Donate.

Advertisement

JIM FETZER "The Raw Deal" (7-19-18) Rolf Lindgren

Please select playlist name from following

JIM FETZER "The Raw Deal" (7-19-18) Rolf Lindgren

3 Comments

Please login to comment

Video Transcript:

For the bomb that drops on you, Guess your friends and neighbors too. There is nobody left behind to breathe, And we will all go together when we go. Wanna come, working back to that histone, Universe, so the reason to inspire and achievement, Yes, we all will go together when we go. We will all go together when we go. All subused with an incandescent glow. No one will have the endurance to collect on his insurance. Lies of London will be loaded when they go. This is Jim Fetzer, your host on the raw deal. I begin with a couple of notes before I introduce my excellent guest for today. The first is that my very able producer, who gets me connected, is so used to connecting to Studio A, that for Tuesday's show, he inadvertently connected me to Studio A, and then made the switch back after the first half hour. He might have tried sooner, but he knew I was videotaping the show. I videotaped our Tuesday show, so I want you to know, where you can get the whole show with all the videos. This may be the single most important program I have ever done, and I want you to share it as widely as you can. Right now, it's up on YouTube under Dr. Jim Fetzer, the raw deal, 171718. Of course, for July 17, 1918, Mona put it up for which I'm very grateful, but it's also at 153news.net. We cannot take for granted anything about YouTube. It's become an instrument of the deep state, as most of you are aware, many, many, many of my videos and interviews have been taken down, especially about Sandy Hook. So at 153news.net, you can find it under Jim Fetzer, without the doctor, Jim Fetzer, the raw deal, 171718 by Gucks. Okay, these Mona and Guss are doing excellent, excellent work in getting my shows up on archive. Now, the beauty about the YouTube version, if you get that, is you can go to the fastest YouTube downloader, and you can put in the URL, and it will download the show for you in a matter of minutes. I've been astonished how rapidly the downloader works. That's one you want to have on your own desktop. You want to be able to send copies of the whole show and not just the link, but if the YouTube link goes out, if they vacate it, which I predict with high confidence, is going to hamper it. It's also already up at 153news.net, as I have explained. Now, the next point I want to make is the following. We know, we know, without any doubt, there was no Russian hacking. What's going on here is a monstrous commission of an elementary fallacy. I spent 35 years explaining to undergraduates to avoid it's called begging the question, taking for granted a conclusion that requires independent confirmation. When Donald Trump, during the summit in Finland, said, where is the server? He put his finger right on it, because we know that even though this allegation, this charge by Mueller against 12 Russian intel officers was based on Guseffer.2 files, we already have way back when new blockbuster research shows Guseffer 2.0 files were copied locally not hacked, because they were downloaded directly into a memory stick in the Eastern time zone at a rate much too fast to have been distant hacking. We also know, in addition, the Democratic National Committee did not allow the FBI to examine the hack server before the agency bling Russia as a culprit. If you want proof, cast our proof that the FBI was in collusion with a DNC and the Clinton campaign, there it is. How could the FBI possibly blame Russia as a culprit when they had not even inspected the server? And if you have any doubt about it, James Comey himself acknowledged that the FBI's requests for access to the hack servers were denied. The only possible reason for denying access to the server would be that the DNC knew they would not find any evidence of hacking. Now I have, uh, uh, uh, maybe the most important blog I will ever publish to at JamesFetzer.blogspot.com entitled Mueller FBI DNC pulling a fast one on the public. I repeat the title Mueller FBI DNC pulling a fast one on the public. Now that's right on my blog. You can get the link and you can share it with friends or acquaintances. Anyone with an open mind, it may or may not be relatives. For example, my wife and I have had our 41st wedding anniversary, but we have had the worst arguments of our marriage since Trump became president and especially in the wake of all of this propaganda coming in as constant barrage from the from the mainstream and the cable networks, especially CNN and her favorite MSNBC. I can listen to the broadcast and I know 95% of what they're saying is not just false, but proof of belief false where I'm giving you the evidence. I'm giving you the proof. So don't take any nonsense about this. We have to get the word out. Think of any persons like representatives, in your congressional district, send them a link to Mueller FBI DNC pulling a fast one on the public. Get it out. Send it to newspapers. I mean, look, really, truly, we're in the fight for our wives. Democracy is at stake. They have determined that Trump is too powerful in taking out the deep state. So the deep state with all of the ferocity it can command at its disposal is using every asset it even it ever had. And some of them are surprising. Mark my word. Anyone who is attacking Trump on the basis that the Russians hacked our server that the Russians are trying to interfere with our elections is on the wrong side, not just the wrong side of truth, the wrong side of the United States, the wrong side of dedication and field to the constitution of the United States. Trump is undertaking an heroic effort to take away the deep state control of the United States, the endless wars, the constant graph and corruption. That is what he is about. It's a titanic battle of Donald versus Goliath. And he is using the slingshot of truth. Mark my words. Now, as I am about to introduce my guess, I want to just relate one of the many attacks we're seeing because this has become beyond hysteria into the domain of complete and utter insanity when it comes to the left, the liberals, the progressives and their allies in the deep state, Zionist, Neocons, top to bottom, A to Z. Here's an example from zero hedge. Democrats call Russia medley act of war, urge cyber attack on Moscow banks and retaliation. But notice as I've been pointing out, there was no Russian medley. They have banged the question, the best cybersecurity experts in the world in the United States, Ray McGovern, Bill McGinney have verified that there was no hacking that it was a leak. Kim.com, a very famous figure in relation to the internet has explained that he assisted Seth Ritch in downloading the DNC emails directly from the server. And as I have reconstructed the case, he provided them Seth Ritch dissolution because the DNC was sabotaging the campaign of Bernie Sanders and Seth Ritch was a Bernie Sanders sub-harner. He was very, very distraught and wanted to do something about it. Got the file too. Craig Murray, UK Ambassador to Ubeckistan, the head of the college and intelligence analyst himself, a friend of Julian Assange who began publishing. Both Craig Murray and Julian Assange have explained they know the leak or he wasn't Russian and he paid for it with his life. Seth Ritch was taken out because of it. Here's another illustration from Portland, Oregon of all places. And I've spoken in Portland on 9-11 Truth, JFK, the role of Saudi Arabia in the Middle East. They have a art gallery there that's featured a photograph of Donald Trump's image where his throat is being cut by a knife. I mean, this is disgusting beyond belief. The backlash, public outrage over the art gallery's violent and I drop window display has led him to paint over the display, but that doesn't alter his sincere belief, which is completely disgusting. It's absolutely contrary to the principles of the United States and a democratic government and constitution under which we live to resort to violence over differences in politics. And here's a third. James Comey has