Speaker 1: The Chilly Effect is sponsored by Wallstreet, Windows dot Com
Speaker 1: and listeners like you Yeah Now, Best Reggivated Noise and
Speaker 1: a Media Chucky.
Speaker 2: June fifteen, twenty twenty two.
Speaker 3: Allegedly, according to that thing we call a calendar, this
Speaker 3: happens to be the show you were looking for.
Speaker 2: How do I know that? Because you're hearing me say
Speaker 2: this anyway.
Speaker 3: Wednesday, Wildnesday, middle of the week, that's right, and this
Speaker 3: is the wildcard. Now, if you're listening to me on
Speaker 3: the live streaming, you're going, what the hell? Why'd you
Speaker 3: start eight nine minutes late?
Speaker 2: Eh?
Speaker 3: Technical issues abound, but let's see if we can keep
Speaker 3: them under control at least for the next two hours,
Speaker 3: and it will be an interesting two hours. First hour,
Speaker 3: you know what, I'm gonna let my first hour guest
Speaker 3: introduce himself because I look at a lot of different
Speaker 3: ways I could introduce him and I'm not sure how
Speaker 3: this conversation is gonna go. H this is This could
Speaker 3: be one of the most awkward first time guest appearances ever.
Speaker 2: But then again, maybe not. I have no idea. Of course.
Speaker 3: This comes from the mind of nature Boy, the Wednesday
Speaker 3: night producer, who I don't put any restrictions on as
Speaker 3: far as who it is he thinks would be interesting
Speaker 3: to bring on the show. So there's that in the
Speaker 3: first hour, stick around for it. In the second we'll
Speaker 3: get to John Potash, who you have heard from before
Speaker 3: on this show, and we might be covering some stuff
Speaker 3: I don't know that'll get me kicked off with.
Speaker 2: Some platform or other.
Speaker 3: I do want to talk to him about the TUPAC
Speaker 3: documentary piece, but he's got a newer one that's coming
Speaker 3: out that we did talk about some months ago on
Speaker 3: the show. He is the author of weapons Oh Man.
Speaker 3: I don't want to screw up the title. I got
Speaker 3: it on my bookshelf behind me. But look the drug
Speaker 3: war and the absolute lunacy, ridiculousness and sham and fraud
Speaker 3: that it is. John Potash is an author to discuss
Speaker 3: that about. Anyways, we'll get into that. But documentary in
Speaker 3: the second hour with John Potess.
Speaker 2: Okay. So again, as I said my first hour guest,
Speaker 2: unusual to.
Speaker 3: Say the least. Okay, And I'll tell you, Joel. Your
Speaker 3: first name is Joel and that's all the listeners know
Speaker 3: at the moment. So how would you introduce yourself to
Speaker 3: some people who hear people talking all the time about politics,
Speaker 3: social issues, everything else.
Speaker 2: Raw thing.
Speaker 3: You're coming out of nowhere, And of course we'll talk
Speaker 3: about where people can find you and all that before
Speaker 3: we're done discussing things tonight. You are an interesting character
Speaker 3: all the way around, so let's just do it that way.
Speaker 3: How would you introduce yourself? Okay, people you never heard
Speaker 3: of me before, this is who I am.
Speaker 4: Well, first and foremost, thank you so much for having
Speaker 4: me this podcast.
Speaker 5: I mean, it's phenomenal to even be here.
Speaker 4: Well, for the people who don't know me, I'm Joe
Speaker 4: Joel and I go by Token Black Guy USA, so
Speaker 4: I know the name is very unique to a point
Speaker 4: where I just want to spark conversation every time someone
Speaker 4: hears it, so it'll get you asking questions. But I
Speaker 4: was actually born in Africa. I was adopted into a
Speaker 4: military family at the age of fourteen years old, but
Speaker 4: I was in an orphanage for basically.
Speaker 5: My whole life.
Speaker 4: I started learning English when I was five years old,
Speaker 4: and from then on it was like meant to be man.
Speaker 4: I know what it's like not to be an American.
Speaker 4: So from the time I was five, I knew America
Speaker 4: was kind of my destiny and I had to be
Speaker 4: here because honestly, opportunity arise in the US and you
Speaker 4: have to pursue that American dream.
Speaker 5: And that's kind of.
Speaker 4: My story in a nutshell, but adopted from in a
Speaker 4: military family with predominantly white parents, even though I really
Speaker 4: don't see color, but apparently I'm supposed to. So my
Speaker 4: parents are two tremendous individuals who have instilled so much
Speaker 4: conservatism into my life. But it's always kind of ran
Speaker 4: in like my bloodstream, I feel like, because everything just
Speaker 4: comes naturally when it comes to.
Speaker 5: My thought process.
Speaker 4: And I guess a lot of people are triggered by
Speaker 4: that fact because they see me and they say, I'm
Speaker 4: supposed to be on one side of the aisle, and
Speaker 4: then they hear me speak and they're like, Okay, interesting,
Speaker 4: maybe he's not one of us. And they're kind of
Speaker 4: right because I'm.
Speaker 2: In the middle.
Speaker 4: I'm not on the left, I'm not in the right,
Speaker 4: but I'm actually more on the right than I am
Speaker 4: on the left.
Speaker 5: But I don't really play the identity game.
Speaker 4: I like to talk about it, but I don't play
Speaker 4: the identity game like they ask me to do so.
Speaker 4: But all in all, I'm a college student who just
Speaker 4: graduated college, living my American dream already. So and now
Speaker 4: I'm working for the North Carolina GOP ready to take
Speaker 4: on the awful Biden administration this midterm election. So yeah,
Speaker 4: there's far more behind that story, but that's just me
Speaker 4: in a nut show.
Speaker 2: Awesome.
Speaker 3: Well, look, you know, first of all, it already sounds
Speaker 3: pretty unusual. Tell you why, you know, token black guy?
Speaker 3: First thing, I think, I'm sorry. I watched a lot
Speaker 3: of cartoons is south Park, and recently they decided that
Speaker 3: they were going to say that token was actually named Tolkien.
Speaker 2: But he's been token.
Speaker 3: Black guy a black kid for years on the show, right,
Speaker 3: and began as a joke because he was literally the
Speaker 3: only black character in South Park. So I'm wondering if
Speaker 3: that inspired any of this token black guy USA stuff
Speaker 3: or if, you know, did that have anything to do
Speaker 3: with it.
Speaker 4: It actually had nothing to do with it until after
Speaker 4: everybody was like, oh, is it from.
Speaker 5: The South Park I'm like, no, I don't.
Speaker 4: Watch South Park. I had never heard about it. I
Speaker 4: actually had to google it. But it actually stems more
Speaker 4: from the fact that I've always kind of been that
Speaker 4: token guy who happens to be black in the.
Speaker 5: Group a circle of his friends.
Speaker 4: I've never always like just assumed or gotten into like
Speaker 4: one area or one black group or one white group
Speaker 4: or whatever. It's always been a very diverse group of
Speaker 4: friends that I've been surrounded with, and I thank God
Speaker 4: for that. But I've always been that one black guy
Speaker 4: in that circle. So I was like, Okay, something that
Speaker 4: fits me. Token Okay, because they're gonna call me token,
Speaker 4: so I might as well just embrace the name and
Speaker 4: then add the hint of USA at the end because
Speaker 4: I'm an avid patriot.
Speaker 5: So it just fit perfectly token black guy USA, right.
Speaker 3: And the other strange thing is that, you know, when
Speaker 3: I think of a token black guy, you know, and
Speaker 3: I'm just gonna be blunt with you here, man. You know,
Speaker 3: tell me if I offend, I'm still gonna speak the
Speaker 3: same way. I'll tell you that right now, because first
Speaker 3: of all, on the left or the right, I'm just
Speaker 3: gonna go h So, you know, I I equally bash
Speaker 3: both lap wingers and right wingers on this show, which
Speaker 3: makes it hard for me to bring certain guests on
Speaker 3: and UHU, because I find that we've gotten into a
Speaker 3: position where I don't believe we should be. And I
Speaker 3: hear your enthusiasm for the American dream.
Speaker 2: I wish I had it.
Speaker 3: To be honest with you, now, most people would call
Speaker 3: me white, and I know that's not correct. First of all,
Speaker 3: because even according to the people that want to, uh
Speaker 3: you know, instill the ideas of white purity and so
Speaker 3: on and so forth, I'm disqualified because first I'm Sicilian.
Speaker 2: So that's the end of that.
Speaker 3: Okay, you know anything about world history, you know that
Speaker 3: Sicilians are are are not entirely white.
Speaker 2: Uh it cannot be.
Speaker 3: Uh So, uh yeah, I don't pass the purity test,
Speaker 3: and I really don't give a damn. The other thing
Speaker 3: is that when when I hear token black guy, I'm
Speaker 3: thinking to myself, that's usually the guy that's introduced there,
Speaker 3: just so you have a black presence. And I saw
Speaker 3: this among general's. After mind, I'm a generation excerp so
Speaker 3: I'm older than you if you just finished college probably,
Speaker 3: although you could have just finished college at my age too.
Speaker 3: I mean, things are different nowadays, but either way, I
Speaker 3: think i'm older than you based on what I've read
Speaker 3: a little bit about you. And it's a different generation
Speaker 3: now when it comes to racial identity. Strange thing is
Speaker 3: it's more extreme, it's more polite, and yet it's more
Speaker 3: extreme than it was when I grew up. So a
Speaker 3: token black guy, though, would be somebody that you just
Speaker 3: brought in there just so you could have black skin
Speaker 3: in the game. It was like, you know, well, we
Speaker 3: have to have, you know, our affirmative action guy here,
Speaker 3: he's the token black guy. I would almost find that
Speaker 3: ridiculous and insulting if you don't want to embrace that
Speaker 3: as a primary function of your identity. And also, by
Speaker 3: the way, just quick commentary before I let it get
Speaker 3: out of my head. You don't sound like you came
Speaker 3: from anywhere else. You very much sound like you were
Speaker 3: born here and a natural English speak all the way around.
Speaker 2: Your accents, you know, not like mine.
Speaker 3: You can clearly tell, you know, even though I live
Speaker 3: in Georgia, I'm from the Northeast, but your accent is mixed,
Speaker 3: but it's clearly American, and that's what I hear. And again,
Speaker 3: I mean, I'm gonna nail this racial thing in the
Speaker 3: next few minutes, and then we're going to get into
Speaker 3: some real topics because quite honestly, I wish it didn't
Speaker 3: count to anybody, it's really stupid. And I'm not saying
Speaker 3: that to be an apologist or to cover up for
Speaker 3: my white guilt or any It's just that it seems
Speaker 3: to me to be a massive waste of time when
Speaker 3: we have so many other things.
Speaker 2: That we need to address collectively.
Speaker 3: And you know, look, nationally, I think we're we're on
Speaker 3: a downhill slope and we've been there a while. And
Speaker 3: by the way, I don't just blame Biden for that,
Speaker 3: but you know, anyway, look, I threw a bunch of
Speaker 3: things at you, But what about the seemingly almost insulting
Speaker 3: nature of the idea of the token black guy that
Speaker 3: you're in brace saying as sort of a way to
Speaker 3: get a conversation started.
Speaker 2: I mean, are you purposely trying.
Speaker 3: To evoke a little bit of that sort of well,
Speaker 3: you know, sentimentality that could cut both ways on that?
Speaker 2: Is that really what the point of it is?
Speaker 6: Then?
Speaker 4: Yeah, the point of it is really to kind of
Speaker 4: have both people kind of shocked every time they hear it.
Speaker 4: And it is a shock factor for sure, because then
Speaker 4: they're like, hmm, interesting because.
Speaker 5: Most of them know what exactly that means. So once
Speaker 5: they kind of it's like a breaking the ice type thing.
Speaker 4: They come up to me and they're like why and
Speaker 4: because they want to know, and then I have to
Speaker 4: just explain exactly what I just explained to you, and
Speaker 4: then they kind of let.
Speaker 5: Their guard down, or they're more open.
Speaker 4: To having a conversation with me because they see that
Speaker 4: I have a sense of humor, and they're more likely
Speaker 4: to approach someone who is more laid back than someone
Speaker 4: who's like, oh, I hate all liberals or I hate
Speaker 4: all conservatives or whatsoever. So I don't find it offensive
Speaker 4: at all. I just find it hilarious that I actually
Speaker 4: most time.
Speaker 5: Always end up being the only black person in a room.
Speaker 5: But does that bother me?
Speaker 4: Absolutely not, because if black people wanted to be in
Speaker 4: those rooms, they would make a way to get there.
Speaker 4: And for me, it's just like, Okay, I walk in
Speaker 4: a room and I see a bunch of Americans.
Speaker 5: That's all I see. I see a bunch of Americans.
Speaker 4: I'm never going to gravitate towards black group just because oh,
Speaker 4: they share the same skin color as myself.
Speaker 5: Never, that's not what you do. When you enter a room.
Speaker 4: You enter a room, you look for familiar faces of people,
Speaker 4: you know, or family members or a smiling face. You
Speaker 4: don't just gravitate towards that. And that's the problem. That's
Speaker 4: the problem with a lot of the black culture, and
Speaker 4: they just assume just because you look a specific way,
Speaker 4: you have to gravitate towards them. And that's kind of
Speaker 4: what barrier I'm trying to break with that one token
Speaker 4: black guy user.
Speaker 3: Name Okay, cool, look, and I do understand that. And again,
Speaker 3: I don't want to spend the whole time with you
Speaker 3: on the politics of race and identity. Oh well, you know,
Speaker 3: might as well hit it upfront since you put it
Speaker 3: up front, right, So here's the thing. I would say
Speaker 3: that it is sensible though to understand that not everybody
Speaker 3: like like I've said on this show and gotten flat
Speaker 3: for it.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 3: Really, the funny thing to me is that black people
Speaker 3: and white people don't actually exist. And you know, people go,
Speaker 3: what do you mean by that? And I say, well,
Speaker 3: you know, even the people that are supposed to have
Speaker 3: white skin, they're not actually white. I mean I've even
Speaker 3: known plenty about buyo people of all ethnicities, and quite frankly,
Speaker 3: as pale as they are, they're not actually white. First
Speaker 3: of all, and secondly, you know people that are black,
Speaker 3: and I've known some dark people, you know, and they
Speaker 3: come close to purple in color when they get dark enough.
Speaker 3: The fact is I've never seen I mean, I've seen
Speaker 3: black hair, but I've never actually seen black skin, absolutely
Speaker 3: black skin close. So really, this idea of black and
Speaker 3: white is all is a misnomer to begin with. And
Speaker 3: I have bad eyesight, I know, but but I think
Speaker 3: I can see this clearly. We're all just different shades
Speaker 3: of brown, honestly. I mean even people that would say, well, no,
Speaker 3: there's yellow and red and yeah, but when you look
Speaker 3: at it, we're all just these odd, sort of weird
Speaker 3: mixed shapes of brown anyway, one way or another. Even
Speaker 3: even the whitest of white people. And yes, some people
Speaker 3: are ghostly white. I know, there's still not actually white.
Speaker 3: So you know, like I always, I always find that
Speaker 3: weird to begin with, just from a like, how do
Speaker 3: you label anybody anyway? Now I get there's African, and
Speaker 3: there's a and you were born in Africa, so you
Speaker 3: could literally say I'm an African American, and and you
Speaker 3: don't want to go with that because you figure that
Speaker 3: it's American. And maybe I came from Africa, but so
Speaker 3: did everybody else come from somewhere else. So whatever. And
Speaker 3: I don't even really love the American label anymore because
Speaker 3: we're so much at each other's throats. I don't see
Speaker 3: it as a good accurate label. Now that's a weird
Speaker 3: position for me to be in, yeh. But here's the thing.
Speaker 3: I think it's also valid for some people that and
Speaker 3: I want you to address all.
Speaker 2: Of this, by the way, I'm not just trying to
Speaker 2: run my mouth.
