John Waters and Michael Yon #1214

What's up everybody? Just want to take a quick second and let people know that I am self-supported. I now put all of my episodes on Substack for paid subscribers. I put them up early and then 24 hours later I release them to the public on all my platforms. I also have Venmo, PayPal, CashApp, BimeoCoffee, Zell, PO Box, and I don't think locals, Patreon, and all of the links are in the show notes of every single episode I put out. So look forward to continuing to provide great conversations and thank you all for your continued support. On this episode of Coffee in a Mic, Irish writer, author, thinker, John Waters joins War Correspondent, Michael Jan to discuss different theories with Charlie Kirk's assassination, invasions in Ireland, Japan. We talk Trump, brainwashing, and music, and much more. Please subscribe, like, and share this podcast. Ladies and gentlemen, the Mic is on. I welcome back John Waters and Michael Jan. Michael, John, let's go with a few steps back. We've already been talking about things in relation to Charlie Kirk and for people that are listening, let's go backwards a little bit and discuss what will summarize what you two are talking about. And thanks for both coming back on. Thank you. John, would you like to start? Sure. Yeah, pleasure. I started off talking about Charlie Kirk and with Michael and I just want to go to what my own kind of encounter with the news was. I was in a place called Ledbury in England at the time. I had two events on Wednesday first of night and nights. And the first we heard about it halfway through the first on Wednesday and it was a total shock, obviously. And my response was pretty, you know, as you would expect. I think your shock and horror and certain amount of grief that this is the loss of this life and so on. And we said as much in the discussion we had, right? John, John, let me interrupt you. John, let me interrupt you one second. I'm hearing a little noise in the background. Is that coming from somebody? Anybody hearing that noise? Michael, it could be there's coming from here. Yeah, yeah. Okay. I think it's okay. Okay, we're good now. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. You Michael, you don't hear it? No, I think we're good. Okay. I always go. Yeah. If it continues again, I'll let you know. Sorry. But go ahead. We've got a creepy floor on my wife is around. Okay. So maybe that's what maybe that's what I'm hearing because it's coming through. So okay. Go ahead, though, John. You want to start again? No, that's okay. Go ahead. Oh, yeah, go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. On the second night, then just before we started, I got I was talking to some people and wonder mentioned that there was this what they were calling a conspiracy theory now emerging about the charity correcting and that it might be a staged event or a false flag or something along those lines. And I mean, to be honest, my initial response to that, a kind of born of my kind of general sense that there's a danger and all that stuff that it's kind of a hobbyism that goes on. Sometimes in the wake of events in the on the internet that people start to meet the terrible things apart and throw out details that don't seem to go here and I kind of was thinking about that for the I kind of said was when I spoke about it very briefly on the night was that, you know, this is a real danger. And I don't necessarily mean to criticize or to condemn the tendency to hypothesize about these things at all, but simply to observe that there's a kind of consequence of this, which in this instance may well be being played by the orchestrators of this. Where by the downstream effect of it is to kind of disintegrate and unravel the possibility of agreed main needs, I mean among the public about what happened and to to fracture any sense of, you know. Cohesion of our coherence and moreover to undermine people's belief not alone in in the tarjis and the facts and so on, but in their own capacity to apprehend information to their own feelings about it so that they, you know, they said they have this immediate response as I had to that shot that appalling shot. Of the the ball is entering Charlie Kirk and and and the spurting of blood and that which really just absolutely paralyze me and yet, you know, you didn't say, oh, maybe I might be played that kind of thing now. I haven't had I haven't had time had time to investigate it in any way I was out in the foreign country and just had my phone so I wasn't really following anything. But as I came back, I started to look into it a little bit and I had to kind of concede that there's something very weird going on here, you know, that's just it's not a normal thing and there's so many aspects of it that are problematic. I just mentioned a few that there's just two guys behind Charlie, Charlie Kirk, just before he's been shot, one of them is wearing a white ball, baseball cap, cap, and he tips it as a certain moment. And there's another guy behind him, which makes some kind of the side of me, he makes a strange kind of signal with his arms where he kind of does something like this, you know, and and and immediately the shot comes. And then somebody in the crowd is seeing to go, you know, make a kind of a jubilant kind of signal and all this now. I'm not suggesting that I'm sort of some great slut in seeing these things quite the contrary. What I'm saying is that these things are done in such a blatant way that they can only have been intended to be seen to be noticed and to be remarked on and to feed into the whatever discussion would happen. So in other words, it's almost as if the people who orchestrated this wanted the conspiracy to evolve about a multiple conspiracies which at the end of the day, it's almost that the longer you go on with this, you can actually end up with a situation where virtually, theoretically anyway, every single person in the world will have a slightly different theory about what happened, but nobody will be 100% sure that there's is any where there's is in relation to the actual truth. But there'll be no sense of agreement or of concurrence or anything like that. That would be, it would be, you know, almost you be afraid to mention it, predicting the present climate. And there are other aspects as well, which I kind of, I'm kind of loads to mention them, but there's some oddities about, you know, the scene which is one out of Charlie Kirk's wife speaking to his dead body. In the casket, which I found very strange and not very unusual, let's say, and at all of it, this didn't seem to be right, it didn't seem to be what would happen in such a situation. I could be wrong about that because of course in these situations, we all know from, I think, from our own experiences of grief that you behave very oddly in the situation where grief is suddenly pushed upon you. So that's kind of, so I suppose I'm talking really about the kind of idea of that you can actually unravel a culture by pommeling it with different versions of the same apparent narrative. And in the end, the result would be a complete demoralization of the public in general, and no sense afterwards of what actually happens. So in the end, you will not be able to use the word, the term, the assassination of Charlie Kirk without actually hesitating before the word hasn't, has a assassination, even if you fully believe that it actually happened as it seemed to happen. Michael? Right, I mean, I agree, except that the way that he put it was more in depth than what we usually hear, John, that was really interesting. Hey, Michael, do me a favor, I'm going to cut you a second, your mic is down, can you turn your mic up a little bit? Minus down, my mic is down. Your volume, no, I'm sorry, your volume. I'm sorry, let's see. Here we go, I might be able to, how about that? There we go, there we go, you're good. Okay, sorry, sorry about that. Yeah, I mean, the way that John just explained it was really interesting and invaluable because, you know, the intentional confusion that's quite obvious. I mean, the only people that aren't going to try to cause confusion for us are definite enemies. You know, in a moment when we need clarity and they're trying to confuse us, whoever they are, like law enforcement, continuously. Let's go back to the last Trump, quote unquote, assassination attempt. I mean, the bullet shot was transparently nonsense. I mean, the bullet trace, I mean, the photo with the bullet trace, let me see here. Which camera is this here? So this is a Sony Alpha 1, you see this? This is the camera that that photographer was using. I use the same camera. It's a different, this is a different lens, but I have the same lens as well. I mean, you know, I've done so much combat photography that even I can't remember. You know what I mean? Thousands of photos and actual combat, and I've never seen a photo like that. And I've never seen any combat photographer or police photographer or any other photographer who's ever captured a photo like that. And any war and any photo that, you know, I'm talking about that bullet trace that, you know, the little streak that got the Pulitzer Prize. I think it got a Pulitzer, you know, by Trump on Trump day. That's clear nonsense that photo, right? And again, the law enforcement cleaned up the evidence immediately, hosed off the roof where the alleged shooter was and took down the stands and everything else. They dismantled the entire crime scene. Obviously, they were covering up obviously right in front of everybody, right? And yet, when you say, hey, these things were wrong, people go, oh, you're saying that the assassination was faked or whatever. Here's the bottom line. If somebody's trying to confuse us, they're not our friends and they're trying to hurt us. And then we go to this one. There's so much confusion and it's