Christopher Bollyn: Hello. Good afternoon. My name is Christopher Bollyn. Thank you for coming.

 

 

 

And I want to thank the people that organized this conference today. Today we’re going to do a 58 minutes presentation to keep it within constraints for a video. And I’m talking about “Tricked into War”.

 

 

Now, I’m not going to go into great detail about the 9/11 crime. The details of the 9/11 crime would take up hours and hours of discussion. I’ve talked about 9/11 and the evidence in other videos, and they’re on YouTube. And I’ve written several books about 9/11.

 

 

Today I’m talking about how 9/11 and the War on Terror are connected and linked. This nation has been at war for 17 years. As Donald Trump said the other day, we spent $7 trillion and got nothing for it.

 

 

The United States and Syria are at face to face confrontation in Syria as we speak. Russian planes are being shot down with Israeli involvement, off the coast of Syria. And the media in this country barely touches it. All the media in this country talks about is sexual peccadilloes between Kavanaugh and some girl in high school. They say nothing about the situation in Syria, which is very important.

 

 

So, I’m the author of Solving 9/11. And as I’ve said in previous presentations, Solving 9/11 ends the war! I was an investigative journalist in Washington, DC when 9/11 started. Here I am presenting evidence of the first citizens Grand Jury in Los Angeles.

 

 

And I’m the author of the Solving 9/11 set of books. And the latest book is the War on Terror, which is a very small book about the War on Terror.

 

 

The Solving 9/11 set of books investigate various aspects of the false flag of terror atrocity. But my main focus is who is behind 9/11 and why was it done? This is the book of original articles. This is the latest book. I wrote this last summer, The War on Terror, the Plot to Rule the Middle East.

 

 

911 was a policy coup. It was blamed on Muslims. 9/11 was blamed on Muslims in order to initiate, to start the War on Terror as an operational war. But behind the War on Terror is a covert strategic plan to redraw the map of the Middle East. You might ask yourself, why is the United States in Syria? We have no national interest in Syria. We haven’t had it for a long, long, long time.

 

Yet we have troops there. We’re occupying the third eastern part of the country from the Euphrates river to Iraq. And we have also occupied the southern part of the country where Syria butts up against both Jordan and Iraq. Why are we there? What’s the purpose?

 

 

Well, 9/11 and the War on Terror were both conceived by Israeli Military Intelligence in the 1970s when Menachem Begin, the head of the Likud Party, came to power. Menachem Begin is known as the “father of terrorism”. Here he is.

 

 

He’s the founder of the Likud Party. He was born in Russia, came to Palestine in 42, became leader of the Irgun in 44, which was a terrorist group. Bombed the King David Hotel, killing 93 people. British headquarters in 1946. Then was involved in the massacre of the Dir Yasin village, which was meant to scare the Palestinians to fleeing, which many did. And he created the Likud Party in 1973, became prime minister in 77, and promptly invaded Lebanon in 1978.

 

 

This is the emblem of the Irgun which he was the head of its a jewish terrorist group and it’s connected to the Netanyahu family, because Mr Netanyahu’s father was the director of this movement, the Irgun, and the New Zionist organization since 1940.

 

 

Here is both Mr Begin and Netanyahu. These men are cut from the same cloth. This is the group that they belong to the great group that they have allegiance to is a group of terrorists.

 

In 1974, a British journalist asked Mr Begin, he said:

 

“How does it feel in the light of all that’s going on to be seen as the father of terrorism in the Middle East?”

 

And Begin said:

 

“In the Middle East?”

 

He said:

 

“In all the world!”

 

So he put on himself the mantle of being the father of terrorism in all the world. That’s his words.

 

Well, 9/11 was a false flag terror atrocity that was designed to instill fear and rage in the American population, so that we would accept and we would get behind this War on Terror.

 

 

And I have to say it succeeded very well. 17 years later, we are still involved in the War on Terror. There is virtually no public resistance to it, and there is no political resistance to it.

 

But starting the War on Terror, the open ended War on Terror, was the primary reason for the false flag terror attacks of 9/11.

 

 

911 was a policy coup that brought us a Global War On Terror and a series of disastrous wars across the region. They call it “The Long War”.

 

 

The War on Terror is a suitable title because the War on Terror is the longest and most expensive war, foreign war in us history, yet there is no resistance to it. How can that be? How can the American people be so numb to American war fighting in a dozen countries across the Middle East?

 

Well, the main reason is because it’s out of sight, out of mind. Unless you have family involved in the war, you don’t hear about it on TV. You don’t hear about it on the radio. You don’t read about it in the newspapers. Not like Vietnam. Vietnam, we heard about, we saw pictures on Life magazine. Today we see nothing. Nothing!

 

[05:51]

 

This is what Donald Trump said in April [April 28, 2018]. He said:

 

 

“We have spent $7 trillion. Trillion with a that, $7 trillion in the Middle East. You know what we have for it? Nothing! Nothing!”

 

And he’s absolutely right! As the author of the Art of the Deal, you would think that he would see that this is a very bad deal and rectify it as soon as possible.

 

The War on Terror is all based., … It’s not just a name, it’s an authorization, it’s a title. It’s an authorization and funding. And it was passed two days after 9/11, three days after 9/11, by the Authorization for Use of Military Force, which basically gave the president the authority to wage war against anybody he thought was behind 9/11.

 

 

So these are some of the places where we, where the authorization used military force has been invoked.

 

 

Was Eritrea? Was Somalia? Were they involved in 9/11? Was Libya involved in 9/11? We, of course, heard about Afghanistan. But are all these countries involved in 9/11? No, of course they’re not! But the authorization to use military force based on 9/11 crime has been abused, terribly abused! It opened up the pandora’s box for American open ended war fighting across the Middle East, around the world actually.

 

 

The fraudulent War on Terror is based on the official myth of 9/11. They go hand in hand. The War on Terror is a criminal fraud.

 

 

We are spending about $400 million per person, per US victim of terrorism per year. So for a cause of death, if you have cancer or influenza, you get pennies! This stack of bills would have to be 1,000 times higher to reflect the amount of money that’s being spent per victim of terrorism. Terrorism is not a leading cause of death in this country.

 

 

The War on Terror is an Israeli stratagem pushed by Netanyahu since 1979 to trick the United States into waging war against Israel’s enemies.

 

 

The War on Terror is based on the 9/11 lie. And unfortunately, Donald Trump has adopted that lie. He said in August of 2017:

 

“9/11, the worst terrorist attack in our history, was planned and directed from Afghanistan because that country was ruled by a government that gave comfort and shelter to terrorists.”

 

And he said that as he increased military presence and effort in Afghanistan.

 

 

Wesley Clark, who was running for president, this was the man who ran US military forces in Europe during the Yugoslavia campaign. And he said:

 

“Whether you’re a Democrat, or a Republican, if you’re an American, you ought to be concerned about the strategy of the United States in this region. What is our aim? What is our purpose? Why are we there? Why are Americans dying in this region? That is the issue.”

 

He said:

 

“What happened on 9/11 is that we didn’t have a strategy, we didn’t have bipartisan agreement, we didn’t have American understanding of it, and we had instead a policy coup in this country. A coup! A policy coup! Some hard nosed people took over the direction of American policy, and they never bothered to inform the rest of us.”

 

 

 

He should know. Who’s he talking about? He’s talking about the Zionist neocons. These three people here, Paul Wolfowitz, Dov Zakheim, Douglas Feith. They’re three of the Defense Policy Board members who crafted the policy for the Pentagon that was put into effect after 9/11.

 

 

Here they are a few months after 9/11, meeting with the Israeli Chief of Staff right here, Shaul Mufaz. He’s the highest military person in Israel. And they’re discussing, what will America be doing? Well, Wesley Clark heard about the memo. He got the memo ten days after 9/11. He said:

 

 

“I went through the Pentagon and I saw Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. One of the generals called me in and said, ‘Sir, we’ve made the decision, we’re going to war with Iraq’.”

 

He said:

 

“We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?”

 

“I don’t know.”

 

He said:

 

“I came back a few weeks later and by that time we were bombing Afghanistan. I said, ‘are we still going to war with Iraq?’.”

 

He said:

 

“Oh, sir, it’s much worse than that. We’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off with Iran.”

 

And as you can see from this shopping list of this agenda, all of those countries have been done with the exception of Iran.

 

Now, what’s going on here is that an Israeli plan known as the Yinon Plan, which was articulated in 1982, is being put into effect. So that countries are being balkanized. That is, they’re being broken up into ethnic statelets.

 

 

They’re causing friction between the various ethnic groups, breaking them up into ethnic statelets. That’s the name of the game in Syria. That’s what they did in Iraq. That’s what’s happened in Libya. Etcetera. This is the Israeli plan to dominate the Middle East by breaking up the large Arab states and breaking up their armies and breaking the countries into pieces like Yugoslavia. There will be no competition for Israel, and Israel will have hegemony over the entire region.

 

 

Here’s Hillary Clinton. Some people point out that her emblem here is very reminiscent of 9/11.

 

But in 2012, Secretary of State Clinton wrote that:

 

“The best way to help Israel vis a vis Iran’s nuclear ambitions is to use force in Syria to overthrow the government.”

 

This email proves that the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton sought to overthrow the government of Syria, elected government of Syria, to save Israel, to serve Israel.

 

So if you understand that, you will understand why we are doing what we’re doing in Iran today or in Syria today.

 

I just read an article yesterday that says that the United States presence will continue in Syria beyond the end of the year because the mission has changed. The mission now is to prevent, is to kick Iran out of Syria. So American forces are now in Syria to battle with Iran and push Iran back. Did we choose that? Has Congress chosen that? Has anybody spoken about that? Of course not.

 

[11:43]

 

This photograph is from the Yarmouk, a Palestinian refugee camp in Damascus.

