(0:00 - 0:08) Hi everybody, I'm Madison Holmes. And I am Maycee Holmes. And you're watching Holmes Squared! Yay! Okay. (0:09 - 0:26) I hope I am flexed on that, I don't know. Okay everybody, this is almost like a part two of last time, but also not. We're going to talk about current events, being the LA riots, the No Kings protests, protests. (0:26 - 0:47) Um, and in part, last time we talked about color revolutions really being coups and, you know, the subversion of democracy and governments. And now it is happening real time. They started, I believe, June 14th, as Maycee alluded to earlier for myself. (0:47 - 0:59) So they're happening real time now. And we thought, okay, this is everybody's needs to keep their head on the swivel because they're going to start to do this divide and conquer. They've already started to do this divide and conquer. (0:59 - 1:21) And now we really have to discern where is it coming from, who's behind it, the funding, all of that jazz. Yeah. So I think I would kind of want to start this off is the fact that when you're having this sort of reaction that we're seeing from left versus right politics, right? Because this is the No Kings movement. (1:21 - 1:33) We're taking a look and like, you could say it's funded and backed by a lot of like leftist, progressive organizations, blah, blah, blah, blah. Right. And so, and what they're doing is they're against Trump's policies. (1:33 - 1:38) Right. And so maybe that's the deportation, et cetera. Right. (1:38 - 2:11) But the thing that we need to consider is it's called divide and conquer for a reason. And so we need to be like, okay, so what is the response going to be from those who are unfortunately fallen into the trap of doing the whole right versus left? What's going to be the people that really do identify as themselves as progressives because maybe they're falling into whatever, you know, dichotomy that they've chosen. Even though we all can agree there's sometimes like it's more easy to find common ground, but that's, you have to value it well enough to actually look for it. (2:11 - 2:28) Right. And then what are the so-called those who identify themselves on the right going to be responding in like doing in response to that as well. And so what me and Maddie, we just recently watched a breaking history episode. (2:28 - 2:57) It was actually episode 100 that Matthew put on. So if you guys are interested in some of his kind of like, I guess, nuance perspective of what it is that he is kind of attributing to these riots, then check out his episode. He does try and paint a very more contextual image and that he may or may not find some links to the NED incorporated in there. (2:57 - 3:28) So go just check that out for yourself. But what I will say is the thing that I took out of that, that me and Maddie wanted to talk about was the idea or the prospect of a civil war. And the reason why we think that, again, these type of movements are used and made to create this sort of chaos from both sides, like getting at each other, is to create chaos, is to create that idea of like, okay, problem, reaction, solution, the Hegelian dialectic. (3:28 - 3:37) Right. And so there was actually a movie called Civil War that was done in what, like around COVID time, I think maybe 2021. Yeah. (3:37 - 3:39) Let me look. Okay. Yeah. (3:39 - 3:44) Many will pull that up. But this is basically what we call- 2024. Yeah. (3:44 - 3:48) Oh, wow. Very recently. So it's what we call predictive programming. (3:49 - 4:01) Right. And so, Maddie, do you want to kind of give an idea of what predictive programming is? Or do you want me to- Yeah, I suppose. I mean, people know the term predictive programming and they know the term limited hangout. (4:01 - 4:14) And that's kind of the idea. You know, once ideas, because ideas, you don't really get to keep them under wraps. You don't get to limit and box in ideas. (4:14 - 4:46) They run on their own. And so, you know, the people, the NGOs, the oligarchs, these technocrats, all of the people that like to put their agenda and create the narrative that we are all subjugated to, they see certain ideas and certain concepts of, you know, their hand getting exposed and they go, okay, we got to put our hand on this and start. It's like in the movie, I think it was called Eight Mile and it's on the Eminem story. (4:48 - 5:16) And, you know, how rappers get in the game is that a lot of them just diss one another. They completely and utter verbal destruction on one another's, their career and all of that and their character. And so in the movie, his strategy, how he beat the other people in these rap battles, Eminem, is he basically took all of the content away from them. (5:16 - 5:27) He crapped on his own character first. He took it away from them so they couldn't go at them. And that's really what a limited hangout and predictive programming is. (5:27 - 5:46) It is bringing up the elephant in the room or bringing it up before it even starts. That way, also another term is normalizing. And they do that to strip it away and make the conspiracy a little less conspiratorial or to make it seem like, oh, everybody knows. (5:46 - 5:54) And they did this with the- That or to make it be like you watch too many TV shows. Yeah. Like if anything, it could have both effects. (5:54 - 6:11) It could have one where it's like, it's like maybe less because everyone knows or it's more because everybody's just like, oh my gosh, you've been watching way too many Netflix series. Like, you know what I mean? Yeah. Because along with the civil war, which there's also leave the world behind. (6:11 - 6:23) And there's that whole scene where they talk about, you know, this cabal. And that's another term that people use. If they don't use oligarch or technocrat, they'll use a cabal, the they, whatever label. (6:24 - 6:51) People know what they're talking about. Generally, they just put the label for the sake of conversation. But to dismantle and dissuade the argument that all these people have been, people that even watch the show are trying to build, they're trying to build their, their knowledge base so they can combat the narrative that are being shoved down their throats in that whole leave the world behind movie, they had this whole section where they're like, oh, it's not some deep cabal that you think is running the world. (6:51 - 7:02) It's like, oh, okay. Thanks for calling out