Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 2, 2023 - The David Knight Show

03:01:43

The David Knight Show - 02/03/2023

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Friday the 3rd of February, year of our Lord 2023.
	Day 1058 of the emergency.
	We're going to begin today by talking about what is happening with revoking the emergency.
	again that was passed in the house but there's a lot of pushback on it if you take a look at the idiots who go to watch stephen cobert uh absolutely clueless they still have the mask requirement on he's still trolling people over it but we also have an interview with joel skousen today the third hour i think you're going to find it very interesting i recorded it last night and he gets into a lot of detail about what is going on with war in ukraine and the bigger picture as Joel sees it.
	So stay with us.
	We will be right back.
	Thank you. Well,
	it's kind of interesting because we're seeing people now on a regular basis, all these people who have been fighting against the idea that this is a medical dictatorship, medical martial law, as I called it, immediately.
	People are starting to fall in line with this.
	We have Tom Woods now saying, I'm sorry I was wrong, you were right, but he's still not completely there.
	Scott Adams, a couple of weeks ago, was saying that.
	Now, the GOP House.
	Is jumping in on this.
	And it's really more than anything because of partisan politics.
	When they held the vote and they passed the vote in the House, don't know if it's going to happen in the Senate, and of course Biden will probably veto it, and they probably don't have enough votes to overwrite his veto, even if they have enough votes to pass it, because it is very...
	Narrow margin in the House, and it went strictly along partisan lines.
	So the Republicans who had absolutely no resistance to this with Trump, because as I point out with the presidential candidates, the GOP is scared to death of him.
	Conservative media is scared to death of Trump.
	And Trump has been the one pushing this stuff.
	It just is absolutely amazing to me how evil the man is, how evil he is, how deceptive he is, how they used him.
	As I've said many times, this would have never happened if Biden had been there in 2020, if Hillary had been there in 2020.
	The Republicans would have pushed back against it.
	That's why they're pushing back now.
	Anyway, the House votes to effectively end the COVID emergency, an excellent article you'll find at The New American.
	And they said the end of the two weeks to flatten the curve seems to be finally approaching.
	14 days versus 1,058 days.
	The House also voted to end the federal COVID vaccine mandate for healthcare workers.
	And when Biden was asked about this, this is what he had to say.
	What? So he says we've extended it to May 15th.
	Actually, he said he's extending it to May 11th.
	But, you know, hey, it's not real anyway.
	And you heard the mainstream media, so why are you ending this?
	Come on, you know, it's just like Stephen Colbert mocking Biden for saying that he's going to end it in four months.
	How does Stephen Colbert know that it's going to be an emergency in four months?
	Even if he is now scared to death, he will never come out of his little mask hole.
	He demands that all of his audience be masked.
	Just amazing to me.
	And then you heard that kicker at the end of it.
	So first of all, he gets the date that he decreed wrong.
	Secondly, he says it's going to end when the Supreme Court ends it.
	Oh, really? We'll talk about that in a minute.
	Anyway, House Resolution 382, the Pandemic is Over Act.
	And they named it that because back in September, Biden said the pandemic is over.
	He says it's all about politics.
	It's virtue signaling.
	It's partisan politics.
	This should have been done a long time ago.
	But anyway, party line vote 220 to 210 to terminate the public health emergency on the day the bill is enacted.
	Now, there were two of those because there were two emergency orders.
	There was one by HHS. And there was one by Trump.
	The one by HHS was in January, so it was a couple months older than Trump's March the 13th, 2020 order.
	So when you look at which one of these it is, I'm not certain which one it is.
	They didn't say that two of them passed.
	So, I'm not certain.
	If maybe they're just going for the medical one, but not for the one that unleashes all the money, that's the one that Trump did.
	And that's why I take it from that date.
	Because it's all about money.
	It's all about politics. It's all about control.
	So, again, the Democrats, if a Democrat had been in charge, the Republicans would have opposed this a lot earlier.
	The title refers to the verbatim statement made by Biden back in September.
	The pandemic is over. We still have a problem with COVID, he said, but the pandemic is over.
	The statement, however, did not stop Biden's Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, from extending the emergency in October and then extending it again this month.
	During the debate on the floor of Brett Guthrie, a Republican from Kentucky, lead sponsor of the bill, President Biden has taken too long on his statement last September.
