Watch this on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v77cmsc-cause-before-symptom-special-edition-ft.-urban-odyssey-sources-and-bibliogr.html
View the slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1DiYdE2lZTNQldeevRd4ERiW_gKGo0ebj6k14FcWsg_8/edit?slide=id.p#slide=id.p
MP4 to TXT Translator:
James:
Welcome, guys.
This is James Carner.
And with me is Urban, my man Josh.
And tonight’s episode, we’re going to call it the Source.
Okay?
Now, tonight is
not a show built on reaction.
It is a show built on record.
And what sits in front
of us is not one book, not one author, not one claim, but a chain of writings
that stretch across centuries.
Languages, religions and political systems.
Names like Perrule, Robison, Webster, Ford, Noblett, Sambard, Guenon
Mullens, Daniel Herzl, Hoffman, Springmire, even Karl Marx.
All voices that
did not know each other, did not live in the same eras and did not share the
same beliefs.
Yet all attempted to explain the same question.
Who or what
shapes the movements of history behind what we can see?
Now, this is
where most conversations stop too early.
Okay.
People are handed
conclusions without being shown the path that led to them.
They are told what
to believe about secret societies, power structures, revolutions, religions and
identity.
But they are rarely shown how each author arrived at those
conclusions, what sources they used, and whether those sources were first
hand, second hand, or inherited from someone before them.
Now, over time,
repetition begins to feel like confirmation.
And narratives that were once
speculation begin to be treated as established by fact.
So tonight, the
approach is very simple and it’s disciplined.
Every source is placed on the
table not to defend it, not to attack it, but to examine it, line by line, if
necessary.
Who wrote it?
When was it written?
What evidence was actually
said and being used?
Whether the claims were built on documents,
observations, theology, philosophy, or the interpretation of someone else’s
work.
This is not about dismissing patterns.
It is about testing them.
And if it’s
true, then the truth shouldn’t hide or worry about lies.
Because if there is truth
in any of this, it will hold up under scrutiny.
It will not need emotion to back it
up.
And if parts of the narrative do not hold, then removing them does not
weaken the search.
It strengthens, clears the noise, so what remains can be
seen clearly.
Now, what you are about to hear is not a lecture.
It is a process.
Two people walking through the material in real time asking the same
question, or over and over again, what is actually documented and what has
been repeated until it sounds true.
Well, by the end of this, the goal is not to
tell you what to think, but to show you how to see.
Guys, welcome my good
Friend Josh Urban.
Odyssey to the show.
Josh, where are you?
Josh:
Oh, here I come.
Oh, there we go.
One moment.
He was here, I was
here.
James:
I’m like, I was hoping you’d be there when I was talking, but that
Josh:
was, that was a little anticlimactic here.
James:
Technical difficulties, folks.
At least we can hear you.
Josh:
Yeah, one moment.
James:
Well, he was live earlier.
We, we did a test.
Josh:
I swear we did.
James:
He was, he was here, but that’s how it is.
You know, the thing is, is
you guys know, every time I come to the truth, man, something happens
technically, and
Josh:
we, you know, One second, let me, let me get it sorted out.
James:
Yeah, yeah, all good.
So what we’re going to be talking about tonight,
guys, is a host of authors and a host of books.
I’ve had many people send me
books to take a look at and to go through and to peruse and either, you know,
dissect and look, there he is.
For the sources and what we’ve been able to
come up with when I was speaking with Urban yesterday is we took all of our
sources and we pulled it together and we’re going to talk about our sources if
they’re legit, if they’re not, and if they have anything that they have that has
actual backed up evidence that we can use.
Because the more evidence we
have, the better we can fight the system, if there is one.
Josh, welcome to the
show.
How you doing, buddy?
Josh:
I’m doing great.
I’m so glad that we, we were able to do this because I
was kind of teasing it to certain people who said that they like the content.
Also your bloodline series that’s been going on Odyssey over the past
probably week or two, because I’ve done it, you know, one per day.
People
are really getting into that.
I’ve been sharing a lot of the, the stuff that you’ve
been doing and then covering the show.
We wanted to put something
together and this was a perfect show to do.
James:
Thank you, buddy.
I really appreciate your help.
And guys, if you don’t
know Josh, I, I, I call him Josh, but his, his, his show name is Urban and
Urban Odyssey has been taken off.
Dude, his show is just, it’s getting bigger
and bigger and bigger.
I couldn’t be any more proud.
Josh has always helped
me with a lot of technical difficulties here.
When, when I first was introduced to
Josh, he was a, he was a fan of, of my earlier works when I was on TikTok, I
think that’s how we met.
And then from, yeah.
And then from there we started
collaborating Back and forth.
He started helping me out with my show.
And I.
Let me be honest with all of you.
Josh is the one who helped me become a
better researcher.
I’m not even joking.
If it wasn’t for Josh, I wouldn’t be at the
area of where I am in discernment.
And Josh, I give all that thanks to you, my
friend.
Josh:
Well, I’m glad that I was able to impart that on you.
That’s really all I
seek to do.
You know, even if I just help somebody learn one or two new
things, I consider that worth it.
You know, you don’t have to necessarily think
what I think, but as long as I help you learn something that betters you, that’s.
I’ll have done what I’ve done, you know.
James:
Absolutely.
And you’ve been doing research on the esoteric thing.
You’ve been doing more research on that.
I’ve been kind of doing other
things, but I’ve been kind of, you know, keeping the esoteric along with it, but
trying to expose it, looking at it through a biblical point of view.
Can you tell us
a little bit about what you work on on your show and, and what your show is
all about and give it a plug?
Josh:
Yeah, so I.
I’m primarily on substack, but I’m on pretty much every
platform.
It’s the official urban substack.com that’s my main link.
But the
primary part of my show that I’ve been trying to do lately is helping people to
understand words and terms and the linguistics behind everything.
So tonight
you’re actually going to see a little a bit of that because the text that we’re
going to talk about tonight kind of fall under the genre of.
It’s called occult
ponerology.
Now that’s a.
Ponerology is technically the study of evil, how evil
presents.
And so occult being, you know, hidden.
So that’s what these are all
about, you know, the elite hidden circles of evil that are unfortunately in some
position a power.
Unfortunately they have a little bit of money on their side.
But the study of how this, you know, charts through history.
Because what
you’ll find is that this.
The same cycles will repeat, the same names pop up,
the same locations pop up, and of course, the same bloodlines always pop
up.
James:
Right.
And evil is really good at secrecy.
And secrecy is the hardest
thing to uncover because, well, when you keep a secret, you won’t know
about it.
And what we’ve learned throughout the course of my work is that a
human being can keep a secret for Two years.
That’s the average that a
human being can keep a secret before it finally comes out.
The military
industrial complex, or we call the Department of War, has perfected that to 20
years.
And so that’s all we have as data for now.
We don’t know if the military
has been able to keep secrets even longer than that.
But secrets is the issue
here.
And on top of that, it is who runs the world.
And all we’ve been seeing
on TikTok is anti Semitism, blame, point fingers.
It’s the Jews.
It’s the Jews.
The Jews run the world.
And we need to expose the Jews.
Well, as we’ve
been doing our research, Josh and I, over these few years, that since I’ve
done them, we’ve been finding that they want us to say this stuff.
They want
us to point the fingers at them and the actual culprits.
It doesn’t point to just
the Jews alone, and it doesn’t even give us a real good history of where they
came from.
You see, I dissected the show Fall of the Cabal, and I compared it
to all the esoteric work that I’ve done.
And what I found out was there was a
lot of missing links and a lot of information that was what I would say
construed and taken far away from the truth.
And so the truth is what I’m after,
and I know the truth is what Josh is after.
And tonight we’re going to show you
all of the evidence, all of the books that we have had, and we’re going to
compare it, and we’re going to basically talk about every single book that
we’ve read and basically talk about the author and what they were trying to
accomplish.
And on top of that, did they have the correct sources?
So, Josh,
take it away.
Josh:
Yeah.
And I just want to say really quick, you kind of took that in the
best direction possible because it is secrecy and truth, those are the.
The
enemy.
You know, secrecy is the enemy because it enslaves you no matter
what.
Even if you don’t want to get into anything beyond that, secrets will
always act as chains.
And that’s why the truth makes you free and, you know,
makes you free.
James:
Thank you for saying make.
Josh:
Well, the words are important.
James:
Yeah.
Josh:
And so make versus set.
You know, if you’re made free permanently,
you can’t be caught again.
But if you’re set free, you know, there’s that chance
under the little linguistic magic that you’ll be caught again.
And that’s how you
will be caught again is through the language, but it is the secrecy.
And so that
is what these groups have in common.
You don’t have to be a specific race,
culture, creed, anything.
But if you’re going to act like you’re one thing
outwardly and then be a liar and do something darker behind the scenes and
keep secrets about it, that just turns anybody evil.
James:
Anybody.
Well, when I read Mein Kampf, I was under the impression
that, you know, it was Hitler angry at the Jews.
And when I, when I got more
deep into it and understood it, he was actually going after the bankers.
Okay.
But then out of the blue, it turned from going after the bankers, the
international bankers, right, who, who held Germany through blackmail
because they owed so much interest, it turned into a hate of a race.
And that’s
something I want to address.
Guys, we’re not here to hate races.
We’re not
here to be anti Semitic at all.
We’re not here to put blame or point fingers at a
race or creed or color or whatever.
What we’re trying to do is find the truth.
Who are the real dynasties that have been in control and what is their goal in
the end, and eventually we should be able to all come to a real simple
conclusion, is that it’s so chaotic, you can’t just point it down to just one family.
There’s.
It’s.
It’s a multiple chaotic world of families fighting against each
other.
And it has nothing to do with Judaism, it has nothing to do with
Christianity, it has nothing to do with Buddhism or any other religion at all.
What it has to do is point blank mammon.
Mammon, the love of money is the
root of, of all evil.
Josh, take it away.
Josh:
Absolutely.
Yeah.
With that, with that, I’m going to, to fire this up.
So let
me go ahead and bring my presentation.
James:
We’re going to give you guys a PowerPoint presentation and then
you’re going to see that.
And then we’re going to just basically
Josh:
walk through each sources for the audience.
I already put it in the
description.
So if you look at the description on pretty much any platform
you’re on, you’ll see a link to the slideshow.
So because there are links and
stuff, I provided a lot of links and stuff for people who were would like any of
these sources.
So to begin, those links are right here.
Some research drives
and also some links to Webster’s 1828, 1913 dictionaries.
Those are free
online.
I use those a lot.
And those are a great habit to build.
If you haven’t
gotten into that habit, I really suggest Just pulling it out, you know, even every
day, you know, there’s a word that I hear in a video or there’s something I
read, you know, I like to make a habit of learning the context, especially you
know, from 100 or two years ago.
James:
Right.
Josh:
Because you’ll find a lot of different stuff.
And for the sake of the, you
know, just presenting this to you in a single show tonight, we’re going to take
the most primary sources in the little first half that I do.
Most of the people and
sources that I’m going to talk about are single authors who have authored a
handful of sources that I’ve, I’ve enjoyed Foundation.
Very informative.
But
there are some, you know, that have one or two because they’re very
important with that starting.
Occult ponerology.
I’ll read this definition to get us
started.
Occult ponerology.
Within the directory that I’m putting together of
these terms of human husbandry.
Occult ponerology is defined as the
scientific study systematization and application of spiritual, psychological and
institutional evil by a hidden elite to subjugate the human race.
It reveals that
the degradation of society is not organic, but the result of a meticulously
engineered multi generational alchemical formula driven by a Luciferian
cryptocracy.
Occult ponerology demonstrates that what the profane masses
perceive as random acts of cruelty, political corruption or moral decay are
actually the manifestations of a highly organized quote, unquote great work.
This dark science operates on four distinct but interwoven vectors, that being
the psychological, the societal, the institutional and the spiritual.
And that’s
what all of these sources are about.
They fall into this category here.
And so
that’s kind of why I decided to start with that.
The very first source, probably
one that’s been the most instrumental and has got some age.
It was published
at the, you know, the beginning of the 20th century by Edith Starr Miller, also
known as Lady Queensborough.
She was married into a, whatever they call it,
a noble house.
And so she did take that title and she wrote the, these texts.
Two volumes, Occult Theocracy and that there is a link here in the.
Right
here.
If anybody views it and clicks it, you can read those.
This is about 800
pages long and it, it takes you through a whole timeline all the way back to
ancient Egypt, the Pharisees, the Sadducees.
It goes all the way from the
beginning and takes you forward until the mystery schools.
Now the first half
of the book is a little bit more sparse.
You know, the time gaps are a little bit
larger but the second half of the book pretty much consists of the last two
centuries.
And it talks about as many of these random mystery groups.
You
know, Scottish.
James:
Right.
Josh:
Palladian.
Right.
You, you got stuff like even the United nations is
mentioned in there because these are all groups fundamentally built on
secrecy.
And, and that’s kind of what we were talking about earlier.
James:
Right.
Josh:
I’ll, I’ll read here on Occult Theocracy.
This is a quick honorable
mention.
This text is one of the most important texts ever.
Occult Theocracy
gives a concrete timeline of the mystery schools from Egypt till the early 20th
century when the book was written.
It serves as a type of encyclopedia of
groups and brotherhoods.
And my belief kind of having started with this is you
can’t really study this completely without having a copy of this on hand.
It’s a
very good foundation.
So that’s the first mention.
The second is Fritz
Springmeier who is very well known.
Fritz Springmeier was doing this work in
the 90s.
He was a graduate of.
I think he went to, I can’t remember, it was one
of the military academies, the prestigious military academies.
And after he
kind of had the run in experience with what, how you know, I guess you could
say disciplined and hard lined and the people who are there, he kind of came
out, decided necessarily he didn’t want to go into that career line.
And so he
started on a mission from God.
This is his word, you know, he is a Christian
and he said that his conviction, that his mission in, in his work was to help
people who were under the throes of what he later called MK Ultra Monarch,
Trauma based mind control, dissociative personalities, trauma program,
multiples, etc.
He started working with them and to expose evil and the
Illuminati.
Those, those are his missions.
So I will go ahead and read this little
section here.
Fritz Sprigm spent most of the 90s by working with SRA or
trauma based Mind controls.
James:
Satanic, Satanic ritual abuse.
Josh:
Yeah, yeah.
Survivors in attempt to deprogram them.
And it was from
this he was able to write his books, most of which are very widely known.
In
2003 the Illuminati researcher Fritz Springm was sentenced to 111 months in
prison on the basis of no real evidence.
His experience suggests that anytime
the Illuminati can put somebody away who irritates them and they can.
Springm was convicted because a bank robber whose name was forest E.
Bateman Jr.
Testified that Springm visited his house on the same day as
Bateman discussed the robbery with two Accomplices.
So this guy Bateman
had discussed a robbery and Fritz Springmeier was there at the wrong time.
