A Heartfelt Video For Michael O'Fallon - You're Welcome!

This may be the final frontier, but it's made in a Hollywood basement. Alright, let's do this.

Let's get right into it. I hope you had a prosperous week. It is Friday, April 21st, Year of Our Lord 2023.

I had a very prosperous week this week. As you know, my son was born on Sunday and he's doing really well.

Thank you for the prayers, by the way, for his health and his mother's health. Both of them are doing great. Also had a few business deals that are kind of cooking right now.

Not 100 % on them, but I'm feeling pretty good, so I would appreciate prayers, of course, for success there as well.

And here we are. Let's jump into it. If you know anything about the A .D. Robles YouTube channel, then you know that typically

I reserve only the most important topics for Friday. Last Friday was no exception.

This Friday is also no exception. I've got a bone to pick. A very serious, serious bone to pick with Michael O 'Fallon.

Now, I really like Michael O 'Fallon. Michael O 'Fallon has been very helpful to me in the past, personally.

And also just in general, he's been very helpful, in my opinion. Sometimes I don't really quite know where he's coming from, but that's probably true of a lot of people that I really like.

But in any case, I did want to address, there's something in this tweet. He wrote a very long tweet. Actually, the tweet was about somebody else, but he went out of his way to apply it to me as well.

He kind of copied and pasted it to a thread that I had told a little joke.

I was just trying to be humorous, you know. Sometimes I find Michael's tweets extremely difficult to understand.

He uses quite a few $5 ,000 words that a regular Joe like me, quite frankly, just doesn't understand.

And so I just kind of made a joke, a little quip, quip, quip. Sometimes my words get confused, you know.

I made a little quip that just said, hey, you know, send me the secret decoder ring. Maybe I can understand you better, kind of thing.

Because, you know, I'm out of Ovaltine. You know, I don't have any more proofs of purchases to send a little orphan

Annie. So I can't get one from her. Maybe Michael will send me one. Just a little joke, but he wanted to respond to that.

And I do have to quibble with something here for sure.

And let me just start this whole analysis, Michael, by saying this to you and to James Lindsay.

You're welcome. You are very welcome. So here we go. Let's read this.

And we'll kind of comment as we go. Here is what he says in response to my tweet about him being difficult to understand.

Which, by the way, I'm not the only one who makes this criticism. A lot of us really think that. And some of us have even had our

IQs tested. So I don't know if it's really a matter of IQ. Maybe it is. Who knows?

Who knows? All right, Michael, here we go. The sad part about this now repeated talking point is that it is most likely a person that benefited from being in chat groups from 2017 to 2019.

Where I spent time explaining what I meant by terms such as Derridian deconstruction, standpoint epistemology or even critical race theory.

But that's all off now because now everyone knows what those weaselly terms mean. Now, Michael's not wrong here.

I don't know what Derridian deconstruction is or if I'm even pronouncing that correctly. But as far as standpoint epistemology and critical race theory,

I'm not sure that I heard it first from Michael or if I learned the most from Michael. But there is no question that Michael in private conversations and chat groups has definitely taught me much about some of these topics.

There's just no question. And so I don't want to challenge any of that. If anyone knows me in chat room groups and things like that, in chat lines, you know,

I've got a little bit of a boomer mentality. You know, you understand on the chat line.

If anyone knows me in the chat line, I don't really participate a whole lot. I have a hard time keeping up with text messaging.

I lurk a lot. So I read a lot, even though I don't contribute a lot. And that's kind of how it was probably back then as well.

There is no question he is right. I learned quite a bit about these things from Michael O 'Fallon.

He continues. Now, instead of, quote, can you help me understand what that means?

That's my voice. That's my voice. That's how I would have been reading it or writing it if I was writing this about someone else.

I would have used that voice. That's the thing about me. You know, like you can't you can't insult me or slight me or zing me more than I'll zing myself.

So there we go. I don't take myself too seriously. So here's me again. Let me just get my voice. You'll see what

I mean by this being my voice in a minute. He says now instead of, can you help me understand what that means?

