Speaker 1: This is just absurd levels of stupidity and hypocrisy, and
Speaker 1: it's just it's kind of amazing to me. And people
Speaker 1: think that this is some kind of based, red billed thing.
Speaker 2: It's not.
Speaker 1: It's a completely controlled and manipulated operation and it has
Speaker 1: nothing really to do with these ideologies other than that
Speaker 1: these are controlled groups that are controlled by Western intelligence
Speaker 1: to engage in irregular warfare, to engage in proxy warfare,
Speaker 1: to destabilize and to restructure and destroy areas to fit
Speaker 1: them into not the American century. Do people understand that
Speaker 1: all these boomers and Cold War people think over more
Speaker 1: fat to communists, We're going to keep the KG being
Speaker 1: Russia out of Ukraine. No, it's not the American century anymore.
Speaker 1: Do you understand that that was a con at this anniversary,
Speaker 1: I guess you could say of one year of tragedy
Speaker 1: in terms of warfare.
Speaker 2: In the Ukraine. And so I thought it'd be great
Speaker 2: to kind.
Speaker 1: Of rehearse how we got to where we are and
Speaker 1: what the dangers are here, because you know, lately I've
Speaker 1: been diving really deep into the Cold War, trying to
Speaker 1: get an assessment of what was really going on, why
Speaker 1: there was this larger project throughout the Cold War to
Speaker 1: kind of synthesize and create this third way out of
Speaker 1: the Cold War dialectic for a future technocracy. And we
Speaker 1: know that from a lot of the writings of the elite,
Speaker 1: which we've covered in the last several years, some fifty
Speaker 1: or sixty.
Speaker 2: Though, So if we go back to the reason for.
Speaker 1: The twentieth centuries, two World Wars and the Cold War,
Speaker 1: according to doctor Carl Quickly, that was to exhaust the
Speaker 1: opponents of the Anglo American establishment, and they would exhaust
Speaker 1: them through two World Wars and then through a Cold War.
Speaker 1: And if we fast forward up to what happened to
Speaker 1: Russia in the fall of Sovietism, the fall of Communism,
Speaker 1: this led to the invasion of Western economic warfare and looting.
Speaker 1: This is the Harvard Summer's Reuben crew that came in
Speaker 1: and through IMF shock therapy, reorganized and looted the wealth
Speaker 1: of Russia. So while I'm sure too many people's public appearances,
Speaker 1: the idea was that Russia was going to be freed
Speaker 1: from Sovietism. And it's true that the Soviet system was
Speaker 1: a nightmare, terrible system, and communism is a nightmare, terrible
Speaker 1: system absolutely one.
Speaker 2: Hundred percent, and it's just amazing to me.
Speaker 1: I can never really talk about this topic without people
Speaker 1: getting mad and assuming that I'm somehow kind of defending
Speaker 1: communism or Sovietism, when all I'm really trying to point
Speaker 1: out when we look into this is that there's a
Speaker 1: danger of taken on new masters, and particularly in the
Speaker 1: realm of the religious world, which we've been covering as
Speaker 1: we've analyzed various tech to get into the history of
Speaker 1: NATO and the history of the can and both the
Speaker 1: CIA and the KGB kind of vying for influence and
Speaker 1: power with the Vatican.
Speaker 2: In order to understand this, we have to understand the
Speaker 2: Cold War.
Speaker 1: And getting out of the dialectical thinking of thinking that
Speaker 1: the West is necessarily good and the East is necessarily evil.
Speaker 1: If you read Brezenski, for example, in his older writings
Speaker 1: all the way back to his nineties text, he talks
Speaker 1: about this being a Manichean dialectic, says the Cold War
Speaker 1: was a Manichean dialectic arising out of the powers in
Speaker 1: the post World War two period. And we might think
Speaker 1: that the West was waging a war against communism and socialism,
Speaker 1: but the reality is that the elites of the West
Speaker 1: were not really anti Marxist. They were against what you
Speaker 1: might call classical Marxism. And that's because classical Marxism failed
Speaker 1: to achieve its objectives, precisely because.
Speaker 2: There was no workers revolution, right. The workers didn't rise up.
Speaker 1: We didn't see the proletariat overthrowing their masters and.
Speaker 2: Taking over the means of production.
Speaker 1: But what did happen was that there was a reformed
Speaker 1: Marxism that found itself a lot more amenable to big capital,
Speaker 1: known as Fabian socialism, that was a lot more effective.
Speaker 2: And had a lot more power and influence.