Basically, this is the official story.
And so he served some time in.
In prison.
And this was a widely kind of followed thing at the time.
And so this article,
you can’t see it here.
I do have a link to an article if you want to know more
about the.
The arrest and how all that happened.
But his primary text, there’s
quite a few.
Yeah, you have Bloodlines of the Illuminati,
James:
which is on the CIA website, by the way.
Josh:
Yes.
It was apparently found in Osama bin Laden’s compound.
So
that’s.
Yeah, it’s very interesting.
James:
Had Fritz Springmeier’s book, Bloodlines of the Illuminati.
That’s
interesting.
Josh:
Yeah.
And so that one’s the.
Probably the most widely known, the
Watchtower in the Masons that talks about the Watchtower Society.
Like the.
The Russell clan.
They are one of the bloodlines, the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
You have the Russell Trust, which is Skull and Bones.
And then there’s
another one, I can’t remember, but it.
The Watchtower and the Masons with
the crown and cross symbol.
Probably the one that I found the most influential
from Fritz Springmeier is the how the Illuminati create an undetectable Total
mind control slave.
It is probably the only information that has any real slight
accuracy because it is a private citizen who wrote this manual based on his
time working and deprogramming survivors of ritual abuse.
And so he
compiled this information and wrote this almost manual to how they did this
program.
Now, the information is a bit dated and it’s obviously from a
standpoint of somebody who, you know, is perceiving and viewing this, but it’s
the only information that is worth referencing on MK Ultra, if you want to know
the specifics.
So Fritz did give a couple interviews recently, but he’s pretty
happy.
He’s got stuff that he’s doing now.
He’s kind of keeping his head down.
I think he really has done a lot and he’s to be commended for that.
There’s
also the book Be Wise as Serpents and a deeper insight to the Illuminati
formula.
There’s a link there for those there, but you can’t see it.
Next is
Eustace Mullins.
Now, he is a very interesting individual.
He lived from 1923
to 2010.
He’s passed away.
Now, Eustace Mullins was the last living protege
of a guy named Ezra Pound, the author of the only book burned in Germany,
Hitler A Burning under the Direction of Americans and a former researcher for
McCarthy.
And this is a quote from a biography that I found.
Eustace Mullen
served 38 months in the United States Army Air Force during World War II.
Following his military service, he pursued higher education at Washington and
Lee University in Lexington, Virginia.
Mullins, a native of Virginia, also
attended New York University and he’s written a handful of books.
I’ll read this
because he’s pretty important.
In 1949, Eustace Mullen was directed by Ezra
Pound, who was.
Ezra Pound was a kind of a political.
He was in jail, he was
a political prisoner and people kind of followed him.
And so Eustace Mullins
was directed by Ezra Pound to investigate the origins and control of the
Federal Reserve System.
He wrote the Secrets of the Federal Reserve Book.
Working as a researcher at the Library of Congress, Mullins systematically
examined primary sources from about 1910 to 1913 to trace the system’s
operational structure.
This archival effort revealed a secretive 1910 planning
session on Jekyll island in Georgia organized by Senator Nelson W.
Aldrich
and prominent private bankers.
Mullins concluded that this process, heavily
influenced by private financial interest, shaped the 1913 Federal Reserve act
enabling fiat currency and mechanisms of elite economic dominance.
And
that’s pretty much been proven through.
And so these are the texts that he’s
authored.
This is not all of them.
He did author a lot of articles and stuff like
that.
There’s a link to those but these are the main ones that are like the
largest ones.
Those are the Secret of the Federal Reserve.
There was one
sequel to that that deals with the London City of London connections.
He did
the New World Order, Our Secret Rulers.
He did Mullen’s New History of the
Jews and he did the Curse of Canaan A Demonology of Histories and is the
title of that text we have.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Nesta Webster now she.
Nesta
Webster is very influential in information because she offered the secret
societies and sub subversive movements and a text called the World
Revolution Plot the Plot against Civilization.
So I’ll read it says Born into a
banking family as the youngest daughter of Robert Cooper Lee Bevin
Webster initially pursued historical fiction and biographies before shifting to
non fiction analysis of political conspiracies following World War I.
She’s
influenced by events like the Bolshevik Revolution.
Her seminal works
including are including the World Revolution, the Plot against Civilization and
Secret Societies and Subversive Movements.
Those were meticulously
documented connections between the groups such as the Illuminati
Freemasons Jacobins positing an occult driven agenda for global disorder
rather than spontaneous popular uprisings.
Real quick, I’ll just go back.
But
this is the chart that she had drafted out.
There are two links here.
You can
access the images.
Some of them are better.
You can make out better than
others.
I’m working on getting higher quality writing.
That’s a little hard, but
these are pretty high quality and these are hugely advanced charts.
But her
books that she’s written, she’s written a couple secret societies and
subversive movements.
The World Revolution.
She did behind the World
Revolution.
Another one on the French Revolution, she did one that I didn’t
picture here on Marie Antoinette.
And then she did one that was under a pen
name, but it’s titled the Secrets of the Zodiac.
That’s interesting.
It’s a.
Yeah.
Why I do have a copy of it.
It is, it’s almost like an allegory laid out that she
was trying to convey a message, but she was trying to use seemingly the old
occult system of using these mythologies to convey the message.
Is how I
interpret it.
Yeah.
In that chart, it’s very detailed.
But she lived kind of in the
heart of it.
So she was witnessing this unfold.
She had time on her hands and
she was a pretty talented writer.
So she’s got a lot of very good books that
are, are well put together.
Now these two, now these two books are perhaps
the most kind of hidden.
They don’t.
The second book, the Grand Design
Exposed was hard to find.
I didn’t even know it existed for a while.
John
Daniel is the author.
There’s not much really known about him.
I couldn’t find
any concrete information on him.
There were apparently some interviews
given because I’ve heard Eustace Mullins reference as much.
He would say,
oh, I heard you interviewed this guy.
I can’t find them though.
So he’s a bit of
a ghost.
But the Scarlet and the Beast is the first one and it, it discusses the
red team versus the blue team.
Now that is not in America.
That’s the red
team in England, the British Freemasonry red and then French Freemasonry
blue.
And my kind of way of looking at this is that this was the fundamental
division.
This is your two people competing with in this system because they
do have fault lines and they see it as a necessary part of it.
They, they need
the interaction between the two sides.
James:
Divide and conquer.
Josh:
Yeah.
You can’t have a WWE wrestling show without two.
A guy on one
side and a guy on the other, you need to have a natural kind of fight.
James:
Or like the wolfs and the jibolines.
Josh:
Absolutely perfectly, perfectly put.
And the grand design exposed goes
into the connections between the Jacobins and the Jesuits and the Jesuits
and Freemasonry.
So these are very good books.
There’s a link to those as
well.
Next we’ve got a newer author that most probably haven’t seen, but he’s
done a series called Order Abko.
Guy’s name is David Livingston and this is
directly from his website.
He says, I’m an independent researcher and my
work represents the culmination of nearly 35 years of study.
When I attended
the liberal arts college of Concordia University in Montreal, I read William H.
McNeil’s The History of Western Civilization which mentions the appearance
of the so called Indo Europeans who emerged suddenly out of the caucuses
and conquered.
Caucus.
Yeah, and conquered the known parts of the world.
The story seems strange to me.
Most nations emerge gradually when they
turn to agriculture.
These Indo Europeans had no prior presence in history
and burst out of nowhere and supposedly mastered the Chariot, though they
came from a mountainous region.
And that was from his about page.
There’s
more, but I’m just going to read that because it gives you a little bit of a start
now.
James:
He’s right, but that’s the same story from all of the other ones all
throughout history, where these people came from.
And there’s.
It’s not.
That’s just not one.
He’s following the same information that we’ve been
uncovering over and over and over again.
We’ll be talking about that later.
Josh:
Yeah, absolutely.
And I tried to let people know that this is not, you
know, I’m.
I’m not just looking at newer information because I, I understand
completely, fairly.
You know, people would say, oh, it’s brand new, you can’t
trust it.
But that’s why I’ve started collecting information, particularly from
before the Internet, as old as I can get, because I fear that that’s going to be
disappearing soon.
So the fire, six volumes, huh?
Yeah, six volumes.
The first
was titled the Dying God and it talks about the origins of the mysteries he gets
into in the second volume, the Grand Lodge.
The third volume, titled Synergy,
which we talked about while I was covering the show, it was one of the first
episodes I did.
Synergy is the opposite, the anonym of anarchy.
James:
Right.
Josh:
So it is there.
It’s their enlightened control behind the scenes by the
illuminated elite.
That’s Synergy.
The volume four is Mind Control.
Volume
five is the new age, with the final volume six being the Third Temple.
Which
brings us to pretty much today.
Those are newer.
Those are really good
works.
These two right here are written by a couple, James and Pamela
Noblett.
I think that’s how you say their name.
They’re clinical researchers
providing psychiatric and anthropological validation of severe ritual abuse and
mind control programming.
There’s plenty of other authors, I put links down
there for all of that.
But they author two text titled Cult and Ritual Abuse.
One
is History, Anthropology, Recent Discoveries.
The other text is titled
Narratives, Evidence and Healing Approaches.
And so these are really well
done books.
Their experience is very broad.
And I really think that in, in
dealing with this subject in particular, people who have worked with a lot of
survivors are the people who have the best information.
There’s no other
people who have the best information because this is not even barely
recognized.
You know, you are hard pressed to find somebody who will give
you basic decency and believe you and listen to what you have to say.
So I
really do find these to be invaluable works.
James:
Right.
And the hardest part about gathering evidence is you, you can’t
just take one person’s word for it.
Right?
That’s the hardest part about finding
sources.
And we’re going to learn soon about where all of these sources of
this originated and where they, where all of these guys will actually quote this,
their sources.
And you’re going to find it’s, it’s, it’s more crazy than you could
ever imagine.
But with, with, with those, with, with.
What they’re trying to
achieve is they’re trying to find the truth, but yet the sources are actually key
and people have been quoting those sources and the, the story continues to
go and, and continues to remain in what would be considered truth.
However,
when we get into my sources, we’re going to go back to the 1700s and find
out that this, this, this, this story just continues to come out and we want to
know why.
Go ahead.
Urban.
Josh:
Yeah.
So the next author that I found to be very interesting is Michael
Hoffman ii.
Hoffman’s extensive research into Talmudic orthodoxy and the
occult renaissance and along with the weaponization of usury, provides a
massive data cluster for the spiritual and societal vectors of the matrix.
Quoting here, Michael A.
Hoffman II is an independent scholar, a former
reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press, and the author of
ten books of radical history, journalism and literature.
He studied political
science and history under Faiz Abu Jabar at the State University of New York
at Oswego.
He investigates political and occult Crime.
Crime by decoding
what he calls twilight language.
And that’s from his Goodreads section there.
James:
Okay, so one thing that’s important to understand is on when it comes
to the third dimension.
Evidence is hard to find when it comes to secret
societies.
And a lot of these authors came to a conclusion, not all, but a lot
came to a conclusion that it’s a spiritual thing within civilization.
And the only
way that we can describe the reasoning behind all of the crap that’s going on
in the world.
Well, it’s easy to point fingers at just one institution, one religious
group, one certain, you know, underground secret society that’s causing all of
these problems.
And what we’re going to find out tonight, that that’s actually
just not the truth.
Josh:
Yeah, it’s.
And unfortunately what happens is only by going down this
path and kind of just finding all of this stuff, you, you start to see these
patterns, you start to understand that it seems like these people are all seeing
the same general structure.
You know, you have the same form here.
Now
some people are looking at it from this side or some people are looking at it
from over here, but you know, you have the same form over hundreds of
years and it, it almost fits with a lot of the, the mythology around the world.
And so I’m just tempted to say that there’s more than a nugget of, of truth here
now.
You know, there’s definitely some false information and that’s a topic
possibly for another show.
But I, I’m beyond convinced because I’ve gone
through hundreds of different sources, more than, you know, we could ever
cover in one night.
So Michael Hoffman ii, he’s got a lot of great sources.
One
of my favorites is Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare.
That one’s a
really interesting book.
It’s about how almost this type of insanity or
delusional, almost schizophrenia.
Yeah.
What they use that chaos in the
population and induce people into insanity basically to control them for their
breath.
Absolutely, absolutely.
Another text that he wrote, Usury in
Christendom, the mortal sin that was and now is not.
And so he, he goes into
usury.
He goes into even white people in the slave trade, which is a very
hushed up part of history.
Talks about the occult.
Renaissance, Church of
Rome, the Catholic Church.
King Kill 33 is about the occult symbology behind
the Kennedy assassination.
And then he does two books on Judaism and the
laws of the Talmudic Orthodox stuff.
So those are Judaism Discovered and
Judaism Strange Gods.
And those are pretty big books.
So he’s a great
source to check out and I think this is the last one I have.
Avro Manhattan.
Now, this guy has written a lot, pretty much everything on the Vatican and the
Jesuits and, and that aspect, so I will read.
Avro Manhattan’s most prominent
work on Vatican politics is titled the Vatican and World Politics.
Published in
1949 by Geyer Associates.
Spanning 444 pages, the book critiques the Holy
See’s diplomatic strategies, ideological positions and influence in global
affairs, particularly during and after World War II, drawing on Papal
encyclicals, concordance and historical precedents to argue for the Vatican’s
role as a super national power intervening in secular politics dedicated to truth
seekers irrespective of creed, it reflects its initial reception among audiences
interested in, in ecclesiastical geopolitics.
And that was from his page on
Rockipedia.
And so he has written some great books.
Now these are very
hard to find.
They’ve been disappeared.
Well, one is the Vatican billions.
What, what happened to all the money that they’ve amassed, the dollar?
And
the Vatican.
He did one called Catholic Terror in Ireland, Vatican imperialism
in the 20th century, the Vatican Moscow, Washington alliance, the Vatican’s
Holocaust in Croatia.
He did one on Vietnam that’s not pictured here.
The
Vatican World Politics and Catholic Power Today.
And most of those are in
the Google Drive there.
So please check those out.
Now this is the end of the
section that I put together.
Those are just skimming the top of the sources that
I’ve used.
I mean, that really doesn’t even begin to go into it.
But those right
there are a solid chunk that if anybody were to look into those authors and
those sources, you would be very oriented to research some more.
James:
Yeah, all of that stuff, all of those books, all of those authors will help
you understand all of the information that they gathered from their sources
and what they think is going on.
So either physically or spiritually.
And so all of
these are absolutely important and key to understanding the, the whole genre
of secret societies and what’s going on behind the scenes.
Now we’re, we’re.
None of us are given access to any of this because we, we’re not bloodline,
we’re not the family.
Right.
So we’re not going to get all of the stuff that these
people, these organizations, these institutions do behind the scenes because
we’re not invited.
