Speaker 1: Shut down, shut out. I was criticizing doctor Jordan Peterson
about this ten years ago. I was criticizing the same
circles that ended up being the Daily Wire ten years ago.
And I didn't have millions of dollars behind me, and
so I didn't get as big a platform as Daily Wire.
But he's still stuck in twenty ten. In Ben Shapiro's mind,
it's twenty ten, two thousand and seven eight the Ron
Paul era of the free markets, and people are way
beyond this, and nobody is interested in rehashing the libertarian
era debate except for midwits and low IQ people that
are in the Ben Shapiro audience. Has captured plantation audience.
Speaker 2: It's a pragmatic foreign policy that spreads our interests and
upholds our ideals. What governmental means our appropriate to achieve
political ends. All of these questions aren't new, of course,
They've been asked for as long as human beings have
been talking about politics thousands of years. And over the
course of this conference, you'll hear a lot of opinions
on a lot of these questions. I have my own
perspectives on them, of course, you can hear them every
single day on my show. My fundamental values have been
the same for twenty five years, peace through strength on
foreign policy, traditional values on social policy, free markets with.
Speaker 3: Regards to economics.
Speaker 2: But today I want to talk about something even more important.
How to discern those attempting to speak truth from frauds
and grifters.
Speaker 1: Now, how are we going to know who a fraud
and a grifter is when we know that the Israeli
government is paying for tweets? So does that count or like,
what's going to count here for frauds and grifters? I'll
be interested to see the bench mark for who fits
into that category and why. Has been Shapiro, to my knowledge,
never debated because he kind of built, like Crowder, a
platform on debating, Right, they both built up platforms from debating,
and Crowder at least wants to take on big name people.
I know he's wanted to debate some big name people.
Has been Shapiro ever debated anyone other than Alex O'Connor
that I can recall, who is basically a philosophy nube.
So Ben Shapiro's never debated anybody other than like college
purple haired freaks who don't know anything, who could barely talk,
and that works to build a giant audience of duping normies.
You could doup a lot of people into thinking, well, wow,
this guy is so smart. He's debated all the purple
haired freaks and he wins. Wow, like that's nothing. That's
low hanging fruit. So built a whole career on low
hanging fruit. Had one decent debate with Alex O'Connor and
wouldn't debate Candace whether you think Candace is crazy or
would win or would lose or whatever, Like, why didn't
he just agree to that debate? So there's to my knowledge,
he's never debated a substantial challenge or person.
Speaker 2: Because something is new, an informational environment rife with both
opportunity and chaos. Opportunity because the legacy media gatekeepers are
no longer in charge of what we see and what
we hear.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, the legacy media gatekeepers. What exactly is the
Daily Wire if funded by anti trinitarian Texas billionaire Zionis.
Speaker 2: Come on, dude, yos, Because a narcic informational environment means
we actually have to be smart and how assess the
information and arguments that we hear. Why does that matter? Well,
because today the conservative movement is in serious danger. It
is in danger not just from a left that all
too frequently excuses.
Speaker 3: Everything up to and including murder.
Speaker 2: The conservative movement is also in danger from Charlatans who
claim to speak in the name of principle but actually
traffic in conspiracy.
Speaker 1: Uh oh, here we go. Now wait a minute, who,
by the way, who made you the face of conservatism?
By the way, first of all, you represent a foreign government. First,
your principles are basic bitch libertarianism. Where in anywhere is
conservative at all except for you don't like t R. A.
Speaker 2: N Z excuses everything up to and including murder. The
conservative movement is also in danger from Charlatans who claim
to speak in the name of principle but actually traffic
in conspiracism and dishonesty, who offer nothing but bile and despair,
who seek to undermine fundamental principles of conservatism by championing
enervation and grievance.
Speaker 1: These by championing grievance, conspiracy theories, conspiracism. Okay, well, I
have Moses Hess's book, one of the founders of Zionism
Political Zionism right here and in revival of Israel in
the eighteen sixties they talked about utilizing Freemasonry on pages
one fourteen fifteen, and the Rothschaw Brothers plan to support
to establish the nation state of Israel. So this is
years before political Zionism. Does that count or is that not?
Is that history or conspiracism? I don't mean what exactly
counts as that. Now, this is a person, as we said,
who says that there is no such thing as a
push for a new world order. There is no conspiracy
of people behind shadowy, you know, corridors in smoke filled rooms.
Are you sure of about that? Because we can go
read these people. For example, David Rockefeller says on page
four or four of his memoirs that one of the
most powerful, wealthy, influential man men in American history, that
he is a absolute proud internationalist who proudly set up and
supports a global government and a push for a one
world order through entities like the Council on Formerly, Builderberg,
et cetera. So there is his book there he is
bragging about it. But according to Ben Shapiro, that doesn't exist.
It's meaningless, worthless to talk about your vile and your
evil and you have bad motives if you talk about history. Now,
I actually have one or two classes away from a
double major undergrad in history and philosophy, not even talking
about grad school, which was philosophy and lit. But I
mean right now, guys were lecturing through Burton Hirsch's book
The Old Boys, which is the history of the os
S and ca coming out of elite families, particularly the
Rockefellers and by extension, the Rothschilds with British intelligence, and
the origins are explicit in the texts. So they say
it's for global government. They say in practical idealism that
the plan is to destroy European peoples, and quickly says
that count Koutenhobb's plan was accepted by the British establishment,
Lord Lionel Curtis and others for global governance. That's just
a couple resources. And as you know, if you follow
my work in my channel, we've spent ten years going
back to starting with Tragy and Hope, lecturing through that
whole twelve thirteen hundred page book. We spent the last
ten years lecturing through book by book by book by
book by book. And this sued this faker who's a
midwit stands up here to millions of people representing conservatism
telling everybody that there is no such thing as conspiracy
for global government, and you're an evil person if you
talk about it. Well, Moses has said that there's a
conspiracy to make Israel the center of the global government,
and that it would be Jerusalem, that all the nations
would come and worship the Jewish nation as it's Messiah.
He doesn't seem to believe in an actual Messiah. It's
the Jewish nation state, according to Moses hes So they
just lie, they just are or they're ignorant either way.
And we have two hundred thousand people following my channel.
They have millions of people following them, mainly because I
think of money, right. We know that Ben built an
audience putting millions of dollars into Facebook ads allegedly. And
of course we built everything here from the ground up
with only support from Lord Voldemort Andrew Wilson, a handful
of good people who supported us to get us growth
or natural organic growth. And this is what you get.
You get, this is the normy slop that's out here
to placate the masses, the dumb dumbs, the evangelical idiots.
And my whole Twitter feed right now is nothing but
the whole thing. If we go to the for you,
all I saw was Israel tweets today and how awesome
Ben Shapiro is. That's all I could see. Now, I
don't go to the for you. I hate the for you,
but I did tested out before you today just to
see and uh, well I was on my phone. But
let's see if let's check trending. No, oh, here we go.
Ben Shapiro, a great man, true patriot. Ben Shapiro give
the greatest speech ever. What this? Uh? Why am I
seeing Mark Live? I don't follow Mark Levin. See, this
is why they The for you is to show you
all this TRD stuff. And then the the ever present.
Jesus was Jewish. Jesus was a Hebrew who worshiped the
religion that he sat down. Jesus was not a rabbinic Jew.
So they just equivocate as usual. Now here's one from
Clint Russell. That's correct, right, Ben Shapiro is the future
and Tucker is the old dead. No, nobody believes that. Nobody.
The reason that they're going crazy is that they're losing
the narrative. The Zio crowd, the neo conservative Zio dispensationalist
goobers are losing, and so they are freaking out. Like
Joel Berry, Tucker is stammering incoherent and they try to
freeze it on some sort of like Hitlarian looking image,
which is all like faking gay. I mean, why this
evangelical Zio fake pastors. Tucker's evil Talker's evil talker's evil
talker's evil Now we're gonna listen to Tucker's speech, but
look everything everything is. Ben Shapiro is fire, Ben Shapiro
is awesome. Ben Shapiro mugged everybody so hard. How much
money did these people make from these stupid ass tweets?
And then Lord Voldemort challenged him to a debate.
Speaker 4: Ben Shapiro, I challenge you to a debate. I challenge
you anywhere, anytime, anyplace.
Speaker 1: Tucker failed, Ben Shapiro one, It's the greatest speech of
all time, and Tucker is the worst person of all time.
Right now, if Tucker says pro Muslim things, I'm going
to disagree with that because it's a false dialectic. We're
going to see we'll take a look at that. But
you get my point, like this is why I never
go to the for you. I don't want to see infinity,
you know, Zio stuff, just mindless stuff. When I check Twitter,
I don't. I'm not. I learned about all this stuff
in two thousand and thirty four, five six. I'm twenty
years beyond all that stuff.
Speaker 2: People are frauds, and they are grifters, and they do
not deserve your time, and they are something worse than that,
a danger to the only movement capable of stopping the
left from wrecking the country wholesale. So today I want
to discuss five obligations that people who speak to you
on matters of importance have to you. I want to
speak to you about our duties. Our first duty is truth.
We owe you the truth. That means we should not
mislead you. It means we shouldn't hide the ball. We
shouldn't be deliberately obscure about what we're telling you.
Speaker 1: Like when you said everybody should get the stabs, like
when you supported all the kouf fauci you were like
pro fauci.
Speaker 2: I mean, we have an obligation to clarity and to honesty.
This means that we actually have to be clear in
the language that we use. We should not traffic in generality.
We should not say things like they shot Charlie without
specifying whom we mean by they, The person who allegedly
shot Charlie Kirk and whom all the evidence points at
all of it is a gay, trans loving furry. If
we are going to target ideological movements, we should talk
about the fact that the radical trans movement treats all
those who oppose it as existential threats.
Speaker 3: Or if we're going to talk.
Speaker 2: About the Democratic Party making room for the radical trans
movement and at going it's inflammatory rhetoric, well we should
talk about that. Those are specific problems and that require
specific responses.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but what about foreign influence from other governments? Is
that not a problem? What about Jonathan Pollard? Is that
a problem? I mean, come on, push.
Speaker 2: Intelligence to Masad, to members of TPUSA, and Charlie's murder
or a cover up in that murder, then we as
people with a microphone, have a moral obligation to call
that out by name.
Speaker 1: So no, there is what is the moral obligation? Even
if you think that everything that Candace is saying is crazy,
on what basis is there a moral obligation to call
out people asking questions I don't agree with. I have
a lot of criticisms of Candace's stuff and her whole
Roman Catholic nonsense, tradcat nonsense. Okay, but on what basis,
in what talmudic ethics, is that the basis for the
obligation to call it out? Like what are you talking about?
Look at all these dumb conservative normies, Like this is
why liberals get so snickery and like snooty and snobby
and self satisfied, is because they they see they think
conservative is this is all these goobers who are just
basically dumb normies.
Speaker 2: Erica Kirk and TPUSA never never should have put in,
never should have been put in the position to have
to defend themselves against such specious and evil attacks, particularly
in a time of mourning.
Speaker 1: Well maybe, but I mean it really just depends. So
just because a person is mourning, I mean, if you're
a suspect in say a spouse's murder. And I'm not
saying Thatmerica Kirk is a suspect, I'm just saying there
is no like self evident rule or principle that says
you can never be a suspect because you're in mourning.
I mean a criminal who has committed a close of
ken or spouse murder can still mourn or give the
appearance of mourning. Like, what are you talking about? This
is all just assertions. By the way, this is why
he would not actually do well in a debate. Can
somebody name a debate opponent that actually was a significant
intellectual challenge? Like, who other than and Alex O'Connor is
not a significant intellectual challenge. He's not some great brain.
He's a midwit too. So where is the actual high
IQ person that Ben Shapiro is actually ever debated? Because
he has this reputation of being Oh he's this amazing debater. Okay,
when did he do this other than purple haired college tards?
Speaker 2: Never And the people who refuse to condemn Candace's truly
vicious attacks, and some of them are speaking here, are
guilty of cowardice, Yes, cowardice.
Speaker 1: The fact that they the way is he saying Tucker
is a coward? I don't understand.
Speaker 3: Have said nothing?
Speaker 2: Well, Candace has been vomiting all sorts of hideous and
conspiratorial nonsense into the public.
Speaker 3: Square for years. Is just as cowardly.
Speaker 1: Now, didn't Ben Shapiro put himself up as a free
speech advocate? So unless the speech is criminal, Like, why
on what basis as a libertarian free speech advocate is
been Shapiro going to say that even and if it's
vile conspiracy vomit, like, what's the moral duty to call
it out? On what basis? Like? Can you show me
the section of the Mishna or the Talmud scrolls? Ben
have the moral obligation to call out conspiracy theories? By
the way, the Talmud itself is a conspiratorial It argues
that Jesus was a sorcerer. So I'm confused. Do I
have to condemn that conspiracy theory to Ben or what?
Speaker 5: Second?
Speaker 2: Because we owe you the truth, we owe you the
duty to speak out of principle, not personal feeling. It
should not matter whether we despise someone or whether we
love someone. The question is what they say and what
they do, and whether those things are morally decent or
not on a political level, do they foster freedom, justice,
and prosperity.
Speaker 3: On a personal level.
