Latest / Under the Docs / The Weathermen III 'All 4 Floyd' (2020): Conspiracy Theories about George Floyd | Under the Docs 004

Transcript

The Weathermen III 'All 4 Floyd' (2020): Conspiracy Theories about George Floyd | Under the Docs 004 · Under the Docs

0:07
Speaker 1: Under the Dogs. Yeah, under the Docks, very favor. We're
0:12
Speaker 1: breaking the looks.
0:14
Speaker 2: Funny you could they risle the shots say coming the
0:18
Speaker 2: dogs under the docks, Under the docks, Yeah, under the docks.
0:38
Speaker 1: Under the Dogs.
0:51
Speaker 3: Welcome back under the Docks.
0:54
Speaker 4: Today, we're exploring the weatherman Iree All for Floyd twenty
0:57
Speaker 4: twenty film, directed and narrated by Patrick Mack. The reason
1:01
Speaker 4: we're covering this film is because it explores the death
1:05
Speaker 4: of George Floyd in a different perspective. Patrick Mack used
1:10
Speaker 4: to have a channel in Pursuit of Truth, which is
1:13
Speaker 4: now banned. You're not gonna find this on the Internet.
1:15
Speaker 4: You're not gonna find this on Google. You're gonna have
1:16
Speaker 4: to go to Rumble and Bitchoot. And what he did
1:19
Speaker 4: with his series was he was talking about the Weather Underground,
1:22
Speaker 4: and the Weather Underground was a group of radical leftists
1:27
Speaker 4: that we're trying to do some political change with kind
1:30
Speaker 4: of race baiting, so and so forth. So he kind
1:32
Speaker 4: of connects this third one with the All for Floyd.
1:35
Speaker 4: So you can go back and watch one and two,
1:37
Speaker 4: but they're totally different because this one specifically goes with
1:42
Speaker 4: the George Floyd incident and they explore some interesting avenues
1:46
Speaker 4: of human trafficking, foss flags, connections with politicians, so on
1:51
Speaker 4: and so forth, And the best way to sum this
1:55
Speaker 4: up would be it has an extensive bodycam footage and
2:00
Speaker 4: police narratives that like maybe you wouldn't see on normal
2:05
Speaker 4: mainstream media.
2:06
Speaker 5: Yeah, this one it was really hard first to even find.
2:10
Speaker 5: I wasn't even sure what this weathermend three stuff was about.
2:13
Speaker 5: I just kind of ignored that part and just searched
2:16
Speaker 5: for the ulf of Floyd, which made it even harder
2:18
Speaker 5: for me to find this thing. And I did find
2:20
Speaker 5: some random link on rumble or Odyssey.
2:24
Speaker 6: It was not the easiest thing to come across.
2:26
Speaker 5: And when I finally started watching it, just to be clear,
2:30
Speaker 5: I don't think you have to watch the first two
2:32
Speaker 5: because I didn't. I just went right to this one
2:35
Speaker 5: and it felt stand alone enough.
2:38
Speaker 3: I think it's completely standalone.
2:40
Speaker 4: I think they kind of just were trying to make
2:42
Speaker 4: some broad claims, which you kind of see.
2:44
Speaker 3: Will get delve into it as we go through.
2:45
Speaker 4: It, but plotting the course, the premise of this is
2:57
Speaker 4: that the media got it all wrong, that it was
3:00
Speaker 4: about racism, it was about something deeper. Was it something
3:03
Speaker 4: personal was it something that maybe George seen that, the
3:08
Speaker 4: oddities that the cops had, the redactions in bodycam footage,
3:14
Speaker 4: the lack of transparency, the George Floyd and Shavin working
3:20
Speaker 4: together at a nightclub. Like so they bring paint the
3:23
Speaker 4: scenario of all these connections of different businesses and entities
3:27
Speaker 4: and political figures that are all possibly in on this plot,
3:34
Speaker 4: but they don't really They kind of dance around what
3:38
Speaker 4: is the actual you know, meat and potatoes. They suggest stuff,
3:41
Speaker 4: but they don't have any evidence.
3:44
Speaker 5: And not only did they not have evidence. In some places,
3:47
Speaker 5: they'll just pull up of random internet search that I
3:51
Speaker 5: don't know if they did or if this was kind
3:53
Speaker 5: of harvesting a bunch of different Internet forums, and then
3:57
Speaker 5: just kind of plucking the most salacious sound stuff. They
4:00
Speaker 5: would just be like, Hey, here's this lady that we
4:03
Speaker 5: were just talking about. Here's a funeral home that she owns,
4:07
Speaker 5: and here's an order for over four hundred caskets.