 

 

And this is one of the ways that terrorism is used to destroy the lives of common people. The Palestinians are refugees since 19 47, 48 in Damascus. And what happened is that ISIS was infiltrated into this camp, ISIS, the terror group. And that brought about fire into the camp. Syrian, Russian, American, whoever was fighting against ISIS in this place, and it destroyed the camp. This camp used to house 120,000 people. Today it houses 200.

 

So these Palestinians were made a target, just like the people of Raqqa, Mosul, or any other place. ISIS is the target, and they put that target wherever they want and then destroy everything around the target.

 

 

So the question is, this is from Linda Heard, a British expert in the Middle East. She says, is the United States waging Israel’s wars? She said:

 

“There is one thing that we do know. Oded Yinon’s 1982 Zionist plan for the Middle East is in large part taking shape. Is this coincidence? Was Yinon a psychic? Maybe.”

 

She says:

 

“Alternatively, we in the West are victims of a long held agenda, not of our making, and without a doubt, not in our interests.”

 

 

So we’re waging war for another entity, for another nation, for another interest that’s not ours, and we’re paying for it. Our sons and daughters are fighting it.

 

 

And this is the partition of Palestine. When it happened in 1947, Menachem Begin rejected it. He said:

 

“Jerusalem was and will forever be our capital. And Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel, all of it and forever!”

 

This is to give you an idea what Eretz Israel means. It means the land of Israel. And according to people like Menachem Begin, it extends from the Nile river to the Euphrates.

 

 

And this area right here is the Kurdish area, which happens to be occupied by the United States. This is all Syria right here. This is where the United States is occupying one third of Syria.

 

 

These are the various ethnic communities, religions, factions in Iraq and Syria. And from the Yinon plan, Yinon said:

 

“The dissolution of Syria in Iraq is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern Front. The dissolution of the military power of these states serves as the primary short term target.”

 

This is exactly what we did when we went to Iraq first 1991, and then again in 2003, we destroyed the Iraqi military.

 

If you remember, one of the first things that happened is when we got into Iraq, we disbanded the entire military, sent everybody home. No more jobs, no entitlements, nothing!

 

So the military went away. And in Syria, we’ve been trying to do the same thing for the last seven years.

 

 

Now, this is another break here. This area, this area here, periwinkle, is the area of the Kurds. And this area is where most of the oil is. And the United States and Israel are supporting the Kurdish independence. This area here in northern Iraq and this part of northern Syria. And in pursuing that, the largest holder of the reserves in this Kurdistan area of Iraq is a company called Janelle Energy, which is a Rothschild company.

 

So they’re going after the strategic assets. And these two cities, Mosul and Raqqa, were targets of the American anti-terrorist attacks last summer, which destroyed those cities. Destroyed them!

 

 

Here’s Mosul in June of 2017. The great mosque of all Nuri, destroyed in the battle of Mosul. The Americans put our artillery around the cities and just pounded them for months. And that has a price. Here’s Syria, the other city in Raqqa, in Syria, October 2017, at least half the city is totally destroyed.

 

 

Now, here you have to understand that these are on the edge of the Kurdish area. But these cities are, Mosul is the second biggest city in Iraq. They contained a lot. They were inhabited by a lot of Sunni Muslims, and that’s why they were pounded. So we said we were fighting ISIS, but under the pretext of fighting ISIS, we destroyed the cities and pushed a lot of people into become refugees.

 

 

The northern part of both Iraq and Syria are peopled by the Kurds. And this was the leader of the Kurdish movement in Iraq. He resigned shortly after his failed attempt to separate the country.

 

 

But I’m showing you the relationship with Israel. Here’s his father, Mustafa, meeting with the Mossad chief in 1966.

 

 

Here’s his father in Israel, meeting with Moshe Dayan.

 

 

And this is the Israeli flag flying along with the Kurdish flag in a protest, or a rally in Irbil.

 

 

So 9/11 happened. We were very quickly given this narrative, I call it the “Zionist Narrative”, about what happened. And the media has imposed on the public a false story that radical Islamic terrorists were to blame for 9/11.

 

 

Now, the only way to liberate ourselves and our nations from the madness that we’re currently in for 17 years is to expose and understand the true source of the terrorism. If you go away from this presentation or if you believe that Muslims did 9/11 with all nano-thermite and destroying the buildings and fooling the US military, then you will support the logic of war. If you understand we’ve been deceived about 9/11, the logic of war evaporates.

 

What happened after 9/11 is that the media and the government declared it to be an “Act of War”. Now that’s a very important legal term because that meant that there would not be a criminal investigation, but rather we would treat it as an act of war by 19 Arabs, who happened to be supposedly coming from Afghanistan. And based on that logic, we went to war in Afghanistan.

 

[17:37]

 

But Larry Johnson, speaking about the terrorists, or the alleged terrorists in Florida – he is a former director of counter-terrorism in the State Department – he said:

 

“We don’t have anything in history to compare with this. The only thing that comes close to it is a former Soviet intelligence operation.”

 

 

Because these are the 19 led hijackers. But 15 of them lived in Florida, where many of them had been issued duplicate licenses, others had passports had been stolen, which meant that somebody was using their identity for them and leaving behind a trail in their name.

 

 

And we now know from the BBC News shortly after 9/11 that I think seven of them were well, and alive after 9/11. And they said:

 

“My picture is being used. My name is being used, but I’m fine. I’m alive.”

 

 

 

So that raises the question, if at least seven of the hijackers were still alive after 9/11, who were the people playing the roles of the real hijackers? Were there real hijackings? Was it all a show? Well, about the 19 hijackers. Robert Mueller, who was then head of the CIA, FBI, excuse me, said in September 2002, he said:

 

“There is no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers.”

 

 

Now, this is an old Mossad trick. If you read the book The Little Drummer Girl, you’ll see that the Mossad tells the actress who’s leaving a trail for a Palestinian. The Mossad man tells the woman, the actress:

 

“Terror is theater. Theater is a con trick. Do, you know what that means? Con trick? You’ve been deceived.”

 

And that’s what we are as a nation. The whole deception is meant to deceive us.

 

I went to Germany after 9/11, shortly after, because I knew it was dangerous to be pointing out the lies of the government story when the government was going to war.

 

So I went to Germany for a couple years and worked out of Berlin. And I spoke to some of the former German intelligence agents, heads, chiefs, and they told me, this guy told me that it looked like:

 

“A Hollywood production.”

 

 

And he talked about:

 

“The deathly precision and the magnitude of planning would have required years of planning. And the absence of leaks.”

 

He said:

 

“Was further indication that the attacks were state organized actions.”

 

So what state are we talking about?

 

Another German guy, Andreas von Bulow, told me without hesitation:

 

“It’s Israel, Mossad!”

 

But when I wrote that in my newspaper, he was a little bit surprised because he said that:

 

“He told that to every journalist in Germany, but it had never been printed.”

 

And he thought it wouldn’t be printed in my paper as well, but it was printed.

 

So I’m going to point out some of the key connections, Israeli connections to 9/11.

 

 

One of the first ones is that when Israel was becoming a state in 1948, before it became a state, the joint chiefs of Staff did 13 papers about what this would mean for the American military. And they wrote in the 13th paper that:

 

“The Zionist strategy will seek to involve the US in a continuously widening and deepening series of operations intended to secure maximum jewish objectives.”

 

 

And the maximum jewish objectives were:

 

“The expansion of Eretz Israel.”

 

That means the land of Israel:

 

“Into Jordan, Lebanon and Syria and the establishment of jewish military and economic hegemony over the entire Middle East.”

 

 

Well, this is what’s going on today and this is what the United States is facilitating.

 

This is the short list of Israeli terrorism attacks prior to 9/11.

 

In 1944, they killed the British minister, Lord Moyne, in Cairo. This was done by Lehi, or the Stern gang. PIn 46, they sent letter bombs to British officials, including the foreign minister, Ernest Bevin.

 

In 46, they bombed the King David Hotel, killing 93 people. That was British mandate headquarters. It was under the British at that time.

 

 

In 1947, Irgun placed a bomb at the colonial office in London, which failed to detonate.

 

In 47, Lehi sent letter bombs to the Truman White House.

 

In 1948, Irgun and Haganah bombed the Semiramis Hotel, killing 26 people.

 

And in 1948, Irgun and Lehi massacred the entire village of Deir Yasin.

 

That’s all before Israel even became a state. This is the bombing of the King David Hotel. That’s Menachem Begin.

 

 

This was the worst terrorist attack in Israeli-Palestinian history to this point.

 

Then Irgun bombed the British embassy in Rome in October 46.

 

 

So they were global in their reach. They would go to London, they would go to Britain. I mean, they would go to Italy. They would even send bombs to America. They sent bombs to the Truman White House.

 

And this is one of the bombers. This is Yitzhak Shamir. He was the head of Lehi. He was the head of the Stern gang when they killed this man, the UN mediator Count Folke Bernadotte, in 1948.

 

 

Now, when Menachem Begin came to the United States in 1948, in December, Albert Einstein penned a letter with, 26 jewish intellectuals about what Americans should know about the Israeli terrorists, the jewish terrorists. He was talking about Menachem Begin’s party at the time. And he said:

 

“The public avowals of Begin’s party are no guide whatsoever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism. Whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character. From its past actions, we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future.”

 

 

Bingo.

 

[23:22]

 

Now, if Americans had paid attention to what Einstein told them in 48, we would not have had 9/11, because the same people are involved, the very same party, ideology and people. What happened is that these terrorists, these are the terrorists of zionism. Begin, Shamir, Sharon.

 

 

They came to power in 1977. I happened to live in Israel at the time. And this was a very sad day for Labor people because they said:

 

“This is the day that the terrorists have taken power.”

 

They knew what they were talking about.

 

Then the terrorists went to work right away. Begin invaded Lebanon in 78, and there was a Palestinian attack in Nahariya.

 

And the response was, this man said:

 

“Kill them all!”

 

And they set up a terrorist squad that operated in Lebanon for four years. And this is Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan.

