Chapters
Shownotes Transcript
Hey, I'll see you on tour in Las Vegas, Chicago, and Grand Rapids. In Chicago, it's stand-up and a live panel show. Go to JimmyDore.com for a link for tickets, and make sure you go to JimmyDore.com.
We have special guests with us. James Corbett is an award-winning investigative journalist. And since 2007, he's been the host of The Corbett Report, an independent, listener-supported alternative news source.
The Corbett Report operates on the principle of open source intelligence and provides podcasts, interviews, articles, videos, and groundbreaking news and important issues from 9-11 truth and false flag terror to the police state, eugenics, geopolitics, central banking fraud, and more. Please welcome to the show James Corbett.
Thanks for having me here. Fantastic. And I apologize in advance for getting you censored off of YouTube and every other platform. Well, that's why we switched over to Rumble for this part. Yeah, good idea. Now, you know what? Let me just ask you that. Now, you were one of the first people I know that did get censored and kicked off YouTube. Now, other people have since, and we've come close, but can you tell us what happened?
Yeah, well, I'll tell you to the best of my ability, because of course, YouTube are weasels and they're not going to tell you exactly what happened. But of course, it was during the COVID scandemic freakout time when you were not allowed to say literally anything that went against the pronouncements of the CDC or the WHO. And I happened to do a lot of that around that time. And so...
It was actually, I got a series of warnings and, oh, this video is being taken down. This is a flag, red flag against your account. But the third strike that was the one that actually got my entire channel taken down was a podcast about the philosophy of science.
where I'm reading, you know, Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn and things like this, but you cannot question the science, even to the extent of just quoting philosophers about the philosophy of science. And that was literally the one that got my channel scrubbed. Wow. No, so no, the first two strikes were for COVID related stuff going against the CDC and the WHO. The third one, he was just doing just general science, just talking about full, full, you lost your science privileges is probably what it is. Yeah. Right. Science is a privilege, not a right.
Evidently. Wow. Well, I mean, you landed on your feet. People, you have a great website and you do great work. So is your stuff also up on Rumble?
Yeah, I'm on Rumble. I'm on Odyssey. I'm on Bitchute. I'm on all sorts of alternative platforms. But yeah, my site is probably the best place for people to catch me. And I've been I was warning my audience about this for years and years and years before that. I'm going to be scrubbed from YouTube someday. You're going to lose me. But every time I'm on anyone's program on on YouTube there, I always see in the comments someone going, James, I remember that guy. I just disappeared one day. They let Jason Burmese back on YouTube. He did this change.
Oh, really? Yeah, Jason Berman. Yeah, my buddy Jason. He was talking about it for a long... This was amazing because I remember everybody talking about it. I can't believe I ever thought there was a possibility that the inner agency didn't do it.
like that it was anything except people that work in our own government helping it happen. I can't believe I ever thought it was the thing they said at all. Are you talking about 9-11? Yeah, looking back now. Well, here's a video. One of the first things that made me aware of your work was this short little video, and I think I played it once before on the show when I had on that
professor from the University of Alaska to debunk what happened at Building 7. But let me just play this. This is fascinating. This is definitely fascinating. On the morning of September 11th, 2001, 19 men armed with box cutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily defended airspace in the world.
overpowering the passengers in the military combat train pilots on four commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor. These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who like to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down three buildings with two planes in New York, while in Washington, a pilot who couldn't handle a single-engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000-foot descending 270-degree corkscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground.
hitting the Pentagon in the Budget Analyst Office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the $2.3 trillion that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced missing from the Pentagon's coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001. Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes. Osama bin Laden. The pundits knew within hours. Osama bin Laden. The administration knew within the day. Terrorists who committed these acts.
and those who harbor them. And the evidence literally fell into the FBI's lap. That a hijacker's passport was found blocks from the World Trade Center crash site, if you can believe that. But for some reason, a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history. That investigation was delayed, underfunded, set up to fail, a conflict of interest, and a cover-up from start to finish. It was based on testimony extracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed.
It failed to mention the existence of WTC7, Able Danger, P-TECH, Cybele Edmonds, OBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush administration, and as for Bush and Cheney, well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secret, off the record, not under oath, and behind closed doors.
It didn't bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is ultimately of little practical significance. Still, the 9-11 Commission did brilliantly answering all of the questions the public had, except most of the victims' family members' questions, and pinned blame on all the people responsible, although no one so much as lost their job, determining the attacks were failure of imagination because nobody in our government, at least, and I don't think the prior government could envision flying airplanes into buildings, except the Pentagon, FEMA, NORAD, and the NRO.
The DIA destroyed 2.5 terabytes of data on Able Danger, but that's okay because it probably wasn't important. The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that's okay because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping. NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7's collapse, but that's okay because knowing how they made their model of the collapse would jeopardize public safety.
The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9-11 should be kept secret from the public, but that's okay because the FBI probably has nothing to hide. This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise, you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise, him, him, him, and her, and her, and her, and him. Osama bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan. Let me just stop it there for a second.
Can you just explain who that guy was? Because I have seen that guy speak. He spoke immediately during the aftermath of it. Go ahead, explain.
So that was Barry Jennings, who worked in New York City's Emergency Management Office. And he was going back with one of the people from that Emergency Management Office, which people might remember, Giuliani put the Emergency Management Office specifically in WTC 7, which was a controversial decision at the time because people were saying, "Well, isn't that likely to be the scene of a terrorist attack if such a thing happens again?" But anyway, they went ahead with that, put it in WTC 7. So
him and Corporation Counsel Hess, I forget the first name, were heading back into the Emergency Management Office on the morning of 9/11 as everything was unfolding. They went into the building, went up to the Emergency Management Office. It was completely empty because of course they cleared out because of course they're not going to be sitting there while this terrorist attack is going on. So as they're attempting to leave the building, there is a huge explosion that
As they're going down the stairwell, because the elevator wasn't working, there was a huge explosion and they get trapped in the stairwell. And Jennings' testimony, absolutely, he specifies 100% that that explosion was not the plane hitting the World Trade Center. It was an explosion from within the building.
