You're listening, Caribbean reason, episode 23 of the Bronze Age Pervert. I'm full of wrath, and I wish for death. It is time for the Mongol, the Mongol power to begin its assault again. Please bring the secret cleansing of the steppe, fire. I am hearing rumors of Katyusha, missile batteries, raid on the border. It is time I call upon the Mongol people to begin the holy barrage of fire on China. Emit, please, immediately, the thunderbolts of the gods, thousands of Katyusha rockets upon China. Now is the time. Put out a call for volunteers, and many will join you from across the world to subdue the rat people. I call on the Koreans also, the Koreans who have themselves resisted sinification for thousands of years, not wanting to be absorbed into this Han blob.

I call on them to use the cleansing fire of nuclear weapons on China. Isn't it great that America stopped Japan from neutering China in World War II? Now what kind of long-term thinking was that? Think about the world that we could have had by now. The Hanborg Biomass, there's no other word for it, it's up to it again. They are up to it again and in fact, no one has any idea what's really happening there because this people knows only to lie you don't believe me they had the samurai with the swastika behind him you remember all of you remember him he was an old Japanese guy with flag behind him now they wiped YouTube off this too but the Japanese know the Chinese can say nothing without lying they lie without even knowing they do their country is the historical flu factory of the planet

just a fact. The inland of China has people living at Africa levels of filth but worse even maybe with livestock in the house with chickens and do you ever wonder why these pandemics all start in the rat pile of so-called cities of East Asia? Why don't they start in Africa? Because China is the human animals, the human reduced to domesticated donkey of burden. And they're most likely lying about what this is. Nuclear tests have been done in any reliable country. They're all relying on fragmentary Chinese propaganda statistics. These are people who sleep with chicken in bed. It's why you rely on this people statistic to understand this virus, if that's what it even is, because it looks to be one of three things.

It could be an engineered bioweapon that came loose because the Chinese are retards. Can you tell me more about IQ tests, please? As if these people would not fake IQ tests, there's nothing in the history of this nation to indicate intelligence of that kind. And if the IQ test they have is indeed an average of 105, as is said, then all this means is this extra five points in average IQ, it proves that IQ at these levels does not mean what its defenders think it does. Because the sorry state of Chinese, and indeed all Asian science for example, this is something that's been true historically, I'm sorry about gunpowder and paper and so on, that was thousands of years ago, but the sorry state of Asian science in general, it continues to this day.

So it's a bit of a hard argument to make that they haven't caught up out of historical circumstance only. It's been decades now that they've been tried, they've tried their hands at science for decades. They're very mediocre, this word people throw around now, aside from a few limited technology areas like robotics in Japan, for example, East Asia, and in particular Chinese science is very primitive, and their supposedly slightly higher average IQ still does not translate into, let's say, academic papers or citations in the hard sciences in any size, any proportions that reflects their population. And I'm not playing at word games here, by the way. If you look at it, I think European nations with much smaller populations by orders of

of magnitude have about as many of these academic citations as all of China still. And then when you look at Nobel Prizes and the hard sciences, if you want, and so on. But in fact, if you go and look actually at the kind of science, at the content of the science supposedly China is producing today, even at the highest levels, it consists of plagiarism, of fraud, or it's something just on the edge of fraud, which reflects if any Many of you have had the misfortune of being around Chinese students in classrooms. If you have one Chinese student, it doesn't matter, but where they form a mass of students, you know about the great cheating that goes on. The way one generation of Chinese students passes on exams to the next, you know, they

all learn by rote the questions and the answers, and it's accumulated in this way over generations of students and this kind of rat-like diligence, this is then the foundation of Chinese science. Except this does not actually work when you have to actually do something. In the same way that Obama found out that affirmative action when he had to work in a Wall Street law firm where you have to make real arguments and he couldn't do it and neither could his shaboom baboon wife, if I can put it politely. They found out it doesn't actually work when it's called to do something real. In the same way, China, it doesn't work when you have to build a structure that will then collapse that you see these Chinese tall buildings that just fall down flat.

I mean, you don't even find this kind of thing in East Europe. If you build a biowarfare facility to contain pathogens that you don't understand, you know, When you're just playing at science in this way and building everything on fraud and cargo cultism, it ends up not working for you. If you don't believe me, I've mentioned it before. Go read the article called Manifold Destiny in the New Yorker, which is otherwise a middle-brow garbage publication, but read this article about Grigory Perelman, a Russian mathematician who solved the Poincare conjecture, a genius. He's a wonderful man. He refuses international prizes, saying that the judges of these prizes don't have the qualifications to understand him. I like him very much.

He's a hermit, completely dedicated to enjoying himself in matters of discovery, not caring at all about status, the opposite of Chinese striver so-called science. But you see in this article, Manifold Destiny, how he was plagiarized by the Chinese who who tried to claim his discoveries for themselves. So that you will see even at the highest levels of Chinese science is a fraud. And a lot of these so-called academic scientific papers they have, what they consist is they take a result from someone else and they add an irrelevant corollary to it and they pretend it's something new. It's all about careerism. I'm sorry, Weihan Zhang, but that whole mindset of differential equations study all day. I'm telling you, I'd rather have Africa. I'd rather live in Africa than China any day.

And now you see why. Yes, I think I have to take a more impromptu break now. I think I may start vaping. But I'm telling you, I'd rather have leftist hipsters rule over me than the Chinese. The Chinese will actually appropriate Western history and inventions, and they will pretend they are their own, same way, forgive if I repeat myself, but they see now that Genghis Khan was actually a Chinese general, so this is how far they will go. Many of artifacts in Chinese history are completely contrived and made up. Many of their ancient structures do not exist. Many of their ancient archaeological findings are fake. I've talked about this before. I think, in fact, the Ming Dynasty, that was basically the only native Han Dynasty in the

last thousand years, and otherwise they were always ruled by Mongols or Jurchen or Manchu and other steppe peoples who easily conquered this mass of slaves. All along the Chinese simply were the serf population, and their women loved Tibetan men historically who are much stronger than Chinese. It's very embarrassing, I don't understand this by the way, this immigration to the West from China. What is the idea of this? Please take our daughters. I don't understand this. Are Chinese parents stupid? What good does it do to come to United States, even if you do well owning a laundry shop or your son becomes an ophthalmologist or whatever other middle class status striving they go for? I don't know.

