Gavin Nascimento Palestine & Israel: the Pursuit of Truth

(0:00 - 4:45) You are now listening to the Here For The Truth Podcast, hosted by Joel Rafiti and Jurassinos. All right, guys, welcome back to Here For The Truth. I'm Joel Rafiti. I've got my co-host Jurassinos with me as always. Difficult, difficult subject to broach. We try to be very careful and waiting for the right guest and the right time to approach this subject. Obviously, a lot of tragedy and horror has taken place on all fronts in regards to what's currently happening between Palestine and Israel. And I think what's more important now than ever is that we can see through, I guess, the veil of our own emotional filters and start to form some kind of foundation of truth and of reality in this regard. And that's what we've tried to do here with this conversation with our dear friend and highly respected researcher, Gavin Nascimento. So we hope you enjoy this episode. All right, everybody, welcome back to the Here For The Truth Podcast. Today, we have our dear friend Gavin Nascimento returning. One of the most prolific truth-seeking researchers we personally know. He's joined us previously for three different episodes. Episode 17, discussing the history of the ruling elite. Episode 76, diving into eugenics and elitism and the history there. And also on episode 123, human identity beyond cultural constructs. Now, today he's joined us in an attempt to dissect a very topical, highly complex and highly controversial issue regarding the ongoing conflict between Palestine and Israel. Today, we'll be looking at a deep history into the conflict. Gavin will discuss his process in challenging his own beliefs on this subject. We're going to look at Zionism, the Rothschilds, the role of World War I, the British Empire, the whole concept of the Promised Land and so much more. Gavin, such a pleasure to have you back, man. Pleasure to be here, brother. Looking forward to this, man. Yeah, bro. This is a prickly pear to pull apart. So where do we begin? To say the least, I think the best place to begin for myself is naturally how I came about challenging my views on this. So way back in the day, probably a good 15, 20 years ago, when I had no interest whatsoever in doing what I'm doing today, I would never think I'd be doing any of this, but here we sit. And in the past, I had a Christian upbringing, not like a really meticulous, strict one, but loosely had these Christian beliefs and just as a result of a religious conviction, so kind of unthinking. And I was one of those people like, you only need to read the Bible. That's the source of all the knowledge, you know what I mean? Not to be a douchebag to the people who do say that. I totally get it. There's lots of good philosophy and there is also some good truth in stuff. But essentially, I had this religious conviction, this unthinking conviction that the state of Israel was kind of like this really benevolent, holy, endowed, godly chosen state. And it was just simply defending itself from this crazy state of Palestine. That's the image I had. Like I said, I knew nothing about politics, but that was just kind of the belief based on the narrow-minded approach I had. And then I had a friend, a really good buddy of mine. We grew up together and he's a first generation Pakistani, so he's a Muslim dude, but he was an American or is an American and came from Miami, speaks full on American and so on and so forth. And me and him were just very close friends. And one day, I don't know how this topic came about, but one day the topic came about and then he said, you know what's going on over there? They're being like brutally oppressed, the Palestinian people. And I'm like, Rez, and let me give him a shout out too. Love you, Rez. And one day the topic came up and then he was like, you know, the people there are being brutally oppressed. And I thought, Rez, come on, brother, you're Muslim. That's why you're saying this, what else could it be? I mean, of course, what else could it be? And then he said, no, look, man, just look into it. He didn't force anything on me. He's a very cool, easygoing dude. (4:45 - 5:02) And so I thought to myself, I know this dude. His integrity is upstanding. We've been through wars together. He's somebody that is, as Jason Basler, my other good friend would say, he's a moral billionaire. He's a really good dude. So I said, okay, let me look into this. (5:02 - 9:18) And as I began to look into it and go down this almost unending bottomless rabbit hole, I became aware of something entirely different, that the Zionist state of Israel is more of a Machiavellian state and it has a very duplicitous history behind it. And unfortunately, people, they just have very little understanding because it's so tribal. It's so polluted by religious politics and also just politics period, right? Conservative politics, liberal politics, and there's multiple layers to this deception. But as I began to explore it, what really disillusioned me was by looking into Jewish historians and actual Jewish military. So the people that have been to Palestine, the people that have been the occupational forces, all the way from higher ranking figures in the military to the lowest level dudes. And then when you start to see these repeated consistent patterns in what's happening to the Palestinian people coming from ex-Israeli themselves, who they have nothing to gain from doing so. Instead, they speak about often being ostracized and alienated from society in doing so. It's very difficult not to say, wow, okay, there's something totally different going on than what I've been led to believe. Hey man, can you start off just by explaining like Zionism, what it is, the history of it? Sure. So there's also a lot of people, they talk about like the past 100 years in relation to what's going on. But really where you have to start is several thousand years ago as documented in the Bible. So in the Bible, there's like where the concept of the promised land itself originates. It comes from the Bible. And let me actually go ahead and I'll bring up that screen for the sake of accuracy. If people can just bear with me for a moment. And in this verse, so it's in the first book of the Bible, which is all about the promised land, the proverbial promised land. And this originates, like I said, in the first book, which is the book of Genesis. Okay. And I know Wikipedia is not my favorite source, very heavily manipulated. All right. So we take a look over here and Wikipedia, don't get me wrong, it's full of all kinds of nonsense, but this is not a difficult thing to research a lot. The concept of the promised land, right? So in the Middle East, Abrahamic religions claim that God promised and subsequently gave to Abraham and several more times to his descendants, the promised land. Now that promised land is what we recognize today as Israel, okay, as Palestine and Israel. Now you see, you go a little bit further down and it explains the concept of the promised land is the central national myth of Zionism. So Zionism is not necessarily relegated to Jewish thought alone. It's oftentimes some of the most powerful proponents of Zionism historically have actually been Christians because they believe in basically the biblical narrative that this is God's chosen people. It's this land was imparted by God and it's a promise from God. And that's what makes it especially difficult to broach or to breach from a objective perspective because there's a lot of religious emotional interpretation involved. Now with that said, if we go a little bit deeper into it and we actually look, who is Abraham, right? The patriarch that God allegedly promised this land to. Abraham never in fact even came from the land of Palestine, which was back in the day was Canaan. It was a larger tract of land, but it encompassed Palestine and Israel. He in fact came from Southern Iraq. So now if we can for a moment just quiet our view of the religious interpretation here and think about this in the modern sense and with a moral compass. (9:18 - 11:04) Is there any right, let's say, specifically for a Christian demographic, let's say that you have the Muslim population and they say that in the Quran or they heard Allah and Allah said, look, we have a right to your land. That's crazy. Of course, it's morally indefensible by modern standards. It's totally unacceptable. Now as we go a bit more forward with this and we see in the Bible, in the book of Genesis, where it specifically arises, this claim, it's Genesis 15 verse 18. So the Lord's covenant with Abraham, right? On that day, the Lord made a covenant with Abraham and said to your descendants, I give this land. And this encompass, like I said, what we look at today is Israel and Palestine. So from this is where we can trace the historical Genesis of this claim and it's right. So it's very significant that we scrutinize this. So we try to understand it. Okay. So yeah, we have a book. Not everybody believes in the Bible and not everybody should be required to believe in the Bible. One of the basic tenants of historical humanity, just humanity throughout history is do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Is it right if somebody believes in something that you don't believe that they impose that on you? Of course not. Now what makes this further questionable, right? Is we see as the story progresses, we go to Deuteronomy and this starts to degenerate into an act of genocide. So now we have Deuteronomy 20 verses 16. And this is again in reference to the so-called lands that are being, and I quote, given to the descendants of Abraham. (11:05 - 12:21) And states do not leave alive anything that breathes, completely destroy them. And I know it's an ambiguous book. And so people come up with all kinds of radical interpretations in an effort to defend it. But we find this again in 1 Samuel 15 verses two through three, where they're talking about the descendants of Amalek, which is not necessarily in that exact vicinity, but it's in that region. And it talks about utterly destroying all that they had, including infants and sucklings and even animals. So my point in sharing that, right, is that's completely indefensible. And I recognize that this is a very complex place for anybody to go morally, because now you are caught in between your inborn morality, which says it's never okay to murder an innocent baby or embark on a campaign of genocide. We all know that this is not necessarily rocket science, but then you're caught in between that and then the interpretation of religious traditions. And so in that particular regard, it's so important for people to remember that basic tenet, the golden rule, to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. (12:21 - 16:47) Is it right to advocate any form of genocide, to steal any form of land, and then you can justify because you say that you're a holy book? So on the other side of that, if in the Quran, the interpretation is, oh, we can take this through an act of genocide, do you think that's okay? And the obvious answer to that is, no, it's not okay. And then just very quickly to wrap that up, we need to understand that there's 45,000 different denominations of Christianity. It is actually more than that, but that's a conservative estimate. So there's a very large number. That means there's 45,000 different interpretations. As I've spoken about before in this podcast, the Bible that we recognize today, this was tabulated and codified and put together under the Roman emperor Constantine the Great. So during the fourth century, and it was done for political expediency. There were radically different interpretations preceding that, but for the purpose of politics, because the guy that was behind this, Constantine the Great, he continued to align himself with the sun god, Sol Invictus. He even had several years after conducting what was called the Council of Nicaea, where the Bible was put together, he would still have, he would issue coinage with him as being the sun god, even December 25th. It's in fact originally the celebration of Sol Invictus or Mithras. Okay, that's how it started in the Roman empire. My point being is just as the Bible became this dominant religion that just swept the whole entire world, it was done for the sake of political expediency. It's the same way that today we see like a Google search engine, it's the most popular in the world. Naturally, the ruling class are going to somehow, some way use that to their benefit. They're going to filter the results, they're going to pick and choose what content is allowed, and the same is undeniably true of the Roman interpretation of the official Bible. Now, I'm not saying you have to go ahead and dismiss the entire book. Like I said, there's lots of good philosophy in there, but if there's one thing that I would recommend amongst those 45,000 denominations that interpret the Bible and Scripture is that one verse, that the kingdom of God is within you. And to me, Bibles, books, they can be changed. And even the interpretation is dependent on that internal kingdom, right? Your emotions, your character is always a deeper filter and that comes from within us. If you see something that is absolutely reprehensible and you know immediately from a moral standpoint that moral kingdom that has already been placed deep within you, then you need to side with that integrity that's deep down inside. So immediately, my whole point, and I know it's a bit long-winded, is that this foundational myth that, oh, the promised land should be given specifically to the descendants of Abraham, which goes beyond just Jewish people. But that central myth, it needs to be looked at again. It needs to be reconsidered and it needs to be reconsidered from the perspective of a humanitarian and it needs to encompass the whole entire spectrum of how the Bible was created, the different interpretations, the books that were left out of the Bible. Because long story short, when it comes to the Bible and how it was put together, there were interpretations that considered the Old as you guys know, like almost the personification of the devil. Now, I'm not trying to freak people out with that, I know it's a process, but my point being is just because somebody believes something that you do not, does not give you a right to impose your will on them. And that is where this foundational myth originates. Yeah, so just to be clear, I guess, is what you're saying that these verses that you've just relayed to us from the Bible underlying everything are still the driving force for what's happening in the region. And also the, I guess, unconscious permission slip to do what they're doing in terms of the deaths and the murders that we're seeing take place. Yeah, 100%. So for me, it's like this, I believe in the guidance of the truth. (16:47 - 17:19) Just to unpack what that means very quickly, truth is another word for reality. So when you become aware of what reality is indicating to you and I know I'm preaching to the choir, so I'm just more, I suppose, explaining to the audience that may not be fully familiar, which is of course, not their fault. We are totally misled in society. Truth is this knee-jerk concept that has been prepackaged, but truth is just essentially another word for reality. So for me, I look at what is the reality behind the foundation, behind why this is okay. So yeah, you're 100% correct. (17:19 - 19:26) So I want to deconstruct it from there and then we slowly navigate forward into more modern history. Yeah, I guess the one other question that might be coming up for those listening is that, but you're talking about a Christian Bible, don't Jews abide by the Talmud? What's the Bible have to do with this? Right. I think it's just in general, the fact that all religions on one level or another, they are not omnipotent. On some level or another, whether people say there was divine inspiration involved or not, because anybody can make their claim. We need to pursue verifiable truth, which is to say, it has to be a reality that on some level can be corroborated. And it's not just trust me, bro, because essentially when people say that they were divinely inspired, they're saying, trust me, bro, anybody can do that. And as we know, historically, there have been no shortage of con artists in that particular regard. I'm not saying that there isn't some kind of divinity in any of these texts, but just to make long story short, again, if you feel divine inspiration, which it can be misguided. We have to be humble and recognize the vulnerabilities in our own psychology. You can be filled with euphoria. I've taken mushrooms before and I thought I figured out life. I figured out reality. I figured it out all. And then as it came down, I'm like, damn, I haven't figured it out all. So my point being, just because something's incredibly profound to you, you have this aha moment. And I know the human experience is very subjective. And then it gets further popularized. And oftentimes things that get popularized have the sponsorship of a greater establishment, which historically, whether it's now or 3,000 years ago, the establishments that have been in power and in charge of the proliferation of information, they haven't necessarily been benevolent and they've had ulterior motives. