonshot was contracted by Facebook to evaluate the performance of their search redirect program in the US and Australia and make recommendations for future

deployments. They claim that they're that search redirect was designed to combat violent extremism in dangerous organizations by redirecting users who have entered hate or violence related search queries towards the education towards educational resources and outreach groups. Yeah, so what

did this actually look like? And this is, by the way for people interested if you go to Facebook's website and look Look for the redirect initiative, you can find some more information about it here and also about the team up with moonshot. But people may remember not that long ago that Facebook, for example, was redirecting people who like false Coronavirus information to the World Health Organization website that's part of this redirect initiative they were involved in. So it's not

just violent extremism. Yeah. And then last May, Facebook announced that it was going to take stronger action against people who repeatedly share information on the platform. And part of that was going to be that people who engage with the post will be redirected to something a more accurate source on the topic. And this wasn't just violent extremism. Yeah, this was according to the article COVID-19 vaccines of COVID-19 in general, climate change elections or other

topics. So right away, we can see that this has nothing to do with violent extremism necessarily. This is being used, you know, as a basically as a hammer to go after go after everything. But it's a it's complicated.

Well, it's important to include the other angle to this right, which is, and this is the this is where it's getting more and more convoluted, and more and more concerning for people like us who are just trying to objectively converse about these things is they've, it's, they the way they've included these things under the guise of violence is now disinformation, as we've seen during COVID equals violence or harm, which then is violence, right?

Ultimately, you're scaring people away from taking the injection, or you're scaring people away from doing the right thing about climate change, whatever. And they argue that translates to people dying, therefore, you're now a terrorist. And that's clumsy, but they're doing it. And that's why I feel like these are kind of patched together. And by the way, there's also the info interventions platform with Google, which is like the same exact thing. Have you seen that

one? It's, it's a new thing, but it's the same thing. It's a setup about redirecting people and, you know, having things show them about, you know, basically at this, what do they call it the pre bunking? Right, if you heard them talk about that, it seemed kind of one of the guys that was involved in setting the stage for that is actually one of the cofounders of this moonshot thing. Where's the Google? Yeah, Google program to do this kind

of stuff. But anyway, so it's not just big tech companies like Facebook. Yeah, it's also like the US government. Here, they talked about one they did with the State Department, where they worked with the US Department of State to create tests and build capacity for comedic content in Malaysia. That was again use the quote unquote, redirect method targeting audiences deemed at risk of violence, Salafi

jihadist extremism. And then other corporations aside from the tech industry, teaming up with Lloyds, a massive bank, they selected moonshot to join the Lloyds lab innovation accelerator to help better understand global geopolitical risk. And then nonprofits and the nonprofit Of course, who else would it be they're partnered with the anti Defamation League to analyze us source search traffic in response to the threats posed by white supremacist narratives and

ideology in the US. And the seventh month period, moonshot recorded over 500,000 white supremacist searches and identified important trends that gave a fuller picture of the threats posed to at risk audiences by this online community. Of course, the answer is more censorship. And interestingly, they focus a lot of their attention on not the big platforms, but Gab, Telegram VK outlet What's the truth, social, and gather? And you know, these other you know, supposedly alternative ones bit

shoot? Who's on here? Yeah, yeah. We chat. Also here, and they operate in 30 languages, and they operate in 60 countries. So this is a very interesting group to look at, they definitely deserve some more of our attention. But a lot of work is going on, to set up these continual narratives about what constitutes violent extremism or domestic violent extremism. So if you look at their most recent threat bulletin, which was for October,

not so not that long ago. These are the examples of the domestic violent extremist trends here. So claims of election fraud, again, about 2020, or about the recent midterms are endemic and DVE domestic violent extremist spaces, prompting a high volume of violent hostility towards

Democrat politicians. So if you're really mad at the Democratic Party, or you think they, you know, weren't exactly fair with some stuff in terms of the elections, election fraud happens in the case to benefit But both parties depending on which period of US history you're talking about, or gerrymandering and all other sorts of stuff, right? What was the basis for that, though?

Like, I mean, that's what people would think about the basis is these halfhearted SIOP narratives like January 6, or cultural, the cultural does that say that correctly? Right? Hotel? I think I'm not sure how to say yes, I'm saying correctly, the same point about her being, you know, basically set up by the FBI. And the point, the point is that these aren't sound, right. Where's the example of people who are questioning the election carrying out terrorist acts or

so on? Like I if they informed me if I don't know about it, but how can you make this gigantic argument that people questioning elections, you know, while ignoring the Democrats doing so about the 2020, as I think you just said, it's just it's just silly. And ADL was inherently anti free speech and biased. I mean, very clearly, whether you agree with them or not.