And he then talked about stepping over dead bodies as he was finally rescued and got out of there. But weirdly enough, exactly as the missed WTC seven report was actually released, Barry Jennings died of a heart attack like the next day or something. It was around the same time. So he was never able to put a different spin on that WTC seven story. And what about Seibel Edmonds?
So Sabella Edmonds was an FBI translator who was hired in the wake of 9-11 as they were suddenly, oh, we have all this backlog of material that we, oh, how are we going to, we couldn't possibly have found anything from all of this material we had. We don't have enough translators. So she was hired as part of that. And she has a whole whistleblowing story about what she heard at her time in the FBI, including some of the material that
apparently involved some of the alleged terrorists talking to each other in ways that the FBI absolutely did here. But that actually just is the window into the much, much bigger story of all of the different information that was collected by very many different agencies.
including the NSA. Thomas Drake has a story about his time in the NSA and what they absolutely, they had a huge report on all of the information and data they collected. They were literally tapping into and listening to the Al Qaeda communications hub in Yemen. So they absolutely heard the conversations that were taking place in the years prior, et cetera. But for some reason, nothing happened. And as Thomas Drake, uh, uh,
said later, in the wake of 9-11, one of his superiors said, this is the greatest thing that could happen for the NSA. Because, of course, that was exactly what they needed to justify what we ultimately know happened with all of the illegal wiretapping and all of that. That's what Beebe said. This is the best thing that could happen for Israel. Boy, a lot of people had their best day ever. I guess, except if you were in those buildings. Anybody else in this that you want to tell us about?
So J. Michael Springman in the top left there worked at the Jeddah Consulate in Saudi Arabia in the 1980s, back when Osama bin Laden was one of the golden boys in Afghanistan doing the CIA's dirty work for them against the Soviets.
And he confessed about his time at Jeddah where he was being overruled by his superiors. He was denying all these visas to these people who clearly should not be getting visas to enter the United States. They were they could they didn't know they couldn't say where they were going or what they were doing or anything.
had any knowledge of anything, but oh, I'm a student or whatever their cover story was, he would deny their visa. But his supervisors, who he later learned were CIA, were overruling him. No, these people are approved. And as he later found out when he went back to Washington and he was talking to journalist Joseph Trento,
He found out, no, of course, this was a scheme that was being run by the U.S. Department of Defense and the CIA to basically bring the Al Qaeda golden boys into the United States for training so that they could be shipped off back to Afghanistan. Like we did with the Nazis after the World War II.
And guess where 15 of the 19 alleged 9-11 hijackers got their passports or their visas to enter the United States? The very same Jetta consulate that Springman was working at. Really? So that's... And... Okay, so... Are you surprised? Go ahead, Kurt. The thing with the lost $2 trillion that they couldn't account for? Yeah. I remember that story, and I was there when 9-11 happened in New York.
I didn't realize it was the day before. Yes, it was the day before. The plane happened to hit all the records of where their $2 trillion went. I have never heard that connection made until just now. To be fair, it was known about from, I think, late 2000 is when the first audit came out that said, hey, we've got this massive problem. And at that time, I think it was $1.6 trillion. It was even part of Donald Rumsfeld's confirmation hearings. They were grilling him about it. It was a known issue. But it was September 10th.
Sorry? Right when Ron Brown's plane crashed with all the important people that were going to turn evidence? That's part of it. But on September 10th, 2001, so literally the day before, Donald Rumsfeld had a press conference at the Pentagon where he announced a new war
a war on bureaucracy because we can't account for this 2.3 trillion dollars and remember there's some crazy one-liners in that speech that i have in my 9 11 trillions documentary um where for example he says people might ask themselves how can the the secretary of defense attack the pentagon in front of his own people and literally the next day yeah
Wow. But if you want the specifics on any of those people on screen, there's a hyperlink transcript for this video with links to every single one of those people and their story and what it leads into. So if people go to CorbettReport.com slash 911conspiracy, they can find all the details. Is there anything that happened that wasn't that at this point? Every single major war, we have a fake thing. Well, not fake in terms of the deaths,
but a thing that they protect, like a false flag. A false flag that precipitates it. Vietnam, World War I, purposely put civilians. Vietnam, Gulf of Tonkin, World War II. All of them. There's not a single... Would they just be peaceful without the people? Absolutely.
World War One, Lusitania. That was again, that was a setup. Yeah, there's it's hard to find because and there's a specific reason for this. It's because back in the olden days, the king would just declare we are at war and everyone would have to go. But in our enlightened modern era of democracy, you need to get the public support now.
for any military action. So you have to gin up something. And whether that something is real or completely generated, at any rate, you need that excuse to send people off to die and to get people to willingly march off to die. Well, last night, a good friend of mine told me World War III is worth it to save you, to stop Putin. With a straight face, said that to me. Okay, let's get back to this video.
Osama bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away. Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora, but somehow got away.
So...
It appears that the reason why they kept Osama bin Laden alive for a while was they needed a boogeyman and a bad guy. And then the reason why they killed him was because they didn't actually want to hear what he had to say, right? That would be a reasonable supposition. My only question is who or what was that that took place in Abbottabad? Who or what was protecting that organization?
How what intelligence agencies were involved in that? I know Seymour Hersh has his story about that. That's completely different than the official story. I tend to think differently than Hersh on that. But at any rate, it's certainly not what they told us. And yeah, perfect boogeyman to basically taunt the world for a decade. And then Obama can go in and say, I got him.
Yeah. Well, I believe the part that they got the walk in that said where he was, that makes sense to me. And then the part where Obama jumped the gun and went in early and Pakistan was going to give him up because the Saudis stopped paying to protect him.