Speaker 1: And it is in fact, entities like the IMF, the
Speaker 1: World Bank, the United Nations, et cetera, et cetera set
Speaker 1: up by the same Rhodes Milner Rawschild round table groups
Speaker 1: that then were able to seize America as well and
Speaker 1: turn it into an engine for this same power block.
Speaker 1: And they did that via backdoor deals, backdoor intelligence operatives
Speaker 1: such as Noel Coward, Rodahl, Ian Fleming, William Stevenson and
Speaker 1: others who convinced FDR and convinced people in the administration
Speaker 1: to set up this private intelligence network, this secret intelligence
Speaker 1: network known.
Speaker 2: As the osays that we become the CIA, which.
Speaker 1: Becomes America, comes Americ's government, and the secret Government wasn't
Speaker 1: really tasked with protecting America from invaders, protecting America from
Speaker 1: foreign threats. Really it was tasked with controlling and steering America.
Speaker 1: Because we see that the other entity that was created
Speaker 1: out of this was, of course the Council on Foreign Relations,
Speaker 1: and that's a policy steering group that sits above the
Speaker 1: government structure, and it in fact hands down.
Speaker 2: The policies of the global elite to the government.
Speaker 1: As an unaccountable, unelected bureaucratic structure that then controls government.
Speaker 1: So you're electing elected officials that submit to and are
Speaker 1: handed policy by these people.
Speaker 2: Who are unelected.
Speaker 1: And if you look at entities in the government that
Speaker 1: really run things, the National Security Council, the State Department,
Speaker 1: it's always CFR people always, And the same CFR people
Speaker 1: go to the Bilderberg Group, and they are also members
Speaker 1: of the Trilateral Commission, and they make decisions about corporate
Speaker 1: policy globally as well as government policy globally. Because these
Speaker 1: corporations are above government, they own government. And until we
Speaker 1: recognize that, until people can figure that out, there's not
Speaker 1: going to be any changes. I'm not saying you can't
Speaker 1: care about who's elected. But as Quigley says, the president
Speaker 1: is limited, right, president can only do so much. Your senators,
Speaker 1: your congressman, they can only do so much. I mean,
Speaker 1: maybe on a local level they can do more. But
Speaker 1: we're dealing with an international elite, and there's not an
Speaker 1: international clique that not only has the ability to set
Speaker 1: up global institutions that give top down global policy.
Speaker 2: Remember, in the last three years, what do they say
Speaker 2: now it's.
Speaker 1: Going to be the UN and the CDC getting their
Speaker 1: policies directly from Rockefeller Foundation. This last week, they had
Speaker 1: the World Government Government Summit, right, and they had all
Speaker 1: these global elites out there pushing for the idea of
Speaker 1: an international health organization treaty and control grid that would
Speaker 1: enforce mandated stabbys because what held them up the last
Speaker 1: time was local, national, and state laws. So they couldn't
Speaker 1: forcibly stabby everybody because of regulations. They were saying, and
Speaker 1: I put these clips on my Twitter if you want
Speaker 1: to see them from the World Government Summit, and so
Speaker 1: they said, in the next pandemic, we want to get
Speaker 1: rid of all that so that we can forcibly forcibly inject.
Speaker 2: Or experiment on track and.
Speaker 1: Trays, and so while Russia has within it, of course
Speaker 1: a fifth column, as Russian geopolitical analysts have written about,
Speaker 1: because a lot of the foundations that think tanks to
Speaker 1: Carnegie Endowment and so forth, Michael mcfowel, they've been in
Speaker 1: Russia for a long time. Because the West took over
Speaker 1: and restructured after the collapse via the IMF shock therapy
Speaker 1: and the Harvard people. Then we have putin kicking out
Speaker 1: a lot of these oligarchs right late nineties, early two thousands,
Speaker 1: and that led to a new struggle, a new Cold War,
Speaker 1: this new East West battle that's now emerging as a
Speaker 1: real large threat.
Speaker 2: So let's get into more of that.
