Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Why are so many healthy, young men dropping dead of heart attacks and strokes at disproportionate levels compared to the rest of the population? Why has the U.S. government pushed so hard to vaccinate our military, and then fought so hard to cover up...
Why are so many healthy, young men dropping dead of heart attacks and strokes at disproportionate levels compared to the rest of the population? Why has the U.S. government pushed so hard to vaccinate our military, and then fought so hard to cover up the mounting injuries and deaths?
👉🏻Today’s show is brought to you by Rise.TV, where it’s our mission to awaken, uplift, and unite America—one show at a time. Get your free trial of Rise.TV! https://bit.ly/3SLvVTg
To learn more about investing in gold visit - http://goldwithseth.com, or call 720-605-3900
For your no obligation home title scan visit - http://hometitlelock.com/seth
Save up to 66% at https://MyPillow.com using Promo Code - MAN
Seth Holehouse is a TV personality, YouTuber, podcaster, and patriot who became a household name in 2020 after his video exposing election fraud was tweeted, shared, uploaded, and pinned by President Donald Trump — reaching hundreds of millions worldwide.
Titled The Plot to Steal America, the video was created with a mission to warn Americans about the communist threat to our nation—a mission that’s been at the forefront of Seth’s life for nearly two decades.
After 10 years behind the scenes at The Epoch Times, launching his own show was the logical next step. Since its debut, Seth’s show “Man in America” has garnered 1M+ viewers on a monthly basis as his commitment to bring hope to patriots and to fight communism and socialism grows daily. His guests have included Peter Navarro, Kash Patel, Senator Wendy Rogers, General Michael Flynn, and General Robert Spalding.
He is also a regular speaker at the “ReAwaken America Tour” alongside Eric Trump, Mike Lindell, Gen. Flynn.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Man in America. I'm your host, Seth Hulghouse. So on today's show, I am extremely excited for this conversation with Jeff Nyquist, because whenever anything happens, especially with China, I want to get Jeff's opinion. So we're going be talking about the power shift with Xi Jinping stepping in for his third term, which may be his term for life for all we know. What happened with Hu Jintao being whisked off stage.
Speaker 1:But we're also going to be looking at the vaccine and some of the relation between what's happening with the vaccine and the effects, and potentially how that could fit into China's overall plan of bringing down The United States. So before we get in, I got a few messages for you. Make sure you're following me on telegram and truth social at man in America. You can also catch every episode as a podcast if you just want to listen. The links to my podcast and social media are all in the description below or just search for Man in America and your favorite podcast app.
Speaker 1:Make sure you leave us a five star rating. It really helps us to reach more people. And folks by now we all sense that we're in for a bumpy ride for the foreseeable future. Much of the world is going through a process that experts are calling de dollarization. And China and Russia are leading the charge.
Speaker 1:So what exactly does this mean? You see, the US dollar is a fiat currency, meaning it isn't backed by anything of value. The only thing that really gives our dollar real value is its demand around the world. But now, and especially under the corrupt and incompetent Biden regime, the rest of the world is fed up with the Federal Reserve printing money out of thin air and demanding the trade it for things of real value. So though the dollar is strong right now, it's only because people are fleeing the European currencies, and its strength is short lived.
Speaker 1:This is why Russia's already backed its currency with gold and many other nations are expected to follow. But what happens if the dollar loses its global reserve status? Well, for most of us Americans, the US dollar is all we know, right? All of our hard earned money is completely tied to it, whether it's the stock market, our bank accounts, pensions, four zero one ks's, etc. The value of our dollars, our life savings could literally be wiped out in a matter of months, weeks or even overnight.
Speaker 1:And look, I'm not a financial advisor. So please do your own research. But I believe that now more than ever, it's a good time to consider transferring at least some of your wealth into physical gold and silver. Real world assets have stood the test of time. And for this, I'm confident recommending Kirk Elliott.
Speaker 1:You can buy gold and silver directly, even in small amounts, or you can transfer your IRA into physical gold or physical silver with zero taxes or penalties. Now look, I want to be really clear. You don't buy gold and silver to get rich. You do it to protect your wealth. So now's the time folks.
Speaker 1:If you want to learn more about this, open up a new tab right now and go to goldwithseth.com or you can call (720) 605-3900 to speak to someone right now. Kirk Elliott's team of advisors will answer all of your questions and take care of you every step of the way. Again, that's (720) 605-3900 or goldwithseth.com. And those the link and the phone number are also in the description below. So folks, I am extremely excited to let's just go and jump right in to this interview with Jeff Nyquist.
Speaker 1:So Jeff Nyquist, thank you so much for joining me today. How have you been?
Speaker 2:Okay. It's been busy lately, as you can imagine.
Speaker 1:I can certainly imagine. So there's a handful of things I want to dig into today. But most specifically, just understanding what's happening within the top levels of Chinese leadership. We had the video emerging recently of in a significant meeting, we had Xi Jinping with Hu Jintao next to him, the former leader of China that was really kind of suddenly whisked away, and it looked like it was against his will. And I just I want to get your take on what do you think is going on with them?
Speaker 2:Well, you know, we've heard for a long time that there's been a power struggle between the Xi's group and Hu Yintao's group, and that the princelings of Hu Yintao have a lot of economic power. They have some power in the army and that there's been jostling between the two. And that, of course, supposedly leaders are supposed to retire. I think it's '68. But Xi doesn't want to retire.
Speaker 2:He wants to keep on as the leader. He's not going to be replaced. Maybe it was Zhui and Tao's faction's turn to control the leadership. This is the kind of stories these are the kind of stories you hear. And that now during this conference, Xi gets to stay in power.
Speaker 2:Who gets led away? It's all in all for the cameras. I mean, it's a photo op moment. And there's there's two things. You can never trust these presentations in communist countries.
Speaker 2:Something like a conflict could be happening. Obviously, it would not be good for this senior leader Hu Yintao to be embarrassed in this way. Right? He wouldn't you wouldn't think he would voluntarily agree to this. At the same time, however, whatever loss of prestige is attached to it, it may not be exactly as presented.
Speaker 2:So I'll give you an example. Two previous power struggles in China. You know about the Cultural Revolution. Liu Xiaoshi was the party leader and Mao, of course. Mao liked to be in a position where he didn't hold an official position, but yet he was the leader.
Speaker 2:Right. So he could do all these things. So Madame Mao and himself and the head of the People's Liberation Army, Lin Biao, formed this started this cultural revolution where they get the young people going and attacking the leaders. And Lu Xiaoxi was just dragged through the mud. And you had people wearing dunce caps.
Speaker 2:And people were killed. Cultural revolution was very brutal. And so it was way of Mao of purifying the party, of destroying anti party elements, what he saw as. But it was there was something else being prepared underneath because he didn't exterminate Deng Xiaoping. Deng Xiaoping, I guess, was washing dishes in a cafeteria or something like that.
Speaker 2:He had a regular job. And so you go through this whole period. And at the same time, Mao is is about to prepare to open up to America. Right? Kissinger is going to make his visit, and Mao is supposedly at odds with the Soviet Union.
Speaker 2:And you have the conspiracy and death of Lin which, by the way, we have multiple versions of what happened. Linbiao, the head of the People's Liberation Army, supposedly tried to overthrow Mao. And he had this secret agreement with the Russian general at that time, the Soviet General Staff, to have a fake war along the Sino Soviet border. Mao would go into his bunker and Lin Biao would gas him there in the bunker. Well, we know pretty much that that didn't happen because we've got a defector like Colonel Stanislav Lune, who worked in China, who said, look, Lin Biao, when he fled to the Soviet Union in his plane, he and all of his companions had been murdered before they were put on the plane.