That part doesn't sound hard to believe any part of that. And that Pakistan had just turned their radar off to let us in. Just for the record, this was the ninth time that Osama bin Laden had been pronounced dead in that decade. So, you know, take it for what it's worth. Yeah, but we didn't see them sad in the Middle East until that time. Do you think he is dead?
I am sure that the Osama bin Laden character was retired at some point. I just don't know exactly when it was. And hey, we will never, ever, ever get the evidence of this. As you're about to see in this video, they they dumped him in the ocean. Yeah, they dumped a traditional Muslim burial. Let's see. OK, here we go. Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team's members died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.
This is the story of 9-11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about... His head could be seen to move violently forward. And... They took the baby's eyes and cabers. And... Mobile production facilities. And... The rescue of Jessica Lynch. If you have any questions about this story, you are a batshit, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone.
If you love your country and or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie, and your grandma, you will never, ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever. This has been a public service announcement by the friends of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, SEC, MSM, White House, NIST, and the 9-11 Commission.
Because ignorance is strength. Yeah, not after that Biden debate. So that was wonderful. That was really well put together. And I love your commentary, your sarcastic commentary.
commentary is fantastic don't you think it's kind of crazy that well first of all they've let me they demonetize it but they let me i brought on this uh uh professor emeritus from the university of alaska fairbanks yeah or anchorage maybe he debunked uh building seven and he showed that there's no way it fell down because a plane hit another building a hundred yards away and
So at least YouTube, they let me tell that story. They demonetized it, obviously. But aren't you surprised that over two decades later, there's still no mainstream news that's going to, I mean, even close? Is it because we only have, is it because of the Telecommunications Act and there's only six billionaires owning that? Is that it? What do you think?
Well, that's I mean, that's certainly part of it. If if people want to deep dive on it, I did a documentary on the media matrix that's all about the development of mass media and how basically from Gutenberg to this point has been essentially the story of how.
uh ruling oligarchs and ruling the ruling class have attempted to keep trying to cork that bottle of the free flow of information and that's taken different forms in different eras but the most effective form of communication control that was ever devised was the corporate oligopoly control of the mass media that took place that really reached its zenith
by the end of the 20th century so that everyone was getting all of their news and information and media and entertainment from the same handful of corporations. The internet revolution threatened to completely upend that, which is why they are furiously trying to stuff that cork back in the bottle. So that was the reason why Bill Clinton was, well,
Well, the reason why they said they allowed Bill Clinton to consolidate the media from 50 giant media corporations, which are still giant companies, down to six, which is what he did with the Telecommunications Act, was because of this new thing called the Internet. And it was going to be this revolutionary thing. And then there's going to be millions of citizen journalists. And there's going to be all these. And so you don't need to have those strict rules, those rules of like you can't own a newspaper and a radio station and a TV station. All that stuff's gone. Right.
And there's only six. So that was supposed to be the reason. But now that it actually is working the way they said it with the Internet, we now find out from the Twitter files that they're completely censoring. The government is now pressuring social media platforms
to censor. And so I know I've been a victim of that. You've been a victim of that. And I know if there was ever a YouTube files, it would come out that there was a, there was an email from somewhere in the government to YouTube to come at me because they came at me for accurate information.
I was reporting that the vaccine didn't stop transmission or contraction, which now everybody just takes for granted that it doesn't because they admitted they didn't even test to see if it did, even though they were saying it did, and that it would never get us out of this pandemic because it was a leaky vaccine that didn't stop transmission or contraction. So I don't know why.
Well, okay, a couple things to say to that. One is you're exactly right. The very things that we now know and take for granted were literally verboten on YouTube back at the time. I know this because one of the videos that got censored at that time before they scrubbed my whole channel was called The Future of Vaccines. It was December of 2020. I was talking about all of those, all of that research that was already there. No, they didn't even test for transmission or anything like this.
No, it's all-- I was pointing to the literal, their documents.
But again, that got scrubbed from YouTube. So that's part of the point. But OK, let me have a controversial take here because everyone's reaction to this seems to be, well, what we need is for the government to come in and tell YouTube that you can't censor people based on their views or something like that. But that, to me, is completely the wrong direction that we should be heading with all of this because the real point of the internet revolution and what was truly so freeing about it was that we didn't
all have to congregate in the same few areas like we did back in the old days with the New York Times and the Washington Post and these other arbiters of our reality. Suddenly you could be Joe Schmo with your own blog, your own little corner of the internet. And then we all started congregating on these same few social media sites and deciding that that is the internet. And now that's the public square. So we all need a space on that. But
I would say to people who are arguing for that, what imaginary committee, what people are you going to appoint to that board that's going to decide who is rightfully allowed a place on this platform and who isn't and in what way and how do you write those rules and who gets to write those laws? I'm holding my breath for that to work out for us for a change, right?
Right. No, I think that's I think that's the wrong idea. The point is decentralization. We need to be supporting those platforms that are about decentralizing rather than centralizing our information. Peer to peer is the way the Internet was literally structured to work. Why are we breaking that in order to all congregate in these same controlled servers?
Um, I, I, you know, I don't extreme manipulation is my guess. I don't disagree with what you're saying. I just think that there have been now there's these, for whatever reason, uh, the human psyche likes to have a centralized places to meet and exchange ideas. And so now there's Facebook, there's Twitter, there's YouTube, there's Instagram. And that seemed and, and Tik TOK, which we've been kicked off a Tik TOK, um, uh,
But, I mean, that's what gives it power because a lot of people can have access to it and things can go viral in that way. And I think the problem is that the social media companies now act as a publisher and they don't get held to the account. They can go in and censor, which is them acting as a publisher, but then you can't sue them.
uh, acting as a publisher. So, because they have that protection from the government. So I would say that they don't get to act like a, don't you think if we just took away their, uh, immunity from that and, and, and, and got rid of their, the fact that they do get to censor, there's already like, I've always made the case that there's already laws in place. There's already, there's already, uh, police enforcement agencies, uh,
There's already attorney generals in every state. And if someone's doing something illegal on Twitter or Facebook or YouTube, there already are these things in place to go get them. I don't need Zuckerberg or Twitter or Google to be policing my speech. There's already agencies out there to do that. That's what I think. What do you think? What do you say to that? I completely understand where you're coming from. And I'm going to be the actually guy here and say, well, okay,
But no one is disputing, for example, YouTube has their policy, no pornography on YouTube. And no one is saying, damn it, but pornography is free speech, First Amendment right, I can post pornography anytime I want. So YouTube must let me post pornography. No one is making that argument because we all understand, no, it's YouTube's platform. They can choose anything.
their level of moderation, what they want and what they don't want on that platform. My choice is to be or not be on that platform, to support it or not support it. And I understand what you're saying about the network effect.
