The following is a transcript from the Pro America Report.
Welcome, Welcome, welcome. Ed Martin here on the Pro America Report. Hey, it’s another exciting, exciting day. A lot of great programs. A couple of minutes we’ll talk with Joe Allen. Joe Allen. I’ve been looking forward to this. You know, Steve Bannon runs the War Room and he uh has this, it’s kind of this, I don’t know how to describe it, this eclectic group of reporters, analysts, and one of the people over there is named Joe Allen, who has really focused on transhumanism and what’s going on with transhumanism, very interesting, thoughtful guy. Well, he’s written a book, Dark Aeon, and we’ll talk to him about the book and see what he says and what is happening there, because this book, the focus is on, the title is Dark Aeon: Transhumanism and the War Against Humanity. Joe Allen, so we’ll do all of that with him in a moment.
And we’ll also catch up with my friend Cheryl Chumley who’s over at the Washington Times. She is the online editorial page editor. She’s just a very thoughtful smart lady and I thought I’d see what she thinks about what’s going on right now in the world.
So, before we get to that, I need to tell you what you need to know today. And this one has been percolating over the weekend. I’ve been very very pleased to let it percolate and here we are together, so I can reveal to you something that I hadn’t quite seen all the pieces to, until over the weekend when I finally figured it out. And so it’s this. What you need to know is, there is an ongoing conversation that’s happening at the highest level and you only see pieces of it and you wonder what the impact is. And I didn’t really say that well, so I apologize. Here’s what I want to talk about. The Panama Canal, the Monroe Doctrine, and fentanyl. Those three things together.
So now, first, a week and a half ago two weeks ago, there was a Tucker Carlson interview. He had on Tucker on Twitter, he had Vivek Ramaswamy. And in that interview at one point Vivek talked about the Monroe Doctrine. And reinvigorating is the word I use, but he said we need to invoke the Monroe Doctrine in terms of people coming into our hemisphere. And indeed we do. And some of us have been talking about the Monroe Doctrine. Donald Trump gave a speech at the U.N. in 20 – September of 2017, I take that back, he spoke in 2019, he gave a speech at the U.N. and said that the Monroe Doctrine was in full effect, and he was aiming at China, as he said this, at communist China regime when he said this, like hey, don’t come in our hemisphere. So that’s number 1.
By the way, John Kerry, about 6, 5-6 years before that, I guess 4 years before that while he was working for Barack Obama, Secretary of State, said the Monroe Doctrine’s dead.
And remember, the Monroe Doctrine is a doctrine that was promulgated just about 200 years ago, December of 1823, and it said, don’t come into our hemisphere with your systems – your systems. Not just don’t come to our hemisphere and invade us. At that time, Truman, uh, Monroe was talking about the Russians and some European powers that were going to the west coast of America.
But it wasn’t, don’t come with your people, don’t come with your military, because there was no fear of that. There was don’t come with your system.
And down to today, one of the reasons we could say, get the Monroe Doctrine, get your Soviet communist system out of Cuba, out of Central America, was because the Monroe Doctrine don’t bring your system here because it’s not compatible with what we’re doing in our backyard. And so that’s clear with the communist China regime. What they’re doing is not welcome in our backyard and we should stop it. Now that’s all the warm up. Now watch this next part.
In a Tucker on Twitter interview with Donald Trump, there was an exchange about the Panama Canal. And the Panama Canal for about 20 years from the 1960s until the late 1970s, for about 10 years, a little more than 10 years, there was a great debate amongst Americans, should we turn over the Panama Canal to the Panamanian government. We had built it, we had paid for it, we had sacrificed lives for it. It was hard to build. And we controlled it. And it was Panama. Basically Panama existed because we had propped it up. And so in the ‘60s and into the ‘70s some on the conservative side said no way, do NOT give up Panama Canal. It’s too important, it’s too valuable, we spent the money, don’t do it. Including the late Phyllis Schlafly, including Ronald Reagan who was on her side, and on the other side even among conservatives were Bill Buckley and others, and – in fact, during the interview with Tucker last week, what Trump said, we gave up the Panama Canal. It was a bad deal. We shouldn’t have done that. Now, what he didn’t say was that at the time the Panama Canal was given up by Carter, it was actually given up and people knew – Phyllis Schlafly pointed it out boldly – that the reason it was being given up to Panama was that the dictator of Panama was immediately going to use it to pay off a bunch of debt to American companies and law firms and others that he owed. So he was going to basically use the value to pay off the debt.