But let's say your son does well this ophthalmologist or computard programming, but then they cannot find a girlfriend or a wife, so what good is it? I'm sorry no one talks about this, but it's a terrible fate for these people as immigrants to the West. I really don't understand the calculation behind it. And it's not like they don't know about it, because they've seen it happen for years now. This is a known and a terrible problem in the immigrant community, the rate at which Asian, and I mean in particular Chinese girls, go outside their people for this. And there isn't generally anyone to take their place. So you have here a huge store of actually incels, and I'm not saying this by the way to rub it in, to glory in it, because I think it's a terrible thing.

And I don't understand the calculation going on in the minds of these parents who immigrate knowing this outcome, and who even, they actually favor male births through selective abortions, right, at least in China, although probably in the United States as well. So that is an insane practice given their sexual situation. It's bizarre to me they do this. This is intelligent people. But enough of that. Yes, you know, I know as a matter of fact that many of America's agencies, including the NSA, they have hired many Chinese nationals and so on. So tell me how that will work out. The American Praetorian elite derp state versus China Comintern. It's two retards fighting. But we will all pay the price. It's a comical conflict, you know, and I'm telling you, if China is allowed hegemony,

they will erase history, and if they can, they will even do a Carthage job on the West. They will completely wipe out and salt the earth of the West. Although, I don't know, it may be that the whole woke left now is just as bad, because they will try to edit books and history also, maybe. So it's as if, what can you do? These are our enemies. need Mr. Clean in the coming decades. Who is that? I don't know. But I was telling you, there are three options. So one is the virus is engineered and they lost control of it. It seems possible. It's a very plausible story because there's evidence that Wuhan's infrastructure was recently compromised by their own incompetence. And of course, Wuhan is also where a biowarfare lab was recently built, or biological pathogen

So it's quite a strange coincidence then. But the second possibility is this is what they say, more or less. It's a result of millions of Han imbeciles living with rats and pigs in the house in close quarters and eating bat soup. I know the story of an old man, an American, and he chose to experience life. So he took a tour of China, a culinary tour, such as Tyler Cowen and these other Libertardians they think is so wonderful, and brunch, the culinary delights of China. So this old guy, he take two year tour of China and he comes back with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Is this what you cretins want? Tell me you want to Creutzfeldt-Jakob Mapo Tofu from Sichuan province? You retards? Oh my God, Tyler Cowen.

So then that's the second possibility, that this is a result of these people's disgusting sub-African living practices. And then the third and most interesting possibility, which is a variation of the first, is that they actually accidentally released the plague in Wuhan. Because there's some evidence of recent plague cases in Inner Mongolia, that's the Chinese section of Mongolia and these cases were transported to Wuhan for study and Apparently many of the symptoms described from within China now not the cases outside but from within China They fit the model of the plague or even of anthrax even better than they fit Coronavirus on which it is being blamed and the coronavirus cases in the West that have been reported at least have been

relatively mild in keeping with the fact that actually coronavirus varieties account for maybe 20% of yearly flu cases anyway. And so the theory here is the Chinese Communist Party is blaming their own crittiness release of the plague in their own country on a minor mutation of the coronavirus. But we'll have to see what happens in the days ahead. Very strange things are happening because this winter already in the West and the United States some time ago was declared a particularly bad flu season with higher than average deaths. So I don't know, something strange going on. The only sure thing is that this cesspool of a nation China is a biohazard for the rest of the world, which is something the Japanese have always recognized, and against which

they've always struggled, they've always struggled to turn away from their immense ugliness. It's amazing to me that there are these cenophiles, the lovers of China, these neo-reactionary dictatorship lovers, who say that I'm being paid by Bannon to say all this, and this is amazing to me. Have you read my book? It's the most comprehensive statement ever against the Han and everything they've been and stood for in history. This is something that I along with others like Hakan have always sounded the alarm over for years now. And it's amazing to me also that in the negative reviews that have been of my book, they always get hot and buzzed by one or two lines I have specifically against the insane Ashkenazi tribe of Jews, which are actually quite measured lines that I wrote in one or two.

But none of these people have anything to say about the spiritual struggle I indicate and book against the treachery and vileness of the Chinese nation. And I don't care now if the CIA or the derp state is turning against China too, but I doubt that they are. I'm telling you, America's so-called agencies are partly Chinese-owned by now. The people responsible for this are the boomer generation, yes, and in general, the middle class, the so-called college educated striver faggot, high IQ middle class, which I will also talk about in this show later. Please go to break. I told you a little bit before in previous show about the controversy about HIV and AIDS and I want to discuss that in a little bit more detail now with some warnings before