But this, all of these authors are trying to give their best
guess as to what’s really going on and their sources that they quote, which
when we go through mine, you’re going to start to find that they’re quoting the
older sources and what we’re going to get to the bottom of is where did,
where did the beginning of this idea of a secret society cabal controlling the
world come from?
Josh:
Absolutely.
Yeah.
I think there’s.
I’ve tried to go into that a little bit, but I
think it’s honestly as old as time.
I’ve come to the conclusion that this is a very
old idea because it, you know, you look at the text, occult theocracy, it’s just a
kind of a repeat.
Even these secret societies would pop up in different areas,
but they would use the same symbols.
The.
The son of a widow, which is a
Freemasonic saying, but that is Egyptian.
That pops up in multiple other
secret societies through time.
And so it seems like this is almost something
that just keeps repeating over time.
James:
Right?
And the good thing about artificial intelligence, folks, is that we
can take all of these books, we’re talking hundreds if not thousands of books,
and we can put it into AI and start searching for the bottom line.
What are they
trying to achieve?
What do they want?
And what we’ve learned throughout the
course of a few years is they want to control us.
And that’s an obvious one.
But the deeper meaning is they want our energy, they want our breath, they
want our loose.
They for some reason believe in their philosophy or in their
science, literally, because most of these people, their religion is science.
And
I’m talking about the elite.
They are pulling our energy to feed themselves and
the gods that they worship, which is science.
And so that’s something we’re
going to be learning a little bit later on too as well.
Hey, Urban, did you put any
of mine in.
In PowerPoint or.
I’m just going to read them out loud.
Josh:
I have the list of them.
I don’t have the screenshots of them, and I have
your.
These two guys at the beginning.
James:
Great, so you want me to go ahead and start with that?
Josh:
Yeah, go ahead.
James:
Okay, so Israel, Zeus.
Well, okay, take a step back.
Santos Bonacci.
When I started to go through YouTube’s years ago, trying to find, you know,
information about cabals, hidden secret societies, where did they come from?
Why did they start.
I ran into this Santos Bonacci.
I think that’s how it’s
pronounced.
And Santos said in one of his lectures, and trust me, there’s
hardly any books by a few of these people that I found.
He has one book, and
his one book doesn’t really detail anything much about the secret societies,
but his book is more about quantum physics and how we are a.
Like a we’re
we’re living in a 3D source, a virtual reality.
And there.
And he focuses also a
lot on Egyptian magic and how they use all of that to control the people.
And
as I was listening to him, watching him during this seminar, he.
He turns
around and he says, this, this one, this one dynasty controls the world.
And he
said, it’s the Orsinis.
And I’ve never even heard of the Orsinis.
And I’m like,
okay.
So that gave me the idea to start looking for it, because after reading
Fritz Springmire and the 13 illuminated families, I found out that those are not
the real ones who have the money.
They’re what’s called new money.
There’s
an actual group of dynasties that are above them in Europe called the thirteen
Black Nobilities.
And those Black Nobilities came all from four dynasties in
Austria, and they all married into.
And over the few hundred years became
thirteen.
But as I was researching Orsini, I found this gentleman by the name
of Domenico Napoleon Orsini, and all of these rumors about him being the,
quote, Gray Pope.
And so I started researching Gray Pope.
And then I.
I didn’t
know there was a great Pope.
Okay, is there?
Well, let’s find out.
As I was
researching, I found out that there’s a black Pope, there’s a white Pope, and
then there’s a Sorcini guy.
Well, he’s somehow on the council, the highest
council of the Jesuit order.
And as I was researching that, I run into this guy
named Israel Zeus.
Now, there’s nothing really on him.
This last post that he
did, he vanished since 20.
Probably his last post was like, what, what does
that say? 2019 or 2018? 20. 2018.
And after that, he goes cold.
Israel Zeus
on his blog spot, started just exposing just hundreds and hundreds and
hundreds of pictures and information on certain families.
And I went through
all of his research, and I found through his work, the thirteen Black Nobility
families.
And I started writing about them and doing more research.
And Israel
reached out to me about, I would say six months ago, and he asked that I put
his sources on my stuff.
Because what I was doing was I was so excited
about finding all of this stuff about the Black Nobility.
I was putting all of his
stuff on my website.
And so I.
I put his.
I put some of his links at the bottom,
but not all.
And he’s.
He just wanted me to put it on top, so I did.
So I put his
source on top.
And nobody knows anything about this guy.
We don’t know his
real name.
That’s the only picture you can find.
And to dig and find out who
this guy is, it’s almost impossible.
But nobody uses him as a reference.
But he
is the one.
I wanted to point out how I got into the 13 black nobility, because
according to this guy, they are above the 13 illuminated family.
And the
Illuminati is the new money.
The Black Nobility is old money.
So that’s where
we went there from those sources.
Do you have another slide?
Josh:
Then these are.
There’s a big list of what you sent me.
It’s in the same
order, but if you need me to pull any graphics up, I can.
James:
No, no need.
So in researching the Black Nobility, these are the.
These are along with some of our viewers who sent me information and
research links to go find certain types of sources.
Okay.
Because Israel
Santos and all of the sources prior that Urban has been showing you, they are
all quoting these sources from the, from the 17th, 18th and 19th century.
One
of them is August Augustine Barule.
I think it’s Barul and his memoirs
illustrating the history of Jacobism.
Josh:
I’ve got that one.
I know about that one.
That’s a good book.
James:
Okay, so he relied on revolutionary pamphlets.
Okay.
These are
propaganda pamphlets that were being sent during the French Revolution.
And he also relied on Enlightenment writings through Alice Bailey, Helena
Blavatsky, and, you know, other Enlightenment areas.
Okay.
And he also
used the Christian Church interpretation, and he concluded coordinated
subversion by linking ideological similarities across texts without direct
operational records.
But a lot of people quote Barul and he said, this guy has
the evidence, but there’s, there’s the evidence that he has, as far as sources
are concerned, are just pamphlets, revolutionary pamphlets and information
that they got from the Enlightenment Church.
And the, the, the cat.
The
Roman or Roman Catholic Church interpretation.
But nothing, nothing
concrete saying this is the book that I read.
Nothing concrete saying this is a
source.
It’s just all speculation.
Then comes Hilaire.
Well, actually, let me.
Josh:
John Robison.
James:
Yeah, John Robison.
I.
I’m sorry, I have these all alphabetical.
Josh:
Oh.
James:
So, yeah, on my, on my, on my notes.
So, Robison, pull it up here.
Josh:
Those were written about the same time I was going to say when I,
When I pulled those two texts, when I was looking into them myself, those
kind of.
It seemed like they were written almost like by people who kind of
were collaborating.
So I’m, I was almost of the opinion that these two people
were doing the research together in a way.
James:
No, they, they don’t.
None of them knew any, any.
None of them knew
each other.
Josh:
Really?
James:
That’s.
Yeah, that’s my, my.
My information says.
Now, John
Robinson, he wrote a book called Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the
Religions and Governments of Europe.
This was in 1797.
And he relied on his
membership lists that he found memberships of secret societies, et cetera.
Stuff like we found for the Bohemian Grove list or stuff that we found through
the Epstein lists.
Okay.
He relied on things like that back then, all right.
And
he also relied on correspondence and a personal experience he had with
Freemasonry.
And thus he based his conclusions on linking networks and
ideology.
But he had no proof.
And John would often reference others like.
Who was it?
Where is it?
Others in the 1700s who basically came to the same
conclusion, but none of them actually had real proof.
So next is Nicholas.
So
Nicholas wrote a book called Secret Societies in Society in 1882.
And he used
Masonic writings, church sources and Baroul’s work.
Okay, so he’s relying on
Barule.
And Barule had no full real sources, just a hunch and a bunch of
pamphlets and information from the Church.
But he’s looking at it from a, you
know, from a point of view of a guess, really.
And when people start quoting
Barule and he’s one of the main sources that people quote, Barul didn’t have
evidence.
He only had flyers.
And the flyers didn’t say, this is the secret
society order number, blah, blah, blah.
Does that make sense?
Josh:
I was going to say, I feel like one thing that I missed that I wish I would
have done in hindsight on this is a lot of like Masonic text and Theosophy and
their doctrines of these actually like, of these groups.
I wish I would have put
more about that on there.
But that has been also very influential is just looking
at Masonic encyclopedias, looking at reference works.
And so I wonder, I
mean, perhaps that that was a.
A bit of something they were relying on, but
I’m unsure either way.
That’s what I did.
James:
Right.
But they did not rely on the court documents.
They didn’t rely
on arrest warrants.
They didn’t rely on any of that stuff.
And that’s the stuff we
need to look for.
You see all of these whistleblowers and people who have
testimonies, they need to file a police report if they were, you know, sexually
abused through a satanic ritual.
These are the things we need to look at as far
as what I call evidence and what we’ve learned from this.
Champs with
Nicholas, in his book Secret Societies and Society, he used the Masonic
writings.
He, you Know like what we found.
Albert pike and all of those books,
morals and dogma.
He used church sources and he again, like the other one,
used Baroul’s work and came to a conclusion formed by connecting
ideological themes across institutions.
But he had no evidence.
Next is JH
Cantaloupe.
And Cantaloupe.
Let me pull that up.
Please be patient with me.
There it is.
So Cantaloupe wrote a book called Political and Religious Sects
and and secret societies in 1863.
And he compiled descriptions of secret
societies using publicly available records and prior authors in his sources.
And
his conclusions again were based on pattern recognition rather than actual
internal evidence.
Next is Henry Dalassis.
And Henry Dalassis wrote a book
called the Problem of the present hour in 1904, another book called the Anti
Christian Conspiracy in 1910.
And he drew from Catholic theology, earlier
conspiracy writers like Baroul, and political events.
And his conclusions were
framed as a spiritual opposition to Christianity rather than documented
coordination.
So he didn’t find sources.
Now guys, keep in mind all of the
great books that Urban was showing you.
All of the authors that are being
quoted now were quoting these guys.
This is key to understanding what we’re
talking about.
Now you can say that secret societies don’t exist, or you can
say that they exist.
The problem is finding the evidence and the proof that
they do or do not.
And this is what we’re going to.
We’re going to the actual
real sources that all the people that Urban his books are quoting and I’m
going to tell you each one of what they’ve.
What sources that they’re quoting.
Next is Dylan, George F.
Dillon and Dylan or Emil Joseph wrote a book called
the Inside Story of the peace Conference in 1920.
He relied on diplomatic
records that he found and firsthand reportings.
He came to conclusions based
on observed political negotiation, but not on secrecy societies.
So he was
looking at banks, he was looking at institutions, he was looking at religious
churches, etc.
He came to a conclusion, but he had no sources next to us,
Nesta Webster, which we’ve already talked about, the Plot Against
Civilization, which this is one of the original origins.
And it’s good that Urban
brought Webster up first.
Josh:
I was going to say now that you say that there’s Avro, Manhattan, Nesta
Webster.
They.
They were also in a bit of the elite class, so perhaps you could
say it.
And I know that somebody in the audience is saying, Carol Quigley,
that is a fair source.
And we’ve definitely looked at those.
It was just not one
that made it into the slideshow for.
Well, yeah, just because it was one that I
didn’t include.
But that’s a fair source.
James:
Right.
And Quigley’s work.
If you go to Quigley sources, these
Josh:
are going to be her.
James:
Carol’s.
I think Carol’s a guy sources.
Now, Nesta Webster wrote the
book World Revolution and the plot against civilization.
She Nest, I think was
that she used Barule Robinson and revolutionary documents and pamphlets.
Conclusions that she formed were through comparative historical
interpretation rather than any new evidence.
So we can’t just go to.
Go to.
Go
to Nesta and say, yep, everything that, that, that she said is.
Is true.
There’s
evidence because she didn’t have any.
Next is Leon Ponchins or Ponson or
Ponson’s.
I really don’t know how to pronounce that.
De Leon is his name.
He
wrote a book called the Secret Powers behind Revolution in 1929 and
compiled earlier works and contemporary political developments.
And he drew
the conclusions that were extended prior narratives with.
Without any new
primary evidence.
Next we move on to Henry Ford.
Guys, this is the biggie,
okay?
This is where people go.
People go nuts.
If you understand Henry Ford,
then you should understand, if you’ve done any evidence, any work on Henry
Ford, that Henry Ford paid money to the Nazi party.
He was in favor of what
the Nazis were doing.
And Henry Ford had a.
What would be considered like
the first magazine back then, and he called it the International Jew, and it ran
for only two years.
And in Henry Ford’s writing, he compiled secondary
sources, newspaper articles and earlier polemics.
And his conclusions derived
from aggregation rather than an actual primary archival discovery.
And Henry
Ford was quoting Baroule.
And so because his name, Henry Ford was in
there, this is where the trail stops.
And nobody goes and looks beyond behind
Henry Ford.
Because here’s what he did.
He.
He printed propaganda.
He
printed information saying that all of these other authors like Barule,
Robinson, Deschamps and.
And Cantaloupe and all of them, that they were
all.
They all had sources.
So if he printed it and he’s a, you know, a wealthy,
you know, industrialist, then it’s.
It has to be true.
And that’s where we come
into an issue as a society when it comes to us doing our homework.
If we just
rely on Henry words or Henry Ford’s words, then we’re going to run into
trouble.
And this is where I ran into it.
Because all of the evidence of the prior
people since the French Revolution who have been writing about secret
societies.
Yeah.
Jacob Jacob.
Jacobinism Yeah, we’re gonna be talking about
that, Phillip.
Josh:
Yeah, yeah.
James:
So I can’t read the bottom one.
What’s.
What’s behind, what’s
underneath, Henry.
Josh:
Well, let me.
Let me do this really quick.
Make smaller so people.
James:
Yeah, I think it is important to go through these, but, yeah, I know
Josh:
that people, like, can’t see it, but there’s going to be a link whenever, if
you’re on YouTube, rumble any of those.
The only one that doesn’t have it is
substack because there’s no description on the video yet.
But, yeah,
everywhere this video is, you can view all these.
James:
Yeah.
Let’s move on to right here.
George Pop Off.
Pop Off.
George
Pop Off.
He wrote a book called the.
The Cheka, spelled T C H E K A the red
Inquisition in 1925.
And he used eyewitness accounts, refugee reports, and
early intelligence sources and came to conclusions, focused on
documentation institutions like the Cheka and what happened then.
So Pop
off is quoted a lot by some of the later works, especially the people like, I
believe it was Cooper, William Cooper, and working off his works.
But his
works came from intelligence sources.
Well, do we know that that’s.
Is.
Can
we consider that a source?
Can we consider that evidence?
Can we.
Can.
My
whole point is, can we take this information to court and prove that whatever
sources that Popoff has and the information he has, will it hold up in court?
It
will not.
He focused his conclusion based on just documents of institutions,
intelligence sources, and refugee reports and eyewitness accounts.