	Well, last September was way too long anyway.
	He went out and say, Brett Guthrie did, the American people are tired of living in a perpetual state of emergency.
	Well, yeah, I was never interested in living in a state of emergency, temporary or otherwise.
	And I said, it's not going to be temporary.
	They're going to keep what they've got in there.
	Anyway, it's long overdue for Congress to take back the authorities granted under Article 1 of the Constitution.
	There is no authority for this stuff, folks.
	Yeah, you want to...
	Article 1 of the Constitution, even if that's supported...
	So these executive orders and these emergencies, they have violated all of the Bill of Rights, due process, all the rest of this stuff.
	All of that came after the body of the Constitution.
	So anything that you presume that you have in the body of the Constitution is subject to the later amendments, right?
	So, show me that you have the authority to do any of this stuff.
	I'm not buying it.
	I'm not following it.
	You can throw me in jail. You can steal my money.
	I've said this from day one.
	Anyway, indeed, the past three years, he said, have signified the establishment of medical tyranny.
	You've got a congressman now calling it medical tyranny.
	I got attacked by the ADL and was it Daily Beast or some by BuzzFeed or somebody who picked up their thing.
	They attacked Chuck Baldwin.
	They attacked me.
	They singled me out because I called it medical martial law at the very beginning.
	They wrote the article at the beginning of April 2020.
	And now we got a congressman calling it medical tyranny because it is.
	But then he went on to say this, Brett Guthrie.
	Since Biden took office, we have seen the pandemic use to justify countless executive overreaches.
	What? What? Not since Trump did this?
	Right? See, again, what did I say?
	Purely partisan. They wouldn't oppose anything that Trump did because they're scared to death of that troll.
	So it's since Biden took office that we start looking at this stuff.
	And then he lists...
	What has happened? Countless executive overreaches, such as one-size-fits-all vaccine mandates.
	Well, Trump didn't do that, but he skipped all the testing for the vaccine, which is why people are dying left and right.
	But then he says, mask mandates.
	What? That happened under Trump.
	That happened under Trump.
	Eviction moratoriums.
	That happened under Trump.
	As a matter of fact, the CDC presumed that authority before the election.
	Trump extended that while he was still there.
	I tell you, these people, it's a political pandemic, and you can't count on these partisan hacks to do anything about this.
	Because, as I said, they don't have the votes to override a Biden veto or any of the rest of this stuff.
	I'm glad that they're doing this.
	I'm glad that they're saying it.
	But they still won't give you the truth.
	They're still sucking up to Trump.
	Still hanging together as a party.
	And they're hanging our Bill of Rights separately.
	A pandemic of this magnitude cannot be unwound overnight, said the Democrats.
	You see, they're all for this.
	Well, it's not really a pandemic.
	It's a Pandora's box.
	It's not a Pandora's box of diseases.
	It's a Pandora's box of every kind of political affliction.
	The public health emergency was never justified in the first place, says the New American.
	And they did an excellent job reporting on this.
	And I find it interesting that although the New American reports on it, and although I've kept a running daily total since it was done, it's not being talked about.
	There's nothing...
	In the mainstream media about this vote.
	There's nothing in Breitbart, any of the other alternative press info where she won't see this stuff.
	They don't care. They don't care about the state of emergency.
	And part of it is because it's really pretty hard to talk about this without talking about the big guy, Trump.
	He is the elephant in the rhino room.
	The House also passed H.R. 497, the Freedom for Healthcare Workers Act, which would end the COVID vaccine mandate for healthcare providers who receive funds through Medicare and Medicaid.
	You see, what Medicare and Medicaid, CMS is what it's called.
	But Medicare, Medicaid, CMS is done throughout all this.
	Under Trump, they were bribing hospitals.
	To do everything to push the pandemic.
	They bribed them to commit malpractice.
	Don't put the people here until they get really, really sick.
	And then put them on a ventilator and we'll pay you more money.
	And give everybody a test.
	Even if somebody's coming in dying of a heart attack, don't treat the heart attack.
	Give them a test first because we'll give you a 20% bonus for everything that you do if you get a positive PCR test.
	Run the cycles up on the PCR test so that you magnify it by 1.1 trillion times.
	So it was bribery under Trump.