Speaker 3: I think it's also valid to recognize that not everybody
Speaker 3: thinks like you and me, and that there are different
Speaker 3: ways that people are treated, whether it's spoken out loud
Speaker 3: or somebody says it straight up or you know, I
Speaker 3: always love the listen, I'm not actually racist. I know
Speaker 3: there's going to be a butt and then there's gonna
Speaker 3: be something where they're just going look. I definitely in
Speaker 3: the American psyche there is a racial ism which is
Speaker 3: not necessarily racist all the time, but racialist where even
Speaker 3: on the positive side, right, somebody might say, if they're
Speaker 3: very racialist, okay, again, your skin dark and most people
Speaker 3: would call you black. Fine, they might think, you know what,
Speaker 3: this guy is probably athletically better than average white guy
Speaker 3: just because well your heritage. Yeah, you know, some people
Speaker 3: might say, uh, okay, I'll pick on myself for a minute.
Speaker 3: Uh so so so I'm Sicilian and Irish, right, so
Speaker 3: maybe some people will think I might have a propensity
Speaker 3: to be a drunk. Some people might think I have
Speaker 3: a propensity to be affiliated to Italian businessmen, you know,
Speaker 3: is something like this.
Speaker 2: They might not be wrong. Uh but and I'm not
Speaker 2: a drunk anyway.
Speaker 3: The thing is, there's a lot of ways to go here,
Speaker 3: positive and negative. But people start to make these sort
Speaker 3: of stereotypical decisions, and the truth is that we are
Speaker 3: we are diverse, and yes, indeed our heritages do lend
Speaker 3: themselves to certain things. I mean, I'm not going to
Speaker 3: tell you that I would worry about you as much
Speaker 3: getting a sunburn as me. Quite frankly, although you can
Speaker 3: get a sunburn. Anybody who's you know, white and doesn't
Speaker 3: believe black people get sunburns, that they're wrong.
Speaker 2: And here I am.
Speaker 3: Using those terms again when I don't even want to
Speaker 3: use them. So one would say even that, are you
Speaker 3: just not willing to recognize and this is an honest question,
Speaker 3: not willing to recognize that in many cases, let's just say,
Speaker 3: in dealing with the police, and I've seen this straightforward
Speaker 3: many different times. Of course, police are unkind to poor
Speaker 3: people in general, but even among poor people, I don't know,
Speaker 3: they seem to be a little less hostile to people
Speaker 3: of my skin tone than they do of your skin tone.
Speaker 3: And I've seen that for myself. It's not the news,
Speaker 3: it's not you know. And indeed that may be on
Speaker 3: a situation by situation basis, but you've got to acknowledge
Speaker 3: that there are people out there that, whether they say
Speaker 3: it out loud or no matter what it is, they
Speaker 3: try and virtue signal. Truth is, they're going to look
Speaker 3: at you and say you and I are getting arrested.
Speaker 3: First of all, you're a younger black guy. I'm an
Speaker 3: older white So suddenly, although it never happens to me
Speaker 3: because I don't know why, but they might give a
Speaker 3: gradi sort of response to us where I'm less dangerous
Speaker 3: than you, Maybe I don't need to be as handled
Speaker 3: as harshly as you, and maybe indeed you're more of
Speaker 3: a criminal than me. In many places in the US,
Speaker 3: not just the South, that does happen, so you got
Speaker 3: to acknowledge that maybe not everybody is, you know, working
Speaker 3: on being colorblind or even getting anywhere near it in
Speaker 3: truth in their internal being. So wouldn't you say that
Speaker 3: there might be some complaints that could be had by
Speaker 3: you that could not be had by me in America?
Speaker 5: I mean by me and you.
Speaker 4: Okay, yes, on an individual's basis, for sure, a lot
Speaker 4: of people could they have been ruffed up by the
Speaker 4: police here and there. However, to me, it's more so
Speaker 4: how you behave in a situation like that. You see
Speaker 4: a policee officer and you don't respect a police officer,
Speaker 4: and so how are you going to react to that
Speaker 4: police officer or the police officer approaches you. If your
Speaker 4: first assumption is that he came up to you because
Speaker 4: of your skin color, then you might be kind of
Speaker 4: right on that notion. But how you react to his
Speaker 4: approach will also in fact kind of.
Speaker 5: Cause how he treats you.
Speaker 4: And that's kind of something I try to explain to
Speaker 4: a lot of my black friends that I have, the
Speaker 4: very few that I have. I'm like, if I see
Speaker 4: a police officer, I already know I respect them enough
Speaker 4: and their job is hard enough because I would never
Speaker 4: want to be put in a.
Speaker 5: Position where I have to.
Speaker 4: Basically make sure the law is kept in that matter,
Speaker 4: because everything you do is under a microscope, and then
Speaker 4: if you do something just an inch off, you will
Speaker 4: be criticized for So their job is already hard enough.
Speaker 4: So I'm going to treat them to the best of
Speaker 4: my ability, regardless of whether or not I'm wrong or not,
Speaker 4: because there's a reason that they pulled me over or
Speaker 4: they're approaching me. So I'm gonna treat them the best
Speaker 4: ways I can possible.
Speaker 5: But to your notion, yes, am I more afraid?
Speaker 4: Am I more afraid when a police officer approaches me?
Speaker 5: No? No, it matters not to me whatsoever.
Speaker 4: Am I intimidated because it's a police officer, Yes.
Speaker 5: Because he maybe who knows, who knows? Maybe I did
Speaker 5: something wrong? Or is it my skin color?
Speaker 4: But that's not ever going to be my first jump too,
Speaker 4: is my skin color? I'm going to ask the right questions,
Speaker 4: and if that police officer is indeed, let's say racist,
Speaker 4: then it's not on me, it's on.
Speaker 5: Him so or her. So ultimately, yeah, it happens to people,
Speaker 5: but I it doesn't.
Speaker 4: It's never happened to me. So I guess on a
Speaker 4: basis that's a loaded one. That's a loaded one.
Speaker 3: You can see that other people's experiences may vary, but
Speaker 3: you actually have experienced it yourself.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, you know, but.
Speaker 4: I don't think would happened to me because of the
Speaker 4: way in which I conduct myself, because I would never
Speaker 4: disrespect a police officer because the majority some black people,
Speaker 4: they already have that instilled into them, where oh, they're
Speaker 4: gunning for me. So if you have their their gunning
Speaker 4: for me kind of mentality, you are going to do
Speaker 4: something that will set it off somehow, and.
Speaker 5: I don't know why. And it's a cultural thing.
Speaker 4: It really is a cultural thing because they've been trained
Speaker 4: to think that the police are out to get them,
Speaker 4: which in fact is not true. What do you They're
Speaker 4: doing their jobs and if they stop you or tell
Speaker 4: you okay, look I need to check something, and if
Speaker 4: they're wrong, okay, call them out. But I know it's
Speaker 4: not as simple as I make it out to be.
Speaker 3: So ye see, Look, I would dispute the notion that
Speaker 3: you have there that they're just you know, always worthy
Speaker 3: of respect and always just they're doing their job, or
Speaker 3: that it's just a cultural thing that people have been
Speaker 3: taught to approach them as the enemy. Because I got
Speaker 3: to tell you, I'm getting a sense, and maybe I'm wrong,
Speaker 3: I'm getting a sense that as the child of let's
Speaker 3: just say, a military kid, which you said you were,
Speaker 3: probably I don't know if you ever grew up in
Speaker 3: really bad neighborhoods at all. If you didn't, you might
Speaker 3: have a different attitude towards the police, no matter what
Speaker 3: color you are, because quite honestly, they don't come into
Speaker 3: the nice neighborhoods with the same attitude that they do
Speaker 3: in places where I've lived, and you get a mentality
Speaker 3: that has nothing to do with what your parents teach you.
Speaker 3: Because I watched and listened and heard all of the
Speaker 3: parents in the bad neighborhoods I knew trying to tell
Speaker 3: us all, you know, look respect to what the cops
Speaker 3: say this, and that they're there just doing a job.
Speaker 3: And we independently, as kids, uh, some of us rightfully
Speaker 3: so developed the idea that when they show up, they.
Speaker 2: Are the enemy.
Speaker 3: And it is not simply based on a cultural teaching,
Speaker 3: it's based on their actions. Now, they come into hostile
Speaker 3: situations with hostility, and I think that's part of what
Speaker 3: goes on. And again I'm the I'm the pale skinned one.
Speaker 3: They're in the equation, not the only one, because I
Speaker 3: grew up in very mixed areas.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 3: But but I did always see that there was a difference.
Speaker 3: And of course if I wandered into the wrong neighborhood
Speaker 3: and my friend, I got to tell you, and I
Speaker 3: stuck out like a sore thumb.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 3: You know, those police officers were harsh to me, but
Speaker 3: they could deal with, you know, the residents of their
Speaker 3: neighborhood who they clearly knew belong there differently. You know,
Speaker 3: I used to get thrown across the hoods of cars
Speaker 3: and have my pockets empty and everything else for walking
Speaker 3: down the wrong street.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 2: It just I didn't look right.
Speaker 6: Uh.
Speaker 3: And and again not a black guy, not even close
Speaker 3: to be and identified as one.
Speaker 2: Clearly they would call me white and all that.
Speaker 3: And these were white officers, so it wasn't a racial
Speaker 3: thing between us quite frankly, I'll tell you this.
Speaker 2: Uh Again, here I go being racialists, but I got
Speaker 2: to do it.
Speaker 3: Frankly, Black officers were always kinder, gentler, and nicer to me,
Speaker 3: even when I was doing things wrong because I was
Speaker 3: a juvenile delinquent. They were always better people to me
Speaker 3: than the white guys who wanted to step on me.
Speaker 3: So I don't I don't know what to say about
Speaker 3: it except that your your experiences could vary because of
Speaker 3: your financial status, your zip code.
Speaker 2: There's a lot of factors that could go into this.
Speaker 3: So but then again, look, I asked you about your
Speaker 3: experiences and you gave it to me, So all right,
Speaker 3: that's great, And again I want step away from the
Speaker 3: racial stuff unless you want to add to anything I
Speaker 3: just said and get into some other questions if you
Speaker 3: don't mind, Oh no.
Speaker 5: Yeah, let me add like one final bit. But for sure,
Speaker 5: the zip code probably does matter.
Speaker 4: And I'm not going to sit here and deny that
Speaker 4: there are some police officers that are in fact have
Speaker 4: a very harsh bias. However, at the end of the day,
Speaker 4: painting all police officers, which I think the BLM movement
Speaker 4: has kind of done and went forward because that's what
Speaker 4: BLM does. They have painted all of them as the enemy,
Speaker 4: and that's something we need to kind of rid ourselves
Speaker 4: of when in fact the police officers are not. When
Speaker 4: you do remove them from communities such as the black communities,
Speaker 4: let's say those crimes increase tremendously. Police officers no longer
Speaker 4: want to go into these neighborhoods because, yeah, it's too dangerous.
Speaker 4: Why because they're more likely to get killed in or
Speaker 4: shot or get in an alter case in those areas
Speaker 4: than any other area.
Speaker 5: So the lack of communal and cultural awareness that.
Speaker 4: The black community commits more crime than any other community.
Speaker 4: But ultimately they completely ignore that fact. They ignore that
Speaker 4: fact and blame it on police brutality whatsoever.
Speaker 5: But when in.
Speaker 4: Fact, I am more likely to get killed if I
Speaker 4: go into one of those areas by a black person,
Speaker 4: not the other way around, and I will pop. And
Speaker 4: that's an actual fact. So raising your kids to hate
Speaker 4: the police when you're worse and your most dangerous situation
Speaker 4: could be by the hands of someone who.
Speaker 2: Looks just like you, Well, I'll tell you what I think.
Speaker 3: Maybe maybe you and I will have a separate discussion
Speaker 3: at another time if you think that this interview is
Speaker 3: a value, because I really explore all of that which
Speaker 3: he just said. But again, I don't want to just
Speaker 3: stay on the it's just discussing race. I swear to God,
Speaker 3: I don't want to do it anymore much rather talk
Speaker 3: about what it is we can do to solve the
Speaker 3: things that actually affect us all, you know, and and
Speaker 3: what are the problems across the board? So I'm going
Speaker 3: to go to something that doesn't actually have color, because
Speaker 3: don't even tell me it's got green to it anymore,
Speaker 3: because who the hell carries cash? Well, let's talk about
Speaker 3: the financial issues that are in front of us, because
Speaker 3: you said you're a bit more of a conservative guy,
Speaker 3: and you clearly signaled that you know Biden is a disaster,
Speaker 3: which I can't.
Speaker 2: I can't argue with you.
Speaker 3: He's a disaster, but you know, to me's the continuation
Speaker 3: of the mess that has been made for a long time.
Speaker 3: And quite frankly, now I'm going to be ageist ready,
Speaker 3: you know, I think it's it's really time for the
Speaker 3: old men, all of them, to be moved out of
Speaker 3: the positions of power, because they're not connected to what's
Speaker 3: actually going on and it's not their future that are
Speaker 3: in jeopardy. So I'm tired of them all together. Anybody
Speaker 3: who's over a certain age. Sorry, And and by the way,
Speaker 3: I'm not offering up my Generation X as any sort
Speaker 3: of uh panacea here.
Speaker 2: We don't have the misers.
Speaker 5: Go ahead behavior, Is that what you're trying to do?
Speaker 2: No? No, I'm sorry you cut up there. I only heard.
Speaker 2: Is that what you're trying to do? Go ahead?
Speaker 7: Oh?
Speaker 5: Can you hear me? How about now?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I can hear you. Fine.
Speaker 4: Oh are you trying to be a savior to the
Speaker 4: Generator generation prior to yourself?
Speaker 2: Or what?
Speaker 5: Now?
Speaker 2: No?
Speaker 3: No, I don't want to be a savior. I want
Speaker 3: all of us out of the way. I think younger
Speaker 3: people are going to think outside of the box. Need
Speaker 3: to get in there and start making decisions because we're
Speaker 3: all suffering financially right now. This didn't happen overnight, and
Speaker 3: I don't see it getting any better. And I'm getting
Speaker 3: tired of the boom and bust reality of you know,
Speaker 3: greater corporate America, who, no matter what, seems to benefit
Speaker 3: while the rest of us scramble to try and figure
Speaker 3: it out.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I know you said you're getting finished with college
Speaker 3: and you're getting ready to really get in full swing
Speaker 3: with your American dream.
Speaker 2: But most of the people I know are.
Speaker 3: Not in that position, are not close to that. If
Speaker 3: they're coming out of it, they're they're they're sitting there
Speaker 3: looking at massive debts, the inability to live on their own.
Speaker 3: As we well know, inflation is right now choking all
Speaker 3: of us, you know. And again this isn't across the
Speaker 3: board issue. So I wanted to transition into finance. But
Speaker 3: when it comes to you know, who should be in power,
Speaker 3: and people want to get diversity in there. Uh my
Speaker 3: claim is that diversity needs to start with the younger
Speaker 3: people whose futures are actually being determined now when it
Speaker 3: comes to finance and everything across the board. And I
Speaker 3: don't care if they're black, white, or uh they you know,
Speaker 3: their ancestors came from a Latin nation. It really doesn't matter.
Speaker 3: Let's get to the reality.
Speaker 5: Goodhead, this needs to be American. That's all we ask for,
Speaker 5: and they just need to be American.
Speaker 4: But to that point, yes, I just graduated college and
Speaker 4: from then on, I mean I understood it was going
Speaker 4: to be a rough world out there. Granted I had
Speaker 4: a lot of support from my family of course. And
Speaker 4: am I in debt, Yes, I am actually in debt,
Speaker 4: and I refuse to basically take the handout that the
Speaker 4: government wants to completely erase my financial debt from college,
Speaker 4: and I made that decision personally because I was under
Speaker 4: the influence that, Okay, that's what the old American dream
Speaker 4: is all about, the traditionalist American dream, going to college,
Speaker 4: getting your degree, then getting your master's. So I did
Speaker 4: that consciously, and I'm not about to have someone pay
Speaker 4: for that whatsoever. Or have you who went to college
Speaker 4: and may have finished it and have finished paying off
Speaker 4: your college debt, I'm not going to have you do that.