The technology of a YouTube, of a Facebook, of a Twitter, of a TikTok is about centralized servers in which we're all connecting to the centralized servers owned by Musk or Zuckerberg or whoever happens to be in charge of YouTube today. But BitTorrent...
peer tube, the library network, the way it was originally set up to work, etc., are based on peer-to-peer connection where there is no central server. There's no one who can step in between a peer-to-peer connection and censor what's going on there. The data is not stored in any central place where it can be limited in that way. And if we put one technology
tenth of the amount of effort into supporting platforms that were based on this true decentralization technology, rather than spending all our time worrying what YouTube and Twitter are doing, we could probably actually accomplish something much more valuable for the long term.
Well, that's a message that could really gain some traction if it was on YouTube. Wait, wasn't it? You know what? You're not wrong. Didn't they purposely destroy one that was a competition? I think it was Parler. Not mine, just Parler. Yeah, Parler. Why did you make your own? Then they did. They stepped in and ruined and destroyed it. Yeah. So how do you even do that? Like compete with them? They will destroy you.
Yeah, well, that had to do with using Cloudflare and other centralized technologies. So yeah, I understand. It's not going to be easy. I'm not a pie-in-the-sky utopian here. It's, oh, it's going to be all sunshine and rainbows. But the technology literally does exist for us to decentralize in the way the World Wide Web was originally supposed to work.
And I'm sure you have a few gray hairs as I tend to have them as well. I'm sure you remember back 20, 30 years ago, the wild west of the World Wide Web where it was absolute insanity and craziness and you could go to someone's personal website and it's got all the spinning flashy stuff and it looks crazy and they're ranting about whatever they're ranting about.
That was the sort of the beautiful spirit of the original World Wide Web that became this corporatized, homogenized, bland Facebook feed of just everything looks the same. You all have to fit yourself into that particular corporate mold. And the idea of designing something yourself and having control over it
has been weeded out of the population to the point where it's just, oh, you know, which service am I going to sign up to is basically the extent of your choice. And when that happens, we become the product that is being sold to the advertisers, which is what, you know, that how that works. So we always were into that system. We can complain about the system all we want, but that's not going to do anything to change the system. Okay. But I don't know how to program computers. I only know about the different types of genders.
Hey, you know, here's another great way you can help support the show is you become a premium member. We give you a couple of hours of premium bonus content every week, and it's a great way to help support the show. You can do it by going to JimmyDoreComedy.com, clicking on Join Premium.
It's the most affordable premium program in the business, and it's a great way to help put your thumb back in the eye of the bastards. Thanks for everybody who was already a premium member, and if you haven't, you're missing out. We give you lots of bonus content. Thanks for your support.
Totally tis.
So just try take and bake for $12 every Tuesday at Papa Murphy's. Change the way you pizza. Let me ask you this. This might let me just take a left turn here. What is your what are your feelings on Bitcoin? Well, Bitcoin. Yeah, a good question. So cryptocurrency as a concept, I think, is a valuable concept. And I have talked about this over the years. In fact, I was first talking about it in 2012, 2012.
I was selling DVDs for Bitcoin back in at that time. So half a Bitcoin for a DVD, that's whatever it is, $30,000 today's dollars. But what does dollars mean, right? Why do we value something in dollars rather than valuing it in and of itself? So the idea of cryptocurrency was to facilitate that kind of peer to peer connection without a central bank. Why do we need a central bank to come in and control the money supply?
and to control our access to the international financial system, right? That was the idea. Unfortunately, in the decade plus since its inception, Bitcoin has been progressively steered towards more about compliance and centralization and, oh, you've got to play by the rules. And if you dare to sign up for a cryptocurrency exchange, you need a blood sample and DNA and next of kin and
whatever. So it's going in the exact opposite direction of its original intention. There are other cryptocurrencies out there like Monero and other things that are at least more privacy focused and more about the original ethos of cryptocurrency. But unfortunately,
Unfortunately, it's like anything else. Once people start to see the dollar signs, oh, you know, I can get Bitcoin and I can know, wow, that'll be a lot of money. And they think they're still thinking of money in terms of dollars. Well, that defeats the entire purpose of cryptocurrency. So, yes, it's a great idea, but actually getting it to function and getting people excited about the idea. Well, it's, you know, it's a much taller task. Do you do you possess? So how much you possess some cryptocurrency Bitcoin?
I used to, but that tragic boating accident, it all disappeared. Really? Okay. No. Okay. First rule of crypto, you never talk about your crypto holdings. All right. All right. I respect your privacy. Let me move on to a topic I know you know a lot about, Bill Gates. Yeah.
You know, it's so funny. You know, I still live in the real world. I go out into comedy clubs all the time and I have comedy friends. And they believe what they read in the New York Times. And I had dinner with the three comedians and one of them said to me, he goes, do you know anything about what you're talking about? He goes, I'm informed. I read three newspapers a day.
