Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro of True Torah Jews attended, along with 15,000 other Rabbis, a Torah Jewry Against Zionism convention held at New York’s Nassau Memorial Coliseum in 2018. The convention’s main subject was The Incompatibility of Judaism and Zionism.
In the video, Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro explores the fundamental differences between Judaism and Zionism and says that Zionism aims to supplant Judaism and the two belief systems are incompatible.
Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro contends that Zionism bases Jewish identity on political and national considerations, while Judaism is rooted in faith and God’s teachings. He warns against the propaganda spread by Zionism and emphasizes the significance of rejecting militaristic tendencies.
Overall, Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro encourages Jews to be proactive in upholding and defending their religious beliefs.
The YouTube video titled “How A Healthcare CEO Got Away With A $12,000,000,000 Scam” highlights a deadly scam involving for-profit dialysis centers.
The scam happened during Kent Thiry’s tenure as CEO of DaVita, during which he radicalized the company’s operations and catapulted it from bankruptcy. DaVita dialysis centers pop up all over the USA, especially in the black community.
The problem with these centers is that patients with kidney failure who go for their blood cleaning and filtering using machines that act as an artificial kidney have a higher chance (up to 24%) of dying compared to those who get their treatment at a non-profit center. Despite the monopoly that DaVita and Fresenius, another for-profit dialysis company, own over 80% of the dialysis centers in the US, the government seems unbothered by the scam.
The video then moves on to discuss the lobbying efforts of Medicare by the Society of Vascular Surgeons (SVS) and how financial incentives exist to put patients on hemodialysis, which can lead to monopolies in the dialysis market, as seen with companies like Kent Thiry and DaVita.
According to Yousef Nofal, MD, the AV Fistula procedure, which is considered a reliable access for patients undergoing dialysis, has a reimbursement rate of up to $110,000 for vascular surgeons. This can generate up to $5 billion in revenue if all patients were on paranal dialysis. On the other hand, the paranal dialysis cath that gets placed collects only about $227.
The speaker advocates for realigning economic incentives in healthcare to reward preventative treatments rather than just treating kidney failure. He encourages healthcare providers and insurers to encourage patients to seek at-home dialysis options and criticizes the current system for not meeting goals set in an executive order from 2019.
He also emphasizes the importance of staying informed and sharing the truth to bring about change, and highlights the impact that even small actions can have.
Wayne Stiles, a co-pilot on the first rescue helicopter to reach the USS Liberty after it was deliberately attacked by Israel on June 8th, 1967, describes the mission. He explains that due to the extent of the ship’s destruction, they had to hover at 25 feet and use a hoist cable to bring the wounded up to the helicopter.
In his testimony, Stiles recounts the events of the morning, including seeing blood flash back and forth in a machine gun emplacement in the forward gun tub. He later learned that two or three crew members had been machine gunned to death while trying to defend against the Israeli attack.
Wayne Stiles also notes that there was another helicopter squadron on board which had larger helicopters and completed the evacuation in the afternoon. Overall, Stiles describes the mission as a difficult and shocking experience.
United States Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri is seen in this video grilling a Health and Human Services (HHS) officer Ms. Robin Dunn Marcos regarding the practices of the office in handling child care and trafficking cases.
Sen. Hawley accuses the HHS of releasing children to labor traffickers without providing them with proper support and resources. He asks Ms. Marcos about the practice of giving a “know your rights” presentation to children before turning them over to labor traffickers, and if she truly believes that this helps the children in such situations.
Sen. Hawley also asks Ms. Marcos about documentation requirements for sponsors, background checks on adults in the household, and home visits in cases of released children. Then, Sen. Hawley references a New York Times report that was published earlier about the children in HHS’s care, and asks Ms. Marcos about any conversations she had with Secretary Xavier Becerra about the risks faced by these children. The NY Times report claimed that the Department of Health and Human Services under the Joe Biden administration ran an assembly line for the release of unaccompanied minors to human traffickers.
Finally, Sen. Hawley highlights the contrast between the stated concern for the safety and well-being of children and the reality, with over 85,000 minors being trafficked. He questions the Secretary about the number of kids in regular contact with them and asks them to provide comprehensive case management. He concludes by asking the officer to stop facilitating the largest child trafficking ring in American history.
In his speech in the British Parliament, Andrew Bridgen MP discussed the rising trend of excess deaths in immediate follow-up of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in the United Kingdom, specifically referring to the Office of Health Improvement and Disparities recording of 8,000 excess deaths among people aged 85 and above and over 18,000 excess deaths recorded among people aged 15-19 in the 12 months starting in July 2022.
Andrew Bridgen MP also discussed Serious Adverse Events that have been shown to be twice as high as a chance of preventing a COVID-19 hospitalization. The video explores the experimental COVID-19 vaccines’ possible impact on cardiac emergencies and Australian mortality, as well as the problems with the safety testing and recording of deaths due to vaccination, the lack of data on Spike protein production, and the contamination of DNA from bacteria in the manufacturing process of the vaccines. Andrew Bridgen MP advocated for evidence-based medicine and a return to basic science and ethics.
The Speech
At the beginning of his speech, Andrew Bridgen MP points out that excess deaths have been on the rise, affecting a significant number of people, generally those in their prime. The deaths have not been proportionate to the elderly population. The speaker also comments on history’s potential judgment of the house’s handling of the issue.
The Office of Health Improvement and Disparities has recorded 8,000 excess deaths among people aged 85 and above in the 12 months starting in July 2020, which includes the Autumn 2020 wave of COVID-19 and a portion of the first COVID-19 winter.
However, over 18,000 excess deaths in this age group have been recorded in the 12 months starting in July 2022, which is 9% above expected levels, more than twice as many as in the previous year. There was a clear stepwise increase in mortality after the vaccine rollout, which has continued steadily ever since, despite data suggesting that fewer hospitalizations and deaths were associated with the vaccine than previous COVID-19 illnesses. Officials seem unwilling to acknowledge this disturbing data and have chosen to turn a blind eye to it.