Speaker 5: It's because it's not fair. I made that decision.
Speaker 8: I alone should have the burden of paying that kind
Speaker 8: of debt off.
Speaker 4: But to that point, when it comes to, yeah, finances,
Speaker 4: it is a hard world out there, and especially as
Speaker 4: a college student who just graduated, Yeah, it.
Speaker 5: Was extremely hard to find a job.
Speaker 4: But opportunities arise and you just have to make the
Speaker 4: best out of it and understand that we live in
Speaker 4: a time where yeah, gases, man, it hurts to say
Speaker 4: eighty dollars just to fill up my gas tank and
Speaker 4: having to struggle to kind of meet ends. Some people
Speaker 4: who are not in very beneficial financially stable families are
Speaker 4: struggling far more. And the top pier, the politicians, were
Speaker 4: the ones making these decisions are trying to make them
Speaker 4: more dependent on them. That's why we've had these stimulus
Speaker 4: checks going like money is printed on the freaking trees.
Speaker 5: Who knows.
Speaker 4: But ultimately everyone is going to struggle. And I make
Speaker 4: this point all the time. We here in the US
Speaker 4: are going to be hit the last. We're going to
Speaker 4: be hit last because we're at the top of the
Speaker 4: food chain. Everybody else outside of the US are getting
Speaker 4: hit now, like the Ukraine odeal right now.
Speaker 5: Great wheat is produced.
Speaker 4: A lot of the wheat that they get in Africa
Speaker 4: is from Ukraine. That shortage has started hitting most of
Speaker 4: the African continents and anything that's below poverty will get
Speaker 4: hit first. And then who's going to be hit last.
Speaker 4: It's going to be the Americans. So it's a very
Speaker 4: hard world. But we also need to understand that we're
Speaker 4: at a position where we are at the top of
Speaker 4: the food chain, and if anything's going to happen, it's
Speaker 4: going to happen to the ones on the bottom. And
Speaker 4: that's what as you were talking about the elitist group
Speaker 4: that met in Switzerland, was it Switzerland? What was it again?
Speaker 4: Was it Switzerland? With the organization?
Speaker 2: Which one you want to talk about the World Economic
Speaker 2: Forum or well.
Speaker 4: On that one, that one their goal apparently to in
Speaker 4: twenty thirty was to reduce the population by fifty percent.
Speaker 5: Or what population are they talking about.
Speaker 4: They're talking about populations that are outside of the US
Speaker 4: who have who are going to be the first ones
Speaker 4: to hit, And that's.
Speaker 5: Kind of like their whole goal.
Speaker 4: I'm not really a crazy person, but he said it.
Speaker 8: What's his name, the advisor director, He said it right
Speaker 8: out of his mouth.
Speaker 5: That is what we're trying to accomplish.
Speaker 4: And unfortunately, we're getting hit in the US and we're
Speaker 4: feeling the struggle because we don't understand. We've never experienced
Speaker 4: something this bad, and we're about to really get hit,
Speaker 4: especially the entire little brats that my generation has created.
Speaker 4: We're going to struggle a bit more because we don't
Speaker 4: have the life skills. So it is time for us
Speaker 4: to kind of step into leadership positions in order for
Speaker 4: us to take hold of our future.
Speaker 3: Well, see, that's the thing is people at that certain age,
Speaker 3: they don't have the same life skills that I know
Speaker 3: my generation had.
Speaker 2: And by the way, we were blamed for not having the.
Speaker 3: Same life skills as the previous generation it hasn't gotten
Speaker 3: any better, I gotta tell you. And it's weird to
Speaker 3: watch an unrealistic situation unfault. But but what do you
Speaker 3: think about the general conditions? I mean, look, let's be honest.
Speaker 3: Me at a minimum wage job, okay, come out of
Speaker 3: high school, I was.
Speaker 2: Able to live. You can't do that today, not even.
Speaker 3: At the you know, people go, well minimum wage not
Speaker 3: actually minimum wage. Yeah, but you know what in the
Speaker 3: time that I was born to the time now, okay,
Speaker 3: you would need to pay me like twenty five dollars
Speaker 3: an hour to make minimum wage that I would have
Speaker 3: made in nineteen seventy two. Okay, I mean it's that
Speaker 3: far removed from this idea that you could just go
Speaker 3: ahead and work and you could work your way up.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's no longer the same thing. Corporate culture
Speaker 3: has changed. You don't have as many independent businesses as
Speaker 3: you once did.
Speaker 2: That were available readily in the community.
Speaker 3: Almost everything is dominated by the Walmart model.
Speaker 2: I mean, you're.
Speaker 3: Stepping into a situation again you didn't create. But how
Speaker 3: do I blame you even for not having those life skills?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 3: How do I even blame And I've got kids, you know, Look,
Speaker 3: my kid's agent range. My daughter just turned twenty three,
Speaker 3: my oldest, and I've got one child that's going to
Speaker 3: turn eight shortly. I look at them and I say,
Speaker 3: I don't know what the hell you guys are supposed
Speaker 3: to even do, yea, because this is a very rough
Speaker 3: situation to come into. I could tell you that, look,
Speaker 3: if you work at it, you go to college. You know,
Speaker 3: if it was twenty years ago, I could say, do
Speaker 3: you go to college, It'll be okay. I can't even
Speaker 3: say that today, and you still sound, you know, very
Speaker 3: much enthusiastic with that old line of thinking.
Speaker 2: And I'm wondering why.
Speaker 4: Well, to me, it's because that whole line of thinking
Speaker 4: kind of helps me see the light at the end
Speaker 4: of the tunnel because right now, I've experienced famine. I've
Speaker 4: experienced not being able to eat before, and it's awful.
Speaker 4: But a lot of Americans who were born in the
Speaker 4: US have never experienced that, especially kids my age. So
Speaker 4: for me it's like, ooh, interesting, I have to kind
Speaker 4: of like fight my way in and I have life
Speaker 4: skills and life some wisdom that they don't, So for
Speaker 4: me it's kind of it helps because I've been there
Speaker 4: and I know what it's like not to have that
Speaker 4: American privilege. Because there is such a thing as American privilege,
Speaker 4: we just don't talk about it. So for the kids
Speaker 4: my age who have never experienced any other kind of struggle,
Speaker 4: this is going to be a tough time for them,
Speaker 4: especially when they don't even teach them how to balance
Speaker 4: a checkbook high school. They don't even teach them financial
Speaker 4: literacy and high school or college. So being having to
Speaker 4: kind of being pushed out there is probably the best
Speaker 4: thing we can do for them.
Speaker 5: You have to force them to swim.
Speaker 4: Are some going to drown, absolutely, but ultimately you have
Speaker 4: to learn to swim in very hard conditions. And that's
Speaker 4: the kind of position they're being put in. And I
Speaker 4: think we were getting a little bit too entitled, too
Speaker 4: entitled kids asking for things after they haven't worked, Kids
Speaker 4: who are refusing to even do.
Speaker 5: Trade kinds of jobs.
Speaker 4: We need those kinds of jobs, and they're refusing to
Speaker 4: do that because they want a degree in gender study
Speaker 4: and gender study. How are you going to survive with
Speaker 4: a degree in gender study?
Speaker 5: You're not.
Speaker 4: So we need to kind of go back to those
Speaker 4: traditionalist jobs that built America, that made America.
Speaker 5: They what it was, which were the blue.
Speaker 4: Collar kind to fields like a plumber, like there's a
Speaker 4: shortage of those like electricians, like all those that require
Speaker 4: you to have an actual skill. And that's the problem
Speaker 4: that the government has kind of like created and it
Speaker 4: it's basically told everybody you need to go to college
Speaker 4: in order for you to be successful, and kind of
Speaker 4: abandoned the blue collar system. And that's what happened during COVID.
Speaker 4: They're like, oh, small business owners, we don't need you.
Speaker 4: We're gonna let the big corporate companies take care of
Speaker 4: everything and you won't have to worry about it. What
Speaker 4: in fact, that's exactly what we need, is those small
Speaker 4: businesses and those blue collar workers.
Speaker 3: Well, right, and look, the corporatetocracy, though, is also done.
Speaker 3: It's a fair share of damage to this as well.
Speaker 3: Right where we have okay, let's just go with the mechanics,
Speaker 3: car mechanics. Okay, yeah, good solid trade used to be
Speaker 3: something that again you know, I grew up in poor neighborhoods.
Speaker 3: They would or just go to vocational school, you can
Speaker 3: go get this skill. But then you have these you know,
Speaker 3: corporate elements that have come together and created this you
Speaker 3: know thing that substitutes for a lot of mechanic services
Speaker 3: that are presented in packages. You get a cheap oil change,
Speaker 3: you get a cheap this cheat that took away a
Speaker 3: lot of the jobs it could have been there because
Speaker 3: now you got Jiffy Loube okay for instance. I mean,
Speaker 3: I'm calling them out, but there's many others. And they
Speaker 3: consumed that and then controlled the wage that could be
Speaker 3: paid to somebody. We even add some of those skills
Speaker 3: so you could be partially skilled, or even some of
Speaker 3: them would train you. You don't know anything about cars, fine,
Speaker 3: we'll show you. And you know, now you don't have
Speaker 3: to hang out your own shingle. And they turn around
Speaker 3: and pay you again a wage which is not even
Speaker 3: a proper wage, and they consume things. I mean, very
Speaker 3: much the same way of like, why is it we
Speaker 3: can't get food in our neighborhood, Well, go look to
Speaker 3: the walmart on the ones of town that is beating
Speaker 3: the hell out of anything that could be an independent market,
Speaker 3: and you might know why there's no diversity.
Speaker 2: In your food.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you know, and again you can't blame the people
Speaker 3: on the bottom of it.
Speaker 2: Going, Well, I got to go where the groceries are cheap.
Speaker 5: Yeah, you know, because that's all they're given. That's all
Speaker 5: they're given.
Speaker 4: And yeah, you have all these resources, all those choices. However,
Speaker 4: those choices are what are kind of hindering you at all?
Speaker 5: Purports. Why is healthy food so expensive?
Speaker 4: Why are we making that a very luxurious thing to
Speaker 4: be able to afford it? But it's also a lifestyle
Speaker 4: kind of choice where you can choose to eat healthy
Speaker 4: and kind of pay that extra in order for you
Speaker 4: to have a healthy lifestyle. But yeah, they're basically kicking
Speaker 4: all these small businesses out of the way, and that's
Speaker 4: kind of what we that's the opposite of what we
Speaker 4: need to be doing. We need less Walmarts. I couldn't
Speaker 4: care less if some small or home little story opened
Speaker 4: up in my hometown, I would support them over Walmart
Speaker 4: any day. And that's kind of those Those are the
Speaker 4: kinds of companies that Americans need to go back to
Speaker 4: support so our economy and our individual holistic society can
Speaker 4: kind of be saved because we can't rely on these
Speaker 4: monopolies to run our worlds or the government is going
Speaker 4: to do exactly what they have done thus far.
Speaker 3: See, here we go and that's why I'm glad I
Speaker 3: got into the financial discussion. And now with the last
Speaker 3: say quarter of our discussion tonight, I want to turn
Speaker 3: it over to you about what you think is the
Speaker 3: biggest concern at the moment, what you think people in
Speaker 3: general need to address pay attention to. You know, I'm
Speaker 3: tired of having these things dragged back out the Roe v.
Speaker 2: Wade thing. Yeah, I could have opposing viewpoints on that.
Speaker 3: I don't want to. I don't want to really evolve
Speaker 3: into that discussion right this second. But my point is
Speaker 3: that they're hauling out all these other things to keep
Speaker 3: us distracted, I feel, from what's really the problem here.
Speaker 3: And I'm curious about what you think needs to be
Speaker 3: addressed in the most immediate way. Where do we need
Speaker 3: to stop the bleeding? Because look, if you're out there
Speaker 3: trying to speak out about anything right now, you obviously
Speaker 3: believe that something ain't right.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's just that simple.
Speaker 3: So what is your main, absolute king of something ain't
Speaker 3: right at the moment.
Speaker 5: Well, my main thing.
Speaker 4: It's actually a multitude of things, and it's probably the
Speaker 4: main reason as to why I'm in North Carolina right
Speaker 4: now working to try to fight for the local elections.
Speaker 4: For these midterms, we have kind of strayed away from
Speaker 4: these elected officials who have a lot of control in
Speaker 4: our lives. And we saw it during COVID, and I
Speaker 4: think that's something we should be focused still a little
Speaker 4: bit more. We had a glimpse of it while COVID
Speaker 4: was happening, and while it was kind of like dwindling away.
Speaker 5: However, we're kind.
Speaker 4: Of swaying away from it and kind of fixated on
Speaker 4: the whole notion that it's all about the federal government,
Speaker 4: when in fact, a lot of it has to do
Speaker 4: with your local officials as well, or else your rights
Speaker 4: would not have been stripped so easily during these COVID times.
Speaker 4: And that is why I'm here at North Carolina because
Speaker 4: as a battle state, I think there's so much to
Speaker 4: be done from like look at Florida. Florida is taking
Speaker 4: it on a local level where they're taking control of
Speaker 4: and given the middle finger to the federal government. And
Speaker 4: that's kind of what the American people need more so
Speaker 4: and what they need to be focusing on. Because these midterms,
Speaker 4: I'm not going to dive into like the unfair.
Speaker 5: Presidential election.
Speaker 4: I'm not going to dive into that, because that is
Speaker 4: a completely different story and you will get banned for that.
Speaker 3: So well, yeah, there, Look, there's always that in North Carolina.
Speaker 3: By the way, I'm curious how the dynamics there are.
Speaker 2: You know, when you're inside.
Speaker 3: Of it, it does not look ash as most people
Speaker 3: would think it does looking at it from the outside.
Speaker 3: I lived in Kinston for a couple of years in
Speaker 3: North Carolina, and yeah, that's not a typical southern state
Speaker 3: that the politics are not typical at all. Also, people
Speaker 3: think Georgia is one way or the other. Gotta tell
Speaker 3: you something about Georgia.
Speaker 2: Georgia is.
Speaker 3: Controlled by one party here, no matter what noise they
Speaker 3: try and make in the media. And it's uh, it's
Speaker 3: not the Blue team, I gotta tell you now. I
Speaker 3: don't care except that they maintain their stranglehold. And uh
Speaker 3: that is never spoken of in the national media ever. Okay,
Speaker 3: and that's top to bottom. Now, North Carolina's weird because
Speaker 3: top to bottom I don't see a singular control where
Speaker 3: you have one party really controlling it. It's actually still
Speaker 3: I don't know, up for grabs from the local all
Speaker 3: the way to the you know, to the state level.
Speaker 3: In my opinion. Do you think I'm off on that
Speaker 3: or what?
Speaker 4: Oh no, you're not, Absolutely no you're not. And that's
Speaker 4: kind of and that's why I'm here because I understand.
Speaker 4: I like the balance of power within the state. Actually
Speaker 4: it kind of makes it great, but it also but
Speaker 4: with the radicalism that has kind of like arisen, is
Speaker 4: kind of the problem is the fact that they're going
Speaker 4: into these schools to try to indoctrinate the kids, and
Speaker 4: it kind of go into territories that they don't need
Speaker 4: to be going into. And I think you asked me
Speaker 4: what was the biggest problem, and I think the big
Speaker 4: problem is the education of our children, and that's what
Speaker 4: they're trying to draw our attentions away from because they're
Speaker 4: the future and they're already destroying the future and how
Speaker 4: else you do that?
Speaker 5: But how else do you destroy.
Speaker 4: A majority's little future when you can easily control the
Speaker 4: way in which they think as they get older and older.