Speaker 1: What is moral decency according to tumutic ethics? And I'm
not harping on that to be up to. That is
his ethical system. So I mean, give us a coherent
account of your moral standards in regard to how you
know you believe that you should handle your opposition. I mean,
particularly he believes Christians are absolute trash, enemies eat on,
they're enemies of Israel. But he doesn't tell any of
his you know, dumb boomer evangelical audience.
Speaker 2: That they treat others as they would wish to be treated.
Personal feeling is not a substitute for moral judgment. To
take again, the Candade's owned situation as an example, friendship
with public figures who say or do evil things is
not an excuse for silence on the matter. Politics is
not the sisterhood of the Traveling Pants.
Speaker 3: Politics is about principle.
Speaker 2: And if you are willing to sacrifice basic truth and
simple principle in favor of emotional solidarity, you have betrayed
your fundamental.
Speaker 1: So some people are having a debate over the size
of this podium, and I did look into this. If
you go down the rabbit hole, it actually turns out
those little things that they use to separate and keep
the pizza from getting squashed, that's actually the podium that
they're using at TPUSA for Ben Shapiro. So there's been
podium if you're wondering the size, and that is to
scale right there. That is the actual size.
Speaker 3: But he's the American people. Grand Canyon University, our sponsor.
Speaker 2: It's an affordable, privately easy for me, new and existing
customers can get fitted. Young mother and thus shying away
from condemning her actions or figuring it about them, that
is a non starter. Megan Markle is a young mother,
ilan Omar is a young mother.
Speaker 3: That doesn't matter.
Speaker 2: And when Megan said this week quote, my goal in
my job here is to try to understand, yes, where
Candice is coming from on this.
Speaker 1: I don't really believe that Ben Shapiro actually cares about
the lives of gentile children, especially with the sacrament of abortion,
which most Jews. Maybe Ben Shapiro has some way around this,
but most Jews believe that abortion is a religious right,
even amongst these so called orthodox Jews. So I don't
I'm not sure I believe that he's really concerned about babies.
Speaker 2: And so she sees no purpose in inserting herself quotes
into this. On one side, that is a moral and
logical absurdity. There is only one moral side here, Erica
Kirk's side.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm not sure I buy that line of argument.
That's also a fallacy, that's a false either or so.
Ben's speech so far has been loaded with slogans and
rhetoric and fallacies, and it is much more in the
domain of propaganda than an actually convincing intellectual speech. But
as Bertrand Russell said, you will capture a much larger
audience with smells, bells, loud noises, a twenty piece orchestra
than you will with anything to do with facts and logic.
Speaker 2: You know, the side of the widow with two children
whose husband was shot live on camera in front of
all of us. Friendship with the person accusing TPUSA of
a cover up of Charlie's murder is no excuse for cowardice.
Speaker 1: Third, and relatedly, so again two shots at Tucker because
Tucker won't condemn everything that Candace says and does. So again,
how is that facts and logic? Though? This is all
moral like blackmail, and it's the same thing that Roots noticed,
the same tactic of Roots of Orthodoxy and Ben Shapiro
here and again, I do not agree with all of
Candace's views. I think Candace, as we said in my
critique of her, has a tendency to latch onto things
without a lot of evidence and run with it. And
her answer oftentimes is I'm okay, I'm okay, well this
is what I feel. Okay, Well, just saying this is
what I feel isn't good enough when it comes to
this type of stuff. Okay, So, but I'd still fall
down on the side of when Lord Valdemort was attacked
over questioning events and if you remember, Piers Morgan did
the exact same thing to Lord Baldemort back in the day,
So you believe that. Of course, I believe that George
Bush was guilty and wanted to kill all the American people.
It just this weird sort of fake that George Bush
ran the whole thing, which, of course, as you know,
it's never said that George Bush wasn't competent enough to
run an entire black ops operation. And so what they
do is they characterize the person who's questioning, and it
doesn't matter if the motives are bad. This is why
everybody wants to shift debates into the motives of the
person debating. It's the gayest thing ever because you can
never prove or disprove anyone's motives unless you have explicit,
textual DM evidence of Ah, I have bad motives. I
will fool them all, but hardly anybody's actually going to
put that into text or into print if they have
bad motives. So you can never really prove bad motives.
It's a slimy debate tactic to turn things into moral
blackmail and moral motivations and debating motives. You can't prove
or disprove people's motives. It's very, very difficult, but it's
the easiest way to fleck the debate into debating about people. Now,
in the case of people in our audience, in our circles,
they do it all the time, rather than say, listening
to Andrew Wilson's argument, Andrew Wilson has a beer and
smokes a cigar. He smokes a cigarette, he smokes a pipe.
No he doesn't. I'm just jokingly. Look it's Gandolf with
a pipe. Now, as if that has anything to do
with what's being said. They do it to me all
the time. Oh, Jay made a fat joke about Erica Borrow,
so he's mean. I don't have to listen to what
he says and all of his arguments are therefore disqualified
because he made a fat joke seven years ago about borrow.
It's like, are you seriously this is this is the
level of childishness and just soap opera. But that's what
masses of people resonate with. And the thing with like
Ben Shapiro or Roots of Orthodoxy or you know, Roots
of Grifting. I guess we should say is that they
know that that's a better way to get attention than
dealing with any actual issues. And in the case of
this scammer, which we said day one, he was a scammer.
Remember all of the comments when I started going into
his Instagram comments calling out Roots of Orthodoxy as a
scam and it was like just walls of people attacking me.
Oh he's so mean, Oh he's living up to his reputation.
Look at Dyer. He's called, well, dare you say this
about such a fine young man? You mean the guy
who's the bff but buddy with voice of Greason. And
then it comes out the Voice of Greason is a fake,
a fraud of phony, as I said all along, but
I'm still bad because I talked about it. Then we
talked about roots of Orthodoxy, was scamming all of the
dumb new Orthodox converts. And I don't mean they're all.
I mean they're dumb because they're new and they think, oh,
it's just an Orthodox channel. What's wrong with rout the
Orthodox because it's not Orthodox. He's a fake. He even
grifted and tricked the priests. And what does he do
once he gets called out? And if people start to
figure out his scam? You cannot make this up. He
fake cries with crocodile tears, the fakest thing ever. I
gotta make this big screen so you can see this.
His sniffles and his tears are so fake. There are
no tears. By the way, he could have at least,
you know, stuck an onion in his face and at
least made some fake tears if he was going to
go this route according to him, no Ortho Bros Significantly.
Virtue posted about the Catholic School Pop Pop event. What.
First of all, it's not true. Tons of Orthodox people
talked about it. But imagine the let's just think about
this psychologically of how messed up this is. This means
that in his mind, the way that you actually care
about people is through virtue piety signaling in social media.
So from his vantage point, if you don't virtue piety
signal on social media, you're not actually being pious. How
does he know that people weren't privately praying? It's this wildest,
weirdest thing ever. Is totally transparent to anybody with any
sense of discernment. As I said for years that this
guy was a fraud. Finally, thank god, everybody is finally
saying Jay was right. This guy was a fraud. Yeah,
I told you, of course, I said it day one.
How did I know? Because he put his one hundred
thousand view silver play button on his icon wall at
the center. Nobody who is serious about Christ puts their
icon wall behind them in their videos and puts the
play button in the middle of the icon wall. That's
the fakest thing ever. Obviously, then it comes out that
he's not Orthodox. He's hosting all of these orientals. Then
it starts being a thing where he's pushing all this
piety signally stuff. Then he starts asking priests trying to
get them to condemn the Ortho bros. And then it
became obvious, Hey, wait a minute, he's doing the same
thing as that Christ and Culture guy. They act like
their Eastern Orthodox, build an audience, and then switch it over.
What happened is the audio that's a numper? Some let
me do the work, run test tests. Is that better?
Is the mic not working around? I mean, everything looks
like it's going good over here. By the way, did
you like y'all liked the upgrade? We got a giant,
fancy new light. Okay, So they he and that other
Oriental dude build a giant audience based around the impression
that their Eastern Orthodox. Then they start sliding in all
their Oriental stuff, and the Orientals did this exact same
thing in twenty eighteen. It's a scam, and you guys
are so naive my audience. I'm talking about people who
are new to Orthodoxy get on Instagram and they see
reels and whatnot, and they just assume everybody's good will
and everybody's Orthodox. And then it turns out after they
built a giant audience based on deception, No, they're not Orthodox.
They never were, and we don't even know they were
actually inquirers. So what they did was they presented themselves
to Father Desiah, to Father Paul Trunanbach or whoever, as
if they were inquiring an Orthodoxy. I don't even think
that's true. I mean, there's no evidence. That's just we're
just taking these grifters' words for it. So then they
do all these interviews, build up the channel, and then
they start slipping in the Oriental mon office site stuff
that started making everybody suspicious. That's when people noticed, hey,
wait a minute, this guy puts his play button on
his icon wall. Nobody who's serious but Orthodoxy would do that.
It's crazy. It's a grifter sign obviously. And then lo
and behold. Once people start figuring out this guy's a grifter,
he has a meltdown. And now all the Ortho bros
are back. Why because we didn't virtue signal on media enough.
I kid you not. You got to hear this if
you missed it.
Speaker 6: When the shooting happened at the Annunciation Church at the
Catholic these guys were freaking silent. All of these Orthodox
guys were silent, and that pisses me off. They were
silent until they found out that an Orthodox girl got shot,
and that's when they started carrying.
Speaker 1: Just totally made up. He's just completely making up out
of thin air. Bull crop and the fake sniffles are
the icing on the cake.
Speaker 6: They started carrying only when they found out that Orthodox
guol got shot.
Speaker 5: You.
Speaker 6: Orthodox apologists are absolutely freaking disgusting. You're disgusting.
Speaker 1: No, the only reason we're disgusting is that day one
we pegged you as a total fraud and we were right.
And now you're having a meltdown. Just like any feminist
TikTok or girl that gets called out, they do the
exact same thing. They have an emotional These people are
just the worst, and it's unbelievable they didn't capitalize on
a tragedy like me on social media publicly showing how
much I pray for everyone human being.
Speaker 5: You are trash.
Speaker 1: Listen to the fake sniffs, dude, the fake sniffs That
is just hilarious to me.
Speaker 6: Shot and that's when they started carrying. They started carrying
only when they found out that Orthodox school got shot.
Speaker 1: You.
Speaker 6: Orthodox apologists are absolutely freaking disgusting. You're a discussing human being.
Speaker 1: You are, now, this is the guy who helps do
all the video stuff for Voice of Sleezing. Where is
your moral outrage for what Voice of Sleezeing did with
all of his plump booty texting of his catechism girls
in his catechism. No moral outrage for that, and what
does he come up with. This is a recent interview,
by the way, this is not months ago when the
tragedy event happened. This is a new interview. And this
is what this retard comes up with. This is insane.
He sounds like feminists on TikTok. This is what feminists
on TikTok do when they get caught in giant lies.
They do this trash.
Speaker 6: I'm not you are disgusting human being that you only
cared about these kids. You didn't care about these kids,
You only cared about the person who was Orthodox.
Speaker 1: And I will be when apologies from all the people
that called me names, because for the last two or
three years I've called him out as a fraud. I
was right, you were wrong, So I will be accepting
your apologies today. Now, that's the same moral blackmail that
this guy is doing.
Speaker 2: We have a duty to take responsibility for what we
say and do if we hire awful people responsible for that.
Speaker 3: I have some experience there, as you might suspect.
Speaker 1: By the way, this is the same tactic as the
left that anybody that you associate with, anybody you interview,
and anyone that you don't publicly denounce, you are therefore
toxified by and supporting. This is a leftist tactic. It's
so annoying, and all of these people try to do it,
even these fake conservatives in the media, and this guy
is like the arch fake conservative of all times. It's
like the pope of fake conservatism right here.
Speaker 2: That means that if we offer a guest for your viewing,
we owe it to you to ask the kinds of
questions that actually get at the truth. If we agree
with the guests, that's fine, but we should own it.
Speaker 1: Okay, what about questions relating to criticism of Israel ben
is that allowed or is that part of the truth,
or is that that's all just pure hate and anti simit.
You know what, even though Arab peoples are also Semitic peoples,
so it makes no sense, but it does have to
make sense.
Speaker 2: So, for example, if you host a Hitler apologist, Nazi
loving anti American piece of refuse like Nick Flintes, you notice.
Speaker 1: By the way, no, none of these people will actually
have a debate with any person that they oppose. None
of them will actually debate these people. Ben Shapiro has
billed himselves as this amazing debater, this great debater of
our age. Why will Ben Shapiro not debate any person
that could be a significant challenge to him? It's all
low hanging fruit, yeah, roots of heterodox exactly.
Speaker 2: You know the Nick Flintez who said that the Vice
President of the United States is a quote fat gay
race trader.
Speaker 3: Married to a jeat. The person who said that Charlie.
Speaker 1: But reading this stuff out is actually kind of funny, though,
let's see it.
Speaker 2: You know, the Nick Flintes who said that the Vice
President of the United States is a quote fat gay
race trader married to a jeat. The person who said
that Charlie Kirk was a quote retarded idiot. The person
who said, and pardon my language here, it's his quote
that he quotes, took turning point USA and did and
that's why it's filled with Graper's. If you have that
person on your show and you proceed to glaze him,
you ought to own it.
Speaker 1: So again, relating to Tucker, these are jobs at Tucker.
I don't know if Ben gave the speech first before Tucker,
or if Tucker was before Ben. But we're gonna get
to that one in a moment.