Andrew Bridgen MP then discusses the issue of harm caused by the COVID-19 vaccines to vaccinated individuals, specifically the Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), which have been shown to be twice as high as a chance of preventing a COVID-19 hospitalization. The vaccines, Andrew Bridgen MP claims, have caused harm to 1 in 800 people to supposedly save one in 20,000, which is, according to him, “madness“.
Andrew Bridgen MP also discusses the flawed assumptions and biases that have been used to arrive at these conclusions, and the importance of considering socioeconomic and ethnic differences in the vaccination process. He also explores the phenomenon of the excess mortality seen in more heavily vaccinated regions, and the correlation between vaccination and several health issues such as cardiac arrest and cardiovascular disease. After saying this, Andrew Bridgen MP calls for transparency and accountability in the vaccination process and the need for further research to identify the causal link between vaccination and harm.
The impact of vaccination on cardiac emergencies in South Australia for 15-44 year olds is then brought up. After the vaccine rollout in this age group, there was a 67% increase in cardiac emergencies compared to usual, with 2,172 cases in November 2021, up from 1,300 emergency cardiac presentations a month before.
Andrew Bridgen MP also discusses the increase in Australian mortality overall, which is due to cardiac deaths, and how these excess deaths cannot be explained by an aging population, disease of old age, low Statin prescriptions, or undertreated hypertension. He suggests that the experimental COVID-19 vaccines may be the cause of these excess deaths and raises concerns about the data presentation by the ON. He also discusses the lack of transparency from the UK Health Security Agency regarding anonymized data and how this data could potentially reveal damaging information about the efficacy and safety of the vaccines.
When discussing the problems with the safety testing and recording of deaths due to vaccination, Andrew Bridgen MP highlights the lack of data on the amount of Spike protein produced on vaccination and the broken system for properly recording deaths.
Andrew Bridgen MP also mentions the issue of doctors waiting for permission from the regulator before certifying deaths and the circularity of the situation. He discusses the problem of contamination of DNA from bacteria in the manufacturing process of the vaccine and the potential harm caused by this. With this, Andrew Bridgen MP calls for a review of the excess deaths and argues that the experimental vaccines are not safe and not effective.
In response to his speech, a female attendee attempts to counter his arguments regarding the increase in excess deaths as being due to a combination of factors, including the ongoing challenges of COVID-19 and the high flu prevalence of the previous year. The leading causes of excess deaths in England were respiratory illnesses, dementia, and heart disease, according to her. Vaccination was mentioned as an important aspect, but conflicting data was presented on its causality. She encouraged the use of the yellow card system for patients who experienced side effects from vaccines. The factor of vaccine safety was also discussed, including the MH’s action in response to rare cases of concurrent thrombosis and thrombocytopenia following vaccinations, leading to the vaccine not being offered to certain age groups and the commission on human medicines conducting an independent review to address concerns.
In this video, Katherine Watt discusses the militarization of public health and the use of the military as a front for implementing a global agenda by central bankers. She explains how the US Department of Defense and the World Health Organization (WHO) are using various tactics such as propaganda, censorship, fear tactics, and toxic vaccines to establish control over the world’s population. Watt traces the origins of this agenda back to 1969 and highlights the financial coercion mechanisms and legal loopholes involved. She also discusses the consolidation of power within global health organizations and the establishment of programs that erode individual rights and transfer control to these organizations. Watt concludes by stating that as more states reclaim their authority to protect their citizens, there will be a tipping point leading to criminal prosecutions against these globalists.
Katherine Watt starts by discussing the concept of public health being militarized and how the military is being used as a public health front. She refers to it as a “kill box,” which is a military term for establishing a geographic area for a military attack. Katherine Watt explains that the goal of the Department of Defense (DOD) and the World Health Organization (WHO) is to set up the entire world as their target population, using various weapons such as propaganda, censorship, fear tactics, and toxic vaccines. She claims that this project has been going on for centuries, with globalist central bankers seeking complete control over human beings. She also mentions the financial coercion mechanisms involved, where compliance with public health measures is tied to access to financial services. On the legal side, she traces the origins of this agenda back to 1969.
Katherine Watt then discusses the establishment of the chemical and biological warfare program by the U.S. Congress and the loopholes built into the law to justify it. She explains that these loopholes allowed research and weapons development for “protective or prophylactic or defensive” purposes. Watt argues that this characterization is false because all biologically active products are inherently toxic and aggressive. She also mentions the creation of the Public Health Emergencies program and the National Vaccine program, both of which were instrumental in setting up liability exemption for manufacturers and funneling vaccine injury cases into a separate compensation program.
Watt points out that the World Health Organization (WHO), which she considers a military organization, played a crucial role in transferring sovereign government power from nation-states to the WHO and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). She highlights amendments to international health regulations in 2005 that aimed at strengthening surveillance, testing, detention, quarantine, and forced treatment during international outbreaks of communicable diseases. Despite the pretext of protecting international trade, Watt argues that the real intention was to establish legal systems that transferred power to global health organizations. She also mentions the establishment of the Emergency Use Authorization program and the transfer of CBRN weapon stockpile control.
Katherine Watt continues by discussing the establishment of program management structures in the early 2000s, following the events of 9/11 and the anthrax attacks. This was done through various statutes such as the 2000 Public Health Threats and Emergencies Act and the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, which effectively put the country into a permanent state of war.
Katherine Watt argues that these actions essentially created a de facto covert global martial law act by the US government, making everyone a presumptive combatant or enemy target. She also highlights the merging of various government agencies through acts like the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act.
Additionally, Katherine Watt mentions the Other Transactions Authority, which was revealed through Pfizer’s motion to dismiss a whistleblower case, stating that the COVID-19 vaccines were DOD prototypes and didn’t require valid clinical trials or FDA authorization. She argues that all of this has led to a massive funding stream for military-led bioweapons research and use, eliminating informed consent and shielding the government and stakeholders from liability. She sees this as a joint project between the US Department of Defense, the Federal Reserve, the World Health Organization, the Bank for International Settlements, and the United Nations.