Speaker 4: So I think North Carolina is one of these states
Speaker 4: that probably is well out, but it could be so
Speaker 4: much better if we got control of it. And I'm
Speaker 4: not saying the Republicans are going to do a better
Speaker 4: job more than the left.
Speaker 5: They are but we also.
Speaker 4: Need to understand that that could also change to a
Speaker 4: completely different route. What if they get control, what if
Speaker 4: we get control as a red state here in North Carolina?
Speaker 4: Are they also going to try to infringe on people's rights?
Speaker 4: Are they also going to go the complete opposite that
Speaker 4: the left was doing? So we kind of have to
Speaker 4: keep that balance of power when it comes to talking
Speaker 4: about the red wave, which I completely want a red
Speaker 4: wave to happen, but I.
Speaker 5: Want it to happen in a very conscious manner.
Speaker 3: Right, Okay, So I'm getting to gist here that you know, Look,
Speaker 3: you want things to be on one side of the equation,
Speaker 3: but you don't entirely dismiss.
Speaker 2: The opposition because opposition is important. See, that's a unique thing.
Speaker 3: I want you to know something that's extremely unique because
Speaker 3: most times people that are on that side of the
Speaker 3: equation that I'm talking to lately, and by the way,
Speaker 3: I can't find anybody that's coherently on the blue side. Okay,
Speaker 3: so I have to speak about the people that are
Speaker 3: coherently on the red side. They are coherent, but most
Speaker 3: of them it almost sounds like I want to trade
Speaker 3: that authoritarian vision for my authoritarian vision. And I go,
Speaker 3: wait a minute, the opposition, the resistance to that must
Speaker 3: be understood and recognized because you know what, if you're
Speaker 3: going to look to govern all the people, and you
Speaker 3: better keep in mind that not all of them are
Speaker 3: going to agree all the time. No, And I think
Speaker 3: that is the thing that is missed by a lot
Speaker 3: of people because again, at the top of the power structure,
Speaker 3: the way this nation was imagined, excuse me for being constitutionalists,
Speaker 3: per second, the way this nation was imagined, the people
Speaker 3: are actually at the top of the power structure. See,
Speaker 3: a lot of people think the federal government has supremacy.
Speaker 3: That's exactly the opposite of the reality.
Speaker 4: And that's what they're, yes, you're good away from and
Speaker 4: think that they're the ones that have the power. And
Speaker 4: that's probably the biggest, biggest faux pap that a lot
Speaker 4: of Americans have tended to kind of think it's true.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 3: No, but I'm hearing that in you where you're saying, listen,
Speaker 3: I think that my vision is right, but I've also
Speaker 3: got to consider that it's not the only answer. Is
Speaker 3: an intellectually honest position to take. It doesn't matter what
Speaker 3: your politics are, man, you got to understand that no
Speaker 3: matter who you are, no matter how intelligent you are,
Speaker 3: no matter how educated been, you don't have everything.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's just that simple. Okay, now it's not.
Speaker 5: It's not.
Speaker 4: It's kind of like, okay, let me add like a
Speaker 4: bill that's being proposed in Florida right now. Florida very red,
Speaker 4: and we love that. I love Florida. That's where I
Speaker 4: want to end up. However, and someone made and rose
Speaker 4: that question today and they're like, and the bill is
Speaker 4: to ban make it a felony for parents, for parents
Speaker 4: taking their kids to a drag show. And I'm completely
Speaker 4: against taking a kid to a freaking dragt show. I
Speaker 4: don't care however, whatever it is. However, there's also all
Speaker 4: drag shows are not created equal.
Speaker 5: Think about that.
Speaker 8: And there's adults who are very hesitant to go into
Speaker 8: drag shows.
Speaker 4: I would never go to one myself because that's not
Speaker 4: my thing, but kids don't belong in there. But that
Speaker 4: doesn't mean the government needs to step in and be like, look,
Speaker 4: it's a felony. In order for you to yeah, iree,
Speaker 4: you should hold parents accountable for exposing their kids to
Speaker 4: things like that. But that's kind of like the extreme
Speaker 4: way that we are taking on the right.
Speaker 5: We can't do that.
Speaker 4: We have to we preach small government, Yes, we preach
Speaker 4: small government, but we also have to understand that with
Speaker 4: that small government, we have to give the other side
Speaker 4: an equal voice.
Speaker 3: Well not only that, but I mean in examining just
Speaker 3: that one issue you just brought up, right, you know
Speaker 3: what I note here being discussed is what about the
Speaker 3: idea that you know you're as a parent, you're supposed
Speaker 3: to be the one who is Now. Now, I'm not
Speaker 3: saying that that's a great decision to bring your kids
Speaker 3: to the drag show, but honestly, is it not your
Speaker 3: decision to make? Is it the government's decision to make?
Speaker 3: See this is where it gets icy for me. And
Speaker 3: now I'm gonna sound right wingy, but got to tell
Speaker 3: you the government doesn't need to be involved in my
Speaker 3: decisions about my child. Not exactly if I'm harming my child,
Speaker 3: I kind of.
Speaker 2: Understand a step in.
Speaker 3: But see, it's whose definition of harm to some of
Speaker 3: those people that are supporting that bill. They think that
Speaker 3: that in and of itself constitutes the same thing as
Speaker 3: you know, breaking the kid's bones.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they really do.
Speaker 3: And I got to tell you that's always got to
Speaker 3: be kept in check.
Speaker 2: You can't.
Speaker 3: You know, you want to say that you want to
Speaker 3: support a parent's right when it comes to masking. Okay,
Speaker 3: I understand you. You want to and and by the way,
Speaker 3: I support that too. You want to tell me that
Speaker 3: it's a parent's decision about vaccines, Maybe you do, maybe
Speaker 3: you don't. I'm not ascribing it to you. I'm just saying, theoretically,
Speaker 3: I understand you.
Speaker 2: You tell me that you want, you know your child
Speaker 2: educated a certain way.
Speaker 3: I absolutely understand you. You tell me that you know
Speaker 3: you want to expose the kid to some things because
Speaker 3: you feel they're ready to be exposed to them, whatever
Speaker 3: that may be, so long as it's not again, things
Speaker 3: that have been.
Speaker 2: Deemed completely age inappropriate.
Speaker 3: Now, somebody would say, there you go, Chuck, that's what
Speaker 3: this is with the Drag Show. But no, no, no, look,
Speaker 3: nobody said that you have to be of a certain
Speaker 3: age to go in there. Now. I can't bring my
Speaker 3: three year old into a bar and give them a feer.
Speaker 3: That's a problem. But you know, if I'm letting them
Speaker 3: watch TV. This is just my personal decision. And unless
Speaker 3: there is something in place there which somebody would say, well,
Speaker 3: find let's make the law that you have to be
Speaker 3: eighteen to go to the drag show. If you do that,
Speaker 3: then now you have to define drag show. Look, legal
Speaker 3: definitions will matter if you're gonna make laws, Okay, And
Speaker 3: at which point does your power to make the decision
Speaker 3: for your child? And and the government now is allowed
Speaker 3: to make a decision because calling it a felony means
Speaker 3: that now you have to define that as a crime.
Speaker 2: How is it a crime?
Speaker 3: You know? And it becomes complex, and to me, that's
Speaker 3: the right going too far exactly.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying you need to bring toddlers to the
Speaker 3: drag show. I'm not saying that. But you know what,
Speaker 3: if it was your decision that your nine year old
Speaker 3: is to go there for whatever reason, I don't know
Speaker 3: what I have to err on the side of the
Speaker 3: parents should make the decision.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 4: No, I now with you on that front one hundred percent,
Speaker 4: because we made that a big deal when it came
Speaker 4: to COVID and I was avidly it's your it's the
Speaker 4: parent's choice, and this should be the parent's choice regardless.
Speaker 4: And I think and that's where we kind of have to,
Speaker 4: like you said, we have to define what a drag
Speaker 4: show is and put limitations. Everything has a limit, and
Speaker 4: we have to have a line that's drawn. Where like
Speaker 4: I said, some are not not all drag shows are
Speaker 4: created equals. Some can be innocentce I guess, I don't know.
Speaker 4: I've never been one, I've never seen one. I don't understand.
Speaker 4: But so that's kind of where we have to define it.
Speaker 4: Be like, Okay, if this kind of content is being
Speaker 4: shown at a drag show, what what we need to
Speaker 4: go into depth with it.
Speaker 5: But it can't be Oh nope, nope, nope, you can't
Speaker 5: do that.
Speaker 4: When we are asking for a small government, we're kind
Speaker 4: of being hypocritical about it when every single time there's
Speaker 4: something we don't necessarily agree with one percent, no matter
Speaker 4: if it's morally wrong, absolutely put your foot down, put
Speaker 4: your foot down. But when it comes to parental decisions
Speaker 4: like that, yeah, I agree with you on that front.
Speaker 2: I agree.
Speaker 3: Like I'll give you a quick for instance here just
Speaker 3: to nail this point down entirely right, and I'm gonna
Speaker 3: ask you a personal question. At some point, your parents
Speaker 3: probably decided to have you know, what we used to
Speaker 3: call the birds in the bees discussion, right. Uh, and
Speaker 3: it has changed over the years, I know. And don't
Speaker 3: go there. Let's go to where your parents would have
Speaker 3: went standard stuff. Okay, probably they said, look, you're a boy,
Speaker 3: this is what you got. Okay, this is what girls have. Uh,
Speaker 3: you know, and look, these things kind of work together.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 3: They chose the time to do that, and that might
Speaker 3: have been appropriate for you, or maybe it was something
Speaker 3: that had to be done in bits and pieces. Okay,
Speaker 3: we tell you this much when you're five, we tell
Speaker 3: you this much when you're seven, we tell you this
Speaker 3: much when you're ten.
Speaker 2: And you know what, no matter where it started.
Speaker 3: I mean, you could tell me if you want, But
Speaker 3: that might be exactly the right decision for you and
Speaker 3: not the right.
Speaker 2: Decision for my son. Yeah.
Speaker 3: And I think as his father, and as you know,
Speaker 3: the man that was involved in adopting you, right, who
Speaker 3: became your father in that way, I think that's his decision.
Speaker 2: I think he needs to make it. I mean mother too,
Speaker 2: if you have both. But either way, whoever.
Speaker 3: Is parenting you makes that decision and that is their
Speaker 3: right and that should be protected by the government, not
Speaker 3: infringed upon.
Speaker 4: In my mind, Oh yeah, that's the role of the
Speaker 4: government is to protect the role of the government is
Speaker 4: not to infringe whatsoever. And if a child, yeah, is
Speaker 4: in harm's way, they have to step so, and.
Speaker 5: You're absolutely right they have. It is the parent's choice
Speaker 5: on where.
Speaker 4: But ultimately, if it's like, okay, if you're teaching the
Speaker 4: kid about all of it at five years old, that's
Speaker 4: an issue.
Speaker 5: We can agree on.
Speaker 3: That, right well, not necessarily because see, look I got
Speaker 3: taught about this stuff very young, but I was intellectually prepared. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 3: I was a little different. Now, other five year olds
Speaker 3: maybe not so much. I mean I understood, and by
Speaker 3: the way, it was all very clinical. I mean like
Speaker 3: I knew the menstrual cycle and all this kind of stuff,
Speaker 3: and how testicles worked and how to make a diagram
Speaker 3: and all that. Because I was very medically curious and
Speaker 3: a little ahead of other five year olds.
Speaker 2: It was appropriate for me.
Speaker 3: Now that doesn't mean that that's appropriate like my son
Speaker 3: right now, my youngest, I haven't gone very much near it.
Speaker 3: There's a difference between boys and girls. That's about all
Speaker 3: he can handle. But in a couple of years, or
Speaker 3: maybe a couple of months, I will watch as he
Speaker 3: grows and develops and as he asks questions, and that's
Speaker 3: when I'll enter that. And that has been my decision
Speaker 3: about that. You know, my oldest, my daughter a little
Speaker 3: earlier by this age, she had a lot more information,
Speaker 3: but she was individually more prepared.
Speaker 2: I made that decision on an individual basis.
Speaker 3: I wouldn't even make it across the board based on age,
Speaker 3: because it's.
Speaker 2: Every kid is different.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you know, so you err on the side of
Speaker 3: not pushing these things to them and letting the parents
Speaker 3: make those decisions. Which is why I have all these
Speaker 3: mixed feelings about the sexual education issue in the classroom,
Speaker 3: because in some cases it may be the correct decision,
Speaker 3: but the school does not have the resources to evaluate
Speaker 3: this on an individual basis, no matter who you are,
Speaker 3: where you are, so frankly, it should be left to
Speaker 3: the parents to sort this out.
Speaker 5: And nor is the school the parents of the child.
Speaker 4: The school at some level is an extension of the government,
Speaker 4: especially the public schools. So it's like, okay, the public
Speaker 4: schools and yeah, no, that's why parents are so pissed
Speaker 4: off on that notion, because yeah, kids can learn about
Speaker 4: sexualite and in school. By however, if you give my
Speaker 4: kid a lesson on that when they're not ready and
Speaker 4: you didn't do your research and you're not its parent.
Speaker 5: Yeah no, that's not.
Speaker 4: Okay, and that's definitely something we can both agree on.
Speaker 2: Where yeah, see, this is the thing.
Speaker 3: It's not their position here to make that decision.
Speaker 2: It's simple.
Speaker 3: And look if you say, well, look we have a
Speaker 3: certain age here where okay, you know what, we also
Speaker 3: have the right to take them to private schools, and
Speaker 3: we should have the right to pull them out of
Speaker 3: that stuff, because this is not necessarily the function of
Speaker 3: the schools.
Speaker 2: It's not their primary function anyway.
Speaker 3: Now, the idea that you have high school health classes,
Speaker 3: I think in some cases good idea. Okay, even junior
Speaker 3: high schools, because frankly, again, not all parents are created
Speaker 3: equal either, and this may be the only place they're
Speaker 3: going to get some actual information. I've seen it with
Speaker 3: my own eyes, where you know, there's a fully developed
Speaker 3: looking girls who do not understand what their bodies do.
Speaker 3: And maybe they should be taught that when they're at
Speaker 3: that age, but no, when they're much younger. It's all
Speaker 3: sorts of a variant decision. And again, these things should
Speaker 3: be primarily left up to the parents. I mean, if
Speaker 3: you want to engage in that, you want to have
Speaker 3: the schools do it, well, maybe there should be an
Speaker 3: option at a certain point, like I said.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I have a conversation with the parent before you've
Speaker 4: been I think about even engaging in such a conversation exactly.
Speaker 2: But you see how there's nuance here where it's not
Speaker 2: all one thing or the other.
Speaker 5: And you have and that's kind of what we're lacking.
Speaker 4: We're lacking at one specific skill because I think it
Speaker 4: is a skill that you're either born with or you're not,
Speaker 4: and some people just can't understand it and.
Speaker 5: Either go from one end to the next. And we
Speaker 5: need people who are able to see both sides of
Speaker 5: the aisle.
Speaker 4: And it's the open mindedness, because we want to call
Speaker 4: ourselves open minded, but when push comes to shove, we
Speaker 4: are not fully open minded. There's alect few who are,
Speaker 4: and then there are those that.
Speaker 2: Are not right. So look, we ran right against time.
Speaker 3: And I'm telling you, it's fascinating to just discuss things
Speaker 3: with you because you're very considerate and very direct about
Speaker 3: your approach, and I love it. There's a flexibility in
Speaker 3: your thinking that is I think absolutely necessary.
Speaker 2: We're not going to get anywhere in any.
Speaker 3: Debate, discussion, or attempt to come together in a socratic way.
Speaker 3: It's not going to occur without a give and take.
Speaker 3: And that's why I love these conversations on this show.
Speaker 3: Script any of this, as you well can tell, it's
Speaker 3: it was weird in this direction. So what I do
Speaker 3: want to do before anything else happens is tell people
Speaker 3: where they can find you follow what you're doing.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 3: Again, I guess if we just google Choking black Eye USA,
Speaker 3: we might find you, but who knows?