Speaker 1: We want to talk about heartland theory, Mackinder, all that
Speaker 1: kind of stuff to go us to background as to
Speaker 1: where we might go in this crisis. On guest host
Speaker 1: Jay Dire jays Nolysis, Welcome back to the Jay Dier
Speaker 1: Jasonolysis talking about the setting for how we got into
Speaker 1: this grand chess board situation with Russia and the new
Speaker 1: conflicts that have arisen the last year, how it arises
Speaker 1: out of the alignments coming out of the Cold War,
Speaker 1: and we were talking about this idea of controlling the
Speaker 1: Eurasian heartland. This is an idea that comes out of
Speaker 1: the British imperial strategy of Lord Halford Mackinder and it
Speaker 1: was the kind of operating system for the British Empire
Speaker 1: as a sea empire, seeking to control the land power,
Speaker 1: the sea power and the land power, the landpower of
Speaker 1: course being the Eurasian heartland. And that's why, of course
Speaker 1: Russia and Ukraine are so crucial in this strategy. Russia
Speaker 1: has to always be kept at bay, always has to
Speaker 1: be pushed back. That was the purpose of NATO actually
Speaker 1: as a defensive strategy during the Cold War and then
Speaker 1: became offensive after the Cold War, which was a violation
Speaker 1: of what NATO was supposed to be.
Speaker 2: But we see NATO now tweeting out on its actual profile.
Speaker 1: That NATO is the Marvel Hero Universe power as it
Speaker 1: fights against the evil Russians. Yeah, kids, you not, that's
Speaker 1: actually on NATO's Twitter. They're tweeting out that they are
Speaker 1: William Wallace. They are, even though William Wallace actually fought
Speaker 1: against degenerate British kings. But NATO is saying that they're
Speaker 1: William Wallace because they're freedom fighters. What does it mean
Speaker 1: to fight for freedom?
Speaker 2: What is free?
Speaker 1: And well, in the case of this, this war has
Speaker 1: now been cast as a rainbow skittles tr n S
Speaker 1: war and NATO fighting for the rights of trn S.
Speaker 1: So isn't ironic that in the Cold War, you know,
Speaker 1: we were told that we're being persecuted by atheist communists
Speaker 1: and if we just have neoliberalism, if we open up
Speaker 1: these other countries behind iron curtain to economic liberalism, we'll
Speaker 1: have freedom.
Speaker 2: Religion can come back.
Speaker 1: But what happened was, in reality, the largest institution in
Speaker 1: the West, the religious institution of the Roman Catholic Church,
Speaker 1: was literally being co opted, advised, and utilized by the
Speaker 1: Central Intelligence Agency, and multiple books confirm this. Now, the
Speaker 1: deeper that I go into this, I'm really just amazed
Speaker 1: at how wide and how deep spread this is.
Speaker 2: Even from two conflicting views of the Cold War.
Speaker 1: You have somebody like Paul Williams, who's a Roman Catholic
Speaker 1: who's very critical of the CIA and the Vatican during
Speaker 1: the Cold War, who admits that it was essentially a
Speaker 1: captured institution for the CIA, And then we have a
Speaker 1: cold warrior himself, John Kohler's book that admits that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: of course, the Brazenski, of course, Kissinger, of course, William Casey.
Speaker 1: Of course, they were all working and all the way
Speaker 1: back to William Colby with Gladio. Of course, they were
Speaker 1: working hand in and with the Vatican, funneling black ops
Speaker 1: funds through the Vatican Bank to fight against the Soviets.
Speaker 1: And it sounds plausible, right, It sounds okay, that makes sense.
Speaker 1: We don't want a bunch of commies running everything. But
Speaker 1: the danger here is that when Uncle Sam wins, it's
Speaker 1: not really Uncle Sam that wins. And it's not really
Speaker 1: communism being defeated for free market capitalism, it's monopoly capital
Speaker 1: using Babian socialism to restructure these countries. I mean, is
Speaker 1: the EU does this seem to be a economic freedom
Speaker 1: based institution?
Speaker 2: To you?
Speaker 1: Does the IMF seem like something that's based around economic
Speaker 1: freedom and liberty? Does you NESCo seem like something based
Speaker 1: around economic freedom and liberty? Well, if you mean by
Speaker 1: economic freedom and liberty going back to the British Empire
Speaker 1: and social Darwinism and you know those things, I guess
Speaker 1: it does make sense that would be atimistic individualistic enlightenment
Speaker 1: libertarianism based around atheistic evolutionary philosophy, in which case rights.
Speaker 2: Don't actually exist. What's this thing? Is rights? Rights or
Speaker 2: just arbitrary?
Speaker 1: Because if our all just manifestations of nature, nature doesn't
Speaker 1: have rights. Do you think the predator prey relationship has
Speaker 1: anything to do with rights?
Speaker 2: Now, it's just brute power, brute force.