And I was like, let me guess, the New York Times, Washington Post, and the Boston. Yes, that was them. So you're less than informed. Yeah, you're misinformed. That's that old Mark Twain joke, right? If you don't read, you're uninformed. If you do read, you're misinformed. And so I meet these people who still like my –
And they're all nice people. They're all decent human beings. And I just can't believe that people, you can get past the age of 45 or 50 years old and not catch on that you're being 100% propagandized. I mean, just the Iraq war, people completely memorabilized
hold it and they went on to do Afghanistan for 20 years the Afghan paper showed it that they lied about it for 20 years straight that Libya complete lie Syria the gas attacks same thing and now but they all go right on board with Ukraine it's like at no point do they learn so
my hope that's a long way to me say I was having lunch with my old roommate and he was saying Bill Gates is a great guy he's trying to he's trying to solve malaria he's bringing vaccines to poor people and um
Just tell people why that's not true. This is after the Epstein thing. This is after Epstein, yes. Yeah, it's amazing what billions of dollars can do for your public image, isn't it? And so exactly as you say, I get why Zoomers who've never known Gates as anyone but this philanthropy god would maybe think of him in that context. But how could anyone who was there in the 90s think of Bill Gates as anything other than that evil, rascally tech monopolist who
who built his fortune and his empire on coming into the open source software movement and the relatively free flow of information that existed there and literally penning this tone-deaf letter saying, I'm giving stuff away to you guys and you're just going to steal it. Why would I do that? Everything should be patented and controlled. And that was literally how he made his fortune. And of course, as we know, the United States basically
the Microsoft back in the day, the antitrust lawsuit, all of that. But suddenly, you know, the turn of the millennium, suddenly he starts to build Melinda Gates Foundation. And now he's good guy Gates giving away his fortune. But, you know, the strange thing is that in that first year of the scandemic crisis, his net worth actually doubled. How does this happen? He keeps giving away money, but he keeps getting more and more. How does this possibly work? And
Anyway, there's a specific reason that people think of him specifically in that context and in that way is because, uh,
In addition to the millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of dollars of personal PR that he has still directly financed, there's the untold tens, hundreds of millions of dollars in grants that his foundation has given to various media organizations to make sure that their coverage of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is favorable. The Guardian's global development website, NPR's global health coverage.
BBC Media Action, the BBC itself, World Health Coverage on ABC News, all have received grants from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which, by the way, are generally reporting on stories about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded research and work. So what conclusion do you think the average person sitting there and just consuming it as just, you know, their usual gullible rube? Of course, this is a great guy doing great work. They've been programmed to believe that.
I mean, I try to explain to them, I go, you know, Bill Gates is a megalomaniac monopolist. And in fact, they had a saying of how they would, now it's slipping my mind, but they would get into a market, then they would expand inside that market, and then they would crush that market. So they did that with Netscape, right? Right.
yep yeah exactly right and uh and people can watch the actual um uh deposition of him during the antitrust
uh trial that was just i mean it's just crazy to watch him as he's attempting to answer the question or attempting to not answer the questions where he's pretending not to understand basic words in the english language because he doesn't he obviously knows he's been cornered and found out but he he just will not respond to it but again all of that's been memory hold for like minute it's like the longest dead pause to a basic way longer than biden
Yeah. And it's just, it's like the Bill Clinton, what's your definition of is, is he was doing that. Yeah, exactly. Right. So, um, I think there are three concepts you need to understand.
Bill Gates, one of which monopolist. I think that's absolutely part of his long term game plan. That was what he did in the software business. And that's exactly what he's doing in his foundation, philanthropic, philanthropic capital work, which is about monopolizing global health. That was that's one of the main research areas and focus areas of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
There is another core concept is software, computer programming, technology. That is the lens through which someone like Bill Gates will examine any problem to the point where, for example, people might remember before they memory hold this and claimed it was a conspiracy theory. Moderna literally talked about reengineering the software of life.
you know, we can re-engineer the software of the human computer system essentially by tinkering with your RNA. Yay. What could go wrong? The third concept that people need to understand is technocracy. He is a technocrat. And if you go and look up the dictionary definition of that, it's just going to tell you, oh, that's,
That's just someone who believes that there should be a sort of a ruling class or a governing class that is made up of engineers and scientists and what have you. That's part of it. But no, if you look into the history of Technocracy Inc., which was this movement that started in the 1930s during the Great Depression, everyone's casting around for ideas. How do we get out of this crazy, topsy-turvy economic situation?
One of the people who came along was this charlatan, Howard Scott, who lied about his credentials and everything else, but somehow managed to worm his way into the basement of Columbia, despite not being a professor there, and set up shop there to start his technocracy movement, which was based around the idea of you're going to have to perfectly plan the economy top down. And of course, you need engineers and scientists to steward over it. They're going to be the technocrats who are going to rule the technate, is what he called North America. What? And...
What they're going to do is they're going to calculate perfectly as scientists, rational scientists can exactly the amount of energy that will be needed to create everything that we need in the economy. Because again, we know exactly what you need, how many toothbrushes to manufacture and everything else.
And they're going to calculate that energy expenditure. Then they're going to take that and divide that, measure that energy in joules, and then divide that up and hand it out as energy credits. There won't be money anymore. You're going to get energy credits measured in joules.
And as a member of the TechNate, as a good worker, productive worker, you're going to get these energy credits every month to spend into the economy. And then it'll perfectly balance inputs and outputs so that there will never be this crazy depression boom bust cycle ever again. Yay, wonderful.
Except the small problem with that plan, it was total madness, complete lunacy back in the 1930s to imagine that they were going to be monitoring literally every transaction in the economy in real time and measuring and denominating everything in joules of energy. It was insane. But actually, in 2024, it's like, you know, kind of could do that now, actually. Why don't we have a system that's based on, oh, I don't know, maybe carbon credits or
And you get your certain allotment of carbon credits and you get to have this much and no more, citizen, because you are now a member of the technate. And don't worry, the overlords, I mean, the technocrats are going to steward over this and make sure you have just enough of what you need.
So when you start to combine those ideas, everything starts to make sense because Gates is in all of these different unconnected areas. Like why is Gates the largest single farmland owner in the United States, right? Why does it sound like more than the Morshins?