now tweeted, listen to this. James Comey tweet, this Republican Congress has proven incapable of fulfilling the founder's design that ambition must counteract ambition. All who believe in this country's values must vote for Democrats this fall. Policy differences don't matter right now. History has its eyes on us. Well, history has its eyes on James Comey, who's a complete traitor, a shell of phony, a sellout. Believe me, when they talk about traders in the American government, they are many, but none of them is named Donald Trump. They have names like Robert Mueller and James Comey and a host of others. My guest now today will address his dear friend of mine. We speak virtually every day about political issues. He has a background in mathematics. The guy is very smart. He has an interest in polls. He earned a degree in math from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He's an expert in politics. He's been very active and libertarian and Republican politics here in Wisconsin. He's one of the smartest analysts of all of these moves being made by the Democrats to impune the integrity of our elected president, Ralph Lindgren. Welcome to the raw deal. It's great to be having the raw deal, Jim. Tell us, Ralph, where should we begin to disentangle this absolutely overwhelming barrage of false disinformation and propaganda? I have never witnessed anything remotely close to this in my lifetime. Okay. Well, you're absolutely right. There's a titanic battle, a good versus evil going on right now, but the good, usually the, it seems like the good guys are losing. That's the way it seems most of my life, but the good guys are winning right now. And I got some polling data to back that up. Good. There's a new poll out. There's two new polls one of my heard on the brush one box showing what I saw here on the daily caller. 79% of Republicans agree with Trump on his summit with Putin and only 18% disapproved and 3% undecided. So we'll just say roughly four out of every five Republicans agreed with, you know, what Trump did at the summit. And that's pretty good because, remember, there are some Republicans still left over from the bush years that, you know, there's still some bad Republicans as well. So right now, Trump has about a 90% approval rating with overall with Republicans. So this summit isn't going to do anything about his base. It's being blowing up in the news media as a big deal, but it's not going to affect the overall, you know, balance of power and the polling. There's also another poll from Gallup, I believe it was from Gallup. It's an open-ended poll and less than 1% of the people think that relations with Russia is the number one issue right now. So, you know, people think things like the economy and immigration are the leaders in that poll, which is, you know, seems that's fairly obvious. So this stuff with Russia is, it's really more, to me, it's more of a proof that when you fight the deep state, what you're up against, the resistance that the deep state and the media industrial complex puts up, yeah, in the mood of the military industrial complex and there's also the media industrial complex. I call it sometimes and it's just amazing. And that's why, frankly, other people haven't really done what Trump is doing since the night. It's not easy to do. A lot of people have said they didn't like the military industrial complex, but how many people have really done, done much about it. Well, not many have done much about it because it's not easy to fight the the military industrial complex. Now, some key supporters of Trump's summit that have come forward of people like Rand Paul, Ron Paul, and Congressman Thomas Massey of Kentucky, these are all pro-liberty libertarian type Republicans, and they all approve what Trump is doing with Putin, that he's trying to meet with Putin, trying to, you know, my theory in this is that, is that Hillary Clinton was planning on becoming president. She was going to be the first woman president and she had to come out with something big in her first year. She had to be tough. She was going to be tough. She's a woman, but she was going to be tough. And to prove it, I'm just, my suspicions are she was going to come out and make tough talk against Putin. She was going to tell Putin, Putin, you're, here's an ultimatum. You need to get out of the Ukraine, you need to get out of the Crimea or we're coming in. And then I think that they were going to, she was going to start some sort of a war with Russia. And although I don't agree with Russia going into those places, you have to remember that back in 2013 and 2014, what was going on, remember in 2013 that the president of the Ukraine was deposed with help from the CIA and he was chased back to Moscow. And Putin didn't just sit around and do nothing about that. He, that's when he went into the Ukraine. He said, well, if you're going to depose the president of the Ukraine, who was going to like did, I'm not going to sit here and take that. So that's why, that's why he went into the Ukraine. And we all know that that's around the same time that Ed Snowden surfaced. And then he ended up, he ends up in Russia. And you know that Obama, you know how upset, Obama, in the deep state is about Ed Snowden because he was a true hero and whistleblower who revealed things that you should be considered conspiracy theories that that that you were being spied on. That was supposed to be a conspiracy theory, but it's obviously not a conspiracy theory. So these, these situations, they go back a few years, I think was leading to Hillary Clinton rolling out some sort of a war with Russia. Not necessarily a full-blown war, but like a, you know, a bigger proxy war than what we have right now, which is still some low-level fighting in Syria, which I'd like to see. And, and I think Trump wants to see it and I think that Trump and Putin from what I understand are working on, you know, ending that conflict. So let me, let me make a couple of points here. You introduced the phrase conspiracy theory. What the government, what these, all these sources are engaged in is a monstrous conspiracy theory, conspiracy between Trump and Putin to get Trump a election that has no foundation. They cannot prove it because it didn't happen. There was no Russian meddling in the election. So the, the media, which likes to attack conspiracy theorists, when we even when we provide incontrovertible proof, Sandy Hook, the school was closed by 2008. There were no students there. We even have the FEMA manual for a two day of fan with a rehearsal on the 13th going live on the 14th that we have no death certificates that they fake the kids by using photographs of older kids when they were younger. Even when we have cast iron proof, we are denied a minimized, trivialized, and assailed for indulging in a conspiracy theory. When here we have a monster conspiracy theory, Trump, far transcending the Sandy Hook, the Boston bombing, Parkland, Las Vegas, it is a manifest absurdity, raw because count my words. They're going to continue to attack. Those of us who are seeking the truth, whether it's about JFK or 9-0-Labin or Sandy Hook as conspiracy theorists, when they are the greatest paddlers of a conspiracy theory the world has ever seen. The New York Times is used to determining what is and isn't a conspiracy theory. The biggest one is probably JFK. The New York Times still thinks that the Warren Commission is like the gold standard of the JFK assassination. I don't know how many times that's been proven to be not true. But getting back to the current situation is, President Trump won the selection. He wasn't expected to win by the experts. I did expect him to win because I thought his messaging was stronger and I figured that the late breaking vote would go for Trump, which turned out to be true. And I also figured that Trump, even though he had less, much less money, then Clinton, he spent more of his money at the very end. So the impact of his last minute advertising bullets was able to get enough people to the polls in key states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, and North Carolina, which were the five key