Episode 49: Everything is a Rich Man's Trick, Part 3

JFK to 9/11: Everything is a Rich Man’s Trick  is a documentary by Francis Richard Conolly that's been viewed millions of times. This segment deals mostly with Nixon & Watergate, false flags, and 9-11.

My Part 1 review can be found here: https://www.buzzsprout.com/2289560/14230087
My Part 2 review can be found here: https://www.buzzsprout.com/2289560/14608883

Links:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oVpt_I9iQQ&t=6s  OR  https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2er3gb

https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKsturgis.htm

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2978657&mesg_id=2994912

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Air_Lines_Flight_553

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SL9orid231c

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honey_trapping

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_massacre#Alternative_theories

https://causeyconsultingllc.com/2024/03/03/its-only-food/

Need more? You can visit the website at: https://consaracytheories.com/ or my own site at: https://saracausey.com/. Don't forget to check out the blog at: https://consaracytheories.com/blog.

I am the author of the forthcoming book, Decoding the Unicorn: A New Look at Dag Hammarskjöld, where I explore Dag's leadership style and his personal journey in greater depth. It will be available on Amazon on Tuesday, January 7th! For updates, please visit: https://decodingtheunicorn.com/. To follow my journey as an author, please visit: https://www.facebook.com/saracauseyauthor. 

Transcript

 Transcription by Otter.ai.  Please forgive any typos!

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Kennedy murder, Watergate burglary, compromising photos, Deep Throat, Nixon's taping system, United Airlines 553, Charlie India Alpha, badge man, Operation Mockingbird, mainstream media manipulation, JFK conspiracy, military control, blackmail, economic cycles, independent inquiry

Welcome to con-sara-cy theories. Are you ready to ask questions you shouldn't and find information you're not supposed to know. Well, you're in the right place. Here is your host. Sara Causey.

