Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Enter the Confoundanatorium!
1 Plays3 seconds ago
Gird your loins, steel your nerves and kiss your loved ones goodbye as we stride proudly into The Confoundanatorium! First, M will attempt to confound Josh with a mini "What the Conspiracy?" segment; then Josh will do his best to confound M with a smaller-than-usual "Does M Remember?" segment! Who will be the most confounded by whom and what will be left of either of them at the end of it all? Only one thing is certain: everybody is a monkey racist.
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction and Episode Teasers
00:00:00
Speaker
This week, I'll try to confound them with their own words. And I'll try to confound Josh with my own words. I assume you're doing all the work this week. I'm just here for some startling verbiage and maybe a few apologies for things said a decade ago I regret nothing.
00:00:16
Speaker
yeah You say that, but clip number three might be legally actionable, and I had to cut clips five and six because yeah i think I'll work it out eventually. Intriguing. And insulting to at least one sitting monarch.
00:00:28
Speaker
Shall we play a game, Dr Denteth? We already are. Duh, then you've already lost.
00:00:42
Speaker
Podcaster's Guide to the Conspiracy, brought to you today by Josh Edison Denteth.
00:01:02
Speaker
Hello and welcome to the Podcaster's Guide to the Conspiracy in Auckland, New Zealand. i am Josh Addison in Guangzhou, China. They are Dr. M. Denteth and this week we neither of us fully knows what's going to happen this week.
00:01:14
Speaker
I mean, isn't that most weeks? Well, I mean, I suppose, but we usually have a better, we're usually more in sync. We usually don't what's going That's are at cross-purposes this week, but not cross-purposes in a sense we don't know what's going on. Cross-purposes
Title Debate and 'What the Conspiracy' Segment
00:01:32
Speaker
in a sense that we do know what's not going on, and that this week I'm going to give you a little What the Conspiracy, and you're going to give me a little Does Em Remember?
00:01:45
Speaker
It's two segments for the price of one, or is it one segment for the price of two? I'm not quite sure how the and analogy works. I'm no economist, I don't know, but...
00:01:56
Speaker
Yes. So yeah i think this started last week or last time when we were talking about what are we going to do for the next episode. And you said, well, I've got this What the Conspiracy thing, but I don't know if it's long enough for a full episode. And then I said, well, you know, I haven't done ah i haven't a dunked on i Does M Remember thing in a while. Maybe I could do a little one of those. Maybe together we can make a full episode.
00:02:16
Speaker
Now, it's entirely possible that we've underestimated how much either of us has to say and we'll end up making an extra long episode. But, I mean, then then you only benefit, listener. Precisely. I mean, our sacrifices are your pleasures.
00:02:32
Speaker
Mm-hmm. It's literally true. So we have any episode which I think M entitled in the project file What the Remembrance I've chosen to call Enter the Confoundinatorium as we both try to confound one another with information that the other one doesn't have.
00:02:50
Speaker
We could go with either title, but um I'm the one who's going to be editing it. so Although Em could then come and has access and could come and change the title afterwards. So frankly, what what this episode is called is anyone's guess, but I'm sure you'll it. might just call it The Travails of Bertie Worcester.
00:03:06
Speaker
It's as good as any. So, given that we've got twice the material to to get into, shall we play the first of two stings and get into the first section? I like your moxie. Let's do it.
00:03:21
Speaker
It's
The 2019 Nobel Prize in Philology Fraud
00:03:22
Speaker
time to play What the Conspiracy.
00:03:33
Speaker
Okay, Josh, it's time to play What the Conspiracy. As usual, there are three questions i am going to ask of you. When the conspiracy, where the conspiracy, and what the conspiracy. So, Josh, take it away. When the conspiracy?
00:03:51
Speaker
I think it's going to be from the late nineteen thirty s to the
00:03:59
Speaker
I mean, i sorry, are you saying World War II? I think the where is going to be over most of the world, and I think the what is going to be some sort of conspiracy to plunge the armed forces of most nations into some sort of long-lasting conflict.
00:04:15
Speaker
So you are saying World War It's not case. why You tell me. Josh, I have to say you are wrong on all three counts. You're wrong about the date.
00:04:26
Speaker
You're wrong about the location. Well, I mean, in a certain sense, because you said the entire world, these events occur within two nations of the entire world. So I guess have to give you partial points there.
00:04:39
Speaker
But you're completely wrong about the time time zone. And it's definitely not... Well, it's a conflict, but it's not it's not an armed conflict. It's more a conflict around truth.
00:04:51
Speaker
It's also not much of a conspiracy. It looks like it at one point but then it definitely becomes the work of one particular person which i guess is spoilers here but when the conspiracy we are going back to the year 2019 also the year very recent twenty twenty five so both so relative distant past and very recent past Now, the where the conspiracy, this is this is why I chose this particular topic, because the where the conspiracy is two nations, one beloved by this podcast and the other one reviled, Romania and France.
00:05:34
Speaker
Good God, a conflict between Romania and France. that's that's I mean, one side's got vampires and the other side's got garlic. They seem evenly matched. There's actually there's quite a lot of garlic in Romania. It's a very popular part of Romanian dishes, at least from my remembrances.
00:05:53
Speaker
And it it's not really a conspiracy, but it is definitely fraud. And it's fraud related to the Nobel Prize.
00:06:03
Speaker
oh Or at least a Nobel Prize. This is the fraud around the Nobel Prize in philology.
00:06:14
Speaker
Now, Josh, what is philology? Philology. Philology, well philosophy obviously we're familiar with. Philately is stamp collecting. Philology, is that the study of love? Is this a sex thing?
00:06:31
Speaker
no so it is phil logos, so it is the study of the word. Philology is literary study or classical scholarship. Okay. So just keep that in mind.
00:06:44
Speaker
The Nobel Prize in Literary Study or Classical Scholarship. So we're going all the way back to 2019, and I'm basing this entire piece on one article, which is why it's a mini What the Conspiracy, that appeared in the Bucharest-based publication, Sina 9. Now, I should point out I was once interviewed by someone from Sina 9 back either end of 2016, beginning of 2017, when I was doing my postdoc in the Institute of Research in the Humanities at the University of Bucharest. That is completely unrelated, but I'm just pointing out, i i at the stage that this article was written, I probably had met some of the people involved.