the elephant in the room and trying to make people look ridiculous. Just backing up the positivity bias that's already in some people's minds. (7:03 - 7:15) So, yeah. And even in that movie, so specifically Civil War, it's like, what can happen is those who maybe do actually lean towards feeling like this is going to be a legitimate thing. They feel like they get made fun of. (7:15 - 7:23) And that just, that just makes you even more angry and it makes you even more apt to want to act. And that's the whole point. It's just, it's also one of those things where it's just like poking you. (7:23 - 7:37) So that way you'll get a reaction. That's what someone who's manipulative does. And so when, so the reason why we're kind of talking about this is the idea of, okay, so we got these rallies going on. (7:37 - 8:08) And can I just say that like the amount, it's not just in LA, like the amount of riots that were getting organized in all of the different states, it's like, this has got to be a much larger movement than just all of a sudden what shows up and you're like, oh gosh, like where did this come from? It's like, what kind of, like, I guess if anything, their own, they're doing their own conspiring clearly. But with what funding and who's behind it. And these are the things that we're trying to figure out. (8:08 - 8:21) So again, you can check out that Matthew video to maybe get dip your toes in that as well. And then there was also a really good video on, I think it's called Pluralia Dialogos. And it was, it's on a YouTube change. (8:21 - 9:02) If you just search up Pluralia Dialogos and you search up Martin Seif, Garland Nixon, those names right there will lead you to that video. And they also were talking about their ideas about these riots, as well as some other current events that are going on with the Iran-Israel scenario. But so now you're going to pull, you don't have to pull it up because I think what I'm going to do is I'm going to transition now to the, the reaction, right? And so what they do is they force you to pick a side, right? So right now we have some people that are protesting the Trump policies or whatever it is that they feel like they're protesting. (9:03 - 9:35) And then the other side is going to be feeling like they're forced to pick a side, right? This is a problem. And so then what happens is then the reaction, the thing we need to take in account, like we were saying in our Mis, Dis, and Mal episode is what are you going to do? What's your, what's your action? And so I was watching a video in Man in America and Maddie, you can maybe pull that one up with, I think it's, I think he's called David Brose or Derek Brose, Derek Brose. Yeah. (9:35 - 10:05) David Brose, Derek Brose. And he brought up a good point, which I think many people need to be keeping their heads wrapped around is the idea of the technocracy state and Palantir and what's going to be implemented, right? Because when you have chaos problem reaction, the reaction is you choose your side and then you're, you know, like the solution is okay. Like the, the state's going to come in and they're going to try and fix it for you. (10:05 - 10:23) Right. And so what he was posing in that video was the idea of basically Palantir kind of acting as a sort of like voted in, it's almost like you vote in your own paramilitary or parallel state. Right. (10:23 - 10:47) And so this is not, this is not the first time that this has happened. Like, so if you, I think it was just to give also some people some context on Palantir, you can refer to that video. But also it's like Palantir says it was funded in 2003 by a gang of five, including Alex Karp and his old Stanford law school classmate, Peter Thiel, now the company's chairman. (10:47 - 11:16) It was backed in part by nearly $2 million from In-Q-Tel, the CIA's venture capital arm. And then Mr. Karp is quoted as saying, saving lives and on occasion taking lives is super interesting. And you're like, what the heck? You describe what his company does as the finding of hidden things, sifting through mountains of data to perceive patterns, including patterns of suspicious or operant behavior. (11:17 - 11:29) And I'm right now, what I'm quoting is just a New York Times article. I think I might've sent it to you, Maddie. And if I didn't, I feel, I apologize, but it's a New York Times article that a woman did an interview, or at least a woman wrote the article. (11:29 - 11:44) And it was an interview with Alex Karp. And then it says, let me see. So the reason I bring that up is again, even like the idea of like, oh, well, taking lives is super interesting. (11:45 - 12:04) It's interesting because he also says, he added, if you believe we should appease Iran, Russia, and China by saying we're going to be nicer and nicer and nicer, of course, you'll look at Palantir negatively. Some of these places want you to do the apology show for what you believe in. And we don't apologize for what we believe in. (12:04 - 12:17) I'm not going to apologize for defending the U.S. government on the border, defending the special ops, bringing the people home. I'm not apologizing for giving our product to Ukraine or Israel or lots of other places. And so this is interesting. (12:17 - 12:41) It's like literally Palantir, if you guys don't know much about it, you probably should look into it, but it's highly involved in intelligence operations and military operations. And as he was just quoted, it's been given to Ukraine, it's been given to Israel. And so we already, I feel like if we don't know already, we already know that the U.S. has a hand in that and in those, what we kind of call proxy wars. (12:42 - 12:51) And so I'm just like, this guy is like Silicon Valley type. You know what I mean? It's like not, check out who they're funded. It's not very good. (12:51 - 13:11) And so it's like, okay, so this is going to be a potentially the solution that comes in, which is like this big, like state tech, military intelligence program that has the ability, like, if you ever seen the movie Civil War, actually, wow, I just realized it's called Civil War. That's hilarious. You guys, we should probably rewatch this now. (13:11 - 13:24) If you guys have seen the movie Civil War, like the Marvel one with, yeah, with Captain America, Winter Soldier. Yeah. It's like Marvel Civil War or whatever. (13:24 - 13:50) When you watch it, it's funny because the program