Speaker 1: And so we're presented with the situation post Enlightenment of
Speaker 1: are you going to choose Hobbesian leviathan state or do
Speaker 1: you want a revolutionary anarco state. No state, which, always,
Speaker 1: as Plato says, falls over into tyranny because when you
Speaker 1: have the rule of the many anarchy, that falls over
Speaker 1: into despotism and oligarchy. And so it's just amazing to
Speaker 1: me that people would buy into this dialectic. And we're
Speaker 1: supposed to have believed that NATO was the good guy
Speaker 1: all these years, and the reality is that we're talking
Speaker 1: about two different bad guys. Okay, we're talking about Soviet
Speaker 1: communism foisted upon Russia and the Baltic States via elites
Speaker 1: in the West. It's not Russia organically that was communists.
Speaker 1: It's not the West organically that has any of these
Speaker 1: ideologies that are unnatural to these people groups. These are
Speaker 1: created ideologies that are techniques and systems of control. And
Speaker 1: so now that we're in this post Cold War era
Speaker 1: where the war became an international war on terror, I
Speaker 1: was watching a goofy movie the other night that illustrated
Speaker 1: this in a very profound way, which surprised me. We've
Speaker 1: done a lot of analyzes of the Bond films, and
Speaker 1: typically we think about, oh, well, the most revelatory ones
Speaker 1: are going to be the ones, you know from the
Speaker 1: classic Ian Fleming period.
Speaker 2: But I was watching Tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Never Dies from nineteen ninety seven, and the weirdest part
Speaker 1: about that one, I think that's the second to last,
Speaker 1: or maybe it's it's the second Pierce Brosman Bond film.
Speaker 1: And if you remember this plot, it's it's pretty instructive
Speaker 1: because you have this giant media empire, the Carver Media Group.
Speaker 1: Jonathan Price plays the Bond villain as a media mogul,
Speaker 1: and the media mogul decides that the the world can
Speaker 1: be manipulated through fake news big news right, and so
Speaker 1: not only does he engineer crises, he also creates the
Speaker 1: narrative around the crises that he's engineered.
Speaker 2: And the plot.
Speaker 1: Involves the East and the West being manipulated in to
Speaker 1: a conflict by an international supra international group.
Speaker 2: And that's always in the Bond films, right, Obviously there's Specter,
Speaker 2: this kind of thing. Now that's not Spector in this one.
Speaker 2: This is, you know, nineteen eighty seven. But here's the
Speaker 2: weird part.
Speaker 1: So Bond ends up working together at times with Russian
Speaker 1: Soviet individuals. I guess we're supposed to think it's post Soviet,
Speaker 1: so they're not Soviet, but they act like you know
Speaker 1: that now it's a Soviet terror network. And then Bond
Speaker 1: aligns himself with a Chinese communist spy to unfoil the
Speaker 1: plot of the international elite. Now that's bizarre because okay,
Speaker 1: there are international elites that try to play these powers
Speaker 1: off against one another. And I think that to a degree,
Speaker 1: that's what's going on. Because I'm not saying that there's
Speaker 1: no real conflict or there's no real war. There is,
Speaker 1: but I'm saying that in so many films we have
Speaker 1: an international elite, this kind of Kissinger Brazenski structure clouds,
Speaker 1: you know, the super international elite that plays the nation
Speaker 1: states off against one another, and they plan and prepare
Speaker 1: for wars decades ahead of time. And so I think, yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 1: they wanted this war in the Ukraine, and they want
Speaker 1: a new Cold War, and it's part of the overall
Speaker 1: strategy to bring in the technocracy.
Speaker 2: And we'll look at that here in a moment.
Speaker 1: Get into the specifics of why these kinds of countries
Speaker 1: and states stand in the way.
Speaker 2: Doesn't mean that they're perfect, but they stand in the way.
Speaker 1: Have a certain kind of ideology, a certain kind of
Speaker 1: worldview that has to be pushed globally.
Speaker 2: This point Max ass jay Di or Jay's analysis. You know,
Speaker 2: what's interesting is that.
Speaker 1: The time of World War Two, when Hitler understood the
Speaker 1: importance geostrategically of trying to control the Ukraine and to
Speaker 1: push back on Russia, the Galen network of Reinhard Galen
Speaker 1: and other Nazis had actually trained and set up a
Speaker 1: lot of the intelligence and black ops structures in these areas.
Speaker 1: And this ties into NATO's Gladio operations. And what's amazing
Speaker 1: is that those networks then were sort of taken over
Speaker 1: by the West. We all know about Operation paper Clip,
Speaker 1: but people like Dulles and others Bill Donovan. They also
Speaker 1: made alliances with these Galen networks that are still running things,
Speaker 1: still doing these operations in the Ukraine. So it's amazing
Speaker 1: all the posturing in the West about being everybody who's
Speaker 1: not for total liberalism as a Nazi, and yet we're
Speaker 1: openly supporting and aiding, openly take pictures with Nazi battalions
Speaker 1: in the Ukraine, the real actual Nazis. And I mean,
Speaker 1: this is just absurd levels of stupidity and hypocrisy, and
Speaker 1: it's just it's kind of amazing to me. And people
Speaker 1: think that this is some kind of based red pill thing.