But I mean, this this bulletin here, you know, this is involving top top people, contractors to Silicon Valley, and the government and groups like the ADL. So, you know, I want people to really pay attention to some of the stuff that's in here. So it's not just this claim claim of election fraud. You're inciting violence against Democrat politicians? Yeah. Here's some other examples. For tracted Pay Pal misinformation policy, sparks violent sentiment. Wow. I'm actually pretty

surprised about that. So the fact that Pay Pal retracted their misinformation policy, where they're going to take $2,500 out of your PayPal account, if they decide you have misinformation that was even criticized by former top executives at pay, pal. Yeah, that is deemed as sparking violent sentiment. It says violent threats and slurs are being directed at the

company and its employees. So again, incitement to violence, and then also claims the policy was developed in partnership with the anti Defamation League or prompting anti semitism and calls for violence against the ADL. All right, we're not going to stop there. Twitter being framed as a, quote, battleground of extremist beliefs a space to spread extremist views to quote unquote, normies. Ilan must take over Twitter is being celebrated by domestic violent extremists. Yeah,

yeah. I mean, let me I'll comment anytime you want me to every single one. Well, the next one's a doozy too. So if you want to just go ahead and express your feelings. Okay, run up to the midterm witnesses first Q anon posts since June. Yeah. But here's the kicker. It's at the end of the paragraph. In broader domestic violent extremist spaces, reactions to the drops are more mixed with many alleging that Q anon is a quote, psychological

operation. Why? Oh, domestic, violent extremist, and Q anon is a psyop. That's not good. How does that they say, Isn't that insane? Yeah, like BuzzFeed, like, logically speaking. So you're saying so these people are being radicalized by Q Anon, which is one of their arguments, but yet people that don't believe it are also being able to think it's a psyop? Or also, yes, yes. Good. Let's just cover all the bases, right. People that don't even know what exists are also being radicalized.

You have to think it's real but bad. Yeah. It's, it's crazy, or Yeah, I don't know. I mean, we can laugh about it. Because there's no logic to that you're just making it both sides of the argument and saying, Well, if it involves the queue discussion, you're being radicalized. And it's, it just doesn't make any sense. But at the same point, with all of this, you can play this game and anything the EDL talks about, in

my opinion, sorry, go ahead. I know you're thinking, here's the last thing so we can bring everything full circle. threats against the Jewish community are at their highest levels in six months, increasing 29% compared to a three month baseline. So before I go to the next part, they don't provide any information on how the threat level is calculated, of course, or what they deem threats to be. Or, you know, what the amount of threats actually is? Yeah, just the

highest in six months. Anyway, after that, it says coma, peaking on October 17, following a series of anti semitic social media remarks by rapper Kanye West. Of course, to your point before it, there's plenty of things that are wrapped up in the argument of what's anti symmetric that are provably not, at the very least they like you said things that are like even arguably not are debatably, white supremacist, but they call it that and then it gets scooped up by the ADL

and this list. They don't really define right? Not to be clear. Are there any cement people obviously are there racist people? Yes, that but to just broad stroke all of these as what they want them to be and then not give you any metrics. The point is, if you say these things and go will prove what you're saying ADL, they call you an anti Semite, right? It's the same game. It says there's no way to make these arguments or to try to defend or dispute what

they're saying. It's a game that's being played and just scooping anti to Kanye West kind of makes our point, doesn't it? This is being used. Yes. It's definitely being used. Yeah. Because why else would this the These people like be bringing it up and focusing on it, highlighting it out of the biggest domestic terrorist threats in the month of October, a major contractor for multiple governments of Silicon Valley, and very powerful and heavily funded quote, unquote, nonprofits.

You know, what scares me the most at this point is now just hypothetically speaking, that this would be the perfect moment, if I were a an intelligent apparatus to execute some kind of a false flag to justify the entire thing. And say, This is what his words just led to, there's your proof of words lead to violence, and everything spins out of control. I hope that hasn't happened. But that's where this seems to logically go.

Well, since you and I have been watching this semester domestic terror thing unfold, you know, for a long time. You know, it seems almost inevitable. It'll happen at some point, but we can't exactly pinpoint when it will happen. I guess we're all waiting for the next Elizabeth Newman to say, we're seeing the next January 6, and we're seeing it build and we can't quite Stop it until you give us the tools to arrest people for pre crime, which I would argue they don't even need. The

next one was a new one. Because that's what they need would be I mean, to the point we always make, too, it doesn't even have to be manufactured. It could just be some random thing that happens. And they go I know, I was joking, because I know man tipped us off that something was gonna come soon about that. Right. So I know, I knew I was just building on that. But the point being that ultimately, that we're, everything's in place, it doesn't even have to

be something that's created. It could just be waiting Rahm Emanuel styling, what never let a good crisis go away. Suddenly, this is what they want to be. Right. I mean, and that's, that's the scariest part about this is it's that simple. And people that already want to agree with whatever they say is racist will jump on that bandwagon without even thinking twice.

Yeah. Well, let's keep in mind, too, that the rhetoric in this country about things like race and like white supremacy are just like in some circles of the country are completely divorced from reality. There is a segment of the population that thinks every Republican voter is an oxy. Yes. And literally thinks that which is actually pretty ridiculous that to your point, it's absurd, and you're disconnected from reality. It's absolutely, but it's not just

Republicans either, right? I mean, it's the same point they make about anybody who questions vaccine efficacy, you're just suddenly a terrorist all of a sudden, sure. Well, remember the story? I don't know if other people do, but I'm sure you do. Ryan and 2020. There were these claims that white supremacist, we're going to weaponize COVID. That's right, become biosecurity

threat. All right, that they were going to like Nazis were going to start licking your doorknob to give you it sounds insane now, but these were real headlines back in 2020. I'm actually really glad you brought that up that see this is this is something you and I were talking about. And and I still think we're in on this track the the overlap of the vanilla ISIS and the COVID narrative, and we were almost kind of there, right? It's just become, you know, hate speech, misinformation from every

possible angle. So it's interesting that that we, you know, that was one of those earliest predictions that that was kind of going to overlap, what I actually thought was going to happen was going to be some kind of a bio attack blamed on a foreign country working with the maggot group, or blah, blah, blah, just guessing, but either way this pans out and kind of leads in the same direction. So very interesting. I'm glad you brought that up. So there's been some weird