that SHIELD was creating was basically like a type of data program where it had some sort of code on basically predicting who would be future criminals to target them now. Right. And so it was like, okay, we're going to create a satellite system on who we think are going to be criminals in the future. (13:50 - 13:54) And we're just going to get rid of them now. Oh, that's Winter Soldier. Winter Soldier. (13:54 - 13:59) Oh, yeah. Potential future threats. And that's the same concept as minority report. (13:59 - 14:35) You know, see, this is the funny thing about watching movies. And, you know, some people conflate watching movies to like playing video games, but it's really not because first of all, the hand of people and the people that control Hollywood and the movies industry, like on the topic of technocrats and movies, there's a movie called Steve Jobs. And so with this whole L.A. rides, there's the the mayor of L.A. is I believe her name is Karen Bass, and she was a former N.E.D. vice chair. (14:35 - 15:07) So you want to talk about N.E.D. connections? She was the former vice chair of N.E.D. And then she oversaw a project and it was called the Global Disinformation Index. And this Global Disinformation Index is, of course, trying to see who were the most reliable sources of media. What are the best companies and best magazines that you can trust our viewers? And of course, you know, the mainstream ones, you get your times. (15:07 - 15:36) Those are trustworthy and stuff like that. And then if any some of these people, if you're aware of Operation Paperclip, we've alluded to Operation Yellowbird we talked about last time, Operation Gladio. There's also this other operation called Operation Mockingbird, and that was the takeover of also released in this 1975 church committee investigations on the CIA and their abuse of their power. (15:37 - 16:11) And so supposedly the closed Operation Mockingbird was supposedly gotten rid of in after 1975. But Operation Mockingbird, a lot of the ones that were co-opted is Times Life, the Atlas and stuff like that, or the Atlantic, sorry. And but on this N.E.D., this Disinformation Index by Karen Bass, she worked with a writer from the Atlantic named Anne Applebaum, I believe. (16:11 - 16:29) And the Atlantic magazine is its publisher is Steve Jobs' widow. Coincidentally, not coincidentally, and Steve Jobs, this whole movie, me and dad watched it at some point. I think you were away, Maycee. (16:30 - 16:50) And it sells this beautiful story about this guy who they paint is a little bit, you know, autistic. You know, he's got the left hemisphere proclivity clearly, and he totally just doesn't know how to manage relationships or people or his family. So he has this bad relationship with his wife. (16:50 - 17:09) But you get a heartwarming story of him reconnecting with his daughter in the end. You know, so it's this tech billionaire who just started in his garage and then has a good connection with his daughter. So talking about taking stories, taking a technocrat, they gave you the same thing with an Elon Musk. (17:10 - 17:34) You know, they tell you they worked their way up from a garage and then they just happened to become this tech giant who is now with Trump in the DOGE system and helping with the administration. Which is bullshit since anybody who knows if you're a scientist trying to get freaking grants or like funding for your project is like, come on, come on. Nah, where is it coming from? Yeah, exactly. (17:34 - 17:57) So these same movies, they get put in your zeitgeist and then, you know, make you think that Steve Jobs is this casual, cool person. And then you relate to him because there's this really nice daddy-daughter bonding story. So all of these manipulations that happen via these movies and these technocrats, it's really prominent. (17:57 - 18:11) And that's why people have to pay attention. Because even you and me, Maycee, when we watched Civil War, we watched it nearer when it came out, near the 2024. And these riots are now happening now. (18:12 - 18:49) And the whole premise of the movie is the same concept that there, I think the intro is 19 states have seceded and now there's more negotiations from this, I think it's a Republican president in his third term. And he has done such a terrible job dismantling the FBI and stuff like that, that the whole US is just splintered into a thousand pieces. And so this idea about the left-right dichotomy is one of the big things that we have to keep our heads on a swivel for. (18:49 - 19:15) Because if they don't give you the left-right dichotomy, or if they don't want to make an explicit enemy out of the local state like that movie does, then they'll paint and put it on somebody else. There's always a person and somebody to blame. So that way you don't look where the actual source is coming from, which is almost always like these NED things and it's always in your own backyard. (19:16 - 19:37) I mean, one of the funny things is you and I went on the website of No Kings to see who some of the partners were. And if people remember the whole Black Lives Matter movement, those have largely been exposed as the colour revolution and these coups that they were. Again, just they say non-violent. (19:37 - 19:52) We all know that they're violent. You look at the photos. But there were a bunch of supporters on the No Kings Partners website that say, you know, there's like Black Voters Matter and then lower you'll have Planned Parenthood. (19:53 - 20:32) Now, anything associated with the Black Lives Matter movement, this is why left-right dichotomies are really utterly ridiculous, is that so that's supposedly a progressive thing, you know, Black Lives Matter, because, you know, the rights are very racist and all that jazz. But then you get Planned Parenthood, who is supposedly, again, for this could be considered progressive because, you know, things like, you know, pro-abortion. And yet you look at Planned Parenthood, who have not only targeted Black communities, but you get Planned Parenthood, which is in favour of things like eugenics. (20:32 - 20:56) Well, eugenics is downstream of transhumanism. Transhumanism is connected to technocracy because you get books like Brave New World and such of how that builds. And then you and then you're right back to this, the radical, what's supposedly Republican today is the Elon Musk's of the world and the Peter