Good morning, everybody and welcome to the highly Civilization as long as it lass not last much longer, but we'll get to that in a minute. Now,. Did you see what I haven't? Let's just documents paper printed from my own new hp printer as wifi and everything and everything's going well today. Nothing can stop me Possibly an alien invasion, but if you like to raise your spirits today, you do, all you need is a cup or mug or a glass or take your jealous side of the canteen joke flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite. good. I like coffee, enjoy. We now. for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better

on this planet and beyond. It's called the simultaneous sip that happens now. That is the happiness of a new printer. That's working perfectly! So thank you hp for the help. Let's go private over here and over here, a local sara, your private. Now Well, let's see everything happening in the news outlets see find the front looks like your prince on both sides, so I dunno what the hell I'm doing now was it a few? ago wont. Let me ask you this idea to do a little check of sanity here.

Am I the only one who noticed that, just a few weeks ago a lot of people were saying on twitter. I think, there's gonna be a you f, o event to distract us from the news. did anybody see that besides me? I didn't imagine that right there were in fact there were okay, I'm seeing confirmations in the comments there were, in fact people saying I think, there's going to be a. U f o event to distract us from ukraine and inflation So in the news it's possible that another planet is watching earth. As a is becoming conscious and they think it would be a good show- maybe maybe. So, as you know, There was a

a long cylindrical object of forty thousand feet over last year. And so by an ordered, a shot down. we don't know what it is, but it's a long cylindrical object. And I asked myself this if we were actually living in a simulation supposes. Reality is just a simulation and I wanted to send you a message: gunnison foreshadowing, How how would it send you if we are a simulation, how it send you the message that your planet is screwed, I don't know, probably not work, because that would be greedy so prior to send you assign. So what way to do. It would be too send a long, cylindrical object to penetrate

there earth in place in alaska, near alaska called and I'm not making this up come down. few m t o doubly when they brought it down and come down all the way down come down. Now. That's how I do it If I were in charge of the simulation- and I wanted to tell you- your planet is totally screwed and sudden that long cylindrical object to penetrate mother earth and come down. That is now, there's no word on which member of the military are going to retrieve the wreckage but I'm guessing seamen. Seven, I think they're to send the seamen to get the wreckage and come down so we're with Kirby was asked.

Ruby binds guy, why did they bring this one down when they didn't bring the other one down and he gave a good reason? I didn't think to be a good reason. I thought I was gonna be: oh, we had to shoot us down, so it didn't look bad politically. I thought I was going to be some political reason right, some like bs political reason, but it turns out. There is a very good logical reason. why they shot this one down soon, whereas the other one they waited, and is that it's the size of the year the pay because the other one was three buses and if you job three buses on us,

Huge baron area in the united states is going to have a lot of debris field, but if you take something down over a huge on populated area in the united states, that's the size of a car not as much debris, totally convincing reason totally condemn noah, payload, meaning just the structure this- attached to it. That's maybe the worst reason I've ever heard, because, from the perspective of the entire united states, the difference in debris, field between three buses and one car is not really significant, really significant. So we know that were being lied to, but maybe just for political purposes and here's. My next question.

how many of these things have been flying around all the time. Did you think it's a coincidence whether we found want to shoot down just one bided needs looked up at the exact time, thereby didn't want. look like he could be decisive. There was And over alaska right where you want it to be so how lucky they? gotta do over how lucky really or was it now, of course, on twitter people are posting videos of other ufos. Look just like I'm not sure I would believe any of the other videos that look just like it was cylindrical objects, but I would just note that there are a lot of videos of said objects. I hadn't twitter, I'm not sure. I believe that the So what are you? What are you to make of this? How many of you think

it's an alien object regimes, alien, From another planet, oh damn it, nobody believes it a one again Oh, I was hoping that we will be far more accepting this. How about whether balloon who's gonna go with whether balloon anybody, whether balloon, apparently, could not navigate was unmanned into die, have sensors, and maybe maybe The blue. Now here is a question for you, and I dont know the answer this question. If he were to take an object like say a parachute, I must say that parachute yoga lifted up and we wind a hurricane or something? Is it possible,