 

 

And he set up an organization called the Front for the Liberation of Lebanon from Foreigners, in which he used car bombs and truck bombs to destroy Palestinian and Syrian targets and to foment conflict between the various ethnic groups of Lebanon. It was very successful. He did it for four years!

 

 

This was revealed in a recent book that came out this year, Rise and Kill First, by an Israeli author named Ronan Bergman, New York Times bestseller. But when they interviewed Ronan Bergman, the New York Times, or when they write about the book, they leave out that little bit of history, that Israel was using a terrorist squad. They would hire, they would recruit people from the Sunni community, the Shiite community, Druze community, to drive the trucks. And then they would blow them up in places that they needed to blow them up.

 

 

Because this is not discussed in American media, because this shows that Israel is a state that has openly practiced terrorism! There’s no question about it. Remember the years 1979 to 1983? And they say:

 

“The aim was to cause chaos amongst the Palestinians and Syrians in Lebanon without leaving an Israeli fingerprint, to give them the feeling that they were constantly under attack and instill them with a sense of insecurity.”

 

This is exactly the same strategy that was applied to Iraq in the 1990s, since the war. Remember car bombs going off every day between the communities, driving the people against each other?

 

And this is exactly what they did to us after 9/11, the bombing in Bali, the bombing in Madrid, the bombing in London, 9/11, so that they went global then, and they wanted to put fear into the entire Western world that were all insecure! And that’s exactly what the terrorism is all about. They want us to feel insecure so that we will support their war agenda.

 

Then in 1983, a nondescript group that had never been heard of before bombed US Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241 marines.

 

 

Caspar Weinberger, defense secretary at the time, said:

 

“There is no knowledge, we have no knowledge about who did the bombing.”

 

This is exactly the same time that Israel was doing exactly this. And we now know from Viktor Ostrowski, who wrote Mossadnik, who wrote about Mossad’s actions in a book By Way of Deception. He said that:

 

“Mossad knew the specific time and location of the bombing, but only gave the US skimpy general information, which was worthless.”

 

So they knew about the bomb. They knew what it was going to be, where it was going to be, what the truck looked like, but they didn’t tell us. That’s like, either “let it happen on purpose” or “made it happen on purpose”. And it’s the worst, it’s the largest [single] loss of life among the US Marines since Iwo Jima.

 

 

Here are a couple of Israeli terrorists from the 1950s. Shimon Peres, Pinhas Lavon and Moshe Dayan. These two characters play a big role in Israeli history, especially in the use of false flag terrorism. This photograph was taken a few months after they were busted for the Lavon Affair in Egypt when they put bombs, nitroglycerin bombs, in American libraries and British libraries and cinema theaters and cultural institutions in Cairo, in an attempt to drive the British and the Americans away from Nasser, away from Egypt. But they were caught. And they’re still smiling!

 

 

After it was discovered by the prime minister at the time, Moshe Sherrett. He said that:

 

“Shimon Peres shares the same ideology as Pinhas Lavon. He wants to frighten the West into supporting Israel’s aims.”

 

And this is exactly where we are today. The whole name of the game of the terrorism is to scare us into supporting Israel’s aims, to drive us as a nation, as a people, as a military, right behind the Israel camp, so that we become the fighters of their wars for them, because we are affected by the fear.

 

In 1967, some people would say:

 

“Israel would never do that. They’re our ally.”

 

I would point them to read about the USS Liberty attack in 1967 during the Six Day War in which Israeli planes and boats bombed the USS Liberty, a spy ship, which was in international waters off the coast of Egypt, killing 34 Americans and wounding 171.

 

 

Two thirds of the crew was destroyed, was murdered or injured. It’s the most decorated ship in naval history. And it’s the one subject of this war, the Six Day War that Americans know virtually nothing about because it’s suppressed. Because if Americans understood. The pilots were asked by the ground control:

 

“Identify the ship!”

 

The pilots called back:

 

“It’s American. It’s American!”

 

The order came from the ground:

 

“Sink the ship! No survivors.”

 

Now, if Americans understood that history, which has been revealed since 2006, they would realize that Israel is a state that will attack the United States when it suits their purposes.

 

 

This is an attack in Libya in 1986 in which the United States was tricked. Israel tricked the United States into attacking Libya. They rented an apartment in Tripoli. Then they broadcast radio transmissions to the apartment in Tripoli, which then went up into the satellite. The American signals intelligence picked up the information thinking that it was coming from Libya and then went and attacked Libya. This was when they killed Qaddafi’s daughter and all that, back in 1986.

 

 

[29:31]

 

 

 

So the War on Terror. I’m going to talk a little bit about how the War on Terror evolved. It’s an Israeli stratagem. How it developed.

 

 

In 1978 is when this all started to come into fruition. In 1978, Israeli intelligence agent Arnon Milchan made his first film called the Medusa Touch, in which a Boeing 747 crashes into the Pan Am building.

 

 

 

Here they are setting up for the film. This is the cover of the book. And here we have the same year he made the film. Here we have Arnon Milchan meeting with Israeli Defense Minister Ezer Weizman.

 

So you can see he’s at the very highest level of the Israeli military. They’re making a movie predicting something that’s going to happen in the future.

 

 

Here he is. He’s a big Hollywood producer. Made JFK, Pretty Woman, Brazil, other films. He’s said to be worth $5 billion.

 

But the point is, if you read the book about Arnon Milchan called Confidential, you’ll see that he is the external banker who controls the slush funds that Mossad uses for external operations. That’s where the money comes from.

 

And he made this film in the year 2000. Well, his partner, his business partner, a man named Rupert Murdoch, who owns Fox News, Rupert Murdoch’s company, made this film in 2,000 in which a Boeing passenger aircraft is flown into the World Trade Center.

 

 

And this aired on TV. This plane in the movie was a half an hour film, worth watching. It’s called The Lone Gunman, pilot episode. And in this movie, the plane is remotely hijacked with passengers on it. And the blame is put on the American Military Industrial Complex, looking for a new enemy.

 

 

In 1979, the head, this is one year later. The head of Israeli intelligence, this man, Isser Harel, predicted that:

 

“The Arabs would attack the tallest building in New York City.”

 

He made that prediction to this man, Michael Evans, a Zionist, a jewish Christian Evangelist from Texas. And Harel predicted that the Arab terrorists would attack the tallest building in New York City. That was 22 years before 9/11.

 

 

And you see the relationship here between Mr Evans and Menachem Begin. The prediction went like this. You know, they were meeting, and Mr Evans said:

 

“Do you think that terrorism will come to America? And if so, where and why?”

 

 

This is 1979. Harel said:

 

“I fear it will come to you in America. America has the power, but not the will to fight terrorism.”

 

Et cetera, et cetera.

 

As to the where, Harel said:

 

“New York City is a symbol of freedom and capitalism. It’s likely they will attack. They will strike the empire State Building, your tallest building, and symbol of your power.”

 

He pretended to be ignorant about the tallest building.

 

 

And in 1979, this man, Bibi Netanyahu, came back from his., … He had been working in Boston for a Rothschild company called Boston Consulting Group, in Boston. He went back, this is his father. And they started something called the Netanyahu Institute, in which they began promoting the idea of:

 

“Terrorism being the scourge that the West has to fight.”

 

And they had a conference in 1979 called The Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism. They blamed all the terrorism in the world on Russia, on the Soviet Union. And George Bush spoke on the third day at the final conference and spoke in support of these pre-emptive strikes against nations that are supporting terrorism.

 

 

And Begin, I mean, Mr Netanyahu went on to make a career promoting the War on Terrorism. Terrorism, How The West Can Win, Fighting Terrorism, and calling for the United States to come to the Middle East to wage war against those terrorist entities that were plaguing Israel. Because Netanyahu logic goes like this. He says that:

 

“Israel is attacked because the Arabs are opposed to our Western identity, our Western values, our Western way of life. We’re a Western nation.”

 

He says, and:

 

“Therefore the West is the target. Therefore it’s incumbent on the West to come and fight the terrorists for us, because we’re all the target.”

 

 

So what they did in 1983, in order to have a War on Terror, you need to have a foe. So they created the foe. They created the foe in Pakistan using a guy named Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who was a very anti-Western militia group he had called Hezb-I-Islami. And the CIA and the Saudis bankrolled the operation. And Israelis trained and armed these people in Pakistan.

 

 

It was done in 1983, in 85. It began when this man, Ehud Barak, was the head of Israeli Military Intelligence. And they sent their men and weapons they had taken off the battlefield of Lebanon, took them to Pakistan and trained these characters, people like Osama Bin Laden, in the arts of terrorism. How to make a bicycle bomb and a car bomb and how to fight urban battles against the Russians. These jihadis were meant to fight against the Russians, the Red Army in Afghanistan.

 

 

And in 1983 it was done by Charlie Wilson, this Congressman from Texas. He’s the one who led the whole thing. And he arranged with the Israelis to provide the weapons and the trainers in Pakistan. And this is him shaking hands with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

 

But the question is, why would the United States and Britain, why would they be funding and training the most anti-Western of the Mujahideen? This man was rabidly anti-Western. Why would you do that? Because they were creating the boogeyman. They were creating the enemy for the next War on Terror, which was Al-Qaeda. And it was done.

 

 

This is the man. This is Zvi Rafiah, the head of Israeli Intelligence in Washington, DC. And he was this man’s handler, Charlie Wilson’s handler. And this man, Zvi Rafiah, used Charlie Wilson’s office as if it were his own office.

 

 

And this is the Hebrew speaking double agent named Ali Mohamed, who was Osama Bin Laden’s first trainer.

 

[35:33]

 

Now, he’s supposedly Egyptian, but he speaks fluent Hebrew. Where did he learn the Hebrew? He’s a double agent. So he was working with the Israelis, training Osama Bin Laden. And this guy, he set up the cell that bombed the US embassies in Africa. He trained the men who were blamed for bombing the World Trade Center in 1993. And he trained the men who killed Rabbi Kahane in New York City.