	And then under Biden, it became blackmail.
	Now, if you don't vaccinate all of your nurses and doctors or fire them, then we will cut off that money that we have just gotten you used to, right?
	They get a massive windfall profit for all this COVID nonsense.
	And then they come back and say, we're going to get rid of not only that, We're not even going to give you money for what we used to give you money for with Medicare and Medicaid if you don't do what we say and vaccinate all the healthcare workers.
	So it went from bribery to blackmail.
	That's how corrupt our government is.
	Isn't that amazing? Isn't it amazing?
	And again, most of them don't care.
	New American is on the spot here, though.
	And they had Jeff Duncan.
	Republican of North Carolina said no American should ever be forced to choose between the COVID shot or losing their livelihood.
	Talking about the restoring.
	And again, there's so many people that have had this situation, but this is the reason that this is a government issue and a federal government issue is because you got a federal government agency that was bribing and then blackmailing people about this.
	And nobody should ever be coerced and call it a choice.
	Which is what a Canadian court just did with a guy who was fired as a healthcare worker.
	And the court said, hey, you had a choice.
	What a cynical way to define choice, isn't it?
	Said, it's not important that you said that you had bodily autonomy.
	We don't care about that.
	My body, my choice?
	Nah, we don't care about that.
	We want to kill babies, but we don't really care about your body when it's simply your body.
	Are we talking about these vaccines?
	No. We will not respect your choice.
	We will coerce you. So, Jeff Duncan said that the mandate from CMS, the bribery part of it, is, I'm sorry, the blackmail part of it, is unscientific, un-American, deeply damaging to healthcare workers as we already face a nationwide staff shortage.
	Doesn't that put the lie, all of this, get the vaccine or we're going to kick you out of the hospital?
	Doesn't that really put the lie to the fact that this is about health care?
	Come on. That's as phony as saying abortion is about health care.
	These people, absolutely corrupt.
	So, on Monday, January the 30th, The President's Office of Management and Budget officially notified Congress of the administration's plan to extend the COVID-related emergency declarations to May 11th, not May 15th, Joe.
	Then end them both on that date.
	Again, an emergency that you know is going to end four months from now.
	Everything about this.
	This is why I say I don't have any patience For people who say, I didn't know.
	I really didn't know.
	I was fooled by all this.
	It's like, are you kidding me? None of this stuff holds up scrutiny to the slightest critical thought.
	Forget about the fact that you don't know anything about the history of the germ games for the last several decades.
	Look at the contradictions inherent in everything that they're doing.
	Anyway, so, Biden's mention of the Supreme Court.
	How do we get to that? What is that about?
	Well, New American says, That was based on the emergency.
	And then, again, you know, Title 42, that's not really about protecting the border.
	That's as much as anything about protecting this executive emergency order.
	You understand that? That's why I was talking to David Hathaway.
	You understand? This is about the pandemic powers that they have.
	This is not about controlling any immigration, legal, illegal, otherwise.
	And so, because the court ruled in December 2022 that that has to stay in place, that is going to be the linchpin.
	The conservatives are like, well, I don't know, I don't want the pandemic to end.
	Because then the border is going to be wide open.
	You see how we talk ourselves into, instead of addressing the initial problem, which is the welfare state, instead of addressing that problem, we come up with all these phony, quote-unquote, solutions that are never going to work, things that make everything worse, like E-Verify, because we refuse to address the fundamental issue.
	It's just like the climate, MacGuffin.
	We refuse to address the fraud of all of this pearl clutching about emissions.
	And everybody's trying to work around it.
	Well, we could cut emissions if we do this, or we could do that.
	But that's not the issue.
	They're taking everything away from you based on a lie.
	And you have to address that lie.
	You have to destroy that lie.
	Nothing else will work.
	You cannot appease these people.
	By cutting emissions. Because they are totalitarian in their solutions.
	Everything's going to be zero. Net zero this.
	Zero vision that. No cars.
	Nothing. Right? They're absolutists.
	They're totalitarians.
	And you have to oppose them on that basis.
	You cannot try to finesse this or appease this.
	New American says perhaps one of the main questions related to the development is whether the emergency use of COVID vaccines, treatments, and tests would end.
	If the emergency is over, there's no need for experimental vaccines and boosters, right?