And then trying to utilize that knowledge to defeat the adversaries of objective truth. The neo reactionaries will now mock the use of descriptive terms that describe exactly what they are becoming involved with in their pursuit of Christian nationalism.

So the process is dishonest. As most know, by way of James Lindsay, the

DARVO acronym means attack, reverse the roles of victim and offender. What's the

D? If it's DARVO, we've got the attack, reverse the roles of victim and offender.

What's the D? Never heard that term before, but there you go. Don't even know what it means. I need the decoder ring for this.

And he says, it seems odd that after all of the kerfuffle, a commotion for Christian nationalist followers.

Very sneaky, Michael. Very. You're trying to zing me. But as I said, nobody can out zing me about myself.

Now, I did know what the word kerfuffle meant, and I hate that word with the passion.

I don't know if you knew that, Michael, just trying to raise my blood pressure. I hate the word kerfuffle, but I did know what it meant.

But here's something you can use, Michael. If you want to, you know, question my intelligence, here's something you can use.

Up until like last year, I thought it was pronounced kerfuffle.

Like, you know, let's make a peanut butter and kerfuffle sandwich. Man, kerfuffle.

After the kerfuffle, a commotion for Christian nationalist followers. That was raised with the

Thomas Accord fiasco this past October. With all of the quote, I have had loved ones explain that this

Anon account must be me. And now I'm beginning to believe it kind of responses. That was ridiculous.

I completely agree with that, Michael O 'Fallon. So no arguments there. And the responses and defense by the center of Christian nationalist.

The Christian nationalist would celebrate another unaccountable Anon account. He's talking about the person he originally wrote the thread from.

He's an anonymous account or she. I guess you assumed it was a he, but I happen to know who it is, and it's not me.

It's not me. I happen to know who it is. It's good stuff. That's for sure. That account is hilarious. And it's not unaccountable.

You should know that it's not an unaccountable account. But you'll just have to take my word for it because I'm not going to tell you who it is.

Anyway, he continues. He says, but let them now celebrate the mentality of the mob, which is now beginning to lose its

Christian characteristics. And, of course, the ironic thing about it is that they are the ones demanding

Christian nationalism, the Mott. And, of course, where they heard the terms

Mott and Bailey was from the conversations that I had with Conceptual James. And, yes, we provided the translation for this now commonly used term.

Yes, yes, yes. So I have to say, you're welcome, guys.

Because, actually, you got it from me. You got it from me. No, I'm just kidding. Of course you didn't get it from me.

People have known about the Mott and Bailey. And even before it was called the Mott and Bailey, people knew this kind of strategy of defending something that's strong and then pretending to.

But actually, you know, trying to smuggle in an argument for something that is very hard to defend and all that kind of stuff.

We've kind of known about this for a long time. But here's the thing, Michael. I think you owe someone an apology.

You're welcome. That someone is not me, though. I do want to make sure credit is given where it is due because that seems to be very important in all of this.

Michael, let me just say this before I get into my evidence for why you're just wrong about this.

Michael, this is no big deal. But you do this a lot. And I don't know why you feel the need to do this.

But just, I want to say, we love you. We think you're helpful, man.

We do. I don't know where you're coming from a lot of the time, especially with this

Christian nationalist stuff. I don't know where you're coming from. But I still like you. And I still got your back, man.

If someone tried to cancel you for something stupid, I would get your back, man.

In fact, this happened. I don't remember exactly when this was, but this was last year.

If you remember, at the time, Kosti Hinn kind of said a bunch of stuff about you publicly.

And he's since repented of that. Good for him. My heart was so warm after that. Not in a joking way.

In a real way. But, Michael, what you might not know is that I made a video that night.

When I saw him come after you like that, I made like a 20 -25 minute video about you.

And about what you were up to. And about the things that you cared about. And it was a glowing recommendation.

And I called Kosti to account in that video, never posted it. Because, at the time, the very next day, he repented.

And so I couldn't post it because he had already said, you know, I was wrong. I was wrong about this.

I was ready to drop that video, man. Because I got your back. I like what you're doing. I think you've had a very strong impact.

I'll speak for myself, okay? I think it's without question you've had an impact on many people.