Speaker 2:There was no flight to the Soviet Union. And the Soviets participated in that presentation to the world that there was an attempt by a Chinese general supported by Moscow to overthrow Mao that then allowed Nixon's trip to China. And people don't realize that's all part of the background to our opening of China. It's sort of the the the backstory. And yet, we know a lot of that is just theater.
Speaker 2:Right? To get the West to support China, which they we ultimately did. We built them up. So that's one level of deception. Now coming fast forwarding to the present.
Speaker 2:In the present situation, we have Hui in town. We have Xi. And you can can play the stories any way you want. You could say that, well, Xi is really a nationalist. He's really a great Han nationalist.
Speaker 2:And he's not really a communist. I mean, I've heard this that he would allow maybe he would legalize Falun Gong. Maybe he would loosen things up for the Christians in China. You can't believe any of this stuff. This is all manipulation.
Speaker 2:This guy is extremely brutal. Look at the lockdowns. Look at the preparations for war. And what I've heard from behind the scenes in China from multiple sources, Chinese sources, for the last more than two years is that China's preparing for war against The United States. Russia is working with China on this.
Speaker 2:So is North Korea and other countries like Iran. And that they they really And the pandemic had something to do with it. They were organizing for that. Of course, they've penetrated our business. They have access to our capital markets.
Speaker 2:They've done a magnificent job. They've gotten into our CDC. They've gotten through Emory. There's all these Chinese from Chinese communist families working inside of our important sensitive health agencies and in our labs in various of our labs. And so this is all and then you have the secret speech of Qiao Chen.
Speaker 2:We want to destroy America with a biological weapon if we can. And my big question is, was the pandemic the biological weapon only made in China? It didn't work so good. They got they stole American technology, as they always do. They use the American technology.
Speaker 2:They they made the weapon. They they unleashed it on themselves. Then they quarantined Wuhan and let it go to the rest of the world. We know all this story. So who is Xi Jinping then?
Speaker 2:When Xi Jinping was part of the leadership that told the city fathers in Wuhan, oh, have the potluck. Let's spread it around before New Year's, before all those people. Look, that's a biological attack on the West. That's an act of war, And it's a weapon of mass destruction. I bet you they thought that weapon would kill seven to fifteen percent when they unleashed it.
Speaker 2:They didn't know it was going to mutate so rapidly that it was nobody has tried a biological attack on the scale before. Look at look at how this is pandemic was one of the biggest things in our lives. Yeah. So Xi Jinping is a nice guy. Right?
Speaker 1:Yeah. Something that you said, I wanna get back to Xi. But you mentioned their control and infiltration into the CDC. And we recently saw the CDC vote to add the COVID jab to the immunization schedule for children. So do you think that because I, know, I've also read the Qi Hao Chen's speech multiple times.
Speaker 1:Yes. Do you think that maybe the release of COVID in the pandemic was just setting things up for the jab so that they could then use that as their biological weapon? Because if you look at all the ties and a lot of manufacturing, a lot of the patents for the vaccine actually do tie back to China. So do you think they could have a hand in that? And, if if they have if they hold sway over the CDC, and, you know, they know what they can do if they can maim our children, that's you know, they're they're really, really, you know, kinda cutting the seed out of the plant, you know what mean, for the future of our human race over here, at least for the American people.
Speaker 2:Yeah. It would be logical. I think I've mentioned General Rothschild's book, Tomorrow's Weapons, Tomorrow's Wars, written in 1964. He was one of our top biological warfare experts back in the sixties when we had a biological warfare program. And it was kind of the first book to fully go over how biological weapons worked.
Speaker 2:And it went through all the different organisms that were the best candidates. And he said some very fascinating things about how in 1955, because of the concern that biological weapons were becoming more and more potent. And at that time, it wasn't just it was toxic weapons, which, by the way, could you could categorize maybe some of the vaccine if it's been tampered with or if some of the vaccines have been tampered with, you could use a vaccine attack factor. So you find out that the, for example, the lead scientist that developed the Pfizer vaccine is a Chinese national. Right.
Speaker 2:So that's very disturbing to me. And what Rothschild says is we have to we have to protect our medicines and our food supply and all of the things that we come into contact with. We have to protect it against adulteration because a foreign government gets infiltrates. They can poison our food supply, our medicines, our vaccines. And actually in 1955, the concern was so great that the generals went to Eisenhower and said, we need to do something.
Speaker 2:But corporate America and the Eisenhower administration did not want to do anything. And they came back in the sixties, wanted to do it again. They just it was in capitalism. We love our free economy. We don't like interference from the government.
Speaker 2:And of course, think about all the restrictions that would be placed, all of the safety. The safety would be redoubled. The government would be medicines and your food to keep it from being adulterated. Well, then there's a second thing that makes me wonder. I mean, we need to be concerned about this, whatever the truth may be.
Speaker 2:You remember the Gulf War and you remember Gulf War syndrome. Well, one of the things that interested me was the fact that we had hundreds of thousands of servicemen, both I think it was Canadian, American and British going to the Gulf War, getting vaccinated. One of the vaccines Anthrax, was anthrax. Yeah. But there were other ones that were untested.
Speaker 2:See, and the problem with giving people an untested vaccine, especially hundreds of thousands of young men, is that if that thing causes harm, well, you develop Gulf War illness. And the best studies now on Gulf War illness shows that it was what they are not sure exactly There was maybe something in the anthrax. They're not vaccine, but it could have been one of the other vaccines that damaged the immune system of these young people. So now of that generation they fought in the first Gulf War, I believe over two hundred and fifty thousand have died. Now, people in their 20s shouldn't be dying in their 50s, right?
Speaker 2:So shouldn't have already died. That's a death rate. Okay, so this was something we did accidentally by being irresponsible because the Army generals wanted to see You. They wanted to cover themselves so that if Saddam Hussein, who they thought had anthrax, had used anthrax. Now, the funny thing is that anthrax vaccine might have been effective for a gastrointestinal anthrax, but not against pulmonary.
Speaker 2:I don't think there is a workable vaccine against pulmonary. Anthrax is a bacteria. It's the most let us say, virulent bacteria in the world. And if you breathe the spores and it reaches the bed of your lung, it's ninety nine percent of the time you're going to die. Your own immune reaction is so severe your lungs fill with fluid and you just drowned in your own fluid.
Speaker 2:It's very hard to survive anthrax inhalation. And so the vaccine wouldn't have even protected our soldiers against anthrax, realistically. But they wanted to be able to say they'd vaccinated them. Right. And I forget the other I read about all the different vaccines.
Speaker 2:There were other ones that were untested. So you get, I think, about half of the people in the Gulf War, and we're talking about hundreds of thousands of British American and Canadian servicemen, got that vaccine. About half of them developed autoimmune illness. And how they know it was the vaccine is that Gulf War illness now is treated as an autoimmune disease and it's treated with immunosuppressive drugs. And vaccines can damage your immune system because that's what they're fiddling with to begin with.
Speaker 2:This is our best understanding of what happened with that. And of course, the government went and covered up, Oh, it's uranium from spent shells. And it's I remember one version of it was they had all this Diet Pepsi they left out in the sun and it changed it chemically and it caused it. You know, all these other explanations that puts them, know, gets the generals out of trouble. No, I think it's the best studies show it was definitely these forced injections.
Speaker 2:Well, I'm a Soviet or I'm a Chinese strategist at the time, and I'm observing this. Right. So I'm a Chinese strategist and I'm going, wow, the Americans and their coalition, they only lost like 160 people in that Gulf War. They only had 100. But yet they basically butchered their own side with a vaccine.