4:10
Speaker 6: What does this mean?
4:11
Speaker 5: And then they would just kind of move along without
4:13
Speaker 5: without actually making the specific claim.
4:17
Speaker 4: And a little of this movie in Pursuit of Truth
4:21
Speaker 4: got a little qi because the guy is a big
4:24
Speaker 4: q Andon supporter and you can tell because it's question, question, question,
4:29
Speaker 4: and like it's cool to ask a lot of questions
4:32
Speaker 4: and their relative but sometimes it kind of gets you
4:34
Speaker 4: down to the path of like, okay, let me, let
4:37
Speaker 4: me get some interviews or some hardcore facts, and you're
4:40
Speaker 4: left hanging a lot of the times. Now, some of
4:43
Speaker 4: the key claims I thought were important for me, that
4:47
Speaker 4: not just important but actually resonated was the El Nuevo
4:51
Speaker 4: Rodeo nightclub.
4:54
Speaker 3: The Shavin and Floyd both worked there.
4:57
Speaker 4: Now they have conflicting information because they have the city
5:03
Speaker 4: council woman on a news report saying they worked there
5:06
Speaker 4: for seventeen years, but the narrator does clear it up
5:09
Speaker 4: that Dovin worked there for seventeen years and Floyd worked
5:13
Speaker 4: there about a year, so we knew that there's a connection,
5:16
Speaker 4: and that's where they kind of harp on the was
5:18
Speaker 4: it personal or did they have some kind of other
5:21
Speaker 4: business relationship together?
5:24
Speaker 5: And it leaves so many of these questions, and that
5:27
Speaker 5: one in particular, I noticed the rhetoric of this video
5:30
Speaker 5: where they would really emphasize over and over how Shavin
5:34
Speaker 5: worked there for seventeen years. You know, how could you
5:37
Speaker 5: not know every single person and then Floyd worked there
5:40
Speaker 5: for almost a year, and I don't know exactly what
5:42
Speaker 5: the almost is. They don't They're not specific enough to
5:46
Speaker 5: know if almost means six months in one day or
5:49
Speaker 5: if it means eleven months and twenty nine days, right,
5:52
Speaker 5: but they kind of state this the seventeen years over
5:56
Speaker 5: and over. I don't know, man, I've worked in places
5:58
Speaker 5: for a long time and not known someone that was
6:01
Speaker 5: there working inside versus you being outside. Because the everything
6:05
Speaker 5: that it clarified was at Chauvin's role at this nightclub
6:08
Speaker 5: was essentially to sit in his patrol car outside and
6:11
Speaker 5: then wait for someone to call him or if he
6:13
Speaker 5: saw something popping off, to then go in and kind
6:16
Speaker 5: of investigate or instigate you could probably stay better.
6:20
Speaker 6: And then Floyd kind of worked either the door.
6:22
Speaker 5: Worked inside the club, so they weren't It wasn't like
6:24
Speaker 5: they were both, you know, sharing a locker room and
6:27
Speaker 5: like dapping each other on the fist on the way
6:29
Speaker 5: in and out. They were still removed quite a bit.
6:33
Speaker 3: Quite a bit from each other.
6:34
Speaker 4: And like you said, I've worked with people right now
6:36
Speaker 4: that I don't know everybody over there, like I could
6:38
Speaker 4: see their face, but I don't have no idea, their
6:42
Speaker 4: name or anything they do at the at my job,
6:45
Speaker 4: I just seen them.
6:45
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, that guy works with me.
6:47
Speaker 5: And they leave a little insinuation that they might know
6:49
Speaker 5: each other from, like the porn industry, although they don't
6:52
Speaker 5: outright stay that. The rhetoric of the film kind of
6:56
Speaker 5: leads you into that angle and then they just drop
6:58
Speaker 5: it and then they walk and you know, going to
7:00
Speaker 5: another angle.
7:02
Speaker 4: Yeah, and when they're connecting all these businesses like the
7:06
Speaker 4: El Nuevo Rodeo nightclub, La Rossa radio station, and the
7:11
Speaker 4: Odd Fellows and like the Secret Society. So these key
7:16
Speaker 4: claims that they make, they're not like it was difficult
7:18
Speaker 4: to put key claims because they're not totally they're claiming it,
7:22
Speaker 4: but they have nothing to back it up. It's like, well, yeah,
7:24
Speaker 4: there's a Masonic temple in that city, and you're like, okay,
7:27
Speaker 4: you know what I mean, Like cool, I get it, Like,
7:30
Speaker 4: but where's the connection like this guy could have Where
7:34
Speaker 4: they bring up Marissa from that the owner of the.
