You're shock of Shelley. You know it's chart Shelley. You are about doing
margin upon the great brusay. The eyes of the world out upon you.
The hopes and prayers of liberty loving people everywhere march with you in company with
our braid allies and brothers in arms on other front. Your task will not
be an easy one. Your enemy is well trained, well equipped, and
battle heartened. He will fight that and demand. The tide has turned.
The free men of the world are muching together to fingering good luck, and
let us are all these seeking to flecting of almighty Gods upon this great and
noble undertaking. So in the fourth and final segment of the Wednesday o'helly Effect,
Let's get to it, Tucker Carlson did an interview of Vladimir Putin and
it made waves and made you know, wow, how did he get that
guy? You know, when you're in a good spot like this and you're
being well supported by the billionaires and of course the state. I found it
interesting some of the stuff that came out here, you know, post Fox
News. Now that he's an alternative media hero, he wanted to talk to
Putin and get some answers on the Ukraine, and he got a two hour
conversation out of the guy that you know, many of the critics described as
extremely boring and pedantic and droning on and on. And that's what Putin did,
and I try not to do that here, but maybe that's what I'm
doing tonight, because we're well over an hour into the Ocelli effect, and
I only meant to go an hour. So I'm going to give you the
abbreviated analysis interesting what went on regarding Vladimir Putin on there, and I got
a couple of clips from the Carlson interview to demonstrate what it is I'm talking
about. He gives his viewpoint the denotification of Ukraine being the primary issue,
also discussing over and over again, although he didn't put it forth as the
primary issue, spent a lot of time on it, telling us all about
how Ukraine was being pushed and gathered up by NATO and therefore he had to
act, but also denotification, and also he gave a long history lesson to
our new friend, apparently according to all media people, Tucker Carlson. I'll
just point out a couple of things that I think Putin got factually wrong.
It's got nothing to do with my viewpoint on Putin. It's just this is
a weird disconnect from a guy who I am very sure is better informed than
any politician we have in America regarding the realities of everything, from what's actually
happening in places like Europe and all that to guess what America. The guy
said, and I thought this was kind of funny. Who boy oh boy
oh boy. And in political news, I was going to tell you about
Uma Aberdeen's new dating things. She's hooked up with Soro's new playboy son or
whatever. That's her new bow because Anthony Wiener is apparently out of the Wiener
game according to Uma. But do you care? I don't they do over
at I forget which British newspaper they got a full article on it. It's
in the show notes. But back to the Putin thing and the other media
madness that is, who boy o boy o boy some relationship. You know,
he claimed that he had the same relationship with Bush that he did with
Trump. I would say that that's actually inaccurate. And you couldn't tell which
Bush he was talking about at the time, because remember Putin's been in power
long enough to have dealt with both Bushes and Trump, and of course Biden.
Interesting conversations. There some stuff he got right by the way, Well,
I talk about some of his factual inaccuracies. Let's give a counterpoint here.
This idea that the presidents, the negotiators, the people that were supposed
to be talking to him and making deals. He pretty much makes blanket statements
repeatedly through this interview that they're not the people in charge. He was surprised
about that. I don't think he should be surprised at all. He also
said that somehow Hitler's invasion of Poland was really accountable to the Polish people.
In other words, Poland caused the invasion from Hitler, which is really weird,
almost like he believes the false flag thing that Hitler pulled there. And
I'm not even just going with mainstream historians. Most people have examined the situation
would not say that the Polish people requested, provoked, asked for the invasion
of Poland by Hitler. But maybe I shouldn't bring up Hitler, although Putin
did quite a few times because he had to for the denotification discussion and he
brings up the interesting point about, you know, the guy who was fighting
Russians during World War Two being celebrated in Canada's parliament. It is true that
that happened, and it is weird because if you were on the side against
the Russians at that point in time, in case you didn't notice, that
kind of puts you as an ally of the Nazis. Because the Russians were
fighting the Nazis. It is weird to see that celebrated in Canada's parliament,
isn't it. But anyway, he talks about a bunch of things, and
I'm going to get to some reference points. But I love also that he
reminds our good friend Tucker there, who's a new hero of the alt media
and all, that he reminds him that, you know, one time he
wanted a job with the CIA, which I found fascinating because Putin states it
rather matter of factly and almost seems to throw it at him like I know
more about that than you think I know, which is interesting. And I
mean, I've even admitted on this show that I made efforts to get a
job with the NSA before I started doing any of this media stuff. I
thought I could be a fair signals analyst. Actually that was back when I
still thought, you know, the system was on the right side of history.
Anyway, he also believes that our inflation is at three point four percent
in the US and all that kind of good stuff, which is the surface
level, open source thing that you could grab from any media outlet painting a
rosy picture of our economy. Putin paints it in a more rosy way than
most American talking heads would, even on corporate media. So there's a factual
inaccuracy for you there. We're not at three four percent. I don't care
if you're talking about this week's implation anyway. Other factual errors, I mean,
there's a bunch of them, but some people would call them matters of
opinion. I guess when he explains the US system, I find it fascinating
that he talks about the elites and now that's all set up and how Actually,
somebody in my mindset would normally agree with him, just can't do it.