Speaker 2:Now, what is this cause in the mind of a of a strategist, of an enemy strategist? He thinks, oh my gosh, they're really dumb about vaccines. Could we maybe get them to do a vaccine to their whole population and do that? What if they built a bad vaccine for their whole population, made everybody take it, and half the country got autoimmune disease? Right?
Speaker 2:Half of America got it. And you had another had a third of them or whatever dying before the age of 60. You would have an unmitigated catastrophe, an unbelievable catastrophe. And what if then your scientists, because you had so integrated your medicine, Look at the the Chinese make our vaccine precursors. They make a lot of the ingredients for our pharmaceuticals, for our medicines.
Speaker 2:They make most of them. Right. At least I mean, I've heard from 80 to 50%, depending on what you're talking about. So here they are. And by the way, they about the time, just shortly after Chiyochen's speech about killing all Americans, he wanted to see if they could kill all of America with a biological weapon.
Speaker 2:It was around that time that they really got into big pharma and they started, whatever you want, we'll do it cheap. I mean, that's irresistible to American companies. This when I look at this
Speaker 1:yeah. Just to walk through the timeline of this, it's actually Yeah. And I've thought a little bit about this, but it wasn't until you mentioned the CDC just kind of clicked. It's like, okay, you're right. So if they look, they say, okay, we've got, say, 400, five hundred thousand troops for Gulf War, whatever that number was.
Speaker 1:They say the US government forced them to take a vaccine, half of them are dead by their 50s. General Qi Hao Shi Chen comes out in the early 2000s with a speech talking specifically about developing biological weapons to eliminate a large part of the American population so they can colonize America. Specifically talking in that speech about race specific biological weapons, because he talks about how they want to be they have weapons that wouldn't target the Chinese in America, ideally. Right? But they're watching that.
Speaker 1:Okay. Well, government did that. So and then you're saying that shortly after that speech, China gets heavily involved with big pharma, even though the generals were warning in the fifties against allowing our enemies to touch our medicine supplies saying, look, if we allow our enemies into our medical supply, they could create poisons out of their factories. Okay. And so then fast forward to this under the Biden regime, you've now got the military being forced into vaccination, or else they're being purged.
Speaker 1:And we're seeing a rapid increase in deaths, especially of young men, right? What what benefit do young men have in society? Well, the ability to fight off an enemy. And so, I mean, to me, it's just like and then we on top of that, you've got the Chinese infiltration and control over agencies like the UN, which is gonna, you know, doing a lot of the the global health policy governing, the CDC, which is obviously, as we talked about, just voted to have this added to the schedule for children. I mean, to me, not then.
Speaker 1:You can look at the, you know, if the Chinese generals are war gaming this, and they're saying, how could we get the American government to give their population all these vaccines? It's like, well, how what if we release a pathogen, release a virus? We you know, and I've actually I've looked a lot into the Wuhan pandemic, and you can see a lot of it was actually as propaganda. A lot of it you know, I interviewed Michael Sanger, wrote a book specifically about this, about how a lot of it was just staging what was happening in Wuhan so the rest of the world would become very fearsome. And then simultaneously, have Tedros, a communist at the head of the UN, telling the whole world, hey.
Speaker 1:We have to follow Xi Jinping's playbook, you know, like, buy the book, do lockdowns, everything. I mean, it when you put it when you lay it all out like that, to me, it just looks like a long term Chinese war strategy.
Speaker 2:Well, you have to I mean, it needs to be investigated more seriously, and we need the intelligence services in the country to focus on it, and we need the generals. But unfortunately, we're so disoriented and and and we don't have creative strategic thinking. Look, war is about strategy and strategy is really a very creative thing. It's an art. Right.
Speaker 2:And it involves various sciences. It's very interdisciplinary. So one of the problems, you know, we dumped our biological warfare program under Richard Nixon. We made defensive biological weapons. We still studied dangerous organisms, don't get me wrong.
Speaker 2:But there's no, The United States doesn't mass produce anthrax or bubonic plague or smallpox like the Russians did. They made tons and tons of the stuff, the dry biological material to dump in what's called polar outbreak or you seed cold air masses. It's the most destructive form of bio attack. But the Chinese preferred this other path. And if you've interviewed Li Meng Yan, she talks about the Chinese like viruses.
Speaker 2:The Chinese are big on viruses. And one of the things when I first read General Rothschild's book thirty years ago and I was studying other books on biological warfare, I thought viruses just aren't very good. The human immune system is very adaptive. You've got the possibility of vaccines. You've got all kinds of Yeah, they mutate.
Speaker 2:They tend to mutate a lot of these strains that are most effective. Well, Ebola is a good example. One of the reasons Ebola, although it can be very lethal, is it's very unstable. It mutates, it becomes harmless, it becomes harmful. Strikes a village, it kills one hundred people, and then it's gone.
Speaker 2:So you don't have in Africa Millions of people dying from Ebola. It's just too unstable a virus. So it's not a good weapon. What makes anthrax, for example, a good weapon, although it's not communicable. If you had anthrax, you can't give it to me.
Speaker 2:I would have to basically cook you and eat you and undercook you and eat you to get anthrax. I couldn't. Or I would dry roast you and then breathe it right off of you. I mean, it's not to be able to get it, though, if you put it in a cold air mass, then we breathe about six gallons of air a minute. And you take that in.
Speaker 2:And if you breathe enough of it, you would get pulmonary anthrax. You get it in your lungs, you die. But Chinese were fixated on this virus thing. And I could never figure it out because, look, even the great pandemic killed fifty to one hundred million people worldwide. Well, that's not war winning, right?
Speaker 2:If you killed seven percent of the population of a country, mostly elderly people, by the way, people with preexisting conditions. Let's say when the COVID first hit, let's say when COVID first hit, it was seven percent lethal. You get these statistics out of Northern Italy, maybe New York when it first hit New York City. Let's say you have that. It's still not going to win a war because nuclear weapons are still more powerful than that.
Speaker 2:And you're thinking, well, why would they want to use? And then again, the human immune system adapts and the thing mutates. But if the Chinese have a plan, had a plan, I remember I was talking to a lady, she had a PhD from Emory, which feeds the CDC. It's in Atlanta, it's a university. And she was talking about like 15% of the faculty and 15% of the graduate students there were Chinese nationals.
Speaker 2:And she told me, she said, And not just any old Chinese. Chinese from state Communist Party families. And I thought, Well, that's interesting. And other people confirmed it. I did.
Speaker 2:I wrote the book China. Let's see. I see the book here. I think it's China's war in America or something. And it was done by the Center for Security Policy.
Speaker 2:I worked with a team. We had some very prestigious people. The team leader was an expert in biowarfare that was a medical doctor. The things that we discovered-
Speaker 1:That's the book that just came out. Is that right?
Speaker 2:Yeah, it came out a couple of months back. I mean, thing that we discovered and we all had assigned our part of the research was how much the Chinese were integrated, how Chinese nationals were integrated in government supported labs and not in the private sector. Private sector, our best people go into that. They make more money. And another what was pointed out to me by a couple of people in academia was that the Chinese graduate students are very obsequious and professors just like a graduate student to do all their grunge work.
Speaker 2:And a lot of Ph. D. Candidates in American is like, I'm not doing your grunge work. I'm here to get my Ph. D.
Speaker 2:I want to do important work. But the Chinese would do it and it would get them into special positions of trust. That's it. CCP is at War with America. Yeah.
Speaker 2:I'm one of the coauthors of that book. Gordon Chang wrote the book.
Speaker 1:Haven't read it yet.
Speaker 2:I I learned a lot. They asked me to do research for it and they assigned me certain things. And everybody I mean, it's really very interesting, very thorough. And we were very careful. Everything in there is proven.