At the end, Katherine Watt discusses the actions taken by globalists against states and provinces that pass laws protecting informed consent and consumer safety. She mentions a report released in October 2022 that criticizes state laws limiting public health protections, stating that the globalists are not in favor of such laws. Watt believes that as more states reclaim their authority and implement measures to protect their citizens, there will be a tipping point leading to criminal prosecutions. She emphasizes that the evidence against these globalists is strong and their attempts to defend themselves using national security only further reinforce the need for action against their crimes.
Dirk Pohlmann (German journalist, author, screenwriter, director and producer) and Jimmy Dore (American stand-up comedian, political commentator and theorist) recently briefed the United Nations Security Council about the 2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage.
Pohlmann presented new evidence suggesting that the operation would have required professional or military divers and a large-scale deployment of explosives, making it unlikely to have been carried out by a small sailing boat. He also raised suspicions about the Bops 20t exercise, which took place around the same time as the sabotage, and suggested that it may have provided a cover for the deployment of the bombs.
Dore highlighted the alleged involvement of the United States in the sabotage, pointing to evidence that US Navy divers planted explosives and high-ranking US officials expressed satisfaction with the attack. The speakers emphasized the need for an independent and objective investigation to reveal the truth behind the sabotage and hold the perpetrators accountable. Representatives from other countries echoed these concerns and urged transparent and timely disclosure of the investigation results.
UN Brief by Dirk Pohlmann
Mr. Dirk Pohlmann, an investigative journalist and documentary filmmaker, is the first to address the United Nations Security Council about the 2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage. He discusses how little information is known about the sabotage, including the number of explosions and the identity of the perpetrators. Pohlmann presents new evidence, including the opinions of Professor Dr. Tanda and the seismic data from a Norwegian seismological station, suggesting that the operation would have required professional or military divers and a large-scale deployment of explosives, making it unlikely to have been carried out by a small sailing boat. He also raises suspicions about the Bops 20t exercise, which took place around the same time as the sabotage, and suggests that it may have provided a cover for the deployment of the bombs.
Dirk Pohlmann makes the claim that the USS Kar 257 M and US Gunon Hall 150 190 M, both small aircraft carriers, could have been used to deploy explosives for sabotaging the Nord Stream pipeline. It is suggested that US Navy divers with deep diving equipment from Panama City, Florida might have been involved in deploying the bombs. Furthermore, it is alleged that a US Poseidon aircraft dropped a sonobuoy that triggered the timers of the bombs. While there is speculation that the Norwegians were supposed to drop the sonobuoy, evidence suggests that a US Hercules aircraft flew to Norway to fetch a specific sonobuoy and bring it to Sigonella.
Additionally, there are discrepancies in the official reports about the amount of explosives used, with a Swiss physicist, Dr. Hans Benjamin Brown, suggesting that the physical evidence points towards the use of an explosive charge at least a thousand times larger than what has been reported. These details were presented in a detailed report to the Swiss government and shared with the United Nations.
Dirk Pohlmann then discusses the contradictions and inconsistencies in the official reports regarding the magnitude and nature of the explosive charge used in the sabotage of Nord Stream 1. The reports initially stated that the explosion had a magnitude of 2.1 on the Richter scale, corresponding to approximately 700 kilograms of TNT equivalent. However, further analysis suggests that the magnitude was actually 3.1, indicating a much larger explosive charge of roughly 25 tons of TNT equivalent.
Dirk Pohlmann also points out that the location of the explosion was strategically chosen to generate a shock wave directed at Kaliningrad, raising doubts about the nature of the explosive charge used. The observations and independent geophysical findings strongly contradict the reported use of a small conventional explosive, suggesting a much larger explosive charge of 1 to 4 kilotons TNT equivalent.
At the second half of his speech, Dirk Pohlmann highlights the importance of securing independent and objective evidence through the authority of the UN Security Council, as it is crucial to address the seriousness of the matter. The Baltic seabed’s abundance of hydrates can be identified by Western navies, making it possible to determine if a ship, such as the Andromeda allegedly used at the sabotage site, was present.
Historical examples of Western intelligence operations targeting Soviet pipelines are mentioned, including the killing of Italian oil manager Enrico Mattei and the destruction of the Mal Pipeline by the CIA.
The briefing also mentions the political dynamics surrounding the Nord Stream pipeline, with the US having no allies but hostages and certain governments suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
UN Brief by Jimmy Dore
Jimmy Dore also discusses the attack on the Nord Stream pipeline, highlighting it as the biggest act of industrial sabotage in human history and pointing out that President Joe Biden himself stated his intentions to attack the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.
According to investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, US Navy divers planted explosives in June 2022, which later destroyed three of the four pipelines. High-ranking US officials, including Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, expressed satisfaction with the attack, claiming it was an opportunity to diminish reliance on Russian energy.
Jimmy Dore argues that the Western media’s coverage of the conflict in Ukraine conveniently leaves out key events, such as the 2014 coup orchestrated by the US and Ukraine Nazis, which contributes to a false understanding of the conflict.
He mentions the involvement of a Nazi Azov Battalion and the violation of a peace agreement by the Ukrainian government. The speaker also emphasizes the expansion of NATO onto Russia’s border as a primary cause of the tensions. It is argued that the United States’ imperialistic ambitions and fear of German-Russian collaboration drive its aggression. Jimmy Dore criticizes the US and its NATO allies for their silence on the environmental impact of the war, particularly the release of methane gas. Furthermore, he mentions Greta Thunberg’s visit to Ukraine following the Nord Stream bombing.
Remarks from International Representatives
The inconsistencies in the narrative promoted by Washington and its allies regarding the bombing of the Nord Stream gas pipelines in September 2022 are then discussed by the representative of the Russian Federation. Despite claims that national investigations are underway, no results have been produced thus far. The speaker suggests that more evidence is emerging in the expert community indicating that the explosion was the work of Washington. He argues that this act of sabotage was committed to consolidate dominance in Europe, ignoring the dire need for Russian energy resources.