Not because I'm holding against him any of the sins or alleged sins of
the Soviet Union, because that's not the point of it. But anyway,
let's get to some of the points of it, if you will and go
straight ahead to let's see, let's go to Putin's own words according to the
translation anyway, and how he kind of begins the interview. This is about
I don't know a minute in or so, but I found this statement and
some others that I'm going to play for you rather fascinating. If the United
States might strike Russia out of the blue, how did you conclude that the
deal? When you've talked to America. It's not that America the United States
was going to launch a surprise strike from Russia. I didn't say that.
Are we having a talk show or a serious conversation? Here's the quote?
Thank you, it's a formidable series. It's serious. Nooscoku was buzzivibro.
Because your basic education is in history, as far as I understand, yes,
possibly, so if you don't mind, I will say only thirty seconds
or one minute to give you a short reference to history. For giving you
a little historical background, please, okay? Now, he he you know,
tells him that I know your history and all that kind of good stuff,
which I find fascinating. This little exchange h for a couple of different
reasons. Now another factual error he makes is that he tells him, I'm
going to take thirty seconds or a minute to talk to you and give you
a history lesson, and he proceeds to give him about thirty to thirty five
minutes of a history lesson, starting at believe it or not, the ninth
century regarding the formation of the Russian state and that it had been around for
guess what, you know, a thousand years by the time the eighteen hundreds
came around, right, So just saying that's what he does there, and
I like his response. It's kind of kind of interesting in that. Yeah,
that conversation begins at like two minutes and thirty into this video and continues
on to like the thirty five minute mark. Yeah, I guess thirty two
and a half minutes that way. It's pretty wild though, that he goes
to such lengths to give him a history lesson and asks him if it is
a talk show or an actual serious interview. Also, he said a few
other things about how he challenged the format and all that. A little more
in depth is his commentary there. Then the translator lets on and I just
understand a couple of Russian words to know that the translator left a few little
subtleties out of it. But hey, I'm not going to trust my translation.
Let's go back and listen to some more of Vlad's words himself. Right,
So let's go back to where he starts to explain, you know,
what is and is not reality regarding Ukraine from about two thousand and eight on.
Okay, and I may have the clip off time wise just a little
started a little early here. But after this history lesson is all concluded,
we have to get into Actually it's at the end of the history lesson,
sorry, the two thousand and eight Ukraine and what he pivots to regarding US
policy and CIA support for Russian operations glows food does he seems, even if
they do not like some things. Now, I'll tell you what happened in
this regard with Ukraine in two thousand and eight. Although it's being discussed,
I'm not going to open a secret to you say anything streat Nevertheless, after
that we tried to build relations in different ways. For example, the events
in the Middle East in Iraq, we were building relations with the United States
in a very soft, prudent, conscious manner. I repeatedly raised the issue
that the United States should not support separatism or terrorism in the North Caucasus,
but they continue to do it anyway, and political support, information support,
financial support, but then military support came from the United States and its satellites
for terrorist groups in the Caucasus. I once raised this issue with my colleague,
also the President of the United States. He says, it's a possible.
Do you have proof? I said, yes, I was prepared for
this conversation, and I gave him that proof. He looked at it,
and you know what he said. I apologize, but that's what happened.
I'll quote he says, well, I'm gonna kick their ass. We waited
and waited for some response. There was no reply. I said, to
death as b director, right to the CIA, what is the result of
the conversation with president? He wrote once twice and then we got a reply.
We have the answer in the archive. The CIA replied, we have
been working with the opposition in Russia. We believe that this is the right
thing to do, and we will keep on doing it. Just ridiculous.
Well, okay, we realized that it was out of the question. Force
is an opposition to you, So you're saying the CIA is trying to overthrow
your government emails if you do them in that particular case, the separatist,
the theorists who fought with us in the Caucasus, that's who they call the
opposition, Tim mean it, so they have it. You have the difference
between one side calling h you know, particular people terrorists and other side calling
them the opposition or the separatists, et cetera, et cetera. Kind of
normal, uh, normal fair for how it is. You know, different
states would view different actors and different groups in the different circumstances. But he
points out that the CIA doesn't necessarily function according to the president's wishes and so
on and so forth. With that, let's turn to one of the big
issues, the thing that got me fired from TNT radio, et cetera,
the denotification, the key thing, the reason outside of this long standing history
lesson and the alleged historical claims that he lays to Ukraine, which have not
to do it the Soviet Union necessarily, but have to do with long standing
I mean, he goes all the way back to the establishment of bringing in
kings to rule and things like this, and the building of the Russian state.
He goes all the way back to that and that history lesson that he
provides for Tucker. But anyway, Carlson has that very same you know,
I'm straining to do something look on his face that he usually has. So
you know, the visuals here are normal, right, you know, concerning
these things, and they bring up some pictures of some of the events that
he mentions, which you know, nice edit on that at least we get
a look at certain things as we're moving along and all that good stuff.
But what is relevant here regarding the denotification, right, what is the thing
that motivates this the reason why it was necessary. He talks about the need
for defending people that are actively Russian in origin and how they were so interconnected
and all this and why it is that he needed to go in and defend
them. He claims that he's defending people when they took Crimea, which you
know was a believable thing the way that I saw it back then, the
way it was sent to me, that was propagandized on all sides MSM and
alleged alt and Russia today and all of them unified on this idea that you
know, Crimea belonged to Russia anyway, not necessarily the truth and not necessarily
the will of the people, because elections are manipulated, and he talks about
how American elections are not exactly straightforward affairs later on. Right, So,
yeah, let's take a listen to the denotification and in his own words,
what that all is, what it means, and why he says it.