Speaker 2:Everything is footnoted. The thing is, we don't know the exact answers. Look, the odds that this was not a weapon, that COVID-nineteen wasn't a weapon, it's very small. I mean, the discussions that we would have in writing the book is, is this a weapon? And it was like, well, there's no absolute proof.
Speaker 2:But like the odds, I think what came down to in terms of the odds, it's like one in twenty thousand that something like this would happen in nature. Right? And in this way, coming out of a place where they had this level four lab and where there was the stories about it escaping the lab and did it escape or did it escape on purpose and how it was handled by the Chinese. I think the running theory of many people now who study this is that it escaped on accident and they decided to go with it. Say, all right, it got out on accident.
Speaker 2:Let's make it into a real attack. Because Trump was messing with them, remember, they they were forced into this trade agreement, which is basically Trump's agreement with them is null and void now. And it it it disrupted Trump's administration. Trump because of the way we had to change voting because of the pandemic, Trump lost. It it it it garnered, you know, the method of of voting, gave more votes to the Democrats.
Speaker 2:I think arguably, people can argue about about all that other stuff, but but that's pretty clear. I think most reasonable people can see that the the Democrats were kind of favored by that that method of of polling of voting. So so you have this situation. Was it all a strategy? Was it thought out?
Speaker 2:Well, on the fly, some of it was very much to China's advantage. And and would they use a vaccine precursor? Or did we just make some mistake with it? Did did we I mean, if you're if this is gonna go on YouTube, you'll be censored. Right?
Speaker 2:Or are they loosened up on that? You know? I don't know.
Speaker 1:You know, it's I'm not sure. It seems that some people I've had on and they're happy with it. Like, had Karen Kingston on who's a Pfizer whistleblower. They didn't like her very much. I I got I got, you know, kind of banned for a week from using my YouTube account.
Speaker 1:But I I think that we've been safe enough. We're talking around in circles well enough.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I I I don't you know, this this area is an unknown area. There's a lot of controversy. But, look, as a strategic I'm looking back like you are. You've mentioned General Qiao Chen's speech just to explain to the people who don't know who Qiao Chen was.
Speaker 2:Qiao Chen was the defense minister of China Twenty Years ago. And I think it was 02/2003 or late two thousand and two, he retired. But he gives this speech. And I've been told I talked to a guy who worked at the Pentagon, a colonel, who was one of the Pentagon translators of the speech. He said, oh, yeah, we think it's authentic.
Speaker 2:Because what they did is he told me that they had looked at his use of language and his pattern of using Mandarin. And they said, oh, that's him. It's like a fingerprint. Mandarin is a very sophisticated language usage, like most languages, idiosyncratic. Your way of using language is like a fingerprint.
Speaker 2:You examine the number of certain words you use and stuff. It's unique to everybody. Your use of language is like this is like you're in your house. If you're in a two story house and someone's walking above you, you can tell by the steps who it is.
Speaker 1:Oh, yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2:I mean, I think we've all many of us who live in two story houses have had that experience. It's like, I know who's walking above me, you know, living in a house with three or four other people. It's like, Okay, I know who that is because some people they have quick steps and others have quieter steps. And it's like a fingerprint. People are individuals and they have these traits.
Speaker 2:So they determined it was him, Qiao Chen. And there were other sources that verified that speech. And of course, it is with some people. Oh, no. When I first heard it, I didn't believe it.
Speaker 1:Jeff, I pulled it up here real quick. I just want to read one paragraph of this. This is on your website. So he says, conventional weapons such as fighters, cannons, missiles, and battleships won't do, neither will highly destructive weapons such as nuclear weapons. We are not foolish as to want to perish together with America by using nuclear weapons despite the fact that we have been exclaiming that we will have the Taiwan issue resolved at whatever cost.
Speaker 1:Only by using non destructive weapons that can kill many people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves. There has been rapid development of modern biological technology and new bioweapons have been invented one after another. Of course, we have not been idle in the past years as we have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of achieving our purpose of cleaning up America all of a sudden. And that's just one portion of it.
Speaker 1:But he goes into it.
Speaker 2:It's like So
Speaker 1:whose words are those that we just read? Explain it to them.
Speaker 2:General Qiao Chen, he was in the Central Military Commission. He was the defense minister, so he was the leading leader of China's military infrastructure. He was the top boss.
Speaker 1:That was about twenty years ago or so?
Speaker 2:Yeah, that speech was made about it was published by Epoch Times, translated it into English and published it in 02/2005, I think February or March. It had gotten out because it's a rather sensational speech and it was made before elite party cadre. This was not for general public. This was just for top Communist Party officials. It was sort of orienting them on their strategy.
Speaker 2:And of course, it's very important what he says in there that Taiwan will make everybody think it's about Taiwan, but it's about cleaning up America. By cleaning up, he means exterminating. And of course, I was when I first read the speech, I was very puzzled because there's no biological weapon that you could even kill half of a population, not realistically. Could hit if you dumped, if you had a dry biological attack using cold air masses, you could maybe kill a third of the people in one area if you were lucky under the right weather conditions. But it's really difficult.
Speaker 2:And besides, if you did that, your aircraft would be seen and the other side would just nuke you in return. You know, Okay, you're going to kill twenty, thirty million Americans. We're going to go kill twenty, thirty million Chinese. So it's not. And so I was mystified when I first read this because I first read that in 02/2005 when it appeared on The Epoch Times.
Speaker 2:But now, reviewing it, thinking about it and having the opportunity to work on this book with the team from the Center for Security Policy, it really comes home to me that with our vulnerability to different attack vectors, look, they could look at look at all the vitamins, American vitamins that the ingredients are made in China. So what if they now? But here's the problem again. If let's say they poison vitamin C, how many people take vitamin C regularly from the particular products that they could adulterate? It wouldn't be enough.
Speaker 2:It would be enough to make us angry and cause us to retaliate with nuclear weapons when we figured out who did it. But it's not enough. It's not war winning. Right. Because if you're going to use biological weapons to exterminate and he's talking about exterminating most of the people, 100 million Yeah,
Speaker 1:one to 200,000,000 Americans.
Speaker 2:He mentions that the speech. Yeah. And it's like, well, do you It's like you think about it. Study how war works and you think, how do you do that mechanically? And it's like, wait a minute, if you have a vaccine that everybody has to take and if you can adulterate all the like three or four vaccines, if you can somehow get in and adulterate them, maybe you can only adulterate one of the vaccines.
Speaker 2:Right. Or two. Maybe you can get to that 100,000,000 to 200,000,000 mark. Maybe you can get there. And that's look, I'm not saying they did this, but I'm saying that we really have to take it serious.
Speaker 2:This should have been and I think that if you want to defend your country, look, if we're attacked by a serious biological weapon and we need a vaccine, I should hope we could make one that would protect everybody. I mean, it would save millions, tens of millions of lives. So we do need vaccines. But we need to not have foreign nationals or a foreign country that is our enemy that's origin might originate an attack whose officials are talking about using such an attack to exterminate us. We don't want them connected to our pharmaceutical industry.
Speaker 1:Right? Also, if you look at what is it that caused so many Americans to go get vaccinated and to have their their children vaccinated, it was organizations like the CDC, which you're saying is heavily infiltrated by China. It was the media companies pushing the vaccines, which are we know are heavily controlled by China. I've done deep dives into that. That's that's without a doubt, the media companies are completely have strong, strong influence by China.
Speaker 1:And look at Biden, look at the White House, look at how much Biden has pushed us. We know that he's a puppet for China. And so even the some of the military generals that are that are going along with this, I think they're controlled by China. So it's like, it makes sense to me that and then even add further the production of the ingredients, you know
Speaker 2:Right.