any natural object to come from the ground and just flowed revenue space for a long period of can that ever happened just based on air currents alone? Now, Bigger I've seen the avenues in plastic trash bags or fly around for a while eureka. Haven't we all seen plastic trash bags flying around and it seems like they shouldn't stay up there, not at forty thousand feet. Why not? Why not? I would think at forty thousand feet or it'd be more likely cause it'd be greater wind I'm saying some people say yes, but most of you say now depends on the densely. Maybe maybe good couldn't whether balloon survivor, forty thousand probably scottish request,

Well, we don't know the answer to John sediment, senator fishermen, sir, the times is reporting the might be have some permanent mental problems because of his stroke in part, because maybe he didn't rest when he should have. Instead, he campaigned. What do you think of that? Do you think permanently disabled himself by campaigning possible. And do you wanna senator who would make that bad of a decision? Well, he would have made a decision, While he was disabled right because we don't know, the quality is thinking of that point So it looks like, as a glutton greenwell points out that once again

Third time in a row, the corporate news has lied to us to change the result of an election, so you got hunters laptop, you ve got the russia collusion and you ve got now that the fishermen of fishermen's fine he'll be fine. So that's three cases where they corporate news apparently, and this being greenwell stake, apparently lied to you intentionally to change the results of the election, that That's so ordinary now it does the image shock me does it is able Well, just like so beaten down by we're all like abused spouses at this point, You don't know why we won't leave. You just get used everything

I mean what you get used to it. Well, yeah they do that still happening for decades. Probably us I remember the reporter who got attacked for reporting honestly that he didn't seem to vote to be able to communicate, and everybody to know you bad reporter, you're not supposed to say you honestly think he couldn't communicate you with you when you doctor is now much say about that projects urges correct me if I'm wrong, but we still don't know exactly why James o keefe was put on paid leave by the board of project virtuous right. That is as still true that we don't know Let me ask you this. How many believes that he showed a video there proves that pfizer's

doktor gave function, research. How many of you blew? That's your movie in your movie? Is this a true statement that the undercut. Video proves at pfizer was involved with ghana function. How interesting you're all saying now, but some are saying Some say us some say now now, good. How could we all watch the same stuff, and some of you think it was proven and some like it wasn't that I have a hypothesis for what the drama is all about you ready for this. This is just speculation. This is reg speculation,

shouldn't put too much credibility, but it goes like this element get a fact check from you. Did James o keefe, presented yo as evidence slash prove their pfizer is doing or was interested in ghana function reason did he presented as them be doing, gave a function. We now look at your answers to some yes or no. I thought you ass. I thought it was presented in a way that you were supposed to interpret it as gave a function. Recent now most of you said that that wasn't on the video so I saw most of you say that the video didn't say that, but many

we were saying that he clubs that says that would there be, would that be grounds for the board to remove him, because I gotta think pfizer's coming after all of them with lawyers, you don't think the board of project. Very us ass, a lawyer saying Your guy is making this claim. The video he's using for his evidence doesn't support their claim. You're, just making up a thing, accusing us but when the video you shout doesnt support the claim, if you're the board, would you remove James o keefe over that? I would. I would if I were the border projects. Where does I would have removed in romania You know why, because I wouldn't want to be associated with a huge, The liability to Pfizer I know what you're going to say because I've been here before

Are you gonna, say pfizer's paying me now There's not paying me no. Or you could say, I'm a secret democrat and I hate project veritas. no. I think they do useful stuff, I'd like to see more of it, but I would have removed them. I would have removed and based On- only what I know right just based on what I know just watching the video and watching his claims. I think I would remove them now that there also destroys project very tells us that I would have destroyed project berytus over that. That's that's how I would have done Anybody else who else if they were on the board would have fired him and destroyed project very task over this. I would have.