Thiel's, you know, even look at Rumble and stuff like that. (20:56 - 21:05) This is the right version of YouTube. So it's a really false dichotomy in the end, looking at either side of these things. Mm hmm. (21:05 - 21:27) And there was a so there was a really good article that Cynthia put out, and I don't know if you want to pull it up, Manny, but it's called How Panama Became the Skynet for Orwellian Totalitarianism in the Americas. And it's funny that you brought up like Brave New World. I know that that's like there's H.G. Will and George Orwell, but both of them kind of play into this. (21:27 - 21:43) And so I had a couple of screenshots that I put into our chat from this article, and then I was basically again, because we're trying to figure out what's going to be the problem, reaction and solution. Right. And so I have screenshot it. (21:43 - 21:52) If you want to maybe, Manny, go to the find in the telegram. It's going to be the one that says Operation Condor formed in the 1970s. Yeah. (21:53 - 22:01) Yeah. OK, so Maddie, just, I'm not sure how you're going to be able to pull that up. So if you want to, I can just read it off my screen to save us time. (22:01 - 22:16) I have no problem with that. So in this article, so oh, he's trying desperately right now to bring it up, which is so cute. Is it working? Oh, yeah, it works. (22:16 - 22:19) OK, great. That's cool. There might be more, so I'm sorry. (22:19 - 22:46) But anyway, so this one says Operation Condor formed in the 1970s, extended the dirty wars across borders. The system's key members were the military regimes of Argentina, Chile, Maddie, help me out, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Brazil, later joined by Ecuador and Peru in less central roles. The Condor militaries made use of a highly sophisticated system of command, control and intelligence in their counterinsurgency war. (22:46 - 23:06) Within the framework of Operation Condor, military and paramilitary commandos disappeared refugees and exiles, including Democratic leaders who had fled coups and repression in their own countries. Some were targeted in Europe and the United States. And in 1980, Condor operations and methods appeared in Central America. (23:06 - 23:24) Condor was a secret strike force of the military regimes and it signified an unprecedented level of coordinated repressions in Latin America. And then as well, I have here, if I can just pull it up. Give me a minute. (23:25 - 23:34) What does Rashid do? He whistles when he's trying to find things. It's so funny. Rashid is just for the- Oh, sorry. (23:34 - 23:40) He's from the Red Pill Diaries. Yeah, he's on Rumble, the Red Pill Diaries. We'll have more time to talk about him, Maddie. (23:40 - 23:56) Don't pull up everything, but so there's another- He's very, very good. He's a very good analyst just to listen to. There's another quote, and you don't have to pull them all up because I feel like this is going to be too much, but it just says, Parastatal structures as the forces and infrastructure of black world special operations. (23:56 - 24:45) This hidden part of the state, the parallel state includes parapolice and paramilitary forces harbored and directed by the state with access to a vast shadow infrastructure, including secret prisons, fleets of unmarked cars and unregistered aircraft, unofficial cemeteries, secure communication systems, and other parallel structures funded by black budgets. In Latin America, the parallel state augmented the lethal capabilities of the military dictatorships while allowing them to retain the appearance of legality and a certain legitimacy. Parastatal structures permitted the militaries to avoid international law and human rights guarantees, prevent public scrutiny, expand the powers of the state over society, and utilize extreme and lawless methods against subversion. (24:46 - 25:42) The parastatal forces created by the counterinsurgents included the clandestine groups, secret intelligence organizations, task forces, and civilian informant networks acting covertly on behalf of the state. And so there was a, I think it was one more thing, and it had to do with Condortel because the reason that this is, I'm bringing this up in this bare significance is again, what is going to be the response? So when we're talking about Palantir, I'm talking about the fact that this is not the first time that this has happened before. When we're talking about Operation Galileo, Operation Condor, and Operation Condor, when we're talking about what that is, it is you had kind of a bit of like a huge network state by various sects in Latin America, overseen and funded and helped and aided by Western backed groupings like the CIA. (25:42 - 26:10) And they kind of created their own, well, parallel state. And so some of it, as you can say, it was like disappeared people who were so-called like enemies, right? But they were actually perhaps like actually good leaders that maybe believed in nationalism. Maybe they were good guys, right? And so regardless, it's very secretive and it's not very accountable at all. (26:10 - 26:44) No, if people want, again, here's another movie, the James Bond's work, but I find even more accurate than the James Bond's is the Jason Bourne movies. The Jason Bourne, there's literal scenes where he goes into this very high elitist bank, and then he has his box of passports, money from various different currencies, passports for different identities. And those are the parallel, that's like a parallel banking system, the parallel police force. (26:45 - 27:25) That way you can, and there's also parallel systems. So even using those passports to get to different countries to do whatever operation you've been assigned is the literal different, it's a literal separate databank that you get processed through to avoid being scanned and recognized on the pleb databank where we might show up. So that's, you watch that and then you see, okay, so that's a portrayal, if people haven't seen it, where you can get the concept of Condortel, that big intelligent Skynet that Operation Condor used, which is Operation Gladio, but in Latin America. (27:25 - 27:34) So Maddie, actually, if you want to pull up the screen, because this one's worth it for people to see. It's an Argentina, Argentine military source told a US embassy. It's up top. (27:35 - 27:40) You're scrolling too far. No, no, no, no, no, no. It's on, yes, that, that, that