obviously intentional, like John said. So whatever, whatever they're up to is malicious. And this isn't the end of it. I mean, this sort of October 7th, it was very similar with the attack there near Gaza. That was a clear state go to attack as you've heard Matt Bracken, and you've talked about before. That was a clear green flag, state go to attack. So I mean, this is what they habitually do, whether it's the USS Liberty or actually rewind back to World War II. The United States did a clear state go to attack with our harbor, with our fleet at Pearl Harbor, left it there. Knowing the Japanese were going to attack, it wasn't theoretical. We knew it. It was on the headline of the newspaper, Seven Days in Advance. Seven days before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Seven days, it was headline news. Japanese may attack over the weekend. And the Honolulu advertiser, right? I first published that like 10 years ago, right? And people said, oh, that's a great Photoshop. You got there. I'm like, nope, Rambo. Seas fire. It's legit. Go down to the microphone, Honolulu, and look it up yourself, right? You can find that it's online now, right? So at the end of the day, that itself was a state go attack. State go is when you, you stake a goat so that some, like a wolf will get it. So you can kill the wolf, right? You know, down in the daring gap where I go so often, I came into a village a couple of years ago. And there was a new Jaguar skull up in a hut, right? And it was fresh. And I asked who killed it. Obviously a very close shotgun shot, very tight. And I said, whoa, somebody was really close to this thing when they got it. And I asked the Embraer Indian how he got that Jaguar. And how did he do it? He staked the pig next to the river. And when that went on a moonless night, because they liked to hunt on a moonless night, he just stayed in the water. And then when the Jaguar came out to get the pig, he turned his light on and shot it, right? And so what I'm getting to is this is a normal hunting technique. It's a normal war technique. And it's used by the United States and by Zionists on a regular basis, right? And what just happened with Charlie Kirk? I don't know. But what I can say is this. He clearly was buoyed by Zionist money. He didn't build that giant company by himself from scratch since he was 18. It's openly that he was built up to, you know, sell the story. The Zionist wanted to hear about Israel and that sort of thing in Iran. And at some point, he started to go off the reservation. Charlie Kirk started to go off the reservation. And he started to almost maybe like Pinocchio who wanted to become his own boy, right? And so he, and this often happens, by the way, when it comes to counterintelligence operations, when somebody is built up to a certain size, or a certain, let's say, ego structure. And they're like, hey, I'm my own man. You know what I mean? I can run this show, right? And the person that's being used kind of goes off the reservation. That's common. That's the common thing, right? And I think that's what happened with Charlie. That's what it looks. It appears that he just got his own power under him. And his own cute, significant young people base was upset. A lot of the people were upset about what's happening in Gaza. It's a clear genocide. They were upset about the attack on Iran. And they're upset about other things. And Charlie, I don't know if he was responding to that because I can't read his mind. But what we can do is read the timelines. And we can, you know, see a few things. He started to change his tune. He started to say, hey, October 7th, something was wrong with that. He clearly stated that in, you know, clear terms. He clearly said that what's going on in Gaza is wrong. Clearly said the Iran attacks were wrong. And, you know, obviously, he's off the plantation at that point. Now, keep in mind, he has, Israel is in trouble. They're in serious trouble because Israel is losing American support base. For instance, people like me who supported Israel most of my life shifted over time to neutral. And then when it came time for the death jab and seeing the things that they did, that's it. I'm no longer not even neutral at this point. I'm speaking out. This is obvious, right? And the October 7th, that was obvious, take the good attack. And so, you know, at some point, you just like, hey, that's enough. And that's happening with a lot of people in our generation. We're tired of them, right? People that used to support them no longer see them as our great ally. We see them actually as a minister to society and a minister to the United States, right? And that is very dangerous to them. And Charlie Kirk has been their last hope. It appears in making that younger generation, you know, sort of co-alace, you know, in Judeo-Christianity as they are always saying. And basically, in viewing the young people of America or many of them anyway, with the idea that they have some obligation to give a kidney and a liver and another kidney for Israel, right? And so Charlie Kirk was very effective at getting people, young people involved to support Israel. And then he started to go off the reservation, which obviously, I mean, that's approximate danger to Israel because not only is he not neutral now, he's actually using the force that they put under him and the platform and the huge access. He's actually undermining their mission. So at this point, they got to make a choice. This guy, Charlie Kirk, you know, could be running for president in the next four or five years when he's, you know, 35, that sort of thing, right? I mean, seriously. And then what, you know, that, I mean, they had to make a choice. I think that's my gut instinct is what I'm telling you. It's not obviously, go ahead. No, no, I finished, finished, finished with thought. But what, what, what, what, what, you didn't have to stop. But what I wanted to add to that, and Michael, and this is where, I mean, I agree with you because he, first of all, he was a politician for all intense purposes, right? He had a manner which he carried himself, the manner and, you know, his appearances. He was very, very smart, very intellectual. And he was running around. His circle was Donald Trump, Donald Trump's kids, JD Vance, Peter Teal. I mean, he was in the inner circle. And turning point and turning point action, which is a sister company, they had started there on the ground campaign. I think it was last year, turning point action, where they, he delivered the young people, which I'm assuming mostly boys, to vote for Trump. Usually they don't vote, they vote Democratic if they do. He was successful in achieving that objective. So now you take him out, you know, he's gone. The turning point has been neutralized. I mean, I know they're going to, they, you know, they're going to go on and go on, but how can they do that without their leader as effective as they were? So, you know, that's where it begs me to ask that question, all right, who benefits from this? You know, Israel, potentially, Democrats, Republicans, establishment Republicans, because the young people next year into the midterms, how, how are they going to feel? Are they going to be completely demoralized from it? John? Yeah, I think that, that, that sounds a very plausible scenario. I, that's your point forward there, Michael. I, I'm not sure about, I like, I, I, I, I'm just going through my head, you know, the permutations and the little, the pieces of fragments that I've been paying attention to that I've heard that are sort of problematic. Like, for example, the fact that he's, that's after the shooting, he, he was taken away, not in an ambulance, was in a car, and there was then some kind of thing about a plane taking off and so on. Now, you see, that implies that it's all fake, completely that he wasn't shot or something. So this, this opens up a whole other, the whole other front, but actually that, that could be just misdirection as well. I mean, so what I'm saying is that there's such a fragmentation of meanings in all of this, that there are multiple meanings immediately off the top of your head, you could come up with five or six different options, permutations for what actually went down, that he was, he was shot dead, he was, he wasn't shot, it wasn't him, you know, there was never charity Kirk or whatever, you know, this kind of stuff. And this is going right all over the place now, and that ultimately, so they get two words with one stone, perhaps, you know, that they take out this guy who was there, such a danger to them and had in their view betrayed him, and then they create massive confusion in the public, which is exactly what this whole project that we're talking about overall, going back to COVID and behind, that that's, that's what that drives on. People's confusion and the sense that I can't possibly say what's real, I can't possibly say what's true, I have no opinion, you know, I don't speak about anything anymore, and so you add to what the kind of what I call the mutism, that is affecting so many of our populations that people are afraid even to think at all in the company of others less, it'd be read. Well, yeah, and you know, you can't, you can't kill the signal, but you can turn up the noise like my friend Dave column likes it, likes to reference, and yes, and that's where I'm having a hard time with the idea of the rifle, and I probably should have checked this before coming on, but what was inscripted was it in the rifle or in the bullets. The bullets, and now we're getting into this whole Jack Ryan Harrison Ford Patriot Games movie scenario, and look, maybe all this is true, maybe everything that they're saying in the mainstream media is, you know, this is, this is the story, I just have a hard time with that. I think one of the things, you know, with soccer and I were just