overlap. And I think we've sort of referenced this a little bit earlier in the conversation how there is this overlap between quote unquote white supremacy and quote unquote, the anti vaccine movement or COVID-19, you know, questioning the the official narrative and there's been articles like the one I have up right now and so it's called alt medicine but like all spelled like all dash right,

it's like all dash medicine. And the subtitle is how the far right weaponizes vaccine hesitancy and it says all medicine groups have managed to monetize their opposition to COVID-19 vaccines. So now we've got we've gone from all right to all medicine, right, but they're framing it in those same sorts

of metrics. And I think most people like don't even understand what all right is supposed to mean and so here all medicine are people that don't necessarily believe the official narrative and you're seeing you know, like these laws in California for example, where like, if you don't toe the line, and you're a doctor, you're

like, screwed basically. So you have to you know, the state decides what is, you know, the science basically, cannabis similar this has happened, I think, I think British Columbia passed passed or something to build their hands. This particular article accuses the quote unquote, anti vaccine movement and specifically refers to people, organizations like children's health defense, they say they dab and extremist hatred, including let's see. Here's a here's a couple

sentences from this article. It says, However, once the anti mass protests of 2020 have evolved into the anti vaccination protests of 2021, the far rate has managed to successfully groom traditional anti Vax communities, turning a public health concern into a political problem of far right extremism. Wow, this anti Vax anti government far right

nationalist protest. medley is evident anywhere from Canada to Australia, where COVID-19 Anti lockdown protests have turned to violence and conspiracy driven anti semitism. Wow. How does that even get roped in? Because they say in France, the ubiquitous yellow stars used by protesters to denounce that unvaccinated status became a stark reminder of how the pain of holographic Holocaust survivors can be easily appropriated. But I'm sure they want reference at various

Shirov. They're very outspoken Holocaust survivor about the parallels of what the civil rights abuses that we saw on COVID-19 with what she experienced in her younger life. So this is a real quick, I mean, this is the fundamental kind of like juvenile, or maybe just ignorance of the corporate media, you're gonna fundamentally choose to misunderstand or actually misunderstand the whole premise of why they're wearing that star, right? You just argue that it's anti semitic, because

they're doing so. But their entire point is that they are the ones being persecuted. And they're so essentially aligning with the history of that idea. Like it just it's counterintuitive. Like they don't, the point is their audience doesn't care. They're so dumbed down and willing to gobble up whatever they put in front of them. They don't even realize their own point proves that they're wrong. I just think that's incredible. It's it's a little microcosm of the

conversation. But yeah, but if you're looking at this on the broader agenda, you see how the war on domestic terror is not about white supremacism like you've been

told. And it's not about anti semitism, like they'd like to say it's really they'll look for Anyway, like this rather creative quote unquote, article, I was just reading fun from anything they don't like any ideology, they will find a way to make it fit into their narrative of these are dangerous domestic terrorists that threaten the public good or public health. Or, you know, well think of how it ever terribly that aged, right.

That's what 2021 That article, look at where we are right now whether lockdowns were clearly bad or the injections are clearly hurting people when people like mucholder are standing up. Everyone's kind of now starting to I'm sorry, I made a mistake. These are bad. And yet that's still there. Oh, Amnesty says the Atlantic Yeah. All right, exactly. Please flip Let's just all forget and move forward. It's like I don't know about. Yeah. But again, returning to

what we talked about earlier. So if far, right, extremism is bad. Why can't we talk about people like the mayor Kahane, followers in the Jewish power party write out exactly how to become in charge of the State of Israel? Right? Well, I mean, the important point to make is these, the leading human rights organizations in the world are outspokenly, calling them an apartheid state that sell them literally says they're a Jewish supremacy, government. I mean, that's their terms as leading

human rights organizations. So you can't call these anti semitic when you're coming from a point of that they're oppressing people, and it's coming from an apartheid state position. And then the point about the ADL openly, and it's not just the Jewish power party, it's the one that I can remember off top my head, but there's

other groups. And you may probably know, the other groups Alongside this, this current coalition that have been elected that are, like, deemed racist and extremist even by these Jewish groups. And yet, now they've been elected. And that's we're not allowed to point that out. I mean, you overlap that with the hypothetical, right?

You can say that Wink wink, here's what he really means over here in the US when he says XY and Z. But it's still even if they're, even if that's true, it's still convoluted over here, they're outwardly saying these things, and we're not allowed to point that out. I think that's what you're saying. Right? I mean, it's just, it's inherently contradictory. And why doesn't the ADL say that? Why isn't that what they're focusing on? You know, it's

Yeah, bias. So I think now is probably a good time to talk a little bit about the anti Defamation League, its roots and why it's not a good organization to have here. But in before we get to that point, the ADL, if you look at their website, and you type in nationalism, you're going to get a lot about how all ethnic national nationalism is bad. White Nationalism is awful. Black Nationalism is awful, and so on and so forth. Right. But if you look up Zionism, yeah.