The lack of progress in the investigations conducted by Germany, Denmark, and Sweden are then highlighted, and questions the effectiveness of these national efforts. He proposes the establishment of an independent international commission to investigate the act of sabotage and emphasizes that this incident was not a prank but a terrorist act with significant economic and environmental consequences for multiple states. He argues that the actions taken fall under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings.
Despite German Chancellor Olaf Schulz’s intention to resolve the matter, there is a lack of relevant information and attempts to conceal the truth. Various ridiculous versions of events have been spread to divert attention from the involvement of Western powers.
Russian representative references an investigation by journalist Seymour Hirsch, which suggests that American divers planted explosives during NATO exercises. There are also mentions of statements from President Biden, Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, and former Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski expressing opposition to Nord Stream. The involvement of Germany, Denmark, and Sweden is seen as a cover-up to protect their overseas allies.
He calls for accountability and justice for the perpetrators and proposes a draft presidential statement for consideration by the Security Council. The speaker emphasizes the importance of preventing such crimes and avoiding impunity.
Following the speech by the Russian representative, the representative of Japan lso expresses concern about the incident and acknowledges the environmental implications it may have.
Representatives from Brazil, Gabon, and Ecuador then address the United Nations regarding the Nord Stream pipeline explosions and the need for transparent and timely disclosure of the investigation results. They emphasize the economic losses, environmental impacts, and threats to international peace and security caused by the sabotage. Expressing support for the national authorities conducting the investigations, they urge cooperation, information exchange, and the avoidance of hindrances or opacity in order to reveal the truth behind the incidents.
Representatives from Switzerland, and China also address the United Nations about the sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines in the Baltic Sea. They condemn the acts of sabotage, highlighting the environmental impact and the potential for heightened tensions and unpredictable consequences. The representatives call for objective and thorough investigations to determine the truth and express concern about the delays in reaching conclusive results. They emphasize the importance of upholding the rule of law and avoiding disruptive actions that hinder the search for truth. China calls for active communication and cooperation with Russia and warns against attempting to politicize the investigation, emphasizing the need for objective and authoritative conclusions.
Finally, representatives from Malta, and the United Kingdom address the concerns of the international community regarding the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines. Malta strongly condemns the sabotage and highlights the threats posed to energy security and regional stability. They express confidence in ongoing investigations and reject claims that sufficient time has not been given to establish the truth. The United Kingdom thanks the briefers for their perspectives but the video ends as the representative begins his speech.
The Online Safety Bill is a new law in the UK that holds social media companies responsible for harmful content on their platforms. While some believe it will create a safer online environment, critics fear it gives too much power to regulators and tech companies to control online speech.
The bill includes measures to protect children from accessing pornography and requires prompt removal of illegal content. However, the presenter – Count Dankula 2 : Electric Boogaloo – believes the true intention behind the bill is to manipulate public opinion rather than genuinely protect users or children. He expresses concerns about restrictions on internet freedom and the flow of information, as well as the lack of public input in the legislative process. The speaker also criticizes the potential threat to freedom of expression posed by tech companies deciding what content is legal.
The Online Safety Bill
While some argue that The Online Safety Bill will create a safer online environment, critics worry that it gives too much power to regulators and tech companies to control what can be said online. The bill also includes measures to prevent children from accessing pornography and requires platforms to remove illegal content promptly. However, the presenter believes that the true intention behind the bill is to control the flow of information and manipulate public opinion, rather than genuinely protect users or children.
Count Dankula expresses concerns about the law being used to target political dissidents and the inclusion of new offenses such as cyber flashing and the sharing of deep fake pornography. However, he supports measures that make it easier for bereaved parents to obtain information about their children from tech companies. The government claims that tech firms have already started changing their behavior in anticipation of the law, but Count Dankula suggests that this is mainly due to the threat of losing their license to operate in the UK. The bill’s journey to becoming law has been contentious, and there are concerns about big tech companies challenging certain parts of it. Count Dankula also questions the responsibility of parents in monitoring their children’s internet usage and emphasizes their own strict restrictions for their children.
Count Dankula argues that the government’s intention behind controlling information is to influence how people vote and support their own interests. The speaker also criticizes the lack of public input in the legislative process and highlights the threat to freedom of expression posed by tech companies determining what content is legal. He further discusses how encrypted messaging platforms like WhatsApp and Signal may resist complying with the bill’s powers to examine messages for child abuse material, as it could undermine private communications. Overall, the speaker views the legislation as deeply flawed and suggests that the government deliberately designed it to exert more control over citizens’ speech and activities.
Later in the video, Count Dankula discusses the role of the communications regulator, Ofcom, in enforcing the new rules. The bill aims to tackle illegal online harms, such as child exploitation, fraud, and terrorism. Failure to comply with the new regulations can result in hefty fines or even imprisonment for executives. The success of the bill is crucial not only for the safety of children and adults online but also for the UK’s reputation as a tech hub.
However, Count Dankula expresses skepticism about the effectiveness of the legislation, noting that encryption and VPNs can easily bypass the restrictions. The speaker suggests that the real motive behind the law is to control the flow of information online for political reasons, which he views as a form of dishonesty.
In this 43 minutes long video, Ben Shapiro reviews the Barbie movie and delivers a scathing assessment. He criticizes the lack of jokes, coherent plot, and logical coherence in the film. Shapiro questions the intended audience and attributes positive reviews to the film’s politics rather than its quality. He also critiques the film’s portrayal of gender dynamics, feminism, and relationships between men and women. Overall, Shapiro considers the movie to be one of the worst he has ever seen and predicts that it will lose its appeal after the initial hype.
As one of the worst movies he has ever seen, Ben Shapiro finds the only redeeming aspect in the production design and costumes. He states that the movie seems to despise Barbie as a fascist emblem. Shapiro questions the intended audience for the film and attributes its positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes to its politics rather than its quality.