Speaker 4: Uh?
Speaker 2: So could you give people some.
Speaker 3: Direct places where they can go to follow you? And
Speaker 3: I think you and I are going to have to
Speaker 3: have some discussions in the future.
Speaker 5: Please please. I love these kinds of dialogues, I really do.
Speaker 4: And I'm always looking for people like you who will
Speaker 4: challenge me on issues like the black on the crime
Speaker 4: issue and all that, because that's a fascinating one.
Speaker 5: But that's on a different notion.
Speaker 4: But to add to a little bit what you said,
Speaker 4: I think the power is in conversation. It's not in debate.
Speaker 4: Debates are very structured. Conversations are very friendly where you
Speaker 4: and I are just exchanging ideas and we're trying to
Speaker 4: underst and both sides and the other person that you're
Speaker 4: communicating with, and people want to debate with the notion
Speaker 4: that they have to win. You don't have to win
Speaker 4: every conversation. So and that's the difference. And that's what
Speaker 4: I promote on my Instagram. It's Token black Guy USA
Speaker 4: on Instagram, on TikTok, on Twitter, it's token bg Underscore USA,
Speaker 4: and the same on getter and and that's it. I
Speaker 4: do have a website, Token black Guy USA at chiap
Speaker 4: at Token black Guusa.
Speaker 5: Dot com and you can find me there.
Speaker 4: But all those platforms the saying, just go to Token
Speaker 4: black Guy USA dot com.
Speaker 5: And you can follow me on every single one that
Speaker 5: I have.
Speaker 3: Right, Token black Guy USA dot com. And I bet
Speaker 3: all of those social media links are there.
Speaker 5: You right, they are?
Speaker 2: They are all right.
Speaker 3: I have got to check out more of what it
Speaker 3: is you're saying and more of the conversations you're having,
Speaker 3: because I find this fascinating. First of all, you may
Speaker 3: be to the right of me. I'm just going to
Speaker 3: tell you now, but here's the thing. I think the
Speaker 3: solution might lie in exactly what you said, which is
Speaker 3: having a conversation, having an understanding of you know, maybe
Speaker 3: points of view that are not necessarily our own. I
Speaker 3: didn't even try to challenge you, by the way, I
Speaker 3: just wanted to address a couple of things because and
Speaker 3: going this as open minded as possible, because I love
Speaker 3: doing that. I really thought that. Frankly, I'm going to
Speaker 3: admit something right now. I thought we were going to
Speaker 3: have a hostile conversation because a lot of conservatives that
Speaker 3: have hostile conversations with me, and you're looking a little
Speaker 3: conservative to me, so I'm going, uh oh.
Speaker 5: Trust me.
Speaker 4: But when you get hostile, that's when the first person
Speaker 4: to get hostile loses it. The argument one hundred percent,
Speaker 4: whether or not you're leftist or your conservative, you have
Speaker 4: lost that argument one hundred percent.
Speaker 5: That's what it is.
Speaker 3: And and don't take offense of me talking about you
Speaker 3: being on the right. At least that means I know
Speaker 3: you made sense. I mean, there's absolutely no coherence on
Speaker 3: the left anymore.
Speaker 4: So as what are you talking about? And I don't
Speaker 4: get offended. It's a feeling. If I'm offended, that's on me.
Speaker 5: It's not on you. It's a reflection of me.
Speaker 3: Awesome token black guy USA dot com check it out,
Speaker 3: and I've I've got to check more of his stuff out.
Speaker 3: I'm even I don't even go to Instagram very much.
Speaker 3: I'm on there, but I think I got to go
Speaker 3: to Instagram now and check out this stuff.
Speaker 2: Thank you, come check it out.
Speaker 5: Would love to have you on a live as well
Speaker 5: or something like that.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, hey, listen, I would.
Speaker 3: I would love to have a wide ranging discussion with
Speaker 3: you on on I guess a lot of different topics,
Speaker 3: because very intelligent and very interesting, very considerate, and uh,
Speaker 3: this is how we're going to get things done, is
Speaker 3: if we actually talk to one another and not just
Speaker 3: at one another.
Speaker 2: So that's that's the way that works.
Speaker 3: Away And sorry I mispronounced. I said Joel, and you
Speaker 3: said Joel. Uh little French accent on that, but I
Speaker 3: didn't realize it.
Speaker 2: French.
Speaker 3: So yes, absolutely, So there you go, Joel Choken black
Speaker 3: USA dot Com. Check out his stuff, and uh, I
Speaker 3: think we'll have to have them on again in the future.
Speaker 3: The Ocelly effect continues with John Potash after.
Speaker 9: This, I'd like to call the order, this secret conclave
Speaker 9: of America's media empires. We're here to come up with
Speaker 9: the next phony. Malooney crisis to put Americans back where
Speaker 9: they belong and dark rooms glued to their televisions, too
Speaker 9: terrified to skip the commercials. Well, I think, NBC, you
Speaker 9: are here to listen and not speak. I think we
Speaker 9: should go with a good old fashioned public healthcare.
Speaker 2: Yeah, a new disease. No one's immune.
Speaker 1: It's like the Summer of the Shark, except instead of
Speaker 1: a shark, it's an epidemic, and instead of summer, it's
Speaker 1: all the time.
Speaker 9: I hate to be the guy who derails what everybody
Speaker 9: else loves.
Speaker 2: He loves being that guy.
Speaker 1: But Janie, we do have standards. This can't be a
Speaker 1: made up disease.
Speaker 9: The only moral thing to do is release a deadly
Speaker 9: virus into the general public. We do have something we've
Speaker 9: been holding on to, but it hasn't been tested.
Speaker 2: Get over here, NBC. Well, we certainly believe in testing.
Speaker 5: But I a.
Speaker 6: Wow wow, oh yeah.
Speaker 1: So we've got our deadly disease.
Speaker 9: Now we just have to blame it on something that's
Speaker 9: in every household, something that people are a little bit
Speaker 9: afraid of already. House cat flu is coming people. The
Speaker 9: Center for Disease Disinformation predicts with some degree of probability
Speaker 9: that the house cat flu might spread in the following
Speaker 9: hypothetical lot break pattern.
Speaker 1: Oh Chili dot com.
Speaker 2: Wall Street window dott.
Speaker 1: Do you like history? Real history that you were never
Speaker 1: taught in schools? Why the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs in
Speaker 1: nation Building in Southeast Asia by author Mike Swanson, with
Speaker 1: new documentation never seen before that'll open your eyes to
Speaker 1: events that led up to this. Why the Vietnam War
Speaker 1: Nuclear Bombs in Nation Building in Southeast Asia nineteen forty
Speaker 1: five through nineteen sixty one. Get your copy today at
Speaker 1: Amazon dot com. Why the Vietnam War by author Mike Swanson.
Speaker 1: Every time I've put it on my face, I'm able
Speaker 1: to breathe.
Speaker 2: Just a little bit deeper. What are people saying about
Speaker 2: my true essence?
Speaker 5: Dot Net?
Speaker 2: I'm gonna tell you something serious, man. I just want
Speaker 2: to tell you listeners. I put some some of them
Speaker 2: well different from Kirsty.
Speaker 4: And she gave me she got she made me up
Speaker 4: some of this emo oil mixed with some other stuff.
Speaker 2: I don't know what's an it, but I like the
Speaker 2: way tomorrow and I started putting it on, rubbing it
Speaker 2: on my foot, then on my knee, and like the
Speaker 2: second day, I didn't you know, I just noticed that
Speaker 2: I'm walking around. I'm like, damn, I knee is Lucien.
Speaker 10: I can tell you that that that oil you gave
Speaker 10: me helped me with my carpole and my shoulder problem.
Speaker 2: And it wasn't I couldn't even I wouldn't be working.
Speaker 2: My ankles would just really be pesky and bother me.
Speaker 3: And I am telling you the pain just went away,
Speaker 3: just a little rule.
Speaker 2: And when I put that on, it's just it's like
Speaker 2: my skin came alive. My true essence.
Speaker 5: Dot net? What up to we would we get to
Speaker 5: bring my mother?
Speaker 3: That's where I thought it from second hour. The O'Kelly
Speaker 3: effect begins now at o'atelli dot com. But of course
Speaker 3: you could be some other time, some other place listening
Speaker 3: to this discussion.
Speaker 2: Now, UH tell you right up front, I'm not sending
Speaker 2: this to YouTube.
Speaker 3: Uh. And why UH learned a little lesson because uh,
Speaker 3: John Potash is with me and potash potash. You know,
Speaker 3: I always pronounced different ways in my own head. But
Speaker 3: we know who we're talking about. Okay, drugs as weapons.
Speaker 3: That author last time he was on we discussed Tupac
Speaker 3: Shakur rather extensively in his writing on it. Now, I'm
Speaker 3: going to talk to you about a video that relates
Speaker 3: to that writing in a minute. But tonight we're actually
Speaker 3: going to discuss something we previewed on that show. And
Speaker 3: I don't even know if that audio still exists on YouTube.
Speaker 3: I've been taken down for so many things that are
Speaker 3: tied to vaccination and such that. Gee, I don't know
Speaker 3: if they allowed that up there. But we'll get an
Speaker 3: update on what John is doing. I'm really glad to
Speaker 3: have him back. He was scheduled I think at an
Speaker 3: earlier date and something went wrong. I think that's when
Speaker 3: I got sick or something. But either way, I'm extremely
Speaker 3: happy to have you back. And John, you're late too.
Speaker 3: I'm making you late, I'll tell you, man, I'm just
Speaker 3: treating you badly. Bro, I don't mean to. You're a
Speaker 3: great writer and you're a great guy, and I thank
Speaker 3: you for your patience, But not only do I want
Speaker 3: to thank you for your patients. This DVD on Tupac
Speaker 3: Shakor and the war against Black leaders and the radical left.
Speaker 2: I kind of didn't want.
Speaker 3: To take your thesis all the way, and then I
Speaker 3: watched your video and I checked out all the stuff
Speaker 3: that you sourced and the way you did it, and
Speaker 3: it is. Look, it's not the flashiest of Hollywood things
Speaker 3: that I have here on this video, but boy, am
Speaker 3: I grateful to have it. And you got me convinced
Speaker 3: there's something there, a great stuff, great stuff. You got
Speaker 3: me convinced. Well, I knew there was something there to
Speaker 3: begin with, but John has actually convinced me that there's
Speaker 3: a lot more there than I ever thought was. And
Speaker 3: he referenced a whole bunch of stuff that people should
Speaker 3: know but don't seem to know. I'm almost curious to
Speaker 3: ask about, you know, what you might have thought of
Speaker 3: the recent Netflix thing with you know, Malcolm X's alleged
Speaker 3: killer is getting let go over new evidence and how
Speaker 3: that was you know, a big puppa smoke that disappeared
Speaker 3: in the mainstream media. But I want to get to
Speaker 3: this new documentary after.
Speaker 2: So first off, how you doing tonight?
Speaker 5: Man?
Speaker 2: Thanks?
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean I had eight hour work day and
Speaker 6: but I you know, doing counseling. I do psychotherapy for
Speaker 6: a living. But it was a good day and I'm
Speaker 6: glad to be talking to you now after it's done.
Speaker 6: And I really I really appreciate you watching that first
Speaker 6: video of mine is my first attempt at a film.
Speaker 6: I did it with a local PBS documentary filmmaker who
Speaker 6: just who just is paid to do the audio with
Speaker 6: me and to get all the you know images together
Speaker 6: with the audio in a professional way.
Speaker 5: And so it's you know, a rudeimentary.
Speaker 6: Kind of film as opposed to my Drugs and Weapons
Speaker 6: Against This, which is more elaborate, but still I was
Speaker 6: just I'm glad it moved to you, and I'm glad
Speaker 6: it got the content of when, you know, the ideas
Speaker 6: I wanted to get out there, you know, in a
Speaker 6: way that satisfied generally happy about that.
Speaker 5: And a lot of people have.
Speaker 6: Bought have bought this DVD and told me, you know,
Speaker 6: nice things about I showed it in the number of
Speaker 6: colleges around Maryland and.
Speaker 5: You know, it's just nice to get good feedback.
Speaker 2: Well.
Speaker 3: Also, Drugs and Weapons against Us absolutely essential viewing for
Speaker 3: my listening audience, because uh, yeah.
Speaker 2: You you did include a section with a couple of
Speaker 2: people I know, so.
Speaker 3: One way or another in there, and it's not I'm
Speaker 3: not saying it because of that. It's it's more of
Speaker 3: a slick production than the video that we just talked about.
Speaker 3: But but both of them. I gotta be honest with you.
Speaker 3: If you think you're educated on the subjects of co
Speaker 3: intel pro and the drug war, do me a favor
Speaker 3: and watch these films in double check, because if you
Speaker 3: weren't before, you will be educated on both issues.
Speaker 2: Okay, thanks, Yeah.
Speaker 6: The second the first film I ever did, of course,
Speaker 6: was that the FBI War on Tupacs, Acre and Black Leaders,
Speaker 6: and so again that was, you know, a simpler film.
Speaker 5: But yeah, the Jugs Weapons against Us.
Speaker 6: I had gotten gotten the technique down better and worked
Speaker 6: with some really good professionals when that wanted to get
Speaker 6: down in a much slicker way, in a nicer way.
Speaker 5: And you also got a.
Speaker 6: Good top entertainment law firm helping me get fair you know,
Speaker 6: fair right use or was it called a fair use
Speaker 6: of lots of video supportive video was really good.
Speaker 5: It was really helpful.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 3: No, look, and that stuff is all interspersed in there,
Speaker 3: and I'm telling you it's it's as good as any
Speaker 3: documentary possible total package. But that first attempt at the
Speaker 3: film is loaded with so much information. I do not
Speaker 3: care that I'm watching the slide show. As a matter
Speaker 3: of fact, of the slide show is actually an enhancement
Speaker 3: to me because I'm looking at these you know, xerox
Speaker 3: file copies of people's faces, and you go, Okay, he's
Speaker 3: using kind of a cheap looking graphic here, right, But no, no, no, no, no, no,
Speaker 3: don't judge it that way. What he's doing is showing
Speaker 3: you and this to me is an artistic thing. And
Speaker 3: maybe you didn't even intend it, and maybe I'm overthinking it,
Speaker 3: but to me, it's like, look, they're just the subjects
Speaker 3: on these files. They are not the complete person. In fact,
Speaker 3: that's not taken into account. When you're looking at a target,
Speaker 3: you don't need to see the whole of the person.
Speaker 3: You just need that flat, basic identifiable image that, by
Speaker 3: the way, you come across when you study official files
Speaker 3: on nearly anything. And I noticed that thematic approach to it,
Speaker 3: and I went, Man, what he's telling us here is
Speaker 3: that it didn't matter that these people were people.
Speaker 2: They were just targets.
Speaker 3: And I thought that was a hell of a message
Speaker 3: that you never spoke of in that.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's that's the way I did.
Speaker 6: My cover was a big target on their faces, you know,
Speaker 6: bullseye on it on their faces to show. They were
Speaker 6: all targets that way. They were leading to like bullseye targets.
Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, because it's got that you know, that rough
Speaker 3: sort of a part of it, and I like it
Speaker 3: that way.
Speaker 2: Don't remake it, Okay, thank you. It is. It is
Speaker 2: just the way it should be.
Speaker 3: And you need to look at these things cold and calculated,
Speaker 3: because guess what, Uh, that's the way the government was
Speaker 3: looking at it. So anyway, let's move on, because again,
Speaker 3: both of those works are great and go to us.
Speaker 6: So it's too bad that the only yeah, the only
Speaker 6: place you can find it is on my website right
Speaker 6: now because Amazon just took it down.
Speaker 5: It's probably my folts.
Speaker 6: I was taking down all my inventory because a new
Speaker 6: publishing company republished my book and I didn't want to
Speaker 6: get things confused. But yeah, I'm not sure if they
Speaker 6: took it down for that reason or they just took
Speaker 6: it down for censorship reasons behind it.