00:07:33
Speaker
But anyway, the Sina 9 article in 2019 discusses the awarding of the Nobel Prize in philology to a Romanian academic. Let me just read from the article here.
00:07:47
Speaker
In December 2018, Professor Eugene Simeon, director of the Institute for Literary Theory and History, former president of the Romanian Academy, was notified that he had won the gold medal for philology, Alfred Nobel, the Nobel Prize for philology.
00:08:06
Speaker
Simeon, age 885, has authored numerous books and articles on literary criticism, and has also coordinated some major editorial projects of the Romanian Academy, among which the General Dictionary of Romanian Literature, the complete series of facsimiles of The National Poet, and a collection of fundamental works, which has seen the publication of over 250 titles.
00:08:33
Speaker
titles The one-page document he received, written in French and not exactly impeccable English, briefly runs through the history of the Gold Medal for Philology and informs the Academy member that he will receive the accolades at the seat of the European Parliament in spring 2019. It concludes by congratulating Romania.
00:08:58
Speaker
Right. i mean, the fact that you're saying it was slightly dodgy English already has me thinking this was some sort of a con and he didn't really get it. is the Are you going to tell me that there actually isn't a Nobel Prize in philology?
00:09:13
Speaker
Eventually, yes I am. But yeah let's let's do a little bit of background before we we get there. Because, yes, no, you're right. There is no Nobel Prize in philology. But there is an interesting story about why people think there's a Nobel Prize in philology, which implicates the French...
00:09:34
Speaker
and makes the Romanians seem like they've been conned in this particular matter. So according to the press release associated with the notification sent to Simeon, the idea of creating a special prize for grammar or literature analysis, critics and scholars, was born in 1927, when French philosopher Henri Bergson received the Nobel Prize for Literature, despite the fact that he was neither a poet nor a novelist.
00:10:04
Speaker
Thus it was decided that every five years the International Society of Philology would award a gold medal of philology in memory of Alfred Nobel, modelled after the Fields Medal for Mathematics.
00:10:19
Speaker
So this would be the first Romanian Nobel Prize at all, and thus this was very much a newsworthy event in Romania, and thus the notification of the award was published widely in the country.
00:10:35
Speaker
People also made a lot of comments online praising Professor Simeon. And on Thursday, January the 10th, a meeting with him took place at the University of Bucharest, where several personalities in Romanian academia held speeches in his honour. And on January the 15th, Romania's National Culture Day, he was celebrated at the Romanian Athenaeum in Bucharest, where he was publicly congratulated for the award he had received. So, so far, so good. A Romanian has won a Nobel Prize. This is indeed a newsworthy event.
00:11:14
Speaker
It certainly sounds like if there were such a thing as a Nobel Prize in phallology, this guy deserved to get one. Yes, precisely. this has done all this work and yeah yeah He's a senior academic in Romania. He is the kind of person who you would think would be at least a contender for a prize of this particular type.
00:11:36
Speaker
But therein lies the problem. Does this prize exist? A cursory internet search would indicate that nobody has really heard of this prize before. And it is kind of interesting that nobody in the media ever seemed to want to do a fact check to see if there was any substance to the story.
00:11:58
Speaker
Because if anyone in the media had reached out to the Nobel Foundation, they would have got the response that Sina Nine did when they reached out.
00:12:09
Speaker
And that response was, the Nobel Prize is a Nobel Foundation registered trademark. The Nobel Foundation is in no way affiliated with the institutions you mentioned in your email. The International Society of Philology and the University of Philology wrote the communication and PR officer with the Nobel Foundation.
00:12:29
Speaker
The same email read that should trademark infringement be at play, the Nobel Foundation would pursue legal action. Right. Okay, so they they they just deny all knowledge. There is no such thing, and anyone who says there is is infringing on their intellectual property.
00:12:47
Speaker
Indeed, they are a bald-faced liar. Now, this is interesting, because in the notification about Simeon receiving the prize, there are listings of people who have won the prize in the past.
00:13:02
Speaker
And there were four, well, in the case of... if we exclude Simon here, three living members having had it awarded in the last 15 years, one of which was the Swedish linguist, Goran Malmqvist.
00:13:18
Speaker
One was a French academic by the name of Florent Monteclair, who was also the honorary chair of the society. And then the big name, Noam Chomsky.
00:13:30
Speaker
Oh, okay. So yeah, he's someone who lots of people have heard of. did did did Did anyone talk to him? Well, herein lies the issue. So Chomsky is a big name and was apparently awarded the medal back in 2016 when he became the other honorary chair of the society.
00:13:51
Speaker
According to the International Society Philology website, there was a scandal around the awarding of Chomsky's medal. So to quote Cena 9 again, the scandal started with an email sent by florence montelare the other honorary chairman of the society philologyology and twenty fifteen meal recipient to the french magazine philosophy on november twenty five twenty sixteen In the letter, he complains that the French National Assembly changed its mind and called off the award ceremony for the medal.
00:14:25
Speaker
He then asks for help in finding another location for the event. The news of turning down the great Chomsky snowballs a little on the French side of the internet, despite coming from a single source, Montclair's email.
00:14:38
Speaker
Journalists at the French edition of the Huffington Post reveal that Chomsky had been invited by the socialist group to the French parliament. The MPs confirm calling off the meeting because of some of his more polemic statements, particularly those about binla bin Laden, yet state that he knew nothing about any awards ceremony.
00:14:58
Speaker
The president of the assembly is also unaware of any medal. Now, one of the editors-in-chief at Philosophy lent a hand to Monteclair and locates a room at the centre Wallonne-Bruxelles in Paris, where Chomsky holds a talk on November 30th that year and is photographed next to Montclair, waving a medal in the air.
00:15:19
Speaker
But herein lies a problem. According to Chomsky, who Cena 9 reached out to, he has no recollection of ever getting such an award. Okay, yeah, that took a turn. So we have what is supposedly photographic evidence of this award existing and being awarded to someone one who... No, Josh, what we have is photographic evidence of Chomsky holding something up whilst talking to Monteclair.