right there. (27:40 - 27:44) Yes. So you can pull that one up. Sorry guys, we're doing this real time. (27:45 - 28:33) I didn't tell her which ones I was going to be quoting directly yet. Yeah, awesome. So this was also from the article and she was just talking about Condortel, because this is, this legit things that happen and this is what we have to consider with even the Palantir thing or the fact that like this technocracy state, it's like, what are we going to be calling for in response to these LA riots? Like even like, regardless of right or left, it's like, what exactly do you think is going to be the reaction that they may or may not have made you actually believe was your own? And so an Argentine military source told a US embassy contact in 1976 that the CIA had played a key role in setting up computerized links among the intelligence and operations units of the six Condor states. (28:34 - 29:26) A former Bolivian agent of Condor, Juan, or maybe it's Juan Carlos Fortin told a Bolivian journalist in the early 1990s that an advanced system of communications was installed in the ministry of the interior in La Paz, Bolivia, along with a Telex system interlinked with the five other Condor countries. He said that a special machine to encode and decode messages was made especially for the Condor system by the logistics department of the CIA. The Condor network secure communication system Condortel enabled Condor controllers to exchange data on suspects, track the movement of individuals across borders on various forms of transport, and transmit orders to operation teams, as well as share and receive intelligence information across a large geographical area. (29:27 - 29:52) Condortel allowed Condor operations centers in member countries to communicate with one another and with the parent station in a US facility in the Panama Canal zone. This link to the US military intelligence complex in Panama is a key piece of evidence guarding secret US sponsorship of Condor. Operation Condor had access to an encrypted or encoded system within the secure US communications network based in the canal zone. (29:52 - 30:39) But even just that part right there where it said that what it was able to do and help them with, it's like, guys, we got to realize that this is more often than not exactly what's going on in the West and what's happening amongst our own system. And even then, are we bringing it in? Are we self-inflicting it ourselves with the ideologies of like perhaps the eugenics ideas of like the greater transhumanism where it's like, oh, we need to be, you know, linked with AI in order to become a better version of ourselves or a transcendental version, right? But then it can play on the other side too, where it's just like you need to, in order to, I think it was the movie Divergent. And it was funny. (30:39 - 30:59) And this is something that's, it's called Game B and Courtney Turner's kind of done her own little research on this. So I will refer you to the Courtney Turner podcast for more on that as well as Cynthia's work. But it was basically that idea where it was like you had all these different factions that would like kind of go off. (30:59 - 31:23) And this plays really well into what we were learning from E.M. Burlingame, Maddie, because we were watching a couple of E.M. Burlingame's interviews that was done with Mel K and on the Tommy podcast. And he was talking about his solution. So again, we need to, what's our reaction? What's the solution? And he was saying that we need to return to a bit more of like feudalism in the sense of like lords and princes. (31:23 - 32:10) And then, you know, like then you have your own jurisdictions. And like, don't get me wrong, I'm all for like local control and local authority. But like the way that you're playing that, is it going to transpire into this idea where we have our own individual nodes? And then does it play into this idea of survival of the fittest in the sense of like evolution, right? Because if you had a sect of people that were like, okay, we're going to dedicate ourselves to we want to be vegans over here or agriculture that's primitive, or I guess like old ways agriculture, where we're still dealing with manure over here, because we're that, you know, stringent on industrialization, because Lord knows, you know, human beings can't figure out a way to have industry and be, you know, friendly to the environment. (32:10 - 32:32) Oh, wait, not true. Anyways, moving on. Or you can be this area over here that's like tech state, blah, blah, blah, right? And so it's like, if you have different nodes, which one like in Divergent do you think is going to be the most going to be the ruler of them all? Right? And I think it was like the aeriodites or whatever, the aeriodites, they were the intelligent science class. (32:32 - 32:51) And like what happened in the movie, they literally ended up just freaking ruling over all the other different districts. So you got to be asking yourself is like, well, what is going to be the solution? Because you think that you can go off in this direction of whatever ideology that's possessing you to do so. But I guarantee you there's going to be well, there's going to be left hemispheres that just want a piece of that. (32:51 - 33:17) They're just not, it's not, it's not going to happen. You know what I mean? Sorry, that was a bit of a tangent, but it still plays into the idea of what's going to be the reaction and then consequently the reality. The reaction and where do they want you to look? So they give you the part truth and then where are they going to put you? So E.M. Burlingame, like you said, E.M. Burlingame is ex-Special Forces historian. (33:17 - 33:34) He was a Green Beret, I believe as well. Um, and he's been making the, the scene on a couple of podcasters that me and Maycee listen to and our dad listens to. And we were listening to him and he says some part truth, like, you know, we need to be more local control. (33:36 - 33:44) Localism over globalism, guys. Like easily, totally can agree with that. But then Maycee said he said something weird, like, okay, we need to go back to our nobles. (33:44 - 33:51) It's like, uh, we need princes again. It's like who are going to be the princes who are going to be the new prince, the new princes. That's the thing. (33:51 - 34:41) So even though you may agree with him up to a point, then he says