I'll keep in mind were wildly speculating, so might my assumption is there were not accurate, who were not accurate about? What's going on in their baby, be all kinds of things we ve never heard of so I wouldn't take my speculation to be very important, but I can tell you as clearly as I can then I would have removed in the fire on the board just over what I've seen. But this is me. You're mileage might differ now have I demonstrated to your satisfaction that I don't know thus for money. Could this more obvious at this point, because you know that I know the mai audio wants me to support him right. That's what you want you want me to support.

and I know that I'm going to lose audience because I said that, but I'm going to do it anyway, because it's obvious and it would be stupid frankly to have a different opinion. I mean it is right there in front of you. There's there's nothing to quest and yeah anyway. What I saw in the pfizer video was a dilbert situation in which here's, how I imagine the meeting went again, pure speculation, so this is based on my my dilber filter on business and I imagine the pfizer baby, the undercover video referenced. So the thing we know is somebody brought up gain of function, research in a meeting. That's all we know. The second thing we know is that the executive, who talked about it on the undercover video, was not in favour of it.

Why would we assume everybody else was in favour of it, but why would you make the assumption that anybody was in favour of it? That without would be unsupported here? Here's how I imagine the meeting I imagine a typical boss and then imagine typical engineers and scientists is just tipp local business people in the bathing. What does the boss say this to be a typical boss thing right, right, We have to be ready for the next variant. What would a ball say that? Do you think a boss, whatever say hey, we ve gotta, be really ready for the next variant to make make the next so called vaccination. Yes, yes, the most obvious thing abbas who say is we have to be ready for that? So he tells the staff are

These are your orders. You ve gotta be ready for the next one. Now, what did the scientists say? It's a typical meaning in a typical dilber accompany the boss says you have to be ready for the next variant. What the scientists say there's only one thing that a scientist says in that situation. Sure if you want to do gain of function research we could be ready right and would that scientist be recommending gain of function. Research in that context,. maybe maybe, but maybe it was just the response to stupid boss. There is only one way we can get ready for the unknown wishes. We would have to say The unknown prepare for a based on the simulation.

And then maybe we have a chance, but if we don't do gave a function, research stop asking us to be ready for something, that's unknown. That would be the most typical business conversation in the world. Now, here's another way could have gone Then again, wild speculation that this is just something I would have said. If you put me in that meeting, here's where I would have said I would have said all right, there's no way to know be ready for the future without gaining function. Research, and we know that gave their function. Research is the most dangerous thing you could ever do right. So for everybody would agree with that something, and then I would say, but. Is there no way to do gave research? Research can function. It is a really no way or what the obvious that the world lab did it the wrong way? For example,

the war lab correct me. If I'm wrong at the end of the shift, people went home right, they won from their dangerous. you biological lab to their house every single night, all of the employees and this dangerous people place- maybe they showered, but all The cleaning grew. Everybody just goes home.

Now I would say this is what I would have said in the meeting alright. So obviously we would never do that, but suppose just suppose speculate. We created a lockdown top secret place where only things could come in and nothing could leave. Nothing could leave it's just a secure location away from everything, so you can go airdrop supplies and stuff and even the garbage wouldn't leave. Even the garbage would stay somewhere locally, no matter how much that was so nothing would leave, including the people, but when they were done and a person wanted to leave, There would be taken to a neighbouring place where they're not near the lab stuff, but their near by also secluded. There would stay there for one month. themselves, wouldn't even be a doctor. Their testing themselves for the whole month

and after one month of big alone than their release back so that I say to my boss right if we worked with the government and we get all the approvals. and we did it in a way that literally nobody can leave what year without being completely safe. Would we be ok with that, because this is such a dangerous situation that we have to get ahead of this next variant? Would that be irresponsible, not as brainstorming idea, When you, you floated an idea like that to see what people think is wrong with it. That's how it works. You don't floated idea and say we're done. You put it out there and then people say no, that's still too scary. I'd rather take the. That's bobo, but there is no indication in the pfizer undercover video that there were serious about doing, there's only indication. Somebody mentioned that.