7:39
Speaker 3: Elnuevo Rodeo Rodeo nightclub.
7:42
Speaker 4: They suggest that her mom may have known Barack Obama's
7:48
Speaker 4: mom because they went to school at the same time,
7:51
Speaker 4: like at Hawaii University, which is a huge college. Like
7:56
Speaker 4: that's like a lot of the vague claims. A lot
7:58
Speaker 4: of these claims are really hollow. Because I watched this
8:02
Speaker 4: film in twenty twenty when it first came out, and
8:04
Speaker 4: I was kind of mesmerized by it because I think
8:07
Speaker 4: I was just in the I was watching so many
8:09
Speaker 4: things at the time and now rewatching it the claims
8:12
Speaker 4: and knowing more and I'm like.
8:14
Speaker 3: It's not as juicy as you expect, man.
8:17
Speaker 4: So the claims are also they start claiming about Dei, right,
8:23
Speaker 4: it gets into this Dei segment.
8:26
Speaker 3: Of where like, hey, there's a you know, there's.
8:28
Speaker 4: A huge Somalian immigration in Minneapolis and there's been this
8:35
Speaker 4: problem with police. But it doesn't really connect for me
8:38
Speaker 4: to the story of what's going on. Like I get
8:41
Speaker 4: where they're loosely going with it, but it's like they
8:43
Speaker 4: jump around because it's like is the cops bad? But
8:47
Speaker 4: then it's this Dui higher that shot this woman, this
8:49
Speaker 4: Australian and they go on a round about that, and
8:53
Speaker 4: it's like a key claim for them, but it doesn't
8:55
Speaker 4: really address much of the actual George Floyd incident.
9:00
Speaker 5: Yeah, and I'll get into like some of the pros
9:03
Speaker 5: and cons. In a second, I'm in my own real
9:06
Speaker 5: short list of the key claims that I came across.
9:09
Speaker 6: There's so many.
9:10
Speaker 5: So for example, that George Floyd and a lot of
9:14
Speaker 5: these claims are just things that I had already heard before,
9:17
Speaker 5: but they're kind of consolidated. That George Floyd had broken
9:20
Speaker 5: into an apartment and held a gun to a pregnant
9:23
Speaker 5: woman's stomach, demanding like money and jewels. That the toxicology
9:28
Speaker 5: report had fentanyl, meth and morphine. That one of the
9:32
Speaker 5: claims is that he went to Yates High School, so
9:36
Speaker 5: he says, but that there's no record of him there
9:38
Speaker 5: dot dot dot, which I don't. It's not a claim outright,
9:42
Speaker 5: but it's an insinuation. Another one was for someone that's
9:46
Speaker 5: affected so many lives, where are there so few people
9:50
Speaker 5: that actually know him that came out and talked about him.
9:54
Speaker 5: Another one is that Ben Crump was after getting the
9:58
Speaker 5: UN to stop militarizing police, so that there was this
10:01
Speaker 5: overarching sort of political motive behind all this that went
10:05
Speaker 5: way beyond any sort of local politics.
10:08
Speaker 6: Uh.
10:08
Speaker 5: The one that you mentioned that George Floyd and Chauvin
10:11
Speaker 5: knew each other and worked together in various capacities that
10:15
Speaker 5: Lana Santa Maria, the lady that owned or the mother
10:18
Speaker 5: of the lady that owned the club again went to
10:21
Speaker 5: this Hawaiiu and just because she went there at the
10:24
Speaker 5: same time, she might have known, you know, Barack Obama's family.
10:27
Speaker 6: Dot dot dot.
10:29
Speaker 5: Also that one of Santa Marina was selling something to Sabri,
10:36
Speaker 5: and this person, Sabri was known as the Muslim Kingmaker.
10:39
Speaker 6: So now there's some kind.
10:41
Speaker 5: Of a connection that if you get high up enough
10:43
Speaker 5: in the local politics of this area, then you can
10:47
Speaker 5: just like run the country. I don't know, dot dot
10:49
Speaker 5: there's another dot dot dot there. There's a whole bunch
10:52
Speaker 5: of different Muslim and Hamas specific clips and people talking,
10:57
Speaker 5: so they start tying this link between George Floyd got
11:01
Speaker 5: co opted by Muslims or by Hamas more.
11:05
Speaker 6: Specifically, or Hezbollah.