something and you've got to go, okay, what is that solution actually look like? What is the actual answer? As Maycee has been saying, what is the, what is the action? What's the answer that they're calling for? So even in these, in these protests and this is an article on forbidden knowledge and this is going around, um, she is a Congresswoman, Anna Paulina Luna, and she's calling out the, the financial backing of the LA riots. And there's definitely some part truce in here because she does call out the NED and some CIA, you know, George Sovereign's model. So there's definitely part truce in here, but then who is the big bad? Well, it's the Chinese communist party. (34:42 - 35:38) So again, it takes you, I don't think I showed you guys that this thing, but this is, this is the article forbidden knowledge. And so they'll show you this and they'll go through some part truce about where the funding is coming from, but then they give you their, what's their action, what's their solution, China. And then they go straight there and you, this is why the four to one rule is so important because even if there's part truth and you, maybe we looked into the individual that she actually is accusing, what is, what is the actual, the actionable thing that is going to come out with this war with China? If so, what's, what's the goal? And you, that's why the mode of attention of all of these, why do they give you movies like civil war, leave the world behind? Why do they tell point China and say, here's the, here's the thing that you should go to war with and the solution to the LA riots. (35:38 - 36:39) And what's the solution to chaos in the world? Well, a technocratic state, apparently what's the solution to a overreaching bureaucracy doge and by people like Elon Musk who created Starlink, which even the CIA and other foreign countries have admitted to using to get information on other people. So even him who Republicans have put a bit too much of their faith in has the right technocratic answers for us to give us, you know, our, our next answer, our next future, the thing that we. And like the thing as well as we were talking in our Tiananmen Square episode was the fact that I made the inversion where it was like people saying that George Soros was an asset of China, but I was saying that no, China is an asset of George Soros, right? It's like, so you gotta ask yourself the question. (36:39 - 37:21) It's like, okay, is it, which one, which one's actually the one that's the more, I guess dominant hand. And even with operation Condor and the fact that there were CIA links and ties, it's like, well then if they've done it before in the past with this or with that, then why wouldn't they do it in their own country? And if you go, if you go in there, if you check out, I think it's part two of that Panama article, Cynthia goes on to describe the operation Phoenix or at least the Phoenix program and how they did it with Vietnam. And it was derived and pulled out of Tavistock. (37:22 - 37:44) And so that's the West. And what it was, if you like, if you even, I don't have the quotes directly on me, I can pull them up, but like, if you listen to the direct quotes that she pulls out of these people and how they operate, they low key are like, we want to figure out how to do mass psychology and mass psychosis and figure out behavioral human beings on an individual level. And then we want to take it to the state. (37:44 - 38:16) Right. And then we want to take that to a state level to figure out how can we mask, uh, manipulate people's minds in order to achieve whatever goal it is that they're wanting to achieve. And so it's like, if our Western agencies are as well interested in like even MKUltra, if you wanted to use that as an example, which is also downstream of Tavistock and the Esalen Institute, it's like, if we do this thing again, enough of the projection, we need to be looking about what, like, are we still doing it? Is it happening here at home? Right. (38:16 - 38:31) It's like, what are the forces that are doing this thing? And then blaming it on a common enemy. What does that do exactly? What does it do when you feel like we have a common enemy? So this is what we need to go and do. And this is what we need to go and fight. (38:31 - 38:41) It diverts you from looking at literally the guy that's about to stab you in the back. Yeah, no. He's like, don't, he's like, it's like, like if a dude was, what is it? I think it was in The Matrix. (38:41 - 38:52) It was like that guy, Agent Smith or whatever. And he took over the body of one of the dudes that left the matrix. And he like, kind of like weirdly encoded himself into him so that he was Smith, but he didn't look like himself. (38:52 - 38:57) He didn't look like him. He looked like one of the allies. And so it was just like, yeah, like, I'm your friend. (38:58 - 39:02) Right. And then what did he do? He's just like, Mr. Anderson. Then he tries to kill Neo. (39:02 - 39:23) It's just like, I'm like, guys, I know that it's like you got, you can't learn much from like stupid movies like that. But it's like, actually, if you try to take a look at what's going on in the real world stays and you damn well can learn a lot from figuring out those references. No, I like what you just brought up, because that's basically the concept of a deep state. (39:23 - 39:55) So talking about there's colour revolutions and colour revolutions are often you get the foreign interference. You know, we get the West that imprints via National Endowment for Democracy. And on that note, I listening to the episode 100 with Matthew talking about colour revolutions, talking about the LA riots, he brought up Tibet, because this is another thing people claim. (39:55 - 40:11) Oh, evil, bad China invaded Tibet in 1959 in the 1950s, took it over. And so you have movements like this, which are supposedly grassroots, right? Free Tibet. This is the thing. (40:12 - 40:21) Yeah. Mm hmm. And then on this website, when I found it, they have. (40:23 - 40:38) A drum roll, a sterile drum roll. You know, if I knew how to use the soundboard, it actually has like a drum roll or an applause sound, but I'm not there yet. I know. (40:38 - 40:45) I wish I had a drum just beside me. I could just be like, you know what? If we get bigger, we'll bring one in. We'll bring one in. (40:47 - 40:52) Yes, because that's very. Cost effective. Yes. (40:53 - 41:05) Cost effective