Hello, hello, and thanks for tuning in. In tonight's episode, I will conclude my review of Francis Richard Connolly's documentary film. Everything is a rich man's trick. We've made it to part three. Hallelujah. So Let's saddle up and take this ride. At this point, Conley starts to segue out of the Kennedy murder and into Tricky Dick Nixon and Watergate. He plays a clip from Alan J Pakula film, All the President's Men. I intend to record an episode about that film, as well as Russ Baker's questions in his book, family of secrets like, did Nixon really know what was going on with Watergate, or was he set up? Was he, in his own way, a patsy for what happened at Watergate? But that's a story for another time. As he points out rightly in this documentary, some of the same names that are associated with Kennedy's murder are also associated with the Watergate burglary, according to Connelly, Frank Sturgis allegedly says that the Watergate burglary took place like the ostensible reason to spy on the DNC is just bogus. One of their goals, in fact, the main goal, according to this documentary, was that there was compromising information, compromising photos of Charlie India Alpha men that were in Dealey Plaza, and they were supposed to go and get that compromising information out of there. You decide for yourself if that's even plausible. There was an interview published in the San Francisco Chronicle dated May 5, 1977 and it reads Watergate burglar. Frank sturdy said yesterday that Charlie India Alpha planned the break in because high officials felt that then President Nixon was becoming too powerful and was overly interested in the pop pop of President Kennedy sturdy has also said he believes Deep Throat a major source for Washington Post reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward was Robert Bennett, a partner in Charlie India Alpha front public relations firm in Washington. Bennett a son of former senator Wallace. Bennett is employed by the Summa Corp, part of the empire of the late Howard Hughes. Hughes was a major client of Mullen Corp. Bennett's Old Firm. Sturgis was convicted in the break in at democratic headquarters, he said, Bennett on orders from then Charlie India Alpha director Richard Helms was fed information by Alexander Haig Nixon's Chief of Staff, Alexander Butterfield, who disclosed the existence of Nixon's taping system and Watergate burglar Howard Hunt. End quote. He also claims that E Howard Hunt did not want to take the fall for everything. So he makes this phone call to Nixon, basically to perform blackmail, like I know what's really going on here. You know what's really going on here, and I'm gonna start talking unless I get a payoff. Now he attributes this this quote about Bush broke out in assholes and shit himself to death. You can't even hardly say it with a straight face. He attributes that to this Howard Hunt blackmail scheme that Poppy Bush found out what was going on, and that's what caused him to break out in assholes and shit himself to death. Sorry. Now there is an alternative explanation for this. I'll drop a link to this from the Democratic Underground so you can read it for yourself. But it's a quote from The Unauthorized Biography of George H W Bush on August 5, 1974 the White House released the transcript of the celebrated smoking gun taped conversation of June 23 1972 in which Nixon discussed ways to frustrate the investigation of the Watergate break ins chairman, George was one of the leading Nixon administration figures consulting with Al Haig in the course of the morning, when Bush heard the news, he was very upset, undoubtedly concerned about all of the very negative publicity that he himself was destined to receive in the blowback of Nixon's now imminent downfall. Then after a while, he calmed down somewhat. One account describes Bush as somewhat relieved by the news that the coup de grace tape was going to be made public, an act probably fatal, as Haig had said. Finally, there was some, some thing that the national chairman could see clearly the ambiguities in the evidence had been tearing the party apart Bush thought at this point, Bush became the most outspoken and militant organizer of Nixon's resignation a Cassius of the imperial presidency. A little later, White House congressional liaison, William Timmons, wanted to make sure that everyone had been fully briefed about the transcripts going out, and he turned to Nixon's political counselor, Dean Burch. Dean does Bush know about the transcript? Yet? Timmons. Asked. Burch replied, Yes. Well, what did he do? Timmons asked, he broke out in assholes and shit himself to death, was Birch's answer. So an alternative explanation is that it's about the alleged smoking gun take conversation that was going to incriminate Nixon and then