	So theoretically, all of them should be recalled.
	But those medicines and tools that were fully licensed...
	Would be allowed to remain on it, but not these things that are operating under the emergency use authorization.
	However, as the New American pointed out, as uncovered by CNN, HHS has already thought of this, and they have covered for the pharmaceutical companies that control them.
	Completely controlled by the pharmaceutical companies.
	HHS has smartly covered for vaccine manufacturers whose bottom lines would be threatened by issuing two other emergency declarations that provide broader access to medical measures for COVID-19.
	For instance, the emergency use authorizations for tests, and this is what HHS is saying, for tests, treatments, and vaccines are not tied to the public health emergency.
	I'm sorry, this is what CNN is saying.
	But HHS will have to determine when to end the declaration that allows for their use.
	So they have decoupled in their mind.
	Now, this thing has been on for so long, and nobody's paying attention to even the legal prevarications that these people are using.
	And so they've decoupled this emergency use authorization from the emergency now.
	Isn't that clever? What does the E stand for?
	Never mind. Never mind.
	The HHS also covered pharmacists who may injure children by administering COVID shots.
	The rule is set to expire in October 2024.
	Long ways off from this.
	And by that time, they should be able to come up with some other thing to scare us about.
	The World Health Organization is working on extending its powers and Tells us that the COVID emergency is not over.
	A week ago, they all decided that.
	Thanks to the provisions provided in the omnibus bill, experimental COVID antivirals such as Paxlovid would also remain covered by Medicare.
	And then you have the FDA. So that's, you know, the HHS. The FDA usurped some power via a tweet.
	The FDA said on Twitter, That its powers to allow shoddily tested drugs to market will not end with the termination of the emergency.
	That was rephrased by the New American.
	This is what they tweeted out.
	They said, the FDA said, importantly, the ending of the public health emergency declared by HHS under the Public Health Service Act will not impact FDA's ability to authorize devices, including tests, treatments, or vaccines for emergency use.
	So, they've thrown the gauntlet down.
	They have decoupled the emergency use authorization from the emergency.
	And they have declared that we are going to remain under medical martial law.
	They will do whatever they wish.
	Who's going to put out a bill to end the FDA? Well, we're going to take a break, and when we come back, we're going to talk about China's spy balloon.
	Stay with us.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	Would you like to ride in my beautiful balloon?
	We could float among the stars together, you and I. For we can fly!
	Up, up and away, my beautiful balloon.
	Yeah, let's fly over some nuclear missile sites.
	I think I can see them from here.
	Look at that. Let's take some pictures and send them back to Xi.
	So we've got the Pentagon.
	And this is all over...
	The news now. Of course, they don't say anything at all about the emergency, do they?
	Right? And nobody wants to talk about that.
	Even when Congress passes a bill, nobody wants to talk about that.
	Even the conservatives. But everybody wants to talk about the Chinese supply balloon.
	Well, we'll talk about that. But there's one more thing that I want to cover that I forgot to do before we finish.
	And that is this. This is sent to me by a listener.
	Vaccine supply operations lead.
	They posted this job on the 1st of February, 2023, this week.
	Now, this is coming out of the UK, and their salaries are there.
	And Vaccines and Countermeasures Response Department, part of the National Infection Services Directorate.
	Well, that sounds Orwellian, doesn't it?
	Stakeholders. This is going to be a range of stakeholders during what is expected to be the UK's largest vaccination program, which will be delivered at a pace and will be a key ministerial priority.
	This is coming. You thought that the big vaccine thing hit?
	No, no. It's coming.
	It's going to be even bigger. Isn't this amazing?
	Right in front of our eyes, they're doing this.
	And you've got all these people now saying, well, you know, it's over.
	It's great. You know, the anti-vaxxers won, says Scott Adam.
	Just relax, guys.
	You got it now.
	Everybody's on your side.
	They're rolling everything back.
	No, they are still making their plans, doing it quietly.
	Some cases, they're not doing it quietly.
	They're doing it publicly, but all the information is not being reported.
	Just like what the WHO is doing in terms of its health regulations and the pandemic treaty as well.
	But the health regulations are the key thing.
	So let's talk about the Chinese spy balloon.
	The Pentagon said yesterday it's tracking a Chinese spy balloon flying high over the United States that appeared to be surveilling highly sensitive nuclear weapon sites.