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Totally, totally. What I'm saying is that I guess you're making the claim that Bible texts are the inspiration for the foundation of Zionism and the promised land mythology. (19:27 - 20:44) But what about those who are questioning that? To an extent. What's the importance of the Bible to the Jews as opposed to the Talmud? The Torah is the Old Testament, correct? Yeah. I mean, it's a little bit more elaborate to the best of my knowledge. But why I'm actually specifically saying this, and I'm sorry, I'm glad you mentioned that so I can give a little bit more context, is one of the most virulent support systems of this is, in fact, Christian Zionists. So that was actually my whole point behind that. Yes. Because if you look at, in fact, and we can lead into this, the modern Zionist movement and the political founder of political Zionism, excuse me, Herod Herzl, he was not a religious guy. He was a secular Jew. So it's also difficult. Sometimes we forget that there's a difference between being a religious Jew and a secular Jew and even an atheist Jew, because Jew is considered an ethnicity. Excuse me. So if we fast forward the history a bit and we enter into Herod Herzl, who's considered to be the father of political Zionism, he, and sorry, let me just switch this off, man, because this light is actually killing my eyes. (20:44 - 23:44) It's still okay then? Yeah, it's just, oh man, it's so distracting. It's like blinding me. It's a light that I've got to make it a bit better, but man, it just, it sucks. It's a new thing. Anyways, Herod Herzl, right? He is considered to be the founder of political Zionism. And what he was initially looking for was just a Jewish homeland in response to the persecution of Jewish people in Russia and in elsewhere. And he was not a religious person at all, man. Like I said, I have read his diaries. I, in fact, want to pull up some of his diaries so people can see specifically what I'm talking about. And then the listeners, I can go ahead and read verbatim and even give them page numbers. So they know specifically where I'm coming from on all of this. But Herod Herzl was not a religious Jew. He was very practical. He said, okay, look, what we need is we need a home state. We just need a homeland. And there were numerous places proposed. There was Uganda, Uganda was proposed. They considered even Argentina. And eventually it resulted in the land of Palestine, which we will illuminate gradually. But for now, let's go ahead and you this is page 1,904 of the complete diaries of Herod Herzl. You can find them at archive.org. I'm going to go ahead and blow this up for everybody to check out. Okay, there you go. Boom. Come on. My apologies. No worries, man. All right. So we have page 1,904. And what we see over here is him basically being asked by the king of Italy, if there are still Jewish people who expect a Messiah, right? This religious conviction of the Messiah and the promised land and so on and so forth. And he replies in the religious circles, in our own, the academically trained and enlightened circles, no such thought exists. Of course, our movement is purely national, nationalist. This is well known. It's not a difficult thing to corroborate. You can easily find it online. So it was very practical in its approach. You see over here, for example, we can look up the Uganda scheme where they considered taking land in Uganda. So it wasn't necessarily that they were fixated on having this specific part of land. That's something that later developed. That's interesting. Yeah. Yeah, it is very interesting. You see over here also, for a long time, and this is where it starts to get really interesting, is the entry of the Rothschild family, because they were incredibly powerful and he knew if he could get them behind it, then he would be in a position where he had a much better chance of establishing this. This guy seemed to be earnest in his convictions, like he genuinely wanted to help. That's my interpretation. And he eventually, at first, the Rothschild family seems to have completely been opposed to him, which he documents in details on numerous occasions in his diaries. (23:44 - 25:53) He talks about how they were opposed. He talks about them as being villainous and all kinds of crazy things. But eventually he wins an audience with, if I recall correctly, with the British branch of the Rothschild family. And then when he's sitting down with him, he basically talks about how he's specifically looking for a piece of land. Because in the beginning, Edmund Baron de Rothschild, who we'll get to in a moment as well, because he's far more significant to the colonization of Palestine than Theodor Herzl ever could be. He's the one that really sits in the background and he's more of the shadowy figure that is the true founder behind this movement. He was actually opposed to Theodor Herzl. And a lot of Jewish people were, just as is true today, which we'll also get into that later. But eventually he wins an audience and he comes into contact with another Rothschild family member. And he basically says to him, look, I'm trying to, because he said at this point, I don't want to take Uganda. I have my eyes on the Sinai Peninsula and I quote, the Sinai Peninsula, Egyptian Palestine or Cyprus. And he looks at the Rothschild family member and he says, are you interested? And then he smirks back at him and he says, very much so. So immediately what we can deduce from this is that this wasn't specifically about the land of Palestine. It was a geographical region. It was a geostrategic region that they were interested in. And the Rothschild family, historically speaking, are a money-minded family. And then from this point, what we can begin to deduce, I mean, you let me know where you would like to go. There's two places we can explore. The first is understanding Baron Edmund de Rothschild's place in all of this a little bit better. And then the other is the geostrategic importance and significance of this region. And the two do somewhat coincide. So I'm sure if you ask one, we can lead into the other. Yeah, man, let's tackle both. Yeah, start with Rothschild and then we'll dive into the geostrategic reasons. Okay. A hundred percent. I've got a good image. (25:53 - 27:55) I can also share these slides with you guys for when you're doing the editing, because there's some good stuff here. All right. So this is just to capture some of the instances and sorry, just to let everybody know in the audience that's curious to look it up, because remember guys, truth cannot be established without verifying it for yourself. Don't blindly believe me. Don't blindly believe anybody. It's page 1294, where he has this conversation with the Rothschild family member about the specific geostrategic region. Now, with that said, some page numbers where you initially see how Edmund Baron Rothschild was opposed to Theodor Herzl establishing a Jewish state in Palestine. We see over here, and I quote, Rothschild will hear nothing, whatever of the matter. This is page 352. And I quote, he considers what I am doing dangerous because I am rendering the patriotism of the Jewish suspect as well as injurious, namely to his Palestinian colonies. All right. So that's where we're going to enter into now. So Baron Edmund Rothschild, he is in fact viewed, and we see, sorry, here's another page over here, page 976, where he's being warned Theodor Herzl that I need to be on guard against the Rothschilds because they would also come in in order to take control of the Jewish state. And these are all very significant things that we need to know about. He's engaging him to try help him fulfill this establishment of a Jewish state, but he's also wary of him exercising too much power. Yes, exactly. It's a balance of both, where he's trying to kind of pick, I suppose, between the lesser of two evils. But he does seem to be earnest in his convictions. I'm open to being challenged on that, but based on what I've seen, he's earnest in his convictions. And then here we have page 876, where he mentions that if Edmund Rothschild is in Constantinople, I suspect some typically Rothschildian villainy. So just on numerous instances, he's remarking on how naturally they can't be trusted. (27:56 - 29:01) And yet we know today, of course, the Balfour Declaration was made out to the Rothschild family, which we'll explore that in a bit more detail soon. But going to Edmund Baron de Rothschild, he is in fact recognized as being the father of Palestinian colonization. And this is something you won't find now, but back in the day, because obviously colonialism had a different association with the people. It was a lot more auspicious. It wasn't as controversial. The smoke screen of propaganda of what it essentially truly is had not yet been taken down. So we see, for example, he has the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. This is from 20th August 1931. And it's talking about Baron Edmund de Rothschild, and they describe him as the father of Palestinian colonization. And you can find that very easily just by looking online. Here's another one from the Washington Post, January 17th, or 7th, 1979. And the author is basically saying, it can be argued that almost until his death in 1934 at the age of 89, Baron Edmund and Jewish Colonization Association, which he chaired and financed, dominated Jewish settlement policy. (29:02 - 30:09) So off in the background, we have Baron Edmund de Rothschild. He was the one that began to settle colonizers in Israel. In fact, I don't know if you guys have ever seen this before, but he is on the banknotes. That's specifically why they put him on that banknote. Some people say that he looks like the architect from the Matrix. I don't necessarily know if there was some kind of influence there. I don't know for sure. But he founded the first, the very first colony of Jews in Palestine. He was the one behind that. Now, immediately from there, we have to say, well, why was he interested? The Rothschilds are like a Rockefeller family. There's a reason. They don't just do things for the sake of benevolence. And much like today, philanthropy is used as a vehicle for an ulterior motive. What's true today was true 100 years ago, and it was true 1,000 years ago. This is something that they don't necessarily want us to be able to see, because when we become aware of how the establishment and the ruling class, the parasite class employ these exact same methodologies, they just remix them up. (30:09 - 31:06) Obviously, we're going to become a lot more aware, objectively speaking, and thinking beyond tribalism to understand, okay, this is what these people are really engaged in. So this is where it becomes really important to know the context. We go with the first one, Rishon LeZion. This was 31st of July, 1882. And basically, Baron Edmund de Rothschild was the key figure in financing this establishment, and he came to control it. He subsidized the farmers, but he made them grow wine. He determined what crops they could grow, and et cetera, et cetera. So immediately, the question we need to ask ourselves is, what was the larger context going on here? Why were they interested in this land, potentially? What can we decipher beyond religion? Because at the highest levels of the ruling class, they use religion more so as a vehicle, much like politics, because historically, it served that role. It's an invented thing. (31:08 - 31:12) Jesus wasn't a religious dude. Muhammad wasn't a religious dude. Buddha wasn't a religious dude. (31:12 - 35:03) Other people made religions based on the alleged teachings of these figures. That's very, very important to make, because truth is awareness, an easier way to frame it. Awareness is an ever-evolving thing. Nobody is aware of everything that is yet to be known or already known, right? It's impossible. You can have a million lifetimes and not do that. So it's impossible to have a religion that has constraints in this particular regard. And as Blaise Pascal said, it is man's natural sickness to believe that he alone possesses the truth. So we have to be a little bit open-minded. Just to confirm, is this baron, the Rothschild, the same Rothschild that Herzl is engaging? He was trying to court him, but then he went with the British branch. Now that is a very good question. However, and I wanted to ascertain this, because that's immediately a question that pops up in your head as a truth seeker, right? You're like, okay, well, maybe these Rothschild family members are in competition. The British branch and the French branch, they intermarried. The cousins would marry one another all the time. They would engage in the Jerry Springer madness. And essentially, they worked very closely. In fact, the war efforts of World War I were, the French government and the British government were largely financed by the Rothschild family, just both branches. So sure, we can say that he was opposed, but what we find later, as Theodore Herzl gains more traction and more publicity and more public support, Baron Edmund Rothschild changes his position, which is a very important thing to ascertain and point out. So the Rothschilds were still reluctant. Even after that meeting that he had with the Rothschilds from the British branch, he was still a bit reluctant to help them. They played a lot of head games with him. But when he died, that's when they actually co-opted the movement, because he wasn't around for a long time. He wasn't around to see the fruition or the manifestation of the Balfour Declaration or anything. Theodore Herzl wasn't around for that. And in his absence, that's when the Rothschilds just took full-on control of what was going on there. But if there are any questions, otherwise I'm going to just climb into the geospatial stuff. Yeah, just keep going through, because you were talking about the reasons why they chose that area. Yes. So the first thing we need to do, a lot of it's going to be circumstantial evidence, because when we don't have concrete, undeniable, incontrovertible evidence, what we have to do is form as much circumstantial evidence surrounding the particular topic and then draw logical conclusions therein. So the first thing we need to look at is what was the context of that specific time? What was going on in this period in history? And during this period in history, this just so naturally coincided with the Second Industrial Revolution. That is a very, very important point for people to grasp. The Second Industrial Revolution, guys, was a technological revolution that has only been probably rivaled by the technological revolution we're going through now. And in many ways, it was the birth of globalism as we recognize it today. Railways were easier to produce. People became more interested in mining minerals. All of these things were going on on a massive, massive scale. And this also coincided