This video debunks the myth driven by quakery that salt causes high blood pressure. The narrator argues that the idea is a fabrication and that there is no strong evidence to support it.
The author criticizes a recent paper that recommends limiting salt intake, pointing out that some of the authors have personal biases towards plant-based diets.
They also critique a study that claims to show the negative effects of sodium, arguing that the reductions in blood pressure observed were minimal and not indicative of hypertension.
The author further highlights that salt restriction does not reverse high blood pressure and may even have negative effects, such as increasing stress hormones and insulin resistance. They conclude that salt is not only not bad but may actually be protective against certain health conditions.
Overall, the author argues that high blood pressure is primarily driven by stress rather than salt intake. While restricting salt may cause minor drops in blood pressure, it is merely a band-aid solution that masks the symptoms of the underlying problem.
This is evidenced by the fact that many hypertension medications work by blocking the pathways activated by salt restriction. The author suggests focusing on complete nutrition, optimizing metabolism, and reducing stress as more effective approaches for managing blood pressure.
This YouTube video discusses the differences between sugar and corn syrup.
While table sugar is derived from sugar cane and consists of glucose and fructose, corn syrup is made from corn starch that is broken down into individual glucose molecules and partially converted into fructose. A 2010 analysis found that high fructose corn syrup contains more carbohydrates than the listed value, particularly in the form of shorter chains of starch.
Interestingly, studies have shown that sucrose, or table sugar, is a superior source of energy compared to corn syrup, with animals fed sucrose having increased energy expenditure and staying leaner and warmer. This challenges the assumption that high fructose corn syrup and table sugar are essentially the same.
Animal studies have shown that consuming high fructose corn syrup leads to more weight gain and obesity-related characteristics, while sucrose tends to increase lean mass. Additionally, high fructose corn syrup has been associated with liver fat gain, unlike table sugar. These effects are not dependent on caloric intake, suggesting that high fructose corn syrup may have unique properties.
The video argues that water fluoridation has poisoned our brains, discussing the politicization, censorship, and dismissal of research on the neurotoxicity of fluoride. It explains how fluoride can accumulate in the brain, disrupt energy production, and induce degenerative changes, leading to diseases such as Alzheimer’s. The detrimental effects of fluoride on the thyroid gland, cognitive function, IQ scores, and mental disorders like ADHD and dementia are also addressed. The narrator questions the need for fluoride in drinking water and raises concerns about the long-term consequences of fluoride exposure.
The video begins by discussing the politicization and censorship surrounding the topic of water fluoridation. The authors of a paper on fluoride’s potential neurotoxicity faced criticism and dismissal from peers, despite presenting their findings at an international meeting. The power players in industry, government, and academia actively suppress and dismiss information suggesting fluoride’s harmful effects. The excerpt also addresses the potential hazards of ingesting fluoride. Animal studies have shown adverse cognitive changes even at lower concentrations, similar to what humans are exposed to long-term. The concentration of fluoride in the blood, induced by even “low” levels of fluoride exposure, is in line with what is seen in animal models. The higher the plasma levels of fluoride, the greater the risk of dental fluorosis and accumulation in tissues.
Fluoride, which is commonly added to water supplies, can build up in various organs, including the brain. The developing fetus is particularly susceptible to fluoride accumulation in the brain. Even adults growing up in areas with high fluoride levels have shown accumulation in cerebrospinal fluid, indicating that it can cross the blood-brain barrier. It is argued that the argument that “it’s just a little bit of fluoride” is irrelevant because fluoride is a cumulative poison, meaning it builds up in the body over time. The video then discusses the importance of energy production in maintaining good health, particularly in the brain. Interference with energy production can lead to degeneration and diseases like Alzheimer’s. Fluoride has been shown to disrupt energy production at the mitochondrial level, induce degenerative changes in the brain, and cause oxidative stress.
The detrimental effects of fluoride on the thyroid gland and the brain can also not be ignored. Fluoride has been found to inhibit thyroid function by displacing iodide, impairing the synthesis of thyroid hormones. This disruption in thyroid hormone metabolism is linked to various health problems and lower intelligence. Additionally, fluoride induces oxidative stress and inflammation, which damage the thyroid and contribute to cognitive abnormalities. Studies have also shown that fluoride can cause depression, decrease energy production in the cortex, and lead to the death of brain cells. The excerpt also highlights the controversial topic of fluoride’s impact on the pineal gland, which is responsible for producing melatonin. Fluoride calcifies the pineal gland, inhibiting its ability to produce melatonin and disrupting sleep patterns. Furthermore, fluoride exposure has been associated with pineal gland dysfunction, resulting in mental disorders like ADHD, Autism Spectrum Disorders, and Alzheimer’s disease. A study in Scotland even found that higher fluoride consumption was linked to nearly three times the risk of developing dementia, suggesting there may be no safe levels of fluoride when it comes to dementia risk.
Evidence from animal and human studies links fluoride exposure to cognitive changes and conditions such as hyperactivity, cognitive deficits, ADHD, and impaired learning, cognition, and memory. The prevalence of ADHD has been found to be correlated with water fluoridation, and studies have shown a negative association between fluoride exposure and intelligence metrics, resulting in a decrease of approximately 7 IQ points in fluoridated areas. Dental fluorosis, which affects over 70% of children and adolescents in the United States, is also considered an indicator of decreased IQ. Critics claim that the fluoride levels in these studies are too high, but many of them actually fall within the limits set by the EPA and WHO. For example, a study in China showed a dose-dependent decrease in IQ, with a mean IQ dropping over 20 points at a fluoride concentration of 4.16 ppm, which is higher than the EPA limit of 4.0 ppm.