But I'll speak for myself. Michael, you've had an impact on me. There is no question about that.

And it seems to me that you are feeling slighted. That I'm not just sitting at your feet about the neoreactionary, integralist, you know, thing that I'm doing now, apparently.

And, listen, like, I never, you know, took an oath of devotion to your teachings.

I never did any of that. I've always been a theonomist. You've known that, Michael. You know I've always been a theonomist.

At least I think you do. I'm not going to tell you what you know. I think you've always known that. I've been a theonomist ever since you knew me.

This is nothing new for me. You know what I mean, Michael? And so I don't want you to take offense for the fact that I just don't think that what you're doing now with the

Christian Nationalist stuff is correct. I don't think it's correct. I don't hate you. I don't want to disrespect you.

In fact, when I see people disrespecting you, I don't like when they're doing that. I like you, Michael. But you're wrong.

You're wrong. You weren't the only person calling into the night in the beginning. If we didn't have you and James, we wouldn't know anything.

A little bit of unsolicited advice, man. You should stop doing that. Because for all of the good you've done, regular people like me, we're not intellectuals.

I've never read Foucault. And that's okay. It's cool that you've read Foucault. I've never read it. You know what

I mean? And a lot of people haven't. And people in the pews, they see this stuff. And they don't care that you talk about this stuff.

And quite frankly, they don't care that they can't understand half of your tweets. I mean, that's okay. There's a lot of people's tweets I don't understand.

But this thing where you're just kind of like, if it wasn't for me and James and all of that kind of stuff.

It's so wrong so often. And to be honest, people get suspicious when they see someone doing that consistently.

You don't have to do that to promote your stuff, man. You are an intellectual not because you use big words.

Because you are a careful thinker. You're a good thinker. You have a lot to offer. James too.

I think James is a bit of a loser sometimes. At least the way he behaves. But some people could say the same about me.

So it's just my opinion. He obviously has a good head on his shoulders. I mean, not that good because he rejects the

Lord. But he has a good head on his shoulders. You guys could do so much if you just stopped caring who got the credit, man.

That's my unsolicited advice for you. Dude, I love you. I love your impact. And I hope you can hear in my voice.

I've got no disrespect towards you. None at all. I disagree with you on Christian nationalism.

But you've got to stop. And if this little video can help you stop, then hopefully it does.

Because you're wrong about this Motte and Bailey thing, Michael. Because here's a video of me.

And this is not about me. You'll find that out in a second. I don't care about credit at all.

Because I didn't come up with this. I didn't come up with using this in the woke context.

Here's a video from me. This is October 2018. And I hope you can appreciate this,

Michael. Because this is an embarrassing video for me to share with everyone. Look at me. I look like the

Wojak meme. I've got the thin little beard. And listen to how

I talk. If you're not taking it seriously yet, you're not taking it seriously at all.

I think my audio is bad. You know, again, this is the thing.

Dr. Russell Moore is an expert at debate and switch. It's also called the Motte and Bailey fallacy.

It's where you defend something that's very easy to defend. And pretend it's an argument for something that's very hard to defend.

And so he's defending lordship here. He's defending that Christ should be our Lord and we should do what he says.

That's very easy to defend from the Bible. And so easy to defend that everyone in this debate agrees with it.

Everyone. Everyone in the debate. All the people who signed the statement on social justice. Everyone agrees with that.

But then he's pretending it's an actual argument for all of the nonsense that he promotes. All of the evil things that he promotes.

And they are evil because they're against God's law. And he says, well, see, if you agree with me here, you've got to agree with me here.

That's the debate and switch. No, the argument is not any of the things you talk about. We're going to stop it right there because I cannot take.

Oh, look at this face. I've got to keep playing for a second. I can't leave myself in that face. I wouldn't be able to focus.

I hope you appreciate that, Michael, because that was cringy. I just. Just look at me.

In any case, so this was October 2018. And I remember exactly where I was.

I remember what I was doing. I remember the weather the day I heard about the Mott and Bailey fallacy.

And it was from an atheist, but it was not from James Lindsay. And so you're wrong, Michael. And you're wrong about this kind of thing a lot.