is one way of putting it. But OK, where is it? Freedom for Tibet. See this, this whole thing. (41:05 - 41:22) And then on there, look at this. Tibetans are denied fundamental rights, but the authorities are especially rigorous in pressing any signs of dissent among Tibetans, including manifestations of Tibetan religious beliefs and cultural identity, says Freedom in the World Report by Freedom House. Ah, Freedom House. (41:22 - 41:33) So again, you get supposedly grassroots, long thing of history. And then you look and look at the people that actually are behind that freedom. And we're alluding to. (41:33 - 41:41) Yeah. And you have to take a look at who's endorsing and supporting it, because that was just a quote of like Freedom House going like, oh, look at like I support what they're doing. Right. (41:41 - 41:50) So it's like, well, that's what that's what you got to look like. Look for as well, because if that's Freedom House and that's US based, it's like, well, what's Freedom House? And that's a good question. You should probably look into that. (41:50 - 41:54) No. Yeah. So the whole point is the whole point is within our own backyard. (41:54 - 42:20) What's in you're not looking at ourselves. Well, and some people that do look at ourselves, they look at some people are you get. It's it's it's a brain thing, and you and I understand this, but you'll get the person that can look at global patterns, look at the foreign interference from NEDs, USAIDs, but then they can't, you know, bring it back home, pull out the plank in their own eye, look at what's in their own. (42:20 - 42:44) Or you get the opposite. And we've seen this, too, where people can look at the US, but they can't see it in other countries. So it's like, OK, if you know that we can get riots and people like your BLM movements and such like that here and you know that you get oligarchs that try and put their hand in our own local politics and subvert our own elections. (42:46 - 43:08) If you understand that, then why is it so hard to believe that there is if we have a deep state and we have a civil war going on, not just a manufactured civil war, but an actual deep state? You know, it's like the CIA versus the government. Even here in Alberta, there's our political party versus the government. There's internal battles going on on little levels all the time. (43:08 - 43:35) Why can't it be happening elsewhere? And another good example of that is Shanghai and China. So in this article where they're accusing the CCP being the cause of the LA riots, they blame an individual named Neville Roy Singham. And looking into him, he is American, but he lives in Shanghai. (43:36 - 44:00) And so they're calling, they say it's the CCP. And although there's affiliations with him, this Neville Singham individual, he is a bunch of NGOs. Well, we went through last episode that nowadays NGOs is pretty much how it's how it's led these non-governmental organizations because the hand got exposed that the government was doing these things via NED, USAID. (44:00 - 44:19) So they started lessening the prominence. And it's the same with Operation Mockingbird. They claim that they no longer, the CIA and the government no longer invades and operates within the media, but they don't need that anymore because now they just have a bunch of NGOs, non-governmental organizations that do it on behalf of them. (44:19 - 44:24) It's just rebranding, yeah. It's just rebranding. So it's the same thing with these organizations. (44:24 - 44:49) This individual who's now in Shanghai, he has NGOs to influence whatever agenda he has to put. And when you look at it, at China's history, we've talked about the fact that Hong Kong got taken over via the Opium Wars and stuff like that and really is still operated. But the finances of China, there's three main banks, I believe the main China Land Bank. (44:49 - 45:15) And then the other two that operate in China's finances are the Hong Kong-Shanghai Bank and then the Standard Charter Bank. Well, it's not called Hong Kong-Shanghai Bank for poops and giggles. Hong Kong's not the only, just like you have here in Canada, we know that Montreal, Ontario, those are our large deep states when you look at Canada's history. (45:15 - 45:37) Most of our deep states and our intelligence agencies erected from Montreal and Ontario. Well, in China, it's Hong Kong and Shanghai from the days of the Shanghai Clique and such like that. So even though they'll paint it as a broad stroke brush China thing, China is also fighting an internal battle. (45:38 - 46:09) That's why Xi Jinping has done so much anti-corruption because he's trying to find and locate these people. Just like we in Alberta, we're trying to, even little Calgary, Kigley, this organization is trying to pinpoint the fact that there's a bunch of council members and the UN and the WEF have taken over our local municipalities. So there's these internal battles all the time everywhere, but people will broad stroke brush it as this, you know, it's a China thing or it's a United States thing. (46:09 - 46:16) It's a Britain thing. But it's like, whoa, whoa, whoa. What if it's the city of London specifically and not the innocent British citizens? Yeah. (46:16 - 46:23) It's way more nuanced. I think you're trying to say there's no broad stroke brushing. You really can't. (46:23 - 46:33) It's way too nuanced. It's like if you already think that the internet's complicated because it's a huge, vast network, it's like that's what deep state is. It's huge. (46:33 - 46:43) It's vast. It's complicated. That's why I like Matthew's work and Cynthia's as well because they are the ones that are quoted where it's almost like there's always two kinds of things. (46:43 - 46:46) Like there's two kinds of America. There's two kinds of Canada. There's two kinds of China. (46:46 - 46:58) There's two kinds of Russia. Because everywhere you go, you're going to have a deep state, but then you're going to have not a deep state, right? And then trying to figure out like who's infiltrating who and blah, blah, blah. It's like. (46:59 - 47:15) It's tough. It's like, it's not just necessarily like whose friends are whose, right? Like, so, okay, so China's got a deep state. And so you're just like, well, all the people victimized in China, it's like, they're not the problem, right? That's why they come here. (47:15 - 47:38) And they tell us about the fact