Several studies also demonstrate the potential negative effects of fluoride exposure on IQ scores. The narrator mentions research that found a dose-dependent decrease in IQ scores in offspring with increasing levels of fluoride concentration, as well as a study that associated fluoride exposure in mothers with a near 10-point drop in performance IQ in their formula-fed children. These findings suggest that even the so-called “optimal” levels of fluoride recommended by public health organizations may still have detrimental effects on cognitive function. The excerpt raises concerns about the long-term consequences of fluoride exposure and questions the need for fluoride in drinking water altogether.
In the YouTube video titled “Geert’s Concern about the New Covid Variant (JN.1),” Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, a virologist with a background in molecular biology and immunology, expresses his concerns about the harmful effects of Covid-19 vaccines and the business model of the pharmaceutical industry. He warns of the potential dangers of focusing solely on vaccine solutions, particularly in light of the emergence of new Covid variants.
Dr. Vanden Bossche argues that these vaccines do not fit the definition of a vaccine, as they cannot be controlled in terms of dose or duration. He also discusses the concept of “immune refocusing,” which can hinder the immune system’s ability to adapt when encountering a new variant, and the phenomenon of “immo quiet” or “immo silent” epitopes, which can recognize previously masked antigenic sites within the Spike protein but do not effectively neutralize the virus, instead enhancing its infectiousness.
Dr. Vanden Bossche warns of the emergence of more infectious variants like JN.1 and GN1 due to suboptimal immune pressure and immune focusing towards cellular responses.
Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche also expresses deep concerns about the evolution of the Covid virus and the diminishing effectiveness of vaccines. He explains that virulence-inhibiting antibodies are decreasing, putting pressure on the virus and making vaccines ineffective. Furthermore, the lack of proper training of the innate immune system due to vaccine breakthrough infections is leading to a corrupted adaptive immune system.
Vanden Bossche anticipates a new, more virulent variant could emerge soon, impacting vaccinated individuals more severely than unvaccinated ones. Despite missing the timeline of the new variant’s emergence, he emphasizes the importance of conveying truthful information and taking action to address the real issue – the evolving crisis caused by the virus. Geert encourages viewers to consider his message and acknowledges the possibility of being wrong.
Detailed Description
Geert Vanden Bossche is a veterinary medicine and virology expert with a background in molecular biology and immunology. He expresses his concern about the current state of the Covid-19 pandemic, stating that he is more worried now than he was even at the beginning. He goes on to describe his academic and professional background, including his work in the vaccine industry and with global health organizations like the Gates Foundation and Gavi. Throughout the interview, Gert shares his expertise and insights on the Covid-19 pandemic and its current challenges.
Geert also expresses his concerns about the new Covid variant (JN.1) and reflects on his past criticisms of mass vaccination efforts, which he believed would have detrimental consequences. He recalls raising warnings about the polio and Ebola vaccinations and being met with opposition from health organizations and the industry, but ultimately being proven right. Despite feeling isolated and criticized for his critical voice, Geert remains steadfast in his belief that truth and science are powerful allies. Despite the challenges, he acknowledges the importance of vaccines and the difficult decision that comes with challenging an industry that has provided significant benefits to the world.
Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche argues that the vaccines do not protect against infection, but only against the disease. In a global health context, preventing infection is mandatory to fight a pandemic, and failing to do so results in the virus spreading, generating new variants that can evade the protection provided by the vaccines. This results in a self-perpetuating cycle of variant generation, turning a natural pandemic into an immune escape pandemic. Despite the obvious issues, some people still argue that the vaccines protect against severe disease and covid-19 related illness. Dr. Vanden Bossche is flabbergasted that this argument is still used, as it does not consider the global health context and the potential for immune escape variants
Geert then discusses his concerns surrounding the continued vaccination efforts despite the emergence of new Covid variants. He argues that the current focus on vaccination does not address the long-term consequences, including the potential overburdening of healthcare systems. Geert asserts that heavily vaccinated populations are experiencing a spiral of transmission, and viable options for controlling the virus appear to have been exhausted. From a virological, immunological, and clinical perspective, the virus continues to evolve, with no herd immunity or endemicity in sight. Geert expresses worry that this cycle of breakthrough infections and immun escape could eventually lead to something very serious
Geert further expresses concerns about the current vaccines for COVID-19, specifically the mRNA vaccines. He argues that these vaccines do not fit the definition of a vaccine as they cannot be controlled in terms of dose, location, or duration. Geert explains that these vaccines allow the proteins to be produced in the body of the vaccinated person and spread throughout the body, which is unprecedented in vaccinology. From a definition perspective, he does not consider these vaccines to be vaccines, despite their ability to generate immune responses against the antigen produced in the human cell. Geert also mentions that these vaccines can induce immune refocusing, which sets up a chain of immune escape. The speaker points to a scientific paper published in October 2021 that shows the response of the neutralization response with regards to the B.1 vent variant booster, which is part of his argument against the effectiveness and safety of the current COVID-19 vaccines
Virologist Geert also discusses the concept of “immune refocusing” in relation to the new Covid variant (JN.1). He explains that, even without a booster, the strongest antibody response to the original variant is still present, creating a focus on the original variant in the immune system. This can hinder the immune system’s ability to adapt when encountering a new variant. While immune refocusing is a known term in vaccinology, the speaker notes that they have not seen this phenomenon occur naturally before. The immune system’s response to vaccine breakthrough infections can boost previously induced antibodies, allowing them to still have some neutralizing effect, but this effect is short-lived. These antibodies, which initially have lower affinity and target less immunogenic epitopes, can drive the propagation of more infectious variants due to their suboptimal immune pressure