But that
doesn’t mean that what he’s pulled together is true.
And he also, again,
quotes Barule.
Next is George Pitt was a Pitt Rivers.
Think it is Pitt Rivers.
Josh:
Yeah, that’s it.
James:
Yeah.
All right, so George wrote a book called the World Significance
of Russian Revolution and a few more.
And he used news reports, political
writings, and earlier authors.
And he basically formed his conclusions by
linking global events interpretively.
So he looked at it from a data point of view
and saying, naturally, what’s going on?
Our secret societies and bloodlines
and oaths and all of that.
But he did not provide any proof whatsoever.
Who’s
next after Pitt?
Gustav?
Gothrat.
I think it’s Gothrat.
Would you quote
Gothaurant?
Josh:
Yeah, Gothrot.
James:
Okay, so Gustav wrote a book called the Communist world in the 20th
century, and he analyzed communist movements using political writings and
historical observations.
He came to the conclusion that was centered on an
ideology and structure, but he had no sources to back it up.
He was quoting
all of the others, Barule, etcetera.
And next under Gustav.
Is that it?
Josh:
Yeah.
Then the next page begins.
James:
Yeah, just hit the.
There we go.
So Werner Sombart.
So Werner
Sombart, he wrote a book called the Jews and the Modern Capitalist Capital
and the Jews and modern capitalism in 1911, and also the the Jews in
economics in 1924.
He relied on economic.
Economic history.
Okay, so he’s
looking at business reports, he’s looking at institution information, he’s looking
at trade records.
And he looked at the sociological data of it.
And he came to
the conclusion based on structural and analytical data.
And he would be
quoting the other sources as well.
So if he’s, if he’s quoting Baroule, if he’s
quoting Ford, if he’s quoting any.
Well, he wouldn’t be quoting for excuse
before Ford, but these are the, these are the ones that Ford were quoting.
Does that make sense?
So these guys had no evidence to back up what
they’re saying.
They had eyewitness accounts, they had pamphlets, they had
books.
But all that stuff had no true sources and evidence that can point a
finger to a one world religion, one world government, New world order.
Next is
Hilaire Balak.
Hilaire Balak, which I think Hilaire is a gentleman.
And he wrote
the Jews in 1922, a book called the Jews.
And he also wrote a book in 1912
called the Servile State.
And he used historical and economic observations of
European society.
And he came to conclusions that were drawn from
structural analysis of finance and minority roles, but not on secret
documentation.
So he didn’t write anything based on Baroul and some of the
earlier works from the French Revolution, but rather focusing on what he can
find through data structures.
Does that make sense?
Now next is Karl Marx,
everyone.
If you’ve been following secret societies, I’m sure you understand
who Karl Marx is.
He’s written several books, and one of the books that he
wrote is called yeah, on the Jewish question in 1844.
And he relied on
philosophical argument, political theory and critique of religion.
And his
conclusions came to theoretical, but not conspiratorial.
He didn’t mention
anything about Freemasonry, he didn’t mention anything about the prior
authors of the 17th century.
All he did was came to his own political
philosophical argument through what he would consider political theory and
critique of religion.
Because he wasn’t interested in the Vatican.
He was not
interested in any religion that would control people.
He was more interested in
the religion that he believed in.
So Karl Marx did a lot of work to help form
socialism and Communism.
And a lot of people quote Karl Marx as a genius
who came up with communism, but he’s not the one who came up with it.
He
just regurgitated from others.
So that’s one book that focuses on a conspiracy,
but there is no evidence.
And you’d think there would be if it would be from
Karl Marx.
Is there any.
Are there any others?
Josh:
That’s the last one here.
We’ll go to religious, theological, polemical.
James:
Got it.
Okay, so I believe it’s Massa.
Josh:
Yeah.
James:
Guggenat.
Masa Guggenat.
And Masa Guggenat right here wrote a
book called the Jew, Judaism and the Judaization of Christian peoples in
1869.
Massa relied on religious texts, okay?
What he found through the Bible
and the Talmud, theological interpretations and earlier Catholic critiques.
The
critiques would be things that the Vatican would put out saying, this is what
we interpret from the Old and New Testaments.
And he came to the
conclusion formed through a doctrinal lens.
He was not quoting any others,
but more or less thinking on a religious point of view, on a spiritual point of
view.
Roger.
What he saw was the spiritual connection versus the physical,
but he had no evidence to back it up.
All of his stuff was based on just his
opinion.
Next we have August rolling.
Is it August?
Yeah, August rolling.
Yeah.
So August rolling.
And, dude, there’s so much more about these guys,
but I’m covering a lot of books here.
So anyway, he wrote a book called the
Talmudic Jew, late 19th century, 1870s, 1880s.
And it used selected
translations of religious texts.
And he came to the conclusion formed through
a theological interpretation, meaning these secret societies are worshiping the
devil.
They’re underground, they have all the money.
And he’s saying this is
biblical.
So he came and by reading the Talmud and reading other, you know,
Zoroastrian texts and other religions, etc, that the natural progression of
society is.
Is a spiritual one.
When society leaves God, then.
Then witches
come.
So when we’re not worshiping God and we’re giving him the glory, then
the witches come.
And that’s.
He came to that conclusion.
Next is Ernest
Jawen.
I think it’s Jawan.
I don’t want to say Jewen.
I think it’s chowin.
So
Ernest wrote a book called the Judeo Masonic peril in 1932, and he relied on
earlier conspiracy literature.
Okay?
He was the one quoting all the other ones,
Baroul and etc.
And also used contemporary political concerns, basically
newspapers, etc.
And he came to conclusions that were synthesized by
existing narratives.
So he brought back the narratives right from Barule.
And
unfortunately we can’t say that his sources are accurate because his sources
are not.
There’s just no proof or evidence to back up his claims.
Next is
Theodore Fritz.
Fritz Fritsch.
Fritsch.
I don’t know how would you pronounce
that, pal?
Josh:
Fritz or Frisch?
Could be either.
James:
Right.
So Fritz or Theodore wrote a book called Handbook on the
Jewish question.
Okay.
Early 20th century, multiple editions, 1900s to 1920s.
He assembled claims and statistics from earlier writers.
The earlier writers
we’ve been talking about conclusions that were based on compilation.
But he
did not offer any original documentation to prove his points.
He just came to
his theory.
William Marr, I believe it’s Marr.
And William Marr wrote a book
called the Victory of Judaism over Germanism in 1879 and based his
conclusions on social and economic observations of 19th century Europe.
And his conclusions and ideological.
Were ideological rather than evidentiary.
So he didn’t bring any evidence.
He looked at from.
From a bird’s eye view
and came to his own conclusion.
And that’s not evidence.
Next is Wilhelm.
Next is.
We already did.
Wilhelm Marr.
Yeah, I’m sorry.
Josh:
So I.
Rosenberg.
James:
Rosenberg.
Alfred Rosenberg.
Okay, so Rosenberg, Alfred wrote a
book called anti State Zionism, 1938 Or.
And 1 that’s really hard to find.
Pest
and Rusland, 1938.
He used earlier ideological writings and political
propaganda and his conclusions were aligned with state driven narratives.
You guys are saying why, why are you going through all of this stuff?
Because
I’m trying to show you guys what propaganda is.
I’m trying to show you where
propaganda starts.
I’m trying to show you where rumors happen.
And then
when we get to recent people who are quoting old, older works from the
1700s, the evidence doesn’t support or there is no breadcrumbs that lead to a
cabal or a Jewish underground Ashkenazi secret society that’s ruling the
world.
What we’re seeing is a bunch of authors who, who could be, could
have been paid to write these things, to give us this impression.
So keep that
in mind as we continue.
We should be.
Should be done here shortly.
Is that it?
Josh:
Rosenberg was the last one on that page.
James:
Okay, Next page.
Josh:
Okay.
James:
Yeah.
So you have to understand what was going on in Europe during
these, these times.
Okay.
Europe was fighting each other.
I believe that was
it, wasn’t it?
No.
No, it’s not.
Okay.
So Theodore Herzl, we just talked.
We just
talked about.
Right.
All right.
So Ludwig did You, Theodore Herzl.
Well, let’s
do it again.
It sounds familiar.
Okay.
Yeah.
He wrote the Jewish State.
Yeah.
Based on political analysis, journalism, and contemporary European
conditions.
But Theodore drew his conclusions openly and proposed that it
was a.
Basically a.
It was publicly debated.
But he.
He did his through a
political analysis of books he wrote and newspapers he read.
And he again
was quoting Barule and all of the other ones in the past, which we cannot rely
on, unfortunately.
Next is admin.
Flag.
Yeah, Flag now.
Doesn’t mean these
guys are wrong guys.
Okay.
That’s not what I’m saying.
I’m saying if we’re
going.
If we’re going to be.
If I’m going to be a Christian, I’m going to tell you
the truth.
What I can find through data.
I’m not going to say, well, this is.
This
is what it is.
But because we can’t.
Josh:
The whole thing is.
But, but I mean, the reason that I’m not following
along with the question, like, is because all, like all of these are.
They all
agree that something is going on here.
Like, there’s something going on here.
But we are trying to say that we saw this part over here because we lived in
France during the French Revolution and then some other writers on
James:
Russia and other places.
Right.
Josh:
So everybody’s sharing their collective viewpoint of this, seemingly.
And, and I think I have personally seen enough to say that all of these people,
barring a couple, obviously, possibly, but most of these people are seeing the
exact same thing, just from different angles.
James:
Right.
But with the same thing continue throughout all history and be
the same structure.
That’s not how.
That’s not how chaos works.
That’s not
how the world works.
Right.
Because they’re all arguing that it’s the same
group of people, the same families, over and over and over being regurgitated
into new names.
And there’s no evidence that supports that.
Their.
Their
evidence is flyers, you know, and newspapers, which we all know.
You can’t
trust the news.
Josh:
James knew about Carol Quigley.
We just literally didn’t put it in the
presentation because it didn’t make it into the presentation.
But yeah, we’ve
known who Carol Quigley is.
James:
Yeah.
So did you want to quote Carol Quigley?
Josh:
Well, I have a.
Well, somebody in the audience asked about Carol
Quigley, and so I, He.
I guess they said that James didn’t know it.
And I was
saying back, James did know who Carol Quigley is.
James:
Yeah, Yeah.
I just didn’t.
I.
On my re.
My stuff, I didn’t need to mention
Carol Quigley, because Carol Quigley was quoting all of the stuff that I’m
showing you guys right now.
So what I’m saying is Carol Quigley believed
Henry Ford and Henry Ford was lying.
I don’t know whether to sell cars or
what, what the whole propaganda machine was, but he was writing
propaganda and that’s been proven.
And so Quigley and all of Quigley’s work.
Quigley is going to quote all of these.
Dylan, Gothrat, Guggenau, Gwenon.
We haven’t even gotten to Renee Gwenon yet, but Carol Quigley was quoting
Renee Gwenon.
But we’ll get there in a second.
So.
Yeah, yeah, way ahead
of you guys.
So next is.
Who is it Edmund Flagg?
Josh:
I think you did Flag already.
Now it’s Lewishung.
James:
Ludwig Lewison.
Josh:
Yes.
James:
No, no, we didn’t, we were getting ready to do Edmund Flagg.
No,
Edmund Flag wrote a book called why I Am a Jew in 1945.
He based it on his
own personal identity, his cultural history and religious reflection.
But he had
no claims of political coordination.
And basically he was saying through just
from a religious point of view that there’s always a secret society underground
that is trying to control the world.
Next is Adolph Jelinek.
Jelinek, yes.
Yeah,
Jelinek.
Okay, so Jelinek wrote a book called Studies and sketches in 1869.
And he used Hebrew texts, religious scholarship and historical studies.
And
his conclusions were academic and theological.
Now if you quote Jelinek,
then you have more of a base to stand on.
But all of the others besides Adolf,
I wouldn’t use as real sources because he was looking at it from a non
religious point of view, just an outside observer, what he’s seeing.
But he still
had no proof that there’s a secret society running the world, especially the
Jews.
Next is Asher Ginsburg, also known as.
Josh:
Yes,
James:
so Ahad.
I have it right here.
So he, Asher Ginsburg, wrote a bunch of
essays and introductions in the late 19th and 20th century.
Not books, but it’s
just a bunch of essays and introductions.
And he based all of his works on the
Hebrew literature, cultural philosophy and in internal Jewish intellectual
tradition.
Meaning based on what he was learning from rabbis, etc, what they
were telling him.
Okay?
And he formed his opinions through cultural analysis
and philosophical reflections rather than any political or organizational
evidence.
So what he’s saying, Asher Ginsburg or Ahad Haam is saying, trust
me, bro, okay?
I can’t, that’s, that’s my problem.
Okay?
I, I, I want to say, hey,
all of these people are real all these people had, you know, eyewitnesses, but
none of them had any actual evidence.
And guys, we’re going to come into
the protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and I will show to you that that
was, that was not the truth as well.
Josh:
So.
James:
And it sucks.
I know people, people hate hearing this.
Next is Renee
Gwenon.
Now, Gwenon is quoted a lot.
Rene wrote many books.
The Crisis of
the modern world in 27, the reign of Quantity and the Signs of the times of 45.
The king of the world in 1927.
The esotericism of Dante, 1925 and the
multiple states of being in 1932.
Also theosophy, the history of a pseudo
religion, 1921 and the veil of Isis in 1922.
And Rene, I believe it’s a, it’s a
gentleman, used comparative religion, metaphysical texts and philosophical
traditions and came to conclusions that were focused on spiritual decline and
not political conspiracy.
Now I lean towards Rene Guinon than I lean towards
any of those other sources.
Okay?
And my, my reasoning is this.
Yes, there
are secret societies.
Yes, they could be controlling many regions, if not just a
few regions, if not all together, but just one or two.
However, it’s a spiritual
thing that happens.
It’s not a point fingers at the witches of Salem or pointing
fingers at the Ashkenazis of Persia or pointing fingers at, you know, the
current Kazakhstan movement in Astana where the new world order is going
to be.
Rene says, look, it’s spiritual.
What happens when society leaves God
and they, they, they put their focus into baal, Moloch and you know, these
other gods versus just worshiping, so worshiping God or Jesus Christ etc.
So
Renee would be a good source.
But Renee’s sources of the secret societies
and all of that information did not have sources, just did not have conclusions.
And Renee would quote others but would not state that those sources were
valid.
Okay, So I would take Renee and Rene’s information and I would lean
towards that as something that I would use for not proof, but go in that
direction and start seeking more of the truth.
Now next is the Edward.
Yeah,
Edward Plant.
Plantagenet.
Plantagenet.
Josh:
Plantage.
James:
Plantagenet.
Edward wrote a book called Initiate Initiatory talks in the
20th century between the 30s and 50s.