with other forms of colonization, which included the Scramble for Africa. So the Scramble for Africa was going on around the same time and the same thing with different parts of Asia. So there was a land grab. You must remember that the earth is the most rich resource next to human beings. It is the most rich resource that can be exploited. And the ruling class know this. So that's the first place that we can sensibly look at. OK, well, this was during the midst of the Industrial Revolution. We do have evidence that the Rothschild family were engaged in numerous business ventures that related specifically to the mining of minerals. So we see over here, this is just the 1880s alone. (35:04 - 36:20) And this is just the French branch. And just to make it clear, because I know there's no source of citation for people to look into, which I can't stand when people do that. This comes from the Rothschildsarchive.org and it's maintained by the family. So in other words, this is as good a source you're going to get because it's coming directly from them. And for those listening, what's going on? Sorry? For those listening that can't see the screen, just let them know what you're saying. Yeah, I'm going to let them know. So what we have in front of us, guys, is during the 1880s, the Rothschilds began to seriously develop their interest in mining. Long before this already, they had actually pioneered railroads. They had been heavily involved in railroads. And the significance of that is if you control the railroads, that's a form of controlling industry. It's huge. But during the 1880s, they were developing the interest in Russian oil. They were involved in mining interests. They were involved in diamonds through the De Beers Corporation, through the De Beers Company in South Africa. So they were heavily invested in multiple forms of extracting the planet's resources, which is a very significant thing to mention because these colonies were established at this exact same time. (36:21 - 39:19) So the potential that there is richness in the land of Palestine in this region is ripe. It's something worth looking into. Now, there's more to it and we're going to get up to that. But I just wanted to show you guys very quickly. We have this news article just to corroborate the speculation from the Evening Tribune in August 22, 1927. Now, look, I do understand this is a news article that's coming long after the 1880s. But historically, the Rothschilds have been very well known, such as with the Battle of Waterloo, to be way ahead in communications. The ruling class pride themselves in getting information, intelligence, whether that be based on resources, whether it be based on anything, before anybody. So anyways, in August 1927, they had an official expedition. They went in and they found that the Dead Sea, you see over here the headline, Dead Sea to Yield Trillions in Riches. And that's in 1927. Okay, that's very, very significant. And then we have also in Popular Science Monthly, this is page 63, 1929, September, and they're just corroborating that the Dead Sea contains gold worth 50 billions. So we have evidence that corroborates what I'm suggesting, that they may have been interested in the resource richness. Now, with that said, there's another aspect to this which we need to explore. During this time, this was also the period in which the Ottoman Empire, because that was the ruling empire of that particular region. So it had had control over Palestine and all kinds of areas in the Middle East. And it was referred to as, and I quote, the sick man of Europe, which is to say its power was dwindling, it was on the way out. You can see over here is a cartoon, I know listeners can't specifically see it. But he has a cartoon that is just encapsulating, he has the so called sick man of Europe. And naturally, as has been true in other instances, such as when China with the opium wars, when his power would see that is another establishment that is on the way out the door, it becomes ripe for the picking. And what makes this especially interesting is what facilitated the Ottoman Empire's downfall, if you look into it, was that they were receiving loans from Western powers and families like the Rothschild family. In fact, you can find some of these loans on rothschildarchive.org. And we see over here the Ottoman Public Debt Administration for people that want to look it up. It was a European controlled organization that was established in 1881, right, 1880s again, to collect the payments which the Ottoman Empire owed the European companies. So it stands to reason, logically speaking, this is from the Rothschild Archive, Turkish and Ottoman loans, and people can go look this up. It's such a great resource, man, I highly encourage people to go check it out. They definitely keep their books tidy. (39:20 - 40:16) Oh, for sure, brother. But the beautiful thing is this is an incontrovertible source of information in terms of loans. And it's very incriminating. Like if you're a researcher, this is just a mountain of gold, right? And so in this region, it stands to reason that they saw that this empire was on the way out, and they wanted to establish as much control as possible. Now, in addition to that, before we officially move on here, and you guys continue with the questioning, in terms of the geostrategic importance, the Suez Canal Purchase. Now, this actually ties into World War 1. The Suez Canal back then controlled trade. It was a key place to control because you controlled the trade coming in and out of the region. This loan, which was done by the UK government, was facilitated. This again is from the Rothschild Archive.org. It's from their own website, and it's not a difficult thing to figure out, to find online, nothing controversial about it. (40:18 - 42:06) That basically, Nathan Mayer Rothschild, he went ahead for the British government, and he gave them the loan, and he facilitated the purchase of the Suez Canal. So why is this significant in particular to this region? The Berlin-Baghdad Railway. A lot of people, unfortunately, don't know about this, but the Berlin-Baghdad Railway is considered a pivotal factor in the culmination of the First World War. Why is that? It's because it bypassed the trade routes of the Suez Canal. So what they were going to do was the German Empire was going to build a railway going straight to Baghdad. And remember, this was when oil, petroleum, as a superior fuel source, became known. And everybody knew that if you could get access and control to this superior resource, you are going to dominate the game, baby. That's it. You are going to dominate the game. So immediately what we find is there's all kinds of things going on in this particular region. So naturally, the more chess pieces you can put up on the proverbial wartime board that can give you control and access to this region, the better. And just for people that want to check a little bit more into the Berlin-Baghdad Railway scenario, evidence is a lot more conspicuous and widely available today. Like 10 years ago, they still were very quiet and hush-hush about it. They wanted to perpetuate the myth that this was about the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, these mythologies that they tell us. That's the public school indoctrination right there. That's everyone's story. A hundred percent, brother. But it's always bullshit. Everything is more practical, it's more calculated, and it's about population control. And to a lesser extent, it's about material wealth. But it's primarily about who's going to dominate this monopoly game. (42:06 - 42:26) We just have a publication that people can look up from the Defense Technical Information Center. This is basically an intelligence branch of the U.S. government. And this was declassified in 1984. And you can see the title here. What does it say? The Berlin-Baghdad Railway as a Cause of World War I. That's massive. That is very, very important for people to understand. (42:27 - 45:54) So rather than looking at this as purely a religious event, what it does is it clouds emotions. It robs us of our reason. When that happens, we can't look at things pragmatically from the perspective of the ruler. Why, we know again, what's true today was true a hundred years ago, was true a thousand years ago. And you find this by meticulous research. But as a truism, as we see politicians presenting themselves as something they are not today, they did the same thing back in the day, guys. So naturally, and Machiavelli actually wrote about this in The Prince. It's one of his most famous passages in The Prince, one of the most controversial pages that people can go look up, where Niccolo Machiavelli talks about how rulers, they need to appear as benevolent. And above and beyond all else, they need to appear religious for the purpose of population control. So it's so important that people don't throw their reason out the window, thinking that, oh, because it's thousands of years ago that maybe the Bible was written or because there is this propaganda about how all Jewish people are like behind what's going on there and so on and so forth. It doesn't necessarily make it true, guys. Let's try to dial the emotions down and think objectively and rationally and from the place of those who are in power. Because when we do that and we think from their perspective, which I know it's difficult when you think of psychopaths, then things start to make a lot more sense. Okay. So you've presented, I guess, Brabham, as a listener, two kind of conflicting ideas here. One being the promised land mythology as a driving force of wanting that land and one from a more of a, I guess, mineral resource pragmatic perspective being the driving force for wanting that land. So how do we reconcile this? Are they using the promised land myth as a cover for the real reasons? I would say at the highest level, 100%. Yeah, I would say at the highest level, 100%. So 99.9999% and the only thing that prevents me from saying 100% of the time that rulers haven't done this throughout history, where they present themselves as being for the people and finding whatever movement is cool and then getting behind it. The only religion that they abide by is power. That has been what I see historically and history to me represents like a sort of science. You see patterns and if it happens long enough, it becomes relatively predictable. So to reconcile the two, we must remember that there are billions and billions of people in this world and we all have different perceptions. It's one of the complex things about the human story. So once you'll get somebody like Theodor Herzl, who he has a very practical perspective, he wants to create a place just like a homeland for the Jewish people, a safe spot. Then on the other hand, we might have, there was a, I can't remember the guy's name unfortunately, but there was a Christian Zionist who in fact was his biggest proponent. He was like his bulldog and he connected him with everybody. This dude was deeply entrenched in religious zealotry of the so-called promised land. And like I said, I realize that some people do believe in this, but you have to just unpack it from an introductory place of morality and humanity. And even from the Bible interpretation of do unto others as you would have them do unto you. (45:54 - 46:46) You can't just steal somebody else's land or say it's okay to embark on genocide. That's crazy. And then of course the other perspective in all of this, and unfortunately this perspective, although it's a tiny minority, it tends to dominate historically, is you get the parasite class and ruling class that they are in it to win it. They don't care, they'll do whatever it takes, and they are not motivated by humanitarianism, unfortunately, but by power. And so in the wake of Theodor Herzl's death, what we see is Edmund Baron de Reischauld and the Reischauld family in its totality gaining much more control over the region. And in fact, they set up numerous organizations and immediately began to also get involved in different organizations that controlled the Palestinian economy, that controlled the resources and so on and so forth. (46:47 - 48:08) Yeah. It's like, as I absorb what you're sharing here, more and more it seems to me like all the emotionality and the religious zealotry is pretty much just a veil for confusion. So let's run with that quickly. I actually have something I want to say about that. Let's think, and this is something I think a lot of people today can understand a bit better, because what's true on the micro is true in the macro, which is to say an individual psychology can be actually applied to a community psychology in many ways. And what I mean specifically by that is let's say that you're in discussion with a friend of yours, or you just see somebody and they overtly react to something that doesn't require such a strong, impulsive emotional response. You know that there's some kind of underlying trauma there. What the ruling class have done historically is they inculcate trauma in us because they know how to do this. They're very skilled in the art of population control and mind control. And so they inculcate these traumas into the way we think, into the way we feel, like a landmines. So when we get near a particular topic, rather than somebody engaging in a rational response, they become very, very defensive. And then it's about, oh, you want to kill the Jews? Oh, you want to kill all the Palestinians? Oh, you want to, you know, and it becomes like, whoa, I was just asking a question about this. (48:09 - 51:38) All right. Yeah. Yeah. All designed to shroud objectivity, which ultimately is going to lead us to the truth. A hundred percent, brother. Objective reality and objective truth are the same thing. And what they have us swimming in and what they have us trapped in is subjective, narrow, individual perceptions. And they dominate those perceptions with emotion, irrational emotions. Yep. Okay. So at the conclusion of World War I, I guess the British Empire controlled and occupied Palestine, which was plagued by violence and conflict during the time. So can you explain some of, I guess, that history to our audience? Okay. Let's actually take a couple of steps back and let's talk about the incredibly duplicitous actions of the British government in how the Arabs, the Jews and the French and the British were all like, they were promising the Arabs and the Jews the land almost simultaneously. Right. This is a very, it's such an interesting part of the history, man, because it also gets into Saudi Arabia. And let me go ahead. I'm going to pull up these slides for those who are viewing. And then for those who are not viewing, I'll just be able to be a little bit more meticulous in my descriptions. So just bear with me for a moment, because this is so important to address with verifiable truth, as opposed to just speculation or yessay or emotional propaganda. So let's start with the McMahon-Hussein correspondence. This is a very, very, if you want to understand what's going on, why there is this incessant conflict that dominates this particular region, it is absolutely imperative that we revisit the McMahon-Hussein correspondence. Okay. What this was, it was a correspondence between July of 1915 and March of 1916 between Sir Henry McMahon, a British representative, and Sharif Hussein, who was considered to be largely the predominant Muslim and Arab leader of that time. All right. And what Britain did in this correspondence is they promised Arab independence in what is now Syria, Palestine or Israel, Jordan, Iraq, and the Arabian Peninsula, if they would help the British win World War I. That's what they promised him. And so this dude, Sharif Hussein, he said, okay, I'm all about that. Let's do it. I will fight on your side. Well, just a few months later, the British government and the French government, and remember behind these governments, we have both branches of the Rothschild family. Of course, it's not just the Rothschild family. I don't want to narrow it down to some silly theatrical Hollywood form. It's