And their complaints about how, you know, they allege that anti Zionism and anti semitism are one in the same. Yeah, they will say, how do they define Zionism? Oh, well, it's just Jewish nationalism. So Jewish nationalism is okay, right. But every other type of nationalism is not if you're against ethnic nationalism, you should be against all forms of ethnic nationalism, right? Otherwise, you are supporting one ethnic nationalism over all of that. And that's technically ethnic

supremacism, isn't it? Right? Yes, yes. Or no. So I got a curiosity. How do they rope in Ukrainian nationalism in this conversation today? They probably don't have a part. Right. So about that. Which is such a huge big, you know, elephant in the room in the conversation, especially since you know what a bigger bigger elephant in the room is? Why has Israel's government funded as

off battalion? Exactly, that's exactly where I was going with that in 2018 Haaretz even wrote about that where their own people were like, stop funding Nazis. Now they act like that's not what's really happening. It's it's current what currently is, as you know, it's incorrect.

Whoa. So anyway, the anti Defamation League who's who's really behind them, who funds them, where do they come from their parent organization has been I breath if you have read or plan to read my books, one nation under blackmail, you will learn about but my birth to an extent. But my breath was founded and like the night the 19th century, it is basically follows the same model as Freemasonry, but is a Jewish fraternal organization, but also admittedly a secret

society. And I mean, if you go through the The New York Times archive, you will find, you know, articles and hybrids from like, the 1870s, and stuff that openly call it a secret society and what have you. And, you know, sort of talk about the founders and it just like, you know, Freemasonry, it has different lodges and all of that, the first of which were, you know, in sort of the New England area, and have expanded across the country since then.

And they come up in the book a lot, because a lot of the people I end up writing about in the book are involved with Banai breath are on their Board of Overseers. And a lot of these people that are on their Board of Overseers are people that are provably as I noted in the book tied up with organized crime, intelligence, or both. So you know, if you want the details on that, I'll refer you to the books and not take up too much

time here today. What the anti Defamation League is an outgrowth of that that was created in the early 20th century, as a result of the fall out, or rather, the lynching of a man named Leo Frank, Leo Frank was lynched after he was found. Well, after he didn't go to prison for the murder, and rather apparent rape and murder of an underage girl that I believe worked in the factory, he either owned or managed, that entire trial is insane, and

really crazy stuff. So you know, there's been a lot to sort of try and sanitize the details of that over the years. But I would encourage people to try and find the primary source stuff about that trial. And you know, why things happen the way they did, but basically, the local community felt like felt like

Leo Frank was guilty. And there were lots of reasons that came out in the trial to think he was guilty, regardless of how you feel about the particular event or the particular people involved, you know, so that but the claim from the ADL is that this effort to go after Frank wasn't because the community felt like a guilty murderer and pedophile. Got off, you know, easy because of his powerful connections, because he was a B'nai Brith. Member. Right. Um, you know, it's been claimed that

it was antiSemitism. And there's been movies that have been made with financing from some of these networks to sort of paint Leo Frank as the victim here. Right, right. But anyway, that's sort of the whole situation that led Banai Brett's decree, the anti Defamation League, right. So the anti Defamation League, you know, frames itself as defending against, you know, not just, you know, defamation of the Jewish community, but all sorts of different communities. But it's, again, important to

look at who funds it. And if you look at the people that have historically been funding it, it's the Bronfman family, Leslie Wexner is historically a big funder of it, and you know, people sort of in those, those networks, yeah. So here's the problem, as I see it, if you're like me, and you want to write a book, about someone like Jeffrey Epstein and his connections, and you end up talking about the Bronfman family, for example, who have provable ties to organized crime and lots of

subjectivity over the years. So I make criticisms that are fact based and reasonable. But the Bronfman family, and the ADL can come in and call me an anti Semite. Right? Even people that were Jewish, that have been that I've written about the Bronfman family in the past were called anti semitic by the Brahmins, or they were called self hating Jews or, you know, stuff like this. Yeah. But essentially, the ADL comes in to help defend interests or people who are tied to its funders, just like a lot

of other organizations. I don't think that's exclusive to the ADL. But the problem is when you conflate someone who is actually involved in crime and reporting on their provable involvement in crimes to anti semitism, you're essentially conflating the activities of this criminal who happens to be Jewish to the entire Jewish community. Right, great point, which is, they're essentially doing what they claimed by itself is creating anti semitism. Right,

exactly. And which could very well be by design, but you don't have to say things like that either. Because you you're insinuating that they may do that would be anti semitism. It's everything they can claim. So in my opinion, the ADL conflates uses anti semitism to its advantage in that sense, so maybe it will, on occasions point out real troubling examples. anti semitism and other times it will conflate anti Zionist rhetoric, which is fundamentally political and not

racist. There are anti semitic Jews, for example, right, a significant community of anti anti Zionist Jews. And actually before World War Two most Jews were anti Zionist. So it's not at the anti Zionist Zionism is not inherently anti semitic at all. Well, exactly. But you can make examples of this about how contradictory they are, or

inherently hypocritical. I mean, I personally think this is an entity that is doing things for political reasons, and not necessarily even maybe at all about defending in a certain group. I mean, you could point out that they'll openly say that wells Alinsky is Jewish, therefore, he's not what you say he is, how can you even make an argument like that with what the history we already know? Like? There are examples of Jewish people working with the Nazis?