I do, namely that people I trust very much and who know much more about medicine and biology than I do, and who are themselves, by the way, are frogs, you could say, or skeptics. They don't generally trust the government, and they're willing to entertain unusual conspiracy theories or whatever. But these people, some of whom you know, like Loki, Julianus, and Menaquin, they believe the mainstream story told about HIV is basically correct. So they do not go in for the crazy things I will tell you now. But like always, I like unusual theories because they reveal much even when they're wrong. And since we're dealing with yet another mysterious pandemic now of unclear origin, I thought I should say a word or two about some controversies regarding HIV, which was

discovered supposedly separately by a French scientist named Montagnier and by Robert Gallo, who is an American Italian scientist, and these two supposedly discovered HIV independently around the same time. Now, the really interesting thing about AIDS is the precursor decade to the 1980s, which is the 1970s, for two separate reasons. First of all, on the discovery side of this, on the side of the people who discovered it, like Montagnier and Robert Gallo, You need to look at what Robert Gallo, the discoverer of HIV, what he had been doing in the 1970s before he supposedly discovered this, he was working on a different retrovirus called HTLV, which is one of the first pathogenic retroviruses discovered and which caused leukemia,

not universally in everyone who got it, but it may be one out of 25 who have this HTLV some form of leukemia and HTLV existed at the time this is an interesting part it existed only in Japan and you have to understand something unusual about retroviruses not unusual but unusual in the sense that virus causes cell death right but a retrovirus does not cause cell death it causes cell proliferation which is why retroviruses are involved in causation of cancers so HTLV is on a of these retroviruses that causes some type of cell proliferation and is therefore implicated as partly the cause of this leukemia, only in a 125th of people who have it. And it's one of these rare endemic viruses probably deeply attuned by the way to the genetic profile of a host population and it was

present really only on some Japanese islands at the time I think. And in its This behavior and action, it was very different from the HIV that was discovered later. Not only in the difference I told you about cell death versus proliferation, but in many other senses, too. But you have to consider two things here. First of all, how strange it is that Robert Gallo was looking precisely for things like this in the 1970s, and then, oh, he discovers it in 1980s. And then the second strange thing is how Gallo, when his HTLV theory, that is probably correct, but at first it failed to gain attention that HTLV causes leukemia. He got very upset at that. His world documented. And he tried at first to say that HTLV, this Japanese obscure retrovirus, is what caused AIDS.

This was his initial claim, which made no sense epidemiologically, because maybe he He didn't know it at the time, but there were no AIDS cases in Japan. And yet here he was trying to blame essentially a Japanese and Japanese-only virus for it. And yes, he later revised his opinion, and HIV was at first called HTLV-3. He said it was a variety of HTLV. Later it was re-categorized as something entirely different. But what's really interesting here is that the obviously false arguments he was using to contrive a connection between HTLV-1 and AIDS are precisely the same argument later used about HIV. In other words, they were ready-made, they were ready-made arguments and he used them first about this previous retrovirus that he had discovered with these Japanese scientists

when it was obviously wrong and he just kept trying it until, oh, look, now finally there's a virus HIV that fits that description. It seems very suspicious to me. You could say, well, he got it right later, but I find very suspicious because the connection between HIV and AIDS is not as strong as you may think. I will say more on this in a minute, in a second, but I must also add that it was Montagnier, the French scientist, who actually discovered HIV. It was not Gallo, assuming it was discovered at all. And I have to tell you that Gallo did not get the Nobel Prize for this, I think in 2008, and that he has been accused repeatedly of fraud and of plagiarism, basically. Gallo received a massive funding for the study of this supposed epidemic, and you must remember

also the condition of the CDC, the Center for Disease Control, in the early 1980s, when its role was being questioned in the Reagan administration. And through this supposed epidemic, it finally found, so it sought, a reason for existing. And then the other side of things you should consider in the so-called gay community in the 1970s, which was being ravaged by all kinds of diseases anyway, parasites that were previously only found in livestock and many such other exotic things, but basically also one STD after another, plus numerous other infections, plus drugs, plus a lifestyle of partying and self-waste. And so what are the conclusions? This would all probably lead to immune breakdown even if HIV had never existed, is the point.

And this is one of the strongest arguments, I think, of the doubters, that actually if HIV had been a real STD and epidemic, it would have spread beyond its original host population as all such things do, they don't stay contained to an original risk population that's just not the epidemic pattern of an STD. But HIV and AIDS, they never really did. It remained a disease specifically of gays and of other so-called at-risk groups such as junkies, prostitutes, hemophiliacs. But if you look at all of these groups, you can see they have quite a bit more in common aside from exchanging bodily fluids, right? They have a bit more in common. These are hardly lifestyles of immune, let's say. These are already immunocompromised types of people. And in gays in particular,

HIV infection, I think, has never been found by itself, but along with many other co-infections. So that, for example, the strains used by both Montagnier and Gallo to supposedly isolate HIV never had just HIV in it. So, anyway, what are the main arguments against HIV-causing AIDS? And I mentioned in previous show two schools of so-called AIDS denialism, which, by the way, the famous health blogger P.D. Mangan, who now has recast himself as something else. This is where I first learned about AIDS denialism from him. But I think I should list their basic arguments on this show, because they're very interesting. And because we're dealing with another possible pandemic right now, probably a real and dangerous one this time.

But look, the main school of AIDS and Dialysis is headed by one Peter Duisberg. D-U-E-S-B-E-R-G. And he is the first discoverer, I believe, of cancer-causing retrovirus in 1970. In animals, not in people, I think. And he's been a professor of cell biology at UC Berkeley ever since. so hardly a lone internet lunatic. And his main theory is that HIV is a harmless passenger retrovirus that is only statistically correlated with AIDS, but does not cause it. And his theory is that the main cause of AIDS was actually drugs, and in particular the anti-HIV drugs, anti-retrovirals like AZT, which are essentially a powerful poison that destroys a patient's biology completely. So you need to take more frequent breaks now.