Speaker 2: There is a reason that Charlie Kirk despised that Nick
quin As and indeed even tied Intaneshkasuza for debating him.
He knew that Nick Fuentz is an evil troll and
that building him up is an act of moral imbecility.
And that is precisely what Tucker Carlson did. He built
Nick Fuenttes.
Speaker 1: I mean to even be having to address these people's
challenges is a sign that these people are worried, because
you know, Fuentest trolled TPUSA and Ben Shapiro for years
and they just ignored Nick and Nick's critiques and challenges,
and that now they're having to address these things, regardless
of what we think of Nick, or what we think
of Candice or what you think of Tucker, that they're
having to give these speeches addressing this, and it's all
just heidy signaling and moral blackmail is itself a sign
I think.
Speaker 2: Of Pan and he ought to take responsibility for that,
just as he ought to take it again.
Speaker 1: And the reason is that because Nata, who said they're
fighting an eight to nine front war and Twitter is
the battleground. The Internet's the battleground. That's why my feed
in the for You is all evangelical zioslop because it's
being paid for. And all of these idiot shills who
are all a bunch of heretics like Mike Swinger. Look
at Mike's swinger, Ben Shapiro with right, this is the
same guy who has thrice turned down. They're two or
three times turned down a debate. I've offered three times,
two or three times to debate him. No, no, no, no, no,
he will not and he is just the same as
all of the other evangelical fraud slap people that make
up the entirety of the for You. All of my
for You is just this that stuff NonStop, so it's
basically useless. I cannot even look at the for You
because it is all of this propaganda. And you guys,
remember what was it a few weeks ago I offered
all of these evangelical Zionis pastors. I went one by
one by one, dming them publicly and privately asking them
to debate. Christian Prince is proud of you of what
Christian Prince is Another lunatic idiot cult uder didn't even
know who Affinacious was, so none of the evangelical Zio
pastors would even come to debate. They're not able to debate.
It's all paid for propaganda.
Speaker 2: Responsibility for glazing pornographer and alleged tex trafficker Andrew Tates,
or for mainstreaming fake historian and soon Nazi apologist Darryl
Cooper as America's best and most honest popular historian. Hosts
are indeed responsible for the guests they choose.
Speaker 1: And now I don't agree with the support of the
Tait stuff, so I would agree with Ben Shapiro on
this point. However, to again say that everyone's positions are
bad because they associate with or have interviewed this or
that person is a leftist, dirty, slimy tactic. Guess what
this is media? Everyone in media interacts with and goes
on the shows of all the other media people. And
to try to turn that into a you must denounce
these people or else you are morally complicit, and it's
just it's just a slimy, ridiculous expectation in media. For
and I I went on Lord Boldemore's show, we had
a media person do this to me who was somewhat
prominent who were friends of ours, and this person said,
you are trash if you dare go on a Lord
Voldemort's show. And I'm like, it's media. That's like, that'd
be like if you were a band saying we hate Metallica,
and so if you're if you open for Metallica, you're
evil in your trash. Okay, Well it's media. Like it's
a job, dude, that's how media works. You get offered
spots and jobs by going on shows, and to turn
that into some gay weaponized thing like if you go
on this person's show, I won't like you anymore. But
this isn't high school, it's the adult world.
Speaker 7: Questions they ask those guests.
Speaker 2: Fourth, because we have a duty to truth, we also
have a duty to provide you with evidence of the
claims that we make, emotive accusations, conspiracy theories and just
asking questions. That's lazy and stupid and miss Leak.
Speaker 1: Well, it may be lazy, it is not necessarily lazy.
So again, this is all trading on ambiguities. It could
be I mean, if Candice runs with something without sufficient evidence,
that could be lazy, and they could be hasty, but
the blanket thing of like anyone doing this. In other words,
if you dare doubt America's pro Israeli foreign policy, you
are therefore a part of Qatar. You are therefore a
part of I mean, people were questioning this before anybody
even knew about some Katar lobby. This has existed for decades.
This exists all the way back to Father Hoflin, the
Roman Catholic priest, to Charles Lindberg. Those were the original
America first people. So this idea that this is all
some recent kataris this is retarded. There were leftists who
got fired and were run out of media, like what
was that Arab woman? What was named Helen Thomas or whatever?
She was fired and run out of mainstream media for
questioning Israel. The CNN guy what was his name, Sanchez,
Rick Sanchez, Mel Gibson run out of Hollywood for criticizing
media and other issues. Right, So this idea that oh,
the kots no people are figuring out that America doesn't
want to support and fight Israel's wars and it's a
double standard and we don't benefit from it, and they
use sexpionage and compromise our leaders and our people via
Epstein and everybody knows it now, and then they say
you should take all the Muslims. No, this is just
ridiculous hypocrisy, and people have figured that out now. You
can't stop people from waking up to that. And nobody
cares about being called racist anymore. No one cares, They don't.
People don't give an f anymore.
Speaker 2: Thank None of them are a substitute for truth, none
of them are a substitute for evidence. So when Candice
Owen says, I don't know no, but I know that
is retarded and we are all more retarded for having heard.
Speaker 1: It, well, I would imagine that we could probably find
all kinds of things that Ben Shapiro has theories on
that he doesn't know no. So I mean, was there
a conspiracy on the part of tiny mustache man to
eradicate Israeli people or your people group?
Speaker 8: Ben?
Speaker 1: Is it was that a conspiracy? Or is that? I mean, like,
where's the line between real conspiracies and retardi conspiracies? Because
if you remember, then supported all the establishment positions until
it became unpopular post koof and then flipped and was
critical of that, just like he was a never trumper
and then flips. He's ends up, Oh, no, yeah, I'm
mag Mag, I'm mag Maga, Magan you were You're not Maga.
Now I don't even care about Maga. But I'm just saying,
like all these people flipped loop and then act like
they were always the face of conservatism. No, you were
a neocon Libertardian and you've never debated anybody above a
twenty IQ purple haired college freak.
Speaker 2: When Steve Bennon, for example, accuses his foreign policy opponents
of loyalty to a foreign country, he's not actually making
an argument based in evidence. He's simply maligning people that
he disagrees with, which is indeed par for the course from.
Speaker 1: Oh now Bannon's bat uh oh, who's been this pro
Israeli person for all this time, and now he's beginning
to budge away from unfettering support of Israel. And so
now Shapiro has to see they wouldn't even be calling
all this out if they weren't freaking out and realizing
that people are tired of the double standard and nobody
wants to just fight wars for Israel.
Speaker 3: And who's once a pr flag for Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 1: Checked okay, record Okay, but Ben, who was Jeffrey Epstein
compromising people? For according to some of the Israeli heads
of intelligence, Oh Israel.
Speaker 2: Our duty to provide you evidence means we actually have
to do much more than just ask questions. Just asking
questions is something my five year old does, and it's
really cute when it comes for my five year old.
Speaker 3: But when grown men and women spend.
Speaker 2: Their days just asking questions without you know, seeking answers,
they are lying to you.
Speaker 3: In fact, they're doing something.
Speaker 1: First of all, everybody who asks these questions, for the
most part, is seeking answers. So I don't know where
he gets this idea that they're not actually seeking answers,
they're just asking questions. Well, even by your own line
of argumentation, if they're bad faith in asking the questions,
they're implying what the answers are. So that's not even
true according to your critique.
Speaker 2: Even worse, they are seeding distrust in the world around you,
and they are enervating you in the process. So, for example,
if many speakers, including Tucker Carlson and others, get on
stage here at TPUSA and claim without proper evidence that
Jeffrey Epstein was running a Masad rape ring being covered
up by the Trump administration. They are not actually uncovering
a conspiracy or effectuating as.
Speaker 1: What about all of the meetings with a Hood Barack
at Jeffrey Epstein's place? What about Whitney Webb's volume two,
which covers all of us? What about the Israeli intelligence
heads that say that it was all about that? So
it's almost like all the evidence points in that direction.
He knows that there's evidence for that. But if you
talk about that, you're just a malicious, bad faith person
who doesn't really care about the answers. No, people are
not buying your bull crap anymore. Dude, How many times
did Jeffrey and Ewood Barack meet? Thirty six? But according
to Ben Shapiro, that is irrelevant, doesn't matter. Me's nothing.
Speaker 5: A corn.
Speaker 1: To Ben Shapiro, there is no sexual compromise that doesn't exist.
It's not a thing. It's all made up. Everybody is
a conspiracy theorist who questions known liars imagine pushing the
normy slop narrative. In twenty twenty five, they.
Speaker 2: Are claiming a special providence to information they won't let
you see, which builds their power and leaves you with none.
Speaker 3: They are also implicating.
Speaker 1: All of this information is public. I don't know what
you're talking about, like information that they won't let you see. Like,
what are you even talking about? I mean, mh is
the is this uh hidden information that nobody wants to
let you see. Let's see if we can find that clip.
Speaker 5: With h.
Speaker 3: M hm hm. H R.
Speaker 9: Point headed a military intelligence at some point, head of
military intelligence in Israel and he apparently was very friendly
with Epstein. And yeah, you probably would have known about.
Speaker 10: The Problemary with your accusations and allegations are that you're
not providing any evidence that Israel was part of running
Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 9: Well again again, Maxwell was working for Israel. The Epstein
was working for Maxwell at the time, and he was
introduced to Maxwell's daughter and they were introduced to Israeli intelligence.
Speaker 1: Uh, this is not hard to figure out. And all
of this is in the open.
Speaker 2: In their speculation. Actual human beings, good at human beings
like Cash Ptel and Dan Bongino and Pambine.
Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, all the good human beings that support everybody
being interchangeable economic units, right Allah Sam Hide Show Episodes
one and two and yes.
Speaker 2: The President of the United States, even if they're too
cowardly to say President Trump's name. And that means you
won't trust those good people in the future. You haven't
gotten smarter, You've just been manipulated. When forced to demonstrate
their evidence, these same people will often refuse to provide it.
They'll claim ignorance, they'll pretend they're outside the system, and
they don't have access to actual information. You know, they're
just asking questions.
Speaker 1: I mean, I just gave you already been Minashi, and
he detailed the history of Robert Maxwell as a known
masade operative. So I mean that doesn't matter. That's all
made up. It's not evidence.
Speaker 2: But many of these same people have direct pipelines to
informational sources. So for example, if Tucker wants answers to
his questions about, say Jeffrey Epstein, he could call the
Vice President of the United States, he's quite close with him.
But he won't because that might undermine the empty speculation.
Speaker 1: None of this means, why would calling jd Vance do
anything about the Epstein information? That would assume that jd Vance.
We don't even know that jd Vance has seen this material.
Like what I don't understand that logic.
Speaker 3: There aren't actual real conspiracies in the world. Of course
there are, oh really, like what, but.
Speaker 2: Actual conspiracies require actual evidence.
Speaker 1: Well, I agree with that, but the idea that there
is no evidence around Epstein is absurd, especially if you
read volume two Whitney Webb's book.
Speaker 2: Yes there was a Russia gay conspiracy, and we know
the names of the people involved and what they did.
Speaker 3: We know.
Speaker 1: Oh okay, So the only things that's allowed to be a
conspiracy are the things that Ben Shapiro has approved. There's
late after the fact, after everybody else already figured out
it was a conspiracy.
Speaker 2: Hillary Clinton infusion EPs and James call Me and Loretta
Lynch and Adam Schiff, we know all of those people. Yes,
there was a COVID nineteen conspiracy.
Speaker 3: We know.
Speaker 1: You mean when you pushed all the normy stabby narrative
that one, and then you flipped after everybody figured out
it was fake and gay, and you suddenly became oh, yes, Champion,
these people are so fake, dude.
Speaker 2: Well that Anthony Faucive worked to shut down alternative solutions
from people like Jay Boticharia. But when people posit a
conspiracy and then provide you no evidence. They are doing
you a fundamental disservice and they are making you stupider
in the process. Finally, because it is our job to
make the lives of our audience better, right, That's really
our job is to give you more information to make
your lives better.
Speaker 3: We have a duty to propose solutions.
Speaker 2: That's why we have to talk about our problems in
order to find the solutions. That's what politics was supposed
to be about, after all, finding.
Speaker 1: This was what he said. I heard the clip today
on Lord Voldemort said of the Fourth Hour, and he
mentioned that Alex and the conspiracy people never have solutions.
That's absolutely insane. Alex is the one who, especially twenty
sixteen seventeen, with the biggest audience out there, actually helped
get He was sort of the spearhead of Trump getting elected.
So this idea that Alex didn't take action, even if
you dislike Trump, I'm just pointing out that Ben Shapiro's
claim against Alex is absurd. It's just patently false that
Alex isn't a black pilled person. I'm more black pilled
than Alex's and I'm not totally black pilled. I'm just
saying I'm more black pilled than Alex's, but that Alex
Jones and conspiracy people in his audience are black piled
as retarded, That's just not even true. I mean Alex
was like at the forefront of getting Trump elected.
Speaker 3: Solutions to our common problems if we.
Speaker 1: Speak, and this guy was a never Trumper, So what
do you mean.
Speaker 2: Flee about the problems we face without ever positing a
solution other than wrecking the system or centralizing power in
a cult like figure.
Speaker 3: We are not finding solutions.
Speaker 2: We are merely making problems worse, just asking questions, positing
vague conspiracies, raving like Alex Jones about the secret confederacies
that control your life. None of it makes your life better,
none of it.