states. I think that Trump was well positioned to be re-elected. Right now, he won 30 states in 2016. And I would say that he would be able to win 30 to 35 states in 2020. I think that he can go after states like New Hampshire, which he very, very narrowly lost. There was the closest state in the union last time. He could also win in Minnesota. And I think he could win in Maine. I think he won one of the, I think he won the second congressional district of Maine for one electoral vote. So I think he could win the whole state next time. And of course, there's other states out there that he would fight for, like for example Virginia, although he probably wouldn't, he may not win in Virginia. He'd certainly fight for, and maybe Nevada and Colorado, which are possibly winnable states as well. He's not quite as popular in the West as he is in the East for some reason. So possibly pardoning those ranchers and things like that might shore up his support, some of the people, some of the Mormon Republicans were, you know, because of Trump's history of having, you know, been divorced. Some of those people weren't really for Trump, but they're coming around. People like Mike Lee was a great pro-liberty senator. And there's other, there's others out there in the West. So Trump has a good, I think Trump is, unless he had some sort of health issues with his age, I think he can easily be reelected. And he, he, he, he, remember, he doesn't drink or smoke. And number has, he lives a very healthy lifestyle and always has his, he had him older brother, you know, who, who died young from drug and alcohol abuse. And President Trump has always lived a clean, healthy lifestyle. And you know, he's in his early 70s and there's a lot of people that are still going strong in their, in their 80s if they live, if they have good luck and live healthy. So I think there's a good, great chance that he'll be reelected. And that's exactly what I am. For the deep state. Ralph, when we return from this break, I want you to address the Democrats' prospects for the midterm election because I think they've shot themselves not just in one foot, but in both. This is Jim Fats for your host on the Rodney Open, my special guest, Ralph Lindgren, will be right back. Listen, revolution radio at freedomclips.com will be right back after this message. Was it a conspiracy? Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting this is a drill, this is a drill on bull hordes during the marathon? That the Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities. And that one would be set off in one minute in front of the library, which happened as the Globe had announced. Peering through the smoke, you could see bodies with missing arms and legs, but there was no blood. The blood only showed up later and came out of a tube. They used amputee actors and a studio quality smoke machine. Don't let yourself be played. Check out and nobody died in Boston either. Available at moonrotbooks.com. That's moonrotbooks.com. What the heck is the truth, G-Hod? Hey, I'm Kevin Barrett host of Truth G-Hod Radio. Federal prosecutors depart by the full-blanc security agents and curious passers-by often ask me, just what is this truth G-Hod thing? Anyway, well, everybody knows what truth is, but G-Hod is a misunderstood term. G-Hod means effort or struggle. The greater G-Hod is the struggle to be a better person, while the lesser G-Hod is the struggle to defend the community. Profit mom and piece upon him did say that the best G-Hod is a word of truth, long in the face of a tyrant. And that's what we do here at Truth G-Hod Radio. Every Friday, 8 to 10 PM Eastern 5 to 7 Pacific right here on Revolution Radio. Find some comforts at Willow's World, a variety of news, commentary and poetry, at Willow's poetry corner, where there are conficutions and attempting selection of collectible comestimals. A show thus quirkly and quintessentially British, with a unique twist featuring Willow and Riesen, your host. Join Willow Monday 6 to 8 PM EST Studio B. The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs and its website by the hosts, guests and colonelists and artists or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them. They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and FreedomSlippes.com, its staff or affiliates. You're listening to RevolutionRadio FreedomSlippes.com, 100% list their supported radio and now we return you to your host. This is Jim Fetzer, your host on the raw deal, where let me reiterate as we were fading out. Ralph, I wanted you to address the prospects of the Democrats for the midterm election because it appears to me they have shot themselves in both feet. This hysterical overreaction was actually beginning before the summit with Pute and what's happened afterwards, I think has made matters immeasurably worse. I don't think they have a ghost of a chance of retaking the House or even gaining seats in the Senate. What is your take? Okay, well the current odds, here's the current odds. According to the odds I have, it's about five to two that the Republicans keep to Senate and I don't see how the Democrats could possibly take the Senate. I don't see it at all. I think that the Senate is more important than the House as well because of the judicial nominations and other things. I think the Republicans can easily pick up five seats in the Senate. I think they can pick up Wisconsin, Florida, Missouri, Indiana, and North Dakota and also they have a good shot in West Virginia, Montana that's seven seats right there. There's two Republican seats that are in jeopardy. There's Dean Howard in Nevada who could lose and then there's the seat in Arizona. Which I think actually the Republicans have a better than 50-50 chance of keeping that seat. I don't really see how the Senate could be lost. I think they're going to pick up several seats. And the other way the last time a president picked up seats in his first midterm was JFK. There's another parallel between JFK and Trump. As far as the House is concerned, the current odds in the House say claim that the Democrats are supposed to take the House. The odds are about almost two to one. In other words, I think they're saying that there's about a 65% chance that the Democrats will take the House. I don't buy that for a second. If I was betting money right now, I would bet money on the Republicans to keep the House. I don't think they're good. I think they may lose a few seats. But I don't think the Democrats are going to take the House because as I said in the purpose segment, I think that the messaging from the Republicans is better than the messaging from the Democrats. So right now the polling benefits Democrats because there's more money and media behind the Democrats, but the closer people get to the elections, the more people look at the message than the money. And that's exactly the same thing that happened with Trump being Clinton. He had better messaging. So there's another factor in these races that we should mention is the FBI scandal and spygate. The FBI scandal, as we know about the corrupt regime of James Colme and Andrew McCabe, I believe that Andrew McCabe, who is former number two at the FBI, will be indicted. And I think he's going to be indicted pretty soon. He's clearly broke laws regarding leaking and lying to investigators. I would say that there's a 100% chance that McCabe will be indicted. He should be indicted. I would guess this month. James Colme, who I think is still out of the country, and has avoided subpoenas to testify to Congress, I believe will be indicted as well. It's probably in August. The main thing that he would have done would be leaking misuse of government property. We know that he took those notes of his meetings with President Trump, wrote him down on his FBI computer, and we know that he leaked them out to a professor who supposedly was a government employee, but that doesn't matter. It's a conspiracy. Two people are in on it. There's other things that he's done as well. Greg Jarrett of Fox News has been extremely good at pointing out the criminal activities of people like McCabe and Colme. I believe Greg Jarrett has a