These allergies are killing me, you know, and even beyond this, it gives me the creeps to talk about this kind of thing, makes me nervous, you know, but I hate disease and all sorts of disease and this is what the Chinese are imposing on us and making me do show about this. But as I was telling you, AZT is essentially a powerful poison. It destroys a patient's biology totally. And there are many arguments that Peter Duesberg and his supporters bring up here. And his supporters include, by the way, people like Karen Mullis, who got the Nobel Prize for discovering PCR, which, you know, what is actually used to test for HIV, among other things, the genetic test. So they have quite a few arguments, and I only mention here the ones that seem strongest

to me, including that there is no infectious disease that works this way in nature among animals. Not one that is known to work this way. Simian immunodeficiency virus, for example, the equivalent in monkeys, does not work anything like what HIV is alleged to do in humans. Second is that the virus, unlike any other known pathogenic virus, is not seen to exist in many AIDS patients at all, nor is it biologically active in supposedly late stages of infection. You often cannot find it in those who die from AIDS at all. This is unlike for any other virus. Third, unlike any other non-disease, the epidemiology is drastically different for different countries, so that it exists mostly in male homosexuals in America, for example, but it is equally divided between males and females in Africa.

You could say, well, but that's because in Africa everyone fucks everyone. You go to a man's house, he says, here is my wife, fuck my wife. That's very common in Africa, so you say the loose sexual morality. But when you then look at the details, you see it is completely different manifestations in what diseases it's claimed to cause also. So in America it causes one set of diseases supposedly, in Africa another set completely. How does that work? I don't understand. Also even within one country the definition of what is AIDS changes so that it changed for example in the late 90s in Russia and before then there were very few cases and And then suddenly it exploded to many more because they were counted differently. And this is very hard to do.

I don't know do other diseases work this way where the diagnostic definition of what it is actually changes from country to country and year to year and there are different risk groups in every country. I don't think so. And Africa actually is a frequently diagnosed AIDS without even an HIV test. Did you know that? There are not the resources for HIV tests in Africa, mostly. So here is a conclusion, actually, that even though skeptical of what I'm saying so far can entertain this conclusion, which is that even if HIV-AIDS connection is what the mainstream says it is, it could very well be that it is overdiagnosed in Africa. In Africa, you must understand the filth of that continent and the explosion in a replicated

life in the 20th century where people there, there are so many people newly now that they live in absolute squalor, not much above survival conditions. So you have malnutrition, you have overcrowding, you have a complex of longstanding, well-known African wasting diseases, some not well-known, some not even discovered yet, caused by a variety of parasites, some not known. And given the money available if you inflate AIDS or HIV numbers, diagnoses, it's entirely plausible that corrupt African governments are blaming traditional African sub-Saharan biological breakdown on this disease, AIDS, because it gets them money and funding. That much seems plausible, but you can go beyond that like Duesburg does and say that

these different country-specific and the risk group-specific distributions are totally unprecedented for any other known pathogenic virus. Something very suspicious, by the way, also, given Africa's much worse health overall, is that an HIV diagnosis leads to death, to AIDS, much less frequently in Africa than it does in the United States. It's very strange, very strange. But his theory is, again, that it only correlates, that HIV only correlates with AIDS. He doesn't deny that AIDS exists, but he says that it's drug use in general, whether AZT and other antiretrovirals that cause AIDS, or in fact recreational drugs in many of these risk groups, which is plausible. It sounds crazy, but it's plausible.

If you look at junkies in England, they're people who, it's not just that they're junkies on drugs. You have to look at the way they live. They survive basically on nachos, they're homeless and such, so they basically, they have AIDS anyway without having HIV necessarily. And although Duesberg is very diplomatic and only goes so far as to say that, well, gays, they lead very social lives and they meet people from all over the world in their clubs and therefore they have stressed immune systems because they're getting exposed to unusual foreign pathogens. But I think you can extend his argument, because he's being very polite. And you can see that the gay lifestyle as such leads to immune breakdown, quite aside from the transmission of any particular pathogen.

And I've already hinted about why, and in this connection, I mentioned the second school of AIDS denialism that disagrees with Duisburg only so far as they say. By the way, they're called the Perth Group, after the West Australia city of Perth. And it's an Australian thing mostly, popular among a branch of Australian doctors and physiologists. But they say that HIV does not even exist. They differ from Duesberg in that they think the HIV test, the diagnosis, actually does indicate something very bad about the physiology of the person being diagnosed as such. And that they do agree that that will inevitably lead to death, quite aside from whether that person uses drugs or whatever. But they believe it's essentially, they don't believe that's the diagnosis of a virus.

They think it's essentially unwittingly a test for cellular breakdown process of some kind and not a virus. Their arguments are very technical and I cannot cover them here in much detail. But basically they say that the HIV virus has never been isolated properly. And in this, by the way, there is broad agreement on this by the mainstream. It's just that the mainstream claims that it's been functionally isolated and that other known pathogens have similarly never been isolated according to standard procedure. But you should know that HID has never been isolated according to standard procedure. And this is the argument of this so-called birth group, the second school of AIDS denialism, that it's never been isolated by itself according to the standards for other retroviruses.

It's never been seen by a microscope despite what you might have heard. And the genetic material that supposedly represents the genome of this virus in patients when you do the tests, the PCR, in fact it differs by quite a lot from patient to patient. And their argument is that two such genomes that are identical have never been found. And this is in a manner not consistent merely with a mutation of a virus. They actually go back and they study the initial supposed isolation or the discovery of HIV by Montagnier and Gallop, and they try to show that what they likely identified, they didn't discover a virus, they likely identified a lab procedure for diagnosing a form of cellular breakdown by manipulating and studying the tissues of people who are undergoing this

cellular breakdown but that was in fact no virus discovered that indeed if you look on my Twitter account I linked to this before very unusual very mysterious study very underreported because the only animal models of AIDS that exist is this one study done in Israel by the Israeli scientists I'm not being conspiratorial I don't think they designed it I think they did very good good work to do this but they were the only people who were able to induce a disease similar to AIDS in animals and it was not induced in mice by any infectious agent or pathogen. They did it by repeated inoculations and by immune stimulation. They actually memed the mice into having a disease that behaves exactly the same way as human AIDS does and is transmitted exactly the same way