more complex than that, but they were both deeply embedded and involved. Whenever you see Britain and France conclude the Sykes-Picot Agreement, you know that the Rothschilds were also involved in that on some level, because they are so deeply entrenched and connected to the government. A few months later, in May of 1916, the Sykes-Picot Agreement is conducted. What happens with this, it was a secret agreement. It was also conducted with the permission and the acquiescence of the Russian government. And we must remember that during this war, the British monarch, the Russian czar monarch, and the German Kaiser were all cousins. They were all family members. It's like a Jerry Springer family feud, where they're playing with everybody's lives. The Sykes-Picot Agreement, they essentially said, no, we're lying to the Arab population. We're not going to give them Palestine. We're not going to give them anything. (51:38 - 51:52) Doesn't matter if they help us win this war. We're going to carve up this region of the Middle East, and we will have colonial administrations there. This was leaked. The document was leaked. It was an authentic document. We can also take a look at, you guys may have heard of Lawrence of Arabia. (51:53 - 52:47) T.E. Lawrence, if you take a look at his diaries, it's from the publication, The Warriors, specifically the chapter, it's called The Letters of T.E. Lawrence, where he reputedly said that he is hoping to go get killed on the way to Damascus, because we are calling them, he's talking about the Arabs, to fight for us and lie, and I can't stand it. He was instrumental. He was pivotal in getting them to fight. He gave them promises. He was kind of the go-between, the middleman. So yeah, we have a scenario and a situation where they are promising the Arab population the lands of Palestine, and much more than Palestine, and then it gets discovered that and then at the same time, a year later, in 1917, as everybody knows now, I mean, not everybody knows, but it's becoming more popular, in the Balfour Declaration, dated November 2, 1917, made out to, Dear Lord Rothschild, we promise you a Jewish state. (52:48 - 55:04) Now, this is very significant, because all of this lying, all of this duplicity, all of this underhandedness, playing both sides, playing all three sides, is where a lot of the conflict and animosity comes from today. I think, let's read this short passage of the Balfour Declaration out, because I think that's important. Okay, cool. Do you want to go ahead and read it or should I read it? I don't know, if the viewers are maybe a bit tired of my voice, I'll give them a break. Sure, man. So, I guess this is a letter. Who is this coming from specifically? This is from, oh man, where was his name now? It was Lord Balfour. I think it was Alfred Balfour. I can't remember his first name specifically, but it was made out to one of the English patrons, the British patrons of the Rothschild dynasty. And it's dated November 2, 1917. It says, Dear Lord Rothschild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with the Jewish Zionist aspirations, which has been submitted to and approved by the Cabinet. His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object. It being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation. Right, so now what we have is three consecutive contradictions. The first one that was originally made was promising the Arabs if they fight on side of the British Government to overcome the Ottoman Empire. Okay, just to give a bit more context here. The Ottoman Empire decided to align itself with Germany. Remember the Berlin to Baghdad railway? This was an agreement between the German authorities and the Ottoman authorities. So what we have is them initially promising the Arab population that we will give you these lands and you'll be truly independent if you fight on our side to conquer the Ottoman Empire in the war effort. So they said okay cool we'll do that, and through with Lawrence of Arabia also engaged in these battles that's exactly what they did. (55:04 - 56:44) They also fought in Palestine, they fought against these people. Then shortly after, just months after these correspondences, we have the British authorities and the French authorities saying no we're just lying, we're bullshitting them, we're going to carve this land up between us. And in the following year now we have the Balfour Declaration where they are promising the Zionist Federation and it's quite important to make the distinction between Zionism and Judaism and Jews period. Right, it's a very important distinction and all of these associations it's actually very skilled manipulation in terms of brainwashing. It's called classical conditioning where you manipulate the associative memory. In any ways these three events are completely contradictory. Now when the Sharif Hussein, right, this dude who's considered the leader of of the Arab world, when he discovered the Balfour Declaration and this duplicity, he refused to sign the Treaty of Visayas after this British deception. And this was the treaty that essentially concluded the First World War and they needed him to sign this. They actually went back and forth with him and this dude was very staunch. Now if you look at British historians they recognize him as just like being filth, you know, evil man. But he was actually a very principled individual. I'm not saying he was without his faults as people always are, especially back then and I don't want to trivialize and romanticize who he is, but he was very staunch in saying look you guys wrote we had this correspondence, the McMahon Hussein correspondence between myself and your representative and you promised us that we would have this region and he made special emphasis on Palestine. (56:44 - 59:03) The Palestinian people back then were major supporters of his and for anybody that wants to corroborate this and look into some of this like source documents, it's so important to look at source documents and correspondence between Sharif Hussein and the British administrators. There's a publication in the International Journal of Middle East Studies. It's a peer reviewed publication. It was made in 1978, but it's still really good and it's entitled A Matter of Principle, King Hussein of the Hejaz and the Arabs of Palestine. And if you look it up, you're going to find it behind a paywall, but go to Sci-Hub. Okay, just type in Sci-Hub. I'm dropping some very goldmine information for people. You go to Sci-Hub, that is a way to get around all these paywall publications that they prevent us from seeing and then you can find some really interesting information. Now, when this dude Sharif Hussein refused to play ball with the British administrators, boom, enter this guy, Ibn Sa'd or also known as King Abdul Aziz. He is known as the first king of Saudi Arabia and he is basically the patron in many instances of the House of Sa'd. So the modern construct of Saudi Arabia traces its origins also to this event, which people don't talk about. So what they did, this guy was, he was literally on the British payroll. He worked very closely with them. And when Sharif Hussein refused to play ball, they sponsored this guy and he overthrew Sharif Hussein. And this is where the modern empire of Saudi Arabia was born. And also this relationship, this enduring relationship with the West and with the House of Sa'd. So we see over here Winston Churchill and Ibn Sa'd. And one of the Sa'd members. So this is where this history can actually be traced to. Wow, bro. Interesting. It's crazy, right? Crazy stuff. Yeah. Exactly. Really, really crazy stuff. I can't believe how much else was born out of this. Right. And like is always the case with truth, there's always going to be more. We are scratching the surface and I'm not saying it in a way like, oh, I just know so much more. I mean, even me, there's so much that I don't know about all of this. But that is essentially how the truth works. And where it becomes more complex to discern what's going on is because that's where the greatest levels of deception lie. Where the smoke is fire. (59:04 - 1:00:02) Yeah. Look, what we can also address, because this was something that interested me as a researcher, let me put a share button off here, that interested me as a researcher was, okay, so how did, after all of this duplicity, all of these talks, how did it end up in the hands of, how did the Balfour Declaration come about? How did they give it to Lord Rothschild? So we can answer you to that and then I'll actually get into your question about the British mandate, because that's also really very, very important. All right. So yes, as we know now, despite the McMahon-Hussein correspondence and also despite the Sykes-Picot agreement, it did end up going to the Zionist element, like the Zionist influence and the Rothschild family played a seminal role. Now for a long time, this has been shrouded in mystery. I've got a question just on that, because obviously there's a separation between Herzl being the main representative for Zionism and the Rothschild family. (1:00:02 - 1:00:15) Oh, massive. Massive, yeah. So then now we come to 1917 and we have this letter addressed in the Balfour Declaration to dear Rothschild, basically handing Palestine to this Zionist federation. (1:00:16 - 1:01:30) So when did Rothschild become the face of Zionism? Never underestimate financial resources. This is one of the mistakes, and it's such a tricky thing, right? Like we need money to get things done. And he recognizes Theodore Herzl by courting the Rothschild. It's ironic that he had a premonition, he wrote about the dangers of doing this and it just manifested, right? It's like getting the Rothschild involved in all of this. But remember, he was embedded from the beginning and he was the first one to finance colonization on a large scale in Palestine. And he did this with multiple colonies. And then naturally these organizations like the Zionist federation and other ones like it, he embedded himself in there. And because of his prestige and his influence, and this guy, I mean, this dude, he's financing governments, you know what I mean? Like this is a big boy. Well, what they want to go ahead and do, because people are unfortunately very gullible just as they are today, oh, this guy's fancy, man. I want him to be on my board of directors. Oh, I want to give him a foot in the door. And when you give a predator or a parasite a foot in the door, they are going to kick their door in and they will take over. (1:01:30 - 1:04:46) And slowly and incrementally they did this. And a lot of the times it was actually done through certain connections, because the really intelligent parasites cause members, what they do is they don't do things directly. What they'll do is they'll get a go-between. They'll get a representative because this doesn't attach their name to it. So in the beginning, he was very much embedded. It's not too difficult to find. Like I said, there's some good information on the archive, but that's kind of what happened. Oh, yes. And then the British mandate, right? You want to get into it? Oh, excuse me. No, sorry, man. I'm just jumping all over the place. How did also the Balfour Declaration. So this is very interesting. You guys may be familiar. You may have heard this speech at one point or another. A lot of people talk about this in alternative media. This guy, Benjamin H. Friedman, he was himself a Jewish individual. He's been since called like a self hating Jew, which is a common tactic. But he basically claimed that the way that the Balfour Declaration was promised to the Zionist element was that the British war cabinet, the government was in a position where they were potentially going to lose the war to Germany. And then the Zionist elements approached him and they said, look, you can still win this war if we get the U.S. government to come in on your side. And so they appealed to the U.S. government to come in on the side of the U.K. And of course, the U.S. at this time was an emerging world power after the conquest of the Spanish Empire. And I always thought, well, you know, that that's all fine and well, but I mean, it's still speculation, right? You can't really put a lot on that. I mean, it seemed like it makes sense. But then we go to the Rothschild archive. And if we look up under the origins in the First World War, they, in fact, claim the same thing. And these were proper legitimate insiders because they were financing this war effort. So just to quote for the listeners, it states, beginning in 1916, the British hoped that in, excuse me, beginning in 1916, the British hoped that in exchange for their support of Zionism, the Jews, quote, unquote, the Jews would help to finance the growing expenses of the First World War, which was becoming increasingly burdensome. More importantly, policymakers in the foreign office believed that Jews could be prevailed upon to persuade the United States to join the war. So this is a place from which we can trace palpably the justification, at least on part of the establishment clauses, and try to make a little bit of sense as to why the Balfour Declaration was eventually issued. And again, I mean, we can't underestimate the role of power, of money, of politics. And so I think that in the end, what came to favor is just it's the Rothschild name, because it's such a unlikely turn of events in the complex dynamic of what really happened there, that for them to still get this power, and Israel is a really small place, and yet to this very day, it's one of the strongest military in the whole entire world. It's not something that can be maintained without massive resources behind it. Now a short break from the episode. (1:04:47 - 1:05:27) Hey, if you'd like to go a step deeper in engaging with these ideas and engaging in a broader discussion with like-minded community and community on the pursuits of their highest individual inner and outer truths, then we do have our membership community. It's called the Friends of the Truth. This is a growing community. We offer six calls a month. You get a chance to connect with us directly, and also some of the highest integrity people that we personally know. So to learn more about that, you can click on the Friends of the Truth link in the show notes, or head to friendsofthetruth.co to sign up on a free trial and stay with us at a minimal cost. (1:05:28 - 1:08:30) Back to the episode. So at the wake of World War I, although the land was promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and it's extremely important for people to understand that naturally because of these very deceptive exchanges, this resulted in a lot of bad blood and anger and resentment amongst all the populations there because they were all deceived. And the conclusion of World War I through the League of Nations, so the League of Nations was actually the predecessor to the United Nations, and the same parasite classes behind this, the Rothschild family, Rockefeller family, all these people that wanted to create a global governing structure. League of Nations, as we know now, it failed, at least in the short term, and it was replaced by the United Nations after World War II. Again, they create conflict so that they can consolidate power. And through the League of Nations mandate, they said, okay, well, the British Empire will have authority over Palestine until they get to a certain point. And this is rhetoric that they used to employ. I mean, at this time, there were all kinds of puppet governments that were springing up in the Middle East because they want to give the impression that there's some kind of autonomy, some kind of independence, so that people obviously don't rebel, not much different to today. And so they went ahead and said the British will have a mandate. It's called Mandatory Palestine, for those who want to look it up, the period. This was at the conclusion of World War I. And basically what happened is the British Empire and the troops, they occupied this territory. And the French Empire, they occupied different parts of the Middle East