that, oh, like, look at like this part of China's big bad, right? But it's like, well, why are they? How did they get set up that way? Who's backing them, right? Is it us? Or are some of us involved in that? And then same thing. It's like, it's some of our deep state also involved in some sort of coercion with this. Sometimes it's like we say it's this one or it's that one. (47:38 - 47:57) We should look at the history of, well, who's been the most prominent, right? In their pattern of this whole deep state operation thing. Where do you see themselves expanding out? And even then, I don't even know, like, yes, that's important. And so that's what Matthew and Cynthia have done is a lot of that work and that deep dive. (47:57 - 48:07) But it's also the idea of ideas of what's going to happen. And hence that manifestation. And what's the classic pattern, regardless of who's doing it. (48:07 - 48:16) So that way we can navigate our response. So that way we can do what it is that we need to do. And then I don't think that going like, again, like going to war with China. (48:17 - 48:34) It's like, who do you think are going to be the freaking soldiers that they send your way? The people that you actually think are the bad guys infiltrating us are going to send average people like you and me off to war. And then look, the overall big gist is depopulation. They win because they get to kill. (48:34 - 48:39) They got us to slaughter each other. It's like, I don't know. I'm very against war, honestly, at this point. (48:39 - 48:51) Too many people who could have just, like, learned how to actually think things through together just end up killing each other. But I feel like you and me managed to probably call it. Yeah, definitely. (48:52 - 49:07) You were ending it off nicely, basically calling out the fact that people need to think and look at the history and look at how things got to where they are. They're going to try and give you a side. They'll give you sides to pick. (49:08 - 49:21) Don't pick them. Because most of the time, it's just not that easy. And so this whole episode was just trying to get people to think about where they're trying to put you. (49:21 - 49:30) The moral of the story is what's your action? And Maycee has really pushed that this whole episode. They'll give you whatever they want to give you. Only you can then do something with it. (49:31 - 49:38) So they give you a bad guy. They give you a good guy. What are you going to do with it? They'll give you their solutions. (49:38 - 49:54) And, you know, we've criticized people for cherry picking before, but you do have to look at there's going to be part truth and then there's going to be the lie. And you really do have to cherry pick and discern. You really have to discern the arguments that are being handed to you. (49:54 - 50:00) So even with these LA riots and the civil wars. Yeah. One last thing I'll say and then we'll end it. (50:01 - 50:11) So, Maddie, if you grab the link that I sent, that one that's like Pearl Harbor moment. I'm not going to quote anything. I'm just going to specifically address it overall. (50:11 - 50:40) It's like, do you remember Event 101 or whatever it was? Is that what it was called, Event 101? And it was with COVID and they were doing that whole thing, tank simulation impression of what was going to happen with COVID and blah, blah, blah, blah. It's like, we already know, or at least at the very least, we should be aware of the fact that it's like people get together and then they have, I guess, their own little simulations of, well, what's the future going to look like? Right. And I think it was Matthew in his Breaking History episode was mentioning something. (50:40 - 50:50) I wrote it down in my notes called, one moment. It was Policy Horizons Canada. Right. (50:50 - 51:01) And in June, 2024, that's basically like a Canadian think tank. And they were basically in their report, Disruptions 2024 report. They were saying, oh, the civil war is going to erupt in the U.S. Right. (51:01 - 51:10) And so it's like, it's damn near like a simulation. If you guys have ever seen Ender's Game, the whole thing, I very recommend that. The whole thing. (51:10 - 51:18) I know we reference movies a lot, but the whole thing. This is the movie episode. Will, if you need help making a title, you just call it Movie PsyOps. (51:18 - 51:24) Movie predictive programming in real life. Right. Movies play in real life. (51:25 - 51:38) Or real life plays in whatever. I don't want to get distracted on that. But regardless, if you've seen Ender's Game, the whole how they were doing it was basically creating simulations, like wartime simulations in terms of how it was going to play out. (51:38 - 51:43) And eventually near the, I don't want to spoil it. Okay. The ending. (51:44 - 51:48) Is the oligarch. Is the oligarch. Watch the movie. (51:48 - 52:12) But when I got Maddie to pull up that little thing and it says Pearl Harbor moment, you have a neocon product of the new American century in RAND Corporation. Again, highly recommend that you check this out. There was a, I believe a guy, Sullivan, Rhodes Scholar, and I'm not going to go too much into it because we are out of time, but he was basically being interviewed. (52:12 - 52:25) Um, and he was saying that it's like, we need to figure out who our next enemy is going to be. The US needs an enemy to rally behind. It was like, whether that be aliens. (52:25 - 52:34) And then he said, I'm thinking it's going to be China. And so I'm like, it was a Rhodes Scholar. And he's saying that China is going to be our new rallying enemy. (52:34 - 52:50) And like, for what? And exactly for what and why? And this is a, again, people in their think tanks going like, what's the world going to look like? And it's like, what are we going to get the people to rally behind? And I'm like, they're telling you this in real life. It's like, I'm sorry. We need to be taking a look at this. (52:50 - 52:54) I'm like, that's all. And so, yeah, I'll shut up now. And then, yeah. (52:54 - 52:59) Yeah. No, that was a lot. We are at 53 minutes. (52:59 - 53:02) Thank you so much for everybody who endured that. Yeah. Sorry. (53:02 - 53:05) Last two episodes. We really do got to stop making them so long. Yeah. (53:05 - 53:11) But they're tough topics. But either way, thanks, everybody. Thank you so much for watching. (53:11 - 53:14) And yeah, this has been Holmes Squared.