Now, I bet that the person that believed that Putin's a good guy is
not going to hear the same thing that I hear in this clip, especially
if we get to the point where he starts talking about who needs to be
gotten rid of and why and what that means for you know, the guy
who has a military at his command, the guy who is a former spook,
no matter what country he was a spook with and former's funny there,
But you know, what does he mean by getting rid of people? Anyway?
Keep that in mind, but maybe not so much. Let's listen to
his own words and try and take him at face value, you know,
again relying on a translator here, but still attempt to stop it. Do
you think you've stopped it now? I mean, if you achieved your aims.
No, we haven't achieved our aims yet, because one of them is
the Nussification. This means the prohibition of all kinds of Neo Nazi movements.
This is one of the problems that we discussed during the negotiation process which ended
in Istanbul early this year of Stambula Nona. And it was not our initiative,
because we were told by the Europeans in particular that it was necessary to
create conditions for the final signing of the documents. My counterparts in France and
Germany said, Germania, how can you imagine them signing a treaty with they
gone to their heads. The troops should be pulled back from Kiev. I
said, all right, we withdrew the troops from Kiev Akiv. As soon
as we pulled back our troops from Kiev, our Ukrainian negotiators immediately threw all
our agreements reached an Istabul into the bin and got prepared for a long standing
armed confrontation with the help of the United States and its satellites in Europe.
That is how the situation has developed, and that is how it looks.
Now, what is what is the natification? What would that mean? What's
your versificat? That is what I want to talk about right now. It
is a very important issue, the Nazification. After gaining independence, Ukraine began
to search, as some Western analysts say, its identity, and it came
up with nothing better than to build this identity upon some false heroes who collaborated
with Hitler. I have already said that in the early nineteenth century, when
the theorists of independence and sovereignty of Ukraine appeared, they assumed that an independent
Ukraine should have very good relations with Russia. Not few stateistical razi, but
due to the historical development those territories were part of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth Poland,
where Ukrainians were persecuted and treated quite brutally, as well as were subject
to cruel behavior elisastalgy of Permita. There were also a chempts to destroy their
identity now carnoven chest All this remained in the memory of the people when World
War Two broke out. Part of this extremely nationalist elite collaborated with Hitler,
believing that he would bring them freedom from the German troops. Even the s
troops made Hitler's collaborators do the dirtiest work of exterminating the Polish and Jewish population.
Hence this brutal massacre of the Polish and Jewish population as well as the
Russian population too. This was led by the persons who are well known Bandera.
It was those people who were made national heroes that is the problem.
And we are constantly told that nationalism and Neo Nazism exist in other countries as
well. Yes they are seedlings, but we approved them and other countries fight
against them. Now, what's strange here is that Ukraine during World War Two
was part of the Soviet Union, and you have a mixed bag of things
going on here where it seems like they would have been running it. You
know, they would have been running everything there. I mean, Stalin is
supposedly running the Soviet Union and should have control of Ukraine. There is a
certain point in time in which I guess the Russians were not against the Nazis,
or should I say the Soviets were not against the Nazis for a certain
period of time. But this is a mixed bag. See again, it's
confusing, isn't it, Because if you were part of the Soviet Union and
they have absolute control over your territory and your decision making and all that it
would seem hard that a significant portion of your population would be forced to collaborate
with your enemies at that time, wouldn't it. It's a very confusing,
messy thing, but it ends up paying a heavy price in World War Two
Ukraine. On all sides, it seems like anyway, it's it's really confusing
in the way that he explains this. I don't know it. Does it
sit right with you? I leave it to your judgment, and I have
some other stuff past the denotification clips here. Let's see if yeah, okay,
we got another one coming up. It'll end in a little bit here,
but I want to get back to how it is you eliminate Nazism in
a moment. Let him finish his explanation and then we'll find out how it
is he would seek to eliminate Nazism, all right, to denazify Ukraine is,
but Ukraine is not the case that these people have been made into national
heroes in Ukraine monuments, so those people have been erected, They are displayed
on flags, their names are shouted by crowds that walk with torches. As
it was in Nazi Germany. These were people who exterminated Bulls, Jews and
Russians parliagophy. It is necessary to stub this practice and prevent the dissemination of
this concept. I say that Ukrainians are part of the one Russian people.