When discussing the potential disadvantages of mRNA vaccines in regards to the production of low affinity antibodies against dominant epitopes, Geers explains that this phenomenon leads to immune pressure and the selective propagation of more infectious variants. According to Geert, the prolonged expression of the Spike protein on the surface of transfected cells during mRNA vaccine production induces imperfect low affinity antibodies, which automatically prioritize subdominant epitopes. He states that after the second dose of mRNA vaccines, cross-neutralizing antibodies against several different variants can be observed. However, Geert expresses concern that this immune response will not improve and instead suggest that administering vaccines or booster doses will accelerate immune refocusing events and immunp escape. He emphasizes that the neutralization observed with these antibodies is not real, but rather pseudo-neutralization due to their low affinity
Geert Vanden Bossche continues by expressing his concerns about the effectiveness of existing antibodies against the new covid variant. He explains that these antibodies, which are called low Affinity antibodies, interact with the virus through multiple arms, creating a multimeric distribution on the surface of the virus. These antibodies can only react with the virus when it is presented as a multimeric structure and cannot react with the monovalent spike. This results in pseudo-neutralizing activity, meaning that these antibodies can only mitigate the infection, not inhibit it completely. Due to the prolonged suboptimal functional activity, immun escape is tremendously driven, leading to the succession of more infectious variants sharing most of their mutations. Geert criticizes the scientists for misleading information presented without testing the antibodies using monovalent spike in an Eliza assay, which would reveal their true neutralizing capacity. He summarizes that while antibodies may lose their neutralizing capacity, they can still attach to single particles and have an infection-enhancing effect, making the situation complex
Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche goes into more detail on the concept of “imuno quiet” or “imuno silent” epitopes, which are non-neutralizing antibodies that can recognize previously masked conserved antigenic sites within the Spike protein. These antibodies have a high affinity for these sites but do not effectively neutralize the virus, instead enhancing its infectiousness by promoting the stabilization of viral aggregates. Over time, with each new immune response following a vaccine breakthrough infection, the immune system may focus on less immunodominant domains of the virus, generating antibodies with even lower affinity, promoting the formation of even larger aggregates that are more readily taken up by antigen-presenting cells
Geert explains that antigen-presenting cells love to pick up larger particles and induce CTL responses, which is why the evolution of JN.1 is so worrisome. While Public Health authorities claim that JN.1 is not more virulent than other variants, Geert contends that this overlooks the message that JN.1 is conveying through its mutations. Upon analyzing these mutations, one can understand the immune pressure that caused them and predict what is to come. Geert finds it suspicious that vaccines are still effectively neutralizing these newly emerging variants despite the changes in the spike protein. He shares images from research papers to demonstrate the frightening continuous evolution of the virus, with mutations on top of previous ones. Geert criticizes scientists and health experts for only presenting data after a boost and claiming the presence of neutralizing antibodies, but these may be low Affinity antibodies that interact with the virus in a way that generates dampened infectiousness, immune escape, and suboptimal immune pressure.
Geert Vanden Bossche also expresses concern over the new Covid variant, GN1. He explains that monovalent antibodies can only interact with the multimeric presentation of the spike on a viral particle or on viral aggregates, limiting their neutralizing effect. He further states that highly vaccinated populations have developed antibodies that stabilize aggregates, which are now primarily taken up by antigen presenting cells and driving mitigation of infection. By killing infected cells, cytotoxic T-cells play a role in mitigating the infection, but this process also drives the emergence of more infectious variants like GN1. Observations include GN1 spreading like wildfire, a surge in hospitalization, severe disease, and death, and the emergence of mutations in non-spike viral proteins that enhance infection. Geert concludes that GN1 is the result of immune pressure on the virus.
Geert Vanden Bossche explains that these newly synthesized antibodies can promote the stabilization of larger viral aggregates, which are taken up by antigen-presenting cells and stimulate CTL (cytotoxic T-lymphocytes) responses. CTLs are not specific to the Spike protein, but bind strongly to the universal epitope. Geert theorizes that this shift in the immune response from humoral responses to cellular responses may lead to the emergence of more infectious variants, as the mutations are directed against the universal epitope. He also criticizes the claim that T-cells are important in mitigating the infection, stating that there is no evidence of memory T-cells being involved, and they can only interact once the cell is already infected. Geert concludes that the new variant, although not itself more virulent, indicates a shift in the immune focusing towards cellular responses, which could be leading to suboptimal immune pressure on viral infectiousness.
The virologist then discusses the shift from antibody-mediated immune response to cell-mediated response in dealing with new covid variants. He explains that as the concentration of neutralizing antibodies increases, they can mask newly discovered epitopes, allowing the immune system to recognize more conserved epitopes. This is referred to as immune refocusing. However, the speaker also notes that a dramatic stimulation of CTL responses, due to large aggregates, can overwhelm antigen-presenting cells and cause them to prioritize CTL stimulation over T-helper peptide stimulation. This can lead to a decline in antibodies and weaker rebooting of the immune response. The lower concentration of antibodies and diminishing affinity will then move the graph further to the right, indicating even more CTL stimulation and less stimulation of T-helper cells. Unfortunately, the speaker concludes that due to the antigen-presenting cells prioritizing CTL stimulation over T-helper peptide stimulation, none of the updated vaccines will effectively work
Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche expresses his alarm over the diminishing concentration of infection enhancing antibodies in individuals who have received booster shots, which he believes are responsible for inhibiting the virulence of the virus. He explains that these infection enhancing antibodies also block the transfer of the virus from dendritic cells to susceptible cells in the body, inhibiting virulence. The shift towards CTL-mediated mitigation of infection, according to Dr. Vanden Bossche, will result in a diminished concentration of these infection enhancing or virulence inhibiting antibodies, putting suboptimal immune pressure on viral virulence. He uses the examples of Omicron and the Harbinger variant to illustrate this concept, suggesting that a new variant could emerge very soon with heightened virulence due to the intense immune pressure on a small domain within the protective antigen. Dr. Vanden Bossche also explains that unvaccinated individuals, who have shifted towards their innate immune system, will not be affected by the new variant as their innate immunity can become stronger with training. However, he emphasizes that the issue is that vaccinated individuals, due to vaccine breakthrough infections and high antibody titers, have been unable to train their innate immune system, resulting in a corrupted adaptive immune system that is becoming increasingly useless as their last line of defense against virulence.