And Eduard relied on internal Masonic
teachings because he was a member and symbolic instruction and came to
the conclusions of a philosophical.
But he said it wasn’t political.
So I would
lean towards him because he was part of the secret societies and he went
through the initiations etc and he said this is a spiritual battle.
It’s not a
material thing.
You can’t point it to just one.
As they all.
He’s saying they’re all
working together, but they’re not all getting the same piece of paper every day
or pamphlet every day on what to do from, you know, the, the Lee’s or the
Orsinis or the break Spears or, you know.
So next is Andre Levy.
Levy.
Andre
Levy, is it?
Levy.
Okay, so Libby wrote a book called the Initiation of.
I don’t
know this word, I’ve never heard of it before, but versing, Versing and versing
A Torics.
It’s an early 20th century work from the 20s.
He drew from
mythology and initiation traditions, Masonic etc.
And historical symbolism and
came to conclusions based on a philosophical and symbolic.
I would lean
towards Andre’s work versus Barule, for example.
Does that make sense?
So,
and again guys, you could take all this information and go find this out for
yourself.
Okay, I’m not saying I have all the answers.
And he’s going to say is
urban.
Josh:
The.
James:
The beginning.
These are all the people that are being quoted.
Josh:
The beginning of this slideshow.
There’s a few links that I showed
everybody at the beginning.
Those links have enough books and material to
keep you busy for the rest of your life if you want it.
So there’s so many
sources and if this is something that I think people need a.
At least a solid
foundation on now, you don’t have to.
You don’t have to spend your life like
going into this.
Some people are interested in it, some people are not.
I get
that.
But it’s coming to a point where I think everybody needs to at least have
enough awareness so that they are not getting got.
They’re not getting, you
know, they’re not in on the being conned.
You know, they’re not a victim of the
con.
A mark.
Right.
Right.
James:
Do me a favor.
I need to interrupt this.
One of my users made.
Made a
point.
Watchman00021 basically said, James didn’t know Carol Quigley
before I told him about it and said I’m bearing false witness and that’s a sin.
James, you’re lying.
Well, no, I’m not.
If you go look at my website.
On March
6, I wrote an essay about Carol Quigley.
So I don’t know where you’re saying
I’m lying.
I just didn’t add Carol Quigley to it because I didn’t think it was
pertinent.
And you said, yeah, this is the historian who Mapped the invisible
empire.
Go look it up on my website.
That was March 6th.
So, yeah, I did a
show about it.
I just didn’t think it was relevant.
I think Carol Quigley was
quoting all of the other ones.
I’m talking about the actual sources here, not the
people on the top.
I did a deep dive into the actual origins, so if you want to
call me a liar, et cetera, that’s fine.
I’m telling you.
Yeah, sure, you may have
brought it up to me.
Great.
I did a.
I did a show on it.
But when it comes to
Carol Quigley, it doesn’t.
It doesn’t feel right in my spirit.
So I’m not gonna.
I’m
not gonna, you know, post it as fact.
And here’s the thing, Watchman.
All of
these books, all of this information that I.
That I have found, all of the
conclusions that I come to between all of them is this.
None of them have any
sources.
None of them have any true information that could back up their
claims.
They’re all speculation.
And I wish I could find things from that.
And
you guys go, oh, I’ve showed you this person.
I’ve showed you that person.
Hey, I did the research.
I looked them up.
I don’t see any evidence.
None.
Nothing is backed up here.
So, yeah, I’m not gonna bring in other people who
are quoting the same old stuff in the back again.
I’m bringing you evidence
from the 1700s all the way up to modern day, and I am telling you that they’re
all quoting each other, and it’s a.
It’s a loop of lies.
So you call me a liar, that’s
fine.
But Quigley, fine, you can say, oh, that’s one of the major pioneers.
They
go grab that book and.
Or whatever, quickly.
Books.
And put them all into it.
I
don’t care.
But I already had that, and I searched that.
It’s my own artificial
intelligence, and I didn’t think we needed to add Carol quickly.
Josh:
That’s.
James:
That’s my opinion.
Josh:
So, yeah, so, like, the point is, is I don’t necessarily.
Like, I’m not
necessarily understanding, you know, like, what.
What the charge was.
I
mean, this is a different, like, discussion we both had.
Did articles on that
author.
But, yeah, it just didn’t make it into the slideshow.
And they’re all.
All of
these authors create almost, you know, a way to view the world.
This is what
they come to believe, or this is what they’re going to write about.
And it’s a
mythology.
And every, you know, for instance, Carol Quigley himself, who
was a.
He was a professor, a really notable one, at a Jesuit school.
And so he
was around a lot of very influential, very smart people.
And so he comes to
see the world in that way that you would, you know, see it through his
writings.
But it’s.
I would say it’s kind of humanist is, you know, the best way to
put it.
You call it kind of Darwinism now.
It’s very close.
I mean, a humanist
and a Darwinist would pretty much be the same thing.
Pretty much.
James:
I’m not talking about people from the 80s.
I’m talking about people
from the 1700s, 1800s, 1900s.
Josh:
Yeah.
James:
I’m talking about the Cosby for symptom.
Josh:
Well, no, I just don’t know what he’s even saying.
Like, I don’t know
what is.
James:
He’s calling me a liar bearing false witness.
And I.
I am not.
I’m telling
you that this guy is quoting all of the other people.
So I’m not interested in
Carol Quigley.
I.
I’m not interested in.
What was the gentleman that you said
earlier with one of the newer pioneers?
Remember, he was the young guy in,
In.
In your works.
I can’t remember his name.
I’m not interested in him.
I’m
interested in the cause.
And the cause is, to be honest, Barule.
That’s where it
really boils down to.
Everyone quotes Barule.
Stop digging it forward and then
move on.
Josh:
I mean, the issue, if you really want to get into the weeds, the issue is
that a lot of the people who are talking and who have apparently somehow
garnered these huge followings, they don’t usually even.
Like, they.
They
wouldn’t even care to know any about these sources.
They don’t read.
They
just watch stuff.
And then they.
That’s how they know about this stuff, is they
watch it from somebody else.
James:
Yeah.
Yeah.
Josh:
So that’s the real issue.
James:
Your Carol Quigleys are going to quote Barule.
I’m not interested in
Carol Quigley.
I.
I’m not interested in anybody from the late 19th century
because I’m trying to get to the cause before symptom.
You see, it’s my job to
point people in the right direction so that they won’t be deceived.
That’s my
job, period.
And this is what I found.
This is what the evidence says.
And all
the.
All of the late 19th centuries, 20th century authors are all quoting all of
these guys.
So there you have it.
And I’m really glad that Watchmen said that,
because I am telling you, Carol Quigley is not a primary.
Primary source.
Just
because Carol Quigley, you know, wrote Tragedy and Hope and the Anglo
American Establishment and Weapon Systems, Political stability.
Josh:
Great.
James:
But go look at his sources and then come back to me.
Right?
Josh:
Because it is right there.
James:
Quoting the same people.
Josh:
Knowledge is the only.
James:
I’m not saying Carol Quigley is a bad source either, Watchmen.
I’m
saying Carol Quigley and his sources.
Josh:
It’s not pertinent to this right now.
That’s not what it’s like.
We’re talking
about just what we’ve seen in general.
James:
Yeah, this guy.
This guy continues to come on, and we’ve got an
agitator in my family.
That’s.
That’s what I have to say.
It just drives me nuts.
So, Watchmen, that’s your third warning.
Third.
And.
And he’s saying you’re
going against what God commands you to do if you say Carol Quigley is a
bad source.
Did I.
Hey, Urban, you got a good memory.
Did I say Carol
Quigley was a bad source?
Josh:
No.
And this is like, I don’t even know where.
Like, why is God
concerned with you and Carol?
Quickly, like, where did that come from?
He
didn’t swear on a Bible or anything?
No, we’re not swearing like this.
That.
I
don’t even know where this came from.
That’s why I’m so confused right now.
James:
I’m sorry.
I didn’t mean to bring it up.
This is coming from my live chat.
Josh:
Yes.
James:
So anyway, moving on.
Josh:
Okay, let’s see.
James:
Moving on.
Josh:
I think this might be the last one we got.
Dylan.
James:
Last one, Dylan.
Oh, okay.
Oh, we have more.
I thought we were
done.
Okay, so, Dylan, Emil Joseph.
Dylan wrote a book called the Inside
Story of the peace Conference in 1920.
And he relied on diplomatic records
and firsthand reporting, meaning he went out and interviewed people.
He
came to the conclusions based on observed political negotiations, but not on
secret societies.
But a really good source.
I would lean towards Dylan if I had
to quote Augustin.
Cochin and Cochin.
Where is it?
Wrote a book called the
election campaign of 1789, and it got released again in 1912.
And Augustine
analyzed political organization during the French Revolution.
He used
electoral records and historical documentation, including quoting Baroul, and
came to conclusions focused on a structural group behavior, but not on just
hidden global control.
And next would be.
I think it’s a netch.
Valadov.
I don’t
know.
I’m not good with pronouncing.
Josh:
That was pretty good.
James:
Wrote a book called Emperor Nicholas II and the Jews.
Okay. 1924.
And used historical accounts of political interpretation of Russia.
And his
conclusions were tied to the monarchy and social conditions, but didn’t have
any sources to quote other than Barule.
You get where I’m going with this.
And then next is Cohen.
Cadmy.
I think it’s Cadmi Cohen.
Josh:
I think.
But yeah, Academy Cohen.
James:
Yeah, Cadmy Cohen wrote a book called Nomads or Nobodies.
This
is French.
And again, I.
Dude, a lot of these books are written in French.
Yeah, Cohen.
I think it’s under.
Yeah, it’s center.
Center K.
Hang tight.
I didn’t
have these alphabetized with your slide.
Sorry.
Okay.
So in the early 20th
century, Cohen, Cadmi used anthropological and historical observations and
came to conclusions that were centered on identity and cultural movement,
but not on secret control.
I would lean more towards, you know, this person
for evidence versus just, hey, it’s a secret group of blood baby eaters.
Right?
And then I believe.
Is that it?
Josh:
I’m pretty sure it is.
Let me make sure.
Yeah, that’s it.
James:
Okay, so guys, here’s.
Here’s the big picture here.
Okay?
Here it is.
This is how the rumor started, okay?
And it’s okay if Urban doesn’t agree with
me.
Urban’s doing his research.
I’m doing my research.
Josh:
Oh.
I mean, fundamentally, we’ve kind of on the same page.
I.
I
appreciate.
I.
I’m of the point where, like, I appreciate the extra viewpoint
because now I.
Like I said, I fundamentally agree with the reasoning that
you’ve applied to these, especially because, you know, this is not a huge
window of time.
This is in geographical regions.
So you said, you know, a lot
of these, obviously by the titles are just French.
And so the same kind of
general region around the same hundred year time span.
You know, that is
not the best sample group data set, whatever.
But there’s still value.
And
going through them like this line item format and just seeing what they’re
about, because this is a process.
It’s not the answer that matters.
It’s a
process.
James:
This is what we’re giving the audience.
This is what we’ve been
working with, okay?
Someone came onto my show and said, where’s your
proof?
Where’s your sources?
And I’m like, here.
And I start showing them,
right?
And they’re like, that’s not good enough.
And then I went, okay, you
know what?
You’re right.
It’s not good enough.
And so I really started digging.
And what I came to the conclusion of is this, guys, this is how the rumor
started.
And we’ll go into your slide here in a second.
And I love this, but guys,
when these writings were placed in sequence, there’s a pattern that emerges
in how claims moved from observation into assertion, right?
The late 18th
century authors like Augustin Baroul and John Robinson, they were reacting
to the shock of the French Revolution and they sought explanations in the
ideas and networks that they could see visibly, right?
Enlightenment writings,
that is all they had clubs that they were hanging out in, lodges that they were
secret society members of, and political correspondence.
And their works all
relied heavily on published material and interpretations, but not on hidden
archives.
And in the, in the 19th century, figures such as Nicholas Deschamps
and J.H. lecontio de Cantaloupe, which we talked about, repeated and
expanded those frameworks, often citing per rule, often citing parole, often,
often citing Baroule as a foundational authority.
And by the early 20th century,
authors like Nesta Webster and Pontchians and Ernest Wynne, or yeah,
Wynn, were drawing from this accumulated body of literature, frequently
referencing earlier writers rather than introducing new primary documentation.
So in parallel, widely circulated texts such as the Protocols of the Learned
Elders of Zion, well, all that entered the stream, guys, it entered the stream.
And they were treated by some authors, including Henry Ford, as supporting
evidence, despite questions about their origin and that were raised soon after
publication, right?
So across these generations, the sourcing chain
increasingly moved from firsthand documentation to previous author’s
interpretation.
And they said that’s proof and it’s not, and that that was
creating continuity of narrative without a continuous set of verifiable records
tying the claims together, because you can’t.
And at the same time, other
writers like Werner Sambard or Hilaire Balak or Karl Marx and Rene Guinon,
they were all analyzing economics, society and religion using their own
frameworks.
But their work was sometimes read alongside or folded into the
same narrative by later commentators.
So this blending of distinct
approaches, political reporting through Emil Dillon, theological critique through
Henry Dalassis and George Dillon, and sociological analysis through
Sombard, and inherited conspiracy literature through Webster and Pontian,
guys, this all helped reinforce the sense of a single continuous explanation,
even when the underlying sources differed in method and evidence.
But the
result is a layered tradition where names recur, references point backwards to
earlier books, and conclusions are often built on chains of citation rather than
independently verified records of a unified central coordinating body.
That’s
what I’m trying to get to, and I would love to say, yep, it’s all real.
And yep,
they all went to these secret societies.
Yep, they all ate babies.
Yep, they all
drink adrenochrome.
There’s no freaking proof.
Josh:
None.
James:
I haven’t visibly seen it.
Have you been to a ritual and seen them
eating babies and drinking blood?
You haven’t, probably.
And maybe you’ve
been invited to them.
But guys, up until I see it myself, I’m not going to report
just based on a hunch or based on what someone told me.
And that’s what
these people did.
And they also reported based on analytical data from the
top view, from a, from a, from a political point of view and from a religious
point of view.
And none of that had any real hard evidence or data to back it
up.
So what I’m saying is they’re all quoting the same source, Barule.
And that
source has no source.
It’s an opinion.
Josh:
Indeed, that’s.
And see, today where we’re at is where it’s history is
basically repeating itself.
Because there’s an old saying from, I don’t know, I
can’t remember the Roman guy’s name, but it goes, kids no longer listen to
their parents and everybody’s writing a book.
And that’s, you know, when,
when civilization and the empire starts to collapse.
That’s what everybody
does is they write a book.
And so here we are in 2026, and what happens is
the people who will apply the method.
For instance, you don’t say who is
responsible?
What is the answer?
I need to know the answer.