as well, unsurprisingly. And again, what is true today was true a hundred years ago and a thousand years ago, when a people who have completely different religious customs or just cultural customs or whatever it may be, or speak a different language or under foreign occupation by a military unit that has impunity in relation to their behavior is going to be horrible things that take place. And those people are going to rebel. That's just how it works. It's not rocket science. In fact, a guy by the name of Professor Robert Pape, he wrote a very interesting book called Dying to Win. And this was at the height of the suicide bombing propaganda as being all about this is what Muslims do. And I've looked at the Quran, that kind of stuff is forbidden, guys. It's just this is the kind of propaganda that is perpetrated and propounded and put out there. And in this guy Robert Pape book, he found that suicide bombings, the overwhelming majority, I think as he said, like 95 percent are in fact committed by people that are simply under foreign occupation and they are doing it as a result of the foreign occupation. So the foreign military that's occupying them. And he found that the number one, at least at that time when he wrote the book, I don't know if it's changed, the number one purveyor, the number one organization involved in terrorist attacks was actually a secular organization, which is a non-religious organization known as the Tamil Tigers. And they were doing this, again, in relation to foreign occupation. (1:08:30 - 1:13:44) So my point being is while the British authorities were militarily occupying the land of Palestine and as it gradually warped into Israel and this land, and the same thing was going on with the French governance, there were rebellions all over the Middle East during this time because they are angry. It's not rocket science. They're angry that they were lied to. They're angry, of course, because it's not that one military is good or one military is bad, guys. When it comes to war, it brings out the worst in people. Human beings aren't meant to be in prolonged states of war where they are oppressing people. It brings out ugliness. And so during this period, there's all kinds of events that go on. And interestingly enough, like the Jafar riots, right, J-A-double-F-A riots, what people don't know, this was an early riot that took place in British, the mandate that they had over Palestine. Jews and Arabs were, in fact, rebelling together against the British authorities. People don't recognize that. And you have to dig a bit into to fully clarify. You can get a little bit of information, fragmentary information about it in Wikipedia. And then gradually, as time goes on, this population that is unifying, which is always a problem for the authorities that are unifying against the British government, they start to be a bit more divided amongst one another. And of course, religion can do that as well. There's no shortage of that. But we have to just bear in mind, and unfortunately, I haven't done the legwork to ascertain this fully, but my spidey senses, my intuition is quite good. Because the British Empire had a policy of divide and conquer, I'm quite certain that some of this was applied to the Arab and Jewish population who, like I said, there were instances when they were unified against the British authorities. But over time, horrible atrocities start to take place. And it's not a majority, at least based on my research, but between the Arab population and the Jewish population, now, because of this quagmire that's been created, this pot that's boiling, the civilian population, the more extreme elements are now at each other's throats. And there was a specific event in 1929, and it's important to acknowledge this, we need to take a look at everything that takes place here from a human perspective and not a tribal perspective, like objectively, how can we assess this? In 1929, there were horrible massacres perpetrated by the Palestinian community. At least this is the feedback that we have against the Jewish community. And let me see if I can pull this up very quickly, my apologies. The 1929 Hebron massacre in particular, and Gavin, what are you doing? And the 1929 Hebron massacre, where a very large number of Jewish people were themselves murdered. And this was going back and forth. So I don't want to say that this was the only time that this took place. But I want to specifically outline this one for the fact that during this massacre, Arabs were sheltering Jews. And it's so important to point that out, because no matter what, guys, you are always going to get individuals who based on their own life experiences have been radicalized. Somewhere along the lines, something terrible has happened. And now they've turned into monsters. And so they are going to do terrible things. Monsters do monstrous things to other people. And unfortunately, it becomes a cycle, right. And as a result of this, they engaged in a horrible massacre. I can't remember how many people were murdered, but it was a very large number. But Arab people, Arab Palestinians, they hid most of the Jewish community. They helped most of the Jewish community. Now, there are some Zionist propagandists, which try to claim that, no, it was a very small number. But the point being is we need to recognize that inborn within our humanity, something that precedes the Bible, the Quran, Torah, religion, and so on and so forth in politics, there is an inborn morality. Like I like to talk about the golden rule, right. It's been around for thousands and thousands of years. It arose as we have documentary evidence before religion. And this shows that there is a common pattern in our principles, in our human principles. And this can unify us. And that when the atrocities committed, even if it appears because the media or the authorities, especially in historical hindsight, portray it as the entire community was doing this to this entire community, this is never accurate. Most people are decent enough, guys. So I just wanted to highlight that specific event because it's an example of, yes, acknowledging that horrible things were also done on the Palestinian side, right. We can't pretend that one side is an angel and the other side is not, but it's always a minority and civilians get caught up in the crisis. Now, just to fast forward, I'm looking at some of the seminal events. In 1936, 1939, there was a major revolt of the Arab population against the British authorities. Again, specifically at this time, it wasn't so much the Jews and the Arabs fighting against each other as it was them fighting against the foreign occupation of the British authorities. (1:13:44 - 1:14:38) They were angry and rightfully so because they had both been promised on one level or another that we're going to get this land, this homeland. And once this concluded, there was something known as the White Paper and the British government was, in fact, now considering giving more land and restricting immigration because there was a huge acculturation. That's a process whereby you silently kind of conquer a region. You bring in colonizers, you bring in settlers. I've spoken about how today they do it more sophisticated. They do it through TikTok and you can control people's ideologies and you can control the way they see the world. And they were doing this as well through immigration. They were slowly acculturating and changing the landscape of Palestine. I mean, today we know it's just massive, right? I mean, it has genuinely been a genocide. (1:14:39 - 1:17:04) And as a result of this, there was a major Jewish insurgency in mandatory Palestine. And let me rather say a Zionist insurgency. There was a Zionist insurgency and it was literally marked by actual terrorism. So there's the King David Hotel bombing. I don't know if your listeners are familiar with that. Yeah, dozens of people were murdered. And what the Zionists did is they bombed this place because they wanted to expel the British authorities. And it's viewed this year, 1948, is what it culminated in, known as, I think it's maybe butchering the pronunciation, the Nakba, by the Palestinian and Arab community. And then for the Israeli, and I hate to frame it in this tribal context, and in the establishment context that, you know, this is the war of independence. At that time, several hundred thousand Palestinian people would basically expel from their homes. And the ascension of what we recognize today as Israel, it was in fact facilitated through terrorism, like legitimately, like horrible events. And I understand, based on the climate of the times, because, and this is also so important to point out, the British were the first ones to go ahead and bulldoze homes. They were the first ones to lock up Palestinians and children without charge or trial. They were the first ones to engage in a lot of the practices that are widespread now in Israel. And this is something that similar happened in South Africa, with the Apartheid government. The framework for that was actually established by the British system. But this is essentially where this conflict can be traced back to. And it's so important for people to understand the history behind it. Because if we don't have some foundation of reality, some foundation of truth, from which we can see things a little bit clearer and make sense of it, then we're arguing and we're fighting about something that just does not make sense. So the rise of the modern state of Israel was done by essentially radical Zionists that engaged in legitimate, objectively speaking, acts of terror. And there are other instances, such as, I'm sure you guys may have heard of Operation Susanna or the Le Bon Affair, which we can also get into, where they have engaged in false flag attacks for the purpose of political control. (1:17:04 - 1:18:12) And that continues to this very day. Man, I'm loving everything that you're sharing. It's eye-opening for me as someone who hasn't dove as deep as you have into this. But I'd love to go deeper into these other things that happened in potential and false flag events. I mean, Joel, if you're cool with that. Yeah, totally. And I guess moving into modern day Israel and Palestine in terms of the conflict as well. Okay, a hundred percent, man. So let me just, for those who are viewing, I want to just share this graphic. It's actually a very common graphic. People can go look it up. But just kind of how Palestinians have been displaced. It's shocking, guys. It's really very disturbing. And that's an objective human statement. We don't have to frame it. I can't stress enough the importance of trying to put the religious blinders off, because at the highest levels, these people are clearly engaged in authoritarian policies that have no regard for the principles of religion. And one of the best encapsulations of that, excuse me, is this false flag event. (1:18:12 - 1:18:58) It's known as, in some circles, as a Le Bon Affair, but more specifically, it was called Operation Susanna. And if I recall, this was in the early 1950s. And what the Zionist state of Israel wanted to do was create acts of terror. So they did. They didn't want to do it. They did it. And they planted bombs. They planted a bomb in a post office. I think another one was in a movie house in Egypt. And the reason why they were doing this is because they saw, I think it was the British government that was leaning towards favoring Egypt in one particular scenario. It's been a while since I've researched it. So there's going to be fragmentary information, but people can easily clarify it. Just remember, look up Operation Susanna or the Le Bon Affair. And so they plant these bombs. And their whole thing, they had a sleeper cell. (1:18:59 - 1:19:04) So this wasn't actually the Maasai. It was another branch of the military. And they had a sleeper cell. (1:19:04 - 1:19:21) A sleeper cell is basically a unit that you have in another country. It can be also in your own country, where when you call upon them, they will engage in whatever act of violence you have instructed them to do. And so they were going to commit acts of terrorism in a local population. (1:19:22 - 1:21:00) And they claim that this wasn't targeting civilians. But I mean, you're targeting a post office, you're targeting a movie theater. And it was meant to be evocative. And they were going to, in fact, blame this on, I think it was communists in Egypt. And this was, in fact, to go ahead and discredit the Egyptian establishment. Now, for decades, this was concealed, not just from the Israeli public. And people need to understand it. The average Jewish person in the state of Israel are so heavily targeted for propaganda. And this is a common tactic of governments. I grew up in the US. I'm from South Africa, where apartheid was over here. So I've had a very unique insight into how governments, the first target that they are going to go for is the local population, because they don't want to have internal subversion. It's a problem. If you have internal subversion, you can be brought down. So that's the first target always. They know that the masses are their true power base. There's no weapon, I don't care if it's an atomic weapon or whatever it might be, that is more powerful than the masses in your corner. And so for decades, they concealed this from not just the Israeli public, but from the world. And then after several decades that passed and it finally came out, what did the Israeli government do? They went ahead and honored these individuals as heroes. So these dudes are legitimately going to engage in acts of terrorism that can harm innocent people. Even if allegedly, yes, they weren't targeting people, of course, something like that can go wrong. Always. There's so much room for error. You go, oh, I'm a post office. Nothing could happen that's going to harm an innocent person. And you just had this insidious, sinister intention. And then it gets celebrated several decades later. (1:21:01 - 1:21:45) And that's a big deal, man. That's a really big deal. We also have the 1967 event when the ship, I think it was the USS Liberty, I can't specifically recall, when it was shot down. This was shot down by the Israeli military. If you look into it, the people that were on the ship that were involved, they believe it was done deliberately. And it's because, according to them, this was done because the Israeli military had engaged in an alleged ceasefire between Palestine, and they were seeking to violate that ceasefire. But for the sake of public opinion, they had to make sure that nobody witnessed this. And so they went ahead and shot down the USS Liberty. I might be wrong on the name, guys. So just, you can go check it out. It was 1967. I think it is the USS Liberty. (1:21:45 - 1:27:04) And it killed dozens of people. I think it is the Liberty, yeah. Right. And so you see this duplicitous kind of behavior. And even now, today, what you see, speaking from a human perspective, is the Israeli government is constantly engaged in authoritarianism. So long before Facebook was censoring everybody, or we had the censorship purge that dominates social media, they were already going ahead and engaging in censorship and threatening Facebook to take down posts and stuff. So, for example, I just want to share the screen with you guys. Let's pull this up. And this is coming, of course, from the times of Israel. So it's always good to use sources like that. And we see the military censor. So they've got a proper military censor that they target everything, man, even WhatsApp. Military censor seeks control over blogs and Facebook posts. And you see the fire writing, bloggers are now required to submit all security related posts, which of course is very ambiguous, for advanced review. So it has to be reviewed. And what's the date there? 