 

And then he was finally arrested and put in jail for bombing the embassies in Africa. He was put in a federal penitentiary in this country, from which he disappeared without a trace.

 

 

And this is the Gulbuddin’s gang. This is when they became Al-Qaeda. In 1994, the Arabs became Al-Qaeda and the Pashtun speakers became Taliban. Then Israeli Mossad got the contract for the World Trade Center in 1987. Security contract, anti-terrorism security contract.

 

 

And it went to this man, Avraham Shalom Bendor. He was the head of Shin Bet. He was involved in a murder in Palestine, in Israel of a couple Palestinians. And he came to America and was the president of this company Atwell Security who got the contract for the World Trade Center.

 

 

But when the Port Authority discovered, this is Zvi Malkin and Shalom Bendor, when the Port Authority discovered that this man was using a fake name and he’d been convicted of murder in Israel, they tore up the contract. Had they not torn up the contract in 1987, 9/11 probably would have happened in the 1980s or early 1990s. But they were rejected by the Port Authority.

 

 

They didn’t go home to Israel. They didn’t give up the plan. They went to work for a couple American jews who did have inside in the Pentagon, Maurice Greenberg and Jules Kroll. And Jules Kroll had a company called Kroll Associates who got the security contract for the World Trade Center in 1993, after the first bombing.

 

And at that point, Shalom Bendor was working for him.

 

 

And in 1992, this son of a terrorist. This is Rahm Emanuel, Mayor of Chicago right now. His father was a member of that Stern Gang, the Lehi Gang. This man became the senior advisor to Bill Clinton. This is the guy that set up the whole Lewinsky thing. But he was also instrumental. He was the Mossad’s man in the White House, so that he made sure that the right people got appointed to the bench. The right appointments were made of under Clinton to make the 9/11 project move forward. And his father was a member of Lehi. He served in the Israeli army, yet he was the senior advisor to the White House.

 

 

This is the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. And in this case, Michael Chertoff was the US Attorney for the District of New Jersey. He played a key role in the prosecution in which Muslims were blamed for the bombing. The six people were killed. Chertoff oversaw the prosecution. And Mukasey, Judge Mukasey, oversaw the actual trial.

 

 

And in the trial, the FBI, who was involved in actually making the truck bomb, they paid this man $1 million.

 

 

This is another Egyptian colonel. This man was the guy who ran the sting operation in which these guys were stung. And he used wires and recorded so that they became indictable. And he testified. He was paid $1 million. This guy, Emad Salem, was paid $1 million to testify against these other fellows that he had rounded up. And then he went into the witness protection program, you know, new name, new face.

 

 

And then this ideation of the War on Terror, or of the 9/11 came out in this article in Foreign Affairs, in which Philip Zelikow, John Deutch and Ashton Carter wrote about “Catastrophic Terrorism”, how this would be something that:

 

“Could happen next month!”

 

And in this article, they had a study group. They imagined the “transforming event”. They imagined the event, like 9/11, that would change America, fundamentally change our policies, our foreign policy, our domestic policy, change the nation. This was printed in Christmas 1998.

 

 

Two of the authors, Ashton Carter and John Deutch, worked for a company called Global Technology Partners, which is an exclusive affiliate of Rothschild North America. I point out these Rothschild connections because there are throughout the entire saga. You find that one step removed from the crime, you find a Rothschild, a Rothschild connection. And the Rothschilds are, of course, the bankers that control our Federal Reserve system and other countries central banks.

 

 

So, 9/11, the New Pearl Harbor. The Zionist neocons had called for a New Pearl Harbor in order to effect the change they needed to see.

 

 

This is the Project for a New American Century run by the Kagan family. These are some of the signatories to the document. And they had imagined that this revolutionary change that they saw turning America into the global police force:

 

“Would require a catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a New Pearl Harbor.”

 

 

And in 2001, an Israeli Mossad company, Rothschild company, called ICTS, controlled security at the US airports. And these are the three principles. Here is Yitzhak Shamir’s son, Yair Shamir. This is Cukierman, and this is Boaz Harel. They ran the company that either let these guys on the airplane, or didn’t. But their company was excused from the process. And so we’ll never know unless we have some change in the attitude about 9/11.

 

[41:04]

 

 

And then in July 2001, Zionists, that’s strong supporters of Israel, got the lease for the World Trade Center. It became their property. And that was done through a man named Ron Lauder, the son of Este Lauder.

 

 

 

And in Israel, he works together with Major General Daniel Rothschild at Mossad University. He has a school there, and he runs the Institute for Policy and Strategy. This man was put in charge of privatizing New York property for Governor Pataky. He oversaw the privatization efforts of New York State in which they decided to privatize the World Trade Center, because the World Trade Center was public property prior to 9/11.

 

 

And then it went from the port authority. This man, Lew Eisenberg, he transferred after negotiations, the property to this man, Larry Silverstein. But these men are connected through something called the UJA Federation of New York, which is a Zionist fundraising operation, where he’s the national chairman and he is on the board of the Planning Board.

 

 

And again, Larry Silverstein, the man who got the World Trade Center lease for 99 years is this man here. He had weekly phone calls every Sunday afternoon with Benjamin Netanyahu.

 

 

Then on July 24, 2001, he got the keys to the front door of the World Trade Center.

 

 

This is what was left five weeks later.

 

 

On 9/11 Ehud Olmerttt, Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister, was on a secret visit to New York City.

 

 

This was taken about two weeks later, but he was there on September 10 and September 11 in New York City.

 

 

Here he is with Netanyahu. By the way, he wound up spending a couple years in jail recently for bribery.

 

 

Here he is after he came back from his ten days away in Israel, he came back to the United States.

 

And since New York City and Jerusalem are sister cities, and he was the Mayor of Jerusalem and the Deputy Prime Minister of Israel, he acted like the Big Brother to Rudy Giuliani.

 

 

But on September 11, when all civilian flights were grounded in this country, one full El Al Boeing 747 took off from JFK bound for Tel Aviv. The flight departed at 4:11 pm with US military officials on the scene authorizing and clearing the flight for takeoff. Who was on that plane? Well, obviously, Ehud Olmertt was one of the people on the plane.

 

This is about the Put Options. You may have heard about the Put Options in which people profited by knowing that the stocks of the airlines and insurance companies would tank on 9/11. And 95% of these options were put by this man’s former company.

 

 

Now this man is “Buzzy” Krongard. And on 9/11, he was executive director of the CIA. But before he became executive director of the CIA, he was the director of Alex Brown, the company that placed the put options.

 

 

And here’s the relationship between Alvin Krongard, Alvin Krongard and his wife. And his wife works directly with Rothschild Asset Management.

 

And then there were thousands of Israelis who were warned about 9/11, and there were 4,000 who were expected to have been at [in the area of] the World Trade Center that day, or the Pentagon.

 

 

And that comes from the Israeli Foreign Ministry. That’s not Arab propaganda. It’s from the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

 

And apparently they got the message through a system called Odigo, which warned people who had that Israeli system of messaging not to go to the World Trade Center that day. The warning message went out about two or 3 hours before it happened. It warned people:

 

“Not to be at the World Trade Center at 8:45 because all hell would break loose.”

 

 

So apparently those 4,000 Israelis who avoided harm got the message, they got the memo.

 

 

And then there were these “Five Dancing Israeli” who were seen celebrating and high fiving the attack at the World Trade Center before [after] the first plane struck. They were on the New Jersey side of the river, and they were photographing and high fiving, and they were observed, and they were arrested on the afternoon of 9/11. It was written about in the New Jersey newspapers, but it was not reported in any other paper outside of New Jersey.

 

 

The two men that did not appear, they’re on a TV show. These three guys are on TV show. They said:

 

“We’re not Mossad!”

 

No, because the two Mossad guys are sitting in the audience. The Kurtzberg brothers were sitting in the audience because they could not go up on the stage and say:

 

“We’re not Mossad.”

 

They are Mossad. And US law enforcement knew it from the minute they arrested these guys that they were Mossad.

 

And one of the guys, this is one of the minions, he said:

 

“Our purpose was to document the event.”

 

Here’s the head of the company behind these foster grants here, Dominik Suter. He fled the country on the 12th or the 13th, and when the FBI went to get him again, he was gone.

 

And this is one of the trucks of their company. They had this truck that was reported by New York police, Urban Moving Systems. It wasn’t a moving company at all! It was a front company. It was set up to facilitate the 9/11 attacks. And they had this truck with the picture of the World Trade Center being struck by a plane.

 

Now on 9/11, when it happened, in the studio, the London studio, the BBC, world television, the largest English speaking broadcasting in the world, who was there except Ehud Barak! Ready to give the interpretation. Remember, the General, Wesley Clark said:

 

“We did not have American understanding of it.”

 

No, what he’s implying is that we had:

 

“A foreign country’s understanding of it.”

 

We had Israeli understanding. The Israelis interpreted 9/11 for us.

 

 

This man, the head of former Defense Minister, Chief of Staff, he said:

 

“The world will never be the same from today on! We know who’s behind this, Osama Bin Laden, and we know where he is!”

 

He said:

 

“It’s time to launch an operational, concrete war against terror, full stop!”

 

[46:46]

 

And that’s what we’ve been doing for the last 17 years, following the Israeli diktat! Living our lives according to the Israeli interpretation of 9/11. That’s what they’ve imposed on us. They’ve imposed a Zionist narrative to explain what happened on 9/11.

 

 

Here’s Bibi Netanyahu. And on 9/11, he praised the attacks because they had kickstarted his War on Terror that he’d been pushing uphill for the last, 20 years.

 

 

He told the New York Times. He was asked:

 

“How will this affect American Israeli relations?”

 

He said:

 

“It’s very good!”

 

When 30,000 people are expected to be in the pile, he said:

 

“It’s very good. It will generate immediate sympathy.”