it didn't have anything to do with the murder of JFK. As I always tell you, do your own research. Decide for yourself. He also ties this all to the crash of United Airlines, flight 553, and there are a variety of conspiracy theories around this, primarily because Dorothy Hunt, who was e Howard Hunt's wife, I think what she died. She was on the flight, and she died. And so there are certainly conspiracy theories that relate to the unfolding Watergate scandal that was going on at the time. It's one of those things like, it's awfully convenient for somebody to be killed in a plane crash when that scandal is unfolding. I mean, as far as the timing goes, it just seems a little bit weird. Now, in his documentary, Conley also points out that a reporter, Michelle Clark, was on board, she was also killed. He claims that her boyfriend was Charlie India alpha, and she knew more about what was actually going on with Watergate than she should have again. Judge for yourself. If you go to Wikipedia under the conspiracy theories tab for United Airlines Flight 553, you'll see one proponent of Watergate related theories was Sherman Skolnick, a Chicago based private investigator who alleged that the aircraft had been sabotaged by the Charlie India alpha on june 13, 1973 Skolnick testified at an NTSB hearing in Rosemont, Illinois, and claimed that the Foxtrot Bravo India, CBS United Airlines traffic controllers at Midway and the NTSB itself conspired in a plot to sabotage the flight because 12 of its passengers had links to Watergate. United Airlines officials had asked the NTSB to hear skull Nick's version, because he had frequently charged that ual was among those attempting to suppress his explanation of events. He said that hunt carried $2 million in travelers checks and money orders stolen from the committee for the re election of the President, $50,000 in currency and documents that may have led to the impeachment of President Richard Nixon. He stated that a hit man that Nixon had placed aboard the aircraft to make sure that hunt was killed also died in the crash. The Chicago Tribune said that scolnick knitted scores of facts and assumptions together loosely and no documentation was produced to substantiate the charges. The claim of Charlie India Alpha responsibility was echoed by Nixon's Special Counsel Chuck Colson in an interview with Time Magazine in 1974 however, the same article speculated that Coulson was accusing the Charlie India alpha of broad Watergate conspiracy in a desperate attempt to stave off Nixon's impeachment in the scandal, and that Coulson may have lost touch with reality as he faced a prison sentence. End quote. He says that there was like a, I think a ham radio operator who had heard misleading information from air traffic control tried to divulge this information, but the tapes were destroyed. He also says that Foxtrot Bravo India agents were on the ground of the wreckage, making sure that there weren't any compromising photos or papers left behind. A lot to digest there. Now he segues from there into badge man. I don't really understand why we're going back to to the allegations of various people that were on the grassy knoll. Why are we not probing further into Watergate? But hey, I didn't organize the documentary. He starts talking about badge man, and I agree with him, or I potentially agree with him, I should say, let me put it that way, I potentially agree with him on the whole badge man thing. I'm not convinced that the blobs in this photograph are a man with a badge on there's another photograph of the grassy knoll, and I believe you can find it in David Lifton book, best evidence. Let me go back. Give me just a second to go back and reconfirm. Yep, I was right. If you, if you check out David Lifton book, best evidence. There is a photograph where it appears to be a man on the grassy knoll. However it's, it doesn't look like badge man, according to Connolly, badge man is like a deep fake that was sponsored by the Charlie India alpha because it throws people off the scent of anything real. While people are debating the identity of badge man, they're not focusing on anything that's true. And to be honest with you, maybe has a valid point there. Now, I don't know if he's a fiction made up by the agency or not, but it is a distraction. You're talking about blotches in a photograph, and then you don't really begin to make anything out until someone colorizes it and tells you, Oh, well, I believe that these blotches are a man with a badge and a fake uniform. You're like, but wait a minute, this is like what I've talked. About in the episode Satan wants you where they talk about the book. Michelle remembers when people are under hypnosis and they're getting all of this suggestion, can you really trust what they're saying?