Good, bad.
That’s it.
That’s not the right question.
This is a process.
That’s what research
is.
You don’t learn about something without doing research.
And that’s what
this.
It’s called the trivia method.
But originally the trivium was three subjects
that were taught grammar, logic and rhetoric.
So this is a brilliant graph.
I
didn’t make it, but this graph shows the three steps, grammar being the first.
If
you don’t know a word or there’s a word that you need information on.
I even
said the.
This at the beginning of the.
The presentation with the Webster’s
Dictionary.
You look the words up and what you’re doing is you’re building a
data set.
The same thing that you would build for like AI, you would build a
data set.
And you need a data from a variety of eclectic sources.
And so these
would be the eclectic sources.
It doesn’t necessarily matter if the information
is true or false, but you need some type of control.
You need some.
There’s
no such thing as true or false unless you have both of them.
You have to have
something to be false.
If they’re going, is going to be defined a truth right in
that falsehood.
And so you have to have a big set of data to do this process
with.
Now once you have the data, the who, what, where, when, answer the
five basic questions and then you reason through it, you try to draw
conclusions, you try to identify patterns, you process it as it says here,
curiosity, doubt, question, right?
And the final step is the most important part.
You have to teach it to other people.
Are you, you know, engage in a
dialogue.
Rhetoric is, I guess you could think of it as speaking, but what we’re
doing now is that third step is the rhetoric.
It’s that James and I could sit here
and we could just talk back and forth about it and that would help so much.
But what we had to do is we had to go through this process more so to
prepare everything and present it.
And then we have dialogue, you know,
what we’ve done for the show and we present it to you guys.
And that in part
is part of the, the process for us to learn.
This is why when people master a
subject, they will usually go and they will become a professor or teacher of
some court, some sort, you know, even if you’re learning a trade, right, you
know, the person who was, you know, the guy who had been in it, there’s a
word, I can’t remember what it is, the senior most guy, the master.
And then
he would train, you know, a new apprentice and that apprentice would
become a journeyman, etc.
James:
Etc.
And there’s, right, and every generation has an author that writes
a book that picks up the same, you know, garbage that was out and then
quotes that garbage.
And then here we are again.
We’re never gonna stop the
garbage trail.
We’re never gonna stop it unless we come to reasoning,
discernment and proof.
And look guys, I didn’t want to come to this fucking
conclusion.
I was convinced it was a bunch of baby eaters.
And what I’m
starting to learn from this and realize is that what if, I’m just saying what if,
what if it’s just a bunch of non believing bankers giving us satanic ritual crap
so that we go research a bunch of crap, waste our time and instead, instead
of petitioning to all the laws that they’re passing in every country so that they
continue to siphon our wealth.
Because what I’m seeing through the evidence,
the evidence shows me, is that there is no evidence of a satanic Luciferian
occult that’s controlling the world currently.
And the Bible says that Satan can’t
have it anymore since Jesus died for our sins.
So what we’re seeing is a lie.
That’s what I’m seeing.
The data says it.
I wish I could say it was real, but it’s
not.
It’s not.
And dude, I may even look great quoting Barule, but Barule had
no evidence, no solid evidence.
And you know what evidence is, guys?
Court
cases.
Court cases, police records, bills that were passed to stop things like
this.
What I’m seeing is a rumor chain, a rubber mill of things that to continue
to get digested that people will believe in and just stop fighting against the real
system.
And that’s the bankers.
If you think who was the one that Jesus was
against this whole time, didn’t hate him, but was definitely upset with them.
Was so upset that he fashioned two whips and went in and kicked them out of
the temple, whipping them with the whip.
The bankers, the Money Changers.
And you know what the Money Changers are really good at?
Propaganda.
And that’s where I think what we’ve been fed is a bunch of.
And it wouldn’t
surprise me if.
Banachi, Israel, Zeus, those are the new icons of the new era.
The old Barus or burrows of the 1700s and the.
The Henry Fords of the 30s
just carrying the same narrative around, getting everybody to be scared about
a satanic group of people who want to eat your baby.
Period.
Josh:
Yeah, it’s all, it’s all done on, you know, it is banking.
The whole thing is
banking.
At the end of the day, we’re all on borrowed time.
At the end of the
day it’s banking because the whole thing is, you know, money is water, it’s
electricity.
And banking is akin to electrical currency.
Electrical, Electrical
currency.
And it flows the same way.
And you will find the terms do the same
thing.
Banks and batteries and dams, dams convert electricity, water into
electricity.
All these things are means to an end.
So what I have found is that
they do those gruesome things, but those are means to an end in that they’re
not the, the.
For instance, the spell, you know, what do they get in return for
these rituals?
Well, it’s to control people.
And the way that they do it, they.
They do it to keep people in line more than because they like it.
And this is
what I have begun to hear from listening to so many people tell their
experiences, like survivors and stuff like that.
They will.
Bunch of them will
say.
It seems like they don’t do it because they like it, but because when they
enforce people to do it in Their circle.
It forces those people to be undyingly
loyal.
These are basically coven secret societies.
People who come together
and swear on pain of death.
James:
Yeah.
Josh:
That we will carry this to our graves.
That’s what it is.
You know, if you
and I go to war together and we’re in a trench together, we almost die
together.
There’s a bond between those people that can’t ever be broken.
And
they only share that amongst themselves.
And so it has to become a secret
society of sorts because other people don’t get it.
And so they find people that
they share companionship with and who get what it is.
And because there’s
only two ways that that goes.
One, you can do it out of faith and love, and you
can lift people up.
You can come together out of, you know, a fellowship and
you can lift people up out of love and you can better their lives and you can
watch them improve.
Or there’s faith or, sorry, fear.
As opposed to faith.
There’s fear and it takes the role of faith in the negative context because only
faith and fear motivate people to action.
Those are the only.
Somebody told
me once the only two real emotions are love and fear and love and faith.
And,
you know, against fear is true.
Everything kind of comes under those two
emotions.
And that’s what pushes.
You know, it’s a spirit, it animates you.
Faith or fear.
And so when you can’t tell anybody what you’re going through
and if you don’t follow orders, people you care about are going to get hurt.
Hurt.
And if you don’t do what we’ve paid you to do, we will extract the value
out of you.
And it is all about money.
And they say, if I don’t do it, somebody
else will.
And business is just business.
And it’s ultimately not anything.
I
mean, they.
Some groups do the extra gruesome rituals because they enjoy
it.
Because they’re evil people who enjoy watching other people suffer.
James:
Sure, it’s real.
They do it.
Josh:
But others.
Others are simply Darwinist.
The only reason they do it is
because I’ve got a family to feed.
And if you get.
If you’re the mark and you’re
stupid enough to believe it, well, you deserve to get God.
And I will step on
you because I’ve got a family to feed.
James:
Yeah, that’s gonna lie to you with propaganda in order to keep.
Keep
my thing going.
And I think that’s what’s really going on now.
I’m not
discrediting that.
Josh:
No, you’re not.
I know.
James:
I’m not discrediting.
Josh:
I hear what you’re talking about.
James:
There’s.
There.
You know, I’m not even saying that there isn’t, you
know, secret tunnels under the Vatican.
I honestly, I don’t care.
I don’t care
anymore.
None of this information from all of these people are going to help
you.
Josh:
Yeah.
James:
All it’s going to do is just put you into fear, and it’s not going to bring
you into peace.
This is.
I’m starting to realize and learn.
This is propaganda to
keep us in fear.
And as long as we stay in fear and as long as we don’t do our
homework, we.
We.
We.
We focus on Satan instead of God, period.
Now, this
whole show is about sources and proof.
Tonight, what I can tell you is that
there is proof that the entire world is not being controlled by the bankers.
And
my proof is this.
Russia kicked out the International Monetary Fund.
Russia
does not have an IMF central bank.
That’s proof and data.
Russia does not
listen and do what the United nations says, nor the bank for International
Settlements.
Sure, they will meet along with all the others to find out what’s
going on every two months.
Like we’ve been learning through Katherine
Austin Fitz for the bank for International Settlements.
All the world leaders
meet every two months in Basel, Switzerland.
Fine.
But they’re not working
together.
That’s my point.
They’re fighting each other.
They all have maybe
the same goal, but that goal is to beat each other out.
To beat each other out,
to get gain and be the top dog.
That is what they’re doing.
Josh:
It is.
James:
And in the.
In all of the symptoms, the.
The symptoms that fall from
just that, the love of money.
Here are your symptoms.
Writers like Baru or
Barule, writers like Henry Ford, writers like Israel Zeus or Santos Bonacci,
that’s all symptoms.
It’s insanity.
Josh:
At the end of the day,
James:
they
Josh:
go insane because they do.
And what happens is because they live in a
world where you gain the most by stabbing the people you love in the back,
because that’s how you make the money, then that means anybody can do it
to you.
And so it makes them go crazy.
And it is a pit.
They have a pit inside
of them.
They’re void.
And that is the evil.
James:
This is.
Josh:
I, you know, it’s.
I arguably see it as spiritual, but what happens is that
it’s more banal.
You know, the banality of evil was a great theory because it
is.
Evil is much more banal when you see it.
And it’s almost like people don’t
Even realize it.
It’s almost like something’s just on top of them.
They just don’t
even see it.
But at the end of the day when you go and you almost take this
bird’s eye view and you zoom out, okay, what happened?
This guy gives an
order at the top of food chain.
How does that play out as it goes down?
Well,
now, you know, you go a few notches down and the general just said, get
something done.
And now the village is burning down and a bunch of people
are gone and died.
Kids, children, whatever.
And did the guy necessarily
know that?
Possibly.
But he didn’t know to some extent how it would get
carried out.
And that’s by design because he’s too weak to do it eye to eye.
Because it’s easy to sign a death warrant when you don’t have to be there to
see it.
And that’s what I mean by it’s been out.
Yeah, because the killers who
kill the most people are politicians who everybody claps for because they go
and they send thousands of people to die in a war and they’re.
They kill more
people than any serial killer.
James:
Now, I want to leave you with one question that I will answer first and
then you’ll answer second.
If you could oblige with me.
Josh:
Sure.
James:
The question to me is, James, where’s your proof that there’s a secret
society controlling the world?
I can tell you with all the research I’ve done for
two hard years.
I have none.
Zero.
And I’ve got.
And I just, I can’t find any
information beyond the French Revolution when it comes to a book written
and has sources available and information that we could use and actually go
to a, you know, a press, you know, CNN and say, look, here’s the source.
This, this is, this is real.
This is happening.
I have none.
I have none.
So I
can’t, as a pastor, as a lover of my neighbor, cannot, with good conscience
report on stuff that isn’t real, that, that, that doesn’t have a trail of data and,
and even a breadcrumb to lead to it.
Other than just eyewitnesses and, and lie
detector tests, none of that is proof.
It’s still speculation until we see an
organization like, let’s just say Epstein and, you know, a company like, I don’t
know, Eminem, Mars Tool, whatever, and they had some sort of, you know,
human trafficking deal that were going on, and they, it’s not them, and they
get taken down completely.
And that, that, that company just immediately gets
bought out.
It changes face and everything is just washed away.
That’s
evidence.
I can use that in court.
Okay?
But if I, I, if I go into court and prove,
to prove that there’s a secret society and we need to write a law to outlaw
them, I got dick.
I don’t have dick.
I got nothing.
And what we’ve seen is we
got a quote, Baru Baro.
That’s just not gonna cut it.
So I’m telling you guys
right now as a researcher who have been researching for the past 25 years
and what I’ve, what I see before me and all the evidence that I have, and I
have evidence, and I’m not going to base it on emotion, I’m going to base on
facts.
I can clearly tell you with a humble heart, there is no evidence that the
Jews and the Ashkenazi and the, the, the Satanist cabal rule the world.
Now I
wonder what your thoughts are.
Do you have evidence?
Josh:
All I’ve seen evidence for is that there are a lot of evil people in the
world who do evil things and who hurt a lot of people.
And some of them know
about it and others, you know, delude themselves into not knowing about it.
But there’s no tangible, not at least that, you know, is human origin.
There’s
no grand architect sitting behind a desk who just says yay or nay.
There’s,
there’s not a, it’s not as formal as people think.
And there’s more stupidity, you
know, lots of it.
There’s so much like, and that’s one of the things that I’ve
always held like in, like kind of to counter it as a counterweight.
You know, I
look around at the, the sheer stupidity of the people who are in charge right
now, and it’s almost like there’s no way these people could even make it
through a dinner together or an event together.
I don’t think that these people
are meeting to build something like that.
I’ve not seen any proof for a human
origin of it.
James:
Right.
Like the learned elders of the protocol, learned elders of the
Zionist.
All of that stuff is propaganda.
And I, I’m starting to think that most of
these books have been written as propaganda to get us to focus on the devil
instead of focusing on the bankers.
Because I don’t really believe that the
bankers believe in the devil anyway.
They love money and they, they’ll do
anything to, to double what they have.
I remember watching some
documentary about a prince in, somewhere, in one of the, somewhere in the
Middle east and he had, I believe the, to the tune of about $600 million.
And,
and 600 billion.
Sorry, 600 billion in, in worth.
Right.
And the interviewer says,
well, isn’t that enough?
And the look on his face and what he was saying was,
he said, no, it’s not enough.
I need more.
What does he need more for?
And I
do, I do think because he’s going up against the imf, the bank for International
Settlements, he’s going up against the bank of England, he’s going up against
London, he’s going up against the financial market.
And 600 billion is nothing
compared to America, who makes $29 trillion a year in goods and services.
He needs more to compete against the Money Changers.
And the Money
Changers have used America.
And this is documented proof because we, we
are on a fiat currency that’s documented proof and have been using America’s
money to accumulate wealth above all others.
And what’s going to happen in
the future with that?
I don’t know.
But what I do know is when it comes to a
one group of Jews controlling the entire world, I don’t buy it.
I don’t have the
evidence for it.
It doesn’t make sense.
It looks like propaganda to me.
And
maybe, maybe this could all be set up for this anti Semitism thing, you know,
to try to, you know, enrage God so Armageddon can start.
I don’t know.
But I
know that I’m humble enough to say I don’t have the answers.
I’m humble
enough to say I have no proof and I’m okay with that.
Josh:
Yeah, I think that’s the most important step to the whole thing because
it’s in that.
Being able to assess that.
Being humble enough to admit that.
Being humble enough to realize that at the end of such a long tunnel path,
rabbit hole, whatever you want to call it, you still only find out that you don’t
know anything.
At the end of the day, you know, you don’t.
It’s still at the end
of the day.
But I’ve seen some very spooky stuff and I’ve seen a lot that
convinces me that this is of an origin so spiritual.
It’s a spiritual battle more
than anything else.
I would agree with the writers on the spiritual battle.
James:
I agree.
Josh:
More so than any.
More so than any temporal, material world
organization.
