This is a fact. The government doesn’t actually oppress anyone. I have a hilarious bit about this that I would love to tweet about but I’m saving it for the special. I’m learning to not spill the beans. pic.twitter.com/HEvsgIWPY0
Have you ever heard the phrase, "anticipatory obedience"? It's a phenomenon where people comply with authority more than what is actually being asked of them, essentially following rules that don't actually exist in anticipation of what authority, or even just social conformity seems to want from them. Very often this is about not wanting to draw negative attention to yourself, right, fitting in rather than sticking out. And very often it's about naturally authoritarian people using the authority of the collective to police other people and make themselves feel a little more powerful. That's what a Karen is, right, somebody sticking their nose in other people's business unnecessarily being a nuisance but still feeling justified because they believe the authority or social conformity is on their side.
In 1978, the former Chech Republic President, Vaclav Haval wrote a parable about a greengrocer living in a communist dictatorship. In the story, after the rise of an authoritarian government, the greengrocer started seeing more and more people putting pro-government propaganda posters in their windows. Now, eventually, the greengrocer who is not a fan of the authoritarian government ends up putting a sign in his own shop window, not because he feels idealistically compelled to but simply because he sees the rise in popularity of this narrative and he wants to be left alone. The idea is if you perform some sort of symbolic gesture to demonstrate your compliance with the authority, then you'll be left alone to live your life. So from his perspective, he's kind of just waving a white flag. The problem is from everybody else's perspective, they're seeing what he saw, lots and lots of windows with scary amounts of propaganda in them, essentially inflating everybody's impression of just how popular this ideology is and just how much power it actually has. Now imagine being a powerful financial interest today who wants to shift the narrative on a certain subject. You essentially have the technology to put 100 million signs in 100 million shop windows overnight. Now, if you also happen to have control of large segments of the corporate media, all you really have to do is sprinkle in a handful of popular bought and paid-for social media influencers. In a few hours, you will have thousands and thousands of people organically making their own videos, and posting their own comments supporting your narrative. Some in an attempt to fit in, eager to signal their moral virtue to the rest of us by how quickly they conform to the new narrative. Others simply relishing the opportunity to kick down by attacking, bullying, shaming, and guilt-tripping those who remain who have not yet conformed. Now in the video, I Stitch, the guy says one 1/3 of the traffic, which as far as I know is an arbitrary number and he's talking about Chinese phone farms. But considering how powerful a tool controlling the narrative actually is, if you really believe that this is the most sophisticated version of this technology that currently exists, well, then I don't know, you and me live in different versions of reality.
Everyone mistakenly thinks that Hamas controls Palestine. That's not true at all. There are 3 different areas that were drawn up with the original partition. It's the West Bank, which is totally under military rule by Israel. And then there's the Gaza Strip which is like an open-air prison which they bomb the sh** out of every couple of years and Hamas controls that area. And then there's Jerusalem, which is an international city center that both Arabs and Jews live in. But the West Bank has been occupied militarily since 1967 and it's complete martial law. There are checkpoints. All political parties are illegal. You can't . . . having a gun is like the least of it. You can't hold a flag. You can't belong to a political party. You literally can't do sh** if you're a Palestinian. You just have to sit there and submit. Even if you share a photo of someone who was killed by an Israeli soldier, you go to jail, and you go to jail for the [number] of months that . . . yeah, based on the shares and the likes of the photo, they'll penalize you more and put you in prison for longer and longer. Of someone who died, and they'll claim that you're sharing a martyr and inciting people to commit suicide. And on behalf of Palestinians, you go to jail. And they put them in jail. There's a 99.9% conviction rate. Kids are tortured. Kids are in prison. It is absolutely insane. The first day that we were there, we went to the funeral of some guy, some farmer, shot by Israeli forces, and we went to the funeral. It was horrible. All the women are wailing and crying. As we were leaving, the Israeli Forces had set up a checkpoint right outside of this dude's house and started tear-gassing and shooting rubber bullets at people who were simply attending the funeral. Just to punish people for attending the funeral.
We went to another girl's house, whose name is Aya, who got shot in the vagina for peacefully protesting at some protest. They shot 200 people that day. One guy next to her died. Another guy was paralyzed. They have a policy that's called "Shoot to Cripple" where they shoot guys in the dicks. Yeah, it's f***ing nuts.
Propaganda does not have to be false, but it does tend to be a little simplistic.
He was going to be the subject of an expedited review at the request of his department colleagues and he attached their letter to him.