In particular, he points to mark Lane's book and documentary rush to judgment as being highly credible and causing people to really question the official narrative. He also talks about Operation Mockingbird, which is valid. I mean, you can go and read about Operation Mockingbird and the manipulation of mainstream media to push very particular beliefs on people, where I think he goes a bit wonky. Here is that he strongly implies in his documentary that Operation Mockingbird was launched because of Mark lane, and that's just simply not true. It was around a number of years before John Kennedy's murder. Now he makes a very bold claim here that every documentary, every movie that's been produced about the murder of JFK is coming straight from the Charlie India Alpha. He specifically includes in that Oliver Stone's film JFK. He also shows clips, as he's saying this narration, he also shows clips from that Docu series the men who killed Kennedy, which I've been in the process of publishing my reviews on I'm like, okay, so every single thing about JFK murder has come directly from the Charlie India Alpha. Who knows? Maybe Connelly is right. That seems awfully hyperbolic to me. Now, if somebody wants to make the argument, well, mainstream, official narrative. Things come from the Charlie India alpha, as well as things that are so far afield, things that are so ridiculous, sort of like the debate over badge man, who actually was bad? Man, Well, shit, it could have just been ink blobs. There might not have been a freaking badge. Man, I don't think he has a completely outrageous point to me, it just seems exaggerative. He also specifically calls out the Nova documentary from 1988 who shot President Kennedy, as well as Gordon Arnold from the Docu series, the men who killed Kennedy, and that scene in the Docu series where he's crying, saying, I could be the only one who saw this man, according to Connolly, all of these people, like two of the scientists who appeared in the Nova documentary, as well as Gordon Arnold, are just professional, paid actors. He talks about an episode of Colombo titled murder, smoke and shadows, where a Hollywood director is trying to fool Colombo because his studio has become a murder scene, and it's not always clear who's an actor, who's involved in the murder, and then who isn't, I guess, until you get to the end of the episode, that's when he compares the Docu series the men who killed Kennedy too, some of the people, according to Conley, a few of them, and only a Few of them are legit and they're sincere, whereas everybody else is a paid actor. He claims that the men who killed Kennedy Docu series as well as Oliver Stone's film JFK, are meant to be disinformation tactics, so that everybody is looking at the grassy knoll and nobody is looking at the storm drain. He makes, I think, an interesting point that's not without validity. He talks about in in particular, the men who killed Kennedy docuseries, times when people are crying. And according to Connolly, this is part of the Charlie India alphas playbook, because decent people are going to have a more emotional reaction when they see someone openly sobbing, they see someone grieving on television, they're not going to automatically be cynical. They're going to suspend critical thinking and empathize with that person who's crying, maybe take them more seriously just because they're weeping on television, as theses go. That's not a bad one. He may have a point there. Now that's not to say that I think everybody who ever cries on television, or anybody who necessarily cried in the Docu series was a liar and was some kind of Charlie India Alpha operative. I just think his overall point is not a bad one. People are going to suspend critical thinking. Well, I shouldn't be a cynic. This person is grieving in front of me. Isn't that terrible? Maybe, maybe not. He also claims that bar McClellan's book, Blood Money and power, how LBJ killed JFK was written by the Charlie India alpha. And he singles out a passage about that Malcolm Wallace guy, and supposedly he was the one that fired the shot that hit Kennedy around the shoulder blade, according to Connolly, this is ludicrous. This is crazy. And the explanation is bar McClellan didn't actually write the book. It was the Charlie India Alpha. I guess this is Connolly going for it, because one of the criticisms of J F. Conspiracy theories. And I'm using conspiracy theories and air quotes here is, well, you guys just want to blame everything on the Charlie India Alpha. You guys think it's the agency doing everything all the time. Apparently, in Connolly's case, there's some truth to that. He also claims that there's no way anybody could know that Malcolm Wallace's bullet split apart in the air, unless they had some kind of stop motion cameras there. How would they ever be able to know that that happened, let alone prove that it happened? And he claims, you know, I don't. I don't know when this hits the hits the airwaves, if I will have made it to the part yet, where I talk about the final episode of the men who killed Kennedy Docu series, and then the rebuttal, where they call in the mainstream historians to tell everybody what to think. I'm not sure if I will be at that point yet. The gist of it is that final episode of the men who killed Kennedy Docu series was apparently so incendiary that it sparked off some lawsuits, and the History Channel decided to record a rebuttal episode to be like, mea culpa are bad. We shouldn't have done this. According to Connolly, even the lawsuit was fake. He claims it's a double bluff, where, because they banned it from television, but it's conveniently available on the internet, truth seekers will go and look at it because it's like, well, it must be true. If it got banned, if it caused a lawsuit, if people got that upset over it, there must be some kernels of truth to it. Again, as a thesis goes, that's not a bad one. I'm not saying it's true. I'm just saying that you pretty much guarantee that people are going to flock to something if you make it verboten, if you tell them, this is the episode you're not supposed to see. This is the content that was so inflammatory. The History Channel got their asses sued. Of course, people are gonna want to know. Oh, shit, they got in a lawsuit. Former presidents and first ladies were so butthurt over this episode that they took the History Channel to motherfucking court. Of course, I want to know. So look, maybe he has a point. He claims that pointing a figure at LBJ is just a distraction. Connolly names Dulles Attlee Phillips and poppy Bush as being the main masterminds. He points out people that were going to give information to Jim Garrison that were murdered, people that were going to testify before the HSCA that were also murdered. This is documented information. He's not so far out on a limb on any of that. He also points a finger, at least to some degree, at the Kennedy family, claiming that it seems like their silence was aiding and abetting what happened that day. And I was like, Oh, damn, that's that's pretty brutal dude. And he gets back into the story of the patriarch Joseph senior, being a bootlegger, being in coats with the mafia that, according to Connolly, the reason why the Kennedys didn't really want any like further probe, just except what's in the Warren Commission, it was Lee Harvey Oswald. He was a lone Cook, end of story. The reason why they didn't want to go beyond that, according to Conley, okay, not according to me. Want to be clear about that, is because they felt that it would bring up a lot of dark and dirty secrets, particularly about Joseph seniors, involvement with the mafia, and the fact that he was, according to Connolly, a crook. He also brings up Chappaquiddick, which, that's something that I have talked about before, in the sense of, I don't get into this mythology of Camelot. I don't sit here and say, Oh, this man, oh, this family. JFK was not a saint. Whether we're talking about a saint of politics or we're talking about a saint in general, he was not a perfect man. Nobody is perfect. I always try to admit my bias and say I have a soft spot for him, because I do feel like he was trying. I've said the same thing about Jim Garrison. I don't think that Jim Garrison got everything right, and I think in a lot of ways, he royally fucked his investigation of Clay Shaw and the attempted prosecution of Clay Shaw, I think he spent a lot of time putting the Warren Commission and the official narrative on trial and not enough time actually trying to figure out what the hell was going on with Clay Shaw. I think he was trying. I think he was trying to expose what he saw as a bunch of insane bullshit and a coup d'etat on American soil. He didn't get everything right. He wasn't perfect, but he did try.