They say, no, we are a separate people. Okay, fine,
If they considered themselves a separate people, they have the right to do so,
but not on the basis of Nazism, the Nazi ideology. Would you
be satisfied with the territory that you have now question neon Nazism. I will
finish answering the question. You just asked, a question about neo Nazism and
the Nazification. Look, the President of Ukraine visited Canada. The story is
well known but being silenced in the western countries. The Canadian parliament introduced a
man who, as the speaker of the parliament said, fought against the Russians
during the World War Two. Well, who fought against the Russians during the
World War two Hitler and his accomplices. It turned out that this man served
in the SS troops. He personally killed Russians, Polls and Jews. The
troops consisted of Ukrainian nationalists who did this dirty work. The President of the
Ukraine stood up with the entire Parliament of Canada and applauded this man. How
can this be imagined? The President of Ukraine himself, by the way,
is a Jew by nationality. Really, my question is what do you do
about it? I mean, Hitler's been dead for eighty years, not sin
Germany no longer exists and so true, and so I think what you're saying
is you want to extinguish or at least control Ukrainian nationalism. But how how
do you see it gets into a strange area here? Because again, if
they were controlled by the Soviet Union at the time, and it was previous
to them going into combat with the Germans and actually confronting them, so for
a time there was collaboration among let's be honest, Ukraine was part of the
Soviet Union. There was collaboration among a Soviet Union satellite. And you know,
I'm just trying to point out that this is not the cut and dry,
clean issue that a lot of people want to make it into, right.
And the funny thing is that some of the people that are complaining about
this and saying, you know, it's all about fighting the Nazis, It's
all about fighting the Nazis. Not too long ago, some of those same
people were also trying to convince me that the history on Hitler was all wrong.
Some of their friends and associates even showed me stuff like the Hitler is
a Hero videos that used to be on YouTube that I think they've actually gotten
rid of in recent months, although you might still be able to find him.
Maybe I'll try and find one for the show. Notes. But let's
listen carefully as to what it is you would do to eliminate, to denazify
Ukraine? What do you do? And Carlson actually asks a reasonable question,
what do you do? How do you accomplish that? What is your idea?
I mean, he asked, are you satisfied with the territory? And
Putin is a little aggravated and a little agitated about it because he's you could
see, he's getting fed up with Carlson even asking a question. And I'm
not sure about how they edited this, because I can see some edits in
it. You know this don't run like you know, fully live and uncensored.
Okay, but still what are we looking at here? Right? And
again, just learn from his words as they're spoken through the translator. One
way or another. Not even trying to tell you what to think about this.
I'm just presenting you pieces of interest I think you should look at and
try to say, is this conducive with the historical record? Is this sensible
regarding the realities we see currently. I'm asking you, the listener, you
have that conversation with yourself, or you could complain to me. And I'm
sure people are gonna complain. There's gonna be people that are gonna yell at
me that I even allowed some of this interview to be commented on on my
air. There's gonna be other people that are pissed off of me thinking that
I'm supporting the Russian side. There's gonna be people that are pissed off of
me thinking I'm supporting the Ukrainian side and the New World Order, etc.
Etc. I'm not doing that. I'm giving you some words for consideration and
telling you that this is interesting. What was presented in this interview with a
friendly interviewer who was not confrontational, who has certainly been part of that contingent
that would be positive to putin. What do we get out of it?
Let's see what we can get out of it. Let's hear about the denotification?
Do that? How do you do what? You listen to me?
Your question is very subtle, and I can sell you what I think.
Do not take offense, of course, because this question appears to be subtle.
It is quite pesky. You say, Hitler has been dead for so
many years, eighty years, but his example lives on people who exterminated Jews,
Russians and polls our lives. And the president, the current president of
today's Ukraine applause him in the Canadian Parliament gives a standing ovation. Can we
say that we have completely uprooted this ideology? If what we see is happening
today, that is what the nassification is in our understanding. We have to
get rid of those people who maintain this concept and support this practice and try
to preserve it. That is what the nastification is. That is what we
mean. Right. My question is almost specific. It was, of course,
not a defense of Nazis, new or otherwise. It was a practical
question. You don't control the entire country, you don't control k you don't
seem like you want to. So how do you eliminate a culture or an
ideology, or feelings or a view of history in a country that you don't
control. What do you do about that? I was nature random Stamboulian,
you know, as strange as it may seem to you. During the negotiations
in Istanbul, we did agree that we have it all in writing, Neo
Nazism would not be cultivated in Ukraine, including that it would be prohibited at
the legislative level. Mister Carson, we agreed on that this, it turns
out, can be done during the negotiation process, and there's nothing humiliating for
Ukraine as a modern civilized state. Is any state allowed to promote Nazisms?
It is not it that is it? Will there be talks? And why
haven't there been talks about resolving the conflict? In you? Okay, when
it gets in this part about the talks, I'll give you the brief synopsis.
He basically says that the President of Ukraine, as May, has put
into place that no one has permitted that talks with Russia right now, so
therefore it's their fault. There's no talks with Russia to solve the situation.