Speaker 1:Of that. So it's like, how do you want to make it so that, you know, because again, say they release some this big biological weapon, right, that like a black plague or some sort of, you know, a hemorrhagic fever. What's to stop that from going over to China? Right? Or being brought back to China.
Speaker 1:There's really not a whole lot. But if they can literally control the distribution of vaccines, and a lot of these whistleblowers are saying they've come out, they're saying that, that you can even trace these specific, you know, batches of these. And they're saying, yeah, we're seeing increased level of death and harm from the vaccine. So this will I won't put this on YouTube. I don't wanna limit this conversation.
Speaker 1:But they're gonna be saying that we're seeing red conservative states are having higher death rates from the vaccines than the others. So we're seeing that there's some sort of potential
Speaker 2:fewer people willing vaccinated in those states. So you would think it would be the opposite number.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Right? Now No. This is all very troubling. I mean, look, I I wrote about this last year. I wrote a couple of pieces.
Speaker 2:I explored the the Gulf War syndrome because I thought it was relate could be related, at least conceptually. And, you know, trying to bring people back to Qiuchin, I think I had a certain impact. You know, there was a lot of arguments about do we talk about the Qiuchin speech in that book? And in the end, they they put it in the book, which I was very happy about. And I I think, look, war is about strategy and strategy is about how to use different weapons and how to use people.
Speaker 2:And the Chinese strategy is is is always been a strategy of infiltration and economically compromising. Look, they have access to our capital markets. That should never have been. They when they got Nixon to go to China and then they got Carter and then they got Reagan and they got everybody to go in and sign on for this for two generations of of Chinese, you know, integrating with our economy where we could not resist the cheap labor. Look, it's slave labor.
Speaker 2:They're murderers. I think I mentioned I interviewed Harry Wu who had been in the Laogay for nineteen years. And I said, what do you think about the Chinese leaders? He said, murderers. What do you think about going into business with them?
Speaker 2:You're an accessory after the fact when you go into business with a murderer. You know, what are you doing? You you're morally compromising yourself. And even more than that. So how many of our executives are willing they they will look at Bill Gates, and I would appeal to Bill Gates.
Speaker 2:Mister Gates, please rethink your relationship with China. They have made you feel like you're the best thing since, you know, since sliced bread. You are just being used. And and and you don't we cannot even conceive of the way they would manipulate an American billionaire or an American scientist to give them things that they need, elements they need to destroy this country. Because the CCP regime, they've killed tens and tens of millions of their own people.
Speaker 2:And their their goal is to to eliminate us, The US. Why would they use these methods when General Qiao Chen has said that's their plan? Right. Why fight a war? Why fight a nuclear war when you could kill all the Americans and get them to do it for you, you know, by their own stupidity?
Speaker 1:Why not? This was I mean, biological warfare is goes back to ancient China. If you look at some of the the battles in the three kingdoms, I remember one battle specifically, I think it was, I forget exactly, was one of the rivers where Cao Cao, I think, yeah, Cao Cao had sent, there's, he had diseased bodies, and he piled them up into boats and sent them into his enemy's shores. And they unloaded these dead soldiers and pulled them off the boats. And that was a was he spread some sort of disease, some sort of plague was then spread into his enemy's camp.
Speaker 1:So like, isn't that the best way to take down an enemy?
Speaker 2:Yeah. I mean, obviously, if you can look. With poison weapons, look at Vladimir Putin, for example, favors poisoning his enemies. So he used Novichok, a nerve agent, poison Navalny. And and of course, you had polonium to poison Alexander Lovitenko.
Speaker 2:And you have you have all these poisonings. You know, the scribbles there in The UK, the GRU defector. Actually, he was traded. He was captured. He was a British agent and he was captured by the he was arrested and put in prison and he was exchanged later.
Speaker 2:Well, they went after him and his daughter got Novichok poisoning. And there were like twenty, thirty British U. K. Citizens just incidentally got exposed to Novichok using a weapon of mass destruction for assassinations. So poisoning, if you can poison use these advanced poisons or even nuclear poisons like live an echo to kill an individual, this also carries with it this signal that we can kill anybody.
Speaker 2:We could kill maybe everybody. Right? It's like a terror weapon. Don't oppose us. Don't tell people what we are.
Speaker 2:Keep your mouth shut. To terrorize. There's a Chinese diaspora. There's a Russian diaspora. There's people who don't want to live under those systems that live abroad.
Speaker 2:And they're a big problem for Moscow and Beijing. They want to ride hurt on them and keep your mouth shut. Don't do what we don't want. Well, you know, and you you know, I know some Chinese people and they don't want someone in their family that's going to start talking because it might endanger the whole family. You know, you can kind of see this and it's it takes courage to speak out against murderers who are the biggest international gangsters in the world with the highest death toll in the world.
Speaker 2:And they want to own the whole world. They want to do to the whole world what they've done in China and in Russia and what the Russians are doing in Ukraine, what the Chinese are doing in Tibet and to the Uyghurs in Central Asia. These are we just can't imagine we live such a soft, privileged life. And I hear people say America is a totalitarian state. Well, we're getting worse.
Speaker 2:Right. But we're not where they are. We don't have what they've got. And we've got to understand how dangerous they are. So this, yeah, this biological warfare thing, this may be what's happening.
Speaker 2:And it troubles me when it's all about Taiwan, but maybe it's not. And it's all about this power struggle. They've got us all focused on Taiwan and on Ukraine. And here we're in the aftermath of this pandemic. And did we just did seven hundred to eight hundred million people in the West just take a jab that's going to cause mass sickness?
Speaker 2:And and is the is the more you you hear the stories from these undertakers. Finding strange blood clots in people's bodies and in all of the rest of it, you think, could that be true? And have we been attacked? And the very fact look at look at when Austria and Germany, they wanted to force everybody in those countries to take the jab earlier this year. They backed away from it.
Speaker 2:Thank God. Because now it's very funny. Australia also had that massive pressure to get everybody. Well, Australia is right a number one in the path of China. Oh, yeah.
Speaker 2:Germany is the country that the Russians would like to they'd like to live in all those cities.
Speaker 1:And with, you know, Italy and China and and, you know, the
Speaker 2:Italy and China. Exactly.
Speaker 1:Completely tied into the Belt and Road Initiative.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I'm I hope this new Italian prime minister is gonna fix that. But they they have to get they have to cut off China and Russia. Look, it's a mistake. You don't go into business with murderers.
Speaker 2:It's the one thing if we could get a message across, do not have trade with them. We should not. You know, I remember it was kind of humorous. Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, was saying, there's no reason for us to have embassies anymore. There's no reason for us to maintain diplomatic relations with the NATO countries.
Speaker 2:Good riddance. Goodbye. Because all every one of those consulates and embassies that the Russians have with us, they're running spies out of. Now, of course, pulling them all out is a prewar sign. You know, that's what you do before you nuke somebody.
Speaker 2:You get all your people out. Right. That's kind of scary. And maybe if we're lucky, here's if we're lucky. If we're lucky, the biological weapon was a dud.
Speaker 2:Maybe the vaccine was bad, but they didn't get a chance to adulterate it or enough of it to really hurt that many people. And maybe they've got to go to nukes now. That's why all the talk about nukes. It's like, all right, we tried the biological attack. It was too complicated.
Speaker 2:It didn't work. People fought us every inch of the way. We couldn't get just imagine if everybody got along with the vaccine, maybe the vaccine was not so bad. Maybe it needed to be tested more. But what if you get everybody used to this and the Chinese are there and they're going, Okay, the next vaccine, we're going to get our people in and the next vaccine is going to be the kill shot.