 

And the relationship between Netanyahu and Barak is that Barak was his commander in the Sayeret Matkal, a covert commando force of Israeli military intelligence.

 

 

And Bibi Netanyahu spoke the next day, September 12, in Jerusalem.

 

 

He said:

 

“We must build a coalition against terror today. It’s time to take on the militant Islamic regimes with a great deal of strength. We should crush the terrorist infrastructure that threatens the entire free world.”

 

Yet if you look at the coalition that’s put together in Syria or in Iraq, you will never find the Israeli flag, because the Israelis are the ones who are running the operation, but keep their fingers out of it.

 

But you see now in Syria, you see the Israelis are now bombing every day. They’re attacking Syria on a daily basis. And they were the ones who actually got the Russian plane shot down.

 

Their four fighters came over and were striking Syria, putting the slow moving Russian reconnaissance plane in the middle, and it got shot.

 

And he also said, Netanyahu said in 2001, he said:

 

“I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction.”

 

That’s what they’re doing to us. They’re pulling us around like an ox with a ring in its nose. And he said:

 

“We are benefiting.”

 

This is him speaking to an Israeli audience.

 

 

He said:

 

“We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the twin towers, the Pentagon and the American struggle in Iraq.”

 

He said that in 2008.

 

 

And then there was an Israeli son of the Mossad who controlled the 9/11 investigation.

 

 

This is the man, Michael Chertoff. He was put in charge of the investigation, which became a non-investigation in which the evidence was destroyed. And for day to day decisions, Chertoff had the last word.

 

 

Then he became Homeland Security Czar in 2005. In this position, he maintained his control of the evidence of 9/11.

 

 

Controlling the evidence, destroying the evidence, was a key aspect of his work. And the evidence was destroyed from the day one. This is some of the steel that was piled up. That was a big steel pile of steel.

 

 

And they began right away carting the steel off to a couple Zionist junkyards where it was destroyed 24/7. Cut into small pieces, mixed with other scrap and sent to Asia for destruction.

 

Because the steel would provide evidence of what really caused the towers to fall.

 

 

And then the Zionists presided over the 9/11 lawsuits and litigation. This is the judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein. There was a fundamental conflict of interest, though.

 

 

His son worked for a law firm in Israel that represented ICTS, the company that was overseeing security at the airports on 9/11 in Boston, in Newark, in Dulles. Here’s the relationship.

 

 

His son was working for a company that was the parent company of ICTS. And that same group of people, ICTS, was in the tort litigation that he oversaw for the families of 9/11. That’s a primary conflict of interest. And the Zionists also oversaw the settlements of the money.

 

 

This man dished out the money for the first, 2,900 families. His name is Kenneth Feinberg, very high level Zionist. This is Sheila Birnbaum. She oversaw the war of attrition against the 96 families. There are 96 families who held out for a day in court. They never got it. One by one, they were settled out of court.

 

And the Zionist control the 9/11 myth and the legacy. This is the Ground Zero. This is the World Trade Center memorial.

 

 

And they control the interpretation of the event was given to us by this 9/11 Commission Report by this man, Philip Zelikow, who’s an expert at creating public myths.

 

 

And he came to the table as Executive Director of the Commission with a complete outline already finished, before the staff even began working.

 

So he had prepared the myth in advance. Then they would pick information that they would put into the myth to make it work.

 

 

But the people who worked on the 9/11 Commission, like the senior counsel John Farmer, said that:

 

“What government and military officials told Congress, the Commission, the media and the public about who knew what when, was almost entirely and inexplicably untrue.”

 

Here are the co-chairmen of the Commission Report.

 

 

They said:

 

“To this day, we don’t know why NORAD told us what they told us. It was just so far from the truth!”

 

So these are the people who actually wrote the report or worked on the report telling you that it’s a pack of lies!

 

Then the Israelis constructed the memorial, the legacy, where the kids go in the school buses and get the walk around and go to the museum.

 

 

The World Trade Center memorial was designed by an Israeli, this man here, Michael Arad, who’s the son of Moshe Arad, the former Israeli ambassador of the United States.

 

 

So from A to Z, from ideation to legacy, it’s all been an Israeli project. For 17 years the media has given us this story, a false narrative about 9/11 and the War on Terror, all the while suppressing real evidence that disproves the official myth.

 

 

Like the molten metal that poured off the building. Like the molten metal that was found in the basement of the World Trade Center. Like the tiny droplets of molten iron that were found in the dust. Because the attitude of the media has been this is from three years later. New York Times.

 

 

“In the three years since 9/11, we’ve begun to understand that it’s possible to know what happened without knowing what happened.”

 

That’s their position! We don’t need to know!

 

[52:46]

 

[Remainder of Transcript in Progress]

[1:28:31]

 

END

top

 

 

 

============================================

 

Odysee Comments

top

(Comments as of 9/10/2024 = 1)

GorgonIII
30 weeks ago
I have linked to a lot of Bolly’s work on 9/11 in this substack essay: Israel and elements of the US government did 9/11 https://binkylarue.substack.com/p/israel-and-elements-of-the-us-government
5 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply

==========================

See Also

top

 

 

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Moderator: We’re gonna do opening statements. The topic is White genocide. Should I see how Wikipedia, … For people who don’t know about this maybe, just what White, … We’ve talked about White genocide before of course. But this is how Wikipedia describes it. And take that for what it’s worth, of course, too:

 

“The White genocide, White extinction, or White replacement conspiracy theory, is a White supremacist – this is how they describe it – is a White supremacist conspiracy theory which states that there is a deliberate plot, often blamed on jews – this is what it says here – to promote miscegenation, interracial marriage, mass non-White immigration, racial integration, low fertility rates, abortion, governmental land confiscation from Whites, organized violence, and eliminationism in White founding countries, in order to cause the extinction of Whites through forced assimilation, mass immigration, and violent genocide. Less frequently black people, Hispanics, and Muslims are blamed for the secret plot, but merely as more fertile immigrants, invaders, or violent aggressors, rather than the masterminds.”

 

Now I’m going to give it to Mark, to take on! Describe the issue how you think it is! Now that’s how Wikipedia describes it! Now White genocide, take it however you want with your opening statement. And we’re going to cover the whole issue. And some of those topics. And if that’s the truth, or whatever. Now go ahead, Mark.

 

Mark Collett: Thank you very much. White genocide, or the demographic replacement of those of European descent is a phenomenon that every Western nation faces! Originally, those who spoke about this topic were branded as “conspiracy theorists”..

 

However, the reality of White people becoming a minority in their ancestral homelands is no longer regarded in that manner. Now, rather than being called a “conspiracy theory”, White replacement is openly celebrated by the establishment, the media, those in the corporate sector. Those who control social media, and leading liberal commentators. White replacement is taking place!

 

The only two issues up for debate, is whether this replacement is part of a planned and concerted effort to reduce White people to minorities. And secondly, whether White people becoming a minority is a good thing, or not.

 

However, when I say these issues are up for debate, that is rather erroneous, as all forms of debate on this issue are shut down by the mainstream media, social media companies, big business. And even governments attempt to criminalize those who push back against such demographic change. This fact alone is enough to prove that White replacement is not just an accident, but the powers that be endorse it.

 

But let’s look at the UK figures on demographic replacement, as they are very Illuminating. In 1950 there were fewer than 20,000 non-Whites in Britain! The vast majority of whom were first generation immigrants. In other words, they weren’t born here. These people made up just .04% of the population.

 

By 2011, the time of the last census, the non-White population of Britain had risen to over 8 million! And accounted for around 13% of the population. To put this into perspective, in just over 60 years the non-White population of Britain has grown over 400 fold! This is a planned social experiment on an unprecedented level!

 

And to put it into a historical perspective, more people arrive in Britain each year, under the current government, than arrived here between 1066, the last time we were successfully invaded, and 1939, the beginning of the Second World War!

 

Mass immigration which is the primary means by which this demographic change has been brought about is not natural. It is a post-war phenomenon. And it was completely manufactured, managed, and accelerated, by the establishment for political, social, and financial purposes!

 

So that just leaves one point up for debate. Is this demographic change good? Well, White people all over the world, and especially in the UK, have consistently shown they don’t want this change. Whether that has been demonstrated in polls, in their habits, such as White flight, or in voting patterns.

 

Despite this though, both sides of the illusory political divide have supported this demographic replacement. And the constant narrative from the mainstream media is that White people must accept immigration and embrace it, or else!

 

The consequences of this replacement for White people in the UK have been, on balance, profoundly negative! Whilst White people are constantly told that minorities must be given special privileges, and a leg up, when White people become a minority in towns and cities they do not benefit from their minority status! They receive no protections. And are often treated appallingly, as worse than second-class citizens!

 

And the establishment and the media are regularly complicit in covering up crimes against White people that are perpetrated by those not indigenous to the British Isles. If White people are reduced to minorities they will not be celebrated and protected. But instead, they will be a hated and despised minority, that will be repeatedly blamed for all the ills, and all the failings of the multicultural State in which they live.

 

I advocate for the UK, and for other Western nations, to remain places where people of European descent are a super majority! And where their cultures and traditions remain dominant. And I believe this is not just best for Europeans. But it is best for all peoples, from all over the world!

 

[05:47]

 

Moderator: Thank you sir. I appreciate that. Getting us started here.

 

Destiny again. Welcome back to the show. And you can go ahead and do your opening now.

 

Destiny: Yeah. When people talk about White genocide I think the biggest hang up that they have is establishing the intentionality part. I think that there are a lot of reasons why immigration benefits of society, especially economic ones. And I think that there are a lot of people that support immigration throughout all of society. All without having White genocidal reasons so the establishment of an “intentionality”, I think is pretty important part of genocide.

 

If we agree with the, … I forget which conference it was that established like “genocide” as the thing, but the intentionality part is pretty important. One of the reasons why, or the main reason why I’m talking about kind of White genocide, I think is a pretty boring topic, or a topic that isn’t very relevant to modern day debate, is, or even political conversations, is that there’s not really anything you can do about it, at this point.