But here's proof, man. Here's proof. I'm not mad. I don't care about the credit because I'm about to throw credit somebody else's way.

I didn't come up with this. I didn't come up with this is how you apply to the woke movement. It applied there.

And, of course, maybe I'm not explaining it the right philosophical way. I don't care. That's not my that's not my game. But just to do

I wanted to sanity check myself a little bit just to make sure that I was remembering this. All right. So I did some digging.

So I did a little x -ray search on sovereign nations dot com. I just a very simple search. Just Mott. I searched the word

Mott on sovereign nations dot com. And here's some articles. About 20 things came up. 2022, 2021, 2022, 2022, 2021, 2022, 2021.

So all of these are at least three years after what I heard. Two years, three years after what

I said. So you're welcome, Michael. Totally not serious.

Here's new discourses. The same thing. I did an x -ray search of new discourses dot com. And I searched the term

Mott. Here's there's about same, but about 20 articles on his. This is James Lindsay's version. Here's one from 2020.

Here's 2020. Here's 2020. Here's 2020. Here's 2021. Here's 2020. Here's 2020. Here's 2020.

Here's 2021. Here's 2020. Here's 2023. 2020. 2020. 2020. 2021. 2020.

2020. 2023. 2020. So again, nothing before 2020.

Mine was in 2020, 18. James, you're welcome. You're welcome. I hope you guys know

I'm not serious. Nobody owes me any gratitude. I didn't come up with this. If it wasn't for me, it would have been someone else.

I'm okay with that. Here's the

Sovereign Nation's YouTube channel. He's got videos going back to five years. I remember some of these videos.

I don't watch all of these videos. I'm the kind of guy who watches, you know, Gordon Flowers trying to catch would -be pedophiles, you know, online.

And he goes to them and he interviews them. If you've never watched Gordon Flowers do this to child predators and stuff like that, it's hilarious.

That's the kind of stuff I watch. It's either that or like prison shows or shows about plane crashes.

That's what I watch online. Or John Harris. I watch a lot of John Harris. Joel Webben too.

But I remember some of these videos, man. I remember watching the Summer Jaeger speech. I didn't watch the whole thing. I watched some clips.

It was good. I remember some of this Alan Keyes content because I happen to like Alan Keyes. I remember watching all of these discussions at the

Sovereign Nation's, I think it was the Sovereign Nation's conference. Votie Bachum, Phil Johnson, James White, Josh Boies.

You can see I've watched all of these. Even the panel. I remember the panel discussion was really good. I've watched all of those, right?

And then, of course, you know, we've got these. Now, this was the very first video I remember. And it's the very first video on your channel,

Michael, with James Lindsay. And I watched almost the whole thing. I didn't watch all of it, but I watched almost the whole thing.

And I thought it was very helpful. I'll never forget watching this because I remember Peter Boghossian, and he sounded very intelligent.

And the only thing I knew about Peter Boghossian was that awful, cringy book about how to create atheists.

You remember that, guys? When he was like, we're going to create a movement of street epistemologists.

And they're going to go into the streets the way street preachers do. And they're going to be street epistemologists. And he had this book called

The Manual for Creating Atheists. That's what the book was called. It was the worst book I had ever read.

I remember where I was when I read it. I was on a bike ride. I was going through Bay Ridge, Brooklyn.

I went through Coney Island. I went through Far Rockaway on the beach. And I was riding my bike, listening to this book, and I was laughing to myself as I was riding.

It was so hilarious. It was an awful book, but he was smart here. The second episode of the

James Lindsay stuff, I watched a little bit of it. To be honest, I haven't watched a whole lot of these.

Again, this is not the kind of content I consume, which might seem ironic to you, but it's just the way it is.

I watched a little bit of this digital currency one because that's something that I'm interested in. I watched a little bit of this climate justice one because it's something

I'm interested in. I watched the hate week Russia, a little bit of the hate week Russia one because I'm interested in it.

But guys, let's just... You're welcome, guys. James, Michael, you're welcome.

You're welcome. Because here's the very first episode of James Lindsay on your channel.