talking about this yesterday that at some point when you just realize, hey, they're trying to trick me, and I'm not going to be able to figure out all the things that they did, I'm just not going to be able to figure them out with any certainty. I shouldn't waste my brain waves on that on what the magician, you know, when did he actually do his hand, how did he make the mask work, you know what I mean. And then start to just focus on, they're trying to fool me, they're the enemy, right, they're the enemy, because the only enemy would do that. So then that changes the way you look at the whole situation, where, you know, instead of trying to figure out exactly when he got the rabbit out of the hat, where he was like, hey, this whole thing is rigged, and that's it, then you don't, you're not actually confused anymore, because you're not trying to figure out when he put, how do you actually get that rabbit out of that hat. Here's like, hey, the guys are fraud, in fact, the whole house is a fraud, right, it's not just him, it's the whole thing that we're in, right, it's the whole ecosystem, because they're intentionally trying to, to put us off balance and make us confused so that they can continue with the next big thing. And while we keep looking at the, you know, the mouse running across the road, bam, another truck hits us, right, you know, there's all kinds of other things going on with our food supply. There's obviously they're, you know, trying to use this distraction to, to put other things into effect that, you know, that nobody's paying attention to, like 9/11 was coming up, right? They didn't want us looking at 9/11, because increasingly people are realizing that, hey, that looks like Zionist too, right? I mean, increasingly, I think a lot of people have changed their tune on that, on 9/11. True or not true, there's been so much bullshit that they've done that's overt, like October 7th, right? That was clear, and that Trump bullet trace and so many, that death jab, right? Anybody that pushed the death jab, the way that they've done, they're clearly committing genocide, right? There is zero that they won't do. There's zero that's off limits, we don't owe them any benefit of the doubt. People are owed the benefit of the doubt when you're, you know, normal situation, but we're in a wartime situation, and we know that they're killing as many of us as they possibly can. We're not obligated to sort out every little thing on how we can assign, you know, who did what to whom? At the end of the day, it looks like Zionist killed Charlie Kirk, right? We don't have time to collect all the evidence and go through it and be uncertain and 10 years later, we haven't quite certain figured it out. This is war, you have to be quick, you have to make intuitive decisions and make your judgment and move to the next thing, right? And in my judgment, the Zionist just killed him. That's what I think, and I'm not going to spend three months going through the evidence that because I'm always going to be fooled and uncertain about it. I agree, I agree, Michael, I just want to broaden out a bit. What's your sense from you've been going around the place for a long time? And, you know, you know, you must probably have a different sense than the ordinary person of what kind of undertones are out there. I have a sense that we're approaching some kind of denouement, you know, at least some, some escalation in events, whether it's a war, whether it's this story about France and Russia, whether it's, of course, the CBDCs are imminent as well, all of these things. What's your sense of the moment now, because you said before and I think rightly, and we all have this difficulty, that timings are very difficult to predict, and that you kind of, we're always going to get them wrong. I mean, lots of us have, you know, stores of 10 food, like which are kind of near, near their cell by dates now, if not by their use by. So, what do you feel we are now? Well, again, like you just mentioned, timing is difficult, but it's very clear that conditions continue to accrue. We're actually in a state of war, that's obvious. It's just not obvious to everybody, because a lot of people don't realize that, you know, for instance, the war has so many faces like the death jab as part of the war. The invasions over our borders, like you see all around you and Dublin, we've been there looking at ourselves, you know, that's part of it, right? Food supply, food prices continue to go up, of course, and energy supply continues to become more and more threatened. I mean, there's so many aspects of this, you know, race hatred that's been stoked. All the sorts of forms of hatred that we've all seen with our own eyes, whether it's men against women or young people against old people, whatever, right? The conditions, there's clearly that people that want us to go into war, and they're successfully moving the ball down the road still. I think some people think that, you know, the death of Charlie Kirk or whatever happened to him would, like you mentioned earlier, we don't even know if that's, you know, we don't know what happened. But obviously that hasn't sparked mass violence in the streets, but, you know, at any moment, something could happen and there you go. You just never know, we could wake up in the morning and, you know, cities are burning or not, we just don't know, but as soon or later, clearly, I think we're going to end up in food problems and food problems, you know, your Irish, you know what that can do. I mean, that's quite significant to put it mildly. Your population never recovered from the famine that ended in the early 1850s, so it's still not recovered, and that's 170 years ago, 175 years ago, right? Yes. It's very significant. Yes, and there's a lot of, there's been a lot of talk. I mean, we had our first conversation on these streams, over 14 months ago, another one about a year ago. And that was the first, I think, that this was talked about on this side of the water anyway. But recently now, on the last six months, there's been a lot of talk about the idea of, in the UK, Civil War. And there's a guy called David, Professor David Betts from King's College London, who's been talking a lot about this, and various aspects of it. He's going through, you know, he works on a different point of view to you, where you're out on the ground talking to people. He looks at the history of these things, and he says the signs are very ominous. He too doesn't, you know, put his pen on the clock and say, this is when it's going to happen. But at the same time, he seems to be suggesting that it's very, very evident that they were closer to tipping point. Yeah, history, I spend a lot of time in history books, great, you should see my library. And it's like, you know, to learn what's going on, you have to spend a lot of time with your nose in the books. And it's very, very helpful to actually go places with key people and spend significant time and do things, actually. And then actually starting to teach, that's like the epitome, when you really start, as you well know, when you start to actually teach, that's when you really start to learn because everybody finds where the holes are in your knowledge, right? And then you have to plug those up through more study. But the history, studying the history of these things, that's absolutely key. I mean, there's no way to be good at war prediction without spending huge amounts of time just studying stuff from centuries ago. And then these patterns eventually, after you've studied enough, they start to become quite clear. And it takes a time, it's not like you're going to, you know, within six months, you know, get your balance on the bicycle. It takes longer than that. But eventually you do and you get to the point where you're like, yep, I think it's pretty clear we're going to have famines. The question is, the question is, when are we going to have wars? Obviously, I mean, that's clear. I mean, that's, a lot of us have been saying that for years. Some people have been saying that since we were little kids. And a lot of the reasons, like J. Edward Griffin, who called me recently, you know, he, he was, I got one of his books right here. The creature from Jack Lyron. I mean, this guy, he was saying it a long time ago. And you can see his black and white films on YouTube, J. Edward Griffin. And some of the stuff that he was predicting back then, it still hasn't fully happened, but it's clearly happening. It's clearly unfolding and in the way that he described. And so, you know, that was how long ago, 60, 50 years or something, 60 years. Yeah, 60 years. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And the, the, yeah, we're here. We're talking on, on, on Sunday. So this is the 6th, 14th of September. And yesterday in, in London, there was a massive demonstration. The, the official figure is given at 110,000, which is utterly laughable. That's the media version. The, you know, the people are saying there's at least two to three million people there. And you can see the, with the, the, the drone shots from above. Like there's vast numbers of people stretching the helicopter river beyond. And, and what, what, I'm wondering about, do you attach any significance to the idea that, you know, this kind of, I suppose you could almost call it a cliche that's been bandied around for it, but they're awakening of the people. There seems to be some movement, but can it actually, is it any use, Michael, in, in, in the context of what we face? To that, that people are now beginning to mobilize. And, you know, maybe confront those who have been doing these things in so blatantly in plain sight. At the end of the day, if we don't treat the symptoms, but actually treat the causes, it's actually not that complicated, right? There are specific people that are doing this. And they're not large in numbers. I mean, it's just a matter of addressing those situations and, you know, taking that off the table. They're taking us off the table with death jabs and everything else. So, I mean, at the end of the day, it comes down to treating the cause and not the symptoms. And, you know, for instance, the invasions that have happened in Ireland and so many other places, that's not organic. That's, that's United Nations and highest, which is the Hebrew immigrant AIDS Society Catholic Charities, Lutheran Services. All these, we see them all the time. But they're still, they still are just mechanisms under other people's control, right? They're still, I mean, you have to go to the actual people that are doing this. And furthermore, the foundations, and I mean foundations, financial foundations. Those are, the organizational structures behind this, some of these things are centuries old, right? I mean, a lot of what we're looking at, that's why a lot of people can't see it because they, they think a lot of Americans still say things like, well, this started under Obama. I'm like, this started before your grandfather was born, right? That's why you can't see it because it's so, it is in front of us, but you can't see it because it was, it was, it was mature before we were born. And now we're, we're just watching it still blossom and blossom and we haven't chopped that tree down, right? It's a poison ivy tree. And, but, you know, once we just identify it and take that thing out, then, you know, life can go on. I mean, we have to get rid of things like the Fed. There's all kinds of things that have been done that undermine, we got, you know, like Japan and the United States, these are both very rich countries filled with poor people. There's been a lot of time in Japan and the United States. Both countries are extremely rich and filled with poor people. And both countries have open borders. And, and the US borders are still open, by the way. In fact, we had dinner tonight with a guy that just came back from, from the United States because he can't get a job in the, he's a computer programmer. He can't get a job in the United States now because Indians just took his job. So he's back here to get a job. Yeah. I mean, we just literally an hour and a half ago, we're having dinner with him. I mean, can you Matt? That was, that was Texas. One of the things David Betz says, and I think you would agree with it is that there is no political solution to this. The reason he offers for that is not so much that potentially there isn't or theoretically there isn't, but that there is no political will among the political establishments of the West to do the things that are necessary to avoid what is coming. And, and that therefore it becomes inevitable. That's what he's, his basic thesis is. Would you agree with that? I would. And it's, I mean, and also over a period of time that the, the governments are captured. There's just sufficiently captured a sufficient number of traders are in there or people that'll just kick the can down the road. I mean, how many disasters happened or finally occurred because somebody said, well, we'll fix it tomorrow or, you know, I don't want to rock the boat. I mean, I wonder how many disasters have happened in military commands because somebody said don't rock the boat. And, and before you know it, the boat is at the bottom of the sea, right? And that's, you know, and you see that when you're in the military, by the way, you get a lot of people saying, mine is not to know the reason why, but to do or die, you know what I mean. Basically, they're just being good little robots, good little gears in the machine and getting their paycheck and they don't really understand what the machine is doing that they're in, that they're doing their job or they're not doing their job. But at the end of the day, like the Border Patrol, I've been across the entire US Southern border. I've seen our National Guard and our Border Patrol load up thousands of people onto the invasion buses, thousands, right? Right in front of me, very close, like touching close, that close, right? And that's our Border Patrol and our National Guard doing it, invading us, and then if you ask them how this happened, they're like, oh, it's the Mexican cartels. I'm like, do you work for the Mexican cartel? Because you're the one doing it. I mean, you are doing it. Yeah, well, I'll lose my paycheck, you know, well, I'm like, well, there you go. You're an ordinary man. You know, like the World War II book, ordinary man, right? You know, you're just doing what you're told, sir, just just doing, taking orders, right? Destroy their own country. And that brings us a little bit closer to the concept of Donald Trump, President Trump. And I mean, I know you've been very consistent on your line on Trump. I possibly was kind of pushing back about that against that because I continued. I had a residual kind of belief in his, in him based on his kind of physical demeanor and the fact that it seemed to be whatever else, what everybody's background, the facts of his history and so on. That he was at this kind of sense of sincerity about him in the face of his own followers, let's say, that it didn't seem to me to be an option that he would betray them. But since he's conveying, I've begun to wonder that I think you're probably much closer to the truth about this than I am. You have been Michael. I mean, I was immediately dismayed with the second day of his office when he brought in those tech roles into the White House and started talking about, you know, MRNA, Cures and AI and so on. You know, that was very dismay. And of course, the warp speed thing is there still. And he has been beginning to try to deal with that, it seems to me. Last week, he made a statement which was something like about Pfizer that he thought Pfizer should do more to explain to the public that their medicines are beneficial because they're telling him this, but they don't seem to be telling anybody else. You know, he goes on to say that Bobby Kennedy isn't happy, you know, and he wants Bobby to be happy and he wants to kind of get this dealt with. So it sounded a little bit disingenuous on one side, but, but also trying to kind of us where move the juggernaut to turn it around and get it facing back the other direction, you know. What is your, I mean, what is your fundamental sense of Trump? Is he just a stooge for designers? Is he the enemy of the American people like, or what? He's a fraud. I mean, he has been, you know, back before the first election, Newt Gingrich, you know, former Speaker of the House called me up. He was trying to gin up support for Trump. And I'm like, you know, I'm not going to vote for Clinton or any of those people, but don't you have somebody better than Trump? I mean, seriously, you know, and, but because you know, the thing is, is you can spot people that are very similar to you, and you can spot your opposite. Very clearly, like I can spot people that are very, the people that are kind of in between on my, can be, can be hard to read them, but you can, the people that are very similar to you, you can kind of read their mind, you know, somewhat, not really reading their mind, you're, you're just similar. And, but with Trump, he's, he's like my polar opposite. So it's easy for me to predict what he is going to do. And I've been incredibly accurate. You know how I do it? As I imagine what I would do, and I do the, and I, and I say he'll do the polar opposite. Like, and he does, you know, he does. I mean, it's like it's very pretty. I'm not reading his mind. I'm reading mine and taking the opposite. Like, you know, like pushing the death jab. Fouch, he didn't fool him. He's not that stupid. He's a smart guy. He's reasonably smart. But he's incredibly corrupt. And he's a mass murderer. I mean, it's, it's crystal clear. He murders his own supporters straight up in mass and laughs about it pushes McDonald's Diet Coke, marijuana, all that, right? He doesn't care. He doesn't care about anybody. He is a cult of one, which is a narcissist, right? And he's like his own little cult. But then, you know, on the Pushka Dolls, he's the tiny little cult, the tiny little center part of Trump is a deeply narcissistic guy, right? The next level is whoever's got a lot of power that benefits him. If it were Catholics, he would be Catholic. If he were Hindus, he would be like a Vishniter or Shiva, Shiva, or something, right? If it were Buddhist, he would be wearing orange, right? But it happens to be Zionist, so he's playing Zionist, right? I mean, he's playing, he's just a narcissist doing narcissists stuff. And if you, if you try to imagine what somebody like that would do and just experiment with that paradigm, you're going to see it's incredibly predictive of Trump. You still have to pay attention to the information to get, you know, as clean of information as you can get. And then you'll see, he plugged that into that paradigm, you'll see, yeah, Trump is not going, look at the things that I said before, he was in office this time. If he doesn't defund the United Nations, I win highest and all these people, then he's not serious about getting all these people out of our country. He's just not. And he hasn't gone after United Nations or any of those guys, they're still perfectly in place. Our architectures are all in place, and he's not doing any mass deportations. He's doing some perfunctory show stuff, but he's just not doing it. It's just not, it's not an evidence and it's not happening. It's just happening enough for some photo ops. Can I add to that really quick in regards to the deportations because, you know, if they really wanted to make an impact, why not go after the landlords that are housing these people and go after some of the employers? Because once that were to occur, you would