And he keeps pointing back to agreements made. It is Sanbul, and that's
where the explanation pretty much ends now he pivoted away from and Tucker let him
off the hook here regarding this question, No, well, what are you
gonna do about this? It's not necessarily what the state can do about it,
or the negotiation or you know, should it be encouraged. Obviously,
most people, even if they are supporting Nazism, for the most part,
will not go out and say they are, even if it is about white
supremacy or their ethnic supremacy over someone else or what. They don't usually come
out and say that they couch it a different way. And it is odd
that when in Russia there are the head quarters for something like fifty large white
supremacist organizations that are permitted to be registered and exist, that he's concerned about
what could be in Ukraine. It's interesting but also logical, and also is
the automatic sympathy of look, you know, how about if you guys just
legislate the idea that it's not legal to be a Nazi. Other countries do
stuff like that all the time. Very reasonable, makes some sense. Anyway,
I know I'm gonna catch a lot of crap for this, but I'm
telling you I want you to learn from what's being said here. I'm not
endorsing anybody, and it's fascinating also to go ahead and take a look at
the video of this. I suggest if you really care about what it is
the individual who is at the top of the organization, the top of the
nation that is prosecuting this war in Ukraine that has now been going on for
all this time, if you're interested in what he really is trying to put
out there, and in some ways what he's revealing about himself through this conversation,
I think you should listen to it once and watch it once, and
pay close attention to the editing choices that are made here, because I'll tell
you, if I was an editor, I would have shortened this thing up
a lot, gotten rid of a lot of extraneous, sloppy stuff, weird
situations. The facial expressions of Tucker Carlson are clearly stilted, as per usual,
but Putin is making some interesting moves regarding his his his his body mechanics
during this time. He is communicating with body language in a way that I
leave to your judgment. I think you should examine this and get a real
feel because this is revealing to me something very interesting here, and I think
anybody who cares about this issue, especially as we're hearing the arguments going back
and forth about what it is you should or should not support as an American,
which is different than endorsing what's happening or simply being on the side of
a very generalized There is a lot of hairs to split here, is all
I'm saying. And I'm leaving this open. I want you to learn from
what is being played here on the audio, for sure, but go ahead
and independently watch this separately too, and pay attention to the dynamic. I
think it'll reveal to you some stuff that I'm not gonna just lay out for
you. I'm not going to just throw it to you automatically. Anyway.
Let's move on from that subject. And this is over two hours this inner
you and probably could have been longer, and I'll leave that to your discretion
to figure that one out as well. You know what does he mean by
that? Yeah, I'm going to leave some cryptic statements here for stuff that
I think should be blatantly obvious to you if you observe this thing properly and
listen carefully. So I like this part where Putin tries to explain the US
system. And I've only got one other part after this that i want to
focus on, which is regarding the you know, the Nord Stream pipeline and
who was really involved with that anyway, Do you want to know what it
is that Putin thinks about the US system, how it actually runs, how
it actually functions. I think it's fascinating, especially after we had to listen
for years about how much info as he was trying to exert on our electoral
system. So let's take a quick listen. Doubt is he thinks it works
in America. The largest number of sanctions in the world which are applied are
applied against Russia, and we have become Europe's first economy during this time.
Nonotheradum the tools that US uses don't work well. One has to think about
what to do. If this realization comes to the ruling elites, then yes,
then the first person of the state will act in anticipation of what the
voters and the people who make decisions at various levels expect from this person.
Then maybe something will change. But you're describing two different systems. You say
that the leader acts in the interest of the voters, but you also say
These decisions are not made by the leader. They're made by the ruling classes.
You've run this country for so long, You've known all these American presidents.
What are those power centers in the United States? Do you think like
who actually makes the decisions America? Some consider you I don't know. America
is a complex country, a conservative on one hand, rapidly changing on the
other. Okay, here, I'm sorry. I'm trying not to put judgment,
but I gotta call bs on that. You mean to tell me that
one of the most well informed individuals on the planet says I don't know when
it comes to how the American system is run? Who makes the decisions.
This guy knows the inside baseball, the outside baseball, and of course he
has access to the Internet. You mean to tell me that, with the
FSB background, with intelligence agencies at his fingertips at his command, that this
man doesn't know how the American system runs. I mean, no matter what
you believe about it, you mean to tell me I don't know is an
acceptable answer. I want you to really think about that, and let's continue
to hear his description and consider that not always is a statement made for the
purposes of the statement on the face of it. But sometimes there are strategic
statements that are made to signal two particular viewers, you know, for the
audience of one for the audience of one agency, for the audience of one
country, whether it's his own or it's someone else's, or et cetera,
et cetera. Maybe a statement is slipped in here or there just to be
a signal to somebody's wife during an interview. I just wanted my wife to
hear that part, and it's thrown in there, you know, politicians,
sports people, doesn't matter. Maybe they want their mistress to hearticular phrase.
Look, all kinds of messaging is built into these interviews, and I guarantee
you there's a lot of different messaging built in here. But I had to
call bs on. I don't know who makes the decisions in America. I
think there is no way in the world that that is a remotely believable answer.
He could have given almost any other answer other than that. So there
is one of those factual inaccuracies. Okay, sorry, I felt compelled.
And again we're going to conclude this with a look at the nord stream pipeline.
But let's hear a little more about how Putin thinks it runs, speculates
about it, how America actually functions. It's not easy for us to sort
it all out. Who makes decisions in the elections? Is it possible to
understand this? When each state has its own legislation, each state regulates itself,
someone can be excluded from elections that state level. It is a two
stage electoral system. Now do you know who he's pandering to right there?
Do you? I do? Sorry, it is very difficult for us to
understand it. Certainly, there are two parties that are dominant, the Republicans
and the Democrats. And within this party system the centers that make decisions,
that prepare decisions. Then look why, in my opinion, after the collapse
of the Soviet Union, such an erroneous, crude, completely unjustified policy of
pressure was pursued against Russia. After all, this is a policy of pressure,
NATO expansion, support for the separatists, in Caucus's creation of a missile
defense system. These are all elements of pressure. Pressure, pressure, pressure.
Then, dragging Ukraine into NATO is all about pressure, pressure, pressure.