Speaker 1: Well, if the conspiracies are about Israeli control of our
foreign policy, et cetera, then that might be a threat
to what Ben represents. So that might be an issue.
That might be why Ben doesn't want you to talk
about those types of conspiracies.
Speaker 3: In fact, it makes your life markedly worse.
Speaker 2: That's because if you truly come to believe that nothing
in your life is in your control, you can't even
take control of your own life, you despair of your
ability to change your own circumstances, and then you fail,
and you must not fail.
Speaker 1: This part is actually true, not that I agree with
what he said about Alex, because Alex doesn't say that
you don't control anything in your life. Alex says the
opposite of it. So this was Ben Shapiro being very
just totally slimy and dishonest with what Alex Jones's positions are.
Speaker 3: Because here is the most fundamentals.
Speaker 1: Look at all these idiot boomers in his audience, that's
his audience. Is these boomers get these like no clue
at all, like how the world works, what's happening? Just
just blue blue boomers, blue sad blue boomers in the audience,
cheering on their fake conninc mouthpiece.
Speaker 5: The truth of.
Speaker 2: All in the United States, all of its problems, many
of which a huge.
Speaker 1: And by the way, this is the guy who just
hired Matt Frad, the calf Ink faker.
Speaker 3: Number of which are real and serious.
Speaker 2: The United States is still the greatest country in the
history of planet Earth.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but that has nothing to do with Zionism in
Israel first, and all of your fake conservative gibberish, that's
actually funny. Yeah, like the blue pilled boomers in the
audience are portrayed in the color blue. That's actually pretty funny.
Speaker 2: We have the greatest constitution ever devised by man. We
have the greatest founding philosophy ever puts a paper in
the Declaration of Independence in this country.
Speaker 3: You can make of yourself what you.
Speaker 2: Will, and if there are true obstacles standing in your way,
we can all work together to remove them. That, by
the way, is the essence of conservatism. That we live
in a world created by God with a logic and
a rationale, That we as human beings, were created in
God's image, as it says in the Book of Genesis,
with creative capacity and the power to choose, and that
in a free country of limited government and to find powers,
with property rights and equality under law, our destiny is
in our hands, and that we all.
Speaker 1: But I'm pretty sure that in Talmudic law, that's not
the print. There is no equality under Talmudic law, So
I'm not sure what I mean. Does Ben Shapiro have
a dual ethic, an ethic for public face and then
an ethic that's a private ethic.
Speaker 2: Interesting, we have a duty to make the most of
that historic opportunity. Anyone, anyone who tries to convince you
otherwise is lying to you, and they are making your
life worse in the process.
Speaker 3: Now that law may feel good in the moment, it
means all right.
Speaker 1: I've had enough of this. We're going to stop there.
We've done most of it. Let's move over here to
the the age bait of Tucker's talk. And you know,
I mostly disagreed with Ben Shapiro. You did make a
couple points that I agreed with at one point towards
the end, that you shouldn't be black built and think
that your life doesn't matter, and that everything's a conspiracy
that's retarded. But that's a far cry from questioning APAC
and Israeli, you know, control of foreign policy. Now, this
whole nonsense that Tucker is a Katari operative, this is stupid.
And I'm gonna say why, Because seventeen eighty nine capital
is this guy omar Omi Malik, Christopher Buzzkirk and Don
Trump Junior, Rebecca Mercer. So you've got Jews over here, right,
Jordan Cohen involved in seventeen But the dumb dumbs out
there that have this nonsense narrative that Tucker is a
Katari operative would have you believe that the Mercers and
Jake Jordan Cohen and Don Trump Junior are all working
for Katar to fund Tucker to oppose Israel, which is retarded,
and so it's just it's just a made up narrative.
It's just a venture capital thing in New Jersey, even
it's not in Qatar. And the guy is not even
they called him Pakistani. He's not Pakistani, He's Iranian American.
Speaker 5: Yeah, this is hilarious.
Speaker 11: Actually one of the clips I was listening to myself thinking,
as I often do when I hear myself speak, which
is never because I never watched myself, but at these events,
they always play like the role of you, and I'm like.
Speaker 5: That guy is pompous.
Speaker 11: Whoop.
Speaker 5: Sorry about that. We don't see ourselves clearly.
Speaker 11: But the prediction that, you know, at some point when
Republicans took power again, which I did everything I could,
you know, to help, and really felt that was important.
I still think, you know, I was right, but I
really thought that the impulse to deep platform people or
even to use the word platform as a verb, which
it's not.
Speaker 5: It's a noun don't.
Speaker 11: Steal my nouns, deep platform and denounce.
Speaker 5: Why haven't you denounced somebody.
Speaker 11: Else the whole like red guard cultural revolution thing that
we so hated and feared on the left.
Speaker 1: Exactly what I said. I've not seen Tucker speech. This
is exactly what I said. Denounce this person or I
will moral morally blackmail you. That we did errole, roots
of grifting, roots of heterodoxy tactics. This is what fake
narcissistic creeps rely on, just like the feminists on TikTok
Ben Shapiro doing the exact same thing as the feminists
doing the exact same thing as roots of heterodoxy. Do
you see the pattern. I'm going to morally blackmail you
because you associate with so and so, denounce them or
else you are evil. It's a leftist tactic. It's dumb,
it's low iq, it's lazy. That's the real tactic of
leftism that most of the fake conservatives who were just
actually leftists. That's it.
Speaker 11: And we could to usher in a new time where
you could have an actual debate.
Speaker 5: I mean, this kind of was the whole point of
Charlie Kirk's public life.
Speaker 11: And I think that I think that he died for it.
I really believe that.
Speaker 5: And I know a lot about.
Speaker 11: It, because the last several months of Charlie's life were devoted.
Speaker 5: In part to arguing.
Speaker 11: About this event, in fact this speech, in fact my
speech here, which he asked me to do earlier this year,
this summer, and was immediately put under just immense pressure
from people who give.
Speaker 5: Money to turning point.
Speaker 11: I would assume good people, but who wanted him to
take me off the roster. And this has all become public,
and the whole thing is so said that I never
talked about it, except to say Charlie stood firm in
his often stated and deeply held belief that people should
be able to debate, and that if you have something
valid to say, if you're telling the truth, you ought
to be able to explain it calmly and in detail
to people who don't agree with you, and that you
shouldn't immediately resort.
Speaker 1: Could you imagine if they let me onto some stage
or platform this big and I could debate. Could you
imagine how insane that would be? I would never ever
be asked or invited to any of these types of things,
because the narrative is a circle and it's controlled as
to what you're allowed to speak about. Now, I'm not
saying that Tucker's back. Tucker and others are breaking that
narrative that Boomer mind mature's control. But I'm a level
beyond Tucker. I'm a phase beyond that of No, I
don't care about classical liberal values at all. In fact,
I critique them. I've been critiquing them all the way
back to when Jordan Peterson was pushing classical liberalism on
everybody ten years ago, and I critique Jordan Peterson, and
the entirety of the comments, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds
of them, was against me for critiquing George How dare
you critique Jordan Peterson? Well, guess who was right? Ten
years later? I was not Jordan Peterson. My critique of
classical liberalism was correct. That position is becoming more and
more normative. I'm the next phase beyond this stuff. I'm
not DISSINGC. Tucker. I'm saying, like the people, the normies
aren't ready for the stuff that we talk about. They're
not ready to talk orthodox monarchy yet. And that's probably
a century or two away. But could you imagine if
Ben Shapiro actually did agree to debate me, Like, dude,
come on, come on.
Speaker 5: Shut up racist.
Speaker 11: You shouldn't immediately go to motive. By the way, shut
up racist is the number one reason I voted for
Donald Trump.
Speaker 5: And because it's just sick.
Speaker 1: Nobody cares about being called racist anymore. And that's now
that the boomer mind matrix has been broken. Now we
can really start to change things and have real debates.
Speaker 10: I mean, first of all, so as by the way,
all the other races are racists, and as the third
world is in mass brought to the first world.
Speaker 5: It's a racist.
Speaker 11: If I was a big and I would just say, so, okay,
it's America. You're allowed to be whatever kind of person
you want.
Speaker 1: I'm not on what basis according to all of the normies.
This is where the debate needs to go. This is
where a pre supper like myself would take the debate.
The next time people start telling you you wastist, okay,
give to me the moral justification for why it is
wrong to be racist. Give the justice, Give the moral
structure and framework and argument as to why racism is bad.
Maybe it is. But if you are a classical liberal,
a classical shit lib anything goes. There is nothing wrong
if shit lib liberalism is true.
Speaker 11: I'm sincerely opposed, have always been and will always be.
But the style of debate where you prevent the other
side from talking or being heard because you immediately go
to motive, Well, I wonder why you're asking that.
Speaker 1: Exactly what did I say? I've not seen this speech yet.
That's the exact thing that I said at the beginning.
You can't debate or disprove motives. It's an impossible thing
to debate or disprove. That's exactly what I said.
Speaker 11: Shit, I wonder why why are you asking that question?
I detect in the question a certain evil in your soul.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly what Ben Shapiro says.
Speaker 11: And everyone listening should know that listening to you implicates
them and did they someday may be asked to denounce you,
and that friendship is not a reason to defend someone.
Speaker 5: Love is no defense.
Speaker 11: I kind of thought we'd reach the end of that,
and as far as I'm concerned, we have, and I'm
not going to play.
Speaker 5: By those rules.
Speaker 1: No Again, Ben Shapiro represents con inc and the libertarian
controlled narrative of the right. The right must always be
kept in bounds with classical liberalism because there is no
threat from classical liberalism. Classical liberalism always allows for the
fake left to gain ground, and the liberal conservatives are
always on the defensive, on the defensive. On the defensive,
they can never make any progress because they're battered over
the head with you're a bad person if you talk
about identity or identity politics, even when I'm pretty sure
that male and female are identities. I'm pretty sure that
white dude and black dude are identities, so there are identities.
There is no such thing as classical liberal interchangeable economic
units philosophy. And that's why they had to stamp out
and destroy the dissident right ten years ago, which they
pretty much successfully did, and now that it's making a
kind of a return, they got to stamp it out
again because it's got to go back to the Ben
Shapiro classical liberal Daily Wire. Fake Conservatives. Is that simple.
That's why things don't change. The Going Rot to You
book detailed this in the UK. The reason that the
UK never got anywhere was because they had a fake
controlled right wing, the Tories.
Speaker 5: I'm not going to engage in that.
Speaker 1: It's very simple. They can flood your country and if
you don't like it, you're racist. And everybody's terrified at
being called racist by people who don't have any view
of morals at all. There's no such thing as right
and wrong. But you it's wrong to be racist? Oh good,
why explain that? Give a justification with that?
Speaker 11: Well, they can't like what I think, fine with me,
as long as I get.
Speaker 5: To express it. That's my view.
Speaker 11: But since we're on the topic, I think I should
take the opportunity to explain why Charlie was under all
this pressure. And I think Erica, who I just saw
backstage and whom I love and who I can tell you,
is totally committed to continuing the core principle of Charlie's
public life, which is the right of every person to
express what he believes.
Speaker 5: That is rooted in Christian faith.
Speaker 11: We believe people should be able to say what they
think because they have souls.
Speaker 5: They're human beings created by God.
Speaker 11: They are not slaves, they are not animals, they are
not objects. You cannot tell another human being to shut up,
even shut up racist, because you don't own him. He
is an independent, autonomous person created by God as an individual.
Speaker 5: Okay, so that's right.
Speaker 1: Well, that's partly true, but that's not the essence of
what a person is. They're not merely individuals. They also
have real metaphysical collective identities that link them to their family,
to their tribe, to their heritage, to their tradition, to
their nation state. Those are all real metaphysical relations that
identify and pick out who a person is and to
act like. As the debate has always been couched for
the last fifty sixty years, you're either a collectivist liberal
or a conservative libertarian. Individualist is a fake and gay dialectic,
and that is breaking. That's the next thing to break.
And I think that they're terrified that that will will
be the next thing to break if the classical liberal,
liber libertarian boomer mind matrix falls, or maybe you could
argue that's more of a gen x mind matrix thing.
When that falls, it's over all this gibberish, all this nonsense,
all the gay crab, the transcript, it's all gone. Because
that leads to questioning rights. Wait a minute, do I
have a right to blaspheme? Do I have a right
to do public displays of art that are blasphemous? Do
I have a right to end life in my womb?
Wait a minute, what is a right? Where does that
come from? It's just arbitrary and for most, especially like
the Reddit tier atheist shit lives, it's given by the state. Okay, well,
the state can take it away. It's not a real
thing then.
Speaker 11: For free speech comes from and there's no accident. This
is the only country in the world that protects it
because our founding documents were informed, as you just heard
so nicely expressed by Michael Noles, my friend, by people
who self consciously incorporated Christian precepts into there.
Speaker 1: And this is why I know, of all of the
faith lords, Tucker is the closest to our sphere in
the Orthodox domain. And he's right about this notion of
having freedom and volition because we're made theams of God.
If we're not many names of God, we lose those
fundamental metaphysical categories of freedom, free choice, et cetera. However,
if Christianity is true, guess what. Historic Christianity and the
Church of Christianity also have a doctrine of Church state relations,
and that doctrine requires that eventually the state make Christian laws.