 

The idea of trying to block all immigration based on a certain skin colour, or the idea of even getting the majority of the public to support such a policy, is basically impossible! And I think that the framing around a lot of these topics:

 

“There are secret people trying to get White people to be a minority, et cetera, et cetera.”

 

I just don’t think it’s very productive to getting to an actual good place in terms of public policy, or discourse. I do agree that there are problems, even problems faced by White people uniquely, maybe, in certain countries in the West.

 

But I don’t think that the solution to these problems is some fantastical border policy that has zero chance of passing in almost any relevant country.

 

I think that instead, it’s probably better that we talk about those specific problems. And then the policy positions we would need to adopt to address those problems. And then, yeah, that’s all I got.

 

Moderator: Now what do you say to that Mark? Kind of says, not even, … He didn’t say, it was not a big deal necessarily, but the ship was kind of sailed on, …

 

Mark Collett: He didn’t really say anything did he?

 

Moderator: Well.

 

Mark Collett: I mean, he didn’t really say anything other than:

 

“Well, it’s sort of going to happen. And you can’t really stop it. And that’s it.”

 

So.

 

Destiny: Well, White people coming a minority is going to happen. The White genocide is something, …

 

Mark Collett: So let’s establish this. You do believe that White people will become a minority, that is actually happening?

 

Destiny: So when you define White people with the one drop rule, then like mathematically, of course, that’s always going to happen! If any amount of Hispanic, or black blood makes you Hispanic, or black then you’re necessarily going to have minority, …

 

Mark Collett: You don’t need to say a thousand words, very quickly,

 

Destiny: Your opening is like five minutes long, I don’t know why you would, …

 

Mark Collett: You don’t need to say a thousand words very quickly. I’m just trying to establish.

 

Destiny: Sure.

 

Mark Collett: You are accepting that White people in Western nations are becoming minorities! And the likelihood is that if trends continue White people in nations like Britain, France, Germany, United States, wherever, will be a minority. And will no longer hold majority status. You agree with that?

 

Destiny: Based on how you define White people, yeah, of course!

 

Mark Collett: Based on how I define White people? We’re not going into Sargon-esque definitions here are we Destiny?

 

Destiny: Well, if a black person and a White person have a child, what kind of child is that child?

 

Mark Collett: It’s mixed race.

 

Destiny: What would you consider mixed race, would be non-White to you, right?

 

Mark Collett: Mixed race would be mixed race. It’s, …

 

Destiny: Well hold on! No! No! Hold on! You can’t push me on an answer and not answer a very simple question!

 

Mark Collett: I’m answering a question! I’m answering the question! It’s quite simple. Whenever a child is born that is mixed race, I classify them as mixed race. I classify them as somebody who’s of mixed race origin.

 

It’s generally the media in the establishment that defines anyone who is mixed race as black. So, for example, Obama is not black. Obama is mixed race. Yet he’s widely categorized as the first African-American President. When, in fact, he’s mixed race. I’m saying they’re mixed race.

 

And when we say that White people are going to become a minority that obviously means that people of European descent, who are wholly of European descent, will become a minority. That’s quite simple!

 

Destiny: Sure. But by that definition then, isn’t literally everybody being genocided? Black people, and Hispanic people, and every other minority group? Because the more interracial marriages that have, …

 

Mark Collett: What a a ridiculous point!

 

Destiny: I didn’t even finish my question. I know you might be used to steamrolling people, because you weren’t talking over, …

 

Mark Collett: I’m not used to steamrolling people, ….

 

[10:01]

 

Destiny: Let me finish my, let me [both talking over each other briefly], …

 

Mark Collett: You are getting away from what we are talking about!

 

Destiny: I’m not being slippery! I just want to, … The problem is, … By the certain premises that you lay out for the argument you’re almost begging the question, right? So with any person that has a child with a White person, if that child is considered non-White. If we have multiple ethnic groups mixing together. And we’re trying to use this framing to say:

 

“Well there’s a White genocide happening!”

 

Well if a mixed-race child is not a White child, and you’re telling me now that a mixed-race black child, isn’t a black child, they’re mixed race, then it kind of sounds like everybody’s being genocided! Now, I don’t think you want to own that conclusion, because obviously it weakens the White genocide point.

 

But would you not agree then that if a lot of Hispanic, and black people, and White people, are all interracially marriaging and having kids, that kind of every race is being genocided?

 

Mark Collett: No, because it’s different. Because what we’re talking about here, we’re talking about nations where White people are either indigenous, or White people were the founders of those nations. And the White people in those nations are being reduced to minority.

 

So here in Britain, White people are indigenous. So the English, the Irish, the Scots, and the Welsh, are the indigenous people. And they are being reduced to minority status.

 

You don’t have, say, Nigerians being reduced to a minority status in Nigeria! So it’s a completely different point.

 

And you know it is. You’re just being intentionally slippery!

 

And what I’m trying to establish is that you do agree that White people in Western nations are becoming a minority!

 

Destiny: Okay.

 

Mark Collett: So it’s a yes, or no, really. Isn’t it?

 

Destiny: Okay. Well, so I understand that you have a dialogue tree that you usually like to run people down. Don’t call me slippery just because I’m trying to engage with your questions on more than just, …

 

Mark Collett: I’m not calling you slippery, because you’re trying to engage with my questions. I’m calling you slippery, because you’re not trying to engage with my questions! [chuckling]

 

Destiny: So initially. You said that there was a planned genocide of White people, okay? You said there was a planned genocide of White people. And then you said:

 

“Mixed race children don’t count as White.”

 

That’s fair, okay? We might end up agreeing finally and everything you’re saying. I’m just trying to make sure we have all of our terms and everything straight, okay?

 

Now you’re telling me that it’s not so much that White people are being genocided. It’s that the indigenous, or founders, of a certain nation – which may be White people – are being genocided.

 

There might be minority genocides going along, going on, as well, because of interracial dating, and children making, and everything. But you don’t care as much about those genocides, as you do about the White genocide. Is that, …

 

Mark Collett: No. What I’m saying is, that I don’t believe it is a good thing for White people to reduce to minority status for a variety of different reasons, which we can get into.

 

But what I am clearly stating, or trying to ask you, is you accept that White, people of European descent, are becoming minorities in Western countries.

 

Destiny: That seems to be the case, yes. If we are ignoring mixed-race children, then yes, White people seem to probably becoming minorities.

 

Mark Collett: Okay. So we agree on that? We agree on that.

 

So what we probably don’t agree on then, is whether that is intentional. But what I would say to you is, are you streaming this on YouTube?

 

Destiny: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: How many subscribers have you got?

 

Destiny: Why is that relevant to this conversation?

 

Mark Collett: I’m just asking! Just asking!

 

Destiny: Forty thousand.

 

Mark Collett: Forty thousand subscribers? What, watching now, or I thought you had more than 40,000 subscribers.

 

Destiny: If, you know how many I have, then why are you asking me? [chuckling] [He has 402K subscribers]

 

Mark Collett: Because it’s interesting to see, … You see the point that I’m getting to.

 

Destiny: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: Is a lot of this can be seen as intentional, simply by the effort that the establishment, including, as I said, the corporate sector, social media, the mainstream media, and the government. The effort they go to actually prevent not people talking about White people becoming a minority, because that is something that’s accepted now, to stop people complaining about it.

 

So, for example, you’re on YouTube with your many hundreds of thousands of subscribers with a monetized account. And you are admitting that replacement migration is taking place. But, because you favour that, you are allowed to keep your account.

 

Whereas people like myself, who spoke within the law, within the legal limits, about similar things. And obviously speaking within the legal limits in Britain means that any YouTube account would easily be within legal limits in America, get completely taken down!

 

And that does prove that there is a major drive by the establishment, which big social media companies are part of, to silence people, like myself, who disagree with White people becoming a minority. Whereas voices like yourself, who actually celebrate this, are amplified.

 

Destiny: Okay. So, a few things. So one, when you say:

 

“Admitting that replacement migration is taking place.”

 

I don’t know if you mean replacement migration in an intentionality point, or not intentional. That’s a pretty important part of that. In terms of admitting replacement migrations is in place, I think everybody it will quote, unquote, “admit” this. It’s not something to be admitted. You can just look at statistics. Anybody in the Left, or Right, any economist, any sociologist, anybody will say:

 

“Well yeah, of course, necessarily as more people from other races migrate, and people intermarry, there’s going to be a less proportional amount of White people in any given majority White country, where immigration is coming from non-majority White places.”

 

Number one.

 

Number two. You say:

 

“Within the law, within the legal limits.”

 

It’s not really relevant to YouTube, or any other types of online conversations, because they don’t function as an arm of the law. They have their own individual terms of services, which they kind of ban people for.

 

Now we can have a discussion on what those TOSs should be, but any appeal to legality, is not really relevant, when we’re talking about what’s allowed, or not allowed, on certain platforms.

 

And then finally the conclusion that you draw is a massive non-sequitur! Just because a conversation is blocked in a certain platform, doesn’t mean that people are implicitly admitting that conversation is true.

 

Mark Collett: Hold on, …

 

Destiny: There may be people getting banned, let me finish [in a high pitched voice] my response! I’m not squeaking! Okay?

 

[15:01]

 

Mark Collett: You are squeaking!

 

Destiny: Are you okay?

 

Mark Collett: You are squeaking.

 

Destiny: Can I finish my response to you? When you jump on personal attacks and you call me slippery, and stuff, I’m giving you advice. The appearance to both me and the audience, is that you feel like you’re weak on your points, you have to attack me personally.

 

Mark Collett: No! No!

 

Destiny: Because you’re not used to engaging with somebody that can actually makes some points, okay?

 

Mark Collett: You are well know for squeaking and slipping out of things [smiling]

 

Destiny: Okay, I’m just putting that out on the floor. You can engage in that if you want, or not. Okay. So the third thing you said is a non-sequitur, right?:

 

“Intentional efforts to suppress a certain conversation.”