Why, I think, among other things, because excessive production capacities were
created during the confrontation with the Soviet Union. There were many centers created and
specialists on the Soviet Union who could not do anything else. They convinced the
political leadership that it is necessary to continue chiseling Russia, to try to break
it out, to create on this territory several quasi state entities, and to
subdue them in a divided form. To you, now, I'm also a
little confused there because the negotiators, the interactors with the Soviet Union, the
Russia, all this thing. They are, on the one hand, there
to chisel away at Russia, But on the other hand, the people he
was dealing with usually didn't actually have the power. Because earlier he definitely states
that you say, the CIA made decisions even though the President literally said I'm
gonna go kick their act. I think that's the phrase he used, I'm
gonna kick somebody's ass over this, And then they kept writ into the CIA.
The CIA said, now we support your opposition, which are actually terrorists
that we were fighting in the Caucuses. This according to him, so on
the one hand, he's saying that the people that are actually negotiating with him
don't have any power. They throw away. He mentioned several times during this
interview that they throw agreements in the garbage or in the I think at some
point he says the furnace or the fireplace, or maybe it's a stove.
I forget which, but either way he implies that they either burn them or
trash them when they make agreements, so it doesn't matter. And the people
that he's dealing with aren't really the decision makers. This is what he's implying.
And now he's saying this about the people negotiating with him. So is
this a contradiction or is this very sophisticated nuanced signaling. And who is he
exactly virtue signaling too? Which audience is he playing to? Who do you
think? I'll leave it to you to figure out the listener. Who's their
combined potential for the future struggle with China. This is a mistake, including
the excessive potential of those who worked for the confrontation with the Soviet Union.
It is necessary to get rid of this. There should be new fresh forces,
people who look into the future and understand what is happening in the world.
Look at how Indonesia is developing six hundred million people. Where can we
get away from that nowhere, we just have to assume that Indonesia will enter.
It is already in the club of the world's leading economies, no matter
who likes it or dislikes it. Yes, we understand and are aware that
in the United States, despite all the economic problems, the situation is still
normal, with the economy growing decently, the GDPs growing by two point five
percent, if I'm not mistaken. But if we want to ensure the future,
then we need to change our approach to what is changing. Okay,
so you know where he's going there. It's like he's still being dealt with
as if it's the Soviet Union. It's not the Soviet Union. And I
get that criticism all the time that that's why I'm so against Putin, But
you know, it's just because I'm universally against elite players making decisions for the
rest of us and deceiving us all the time, and I think he's one
of those guys. Now you may disagree with that, but that's why I'm
generally against, you know, doing what Trump suggested, which is I'd let
him do whatever the hell he wants. I don't think that's a good idea.
I think that some resistance to Putin's plans might be a good idea for
the self preservation of others in certain cases. I think people who live in
Ukraine right now might agree with that, but there are other people in other
places. And he talks at a certain point about how it would be absolutely
foolish for him to invade Poland and things like that, because some people are
bringing up that hyperbole that he's about ready to invade Poland. I don't think
so. He also talks at certain points about nuclear weapons and the use of
them and how it is that he's actually being pushed to that point, but
he hasn't made those suggestions. And even when Carlson tries to show him quotes
where he has said certain things like that, and other points where he tries
to show him quotes like at the beginning of this discussion, he says,
no, I never said that. Are we getting the wrong stuff from the
interpreters over here? Because best I can figure out he has said certain things
and often denies that he made such comments. But again, is this somebody
who's being savvy or is this something else? Again, I leave the judgment
to you, because I don't know if I can judge this properly. Again,
I'm listening through an interpreter just like you are now, so we're doing
the best we can. Right. How about we conclude though, with the
issue of the Nord Stream pipeline. I found this to be one of the
more interesting points. And there's a lot of interesting stuff in here, okay,
And again you have to study it and understand that certain statements are made
for your benefit, some statements are made for other people's, particular people's benefits
during this discussion, and I think that he got the most unfettered, unscreened
commentary that he could out there. His statements are absolutely out there, nice
and clear. If indeed this translation was approved, which I assure you it
was before it was released. Again, I I don't agree with all the
editing the choices here, but here we sit. So let's take a listen
to the section about the Nord stream pipeline and who putin says is responsible for
that and how significant it is. It seems to me that this is much
smarter and more rational. Who blew up nordstream? You for sure, I
was busy that day. I did not blow upstream, thank you. Personally
may have an alibi, but the CIA has no such alibi. I like
that part. By the way, I didn't personally blow up the nord Stream
pipeline. Yeah. Uh, did you have evidence that NATO or CI did
it? You know, I won't get into details, but people always say
in such cases, look for someone who is interested. But in this case,
we should not only look for someone who is interested, but also for
someone who has capabilities. Because there may be many people interested, but not
all of them are capable of sinking to the bottom of the Baltic Sea and
carrying out this explosion. These two components should be connected. Who is interested
and who is capable of doing it? But I'm confused. I mean,
that's the biggest act of industrial terrorism ever and it's the largest emission of CO
two in history. Okay, so if you had evidence, and presumably giving
your security services rental services, you would that NATO, the US, CIA
at West did this. Why wouldn't you present it and win a propaganda victory.
In the war of propaganda, it is very difficult to defeat the United
States because the United States controls all the world's media and many European media.
The ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American financial institutions, don't you
know that? So it is possible to get involved in this work, but
it is cost prohibitive, so to speak. We can simply shine the spotlight
on our sources of information and we will not achieve results. It is clear
to the whole world what happened. Then, even American analysts talk about it
directly. It's true, yes, But here's a question you may able to
answer. You worked in Germany famously. The Germans clearly know that their NATO
partner did this, but they and it damaged their economy greatly. It may
never recover. Why are they being silent about it? That's very confusing to
me. Why wouldn't the Germans say something about it? This also confuses me.
I like that putting his shrugging his shoulders at that, you know,
like, I don't know. Uh, that's the body language thing coming in
again. And it's fascinating that, Uh, Tucker actually puts a good question
in here. I don't like Tucker Carlson. I really hate him. I
find him despicable. He's exactly the kind of guy who I rewind in my
head and figure he's exactly the kid that I you know, I never used
to bully people. But this would be a kid who's asked needed to be
kicked as a kid, if he had the same facial expressions that he has
as an adult, it would just be one of those faces you want to
and have to punch at some point. Could be the jersey thing and may
maybe we'll go back to the neutering your your ex But let's continue on with
this nord Stream discussion because I find it interesting. I like how he presents
say, look, you know the beneficiaries are when it comes to European media.
Come on, you you know this. You're in on it man.
Of course he is, but we're supposed to pretend like he's an outsider and
the hero of the alt media. So pay attention to that too. By
the way, exactly the behavior of the hero of the alt media now,
Tucker Carlson. But today's German leadership is guided by the interests of the collective
West rather than its national interests. Otherwise it is difficult to explain the logic
of their action or inaction. After all, it is not only about north
Stream one which was blown up and the north Stream two was damaged, but
one pipe is safe and sound, and gas can be supplied to Europe through
it, but Germany does not open it. We're ready, please. There's
another route through Poland called the Yamal Europe, which also allows for large flow.
Poland has closed it, but Poland packs from the German hand. It
receives money from the Pan European Funds, and Germany is the main donor to
these Pan European funds. Germany feeds Poland to a certain extent, and they
close their route to Germany. Why I don't understand Ukraine, to which the
Germans supply weapons and give money. Germany is the second sponsor of the United
States in terms of financial aid to Ukraine. There are two gas routes through
Ukraine. They simply closed one route. The Ukrainians open the second route and
please get gas from Russia. They do not open it. Why don't the
Germans say, look, guys, we give you money and weapons, open
up the vault. Please let the gas from Russia pass. True for us
eyeing liquefied gas at exorbit prices in Europe, which brings the level of our
competitiveness and economy in general down to zero. Do you want us to give
you money? Let us have the decent existence to make money for our economy,
because this is where the money we give you comes from. They refuse
to do so, why ask them? That is what is like in their
heads? Those are highly incompetent people. Well maybe see it's interesting that he
questions the competency of the people as opposed to you know, other motives that
could be discussed here. Right, So, how does this fascinating discussion conclude?
Let's see if I can get the final the way it concludes. And
then I got one more story just to look at real fast before I close
the mic on this Wednesday night. Let's just look at the conclusion here,
the last couple of minutes of the discussion between Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin.
How does it end according to the video? And then we're going to take
a look at an article passing me in the chatroom Atochelli dot com. You
can follow with all the show notes, the references and everything that I've discussed
tonight. By the way that's set in, they have to think what to
do next. We're ready for this dialogue. Would you be willing to say
congratulations NATO you one and just keep the situation where it is now it was.
You know, it is a subject matter for the negotiations. No one
is willing to conduct or to put it more accurately, Yeah, they're willing,
but do not know how to do it. I know they want it.
It is not just I see it, but I know they do want
it, but they're struggling to understand how to do it. They have even
the situation to the point where we are at. It is not us who
have done that. It is our partners opponents who have done that. Well,
now let them think how to reverse the situation. We're not against it.
It would be funny if it were not so sad mission when you this
endless mobilization in Ukraine, the hysteria, the domestic problems. Sooner or later
it will result in agreement. You know, this probably sounds strange given the
current situation. So I don't know, but the relations between the two people's
will be rebuilt anyway. It will take a lot of time, but they
will heal stomachs, but they would agreement. I'll give you very unusual examples.
There's a combat encounter on the Bottlefield here a specific example, Ukrainian soldiers
got encircled This is an example from real life. Our soldiers were shouting to
them, there is no chance, surrender yourselves, come out and you will
be alive. Suddenly the Ukrainian soldiers were squeaming from there in Russian perfect Russians,
saying Russians do not surrender, and all of them perished. They still
identify themselves as Russian. What is happening is, to a certain extent,
an element of a civil war. Everyone in the West thinks that the Russian
people have been split by hostilities forever. Now they will be reunited. The
unity is still there. You present, Why are the Ukrainian authorities dismantling the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church? Because it brings together not only the territory, it brings
together our souls. No one will be able to separate the soul. Shall
we end here or is there anything else? No? I think that's great.
Thank you as president. Now there you go. So that's how that
interview ended. You know you've done with me yet, Okay, fair enough.
I think it's fascinating that he's presenting something that I've seen no evidence for.