According to Connolly, Frank Sturgis and E Howard Hunt were somewhere on the scene when Chappaquiddick happened. And I'm like, Okay, wait a minute. What so Connolly feels like the common narrative was old Teddy Kennedy got caught with his pants down. He was a married man. Misbehaving, and there was this car accident, and he may have been drinking, and so it kind of turned into a national scandal, because he was being naughty, like doubly naughty, because messing around with this woman, and then he was drunk, and oh my god. And according to Connolly, this is another way to make sure that a Kennedy stays out of the White House, you're going to put this blot on Ted Kennedy, so that forevermore, when we think about Ted Kennedy, one of the first things that we think of is Java clinic. He goes on to ask the question like, what becomes of the military when its commander in chief is murdered? I'll be honest with you, I've had the same thought before like man, the commander in chief of the armed forces is murdered in broad daylight, what happens to a military system after an event like that? How do you pick up the pieces? How do you move on and then Who do you become? Well, according to Connolly, again, not according to me, to be clear, according to Connolly, the US armed forces are now controlled entirely by the mob. He then talks about this interview that happened between Rick straw cutter and a woman named Kay Pollard Griggs, who says that she was the wife of Marine Corps Colonel George Griggs, and that the military is rife with blackmail via sodomy and putting young men in compromising positions so that they have to do favors for the older men. Conley talks about blackmail, putting up cameras and brothels. And the thing is, we know that these honey trap or honey pot scandals are real. We do know that intelligence agencies use that on their quote enemies. Now, is what Griggs is saying about what goes on in the military in this so called pink triangle. Is that true? I'm not telling you that it is. I don't know. It seems awfully far fetched to me to say that the American mafia controls the entire American military. But hey, this is Connolly's documentary. He can say what he likes. He also quotes Ted Gunderson, who you may remember, got into some of the Satanic Panic stuff. I think that he and Maury Terry. I can't remember if Maury Terry quoted him, or if the two of them worked together, I'd have to go back and reread the ultimate evil I talked about that and in a previous episode that book, how Maury Terry just goes down this intense rabbit hole, and it just gets more and more complicated. It's like one rabbit hole leads to another, leads to another, leads to another. But his basic overall concept, could there have been more than one Son of Sam shooter? That's a valid question, and it's a question worth asking. What if there were people that literally got away with murder that were never brought to justice? That's a horrible thing to think about, and so it is here. I mean, what does happen to a military after the commander in chief is murdered, nothing, everything, something I don't know, doesn't necessarily mean that the mafia controls the entire military, or that this lady is telling the truth about weird, gay, black, male, pink triangle situations, but, but still, it's a it's a question worth asking. What actually happened to the country that day when Kennedy was murdered. What actually happened? He also talks about the Charlie India alpha's involvement with drug trafficking, which is a valid point to talk about. And he asked the question, if you have an organization that can get away with murdering a US president in broad daylight, what else can they get away with? And to me, I'm like, thank you. This is also a valid question some of his theories and ideas, especially since he's positing so much of this as fact, which is a turn off to me, some of his theories might get way, way the fuck off. I don't know, left field, right field, some somewhere, outer space, but that's a valid question. If a president can get murdered in broad daylight, and it's a conspiracy, it wasn't just Oswald as a lone pop, pop or crazy. What else is going on? What do we not know about who's who's really in charge of this shit show? Anyway, he now gets into 911, and some of the discrepancies about that, can jet fuel really melt steel beams? And then also, why would the towers collapse with such uniformity? I mean, they just like staying right in perfect alignment. How would that actually happen? He brings up operation north woods. I intend to do a podcast episode strictly about Operation north woods, because it shows you that the people in charge, the power brokers, have no compunction about conducting a false flag. And in North Woods, they didn't actually give a shit as to whether there were real victims, real people who died, or if it was all. Fake. They just wanted an excuse to invade Cuba. So it's like if some people die, whether they're military personnel or they're civilians, we don't give a shit. We don't care if we actually have to kill people, or if we can just fake kill people. And they came up with some pretty crazy things about like a fake plane hijacking, and we wouldn't even have to put people on it. We could just do everything by recording and Kennedy told him to fuck off. I mean, say what you will about him as a person and his philandering and all of that, at least he told them no on that. My God. Connolly also claims that the 1980 bologna bombing in Bologna Italy was it got blamed on some kind of fascist group, I think. But according to Connolly, it was actually the Charlie India alpha and MI six that did it. According to Connolly, the like man on the street interviews during 911 show people that are trying too hard, and the things