 

Does not necessarily mean that that particular topic is true, or people won’t admit it’s true.

 

For instance, if YouTube decided to ban all talk of like, I don’t know what you believe now, but like if Hillary Clinton being a reptile. Just because they’re banning that talk doesn’t mean:

 

“Wow! Obviously she is a reptile! Because it’s getting banned.”

 

You need another connector there! That doesn’t logically follow, okay?

 

Mark Collett: No, no! That’s [chuckling] not what I’m saying.

 

Destiny: That is exactly what you just said!

 

Mark Collett: What I’m saying is, on YouTube. And it’s not just YouTube. You just said a single platform. It’s every platform! It’s every platform! So you have YouTube, you have Facebook, you have Twitter. You have all social media sites, except for sort of renegade social media sites, like say BitChute, or Odysee, or Telegram. Which are pressured to follow suit, and to some degree have to with certain commentators.

 

All of them hold a line whereby people are encouraged to celebrate this demographic change! And I’ll give you an example. There are videos on YouTube of content creators saying:

 

“Oh! I went to London and White people are a massive minority in London! And this is great! And we should celebrate it! This is fantastic!”

 

Yet, if you go to London and say:

 

“Well, White people they’re a minority here now! I think London’s lost a little bit of its character. It’s not as British anymore. It’s not as English.”

 

Then you would be banned! And that is done on a blanket level across mainstream social networks. That is done on a blanket level in the media. And what we are seeing here is anybody who advocates for White people to remain a super majority in their ancestral homelands, is being shut down! Which does point to the being intentionality!

 

Because there is a widespread campaign to stop White people organizing along ethnic lines. And to stop White people advocating for their own interests! Whereas every other racial group is allowed to advocate for their interests. And is actually encouraged to organize along ethnic, or racial lines.

 

Destiny: Okay. So you restated what I just said. What didn’t logically follow. But I’ll restate it. And then you tell me if you agree, or not, I guess we can move from here.

 

So you’re saying that, because people are banned from a multitude of platforms for trying to talk about X, since they’re banned from talking about that, X must be true! This is basically what you’re saying, right?

 

Mark Collett: No, … Do you want me to state what I’ve said again, but quicker? So we’re not like eating up the entire, …

 

Moderator: Yeah! Go ahead and do that! Yeah, say it again but quicker.

 

Destiny: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: Right. You can talk! You can talk on social media about Whites becoming a minority, but only if you support White’s becoming a minority! So social media doesn’t ban you from talking about Whites becoming a minority.

 

They only ban you if you disagree with that happening, or wish to, in any way, advocate against that. So this isn’t like some mad thing what you’re trying to paint. As you’re trying to say:

 

“Well if YouTube banned you from saying Hillary Clinton’s a lizard, that doesn’t mean Hillary Clinton’s a lizard.”

 

No. What you’re doing now is you’re drawing a false equivalence to try and derail this into some kind of comedy, because you can’t answer what I’m saying.

 

Destiny: I haven’t even, … I’m trying to understand your question. I’m not trying to derail anything. Now. [both talking over each other briefly]

 

Moderator: What do you say, for example, like there might be an editorial where they talk about the browning of America, or whatever, or they talk about Whites are going to be a minority. And I’ve seen these myself. And they’re celebrating it right? It’s in the New York Times, ….

 

[20:02]

 

Destiny: I’m not disagreeing with that.

 

Moderator: Well, yeah! I’m just asking. What do you say about that though? Like I mean, yeah, I’m not even saying you’re taking an issue with it.

 

Destiny: I think it’s a dumb shit that gets banned for, because of, what advertisers think is friendly, or whatever, or what the most people will support without cancelling somebody. But I agree that a lot of that is cringe.

 

However! Just because platforms, even if it’s every platform in the world, is not platforming a certain type of speech, that doesn’t necessarily mean that there is some truth that those people are getting at! There could be a variety of reasons for why they’re banning that speech. Not just because they’re trying to hide the truth. That’s all I’m trying to say [this is a retarded time-wasting point he’s making here – K]

 

Mark Collett: No, no, wait! You have just earlier on, in this very debate, accepted that White people are becoming a minority. You support that! You are a multiculturalist! Hence, you are allowed to keep your 400,000 strong YouTube army, make lots of money, have monetized videos.

 

But if somebody came on YouTube today, … If I started another YouTube channel, … I had a hundred thousand subs, mine initially got shadow banned, then demonetized, them banned all together. All channels that say exactly that come from the same starting point as you do, that this is happening. But then say:

 

“We disagree with it happening.”

 

Are banned! So what you’re seeing here is a concerted effort across all platforms to stop anyone talking about demographic change, …

 

Destiny: I acknowledge all of this. But what I’m saying is, because you’re trying to say that because that’s happening, either people don’t want people to know that it’s true, or they’re banning it, because there’s some intentionality, that they’re trying to hide.

 

What I’m trying to say is there’s an alternative explanation. And it might just be that this particular type of speech is so unpopular, that there’s pressure on advertisers not to host this type of speech.

 

Mark Collett: But it’s not so unpopular! It’s not so unpopular! Because when I had a channel I had videos with millions of views!

 

When I had a channel I was gaining a thousand subscribers a week, until YouTube shadow banned it. There are plenty of people out there talking about this, that are very popular. It’s not popular.

 

Trump got kicked off Twitter. He was very, very popular! He was the President. It’s not a matter of “popularity”! This isn’t just down to some sort of series of unfortunate coincidences. There is intentionality here! And you only have to be a mildly intelligent person, who can join up dots, to see that.

 

Destiny: What I’m trying to tell you is, it’s possible that you can get views, or you can get like millions of views and videos. What I’m saying is this particular type of speech is so unpopular, not that nobody will see it. But there’s enough of a public backlash against it, that advertisers might want to say:

 

“Hey! We don’t want to be involved in advertising here, or we don’t want to be involved in this particular thing.”

 

And that sort of public pressure is usually what gets this type of content deplatformed.

 

Mark Collett: So you’re saying now:

 

“You can have millions of views. You can have a 96, 97% positive ratio. People love your videos. But you’ll get banned!”

 

Because the three percent who are disliking your video are so powerful, that the advertisers will listen to them, YouTube will listen to them, and your speech goes down the toilet?

 

Destiny: Okay, I’m gonna ask you a question. And we’ll see if you can engage in good faith. [pot calling the kettle black – K] Do you think only three percent of people in society are offended by views related to White Nationalism, or ethnic majority White people needing to be a necessity for the future of country’s destinies?

 

Do you think only three percent of people in society are offended by that? Because you said, you made it sound like just because you’re getting 97% thumbs up, or whatever, doesn’t, …

 

Mark Collett: Yes. On the videos with millions of views.

 

Destiny: Doesn’t necessarily mean that the overwhelming amount of people support that type of speech. Even want to see it on these types of platforms.

 

Mark Collett: But, [exasperated] you see what you’re saying here is that there is a group of people who are undefined, who are apparently seeing these videos, that didn’t like it. But didn’t say anything about it. And because of that group of people, the videos have to be removed. Well that doesn’t really make a lot of sense.

 

It’s the same with Trump. You know, huge, huge, amount of support, roughly half of Americans supporting him, maybe more depending on what you believe, removed from all social networks! Now that tells you that this isn’t being done, this mass deplatforming, isn’t being driven by large majorities! It is being driven by small, vocal, minorities. Or a tiny minority of people who are in control of platforms, that have a very politicized agenda.

 

And part of that agenda is, ensuring that White people don’t advocate for themselves! I don’t know who that tiny minority of people could be! But I’m sure somebody in the chat can help us out with that.

 

Destiny: So you legitimately believe then, that that type of speech, that over 50% of people that are on YouTube are in favour of seeing stuff related to like White Nationalism, or White supremacy? That these are ideas that they would find palatable to be on YouTube?

 

Mark Collett: I didn’t say “White supremacy”. I said:

 

“White people advocating for their own interests.”

 

You then injected “White supremacy” to make my, …

 

Destiny: Very, very hard to find one without the other! Right? I can have a conversation, …

 

Mark Collett: I’m nor a White sumpremacist, where, …

 

Destiny: I don’t know if you are not. But half of what you said in this conversation is like, kind of not true! So, for instance, when you say White people can’t have, or advocate on their own ethnic lines, whatever. I’ve had conversation about that before, and I haven’t gotten banned, ….

 

[25:06]

 

Mark Collett: When I say White, …

 

Destiny: But hold on! The problem is that oftentimes this is paired with other types of speech. And that’s why these people end up getting de-platformed. Is they’re not just saying like:

 

“Hey! Like black people have their own groups, Asian people have their own groups, like Asian people, like a whole bunch of people. Why can’t they have their own group, and White people can have their own group.

 

I’ve had conversations like this before. And I don’t get de-platformed, on any of these platforms. So my guess is that when you say:

 

“Well, you can’t have these conversations!”

 

Because there’s usually other things that go along with it, like the little joke you just made about it:

 

“Well, there’s a certain minority of people that are controlling these things. I wonder who they are?”

 

That’s generally the case!

 

Mark Collett: No, no, no! Number one, you don’t get de-platformed, because you are an establishment mouthpiece. You support what the establishments are saying, and you’re leading a group of people who all support you down a road of sort of mocking White advocacy. That’s the first thing.

 

Secondly, making jokes shouldn’t really be illegal, should it? [Destiny trying to speak over] For White people, as a group, don’t just face losing their social media accounts. They face losing their jobs! They face all manner of social problems, which are leveled at them, by a small and very aggressive minority of people, who seek to silence them!

 

But the same minority group, that seek to silence Whites to advocate for themselves, raise up and amplify the voices of other ethnic groups that seek to advocate for their rights! And their interests! Which exposes another massive hypocrisy!