2016. This was long before we saw the censorship that was dominating what we see now. This is also some good testimony over here from this guy. He's an award-winning journalist, John Lyons, or John Leon, I'm not specifically sure. And he's spoken on numerous occasions about how journalists from all ranks, they engage in self-censorship. They are so scared of the blowback that comes from that. And over here, this is from Mondo Weiss. It's a reputed and credentialed source. I always try to give that to people. So where somebody goes to Wikipedia and they're like, oh, Wikipedia said it's bad. I'm not looking into it. So with this, just reading an extract, it says the show's host, Ellen Fanning, notes that in Lyons' new book, Balcony Over Jerusalem, a Middle East memoir, he recalls sitting with a leading correspondent from Agence France-Presse, not French, sorry guys, and asking him how many foreign correspondents censor themselves. And this is what he replied, everybody. And then it says, and this guy's one of the toughest bureau chiefs around. As part of the book, I interviewed the New York Times, the Economist, Reuters, the Agence France-Presse, and I found a common trait. Reuters even has their own special words that were allowed to use that won't upset the Israelis. And when I went there to Israel, with the view that I had when I went to Washington and New York, I would report it as I see it. But every time I would write about settlements, something that's factual, you get targeted as a journalist. And this is just a repeated theme. And another guy, Chris Hedges, and I want to make it clear, guys, I don't necessarily agree with the views of all of these individuals. But another guy, Chris Hedges, and this is on truthdig.com, you can find this article. He talks, have you read it? He talks about how they targeted like kids, snipers targeted kids. So my point being, and I suppose we can all direct people to a good source for actual military testimony, because that's the best place to go to, man. You want to listen to the people that have been there, and now they are riddled and plagued with the horrors and guilt that they were engaged in, because we're human, first and foremost, we have a moral compass. And essentially, what Chris Hedges talks about is, they baited and they shot little kids. And you see this often, where kids can legitimately be locked up without any reason for an indefinite amount of time, because they were throwing stones. And there's been instances when they've been shot for throwing stones. And this is also another fundamentally important point to make. Israel has been recognized as one of the world's biggest and most powerful militaries, guys. A really strong military up there with Russia, China, and of course, the US. The difference though, being that those countries are massive. Israel is tiny in terms of its geographical region, whereas Palestine has no army, guys. It's non-existent. It does not exist there. And this is what people recognize. Now, yes, Hamas is a very dangerous group. But as Chris Hedges himself said, in relative terms, and it's not to say that one form of atrocity is okay and another is not. We need to recognize though, in relative terms, that the sophisticated military war that is being waged against Palestine and the people of Palestine. Because if you look and listen to the testimony of all the soldiers, what they are legitimately engaged in, and guys, I am an expert in psychological warfare and essentially like terror tactics. I know this in and out. They are terrorizing the local population. It's absolutely insane. Yeah, it's crazy. And I've sifted through about 100, no joke, like 100 to 200 hours of footage, which I'm still tabulating, of all of these soldiers, because I want to show everybody how you've got dozens and dozens and dozens of soldiers saying the exact same thing, of how they do something they call demonstrating presence. Demonstrating presence means you just shoot bullets into like a random house. They ransack homes and then they're going to occupy the home. It's insane. It's completely insane what's going on there. (1:27:05 - 1:27:58) And when the deception is removed, then people can view this objectively and from a Machiavellian perspective. And what the ruling class are actually doing is they are terrorizing these people, man. Yeah, I mean, well, it's an open strategy of theirs, this whole concept of demonstrating presence. Like they're ordered for like eight hours a night just to literally like walk through people's houses, banging down their doors. And it's terrorism. Yeah, it's 100%. And they've even conceded on numerous occasions, which is another thing when I, I can't wait to get it done, man. But it's such, it takes time. These things take time, which is why I'm also glad we're doing this, this podcast. But another recurring theme that you find is that they actually use human shields. They use people as human shields. It's a common policy. It ended very recently, like a year ago. But prior to that, it was a common policy. And yet the inversion of the propaganda is that on the Palestinian side, it's always human shields, always human shields. (1:27:58 - 1:29:06) But the objective evidence indicates, and I'm not saying that there's no truth to that, but the objective verifiable evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of showing that the Israeli military are doing this. I don't know if you guys may recall when there was that evocative image that just went viral. And it was a real image where the Israeli military literally tied a Palestinian boy to their vehicle and he was on the windshield. And this was a long time ago. Have you guys seen that? I can quickly pull up that image. Yeah. Let me pull that image. That's crazy. Yeah. It just shows you how sensitive everything is. But I mean, like this is narcissism 101, right? Accusing the other person of what you're doing. Yeah, it's the mind of the terrorist Okay. Am I sharing the screen? Okay. So for those who are watching, what do we see here? These are the biggest militaries in the world. Okay. So you see from the Times of Israel, Israel ranks among 10 most powerful countries in annual list, fourth strongest military behind only the US, China and Russia. This is from January, 2020. That is crazy, guys. And then we take a look just for the sake of making some kind of comparison in context. Look at the size of the United States, Russia, China, and then where's Israel? There's Israel right there. That tiny little thing over there. (1:29:07 - 1:29:42) And yet it's got one of the strongest military presence in the world. And that's because it's all about geopolitics, man. It's just a very important region. And I'm not saying there's not some kind of occult spiritual explanation of how people make these arguments. But in this informational war, unfortunately, that's not going to appeal to the sides of rabid, intense fighting and just the drowning in ignorance that is going on. We need something more palpable because, you know, this is because there's something, it's all about like spirituality. (1:29:42 - 1:32:18) And this is a holy war because that just further adds fuel to the fire that the ruling class wants. And they get us to fight each other about our own emotional convictions. And we fight about our perceptions where we have the same principles, like the average Arab person and the average Jewish person. And this is going to seem like it's such a crazy statement. And as George Orwell said, the first thing that a person needs to do and it becomes a revolutionary act is simply stating the obvious, that the average Arab person and the average Jewish person are far more alike than the people that are ruling over them, than Hamas or the Israeli government. And it's not rocket science. But when there's deception and all of this emotion, it convolutes our capability to critically think, then it seems like, oh no, this is all about, you know, the one side is evil and one side is good. That has never been accurate in the human story, guys. Never. What's the intention of modern-day Israel? Yeah, look, so I'm sure you've heard of the Greater Zionist or Greater Israel project where they're trying to expand the borders and have a much bigger tract of land. I think it's just about control, man. You know, this goes all the way back to Alfred Mackinder and the concept of the great game and the heartland theory. So he had this theory that if you control that area, not specifically where Palestine is, but the area of, I think he said, Eastern Europe. And I'm sure since then it's expanded. It's, you know, these things that tend to change over time. But it's all about who is going to have a greater level of control. Do I believe that there are things specifically in relation to that part of the world that can transcend our human understanding? Like something, some deep shit, right? Like something that goes beyond this world. Like this is like a totally different level of politics. It goes deep. Yeah, sure. That's possible. But in terms of a practical perspective, it seems to be what it has always been about, which is just, it's a strategic piece of land. And it's been very difficult historically going all the way back to World War I to control the Middle East, because there's a lot of division there, not just amongst the borders that have been created, but it's been pre-existing. There's a lot of division amongst the Arab populations. There's a lot of, it's a sensitive place. And naturally when you're pouring in so much military power and so many weapons, it's undeniably, in my view, for the purpose of population control on a much grander scale. Not to say just of the Palestinians, I mean of the entire global region. (1:32:19 - 1:34:08) Yeah. Well, I mean, it seems like the, I guess the perfect tool to stake a flag in the ongoing destabilization of the Middle East. Yeah. And you know what you just made me think of as well? Beyond that, it's such a, because this is so common. In the past 12, 13 years of me doing this, every now and then you see this going on. And it also, it creates division worldwide, where we should be unified based on just basic human principles, but then we get divided through all this deception. We have these different perceptions and then everybody's at each other's throats. So I think even beyond the importance, like in the more physical sense, I think in the mental and intangible sense of psychological warfare, it's also just an excellent card to play. Yeah. For sure, man. So I guess, if you want to keep leading up to present times, but like with everything that's gone on in the last few weeks, like what are your thoughts on that? Unless it's a continuation of everything we're talking about or if there's any specifics you want to get into. Yeah, it's a continuation. There's also been these atrocity propaganda stories, which is very common historically. And this again is because we aren't given knowledge. If we have a foundation of truth, which is to say reality, that there have been examples of atrocity propaganda. So we heard that they're cutting off the heads of babies. I don't know specifically what was said. Like I said, I'm in the process of moving continents. I've got all kinds of things that have to take precedent right now. But historically, this has been done on multiple occasions, guys. There was the story of babies on bayonets where the Wellington House and the Creel Committee, the Committee on Public Information. (1:34:08 - 1:37:46) So these were the propaganda outlets of the British government and the US government. They made up a completely bogus story that not only were these German soldiers like bayoneting babies with knives, you know, the knives on the back of the guns that they were killing these babies and pregnant women and raping them. But there was also this one story with a nurse by the name of Nurse Hume, H-U-M-E. And they claimed that this was a hospital with all these wounded soldiers and innocent people. And the German soldiers went in there and they cut off the breasts of this nurse. And then they lit the whole entire hospital on fire. And this just resulted in a wave of indignation. And people were so angry. Well, lo and behold, Nurse Hume, she comes up in the public press and she's like, well, as you can see, I've got both my breasts and it never really happened. So atrocity propaganda is a very common thing, man, historically. Also with the invasion of, I can't remember, I think it was the invasion of Iraq with Saddam Hussein the first time around. But there was a story, you guys may have heard about this, Nurse Naira. Have you ever heard about this story? So Nurse Naira, this was in the 90s, she went on national television and she was crying, man. She gave this heartfelt testimony about babies that had, at the hospital, they were thrown out of the incubators and thrown on the floor by the Iraqi forces. And the same thing happened. And George Bush Sr. at the time, I think he was the president of the US, politicians ran with this and it was all over the media. Well, lo and behold, this woman, Nurse Naira, she was in fact the ambassador of the, or she was the daughter, excuse me, of the Kuwaiti ambassador who was close to the Bush administration. When investigated, there was no evidence whatsoever to corroborate her claims. And she had in fact been coached on how to do this by a firm known as Hill and Knowlton, a propaganda public relations outfit. So atrocity propaganda is nothing new. And unfortunately, now with social media and the lack of awareness and the flood of ignorance, the moment people hear about this, man, they're up in arms, they're sharing, it's getting millions of views, but we can't be so quick to impulsively react because the ruling class are skilled in psychological warfare. So I find it very questionable in other words. And even like, I don't know the whole story, but from what I understand, they parachuted or hand-glided or something into Israel. And then I heard the guy say, this is our 9-11. And to me, that's almost like an inside joke for them because 9-11, as I will challenge anybody on, bring all the professionals you want. As I've already authoritatively put together in that very brief video for people to check out, about 3000 experts show that 9-11 is an inside joke. It's bullshit. Israel, like the US government, is one of the most sophisticated militaries in human history. And now these cats on paragliders are going to come in. It's like they joke about this kind of nonsense, man. And I'm not saying that- They back up for seven hours. Seven hours was the time. Is that the story? You know what I'm saying? Yeah. They're saying they didn't do anything for several hours. Brother, let me tell you something. They are on the Palestinians' arse 24-7. They have them under watch. Anybody that actually has knowledge, to me, I sometimes think they're sitting around the table and they laugh about this shit, man. And it's almost that they do it and we say to ourselves, man, it's so reckless. How can people see it? Sometimes it feels like they're trying to incite and instigate and give the finger to the people that are aware. Like, yeah, you're trying to get to us, but we still got to use the well-intentioned ignorance of the masses to buff you, to rebuff you. We got to use them to go to war with you. (1:37:47 - 1:38:47) Yeah, man. And it's like you talk about psychological warfare. And so how do you defeat that? And it's like understanding psychology and truth and doing your inner work and embracing the parts of you that could commit evil and bringing more regulation to your nervous system and building emotional maturity and not allowing yourself to just respond and react emotionally in the moment. I get it. We're human. But it's like, this is what they prey on. And this is what we see over and over and over again. And you just see people sharing propaganda. And then two days later you find out, oh, wait, that was wrong. And it's like, do people then take responsibility? Oh, hey, two days ago I shared something that wasn't fucking true. Yeah. Own up to your shit. At least own up to your shit. And it's so challenging because I also understand the psychology of not wanting to be wrong. But when we do this, we need to recognize that, sure, to us it's an argument. But there's people that are dying. There's people that are being killed on both