Geert Vanden Bossche explains that the virulence inhibiting antibodies are decreasing, putting pressure on the virus and making the vaccine ineffective. Additionally, he notes that the innate immune system wasn’t fully trained due to vaccine breakthrough infections being sidelined. Dr. Vanden Bossche predicts that when a new variant emerges, some unvaccinated individuals may experience completely asymptomatic or mild infections due to their immune systems being trained by more infectious variants. However, he also warns that the continuous exposure to the virus in a highly vaccinated community can pose a risk to everyone. He uses the analogy of physical training to explain the impact of infectious variants on the immune system and emphasizes that the nonvariant-specific innate immune system can deal with different types of variants as long as it is trained to handle a higher level of infectiousness.
Geert says the focus of the Covid crisis has shifted to a fight between those promoting vaccination and boosters, and those raising concerns about their safety, but that both parties are distracting from the real issue, which is the evolution of the virus. Geert warns that the virus is “running away with the bone” due to its rapid spread and immune pressure on virulence-inhibiting antibodies, and that memory T cells, which can mitigate infection, have not been shown to be induced by vaccines or natural infections. Geert anticipates a significant rise in mortality from Covid-19 and encourages viewers to be aware of this potential outcome.
Geert also discusses his concerns about the rapid progression of a new covid variant and the immense damage it is anticipated to cause. Although he admits to missing the timeline of its emergence, he emphasizes the significance of conveying truthful information. He explains that the immune refocusing mechanism, which allows the immune system to recover and prolong viral spread, no longer applies to this new variant as it progresses rapidly. He predicts that there will be a transition from asymptomatic infections among unvaccinated individuals to severe cases and deaths in vaccinated populations within a continuum. Geert urges that the damage will be enormous and emphasizes the reality of the evolving situation, which he believes is beyond our control
Geert argues that the neutralizing effect of antibodies against the new variant is much lower and Virus spreads as it is under infection mitigating pressure. The speaker asserts that there will be no more infectious variants, a new variant will emerge in highly vaccinated countries, the rate of mortality and morbidity will increase exponentially in vaccinated populations, and African populations will not be affected. He recommends that people who are thoroughly vaccinated take antivirus and predicts that there will be mandates for taking antivirals in the future. The speaker expresses his conviction that history will show that those who did not try to suppress the viral spread at this point will not be on the right side of history
Geert remarkedly expresses his deep concern about the current crisis caused by the new Covid variant. He believes that we are facing a monumental crisis and emphasizes the importance of taking action. Geert shares that he cannot accept the disaster as a human being but only accepts it as a scientist. He has done extensive research on the topic and asserted that all the elements of biophysics, immunology, virology, and vaccinology fit together in a way that doesn’t violate any laws or rules regarding these disciplines. Geert strongly believes that this is the truth and is preparing for the chaos that is coming. However, he criticizes health authorities for only looking at the surface of the situation and not examining what is happening beneath the surface, where the real danger lies. Geert’s passionate and convincing message highlights his commitment to humanity and his willingness to stand up and speak out against the crisis
At the end of the video, Geert acknowledges the possibility of being wrong but emphasizes that if his concerns about the new Covid variant prove to be true, the implications would be difficult for everyone.
In this video, Aleksandr Dugin, mentor of Vladimir Putin, discusses the Palestine-Israel conflict within the framework of the shift from a unipolar to a multipolar global order. He argues that Israel serves as a proxy for Western hegemony and that understanding geopolitical power dynamics is crucial for understanding their actions and motivations. Dugin emphasizes the need for unity among Islamic countries to resist Western control and establish their sovereignty. He also criticizes the West’s imposition of its values and rules on other civilizations and highlights the biases and double standards in Western media’s coverage of conflicts.
Dugin emphasizes the need for a belief system that promotes harmony and respect, criticizing the reputation of Israel and the United States’ support for it. Dugin predicts opposition against the West from the Muslim world and highlights the significance of the conflict surrounding the construction of the Third Temple in Jerusalem. He also discusses the potential for a nuclear conflict in the Middle East and the need for an ontological explanation to comprehend the ongoing crisis. Dugin concludes by urging for unity against a common enemy and expressing his hope for a free Palestine.
Detailed Description
Professor Alexander Dugin begins by discussing the Palestine-Israel conflict within the context of the transition from a unipolar to a multipolar world system. He highlights that Israel is a proxy for the hegemonic power of the West, which plays a significant role in the conflict. Dugin suggests that understanding the geopolitical balance of power is essential in comprehending the actions and motives of the Israelis.
Prof. Dugin then discusses the current global order and the potential shift towards multipolarity. He explains how the hegemonic power is resistant to allowing this new order to emerge, leading to conflicts, wars, and diplomatic confrontations. Dugin argues that understanding Israeli politics requires considering the psychology of the Israeli state, which is based on a radical vision of the chosen race and religion. He suggests that Israel sees itself as the main people on Earth and views any resistance as a radical humiliation. Dugin predicts that Israel’s response to Hamas attacks will be harsh, with the goal of full extermination and ethnic cleansing of Gaza. He emphasizes that Israel is being supported by the global hegemon in this endeavor.