Speaker 2:Right? Because the Chinese are right there. They're making the vaccine. What if they make a vaccine precursor that literally two years after that you're vaccinated, you just drop dead? Right?
Speaker 2:You don't know.
Speaker 1:What's crazy is that I was because I I follow the the vaccine stuff, you know, quite heavily, especially my wife does as well. She's always sharing research. And one of the recent people have come out, and they're saying that they're looking at the death statistics. And it was almost, like, an almost not believable that all of these people were dying literally within one year of getting the vaccine. Like almost had a timed release, they were dying.
Speaker 1:And then what's also interesting is that you have Karen Kingston, who was the Pfizer whistleblower who I should be having on soon. And she's coming out and she and she's not someone that is just pulling things out of the ether. She's coming out looking at patents and looking at everything. She's a researcher. She was, you know, with Pfizer, right?
Speaker 1:This is exactly what she does, showing all of these connections between five g and the some of the materials, some of the is graphene oxide and some other things that were within the vaccines. And what everything that she's saying is pointing to is that there might be some relationship between five g and the ability to activate something within the vaccine.
Speaker 2:Something that's lethal.
Speaker 1:And if you take a step back, it's like, well, who owns and who controls the world's largest five g?
Speaker 2:China.
Speaker 1:I mean, it's just there's there's so many of these things that stack up. And so kind of coming full circle back to Xi Jinping and the changes. I I you know, through my own research, I have a lot of contacts back at the Epoch Times I talked to. And and if there's one organization of people that understand China, I would say it's the Epoch Times and a lot of their journalists. And, you know, as you mentioned, they're the ones that broke Qi Haochen's speech back in 02/2005.
Speaker 1:And Right. But looking at the what's happening in China, I've understood that there's been a power struggle, which is, you know, common in these communist countries. But there's been a very strong power struggle at the very top. And I think you've talked about this and other sources I've talked to have spoken about as well, that part of that power struggle was that Xi Jinping was almost too much of a Maoist communist, and they were worried about what would happen under him with full control, and that the purging that's happening is perhaps pointing to Xi purging people that aren't for his aggressive stance towards The US and everything. And so do you think because I've had you on multiple times the past couple of months talking about these these plans for a potential kinetic attack on America, Taiwan, etc.
Speaker 1:Do you think that this kind of power consolidation happening under Xi is inching China closer towards something that's a more significant move on the West?
Speaker 2:Well, there's a big question as to why, given the failures in Ukraine look, I interviewed you maybe know, I interviewed Mr. Wang of Luda Media in June, and he was the guy his organization got the fifty seven minute, recording out of Guangdong about transition from normal to war in China in Guangdong, talking about a mobilization order that had come down from the CCP, in April to mobilize. That was a I believe that meeting happened on May fourteenth of this year. And, of course, preparing RoRo ships and preparing nearly a thousand merchant ships to be ready to carry military supplies. This is an enormous preparation.
Speaker 2:And Mr. Wang then, his sources were saying, look, they want to go before November 1. Well, Mr. Wang is saying, they're going to put it off maybe to December. I think they're going to put it off more to that.
Speaker 2:And it's it's it has to do partly with the Russian failures. But it also has the fact that what I've gotten, you know, I'm I'm I'm on the committee for the present age of China and we hear a lot of experts and a lot of opinions in it. And it that China, of course, is having a lot of problems economically. There's there and one of the interesting things is that the regions in China have misreported their population figures for a long time. This this might even go back to Stalin.
Speaker 2:You you maybe know there's a famous story, and it's told in the guy that wrote the Conquest of Sorrow, Robert Conquest's Stalin biography, that Stalin they had a census, I think it was 1937, and the Census Bureau had showed that they had like something like 11 to 17,000,000 less people than you would have thought. Right. And so, they'd had the Ukraine famine. They murdered 11,000,000 people in Ukraine. And then there was in the Volga, they did similar things around their country.
Speaker 2:Had collectivized farming, which caused a lot of loss of life. So what's really interesting is that Stalin had the whole Census Bureau shot. They didn't say why. You just you're all dead, replace you. And then the rest of them thought, Okay, they figured it out.
Speaker 2:Stalin wanted a higher statistic as if all those people hadn't been eliminated. Right. So what's interesting is you got the same kind of phenomenon in China where the Census Bureau knows that the government wants to have good news, higher numbers for because their labor if they consents, they want more because they want to expect more from the farms, more young men leaving the farms going into the cities. So this may explain why they built all these empty cities where people said there's region. There's a region in China.
Speaker 2:I was just told this morning, this one researcher told me, where they know from studying the electrical system that 65% of the apartments aren't getting electricity because there's no one in them. Right? Because they just built all these residences and they built all this infrastructure and there's nobody nobody showed up. There's a problem. Socialist planning, it's not a market.
Speaker 2:And they lie to each other about what the truth is, you know, to please their political bosses. So they've messed up their economy massively. And, you know, there's some people saying they're they're having a demographic implosion because of the one child policy. You have two adults and one child, and now those adults are getting to be 60 or 70. And there's two elderly people for one person down there supporting them.
Speaker 2:And maybe part of the pandemic was they needed to kill off their elderly population. Right? Because the virus was killing older people and people with preexisting conditions. The people at risk were people 70. The people at most at risk over 80.
Speaker 2:If you've got a system that's that you know, upside down, that's the kind of corrective measure you would need. That's also an interesting point. So there's there's all kinds of ways in which this makes sense what they did, you know, in that. But but getting back to the point of what they're up to, what's really troubling is that with all of our attention on Ukraine and this other thing, we've kind of taken the eye off the ball as to what happened with the vaccine. Are we now are they locking everything down?
Speaker 2:Here's the question. Is is Xi Jinping consolidating power, locking everything down? Is Russia in war mode, getting its people ready to receive a nuclear attack? Because they're afraid that China and Russia really colluded in this. And they're afraid we're going to figure out when millions start dying of the vaccine.
Speaker 2:Not saying that's going to happen. It's just a thought, A paranoid thought. Please.
Speaker 1:Already based upon the people I'm talking to. Like, I mean, I interviewed doctor Jane Ruby this past month. And just from her research, she's saying it looks like there's been around three and a half million deaths so far. The what show what her research is showing her. So I mean, it's already Yeah.
Speaker 1:And But you're right. It gets to say thirty million, you notice that.
Speaker 2:Yeah. If you if you suddenly it can't suddenly, we realize that something happened to us and we start investigating. We start saying, wait a minute, these are Chinese nationals. They poisoned us with vaccine precursors or whatever. If that happens, then what would they expect?
Speaker 2:A nuclear strikes. We would have to strike them because when Nixon got rid of our biological warfare program, we don't have any bio lethal bioweapon to strike back at them. And besides, look at how China's locked down. Are the Chinese lockdowns paranoia that we're going to strike back at them with a weapon? Is our what we're you know, we often don't realize that the behavior we see in other people is a reflection of their paranoia about us.
Speaker 2:And we're thinking, well, we don't intend to do anything to them. Why are they behaving like why are the Russians and Chinese acting like we're about to nuke them? The Russians are acting right now like we're about to nuke them. Now, why would we be about to nuke them? Would it be because they and the Chinese got together and they did a bio attack on us?
Speaker 2:Because, look, the Russian vaccine and the Chinese vaccine, they're not vaccinating their people with the vaccines that we supposedly made, right?
Speaker 1:That's a really good point.