Speaker 2: It's not.
Speaker 1: It's a completely controlled and manipulated operation and it has
Speaker 1: nothing really to do with these ideologies other than that
Speaker 1: these are control groups that are controlled by Western intelligence
Speaker 1: to engage in irregular warfare, to engage in proxy warfare,
Speaker 1: to destabilize and to restructure and destroy areas to fit
Speaker 1: them into not the American century. Do people understand that
Speaker 1: all these boomers and Cold War people think, well, we're
Speaker 1: more fat to communists, We're going to keep the KG
Speaker 1: being Russia.
Speaker 2: How do Ukraine?
Speaker 1: No, it's not the American century anymore. Do you understand
Speaker 1: that that was a con and maybe there could have
Speaker 1: been an American Century that wasn't a con.
Speaker 2: And I don't know, but all the people who came
Speaker 2: up with the idea of.
Speaker 1: The American Century, the State Department, George Keenan, that was
Speaker 1: all dreamt up by the CFR and nineteen thirty nine
Speaker 1: War and Peace Studies Project from the New York City
Speaker 1: Council on Foreign Relations. That's when they created. Right after that,
Speaker 1: the un right right at that time. And so this
Speaker 1: idea of fostering democracy, fostering free market liberalism, which is
Speaker 1: not really what it was, that was for the fortune
Speaker 1: one hundred, fortune five hundred to go into these countries
Speaker 1: and restructure them, to loot them. So again, does that
Speaker 1: make the Cold War iron curtain? Does that make them good?
Speaker 2: No?
Speaker 1: But is it possible that we have turned into a
Speaker 1: worse thing. That's what I'm trying to pose it to you.
Speaker 1: And the more that I read about the Stars and
Speaker 1: the KGB and all this stuff and how awful they were,
Speaker 1: all the awful stuff that they did to people in
Speaker 1: these books, I'm just reminded of. But aren't the global
Speaker 1: elite that run things now like ten times worse? Are
Speaker 1: they doing ten times worse things? Isn't what they want
Speaker 1: to set up with every area of your life?
Speaker 2: Tract and trace a ten times worse version of all
Speaker 2: that stuff seems like it to me.
Speaker 1: And while it's true that communism had this ridiculous idealistic
Speaker 1: system that was based around everyone being essentially sacrificed to
Speaker 1: the collective and to this bizarre technocratic atheistic system, that
Speaker 1: was an older technocratic model that has caved to a
Speaker 1: new technocratic model. If you remember the way that Brazenski
Speaker 1: and Brezenski, the way that bertrand Russell and ah c
Speaker 1: Wells these different, these big level strategies, the way they
Speaker 1: talked about communism and socialism and Marsam was as if
Speaker 1: they were experiments in other countries to see how well
Speaker 1: they functioned, how well they worked as control mechanisms in
Speaker 1: other areas and for certain people. And not every system
Speaker 1: works that well to control everybody equally, because different regions,
Speaker 1: different people groups require different strategies. That's why the CAA
Speaker 1: studies ethnography to master the local customs and idiosyncrasies of
Speaker 1: various peoples to best influence and control them.
Speaker 2: And so.
Speaker 1: Do we understand what's going on really that it's and
Speaker 1: it's doesn't mean that Russia is a representation of authentic, pure,
Speaker 1: one hundred percent accurate Christianity. There's absolutely corruption in Eastern
Speaker 1: Bloc countries. There's absolutely corruption in the Russian government, sure,
Speaker 1: but that's everywhere. And if you listen to putent speech,
Speaker 1: what did Putins say about what Russia represents?
Speaker 2: It's the representation of a system that I didn't completely
Speaker 2: get destroyed.
Speaker 1: In the post Cold World period, in the World War
Speaker 1: two and post Cold War period. In other words, there's
Speaker 1: a representation of the maintenance of people and their faith
Speaker 1: and their tradition and that they don't want enforced Satanism.
Speaker 2: And even if.
Speaker 1: Putin is some villain or something, which he just seems
Speaker 1: to be a pragmatic global leader like anyone else. Right,
Speaker 1: People always ask me all the time, what do you
Speaker 1: think about Putin? What do you think about Elon Musk?