Hold on, where is it? Three years ago. And I don't think he spoke about the mountain belly in this episode, but even if he did, that's at least and probably close to two years after I spoke about the mountain belly.

But obviously, you don't owe me anything. You're not welcome because there's no welcome to...

I guess you could be welcome. I'm not going to say you're not welcome, but you don't owe me anything. You didn't hear it from me.

This strategy is well known. It's well known and good on you guys for getting it into common use.

But to this act about how everyone owes you, that's what it's like.

It's like you guys think we owe you obedience in Christian nationalism because you were so helpful with allegedly

Doridian deconstruction. I mean, again, I don't know what that is. Stamppoist, epistemology, critical theory. We don't owe you anything.

You guys have been great, and I'm there to back you up, and I love you, and I want you to be more effective.

That's why I gave you that unsolicited advice. Take it or leave it. It's okay. It's just advice from a layman. Who cares, right?

You can promote James, man, without pretending that he's the lone bulwark, if you know what

I mean. James Lindsay, the lone bulwark against the woke movement.

Oh, man. You can promote him without doing that because that kind of thing, in my opinion, solicits suspicion from regular

Joes. It does. It does. But anyway, here's who you actually owe an apology.

Sargon of Akkad. This is where I heard the Mont and Bailey. I was in my garage. It was a boiling hot day.

I'll never forget this. I was on my elliptical, and I was in the middle of, like, a 50 -minute elliptical session, and usually

I do 30 minutes, so this one I remember being very tired towards the end of it. I was pouring sweat, thinking to myself, why in the world would

I be in my stuffy garage on such a hot day doing an extra -long session on the elliptical, and I was listening to it.

It was either a Sargon of Akkad video or a video where he was debating someone or talking to someone, so it wasn't his video, but it was still him, and he was talking about the

Mont and Bailey, probably applying it to feminism because that's what he typically talked about or some of the race -woke stuff.

It could have been anything, but this is where I heard it. I heard it from Sargon of Akkad. My atheist can beat up your atheist.

Well, maybe not. I don't know. I wouldn't take that bet. James Lindsay might be able to beat up Sargon of Akkad.

I've seen James Lindsay with that sword. Remember that video where he had that sword and he was doing those exercises? That's pretty brutal, man.

The most violent thing I've ever seen Sargon of Akkad do was when he was running for office.

Remember he came up with that thing where he was like, the Marx people have Marxists.

The femme people have feminists. We're classical English liberals. We'll be liberalists.

Remember he decided to come up with that? That was so cringy. Anyway, right when he came out with the liberalist thing, that's when

I stopped watching him. He was running for office, and of course he lost, but there was an interview that he was outside on a bridge and somebody came up to him and threw a dead fish right in his face.

That's the most violent thing I've ever seen happen on a Sargon of Akkad video. So I wouldn't say my atheist can beat up your atheist, but he was there first, at least for me.

But I don't know. I think he might have been on top of this woke stuff even earlier than James. Maybe not. Maybe not.

And it's not a competition anyway. It's not a competition anyway.

So again, God bless you, Michael. It's not a competition.

It's not a race. It doesn't matter how much credit you get, how much credit somebody else gets,

Doug Wilson, all this stuff. You guys can fight online if you want to, but about that kind of stuff, about how

I was there first, it's just... I wouldn't do it, and I don't want to see you do it because I don't think it helps you the way you think it does.

I just don't. I mean, I could be wrong, man. Listen, I'm just a layman. I don't know about politics and how movements are created, so do what you want to do.

It's not a sin to do what... I don't think it's a sin to do what you're doing as far as that goes.

I don't think it's just a matter purely of pride. I'm sure it's a strategic thing. But the point is, though, that we don't have...

It doesn't have to be this way. It doesn't. We can still be friends. We can still get each other's back.

I hope you understand that if the woke mob came for you, I would have your back. And I hope that if they did the same to me, and it was unreasonable, not something

I didn't do, of course, that you would have mine. I hope you would have mine.

And so let me say it one last time. I hope you take this with as much seriousness as you should, which is zero.

But when it comes to the Mott and Bailey fallacy applied to the woke church movement, James, Michael, you're welcome.