new book coming up called The Russia Hokes. I don't think it's out yet, but it should be out very soon. I'm going to plan to take up a copy as soon as it's available. If these indictments come out, it's expected, sometime during, we want the indictment should be put out at least 60 days before the election to avoid the appearance of affecting the elections. That will be a big boost to essentially Republican candidates overall, because most Republican candidates are trying to... There may not be the greatest people on earth, but most of them are going to be fighting for the Trump policies and Trump is around. Most of the Republicans seem to fall in line with Trump, which is a good thing. I think that the overall message... You know what the new motto for the Democratic Party is for these fall elections? That your motto is? I'm scared to ask, Ralph. The old motto, which fell flat, was a better deal. But they just scrapped that one, because it wasn't working very well in their new motto for the people. Say it again, Ralph. You're going to hear for the people or the new motto. The Democrats, Democratic candidates all over the country are supposed to work in the phrase for the people into their speeches and advertisements up until the election. So if you get sick of that phrase, you're not going to go to blame. So it sounds like a pretty dumb slogan, because it doesn't really fit their party. Their whole message is more like for the giant corporations. It's really more what they stand for. But that's their slogan. Now, if you remember, Trump stated in his inauguration speech, he said he was going to transfer money from the big corporations to the people. So what they're really doing is they're trying to steal what Trump is really standing for. Trump has more small donors now than the Democrats do. He's got a lot of small donors. He's doing what Ron Paul did about 10 years ago. But he's much bigger, of course, than Ron Paul ever became. That's my predictions on the elections. Now, there's other things that are coming out that are playing out. We know that Robert Miller, Miller, Miller, whatever his name is. Mueller. It's trying to indict lots of people. We already know that he hasn't really come up with much. He's gotten a few people to please guilt to the line to investigate. Probably these people probably shouldn't have cried guilty, but they were probably forced to because they ran out of money or terrified. I think eventually these people will be vindicated. People at Michael Flynn and George Poppedopolis. George Poppedopolis, please guilt the almost 10 months ago. He still hasn't been sentenced. Michael Flynn has pleaded guilty almost eight months ago. He still hasn't been sentenced. Something's going on with those cases. Paul Maniforce case looks like it's heading for a trial. I don't know exactly what exactly the trial is going to be about. I think it has something to do with whether you've got to permit to do something that he said he didn't need to get a permit. Mueller says he didn't need to get a permit. To me it sounds more like a big legal argument rather than a criminal issue. It sounds to me to look like the whole case would have been better handled as a civil issue than a criminal issue. Trump, of course, has the ultimate Trump card, Trumpkin, of course, pardon any of these people. I think that eventually if something doesn't happen, he will pardon these people because what does Trump always say when he issues a pardon? The person was treated unfairly, right? He says that about every pardon. Schubert, Libby, the ranchers, Jack Johnson, Denise D'Souza, the guy who was in the submarine. He always says this person wasn't treated fairly. He's going to say the same thing about Paul Maniford, George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. People were not treated fairly. I'm really happy to see, by the way, President Trump issue with all these pardons. Trump is the first person president since JFK to go out on a limb and pardon people who deserve pardons. The media doesn't approve. JFK is people, some of them might be aware, pardoned almost everybody in the federal war on drugs. Now, there weren't as many people in prison in the war on drugs in 1960. There was only a few hundred, but almost all of them were pardoned by JFK. And since JFK, we haven't seen anything like this where a president issued pardons by himself through the White House staff not through the pardon review board. Obama, some people think Obama issued a lot of pardons, but actually he did not issue very many pardons. Obama issued prison commutations for people with drug cases. He did get by a lot of people out of prison who have long prison sentences, or even medium prison sentences, I mean drug cases, but he did not pardon them in most cases. He just committed their sentences. JFK, I mean, and actually pardoned the people who had long prison sentences. And also that brings me to another part of his, the Kim Kardashian part of the woman who had a wife sentence. That definitely was a commutation. I think not a pardon. But when you have a wife sentence, that's a pretty good deal for her and I'm glad it happened. So President Trump is doing all kinds of things. I can tell you right now that the deep state doesn't like all these pardons. That's another one of the many. Remember all the things that we can find with JFK that people didn't like, the powerful people didn't like whether it's stuff with the front reserve, the drug war, there will be an out war. Well, it's the same with Trump. There's not just one thing or two things that the powerful people don't like with Trump. There's literally dozens of things. I think the biggest thing that Trump is doing is he's fighting the media hat on. He's especially going after three media sources, the most, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and CNN. Those not three media sources that Trump has really focused in on, I think I think that he's leaning the battle with the media because these media sources are losing their credibility as independent news sources. Every day, their partisanship becomes more and more obvious to the average person. They're also losing their market share of how many people they can keep under under my control or brainwashing with their daily propaganda. By the time Trump is up for reelection and by the time Trump finishes and say it's second term, I think that the size and scope of CNN, Washington, and Poland, in their time, will be significantly less than they were before Trump was president. It will make a significant change for the better, for the history of the United States and the United States. People out of country will be much freer and better because of the weekend influence of the New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN. These three sources, which are essentially billionaires of these media sources to control society, these sources, these people behind these organizations are losing their grip on power. That's what's happening. Well, let me add a further reason why I think there's something to your comparison. JFK was a threat to the deep state. He was talking about shattering the CIA into a thousand pieces that he was upsetting the joint chiefs because he didn't want to go to war in Vietnam. He was the FBI was cracking down on organized crime, bringing more indictments and convictions in every before in history. He'd upset the Texas oilman because he was going to cut the oil depletion allowance. We know what they did with JFK. They took him out in a very brutal fashion. Anyone who wants to get a recap on what we know about the assassination of JFK, go to BitShoot JFK, who was responsible and why an interview I did with Ryan Rue, RUHG, two hour overview. Very comprehensive. Identifying six of the shooters. There may have been as many as eight JFK himself was hit at least four times in the back from behind in the throat from in front. Then after the driver brought the limousine to a halt twice in the head, once from behind, he slumped forward, Jackie's been back up and he was hit the right temple by a frangible or exploding bullet that set up shockwaves at who his brains out