I would have mentioned it. If you put me in that meeting, I would have mentioned because they see Obviously to bring up you. I wanted to rule Adele probably would have. I probably would have ruled them, but I would have it because you have to look at all the options. There we go sunshine, felder, stop helping them all my good, it is so hard not to use profanity, I wanna go if I knew so hard right now call bit, because I think you're you're the symptom of everything that's wrong with the world, yet you're completely offended that I would give cover to somebody who you don't like I'm going to give cover to everybody?

you know like not just her. If you watch me long enough, you know I always take the the defend the the most guilty person or a guilty. Person. You know, I always argue the other side. If you can't deal with that, you are not intellectually capable of understanding the stream. If you don't understand that both sides have issues are worth looking at your just due to go back to where the npc is hang out, the the actual people with brains and minds and stuff, they can talk about both sides of issues, the rest of you. Maybe you need to be somewhere else. Obviously this isn't the place for you well, let's talk about the the new york times is going after kamala harris per yard, so apparently

I did some research and they talked to dozens of Democrats in the white house and on capitol hill and pretty much. They all seem to have the same opinion, of course, the new york times. That cobbler harris has not risen to. The challenge is not risen to the challenge. and they didn't even quote any republicans in their story. So as a story, a completely negative story about calmly harris and they didn't even need to talk to a republican. They got dozens of people to say negative things all on her team now is there any chance, she's gonna be the vice president. What do you think. How'd you get here. Here is a problem, though, when you see that she is completely incompetent, you're automatic common sense goes to then obviously the replacing

here's the argument for why they won't go with war replace her years, why? You would never be find somebody less capable than Joe Biden. If you look no matter how argue look she's the only person less capable than Joe Biden, and that's That'S- that for one requirement number one requirement. Is you can't be more impressive than the top of the pig ticket. and Joe Biden brings down that level so long, and this is not a joke. This is not a joke. This is the actual way it works. The president has to be more impressive than the vice president period now, except you're, not gonna, see anybody violate the rule. Who, in the world as calmly harris would everybody agree. Everybody both democrats and republicans, everybody agrees, she's, even less cable,

well, that is, can you even imagine anybody else in national politics who would fit that bill? Nobody fetterman said settlements is a funny answer, but you're right, you're right he'd be the one person who would fit that target, but he's sort of white and male and that's not going to work. So if I find somebody who's a person of color, female and and less capable than Joe Biden pretty hard for her to do so, I'm going to predict that the the sensible of vice president, has to be worse than the president is Biden continues to run and I'm going to say he will listen. Let's see your opinions, I say: bye,

It will run go. What do you say because he's president he wants to that's, probably all that matters yeah, mostly ss. We could be surprised. Would you be surprised if he didn't? I wouldn't be surprised. but my prediction is run and the reason I think you'll run is that he beat trump once so. I think so. It, and then they also say that yeah, the Democrats believe Biden's done an unusually good job on the economy because they can lie with numbers. They just show you misleading numbers, and the Democrats think everything's going great so I will keep watch now, but I think she's going anywhere. I use a question I asked if you are, but if your country, you was

he attacked, let's say you're a ukrainian you're ukrainian citizen And you see a russian soldiers that you know is russian soldier is attacking you country. Can you kill less holder that legal. Because I don't know so, a civilian can kill. Adding soldier who they just happened to see walking across the field right. If they captured him, they could suppose a caption. Could they kill what? If what if it were easy to capture him, but they decided to kill him. Would that be illegal because that would be a war crime, but it's a war crime but they're not

they're, not soldiers, so if a non soldier kills you is that illegal right now, that's ukraine, so I dunno what the rules are. Their supposed suppose is america. Smell from ukraine in america. Let's say america is invaded by a foreign force and you see one of their members. Can you kill lepers? What do you think. If you're actually be invaded by air force, you can't kill him. Look, I'm sure you are. Where they are unsure, because I am unsure as well. I don't know the incident. Let's say that, let's say they're not in uniform, but it's an invading force that doesn't wear uniforms. Let's say it's a force that doesn't wear uniforms. What are you going to do? You can't kill anybody because nobody's in a uniform