None of them had talked to him directly. This is about 25 of his Department colleagues. He hadn't heard from any of them. They sent this letter to the Dean accusing him not only of telling his students not to wear masks in violation of university policy, and they said that a New York State law and there was no such law . . .
and I am not intimidated by students who were wearing masks in class, but we were online so nobody was wearing a mask. But they then jumped into the wild blue yonder by accusing him of explicit hate speech, attacks on students and others in their [school] community; advocating for an unsafe learning environment; assailing his students with non-evidence-based theories, which means conspiracy theories; and microaggressions and aggressions. So, this was like the censorship Trifecta.
I was a Covid heretic because I questioned masking.
I had sinned against Woke etiquette, right, and hate speech, and I can explain what they meant by that. And I was guilty of conspiracy theory. I mean this was really an amazing document.
The Dean went ahead and ordered the review, saying that he had no choice because the university's lawyers had told him he must, which is, I think, probably significant. Let's put that aside.
Meanwhile, I wrote back to my colleagues. I rebutted their letter point by point. I asked for a retraction and an apology. They ignored me. I sent a follow-up letter. I asked the same thing. I said by November 20, please retract this and apologize; there's not a word of truth to it. They ignored me, so I sued them for libel. And the libel suit is ongoing. And one of the reasons I wanted to talk to you is I wanted to discuss the status of that suit.
What is the status?
Well, they got themselves a lawyer, and they filed a motion to dismiss. Ordinarily, judges rule on motions to dismiss right away, but the judge in this case waited a whole year. And when he finally ruled, he ruled that we had not proved actual malice, which kind of blew my lawyer's mind because it was abundantly obvious that there was malice here. So we had to appeal. We appealed. We appealed to the Intermediate Appellate Court. They got back to us a few months later. They agreed that there was actual malice, but, and this is what was really surprising, but really dangerous. They ruled that what my colleagues wrote about was pure opinion and therefore protected by the 1st Amendment.
So what you're saying isn't protected by the 1st Amendment, but when they falsely accuse you of doing something, that's protected by the 1st Amendment even though the things that you were saying have the science on your side and you were correct.
All I was doing was recommending that people read the science What's dangerous about this suit is that the decision has set a precedent, whereby anyone in the United States who is accused of libel, and point to this decision and say, "This is just my opinion." So you can say, I know for a fact that Jimmy Dore has sex with goats and he has child pornography on his computer. This is a fact. I know this," and then you sue me for libel, as you have every right to do, and I'll point to this case and I'll say, "Well, this is my opinion." And the court will say, well, yeah, there's a precedent for this, and so it is. So it means that the have-not, those who are weaker in the system, are now at a real serious disadvantage because if this decision stands it will be possible to dismiss any libelous suit on those spurious grounds. Now, we have appealed again. We have appealed to the Court of Appeals in Albany, which is the highest court in New York State, and we don't know yet if they're going to take it. If they don't take it, it's over. I will have lost. That decision will stand as a precedent, and my colleagues will have got away scot-free, although what they wrote about me meets the classic definition of defamation. They made claims that they claim were factual claims, but now they'll be able to say that this is just our opinion, our point of view.
Wow. That's quite a story. I've heard other stories like this from Dr. Jay Bhattachara and Dr. Khierarty. They were shocked to see their own colleagues turn their back on the value of protecting ideas through vigorous debate and freedom of speech, and they all turned their back on it and tried to cancel you, they canceled them. And they tried to get some people fired. Well, you're not allowed to teach that course anymore.
Well, that's right. I'm not allowed to teach the course on propaganda. I have friends and acquaintances throughout the hemisphere who've been fired for various, you know, for Covidian sins, sins against so-called social justice. This is a very, very . . . we're at a frightening place right now it seems to me. Free speech and academic freedom have never been more at risk. And all those Democratic essentials that concern free speech and open debate are now treated as crimes. I'm sure you've noticed that the media coverage of Robert F. Kennedy's campaign. My mind is blown by the shrillness and unanimity of the media, of our free press, the liberal media, and every single outlet out there, every single newspaper, every single magazine, every TV network, they're all saying the same things, which is a clear indication of propaganda. And it's all hysterically negative about Bobby Kennedy's inclination to question or complicate official narratives, whether it's on vaccination generally or the Covid vaccine or Ukraine, or school shootings, you name it because he departs from the permitted narrative, he is a thought criminal. He is a domestic terrorist. He certainly should not be allowed to debate with Joe Biden. You know, Peter Hotez, the fraud who is telling us all to get vaxx'd and boosted for 3 years, the guy, everything he's said has turned out to be dead wrong, he tweets a Vice article attacking Bobby and Joe Rogan. They invited him on to debate, and, of course, he weasels out, but the media is treating him as courageous, saying he should not debate him. He's a victim of harassment, no doubt, by white supremacists.