Speaker 1: What do you think about Donald Trump? I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't have any thoughts other than I like it
Speaker 1: when they do something good, and if they do something bad,
Speaker 1: I disagree. So there's no pipe dreams about, you know,
Speaker 1: some utopia that's going to be created in some other country.
Speaker 1: But there is the reality of Western elites being completely maniacal,
Speaker 1: completely out of touch with the reality, the completely I mean,
Speaker 1: it's people like brazent Ski and Kissinger and Bill Gates
Speaker 1: and and Klaus Schwab and George Soros, and I mean
Speaker 1: they brag about what they're doing. They're one hundred percent
Speaker 1: into Malthusianism. But even the Soviets weren't maniocal Malthusians, right,
Speaker 1: They had ridiculous things like Lysinkoism and these stupid philosophies,
Speaker 1: and they would they was certainly killing and starve off
Speaker 1: people who oppose.
Speaker 2: Them, but.
Speaker 1: Hourly who by the way, supported all those ideas, now
Speaker 1: want something ten times worse than that. Do you understand
Speaker 1: how crazy that is? And now we're at the point
Speaker 1: where it's like, oh, yeah, now we need to nuke,
Speaker 1: we need to we need to blow everything up, destroy everything.
Speaker 1: These lunatics like Sean Penn, Let's nuke everybody, Let's nuke
Speaker 1: these whole all of those blow up everything up.
Speaker 2: I mean, I can't imagine that these people, I mean.
Speaker 1: It's almost as if they're completely taken over by something else,
Speaker 1: something else was running them.
Speaker 2: And they just have this innate thirst for the.
Speaker 1: Destruction of cities, the destruction of countries, the destruction of
Speaker 1: what they think is their enemy. Like the view Heartbeat
Speaker 1: saying that everybody in the Midwest deserves to be destroyed because.
Speaker 2: That state went for Trump. That's crazy.
Speaker 1: But we see the spirit that motivates somebody like that
Speaker 1: can't be good. That is a demonic spirit. And so
Speaker 1: this whole Cold War situation and where we're going is
Speaker 1: not random conflicts. This is all drawn up by the Rancorporation,
Speaker 1: drawn up by these entities created out of the same
Speaker 1: network that I'm talking about, the deep state.
Speaker 2: And by the way, it's great that Trump called out Victoria, Newland.
Speaker 1: That's that's I mean, that's who has been pushing this
Speaker 1: for all this time, trying to provoke this conflict, trying
Speaker 1: to provoke Russia for all these years, back to twenty
Speaker 1: fourteen and all the way back to the eighties with
Speaker 1: the Color revolutions. But if Rand Corporation was drawing up
Speaker 1: these strategies in these plans decades ago, then how can
Speaker 1: it be the fault of countries that just want to
Speaker 1: preserve what they are in their way of life? And
Speaker 1: Ukraine is not a historic nation state. It's part of Russia.
Speaker 1: So of course they want Ukraine. Why wouldn't they win.
Speaker 1: That is the heart of Russia. Kiev is the heart
Speaker 1: of Russia, and breaking it off is a Western imperial
Speaker 1: strategy going all the way back to World War One.
Speaker 1: So you have to understand that this is a bigger
Speaker 1: game that's being played. And it doesn't mean that Russia
Speaker 1: or any of these other countries is a perfect utopia.
Speaker 1: It means that they represent things that stand in the
Speaker 1: way of the advance of total technocracy and total malthusiaan depopulation.
Speaker 2: Sometime you got So's Jay Di or jays analysis.
Speaker 1: We were talking about what emerged out of the Cold
Speaker 1: War dialectic and what the long term plan was, and
Speaker 1: the long term plan is now completely evident.
Speaker 2: Right again, I think we could give.
Speaker 1: Some leeway to people in the fifties, sixties, seventies, you know,
Speaker 1: living in the time of the Cold War. They didn't
Speaker 1: have access to the information, they didn't have access to
Speaker 1: what we have access to now, and so a lot
Speaker 1: of good people, including my family members. I had family
Speaker 1: members that fought for the West and were Cold warriors
Speaker 1: that engaged in Cold War activities for the Air Force,
Speaker 1: for example, And so you know, it has nothing to
Speaker 1: do with I want to pick some side because to
Speaker 1: have this idealistic view that somehow there's going to be
Speaker 1: this future or is itox Christian empire, or that Russia
Speaker 1: is going to save the world or something like that. Now,
Speaker 1: maybe Russia saves the world by and I don't know.