Mr. Dugin goes on to discuss the situation in Gaza and the lack of a solid and clear Russian stance on it. He argues that while Russia has expressed its support for the Palestinian people and their struggle against Israel, it ultimately sees the issue as primarily a problem between Arabs or Muslims and Israel, with the support of the United States. Dugin suggests that if the Islamic world does not react forcefully against Israel and instead tries to find a solution through diplomatic channels, Russia cannot intervene directly. He also notes that during Russia’s conflict in Ukraine, few Islamic states came to their aid, highlighting the need for Islamic countries to overcome their internal conflicts and consolidate their power as a pole within the global system.
Aleksandr Dugin argues that the conflict between Hamas and Israel is not just a local problem, but a direct attack on the sovereignty of Islamic civilization. He believes that if Islamic civilization does not react and stand up for itself, it shows that it is not ready to exist as a sovereign and independent power. While Russia is politically on the side of the Palestinian people, Dugin emphasizes that it is not realistic to expect Russia to open a new front and fight for the Palestinians against American power. He questions the absence of support from Islamic states, armies, and people in the face of what he perceives as the extermination of the Palestinian people. Dugin believes that the treatment of the Islamic world by the West, particularly in regards to the Palestinian issue, is a humiliation and existential threat that must be responded to in order to uphold Islamic identity and rights.
Aleksandr Dugin then discusses the concept of sovereignty and how it can be tested through the response to existential threats. He argues that many countries may claim to be sovereign but are not if they do not respond to geopolitical challenges. Russia, he says, is fighting to restore its sovereignty in the Eurasian context. He also suggests that if the Islamic world accepts and responds to the challenges it faces, it could become a new sovereign pole alongside Russia and China. However, Dugin acknowledges that there are divisions among Arab nations and within Islamic countries themselves, with the elites being influenced by globalist networks while the people have different perspectives. He believes that if Islamic leaders listen to and align with their own people, unity can be achieved.
Aleksandr Dugin explains that the resistance against Israel by Lebanese, Syrian, and Palestinian groups is becoming a global Islamic phenomenon that will eventually become an independent geopolitical power. Dugin believes that Muslims are gaining a geopolitical consciousness and understanding the need for unity in order to resist colonization and regain their status as subjects in geopolitics. He mentions the importance of a common platform and denominator for their self-organization and emphasizes that Gaza and Palestine are crucial test lines for their sovereignty.
When Prof. Dugin touches on the concept of sovereignty and how it has evolved in the post-Cold War era, he explains that in the bipolar system of the Cold War, only the capitalist West and the socialist East were considered sovereign, while the rest of the world had to choose a side or submit to the rule of one of these powers. However, after the fall of the Soviet Union, there was only one pole of sovereignty, the liberal West, and all other states were expected to abandon their claims to sovereignty. Dugin argues that with the growing independence of Russia and the rise of China, there are now other contenders for sovereign power, but neither country alone can compete with the West. Therefore, he suggests a redistribution of sovereignty on a multipolar basis, where Russia and China can combine their capacities to challenge the dominance of the collective West.
Speaking to the issue of sovereignty in the Islamic world, Aleksandr Dugin states that it is crucial for Islamic countries to unite and establish their sovereignty in order to resist Western control. He emphasizes that countries like Israel are not truly sovereign as they rely heavily on the West for support, while countries like Russia and China strive to affirm their sovereignty. Dugin argues that the world can either be unipolar or multipolar, and it is important to choose the latter, which is based on the collaboration and commonalities of different civilizations. He believes that a multipolar world order can only be established through the unity and cooperation of civilizations like Russia, China, the Islamic world, India, Africa, Latin America, and others.
When discussing the concept of universal values and how the West has failed to uphold them, Aleksandr Dugin argues that the West, with its emphasis on individualism, liberal democracy, and market economy, has imposed its principles on the rest of humanity. However, new civilizations are emerging based on different principles. For example, in Russia, traditional values, family, patriotism, and empire form the basis of their civilization. Dugin explains that in Russian society, being human is not about individualism but about being part of the whole, with ties to religion, ethnicity, and tradition. Similar principles form the basis of civilizations like China and Islamic tradition. Dugin asserts that without a belief in God, there are no rules, and this nationalistic attitude common in the West is rejected by other civilizations.
Aleksandr Dugin mentions that while India relies on the West to solve its regional problems, it maintains good relations with Russia. Dugin criticizes the West’s attitude towards the “other,” stating that they either view them as the same or as a dangerous threat. He argues that this racist mindset is ingrained in the West’s ideology and geopolitics. Dugin points out that resistance against global liberal values and unipolarity is growing not only in other countries but also within the West itself, with many people protesting against the treatment of others, such as the Palestinian genocide. He concludes that modern-day racism is still prevalent, despite the abandonment of the term, and cites Israel and the West as examples of this.
Aleksandr Dugin criticizes the Israeli government for targeting Palestinian civilians and ignoring their sovereignty, despite international decisions and the obsolete structure of the United Nations. Dugin argues that international law is not real and is simply a tool of Western hegemony. He mentions the double standards in indictments, pointing out that while Vladimir Putin has faced allegations of war crimes in Ukraine without evidence, Benjamin Netanyahu has not faced any consequences for his actions. Dugin highlights the hypocrisy and indifference of the West towards civilian casualties in Palestine, as compared to the attention given to the conflict in Ukraine.
Aleksandr Dugin argues that those who deeply believe in the Western system and its values tend to accept everything the media says, even if it includes lies. Conversely, societies that reject the Western agenda are more inclined to believe alternative narratives that expose the hypocrisy of Western media. Dugin suggests that we are in the midst of a deep psychological, cultural, and mental war, where the transmission of facts is heavily censored and controlled. He also highlights the disproportionate coverage of civilian casualties in conflicts like Ukraine and Gaza, implying that the globalist agenda is indifferent to the suffering and continues to perpetuate genocide.