have a ripple effect of the employers saying, all right, I can't work for him anymore. You can't live here anymore. That would echo across the country so fast. But yet they send in, you know, ICE agents into L.A. into a garment district where you know that's going to be a heavily, you know, a lot of migrants and illegals are there. So like to Michael's point, I don't know. I mean, I feel like what I said would be more viable and it would be you'd see a quicker turnaround, but they're not doing any of that. Like I said, Masako and I tonight just hour and a half, two hours ago, we had dinner with somebody who literally just came in from Texas, a computer programmer, and he lost his job to Indians. So he's over here looking for a job. I mean, straight up hardcore, you know, and how many stories are there like that Indians are moving to Texas and Canada and whatnot and Trump's given the visas out. I mean, he straight up taking jobs from Americans and now they're not coming over the border at midnight. They're coming over on, you know, on scheduled flights. And I just want to go back to the big farmer here for a second in regards to Kennedy because and John, this would be a good question for you being that you're or and Michael, but start with John, you know, being in Europe and Ireland because I had said to your point, Larry Ellison from Oracle was in the White House. Right as a new administration and come in talking about, you know, these new solutions and, you know, shots and whatnot. And I it's, you know, the big tech to me, they were. Okay, we got this wrong, but we're going to correct it going forward and big farmer is not going away. Like this whole notion that Kennedy is going to come in and destroy big farmer. How many people in the United States are on SSIs, Adderall, ozemic. And if you cut that off, there would be mass suicides and chaos in the United States. And how many kids are on all these things. How many children are on some type of anxiety and type of presence? I don't know what that number is, but I'm also going to go on a limb here and say every parent that's on that uses ozemic. How many kids of those parents are taking it? What does ozemic do? That's this white suppression, the meal. It's, it's, it was originally designed for diabetes, but now people are taking it, you take it in form of a shot. I don't know if it's a pill yet, but you take it in a shot and it kills your appetite. So you're losing, you're losing, you're losing. I'm not away from it. It's basically a concert acquiring substance. In other words, the, the, the, the, the, the stats are indicating that close to 100% of people who go on it for any period of time end up getting cancer. Well, you get the eyes, you get the eyes from it too. Like people that take it, if you meet somebody that's, if you see somebody now that's lost a tremendous amount of weight, more than likely, they're taking ozemic. And it's a form of a shot. I want to say it's a hundred bucks every time you get one. And now all these meti spot med spots are jumping on this. And it's, it's, it's, it's so new to the market that, you don't know what the fallout or the side effects are going to be, but it's, but people are losing it. They're losing lots of weight from it. And just to come to your general question, Mike, well, my response, it jealous of something that happened last March with regard to Ireland and Donald Trump in the White House when he had, first of all, the T-shirt, the Prime Minister of Ireland over and kind of seem to be taking the Mickey out of him, you know? And he mentioned that night, a person called Conner McGregor, who then ended up in the, when people know he's an MMA fighter, and, and he, remember, I'm appearing in the White House on Saint Patrick's Day, which is a traditional day when the Prime Minister of the T-shirt of Ireland girl is invited. But that was like a very pointed kind of strike at the regime in Dublin. But the other issue and possibly more important than that is that Trump was, was implicitly promising that he was going to withdraw or cause to withdraw of big farmer from Ireland, more or less. Now, he didn't say expressing that in those terms, but that was the implication that he would, they would never have been allowed to come to Ireland if he'd been there. That's the way he put it, and that he would have put a stop to it, because, of course, they're, they're operating on the lowest corporation tax in the world and so on. And they're mounting to like 60% of the, Ireland's GDP and so on. And, and, you know, that sounds like, well, of course, that would be a mortal blow to the Irish economy. And yes, it would, but anybody who understands what's happened to Ireland would have to be kind of very at best ambivalent about that. Because they would recognize that that was probably the key reason why the destruction of Ireland got in, got going in the first place. Because the amount of money that was going in their jobs, the influence of corporations in the, in the culture and so on. All these factors resulted in the Ireland we now have, which is basically a husk of itself of what Ireland was and ought to be. And, but that didn't, likewise, as Michael says, nothing has happened here either, nothing, like they just, just died on the vine, no more discussion about it. Conor McGregor is now still talking about running for the president of Ireland, which is quite a habit in, in about five weeks time. So he needs to get his skates on because he needs to get either four county councils, or I think it's ten members of the parliament to endorse, to sign his nomination papers. And there's no indication that he has a single nomination vote yet. But there's a big, the question of Conor McGregor is a big one. I mean, you know, he's a very charismatic guy. He speaks very well, he's, you know, he's, he's rhetoric is very, very impressive. When he talks about Ireland, and there's clear deep affection he has for Ireland. And, but it's unclear whether, you know, how, how, how good of a president he would be. But what isn't unclear is that the establishment will not under any circumstances allow him to get the nomination. I can be almost, I nearly bet my house on that. And he's only got a few a week or ten days. I think it's to know to sort that out. But big far more you see is this is the problem. You see, and, and our relationship problem to that, Mike and Michael, is that the medication issue in Ireland is something that you kind of keep forgetting about as it were. It seems to be like a separate problem over there. So when you're talking about why it is that the Irish people are so quiescent. And, and so kind of indifferent to the fact that their country is being flooded with foreigners or their, their, their children are being killed by, with, with, with vaccines. You think, why aren't they doing something? And then you think, well, probably two types of operation are. Dr Dr here. So don't care about anything. That's kind of the terrible situation that we may be dealing with here that people are so basically. Medicated that, and that that's part of the whole thing that the medication aspect of this is is one that you need to factor in. Pretty early on in your calculations, you know, if you're not going to waste a lot of time trying to weigh up peripheral factors that really are making all that much difference anyway. But this is actually probably a very, very substantial one in the whole experience. And I think this has been much more the case in Ireland than almost anywhere else. Perhaps actually for the reason that pharma has such a grip on our country that, and, you know, maybe it's more, you know, it's more diluted in the culture in other countries. And certainly it seems to be in the United States in general, I would say that the people of the United States in general, I would say, certainly they come across to us as being. Pretty, you know, awake, pretty, you know, exercised. You couldn't say that about the Irish population in general. And so that's kind of what I see there, but you know, so that it seems that this is the thing about Trump that I'm now, I mean, maybe you can call me naive on this and either have to own up to it. But I don't necessarily think naive, he's always kind of bad thing. It probably is if you hold on to it too long, but I see I certainly now see this whole thing that, you know, these guys Trump fans must those three, for example, they talk the talk really well. Like they say all the things that we want, we think ought to be said that we believe in that we think would make a difference if they were done. But they never do them. And actually then when you look at the subtext of their old lifestyle or their professions or their roles in the world in the like musk, for example, he's into like chipping brains and he's into surveillance to satellites and he's into a driverless cars. Well, that's there's nothing that he and cloud Schwab would have a lot to talk about. I'm sure if they ever met or not sure if they did. Maybe they did. You know, so, you know, I get no pleasure from saying this, but it does look like that in a certain sense, the one revolution in the world that look like it might actually have the effect of, you know, inspiring the rest of the world. It's not actually fraudulent. Well, and also with that, I mean, you look at, you say you lawn moss, but Peter teal to me is, I mean, I'm using the analogy. He is the new George Soros. People keep referencing George Soros. I don't mean the guy's 95 years old. How much of a, how much of an impact is he having anymore? I know his organization. I know his son is very active. But Peter teal, Alex Carp. I haven't listened to the Sam Altman Tucker Carlson conversation, but I heard it's quite disturbing. Yeah, sorry, John. Sorry, sorry, just to hold your talk, but I just wanted to add something in there. I