00:15:49
Speaker
That is what we have a photo of. Okay. The subtitle for the photo claims he's getting the Nobel Prize for Philology. But the photograph is simply the photograph of Chomsky in a room holding an object.
00:16:04
Speaker
And it's it's this ISOP, the people displaying this photograph? it's Yes, it's on the ISOP website. So these guys are the ones who aren't on the level here.
00:16:17
Speaker
is that Is that what I should be taking from this? Yeah, because the other person who... is Well, what there are two other living awardees. There's Gurim Mumpfist and there's Monteclair himself.
00:16:31
Speaker
Now, Mumpfist did not receive the award. He is alive and has no knowledge of this award in any way, shape or form. And the dead historical individuals...
00:16:42
Speaker
On their Wikipedia pages, it does mention them being awarded this Nobel Prize in philology. But the only source for that information is the ISOP website itself.
00:16:58
Speaker
Right. Okay. So, I mean, this is definitely sounding dodgier and dodgier on the part of the ISOP. I have to wonder what's in it for them, though. it is At some point, are they going to ask for a bunch of money to come overseas? No. The kicker at the end is going to be astounding, Josh. It's going to be absolutely astounding.
00:17:21
Speaker
Okay, take me there. Cena and nine point out that if anyone had even done the most cursory investigation of the International Society of Philology, they would have discovered the ISOP website, which turns out to be a fraudulent mess. There is a website, but it is an unprofessional site.
00:17:43
Speaker
it is just It's just an absolute mess of filler text and bits of information which is kept which are inconsistent and cannot all be true at the same time.
00:17:54
Speaker
It does list a number of universities that support the International Society of Philology. Most of those institutions are African institutions. And most of those African institutions are institutions that either do not have literature departments or or are associated with departments that do not exist on the website.
00:18:20
Speaker
The website also has a bunch of named members who are claimed to be members of the Institute of, you sorry, the International Society of Philology. But when they were contacted, deny even having heard of the societies itself.
00:18:37
Speaker
One of the prime funders of the ISOP is the Center UNESCO de Besquecon, a center that does not exist.
00:18:48
Speaker
The International Society itself is located in Lewes in Delaware, but when you go and check its location on Google Maps, it's simply a set of houses.
00:19:01
Speaker
The University of Philology, which houses the International Society of Philology, is also located in Lewes, Delaware. When
Florent Monteclair: The Mastermind's Motivations
00:19:10
Speaker
you locate that on a map, it turns out to be a set of commercial buildings.
00:19:15
Speaker
This is interesting because the university website uses photos of the campus that does not match the location of the campus. And that is because the photos of the campus belong to a university in British Columbia.
00:19:30
Speaker
The text on the university website borrows text from numerous universities in the United States, including... If you ever try to apply to a job at the University of Philology, congratulate you on applying for a job at the University of Arkansas.
00:19:48
Speaker
If you were to call the phone number listed on the university website, you would discover the answering machine is in French. Okay, so we have an obviously fake university or we have an obviously fake society run out of an obviously fake university.
00:20:05
Speaker
Is it bigger than this? Does it then turn out that there are a whole bunch of dodgy societies giving out awards all over the place? No. are they just really, really into philology? No, at all it all comes down to one person, the other living awardee of the Nobel Prize in philology.
00:20:28
Speaker
Fulleront Monteclire, a 49-year-old Frenchman who indeed wrote a PhD, wrote a PhD on the works of Jules Verne, Anne claims to have a second PhD on gypsies in French literature, although that second PhD is a little bit dodgy, given it was awarded by the fictional university. Ah, yeah.
00:20:50
Speaker
Now, he lives in France and teaches at the ESPE in Belfort, an education science university, as well as the UFR STGI. Now, I actually don't know what any of those things stand for. They're acronyms for educational institutions that do exist in the French Republic. He is the author of the letter sent to Simeon about the award and is the only person who has provided details on the background of this award and is the only person who actually claims to be an honorary chairperson for the International Society of Philology itself.
00:21:33
Speaker
Amongst his associations, he claims to be the former president of that fictitious UNESCO Center. Right, okay, I can why you said this turns out to be less of a conspiracy if it's actually just one person behind the whole thing. He's not conspiring anyone else. There is a second person, because your note...
00:21:55
Speaker
Monteclair is the honorary chairperson for the International Society of Philology. There is a president of the society, and his name is Martin Belmont.
00:22:08
Speaker
He is the rector of the fictitious university. He published his fantasy novels published by the fictitious UNESCO Center. He was a co-signatory of the letter informing Simeon that he had won the award, the Nobel for phil Philology. And really interestingly, his signature is a very close match to that of Monteclair himself.
00:22:35
Speaker
Gosh, that's aden that's ah it's a strange coincidence. Yes. Who would have thought that these two perfectly real individuals would... Well, no one one is a real individual. The other appears to be... Everything I've heard so far in this story leads me to assume that this other person who shares a signature with the other guy must be a fully real and whole human being. Otherwise, the world's gone topsy-turvy.
00:23:00
Speaker
It's true. I mean, he's an author of vampire novels, so he must be Well, you get more real than that, yeah. Or Romanian, frankly. Well, except that he's French. Yeah, but I assume anyone who writes on him has on levels. So you think that spiritually, even though he may be French spiritually, he must be Romanian. That's a terribly racist thing to say, Josh. I can't believe you said this this podcast. It does mean I am by insinuation blaming Romania for the Twilight series and Stephanie Myers, so maybe I should retract that, yeah. Yes, I think you should. I think you should make a formal apology to the one Romanian listener I know we do have.
00:23:40
Speaker
Philip, yeah this apology is for you. I'm sorry for say suggesting that Romania is to blame for the Twilight series. Or that Stephanie Myers is a honorary Romanian. Yes, well, I hope you feel suited sue suitably chastised.