Now have we not declared that the cartels are a terrorist organisation? I dont think its official right congress has an official but has been proposed that the. Cartels are a terrorist organisation. Now, let me let me change from invading force to a terrorist. Say you spot a terrace that he knows the terrorists. Somehow you know you know they're a terrorist. Can you kill him or do you have to call the call the police. Well, let's say they're not in the act of doing the terrorists actually will say they are let loose, You see them actively preparing for, but out there not quite at the moment of the bomb. Goes off, but you see them actively preparing a you know.

If you alerted authorities, there might not be time for the authorities to respond, but they're not they're, not quite push the button. Yet. But there are preparing the bomb and important. is your van and are heading toward where they're going to go. But let's say you catch them, somehow, you're, just a civilian! Can you kill them? Can you kill them. A terrorist known terrorist who is going to blow up a building, you kill people? Can you kill him because you're not doing it yet you're not doing it yet? I don't think you can. I think the answer is no. I think the answer is no. That would be I think so here is what we need. We need a little clarity is fairly clear that our government is not protecting us from the cartel. Would you all agree with that? Your government is not protecting you from the cartel

At what point does your second amendment kick in and you can just start killing everybody who sells fentanyl. whether their american or not. Because even an american who sells Fentanyl that came across the border is working with the cartels that are working either directly or indirectly, with the cartels that would put them on the other side of the the war. Now, if we agree that its terrorism an hour to just Let's say there was a sentinel house on my blog and I got all the dad's whither air their heirs and we surrounded it one day and we just let it up just killed everybody inside and the police carbonate arrest. This, of course, and then they look inside they see it's all cartel members that a crime, because the moon, the cartel members who are getting ready to sell sentinel our mass.

earth they are killing americans you're, just getting ready to do it, and there is no doubt that there are going to do it. There's no question who happens next. There are people who sell self and they got a big batch in their they're gonna sell it. People are going to die there is. There is no question about what happens. That's easy to know you can't murder them or kill them wouldn't be burger might well here is the problem were going, we're gonna be there we'd, better figure this out, because the government seems to have no will to handle this, and there will be a point where americans decide to do it themselves. we're not right there but we're heading towards their at sixty five miles an hour, we're approach,

to point where somebody with a nay are is gonna wipe out a bunch of cartel suspected people, and then here's support this fun put beyond the jury, but beyond the jury No way no way, I'm not having listened to the evidence won't even listen to the evidence and I'll tell you the front, knock, knock and listen to the evidence. If they took out a cartel members self defense end of story, I don't care what they were doing. I don't care if they were family members in the house. I don't care, I don't care. If there was collateral damage, no longer they would get off, and I would like every american to make the same commitment.

The american kills a member of the cartel or anybody dealing sentinel, that you would promise that, if you're on a jury, you would not convict them under any circumstance, no matter what law they broke Because your government has abandoned you on fentanyl, let us be clear: the government has abandoned you. I do not recommend vigilantes. I oppose it. Do not recommended probably going to happen, and that is what I do recommend if it happens, don't put him in jail if they kill cartel members. Even maybe if they have some collateral damage, I would go that far Because it is a war and your governments not protecting you, you do have a right to protect yourself. You do have there

It's just not legal at the moment, but you have the right because the right is independent of the law. This is one of those cases where it wouldn't really matter what the law says. You're right to protect yourself is unassailable. It doesn't matter what law everybody has doesn't matter. What your constitution says. You can protect yourself in your family period. We all a great right. That's not that's! Not a couple. station, though so I'm just going to promise that, if you put me on an a jury trial for somebody who murdered a member of a cartel, I will not vote under any circumstance. I will not vote guilty now. Of course, this guarantees, I will not be on a jury trial. Am I right? no no authority would allow be other trial. But you should do the same.