that they say sound scripted. And sure enough, he does play this man on the street, and there's a dude in a suit behind this guy that's talking, that's just like in a T shirt and a ball cap. Now, according to Connolly, the man in the suit is a Charlie India Alpha handler, and the dude in the ball cap is an actor. I'm not saying I think that I'm just telling you, I'm relaying the information, but this guy makes the comment mostly due to structural failure, because the fire was just too intense, and Connolly has the caption up, who really talks like this? And that too is a valid point. We who would, who would be saying that in the middle of a tragedy, when all of these things are going on, why would you be relatively well composed and say something that sounds that formal, mostly due to structural failure, because the fire was just too intense. Well, how the hell would you know? I mean, how would you know that that that's what happened. Mean, that is kind of funky. He actually, in this documentary, goes so far as to say that all T word attacks are fake. They're perpetrated by the rich on the poor. None of them are real. Another point that Connolly makes, that I don't think is a bad point at all. I mean, some of some other authors and documentarians have made the same point with the end of the Cold War, there had to be another enemy. There's going to have to be this steady stream of wars. There needs to be a steady stream of fear keep the defense spending going. We can't ever stop arming. We need to always be in a state of panic about something. And so T word attacks, pointing the finger at the Middle East and saying T word attacks, that's the new boogey man. When the Cold War ended, that's the direction they went in. He also makes a very good point that if you have world peace, you're not going to need all of the surveillance without the fear. You're not going to want to spend money on the armaments. You're not going to submit to the control. I'm thinking now of Kennedy and the peace speech at American University. If the goal is to really stop all of this fighting, to build up nations so that they have their own self determination, nobody is subjugating anybody else. People can live in freedom. They can have peace. And you're making strides towards disarmament. You are really fucking the system, and they're not going to tolerate that. I mean, I feel like the point that Connolly is making here is a sound one. You need to be in fear. There has to be a boogey man, there has to be a bad guy. There has to be some us versus them narrative, so that people are panic stricken whatever you want to do, whatever civil, civil liberty you want to take away from me in the name of security, I'll go for it. Whatever amount of money that you want to tax us for, or print up bullshit fiat currency and raise inflation for. We'll go along with it because we're terrified. He also says that religion is a rich man's trick, because instead of having a pantheon of many gods and goddesses, you say there's one God, and then you say he watches you all the time. So then the government or the ruling class doesn't have to have soldiers watching everybody and keeping them in line. They'll self censor if they feel like a God in heaven or a god in the sky is watching them all the time, as he says, any adult knows that there's one set of rules or laws for the rich and the powerful, and then there's another set of rules and laws for everyone else that we are in agreement upon. He shows a clip with Anthony C Sutton, who's written books about Wall Street and the rise of Hitler Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. And Anthony is talking about how he was going to give some testimony in front of the Republican National Committee, and then was told not to speak about those things anymore. And he was talking about information that Americans were giving to the Soviet Union so that they would have the technology to develop their war potential. Well, I intend to do an episode around this question of, was the Cold War an orchestrated Sham? As Connolly is saying, everything is a rich man's trick. Was the Cold War no exception to that? Was it a rich man's trick? Do you, as he alleges in this documentary, have the fat cats and the hyper elites funding both sides of a conflict so that no matter who wins, they win. He mentions George Orwell's 1984 if it once became General, wealth would no longer confer distinction. So his idea is that society is not set up so that poor people, middle class people, ever really have a chance to break out of that social structure. Because if everybody was a millionaire, it wouldn't be special anymore. What I was thinking about was how the WEF has already predicted that within the next decade, maybe not even that long, the world will have its first trillionaire, because being a billionaire is so blase now you have to up the ante and make trillionaires. Something else he mentions that I agree with is that these boom bust cycles and recessions are orchestrated. I firmly believe that to be true. I do not think that these boom bust cycles and the artificially manipulated, artificially overheated markets happen by accident. When you think about 2021, for example, the FOMO and the YOLO, it was not only happening in the housing market, it was also happening in the job market. And for my part, if I wasn't the very first person, damn I was on the leading edge of saying the great resignation is over. I felt it January 1 of 2022 it was palpable to me. And as we went further and further into that year, I kept sounding the alarm. This is not going to last forever. People need to get where they're going to go and hunker down, because the fat cats have already said, you know, there was that leaked Bank of America memo. We hope that conditions