the back of his head. Now, I think the CIA may be wary that the parallels are a bit too obvious. So instead of the literal physical assassination of Donald Trump, they're attempting to massive character assassination of Donald Trump. But, Ralph, I think you're making good points here that he Donald Trump, like JFK is a threat to the deep state, the greatest threat they have seen since the assassination of John Fitzgerald Cannon. Yeah, I agree 100%. And just to give you an example of how Trump you know, sticks it in their face, apparently Trump just said he wants to have another summit with Putin. Did you know that? I love it. I heard that on the Sean handy show. You know, people are all these puns that well, this was a really bad summit. You know, even, you know, I'm a Republican, but I have to agree it was a bad summit. People are talking like that and then Trump says, I'm going to have another summit. You know, I mean, this guy is unbelievable. Now, I want to get back on the mention one thing on the Vietnam War too. I've heard people complaining about JFK got us into the Vietnam War. Okay, I want to make it really clear. First of all, Eisenhower actually got us into the Vietnam if you really want to get technical. Okay, the fact is is that the Vietnam policy under JFK was very, very successful. If you look at the territory held by South Vietnam during the JFK years, you'll find that very, very little territory was lost. There was one medium-sized city lost in the three years, and that's it. And this is JFK using a very minimal amount of US resources, no combat troops to defend the southern territory from the communists. The Vietnam War was not unsuccessful with JFK. Plus, of course, there was a very small amount of loss of life or injury. Now, you compare it to the Lins and Johnson years that was an utter disaster. Lins and Johnson is the one who escalated the war, and then Lins and Johnson, of course, put himself in a position where he couldn't, he had to quote, save face. So, he put himself in a true position where he was not able to withdraw from being with a losing his respect, you might say, whatever that means. Whereas JFK always preserved a strategic withdrawal situation. In other words, JFK was in a position where he could have slinked back the troops, the small number that were there, and quote, saved face. That's what JFK was doing. This is in a book by H.R. McMaster explains how disastrous Lins and Johnson's policies were right after JFK died. And we all know that JFK did issue an executive order to bring a thousand people home by Christmas in 1963. So, I don't want to hear anybody telling me that JFK started the Vietnam War or had a bad policy that simply isn't true. It was Lins and Johnson that did that, not JFK. Well, if you're completely correct, JFK had even signed the National Security Action Memorandum, directing the withdrawal of American forces by 1965. He didn't want to make it an issue before his reelection in 1964. But he had already signed the National Security Action Memorandum withdrawing American forces from Vietnam. Before he was dead, they had revised the memorandum for signature by Lins and Johnson reversing JFK's policy and increasing our commitment in Vietnam. So, you're exactly right on the money about this. I'm very glad you're bringing up these issues. Well, Lins and Johnson did is the advisors told well, if you send in 20,000 more troops, okay, then he sent, well, we need 30,000 more. And then eventually it was 300,000 or whatever it was. And then of course, Lins and Johnson didn't want to retreat, because then he'd say, why lost the war? So, he just lied about it for several years, till the Tad Offence of the lies pretty much to some extent work, because people didn't really know what was going on over there. Of course, the New York Times didn't tell people what was going on over there. So, yeah, there's a lot of history now with Trump. Another parallel that I think that Trump is doing is, if you look at something called war propaganda, now think about the lead up to say the Iraq war. We had a constant drum beat of war propaganda. It was coordinated between the Bush administration and the intelligence agencies and the media, constantly telling us about weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein did this, Saddam Hussein did that. He wouldn't let the inspectors see this. This over and over and over again, this war propaganda. And then of course, he invaded. Well, why did that happen? Because most of them really want to invade other countries. So, the only way you can get the public to buy into it is expose them to a lot of war propaganda before you do the war. Now, that's of course, that's the the only kind of war that's different is if you actually are attacked by another country, then that's a little different. But in a case like Iraq, where there was a completely discretionary by the Bush administration. Now, what is Trump doing right now? Trump isn't doing war propaganda. He's not really doing war propaganda. He wasn't doing war propaganda with North Korea. I brought all the war propaganda in North Korea. That was all coming from the news media. Every time he shot off a missile, Kim Jong-un said, oh my god, he shot another missile. He said, oh my god, he said, that was on CNN. That wasn't coming from the Trump people. Now, we see that that's been that's being settled in North Korea. It looks to me like that's going to be a very big success for Trump. Another one is Iran. Remember I'm a president, I'm a Dina Jai. How much we used to hear about President I'm a Dina Jai. Who's the president of Iran now? I don't know who that is. Nobody knows who it is because there's no more war propaganda coming out telling us how evil Iran is every day and if there isn't any war propaganda, no one's going to want to do anything over there. Iran is a very big country. So trying to get it into a war with them would be a bad idea. And it's the same thing with other places in the world, you know, Afghanistan. I know there's still troops over there and we have more troops than we should. And they're still fighting over there. But it's frankly a very low publicity, which is actually good because it's a lot easier for Trump to withdraw the troops if there's very little publicity. And why is there a little publicity? Because the Trump administration is not putting out war propaganda. That's why Trump isn't using war propaganda like like Obama and Bush and Clinton did. Remember the war propaganda in 2013 when Obama wanted to go into Syria? Remember almost war propaganda there was? And then the Senate finally had a vote to go vote on it or was going to vote on it and decided not to send in ground troops. But of course Obama was still bombing Syria. Okay, Trump isn't doing any of that anymore. Trump is finding to negotiate supplements with these different conflicts and some people think, oh, it just pulls the troops out. Some people are going the other way. Trump is a war monger. He doesn't, he can just pull the troops out. If the problem with that is if Trump does something like that, he's going to end up like Jimmy Carter and he's going to be labeled as a weak president and then let's what's going to happen. A war monger will run and defeat Trump and probably the Republican primary or in the Democratic Party. And then it'll, and then it won't do any good in the long term. When Jimmy Carter was made up in a peaceful man, but what good did he do in the long term to stop the military dust or complex? He didn't see what he didn't really achieve anything. Ralph, I'm really pleased you're here today. I think the timing's impeccable. I'm very impressed with what you're telling us. I want everyone to know that we're taking calls the second hour, the number to call in today 540352 4452 540352 4452. If you have questions for Ralph or for me, you're welcome to call during the second hour. Ralph, I'm going to bring you back after the break, of course, for more. You can say a few more words, but we're getting very close when we hear the bumper music. You'll know that we're going to break. Okay, yeah. I want to just mention a couple quick items