Speaker 1: I mean, things are getting so crazy, who knows. But
Speaker 1: I don't think that salvation or anything like that comes
Speaker 1: necessarily from a nation state per se. But God can
Speaker 1: providentially use situations like this to stave off completely demonized
Speaker 1: structures that are openly everybody can see what's being promoted
Speaker 1: by the Western elite now and one hundred percent this
Speaker 1: is a global agenda. They want to push this everywhere.
Speaker 1: And so what's happening is the removal of potential areas
Speaker 1: of resistance. And that's not just the Ukraine conflict that
Speaker 1: also is domestically in the West. It's anybody in the
Speaker 1: in the Western countries that potentially could stand up to
Speaker 1: or oppose a threat. That's why there are these long
Speaker 1: term operations to demographically destroy different areas and regions. It's
Speaker 1: an open stated thing there's a book called Weapons of
Speaker 1: Mass Migration by Kelly green Hill. It's a I think
Speaker 1: it's a Stanford University publication. I think it's connected to
Speaker 1: the Army War College. It's about warfare with population. But
Speaker 1: you can't talk about that because that makes you a
Speaker 1: bad person, even though it's a public fact that it's
Speaker 1: a real strategy of warfare, and that's too weaken and
Speaker 1: destroy to integrate into this coming global government. So the
Speaker 1: danger is that now that we're reaching this coming to
Speaker 1: a head, and now we have Zelenski and others threatening
Speaker 1: World War III, if there's a union between Russia and China. Again,
Speaker 1: keep in mind that doesn't make any of these powers
Speaker 1: necessarily the good guys. And my point is that, as
Speaker 1: I was pointing out with the Bond film Tomorrow Never Dies,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of other movies that have the same
Speaker 1: kind of plot going on. Think about X Men, the
Speaker 1: one with Michael Fassman where he's Magneto. You have this
Speaker 1: elite group that's trying to kick off a nuclear exchange
Speaker 1: between the East and the West. Think about war Games
Speaker 1: where an Ai tries to kick off this global world
Speaker 1: war between the East and the West. Think about tomorrow
Speaker 1: never dies where an elite group is trying to cause
Speaker 1: an instantiate in an act that war between the East
Speaker 1: and the West. And so I think that there is
Speaker 1: a desire on the part of some of the more
Speaker 1: demonically energized elites in the West that they would be
Speaker 1: happy to see full on total war, because eventually what
Speaker 1: happens is that these people are so given over to
Speaker 1: evil that they're not even in control of their own
Speaker 1: faculties anymore. They lose their own reasoning faculty, and they
Speaker 1: become essentially unionize united with evil powers, and by doing so,
Speaker 1: they're not in control. They're not steering anymore. They're steered
Speaker 1: by something else. And what is it that all these
Speaker 1: people want to enact. They want to enact a new
Speaker 1: order and new aon, a new era that is posthuman.
Speaker 1: Every one of the global elite that we've analyzed in
Speaker 1: terms of their books, they're all one hundred percent on
Speaker 1: the same page when it comes to this. None of
Speaker 1: them disagree. There are no pro human, pro life global elites.
Speaker 1: You understand that, none of them. There are none of
Speaker 1: them who disagree with a global government, who disagree with
Speaker 1: a global single CBDC currency, The bis guy, the Triple
Speaker 1: Chin guy just came out again and said FIAT has won.
Speaker 1: It is beaten bigcoin, which is laughable. He says that
Speaker 1: we will have this CBDC. We will have it and
Speaker 1: will shut your wallets off. You will be under total
Speaker 1: control for anything you say.
Speaker 2: That's esg.
Speaker 1: This technocratic system was designed out of rand CIA World
Speaker 1: War two Cold War operations studying all of the conflicts
Speaker 1: to figure out the best techniques and mechanisms to control
Speaker 1: and manage populations through tech through smart cities. For example,
Speaker 1: in the Phoenix Program book that we analyzed by Doug Valentine,
Speaker 1: we learned that FEMA and Homeland Security were set up
Speaker 1: on the models of the Phoenix Program and on the
Speaker 1: models of Vietnam and population reorganization studies. We learned that
Speaker 1: in Vietnam a lot of the AI and drone technology
Speaker 1: was first tested out in.
Speaker 2: The Vietnam conflict.
Speaker 1: We learned that DARPA and the Pentagon were strategizing and
Speaker 1: testing out vas techniques for masses of population tracking and
Speaker 1: control in Vietnam and subsequent conflicts as well. Right Desert Storm,
Speaker 1: we know that people were beginning to be biometrically tracked
Speaker 1: and traced even at the time of desert storm in
Speaker 1: the Iraq conflict. And so these power structures are the
Speaker 1: same power structures that control the global drug trade.