That's what the Orthodox imperium always did. That's what Christian
nations have done, especially Orthodox Christian nations that went to
war and fought against Muslims, like Serbia, like Byzantium, the Empire,
like Russia when it was Christian Orthodox explicitly, that's where
this leads, and the partisans of Enlightenment liberalism will lose
their power and their mindset, their Boomer mind matrix if
ever Christians and people begin to figure that out.
Speaker 5: Sure of government.
Speaker 11: So Charlie was committed to that, but the people around
him are like, you can't because it's not that Carlson's wrong.
My only point was I don't want a land war
with a wrong. I got over my skis and said
I didn't want another regime change war with a Run.
Rather than explain why we should have a regime change
war with the Run, on which I'd.
Speaker 5: Be happy to listen to. He's an anti Semite.
Speaker 11: He's an anti Semite, which I said, well, obviously that's
not true, and trys it.
Speaker 5: I know, and then it just didn't stop.
Speaker 11: So I continued to say I'm not an anti Semite.
Speaker 5: We don't care what you say. You're lying you are,
so let.
Speaker 11: Me just affirm one final time, not only am I
not an anti Semite, and would say so if I was,
I'm not an anti Semite for a very specific reason,
not because it's unpopular or my donors don't like it.
Speaker 5: I don't have any donors.
Speaker 11: I'm not an anti Semite because anti Semitism is immoral
in my religion. It is immoral to hate people for
how they were born, period.
Speaker 5: But that is not.
Speaker 11: A limited principle. That is a universal principle. It applies
to every human being.
Speaker 1: Now understand that Christian ethics, like Tucker is saying, does
not allow you to hate people in some you know, rabid,
you know, ferocious way. We love people and we want
the best for people, but we also believe that what
is best for people is Christ and that immediately puts
you into conflict, especially with people like Rabbinic Jews or
with Muslims, who both of which follow a Talmudic ethic
that is not based around loving people. I don't know
if you know that, but neither of them have that ethic.
They have an ethic of hatred of those that are
kafir idolators or those that are a malek or etom
right and let's understand from the famous operative of Victor
Ostrowski himself, the power in this term, in this weaponized term.
Speaker 8: Now I know what they do because I used to
ask them to do it. I mean when I was
in the Masada and we had a guy that gave
us problems in the US.
Speaker 9: And he was speaking out and he was talking like Pete.
Speaker 8: Talked once and said, Israel is bombing Lebanon with buster bombs.
Speaker 1: We said, hey, who's that guy, you know, mccakti.
Speaker 8: We used to call him, yeah, which is Pete the
cockroach because he makes a lot of noise and he
can't get rid of him. So what you do is
you get in touch with the guy in the in
the station in New York or in the station in Washington.
Speaker 3: You say, tell the guys at Benabria to label.
Speaker 8: Him, and of course the campaign starts. Before you know it.
Speaker 6: The guy's labeling.
Speaker 8: And he's an antisember because that's what we say.
Speaker 1: And that's one thing you cannot watch now.
Speaker 8: It shames me as a Jew attend to them.
Speaker 1: So there's Victor Ostrowski, the famous former operative, telling you
that the term is weaponized to control.
Speaker 11: People unplanet Earth. You may not you are prohibited by
my religion, which is Christianity, from hating people for how
they were born, because God created them with his spark
in his image, because they have souls. You can disagree
with them, you can hate their ideas, but people.
Speaker 1: Need to understand, especially in the Christian so called pseudo
Christian West, that the other systems don't have this ethic.
Muslims do not have this ethic. Rabbinic ethics is not
this ethic. Those systems have dual ethics, meaning one ethic
for those outside and it's separate ethic for those on
the inside. They don't have a universal treat everybody the
same and treat them all fairly ethic. And if you expect,
because Ben Shapiro puts on a nice face and this
kind of stuff, that they will, you're being naive. I'm
not saying Tucker's naive. I'm saying that that needs to
be what these people need to understand next.
Speaker 11: Even find yourself, and I do, I'll confess it hating
them for a moment, But you can't hate everyone who's
like them. You can't punish people for crimes they didn't commit.
That's the basis of our justice system. That's the basis
of Christian ethics. That's why we have what are called.
Speaker 1: By the way, I'm not arguing for Christian nationalism. There
is no possible Christian government that Doug Wilson and a
thousand other retarded sects are going to be able to
come up with. That's somehow lowest common I'm in you're Christian.
The only Christian government possible is an orthodox Christian nation
state when the majority of the people become Christians. I
know y'all are stupid, a lot of you out there,
because when I say this, I have to give the
same speech an explanation a thousand times over. That is
not coming anytime soon. That is coming in generations down
the road, when the majority of the people become Orthodox.
I'm not saying who talked aboutationalism was it? But what
was he talked about? No, I'm talking about two three
hundred years in the future when that's a real viable
political option. It's not a viable political option when an
Orthodox Christianity is a minority, obviously, and politics isn't first.
To put politics first is just another idolatry.
Speaker 11: Human rights they apply to every human, not just your group,
not just my group, but every group, every human because we.
Speaker 1: Don't not talking about my audience. I'm talking about the
people that come and out asked me the same questions.
Are you a Christian nationalist? What's your problem with Christian nationalism?
I'm not talking about my audience is super high AQ,
so he sys he hates his audience. No, I don't.
I'm talking about the dummies that are new here that
asked me the same question all the time.
Speaker 11: Center people in terms of the groups to which they belong,
we consider them as individuals the way that God created them.
So anti Semitism is not just naughty, it's immoral, and
it is precisely as immoral as hating any other group.
And that would include other groups in the United States
that are hated and have been under attack for decades.
Speaker 5: And that would include white.
Speaker 11: Men who did nothing to become white men.
Speaker 5: They were born that way.
Speaker 1: And just because he went full gaga, he was a
full lady God, I said, I was born this way.
Speaker 3: Woo woo.
Speaker 1: Okay, I'm getting rid of this retord. You're done, get
out here. That's the fact.
Speaker 5: Deep with a white man.
Speaker 11: Let's just say, Donald Trump doesn't mean you get to
punish all the rest of the white men in the country,
and yet our leaders, not just of our Congress.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but Robinic philosophy also is against these people, Tucker,
are you Are you aware of that phase of the
progression down the rabbit hole? Yet? I mean Rabbinic philosophy,
as nat Yahu said the other day, believes that Christianity
is eatom. It is the enemy, and it will must
eventually be destroyed.
Speaker 5: I can a branch under Biden.
Speaker 11: But of every major US corporation, of every college in
the country, probably except Hillsdale and two others, every single
one for more than ten years, has engaged in a
systematic effort to hurt white men because they are white men.
That is racism. That is precisely as.
Speaker 5: Bad as anti Semitism, but it is much more widespread
and happen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but again, people need to figure out like and
I think many people are figuring this out. Like all
the other cultures and races, they don't care about this.
They're not concerned with proving to everyone else how not
racist they are. Take Asians, all of the Asians, dislike
all the other Asians, and constantly make fun of all
the other Asians. The same with Latinos. Mexicans will diss
and make fun of the Puerto Ricans, and they'll diss
and make fun of the Venezuelans. So it just doesn't make.
Speaker 5: And so far much more damaging.
Speaker 11: And my point is if you said nothing about that,
or if you encouraged it by say cheering on BLM,
which was an anti hate group, and said so, then
you have no moral standing to lecture me about bias period,
because all bias is the same. You are not allowed
to hate people based on their bloodline. We do not
believe in blood guilt. We reject blood guilt. That's why
our justice system is just. That's why our religion is
just everything.
Speaker 1: But remember the other cultures and civilizations do not have
this same ethic, as I've been pointing out forever for years.
I've been making this argument since I was awakened to
these issues in two thousand and six and seven.
Speaker 11: Person has the possibility of transformation. Paul is wandering around,
Saul of Tarsus is wandering around murdering Christians. Then he decides, well,
I'll walk to Syria. And he's met on the road
by Jesus who changes him, and in one day he
becomes the most energetic church planter and apostle of Christianity
in one day.
Speaker 5: He went from enemy to leader in one day.
Speaker 11: And that possibility exists for every human being, every human being.
That's what our Christian faith tells us. That's also what
our eyes tell us. There are no permanent enemies. There
cannot be. And I would extend this to even people
who attack me from the stage.
Speaker 1: Well again, I think as talker gets more educated in
Christianity and Christian history, he'll realize and learn, no, there
are actual perpetual enemies. That's not true. I mean New
Testament in many places talks about enemies off the cross,
So that's not true.
Speaker 11: If we agree on something, I'm happy to be friends
with you.
Speaker 5: You may even mean to be one day. Well, I
was meaning to you too. That's all right.
Speaker 11: There is always the possibility that we can recognize we
have more in common than divides us and come back together.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But the problem is that that reconciliation, according to
Galatians three, only occurs in the Orthodox Church. It doesn't
really occur outside of Orthodoxy. Now, there can be instances
of people being reconciled, but the reconciliation that Paul's talking about,
and Tucker is referencing Paul. Here is not a camaraderie
that everybody just accepts in some social convention. No, No, it's
a orthodox Christian acceptance of we are all one in Christ,
whether Jew, whether gentile, weather slave, whether free, whether male
nor female. Now the woke lib misinterpretation of that passage,
as I saw somebody on a comment on one of
my videos the other day saying, Oh, Jesus comes and
wipes out your identity. Are you serious? So you think
Jesus is a savior who makes us all trends or
non binary. I'm being serious because if Jesus gets rid
of my identity and my heritage and my tradition, then
I'm also losing my gender. Because Paul says neither male
nor female, the passage doesn't mean he erases those things,
you idiot, You idiot. People are so stupid it's kind
of mind blowing. Actually, all he means is that in
terms of salvation, it doesn't matter whether your male or female,
or you are Greek. Everyone is saved and can be saved.
It doesn't erase your history. If it erased the history,
we want to include people color in the icons, everybody
would be the saints would be all gray. Well, Moses
the black as a black dude. And it's so weird
to even have to explain and debate this when nobody
even questioned this until after the nineteen sixties, Like the
entire world believe that Chinese people are Chinese people, Black
people are black people. The saints of the Church are
the saints, that they were raised, that their time and
place in history is part of their story. It's gnostic
to erase that and to have Chinese Jesus or everybody
loses there No, it says in Revelation in the Resurrection,
it's members of every tribe, tongue in nation worshiping the Lamb. Well,
that means they retain their racial identity and heritage. It's
not erased. We don't become gray goo beings in the escoton.
That's all just gnostic.
Speaker 5: There are no permanent enemies.
Speaker 11: There is no such thing as blood guilt and collective
punishment in this country in the Middle East.
Speaker 1: Any that's true A Tucker's correct, But remember that is
not the ethic of Muslims and Jews. They have a
different ethic, and even other pagan groups believe in blood
guilt and collective guilt.
Speaker 5: The planet is totally immoral.
Speaker 11: And if you want to know what makes America exceptional,
it's that idea and it's our job to defend it.
Speaker 1: Well.
Speaker 5: This Christmas give the gift of sleep.
Speaker 11: With eight been one of the most aggressive cheerleaders for
hate against white men in the United States, now trying
to lecture the rest of us about hate.
Speaker 5: I would say it's.
Speaker 11: Enough to point out the irony who said anything about
Many organizations now and particularly the supplies to the Anti
Defamation League, which has cheered on anti white hatred for decades,
has attacked to anyone who said anything about it, which
has been one of the most aggressive cheerleaders for hate
against white men in the United States, now trying to
lecture the rest of us about hate. I would say
it's enough to point out the irony of that costroy
this country.
Speaker 5: Certainly, the only thing that will save it is.
Speaker 1: Now the Zioslop commentators on X by the way they
have their comments, I kid you not. They were saying
Tucker was a screaming, rambling, incoherent mess. Brandon Tatum. Tucker
preaches anti Christianity. What now we haven't finished the talk yet,
but where has any of that? I mean, he's literally
so far just said Christian ethics is an ethics of
love that binds people too, not hating people, not having
vengeance and vendettas and blood guilt, et cetera. So far,
it's just basic Christian ethics. Now, maybe he's going to
say something erroneous. I don't know, but I mean, these
phonies on X everywhere on X are literally just just
losing their mind.
Speaker 11: If my brother went on a drug related murder spree,
I would not denounce him.
Speaker 5: What are you for?
Speaker 11: Drug related murder spree? He's knowing for my brother and
nothing will ever make him not for my brother.
Speaker 1: Now, look at the Zio commentators clipping that out that
Tucker says, my familial bonds are such that even if
my brother becomes a murderer, I'm still gonna love my brother. Right,
that's the point he's making. Obviously, he's not saying that
I support my brother being on a murders free And
look at the phony blogoney's here calling this out. Excuse me,
what is the Zio rabbinic policy about protecting criminals in
those organizations? There's nothing anti Christian about what he just said.
That's ridiculous. So these people are actually unhinged and insane
the understanding that principles upon which America was found to
apply to every single human being always.
Speaker 5: So I just want to say that by way of.
Speaker 11: Saying that I'm not just situationally opposed to anti Semitism.
Speaker 5: I'm actually opposed to antisemit.
Speaker 1: So all of this, by the way, like they don't care.
Like you can say all day long that you don't care.
I do not have the racist ethic of the Talmud,
and I do not have a double ethic, and I
love all that. They don't care. Man, people don't care
about you constantly decrying that. All they care about is
do you worship the nation state of Israel or not autism?