Speaker 5: Because I only.
Speaker 6: Wanted to take down my book, and then they take
Speaker 6: down my DVD, I'll set but it's FBI World.
Speaker 5: Tupac dot com is where you can get.
Speaker 6: That DVD or John Podash dot com either one.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I was just saying and potash, even though no
Speaker 3: matter how I mispronounced it is.
Speaker 2: P O t A s h.
Speaker 5: Okay, t asa trade, thank you. Potash is definitely easier
Speaker 5: to say. I like that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm just look, I'm just mispronouncing things because I'm
Speaker 3: like that. But I'm used to reading things more than speaking.
Speaker 3: And believe it or not, even though I run my
Speaker 3: mouth on here plenty. But let's get to you run
Speaker 3: in your mouth because, uh, tell us about this newer
Speaker 3: piece of film that's gonna come out. And by the way,
Speaker 3: go to John's website. I'll mention it again before we're done.
Speaker 3: Either one of those websites, get that video, get get
Speaker 3: any of John's work. Actually, there's not anything bad in it. Okay,
Speaker 3: like there's nothing. I would say, listen, I recommend John stuff,
Speaker 3: but don't read this. Uh, and I know I do
Speaker 3: that sometimes. No, all of John stuff is good. So
Speaker 3: go to John protest dot com. And again that's p
Speaker 3: O T A s h. Put enough out of me
Speaker 3: and your promotions and your plug. How about what it
Speaker 3: is that you're coming out with that Again, we did preview.
Speaker 2: Some months ago on the show. Give us, you know,
Speaker 2: give us the whole rundown.
Speaker 6: I'll shut up now, Okay, yeah, I I I'm a
Speaker 6: little scared to even talk about because again I don't
Speaker 6: want anything you know, censored for for you, I don't
Speaker 6: want your shit censored at all. But it's uh so,
Speaker 6: the new new movie coming out in three weeks exactly
Speaker 6: three weeks July fifth, twenty twenty two, is called Shots
Speaker 6: Eugenics to Pandemics, and it's it's not on as many
Speaker 6: digital platforms as Drugs' Weapons Against This was Drugs' Weapons
Speaker 6: against This is made on many, you know, a number
Speaker 6: of different digital platforms in terms of you know, Amazon
Speaker 6: Prime and to B and what else, Voodoo and and
Speaker 6: different one like that. It's probably about eight different ones now.
Speaker 6: This new one is actually on twelve different digital platforms,
Speaker 6: but Amazon Prime and to be are the biggest ones.
Speaker 5: It didn't get on some of those.
Speaker 6: Like Voodoo and things places like that because it's it's
Speaker 6: being censored.
Speaker 2: For sure.
Speaker 6: I can't, as you mentioned, I can't get the trailer
Speaker 6: up on YouTube because they censor that topic and anything
Speaker 6: on you know, the shots and you know, and an
Speaker 6: alternative point of view when the shots they censor. But
Speaker 6: I really it's a much more advanced film than Drugs
Speaker 6: and Weapons against Us in terms of lots of special effects,
Speaker 6: with the different kind of I also have song parodies,
Speaker 6: so I try to make it a bit musing, even
Speaker 6: though I try to put a lot of new information
Speaker 6: about the history of these shots, as I say, from
Speaker 6: the time of eugenics, the eugenics movement in the United
Speaker 6: States in starting in the early nine eighteen hundreds all
Speaker 6: the way.
Speaker 5: Up to now.
Speaker 6: And so the whole film project, I actually originally planned
Speaker 6: to make just a comic version of Drugs' Weapons against Us.
Speaker 6: The film Drugs Weapons against Us. I was going to do,
Speaker 6: you know, just just a humorous version of it all
Speaker 6: because there is so much, you know, so much stuff
Speaker 6: you can make fun of with the whole drug war
Speaker 6: and even with MK Ultra, you know, the Seis Project Ultra.
Speaker 5: But so that was a majority of the film.
Speaker 6: And as I was finishing the film, COVID hit, and
Speaker 6: so I just included a little bit about COVID At
Speaker 6: the anks there is some overlap. There's a group called
Speaker 6: Imperial College was a you know, this this university in
Speaker 6: England that was doing all this research on psychedelics, and
Speaker 6: they also got a huge grant to do all this
Speaker 6: research on uh, basically funding this guy, this British supposed
Speaker 6: expert when COVID who was predicting that, you know, tens
Speaker 6: of millions or so, these huge amount of people are
Speaker 6: going to die in England of COVID. And so this guy,
Speaker 6: I forget his name off the top of my head,
Speaker 6: but he was considered he actually never got a degree
Speaker 6: in a health field, and so he was not you know,
Speaker 6: they acted like he was a leading urologist, and he
Speaker 6: actually didn't have any degree in a health related field.
Speaker 6: And yet but he was being funded by the Gates
Speaker 6: Foundation in a huge way of Imperial College, in the
Speaker 6: same way that these oligarchs were funding the psychedelic research.
Speaker 5: And so I showed that overlapped and I included something
Speaker 5: on him.
Speaker 6: His name was actually Neil Ferguson, and so Ferguson predicts
Speaker 6: this massive amount of people are going to die in
Speaker 6: England and then he gets it completely wrong. He gets
Speaker 6: it wrong by a factor of one hundred. I mean,
Speaker 6: it's ridiculous. So he's kind of made fun of it,
Speaker 6: you know, in England a bit. And so meanwhile, while
Speaker 6: they had the lockdowns in various countries like England, he
Speaker 6: apparently gets COVID.
Speaker 5: He's comes up being positive for COVID's supposed to be sick.
Speaker 6: He breaks the COVID rules to go and have sex
Speaker 6: with some woman who's married to someone else, gets caught
Speaker 6: doing it. So of course, like some of their tabloids said, uh,
Speaker 6: professor Lockdown gets caught with his pants down, and so,
Speaker 6: you know, so easy to make fun of some of
Speaker 6: these guys. And so he gets you know, just shamed.
Speaker 6: And not only is he shamed for you know, I
Speaker 6: really don't care that much that he's having an extra
Speaker 6: marter of relationship with you know, someone, but but he's
Speaker 6: just an asshole because he's making these wild predictions and
Speaker 6: causing us all to have to be you know, locked
Speaker 6: inside forever, and you know, making a bigger thing than
Speaker 6: it was now. Granted thought you know, lots of the
Speaker 6: world lockdown. But so I just show a lot of
Speaker 6: the research that says that the CDC, even under the
Speaker 6: most dangerous threat of all viruses like this, if there
Speaker 6: was a you know, the Black Death in the world
Speaker 6: that was killing hundreds of millions of people, they still
Speaker 6: did not plan to do what they did, which is
Speaker 6: locked down the whole world, and you know, closed schools
Speaker 6: for for six months to a year, a year and
Speaker 6: a half maybe even. And so they you know, all
Speaker 6: the CDC planning for something like this, never had them
Speaker 6: get this draconian. And so I showed the evidence that
Speaker 6: this was a big build up from the eugenics time.
Speaker 6: And the eugenics movement was about targeting poor people. It's
Speaker 6: about targeting immigrants in particular. It was about targeting really
Speaker 6: most most of society that wasn't wealthy, white Anglo Saxon
Speaker 6: Protestant believe it or not, that was what the eugenics
Speaker 6: laws were about. When you see the best writings on them,
Speaker 6: like such as Edwin Black's War against the Weak and
Speaker 6: other and other writings on that time. And so so.
Speaker 5: I go into that.
Speaker 6: With the eugenics movement, it was the Rockefellers, the carnegiese
Speaker 6: the Harremans, the JP.
Speaker 5: Morgan family that was inter locked with the Rockefellers.
Speaker 6: They started, they got eugenics laws passed in thirty states
Speaker 6: calling for sterilization of defectives, and defectives was anyone who
Speaker 6: got low IQ scores and the iq i Q test
Speaker 6: asked about things like tennis courts and bowling that immigrants
Speaker 6: knew nothing about in that time, you know, And so
Speaker 6: it was just really about sterilizing and eliminating low tons
Speaker 6: of the population. They really wanted to eliminate the population
Speaker 6: ten percent at a time, okay, And so.
Speaker 5: That overlapped with World War One.
Speaker 6: They also put huge money into promotion of why we
Speaker 6: should go into World War one, you know, defend as
Speaker 6: if we needed to defend our country in some based
Speaker 6: on some little war skirmish in Europe. And so part
Speaker 6: of I show the evidence, I think that part of it,
Speaker 6: part of World War One and sending millions of troops
Speaker 6: over there was the was part of eugenics to get
Speaker 6: rid of people, to get rid of the unwashed, you know,
Speaker 6: the useless eaters as some of these politicians have called them.
Speaker 2: Right. Look, this is this is a deep issue.
Speaker 3: Because I think that a lot of Americans actually failed
Speaker 3: to recognize the eugenicist.
Speaker 2: History that's here in America.
Speaker 3: You know, you say eugenics, and you talk about eliminating
Speaker 3: the week and this kind of thing, and where does
Speaker 3: their mind usually go.
Speaker 2: Well, they go Nazi Germany and.
Speaker 5: Appropriately though appropriately.
Speaker 3: Look appropriately but maybe not. And you know why, because
Speaker 3: those ideas were really fostered guess what here.
Speaker 6: Right exactly, Chuck, and I say appropriately because they were
Speaker 6: fostered here and then our oligarchs funded the rise of
Speaker 6: Hitler exactly.
Speaker 2: But that's yeah.
Speaker 3: See they're they're in and I'm sorry to cut you
Speaker 3: off again, but there realizes the problem. They think, Oh no,
Speaker 3: there were people that subported Hitler over here. But hold on, no,
Speaker 3: if it wasn't for that, the whole you Genesis program
Speaker 3: in Germany might not have even existed.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying.
Speaker 5: Absolutely, I totally agree. I'm right with you to that,
Speaker 5: no doubt.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, and it's and it's crazy that you
Speaker 3: got to explain this. It's like this stuff here it
Speaker 3: was sanitary laws or something like that, where it was
Speaker 3: you know, and think about that for a second.
Speaker 2: Sanitation, what do you think about today?
Speaker 3: You think about the people taking out your garbage, right,
Speaker 3: they're your sanitation workers. All right, Well, that's pretty much
Speaker 3: what they were talking about with people. They were sanitizing
Speaker 3: us from those that were weak and looking for the
Speaker 3: sterilization of people that yeah, failed IQ tests, and IQ tests,
Speaker 3: by the way, are not accurate measurements of intelligence. Altogether
Speaker 3: to begin with, not the sharpest scientific tool to be using,
Speaker 3: but even so, eliminating people because what they're handicapped, all
Speaker 3: that kind of stuff one way or another, whether it's
Speaker 3: psychological or physical, because that was another thing.
Speaker 2: You know, if they're not going to you know.
Speaker 6: Produce, eliminate people because they're a poor pulpers people laid
Speaker 6: on paying fines people true it were truant from school.
Speaker 5: They were just the people they were.
Speaker 6: They were talking about getting rid of eliminating some unbelievable
Speaker 6: you know, the categories.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and as you said, there were laws that were
Speaker 3: on the books here that justified the government taking care
Speaker 3: of that. Again, I bring you back to the garbage men.
Speaker 3: This was the idea, except guess what you might not
Speaker 3: realize that you're listening right now, could have been thrown
Speaker 3: in the category of the garbage that needed to be
Speaker 3: taken out.
Speaker 2: And I think that's an important point. Now.
Speaker 3: Somebody might say, how do you get from that to uh,
Speaker 3: you know, the pandemic and all this other stuff. Well,
Speaker 3: you know what, if your scientific community is inundated with
Speaker 3: people who think like this, uh, guess what, it might
Speaker 3: motivate them to.
Speaker 2: Make certain decisions.
Speaker 3: About what they call safe, about what they call necessary,
Speaker 3: about what necessary risks are you know, and and and
Speaker 3: by the way, you also talked about you know them
Speaker 3: funding psychedelics. Now, you and I might have a slightly
Speaker 3: askew view on this together because a couple of years ago,
Speaker 3: I was really suffering.
Speaker 2: And here we go.
Speaker 3: Now, I'm gonna dig on your psychotherapist background for a second.
Speaker 3: I was suffering brutally from PTSD, which I've carried around
Speaker 3: since the child, since I was a child, And I'm
Speaker 3: not using the more common definition that people use today.
Speaker 3: It seems like it's thrown around everywhere. I mean, I
Speaker 3: was diagnosed with this in like say, nineteen eighty one
Speaker 3: and when I was nine. Okay, so this is not
Speaker 3: the Oh, no, I had a bad day form of PTSD.
Speaker 3: They call it PTSDC or something like this, which I
Speaker 3: don't take it seriously because sorry, I carried the other
Speaker 3: thing around for thirty five years. Anyway, in doing that,
Speaker 3: in desperation, I dosed myself with psychedelics.
Speaker 5: To be honest with you, if it helped you, great,
Speaker 5: I'm not against that.
Speaker 3: Well, no, I'm just saying though that you know, some
Speaker 3: people hear that Okay, so the wrong people are funding
Speaker 3: that research right now, it's they're not funding it in
Speaker 3: a I'm not ascribing their motives here, But what I
Speaker 3: am saying is there is something to this because it
Speaker 3: absolutely saved my life.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you that is that psilocybin.
Speaker 3: It has allowed me to live, and I really believe
Speaker 3: I was dying from it before. So I'm just saying, yeah,
Speaker 3: it's not as though there isn't something valuable that might
Speaker 3: have been exact. I don't want somebody to say, Okay,
Speaker 3: see the evil people are funding this, so therefore the
Speaker 3: entire concept is no good. In fact, as much as
Speaker 3: I object to vaccination in general, I'll tell you this,
Speaker 3: I do understand the concept as valuable.
Speaker 2: I understand it, you know what I'm saying.
Speaker 3: Sure, But the people that are running this program and
Speaker 3: the people that are distributing this, manufacturing this, I'm sorry,
Speaker 3: I don't trust them.
Speaker 2: I don't believe they're doing the right thing.
Speaker 3: I don't believe they have the right motivations, and it's
Speaker 3: destructive as it stands now. The general concept of introducing
Speaker 3: a bit of a say, a disease to somebody in
Speaker 3: a controlled way so that their immune system can actually
Speaker 3: react to it. Not a bad or fouled concept in
Speaker 3: and of itself.
Speaker 6: Right, Yeah, by itself, it's fine. It's just what you
Speaker 6: put in that vaccine is very important. And that's the
Speaker 6: key exactly. A quick quick word about psilocybin. I don't
Speaker 6: cover psilocybin in my book or my film because I
Speaker 6: think psilocybbin is a good bit safer for sure.
Speaker 5: It's not like acid.
Speaker 6: Acid is massively kind of you know, artificial and has
Speaker 6: problems with it where and be you know, STP is
Speaker 6: a super psychedelic, it's got serious problems.
Speaker 5: B Z and other super psychedelics, serious problems. The psilocybin
Speaker 5: is as.
Speaker 6: Much safer, and I think if that can help someone
Speaker 6: with PTSD, that's great, that's fine.
Speaker 5: I'm not talking about psilocybin. I'm talking about you.
Speaker 6: Know, the uh, the acid and you know LSD and
Speaker 6: the z STP that they used against some of the
Speaker 6: activists like Paul Robison and others to mess up their heads.
Speaker 2: Oh no, no, And that's and that's perfectly valid.
Speaker 3: But I just want to make that distinction that there
Speaker 3: is you know again here it is there are scientific
Speaker 3: concepts that could be useful and actually helpful to humanity,
Speaker 3: and then they're in the wrong hands and anything can
Speaker 3: be weaponized.
Speaker 2: That's the point. So I just wanted to make sure
Speaker 2: that was real clear. Sorry.