Aleksandr Dugin further discusses the need for a deeper belief system that promotes harmony, respect, and love for tradition and diversity of cultures. He argues that those who perpetrate crimes and fuel conflicts will eventually be defeated. Dugin also suggests that the reputation of Israel is irreparable, and the United States’ support for Israel creates problems with the Arab and Islamic world, damaging their relations. He believes that the US’s current actions lack real geopolitical reasons and are a hegemonic gesture. Dugin predicts that the West will be opposed by the Muslim world, and the US will lose without any balance or positive relations.
Aleksandr Dugin believes that while the West will continue to supply Ukraine with weapons, the situation is worse for the global West overall. Dugin emphasizes that multipolarity does not promote anti-Semitism or racism, but rather accepts and celebrates differences. He also suggests that the current events in the Middle East, particularly with the conflict between Arabs and Jews, is causing deep trauma for the Islamic soul and will lead to a long-lasting and significant impact. Dugin speculates that Germany may be a victim of its own strategy, as the situation has undermined their position and created new security threats for the entire West. He also brings up the religious dimension of the conflict, highlighting the eschatological elements and the significance of defending Temple Mountain as potential triggers for a large-scale Palestinian revolt in the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem.
Prof. Dugin explains the significance of the conflict surrounding the construction of the Third Temple in Jerusalem, emphasizing that it is not solely an economic or political matter. He discusses how different religious groups, including Jews, Christians, and Muslims, hold religious beliefs regarding this temple and its connection to the end times. Dugin argues that these eschatological beliefs can intensify the conflict and make it more radical. He also dismisses the notion that the situation is about gas discovery in Gaza, stating that the economy is a flexible element that can adapt to various circumstances. Instead, he asserts that geopolitics and ideological factors play a much more crucial role. Lastly, Dugin briefly touches on the risk of nuclear weapons and suggests that a potential World War III has already begun in some form between the unipolar camp and its opponents.
When discussing the potential for a nuclear conflict in the Middle East, Aleksandr Dugin mentions that Israel, Iran, and Pakistan are known or suspected to possess nuclear weapons. Dugin suggests that if the conflict escalates further, there is a possibility that tactical nuclear weapons could be used, potentially leading to a nuclear exchange between these countries. He also highlights the involvement of the United States and Russia in potentially supporting their respective allies. Dugin emphasizes the devastating consequences of using strategic nuclear weapons, which would result in the end of humanity, but states that the use of tactical nuclear weapons could still allow for the continuation of humanity, albeit with significant destruction and loss of life.
Aleksandr Dugin then discusses the significance of the Middle East in relation to the concept of Armageddon. He believes that the current conflict in Gaza holds religious importance, as it aligns with the prophecies of monotheistic religions. Dugin argues that geopolitics is an important tool to understand these events, but it should be complemented with a religious analysis. He suggests that there may have been a crucial error in human history that has led to the current situation, which goes beyond ideology or religious differences. Dugin emphasizes the need for an ontological explanation to comprehend the ongoing crisis, as it ultimately impacts the destiny of humanity. In closing, he warns against being influenced by leaders who do not represent the will, thoughts, and values of the people, as this can lead to real authoritarianism and totalitarianism.
Ultimately, Aleksandr Dugin emphasizes the importance of standing together against a common enemy, as they do in Russia. He urges Islamic brothers to understand the struggle and fight for their own values, as they are in a similar position as Russia was in the Ukrainian conflict. Dugin believes that only by being united can they preserve their dignity and achieve victory. He also expresses his hope for a free Palestine.
In the video titled “Your Own Damn Fault“, Larken Rose argues that reality has a built-in reward and deterrent system that is effective if the consequences are immediate and obvious. However, many people are not aware of this because the consequences of their actions are not immediate enough for them to recognize that it is their own fault.
He uses examples such as how Trump supporters cannot deny that Biden’s inflation was caused by Trump’s socialist policies, and how the high crime rates in disarmed areas are due to the victims’ lack of weapons. Rose concludes that people’s political and personal choices can have long-term consequences that they will have to face, and it is their own fault for reaching those consequences.
Larken Rose then addresses the ongoing murder of civilians in other countries committed by the US military. He argues that these actions have led to a boiling point where some people feel justified in responding violently, even if it means harming innocents. He also criticizes the idea of supporting the troops and the military, arguing that their actions ultimately harm civilians and serve corporate interests.
Larken Rose further touches upon the issue of police brutality in the US, arguing that the police are not always protecting innocent people, but rather are involved in road piracy and are more interested in justifying their actions than in stopping true criminals. He ultimately questions the idea of supporting the sheriffs and the police, arguing that their actions often harm innocent people and do not truly protect the innocent.
According to Larken Rose, law enforcement is not synonymous with freedom or justice, but rather is used to control the population through violence and intimidation. He argues that drugs and other “vice” laws have only made society more dangerous and violent, as they create a black market where organized crime can thrive.
He uses the example of alcohol prohibition to illustrate this point, noting that the Mafia took control of the alcohol trade and created widespread corruption and violence. Larken Rose suggests that ending the War on Drugs and legalizing drugs like marijuana would help to reduce violence and abolish organized crime.
Larken Rose goes on to argue that government intrusion into various aspects of people’s lives, including poverty levels, homelessness, food waste, and housing regulations, are ultimately the result of the problem being created by the left. He suggests that the left relies on keeping people dependent on the government and believes that government hostility is necessary for the common good.
He draws on personal anecdotes to illustrate how such policies have caused hardships for people, including homelessness and job losses. He believes that government violence is a major contributing factor to society’s problems, and that it is essential to recognize one’s limitations and avoid imposing them on others.