11:06
Speaker 5: They kind of go through a few different names, and
11:09
Speaker 5: that the entire BLM movement was co opted by Middle
11:13
Speaker 5: Eastern politics used to just foment more chaos in the
11:17
Speaker 5: United States. If anything I can say is like the
11:20
Speaker 5: main claim that was like the number one claim, and
11:22
Speaker 5: then there was a few other really minor ones about
11:25
Speaker 5: human trafficking, which it didn't go too far into. And
11:28
Speaker 5: then it also because they went so hard on the
11:31
Speaker 5: paint about Middle Eastern politics, and then they're also like,
11:34
Speaker 5: oh and Larasa, which is like this Mexican South American
11:38
Speaker 5: movement is also trying to take over the US. So
11:41
Speaker 5: they kind of just try and take a little bit
11:43
Speaker 5: of everything from the whole buffet and present it. But
11:46
Speaker 5: those were the main ones, and one of the finals
11:49
Speaker 5: that maybe George Floyd was a dummy or had a clone,
11:52
Speaker 5: and then those are left very vague, but the insinuation
11:55
Speaker 5: is definitely made.
11:56
Speaker 4: And then that's why I was going to go off
11:58
Speaker 4: with the dummy where they're like, like the seventh Sigma
12:01
Speaker 4: Incorporated that makes these dummies is right across the street.
12:05
Speaker 4: That's like the only information that they have that that
12:08
Speaker 4: like to stake on this claim. They're like, whoa, I'm
12:11
Speaker 4: just saying there's a thing across the street. You never know,
12:14
Speaker 4: Like that's that's part of the trouble in some of
12:17
Speaker 4: the of the claims in the Film's.
12:25
Speaker 3: Get to the hidden treasures. I don't know about you there.
12:29
Speaker 3: I had a few hidden treasures in here. To me.
12:33
Speaker 3: I thought the score is top tier.
12:35
Speaker 4: I like the beats, but that's just me being biased
12:38
Speaker 4: because I'm a hip hop guy, you know what I mean.
12:40
Speaker 4: This guy's Patrick Mack is a musician. Before he started
12:45
Speaker 4: doing all this stuff, he was a musician and it shows.
12:48
Speaker 3: And I like the beats. I like some of the
12:49
Speaker 3: transitions of the movie.
12:51
Speaker 4: I thought it was a thorough breakdown of the police
12:54
Speaker 4: footage of what you could get. A lot of it
12:57
Speaker 4: was redacted obviously, and kind of you could tell that
13:01
Speaker 4: there was nefarious stuff going on. And I liked how
13:03
Speaker 4: they really connected a lot of people, like it was
13:06
Speaker 4: like cool to like, oh I can look into this right, like,
13:10
Speaker 4: oh maybe this is something. Didn't give me any clarification,
13:13
Speaker 4: but it gives you a whole lot of lists.
13:15
Speaker 3: If you were like doing.
13:15
Speaker 4: A podcast or something, you might have so good material
13:18
Speaker 4: to go off of.
13:21
Speaker 5: I mean, I agree, but I also disagree on the music.
13:24
Speaker 5: I liked some of the music, but there were so
13:26
Speaker 5: many times that I actually had to make a note
13:28
Speaker 5: as I was watching this movie, like I like the music,
13:31
Speaker 5: but it does not go with whatever they were showing
13:34
Speaker 5: me on the screen. It would be like a city
13:36
Speaker 5: on fire, and then it's like a club beat or
13:38
Speaker 5: something or I don't know, or there would be like
13:40
Speaker 5: a very somber moment and then like this really aggressive
13:43
Speaker 5: beat or vice versa. So the actual pairing, like the
13:46
Speaker 5: DJ work, could he use a little bit of help
13:49
Speaker 5: or more discretion, I think. And it's funny that you
13:52
Speaker 5: say that the guy that made this has like a
13:55
Speaker 5: music background, because I kind of make so much more
13:58
Speaker 5: sense now because it really does make it easy that
14:01
Speaker 5: if you're into pro tools or you're using you know,
14:04
Speaker 5: one of the other sort of like digital audio workstation software,
14:09
Speaker 5: once you just add a video track to it, it's
14:11
Speaker 5: like the same tool all over again. So for a
14:13
Speaker 5: lot of people, video editing and audio edding becomes interchangeable,
14:17
Speaker 5: especially if you're into the engineering aspect, so I can
14:20
Speaker 5: I can see that, and it also gives you a
14:22
Speaker 5: leg up on being able to just put together a documentary.