about the the Mueller investigation. Did you know that the Mueller investigation declassified all the alleged hacking by Russians against Democrats, but kept all the alleged hacking against Republicans classified? Well, there it is. That's a great point. A great point. We'll be right back after this break, Jim Fetzer with Raw Flickrush. You're hearing it here on Revolution Radio. The listen Revolution Radio of FreedomSlus.com will be right back after this message. In breaking news, a visiting Syrian diplomat reported today that their population is evolving rapidly and advancing into a fifth-dimensional consciousness. They are seeking peace with all cosmic cultures, which may mean that the earth will be asked to join the prestigious Galactic Federation of Lightal Sciences. Please join Debbie West and Michael Hathaway on Lost Knowledge Saturdays 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time in Studio A. For the latest breaking news on the star visitors' peaceful contact and the ongoing project of Plenty, the earth. Who are you? I am the architect. I created the matrix. I've been waiting for you. Why am I here? You are the eventuality of an anomaly which despite less than serious death as I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision. You just led you in history of play. Here you have an answer to my question. The matrix is older than you know as you are undoubtedly gathering the anomaly is systemic, creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic equation. Choice. The problem is choice. Right here at RebelistRadioFreedomSludes.com, be here Wednesday evening at 8 p.m. Eastern Time for Private Eye Matrix revealed with Monique Wasaba. Even the government admits that 9-11 was a conspiracy, but did you know that it was an inside job that Osama had nothing to do with it? That the twin towers were blown apart by a sophisticated arrangement of mini or micro-news. That building seven collapsed seven hours later because of explosives planted in the building. Barry Jennings was there. He heard them go up and felt himself stepping over dead people. The US Geological Survey conducted studies of dust gathered from 35 locations in Lower Manhattan and found elements would not have been there at this not been a nuclear event. Ironically that means the government's own evidence contradicts the government's official position. 9-11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the Neal Cons of the Department of Defense and the Mossad. Don't let yourself be played. Read American Nuke on 9-11, available at moonrockbooks.com. That's moonrockbooks.com. This is Thomas aka my painter. I'd like you to join me Monday nights 10 p.m. Easter Standard Time for Open Canvas. Don't forget to bring an open mind. Yes folks that's right. Bring an open line to an open canvas again. That is Monday nights 10 p.m. Easter and UFOs to government corruption. This is Revolution Radio for idemslips.com. You don't need to expect us. We're already here. Thanks for tuning in to Revolution Radio. Here at Revolution Radio we are listed sponsored by the National Security Council. There are still bills to pay in order to raise some needed funds to cover the cost our station is offering a silver special. In the continental United States for a $60 donation for in Alaska, Hawaii or Canada for a $70 donation we will send you an uncirculated 2018 one-ounce pure silver eagle. The $70 donation extra tannis to cover shipping by the way outside of the continental United States. When making the donation you must put silver eagle promo in the notes on the donation and thank you for tuning in to Revolution Radio at Revolution.Radio and freedomslips.com. Without you there is no less Revolution Radio where information never sleeps. Hello this is Maggie Rose Legrap of The Concert Show. And hello Marie Corn Map coming to you on Monday and Tuesdays in Studio A noon to two Easter. And Studio B on Wednesday nights 10 p.m. to 12 a.m. Easter with educational instructional information and situational update often with wonderful guests on the current landscape in the U.S. and overseas. This is a go go go go. We are with you side to side and back to back. Please join us on Monday through Wednesdays as well as other hosts and guests here on Revolution Radio. We said do not go to take it anymore. That's right do not go to take it anymore. The opinions expressed on this radio station. It's programs and its website by the hosts, guests, and colon listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who express them. They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and Freedom Slips.com. It's staff or a fill list. You're listening to Revolution Radio Freedom Slips.com. 100% listener supported radio and now we return you to your host. First, besides influencer, you're host on the raw deal and before we continue with my guest, Rob Lindgren. I want to pick up on a couple of points. One is you heard the announcement about the book I have edited. America nuked on 9-11 compliments to the CIA, the Neoconson, the Department of Defense. Well, Robert David Steele has been editing a brilliant series of one page memoranda for the president about 9-11. He has a fantastic lineup of contributors, including Christopher Bolin, David Ray Griffin, Scott Bennett, Barbara Hanager, Peter Dale Scott, Gordon Doff, Richard Gage, T. Mark Hytauer, John Lear, check him out. Just put it in his name. Robert David Steele, you'll come to his homepage. Look for websites. Check on websites. It'll take you to the one where you can find all of the memoranda. There are about 20 of these already published. I just want you to know this is absolutely brilliant. This is making a sensational difference. This is exposing 9-11 by the best collection of 9-11 experts ever assembled. This is fantastic. I want you to be aware of it. In addition, and now very close to home about what we've been discussing here with Ralph today, we have a video that's just appeared online. It's 10 and a half minutes. Russian election hack impossible. NSA veteran and whistleblower. None other than Bill Benny. This guy is the best of the best. He's given a 10 and a half minute explanation of how this old Russian hacking thing is complete and total bullshit. And guess what? It's not coming to you from CNN. It's not coming to you from NBC. It's not coming to you from MSNBC or ABC or CBS or The New York Times. It's coming to you from RT, Russia today. This is one more indication that there's more truth and honesty to be found on RT or in prof der than you can find in The New York Times or The Washington Post. Ralph has been hitting it right now with a ballpark. I'm so glad to have him here today. Ralph, this is absolutely perfect for you to be here now. Please do pick it up wherever you like. Okay. Another report that I wanted to touch on is there's a report here. Apparently, when Putin was speaking to the other day, he said that US intelligence agents funneled $400 million into the Clinton campaign. Have you heard about that one? Yes. $400 million. This was a guy named Brown, Michigan, one and a half billion in Russia never paid any taxes. Yeah. So this guy, apparently, you know, I getting out of taxes is great, but, you know, unfortunately there are laws. This guy, where's Robert Mueller on this? It's kind of interesting how everything that Robert Mueller investigates is always anti-Trump. I guess. And, you know, I've heard the conservative talk radio mentioned this, people like Hannity and Limbaugh and others. But is Robert Miller, does Robert Miller ever investigate anything about the Democrats? You know, it's almost like this stuff is set up. You know, what if every candidate for president gets investigated like this? And then whoever wins, that's how you keep the president in check with the deep state and the media keeping the president in check. So what if Obama and Clinton and Bush are kind of being held in check by the CIA and the FBI and the New York Times? What if they're being held in check, too, even though we think of them as well, they're on the bad guys. The bad guys wouldn't spy on Obama and Clinton and Bush. What if that's how the system is