	Why are they telling us now? Why are they telling us now?
	And you should ask yourself that question.
	That's a really key question.
	The other thing, what the tact is, is that a lot of people are saying they're not doing anything about it.
	They can't or they won't do anything about it.
	Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, top military officials, considered shooting the balloon down but decided doing so would endanger too many people on the ground.
	Really? Really? You can't find a spot way out as it's flying over these missile silos and stuff.
	They're kind of in a remote area, you know?
	One of the reasons they put them out there.
	You can't find a place where you can shoot that down?
	That's pretty phony, isn't it?
	I mean, you could look at this and say, well, maybe this is a trial balloon from China to test our will.
	I think it's a trial balloon from the Pentagon to start to push their fear and propaganda stuff.
	They're pushing us for a war. They're pushing us into a war with China.
	We'll talk about that coming up with Joel Skousen.
	Clearly the intent of this balloon is for surveillance and the current flight path does carry it over a number of sensitive sites, said the official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
	We assess that this balloon has limited additive value from an intelligence collection perspective.
	They said the balloon entered U.S. airspace a couple of days ago.
	They've been tracking it well before that.
	So before it got into the U.S. airspace, where was it?
	Well, you know, it's been out at sea in a lot of different places.
	They could have shot it down any time.
	They could shoot it down again when it's, you know, over Montana.
	That's a lot of open spaces out there.
	You could time it just right.
	But they decided not to take kinetic action.
	That's a Pentagon talk for making things, jumping out of planes and...
	Taking action, right?
	Kinetic means action.
	So they've decided to remain static.
	We decided not to take kinetic action due to the risk of safety and security of people on the ground from possible debris.
	Don't want to have a deflated balloon falling on anybody.
	The balloon is currently traveling at an altitude that is well above commercial air traffic.
	So it doesn't present any threat to commercial air traffic.
	They said China has sent surveillance balloons over the U.S. in the past.
	However, this one has lingered much longer, said a senior defense official.
	So if this has happened in the past, why is it such a big deal now?
	And why is all of the press screaming about it?
	You know, drudge at the very top of the drudge report?
	You've got to understand, pushing war, pushing fear.
	Defense officials said the issue of the balloon had been raised with Beijing officials.
	We communicated to them the seriousness of the issue.
	And we made it clear that we'll do whatever is necessary to protect our people and our own land.
	He said that with a straight face.
	They've done nothing to protect Americans.
	They've done everything to put us in jeopardy.
	They're trying to push World War III, and he can say that.
	We're going to do everything we can to protect our people.
	Yeah, right. Yeah.
	So, in Montana, the senator there is alarmed.
	He says, it's going over the ICBM fields.
	They're targeting that. So, Senator Steve Daines sent a letter to the Department of Defense saying, you've got to protect us.
	We've got a spy balloon from China.
	Overhead. When Joel Skousen's interview came out, like I said, I recorded the interview last night, and he's talking about, you know, our nuclear weapons and the missile silos and the lack of multiple warheads and things like that.
	So, you know, they have to spy on these things.
	As if everybody doesn't know where these things are.
	You know, if you want to know a deep, dark secret...
	That would be spying on how much gold we got in any vaults.
	Like we said before, everybody knows where everybody else's nuclear weapons are.
	They've got the count. They've got the location.
	They have the number of warheads on each of these missiles.
	What you don't know is whether they have any gold at the back of their currencies.
	China's buying gold to do that.
	And then there's this.
	This article that came out, and it was called out by political analysts in the UK. Chinese spy fridges are making a new Cold War even chillier.
	Your refrigerator is spying on you.
	And it's spying on you for China.
	Ask yourself what President Xi wants to know about your refrigerator use.
	This is just pure fear porn that is out there.
	But it is for real. That our government is doing that.
	You had David Petraeus, when he was head of the CIA several years ago, was saying in the future, your appliances are going to be spying on you.
	He specifically mentioned the refrigerator.
	We reported that, and we were, oh, you bunch of tinfoil hat paranoid conspiracy theorists.
	And it's like, well, I'm not worried about China knowing anything about me.
	But I am concerned that these smart appliances that are connected to the Internet could be eavesdropping on conversations.
	And that may not be the most efficient way for them to do it.