Like, it's just so silly that you can make that kind of broad argument or what about the Ethiopian Jewish population, they get openly, Segre, you know, attacked? And like there's just no consistency to their

argument. Right. But the one of the things that I think is interesting today to overlap this with the fact that they are really more about controlling a narrative than actually defending the reality or facts is, I don't know if you saw this new documentary that came out on Netflix actually came out today or yesterday, I don't have

Netflix. Well, it's called Farhan. And it's an apparently Israel's just completely worked up about it, calling it all like literally, it shows, in my opinion, and I've touched base with a few people that, you know, really understand the history, they think it was really well done, that it really does show about the NOC bot or something. Yeah, exactly. It was about what happened to the

Palestinians. And and the problem is that they're acting like it's fake, but the stuff they showed in the duck documentary, or is literally still happening today, you know, and it's, you know, they're coming out and tacking this as anti semitic, and blah, blah, blah. But you know, you can provably show that this is even currently still happening. So it's just there's no consistency. There's no facts in this, in my opinion, it's really just about controlling a

narrative. And, you know, you could argue that there are people that work with the organization that try to do some good, I don't know if I can

prove that. But ultimately, that's something you could say about any of the organizations even something like a foreign policy group, but to the point, these people don't have the interest of a group in mind, in my opinion, I think it's about selling us on the idea that what they want us to think is racist when they want us to, to x y&z what we're talking about today create words or violence, right to make the the billionaires and the people like the Bronfman to the

Wexner. And some of these people I talked about in the book that are that are major funders of the ADL, if you look at the other organizations they've created, like birthright, for example, or the mega group or things like this, what they're most, a lot of their quote unquote, philanthropy is focused on instilling Jewish Americans and also Israeli Jews with this particular political identity and a lot of it for these guys, these funders of the ADL that I'm talking about here is is

very much Extreme Pro Zionism. very extreme ethnic nationalism, ultimately, at the end of the day, and you even have, you know, key members of this of this group here like Michael Steinhardt saying things like, I think that he, he's an atheist, but he says Jews need to replace their religion with Zionism, worship of the State of Israel,

right. And you have these politicians coming to power right now that, you know, since Likud has been in power on, you know, more or less since the 70s or so, a lot of people have pointed out that the right has really dominated Israeli policy political discourse for a very long time. But the current group to come to power is even more to the right of that paradigm. Alarmingly so and significantly.

So yeah, yeah, I should say, I really hope people take the time to look into that specifically, because we could do an entire show on the the outwardly spoken extremist perspectives of the people that are currently in power in Israel, more so than we've seen before. Like you can show videos of that in the past. But this is a whole nother level. It's like we pointed out even these groups that are pointing out racism elsewhere have in the past called these groups themselves, like

borderline terrorists. I mean, it's just incredible. This gets voted in. I mean, again, I put the caveat in if that's really what happened. I doubt whether I tend to question most of these democracies today, personally, but that's another discussion. Yeah. I mean, I don't I don't really know the situation there. Because again, I don't I don't really follow geopolitics as closely as I as I used to, because of everything that's gone on in the past couple

years. And you know, sort of the arc that might work is sort of has sort of taken but as I see it, the ADL is sort of there to shepherd speech with a particular political agenda

behind it. Absolutely. And a part of this political agenda is laundering the reputations and protecting criticism of powerful actors who engage in criminal activity, whether that are, you know, people in Israeli intelligence or whether it's, you know, people like the Bronfman, some people like that, that's creating an atmosphere where legitimate criticism of them is, you know, deemed

racist, right. And it's not what's racist, is to say that people that are basically in the As the remnants of what was once the Jewish mob, the successors to people like Mayor Lansky, and whatever, that calling them out for engaging in criminal activity is, you know, conflating people like that with regular Jewish people. Right? What do you need of itself is racist? Which is not? That's what that's what they do, though. Yeah, that's it do

exactly. Yeah. So, um, I don't know what else you want to cover

today. But I did really quickly want to want to make a return sort of, of what we're discussing in the beginning and make a point that if this was not about setting up Kanye West for complete destruction, and to further this particular narrative we've been talking about today, there is a very nuanced case to make that criticism from the conservative side that criticizes the US relationship with Israel, and, you know, Zionism, in its influence on American foreign policy, and in even domestic

policy in the United States. And I just, you know, for people that are listening, I just think it's important to point out some of these key points. And one of the, I think most important points out of this is it is documented that as part of the US special relationship, quote, unquote, between the US and Israel, the US provides Israel with sensitive US military

technology. Since the 90s people in the US national security state, the early 90s, have been going off on how Israel has been sending all of that tech stuff to China, to undermine our US national security, then you have the case of the PROMIS software scandal, confirmed Israeli intelligence even involved Robert Maxwell, put backdoors into sensitive US nuclear net laboratories install nuclear research, you have that happening, involved the same Israeli intelligence network

responsible for Jonathan Pollard. There is a numerous cases of Israeli intelligence engaging in espionage against the US national security state, and then using that sensitive stolen data. And and giving it to our best and civil adversaries. If you are a conservative concerned about the rise of China, and the these types of things. You have to look at this stuff. You can't

look away from it. But for some reason, you know, people do are we going to subsidize the Israeli military when they're undermining US national security? Right? Are we going to continue to subsidize not just their military, but also they get lots of other subsidies from the US from their men? For like economic stuff and industry? And what that but they have low standard of living that's comparable to the Netherlands? Why are we pouring billions over

there? Exactly. It's still, you know, so I mean, from a conservative standpoint, there's a lot to criticize. And if the people around Kanye West were, quote, unquote, serious about starting a real conversation about some of the issues here, they would calculate, make calculated moves, like any

political campaign, right? You sit down, you talk about the talking points, you plan them out, you plan out your PR, and all of this stuff, and people write speeches for you, and set up talking points for you for

interviews and whatever. And since he's had this quote, unquote, campaign staff, he's gone from, you know, trying to have, you know, his version of a quote, unquote, normal conversation, I guess, to, you know, having a ski mask on his head and talking to talking as a makeshift puppet and unelma voice on Alex Jones.