00:23:55
Speaker
Although King Charles is also an honorary Romanian, we're pretty sure he's a vampire. so I don't know, it all works out. So Monteclair and Belmont appear to be one and the same person, which does mean it's not a conspiracy. This is just an act of fraud. But the question is why fraud? What's going on here? yeah i mean It feels like someone who's just a bit of a weird fantasist and has cooked up her wants to make themselves be more important than they actually are and has invented this fantasy world where they're the head of ah of ah of an international organization handing out prestigious awards. I mean, if if if if if there generally genuinely is no money changing hands, if it isn't actually a financial scam, I have to assume it's just somebody wanting to feel like a big person.
00:24:47
Speaker
I mean, it does seem that basically Monteclair wanted an award and invented one and then ah then a history for that award and then tried to award that award to other people to to legitimize the fake award he gave himself.
00:25:03
Speaker
Actually, yeah, it has a bit of a bit of a sort of a sitcom feel to it or something, like an episode of Seinfeld where he sort of tells one lie about having this award and yet it it snowballs and snowballs until suddenly he's inventing fake universities and and and emailing people all around the world something.
00:25:20
Speaker
Now, at the time the original article came out, Sena 9 contacted Monteclair and asked him a bunch of questions, such as, is Martin Belmont real?
00:25:31
Speaker
What's the status of the ISOP? Why is the website so weird? Why is the university located in commercial buildings and uses photos of the wrong type, etc., etc.? And Monteclair's response was basically, why are you so interested in this? Aren't you just proud that a Romanian has won a Nobel Prize?
00:25:50
Speaker
I mean, that's that's a good deflection. give it is, and that seemed to be the only kind of responses he made back in 2019.
00:26:01
Speaker
Now, Sina 9 also pointed out the result of their investigation to the Romanian Academy. which did mean that days after they had that event on the Romanian National Culture Day, the announcement of the award was removed from the Academy's homepage.
00:26:21
Speaker
But no real investigation was done by the Academy, because after they tried and failed to contact the Society, they basically abandoned any investigative work into what was going on. They basically just...
00:26:35
Speaker
pushed everything under the car carpet and moved on. And for many years, that was the end of the story until we get to 2025, in which point Le Monde, the big major French newspaper, reports on the matter and relies on the Sena 9 article, which they call a little masterpiece.
Investigation and Legal Proceedings
00:27:01
Speaker
And then this led in Early 2026, a prosecutor's office in France opened a preliminary investigation into Monteclair's work for forgery and use of forged documents, fraudulent use of a professional title or status, and just general fraud, leading to his house being searched.
00:27:26
Speaker
And this then led to Monteclair claiming that if the medal was hoax, he was the first one to be hoaxed by it. Right, but where did it where did he get it from?
00:27:39
Speaker
Well, right, he fine so where did he get the medal from? Well, from a Parisian jeweler, he commissioned it. Right, yes, that sounds... the €250, he commissioned a medal back in May of 2016. And he admits to the police, oh yes, I commissioned the medal, but, and here's the kicker,
00:28:11
Speaker
He claims he can't have committed a crime because if the medal was a forgery, it would have to be based upon an original.
00:28:23
Speaker
He invented the Nobel Prize for philology and thus cannot have forged something that he invented in the first place. Oh, I mean, that's it's an interesting an interesting line of argumentation. But then I guess you could just say, OK, fine, it's not forgery, but it's still it's still fraudulent. It's still infringing on the Nobel Society's trademarks and what have you. It's not it's not okay No, it's not. And I believe the case is ongoing. As I say, the investigation started at the end of last year. the Search warrants were conducted in February of this year. And they'll say probably will be sometime before we get an official verdict as to what is going to happen to Monteclair.
00:29:09
Speaker
But yes, it seems that he was someone who wanted to be awarded a medal Yeah.
00:29:19
Speaker
and having never received such a medal invented one for himself then invented a historyfores saidd medal and then attempted to award it to at least one other person thus leading to an investigation as to what was going on back in 2016, which has rather backfired on him personally.
00:29:44
Speaker
So that that that photo with Noam Chomsky then, do we know what that was like? Did he just walk up and say, hey, what do you think of my fancy medal? Or do do we have a background on the Chomsky photo?
00:29:55
Speaker
No, I mean, all we know is that Chomsky doesn't recall being awarded the medal. Now, of course, when this article first came out in 2019, Chomsky was a lot more compass mentis than he is now.
00:30:09
Speaker
Now that they're doing further investigations, Chomsky is largely no longer compass mentis. All correspondence goes through his partner. He hasn't responded personally to emails in quite some time. he is
Reflections on Monteclair's Fraud
00:30:24
Speaker
meant to be in a fairly dire strait health-wise. So we probably will never find out exactly what happened at that meeting in France other than he met Monteclair and a photo was taken with him with Monteclair.
00:30:42
Speaker
Well... I mean, the the the the object of the episode is is confounding, and and I have to say that is quite a confounding story. I would not have guessed where it ended up, and no I sort of quite understand what the hell went on.
00:31:00
Speaker
Yeah, I mean, it just seems to be someone wanted an award and told a really, really elaborate story to justify getting that award. But...
00:31:12
Speaker
I mean, the audacity of inventing a Nobel Prize for philology and thinking you would get away with it is kind of astounding.
00:31:22
Speaker
Did he hope
'Does Em Remember' and Dr. Sexy's Comeback
00:31:23
Speaker
that if people called up the Nobel Society and said, hey, did you give this guy the Nobel Prize in philology? They would have said, oh, gosh, yet guess we must have. If we didn't, who else did?
00:31:34
Speaker
Actually, the reason why the society is large to largely supported by African institutions and the award was given to a Romanian is probably actually going to be more racism than anything else. And that these are people that someone in France might think that nobody sensible is ever going to contact to get further information from.
00:32:02
Speaker
Right. Oh, now, is there a particular reason why it took like six years from the original Romanian article and then the French Le Monde article picking it up? Was it just a case of somebody in France happened to come across this story and thought it deserved looking into more?
00:32:19
Speaker
I mean, I think it's as simple as someone finding the article and then going, oh, the French authorities should probably look into this. Yes. Well, good.
00:32:31
Speaker
I don't quite know what to say to that, but um people sure do believe funny things. They sure do And so, yes, that is our mini, What the Conspiracy?