evolved since the times of JFK? What if the system is set up so that these deep state apparatus, what do we want to call it, the military industrial complex? What if everybody gets spied on? And that's why presidents never do anything. It seems out of bounds from what the New York Times says is acceptable. What if that's the way it's been and what if the conditions are changing where a president like president Trump not only has the ambition to break the chains of the deep state, he has the ambition to do it. He also has the talent and the initiative to do it. But also, what if the deep state isn't quite as strong as it used to be? Maybe because of the internet, maybe because of alternative news, media, internet, radio, different websites, they're out there like bright-part news, daily caller, Alex Jones. What if changing conditions are being seized down by a great leader to make fundamental change? That's what the founding fathers did. There were changes that they seized upon. The founding fathers may not have been the great people they were if they had lived in another time or another era, but they seized on the opportunities to make things happen. So did Galileo. Galileo seized on opportunities like the invention of the telescope, which he invented himself actually, and then made things happen. What about Martin Luther when he nailed up the 95 thesis that the printing press was brand new at that time. Martin Luther is probably the first person to make fundamental political change using the printing press. If Martin Luther had lived 100 years earlier, he wouldn't have been able to do that because they didn't have a printing press. Now we have the internet as a new form of communication, and then the smartphone as well, what if Trump just came along at the right time? We know that Ron Paul tried to start the Ron Paul revolution, but he made an impact, but he didn't win. Now it's 10 years later, what if 10 years later, what if the smartphone made the difference? It's hard to know exactly what's going to happen, but right now things are going in the right direction, in my opinion. There's a bunch of bad Republicans, you might say, in the Senate, that could be out, looks at their own way out. Jeff Flake is gone. He's going to be gone. He's not running for re-election. We got Bob Corker, another one. He's on the way out. Thad Cochran is now retired. He's not there anymore. There's a few others that are going to be gone. Maybe Trump will even be better in his next two years. What if he has 53-55 Senate seats? What if he has 56 Senate seats? His latest pick of Brent Kavanaugh. I've seen some criticisms of Brent Kavanaugh, some libertarians. They say, well, he's not really that good on this. What if Trump picked Brent Kavanaugh because he was the past pick he could make that he could get through the Senate? What if that's what happened? Does anybody ever stop and think about that? There's only 50 voting Republicans in the Senate right now. That's it. There's 50 votes. Did you know that one of Trump's picks in the ninth circuit was just rejected by the Senate? The Senate didn't give him enough votes, so the pick has been withdrawn. Did you know that? Yeah, I just... There's a few picks that are going through. I mean, see, when he picks these picks, some people are complaining, this person isn't a pure liberty person. This person once said this about gun control. Okay? Well, the fact is, is that Trump is not a dictator. He's the president of the United States and he has to follow the rules of the Constitution as they've been interpreted and preaching here. He's not a constitutional scholar like Rand Paul. He's not like that where he's going to say this is the way the founders wanted it, but what he is doing is he's following the basic rules the way they were handed to him from the previous president. He's not doing anything and I can't say this about any other president in my lifetime. President Trump is not doing anything that's unconstitutional that hasn't already been done by the previous presidents. I can't think of anything that he's done. I read a lot of stuff. Yeah. But President Trump is just following the rules, the way the rules were interpreted when he was handed the president to him. It's just like the absurd outrage over the separation of children from parents at the border. That was a policy Trump inherited. It was actually signed into law by Bill Clinton making Hillary Clinton's outrage preposterous. It was enforced by Barack Obama who separated 90,000 children from their parents, but we didn't hear a peep about it from the mainstream media or the Democrats at the time. Trump 2000, I'm sorry, signed an executive order to end the practice, but it didn't begin with him. He had an obligation to enforce the laws as the head of the executive branch. So this is just one more illustration of the extreme hypocrisy and corruption of the mainstream press. And by the way, a brand new Rand Paul savages John Brennan is most bias bigoted unhinged CIA director ever. To my utter astonishment, Ralph, these networks like CNN and MSNBC are featuring figures like John Bodesta, who we know with Robbie Mook made up the whole Russian hacking meme out of a whole cloth within 48 hours of Hillary's concession speech in John Brennan who colluded with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to invent ISIS in 2012 over the opposition of Mike Flynn, whom Brennan then recommended Obama should fire because he wasn't a team player. I mean, this is just to reach a point of disgust, the distortion of history is completely outrageous. Well, it's outrageous. And like I said, these immunity deals, we know that when the Clinton email investigation, there was immunity handed out to at least five people who were not even interviewed when they had already written the exoneration. Why would you give someone immunity for a crime and then exonrate the target of the criminal probe before you even interviewed the person who you gave immunity to? I mean, that's ridiculous. And like I said, this immunity that I'm hearing about Miller possibly giving to Tony Podesta and some others, I haven't looked into the specific details of her, but it doesn't sound very good to me. I want to go back to the separation of the children. Sure. This was a, I would see a media program that was designed. They're always thinking of something to do. The media is constantly working up ways, it's almost like a media campaign to stop Trump. Okay, first of all, anytime a parent breaks the law and gets arrested, they're going to be separated from their kids. That happens with any crime if you go rob a bank and you have a kid. Yeah, you're going to be separated from your kid. The drug war, now I'm out of favor of the war and drugs. Okay, I don't, I think that we should add on the war and drugs, but I will tell you if you have kids and you go and sell drugs, then you could get arrested. And if you get arrested, you'll probably be separated from your kids. The fact is if you break the law, there's a good chance that that's what happens. It's always been that way in these laws. That's one reason why you wanted right was, so only the truly criminal people are arrested. And as far as immigration, all that's the whole crux of the thing. And some people don't think that immigration is really the same thing as other kinds of crimes. But the fact is, is what are we supposed to do about immigration? When we have a welfare state, when we have a society with a free education to all children up until the 12th grade, we have all kinds of housing allowances, we have food stamps, we have aid for children up until they're 18. We have all kinds of programs in this country, a free stop from the government. We're going to have a welfare state, we have to have border control. When the founding fathers were around in the 1800s and the 1700s, there wasn't a welfare state. Let's do it. If you came over here, you had to chop down trees to keep yourself alive. You couldn't get, it wasn't the way it is now. There's also the issue of voting in some places, we know that illegal aliens are brought in and the people who run the big cities, of course, expect