 

So, if somebody came on this stream, a black man came on the stream and said that they’re advocating for black rights, they were advocating for black people in America, or Britain, as a racial, or ethnic group, nobody would bat an eyelid.

 

But society has been conditioned, by a small group of people who have taken control of the media, social media, etc., to basically turn a blind eye, or walk away from anyone who says they advocate for White interests.

 

Because, if you say you advocate for White interests, there are social consequences! We are shut down for advocating for our own group! Which in the current, you know, larger political sphere, is massively hypocritical! Because everyone else is advocating for their racial group.

 

[27:26]

 

 

Destiny: So when we talk about cancel culture. I don’t think that this is driven by just a small minority of people. When you’re talking about people can lose their jobs, they can get de-platformed from large platforms, like I’m pretty sure that the pressure here is pretty massive. It’s not just three percent of the society that agrees with these certain ideas.

 

There’s a lot of people that participate in this type of stuff and I think, … When you look at like the “adpocalypse” in what like 2017, and YouTube, over like family-friendly content and stuff, or all of the weird stuff going on with children. Like a lot of this stuff isn’t just like a small minority of people that are shadow controlling, the “cabal”, trying to control everything behind the scenes.

 

I think there are genuinely a lot of big social movements that push in certain directions. Now maybe you’ll say they exist. But they’re controlled by a minority of people, I guess? But I don’t think that it’s just like a few people that are driving this. I think that there’s a huge cultural consensus around some of these ideas. And then that pushes advertisers to act in certain ways. And then that pushes platforms to act in certain ways.

 

I think that’s a far more believable explanation than there is like at the shadow cabal. Unless we can find them, or I guess unless you could show me them. But maybe that’ll be the next part of the conversation we’re moving on.

 

Moderator: Well, I was going to say, I made a notation here, the intentional part, right? That is a big part that we haven’t really delved into at this part, at this point, yet. So why don’t we do it now. Mark? [all talking over each other]

 

Mark Collett: Well I’ll talk another point about this okay functionality yeah that’s kind of I’ll talk another point about this intentionality.

 

Moderator: Okay. Yeah, that sounds good.

 

Mark Collett: I’ll talk another point about this intentionality. I’ll give you a great example. Everyone knows that I work in design. If I started Marky C’s Magical Design Company tomorrow, and put up a job application saying:

 

“Only White people are welcome for this job.”

 

Or saying that, say:

 

“Black people are not welcome at my company!”

 

I don’t want to employ them. I wouldn’t do such a thing. But if I did, there would be absolute uproar and outrage! But in Western nations, such as Britain, you do have examples where White people are excluded from certain jobs, certain positions in the state, certain positions in the media. White people are openly discriminated against in a number of ways. And they’re the only people who can be discriminated against.

 

Now, at this point, you might have, …

 

Destiny: Can I ask a a clarifying question? So in the United Kingdom, you’re telling me, it’s legal to discriminate on the basis of race against White people?

 

Mark Collett: No. It’s illegal to discriminate on the basis of race. But, that is something that doesn’t seem to apply when it comes to White people. So I’ll give you an example. The Fire Service in England, they change their testing so you needed 90% on the admission test to get in, if you’re a White male. 80% if you’re a White female, and 70% if you were somebody from an ethnic minority background.

 

Now that’s clear discrimination. Yet those things are basically rubber stamped and endorsed by the same people who say that they want no more discrimination, and they want equality. That isn’t equality! And what’s happening here is a system of discrimination. Just like I was talking about on social media.

 

A system of discrimination that discriminates against White people! Turns White people into second-class citizens! And again, this is endorsed by social media, because you can’t talk about it on social media. This is endorsed largely by the mainstream media and the State. Now, do you agree with that kind of discrimination?

 

[30:39]

 

Destiny: I would have to see in terms of like affirmative action. Basically, is what you’re talking about? I don’t know, I would have to see how it plays out in the UK. I can speak to US laws a lot better. But my understanding is in the UK, I don’t think you’re allowed to engage in this type of discrimination.

 

Mark Collett: But it does happen. I mean, even the BBC have posted job adverts specifically for people who are not, …

 

Destiny: Saying it does happen doesn’t mean that it’s legal, or allowed. There are a lot of things that do happen everywhere, right? So I’m not interested in like it happened one time. But more so like as a rule. Like this is something that’s become legal, or this is something that’s been culturally accepted. These are like far different than this.

 

Mark Collett: But it is culturally accepted! That’s what I’m saying! Discriminating against White people is culturally accepted, …

 

Destiny: In terms of, … Stop broadening the conversation. In terms of like job applications, or like tenants can live in areas. My understanding is in the way of the United States, and I’m pretty sure it’s still in the UK. There are certain classes that you’re not allowed to discriminate on, no matter what! You can’t say renting a house to only black people, only Asian people, only White people. My understanding is, I think, that’s similar in the UK.

 

Now, affirmative action falls under a special different thing. We use for some universities. I don’t know if you guys have that for certain types of jobs, as well. Maybe you do, maybe you don’t? So I can’t speak to British law, as well as I can to US law.

 

But regardless, even if these things do exist, we haven’t gotten anywhere near the intentionality aspect, of like a White genocide, or a White discrimination, …

 

Mark Collett: Let me explain, …

 

Destiny: , … Explanation for why we enact these types of policies, …

 

Mark Collett: Let me explain in simple terms! Laws are enacted to bring about fairness, to end discrimination, supposedly. And these laws prevent you from advertising a job on the basis of ethnicity. But then, once that law has been enacted, usually another law is enacted alongside it, which states:

 

“Despite what they’ve said earlier, that you can’t actually discriminate in the workplace, on the basis of race, every workplace has to take so many quotas of people.”

 

So, in fact, they are discriminating on the basis of race, but only in the benefit of people who aren’t White. You understand that? That’s a very simple point.

 

Destiny: Yeah, I understand what you’re saying. I never take anything from people like you on face value! [talking over each other]

 

Mark Collett: You understand if you, …

 

Destiny: Hold on! Let me just say. Okay, because you keep throwing so much together. When you’re like the BBC is hiring certain people, right? If you’re saying that like the BBC is looking for like a reporter to report in a certain area, that has to match like ethnicity there. I can agree with that. I think that’s an okay thing.

 

Even in the United States we have exceptions for stuff like that. For instance, if you wanted to make a documentary about Martin Luther King, you’re allowed to discriminate there when it comes to hiring an actor. It doesn’t have to be equal opportunity. You’re not going to have an Asian woman playing Martin Luther King in a movie, right? Much the same that there are certain limited exceptions where asking for people of a certain background, …

 

Mark Collett: Why not! You’ve got black people playing English Kings and Queens now! Why can’t a White person play Martin Luther King!

 

Destiny: Hilarious! So there are certain times where it makes sense for some forms of like discrimination be okay. So when you’re saying:

 

“BBC job postings.”

 

It’s making me wonder if they were looking for reporters, reporting certain areas. In which case I can understand it. If you want to have a broader conversation about affirmative action, I mean, largely I’m not necessarily in favour of affirmative action. There are some cases where I can see it being the case.

 

But when you bring up BBC job offerings. This is what is coming to mind for me. And it sounds to me like you agree that there are larger laws in the UK that make it illegal to hire somebody, or not hire somebody, at least on the basis of race, or sex, or there’s probably other protected class in the UK, as well.

 

So if it has happened before I would probably disagree with it. If some people are pushing forward I would probably disagree with that. But this still doesn’t get us anywhere near the intentionality aspect of White genocide.

 

Mark Collett: I really like the way you say an awful lot of words very quickly, yet say nothing of substance! That’s a real skill!

 

Destiny: Okay. If I ever say something and you don’t understand what I’m saying, I can break down, whatever. Every word I say is very intentional. And if you don’t understand, you’re not following, Follie [?] and I will read it out for you. [talking over each other]

 

Mark Collett: You stated that a White person shouldn’t play a role like Martin Luther King. Yet black people are now playing the roles of English kings and queens. The fact is, that’s another interesting point that you raised yourself that defeats your own argument. That when a black person plays a White historical character, everyone cheers and applauds in the press, the media, on social media. If you speak out against it you get into trouble. Whereas if Mel Gibson was cast to play Martin Luther King, that’d be outrage. You could not have a White person play a black person.

 

Destiny: I never said that a White person couldn’t play, like unless they wanted to. I’m just saying that you have the option to discriminate there for artistic purposes, …

 

Mark Collett: I want to see Mel Gibson as Martin Luther King!

 

Destiny: Sure. So are you saying there are black people playing like historically accurate English kings?

 

Mark Collett: Yes!

 

Destiny: Are you talking about like Lord of the Rings, or like, fictional things?

 

Mark Collett: No. There was a black actress recently cast to play Anne Boleyn. [Anne Boleyn was Queen of England from 1533 to 1536]

 

Destiny: Okay. But I mean, like, I’m saying that if White people want to play historically, …

 

Mark Collett: White people are being erased from their own history! [taking over each other].

 

[35:51]

 

REMAINDER OF TRANSCRIPT IN PROGRESS

 

[153:52]

 

 

END

 

top

 

 

 

============================================

 

 

COMMENTS

top

 

xx comments

 

 

 

============================================

See Also

top

 

 

Mark Collett — It’s Okay To Be White — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett — Christmas Adverts – Multicultural Propaganda — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett — What We Must Do To Win — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett — Assad Didn’t Do It – Faked Syrian Gas Attack — TRANSCRIPT

---

 

 

============================================

 

 

xx UNFINISHED TRANSCRIPTS — Volunteers Needed

 

============================================

 

 

PDF Download

top

 

• Transcript Total words = xxx
• Blog Post Total words = xxx
• Total images = xx
• Total A4 pages = xxx

Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB):

(Available later)

 

Version History

top

 

Version 5:

 

Version 4:

 

Version 3:

 

Version 2: Jan 15, 2022 — 35/153 mins of transcript complete.

 

Version 1: Jan 15, 2022 — Published post. 27/153 mins of transcript complete.