14:25
Speaker 5: So the main pro for me, I think was just
14:29
Speaker 5: that it does a great job of summarizing all of
14:33
Speaker 5: the different soundbites that you might have heard on like
14:37
Speaker 5: Fox News or AM radio or anything, making the rounds
14:40
Speaker 5: on like you're racist aunt sharing something on Facebook and
14:43
Speaker 5: you're like, oh, yeah, I heard that George Floyd might
14:45
Speaker 5: have been a dummy. Well, here you've kind of got
14:48
Speaker 5: all of those different claims consolidated into one video, which
14:53
Speaker 5: is the main pro. And then I guess the main
14:55
Speaker 5: con for me is that that's all you get. You
14:58
Speaker 5: kind of just get a recap, a mixtape of the
15:02
Speaker 5: claims that Fox would insinuate. But there's not a lot
15:05
Speaker 5: of follow up on this. And then it also adds
15:07
Speaker 5: a little bit of extra noise because not only do
15:10
Speaker 5: you get the Fox News claims, now you're getting like
15:13
Speaker 5: the weird truth social claims and the weird like fore
15:16
Speaker 5: Chan claims like all across the internet. Those are also
15:20
Speaker 5: kind of stummarized in here. But again I want to
15:23
Speaker 5: stress that summarize does not mean that any conclusions are made,
15:27
Speaker 5: any additional context is really provided other than just collecting
15:31
Speaker 5: it all for you.
15:34
Speaker 3: I would have to agree on that.
15:35
Speaker 4: And also one of my overboard and just kind of
15:39
Speaker 4: doesn't do the film well. It's way longer than it
15:41
Speaker 4: should be. It drags a lot, like you're trying to
15:44
Speaker 4: like okay, And the thing is, it's not a long film.
15:47
Speaker 4: It's not like a money Master's three hours. It's like
15:49
Speaker 4: an hour and twenty minute.
15:50
Speaker 3: So you'd think like, oh, it should be boom boom
15:52
Speaker 3: boom boom, but.
15:53
Speaker 4: It just drags and they kind of hop around on
15:57
Speaker 4: the scenes, like they'll be talking about Santa Maria and
15:59
Speaker 4: this scene and then it goes off and you think
16:01
Speaker 4: that they're starting on a new thing, and then they
16:02
Speaker 4: bring her back into it and it's just all over
16:06
Speaker 4: the place.
16:07
Speaker 3: And you made a good point. It's kind of like.
16:09
Speaker 4: A four chan form just people arguing about did you
16:13
Speaker 4: see this? Did you see this? Like that's kind of
16:16
Speaker 4: for me, and that it speculates way too much. There's
16:19
Speaker 4: way too much speculation that makes so many claims without evidence,
16:23
Speaker 4: especially with the human trafficking and drug trafficking quote unquote.
16:27
Speaker 4: They kind of just throw it out there and then
16:29
Speaker 4: make no addition. They're like, well, secret societies do kidnap people,
16:33
Speaker 4: and they do human trafficking, and Laurasa does this and
16:37
Speaker 4: Hamas does this, so possibly there could be human And
16:42
Speaker 4: they're like, okay, but where's the evidence of all the
16:44
Speaker 4: people that you brought up connected to it?
16:48
Speaker 5: Right, So there's a couple different rhetorical rules and if
16:52
Speaker 5: you have do like philosophical debate and stuff. But the
16:54
Speaker 5: two ones and the reason I want to bring this
16:56
Speaker 5: one up is because they get criticized so much for
16:59
Speaker 5: main media, and I guess this particular documentary it felt like,
17:04
Speaker 5: whether intentional or not, those same rhetorical devices or like
17:09
Speaker 5: tricks that are coming from mainstream media made their way
17:13
Speaker 5: into this video too and just kind of got repeated.
17:15
Speaker 5: For example, there's a lot of ad hominem where ad
17:19
Speaker 5: hominem for they'll mention like, well, here's this guy, Keith Ellison,
17:22
Speaker 5: and Keith Ellison is connected politically to the lady that
17:26
Speaker 5: owns the club and to politics, and here's some domestic
17:29
Speaker 5: abuse allegations that were later dropped, and then here's and
17:32
Speaker 5: then they don't actually like say, like what specifically about
17:36
Speaker 5: the abuse allegations that they decided to you know, put
17:39
Speaker 5: vo and put an image and go into it for
17:42
Speaker 5: this documentary.
17:43
Speaker 6: At what point does that tie.
17:44
Speaker 5: Into George Floyd or you know, Hamas or any of
17:48
Speaker 5: these other It really is just sort of like selling
17:51
Speaker 5: everyone's character. The same way that I was kind of
17:54
Speaker 5: excited in a way to hear about the human trafficking
17:58
Speaker 5: like porn industry can between Floyd and Chauvin because I
18:02
Speaker 5: had heard this before online or internet or whatever, and finally,
18:07
Speaker 5: you know, here's a video that's all about it, and
18:09
Speaker 5: they just kind of repeated the claim and didn't go
18:11
Speaker 5: directly into it. So just it's a lot of like
18:14
Speaker 5: ad hominum stuff. This guy smoked weed, this guy was
18:16
Speaker 5: in poorn, this guy, you know, did you know fentanyl?