Speaker 2: Do you think that these are good people? They're controlling
Speaker 2: the global drug trade.
Speaker 1: And the insane explosion of heroin production since.
Speaker 2: The last ten to fifteen twenty years.
Speaker 1: Look at our country being destroyed by legal heroin opioids
Speaker 1: and illegal opioids.
Speaker 2: That's because the.
Speaker 1: Western power structure took over all of the drug networks
Speaker 1: and lanes in the last fifty sixty years. And they
Speaker 1: did that in concert with aligning themselves organized crime, as
Speaker 1: multiple analysts have pointed out, even from the FBI itself,
Speaker 1: right FBI consultant Paul Williams Ciaoss, they took over all
Speaker 1: of the old drug networks, drug lanes. And what I'm
Speaker 1: trying to say is that this is what it means
Speaker 1: to have full spectrum dominance. To have full spectrum control,
Speaker 1: is to control all these areas of life.
Speaker 2: They're not doing it because it's just a hobby.
Speaker 1: It's fun to do, to study. Oh, we're nerds. No,
Speaker 1: it's about what they are bringing in. Do you understand
Speaker 1: this is not This is a real plan. It's not theories.
Speaker 1: I wonder what they're going to do. I mean, they
Speaker 1: all put in.
Speaker 2: Their books what they're going to do.
Speaker 1: It's not guesswork. Now, how they roll this out is guesswork.
Speaker 1: We don't know what cards these people are going to play.
Speaker 1: A lot of people didn't know for sure, or we
Speaker 1: didn't know they were going to have this COVID all
Speaker 1: this kind of stuff that rolled out. But then after
Speaker 1: it happens, we look back and we can say, oh,
Speaker 1: they're running all these drolls for the exact same thing.
Speaker 1: Crimson Contagient, Clayed X spars document event to A one,
Speaker 1: and we can see that this is a strategized, rolled
Speaker 1: out plan. It's the same with all these Rank Corporation
Speaker 1: documents that have been mentioning, all these white papers that
Speaker 1: plan the future, that plan and strategize a global conflict
Speaker 1: as one of the cards that can be played. Literally
Speaker 1: Rand Corporation strategies about a war between Russia and the West.
Speaker 1: Nuclear stranges right PDD sixty or whatever it is Presidential
Speaker 1: Decision Directive under Clinton of absorbing a nuclear strike, which
Speaker 1: supposedly has.
Speaker 2: Been updated or whatever.
Speaker 1: I don't know all the PDDs, but the point is
Speaker 1: that you do have strategies about this, and none of
Speaker 1: those strategies are.
Speaker 2: Made with your welfare in mind.
Speaker 1: Because the same people that run giant drug laundering banks
Speaker 1: like HSBC and all these other banks that got busted
Speaker 1: ten years ago for three hundred million dollars worth of
Speaker 1: drug money. You think that's just random bad apples. No,
Speaker 1: that's the people that run the West. That's the same structure,
Speaker 1: the same people that we're talking about. It's Specter and
Speaker 1: Spector would like to see a destructive war probably eventually.
Speaker 1: It's definitely one of the cards that they could play.
Speaker 1: I mean, I hope there's not going to be a
Speaker 1: world war, but they could definitely play that card. They
Speaker 1: have talked and strategized about it for a long time,
Speaker 1: the possibility of a new world war.
Speaker 2: Now it's more likely than ever.
Speaker 1: It's being talked about openly, and if it happens, it
Speaker 1: would be because the elite want that to happen, to
Speaker 1: have a mass destruction, to bring in their post human
Speaker 1: world where we're run.
Speaker 2: By AI, we're run in some kind of new.
Speaker 1: Technocratics system where everything is tracked and traced. Maybe the
Speaker 1: elite emerged from underground bunkers after a giant exchange. Who knows,
Speaker 1: but that's definitely one of the cards that they could play.
Speaker 1: We have to keep that in mind. And another pandemic
Speaker 1: is another card they could play. They could play both cards.
Speaker 1: So we have to be prepared for these things because
Speaker 1: these are realities. That's the world that we live in,
Speaker 1: and if we don't realize what's going on, it's just
Speaker 1: going to be all the worse for us.
Speaker 2: Do you want to get my books? Go to Jay's Analysis.
Speaker 1: You can buy my books in the shop signed copies.
Speaker 1: You can follow me over on rockfin as well and
Speaker 1: get all those products there. And the Tip of the
Speaker 1: Spear