Taxes- you just with that, you would not convict anybody for killing a cartel number or offence in all dealer doll recommended this, very important do not recommend it and by the way you I'm sure you know by now that this live stream has been democratized? You can't even talk about this topic without getting due monetized. So I'm doing this for free working for free. Today, as I did the other day when I mentioned vigilantism yeah, that's immediate demonetization is very expensive, it's very expensive to say something, that's useful and true, very expensive, but.

Shouldn't you killed my son in law or by a subsidy, so if that killed, my steps are not properly shut up about this, but I didn't started. I didn't start the fight, but If any of you vote to convict somebody who kills a fentanyl dealer, you got a lot of explaining to do. You have a lot of explaining to do because. Well, I don't have to say anything about that. Alright, that I don't say everybody does. It will be. I see anybody disagree with me is there. Anybody would disagree with the the jury idea of not connecting them. Anybody against them.

I think you're all on the same page see this is what's so remarkable out about this situation is remarkable and that the public is all on the same page and the government won't act. The only possible reason for that is that they're already bought off. Oh excuse me for a second I'm going to take off my microphone to bring my whiteboard over here hold on.

The. back in action, so here's the thing I worry about. Worry is the wrong word, because this is a fact I m I'm going to show you isn't speculation. This is why everything has to go. let's say you're a cartel and you

want to sell some stuff in the united states if you're they doing it on a small scale and there's not much harm. Yet. The only thing you have to bribe is maybe so maybe a police officer and a small town. Maybe slowly, bribery need because you're not doing much harm yet, but as your harm increases in your solemn orphans in all in your killing tens of thousands of americans here the only way you're going get away with, that is to increase your bribery and your control. So you going have to bribe you away. From local police officers to maybe council people too. Maybe stay senators to maybe congress. The bigger fanciful gets. The more they're gonna have to bribe to stay in business.

At some point they have to control congress or go out of business because it gives the cartels have to either grower die, just like any other this. Every business has to either grow or shrink that nothing ever stays the same. For years and years everything grows or shrinks. The cartels have to grow. They have to grow, to be competitive with the other cartels they have to grow to be competitive with the mexican government it should. It ever become less corrupt that they have to increase their power all the time, because they're increasing their harm, so the will to fight them is going up with the harm and they have to work against the will to fight them through bribery because they don't have an army per se. Not a standing army. So it is inevitable that if we don't deal with them, they will own congress eventually. Why

congress not acting. You can say they have standing armies or I'll. Give you that Why is congress not acting in the most obvious way, which is to go directly after the cartels. there's only one reason I can think of there were already here. That's the only reason I can think of because the debate. Doesnt really make sense source, now happening, it's not like that, even a debate on this. going on, and I can't think of anything else would be so Your best case scenario is there were not there yet, but if we don't worry,

There's only one way this can go, there will sell nor frontal more harm. They will have to bribe higher and higher officials to stay in business. Otherwise will send the military eventually they have to own congress. It would have to do it as a business strategy. They don't have a choice. They have to own congress. the banana business? It's also them where they just doesn't seem like you cause you you're, probably still down here somewhere, but they have to get to that point. They can't survive unless they take over the american lawmakers. Has anybody ever explain that to you before The first time we are learning that it is a fight to the death. The fight with the cartels is to the death or control.

it's not to death. I suppose they either will control us or we will destroy them. They have no other options in the long run in the short run they just they do their business as usual and try to grow in the long run. It's us or them never that before did you yeah? If you doubt it just look at mexico, the the cartels had to take over the entire mexican government they had to so they did so they did. They have to take over the american government they have to. Maybe they already have. Maybe they already have. I don't know it's possible. I mean the evidence was just they have there's more evidence that they have that that they have now it could

That is only indirectly because nobody wants to. Nobody wants to be the target, so it could be that alright. Well, that's where we're at, but I'd rather talk about you. Fo is going down and come down. That's the fun story. All right! Ladies and gentlemen. This concludes my prepared. remarks? I say goodbye to the universe and then talk to my beloved community locals And I'll talk you tomorrow, you tube us live streaming. Overseen by for now.