don't know. I mean, this is a kind of a almost sounds glimmer slightly kind of flippant point. But actually, it's just, it's nearly knocked me dead when I want to somebody point this out to me. You know, Peter teal, who's kind of an obscure figure again, talking about conspiracy theories, you know, the whole idea of like trying to track down where he came from and all that is not that easy. And he just seems to float around the place going to Yale to pick up VJD Vance when he was nobody and getting him a publisher for his book and so on. But you know, there's an anagram for Peter teal. Do you know what that is? Have you heard of this diagram? No. Do you know Michael? No. The reptile. But I'm sorry, I cut you off set. The reptile. You expand on that? Well, how do you end up with it with an anagram of the reptile of your name? I don't know. I mean, I'm sure it's okay. It could be a coincidence. But it sounds you. It's basically rearranged, rearranged the letters in his name and you can get reptile. Yeah, reptile. Yeah, that's what you get. I've been saying that it seems to me that, you know, that you can invent, it seems now that part of the thing we have to deal with in the world is that you can invent whole characters, whole personalities, hold biographies and launch them into the world and nobody will ever know. And you can create and so you can take the piss as it were. You know, if you're doing that pick a name that will be in some way, not just a kind of a gaslighting exercise, but actually one that actually does what they're required to do, which is tell people advertise what they're doing. In other words, that they're required as I go understand what is the Masonic or the Satanic code that requires you to to to say publicly what you're about. And then you can do what you like. You can do carry it out. And it seems to me that that, you know, I would have talked us a name like that. It's a strange name in the first place, Peter T that certainly tore Irish years anyway. I don't know if it's a very common American name in Iran and America, but it's a very unusual name. It sounds to me that it might be just to make you make you up now. Good. And there's a lot of that stuff out there. A lot. It's hard to even know where it begins and ends. For instance, the strange six million number that's getting repeated. You know, the six million that died in the Holocaust, but that number was used over and over and over years in advance of World War II. You know, six million, where did that come from? It didn't come from World War II. It was being used before World War II. And, you know, that's a six followed by six sixes. And if you take the inverse of that, it's 0.006 zeros. Again, 1 66666, you know, it's like, I don't know. We're talking about people that are into numerology is what I'm getting to. You know, tonight, over dinner, one of the people at the dinner tonight, he asked me if I had heard about this fortune teller in Burma. And actually, I had come to, you know, because I had written in about 10 years ago a dispatch, which you could find online called the fortune teller of Burma, because I was in some fighting here in Bangkok. I'm in Bangkok now. Back in about 2014, this fortune teller told tax in who's in jail now that if he doesn't do a certain few things by a certain date, he would never get power back in Thailand again. Anyway, long story short, that fortune teller's fortune, which was publicized before all this happened, he actually lived it out. I mean, it ended up in a big firefight. People got killed. I mean, I was present, right? So, I mean, what I'm getting to is, is people do make huge decisions on numerology or astrology or like the fortune teller's name was ET, actually. And the numerology thing, where did that 6 million number come from? That's a sensible question, actually. You know, six followed by six. We're talking about people that are deeply in the numerology to start with. And maybe they're just telling us who they are, six followed by six sixes. And then you take the inverse of that. And it's, you know, it's six zeros again and one six six six. Right. It's, I don't know. It's just, it's just what you've reminded me, Michael, that actually I picked this up as well that. And it says been remarked upon that cash per tell the head of the FBI when he was speaking about the investigation into the assassination of Charlie Kirk said that the he stressed and said it several times that the investigation took 33 hours. 33 is not always popping up, isn't it? Yeah, it is. So, you know, and here's, okay. So there's a double layer. There's two layers to the possibilities of that. One is that it is the literal that he's simply sending some kind of coded was a rather a Masonic message. The other is that he actually is playing that down to to awaken the conspiracy theorist as it were. I don't like that phrase for all kinds of reasons. But anyway, we know what that means. And that he's that it's like it's like breadcrumbs laid out for those guys to get them excited and get them thinking in a certain way and creating more destruction and diversion. And he is doing that. If he is doing that just to confuse us and distract us, then he's behaving as an enemy. He shouldn't be doing that as an FBI director. He just should not be doing it. If he's doing that, he's behaving as an enemy. Right. Yeah, well, there was some very strange shots of him in that lineup in the press conference where he's lined up with all the other officers and so on. And he's either shooting in all directions and he looks like quite mad actually before he starts to speak. And he looks as you know somebody said, you know, he's like a hostage waiter. I mean, yeah, he's like a hostage waiting, you know, those those videos that the kidnappers send to the families, you know, he's waiting waiting for his turn to be filmed, you know, that's kind of the thing. Yeah, yeah, that's right. Yeah, yeah, exactly that. That's what it is. Yeah. And so like what does that mean? Like who's in the room? You know, like because that's the feeling you get that the people that he's afraid of are right there. They're not like they're watching and they're, you know, whatever it is, they're, they're, he's determined that he's not going to do it. Yeah, he and Bungino. These were obvious just actors to begin with. You know, and I published on this today on my substack, like you never hear this publicly, but I know some of the people in this world, they call them talent. They call people like that talent. And the ones that are bought, they call them properties. They straight up call them properties, right. Like for instance, Jordan Peterson, he was a talent and a property. He was a property of a daily wire. I think he still is, right. I mean, this is normal. This is there's, there's a huge like a Rogan. He's pushing dope out there. He's a property and he's a talent, right. But you never hear those. It only in, you know, behind the scenes, you'll hear him talked about as, you know, so and so is a property or a talent, right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's a common showbiz thing talent. You know, this is common showbiz, but actually when you're talking about people like Bungino, he's a talent. And he's a property. He's a straight up property. Yeah. There's something, there's something very strange about those two guys, Patala and Bungino, the way that they behave through the whole episode saga. There's some weeks ago, a month ago, all that that they seem to be kind of kind of caught in the headlights that they have, they have expressed themselves very strongly in the past on these issues in a way that would lead them to believe, to need you to believe that they're going to act very forcibly in a certain direction. And we know what that direction will be. It will be to flush the whole thing out into the public arena. And now they're in the position to do that, we think, or we, it seems, they're suddenly tongue tied. Because it's all fraud. That's all it is. I mean, when you go with that paradigm, this is a big movie and we're living it, but people actually die in it, like really die in this stage act. You know, once you just accept that that's actually what's going on, it's easy to make sense of stuff. You know, if your paradigm, if your paradigm is accurate and your input information is accurate and you have a sufficient amount of it, you won't be surprised by things. You won't be surprised with Charlie Kirk. I wasn't surprised at all. Well, you know, like that, that Bongino and Patel, I wasn't surprised. I'll say in this in advance. It's obvious. They're just actors. You know, they're just talent. That's all they are. And they are all part of this larger ecosystem that is intentionally destroying the United States. But again, not that Bongino and Patel have the brains or any of that to do this, they're just talent. You know, it's not like Bruce Willis made Hollywood. You know what I mean? Or that Hollywood is the, you know, is the borders of what's going on. That's also a subset, right? This is basically a big, you know, one intelligent, a senior intelligence person told me years ago. She said Washington DC is a, is Hollywood for ugly people. Yeah, you'll understand what I mean. Michael, just going back to the conversations we had last year, it's very interesting. You know, the, the width. There's been a, there's been a fairly noticeable shift. I remember after that, like I was kind of accused of being like an extremist for having you even on, on, on, on the talking tier, you know. And, and putting about this idea and as like as if, you know, as a journalist, one is not allowed to actually invite somebody to talk about whatever they want to talk about. I mean, that used to be the way when I was doing it, you know. But I remember it was actually, and that was an alternative site, which