Ben Shapiro diligently discusses the movie’s portrayal of Barbie as a tool of the patriarchal capitalist system and the failure of her message of female empowerment. He highlights the film’s lack of logical coherence, including the criticism of mommy dolls while also criticizing discontinuing a pregnant doll named Midge. Shapiro questions the intended audience of the movie, as it references complex topics like Citizens United and includes explicit sexual innuendos. He also comments on the film’s portrayal of Ken as secondary and unnecessary, emphasizing the repeated gay masturbation jokes in a movie targeting children.
Shapiro questions why the film delves into existential themes and politics instead of catering to its supposed target audience of seven-year-old girls. He also disapproves of the film’s portrayal of sexism in the real world, claiming that it perpetuates a victim narrative for women. He highlights his dissatisfaction with the movie’s handling of the relationship between Ken and Barbie, arguing that it missed an opportunity for addressing equality, and instead, the plot simply restores Barbie’s dominance. Furthermore, Shapiro comments on the film’s attempt to portray the board of Mattel as solely composed of men, which he refutes by mentioning the female representation on the actual board.
Shapiro also highlights how the character inconsistencies undermine the believability of the story. He discusses the themes of feminism and patriarchy in the film, expressing disagreement with the portrayal of women as competent and brilliant, while men are portrayed negatively. He argues that the film fails to present a balanced perspective on these issues and instead relies on lazy writing and obscure jokes. Moreover, he points out the lack of explanation for certain character decisions and plot developments, further undermining the coherence of the film.
He argues that the film propagates the idea that women who enjoy the company of men have been brainwashed by the patriarchy. Shapiro also points out various inconsistencies in the film’s plot, such as the unnecessary vote held by the Kens and the introduction of random characters like Michael Sarah. He highlights the film’s portrayal of men as all being garbage and the lack of fulfilling relationships between men and women. Shapiro concludes that the filmmakers are insecure about their own script, evidenced by the narrator stepping in to address the shortcomings of the lead actress, Margot Robbie.
Ben Shapiro emphatically criticizes the movie for its feminist message, claiming that it perpetuates the idea that it is impossible to be a woman in the modern age due to the patriarchy. He argues that the film wrongly portrays women seizing power away from men, when in reality women obtained power through lobbying men. Shapiro also mocks the film’s portrayal of women masking their power under a giggle and pretending to be confused about money. He concludes by ridiculing the idea that women not being able to wear pants is a symbol of men’s control, calling it “claptrap.”
In the second half of the review, Ben Shapiro discusses the absurdity and lack of coherence in the plot of the Barbie movie. He points out that the movie tries to create conflict between the men by having the women switch partners, but argues that in reality, men would likely just throw a party if beautiful women switched to other men. Shapiro also criticizes the inclusion of a 15-minute long musical number that adds no value to the plot. He sarcastically comments on the portrayal of men and women needing to be separate and the supposed subjugation of women in the real world. Shapiro concludes by highlighting the multiple endings in the movie, each with its own inconsistencies and lack of substance.
When discussing the ending of the Barbie movie, Ben Shapiro criticizes its attempt to please the core audience of moms and daughters by inserting footage of moms and daughters playing. He argues that the entire movie focuses on portraying men and Mattel as evil and terrible, and that the last-minute nostalgia play falls short. Shapiro highlights the revelation that a woman actually created the Barbie doll as a failed attempt to defy the patriarchy narrative. He also criticizes the movie’s emphasis on Barbie going to the gynecologist as the epitome of being a human woman, noting that it contradicts the film’s own trans-inclusive messaging. Ultimately, Shapiro concludes that the film’s politics overshadow its poor plot, characters, and humor, and attributes its positive reviews to the infusion of feminist ideologies.
In the end, Ben Shapiro expresses his concerns about the negative messages the Barbie movie promotes. He believes that Hollywood has taken a beloved brand and turned it into a politically divisive film that seeks to separate men from women and undermine basic human values. Shapiro finds it alarming that a movie marketed towards children ends up being filled with angry feminist themes. He predicts that the movie will not do well in China, and ultimately gives it a negative rating, stating that it is one of the worst films he has ever seen.
On Company Business is a 1980 documentary on the CIA by the late Allan Francovich. The documentary is a comprehensive look at the role of the CIA in various covert operations during and after WWII. The video covers several topics, including the economic rationale behind the Marshall Plan, the agency’s involvement in supporting democratic forces in Europe, and their use of front organizations to influence events in various countries. It also covers the tensions between Fidel Castro’s Cuba and the United States during the Cold War, the failed Bay of Pigs invasion, and the various assassination attempts against Castro.
The documentary also delves into the CIA’s involvement in the assassination of Congo’s first Prime Minister, Patrice Lumumba, and how they attempted to assassinate him with poison. Throughout the video, former CIA officers discuss their experiences working for the agency, the risks involved, and the need for secrecy in their operations.
The video also provides an in-depth look at the CIA and its involvement in Latin American politics during the Cold War. The CIA is shown to have assisted multinational corporations, engaged in propaganda and political warfare, trained labor organizers against communist movements, and supported military coups. Torture and assassination were also used in the agency’s efforts to combat communism, including the training of death squads and torture techniques in Latin America. The video also discusses specific incidents, such as the Bay of Pigs and the Chilean political situation, to illustrate the CIA’s activities during this period.
In the last section the video discusses the CIA’s involvement in various foreign conflicts, including in Chile and Angola. It highlights the agency’s attempts to manipulate events to further American interests, often at the expense of human rights and democratic values. The documentary also delves into the relationship between the CIA and American news media, with evidence suggesting that the agency planted stories abroad that eventually made their way to the United States. The video presents various individuals, including former CIA agents, who express differing opinions on the agency’s actions and the ethics of clandestine operations. Overall, the documentary raises questions about the role and accountability of US intelligence agencies in shaping foreign policy and their impact on global relations.