Which is by the way not strictly speaking sexually its transfer transferable through blood plasma and it's transferable through Insemination which is by the way something quite different from sexual transmission And it causes very similar symptoms in these rats and this was not the result of an infectious agent as I repeat but of repeated immunizations or immune Yes, somehow that becomes transferable. What do you call that? It's very strange. But anyway, this is not family show and I say before, but semen itself is an immunosuppressant. There are evolutionary reasons for that. You have to think it through to lower the immune system of the woman to accept the semen of the man. So you must think of what happens to an individual who takes maybe hundreds or thousands of inseminations

from different individuals. I mean, think it through, it's quite disgusting, but do you want to know why roasties hit the wall now at, uh, 20 or 21? You look at their faces, you look at their habits. And like I tell you, modern women are bathhouse faggots! You want to know why gay guys like Anderson Blooper have their hair turned white at the age of 35? You look to their habits. And this group of AIDS, or rather, HIV denialists, because they do say AIDS exists, but this is their model for it, that it's caused by so-called modern lifestyle of basically immune destruction, and not just the weird sexual habits, but the drugs, the malnutrition, and all of this, plus a repeated exposure to strange and dangerous other pathogens, incidentally.

So in these ways they agree with Duisberg, as I mentioned before, but they're nice and they don't say it that way. They don't say, they say that this, you know, This is a modern disease characteristic, although not limited to gays, and that its prominence in the study of infectious diseases is stupid, as is the poisoning regimen given to its patients. And so this is a study of a medical outrage that takes attention and funding away from other more serious diseases that are actually infectious. And I guess here's the other conclusion everyone can draw from this anyway, even if you don't agree with these crazy theories. But this, what I'm about to tell you, is accepted basically even by the mainstream, which is that this is not really a straight disease, a heterosexual disease.

Heterosexuals do not really get it. They don't get this disease. You can't really get it from a woman if you're a man. It's very difficult. That's propaganda, okay? The odds of a man getting this disease from unprotected sex with a woman are basically zero. And I think people don't realize that even for a woman, It usually takes hundreds of inseminations from an HIV carrier to get infected. It's remarkably hard to transmit. It's not like you do it once, which is, by the way, another reason it's false to call it an STD, because an STD is sexually transmitted disease. By definition, these evolve so that both the man and the woman are equally likely to get it from each other, usually in one copulation, but AIDS is not really transmitted sexually

in this way, you know, bloody anal sex hundreds of times is not really sexual contact in the actual medical meaning of the word. Even getting blood, by the way, on you is not enough to cause it, it has to be within an open wound and all of this, and it's propaganda to scare, for example, white high schoolers from Fresno in the 1980s, or even today in America, in the America Heartland, to scare white high schoolers into thinking that if they have sex with their girlfriends, they're both likely to get this horrible disease. This whole mentality has had a terrible effect on the culture at large, in my opinion. No, it has not, uh, it has not advanced sexual morality. I'm sorry to tell you that whole theory of how STDs cause sexual morality to become stronger is false.

What it causes is asexuality and infertility. And this whole mentality has been caused by the cowardice of people in not calling out the gay lobby and not calling out the medical establishment lobby and the CDC. The Center for Disease Control, who as you see now, as you saw with Ebola, are useless traitors who have no interest in protecting you. But like every other government mafia, only in their own funding. But I must now again go to break. I'm sinking on this break. I'm on several coffee now. I'm so worked up against these middle-class striver faggots, the status striver faggots. You don't even know how much of this middle-class, upper-middle-class faggotry is the cause of all our problems in the West. You want disease?

Do you know when the Ebola thing was going on and some middle-class garbage striver status apparatchik working for Obama got up and said something like of course we will not quarantine those areas we will not close borders because we can advance only all together or go down all together or something like that and there were not riots there was not a revolution and so you're basically a nation of sissies they can spit in your face like this and you just take it like people also did you know there was There was another strain of a rare virus that got in with Central American migrants. It was the H1N1, I think, in 2009, 2010, and actually American school kids got infected and died during the Obama years because of this. It did not exist in the United States previously.

Now it has been brought in because of immigration, so they're spreading basically a disease inside your country. spreading shit, and the Center for Disease Control does nothing. Does nothing of what it is supposed to do. They're gay middle-class strivers and so are you. It's faggots sodomizing faggots. Government by mass sodomy. They're your poor latrine world disease down your throats, and because it's the decent middle-class thing to do, you do it. You take it. So look, don't get me the wrong way. This is not a financial definition of class. I mean it, what it went with originally may have been financial, but what I meant is read Paul Fussell's book on class in America, F-U-S-S-E-L-L. It's a good book and it's a mostly sociological definition of class.

It has to do with your way of looking at things and less so with your manners and way of talking and more with a general way of looking at things, this definition of class. So actually, it doesn't matter what you are financially, don't take it as a personal attack on you. You know, but many of modern pathologies can nevertheless be laid at feet of middle-class striver faggotry. Maybe as much as you blame the Jews or the boomers, maybe even more you should blame the middle class. I'm well aware of oligarchs, okay? And I agree on that, I've been promoting this idea for a long time that it is the oligarchs and the secret oligarchs doing it and the only reason many of us are actually interested in politics today at all is to protect the white middle class from a globalist oligarch treachery.

And I would include actually the Korean and Japanese middle class in this as well. Their fight is our fight. So yes, I agree with you on all this, with the nationalists. But in another way, these oligarchs and globalists are themselves middle class. Not maybe in political sense, but in the sociological sense I'm talking about on this show. No matter how much money they have, all these panics like Tim Cook, Bill Gates, Paul Singer, Many others who are responsible for the driving treachery are middle class in their outlook on their world. Tony Blair, right? Tony Blair, middle class. Peter Strzok, Comey is the worst one. All the so-called derp state spooks who play act at being James Bond and Metternich. All the Samantha Powers middle-brow human refuse.