Speaker 2:They're not taking AstraZeneca or Moderna or Pfizer or Johnson and Johnson in Russia or China. So what if their vaccines are just a placebo? What if their vaccines don't do anything? And what if they then they put out reports that the Russian vaccine is killing Russians and they're having the same problem with their vaccines in Russia. Look, I don't think they vaccinated that much of their population anyway.
Speaker 2:Right. That I mean, I don't know. I don't trust the Russian media. They lie, you know, just to mark time in Russia. Same thing in China.
Speaker 2:It's like you can't tell what's going on in there. Everything's so opaque. But one thing's for sure is that if they did this to us. And we find out they would be expecting a nuke. So have they gone to war and have they mobilized from normal to war because they have now hit us with something really disastrous?
Speaker 2:It's like, let's say a wife poisons her husband during dinner. She knows that if he realizes she's poisoned him, he may have enough strength to strangle her to death. So she's got to divert his attention and, oh, dear, do you have a stomachache? And make sure he never suspects she's done it. But when he starts looking like, What have you done to me?
Speaker 2:She's going to the knife in the kitchen and she's holding it up to defend herself. Right? Is that what the Chinese and the Russians are doing? Are they Have they gone Russia invading Ukraine is an excuse for them to prepare all their they've prepared all their nuclear shelters. They're even talking about this dirty bomb story that that they need to get their people ready because America is going to nuke them.
Speaker 2:Is that really guilt? Is all the misdirection? I don't know. But if you're thinking creatively and I'm not making a conspiracy theory, I'm thinking about strategy. We're in a war situation here.
Speaker 2:There's wars going on. Thousands of people are dying in Ukraine and China is supposedly getting ready to attack Taiwan. But what about misdirection in strategy? That is how they operate. We've always known that.
Speaker 2:That's how the communist systems do. You read their books. Maskarovka is the Russian word. It's kind of like the English word mask. So it's really is more like psychological camouflage plus camouflage plus masking.
Speaker 2:Right? It's the above. It's a very rich word in the Russian language. So what have the Chinese done here? So I wouldn't be surprised there's a that there has been some kind of other attack or there'll be more attacks and that we are going to figure out eventually.
Speaker 2:Look at all the disorientation. China is bad. Russia is good. Putin needs to be our ally against China. And then, oh, we need to do this.
Speaker 2:We need to do that. Oh, and then we've got our fifth column here in America. We've got and in Europe, we've got all these Marxist politicians who pretend to be centrist and they are helping out. And we've got all these compromised billionaires. So the elite is bad, right?
Speaker 2:We need a revolution. So we'll revolt against our well, who wins in all these scenarios? Russia and China are left off to the side. Maybe they're even regarded as allies against the deep state or the new world order. No, it's all part of this game because it's about control of the planet and the World Economic Forum can't control the planet.
Speaker 2:But Moscow and Beijing together as partners, they can.
Speaker 1:This that is it's interesting you brought that up because I I recently had on Trevor Loudon, and we got into this discussion about, you know, the world economic form. And right now, you know, a lot of people are looking to Klaus Schwab as like he's the he's the villain. And there I feel like that what's happened is there's been a giant misdirection towards, say, Klaus Schwab, who, of course, he deserves our attention because he's out there saying you'll be you know, you owe nothing and be happy. And, you know, he's a proponent of transhumanism and all this stuff. But it seems like he's the villain everyone wants to focus on ignoring these giant communist systems.
Speaker 1:And what Trevor said, he said, look. Here's a simple way of looking at it. If the war economic form disappeared tomorrow, another one will pop right back up. If the CCP disappeared, you would not have a new one emerging. He also said, look who controls the weapons.
Speaker 1:Look who look at China or Russia. Look who controls the weapons. And so this is a question that I have, because, know, I'm someone that, you know, I like I how I look at this situation is I think that there's there's no black and white to it. Right? There's no and that there's there's propaganda on every level.
Speaker 1:And it's so hard to really tell what's true. Right? Because even the whole idea of the Nazis in Ukraine, right? It's like, well, are there Nazis in Ukraine? Well, there's Nazis everywhere.
Speaker 1:Right? And so and how how do you know that the there's not Nazis in Ukraine that are being kind of propped up by the communists? Right? Like, you know, like, what what's happened in America?
Speaker 2:And you've got Nazis in Donbas fighting for the Russian side. I mean, we know that's documented.
Speaker 1:There's there's it's so complex. I find that so many people that they wanna look at it and say, it's black and white. This is the truth. Whatever the media says is is is false, and the opposite must be true, which is also dangerous because you're still allowing the media to control what you believe if if you fall into
Speaker 2:that thought. Like reverse psychology. Oh, if I say Black, you say white. Okay, now I know what to say next. Exactly.
Speaker 2:Get you to say what I want you to say. Yeah. Mean, about Claude Schwab, he was a protege of Henry Kissinger, Right? Well, look at Frank Kopel's book. Look at that.
Speaker 2:Henry Kissinger's Soviet agent. That's by Frank Kopel. Right. That was published many years ago. And that this is a very strong case that Henry Kissinger was a Soviet agent.
Speaker 2:Talks about the high level journalists and people from the intelligence community that thought Henry Kissinger was a Soviet agent. So the fruit of the poison tree, if Klaus Schwab is a protege of Henry Kissinger, Henry Kissinger was a Soviet agent, what does that make Klaus Schwab? And a Soviet agent is an agent of which country? Which capital? Moscow?
Speaker 2:Right? Klaus Schwab has bragged that Putin is one of his guys. No. Actually, that's he's one of Putin's guys, maybe. Maybe that's the reality.
Speaker 2:It's like, it's just wonderful to pretend you're your boss's boss, but you're really just an underling. Well, and
Speaker 1:there's also people that they say, well, you know, that maybe Xi Jinping is gonna be fighting against the deep state, which they say is the UN. Yet you also have China hosting the UN, and China's pushing for agenda 2030. It's like, why doesn't make sense? Because aren't you saying that Xi Jinping is a nationalist that's fighting against the UN deep state, yet at the same time, Xi Jinping is headlining the UN, you know, conferences in China pushing forward agenda 02/1930, where, you know, to me, what it looks like is that there's, I do believe that within all of these these elites, we want to call them that, that there's power struggles, and they're fighting for global dominance. And I think that at one point, it was the kind of American imperialism and the military industrial complex of the West that was kind of working together perhaps with some of the Europeans for their goal of a one world order.
Speaker 1:But what I'm seeing right now, and there's a there's a, I guess, this guy named Leo Zagami, who's interesting, you know, a very interesting guy, and he's was, you know, part of the high level kind of secret societies. And he's coming out and saying that the the kind of powers that be have realized that the West is waning in its power, and they're looking towards a future with what they call the the China Russia new world order. Right? And and how they're seeing that it's actually China is their best bet towards leading towards this one world order because China has the infrastructure. They have the five g required for the technocracy, everything.
Speaker 1:So it's it's such a dynamic field, but I think that you're you're so correct that there's all this misdirection. And I think the greatest misdirection has been taking us away from looking at what's happening at the polyp in the polyp bureau, what's happening in China. I still do see the CCP as the greatest threat. And a lot of the narratives that are emerging about Xi Jinping being a nationalist and how he's against the CCP, to me is just a a one of the most significant propaganda, you know, narratives I've heard in some some while. It's like Xi Jinping has been leading China for a long time now.
Speaker 1:You haven't seen the persecution of Falun Gong stop. You haven't seen the organ harvesting stop. You haven't seen the Uyghur concentration camp stop. It's like everything has just continued full force under him. So what makes everyone think that now he's gonna be our savior all of a sudden?
Speaker 1:It just to me, it just I have a hard time with this.