00:32:42
Speaker
Right, well, then it's my turn to do a mini. what does not that It doesn't start with what at all. A mini does even remember. so I guess it means we get to decide. This might be the first episode where have a double a double sting.
00:32:55
Speaker
that all difficult All I'm thinking now is the police. So double sting. Twice the pleasure. Can't go wrong. Really long tantric sex.
00:33:07
Speaker
Hmm.
00:33:09
Speaker
Oi, have you heard? That's conspiracy. At the risk of your own sanity, keep listening.
00:33:19
Speaker
Right, so I feel it necessary to introduce these things every time we do them because we do them so infrequently, but long-time listeners will know that Ian, before we started doing this podcast, therefore a very long, long time ago, Ian had a show, a brief segment talking about conspiracy theories. It was about sort of 15, 10, 15-minute segment on BFM, the student radio station at New York University.
00:33:45
Speaker
University of Auckland, um and Em had the presence of mind to put all these episodes on their website, mrextenteth.com, where you can go and and listen to them and read ian's commentary from the time.
00:33:58
Speaker
And so I, every now and then, will go and listen through these things from around sort of a dozen years ago more, play them back for Em in ways that will be embarrassing to them, and see how much they remember of it. so I think just to judge just ah just to give you an idea of of what to expect from this thing, Ian, could you play clip one, please? This is Dr. Sexy in the house. i I'm broadcasting live from BFM where things could get hairy. And indeed
Space Monkeys and Iranian Conspiracy Theories
00:34:29
Speaker
they did, Josh. Indeed they did Dr. Sexy is in the house.
00:34:33
Speaker
Now, that episode you were talking about Prism and Edward Snowden isn't actually interesting at all. Don't want to talk about it at all. I just wanted to start with with with Dr. Sexy. And frankly, i think Dr. Sexy should make a comeback. I think you should be introducing yourself as that every episode. all may be maybe you should be introducing yourself as something else, but we'll get there.
00:34:55
Speaker
No, so I had um a a couple of a couple of the episodes and are unconnected. I don't have a common theme this time, but just a couple of ones that sounded interesting that you may or may not remember. So for our our first actual episode that I want to test your memory on, could you play clip number two, please?
00:35:12
Speaker
People may not be aware, but I'm actually quite ancient by age. I remember back in the glory days of the early 80s where comic books used to have ads for all sorts of exciting things, such as sea monkeys. and These were these great little tanks of things that you put these seeds into. And according to the pictures, they're filled little kingdoms and castles, and all the sea monkeys would in fact wear crowns.
00:35:35
Speaker
Now, first of all, apologies for the audio quality there. This was one you couldn't make it into the studio. Yes, I could tell, but it was a phoner. That was a phoner. That was a phoner. Now, that isn't just me highlighting something random you said to make you sound silly. That was actually quite a clever segue into the topic of that episode. Can you remember what you segued from Sea Monkeys into?
00:36:04
Speaker
Is it something about Atlantis? No, it's not nothing to do with the sea part. It is about monkeys, then. But not sea monkeys.
00:36:15
Speaker
you think about al you mean you You mean non-sea monkeys? You mean land monkeys? Or do you mean the mysterious air monkeys of Oz? I mean, none of those. that give You're missing one. There's another location monkeys could be. Are we talking about swamp monkeys? Are we talking about theories of evolution, about the hairless apes on the savannah, and the fact that we're meant to actually have evolved in swamps? Is that we're talking about? oh we're talking about space. Space monkeys. Monkeys in space. Oh, are we talking about early proto-astronauts?
00:36:51
Speaker
Actually, it was timely. Timely. It wasn't about the history of space flight. it was This was an episode, I should say, from February of 2013. and you were talking about recent events.
00:37:04
Speaker
Monkey or monkeys had been sent in space at that that time by the Iranian space program. Of of course, yes. you remember the conspiracy theory around that?
00:37:16
Speaker
No. wasn't There was a minor one. I'm trying i'm trying to recall, but no, no i I remember the stories at the time. I do not recall what the conspiracy theories were, other than possibly they weren't monkeys, they were prisoners, but that might actually also it' a recurrent theory that's gone through a lot of non-NASA-related space programs. Oh, those people who are the Americans are sending prisoners up into space and claiming they're animals instead.
00:37:44
Speaker
yeah No, what it was, was Iran sent a monkey into, or I'm not sure, what I think it was actually into technically into space, sort of up into the the outer atmosphere, and brought them back down.
00:37:57
Speaker
Now, the problem was they released a couple of photographs, including of the monkeys. And they They weren't the same monkeys. Monkeys, yes, all right, now it's coming back to me.
00:38:08
Speaker
i'm I'm no racist, but all monkeys do look alike to me. However, in this particular case, this this little monkey was a little, I don't know what it was, a little marmoset or a spider monkey, one a small small monkey, but the before photo, the photo of a monkey before it was sent into space, had a quite noticeable mole over one of its eyes.
00:38:30
Speaker
And then the photograph they released of the monkey after its space flight, safe and sound and alive alive and healthy back on Earth, quite notably didn't have a big mole over its eye. and people I mean, that's easily explained by cosmetic surgery in space. I mean, what what's a monkey going to do in space other than perform a bit of minor cosmetic surgery whilst waiting to come back down to Earth? i mean, really? Really?
00:38:58
Speaker
People come up with conspiracy theories about the most ridiculous things, hypothesizing that maybe the monkey didn't survive the journey, and the Iranians wanted to win a PR ah battle, so they replaced one monkey for another. Cosmetic surgery makes so much more sense.
00:39:14
Speaker
It's interesting you should say that, because that was my reaction. Although at the time, going by, you sort of in the episode you ran through a couple of competing theories and then went into it in more detail on the accompanying blog on your website, but there There are pursued a few possibilities. One, the launch went wrong somehow and the monkey died, and so they swapped it out for another one to suggest that things went okay. Because, Josh, as you pointed out, everyone thinks that monkeys look the same because everybody is a monkey racist. Everybody is a monkey racist.
00:39:45
Speaker
We're going to have fun in 10 years' time. Maybe we'll start clipping our own episodes and I can come back and using from you can say to me, so Josh, here you are. Everyone is a monkey racist. Can you explain that? And I'll say no, because I'll be 60 years old and praying for death.