Speaker 6: Well, the other thing is I want to just point
Speaker 6: out that e M d R Eye movement desensitization reprocessing
Speaker 6: is something I got trained in seven years ago and
Speaker 6: it's been miraculous for PTSD, Absolutely miraculous, and I I
Speaker 6: can't say more about it. It's it's incredible work for PTSD,
Speaker 6: and it's you don't have to worry about any side
Speaker 6: effects whatsoever. Not that psychedelic mushrooms automatically have side effects.
Speaker 6: But I had some side effects from psychedelic mushrooms when
Speaker 6: I was younger, but you know, nothing major, nothing like
Speaker 6: acid at all. They went away after a month or
Speaker 6: two or three. You know, there's no problems after that.
Speaker 6: But they did last for you know, one or two
Speaker 6: or three months for me. But it's acid lasted years
Speaker 6: for me. You supposed to just months. And so I
Speaker 6: think that EMDR has no side effects and it's an
Speaker 6: excellent technique for PTSD. And that's why I just say
Speaker 6: there's better techniques even than psychedelic mushrooms for PTSD.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, but everybody's an individual, John, And you know,
Speaker 3: do you think with that kind of technique for me,
Speaker 3: I would be disqualified from it for certain neurological reasons.
Speaker 2: So you know, in that case, you can see why
Speaker 2: it is I did that.
Speaker 5: You know, whatever works for you, I agree with Chuck,
Speaker 5: you know.
Speaker 3: And and that's the thing is that it could work
Speaker 3: for me and not work for the ten guys, but
Speaker 3: maybe it'll work for the eleventh.
Speaker 2: You know. Sure, we're all different.
Speaker 3: Anyway, I do have an option here before I let
Speaker 3: you go on, because I want you to keep discussing
Speaker 3: this and tell us the rest about what's going to
Speaker 3: be out in this film in three weeks and of
Speaker 3: course to John Potash dot com and uh, you have
Speaker 3: the the trailer there, but I have the audio for
Speaker 3: the trailer if you actually want to play it for
Speaker 3: a minute or two. Here, what is it? It's well,
Speaker 3: it's actually almost four minutes long.
Speaker 5: I don't know.
Speaker 6: I got I got so, I said, I sent the
Speaker 6: link to you guys of the two minutes and fifty
Speaker 6: six second chair.
Speaker 5: That's the new tailer, that's the go.
Speaker 3: Okay, let me, let me go ahead, and grab that.
Speaker 3: But let you continue to talk about this for a minute,
Speaker 3: and I'll try and set that up so that we can, uh,
Speaker 3: you know, at least play the audio.
Speaker 6: Well, I said to the Dave Davy, I think, David,
Speaker 6: I think you've got that in your email right the
Speaker 6: tail few.
Speaker 3: If he does, do do me a favorite man, drop
Speaker 3: it over into the sky chat and I'll open it
Speaker 3: up and we'll play it right here live there.
Speaker 5: Good. I just don't want you to get banned for it.
Speaker 5: That's the only thing, you know.
Speaker 3: Ah, you know what, it's gonna happen. It's gonna happen.
Speaker 3: The only thing is I'm just telling you I can't
Speaker 3: send this to YouTube.
Speaker 2: Other than that.
Speaker 6: Well, yeah, sure, that's fine, as long as you don't
Speaker 6: do that, right exactly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean I should be okay.
Speaker 3: I mean, who knows, maybe you'll be the test case
Speaker 3: out that it's actually much worse than that.
Speaker 2: But anyway, let.
Speaker 6: Me Yeah, I'm gonna put this in the chat now
Speaker 6: and hopefully that'll be easy enough.
Speaker 2: To get a great Hey.
Speaker 3: So in the meantime, yeah, continue telling us about this.
Speaker 3: I kind of sidetracked you for a second about psychedelics,
Speaker 3: but I just want to be clear about that. And
Speaker 3: also I never object, by the way, to anybody's look
Speaker 3: people's personal drug.
Speaker 2: Use or whatever. I don't ever want to make it
Speaker 2: sound like that.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 2: And that's a fact.
Speaker 3: If you're using something, whether it's natural or not, I
Speaker 3: feel like it's none of my business.
Speaker 2: But it's are weaponized.
Speaker 3: Against the population, and it does become my business because
Speaker 3: there are people doing that in yours and my name John,
Speaker 3: And that's not something we signed off on, or would we.
Speaker 6: Yeah, as there are tax dollars going to uh, you know,
Speaker 6: Operation Paper equip Nazi scientists they brought over to be
Speaker 6: part of mk Ultra to learn how to use these
Speaker 6: drugs as weapons against activists, and that's just part of it,
Speaker 6: you know.
Speaker 5: But Yeah, people's personal drug use. I could care less about.
Speaker 5: It's up to them.
Speaker 6: I mean, I'd like to see them just you reach
Speaker 6: your fullest potential without the drugs. But if they if
Speaker 6: drugs help them in some way, that's their their personal business.
Speaker 5: I don't care sactly. Yeah.
Speaker 6: So I so in terms of the shots eugenics to pandemics,
Speaker 6: the eugenics during World War Two, the big thing I argue,
Speaker 6: and I show the evidence of is that the first vaccines.
Speaker 6: There was about two a dozen to two dozen different
Speaker 6: vaccines that were given to these millions of soldiers going
Speaker 6: up to World War One, and they were completely experimental
Speaker 6: vaccines coming out of the Rockefeller Institute, and so you know,
Speaker 6: there was a there was different journalists and scientists and
Speaker 6: people that were documenting the fact that these things were.
Speaker 5: They didn't know what they were doing when they had
Speaker 5: these vaccines.
Speaker 6: They were just experimenting on all these young soldiers and
Speaker 6: these and these soldiers were dying. Someone were dying on
Speaker 6: the spot, so you know, tons of them were getting
Speaker 6: sick immediately. And there's lots of evidence to say to
Speaker 6: suggest that the so called Spanish flu actually came from
Speaker 6: these experimental vaccines at the Rockefeller Institute was pushing on
Speaker 6: everybody because they Rockefellers and the Morgan families had huge
Speaker 6: investments in banks in Europe, in many European countries, and
Speaker 6: they ended up pushing these vaccines all in all these
Speaker 6: different countries, not just US, but in European countries.
Speaker 5: And when soldiers over there and people.
Speaker 6: Over there, and then countries that that resisted those vaccines,
Speaker 6: they didn't get the Spanish the so called Spanish flu,
Speaker 6: and only the you know, the countries that that took
Speaker 6: one of the vaccines got this Spanish flu. And so
Speaker 6: books were written about that showing that and the people
Speaker 6: that resisted the vaccines in the United States never got sick,
Speaker 6: according to people.
Speaker 5: That lived back then, including this.
Speaker 6: One scientist that quoted uh whose name leaves me at
Speaker 6: the moment.
Speaker 5: But so you'll see evidence around that around the first
Speaker 5: experimental vaccines that they tried when they didn't know anything
Speaker 5: about vaccines, and they were just you know, they were
Speaker 5: part of the eugenics movement, I argue.
Speaker 6: And so then you go, you go into the thirties
Speaker 6: and you see the build up of Nazi Germany, and yes,
Speaker 6: the oligarchs of America and some of England, you know,
Speaker 6: funded the eugenics movement that really became Nazi Germany. And
Speaker 6: it was really I argue that it was really a
Speaker 6: takeover of Germany because they were destitute after World War One,
Speaker 6: financially destitute, and so they used that opportunity to just
Speaker 6: put tons of cash in there and and really take
Speaker 6: over the country with funding the brown Shirts of Hitler,
Speaker 6: and it was imposed on them, and you know, and
Speaker 6: you had had the killing of millions of Jews, Gypsies,
Speaker 6: you know, communists, et cetera, and gaze et cetera, and
Speaker 6: you know, and that was just the end of that
Speaker 6: eugenics movement that was.
Speaker 5: Ended up waging a huge war when.
Speaker 6: The Soviet Union because most of the battalions, really the
Speaker 6: biggest bulwark against Nazis was the Soviet Union. They lost
Speaker 6: twenty to thirty million people, whereas England and America together
Speaker 6: lost less than a million people.
Speaker 5: So who really, you know, who really was that war about?
Speaker 5: That war was about.
Speaker 6: It was a war on the civic union, I could argue,
Speaker 6: but nonetheless, I don't get into that. It's just that's
Speaker 6: that's a you know, part of what the numbers say.
Speaker 6: But nonetheless it was that was the extent. The Nazi
Speaker 6: was the last extension of eugenics at that time in
Speaker 6: terms of like the fullest.
Speaker 5: Extension of eugenics.
Speaker 6: So the Nazis made eugenics look bad after they were defeated,
Speaker 6: and eugenics went a bit underground. Now, they still put
Speaker 6: out notices and they still had meetings, but they were
Speaker 6: they were more covert, you know, more underground, and so
Speaker 6: tons of Nazi scientists were taken into the CIA to
Speaker 6: be part of our rocket.
Speaker 5: Program, to be part.
Speaker 6: Of our you know mk ultra with you know, use
Speaker 6: of drugs as weapons, you know, And they were sent
Speaker 6: down to South America and they helped, you know, create
Speaker 6: the rat lines that I mean, helped create the cocaine
Speaker 6: lines down there. They were sent actually the Middle East too,
Speaker 6: or all over the world a lot of these Nazis. Nonetheless,
Speaker 6: I don't get into that as much. I just mentioned
Speaker 6: that stuff. But what what authors have found is that
Speaker 6: they started testing all kinds of biological weapons, and uh
Speaker 6: in Korea for example, it used all kinds of biological warfare.
Speaker 6: And then they were doing, you know, testing chemical weapons.
Speaker 6: And they had Fort Dietrich and they had a fort
Speaker 6: you know, Edward Arstale that's in my neighborhood of Maryland
Speaker 6: here where I live, my hometown. You know, Fort Dietrick
Speaker 6: is just maybe forty five minutes away from me, sadly enough,
Speaker 6: and so that's where they were. They were they were
Speaker 6: testing all kinds of new chemical weapons in terms of
Speaker 6: biological weapons, and that's when you get into and so
Speaker 6: into the gain of function research.
Speaker 3: Well, every conflict, by the way, John presents a new
Speaker 3: opportunity for them to have an open air laboratory to
Speaker 3: test things. I pointed out that in Vietnam we definitely
Speaker 3: had weather manipulation. You have chemical warfare being tested there,
Speaker 3: the de fully hitting agent of age and orange.
Speaker 2: Sure.
Speaker 3: Sure, but only in very recent times are they even
Speaker 3: willing to discuss the burn pit syndrome that Iraq and
Speaker 3: Afghani war veterans are now suffering from. Even though I had,
Speaker 3: you know, a guy who was in the military, he
Speaker 3: couldn't get his own book into military bookstores on bases
Speaker 3: and things about it years ago. Well, now it's sort
Speaker 3: of acceptable to say, well, there might be a little
Speaker 3: something to this burn pit thing. You know, these guys
Speaker 3: were exposed to some chemicals maybe maybe you know, but oh,
Speaker 3: the gol war syndrome, that's not real.
Speaker 6: Though John Steart did a great thing on the burn
Speaker 6: pits with the problem with John Stewart, I saw an
Speaker 6: episode of that where they test all the evidence of
Speaker 6: the burn pits.
Speaker 2: Yeah, oh yeah.
Speaker 3: But I had a guy and I think his name
Speaker 3: was Joe Hicks, like maybe six years ago, and immediately
Speaker 3: that was one of the first things that I got
Speaker 3: like shot down for on a bunch of platforms was
Speaker 3: talking about this guy was in the military who served
Speaker 3: saying listen, my friends are sick and this is why,
Speaker 3: and they didn't want to hear it.
Speaker 2: And he published his book anyway.
Speaker 3: You know, it's like, okay, you know, I don't know
Speaker 3: what happened to the guy ever since, but I know
Speaker 3: he was trying for years.
Speaker 2: To get people listen and nobody would hear it. Anyway.
Speaker 3: I've got that now loaded up your your your trailer?
Speaker 3: Why did I not get that word in my head trailer,
Speaker 3: which is available on bitch shoot don't look forward on YouTube,
Speaker 3: but it is available on bit shooting a couple other platforms.
Speaker 3: And I think you and I could just be quiet
Speaker 3: for a minute and play this audio, because you're in
Speaker 3: the midst of a great explanation. But I'd like you
Speaker 3: to take a breath. So let's let's do that. We'll
Speaker 3: be quiet, and this will be about two minutes or so.
Speaker 3: We'll leave the microphones open, though, but you and I
Speaker 3: just quietly listened together. I haven't heard this, and I'm
Speaker 3: going to be seeing it. I'll give you, guys the
Speaker 3: link in the show notes so you can go see
Speaker 3: it for yourself. But for now here's the audio.
Speaker 11: By nineteen twelve, the wasp super wealthy families, America's oligarchs, including.
Speaker 2: Railroad tycoon E. H.
Speaker 11: Harriman, the Rockefellers, and Morgan's, had joined the Carnegie in
Speaker 11: sponsoring eugenics nationwide.
Speaker 2: And state hospitals.
Speaker 11: They fed the feeble's milk from tuberculosis infected cows to
Speaker 11: get rid of them. The oligarchs overflowed with creative ways
Speaker 11: to kill. NBC News covered how some states kept practicing eugenics.
Speaker 11: As late as the nineteen seventies.
Speaker 5: Thirty one states had legal eugenics programs.
Speaker 11: Pharmaceutical giant vaccine makers Bristol Myers and Merk interlocked with
Speaker 11: The New York Times and Time Incorporated, respectively. The ABC
Speaker 11: News article cited CDC findings that ninety four percent of
Speaker 11: the reported COVID nineteen deaths involved an average of two
Speaker 11: point six other potential cause of death. As the narrator
Speaker 11: of this documentary on Bill Gates revealed, he was also
Speaker 11: the top donor to the Center for Disease Control CDC.
Speaker 11: This Brookings Institution article shows CDC stats that report how
Speaker 11: middle aged, black and Latino death rates are at least
Speaker 11: six times higher than for whites.
Speaker 2: ECR is separate from that.
Speaker 4: It's just a process that's used to make a whole
Speaker 4: lot of.
Speaker 2: Something out of something.
Speaker 5: That's why it is not It doesn't tell you that
Speaker 5: you're sick, and it doesn't tell you that the thing
Speaker 5: you ended up with really was going to hurt you
Speaker 5: or anything like that.
Speaker 10: At inne vaccine, Tony Falci's top a's own royalties to
Speaker 10: that sow people in his agency collect one hundred and
Speaker 10: fifty thousand dollars a year in royalties on that vaccine.
Speaker 11: Pfizer a name you can't trust, said the US Justice
Speaker 11: Department in two thousand and nine.
Speaker 2: The federal government today announced the larger medical fraud settlement
Speaker 2: in US history.
Speaker 12: Mountains of data have emerged from many centers and countries
Speaker 12: around the world showing the miraculous effectiveness of ivermecan. It
Speaker 12: basically obliterates transmission of this virus.
Speaker 7: Side to get some contexts, over the past twenty years
Speaker 7: all vaccinations combined, there are reported four and eighty two
Speaker 7: deaths over the past twenty years. In the past four months,
Speaker 7: we're now sitting in seventy eight deaths associated with the
Speaker 7: COVID vaccine were to study commissioned by the Department Health
Speaker 7: and Human Services. It's in twenty ten and Harvard carried
Speaker 7: out this study and the conclusion was only about one
Speaker 7: percent of adverse reactions are ever reported to THEIRS.
Speaker 3: Also, what's more, what's more, well, john that is the
Speaker 3: the creepy AI voice, I would say is appropriate, and yeah,
Speaker 3: these are these are the facts, some of these facts
Speaker 3: that are just there, and your trailer.
Speaker 2: Should be enough to get people to consider what the
Speaker 2: hell is going on here.