At 00:00:00 various individuals including former CIA agents discuss their experiences working for the CIA and the nature of its operations. They discuss covert tactics and weaponry such as poisons and electric guns. One former agent also speaks about being recruited under the guise of working for the Department of Defense before discovering that he was actually working for the CIA. Others discuss the risk of having a secret organization like the CIA, but highlight the necessity of having some sort of intelligence service. The documentary also touches on the history of covert operations during wartime.
At 00:05:00 the video discusses the economic rationale behind the Marshall Plan and the CIA’s role in combatting left-wing political organizations in Europe that opposed the plan. After World War II, there was a fear that the return to unemployment of the depression could be averted only by creating foreign markets for overproduction. Thus, the Marshall Plan was established to provide economic support to the free nations of Europe. However, left-wing political parties in Europe, especially in France and Italy, who were the backbone of the resistance to fascism, opposed the plan, knowing that reconstruction would bring economic and political dependence on the United States. Consequently, the CIA was partly set up to combat on a political warfare basis against the efforts of these parties to impede the success of the Marshall Plan.
At 00:10:00 the speaker discusses the CIA’s support of democratic forces in Europe and their opposition to fascist and right-wing groups. They also talk about the Cold War and how the fear of communist influence was widespread at the time, with Senator McCarthy fueling conspiracy theories about Soviet spies in the State Department. The speaker mentions that the institutions of power which are penetrated include political parties, security services, youth and student movements, cultural organizations, and even professional societies. To combat this, the CIA funded media outlets such as Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty to spread the message of freedom and provide specific instructions for the Russian people on working towards their liberation under the noses of the Soviet secret police.
At 00:15:00 it is discussed how the CIA used front organizations to influence events in various countries after World War II. Examples of organizations that were set up by the CIA include the World Assembly of Youth and Coordinating Secretariat of National Unions of Students, which were used to control and influence their members. The CIA also helped to found the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. The video mentions Irving Brown, who received money from the CIA and distributed it to labor operations, and how the CIA provided financial aid to French unions during a general strike. Overall, the CIA’s involvement in supporting various organizations was considered patriotic during the 1950s.
At 00:20:00 the documentary discusses the opposition that the communists had towards the Marshall Plan, which was providing economic aid to support freedom and France. The communists attempted to defeat the plan via political strikes called by trade unions and political elements. The US government consequently called upon Irby Brown and Jacob Stone to break the strikes, and they used the help of the Corsican mafia, particularly the racketeer name Fairy Pazhani, who ended up becoming a paid agent of Central Intelligence. The documentary also mentions a conversation between the acting labor attache and George Meany, the Secretary of the American Federation of Labor, where the former gave his views on how unpopular Irving Dunne was and how much damage he was doing to free labor and discrediting people.
At 00:25:00 it is revealed that the purpose of political and front organizations in Europe after World War II was to fill the political vacuum with forces that would be favorable to close relations with the United States and to preclude any left-wing participation in political life. This was achieved through support for anti-communist movements, intervention in the affairs of other countries, and the support of half-assed dictators, military print, or oligarchy that promised to maintain the status quo beneficial to the interests of the United States and its corporations.
At 00:30:00 the documentary delves into the tensions between Fidel Castro’s Cuba and the United States during the Cold War. The US government was concerned with the spread of communism, and viewed Fidel Castro as a threat to its interests. However, some within the CIA believed that the US should not be attempting to overthrow or assassinate national liberation leaders like Castro, but rather work with them. Nonetheless, tensions boiled over when Castro announced the expropriation of US-owned property in Cuba, leading to a break in diplomatic relations and the events that followed. The documentary explores the CIA’s involvement in various operations to undermine and overthrow Castro, including the attempted assassination and sabotage.
At 00:35:00 of the CIA documentary, the necessity of keeping operations secret from public debate is discussed, citing the infamous Bay of Pigs fiasco as an example of when a lack of secrecy led to failure. The documentary includes footage and accounts of the failed invasion of Cuba by human revolutionary troops and the heated denials of aggression made by the US. A former CIA officer stationed in Cuba recounts his personal connections with some of the participants of the Bay of Pigs landing force and his recommendation of individuals for the operation. The epilogue shows exiled family members desperately seeking news of their loved ones while Fidel Castro threatens death for the invaders and President Kennedy seeks bipartisan support for the situation.
At 00:40:00 several individuals discuss the possibility of President Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy knowing about assassination plans against Fidel Castro. While there is no definitive answer, it is clear that many high-level officials within the U.S. government were aware of the constant actions being taken against Cuba, including attempts to blow up power plants and sugar mills. However, no one in the government approved of any CIA-led assassinations, and the head of the agency at that time stated that he had no knowledge of such plans. It is unlikely that any President would overtly order an assassination, but rather issue non-directed orders to solve problems in Cuba.
At 00:45:00 the video discusses various attempts by the CIA to get rid of Fidel Castro, including the involvement of organized crime figures such as John Roselli and Sam Giancana. It is revealed that William K. Harvey was in touch with Roselli during an alleged plot to transport poison pills from Florida to Havana; though there was no evidence that this plot ever materialized. Meanwhile, the CIA’s involvement in operations such as these typically did not extend beyond the planning stage, with the work being carried out by contract agents, gangsters, and mercenaries. However, there are reports that at the time of JFK’s assassination a CIA officer was meeting with a Cuban agent in Paris to provide an assassination device to kill Castro.
At 00:50:00 there is a discussion about the CIA’s involvement in potentially attempting to assassinate Fidel Castro, using methods like giving an agent a device that kills. The committee questions the morality and safety of such covert operations, especially when involving dangerous organizations like the Mafia. The CIAers are quick to note that it is a tricky business, involving evaluations by good intelligence officers and policymakers. The video also shows some historical events, such as the capture of former Congo premier Patrice Lumumba and the CIA’s training camp at Camp Perry.