. . . and Russia.
But I can't believe, I'm in my early 70s, I've seen a lot of things. I never thought I would see the Western press across the board treat debate in a political campaign as a no-no. This is really reminiscent of the press under Dr. Goebbels. Now, having said that I can be accused of trivializing the Holocaust, I guess.
They did that to Bobby Kennedy. He said that about Anne Frank.
Right, right. He said that if Hitler had had the kind of sophisticated surveillance capabilities that they have now, she and her family would not have been able to hide out in the secret annex, right? He was immediately accused of trivializing the Holocaust, even of Holocaust denial. And he apologized, which I thought he shouldn't. I did a Substack post about it. It's not for me to say what he should do but the fact is that he did nothing wrong, said nothing wrong. God knows, he said nothing hateful or even incorrect. But we've come to the point where you really have to watch what you say and that is reminiscent of life under totalitarianism.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. talks about Operation Mockingbird, the CIA’s covert propaganda program to manipulate the mainstream media and the American people through the use of numerous assets who. RFK Jr. brought it up during an interview with Lex Fridman who was completely clueless. Media analyst Mark Dice has the story.
THE CIA AND THE MEDIA, by Carl Bernstein How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up
1:37. The CIA is the biggest funder of Journalism around the world. The biggest funder is through USAID.
2:52. The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide inteTandigence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media Outlets.
3:19. The United States funds journalism in almost every country in the world it owns newspapers it has journalists has thousands and thousands of journalists on its payroll they're not supposed to be doing that in the United States but in 2016 President Obama changed the the law to make it legal now for the CIA to propagandize Americans . . .
through the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act 2012 Obama needed to modernize it so that it would be fully legal for the CIA to spread fake news in American Media.
3:52. There are certain press organs that have been linked to the agency to the people who run those organs like The Daily Beast, now Rolling Stones. The editor of Rolling Stones Noah Shachtman has deep relations with the intelligence community. Salon, the Daily Kos . . . .
5:38. I actually think that the field of Journalism has shamed itself in recent years because the principal newspapers in this country and the television stations the Legacy Media have abandoned their tradition which was . . .
they have abandoned all sense of integrity and morality.
7:07. Sadly the only time that this is ever been mentioned on Fox News was 2 years ago on Tucker Carlson's show when Glenn Greenwald said this,
If you go and Google, and I hope your viewers do, Operation Mockingbird, what you will find is that during the Cold War these agencies used to plot about how to clandestinely manipulate the news media to disseminate propaganda to the American population. They used to try to do it secretly. They don't even do it secretly anymore. They don't need Operation Mockingbird. They literally put John Brennan, who works for NBC, and James Clapper, who works for CNN, and tons of FBI agents right on on the payroll of these news organizations. They now shape the news openly to manipulate and deceive the American population.
8:00. I'll leave a link in the description below to my previous in-depth report it's rather lengthy about RF Kennedy Jr raising the alarm of about astrazine the herbicide that is found in drinking water across the country that has been found to convert testosterone into estrogen he and many others believe may be responsible for the gender dysphoria epidemic in society and just as I predicted he mentioned that on the Jordan Peterson's podcast which has since been censored from YouTube because he was talking about vaccines then the all-knowing fact checkers claimed is atrazine in the water supply contributing to sexual dysphoria in kids well they say of course not yes I'm sure that BPA by spinal a and phthalates which are synthetic estrogen found in Plastics which are often used in food packaging toys and even clothes has nothing to do with it either right oh wait what's this a 2005 article from New Scientist magazine title gender-bending chemicals found in to feminize boys
9:00. Gender-bending chemicals mimicking the female hormone estrogen can disrupt the development of baby boys suggest the first evidence linking certain chemicals in everyday Plastics to affects in humans. The chemicals implicated are phthalates which make Plastics more pliable in many Cosmetics toys baby feeding bottles and paints and can leak into water and food.
9:28. Then three years later, other studies confirmed these same concerns.
Chemicals commonly found in food wrapping makeup and baby powders are having a gender-bending effect feminizing male populations of Wildlife and humans a scientific report reveals. "Chemicals Feminizing Males, Study Suggests," Toronto Star Diana Zlomislic, December 9, 2008.
9:45. This from 2009, "Two-Year-Olds at Risk from Gender-Bending Chemicals, Report Says," Owen Bowcott, The Guardian, November 6, 2009. You're not supposed to say anything wrong about someone with gender dysphoria. It's an orientation. It's no different than someone being left-handed or right-handed.