This is all middle-class and then on the other hand what you must understand is that our enemies are in fact very weak And they're acting like an opportunistic infection And the reason they can do this is because society today is run by the middle class college Educated faggots and it's these people that bend over and open their legs They let their nations be raped because they have no concept of nation, no concept of loyalty or honor. In many cases, they cheer on a Samantha Power or a Nikki Haley. So let me ask you, during the 2016 election, who were the people we hated the most that year? And in 2015, when Trump declared he would run, it was the neocons, right? It was all the National Review world. We just went to war with them, more even maybe than the left. Because why?

It's because they were a backstabber, because they would normally support a Republican candidate, but on this occasion they betrayed. And why did they betray? Because we all know, well, we know the reasons, yes? Primarily it was the immigration, and then the trade and foreign wars. We know they hated this platform, but you are mistaken. If you think they got a phone call from Koch telling them to snap into line, that's not how it works. These are all well-trained house pets. You don't have to tell them, they know the cues. You see they get selected because they have a terror, a status terror, inculcated in them for a long time against downscale whites. So to them, anyone who is a champion of the plight of the middle America, of the factories,

of the working heartland and that whole world with its working way of life and so on. Whether it's Trump or Huckabee before him or Cannon before that, they just become terrified of being associated with that. To them it would be like a demotion in class status, social death. And with Trump it was amplified many times over because he's very much upper class in a way. Look, I know he's the working class, the working class man's billionaire, yes, and that whole And I understand he's a nouveau riche and I understand the Jewish stand-up comic act that he does I'm aware of this and very much new rich and not old-school rich But no, actually he's a very particular type of garish upper-class billionaire very much

So like it or not and it's a type that is especially offensive to the middle class and upper middle class class striver faggot. I mean just in the sense of flaunting his wealth which they are taught is de classe, but also Trump's beautiful wives. I cannot tell you how many times in private the few mainstream conservatives I knew they seem especially bothered by this, by his attractive vibes. I mean that's an outrage to your middle-class gay striver, you know, having a beautiful wives like Of course the excuse they say is that he's buying them which I would also ask I would ask these people They say oh, he's buying his wife. So why isn't the Bill Gates buying a beautiful wife? Is it because he's like you a truly moral and virtuous man who cares about?

Women's and individuals and only about their souls and never anything so vulgar as their bodies and their beauty Is that the reason Bill Gates dresses like a dork and has an ugly wife or zooker face with his Wuhan wife? I don't know. Or is it because they're smart enough? Bill Gates is smart enough to realize they'd get raped the way bozos just got raped because they wouldn't be able to command the respect and admiration of a beautiful woman who has options, who knows she was beyond them in biological worth, who have no qualms to destroy them in divorce court. I think that's the real reason. And by contrast, every woman Trump has been with, I mean wife or girlfriend, has loved him and has only good things to say about him because he has tremendous charisma beyond

money with which you cannot control women whose money these days is not possible. They will rape you. So I think the middle-class dorkoloid billionaires, by contrast, know this would not be the case with them. But anyway, this is a big source of resentment against Trump, the upper-class billionaire with the beautiful wives. And why do I tell you this? Because just like the neocons and the national review types, and indeed their base, this is what I mean, was the suburban, college-educated, Republican, upper-middle-class faggot, right? That is their base. That's the people I'm talking about in this show. Trump did not do well with these people. He lost the Wisconsin primary. I fucking hate these people so much. You do not even understand.

This will not be popular with some of you because this transcends actually every sociological boundary, even the Jewish thing, you know. Yes, I'm aware that the Democrat Party is 52% funded by Jews in the primaries. This is true. But, you know, Trump won the Brighton Beach Jewish vote by so much, I think he won it by 80% or something, because the Soviet Jews who are here have quite a bit of distaste for the office-acculturated, office-mannered, American middle, or rather, upper-middle class. And Trump will do well basically with all groups who reject that, that faggotry, with all white or white-oid groups, he will do well, the ones who reject that. But as for the college, upper-middle class, Republidork, I despise these people so much

And you must understand the extent to which your nation is being destroyed by you know They reject Trump because he has a potty mouth and he makes them feel like why do I need to say this? It's very much like the national review thing But rather than go through a list you likely already know all the reasons. I will tell you by example I'll tell you by cultural example, right if you can call TV culture But I was watching two TV vision show recently So one show you know already very well, Breaking Bad. You've all watched it. And I always found this show difficult to watch. I watch every episode, but I found difficult because badly written show is grim, humorless, and it's supposed to be an intrigue based show,

but the actual intrigue plots they could have played out are very thin. Just not enough. They have even filler episodes. If you remember the shit-brain concept episodes like the one with the sidekick Jesse Pinkman I think his name is where he's stuck in a room with a fly and The whole show was just about that this guy in the room with a fly and the goofy music is a complete waste of time I'd be ripping you off. It's like if I came on here on air and just started To say the same three or four words over and over for an hour and I called it a concept performance art show I'd be ripping you off, you know, just take the week off then and many TV shows do this but Breaking Bad was, you know And I know you all like its symbolism. I understand with the old intelligent white man

But to me it's symbolic of something else something very bad, which is a middle-class faggot mindset This is this is to be seen above all is a main character son who was Disabled and I guess you're supposed then to think he's virtuous because of this and never criticize him But this little middle-class moral fag he rejects and attacks his own father He betrays his own father because his father deals drugs and I found this not just outrageous But even unbelievable the idea that you would turn on family or a friend because of the law Or because of a social moral code This is so repulsive to me And of course they double down on this theme in the show by having the sidekick Jesse Pinkman I think, he was also a moral fag, just constant moral anguish, displaying it for you as,

oh, he has a problem, he cannot take the things he's doing. Except the writers didn't want you to see him as a bad guy, they want you to see him as the moral conscience or the moral voice of the show. And this kind of rote obeisance to what is a right, and this elevation of moral worldview above personal loyalty and above what's actually a right to do in the circumstance, I find it so insanely repulsive to my way of thinking. I have no words for it other than to tell you it's the cause of so much damage that's being done to America, so much more than you think. Before I tell you more on this, let me say a second show. Many of you laugh at me when I say I watch Gossip Girl now, but I think it's an excellent show. I don't care what you think. It couldn't be made today, this show.