Because if any, any of us are human anymore, it seems like
some people aren’t human anymore.
You realize that people don’t get along
that well.
James:
Yeah, they don’t.
Josh:
You know, if there’s a monetary incentive, you get along with people as
long as you’re getting a paycheck.
James:
And so you send in your, you send in your daughter to marry and into
the other family.
Josh:
Indeed.
And so what happens is.
James:
That’s psychotic.
Josh:
No, if.
How about psychotic?
What if we do a research study and we
find out that the optimal way to brainwash somebody is to do it under the
guise of satanic ritual.
And so, okay, just to do the program the best way,
we’re just going to do this.
And it’s like we don’t actually believe it, but it’s just
a means to an end because it works.
James:
Yeah.
Josh:
And so that’s like these, it is insanity.
They’re all like arguably
completely psychotic people.
James:
Yeah, yeah.
And so something changes in you spiritually when you
accumulate wealth.
You know, and it happened to Solomon, happened to
King David, it happened to the best of them.
Look, first and Second Kings,
you’ll learn all about what, what wealth does to, to a nation.
Josh:
Yeah.
And these stories are, that’s, that’s why I’m convinced that these
are spiritual matters.
Because these stories very, you know, they, they
perfectly match Bible prophecy.
And dare I say this, this is the biggest thing
that I have learned for those people who are willing to go and read history.
You will find out that history confirms that the Bible is telling the truth.
You will
find out that that prophecy is fulfilled in history and is confirmed burned by
history.
James:
But I agree, 100.
Josh:
The people that don’t read history, well, they don’t.
See, that’s where
they slip in.
The, the easy way that the just, you know, just say it, just watch it,
just donate some money.
But then you have to have faith in it.
But some of us
just know because you, you know, you know, you can see it.
James:
But you just said, you just said the easy way.
Yeah, the easy way is
saying, yeah, there’s just a bunch of Zionist Jew satanic baby eaters running
the world.
That’s the easy way.
But that’s not the truth.
It, there’s no, there’s
no evidence backing that up.
Yeah, sorry, I didn’t mean to interrupt, but I
really wanted to put that point.
Josh:
Really.
It comes back to what you said.
Being humble enough to realize
that you don’t have the, the one and only truth.
That’s, that is the answer.
I
know that it’s the answer because if you always are in that mentality and you
are always receptive to the knowledge, Jesus said that you have to plant each
seed and let the, you know, tree grow to see what fruit it has.
James:
Right.
Josh:
Because if you don’t know what fruit it has.
And maybe it’ll be good fruit
and you want to keep it, but maybe you don’t want that tree.
But the point is,
literally think of it as a tree.
You can’t do that unless you let it grow.
And so
that means you have to be receptive to a knowledge or a new idea.
Now, if
you think you have the answer and you think you are convinced, oh, I know
who it is.
So anything other than that’s not the right answer, or that person is
trying to deceive me, but what happens then is because you are not receptive
to anything new, then the one thing you have to do, you know, to ask for
forgiveness.
Why would you have to ask for forgiveness if you haven’t done
anything wrong?
James:
That’s what Trump said.
He said it.
Josh:
I know.
And the part about it is not anything other than hubris.
He’s just
so hubris.
But what if the only thing you need to do to be, to be forgiven, to be
free, is to ask for forgiveness?
But that means you have to be capable of
doing something.
To be forgiven means you have to have.
Well, I, you know,
I’m a imperfect person who needs forgiveness because I don’t have all the
answers.
James:
Well, that’s the parable of the, the, the.
The two men at the, at the
steps of the temple.
One man says, lord, thank you for my, my family.
Thank
you for all this stuff.
You know, I just.
Thank you.
I’m not like this publican over
here.
And then it, the story goes to the public and the publican bashes his
chest and lord, forgive me for I’m a sinner.
And Jesus was like, that’s the
humble one, not the one like, I’ve got it great, you know, no, dude, get, get
down on your knees and realize that you are.
You have no power without the
Holy Spirit.
You have no power without the blood of Jesus.
You have no
power without learning who the father is.
And that’s.
That’s where it is.
Josh:
The, The.
You know, the sad thing is, like, the.
One of the worst
additions of that is I already have Jesus, so why would I need anything more?
Because that’s the trap that I see so many people fall into today.
It’s like they
really turn themselves off because they think that they have and they don’t
need anymore.
James:
And yeah, yeah, I mean, dude, I could accept Jesus and turn around
and make a billion dollars and, and still go out and do evil and.
But I can’t use
that as my, as my, as.
As my crotch I can’t use that as my golden ticket into
heaven because all of the things that, that I have used with the money that
was given to me by the father wasn’t my money.
What did I do with it?
That’s
going to be the question, you know, did you help people?
Did you, you know,
or did you hoard it and try to double it?
You know, did you, did you gamble in
Vegas and, you know, throw it away?
But what, what, what really is, is the
bottom line to all this guys is our heart.
Heart.
Where is our heart?
And all of
these people that we’ve researched, their heart was, hey, it’s satanic worship
and it’s baal, Moloch, and that’s what they really believe.
I don’t have the
evidence, but trust me, bro, fine.
The Bible, honestly, the Bible has all the
answers too.
If you read the Old Testament, it talks about the Israelites
leaving God and worshiping baal.
And BAAL was an agricultural God and
BAAL was the one who provided the rain.
But in exchange, you got to kill your
firstborn.
In exchange, you got to eat babies.
In exchange, you got to drink
blood.
And that’s what they did.
And then they found out that, hey, we’re not
treating each other right, we have to go back to God.
And it happens over and
over and over and over and over.
So what.
What I think, just like what you
said, you believe those authors.
This is a story.
Spiritual war.
Josh:
The only context to answer the question
James:
is that, yeah, spiritual war.
And when it comes to.
It’s just a group of
people.
This committee of 300, the committee of 30, the committee of 13, the
committee of 3, the Jesuits, they’re not in control.
They want to be, but they’ve
still got countries that just won’t do what they want.
And this is why were
bombing Iran.
This is why we’re taking advantage of oil in Venezuela that
doesn’t belong to us.
Because there’s always.
There always has to be.
It’s.
It’s
king of the hill.
Remember playing that in school?
Yeah.
A little mound and
then you would beat each other up to get to the top.
So you’re the king of the
hill.
And when anybody come up, you got to kick them, you got to push them
to stay the king of the hill.
Do you ever play that Urban?
Josh:
I did, yeah.
In Jim.
James:
Okay, that’s what’s going on.
And they want us to go.
Nope.
It’s all a
bunch of eyes wide shut robed Satanists in circles doing rituals and spells
over the people.
Now I’m not saying that they don’t do that.
Oh, they do.
But
that’s not, that’s not the source.
That’s not the, the, the, the, the one entity that
we can point fingers at.
And we have no evidence of that.
Period.
And that’s
what I’m saying.
Josh:
Yeah.
What I was saying, like when you had talked about the Bible
having the answers, the only, the only framework or context that exists that
could, that we could use to answer this.
The answer doesn’t lay within
anything human.
The only way that this can be answered in a conclusive way
is in the spiritual framework, the spiritual context.
And let me give.
This just
popped into my mind.
But there’s a special verb tense in the Bible.
It’s called
the prophet, prophetic, perfect tense.
So speaketh.
That means will have
spoken.
So it’s almost.
You’re referring to something that is guaranteed to
happen in such a way that it’s already happened.
But that’s the, the weird
tense that happens.
It’s, you will have already done this.
I know what you’re
going to do.
You will do this.
That tense.
So that’s when God, you know, is
speaking.
He’s.
He walketh, he will have walked or he will have moved in that
direction.
Because when the Bible talks, you know, yes, you’re, you’re putting
yourself into the, you know, the narrative, as the words go.
But these words
are not just like, you know, it’s not just history.
This is like every word is so
heavy, you know, like we talked about earlier, the difference between set and
make.
If you change that one word, it’s so powerful that you get kind of a
different meaning to it.
James:
Right.
Josh:
Bible being objectively like absolute truth, almost like a source code.
You know, you change that, you’re going to get a whole different thing.
You’re
going to get a whole different meaning.
So that’s why the whole thing is set up
that way.
It’s set up because when the human mind tries to comprehend it.
Somebody in your audience told me this.
If you read the Bible and you listen,
it will speak back to you.
That’s why you can read it in the year 1700.
For
those people who could read, you could read it near 1825, 1923, 1976.
And
every person who ever reads it will get this unique experience, you know, one,
you could call it a personal relationship, but everybody will have that in it.
Because if, if it was just a history textbook, everybody would read the story
the same way.
That’s where the error today comes in, is people Just almost.
It’s like this vile, twisted way of viewing it because, like, they.
They believe it,
but they still read it as a history textbook.
Do you know what I’m saying?
James:
Yeah.
And then quoting Barol, dude, it’s a loop.
It’s a loop of false
information or a loop of propaganda that has continued to work for 200 years.
And I want to put a stop to it.
That’s how I feel.
Now, we really should
convince.
We’ve been here for two hours.
But, guys, here’s the bottom line.
And I’m gonna say my closing.
And you can see your closing after, if that’s
okay, buddy.
When all of these works are laid side by side, which we did
tonight.
We did it, dude.
If it would take us two days to go through every one
of those books and give you the summaries of it and what they were really
trying to accomplish.
But when all these works are laid side by side, the final
question really becomes unavoidable here.
Why would so many authors
across so many generations print such sweeping claims without producing
verifiable documentations of a single centralized command behind world
events?
You see, the answer does not require speculation.
It sits in the
context each of these men lived in.
Barule and Robinson.
They are quoted
almost every from.
They’re quoted all the time.
And we found tonight that they
have no sources to back them up.
But Barule and Robinson were reacting to
the collapse of the old order in Europe.
You would agree with that.
They were
reacting to it.
They needed an explanation as to how fast this shit went down.
The old system went down overnight.
Overnight.
And they had.
They had no
evidence.
They had nothing.
So they started writing about it, trying to put the
best conclusion they could put together, but they had no evidence.
Now just
Champs and Delassis and Dylan.
They were defending religious institutions
against rising secularism.
And Webster, Pontchians and Ford, they were
riding in the shadow of revolution, war, and economic upheaval.
Because you
know what?
There’s money to be made there.
And I believe Ford was quoting
all of those other ones, and they all did not have the correct sources.
They
didn’t have anything.
And Webster, Ford, Shadow, Revolution, War,
Economica, people, each of them faced a world that appeared to be changing
rapidly and at times chaotically, which we were talking about.
It’s all chaos.
And Satan’s all about order.
Out of chaos.
He is chaos because he’s the
father of lies.
That’s all he can do.
That’s all he can do.
He can lie to people
and continue to put order his way, but it’s an inverted system.
It’s inverted
from the kingdom of heaven.
It’s upside down, it’s backwards.
And that’s the
world we live in and we’ve always been living in ever since Adam and Eve.
Now, in that environment, the method that they shared was not uncovering of
hidden archives, but what they uncovered was the interpretation of visible
patterns linking ideas that could explain what they were witnessing.
But it
wasn’t evidence, it wasn’t court documentation, it wasn’t arrest warrants.
They
were just interpreting the visible patterns of the times.
And the printing press
did the rest.
The propaganda.
Printing press started taking all of this, and the
rumor had it all over the place.
So once an interpretation was written, it
becomes a source for the next author who comes in.
And over time, repetition
gave weight to what had not been independently proven.
That’s right.
We
talked about the first, the.
The international Jew.
We talked about that author.
So this is where the principle of Occamus razor becomes necessary, folks.
And welcome.
Plasma.
Plasma just rated my stream.
Have you ever been
stream rated?
This is a first for me.
Yeah, Duke can take all his people and
then come on to our show and.
Josh:
Yeah, that’s great.
James:
Brings a bunch more people.
Thank you, Plasma for coming back on.
Unfortunately, we’re at the end of the show, but love you, buddy.
So this is.
This is where the principle of Occam’s Razor really becomes necessary.
Okay.
Not to dismiss the search for truth, but to ground it.
I would be a
horrible pastor if I would get up there and start spitting conspiracy theories.
I’d
be a horrible pastor if I told you that aliens exist.
I have no evidence of it.
And
Occam’s Razor, it just means the simplest explanation tends to be the correct
one.
And when multiple explanations exist, the most that people actually rely
on, on the fewest unverified assumptions, is the one that stands first.
And
that’s what we found through Peru, and that’s what we found through
Robinson.
The first two that were quoted in the 1700s based on what they
saw going on in the French Revolution without any proper paperwork.
Thus,
over time, repetition gave weight, though it had not been independently
proven.
So this is where the principle of occupation comes.
And across all of
these texts, we’re talking about unverified assumptions.
Let me repeat that.
We’re talking about unverified assumptions.
All of these texts and books, what
is consistently documented is not a single hidden council directing history
from the shadows, but a series of observable forces.
Political movements,
economic shifts, ideological conflicts, religious disagreements, and
institutional power.
Structures.
That’s not the Jews.
Does that make sense?
It’s not the Jews.
And the more complex of the claim that all of these are
accorded by a single concealed authority that requires evidence that does not
appear in the records that these authors themselves provide.
And that’s what
I’m trying to say, guys.
I wanted it to be real.
I wanted to blame everything on
this.
These.
These fake Jews from Europe who are white and not black.
So
the conclusion here, guys, is not that nothing exists.
Let me repeat that.
It’s
not that they don’t have their secret societies and eat babies and drink blood.
That’s not the problem.
The problem is everyone’s basing their research on
old documentation that has no verifiable proof that what they’re saying exists.
So.
And that’s the assumption we’re jumping into.
And it’s.
It’s.
It’s.
And for
anyone seeking truth, which is me, because it’s in my heart, because I’ve
come to you guys many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many times
with my mistakes, and I repent of it.
You guys have seen me on my show over
and over and over again making mistakes.
And I come back on the next show
and I go, I got to tell you guys, I was wrong.
That’s a heart for the truth.
And
for anyone seeking truth, that standard does not weaken the pursuit.
It should
protect it.
So what I’m doing is I am exposing the truth.
And the truth is there’s
no documented evidence that a hidden cabal exists that has taken over the
world and has taken over the world for the past 200 years.
Because, again, it
doesn’t weaken the pursuit, it protects it.
Urban.
Josh:
That’s really just a brilliant way to put it.
And I think that is a great cap
on the show.
All of the.
If there was any, like, conclusive evidence, it’s
probably locked away underneath the Vatican and the secret archives that go
on for millions of, like, just like, you know, there’s so much stuff in there,
James:
but it’s not public.
Josh:
Yeah, it’s.
It is so broad.
This is something that has existed as old as
time.
And so there is no central one person pulling the strings.
There’s no
such thing as uniform power.
Power and jumper cables has a positive and a
negative lead.
James:
Yeah, good point.
Josh:
The own.
The per.