So that's what I want to actually get into that right now. So here, this is from a place called Land Report. It says he owns a total of 275,000 acres of farmland. And it says with almost 250,000 acres of highly productive farm ground spread out over 17 states, the co-founder of Microsoft ranks as the nation's largest private farmland owner. Why would a tech nerd want to be a farmer?
Much of Gates' acreage was bought in huge trenches, including a group of farmland assets owned by the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board that was acquired in 2017 and the 2018 acquisition of the 100 Circles acreage in the Horse Haven Hills of eastern Washington. Those two purchases alone total an investment of more than $690 million in
In farmland assets, and here is a, so here's all the places that Bill Gates owns farmland. Look at that. He owns 20,000 acres in Nebraska, Wyoming, 9,000 in Idaho, 16,000 in Washington, 4,500 in California, 25,000 in Arizona.
Just one acre in New Mexico. He wanted to get his feet wet. What is that one acre? 69,000 in Louisiana, Arkansas, Illinois at 17,000. It's Ohio, Wisconsin. I mean, even Florida, North Carolina. And here's just a quick little...
A couple of paragraphs from Investigate Midwest. Spilling Bill's beans. Tech billionaire spent $113 million on Nebraska farmland. And Bill Gates' Nebraska neighbors, they don't know that he owns the soybean field down the road. Here's the story. Gates' farmland is held by more than 20 shell companies. Why would he want to do it through shell companies? Some lead back to a P.O. box and a P.O. box.
In Kirkland, Washington, the city where Cascade Asset Management, which manages all Gates investments, is headquartered. These limited liability companies buried under layers of business names, overlapping employees and addresses in at least three states form a network more tangled and opaque than one created by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is buying a giant amount of Nebraska ranch land because it's hidden.
The Braskins living and farming in communities where Gates is among the largest landowners are often unaware that one of the world's richest men owns the cornfield down the road. Why? Now, James, tell us, why is he doing this and why is he doing it so secretively?
Because he's a monopolist and a software engineer who's thinking in those terms. So in order to start to understand this, you have to understand all of the different investments that he has in all of the different parts of the global food supply and the food supply chain that...
including, of course, his early investments in Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods and all of that, where he is very much on board with, well, we have to get rid of this stupid old system of, you know, raising cattle and slaughtering. No, no, no, no. What we need is lab engineered meat substitute gunk, right?
What could go wrong with that? We're going to engineer our meat in a lab and it'll be good for you guys. Why? Why would he be so interested in that? Well, first, it's a technological solution to the problem, which kind of fits. It fits to a T, doesn't it? But secondly, it's because it allows more control of a few companies to literally control the global food supply. If you can get people weaned off of actual real food,
food, including not only cattle and what have you, but how about plants growing in the ground? The oldest form of human activity, agriculture and growing things from the abundance of nature. If we could somehow convince people that that's some outdated, oh, who needs that? What we need is a few companies to control these labs that are going to engineer your food substitute gunk.
So he has big investments in that. He also has big investments in a lot of different aspects of the seed cartel that has...
uh morphed over the decades people might remember way back in the day they talked about the abc seed cartel archer midlands and whatever the other b and c were but that that that that there's a handful of corporations that have controlled the global food supply of um seeds for a long time but now that's that's evolving in these weird ways there's things called like the crop trust
which sounds like a wonderful thing. And one of their big projects is this Svalbard seed vault that is like something out of a James Bond movie. You have to look this up to actually see it. It's carved out of the side of a mountain up in the Arctic tundra in the permafrost. And they're storing seeds in there, you know, just in case some sort of catastrophic thing happens. And I don't know, the entire global food supply is gone. They'll have these heirloom seeds stored.
in a fail-safe way like Noah's Ark that's that's the plan but what kind of catastrophe could they possibly be planning for I don't know how about some sort of genetic modified monstrosity being released out into the uh ecosystem and just going rampant and hey we don't have any food anymore oh don't worry we've got it in our Svalbard seed vault and who's who is I think
I stand to be corrected on this, but I believe the single largest non-governmental investor in the crop trust is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Yes, it is. That's correct. Yes.
That's how I first heard about that seed vault where they're talking about Bill Gates owning all the seeds. There's the African Green Revolution Alliance or something like that, AGRA, that, again, was partnered, Bill and Melinda Gates and the Rockefeller Foundation were partnered in, hey, guys, we're going to spread our love to Africa. Don't worry, guys. We're going to totally revolutionize your stupid, dumb, old farming practices. We're going to give you all the new whiz-bang technology and make sure you guys are –
And after 20 years of that, a bunch of African NGOs and farmers and activist groups got together and said, please stop destroying our continent. Your stupid mechanized input intensive chemical farming processes are destroying Africa and we don't want you anymore. But they're continuing pressing ahead with that. There's so many other aspects of this. I just found out about one called, I think it's called DivSeek.
which again, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation heavily invested in, that is collecting the genetic sequence material of all of these different seeds and patenting them so that they can then spread the love through their corporate oligopoly to all of the different corners of the planet. Don't worry, guys, we'll take care of the food supply. You just have to put all the control in us. And that is kind of the bigger picture of this farmland question. Yes, so that seems super scary, especially when Bill Gates is saying,
Basically the guy who runs the WHO. And I don't know how engaged he is with the WEF. He is though, right? He's certainly spoken there and been promoted there. He's a frequent attendee of Davos, yes. So when I see him say this about farming...
I know he's up to no good. Here, I'm going to play it. We really owe it to the poor farmers to give them better tools. My awareness of climate change really came when I was visiting Africa and seeing that as the crops failed there more and more because of the temperature increase,
that was leading to malnutrition. And of course, when malnutrition goes up, that increases deaths. It means that kids are not able to develop either physically or mentally. There's reasons to believe that by using the latest techniques of being able to sequence genes,
using AI, using satellite data, that for all the crops, not just the main cereal crops, we can make them far more productive and far more climate resilient. They'll be able to improve the lives of over 500 million farmers. And so, you know, this is a very fundamental, top of the list thing to address climate adaptation.