It couldn't be made even in the time of Breaking Bad. It's almost like a Japanese anime show about Japanese school kids. And I realized the reason I thought this is so is because the writers of Gossip Girl are showing the upper class way of thinking, and they're trying actually to present it to you as something negative, a bad thing, but because they show it more or less accurately, it's It's based on the memoirs of this upper class German aristocrat who grew up in Manhattan. And it doesn't come off that bad at all. It comes off not that bad. It's about upper class kids at the Manhattan private school, and they're always scheming and so forth, and it's mostly about love and romance, they're scheming, and they're sleeping around without much hesitation.

And I guess you're supposed to shake your head at that, and also like it, but to shake your head that they're outrageous tell us a behavior and to empathize and see this is the reason I wanted to tell you this whole thing because the middle class character on this show I think his name Dan is played by I don't know the actor's name but he plays the serial killer in the more recent show you but the middle class character on this show gossip girl is just so absolutely awful absolutely insufferable to me and it's obvious that the writers wanted you to to empathize and identify with him, and to see this sort of sick, amoral world of the upper class through this very moral, down-to-earth and upright eyes of this character, but is not how it comes out at all. Not at all. Not to me.

There's a personal element here I can tell you without doxxing myself, because I saw in the way these school kids behaved very much my own friends when I was a small boy, And I won't tell you where I grew up, and I'm not claiming by the way that I was upper class or anything financial, but the way, I mean, the way these school kids behaved where I was, it was very similar, is that we had our own society apart from the adults. We were not closely parented. Our own affairs, even at a very young age, we had a part. And I don't mean romantic affairs, but affairs in which we did not involve parents. We were not overseen by parents or by schoolteachers, and who did not police us the way middle-class parents in America police their kids, and we had also a kind of immoral solidarity that

these kids in Gossip Girl, the upper-class kids you're supposed to think are callous, they also have this kind of solidarity that, by the way, working-class people also have that solidarity that middle-class moral faggots do not. For example, in banding together, never to rat on one another. And this solidarity that the middle class character in this show then, he finds totally alien to himself. So he gets ready in this show at the crucial moment, essentially to become a tattletale, to tell on his own classmates, which in the world I grew up in among the kids, that would have been just the worst thing you could be as a tattletale. We were left mostly to do what we wanted. And I don't remember also this very crucial, for one moment I do not remember anyone using

moral casuistry or passing moral judgments, ever entering into any of the relations I had with my friends. That doesn't mean we were friends, but our rivalries were based on completely different things, not on morality. And morality never entered into our friendships or our rivalries with other groups or our scheming against them or anything like this. So for me, it was very refreshing to see this world in Gossip Girl, which again, I'm not talking about the financial side of it, but the immorality, the group behavior of these group of school kids, the way it's set up socially, the whole social structure of it, I felt was very familiar, very much what I remember of my best friendships to have been. And very unlike when I later came to America and I could never accept the faggot striver

Middle-class world where kids told on each other they told teacher I have to tell teacher and I couldn't believe this what I could what I was seeing there was no solidarity now of course There were cliques of friends that happens everywhere and social life of students But everyone in the middle class America seems somehow Tightly controlled by parents and even when parents were not around It's never enough for a middle-class striver just to enjoy himself or to Unobassionally pursue his own interest. He always has to feel like he's a good person See, that's what I'm talking about Which he's not because no one is a good person but the desire to feel this way it leads to very bad things And well, this is the thing this character from the Gossip Girl

Like the ones I mentioned before from Breaking Bad the so-called middle-class character you're supposed to empathize with. He's a huge moral fag, constantly judging other people on whether they fit his concept of what a good person is and constantly torturing his beautiful but troubled girlfriend, Serena Van Der Woodsen, her name, but constantly torturing this poor girl on whether she lives up to his pettifogging moral standards. This is the other side of it, The side I could never get used to that I noticed which is you know It's not that the a middle-class people are more moral than others as I tell you that can never be Man is a lying treacherous animal and a misbegotten animal at that So when you train people into the moral framework the way the Western middle class is trained to be

You don't get actually moral people you get people who are self-righteous and traitors That's all just self-righteous cunts like Comey and Comey Jason Comey James Comey what I can't remember his name Comey The ultimate middle-class striver faggot type the moral, you know We see so much of this rhetoric is this week during impeachment That's the middle-class mindset rhetoric the empty language of moral uprightness or republic or virtues, self-righteous, annoying people who do all the nasty things and all the lies anyone else does but worse because They never even realize they're doing it to themselves. They can't admit it. For example, they lie For example, they lie, but when they lie as much as anyone else lies But instead of a strong innocent self-serving lie