sides. I get it. (1:38:47 - 1:39:41) Yeah. And when we impetuously and impulsively share something, that can serve as the justification for a fucking bomb or something, for something terrible to take place, a bombing of a school, of a hospital, whatever the fuck it is, right? Yeah. And listen, man, I get it. I'm here outside of Los Angeles. I'm not in Israel. I don't have friends there that were murdered by Hamas and kidnapped. And I don't live in Palestine or Gaza and dealing with what they deal with. So I get it. It's different. And so I think we're doing our best. And while you're definitely, man, with what you've done over the last however many years of diving deep into the historical implications of what we're seeing now. And I think it's up to the individual to bring some objectivity as best they can. I get it. If you're in it, if you're witnessing terror and you're dealing with the death of your loved ones, okay. You know, it's different, man. (1:39:42 - 1:42:49) A hundred percent, man. And I mean, really to me, people like Joel right now, I'm not active on social media at the moment because of all this stuff that I've got going on. Whereas Joel and all these other individuals, they're on the front lines. That's difficult to do. It's not an easy thing to do. It's very time consuming. It's not very rewarding. You get people that direct their anger at you. So hats off to you, Joel. I also know that you've shared some good stuff yourself, Erasmus. So hats off to you guys, man. And anybody that's trying their best to illuminate the truth. And I think the important thing, guys, I like to always just try to reframe it this way, is while we try to share our perception, our perception, we've all got a limited perception. It's impossible to know everything. While we try to share our perception of truth, let's not relinquish and forget about the principles of humanity. Like a human life is a human life. It's not that one human life holds more value than another or one person being murdered is more of an atrocity than another. It's all terrible. And in that way, we all have like a moral duty to, in fact, become aware that there is this insidious element that engages in psychological warfare because they have these ulterior motives. And it's common. It's thousands and thousands of years old. This is as old as the human story. And now they have the weaponry of social media. So we have to be, and I know it's difficult because sometimes time is of the essence, but we have to think twice before we share. We have to say, what's the ramifications of this? What if I'm wrong? And we need to do our due diligence and provide authentic sources to the best of our capability. Yeah, I agree, man. A hundred percent, man. I'm just wondering, Gavin, do you have any commentary or research into obviously the main alternative media talking points right now is that Israel had a huge hand in creating Hamas and is very much invested in Hamas being the elected government? That's an actual thing. Unfortunately, when people hear that, because again, it sounds so insane, they just become dismissive. They don't know. Oh, that's the funniest thing in the world. No, it's the actual truth to that. So as is true with all establishment authorities engaged in this Machiavellian politics, they will oftentimes, we saw it in Syria, we saw it in Libya when they got rid of Gaddafi. Same thing about the origins of the Balfour Declaration and the Hussein McMahon correspondence where they'll make promises and they'll build up a particular element. Also what happened with the Afghan-Soviet war and the rise of the Taliban, Operation Cyclone, they'll build these people up, they'll arm them, they'll train them. And then once they have used them up, then they will either get rid of them, but that's still a useful chess piece on the board. Terrorism has been a very useful weapon historically for the US government, for example, like in Libya. Oh, we're going to go in Libya to liberate the people, which we now know was all about lies, but they could use that as, oh, we're the benevolent protectors, even though what's going on there is actually being facilitated by terrorists, but we need to intervene to help. Okay, but you created the problem, now you're giving the solution. (1:42:50 - 1:44:56) So I haven't elucidated it in absolute meticulous detail, but I do know that that's the methodology that they used. And based on my understanding, my thorough, cogent understanding that has gone on for many, many years, and I've worked my arse off to develop this awareness. So I hope it doesn't come across as being arrogant, but that's certainly not my intention. I mean, look, there's a lot more that I don't know than I do know. But in this particular regard, I'm almost certain that they used their Hamas organization, if not in its totality, at least certain sleeper cells, sleeper individuals within the organization, as a chess piece on the board for their own dealings and doings. And this is standard procedure, guys. False flag attacks, and I'm not saying that's 100% what happened, which I'll never do unless I have incontrovertible evidence, but false flag attacks are unfortunately very common. And their historical willingness, governments of all sides, including the US government through Operation Northwoods, which never went through, fortunately. The one that did go through was Operation Gladio, people can look into that. But they are willing to sacrifice innocent lives, including children, in pursuit of a greater objective. And that's because they don't value human life. Yeah. It's like the audacity for them to throw around the word terrorist. And, you know, barely anyone is looking at them, you know, like the actual fucking terrorists. It's gaslighting. They are experts in gaslighting and psychological manipulation. So they are the worst of the worst of the worst on a level of fault that I don't think any of us even fully understand. Yeah. And that's why you get some people, they'll make the leap, like, oh, these are reptilians and stuff, because it's so inhumane. And I'm not saying that that can't be true. You know, I'm not, I recognise how little we do know. (1:44:56 - 1:46:06) But my point being, like, they're so crazy, and they're so fucked up in their heads, that who knows what these people are really about? Like, what are they doing at the deepest level? Yeah. Why do you think that there's such, like, obviously, you know, people have described Gaza as an open-air prison. We've all seen the footage. There's numerous documentaries. They turn on and off access to water, electricity, food, you know, at their own discretion. I mean, I've got my own theories around this. But why do you think there's such a vested interest in what ultimately seems to be genocide and the eradication of this population? I think that, first of all, I want to just validate or provide people with a source in which they can validate the claims of, like, an open-air prison. Because I've heard influencers, very popular influencers, say, oh, no, that's not true. And they give these very unique examples of Palestinians that are thriving. And that is true. That does happen. But I want to refer people, and I'm just going to share the screen on this before I forget, because it's so important, man. (1:46:07 - 1:51:54) I want to share people to a website called Breaking the Silence. Oh, yes. And he has that human shield thing for you guys to see. Israel faces human shield claim. This was in 2004. And they literally tied this little boy to their vehicle while they were engaging in putting down protests, which is insane, right? So there's palpable evidence right there. Boom. But he has this website. It's called Breaking the Silence. Man, it has so much testimony of actual Israeli military fighters. So people that were working at the borders, working at the checkpoints, people that would ransack the houses, people that would detain their children, people that were just occupying them. This is where you want to go to find out what's going on. You don't want to go to the news sources and the politicians and the social media influencers. Go to, and I'm not saying that there's going to be, you won't find military individuals that are going to lie, because sure, that's there too. But if you're lying and you're working in the military, the consequences of that is that you might get a promotion from the establishment, from the government, which is to say you don't really have any motive, which is to say there's plenty motive to maintain the official government line. Whereas these people who are speaking out against the Israeli military and what's really going on there and confessing to the horrible things that they did and that they were a part of, they have nothing to gain from that, guys. Logically speaking, right? Like you there, I did these horrible things, I'm truly sorry. And then what happens? They become targets of their own government as, oh, you know, these are unpatriotic people and so on and so forth. And I'm accustomed to this because like 12 years ago, I went through testimony of US soldiers that were confessing to war crimes. And back then people said, oh, no, it's impossible until they started to see it. And this is where you go. You need to go to the people that are actually there. So breaking the silence is a really good place for people to check out. Yeah. Now, in regards, sorry, John, I didn't mean to sidestep your question over there. Can you just give me a quick refresher, man? Oh, it was just like, what do you think is their vested interest in like what ultimately seems to be the eradication? Oh yeah, eliminating them? I'm going to be honest with you. I don't fully know, man. That's a tough, yeah, that is a tough one to answer. Like what is the actual motive? Well, I think in many ways they've inculcated a genuine hatred. You also find this when you really dig into what's going on with the settler population, with a lot of the settlers that live there. There's a rabid hatred towards a lot of the Palestinian people. I'm not saying that all Jews are like that at all, because like I said, man, there's a massive demographic. We can even go through some of the authorities, credentialed authorities, well-respected authorities that are speaking out against what's going on in Palestine, and they're totally opposed to the Zionist government, which has been the case from the beginning, so that everybody knows from the very beginning. But it may just be part of the nature of the control there, like that bloodlust. And I suppose if there is no element of potential internal subversion, it strengthens the greater establishment power. But that's just me speculating. I actually don't know. From my own ruminating, it's like if we do take the macro perspective that the Israeli government is acting as some kind of rogue, psychopathic, narcissistic entity, then even a single Palestinian life ultimately represents the lie, right? A hundred percent, and an act of rebellion. Yeah. And at the end of the day, you know, that's such a good point that you make, man, because historically, that has been the one thing that has really gotten under the ruling class's skin. I mean, dating back to antiquity, when people, no matter how poor, no matter how many, how few, or they refuse to bow down, they refuse to comply. And there's a great spirit of rebellion that is personified by the Palestinian people. And I'm not talking about Hamas, guys. Hamas and the Palestinian people are not the same. I'm just saying to anybody that always goes there in their minds, I'm talking about the people who will pick up a stone and throw it at a tank because of the injustice that's taking place. Terrorism, right? Terrorism. A hundred percent. And that's how it gets framed, man. It's insane. I'm sure you guys may also recall there was that one young girl, I can't remember her name now, but her mother formed when she was, this was several years ago, and she formed an encounter with the Israeli military, but the Israeli military guys slapped her, and then she slapped the Israeli military back. And then they charged the mother with incitement for filming this. So you have an encounter with police or whatever, and you film it for your own safety, and now it's incitement? That's crazy. That's absolutely nuts, man. What's been quite eye-opening for me, just in terms of the truth community landscape, since this issue has come into the fray, is just like, I think during the COVID years, there began this conflation between conservatism and truth seekers, right? Or people with conservative values and those who are actively seeking the truth. And those who seem to be very aware of media propaganda, media lies to pursue our agenda, now all of a sudden, I don't know where it's coming from, but seem to not be willing to question that the media might be lying or the media might be exaggerating in order to further agenda when it comes specifically to Israel. 100%. So I think it's all done very skillfully. (1:51:57 - 1:53:30) No, I was just going to say, yeah, it's so interesting to see things from a political standpoint, even on the left, you have people who are more in line with anti-colonialism, and so they're in support of what's going on, or maybe more in line with questioning the tactics of the Israeli government. So it's like, there's this flip, not with everyone, but just, and I think some people are having mind fucks. 100%. No, no, what you guys are saying is so true, and man, I'm sorry that I actually didn't address this sooner, because this is on the same footing. In fact, it may be even more so than the religious story of the promised land behind it. And that's also what a lot of conservatives are invested in, the way that it's framed in the media, which is that, okay, immediately, because this group is now supporting this, let's say you have NBC and they're kind of speaking the truth. And I like to say a broken clock is even right twice a day. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. And that's why you'll see Fox News, it'll occasionally share some truth. That's why you'll see NBC, it'll occasionally share some truth, because you can't always be deceptive. And what I've found, and it's very interesting, I actually think it's a strategy of the ruling class. So during the so-called pandemic, for example, we would see that when genuine scientists, and I wrote a blog about this, and I spoke about it also when I did that very lengthy five-hour presentation, they would associate every scientist that's speaking out against the lockdowns as somehow being associated with the right wing, as somehow being associated with Donald Trump. (1:53:30 - 1:54:01) And they would largely silence these really intelligent, kind of secular in relation to politics, they don't really care for politics. These scientists, they would kind of minimize their voices and the ones that had some kind of conservative leaning, and they would amplify them as loud as they could. Or they would talk about, oh, Donald Trump said this. And then through what I spoke about earlier, the tactic of you have these very skillful associations, that's actually called the associative memory. So you target the associative memory. It's an unconscious thing, people don't realize this happens, it's called classical conditioning. (1:54:03 - 1:57:52) And it goes all the way back to Pavlov's dogs. You may have heard of Pavlov's dogs, and he learned that every time the dogs would see his assistant, they would feed them, they would salivate. They weren't actually eating, but they would salivate because they associated her with this. And people that have a dog, if you get out the leash, they get excited because they associate it, there's an emotional association there. There was a guy by the name of John Watson, and he conducted the little Albert experiment, where he took a small baby, very unethical experiment, and he put all kinds of different things. He put a mouse in front of this baby, he put a monkey in front of the baby, he put newspaper, burning newspaper. And the baby didn't really have much of a reaction to any of this, but he did have a reaction, a favorable reaction to the mouse, he wanted to play with him. So he took down these observations. And then what he did was he gave the mouse again to little Albert, and every time little Albert went, he was smiling, he wanted to play with the mouse, he would make a horrible loud noise. And he did it over and over until the baby was terrorized by that sound, and he associated it with that mouse. This kind of propaganda is inculcated into every aspect of society, both so-called good and so-called bad. And so we know about the propaganda campaign in Nepal, where the FBI, for example, they engaged in an entrapment, they would target poor Muslims, they would set up a bombing, and then they would say, oh, they're terrorists. You do that association long enough, people will unthinkingly go ahead and regurgitate that. They did the same thing during the so-called pandemic. So they associated over and over and over again, that if you are opposed to the lockdowns, oh, you must be right-wing, you must be a Donald Trump supporter. So it's actually a very skilled tactic. And what I see them doing is because when they would expose something about the lockdown being bad, they would report it through Fox News, they would report it, or there was one guy, Michael Levitt, a Nobel Award-winning physicist. He explained how Fox News would have him on, but the more liberal media wouldn't have him on. Why? The guy is not politically associated with anything. He's a Nobel Prize-winning physicist. That doesn't make any sense. But if he's exclusively on these conservative media outlets, then he can be associated with that, or they'll have it on the Daily Mail. I've seen it. The Daily Mail, I remember with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group in Libya, that whole terrorist cell that was sponsored by the US government, there was a investigation that showed that US governments and their allies financed terrorists. It wasn't published in any media outlet, but it was in the Daily Mail. When you do this repeatedly, it creates tribalism. So now what do you have? You have the liberal media only speaking out about what's going on there. And then on the other side, the conservative media is not doing it. You're not having an objective human approach. And what I would recommend to people in that regard is, I mean, listen to this podcast. That's a good start. And look at history. Look at the correspondences in history and then do your very best. I know that we don't all have time to dig into these things, but do your best to find somebody that is morally consistent in the interpretations of what's going on. And you can see on some level that they're not dominated by tribalism, but rather the pursuit of truth. It's so important to look for that and then just to recognize that psychologically we all have been programmed, including myself, in one way or another. Like I said, I initially believed in the whole concept of like, oh, you know, it's just, this is a promised land and this was God's chosen and blah, blah, blah, blah, without opening my mind to the other end of it. We just have to accept, like, we don't know everything. And emotions, they convolute our capability to critically think. So it's very challenging. It's very tricky, but at the very least, people who don't have the time, you need to make the time, you need to prioritize the time because human lives are at stake. Your human well-being is at stake. Your children are going to inherit this world. You need to make the time to at least seek out a source that has been morally consistent in their principles. Well said, man. (1:57:54 - 1:59:20) Yeah. Such an incredible moment. It's tragic though, man. What's going on? It's tragic, man. No, it's horrible, man. I mean, it's like knowing that all these innocent people, you know, have been impacted and almost pawns in like a greater game. I mean, it definitely brings in that like righteous form of anger, you know, like feeling this injustice, you know. Can I say something about that real quick? This is another thing that they play on. I might have mentioned this to you guys before, right? Professor Paul Bloom of Yale University, and this is way like we're talking about an understanding of human psychology and yourself and what applies to the micro, applies to the macro. So what's true in yourself is generally true with others. And they say psychopaths, right? Which is a very small minority. But he did studies, you can look them up, called The Moral Life of Babies. That's how it's commonly referred to. Professor Paul Bloom of Yale University. And this was studies done over like a two-year period on human nature. They were in fact award-winning studies. Although I've never heard anybody speak about them except myself. I mean, they were reported in media outlets, including establishment media outlets, but it's just, it's such an explosive study that this needs to be like a cornerstone of education for everybody. And anyways, in the study, he did research on babies as young as three months old, and people can just go look up the methodology. I don't want to stretch out the podcast too long. But what he came to the conclusion of is that we share a moral compass, that we actually want what's best for one another. (1:59:20 - 2:03:33) We have human values, we have principles, and these things are not something that we actually get from society or religion, although those things can impact it later in life. But one of the key things, one of the key takeaways for me, is that we have something called righteous anger. The exact word you just said. And what righteous anger is, is he would find that when he would conduct these tests, one of the tests that he did was he would take puppets, and these puppets would play together. And then one of the puppets played the role of being a bully, and it would play unfair, and it would do horrible things. And then afterwards, he would give the children, which one do you want to play with? And they would always choose the one that wasn't a bully. But some of the kids, a significant demographic, they in fact slapped the bully puppet. Righteous anger. And we see this in every element and aspect of society. We know biologically for ourselves, if you find out that there's a pedophile harming an innocent child, what do you want to do? Let's hang that motherfucker, right? What is the common theme in the most popular Hollywood films? And Hollywood films, that's funny, but it's in fact a good standard to measure human psychology worldwide, because Hollywood films are popular. What's popular in the US is going to be popular in China. It's going to be popular in Russia. And the common theme is the good guy overcomes the bad guy. So we have this inborn moral compass. It's in fact part of our human blueprint. And if we can just remind ourselves of that, and that is a small minority, and this has got nothing to do with skin color, it's got nothing to do with race, but there is a small minority of psychopaths, and they come in all skin colors, and they will wear the sheepskin of religion. You know, like King Leopold. King Leopold, the horrible things he did in the Belgian Congo, he did that under the auspices of, oh, I'm going to be a good Christian, and God has called me to do this work. And it resulted in millions and millions of people, and what people refer to as genocide. Right? Just because somebody says that this is a religious thing, or it's beneficial, and it's for the good of the people, historically the rulers have done that because it's the proverbial wolf in sheepskin. But if we can recognize that we are fundamentally the same, irrespective of skin color, irrespective of culture, irrespective of all of these things that weaponize us against each other, then we can start to ascertain and figure out who is the real enemy, and that's where we can work from. That's it, bro. That's the end. Epic, man. Thanks for all the research. Thanks for sharing all this. You definitely opened up my eyes to a lot of things. Dude, we're so excited to get this out there and have our audience listen to it, and hopefully everyone just shares it. Hopefully, man. I try to always entrust, especially after I went from having literally tens of millions of, reaching tens of millions of people every month, I went to that to reaching tens of people. You know what I mean? You have to have some kind of faith and belief in the goodness of the intangible universe, or God, or whatever you would like to frame it as, that what you are putting out there with those good intentions, it's going to reach the right mind. I also try to remind myself, in the past, historically, man, you had people that would go on foot into other countries and they would hope that they could get four people to listen to them over the period of 10 years, way back in the day. You have people that, they died, they were murdered because they were just trying to bring some knowledge to a publication that was forbidden to the people. So if they can do that, man, rock and roll, let's do it, brother. Let's keep going. Yeah, dude. Oh, man. I mean, just to add one more thing, there's a natural law that exists. There's a universal order and balance to all things, man. And as tyrannical and as horrific as even the COVID vaccine lockdown measures were, that ultimately led to a worldwide greater awareness as to the truth about vaccines and tyrannical governments all around the world. And as horrific and tragic as this event is, I believe this has completely pushed this issue into the forefront of the collective consciousness. And ultimately, I think this is going to backlash on the psychopaths. (2:03:33 - 2:04:04) Oh, 100%. I totally agree with you, man. Yeah, man. I mean, at the end of the day, it's like truth wins. And one of my favorite quotes of all time is what? Three things cannot remain hidden for long, the sun, the moon, and the truth. And even if it takes 100 years, 50 years, 1,000 years, man, that's where I put my faith back into that universal goodness. And I think we'll see what happens, man. But each of us got to do our part. Ultimately, everyone will be humbled by the truth. (2:04:05 - 2:06:13) And some of us learn that lesson quicker than others. For some, it may take lifetimes, but it'll come for you. There's no question there. Gavin, bro, you, your research, your mind, your heart, like, bro, you were meant to exist right now. We were meant to have this conversation. And it's such a rare gift that you have, bro. And all I can do is say that Yerasimos and I, at least, are just incredibly grateful, bro, for who you are, for what you do, and for your ongoing pursuits of disseminating objective reality and objective truth, and guiding people towards what that actually is on a deeper level, man. So much love, bro. Yeah, dude, so much love. And likewise, man. Yeah, man, so much respect. And just also the humility in the good sense of even though you've put all these hours and hours and hours into the research that you've done, even hearing you talk, there is this humility where you're like, listen, figure it out, search for yourself, check it out. Like, yeah, I'm sharing some information. You're not coming in here proselytizing, like, I am Gavin Nascimento, and I have the truth, and you must listen to me. And that's a red flag, man. That's always a red flag. Yeah, that's always a red flag. So this is why I like to tell people, like, we can't get too hung up on fixating on following human leaders, because as human beings, I love human beings. Human beings are so beautiful, like, when you get to know them as an individual. George Carlin spoke about this, how he hates groups, but he loves individuals. But human beings are flawed, just in relation to our capability to perceive the greater truth of reality. It's inescapable, right? Like, we don't know what this is all about. So that always encourages me to be humble. And immediately, what we need to recognize is rather than being guided by our narrow perceptions, and the people that are trying to hijack those perceptions, because it's always going to be incomplete, like you can't delegate and stand up on a pedestal and say, I know the truth, because it's just not possible right now. (2:06:13 - 2:06:52) There's certain truths we can establish and ascertain, and we can use that to guide us. But above and beyond all else, I'm a firm believer we need to be guided by our human principles, right? And recognize that truth is infallible. Human beings are not infallible. So you must try to pursue the guidance of the truth. Integrity is infallible. Human beings are fallible. So you must try to pursue the guidance of integrity. Humanity as a principle, compassion, kindness, all of these really good things, those are infallible, right? We can argue that those are always good things, virtually. When they're authentic, those are good things. Like you want to help. You genuinely want to be a better person. You want to create positive change. (2:06:53 - 2:07:26) So we must do our best to strive to embody that, and then to also follow the people that embody that to the best of their capability. And always be humble, that no human being, including ourselves, can fully embody that with invulnerability. Gavin, man, how can people support you, your research, your work? People can, you know, in terms of actual support, Patreon is the place where I'm at right now. (2:07:27 - 2:09:54) I've got so much craziness going on, but I have an idea. I don't want to say too much, but I have a great idea to even move myself away from Patreon. It's so important. I think as an entire community, we have to be in a position now where we have a stronger organic relationship with our supporters, because it's infinitely better to have 50 people that are truly down for the cause, that they want to create positive change, just like you want to. And they see that, you know, I can't necessarily do what they were doing on the front lines, but I can give some material or financial support. I can give some moral support. I can help share. I'm creatively capable in design, whatever it is, and surround yourself with those people, rather than getting caught up in people that just want fast food. What's cheapest? What's freest? Because then you're going to get junk information. So I think it's about elevating ourselves into a place where we have a dynamic that can be monetized, it's financially reliable. And through that monetization, it creates more stability for us. As you guys know, this is very challenging work. And you guys are doing an awesome job, by the way. I actually look at you guys. I revere what you guys are doing in that regard. I want to do something similar in that regard. And then you use that stability, because we all need financial stability. As I say, you don't need money, but on some level, you need money. And the more positive change you want to create, the more funds are needed. And ironically, this is in fact exactly what the ruling class have done. They have used material wealth, which they have come to control because they are so insidious, as a means of creating the world that they want for themselves. And I think we need to start to maneuver towards that direction. So I'm working on a digital school, very similar to what you guys are doing. And I'm sure we'll work together at some point, which would be amazing, because you guys are just, we cut from the same cloth. But otherwise, people can just look up my name and find me on the usual outlets. I don't post that much. But when I feel like there's something really important to share, then I try to do so. Awesome. Guys, I can't recommend enough searching out Gavin for yourself and staying connected. When he speaks, it definitely matters. And I definitely pay attention. And I know it's coming from the greatest of integrity. Gavin bro, thank you so much for sharing this discussion with us, man. We appreciate it. Everyone else, thank you so much for listening. If you got value out of this, if you know someone else who's going to get value out of this, please share it. Please share it. We'll see you next time.