Of course, we don't just want these improvements to be in the lab. We want them to scale up. We're impatient to see this done. Prioritizing the highest impact interventions like we do in health will be very important. But I think we'll look back on today as a real milestone towards accelerating this adaptation innovation. So that puts a chill down my spine when I hear him say that stuff. It's like, oh, we're going to help 500 million farmers. You mean you're going to control...
500 million. That's what I hear. What do you hear, James?
I hear the exact same thing and I come at this from the perspective of having studied this for a long time and seen that the green revolution from the 1960s, 1950s and 1960s that was Rockefeller funded idea that if you read the history books about it, it was this wonderful revolution in technology for farming that has increased abundance and supply all over the world and it's a wonderful thing that happened and has fed billions of people.
But the real story paints a very different picture. And I've written about this. I've talked about it before. But basically, long story short, it was the invention of the agribusiness model. So you had, for example, the Rockefeller family, which, of course, made its fortune from oil, coming in and proposing all of this technology for food production, which would, of course, have a lot of oil inputs.
as well as chemical inputs, which, by the way, the Standard Oil oligopoly also had its tentacles into. And that was spread around the world by the largest, of course, of the U.S. government, largely. Eisenhower had, it wasn't Atoms for Peace. I can't remember what the name of the program was, Food for Peace or whatever, but
wonderful idea they had. But basically their idea is, okay, we'll subsidize all of these different countries to buy this machinery and implementation of technology and chemical inputs. And we'll help subsidize that for the benefit of, of course, largely the American corporations that are selling this around the world. And we'll get them hooked on all of these chemical inputs, etc. And then, you know,
Play that out a few decades and you start getting things like the Indian farmer suicides and other such things as people get locked into these contracts where they're beholden to companies. They have unpayable amounts of debt. They end up killing themselves as a result. And that's that's increasingly playing out in America right now. Farmers in America have three and a half times more
greater than the national average suicide rate because they get themselves locked into these massive debt programs for subsidizing them. Almost no farmers can actually own their tractors and their technology anymore. They lease them and they have to, of course, purchase the contract
for the seeds and all of this from Monsanto or Buyer Santo or whatever it's calling themselves these days. And they get themselves locked into millions of dollars of debt that gets completely unpayable and end up killing themselves. It's a tragedy, but it is the inevitable result of this
centralization of power in the hands of few and few monopolists, corporate oligopolists who basically have cornered the global food supply. And that is the vision of someone like Gates. And when they're talking about then taking that down to the genomic level, and don't worry, guys, we're going to start patenting all these genetic sequences of all of these plants in order to find the best varieties and help the poor grow these wonderful life-saving crops. I'm going to take that with a gigantic grain of salt.
So it is not a stretch to say that Bill Gates is a bit of a psychopath and that he is the old idea from the Bond movies. He is Dr. Evil. He wants to control the world health. He wants to control the world food. He wants to control the world technology.
Uh, is he getting, he must be getting into, uh, central banking, digital currency somehow. I mean, he's, yes, he is. So if people really want the deep dive, I did a two hour documentary called who is Bill Gates. Uh,
corporate report.com slash Gates. And in that documentary, I go through all of that and all the way there's different parts of this disparate picture connect, including Gates's heavy promotion of digital ID, of course, and how that leads into digital currency. And he's talked about both at length. In fact, he was, the foundation was involved in the creation of the Indian Adhar system, which is this biome, the largest biometric system on earth where a billion Indians have
scan their fingerprints and their irises in order to get registered with the government and get this 12-digit number that they can then use to access government service. See, it's all about banking the unbanked and providing for people who need to access government services. How could we possibly do this without this complicated technological setup? And then, oh, by the way, there's been all of these data leaks with Aadhaar and everyone's iris scans and everything being
widely available online. It's insanity. And it doesn't make sense from any perspective other than the perspective of someone who wants to monopolize and control literally everything, really, when you think about it, down to the genomic level. And that, unfortunately, this is one of the richest people on the planet, or at least...
what they tell people about their, I'm sure the richest people on the planet are not on the Forbes rich list. But anyway, one of the front men at any rate for this agenda of consolidation of control. - Well, here's one more. - COP 28, very, very important meeting.
The issue of health and climate will be discussed at length. That's never gotten the attention it deserves. So in the last video, he was putting together farming and climate, and now it's health and climate. So I've slowly awakened to this people using climate change as a shield to cover up some nefarious agenda.
Right. I mean, I always knew that what was going to kill the planet were gas powered leaf blowers and Dutch farmers. We all knew that. They're nitrogen, Jimmy. Yeah. Think of the nitrogen. We all knew that. But anyway, so I just just watch how they it's always like these these do gooding. Oh, it's about climate. We're all trying to fight climate. We we have to we have to do.
What's the stuff that they use for batteries, Bob? Oh, not cobalt. Cobalt. Yeah, we have to mine cobalt in Idaho to fight climate, right? But isn't that what poisons the water? Shit.
I slowly became aware after none of the predictions came true at all. None of their predictions. Over 20 years. So let's just, yeah, let's just play this. This is COP 28. COP 28. Very, very important meeting. The issue of health and climate will be discussed at length. That's never gotten the attention it deserves.
The issue of food systems and how with climate change a lot of farmers aren't able to grow their crops, which is a tragedy for them. We'll talk about using innovation to absolutely solve that problem. I'm here in Dubai.
Go ahead. There's more plants now because of the car. Remember the NASA? So, yes. So how would that be harming farming? So it doesn't make sense that what he just said. Right. Because we've already NASA already put out a paper that talked about how because there's so much more carbon dioxide in that, that's what actually makes plants grow.