18:20
Speaker 5: So therefore, if you're going to try and make a
18:23
Speaker 5: case that maybe he died from fentanyl and not from
18:26
Speaker 5: being suffocated, then make that case. And I've actually heard
18:30
Speaker 5: convincing versions of that case, and none of that was
18:32
Speaker 5: in here, So it where it kind of needed those boosts,
18:34
Speaker 5: it didn't have it, and it leveraged ad hominem and
18:37
Speaker 5: the other I guess the million dollar word for this
18:39
Speaker 5: one for me is there's a rhetorical device called gish gallop,
18:43
Speaker 5: and gish gallop as if you're in a debate, if
18:46
Speaker 5: you just pepper someone with like two hundred claims, now
18:50
Speaker 5: they're going to have to spend the rest of their
18:52
Speaker 5: time not presenting their own thoughts and ideas or counters,
18:55
Speaker 5: but they're gonna have to address every one of those
18:57
Speaker 5: two hundred things. And it's a lot easier to make
19:00
Speaker 5: a claim, and they just let it sit out on
19:02
Speaker 5: the table than making the claim and backing it up
19:05
Speaker 5: versus somebody that has to now like counter that thing,
19:09
Speaker 5: because now you've got to be specific about what you're countering,
19:11
Speaker 5: what information you got to bring to the table. So
19:14
Speaker 5: that's known as a Gish gallop rhetorical device, where you
19:17
Speaker 5: just flood with so many things that are shallow that
19:21
Speaker 5: you can't really come back and refute them all or
19:23
Speaker 5: even think about them all. It's like just bam bam, bam,
19:26
Speaker 5: bam bam. Here's another unrelated thing.
19:36
Speaker 4: I think it's time to test the waters with a
19:38
Speaker 4: deep dive. For me, what holds up is, even though
19:43
Speaker 4: it's brief, they kind of finally make the connection.
19:45
Speaker 3: This is where the whole film stretches.
19:47
Speaker 4: I feel like they stretch this one to kind of
19:50
Speaker 4: fit into the Weatherman one and Weatherman two. So at
19:53
Speaker 4: the end of the film they kind of go, and
19:56
Speaker 4: here's the weather the weather underground connection because this guy
20:00
Speaker 4: knows this guy, this guy knows this guy.
20:02
Speaker 3: That was consistent, because you can look it up.
20:05
Speaker 4: I looked a couple of you know, those people do
20:06
Speaker 4: know each other, and I think the inconsistency in the
20:11
Speaker 4: official story, but it's kind of something we already knew,
20:14
Speaker 4: but that does hold up. And then I would say,
20:16
Speaker 4: obviously the Minneapolis Police force corruption, but that's also kind
20:22
Speaker 4: of like a hey, captain, obvious for me, you know
20:24
Speaker 4: what I mean, Like, yeah, it is corrupt.
20:25
Speaker 3: Probably, Yeah.
20:27
Speaker 5: I was hoping that they were gonna be pulling some
20:31
Speaker 5: police reports and then we did a deep dive into
20:33
Speaker 5: this officer involved, and again it didn't really go into
20:36
Speaker 5: the deep dives I needed from them for this to
20:39
Speaker 5: be like a super valuable documentary for me.
20:43
Speaker 3: No, I totally agree.
20:44
Speaker 4: And what doesn't add up for me is a lot
20:48
Speaker 4: of the stuff, right, It's too many to even just
20:52
Speaker 4: really name. So I kind of just summed it up
20:54
Speaker 4: in like so much speculation. I think you said it
20:57
Speaker 4: the best. Just pepper them to death with so much
21:00
Speaker 4: claims and suggestions that you can't debunk it because it
21:05
Speaker 4: will take you forever, so you just kind of move on.
21:07
Speaker 4: And a lot of stuff doesn't hold up in this
21:10
Speaker 4: in these claims because we've now I'll give them one
21:14
Speaker 4: credit is that they did it so fast. This came
21:16
Speaker 4: out about a month after the George Floyd incident, so
21:21
Speaker 4: they kind of like they lost a lot in the
21:24
Speaker 4: mix right in the sauce. They were trying to throw
21:26
Speaker 4: it together. They got like the q vibes, and they
21:28
Speaker 4: try to throw everything that they talk about on their
21:31
Speaker 4: podcast in the previous two films and try to shove
21:35
Speaker 4: it all in here, and a lot of it doesn't
21:37
Speaker 4: hold up.