called me an extremist and, and so on. That was like, you know, meets the afterwards. And but then, you know, a few months later, when you have people like David Betts coming out and saying the same thing from an academic point of view, and they're not attacking him as an extremist. It's similarly like quite plausible and you get more and more people sort of tuning in to what you're saying. Certainly from Ireland, I think. What, have you noticed any escalation in the last, say, year about it, and how would you describe. Where we are now compared to what, where we were then. Definitely an increased danger. I mean, it's the whole energy system if we should call it that is moving in that direction. I'm on a global scale. That's why I'm in Bangkok now. I'm here on vacation, right. This is, this is another one of the battlefields in Japan, and another one I was just over in Japan again. And from there, before that, I was in Texas looking at it there, right. And before that Panama looking at it there. So I mean, this is all part of the same storm system. It's not, these are not discrete parts. Ireland is not a discrete, separate issue. It's all the same issue on the same body and the same players that are ripping apart Ireland are working to rip apart Thailand. These same players, right. And using these same mechanisms like for here, now all of a sudden, there's in the last few years, there's thousands of licenses been issued to sell cannabis. There's cannabis stores all around me now. I mean, all over, I could go to 10 cannabis stores within six minutes walk, at least 10, at least 10, and just within six minutes walk, right. And those were here three years ago, right. So there's been about 10,000 licenses issued in the last three years in Thailand for growing, wholesaling, transport and retailing, right. That is one of the weapons that's being unleashed here, they're doing the same in Argentina, a massacre when I were down in Argentina late last year and went to a dope expo that was partially put on by the government, right. And I'm sorry, but Israel is heavily doped up by the way. A lot of people don't realize that Israel is big time dope and it has been for a long time. I don't know if people know this, but that's been a hub for drug trade since before Israel was even born. That just happens to be where drugs kind of cross, crisscross right there. So, you know, you naturally going to get hit with them. What happened to Japan, Michael? I mean, Japan was kind of well known for having resisted inward migration for many, many decades and to have kept its integrity as a total integrity as a homogenous population. Is it now? Is that stopped? Is it what have caused Japan to come under attack? Information more. And again, it's the same players. IOM is over there, highest, right. All the same players. United Nations has a huge office downtown, like a skyscraper. Actually, we've been to it. And, but the information more, of course, information more is the most significant weapon in this that we're all facing is information. That's what we've been talking about the whole conversation is information more. And when it comes to information more, the grease of information more is in toxicants, whether that be alcohol, cannabis, opium, whatever, right. It's cocaine. It's in toxicants. That's the grease. That's the fuel. And another huge component is music, right. Music, music and in toxicants, those can make, I mean, that's like atomic bomb level stuff when it comes to information more. And those have been unleashed now for generations. And they've had severe effects, right. If you want to destroy a country, of course, you're going to unleash in toxicants on them. Go ahead. No, sorry, just talk to me about the music aspect, because that's, you know, I kind of understand the point, but in the context of drugs and rock and roll going together, but the music on its own, though, does that have a harmful effect also? It can in a big way, especially when weaponized and music is highly weaponized, right. And a lot of people have come to me over the years, bizarrely, and asked me about depression stuff, because a lot of people see that I have a pretty steady personality, and I don't get depressed, right. It's just like, I don't know what depression is since many, many years I've never been depressed. But every once in a while, I'll feel a spark of depression when I'll hear certain few songs, like one last year I heard one when I was with Masaka at dinner, reminded me of when my mother died when I was a child, right. And it was the music. It only took like five seconds of that. And I remembered that song from when I was a child. Every time I hear it, it's only ever a few years, I hear it. You know, what I'm getting to is when, when people have come to me and asked me about, you know, hey, you know, or they're saying they don't feel bad. First thing I want to look at is what you're listening to in your music, right. Elton John, all the sad music, sorry, got to go, all got to go country music where people are all drunk all the time, meet in the bar, got to go, right. You know, I love country music. But the fact is, anything, any music that's depressing or that makes you want to go kill cops, got to go, right. You know what I mean. And, and just go to like Beethoven, you know what I mean. You can listen to that all day long and not want to kill somebody or jump off a bridge. And so all intoxicants, no intoxicants, no sad music or crazy music, no, you've got to get your sleep, you got to get your sleep and get some sunshine and go for walks. And that's about it. If you can just do these things, no sad music, no intoxicants, go for walks in the sunshine and get your sleep. I'll guarantee you 99% of the people are not going to have any depression left. You know what I mean. It's like it's just like right out the window. Yeah, so that's a very interesting thing, Michael, because I mean, I'm a big music fan, but I'm also kind of aware of that those associations. And I remember actually, for years ago, as an experiment, I went under the underwent a kind of what a friend of mine was a psychiatrist. He bought people into a church and he did this kind of thing of taking them back to their previous lives and all this stuff. I didn't believe in it. I didn't believe it at all. But one of the devices he used was he had spliced all kinds of music together so that you had your Beethoven, you know, beautiful swirling kind of music. And then drums, you know, and so you'd be kind of thrown from one mood to another. And this was one of the devices to bring you back. Yeah, yeah. And it's very analogous to what we were talking at the very beginning there where what they're trying to do with this kind of fragmentation of narrative that there's so many different perceptions and different that you don't know. It's like almost like a Picasso, be living in a Picasso painting. You know, you don't know what's what's reality. That's a good way to put it. You know, I would like to listen to the music that he put is. Do you know him still? I'd like to talk with him. That sounds interesting. No, he died, unfortunately, there, there last year. Yeah, I've a brown, he's a very brilliant man and he also used a mask, what do you call that drug? The horse transcolyzer, not the masculine. It's a forget now, but he went for certain people. And I didn't really want to take that. But I did actually take a shot of it just because he kept saying because I was I burst into tears, Michael straight off like they were literally within minutes. I couldn't stop crying for an hour and a half. And then the following day he gave me a shot of this and I went the other way completely started laughing. I was like I was in a big bar. I was talking to the guy down the far side of the church, but here was clear as day as if he was sitting beside me. And we were just laughing and like it was quite surreal. And it was a guy beside me in the bed, you know, and he was screaming. You got up and he says, you know, kind of man not dying peace here, you know, and another woman kind of came rushing up to try and kill her father because she thought I was our father because I was I was using the line out of one through over the focus net. Yeah, there's ratchet. I won by fucking cigarettes, you know, and she came running up thinking I was already because our father used to send her to he was abusing her, but he used to send her for cigarettes. And you know, it's all this stuff. It's surreal stuff in a way, but I didn't believe in it, but I came away thinking, whoa, this is heavy shit like I mean, this is not this is something that there's something going on here that is real. That you can actually go into these places in yourself and out then out into the stratosphere as well, because you feel that as well with these kind of musical things. You know, in that sense of because you it's what you got deep abdominal breeding. That's one of the techniques as well, which is a very dangerous thing actually I really like you can actually do it to yourself like literally within a couple of minutes on if you just lie on the ground and you will actually create an altered stage with it. So all these things in combination, I didn't I only know this kind of thing. That's the only time that I never did any LSD or cannabis or anything. What it showed me with the potential of drugs to kind of, you know, take you into strange places, which mirror, and then you're there. And then you're there. I'm places which may or may not be real in any kind of historical sense, you know, you don't know you've no way of knowing because your dream your dream life is in there as well, isn't it? And anything it's your dream life. We know it's capable of anything like you can there's nothing that isn't possible in there. You know what I'll tell you a trick for becoming smarter very quickly. Go for long walks. I learned this by accident because I used to walk in the Himalayas a lot. And because there's a lot of stuff in your mind like you're brilliant like I've read so I mean you like, but I'll guarantee if you go for a long walk like a couple weeks, not I don't mean a couple hours. I'm talking about like two or three weeks a month. You go for these long walks because there's a lot that's in your mind that you haven't had a chance to honestly sort out. But when you go for these long walks and you're not no distractions it's just the birds and the mountains and you're getting hungry and you go a little further and you stop and have some tea. You have a time to sort these boxes out and make connections that you don't normally make when we have all these distractions. That's why I've done quite a lot of long walks and every time when I'm finished with a long walk I'm like, man, there's things I see now that I'd never saw before because I just took time to you know clean up the mess and stack the papers in the right places. I'm telling you it works. I just discovered it by accident just because I walked a lot in the mountains and I'm talking myself into it. I want to go do it tomorrow. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I used to walk a lot but I had a kind of a viral attack about six, seven years ago which really damaged my balance and everything so I find I get very tired after about you know I used to be able to do 20, 30,000 steps a day. One of those stepometers which I shouldn't have but I only use it for that and now down to 40,000 a week as opposed to maybe 150,000 you know what I loved walking yeah but I think after driving driving long distances can achieve something similar I think you know I found that I drove a van for a long time. You know, and I found that actually just on your own strictly in the very morning driving and no interruptions very little traffic nobody around you could really kind of go into lots of strange crevices in yourself and sort of sort things out and come up with some really good ideas I think as well I mean. You need that quiet the quiet sort stuff out and just yeah, I kind of think that actually writing creative writing or journalism even though you know and all that he's actually and and long distance driving actually go very well together you know what I mean it's just very good writing is very good I don't know what it is about writing but writing is another way to pull. Yeah I'll just out of yourself that you didn't have before you did the writing all very often yeah I mean I can start off to write something and I end up writing something I didn't even know on you you know exactly yeah it's a start it's a solution you know but I to go back to the war Michael you know as you know Ireland as you say it's in it's in a pretty bad shape we we have a situation now where our leaders are treating the people with such content. And gas lighten them in such an extent we have the guy who is you know leader of our government by minister T-shirt we call T-shirt which means Chief to go help us you know he. He attacks the people all the time he tells them that you know they've got to let go of this old fashioned no fashion notions of sovereignty or their you know narrow nationalism or he told us that oh we were the Irish were never a modulus people which is actually a lie because not long where we were we are the science shows that we are still almost like you know apart from a couple of like dilutions from the Vikings and almonds we're we're kind of a hundred percent gaelic Irish Celtic. You're straight up indigenous people yeah and then the most the most recent one now he's telling us that that the idea that we that the Ireland is for the Irish. Ireland belongs to the Irish is a is a very reactionary and retrograde idea I would have taught it's an obvious idea because first of all it's in the proclamation of 1916 read at the on the steps of the GPU by Paul Pierce as part of the revolution that occurred at Easter in that year and you know it's it's it's obvious like if the Irish people don't own Ireland well who the hell does well now it's beginning to emerge that actually a the debts which are in the crude in the period of the Celtic tiger which were driven by corrupt politicians have ended up in the hands of the triumph of black rock etc. And those guys are actually a gather under the impression that they can come to Ireland knock on the door and say when when are we going to get fake in possession that that's old that's old old stuff. Oh yeah but they've been they've been hanging around for a long time but you see these guys being on the market for a long time these bonds and so on. I believe I've been told actually that that's a lot of these chits might have ended up in the Middle East places like that which could have another old is that that. Oh 15 years. I thought it was much older than that. No it's it really it kind of landed in the wake of 2010 when the trache the trache arrived in Ireland basically to accept the surrender of the Irish economy and the Irish sovereignty concerning its own economy because the trache was representatives of the European Commission the IMF and the World Bank. And they basically came in and then they got in see I I believe what happened then was that there was a kind of a coup in Ireland. I call it an autofolpe a stedo which means an assisted self coup it's a French phrase that it's not quite it's not quite a coup in the normal sense it's not a color revolution in the normal sense. It's it's like an agreed arrangement of the country's future whereby the government becomes simply an administrative body that carried out instructions which are coming from outside. And I believe that the Clinton Foundation the American state probably in my six the city of London all of these forces were to play here and essentially Ireland was recolonized and you can see the traces of that in true to 2011 was an election in February I mean the people the government that got elected there was a pauling like it's just like this you know the people of Ireland would have been. I you would have thought ready to kind of march on government buildings and they were in the 2020 when the trache was here. But then there was all kinds of talk about starting movements to take out the old system to take out the old parties the big beasts feed the fall and feed again we had really done this between them. And so everybody was talking we need a new party we need a new party and then a new party arrived just called democratic democracy now. And everybody said okay well that's great it was a two journalists in charge we were running it every say well okay we don't always agree with those guys about everything what their decent straight guys you know as you know Tony Blair's famous phrase pretty straight guys. You know which is a slightly loaded phrase but probably accurate here and the next thing the election was called was pulled back from summer may maybe or June to February. And it was announced in January and suddenly the leader of these guys says oh too bad we don't have enough time we can't get our act together in time to run to run the election the result was that they basically allowed the biggest party in the country to sweep back into power. In a coalition and since then like even though we've had elections in 2016 and 2020 and 2024 it's essentially the same government you know you know and they're doing the same things so there's been a total coup in that sense in any meaningful sense it was a coup. They were all kind of odd events that happened that year as well like in May there was in one week in May there were two state visits to Ireland one was Queen Elizabeth of England and the other was Obama. And they didn't come together there was a day between the two visits but they were all televised and on the radio and I was listening to the radio and the teams of the team of the Elizabeth one was oh we need to put our history behind us you know we need we now our history now is a shared history you know. And all this sort of stuff and then the Obama vibe was quite different it was like let's look to the future this is this man represents our future and so there's something very profound happened that nobody knew about. I didn't I didn't sort of look at this was only in retrospect in the last couple of years I started to look at this and see that we were being basically captured and trust up for some future you know Divi Divio. Oh clearly clearly but gentlemen I have to go because it's after midnight and I have a very early meeting here in Bangkok and I hope we can talk again soon. Sure thing like yeah definitely Michael even though you were just on here where could people find you. I'm on sub stack I just put up something today actually about the Charlie Kirk thing whatever whatever is happening it's a it is a thing obviously it's more than just Charlie Kirk it's that much much bigger but I just put something on sub stack just look up big honey I put I made it simple. Look up big honey on sub stack and you can you can find it. Well I'm on sub stack John water stuff sub stack calm and I'm somewhere else as well I have that I sometimes do some videos like don't introduce on the scholar gypsies and I got my book college which is the abolition of reality first draft of the end of history and it's kind of available on while it said but Amazon are doing a good deal with delivery and so on. So that's kind of it I'm on Twitter but I just ignored because I kind of was a mistake and I haven't actually got around to take it it down I don't even know how to so it's just up there but nothing's happened there so it's like just tumbleweed all over the place hopefully. Guys thank you so much for doing this and look forward to our next conversation. - Thanks, you're welcome. - I'm fine. - Good night.