Larken Rose then challenges the validity of conservative claims to a right to freedom. He further suggests that the remoteness of the consequence from the cause often leads to cheering for a solution without understanding its true nature and its impact on society.
Larken Rose is critical of not just conservatives but also the political left, arguing that many of their economic regulations and support for government welfare harm people. He concludes that people need to understand the causes and effects of their actions, recognize the failings of their political beliefs, and take responsibility for their mistakes if they truly care about justice and society’s welfare. He challenges people to check whether their advocacy is causing more problems than solutions and to dare to take responsibility for their actions.
At the end of his speech, Larken Rose emphasizes that individuals need to take responsibility for their own problems and stop blaming society or external factors for their issues. Whether someone is a conservative, liberal, or voter, they are personally responsible for their actions. The speaker raises the question of asking if individuals dare to take a step back and self-reflect, acknowledging their role in the problem and taking action to resolve it, or do they cling to their comfort zones and ignore the suffering of others. He uses examples of child hunger and homelessness as examples of human suffering that can be a result of inaction, emphasizing the urgency of addressing these issues.
The YouTube video “How Jeffrey Epstein Got Away With It” explores the story behind Jeffrey Epstein’s examination, trial, and conviction for federal sex trafficking involving minors. The video highlights the questionable plea deal struck with Epstein by Alex Acosta, the Chief Federal Prosecutor for Southern Florida, and the implications it had on the justice system. The documentary also examines the case from the perspective of intelligence agencies, particularly the CIA and Israel’s Mossad, and their alleged involvement in it. The video raises questions about the circumstances surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s death in 2019 and suggests alternative explanations for it.
Acosta was the Chief Federal Prosecutor for Southern Florida from 2005 to 2009, and his job was to ensure that criminals went to jail. He was portrayed as a person of integrity and an honorable guy, who caught the attention of former president Donald Trump. However, he refused to answer questions during his Senate confirmation hearing for the Secretary of Labor position, and the Senate was concerned about a particular case involving Jeffrey Epstein.
Jeffrey Epstein was a friend of presidents and high-profile lawyers who was arrested on new sex trafficking charges and waiting trial for federal sex trafficking involving minors. Acosta gave Epstein the plea deal of the century, which excused underage sex trafficking, and allowed Epstein to walk free.
When Acosta was being interviewed for the job of Trump’s labor secretary, he was asked about the questionable plea deal, and he said that he was ordered to stand down immediately because Epstein belonged to intelligence. The current US Attorney General cannot order a US Attorney to stand down unless he is elected by someone who is not part of the judiciary.
According to Nick Bryan, an expert reporter on the Epstein case, only the president or the Attorney General has the power to order a US attorney to stand down. There have been four presidential administrations that have covered up the Jeffrey Epstein case, and now, the Biden Administration is covering it up. The American government is aiding the embedding of child trafficking by not investigating Jeffrey Epstein.
The evidence potentially connects Jeffrey Epstein to the CIA and Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency. The film highlights how it was possible for one man to be protected and supported by the entire US government and how Epstein’s lawyers at Morgan and Morgan fight to give victims the best shot at compensation.
The film also discusses how lawsuits can be expensive but that victims of abuse can receive compensation with the help of law firms. The film explains how Epstein’s case was yanked away from the Palm Beach Police Department and given to a grand jury, where a special prosecutor was responsible for showing the grand jurors the evidence necessary. However, the film argues that the grand jury was corrupt and that the special prosecutor, Barry Cromwell, called only one victim and skewed her credibility.
The speaker then discusses the background of Jeffrey Epstein and how his victims were repeatedly molested and became addicted to drugs. The system in place allowed the perps to go unpunished once they became “unmarketable” and their damaged credibility would compromise them.
When the grand jury didn’t indict Epstein on a single count of child abuse, the Palm Beach Police Department and its chief Michael Ryder went to the feds and claimed it was a cover-up. They didn’t prosecute him, despite having a list of 32 victims, due to pressures from high up, possibly the President or the Attorney General. The outrage over Epstein’s lenient plea deal and lack of punishment raises questions about the justice system’s dealings with high-powered individuals, prompting some to question the existence of a “VIP justice system” in the United States.
The speaker claims that Epstein was a professional con man with access to people, money, and young girls, and that the government targeted him due to his exploitative and blackmailing behavior. The speaker also suggests that Epstein was meeting with Joe Biden’s CIA director and that he was recruited for his intelligence work due to his predilection for underage girls and his charm, deceitfulness, and sociopathic tendencies.
The speaker further claims that Epstein’s case makes more sense when viewed from the perspective of an intelligence operation, and that the sweetheart deal he received in 2006, the prison cell cover-up, and the disappearance of his tapes are all explained by his status as an asset. Finally, the speaker points to the recent raid on Epstein’s Caribbean island and the discovery of tapes there as evidence of his intelligence work. The speaker is Stuart Kaplan, a retired FBI special agent.
Jeffrey Epstein was later convicted as a registered offender, but despite this, he was able to maintain relationships with politicians, CEOs, and public figures, who should have had no interest in him. The speaker suggests that these actions may be due to threats or blackmail from intelligence agencies, as Robert Maxwell, Epstein’s closest confidant, was believed to have been working for Israel’s version of the CIA, Massad. The speaker also mentions the possibility that Epstein was able to blackmail powerful figures due to the intelligence apparatus behind him, making it clear that his actions were not possible without this support.
The documentary makes claims that Robert Maxwell, an Israeli-born British media tycoon, had spilled confidential nuclear information about Israel, which led to his kidnapping and imprisonment for 18 years. After his death in 1991, Maxwell’s close relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and alleged involvement in intelligence work are speculated upon.