Speaker 3: I love that you point out that Pfizer is, you know,
Speaker 3: clearly not one of these trusts. You know, you should
Speaker 3: trust the science and trust the people giving you the
Speaker 3: scientific you know, stuff for you to get better, for
Speaker 3: you to be better, right, I keep pointing out.
Speaker 2: And they don't. They don't bring it up anymore.
Speaker 3: You notice that the Johnson and Johnson vaccine is no
Speaker 3: longer in discussion at all. I wonder if that has
Speaker 3: anything to do with the fact that Johnson and Johnson
Speaker 3: repeatedly has been called on the carpet for what they
Speaker 3: can't figure out how not to put something that's cancer
Speaker 3: causing intal compowder first of all, but also, hey, you know,
Speaker 3: that whole opioidydemic epidemic thing that seems to have also disappeared.
Speaker 3: They contributed mightily to that by creating an interest thing
Speaker 3: where you could harvest the entire poppy plant, okay, and
Speaker 3: crush up the opiate straw so that you could more
Speaker 3: effectively harvest your crops to make guess what the pills
Speaker 3: that everybody got hooked on, that that people are still
Speaker 3: hooked on if they haven't found their way to regular
Speaker 3: street level heroin. Because you know, that's a good thing
Speaker 3: for a company to participate in. Johnson and Johnson, your
Speaker 3: friends who also can't figure out how not to put
Speaker 3: in bombing fluid in products that babies are going to
Speaker 3: put in their mouths wonderful. Sorry anyway, john I'll turn
Speaker 3: it back.
Speaker 6: It's hard to believe that Pwiser is actually, you know,
Speaker 6: even more corrupt than Johnson and Johnson, you know, with
Speaker 6: all the things you just mentioned it.
Speaker 3: That's the thing is, that's the scary part is that
Speaker 3: Peiser is actually worse when you go to look at
Speaker 3: their list of products that they've had plenty of these
Speaker 3: class action lawsuits against. Because this may result in death,
Speaker 3: you know when there's a female reader. Of the various
Speaker 3: side effects, you know, rectal bleeding, your eyes might swim, well,
Speaker 3: your tongue might fall out, and also death.
Speaker 2: You know, check with your doctor if any of these
Speaker 2: things happen. How do you do that? If you did?
Speaker 2: All right?
Speaker 3: Sorry, John, by all means go ahead. I just needed
Speaker 3: to point that out, in vent that first second. But
Speaker 3: I love this the audio of it. I love the
Speaker 3: visuals on it.
Speaker 2: Robert F.
Speaker 3: Kennedy Junior in it. Uh, you know a guy I'd
Speaker 3: love to talk to personally. But anyway, go ahead.
Speaker 5: John, Yeah.
Speaker 6: So, so, just to add to what you're saying, Darena
Speaker 6: had never had a vaccine authorized before, and here we were.
Speaker 6: They got a billion dollars of our taxpayer money for research.
Speaker 5: How did our taxpayer.
Speaker 6: Money, a billion dollars of it go to a company
Speaker 6: that never had author got a vaccine authorized before? Could
Speaker 6: it be because they have JP Morgan on their you know,
Speaker 6: board of directors, you know JP Morgan employee, I mean
Speaker 6: not JP Morgan himself.
Speaker 5: Of course, one of the employees from JP Morgan. I mean,
Speaker 5: it's just so corrupt, it's incredible. And we're supposed to
Speaker 5: trust these groups.
Speaker 6: You know, trust these pharmaceutical companies that are all corrupt
Speaker 6: as hell, and so the.
Speaker 5: Yeah, in terms of.
Speaker 6: That that trailer, I'll just say people couldn't see that
Speaker 6: the person talking about the PCR test was doctor Carrie Mullis,
Speaker 6: who was the inventor of the PCR test, and so
Speaker 6: he's the one that said it's not for you know,
Speaker 6: uh calling whether you have you know, it's not for diagnosis.
Speaker 6: The PCR test is not for diagnosis, he says, basically.
Speaker 6: And he's the one that won the you know, Nobel
Speaker 6: Prize for inventing the PCR tests and he died right
Speaker 6: before COVID came out, so uh, you know this. These
Speaker 6: are some of the sources of of of the evidence
Speaker 6: that I have in my film, and I have other
Speaker 6: Nobel Prize winners like the guy who was won the
Speaker 6: Nobel Prize for isolating HIV, Luke Montaigne, and so they
Speaker 6: are very credible sources. The guy I talked about ivermectin
Speaker 6: was asked to testify about about it in front of
Speaker 6: the US Senate, and that's where he's getting He's talking
Speaker 6: about vermectans to the US Senate. He was in the
Speaker 6: US senex he's on the front line, doctor pr Cory.
Speaker 6: So there's a lot of great sources that are saying
Speaker 6: the stuff that you know, you heard in that film,
Speaker 6: in the trailer for the film, and in my film
Speaker 6: in general, I think, and so I'm just glad to
Speaker 6: get them on film saying these things.
Speaker 5: Of course.
Speaker 6: But so you know, with that what I was telling
Speaker 6: that history when you know, I argue that that war
Speaker 6: is partly for resources and partly as a form of eugenics,
Speaker 6: like just these these guys are expendable that go out
Speaker 6: and fight for those you know, taking over lands for
Speaker 6: those resources, for.
Speaker 5: The rich to just you know, the greedy rich to
Speaker 5: gain those resources control over them.
Speaker 6: And so but as you said, they were also using
Speaker 6: biological warfare and chemical warfare in a lot of these wars,
Speaker 6: from Agent Orange to the biological warfare biological weapons that
Speaker 6: dropped on Korea, and international panels have discovered that, you know,
Speaker 6: what happened in Korea, and so they were continually practicing it,
Speaker 6: finding new forms, new weapons in that way, to the
Speaker 6: point that they were now you know, up into the
Speaker 6: nineteen nineties and two thousands, they were doing more and
Speaker 6: more gain of function research, which is the euphemism for
Speaker 6: making viruses more deadly. Okay, make them, you know, function
Speaker 6: even stronger, and function the viruses, the deadly viruses that
Speaker 6: they found in animals, they were trying to figure out
Speaker 6: how to make them functioning even deadlier, gain function in humans.
Speaker 6: And they were successful with things like the coronavirus and
Speaker 6: you know, other viruses, and and it's really ugly that
Speaker 6: they were doing that kind of research. Now, I don't
Speaker 6: know how successful they were with this coronavirus, to be honest,
Speaker 6: but nonetheless, obviously some people died. I don't think any
Speaker 6: we are near as many as they say, because as
Speaker 6: the CDC, as ABC News said about what the CDC said,
Speaker 6: you know, ninety four point six percent of people that
Speaker 6: supposedly die of COVID could have caused you know, died
Speaker 6: from two or three other things. So you know, it's
Speaker 6: not known that they definitely died of COVID. They could
Speaker 6: have died of these other things that could have caused
Speaker 6: their death. They changed the whole way they determined death
Speaker 6: in this country. You know that for decades they had
Speaker 6: a certain way the way they determine the death, and
Speaker 6: they completely change those rules just for COVID.
Speaker 3: Just all right, because the major point to be made
Speaker 3: here is, you know, people that oppose my viewpoint on
Speaker 3: this often say, look, the statistics don't lie, and you
Speaker 3: know what, I agree with you, the statistics don't lie.
Speaker 3: But here's where the lie can come in. What you
Speaker 3: decide to feed into a statistical equation is where you
Speaker 3: can lie.
Speaker 5: Okay, changed, Yeah, the equation has been completely changed. That's
Speaker 5: the issue.
Speaker 6: They changed their rules and the way they developed those statistics,
Speaker 6: and that's the problem, you know, And so we don't know.
Speaker 6: We just can't know for sure how it all worked, ow,
Speaker 6: you know. So nonetheless, the other issue is now whether
Speaker 6: coronavirus was very deadly or not.
Speaker 5: I mean, maybe it wasn't. That's whatever, that's what it is,
Speaker 5: and we don't know for sure.
Speaker 6: But if it was, Okay, so people were in the hospital,
Speaker 6: what do we do with them?
Speaker 5: What do we treat them with?
Speaker 6: They found that ivermectin and also, as controversial as it is,
Speaker 6: the hydroxy quirkham with zinc, which I don't mention in
Speaker 6: my film, but there's loads of studies about show that
Speaker 6: they can help this COVID. And instead, now I didn't
Speaker 6: I didn't get to get this research. But I do
Speaker 6: show that the two prescriptions for what they should use
Speaker 6: in the hospital.
Speaker 5: It's two main prescriptions.
Speaker 6: One is ventilated and then a study after the use
Speaker 6: of ventilators for months, they found that ventilators, like eighty
Speaker 6: eight percent of people that were put on ventilators died
Speaker 6: and they were killed by the ventilators.
Speaker 5: Okay, the best evidence is they were killed by the ventilators.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 6: And you know, nurses blew the whistle on film, and
Speaker 6: I show that in my movie. Well, the fact that
Speaker 6: they talked people in that didn't even weren't even COVID
Speaker 6: positive into getting on the ventilator and then they died
Speaker 6: on the ventilator, you know. So the other thing they
Speaker 6: prescribed was remdesevir And now RFK Junior's book, excellent book,
Speaker 6: The Real Anthony Fauci quotes nurses who say they dubbed it,
Speaker 6: they nicknamed it run Death is near, Okay, because remdesevir,
Speaker 6: according to the studies, killed over half the people that
Speaker 6: they gave it to in the studies, So they were
Speaker 6: giving people a poisonous medicine, you know. And so those
Speaker 6: are two main things prescribed for people and it's.
Speaker 3: It's have no fear, John, because you know you're good
Speaker 3: friends at Fvizer. Now have an oral medication which you
Speaker 3: can take to uh, you know, prevent your your COVID
Speaker 3: symptoms from getting out of control.
Speaker 2: Don't you know that? I mean we we we should
Speaker 2: all relax now.
Speaker 3: Everything's good because they've given us the solutions.
Speaker 2: You know, you know what I'm really saying.
Speaker 6: To you, right, Okay, joke, it's it's such a joke.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 6: They they completely ban these these medicines that are considered
Speaker 6: essential medicines, you know, hydrox cor quin and ivermectin or
Speaker 6: on the uh we're originally on the World Health Organization's
Speaker 6: essential medicines lists.
Speaker 5: I mean they were for decades. They were you know,
Speaker 5: at least a decade or more.
Speaker 6: They were considered essential medicines that weren't that weren't allowed
Speaker 6: to be, you know, taking advantage of by greedy pharmaceuticals,
Speaker 6: you know. So you know, they were used throughout the
Speaker 6: world and and really helped other issues. And then they showed,
Speaker 6: you know, they did a bunch of studies when could
Speaker 6: they help with this coronavirus and they found they could
Speaker 6: and there was great there's been great studies out there
Speaker 6: on both those drugs because I drox the quork when
Speaker 6: helps zinc into the cells, and i remectin is a
Speaker 6: great you know, as you heard from doctor Pierre Corey
Speaker 6: was on the front lines.
Speaker 5: He had a tea.
Speaker 6: He represented a team of doctors that reviewed all his
Speaker 6: studies all over the world about ivermectin to come up
Speaker 6: with what he said, you know, and so you know
Speaker 6: what he testified about to the US Senate.
Speaker 5: So this is so they.
Speaker 6: They they then take their their media assets and they
Speaker 6: vilify iv remectin and they pretend like these scientists who
Speaker 6: discover the great uses of ivermectin never won a Nobel
Speaker 6: Prize for their great find But ivermectin is a horse
Speaker 6: medicine only, and that people it's not you know, it's
Speaker 6: poisonous for people, like you can't give it to people.
Speaker 5: It's dangerous for people. That's what all the press was saying.
Speaker 6: You know, my wife had a back and forth debate
Speaker 6: with a calumnist and you o Balemar's son about that.
Speaker 5: That ridiculous.
Speaker 3: Well, and the realistic thing is, look, too high of
Speaker 3: a dose of ibermectin is bad, but so is too
Speaker 3: high of a dose of penicillin, okay, which people would
Speaker 3: think is the most innocuous thing in the world.
Speaker 2: This is the truth.
Speaker 3: You have to have a measured and proper response, and
Speaker 3: yes you do have to rely on science. But you know,
Speaker 3: the thing is, again, as I said earlier with the
Speaker 3: psilocybin issue, not.
Speaker 2: Every solution is for everybody.
Speaker 3: And you have to explore and know and take a
Speaker 3: look at the interactions and know what's going into your body.
Speaker 3: Know your body first, I mean, And all this stuff
Speaker 3: to me boils down to what should be decided between
Speaker 3: a physician who is actually interested in a sustaining life
Speaker 3: and a patient exactly.
Speaker 6: And so let the doctors do the work, good work
Speaker 6: they do. They they found that this works, let them
Speaker 6: use it. And instead they're they're taking away doctors life
Speaker 6: licenses for using the medicine that they found worked for
Speaker 6: their patients. They took away doctor Merril NASA's license. She
Speaker 6: was an expert on biological weapons, you know, such as
Speaker 6: the anthrax you know, which she was asked to They
Speaker 6: actually created new legislation around her great research on anthrax
Speaker 6: in front of her testimony in front of Congress, and
Speaker 6: you know, because she had found like just how I
Speaker 6: was used. You know, they pretended like anthrax was something
Speaker 6: that was some naturally occurring thing, and she found that
Speaker 6: it was actually weaponized.
Speaker 5: And so it's just they they.
Speaker 6: Took away her medical license for using ivermectin to help
Speaker 6: COVID patients.
Speaker 5: It's absolutely crazy.
Speaker 3: No look, and and we live in a crazy world.
Speaker 3: John Potash dot Com p O T A s H.
Speaker 3: And John is just spelled John. Okay, uh p O T.
Speaker 3: Pot Let's see, Yes, I got it right the first time,
Speaker 3: all right, yeah yeah, But anyway, dot com go there
Speaker 3: you can see the trailer. We're gonna give you the
Speaker 3: the bitch shoot link for this trailer.
Speaker 2: Also, somebody dropped in the chat room.
Speaker 3: I'll include it with the show notes Drugs's weapons on
Speaker 3: bit shoot.
Speaker 2: I think that's the trailer as well.
Speaker 3: Anything with John Potash's name on it. Again, pronouncing it
Speaker 3: that way so you'll remember how to spell it anyway.
Speaker 3: Uh yeah, Look, all of his work is valuable. Drugs,
Speaker 3: his weapons, this new documentary, which I'll have him tell
Speaker 3: you about one more time, and even even his work
Speaker 3: on Tupac. As much as I gotta be honest with you, John,
Speaker 3: I wanted to.
Speaker 2: Reject it a little bit.
Speaker 3: I wanted to go along with part of it and
Speaker 3: say maybe you went too far. And then after I
Speaker 3: watched this, this film you put together, which you said
Speaker 3: was the first one you ever put together. Yeah, I
Speaker 3: don't want to argue with you anymore. So great evidence,
Speaker 3: great stuff. He puts a lot of research behind what
Speaker 3: he does. It's not just about speculation, although it might
Speaker 3: cause you to speculate about what's really going on. So
Speaker 3: the Ocelli Effects done for tonight, John one more time,
Speaker 3: John Potest dot Com?
Speaker 2: Anything else you want to throw in here?
Speaker 6: No, just said the shots you janks. The Pandemics is
Speaker 6: being released on July fifth. Look for it on Amazon
Speaker 6: Prime and two B and whatever other channel, and you
Speaker 6: might want to look for it on Google Play, Google
Speaker 6: TV and stuff, well.
Speaker 2: Wherever you can get it. And I'll tell you this,
Speaker 2: If you can get it and.
Speaker 3: Download it and keep a copy of it, I would
Speaker 3: do so because who knows they might disappear this work.
Speaker 3: I mean, I'm not trying to make you worry, John,
Speaker 3: but it might. We live in an age where if
Speaker 3: you can't get a hold of a copy of this
Speaker 3: and hold it in your hand or hold it on
Speaker 3: your own computer.
Speaker 2: You never know they might disappear it