At 00:55:00 former CIA officers discuss the agency’s involvement in the assassination of Congo’s first Prime Minister, Patrice Lumumba, and how they attempted to assassinate him with poison. The operation ultimately failed, and the CIA resorted to convincing Mobutu to have Lumumba killed. The officers also explain how the agency recruited and worked with agents, including how they sometimes targeted people who were a little devious. They also discussed the risks for intelligence officers who attempt to recruit assets to serve the interests of the US rather than their own country.
At 01:00:00 the speaker discusses how the CIA would check the names of potential Venezuelan employees of Creole Petroleum Company against their computerized files for any indication of left-wing political sympathies or membership. This was an example of the CIA assisting a multinational corporation. The CIA was also engaged in propaganda and political warfare throughout Latin America to create the optimum operating conditions for multinational corporations. They created fear and hysteria around the growth of left-wing political organizations, such as the communist organizations, and used forged and false documents to bring about a timely effect in certain areas.
At 01:05:00 a CIA officer talks about how they planted a report in a toothpaste tube to frame a left-wing organization leader who had gone to Cuba on a trip. The planted report in the toothpaste tube was found by the authorities in his luggage upon his return, which led to his immediate arrest and the eventual establishment of a military Quinta. Additionally, the video discusses the CIA’s efforts to drum up support for the Venezuelan charge that Castro was supplying arms to guerrillas in Venezuela by influencing the Argentine government. The video also talks about Kennedy’s policy towards Cuba and how the issue between communism and democracy will eventually be settled by the ordinary working people of different nations.
At 01:10:00 a man who worked for the CIA recounts how he was called to Washington and interviewed for a position in Brazil. His position was supposedly going to be for a phony organization known as the Postal Telegraph California International, which was later revealed as being under the CIA. He was trained on how to organize against communists, and he eventually became fanatical about it. He was later accused of collaborating with the CIA and did not provide a response to the accusation.
At 01:15:00 it is revealed that the American Institute for Free Labor Development was established during the Kennedy period, and it was a joint venture between American trade unions and multinational corporations operating in Latin America. The organization’s cover was education and social projects like developing cooperatives and housing, but the real reason was to create organizers who could go back to their industries and spend time doing nothing but organizing. The organization trained Democratic trade unionists, and it was hoped that they could go back to their respective countries and put into practice some of the things that they learned. However, the organization’s board of directors had prominent American employers, such as Peter Grace, and the list of corporations that contributed included American corporations that had never paid decent wages or provided good working conditions in the United States.
At 01:20:00 it is discussed how the CIA would train and support labor organizers in Latin American countries to turn against the communist movements and prevent them from taking over unions and other organizations. The training included sending people to Front Royal for courses on organizing. The efforts resulted in the overthrow of the Gula regime in Brazil, and the CIA’s involvement was suspected by both the communists and their opponents. The AFL-CIO denied receiving any money from the CIA, and the organization’s books were open to the public. The CIA did not want any records kept to avoid any information leaks.
At 01:25:00of the CIA documentary, it is revealed that the organization led a propaganda campaign and disinformation strategy in Brazil to justify a military coup in 1964. The campaign emphasized the threat of communism and rallied support from women and religious groups. The CIA also supported the coup by providing arms and even naval assistance. The exiled Brazilian president, João Goulart, had sympathies with Fidel Castro and his regime was ultimately overthrown by a bloodless military coup. Many Communist supporters were jailed and eliminated from the labor movement, while the Brazilian economy suffered as a result of the regime change.
At 01:30:00 of the video, the Bay of Pigs is mentioned as a turning point in the CIA’s involvement in training and expanding foreign police forces to fight communism. Byron Angle, a member of the CIA at the time, was recruited to expand and lead this program. A third of the police training was devoted to making them aware of the communist menace. As a result, many countries’ police forces ended up using torture, including methods learned from the United States, when interrogating suspected communists. Victims, including political exiles in Europe, reported being tortured with US Army Field telephones, and they were often subjected to cruel forms of torture with no embarrassment from the torturers.
At 01:35:00 the video discusses the use of torture as a means of interrogation during the Cold War and its ineffectiveness in getting information. The CIA officer interviewed explains that torture is a necessity in the system due to the continued resistance of leftist groups. The video also covers the unsuccessful attempts of the CIA to weaken the left in Uruguay during the 1960s and the promotion of repression during that period. The video then details the story of Dan Mitrione, a CIA officer who worked in Uruguay to improve police intelligence capabilities. Mitrione’s use of torture as an interrogation technique, such as the use of thin wires, is described in detail.
At 01:40:00 it is revealed that the agency was involved in the training of death squads and torture techniques in Latin America during the 1970s. The program school in Los Fresnos, Texas was used to train students from Latin America how to construct bombs and destroy radio stations and cars, with the CIA running the courses. The agency also maintained a subversive control watchlist that included detailed information on left-wing political activists, which would be handed over to local police or military authorities for action. The death squads were then sent to Argentina where several leaders were kidnapped and assassinated, including Hector Gutierrez and Senator Selmeri Collini, prompting the victims’ families to register with police and flee the country.
At 01:45:00 it is revealed that the murder of political leaders in Uruguay, including Mitrione, was part of an international campaign that included assassinations of political figures in Chile, Bolivia, and Europe. Mitrione’s presence and actions in Uruguay were part of a CIA advisory program that led to an increase in torture and brutality. Mitrione was eventually kidnapped and killed, and while the US government denied involvement, the murder highlighted the inhumanity of terrorism.
At 01:50:00 the video discusses the CIA’s involvement in Chile during the 1960s and 1970s. The CIA provided millions of dollars in assistance to various political parties to strengthen them against the agenda supported by Castro. The goal was to prevent IND from being elected president of Chile in 1964 and to elect the Christian Democrats instead. However, after IND was elected in 1970, the CIA launched a plot to stop his inauguration and offered $250,000 for a constitutional ploy to block his election. Nixon ordered the CIA to proceed with the plot with the Chilean military to try to thwart the inauguration of IND.