That when you're face down with you know, Russian troops about to kill
you, that you're screaming back at them. Hey, Russians don't surrender even
though they're in Ukrainian uniforms. Doesn't sound like something that really happened. I
guess stranger things have happened in battlefields. But again, I'm not trying to
judge this. I want you guys to take a listen to this and figure
out what it is is really being said here, what the real purpose of
it is. So with the final story for the night, here it is,
and I'll go to uh cause I gotta chatter that often dumps a whole
bunch of Fox News in the room, and I thought this headline was worth
sharing, and I'll include it in the show notes as well. House Intel
Chair Turner warns of quote serious national security threat end quote urges Biden to declassify.
Kind of an alarming headline. But where's the beef right declassify? What?
What is the national security threat? Let's look at the articles see if
we can find out. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike is urging President Biden to
declassify information related to quote a serious national security threat. However, House Speaker
Mike Johnson says the threat is not immediate and there is no need for public
alarm. So it's serious, but it's not immediate. Sorry back to the
article. Turner, Republican from Ohio, on Wednesday morning released a statement saying
that the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has made available to all members of
Congress information concerning a serious national security threat. Quote. I am requesting the
President Biden to classify all information related to this threat so that Congress, the
Administration, and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this
threat, he added. Fox News Digital obtained the notice sent to congressional members
Wednesday, which pointed to an urgent matter with regard to destabilizing foreign military capability
that should be known by all Congressional policy makers. A separate source told Fox
News that this threat is concerning Russian capability, noting that the quote potential seriousness
of the threat is grave end quote, but quote the threat is not immediate
in nature end quote. And a Pentagon source told Fox News that the threat
is related to space. Do you see how this staggers all the way through
that eventually we find out that this is a Russian threat in space? Should
I continue on? All? Right? Johnson, Republican Louisiana, La attempted
to quell any panic caused by Turner's statement by explaining that last month he sent
a letter to the White House quote requesting a meeting with the President to discuss
the serious national security issue that is classified end quote. In response to the
letter, a meeting is now scheduled for tomorrow on this matter here at the
Capitol with the Gang of Four and with the President's National Security Advisor, Jake
Sullivan. Johnson said, I will press the administration to take appropriate action,
and everybody can be comforted by that. Johnson said, he quote saw a
Chairman Turner's statement on the issue, and I want to assure the American people
that there's no need for public alarm end quote quote. We are going to
work together to address this matter, as we do all sensitive matters that are
classified, Johnson said. And beyond that, I'm not at liberty to disclose
classified information and really can't say much of that, but we just want to
assure everyone steady hands are at the wheel. We're working on it. There's
no need for alarm. Now. What's really funny is what pops up right
under that is Biden's memory struggles could imperil. National security defense experts warn not
only weak but confused. That's the sub headline and you can click on it
anyway. I'll put the link in the chat room, although somebody else already
did atoceelly dot com and include it in the show notes. But what are
they saying here? A very generalized open threat Russian something in space and I
don't know, nothing specific but a lot of words to say very little in
the Fox News article. This is why I get so frustrated with them,
Just like CNN repeats itself and makes all sorts of contradictory statements to point out
stuff that is irrelevant most of the time and leads you in other directions away
from this is related to this, and this is related to that. And
after a while, when you play the connective tissue game, you know athlete's
foot is related to your dandriff in some way. It's just, you know,
come on, man. But the idea that there's steady hands at the
wheel, or that there will be anytime soon, considering that we got the
two parties running the two old men against each other, you know, I
want to do a Putin laugh here. Maybe I should isolate the Putin laugh
and just have it at the ready all the time. Putin and Carlson,
maybe you blew up the Nord Stream pipeline. You gotta love that one.
Just with my constipation face, I sank down there and blew up the nord
Stream. I have an alibi, I mean seriously, But look, there
is a lot of serious information there and a lot of things that can be
gleaned from that interview. And I've got a lot of thoughts about my analysis
of what I saw in the body language and everything else. But why should
you listen to me? I just gave you the commentary and played for you
the translation so that you could judge for yourself what's being said. I assure
you that there are multiple layers to be appealed here. It's you know,
people talk about peeling the onion right and all that good stuff. Definitely you
should because there's a lot of layers. And sometimes when you leave the onion
sit and you know, decay a little, it starts sprouting other onions.
It will do that, believe it. Believe it. And one of the
headlines that I didn't read from from the Bulwark earlier in the show, regarding
the selection process and how USA, politics can do brain damage. Here's the
thing. This one was on the Bulwark Right Decision twenty twenty four. The
headline is a well meaning old man versus a corrupt old man. Here's my
problem, folks, and I dare you to really argue with me too bad
which one is which? So, no matter who you are, where you
are, when you are, I am merely O'Kelly. All of you are
indeed the effect, and at all times am I willing and happy to receive
any sort of support memberships, sign ups, ad Patreon, sign ups at
o'chelly dot com. It will keep us running and the bills paid. And
it's always a good time to be the effect and support o'celly as I try
to support you and get you the best information I can on what's happening in
the world without ever ever m hm m hm m m hm m. The
views expressed by caller schools or anyone else who happens to get on the air
at o jelly dot com do not necessarily replected he views of jelly dot com
or Chef Ocelli, and we are not responsible for any stupidity which you might
issue. Thank you,