00:40:00
Speaker
No, so, I mean, possibilities, that but maybe maybe the launch did still go okay, but nevertheless something went wrong in flight and the monkey died. Maybe the launch went right, but the whole technology is good enough to send live animals up and bring them back was a lie and the monkey was never actually sent.
00:40:17
Speaker
A bunch of
Michael Hastings' Death and Related Conspiracies
00:40:18
Speaker
possibilities. Or maybe they just mixed up the photos because they had a few different monkeys and that that they were using in this program and maybe they just took the wrong photo of the wrong monkey. Because remember, everybody thinks that monkeys look the same. They do. But I mean, yes, my immediate reaction was either there's some sort of like outer earth radiation immediately destroys facial blemishes or possibly, yes, a race of alien cosmeticians living in low Earth orbit who will happily go out and perform cosmetic surgery on anyone who passes by them.
00:40:53
Speaker
And the government doesn't want you to know. I mean, I believe that's why Richard Branson created Virgin Galactic in the first place and why Jeff Bezos is so keen to send people up into space. The costs are to pay the cosmeticians, not because of the cost of the rocket fuel.
00:41:11
Speaker
That makes perfect sense. So, yeah, Iranian space monkeys. I mean, I couldn't i can't can't go past an episode that's about Iranian space monkeys. But then the next episode i wanted to actually, it's actually two episodes. You did did one episode and then a follow-up a little bit later, but it's about the same story.
00:41:28
Speaker
And it's a story that has some interesting parallels to other things we've talked about recently. So this you first discussed this in June of 2013, and then had a follow-up in December. But could you play clip three, just to get things started?
00:41:44
Speaker
My throat's been completely ruined, and now I'm an Avenger of the Night, bringing justice to all those who oppose my conspiratorial wants. That is the best Alex Jones impression I've ever done.
00:41:57
Speaker
So, um, you'd done stuff to your throat, had you? uh... What have you been turned to your throat? What have you been suggesting I've done to my throat there?
00:42:09
Speaker
i don' I don't like to speculate because I know you just had laryngitis, but anyway. Yeah. but I don't know. I mean, maybe yeah you would certainly were suggesting in that episode that you are now Batman. Now, are you Batman?
00:42:24
Speaker
I should say right at the start. are you You can tell me I'm not a cop. That's what a cop would say. Well, that's what Batman would say. Precisely. So the question I have is, are you Robin?
00:42:39
Speaker
I'm Robin, you have precious moments of your time by talking about nonsense, when in fact the story we're going to talk about is is not actually lighthearted at all. It's a bit depressing.
00:42:52
Speaker
Do you remember the story about the death of Michael Hastings? Yes. Oh, that name does ring. it So he was a journalist? He was a journalist.
00:43:03
Speaker
yeah I'm trying to remember which particular... So I know his family has been hounded by people like Alex Jones and his ilk for quite some time because he was apparently going to release information that would be against the interest of the New World audience.
00:43:21
Speaker
order But I can't quite remember which particular journalist who died mysteriously, what things he was meant to release. It's probably something about the Clinton body count or something of that particular ilk.
00:43:35
Speaker
It's about American politicians. That's right. Okay, I'll fill you in and and fill in our listeners, because this is not a story we've talked about before, although it's very similar to the death of Willie McRae that we talked about recently. And as we mentioned at the time, his death was was not at until entirely dissimilar to the death of Dr. David Kelly as well. They're all people who died...
00:43:55
Speaker
in In ways that were not necessarily suspicious, but it was simply the fact that they died. Yeah. um Yeah, it was made of suspicious. So um Matthew, ah sorry, not Matthew, Michael Hastings was a journalist who worked for Rolling Stone, he worked for BuzzFeed, And in the early hours of June the 18th, 2013, so this was, this you would have been talking about the story as it had just happened in this episode, he died in a high-speed car crash. He apparently drove a fancy Mercedes sports car and was going very fast in it. When it lost control, crashed, exploded, and and he died on the spot.
00:44:35
Speaker
Now, the thing yeah the thing that Michael Hastings was best known for was his 2010 article in Rolling Stone, The Runaway General. Do you remember that one?
00:44:47
Speaker
Now, this was the interview he did with, was this McChrystal? It was McChrystal, yes. Yeah, so he did the interview with McChrystal, which then caused McChrystal to have to resign from his senior position because he was a little bit too frank about his criticisms of the president at the time, who I believe was one Barack Obama.
00:45:08
Speaker
That is correct, yes. So i gather that McChrystal, so so General McChrystal was in charge of the war in Afghanistan at the time. Hastings had gone over to Afghanistan and to do some reporting on there, and I gather he had been fairly sort of stage-managed at the time, but then there was an incident where it was so something to do with flights getting mixed up, and he ended up travelling with...
00:45:34
Speaker
McChrystal and his his entourage, and they ended up going out for drinks, and our alcohol loosened a bunch of tongues. And I don't know if it was McChrystal specifically, but certainly a bunch of his people, a bunch of his staff were talking, and from what they said, it was very clear that they had no respect whatsoever for Obama's White House or other civilian authorities. They like, you know, the White House and Congress, the are these pinched-pushing civilians who have no idea how how how to run a war.
00:46:04
Speaker
and basically made it clear that they were running the war they wanted and were completely ignoring the civilian authorities as as much as possible. Now, Hastings, at the time, he had said that there was an interview he did with Matt Lauer where he said, I didn't think General McChrystal would be fired. In fact, I thought his position was basically untouchable. I thought it would give them a headache for maybe 72 hours. But it did not. He was summoned, McChrystal was summoned to the White House by Obama, was raked over the coals and resigned fairly quickly afterwards.
00:46:34
Speaker
Yes, um mean so you can imagine Michael Hastings made a few enemies in the armed forces. At the time of his death, he was apparently working on another story and would that that was know maybe maybe going to be as...
00:46:50
Speaker
salacious or contentious yeah As the runaway general. ah After his death, his wife said apparently it was going to be a story on John Brennan, who at the time was the director of the CIA.