get worse for American workers. They wanted their balance of power back. They were not going to allow everybody out in the public to Job hop ad infinitum and constantly ask for more money. It just wasn't going to be allowed to happen back in March over on my business related podcast, oh, excuse me, my business related blog, I published the post. It's only food, because there was this article on Yahoo Finance about the sky high cost of food is eating up our paychecks at a near historic rate. And one of the things that I write in this blog post is these boom bust cycles and inflationary cycles are engineered. They don't happen by Weird, random accident. And then I quote JFK when he said, a market, of course, is not a fact of nature. It is a creation of man. Yeah. Another thing that I agree with Connelly on is when he's talking about people saying there needs to be an independent inquiry, you know, and pick whatever scandal, whatever atrocity that you want to people say this still yet about the murder of JFK, there needs to be another inquiry, and it's like, Why? Why? As Connolly says in this documentary, these hyper elites are not going to investigate themselves, not truly. They're not going to incriminate themselves. They're not going to prosecute themselves. They're not going to punish themselves. That is another point where I would say I agree with him. It's to me, we're so far gone. It's a waste of time at this point to sit around and say there needs to be another official inquest. Okay, near the end, he asks the question, what kind of society is it which kills its own best men? So where does this leave us? I think it's intriguing that in this documentary, he talks about other documentaries and movies and books that take some fundamental truths, but then pepper and lies or outlandish accusations, and it winds up throwing sand in the entire question. As I've said, there are some things, some comments that he makes, and some questions that he asks that I think are fair, and the idea of recessions and boom bust cycles being engineered, there being a different set of laws and rules for the rich as opposed to the poor. I agree with him on those things. The idea of an inquest, we should have an official inquiry, an official investigation, and it's like, Give me a break. That's not going to accomplish anything, that is going to be a waste of time and money, and we all know it. So there are some fundamental points that I agree with him on, but then at the same time, throughout this documentary, some of his ideas just get so far afield. And to me, it seems I don't know, awfully tidy and convenient to say everything is the Charlie India alpha. And then, then at the same time to make the accusation that the mafia controls the entire US military, or that any, any documentary, any film that's been. Eight about JFK is automatically Charlie India Alpha propaganda. That's awfully hyperbolic. And then it leads to like, well, all of the rest of them are garbage, except me. I'm straight, I'm I'm honest. I'm always a little bit suspicious of people like that. Everybody else is lying to you, but you can trust me, because I'm the only one that's really telling you the truth is it worth watching. Only you can decide that for yourself. It's my hope that before you've ever listened to these podcast episodes, you have watched it and you've made up your own mind what you think about it. For me, hmm, I'm trying to give you a good insight as to whether or not I'd recommend it. And that's tough. It really is, because I feel like if somebody were watching this and they hadn't already done some real research, they hadn't already read voraciously about the JFK, pop, pop, they could get some really crazy ideas from this. And so I'm just, yeah, I'm not sure. I think that I'm struggling here. I really am, because I'm like, on the one hand, he does make some points that I agree with, but on the other some of the theories are just so crazy. And I'm trying to decide, like, does that? Does that help? Because if somebody starts asking questions and then that spurs them to read books, they want to collect some information and make up their own mind and think about it critically, then that's a great thing. But if somebody were to watch this and just go, oh, well, everything he says is gospel truth, so I don't need to read a book. I don't need to fact check. I don't need to decide for myself if I think he's full of shit or if he's truthful, then that's a bad thing. I would say the same thing about Oliver Stone's movie, JFK, or the men who killed Kennedy Docu series. Don't take any of this stuff at face value. Please go and look into these issues for yourself. Read books. That's what I always say about JFK. Read a book or two or five or 10. There's plenty of them out there from a variety of voices. You have to start looking for these strands of truth. I'm also thinking of the book that I read about the death of Dag hammersholed, the golden thread. You have to start looking for these golden threads that make sense to you. Now, maybe this author is way off in left field, but I think this author is telling the truth, or I can begin to see this pattern emerging as I get more and more information. I guess maybe that's what I would say, and coming to some kind of conclusion here, if you watch it, or you have watched it. I'm hoping that you didn't just take everything that he said at face value. It's my sincere hope that you will probe, you will ask questions, and you will decide for yourself what you think in this documentary is sensible and what you think is complete as amenity. Stay a little bit crazy and I will see you in the next episode. 

Thanks for listening. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe to this podcast and share it with others.