In other words, the swamp wanted it to happen so the swamp could get paid. Because the Panamanian, corrupt Panamanian dictator owed all this money, and this was the way, and so they did, they ultimately did it. And it was proven as a disaster. And all these years later China has bought up the land around the Panama Canal, the operations units of the Panama Canal, so now, China, the communist regime controls the Panama Canal. And even though you say, oh, well, we don’t need it as badly as we did, we sure do. We still do. Not quite the same level, because we have missiles and we have submarines all over the place, but for shipping through the Panama Canal, and for national security, a huge deal, and a huge loss.
Now, watch what happens when Donald Trump says in the interview with Tucker, he says this: We neer should have given it up and now China controls it. And it shouldn’t be that way. Now that’s Monroe Doctrine stuff. It’s important. It’s important that we say why would we let the communist regime from China control the Panama Canal. But it’s also a huge message to China. And the message is this. If you mess around. If you mess around with us, we’ll take back the Panama Canal very easily. Very easily. If you want to mess around with us, if you want to take interest off the table for us, for example, with 90% of our chip industry being controlled by the companies that make chips in Taiwan, if China grabbed that on us it would be a big blow, and what Trump is signalling is we know stuff we can grab from you, because all of a sudden you can’t ship things from China the same way. You don’t have, uh.
And so, my point is even while not president, Trump is showing the pathways to be smart about the stuff we can control. We don’t have to take back the Panama Canal to make clear how important it is to us, and how we could do it. And Trump never stated any of that. But my point here is there needs to be more serious understanding of the systems that are threatening us. And the number 1 system that’s threatening us is the communist regime in China. There are some others. There was the system called Islamic terrorism, fundamentalist terrorism. That seems to be under control right now. There haven’t been any terrorist attacks. That doesn’t seem to be on the rise.
But the communist regime is controlling more and more aspects of our lives in ways we have to have a systematic approach to push back. And one would be this one. In fact, I think we should make an argument pretty quickly that we want the Panama Canal back and make them give it to us.
But more importantly, I said I would talk about fentanyl. We have a problem and fentanyl is coming to us through the border. Our open border – what a disaster. But also it’s coming from suppliers in China. And the Chinese regime – you cannot be a communist Chinese regime business and succeed. Let me say it differently. You can’t be a Chinese business and succeed without the sign off, the imprimatur, of the communist regime in China. That’s just the facts. Nobody disputes that. And there you have it.
And so when it comes to again, in our back yard, in our back yard we have a problem, right? We have a major problem in our back yard caused by the communist regime. We should address it as such. It should not be in a coded ah, message or coded description. The simple fact is that we have a communist regime that is in our back yard with the cartels, the cartels are allowing it. And if we can’t control the border right now because of the president, we should at least name the Chinese regime and the next president should look at that, not look at it, address it, point blank, straight up, right in its face. Because there is no doubt that the communist regime is doing this to us.
And it’s an example of exactly what we should be pushing back on and making clear we won’t tolerate. And I have to say, that’s the stuff to me that you see in a Trump leadership. And it’s the kind of thing you wonder, what, what is Biden thinking? Like, what is that guy thinking? What is he thinking. You wonder, what is he literally thinking? What’s going through the brain in terms of the policies that are getting us in this position. So there you have it. That’s what you need to know today. That’s one for today, a little bit convoluted, but if you go to PhyllisSchlafly.com you’ll see a couple of Phyllis Schlafly Reports, one called Reaffirming the Monroe Doctrine written in 1987 I think, and another one about the Panama Canal that was written in 1967 that was prescient, as they say.
Alright, we’ll take a break and be right back. It’s Ed Martin on the Pro America Report. Back in a moment.