them to vote Democrat. If you've lived somewhere for five or ten years, or ten or twenty years of your family's lived somewhere for 50 or 100 or 200 years, and then someone just shows up and then they're going to yell the vote and have the same vote that you have. A lot of people don't think that's fair. I'm actually a libertarian, I'm not a big anti-immigration person, but if we're going to have a welfare state, we've got to have border control. We've got to do something about, we've got to have a reasonable immigration policy. We have legal immigration. I don't see any laws being passed by Congress. I didn't see Obama proposing any laws being passed to change immigration. I didn't see it. It was all done by judicial, fiat, and executive order. I don't see the New York Times advocating a new immigration law, but yet they're contrived deciding Trump for enforcing the law. That's what Trump is supposed to do. He took an oath to defend the Constitution and the immigration laws to my, I believe, our constitutional for the most part. I've seen arguments that some of them might not be, but I think that most of these laws are constitutional. There are other reasons. Some people don't want a lot of too much immigration. Some people who work in unions, not the government unions, but the private unions. Some people who work in private unions think that they can lose their jobs or lose head-lower wages. I don't know if I believe that, but some people do. There's a lot of reasons why we need to. Some people are worried about crime. I think that Trump is doing is pretty reasonable. Ross and Raj, you're making a lot of great points. We have a caller here from the 408 area. You've got caller, please come on. Give us your name and address your question to Royal for me, please. This is the office of Senator Diane Foyne. Oh, my God. I would like everybody to call and find your office irregular. I would like everybody within the sound of my voice to turn in your weapons. Don't worry. We'll protect you. I had a number of things I was thinking I was going to say today. Some of the things your guest has said in the last 10 minutes has really got me going. I don't want to get off track. Here's the first thing I want to say to Eugene Fetzer. I listen to your show on Tuesday almost in its entirety. I don't always listen on Tuesdays when I do. Sometimes I don't catch the whole show. You are in top form. I have to say. It's almost as if to me there's just this clarity and synthesis of what you bring together and put forth. It's just the shame that the vast majority of American people are deprived of the things that you read and your comments and your insight. Because so many nails were hit precisely on the head in that show. I wanted to at least recognize you for that. Anyway, having said that, something that your guest said just a few minutes ago about he's kind of a libertarian and he's not big anti-immigration. I want to put a finer point on this here. Immigration is a big word. It's a general term. What we have here, and it's a funded agenda both here and in Europe, is to destroy the white majority of every one of these countries. If you are not anti-that, then you're the enemy, sir. I'm sorry, but this is an agenda to deluge us with the non-white third world and that's exactly what's occurring. So this debate needs to be, how should I say, solidified and specified. Because this nonsense that you get from immigration, immigration, we're a country of immigrants over and over again, it misses the point. The fact of the matter is this. It's still to this day and it's going to change if we don't do something to stop it. Still, to this day, we're a majority, white country founded by white people. That's a fact. If you want to go ahead and sort of, this is the way that I look at it because they throw you in. I think you're racist. You're right. I am. A racist. Define racist, then I'll tell you. It's not about being a white majority. Yes, it is. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Yeah. Who wrote that? And then you're a rate who wrote Thomas Jefferson. Yeah. He was white, wasn't he? I thought he had right here though. Didn't he? Jim? Jim? Who is this guy? Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on, for a second. You're a racist. You're a racist. You're a racist. You're a racist. You know what? You know what anybody who calls anybody a name I'm gonna be associated with this guy's stuff Ralph Ralph Ralph Paul is a regular caller. He has very Girlfriend is my girlfriend is is black and she's from Africa. Oh my god. That's all I need to hear You're a car It's all my girlfriend on the radio. You're a cook in a pool. All right, he's calling me name Why don't you shut up and let me explain myself You're a You're a baggy you're a bag of race crater is what you are Tell me where you want to meet tell you tell me where you want to meet we'll settle it, okay? Yeah, yeah, yeah, we don't have that power. I like to finish my point Jim if you can shut this guy up for a second Yeah, I'm gonna put Ralph on hold Okay, so listen I got accused the other day by my boss all right of being a racist Okay, I've heard this before and I know exactly what it means that I'm gonna define it in very clear terms Okay, let's say that I make the observation that the population of the greater San Jose area is 50% Chinese and Indian let's just say I make that observation. Okay, that's not racist to make that observation Here's what's racist I know particularly care for it. Okay, so now I'm a racist I mean this is exactly if you say oh, I'm in favor of that I love the fact that the population of the South Bay is 50% Hispanic Well, you're not a racist if you were to say well I wish the population of South Bay was like 70% white then now you're a racist this term racist is used to basically be funnel and make fools of Simple 10 whites who can't figure out that they're being programmed and brainwashed like your guest and I will just pose this question to your guest Just for the fun of it the reason that your white is because your dad and your mom were both white So you can't do that same honor to your own children. Why why did you make that decision? You don't have to answer you could call me all the names you want Okay, but I can see the writing on the wall and the writing in the wall is anti-white any Sentiments where you're pro white you're a racist any sentiments where you're anti-white all of a sudden you're a great guy You're not a racist. All right You Listen revolution radio freedom slips dot com will be right back You Where are they conspiracies Have you ever wondered if we really did go to the moon If Paul McCartney died in 1966 and was replaced by an even better musician Did you know that Saddam Hussein died in a B1 bomber strike on 70 April 2003 and was replaced by one of his doubles who was put on trial and hanged in his place or that Osama bin Laden Die in Afghanistan on the 15th of December 2001 and was buried in an unmarked grave in accordance with Muslim traditions At the raid in Pakistan was faked There's more including four chapters about the end of World War two which proved that events we've been taught were very different than we have been told Don't let yourself be played read and I suppose we didn't go to the moon either Available at moonrockbooks.com. That's moonrockbooks.com Looking for a night cap to fill your listening needs come join us on space-doubt radio with me Dave Scott right here on revolution radio Monday through Friday for three hours a night starting in 9 p.m. Pacific Midnight Eastern we will take you down the supernatural path from ET contact to the paranormal and all of the Spiritual cryptid and conspiracy stories in between you could find us right here on revolution radio at space-doubtradio.com On Twitter at space-doubt radio and on Facebook at space-doubt radio show Space-doubt radio it's a night of talk and interaction are you experienced? Even the government admits that 911 was a conspiracy But did you know that it was an inside job that Osama had nothing to do with it? That the twin towers were blown apart by a sophisticated arrangement of mini or mic