At 01:55:00 the speaker discusses his efforts to prevent a plot with the Chilean military, which included sending cables to the White House and State Department. The speaker discovered that the CIA had countermanded his specific orders and was secretly plotting with an extreme right-wing group called Patria Libertad, which had been put off limits by him. He also speaks of his meeting with Kissinger and the President where he accidentally touched a sensitive nerve and learned of a plot to eliminate certain individuals in Chile. The speaker suggests that the Chile situation warrants high priority for the entire administration, and everything should be done quietly.
At 02:00:00 of the documentary, it is discussed how the CIA attempted to create a financial squeeze on Chile, preventing the government from governing efficiently. By financing truck drivers, the CIA created conditions that would lead to right-wing military leaders intervening, restoring national order, and appealing to those who seek peace. However, this peace is often the peace of the grave for many people, and it didn’t deter Chilean President Allende from standing up for the will of the majority of Chile.
At 02:05:00 the video provides a collection of transcripts that detail the events surrounding the coup against Salvador Allende’s government in Chile. Orlando Letelier, a former Chilean ambassador to the US, recounts how he was informed of the coup in the early morning hours and how the military demanded that Allende surrender. The video also features commentary from US officials who express regret for the loss of life in Chile but also express that the coup was an internal affair. The aftermath of the coup is also explored, including the torture of hundreds of people in the Air Force Academy basement.
At 02:10:00 various individuals discuss the dilemma faced by those involved in clandestine CIA operations in Latin America, as well as the potential conflict between US and Latin American interests. The video also features a clip of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger testifying about US policy towards Chile during a period of political unrest. The Americans defend their actions as being in the national interest, but there is growing public concern and moral dilemmas regarding the ethics of such actions.
At 02:15:00 of the CIA documentary, excerpts of interviews and congressional hearings are shown discussing the oversight function of the US Congress. It is revealed that the Congress had failed in its duty to oversee the executive branch of government and, in particular, the CIA. Various committees and subcommittees of Congress were tasked with oversight of the intelligence community and its operations. However, it was common practice for the intelligence community to brief only specific members of Congress rather than the entire committee, and often they would not pass on the information to the full committee. Some senators even expressed that they did not want to know certain things. Despite this, the CIA continued to involve itself in foreign conflicts, such as by flying arms to Angola, which would lead to further criticism of the agency.
At 02:20:00 several individuals are questioned about the possible involvement of the United States in the war in Angola. While some deny any knowledge, others admit to receiving CIA funds and support for their activities in Angola. The legality of this involvement is called into question, as the War Powers Act requires that Congress be informed before the commitment of the United States Armed Forces, including paramilitary or other forces, in such activities abroad. Despite this, it appears that the CIA has been recruiting mercenaries and providing them with weapons and training. The reasons for US involvement in Angola are also discussed, including the old Cold War rationale of stopping the Soviet tide and supporting allies who have assisted US policies in other parts of the world.
At 02:25:00 the documentary details the United States’ involvement in Angola and their fear of Soviet and Cuban influence in the region. The CIA spread false stories about Cubans raping Angolan women to generate support for their efforts in the country. While the CIA was coordinating with South Africa, they were almost helpless against the MPLA, and after an attack by Mobutu’s spare commanders, the United States’ effort was out of business. Senator Clark was sent to Africa to confer with southern African heads of state, and the CIA attempted to control the narrative by ordering their chief of station to prepare Mobutu and the FNLA president on what they should and should not say about the situation in Angola.
At 02:30:00 the video describes how the CIA attempted to save face after spending millions of dollars on the Angola conflict. The agency could not provide further funding due to public opinion, leaving the soldiers without support. The families of those involved had difficulty receiving help from the US government, as officials claimed that these actions were not part of official policy. The former soldiers and their families expressed their disappointment in how the government handled the situation.
At 02:35:00 the issue of the CIA’s influence on American news media is discussed, with clear indications that the agency planted stories abroad that eventually made its way to the United States. The chairman questions if the CIA paid people who worked in American journals or for television networks. The head of CBS at that time confirmed that certain relationships had already been established with the CIA and that using CIA agents as sources of information was useful for assessing world conditions. However, the risk of being viewed with disfavor by the public is high now for reporters who work with the CIA to influence American news. The Church Committee was infiltrated by CIA people, and abuses were ordered by presidents, not just the CIA. The main argument is that the CIA is just an instrument for policy execution, and the people who determine US foreign policy are the ones who call upon the CIA and other agencies to execute that policy.
At 02:40:00 the speaker discusses how the CIA consistently maintained relationships with various security services in countries such as Iran, Chile, Brazil, and Uruguay, even though the human rights violations committed by these security services were publicly known. The speaker argues that these institutional relationships continue to some extent and that they must be stopped for real progress on human rights issues. Additionally, the speaker criticizes the actions of ex-CIA agent Philip Agee, who published a book containing the names of CIA agents and their addresses, calling for them to be punished for violating their agreements to keep classified information confidential. Overall, the speaker opposes secret intervention and subversion abroad and believes that individuals must fight against it.
At 02:45:00 a former CIA agent denies any involvement in the killing of Richard Welch and explains that Welch was not killed because of his name or nationality, but rather due to the CIA’s history of destabilizing efforts towards socialism and progress in countries like Greece. The agent discusses the CIA’s promotion of dictators and suppression of human rights in various nations, citing Iran as an example where he believes the United States has benefited from its relationship with the Shah. However, he also acknowledges that the Iranian people may not have shared the same view and that the propaganda coming from the regime was not necessarily reflective of reality.
At 02:50:00 retired CIA officer Stansfield Turner discusses the agency’s involvement in Iran during the Shah’s regime. Turner recounts how the CIA was instrumental in organizing the Iranian internal security police, known as SAVAK, which was well-documented as using torture to suppress political dissidents. He notes that the Iranian people are fully aware of the CIA’s role in creating SAVAK and how this has caused rage and anger towards the US. Turner then takes an oath pledging to support and defend the US Constitution.