Yeah. Right. I mean, let's not forget as well, that that Netanyahu during Trump's administration, will just his government, let's say was, was openly caught and covered by the corporate media for spying on Congress, like during, or excuse me, the White House? Yeah, the stingray devices around the White House. Right, right. In I mean, was that did you? Did you include that? If you missed it? No, no, I hadn't referenced that. Yeah. Okay. Okay. No. And so that's an

important. I mean, it's incredible that that just got dismissed, right? Or, I mean, any number of examples like that, that show you that? There's, I mean, you know, what's a great example of the ignorance around the China point is that the, in the injections of warp speed from Trump's polling, warp speed, operation, warp speed, that code genetic code for that came directly from the Chinese through the two Maderna on the rest of the companies through the genetic sequencing platform, before they

claim they've been isolated. And yet the argument is China bad guy, and the question what they're doing yet the entire impetus for the entire program still rests on the genetic sequence coming from China. You know, the point is that the whole conservative mentality around China bad guy, or how they perceive these things are like we're pointing out or based on talking points. And the reality of this is usually far

more nuanced. And I think, to your point about this is that if until we're ready to have an actual conversation about these things, and we're only going to get the extremist sides being put forward by the manipulators. Right. And you're right, though, like if he really wanted to make this an actual run, which I don't think they do, right, they would have meant they would have been more calculating about

their moves here. And I think anybody honest can see that the way that this is being presented is, I mean, again, it's my opinion, but it seems meant to be inflamed. matory. Right. And I think that's your whole point that that wouldn't be the way you'd go about this. If you were truly trying to inform people or actually run for president candidacy, you know, but I think that we're being set up. I really do. Yeah. I mean, that's how it

seems to me. And you know, what I've talked about a lot, especially in the context of my book is how government right now is organized crime and its transnational. I talk a lot about in the book, for example, how there were like Robert Maxwell, obviously, because of Glenn Maxwell and Jeffrey

Epstein. Robert Maxwell, according to top people in the US FBI before he died set into motion, a global coalition of organized crime, he united organized crime groups all the way from Japan, to Eastern Europe to the Middle East and Europe and beyond. Yeah, yeah. He's credited with doing that. One of his key business partners was a guy named Semion Mogilevich, who's Ukrainian. But this of course, you know, was when the Soviet Union was still

around. And he, Robert Maxwell with Israel's approval, got Mogilevich Israeli passports, which enabled him to take his organized crime activities, not just to Israel, but to the United States and beyond. Right, allowed him to go global. Right. So, you know, if people want to talk about specifically conservatives about the US having a deep state, Israel provably has the equivalent of that, yeah, in a huge way. And their involvement with some of these organized crime networks

in Ukraine is considerable. So when people want to find answers as to why Solinsky is allowing airsoft battalion to operate, why Israel is giving you no money to as off battalion, all of this, you will probably find the answer and the fact that organized crime is in charge of multiple governments around the world. And, you know, yeah, I don't think they want people looking into these types of networks, obviously, if not, they are organized crime

entirely, right. I mean, I remember you and I talking about this, you know, a while back and the interesting points about, you know, whether, whether, you know, just for and who knows if its entirety or not, but whether at some point, and this was all based on your research about the overlap of the Jewish mob at the time with, you know, the, the during prohibition and the overlaps, and all these different timeframes about whether the organized crime essentially took over the

government and just realize, well, hey, if we play the game the right way, we can just become the government and they're playing the same game. They're just better at it, you know? Yeah. And I think genuinely, that's where we are today, you know, whether it's exactly that or not, it's, they've essentially become that, but I wonder whether it is actually that, you know, and they just decided amongst themselves, we're just no longer gonna tell on each other. You know, it's very interesting

conversation. Yeah. I mean, I know you do get into that in your book, right. I recommend people check that out. If I haven't said that before. I think it's yeah, no, I do. I do talk a lot about that stuff in the book. But you know, as I see it, it's not just, you know, this particular group that got in bed with intelligence and took over a lot of political power for itself

has evolved over time. So originally, it was sort of this National Crime Syndicate, as it was called, which was mostly a coming together of the Jewish mob and the Italian Mafia. But you look at it over time, and most of the Italian Mafia guys got taken out by none other than Rudy Giuliani in the 1980s. And to me, that was consolidation of control, they framed it as the end of organized crime, the United States. And that's not

the case. Because you have people like I prove, basically, you know, I make a really convincing case, in my opinion, of course, in the book that people like Leslie Wexner, well, actually, unless the Webster's case, it's a documented organized crime connection, he has documented ties to organized crime that you just can't, unless you want to say that, like local police in Ohio, and you know, even beyond that, at the state level are full of

shit. You know, they say it, that's not nothing for me, you know. So, you know, the organized crime stuff is still around. And it's definitely, you know, once enough Americans realize the government is organized crime, I feel like something has to happen, you

know what I mean? But if we're going to cheap in the actual discourse, and the actual reality, to you know, Kanye West, going around, and like screaming about stuff on Alex Jones's show, like, no one's gonna bother to engage with like, actual research about the powers that be that's exactly what I think this is being done for I and I know, this is something that not everyone agrees with. But you know, I've been saying this

before COVID. But clearly, through this whole illusion, I think things have shifted quite dramatically. And maybe it is just because of you. And I talked about how clumsy this was, and how it sort of forced people to realize that they're being lied to you whether Ukraine or any other thing we've seen since the beginning of this, but that, that most people are seeing through this. And I think these are acts of desperation to try to shock people back into place, you