21:39
Speaker 5: There's some very specific examples of that that I got
21:42
Speaker 5: for Like, So, as they're going through this, they bring
21:45
Speaker 5: up the Bill Ayers, the weather Underground, they bring up
21:47
Speaker 5: move dot org. They mentioned that Omar Ilahan like married
21:51
Speaker 5: her brother. At one point, they show clips from Project
21:54
Speaker 5: Veritas doing underground like secret interviews with people about using
22:01
Speaker 5: fetal cells and planned parenthood. And then they start showing
22:04
Speaker 5: Antifa books and then they show like, look this guy
22:07
Speaker 5: that's holding his ANTIFA book. There's a cafe connected to
22:10
Speaker 5: it called Moon Palace Books, and they're connected.
22:13
Speaker 6: To this place called geek Love.
22:14
Speaker 5: And now here's a picture of the FBI Pedophile logo
22:17
Speaker 5: next to Roxy logo. And they're not stopping and saying, hey,
22:22
Speaker 5: here's why we're connecting the FBI pedophile logo through the
22:26
Speaker 5: Roxy logo. Here's a specific claim, here's a person at Roxy,
22:30
Speaker 5: or here's you know, them using their company assets to
22:33
Speaker 5: do this it's just here's a picture that you might
22:36
Speaker 5: have seen online.
22:37
Speaker 6: Okay, here's another one. Here's another one.
22:39
Speaker 5: Yeah, so and the other big the deep dive ball
22:42
Speaker 5: was hoping they will go into is they bring up
22:44
Speaker 5: the Oddfellows and then they bring up like Lodge one
22:47
Speaker 5: eighteen and they zoom into an all seeing eye graphic
22:51
Speaker 5: somewhere and then they show a picture of the Oddfellows
22:54
Speaker 5: dressed as women, making just I guess an insinuation. That's
22:58
Speaker 5: also I wasn't understand, And how did this kill George Floyd?
23:02
Speaker 5: Did these dudes dressing up in the forties somehow like
23:05
Speaker 5: kill George Floyd? I was waiting for that specific connection,
23:08
Speaker 5: and then there was kind of a mic drop moment
23:11
Speaker 5: where they were like, who knows if they're really connected
23:14
Speaker 5: to the Oddfellows. We don't really know or any other
23:17
Speaker 5: Masonic organization. And I just got a point like Oddfellows
23:20
Speaker 5: is not a Masonic organization. It's a non Masonic organization
23:25
Speaker 5: for people that don't want to join the Masons but
23:26
Speaker 5: want to have the same kind of vibe and then
23:29
Speaker 5: get drunk and dress up like chicks.
23:31
Speaker 6: Right, that's what they go to the Oddfellows for.
23:34
Speaker 4: Yeah, they really did push a lot of narratives. That's
23:37
Speaker 4: where you're talking about the oddfellows and then for me,
23:40
Speaker 4: for me, the hardest part was just getting through the
23:42
Speaker 4: like I'm like, okay, we're I'm thinking that we're gonna
23:45
Speaker 4: get oh man, this cop had twenty other cops that
23:49
Speaker 4: were slaying dope for him, and they had like they
23:51
Speaker 4: found like fifteen houses with a bunch of kids in
23:54
Speaker 4: the basements or something of that nature. And they never
23:57
Speaker 4: give you anything that the payoff is. It's really it
24:01
Speaker 4: sucks the historical culture. Like any impact it had on
24:13
Speaker 4: on what we do, I don't think.
24:15
Speaker 3: I think it was very minimal. I think that it's
24:18
Speaker 3: something that was just there.
24:19
Speaker 4: It's something that I think that I was, like I
24:21
Speaker 4: saw it, and I don't know how many other people
24:22
Speaker 4: saw it. I think it was like when I looked
24:24
Speaker 4: up on altsensor dot com where you can find all
24:28
Speaker 4: the in pursuits work, they had to think about like
24:31
Speaker 4: two hundred thousand views total, maybe three hundred thousand, a
24:34
Speaker 4: nice view count, but mainly it seems like a Q phenomenon.
24:39
Speaker 4: So it was very niche you know, it's stuck in
24:43
Speaker 4: this little group of people that believe a certain thing,
24:46
Speaker 4: and now this film may have pushed more onto that
24:49
Speaker 4: Q narrative and been significant in an impact for them,
24:53
Speaker 4: But other than that, I don't think it really held
24:56
Speaker 4: wait for much people, and it was gone, and that's
24:59
Speaker 4: why it's all so hard to find.
25:02
Speaker 6: I agree on all counts with that.
25:03
Speaker 5: I think that it's a good example that it's so
25:06
Speaker 5: hard to find is almost proof that it hadn't made.