The best person to put in this candidate seat of
entrepreneurs charges the person who sees that and is able to play the
positive and the negative against each other.
And I will give you my best
evidence for it being the bank in Basel, Switzerland.
Is that not even the
government of Switzerland can enter the bank without permission.
So who’s
in charge?
No country in the world can enter that bank, not even a country
that it’s in without permission of the manager.
So.
James:
Right.
Josh:
Money is the God of this world.
James:
Right.
Josh:
And with that I think that caps it off.
James:
That’s mammoth.
Guys.
This has been caused before Symptom and
Urban Odyssey.
We really appreciate you being here.
Since 9 o’ clock this
has been a very eye opening thing, not only just for Urban, but for me as well.
I really wish that we could find evidence and say, guys, this is, this is it, this is
where we are.
But if we are to report on the truth, if we report just on rumor,
we’re not going to get anywhere.
We can’t use the enemy’s tools to fight the
enemy.
You know, the Bible says, how can Satan cast out Satan?
Why would
he in the first place?
It would just, it would hurt his kingdom.
So that’s what
we’re trying to work with here.
We’re just trying to work with the truth and with,
with what evidence we have.
And I know this kind of direction for just my show
personally.
People are going to hate that because everyone is addicted to a
car crash and see blood.
You’re not going to see it here.
You’re going to start
to see just plain Jane stuff that, that, that, that’s being used as propaganda in
a whole different fashion just so that we can stop looking at the, all the
bankers hoarding the money because that’s all they care about is hoarding
the money.
And that’s why they, they crash things and they have control of
that.
That’s more of a better way to go when it comes to research than finding
a satanic cabal controlling the world.
That’s just, that’s just my opinion.
Josh,
thank you so much for being here.
I love you.
You’re an awesome, you’re an
awesome guy.
Guys, I really do recommend you go check out Urban
Odyssey.
You can find him on his website, official urban.com and on his
website.
He has everything on there.
They could point you to his, his other
links, et cetera.
I believe it is, yeah, the official
Josh:
urban.substack.com and that’s my sub stack and I’ll put it, I’ll update all
the videos and everything.
And guys, I want to say this.
If you want to see
more of stuff like this, if you want us to do some more stuff together, let us
know because we’re kind of trying to judge, to see if people like the potential,
you know, us doing a show together on a periodic basis.
So if there’s
something that you think that we.
We could do well or like a show that you
would like to see us cover and you think that would be good, please feel free
to leave that feedback.
We’re really, really eager for that because we’re
always looking to, you know, find new things to do.
It’s what keeps points
fresh because you have to pump, you know, blood into the.
The effort, you
know, to learn.
You have to continue to not be in one spot.
You have to move.
James:
Thank you.
I agree with that. 100.
Thank you so much for that.
I
wouldn’t have thought about that.
And, yeah, guys, if you’re interested in this
show, if you guys really think that me coming together once a week with
Urban and discussing the source, we’re kind of playing around with the show
names.
But if you think that this is something you’d like to see once a week,
us coming together and discussing topics, then you let us know.
Thank you so
much, guys.
This has been Cosby for Symptom and Urban Odyssey.
We will
see you guys.
I’ll see you tomorrow.
And, Urban, you’ll see your guys when
you see them?
Josh:
Absolutely.
All right.
James:
Be blessed.
Love you.
Josh:
Take care, guys.
Good night.
Opening
Tonight is not a show built on reaction. It is a show built on record. What sits in front of us is not one book, not one author, not one claim—but a chain of writings that stretch across centuries, languages, religions, and political systems. Names like Barruel, Robison, Webster, Ford, Noblitt, Sombart, Guénon, Mullins, Daniel, Herzl, Hoffman, Springmeier, Marx—voices that did not know each other, did not live in the same eras, and did not share the same beliefs—yet all attempted to explain the same question: who or what shapes the movements of history behind what we can see.
This is where most conversations stop too early. People are handed conclusions without being shown the path that led to them. They are told what to believe about secret societies, power structures, revolutions, religion, and identity—but they are rarely shown how each author arrived at those conclusions, what sources they used, and whether those sources were firsthand, secondhand, or inherited from someone before them. Over time, repetition begins to feel like confirmation, and narratives that were once speculation begin to be treated as established fact.
So tonight, the approach is simple and disciplined. Every source is placed on the table. Not to defend it. Not to attack it. But to examine it. Line by line if necessary. Who wrote it. When it was written. What evidence was actually used. Whether the claims were built on documents, observations, theology, philosophy, or the interpretation of someone else’s work. This is not about dismissing patterns—it is about testing them.
Because if there is truth in any of this, it will hold up under scrutiny. It will not need emotion. It will not need assumption. It will stand on its own weight. And if parts of the narrative do not hold, then removing them does not weaken the search—it strengthens it. It clears the noise so what remains can be seen clearly.
What you are about to hear is not a lecture. It is a process. Two people walking through the material in real time, asking the same question over and over again: what is actually documented, and what has been repeated until it sounds true. And by the end of this, the goal is not to tell you what to think—but to show you how to see.
===============================================
How the rumor started
When these writings are placed in sequence, a pattern emerges in how claims moved from observation into assertion. Late–18th century authors like Augustin Barruel and John Robison were reacting to the shock of the French Revolution and sought explanations in the ideas and networks they could see—Enlightenment writings, clubs, lodges, and political correspondence. Their works relied heavily on published material and interpretation, not hidden archives. In the 19th century, figures such as Nicolas Deschamps and J. H. Le Couteulx de Canteleu repeated and expanded those frameworks, often citing Barruel as a foundational authority. By the early 20th century, authors like Nesta Webster, Léon de Poncins, and Ernest Jouin were drawing from this accumulated body of literature, frequently referencing earlier writers rather than introducing new primary documentation. In parallel, widely circulated texts such as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion entered the stream and were treated by some authors, including Henry Ford, as supporting evidence despite questions about their origin that were raised soon after publication. Across these generations, the sourcing chain increasingly moved from firsthand documents to previous authors’ interpretations, creating continuity of narrative without a continuous set of verifiable records tying the claims together.
At the same time, other writers —Werner Sombart, Hilaire Belloc, Karl Marx, and René Guénon—were analyzing economics, society, and religion using their own frameworks, but their work was sometimes read alongside or folded into the same narrative by later commentators. This blending of distinct approaches—political reporting (Emile Dillon), theological critique (Henri Delassus, George F. Dillon), sociological analysis (Sombart), and inherited conspiracy literature (Webster, Poncins)—helped reinforce the sense of a single, continuous explanation even when the underlying sources differed in method and evidence. The result is a layered tradition where names recur, references point backward to earlier books, and conclusions are often built on chains of citation rather than independently verified records of a unified, central coordinating body.
Satanic Cabal Sources:
Ahad Ha’am (Asher Ginsberg) – essays and introductions (late 19th–early 20th century, primarily 1890s–1910s), based on Hebrew literature, cultural philosophy, and internal Jewish intellectual tradition; conclusions formed through cultural analysis and philosophical reflection rather than political or organizational evidence.
Barruel, Augustin – Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism (1797–1799); relied on revolutionary pamphlets, Enlightenment writings, and Church interpretation; concluded coordinated subversion by linking ideological similarities across texts without direct operational records.
Belloc, Hilaire – The Jews (1922), The Servile State (1912); used historical and economic observations of European society; conclusions drawn from structural analysis of finance and minority roles, not secret documentation.
Canteleu, J. H. Le Couteulx de – Les Sectes et Sociétés Secrètes Politiques et Religieuses (Political and Religious Sects and Secret Societies) (1863); compiled descriptions of secret societies using publicly available records and prior authors; conclusions based on pattern recognition rather than internal evidence.
Cochin, Augustin – La Campagne Électorale de 1789 (The Election Campaign of 1789) (1912); analyzed political organization during the French Revolution using electoral records and historical documentation; conclusions focused on structural group behavior, not hidden global control.
Delassus, Henri – Le Problème de l’Heure Présente (The Problem of the Present Hour) (1904), La Conjuration Antichrétienne (The Anti-Christian Conspiracy) (1910); drew from Catholic theology, earlier conspiracy writers, and political events; conclusions framed as spiritual opposition to Christianity rather than documented coordination.
Deschamps, Nicolas – Les Sociétés Secrètes et la Société (Secret Societies and Society) (1882); used Masonic writings, Church sources, and Barruel’s work; conclusions formed by connecting ideological themes across institutions.
Dillon, Emile Joseph – The Inside Story of the Peace Conference (1920); relied on diplomatic records and firsthand reporting; conclusions based on observed political negotiation, not secret societies.
Dillon, George F. – The War of Antichrist with the Church and Christian Civilization (1885); used Church doctrine, prophetic interpretation, and earlier Catholic critiques; conclusions framed as theological conflict rather than documented conspiracy.
Fleg, Edmond – Pourquoi je suis Juif (1928), Why I Am a Jew (1945); based on personal identity, cultural history, and religious reflection; no claims of political coordination.
Ford, Henry – The International Jew (1920–1922); compiled secondary sources, newspaper articles, and earlier polemics; conclusions derived from aggregation rather than primary archival discovery.
Fritsch, Theodor – Handbuch der Judenfrage (Handbook on the Jewish Question) (early 20th century, multiple editions c.1900–1920s); assembled claims and statistics from earlier writers; conclusions based on compilation, not original documentation.
Gautherot, Gustave – Le Monde Communiste (The Communist World) (20th century); analyzed communist movements using political writings and historical observation; conclusions centered on ideology and structure.
Gougenot des Mousseaux, Roger – Le Juif, le Judaïsme et la Judaïsation des Peuples Chrétiens (The Jew, Judaism, and the Judaization of Christian Peoples) (1869); relied on religious texts, theological interpretation, and earlier Catholic critiques; conclusions formed through doctrinal lens.
Guénon, René – The Crisis of the Modern World (1927), The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times (1945), The King of the World (1927), The Esoterism of Dante (1925), The Multiple States of the Being (1932), Theosophy: History of a Pseudo-Religion (1921), The Veil of Isis (1922); used comparative religion, metaphysical texts, and philosophical traditions; conclusions focused on spiritual decline, not political conspiracy.
Herzl, Theodor – The Jewish State (1896); based on political analysis, journalism, and contemporary European conditions; conclusions openly proposed and publicly debated.
Jellinek, Adolph – Studien und Skizzen (Studies and Sketches) (1869); used Hebrew texts, religious scholarship, and historical study; conclusions academic and theological.
Jouin, Ernest – Le Péril Judéo-Maçonnique (The Judeo-Masonic Peril) (1932); relied on earlier conspiracy literature and contemporary political concerns; conclusions synthesized existing narratives.
Kadmi-Cohen – Nomades (Nomads) (early 20th century); used anthropological and historical observations; conclusions centered on identity and cultural movement, not secret control.
Lebey, André – L’Initiation de Vercingétorix (The Initiation of Vercingetorix) (early 20th century, c.1920s–1930s); drew from mythology, initiation traditions, and historical symbolism; conclusions philosophical and symbolic.
Lewisohn, Ludwig – Israel (early 20th century, c.1925); used literary analysis, history, and cultural reflection; conclusions centered on identity and assimilation.
Marr, Wilhelm – Der Sieg des Judenthums über das Germanenthum (The Victory of Judaism over Germanism) (1879); based on social and economic observations of 19th-century Europe; conclusions ideological rather than evidentiary.
Marx, Karl – Zur Judenfrage (On the Jewish Question) (1844); relied on philosophical argument, political theory, and critique of religion; conclusions theoretical, not conspiratorial.
Netchvolodow, A. – L’Empereur Nicolas II et les Juifs (Emperor Nicholas II and the Jews) (1924); used historical accounts and political interpretation of Russia; conclusions tied to monarchy and social conditions.
Pitt-Rivers, George – The World Significance of the Russian Revolution (1920); used news reports, political writings, and earlier authors; conclusions formed by linking global events interpretively.
Plantagenet, Édouard – Causeries Initiatiques (Initiatory Talks) (20th century, c.1930s–1950s); relied on internal Masonic teachings and symbolic instruction; conclusions philosophical, not political.
Poncins, Léon de – The Secret Powers Behind Revolution (1929); compiled earlier works and contemporary political developments; conclusions extended prior narratives without new primary evidence.
Popoff, George – The Tcheka: The Red Inquisition (1925); used eyewitness accounts, refugee reports, and early intelligence sources; conclusions focused on documented institutions like the Cheka.
Robison, John – Proofs of a Conspiracy Against All the Religions and Governments of Europe (1797); relied on membership lists, correspondence, and personal experience with Freemasonry; conclusions based on linking networks and ideology.
Rohling, August – Le Juif-Talmudiste (The Talmudic Jew) (late 19th century, c.1870s–1880s); used selected translations of religious texts; conclusions formed through theological interpretation.
Rosenberg, Alfred – Der staatsfeindliche Zionismus (Anti-State Zionism) (1938), Pest in Russland (1938); used earlier ideological writings and political propaganda; conclusions aligned with state-driven narratives.
Sombart, Werner – The Jews and Modern Capitalism (1911), Les Juifs et la Vie Économique (1924); relied on economic history, trade records, and sociological data; conclusions structural and analytical.
Webster, Nesta – World Revolution: The Plot Against Civilization (1921); used Barruel, Robison, and revolutionary documents; conclusions formed through comparative historical interpretation rather than new evidence.
Closing
When all of these works are laid side by side, the final question becomes unavoidable: why would so many authors, across so many generations, print such sweeping claims without producing verifiable documentation of a single, centralized command behind world events. The answer does not require speculation—it sits in the context each of these men lived in. Barruel and Robison were reacting to the collapse of the old order in Europe. Deschamps, Delassus, and Dillon were defending religious institutions against rising secularism. Webster, Poncins, and Ford were writing in the shadow of revolution, war, and economic upheaval. Each of them faced a world that appeared to be changing rapidly and, at times, chaotically. In that environment, the method they shared was not the uncovering of hidden archives, but the interpretation of visible patterns—linking ideas, movements, and institutions into a framework that could explain what they were witnessing. The printing press did the rest. Once an interpretation was written, it became a source for the next author, and over time, repetition gave weight to what had not been independently proven.
This is where the principle of Occam’s Razor becomes necessary—not to dismiss the search for truth, but to ground it. When multiple explanations exist, the one that relies on the fewest unverified assumptions is the one that stands first. Across all of these texts, what is consistently documented is not a single hidden council directing history from the shadows, but a series of observable forces: political movements, economic shifts, ideological conflicts, religious disagreements, and institutional power struggles. The more complex claim—that all of these are coordinated by a single concealed authority—requires evidence that does not appear in the records these authors themselves provide. So the conclusion is not that nothing exists, but that the strongest case is built on what can be shown, not what must be assumed. And for anyone seeking truth, that standard does not weaken the pursuit—it protects it.