know, like that. When's the last time we saw this kind of madness, from all different angles? I mean, whether it's the great reset, or COVID, or Ukraine or Kanye, I mean, it's just everything's spinning out of control. And we all feel that, but I think it's not. I mean, part of it is by design, I think to drive people back into their place, because people just aren't really buying everything

right now. Even people that were moments ago, buying things are kind of like, I'm just gonna pause for a minute, you know, I'm not going to take that A new booster. I don't know what's going on right now. People are listening more to people like you and information like this than ever before. That's what I think this is all meant to do. Yeah, yeah, it's really possible. I mean, it's

definitely possible. So really quick, I want to give a quick overview before we wrap up about some of this some other stuff go a little farther back than we've already gone about the domestic terror stuff. And where this all really comes from. So in the book, right, I write a lot about Iran Contra and different parts of it and the particular power Nexus that was responsible for that. Yeah. So you have people like Jeffrey Epstein and his crowd in that mix. More specifically, Robert Maxwell.

And that side of it, you have Israeli intelligence, you also have US intelligence in the CIA. And you have a lot of other actors, but the main players you could probably argue, are us and Israeli intelligence. Yeah. When Iran Contra is going on one of the key guys involved in it, who people are probably familiar with Oliver North, was testifying as part of the investigations into Iran Contra, and he's asked essentially, about the main core database, and then the line of questioning

is shut down. Right. It's not allowed to be answered. Yeah. So you just record date? Sorry. Yeah. Yeah, there's clips around of that particular exchange. And they're very instructive about, you know, what part of what was going on here? So basically, main cord was created between with the involvement of US intelligence and also Israeli intelligence. Yeah. All right. It was a creation of a database of perceived dissidents, American dissidents who had

committed no crime. Yeah. But they were deemed unfriendly, quote, unquote, and could be rounded up in the event of a vaguely defined national emergency. This is part of what is known as the continuity of government protocols. Right. Yeah. In the event that there's an attempt to overthrow the United States government, basically. Or but I mean, you would assume it would be that

right. But no, it's also, as they wrote it, if too many people protest against the US military intervention abroad, well, this can be activated. Yeah, you and I've talked about this a few times, I think and like the, you know, the Reagan shadow government overlap. And you know, how that played a part in this. And, you know, it's very, it's very interesting that there, there's numerous times to

this been discussed. But I think it's most telling that this was briefly pointed out, I think the continuity of government point, during COVID, for example, or during a few different things, but the point that you make there about protesting foreign governments, I mean, we're seeing this happen all over, where if you just put like for here's a good overlap, like pointing out how CNN is calling the protests in China freedom fighters, but when we protest COVID lockdowns in this country

were terrorists, you know, it's all subjective. And I think the real point is they can choose and pick and choose where and how they want to apply this, you know, and ultimately, it just makes you know, you're if you're challenging the government narrative, you are on this list. I think that's pretty obviously clear today. And I think the problem is that it's already been exposed that a lot of media personalities, and so on, are on

these kinds of lists. And it's, it's, it's Yeah, so, um, to follow that up, right. So main core never went away. It has continued to be active. It's still active today. Yeah. During 911, it was seen being accessed on White House computers. The last mainstream, while I'd say rather mainstream adjacent reporting, on Main, on main core was from like, 2008. And in that reporting, they basically talked about how main court had developed to basically be it

profiles, Americans, right. But everything the NSA, or other intelligence agencies have sucked out, or all the data they've liked, you know, certain surveilled and obtained from you, through illegal surveillance programs is under your profile, right? It's all there, like your financial activity, all your search history, whatever, all that stuff's on there. Whether it comes from Facebook, Google, it doesn't really matter. Right?

That's all there. Okay. So the the way to turn these masses of data into actionable intelligence and decide who gets into main core is not is Palantir. Yeah, just Peter TEALS. Company. But let's go back a second. So 911 happens, right? And there's, you know, this desire, apparently, to use main core, and there's this previous agenda. Developed in the Reagan administration. There's obviously a lot of overlap between George W. Bush's administration and the Reagan

era, right? To further this idea of domestic terror, pre crime, stop terror before it starts, and so on. This led to the development of the total Information Awareness Program at DARPA, which was going to be run by John Poindexter, who was one of the top co conspirators in Iran Contra who was actually indicted and convicted but of course, pardoned by William Barr. You 1991 So he didn't actually serve prison time I

don't pollution. But anyway, he's the guy that decided to put in front of the and in charge of this, what a coincidence, right. And total information awareness is all about stopping pre current, you know, stopping terrorist attacks before they happen. But not just that. There was, as we've talked about a bio surveillance program that was about stopping pandemics before they happen. Wow. So ahead of its time, not really. What happened with COVID was just part of an older agenda, right?

But total information awareness gets shut down, because people point out it will in privacy in America and profile innocent Americans. And it's, you know, what a dictatorship would do. That doesn't stop them. Instead, Peter Thiel teamed up with the CIA to resurrect it as Palantir. And one of the key people involved in that was Richard Perle, who has a very complicated and very disturbing relationship with Israeli intelligence going back to I

believe, the 70s. And of course, he was in the Reagan administration in the Department of Defense at the time, he was advising Peter Thiel about this. And then Peter Thiel at the same time, develops and helps put Facebook on the map by get by, you know, turning them into the corporation, they are today becoming their first big funder, right, which was Facebook itself was a successor to a related DARPA program called Lifelog, which is also about profiling you and deciding how naughty you

are. Right, exactly. So these agendas still exist. And this desire, what we're seeing now we talked about the more recent history, the domestic terror program in 2019, and pre crime and Harpa and ARPA H, and all of that earlier, but this has been going on a very long time, you can arguably trace it even before the 80s back to the Vietnam era, which actually Yasha Levine and surveillance Valley does quite convincingly.