25:09
Speaker 5: The hugest ripples and waves, and the impact that it
25:12
Speaker 5: might have made, or any legacy that might have left,
25:15
Speaker 5: is going to be largely emotional, I think, and rhetorical,
25:19
Speaker 5: and not necessarily somebody five or ten years from now
25:24
Speaker 5: quoting this movie because it broke some brand new information
25:28
Speaker 5: that led to some other discovery, because it doesn't do
25:30
Speaker 5: any of that.
25:35
Speaker 3: So let's get into sink or Swim.
25:38
Speaker 4: I'm gonna let you go first because I kind of
25:40
Speaker 4: changed mine up, but I think we're kind of bordering
25:43
Speaker 4: on the same level in this one as well.
25:46
Speaker 5: I would rate this one shallow out of three. We
25:50
Speaker 5: got shallow, deep dive or twenty thousand legs. If we
25:53
Speaker 5: were to simplify and just say sink or swim, then
25:56
Speaker 5: I would just have to say sink like this one
25:58
Speaker 5: sinks because it just repeats all of the things that
26:02
Speaker 5: I've already heard and it doesn't go into any more detail.
26:05
Speaker 5: And if we've got a rating for sink or swim
26:09
Speaker 5: or to keep something shallow, then I think this sets
26:12
Speaker 5: a pretty good baseline, like this does not meet I
26:15
Speaker 5: guess my criteria for something I would recommend someone else
26:19
Speaker 5: going watch. If I recommend someone else go and watch this,
26:22
Speaker 5: I would be embarrassed because they would come at me
26:24
Speaker 5: about like, hey, this made all these claims, and I'd
26:26
Speaker 5: have to be like, yeah, I guess, yeah, No, it
26:28
Speaker 5: doesn't really back any of that up. So this one
26:31
Speaker 5: is kind of in shallow waters with me.
26:33
Speaker 3: And I'm with you. I think it sinks.
26:35
Speaker 4: But I changed my rating because I was kind of like,
26:37
Speaker 4: I think they dive deep on a lot of subjects,
26:40
Speaker 4: but I put it like a point five a shallow
26:43
Speaker 4: dive because it really like makes you think you're gonna
26:46
Speaker 4: go into something incredible, but boom, your neck cracks at
26:49
Speaker 4: the bottom of the ocean because you're only in two
26:51
Speaker 4: feet of water.
26:52
Speaker 3: And this one does not hold up at all.
26:56
Speaker 4: I'm the one that watched it first because I saw
26:59
Speaker 4: it in twenty and I think at the time, watching
27:03
Speaker 4: so many other things, and I think I blended some
27:06
Speaker 4: other documentaries that we're actually gonna get into into this
27:09
Speaker 4: one because I watched them all around the same time.
27:11
Speaker 3: And rewatching it, I was like, oh, wow, this really sucks.
27:15
Speaker 4: Like this stinks, like it doesn't have anything that I
27:18
Speaker 4: can go off off. I can go look up these
27:20
Speaker 4: connections which you already know, but they're not significant enough
27:24
Speaker 4: to make anything any more material. It's it's just got
27:27
Speaker 4: like a point five And I'm with you, like, if
27:29
Speaker 4: we have anything, this is a sink completely, you know,
27:31
Speaker 4: abandoned ship.
27:42
Speaker 3: Or I think that does it for us, you know
27:44
Speaker 3: what I mean.
27:45
Speaker 4: Tune in Under the Docks, got a good one coming
27:48
Speaker 4: up for you next the Trayvon Martin Hoax. I think
27:52
Speaker 4: that'll get some people really happy with us.
27:56
Speaker 5: Yeah, And speaking of being happy with us, go ahead
27:59
Speaker 5: and go uh to our websites. You can go to
28:02
Speaker 5: Paranoid American dot com, go to the Patreon. You'll get
28:05
Speaker 5: early access to this maybe other uncut versions. Who knows.
28:10
Speaker 5: You'll have to join in order to find out. And
28:12
Speaker 5: I know you've got some spots you can send people
28:14
Speaker 5: to it as well.
28:15
Speaker 4: Yeah, kill themocking birds dot Com. And I was actually
28:19
Speaker 4: gonna get a I'll talk to you afterwards maybe well
28:21
Speaker 4: maybe we'll get some uh links up. I was gonna
28:24
Speaker 4: say that was on both of our sites where they
28:26
Speaker 4: could get some of these documentaries to watch for themselves.
28:29
Speaker 7: All right, y'all peace, Yeah, the.
28:45
Speaker 1: Funny only the Ducks, Onneil the Dux, Yeah, Mondion, the
28:55
Speaker 1: do under the Jobs,