Speaker 3: And I hope that the ADL will join me.
Speaker 5: I'll send them money.
Speaker 11: By the way, if they come out against peate aimed
at anyone, and everyone hope they will.
Speaker 5: But let me just say something.
Speaker 11: More broadly about where the conservative movement, whatever that is.
Speaker 5: The people voted for Trump.
Speaker 11: The Trump coalition, and the supposed civil war going.
Speaker 1: On, there is no conservative movement in America. And that's
what we have to realize. I met with some people
from Russia who have a channel that's pretty large historian,
a sort of the Pago of Russia, and we had
a long conversation. They came to our event at our church,
and he had the argument that there really isn't a
conservative movement in America because America is built on liberalism. Exactly,
thank you. That's exactly what I've been saying for at
least the last ten years online. But more than that,
because I learned this by reading critiques of classical liberalism.
Twenty years ago, when I was a traditional Catholic, I
started reading critiques of classical liberalism and reading pro monarchist,
pro traditionalist works, and ever since then then I have
essentially been a critic of classical liberalism. Now it doesn't
mean that I disagree with everything, because there's parts of
classical liberal philosophy that retain Christian ethos, Christian elements, so
it's not all false but negative liberties. You know, the
idea that the state has no role except to foster trade.
I mean, none of that is realistic, none of that's historical,
none of that makes any sense. It's all just platitudes
that fake conservatives still push out to normy audiences that
still eat it up. They just eat at the slop
trough of normy bullshit, which I mean, I wish I
could convey how frustrating it is, for example, to have
critiqued Jordan Peterson on this point ten years ago and
to have the comments just ratio me into oblivion. The
original number of thumbs down on that video was like
it was like seven hundred to one hundred, right, one
hundred ups, like seven hundred down. Everything I said in
that video is one hundred percent spot on, but all
of the comments were cult personality, unquestioning support of Jordan Peterson,
without even considering any of the arguments I made. Ten
years later, the tables have turned. It's everything has flipped.
Now that they don't have the censorship lockdown that they
had ten years ago. People can speak more freely. I mean,
there's still a lot of censorship, but people are speaking
more freely. My video critiquing Jordan Peterson, what I just said,
it's like eight years ago, okay, almost ten years ago. Whatever.
What video the one critiquing Jordan Peterson from almost a
decade ago. Now it's flipped now I was right about
what I said, and we still have a small audience here.
I I don't know. Is it just because we don't
have millions of dollars of I mean, what is with
people who just can't understand arguments and they only follow
like flashy teleprompter presentations like I don't get it, Like
can can none of you can? None of these people
understand arguments. I guess not because most of these people
are in like evangelical jellyfish slop churches. They just they're
totally oblivious, just totally out to launch. And so Tucker
isn't even saying radical things. Tucker is saying like very
middle of the road stuff, and these people are losing
their minds.
Speaker 11: It's crazyn within that group. I don't think it's real,
Like it's fake. It's totally fake.
Speaker 5: I don't think. And I've had cause to think a
lot about this because I've been unwittingly.
Speaker 11: Involved in the proxy war. There are two things going
on here, and I'm not guessing one is jockeying for
position post Trump. So Trump created this amazing coalition bringing
in people who had never voted Republican before but were
very enthusiastic about him, and that coalition took over the
most powerful government in the history.
Speaker 5: Of the world.
Speaker 11: So there's a lot at stake here as the question
becomes who gets to run it after who gets the
machinery when the president exits the scene, and there are
a lot of people in Washington, maybe even in this room,
who aren't quite sure what they want, but they know
they don't want jd Vance. Okay, And so the attack
and you heard it from the stage tonight. There's someone
here who's a very bad man, and he's friends with
jd Vance.
Speaker 5: Could be me. I am sad.
Speaker 11: About being used in a proxy war over politics in
which I'm not involved in any level. I'm not an
advisor to anybody, but I just think I should say
that out loud. Okay, there are people who are mad
at jd Vance and they're stirring up a lot of
this in order to make sure he doesn't get the nominations.
Speaker 5: That this is true. So this raises the.
Speaker 1: I don't even I don't follow jd Vance or like,
what's what's the I don't even know what is the
controversy there? Like what are the people not like about him?
Is it just that jd Vance isn't Zio enough. I mean, like,
what's what is the critique of that? Somebody who follows
all this political stuff in the audience here, can you
enlighten me to what I thought jd Vance was pretty
much pro Israel? Is he beginning to fudge a little bit?
Is that what the concern is? Because these people freak
out if you don't worship Israel, These people just freak out,
They lose their mind. I'm aware of the pallunteer collection
or connection. What I'm asking is what is Tucker talking
about that there are people at this event that don't
like jd Vance. I know about the Peter Teel stuff.
I'm asking is that what Tucker is talking about? Or
what is he talking about?
Speaker 11: The question was just why are they met at jd
Vance such a nice guy? Which is they're mad at
Jady Vance because he is the one person and things
could change, of course, But right now, who really kind
of buys the core idea of.
Speaker 5: The Trump coalition? Now? What is that idea? Ladies and gentlemen,
anyone know? Anyone know? America first? It's America first.
Speaker 11: It's really simple, which I notice some people are pretty
anxious to retire that phrase. Remember when they told us
that's a bigoted phrase.
Speaker 5: Really it is, and then they.
Speaker 11: Just decided to ignore it in favor of maga make
America great again, which I'm obviously for. But how do
you make America great again by putting America first?
Speaker 1: Now?
Speaker 5: What does that mean? I'll be more precise.
Speaker 11: It's not a complicated Katie concept. It's a really simple concept.
The US government, the largest organization in human history, with
the most well funded military in history, ought to in
all the decisions it makes, put the interests of American
citizens first.
Speaker 1: Yes, And this is what goes back to what we
covered today on the fourth Hour of Alex which was
the dominant position back at the time of WW two
many Americans, including people like Father Charles Coughlin, people like
the Lindberghs. I'm not advocating for everything these people believed.
Their position, including I think Dulles himself, was that we
should not be involved in World War two. So the
reason being is that America doesn't need to be involved
in European wars and conflicts, because that's the original sort
of founding father ethos, to make America prosperous and not
get bogged down in being world police. And of course
the Rockefellers and the temptation of the internationalists and the
Rothschilds and others was too much. There's too much greed
and opportunity there to not push America into being a
globalist operation.
Speaker 5: That's it.
Speaker 11: Oh, that's creepy, sounds kind of fascists. You're gonna invade Poland? Now,
now just the opposite. In fact, the original America first
ures were kind of against wars, and.
Speaker 5: The current ones are too.
Speaker 1: That's what I was referring.
Speaker 5: Actually, it just means what it sounds like.
Speaker 11: The government ought to serve the people who pay for it,
who elected them, in whose name the business of government
is conducted.
Speaker 5: That's all it means. Now, there are two things to
know about this idea. The first is almost everyone's for that.
Speaker 11: What percentage if you pulled that idea in the supposedly.
Speaker 1: Now notice actually watching this speech, there's nothing even that
radical or outlandish in this speech. The exact opposite of
the lying shills on X, all of the Zio even
jellyfish nonsense. People acting like this was some unhinged you know,
fascists slamming the podium, screaming rant. There's nothing like that.
That's total nonsense, totally ridiculous. And the only reason all
of those fakes and frauds on x are losing their
mind is precisely because people are beginning to question unfettering
support for Israel on the right. Is that simple? That's
all it is? Is that simple. That's the reason they're
freaking out.
Speaker 11: Axious Trump coalition that's in the middle of a civil war.
Speaker 5: What percentage people disagree with that?
Speaker 1: Yeah, the hard right is literally just there is no
hard right in America. Tucker isn't even hard right. That's
what's so crazy, is like maga Trump's policies are I
just did Ben A. Shapiro in the first hour? What
are you talking about? Do Ben Shapiro? We just did it.
Candice did a half a million viewers or a half
a million dollars? What are you talking about? You mean
she has half a million viewers right now? What do
you mean?
Speaker 5: All right, you guys, Happy Friday.
Speaker 1: I don't know what you mean. The first hour today
was Ben Shapiro's speech, and we're comparing it to Tucker's
speech here. So, by the way, this is my video
from it's eight years ago. In a couple months, it'll
be eight years critiquing Jordan Peterson's classical liberalism. I was
right in everything I said. Hundreds of comments were dissing me,
and now look, I even said right here. Remember when
this had as many dislikes as likes, I do well.
The tables have turned. Now my video with seventy thousand views,
has two point four thousand thumbs up. So it took
all these slow boys about eight years to figure out,
almost a decade to figure out. Oh, Jay was actually
right when he was critiquing doctor Peterson's classical liberalism eight
years ago. He was right all along. But it was
a cult of personality. And I don't hate doctor Peterson.
I learned from and I enjoy doctor Peterson, and I
want him to be orthodox. I want the best for him.
I want him to do well and to flourish. I
don't have any personal dislike or hatred or anything, even
the impressions, like I do impressions of everybody. I do
impressions of people. I like people, I don't like people.
I love people. I can't stand impressions, have nothing to do.
It's weird too, Like you do an impression. Oh he
hates the person, he hates them. I love Alex Jones.
I've done impressions of Alex Jones for years. I do
him on the show. There's no hatred in an impression. Now,
some people I don't like, like Ben Shapiro, I'll do
an impression of Ben Sapiro. People love to just read
into things, which is also like a weird faking gay thing.
Speaker 5: Well a few you.
Speaker 11: Know people whose names you know, Well, that sounds like
America only.
Speaker 5: No, it's not America first.
Speaker 11: Simple, but like probably ninety of Trump photo should be
for that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, ah, Brosey ten dollars says in Vance's recent visit Israel,
he went to Holy Sefflical. Yeah, I know about that.
I saw all the news about it. That's what I
meant by saying he's fudging a little bit and not
worshiping that stupid wall. I mean, is that the thing
that's like, oh oh, we got to worry about freak
out because Jade Vance didn't kiss that stupid wall. Saw
boy wife, We're two dollars, got your book in the mail.
Thank you, guys. You can get Esoteric Hollywood Part three,
Part three right here. Signed copies in the shop and
good news we are down too. The last one hundred
orders were under one hundred. I think we have ninety
eight orders left to go. So we went from about
four fifty and it's just me and Jamie doing it
and we're down to ninety eight and I'm still getting people.
We're more or you're probably amongst the last ninety eight.
And that's all I can tell you. I Am not
going to go through every single person's orders to find
you the exact date of when you ordered it and
when I don't know when it's going to get there,
because there's just me and my wife doing it. All.
You will get it, though. I promise you that.
Speaker 11: You, like probably seventy percent of people who didn't vote
for Trump would before that, and if you calm down
explained it to him, probably like ninety percent.
Speaker 1: Why Because it's another thing that's super annoying about this
whole the conservative sphere is that, you know, the people
that are the sort of the big name conservas, conservai ormies,
you know, the Michael Knowles is or what like. Michael
Knowles will not address any of the types of topics
that I bring up. What about Vatican Two's documents about
Judaism and no stretate and all of that. They won't
address any of that. They're never going to talk about that.
Every day people say when you going to debate Michael Knowles.
Michael Knowles is not going to debate me. Ben Shapiro
is not going to debate. None of these people are
going to debate. Do you have you not figured this
out yet? We're basically at a point where nobody will
debate me. Who isn't just a complete guber tard. Okay,
that's it. That's the only people left after Tim Gordon.
There's no one else left who wants to debate. They don't.
There's nobody and for this arena debate thing, Like I
told those guys to people setting all that up, and like,
I don't think you're going to find anybody who will
debate me. And I'm not being a dick, I'm not
being arrogant. I'm literally saying what I think is the true.
I don't think there's a person who wants to go
into a big arena debate with me. I said, I
listed like ten people. I'll tell you who I listed,
and it was people that I the only people I
thought might actually do it. And then it got down
to like last resort is the worst of the worst,
would be like need God. But he won't even debate
on like a real subject. It has to be some
false dialectic gay topic that he could or salvation by
faith or works. I'll be the faith part, so I
doud come on. So here was my suggestion of people
to debate, and I don't think any people are going
to do it. Stephan mall in New Round two, which
would be a good discussion. Maybe stuff On would be
willing to do it. Sam Harris, Professor, Dave Muhammed djab
Piers Morgan, Michael Knowles, Wes Huff, Danesh de Suza, cosmic
skeptic David Ike, Dave Smith, and libertarianism Trent Horne, Jimmy
Aiken or last resort Joe Heshmeier Need God. That was
all the people I suggested to the World War Debate people.
I don't think any those people do it. Even if
World War Debate figured out how to offer some money
to do it, I still don't think they'll do it now.
Ben Shapiro, so far, in comparing these two speeches, Ben
came off angry and vindictive and Tucker comes off as normal,
you know, lacka days ago laughing. He's laughing, he's having fun.
He's joking. Ben Shapiro is angry, vindictive. It's the opposite
of the way that it's portrayed on X all the
zio slot. Basically, you can just assume that whatever the
zioslot people are saying on X, it's the opposite. You
can just assume that.
Speaker 11: Self evident, like most true things. And moreover, and think
this through for a second. There is no other legitimate
rationale for running our government.
Speaker 5: We have self government. This is a democratic republic.