But there has been an effort by the national security state to use the same policies are really, you know, dissident elimination programs that they initially have done, you know, in most cases have done abroad, the Phoenix program in Vietnam, Operation Condor in Latin America, the the quote unquote Deep State, which I don't like that term, I prefer the national security state because it's more accurate. I have wanted to use that in America for a very long

time. They need the pretext to do it, they need people to think the threat is enough. And they need a certain amount, not the entire population, not even a majority, but a segment of the population to support them. And from what we've been talking about today, it seems like Kanye West because of his visibility. And now in recent iterations, the outrageousness of his behavior is going to be part of the pretext there. But I don't think it's going to necessarily

be just him. But I think this is going to be utilized towards these ends, however, that develops remains to be seen. But I would encourage people listening, we should not be feeding the rhetoric about haha, Kanye West is so insane, blah, blah, blah, there is obviously something that is using this for

very sinister ends. And we should be bringing attention to that information to the into those agendas, because it's intimately tied up with the efforts to completely eliminate free speech and it states, particularly online, at least first, right, and then usher in what they have been trying to do for decades now, a pre crime system.

Completely agree. I mean, I would argue just like with the great reset agenda that we've just read, reached this moment now where the technological advancements are enough to where they can execute these things like whether, you know, the total information surveillance and so on, you know, was clearly continuing, but now they're at a point where this can be executed, I think and achieved in a certain level that weren't that wasn't possible, then they're going back to the Reagan

administration. Right. And so that's kind of where I think we are and I think you're right, I think this is all being lined up perfectly. And whether they know this or not, are being used and we just need to be very careful

about that. Because these actions are being you know, they're pointing at the comments of people in the the the things they say alongside this as the bigger picture and showing how people agree or don't agree and this will be used against us very clearly, you know, and no, like we I am I'm a free speech absolutist and I've made that clear, but it doesn't mean they still won't use that against us right so and I'm I'm absolutely against self censorship either, but this conversation is going

to be used to censor your speech. And you know, we need to fight back against that. So thanks. Thank you for having this conversation today. I think this is important. Yeah, thanks for being here. Ryan. So why don't you let people know where they can find you and follow your work? Oh, yeah, this the last American vagabond.com That's that's the central hub for all of this you know, whatever else you want. We're not you know, my daily

Wrap Up Show. Now rebuffed is now part of Eli we're doing the pirate stream pirates free media discussion, which you and I should talk more about, but the the everything you'd find her to live will be there but we're on every possible channel out there. So check us out. And I know you've been censored a lot on Twitter, do you want to share your current Twitter handle? Your telegram channel? Anything? Anything like that?

Since you know, I know that you have expressed like, since you've been deleted from a lot of the big platforms, people are like, do you have just disappeared? And you're like, No, I'm still here. Right? So do you have like a link tree that gets updated to where all the different stuff is anything like anything like that, that you want to share? Yeah, as well, same point. That's why I you know, try to make it as the last American vagabond.com is the best place

to go. You'll find all the links to wherever we currently are. The pirate channels we're currently using. If you don't understand that, just look up pirate, the hashtag pirate, you know, Tila pirate streams, and you'll understand what we're doing. But yeah, it's after hours live with the after hours, like underscore live. It's just one. It's Brian Richmond channel. He's letting me use

now. But we're going pointing out right now how we're being just denied the appeal to our old plot, you know, old to a vagabond account. So we'll see how that pans out. But telegram I believe just just search the last American Vagabond most these platforms, and it should pop up unless it's being suppressed. But anywhere else you look, you'll find it into that. But yeah, any I think right now we should be doing our best to lean into alternative platforms. Just on a side note.

No, I definitely agree with that. And RSS feeds. If you're not familiar with that to go take a look, that's probably the best, you know, best way to really develop your own news feed and not have to depend on a very corrupt social media company to do that for you. Absolutely. Yeah. It's funny. Somebody asked me to put that back on our website a long time ago. And I was like, really RSS like, now I'm realizing I'm glad we did. Because it's you know,

it's been there for so long. But a lot of people don't do that anymore. It's just like a direct feed right to your website. It's important. Yeah. So you can get like RSS feeders and you can like put all the different RSS feeds from sites you follow. And it'll all be there. Right? It's very, very convenient. Definitely recommended. All right. So anyway, thanks again, Ryan for being here. Probably a little longer than my usual podcast, but definitely an important conversation that needs to be

had. Because so often these, these distractions are out there to divert our way, our attention away from things that really matter. But in this case, like we've talked about today, this seems like it's just a celebrity distraction, maybe to some people, but there's really a deeper agenda sort of hovering, at least over this situation to an extent that definitely needs to be talked about and understood by as many people as

possible, I would say. So if you found this information compelling, I would encourage those listening to share it, particularly once it becomes publicly available, which was just a few days after we initially publish it first, which is, you know, for subscribers on rockfon, and elsewhere. So thanks again to everyone that supports this podcast and catch you all next time. Thanks.