And so these people want to take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and that the earth has greened like an unbelievable amount. We're supposed to be out of rainforest by now. Right. So, yeah, that's right. Remember that? But here, this guy tweets out, Dr. Eli David says, Bill Gates owns four private jets, two Gulfstreams, two Bombardier Challengers. Each one of them emits more carbon in a single flight than your car is going to in your entire lifetime.
And when he's asked about this, he says, well, I buy carbon offsets. Yeah, his good-out ways... But that still doesn't stop the... You're still putting carbon into the... You're still...
Anyway, so... He had four private jets and the guy still flies on Epstein's jet. Isn't that weird? And he still needs to fly on Epstein's jet. Look that up, guys. I'm not making that up. He was on the flight logs. But he said, I didn't know it was Epstein's plane. Yeah, Kevin Spacey didn't know where he was either. He didn't either. He couldn't believe Bill was there. So what do you make of this climate? I feel like I'm not qualified to know if...
if carbon-based climate change is real or not right i i just took i just accepted that it was and that climate change is this thing i better get on board with and but it turns out every solution that the people who are telling me that climate change is real every solution they propose is a scam
Because we all know the number one admitting organization of carbon in the world is the U.S. military. And not once has Greta Thunberg ever protested in front of a new military base. They just they put two permanent ones in Syria, three in Philippines. They're just in the last couple of years. They're never, ever talking about that. They're never saying get rid of your private jets. In fact, they all take private jets to Davos where they tell you we got to fight climate change. So.
What is your take on that climate change movement, James? Yeah, well, this is, of all the things I've ever covered, it's actually surprising to me. This is probably the most controversial. I thought I was going to get pushback 9-11 inside job. You're crazy. No, the most pushback I've ever had is calling anthropogenic global warming hypothesis unfalsifiable pseudoscience woo-woo, which it is, demonstrably so. And I've talked about that over the years. I've talked about
the nitty gritty details of the IPCC reports and equilibrium climate sensitivity and other such boring topics. I've talked to the censored climate scientists like Judith Curry, etc. So there's a lot there. But let's just play pretend. Okay, it's totally real, guys. It's absolutely going to kill you and your progeny. So what is the solution to this? And you're exactly right. It is the...
perfect tool for the erection of a global government by default, by de facto anyway, through all of these organizations. And as you say, all of the jigsaw pieces are starting to fit together in weird ways. Like, oh yeah, climate is now a health emergency. So now the World Health Organization is on board with this. And they've got this term for it, One Health, which
which sounds so wonderful. And the concept of One Health is your health is related to the health and well-being of everything around you, all of the plant and fauna and other human beings, etc. We're all part of one healthy ecosystem. So it
In order to make sure that everybody's healthy, well, we basically just have to control everything in the environment and we'll make sure that it's all healthy for you. And that is where this is going. It is a gigantic global power grab. And of course, there is a financial element to that, which I've talked about before. Look up things like GFANS, the Global Finance Net Zero Alliance, whatever it is.
ridiculous acronym they came up with, in which they have tens of trillions of dollars in investable capital that they're going to be directing into such things as natural resource corporations and other such things, which they're going to start monetizing and financializing nature itself and trading it in crazy derivative schemes. What could go wrong?
This is where it is heading. It is about power and control, and it fits in. Every piece of this agenda fits in because ultimately it's the same agenda. It's about centralization of power and control in fewer and fewer oligopolist hands. That is the direction that things are heading. And when you see, when you put on those glasses, it's like the They Live glasses. Suddenly, oh, yeah, okay, that makes sense. Oh, I get why he's in digital ID. I get why he's in vaccines. Oh, I get why he's over here in a climate. I get why he's doing the food thing.
Well, do you remember this when I believed it was a real thing, man-made climate change, because all the oil companies, and I remember this vividly, it was always like Chicken Little was the mascot of being afraid of climate change. And it was an oil company, so I'm like, okay, they got an investment in lying, okay?
Then a weird thing happened where the oil companies start saying, oh, no, it is real and mankind is doing it. And you need to do something. Like when the NFL told you not to beat your wife on those commercials. Yeah. And I was like, wait, okay, so now it's real, but it's my fault? And the oil company is saying it to me? And then a little more time went by. And every single thing that I was afraid of, because I was, they go, we got five years. The coral reef is gone.
All that bullshit they said. None of it. Ice-free summer in the Arctic, stuff like that. Jehovah's Witnesses have a better record of predicting the end of the world than science. Because they only predicted it once in my lifetime, and it didn't happen. All these other models and shit have been wrong. I can count five times where they were making me anxious, and nothing happened other than they bought more of our shit. Yeah, yeah.
Okay. Well, James, I know your time is tight. I appreciate you coming on. I hope we can get together and talk more soon. Everybody should check out.
Your website, it's CorbettReport.com. CorbettReport.com. Yes. And tell you what, I'll give you a bonus. CorbettReport.com slash Big Oil. I did an entire documentary on how Big Oil conquered the world and why Big Oil conquered the world that addresses specifically that shift in the narrative that took place in the past couple of decades where suddenly Big Oil are the ones pushing this climate agenda. Yeah, and carbon footprint and stuff. Oh, oil's not scarce, too. Is it like the De Beers diamond thing? Yeah.
There's actually plenty of oil. They just said there wasn't. I'll bet you it is that. Yeah. Yeah. I agree. Okay. James, thank you so much for coming on. Our audience is thrilled and hopefully we'll talk soon. All right. Thank you. Okay. Bye-bye. Hey, become a premium member. Go to JimmyDoreComedy.com. Sign up. It's the most affordable premium program in the business.
Don't freak out. Don't freak out. All the voices performed today are by the one and only, the inimitable Mike McRae. He can be found at MikeMcRae.com. I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not. That's it for this week. You be the best you can be, and I'll keep being me. Don't freak out. Don't, don't, don't, don't, don't, don't, don't, don't freak out. Don't, don't, don't, don't, don't, don't, don't.
Do not freak out.