Speaker 1: AC five dollars. No, I don't think it's worth debating
Khalil and Donnie because all he wants is placed at
the table. He wants Shia neil platonic nonsense to be
given attention, and it's he's already lost his debate to
scam Shamou And it's just not worth giving people that
want to be seen the attention that they want. In
some cases, now, if there's mass conversions to Shia Islam,
maybe it's time to address doctor Khalil and have a
public debate. But people aren't converting to Shia Islam. AC.
We need ad digital non sedition acts. Gang Blink four
four five dollars. Goblin demon boom retard has ended every
music ever. Music is now over, Thank you, Andrew. What
do you think about arbol arvol and his colony as
a compatitive, Well, the problem is that Orvoll is crazy.
I don't believe him to be a sane person, so
I don't I wouldn't go live in his colony White
Lightning five dollars. Do you think debunking Christian Zionism will
actually help Orthodoxy grow even bigger? Absolutely? Of course, Skippy
red debate Richard Spencer already did. We already had a
debate eight ten years ago. It's just going to be
the same debate. Although I guess since Richard's isn't Richard
Spencer like a normy Democrat now, so maybe it wouldn't
be the same debate.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't know that he does debates. Nick Ce five dollars.
Ben Shapiro only debated blue haired libs to dunk on
them for content, but he will not debate high profile names.
He's a faker, exactly. I don't understand why people couldn't
figure this out. I said this about being Shapiro ten
years ago, Like this guy doesn't debate anybody with like
an actual challenge. It's low hanging fruit. But debating the
low hanging fruit, I mean it's good for billion audience.
Ortho Anglo crow at twenty five dollars. You should listen
to Dami's vision for Orthodox media. You are not named there,
but he has red flags. He also diss his Death
of the World and that entire ethos. Dude, nobody cares
about what Father Damick says that whole, Like nobody's I mean,
ancient faith is not what people are even looking to.
They made their bed years ago and they wanted to,
you know, alienate everybody who was an Ortho bro. Father
Dami called them all in cells. He had to publicly
apologize for it. I don't care if Father Damic issues
a warning about Ortho bro like he's already been doing
that for like eight eight years, Like who cares. I
don't And I'm not mad at you for the super chat,
but like I don't care anymore. I don't care what
Damik says. I don't care or what Orthodox priests are
someone just jewel into I don't care. They already Father
Soroka already went to a Jewish Acumenist magazine to contribute
to a hit piece on me. I don't do you
think I care that they're warning about what they've been
warning about Ortho Bros For eight ten years, and the
audience at Ancient Faith has only declined, So let them
keep declining. H. Brozi, we obligatory reminder. We love our
Ortho ladies, Slowboy, Whiteboard and OBG. H Brosey tend to
I kid you not Advance's most recent visit to Israel.
He went to the Yeah we read that RUI Techsera
at seven seven. Regarding your audience, my opinion is that
you defend Orthodox Christianity with all your hard and soul.
That divides people because most people are not Orthodox. Yeah,
it could be banana Banana up the butt. Ten dollars Jay,
Have you ever looked at Eyes Wide Open channel on YouTube.
It has a lot of videos about c a drug trade.
Speaker 6: I have.
Speaker 1: In fact, I've watched several of those. I think we
even did some streams where we played some of those
videos on the stream. It is a good channel and
it ties into what we're discussing in our newest global
elite book, Old Boys. Burton Hirsh and I gotta I
gotta chastise you, guys, because part of the part of
the problem is you guys in the audience. I'm talking
to you guys now. Usually I'm kissing the butt of
my audience, but I'm sorry, I gotta fuss at you
guys a little bit because when I do the real
historical deep dives, only half of you guys watch it,
which tells me that one point five thousand to two
thousand people will come over here and watch me live
talking about Candice and Tucker and Ben Shapiro drama. But
when I go into the real information that would arm
you and equip you like spies control us, only eight
point seven thousand of you will come watch it. We
should have had two five ten thousand people watching this stream.
But people want drama, they want soap opera, they want
all this gibberish. They don't want the real stuff. And
I mean, it's okay, I understand I have low expectations
for everyone that way, I'm pleasantly surprised when anything good happens.
But again, I'm gonna chastise you. Got you guys need
to get into this stuff over what did Tucker say
to what have been shapiros. Oh my gosh, did you
hear what Canda said?
Speaker 8: Oh?
Speaker 1: This is this is soap opera stuff. Okay, Now it
does matter because it's important to see the narrative breaking.
And that's the reason that we're covering this. As we
said when we covered the Candace stuff, it's not about
Candace and Eric and all that. That's what everybody's tuning
in for for the soap opera. But the real issue
is the boomers io matrix, mind matrix control matrix breaking.
That's what's breaking. That's why this is such a big deal.
That's why all of the shills on X are losing
their mind.
Speaker 11: Exists for our benefit. The documents were written that way.
The point of the American Revolution was to make that point.
And so if you're not operating the federal government on
behalf of US citizens, you're illegitimate.
Speaker 5: You actually have no right to rule, period.
Speaker 11: And if you disagree, tell me what the other legitimate
justification is. Oh, because my friends or people I agree
with or in my you know, interest group, or I
mean no, the government must must. This is non negotiable
operate on behalf of American citizens.
Speaker 5: So once you realize and what.
Speaker 1: He means is that's not Israel first. That's why everyone
is so mad about this, That's why they're losing their mind.
Speaker 11: That's the statement at the center of the debate. It
all becomes pretty clear, really clear. Actually, it's not an
ideological bait. There's a thing ideological about that. I've got
all kinds of cookie ideological views.
Speaker 5: I love Knowles's list of.
Speaker 1: All the views.
Speaker 5: I've probably had most of them in my long and
varied life. I have fewer now.
Speaker 11: I just kind of want to see a good faith
effort to improve the country.
Speaker 3: That's it.
Speaker 11: And I'm ever aware that I'm not exactly sure the
right way. A lot of times are tarriffs the best
way to help the country. I don't know, I hope
so not an expert.
Speaker 5: All I really care about is that the people in
charge care. That they love the people they lead.
Speaker 11: That is the first and most important requirement of leadership.
A father who loves his children may make mistakes, probably will.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's not going to happen with Infinity Indians exactly. Again,
this was the whole I co wrote the Sam Hide
season one. Almost every episode. I mean I didn't write
every episode, and literally all of them saying like I
had a significant hand in all the episodes, including the
H one B visa and the the episodes, so uh,
that's the point of those episodes.
Speaker 5: Really, well, I did.
Speaker 11: But if he loves his kids, he'll do a pretty
good job and they'll be fine.
Speaker 5: An officer who loves.
Speaker 11: His men, you know, he can't control the battle, but
they'll do better than the officer who doesn't. The president
who truly loves his people will over time tend to
make wiser decisions on their behalf. But the leaders who
don't care at all, they'll destroy your country.
Speaker 5: And that is absolutely what we've had. That's, by the way,
not noted as an.
Speaker 11: Effort to backpill you or an effort to discourage you
or convince you you have no agency or control. You
have a lot of control. You just change the government good.
But if you want to know what the debate is
going forward and what your job is going forward, it's
holding your leaders to that very simple standard. Not on
tariffs or any of.
Speaker 5: These specific policy questions.
Speaker 1: Necessarily, but uh yeah, I mean, isn't this all exactly
just like basic principles of America? First, I don't mean
necessarily Fuenttis's stuff. I'm just saying the idea of putting
America first, Like, how is this even like controversial when
all of the people on X are literally freaking out
losing their mind, as if this is some new you know,
like literal you know, tiny mustache man speeches, the beer
Hall puts or something right, Andrew, what do you think
of the Chinese Orthodox Church? Sounds cool. I don't know
much about it, but I hope there's more of it. Solomon.
I'm in the top one percent of dire viewers in
twenty twenty five. I watched four hundred and sixty six
of your videos. You can put the flowers on my table. Well,
thank you very much, Solomon. Appreciate you being such an
avid listener. Hopefully it benefited you. Andrew two dollars. I
second the guy that said debate, Professor Dave Well. I
did message him on Instagram, so that's where people said that.
He replies, and so far I've not heard anything back
from Professor Dave. So I don't know. X review the
new Paul Thomas Anderson movie. Okay, I'll have to check
it out. I'm not familiar with what the new one is.
Andrew what's your favorite PayPal quote? Mine all of them
because they're all faking gay Trey debate, the science professor
atheist guy. That's Professor Dave, Islamic cousin Falker twenty dollars.
Thank you for all that you do. Thank you, appreciate you,
Islamic cousin humper.
Speaker 5: A. S.
Speaker 1: Brosey, five dollars. Imagine if Tucker tossed out then boxing
gloves and said just square up, dude, that would be funny. JB. Peltier,
But Jay, what about the Abramic religion. There is no
Abramic religion except for worthours Christianity. That's it. AC five dollars.
Ancient faith got doctor Zach porku On to make critiques
of liberalism. Now, well, I guess they had to find
somebody because I mean they were platforming women like Angela
Dole Carson, who were for women's ordination. They were pushing
her books, So I mean, unless they want to have
zero audience, they might as well get somebody element to
five dollars. K Griggs vindicated with the current development of news,
I'm surprised you haven't covered Griggs talks. I mean I don't.
I can't keep up with everybody's stuff, dude, Like, I mean,
I'm sorry, I don't fund every random conspiracy person's video
and cover it. I must be part of the cover up.
JB five dollars. Very ironic for Ben Shapiro to fingerwag
about not trusting the world around you. Yeah, isn't that
kind of a pathology of certain people? Nelly forty dollars,
Jay big Man, thank you for the education, Thank you
for the tracks. Merry Christmas to you and Jamie god
bless Mery Christmas to you too. Thank you. Nelly's over there,
take off all his clothes. It's getting hot in here,
Nelly A sprasey five dollars. For the sake of argument,
we could just grant that everything that Ben Shpiro said
it was true. However, Ben Shapiro is still a little
hat bro, and we win by default. Now Ben can
go back to his country and leave our country. D
Murdoch five dollars. If guilt by association is a valid
way to critique people, then Fox owns to be and
two B platforms movies that are recommended by NAMBLA interesting guilt. Yeah,
you could actually use guilt by association to destroy everybody
so basically everybody is now destroyed and compromised. If you
want to get really savvy with guilt by association, the
Journey of Abundance five dollars. Russia and US should be
best friends, but we still have boomers in charge, and
they have boners for the Cold War, well boomer neo
cons especially right, and they have a long hatred and
vendetta against Christian Russia. MVY two dollars. Church Fathers books
behind you? What's the publisher? The Phillip schaff Father's said,
ac five dollars. The strongest conspiracy data we have is
older conspiracies and reading the books that you that let
you navigate conspiracies without naivity or overreaching. Exactly. So the
very thing that ironically Ben Shapiro is calling for and
asking for is what I do on my channel. So
if you want evidences, well, how about working through dozens
of elite texts for the last decade. How's that for
the strongest rational between Scylla and charibdis navigating of the
conspiracy geopolitical world. Glacier ten dollars, Hello, Habib, can we
go to Frey week? You are our number one free latinizer.
Blessed Miko the gay Latinizer will be there. Well, I
guess if you go to Free week you will see
him there. Saint Michael save us. Here's some bread for
Voice of Booty's Patreon Voice of Juicy Booty Patreon, Bob
Dog ten dollars. Oh you're saying Ben Shapiro debated chenk
Uger and Anna Kasparion. They're the best opponents that he's
ever debated. Oh my gosh, that's the best of his
opponents he's ever debated. Is like these weird liberals. And
by the way, Anna Kasparian, actually she had did a
video the other day actually agreed with so I probably
don't agree with her on anything else, but she did
a video on I forget what it was even about,
maybe this foreign policy or something. I don't know, but
glacier five dollars. Are you going to Free Weekend in Atlanta?
Absolutely not. You will never catch me anywhere near anything
remotely free. Journey of Abundance ten dollars. Here's eleven thousand SATs. Well,
thank you. If you want to support the stream, you can.
This is my bitcoin wallet right here for people who
want to support via bitcoin. You can send to that
QR code address right there as Journey of Abundance just
did AC twenty dollars jape. Does groups X gain an
unaccountable deep state with total negative tradeoffs from interventionism? Therefore
we should reject interventionism work as a first order argument
before secondary arguments about who's in charge. Okay, so let's
see if we can navigate this in parentheses. Group X
gains unaccountable deep state with no tradeoffs from interventionism. Therefore
we should reject interventionism. Does that work as a first
order argument before secondary arguments about who's in charge? I
want to be honest with you. I don't even understand.
I think trying to apply strict formal logical arguments to
geopolitics is difficult. I'm not trying to. I just don't
even understand. I'm not saying you're making a mistake. I'm
just done understanding. Octavian ten dollars. There are a thousand
pastors that went to Israel and they trained one hundred
thousand ambassadors. Brace yourself for unprecedented slop levels. That's what's
coming exactly, or on two dollars, hobbit freestyle dropping when
I don't know if I'll do another hobbit song ac
Dollar Ben Shapiro will grease up America really good, really good.