Maxwell’s lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, is also discussed, highlighting his role in securing Epstein’s plea deal in 2008 and his close friendship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The video posits that Epstein’s downfall, which took place in 2019, was a result of his growing arrogance and his use of blackmail to maintain power, ultimately outliving his usefulness.
The opinion is then discussed regarding Jeffrey Epstein’s death in 2019 while he was awaiting trial. While it is widely believed that he committed suicide, the speaker argues that there is a larger conspiracy at play and that other co-conspirators, particularly federal agencies such as the CIA, are responsible for his death. The speaker also raises questions about Epstein’s lifestyle and funding, pointing out that he was known to have only two known clients and had a close relationship with Leslie Wexner, a wealthy CEO with ties to organized crime. The documentary however fails to consider the most likely possibility that Jeffrey Epstein is still alive and his death was faked.
At the end, the speaker argues that Epstein was compromised himself and that his allies, including Wexner, implemented a system of secrecy and control to keep people from investing with him. The speaker also references the Epstein House of Horrors and the victims’ compensation fund as efforts to cover up his crimes. The speaker then introduces EpsteinJustice.com, an organization aimed at taking accountability for Epstein’s crimes and protecting children from similar harm.
In the short film by Amanda Zackem, Chris Hedges discusses the fragility of modern societies and how people tend to be emotionally incapable of understanding or confronting collapse, even when it’s staring them in the face. He draws on his experiences living in totalitarian societies like East Germany and Serbia to illustrate how these systems work and the dark emotions they evoke.
Chris Hedges argues that the illusion of hope and optimism, fueled by the cult of the self and the worship of power and money, has actually become a form of fantasy and is leading us towards disaster. Hedges contends that critical thinking and the study of the humanities are essential for teaching people to think critically and challenge assumptions, and that historical amnesia perpetuated by popular culture is another tool used by totalitarian systems to keep people in the dark about their problems.
Chris Hedges then discusses the dangers of unchecked capitalism and its impact on society. He argues that capitalism exploits everything, turning human beings, the natural world, and even the environment into commodities to be exploited until exhaustion. Hedges contends that the forces of capitalism, including corporate socialism, are responsible for the decay of states and the enslavement of vulnerable populations. He advocates for a greater emphasis on values that are rooted in community, empathy, and a sense of purpose, rather than consumerism and hedonism.
At the end, Chris Hedges discusses the importance of self-sacrifice and service in achieving a life of fulfillment. He argues that community is essential for personal growth and development, but it also comes with a sense of anxiety and responsibility. Hedges believes that consumer society magnifies this anxiety, pushing individuals into destructive behaviors.
He also talks about the dangers of totalitarianism and the corporate state’s total control over society. Hedges believes that popular culture has replaced real culture and that the corporate state seeks to eradicate the forces that remind us of our humanity. Hedges urges individuals to make a decision about whether they want a life that means something or continue to seek hedonistic pleasures.
This video was recorded at night in Miami, Florida from a car and features homeless preacher who delivers quite a powerful speech. The preacher reflects on the challenges of trying to listen to God while being pulled in different directions by personal desires, family, friends, and distractions. He emphasizes the importance of going through the journey rather than rushing to the destination, as it is in the journey that we encounter people and experiences that shape us.
The preacher highlights the significance of acknowledging and connecting with those who might be homeless or marginalized, as they too have valuable lessons to teach. He also emphasizes the need to be humble and open to wisdom and understanding, rather than thinking one already has it all figured out. Ultimately, he suggests that the purpose of going through difficulties is to inspire and uplift others, rather than solely focusing on personal gain.
The preacher then reflects on the challenges of working in an environment where there is constant complaining, backstabbing, and lack of appreciation. He encourages gratitude for the little things and emphasizes the importance of finding a job where one can truly enjoy going to work and be appreciated.
He also discusses the concept of haters and explains that sometimes people hate without even knowing why. He emphasizes the need to teach others and show them love and forgiveness, rather than hold grudges. The homeless preacher also talks about the decline of God’s popularity in society and encourages individuals to let their actions and spirit speak for themselves. He believes that going through difficult times is necessary for growth and authenticity, comparing it to the process of testing gold in a pawn shop. Ultimately, he emphasizes the importance of staying true to one’s faith and not letting others deter them on their journey.
Later, the homeless preacher emphasizes the importance of humility and being open to correction, sharing that even though it may be painful, it is necessary to experience foolishness and limitations in order to gain wisdom and understanding. He encourages listeners to be sincere in their search for purpose and to trust that God will reveal it to them in due time.
On October 13, 2023, as journalists from different news outlets were covering the conflict in Alma al-Shaab on the southern border of Lebanon, the Israeli militants launched a series of deliberate shelling attacks on the journalists, killing Issam Abdallah of Reuters and seriously wounding 6 others. Among the wounded are Christina Assi of AFP (Agence France-Presse) who lost her leg in the attack. Carmen Joukhadar and Elie Brakhia reporting for Al Jazeera, Dylan Collins with AFP, Thaer Al-Sudani and Maher Nazeh with Reuters were also wounded.
The footage from the attack was analyzed by the Amnesty Intentional and revealed that the journalists were marked as PRESS and their car had TV plastered on top of it, suggesting the attack was a violation of international law. AI called the attack by Israel a war crime and calls for an investigation to bring accountability and justice for the victims and their families.
The video discusses the importance of journalists documenting events and collecting evidence to piece together what is happening. The affected journalists describe how seeing their friend and colleague die only strengthened their resolve to speak up for those whose voices have been silenced by Israel. They ultimately believe that this experience has made them even more committed to his field.
So far, 63 other journalists have been killed by Israeli militants in Gaza to stop the truth from coming out.