00:47:01
Speaker
But basically, it was simply a case of this guy is a reporter who has made made made made enemies in high places, supposedly was working on something else, dies in what appears to be a freak accident.
00:47:15
Speaker
That seems a little bit suspicious. Yes, from memory, it has elements of the Paradise Conspiracy with the idea that there were things added to the car to cause the accident.
00:47:28
Speaker
Well, it was and was there was a bit less to it than that, from what I gather. um There was a guy called Richard A. Clark, who was the former U.S. National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counterterrorism.
00:47:44
Speaker
And he said, it seems like he was kind of just just thinking aloud. he He basically said, you know, it's possible that the the technology exists to perform cyber attacks on cars, anything that has ah an onboard computer and any sort of wireless access. And I mean, cars back then definitely had Bluetooth and stuff like that. He said it was it was it was technically feasible to remotely hack into a car,
00:48:10
Speaker
and mess with it in such a way that you could cause a person to crash and make it look like an accident. Now, he didn't say this is definitely what happened. He didn't say I have proof or evidence that this is what happened. It was simply just a case of... It could happen. Yeah, killing someone inconvenient to them is the sort of thing the CIA might do, and B, hacking a car and making it crash is the sort of thing they possibly could do, but didn't have anything that's to suggest, and that is what happened in this case.
00:48:38
Speaker
But um
Debating the Legitimacy of Hastings' Conspiracy Theories
00:48:39
Speaker
that was enough. That was enough for a great many people, including, as you say, Alex Jones. He, about apparently the 9-11 Truth movement made a fair bit of hay on this. um They started spreading the idea that this guy had been bumped off by the evil government, because, of course, this was this is Obama's, this was a Democrat government at the time, and in conspiracy theories started going far and wide. Now, is it it was interesting to hear, actually, in that episode, you mentioned that it didn't help that America... was was was getting a reputation for going after whistleblowers because you'd had the Chelsea Manning case and at the time that you'd had the case of that poor old Julian Assange who the Americans were being so mean to
00:49:20
Speaker
Yeah, I think view views have changed a lot on his particular character. Despite, I mean, to to be fair, though, it was always the case that America was going after him because they didn't like the stuff that he'd been saying. The fact that he also was a ah particularly creepy person who did not place much stock in the concept of consent ah wasn't wasn't their motivation.
00:49:44
Speaker
No, although the other thing to point out about Assange is that he's also been quite happy to release information or keep information back depending on which autocratic government pays him more money.
00:49:57
Speaker
Now, at the time you first talked about this in June of 2013, you sort of said, well, look, all the evidence we have points towards freak accident. Yes, there are people who are saying it might not have been, but they haven't there's nothing to back that up. So, you know, based on everything we have, we should... um We we really should to just go for the idea that there is nothing sinister about this, but maybe we should wait and see you wait for the TOCS report to see if there's anything suspicious there.
00:50:24
Speaker
So then in December of 2013, this was when you did the follow-up episode talking about Batman with your ruined throat. because the tox report had come back, and it showed that Hastings had evidence of marijuana and methamphetamines in his bloodstream, but not at levels that would have affected him at the time.
00:50:44
Speaker
So it showed that he he was a drug user. He had been using these drugs, but wasn't actually high at the time that he crashed. So you you couldn't blame you couldn't blame substance abuse on his crash. But nevertheless, as with the case of Willoughby McRae, people closest to Hastings don't put any weight on conspiracy theories. His brother, Jonathan Hastings, said that yeah apparently Michael Hastings had a was was not a fully stable person and was known to have sort of manic episodes and what have you. His brother Jonathan jonathan said that he had had a manic episode recently and had been using drugs, and Jonathan said that he had been trying to get his brother Michael into rehab at the time, and then he died in this crash.
00:51:29
Speaker
So there's, in in November of 2013, Salon.com interviewed Jonathan Hastings, who says... I really rule out foul play entirely. i might have been suspicious if I hadn't been with him on the day before he died. After all, he definitely was investigating and writing about a lot of sensitive subjects.
00:51:45
Speaker
But based on being with him and talking to people who were worried about him in the weeks leading up to his death and being around him when he had had similar problems when he was younger, i was pretty much convinced he wasn't in danger from any outside agency. And his Michael Hastings' widow also believes it's an accident. So they don't don't have any trope with conspiracy theories. But nevertheless, as you say, other people keep keep annoying them by bringing these theories up.
00:52:10
Speaker
Yes, once again, shades of oil and gray. Yeah, so it was an interesting... interesting parallels there in the story. Now, actually, also what what was interesting was, as I say, you downloaded these episodes from the BFM website and then put up blog posts on your own site where you'd give a bunch more bunch more of your thoughts about it in a bit more detail.
00:52:30
Speaker
Do you recall the young the page that you the the blog post that you did for that first episode? In the comments, you ended up getting into a... A bit of an argument with someone who took a issue with your dismissal of these conspiracy theories. and i suppose you remember that happening?
00:52:48
Speaker
I mean, I do remember there was one particular vexatious correspondent I had on my old blog. And I remember there being quite lengthy comments threads until I decided to shut comments threads down. But I don't remember this particular debate. It was basically, you know, you you did this thing and you said, look, it certainly looks like a tragic accident and we don't have any evidence to suggest otherwise. So that's what we should conclude for now.
00:53:19
Speaker
And then somebody wrote in and said, oh, so just the government says it was a tragic accident and you just go for it. And and and basically you took a issue with that and, It was quite frankly a little bit rude, even though you tried to reply and and and make your case. they They weren't having it.
00:53:34
Speaker
But to yeah, so so Iranian Space Monkeys and the death of Michael Hastings were the two things I was interested to hear you talking about from 23 years ago.
00:53:47
Speaker
um So just to finish things up, could you play clip four? i am the Pink Batman. You sure are. sure am. ye Yep, I sure I'm willing to admit, I may not be Batman, but I am the Pink Batman.
00:54:02
Speaker
i I don't think that clip needs any explanation at all. I don't see how it could be any clearer. No, I mean, it's self-evident. Yeah, and I look forward to the reintroduction of both Dr. Sexy and the Pink Batman to this podcast on an ongoing basis.