You have a very prop treasury. That's funny. Victor Ziegler
eleven dollars glad to see good to see you highlight
demonic influences of other countries. It's in the mainstream. It's
in Christianity versus Judaism is antagonistic. It's the central world
conflict since thirty three A d Well, I would say
it's the central conflict spiritually speaking, maybe nowadays, but I
don't think it was like the central conflict in the
Middle Ages. I mean, I think probably Islam became much
more of a challenge, you know, than Rabbinic Judaism in
the Middle Ages. I'm guessing so Alderbana. I mean, Jews
are a very small portion of the population, right. But anyway, Andrew,
ten dollars, Jay, you actually showed me how dumb both
Judaism and Islam are as religions. I was a religious
studiesscription and that is the link right here, the New
Philosophy course. The link is Richard Grove's autonomy Agora Marketplace.
So I'll put that right here in the chat for you. Guys.
It's a full course, twelve lectures, twenty four ish hours
worth of lecture material. It includes three recommended reading books,
three recommended reading texts, and even two guest lectures with
a father deacon doctor Anonius on epistemology and my priest
father Vladimir on aesthetics. But in regard to the Moscow
ep Orthodox schiz them. If you go to my channel,
I have many, many, many old podcasts addressing that motive.
Speaker 11: Can you look me in the face and explain to
me why the thing that you were doing, the money
you're appropriating, can you tell me why that helps our
country and our people?
Speaker 5: Tell me how?
Speaker 11: And if you're you're doing the whole shut up racist thing,
then I have a right to question your motives. Actually,
why can't you answer the question? Why can't you answer
that question?
Speaker 5: Why do you have to imply that some college kid
is like some kind of Kittler writer.
Speaker 11: Or something because he's asking about an event like what.
Speaker 5: By the way, it is okay to ask questions?
Speaker 11: And I thought that was like the whole reason we
were against the left. They're not going to force you
to get up there and make ritual denunciations because this
isn't my religion, it's politics. By the way, your politics
do not trump my love for other people. Well, this
country's two hundred and fiftieth birthday.
Speaker 5: And then he once said something lunatic, as brothers do.
And I remember all these reporters.
Speaker 11: Went from the Washington Post, which used to be a
newspaper in Washington, calling me.
Speaker 5: And being like, will you denounce your brother?
Speaker 11: I said, son, if my brother went on a drug
related murder spreed, I would not denounce him.
Speaker 1: What are you Yeah, I mean, he's making a point
about using rhetoric to stress that, you know, I'm not
going to denounce my family members, even if they do
something heinous. I'll denounce the event or the action as heinous,
but I'm not going to hate my family members because
I love my family and my friends. So he's just
expressing the principle of, you know, the ties that bind,
and all of these idiots and liars on Twitter took
that as if he was saying some insane, pro murderous thing.
It's just so stupid.
Speaker 11: Man related murder spree is knowing for my brother, and
nothing will ever make me not for my brother.
Speaker 5: I'd probably tell him no more drug related murdersprees for you.
Speaker 11: I'm not for that, not for a lot of things actually,
but I will never ever denounce people I love to
satisfy the mob.
Speaker 1: Right, Yeah, this is how they control everybody through cancelation,
cancel culture. That's what the left has done. And to
you know, have these fake right wingers demand through moral
blackmail that you denounce everybody that says something that they
don't like. Is literally cancel culture. Bullshit. That was his point.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's crazy.
Speaker 11: So as you think through like what should this movement
be and what side should you take on the conservative
civil war?
Speaker 5: WHOA, you already know the answer. You're on the side
of America first. And if they can't tell you why
it's America first, you just won the argument because they
don't have one.
Speaker 11: Shut up Nazi is no different from shut up racist.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well that's exactly what the left does. And most
of the right in America are just leftists because America
doesn't have a genuine conservative right wing movement. You cannot
have that without a religious grounding and paradigm. That's why
all the normy conservatives immediately cave to the butt stuff.
They're all pro butt stuff. That's conservative values now because
there is no legitimate conservativism in America. It's a little
more annoying actually, And I would just say this too,
and you're not going to get it, by the way,
with the gapacy right, the Roman Catholic gapists is not
going to be a foundation for legitimate conservatism or legitimate
right wing when it's basically also via nostra tte a
judized institution.
Speaker 5: Because the passion is real, the anger is real, I
feel it sometimes.
Speaker 1: Do the Pope every day calls for open borders. The
Pope supported the gay pilgrimage in the Vatican a few
weeks ago. How is that going to be the religion
that grounds conservatism? It's so stupid.
Speaker 11: Wants to get involved, But somehow I keep involving myself
and I try to read the Internet because I don't
think it's good for my soul.
Speaker 5: But you know, more addictive than cigarettes. I quit cigarettes,
not Twitter. I think I'm going back to cigarettes and
giving up Twitter whatever. I don't want to burden you,
not kidding actually, but anyway, the point is.
Speaker 11: You need to remember if you're a Christian, and I
think there are a lot of them in this room.
Speaker 5: That Jesus makes demands on you.
Speaker 11: And holds standards for you that are very different from
those As my friend, close friend Russell Brand so beautifully explained,
they're very different from those of the world, which really
is controlled.
Speaker 1: By the by Satan.
Speaker 11: It's hard even to say that because it's so dark,
but it's also so true. So don't be surprised when
Jesus sends out the disciple. One of my favorite passages
in the whole New Tests when Jesus in Matthew ten
sends the disciples out. He's just picked them like ten
minutes before. He's like, all right, I want you guys,
road trip, no money, no clothes, no staff, and by.
Speaker 5: The way, you're gonna get flogged, you're gonna get beaten
with whips and arrested.
Speaker 11: I'm sure they're all thinking, like what I you know,
I thought we were the winners here and when that happened, like,
don't worry abou where you're going to say?
Speaker 5: The Holy Spirit will speak for you. And I'm like,
I just can't get over the blase.
Speaker 11: Way in which he just tells them the world is
going to try and kill you, which, by the way,
it did.
Speaker 5: I think all of them end up getting killed. And
that's just the baseline. We'll promise that it's a fact.
You get up and give a speech about Jesus, you
talk about Jesus, you try to live out his commands,
you're going to get attacked. Okay, we know that. Don't whine.
Here's the pitfall.
Speaker 11: Here's the trap is becoming hateful yourself. And I sincerely
believe that this is a spiritual battle.
Speaker 1: And I'm not saying now that he is correct about
And that's why really orthodoxy is the only way out
of this mess and this boomer mind matrix, because if
it just turns into mindless counter hatred, you're not going
to get anywhere and you're going to destroy yourself. Benjamin
five dollars. Jay, he's referencing a question from a college
kid who asked him a question after a speech. Check
it out. I'll try to find that Zester five dollars.
I thought about buying a kindle for books. Is that
faking gay compared to physical books? Yes, I do not
recommend a kindle. You need to have a physical book
that you physically interact with, touch, handle, read, taught, underline,
make notes in. That's essential to retaining the information Ethan
Klin two dollars debate Hamas Piker, Hassan Piker. Hamas Piker
was bragging about how he was supposed to debate Charlie
a week after he died. I would debate Hassan Piker,
but there's no way he's gonna ever do a debate.
Minute might five dollars. Sorry, the voice the text messed up.
I found you through Kurt Metzger. I've been watching her content.
Hope to see him come back on. Yeah, I mean
I enjoyed the conversations and the times I've chatted with Kurt.
He's a character. He's always welcome. Gondor five dollars. Is
Hollywood dead? I mean pretty much. I mean there's not.
It doesn't mean movies are dead. I think the the
traditional Hollywood studio system is dead. But I'm sure that
you know you said where are movies going? I mean,
streaming services are churning out movies nonstops. So I guess
that's the new Hollywood. Whether it will be as successful,
I don't know, but I mean there's still gonna be
movies and movie blockbusters and movie theater movies and all that.
I just I don't know if it's ever going to be,
you know, back to the levels that it was pre Koof.
I mean maybe I don't know where it's going to go.
Joshua twenty dollars, what's up og? Triple og? I am
looking at Orthodoxy. I got an Orthodox Study Bible, I
got a book on the Church Fathers. I've been browsing
Orthodox books. Are there any authors that you recommend I
do not read? I don't ever get asked that question.
I mean, I get probably I'm looking over at my
Orthodox bookshelf to see if anybody stands out, as you know,
really bad to not read. I mean David Bentley Hart
nowadays is like a perennialist universalist.
Speaker 8: Uh.
Speaker 1: I mean most Orthodox books, even by liberals. I mean,
they still kind of have a usage, right, Like, uh,
the Invention of Peter was written by a Fordham lib
but it's a youth. Off the top of my hat,
I'm not sure who to say. I mean, I'm sure
there is some like pro gay Orthodox book or something.
I just don't know off the top of my head. Bolgakov, Yeah,
I would avoid Bolgakov.
Speaker 11: When it disagrees with me, is on the side of evil.
I don't think that I think I'm often wrong. I
know that I am, But I do think that fundamentally
this is light versus darkness.
Speaker 8: I do.
Speaker 5: And darkness is characterized by.
Speaker 11: Rage and division and chaos and confusion, and light is
God is characterized by the opposite of those things.
Speaker 5: And I've noticed this.
Speaker 11: There are attempts to make people hateful. One of the
reasons people scream insults in your face is to provoke
a reaction from you and make you hate them.
Speaker 5: They want you to hate them, they want you to
become what they call you. Why. Because evil feeds on hate.
That's why. So don't participate in.
Speaker 1: That journey of abundance five dollars. I would like a
Pope of the Future T shirt. I think we'll eventually
get around to doing merch. We've had so many requests
for merch. We just haven't done it yet. Have you
done esthetery review of any Wes Anderson movies Rolf Steaks Rolling? Actually,
I don't think so. I mean, I've watched most I
haven't seen the last two h Wes Anderson movies, but
I've seen most of them, but I haven't really done
a deep dive on them. That might be something. I
think what we're gonna do is for movies, we're gonna
start doing podcasts based around actors and directors, and we're
gonna do like three good and then their worst, so
we'll do four films per you know, we'll do like
a Keano stream, Mel Gibson stream, Sean Connery stream blah
blah blah, on and on and on for Bogart's Dream,
and we'll pick their three best and then one of
their worst to kind of laugh at. I think that
could make for a new domain to enter movie wise,
so that we're not limited to like esoteric movies, because
not all movies are estoteric. You know, there's a lot
of good movies that are just entertaining or good production,
good acting, you know, all kinds of stuff out there
that we'd like to broaden the scope. I did like
Fantastic Mister Fox. I remember seeing that back when it
came out roll Stakes US for ten dollars, So maybe
we should do The most requested for the next movie
podcast was number one, Mel Gibson, so to do his
three best and his one worst critically rated worst, and
then the next was Christopher Lee. Interestingly enough, I wouldn't
have expected you guys to be so hyped up for
a Christopher Lee movie a stream. But yeah, we need
to do a Wes Anderson stream and that would be
a really good podcast. So that's that's what we're gonna
do next steven Sagall Marathon. They'll be poly Shore marathon,
poly short could be fun, right like Brendan Fraser stream.
That'd be fun. Neptune five dollars Well, Alex O'Connor debout.
You know he won't. We've asked many times. Trolo five dollars. Jay,
you should go debate Cholo's in the hood. Explain to
them their lifestyle is only possible because of feminism, because
they deny marriage. Interesting A homie, I'll back you up.
There's nothing more comical than meeting feminist cholos. Interesting. That
does sound funny. JB. Pilt ten dollars. Do you have
any opinion on christ Eternal dow? H You know, it's
it's one of those texts that I've never gotten around
to that I've wanted to read for a long time.
The premise sounds good. In the beginning, was the dow
the that was with God? And was the dow that
had me saying, yikes. I mean, I don't think the
words themselves are not the problem as long as it's
conveying the right idea. I mean, that's the whole premise
of translating the liturgy and the scriptures into every native tongue.
So I don't see necessarily an immediate problem with that.
But I've not read the book, so I can't really
comment on it, but it is one that I meant
to get through for a long time. Guys. Remember also,
we have a show sponsor, which is Chalk dot com
c choq dot com, the best and supplementation on the Internet.
We have a special going right now, which is that
you can get sixty percent off by using Promoco J
sixty Life. That's J Y six zero Life, J sixty
Life special papal Indulgence for this season. You get sixty
percent off with J sixty Life. You can unsubscribe at
any time, but I do recommend either that performance stack
or the Male Vitality Stack here percent off. You can't
beat it. The best and supplementation on the Internet, Chalk
dot Com. Get your toxic masculinity levels up.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 1: By the way, I do like Rushmore. Rushmore is a.
I mean I like a lot of Wes Anderson movies.
The last few that I saw were kind of trailing off,
and Grand Hotel was okay. I was not that hyped
about the next one, but I haven't watched it. Maybe
it gets good. Have you done it? George Clooney stream?
They seem like they're intelligence. Yeah, absolutely are. Now we
need to do the Clooney Stream. I mean, I didn't
dislike Grand Hotel. I just thought it was kind of mid.
It wasn't. I just feel like Wes Anderson has been
really good and then they'd just been kind of in.
But I've noting the new the newest, newest one with
the Benicio del Toro, so we need to do that
one too. Bottle of Rocket's great, it's really funny. I
just haven't seen the last two West Enter some movies.
So we'll see. Andrew, here's a five dollar super chat
to break up my two dollars, so don't look like
a cheap Oh, thank you to appreciate that skippy two dollars.
What happened to three I at lists in the nuclear
war that was supposed to happen? Well, that shit's always
faking gay. Anybody following all that retard stuff as an idiot.
Jordan's stuffive dollars. We did him. He was a top
listener Viceroy five dollars. Do you have any upcoming film
reviews