They lie in effeminate passive-aggressive ways by telling you a half-truth as if they're in a court So that it's technically true before what they imagine is a courtroom drama in an imaginary judge, but it misleads the other guy just as much as any other lie would. So it's just as big a lie, of course. But then they do it because they have to feel moral. So you know, they write books like ethical slut, because you know, the really important thing is to feel ethical. You see this also in the Reddit or in the Yang campaign, which is a Reddit in politics. the whole middle-class moral fag mindset, where it's important to jump through these hoops so you can feel like a moral or ethical person. And in the show Gossip Girl, furthermore, there is this scene, it's very revealing scene,

where this guy, middle-class guy, his rich girlfriend, wants to get him a nice gift, and he turns it down because it's too expensive. And then he makes up this contrived rule that they can only give each other a gift that does not exceed $50. What? I will tell you I found this unbelievable, except this scene brought back so many memories of this kind of contrived, concept-driven, moral, these kind of people that I knew who are ruining your country, and this guy, he will not accept it because he cannot reciprocate it, basically. Now, think that through. He turns down, she wants to do something nice for him, but he turns it down because he cannot reciprocate. Do you know how disgusting, disgusting this mindset is? You know, Tacitus, Tacitus, says the ancient Germans,

that they would give gifts without expecting anything in return. And they would also accept the gift and never think about having to reciprocate it. And that is through nobility. But this kind of status and morality obsessed, insecure little middle class unit mindset. And of course, and I mean mostly upper middle class, of course, It's infected all of America right now, including the very rich. As I tell you, Tim Cook has this mindset. It doesn't matter how much money he has, he's an upper-middle-class, striving faggot. And of course, this show, Gossip Girl, displays this as a good thing. So the guy, he gets for his girlfriend, okay, because she's living in a hotel at the time, and this show.

So he gets for her a Christmas tree, which she then has to jump through all kinds of hoops to actually carry across town and to get to her apartment. Look, I know it's a lot of detail from maybe a show you have not seen, but there is a reason I'm telling you this, because this scene reminded me, I recognized even in small things like this, all the annoying, self-righteous, try-hard, suede things that middle-class people do. It's insufferable. It extends well beyond social relations even to art where for example the equivalent of a nice expensive gift like this The girl wanted to make to her boyfriend this nice I think it was a watch as expensive and the reaction is oh, no, that's immoral Oh, no, that's materialistic and instead of doing that No

You have to jump through all these convoluted contrived hoops that are to display your passion as if you're Jesus And you have to show that you're a good person This striving hard or the equivalent you have to show that you're a creative person instead of giving people something They actually enjoy and that's the nutshell of it say our morality I use this word But they pretend not to you know You can't even criticize them for that because they're not aware that a moral fact that beyond that too. You see they are wise They're postmodern You know, that's another one of their feminine cunt evasions. They want to pretend sometimes they are not even concerned with morality. They're ethical or they use other words.

They just call the same thing by other names. Oh, I'm not interested in morality. So therefore I'm not judgmental. You don't call me that. It's something else. And so they have extra ammunition against others. You can then judge as not a good person. That's all what this is about including their contrived art, There can try thought in everything they do, but you know I see in this doltish character. For example, I had friends who fit this middle-class striver mindset entirely, and you know these fucking dorks would just give me away, would betray. Like I would tell somebody a false name or a lie when we were out and I was trying to fool people for our own enjoyment, and despite themselves, these people would, these supposedly my friends, they would give me away.

They get this look on their face, they're just unable to play along in a ruse, you see. Makes them feel like a bad person, but then they will backstab you in a moment with the right kind of words, the right kind of after the fact justification. Morality for most people is never means doing anything that's costly. It's just a way to justify doing evil to others, which is why all of this is so contemptible I mean this whole moral mindset that I've been calling the upper-middle-class striver fag mindset as a shortcut Because they can never act self-interested in a manly and direct way They always have to pretend they're also being good and right so you see how much of this way of thinking has corrupted nations and

Even if it's not the ultimate cause of all our problems and weakness it provides a cover and a justification for it So then you can get people like Comey or like clappers being so self-righteous in front of Congress quoting you Niebuhr and talking about decency while engaging in the most outrageous corruption or the Bidens or whoever who are bombing countries and destroying towns so their friends can get a deal later But that's not enough for them. They also I'm telling you it doesn't cross their minds in many cases They do feel it's morally justified So it's like the whole Samantha Power framework is telling other countries Don't you agree that we did you a good by bombing you? It's not enough for these people to bomb them and to defraud them

They also have to make the other guy agree that oh, you're a good person. You're moral. You did the right You did the right thing. Oh This is what and that's been also the American message by the way after World War two for example to Germany and Japan and I can tell you After two or three drinks those people's as many others do they let the mask off and they tell you how much they hate this How much they despise this kind of effeminate treachery the equivalent of this god forbid you had I know you don't want to agree with this so many of you still think Germany and Japan should agree you did them a good by destroying their cities It's amazing, but let me give you an equivalent some of you may have been acquainted with So God forbid you had a middle-class girlfriend, right?

Let's say a middle-class girlfriend. I mean middle-class in this moral, the worst way. So, who's a slut as much as any other woman is. But let's say she wants to cheat on you, but that's not enough because she knows the pleasure of cheating on you is not enough, and God forbid she should have a bad conscience. So then she designs all kinds of ways to justify it. For example, engineering fights with you beforehand, so she has some moral cover. Or this is very common, of course, when a wife gets found out and then tries to blame the husband. That's classic, right? Because, you know, she's a good person and obviously she wouldn't have done this unless. So now you extend this mindset to basically the entire political class. And it is that woman, okay?

And that's what is meant by a conservative too, alright? These people never understood what we meant by that, but it's basically a delusional sucker who takes this abuse from the political class, who's a woman that's cheating on him. And it's been used that way, this same metaphor, in Latin America for decades, where the people are well aware of their political class, that it is a disgusting, cheating, lying whore of a wife, that they cannot escape. Except, I have to tell you, in the Latin American case, it's not as bad. The abuse the people undergo, the corruption, the cuckery is not as bad, As in America, nothing comes close to Paul Ryan or Buttigieg. America's heartland gay lovers and two-timing cunts. Paul Ryan and Buttigieg. Nothing comes close to that in Latin America.

The only thing that comes close to that anywhere in the world is the middle-class faggot cunt center for disease control inviting strange diseases to run wild in your country. And the middle-class eunuchs accepting it because we good people, we good country, we strong. This just like classical Athens, we good. Seriously, please fuck off! This decade is the return of Mr. Kling. You think about that. Please return Mr. Kling.