00:54:18
Speaker
They both have the same voice, Josh. They both have the same voice. What Dr. Sexy does as well. I suppose well i suppose yeah suppose if anyone's had horrible damage done to their throat, it would probably be Dr. Sexy, yeah. yeah It's true.
00:54:33
Speaker
You won't believe the things I've sucked down or things I've sucked up. It all fits, another quote from Dr. Sexy. Now, I think we've come to the end of an episode. You've confounded me, I've confounded you, although you did equip yourself fairly well in the memories of the Michael Hastings and what have you, so that was that was good.
00:54:54
Speaker
i I sure as hell didn't remember, I barely remember the name Stanley McChrystal, quite frankly, when read it, oh, yeah, I remember General McChrystal because his name was McChrystal, and that's a bit weird. Yeah, the issue with conspiracy theories is about dead journalists is that there are a lot of them, and I can never quite track which name goes with which particular conspiracy theory. But with enough contextual clues, oh, of course, yeah. Michael Hastings is the car accident with the cyber attack claim who interviewed General McChrystal, and there was the stuff about John Brennan that was apparently going to come out. So, yeah, it's...
00:55:33
Speaker
it's it's It's one of those, it's a classic story and it's interesting. It has largely disappeared from conversation. I think in part because the conspiracy theories have moved on. The kind of things that we had about named members of the armed forces or heads of the CIA, those ones have all kind of morphed into your QAnon or QAnon-adjacent conspiracy theories. That's where the focus for that particular kind of person, whether you're a Tucker Carlson or an Alex Jones, has really become quite concrete.
00:56:12
Speaker
I think we talked about this in a past episode. There is, sometimes there seems to be a disturbing lack of new conspiracy theories out there, which I think speaks against the idea that the world is awash with conspiracy theories. It seems it's just awash with the same conspiracy theory laundered with different names.
00:56:30
Speaker
Although that said, the phenomenon of the celebrity general seems to have fallen off a bit. I remember, old I remember, remember, I remember, remember what was the um guy in charge of Iraq?
00:56:41
Speaker
Schwarzkopf or something? oh yeah. Yeah. I remember, I remember at the time you there'd be these generals in charge of the wars who were were were sort of public figures. But now the only person I know who seems to regularly make the news is old bloody Pete Hegseth in charge of the Department of War, they now call it.
00:56:59
Speaker
I couldn't tell you the name of a American general at the moment, but it used to be that you couldn't avoid them. So I don't know. Who knows? Yes, the landscape has changed. Well, i and the the one to think of is Michael Flynn.
00:57:11
Speaker
Which one's he? He's the QAnon general. He's the one who got fired by the Biden administration and then became an ardent QAnon fan.
00:57:26
Speaker
Right. And has been a regular a regular guest on Infowars. who But in terms of, I couldn't tell you who's in charge of the the current war in Iran, for instance. All I know is, he exists, the only name I know there, so...
00:57:42
Speaker
Yeah, I don't know. But at any rate, I think we're done. I think we're done with this episode. It came in two parts, and it's worked out at about the normal length for an episode. So I think it all worked out nicely. We managed to get our timings correct.
00:57:56
Speaker
So that's nice. And I have a suggestion for next time. You do? I think next time we should look at Project Anchor. I don't know what that is. Well, Josh, if Project Anchor is true, you're going to find out what it is quite soon, because at some point in August, the Earth is going to lose gravity for seven seconds, and NASA is trying to hide that from the general population.
00:58:22
Speaker
Oh, I look forward to both doing an episode about this and experiencing it in person. Okay, you heard it here first. That's what we're going to talk about next time, apparently. I think we'll be broadcasting after the event is said to happen. doesn't come out well that's probably because the world ended and frankly if after the world ends you still want episodes of the podcast as guide to the conspiracy then we love you because your focus is on the right thing but maybe do a little bit more survivalism and a little less listen to your backlog of podcast podcast episodes because we know where it all goes it's mad max it's masks it's It's gas walls. It's mutations. It's the whole Fandango.
00:59:08
Speaker
But anyway, at least, at the very least, before the world explodes or whatever's going to happen, you do get to listen to a bonus episode as well. If you're a you're one of our patrons, yes, yes. So if you were to go to Patreon and look for the podcast's Guide to the Conspiracy and sign yourself up, you will get access to a bonus episode, which this week...
00:59:30
Speaker
We go from Iranian monkeys to French monks. I thought that sort of worked. Plus also bad cops, podcast news, bit more religion.
00:59:42
Speaker
So, yeah, if that's if if any of that sounds appealing to you and you're a patron, I have very good news for you. If you're not a patron, I also have good news. You can become one. No one's stopping you. Nothing at all. yet it's It's one dollar or equivalent unit in your currency a month, and then you get access to all the patron bonus episodes, most of which are about contemporary news, so most of which are completely out of date by the time you become a patron, but you will get to find out what's going on in the world from this week onwards. And I believe there are a few things in the archives which are probably worth listening back to min anyway.
01:00:21
Speaker
There must be, there must be. really not selling this patron thing at all. well there's also viing me if you plinmpph If you pledge at a particular level, there's also merchandise.
01:00:32
Speaker
Oh, yes. yep Merch. Got have merch. Not podcast with without merch. Hoodies, mugs, mouse mats, stickers. You pledge, you'll get stuff. That's what I'm told. Okay, time to time to bring this to a close and then go and record that po that bonus episode. I keep saying ponus. I keep getting patron and bonus mixed up, and it sounds vaguely rude to me. I don't know why.
01:00:56
Speaker
but we'll go and we'll go and record this bonus episode, and you guys can get on with your lives. Goodbye. i am the Pink Batman.
01:01:11
Speaker
The Podcaster's Guide to the Conspiracy features Josh Addison and Associate Professor M.R. Extentive. Our producers are a mysterious cabal of conspirators known as Tom, Philip, and another who was so mysterious that they remain anonymous.
01:01:26
Speaker
You can contact us electronically via podcastconspiracy at gmail.com or join our Patreon and get access to our Discord server. Or don't, I'm not your mum.
01:01:53
Speaker
And remember, these.