Speaker 2:No. And see, what people misunderstand is the West is pluralistic. That is, the West being with the market system, there are so many different areas of the economy, so many different kinds of billionaires. I mean, we have so many wealthy people in The United States. It's just staggering.
Speaker 2:They form these interlocking webs of elites. There's no one elite that controls everything. And if anybody knows who the next president is going to be, just look at the twenty sixteen election where one billionaire stood up and got himself elected president. I mean, it's not people have this idea that somebody controls everything, where there's a group like there's the Dilili Lama and Dilili Plaza, and it's a firing squad. The aliens are there and the Nazis are there and the FBI and the cattlemen and the oilmen and the KGB, and everybody's there to shoot JFK.
Speaker 2:Look, the problem with conspiracies is that power is largely an illusion. And when you look at the totalitarian regimes like in Russia and China, they really tried to make it where they could control every aspect of a person's life, that they really did have control. I mean, you look at the kind of freedom. They can't make people do. It's like herding cats in America.
Speaker 2:How can you make people do anything? But they really tried in Russia. And what did they end up with? They ended up with a country that was totally demoralized, where the slogan was, We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us. And then now, when they try to reorganize it under nationalist slogans, the same old Soviet nomenclature tries to reorganize it under Putin.
Speaker 2:And it's totally corrupt. It's become a kleptocracy. They've stolen their own weapons. They've siphoned money out of their own weapons program. Here, I mentioned Valerie Solovey saying that they had two nuclear weapons tests.
Speaker 2:Nothing happened. Right? What happened? The weapons didn't work. I mean, a nuclear bomb is like a Swiss watch.
Speaker 2:It's so complicated if you don't maintenance it. It doesn't go off. So, you come back to America versus where we actually our system, actually, people are motivated. Oh, I'll make money. I'll get rich.
Speaker 2:I could become a billionaire. Look at the Elon Musk and the rockets and the satellites he's put up and stuff, it's like that can't happen in China or Russia. They can have an Elon Musk. They can have an actor because we actually do have freedom. And we say it's not about control.
Speaker 2:It's about it's about the freedom. And that's why we're better than them and why we have to protect freedom and why they're failing in Russia and China, because centralized control controlling everybody, it doesn't really work.
Speaker 1:No, it doesn't. Well, Jeff, I think this is we're a little over an hour. And I think that this is probably a good point to conclude on. I just want to thank you again for continuing to come on. I encourage people to check out your website, jrnyquist.blog.
Speaker 1:And I think that we'll just have to see what happens. But if there's look, if there's one message for, you know, the viewers to take away from this that that I've learned, especially in the past six months, as I've really dug in, in researching, is that the more confused you are, that the probably the closer you are to the truth. Because I find that whenever I've found myself convinced that, oh, this is how it is. And this is it's like, I learned something else. It's like, oh my goodness.
Speaker 1:So I think it's it's just so important for us to understand that we're dealing with layers upon layers upon layers of propaganda, lies, and even like we're talking about the media. You know, they the look. The the people that that control the media, they know that there's a a portion of our population that look at the media and say everything the media says is a lie, and the opposite must be true. Well, they can use that to control us just as much as they control the people that turn on CNN and withdrawals, you know, drop open as they eat their microwave dinners. It's the same thing.
Speaker 1:So I think it's really important for us to really be discerning. And the one thing that I've really tried to hone in on is this is just to learn to follow my gut. And what if I'm watching somebody, or if I'm if I'm reading something, to really tune into what my gut is telling me, because it's not easy.
Speaker 2:It well, there's really you can boil it down to there's different philosophies in different camps, and people believe certain things. And there's the belief that that we're just matter and that the mind is epiphenomenal and they want to make some kind of scientific world. This is scientific socialism, and socialism is like a new religion. And there's many different versions of it. And Marxism, Leninism has been very successful at organizing behind the scenes and having clandestine structures.
Speaker 2:But it is there's lots of different kind of leftism. And then you have the old traditional beliefs of people. You know, there are the traditional religious faith and you have so you have these different belief systems and they're all competing. And so that's all part of it. Right.
Speaker 2:And and but people, there are ways of manipulating people's beliefs. Right? And there's ways of appealing to people. And what really we have to look at the structure of the arguments we're hearing. What is this?
Speaker 2:What is this argument supposed to get me to do? And is this to the advantage of me and my or my country? And just think about it that way. Whoever's making the argument, it's like, is this going to help me out? Because we have to the most important dimension of orientation in politics is who are your friends and who are your enemies?
Speaker 2:Truly. And once you have that orientation, go, wait a minute, there are my enemy. Once you have that or once you have that down, you can kind of figure out what's coming at you and why. Right. You can't always know who's who because you got people who pretend to be your friend and they're not.
Speaker 2:But once you figured out somebody is your enemy and that's Beijing and Moscow and Ivan and Pyongyang and so on. And once you figured out who's really what's really helping them. Then you can think about it and go, well, maybe that guy means well, but he's actually feeding into what China wants or what Russia wants. So we've got to try to piece it together in some way. That makes the most sense to me.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And I think also, it's important for us to look back to history as well. And that's something I always appreciate in talking about you is that you're when you're you're talking about your research, you're not saying that, oh, I I found this on Twitter, and I looked at and analyzed these this Twitter thread. You're saying, yeah, I talked to a KGB defector, or I read this book by you have the book about Henry Kissinger being a Soviet agent. You're not going to find that information floating around on social media.
Speaker 1:And so it's also something I encourage for people is to really look to history and look to also a lot of the experts that have studied history extensively. And just use that as a as a guidepost. Not saying, look, we can't follow anybody blindly. We have to question everything. But I think it's important to really have some good guideposts and and also to look to, you know, places like the Epoch Times and look at what their reporting is saying.
Speaker 1:Look for people that are on the ground reporting. So you know, anyway, it's we definitely were in the middle of an information war right now. And there, we're also in the middle of the fog of war. So I really appreciate these conversations, because I feel like that, like for me, it allows me to vocalize some of the things I'm kind of going through and trying to understand and hear your thoughts on it. And actually, think that part of what emerged, which I didn't expect coming into the conversation today, is just the narrative about what's really happening with the with the vaccine and what is China behind that because we paint this picture, it's like, oh, goodness, like this.
Speaker 1:I think that it's really strongly points to something that is kind of a threatening reality, unfortunately.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Well, when you have so many economic actors in the West that are tied to China and you're saying you're looking at that going, no, that's bad. It it it would be like if your relatives started to get into business with the mafia. What are they bringing home to you? Right.
Speaker 2:And and so what is this? What does this involve us with if if the if the Chinese get into our system? And we we need to I mean, obviously, you don't want nuclear war and and things are getting out of hand. But I think, like you just said, we need to check our premises. We need to keep going back over information.
Speaker 2:Maybe there's something we missed. Right? I mean, we can't be right all the time. We just can't be. And there's so, like you say, fog of war.
Speaker 2:We don't know. So let's ask the questions. What what is the harm in asking? Oh, you know, oops, I goofed or I got something wrong. I mean, you're going to get something wrong.
Speaker 2:This is the way it is in this field because you get somebody comes to you with information. It looks good. Turns out it's not. And this is we all have this experience. So I like to wait sometimes and ask the question.
Speaker 2:But still, you know, it's like, well, that was a dumb question. It's like, but wait a minute, maybe there are no dumb questions.
Speaker 1:That's true. Yeah. That's true. Well, Jeff, thank you so much again for being on the show. We'll probably have an update before too long as things unfold.
Speaker 1:And just, you know, take care. God bless. Have a wonderful night. And just thanks again for everything that you're doing.
Speaker 2:Thank you for having me.
Speaker 1:Alright. Take care. Bye bye. Bye bye.