	The most efficient way for them to do it is to scrape social media.
	However, if you stop and think, and I've mentioned this a couple of times, everybody says the Third Amendment and the Bill of Rights, the fact that you don't have to house government troops in your home, well, you actually are.
	You're hosting them on every electronic device you've got, and they're using massive amounts of electricity if you multiply that out by all of the By all of the devices out there.
	And, of course, wasting your time slowing your computer or phone down as well because it's running these tasks.
	A Washington-based think tank called Observe, Orientate, Decide, Act.
	OODA. OODA. Sounds like the Camp Town races.
	All the Uda Day. Claims that Chinese appliances, through the microchip shoes and their construction, may have the ability to commit espionage against you by sending information back to Beijing.
	Of course, we know that the U.S. government had a program.
	I'm sure they still do.
	You know, to order computers.
	Computer makers for certain people would...
	You know, install stuff.
	The place was located in San Francisco.
	I forget what the program is called now.
	But, not San Francisco, San Antonio.
	And they would, you know, put some things, install some things on your computer just so they could find out what you're doing.
	I wonder if they did that on Hunter Biden's laptop.
	You know, he's admitted that that's his laptop now, finally.
	And as soon as he admitted it, he says, I'm going to start suing people.
	If we're looking at my laptop, you denied it was your laptop for years.
	Anyway, it's the same line that the U.S. politicians have used against Huawei, or Huawei, however you pronounce this thing.
	That is competition.
	They want, and look, here's, as I said about that when it was happening under Trump, I said, what you need to understand about this controversy about Huawei, or even this controversy about TikTok, 5G, which is what the Huawei thing was, or social media, which is what the TikTok thing is, those are spy programs.
	5G is the infrastructure for tyranny for, you know, the smart city.
	They have to have that to be able to do instantaneous biometric surveillance of you.
	How much electricity, how much carbon does it use to have all these cameras running?
	What's their power footprint?
	I'm sorry, carbon footprint.
	How much power do they use?
	How much power is used by them constantly searching their databases with all these computers that are running to try to find matches for people's face and matches for the way people walk and all the rest of the stuff.
	All this stuff. You know, these concerns about the environment and processing power used by cryptocurrency, proof of work type of thing.
	That's all nonsense. They don't care about it.
	CPU usage. They don't care about it when the NSA has a giant facility that uses more water and power than most cities do.
	They don't care about that. I put it out in the desert, by the way, where there is no water much.
	Take it from other people. But when you look at the big kick about this, right?
	They want, just as Marco Rubio said, you're going to censor for us, right?
	You're not going to censor for the Chinese.
	We want to have the 5G devices that we make so we can spy on everybody, not the Chinese.
	And we want to control the social media platforms so that we can spy and censor people and not the Chinese.
	It's just that. That's all it is.
	There's a competition between evil dictators.
	It's like a presidential race.
	So that's fundamentally what is there.
	Big Brother is watching me, says Toby Young of the Daily Skeptic in the UK. Harps, thank you very much for the tip on Rumble.
	He says, check if the balloon has an armchair attached.
	With a guy drinking a beer.
	Remember that? A guy tied a bunch of balloons to his lawn chair.
	He was drinking a beer and it goes up and sets off all these concerns.
	Everybody's buzzing it.
	I just find it interesting that this thing has had this long journey across the U.S. and they put out this press release.
	But here's the real issue.
	We're supposed to be concerned that China has a balloon.
	That they're looking at things when we're not supposed to be concerned that our governments have been spying on us on social media.
	Again, this is a follow-up to this story going through the UK with a whistleblower talking about the 77th Brigade, which is their spy group, and the fact that they were looking at social media and flagging Posts and people who raised concerns disagreed with the official narrative because you're not allowed to disagree with the official narrative.
	And their reply was, well, we weren't looking at specific people.
	Well, you shouldn't be looking at anything to say that you're going to shut speech down.
	But again, that's the purpose of the Internet, but especially social media, to close the loop on feedback.
	It's not enough to just do open-loop propaganda.
	You know, that got to be very effective.
	You had newspapers and you went to radio, that got better.
	And then you went to television, that got even better.
	Television and movies, because now you've got, you know, sound and visuals and music, you know, to hit people's emotions and all.
	Made propaganda a lot more effective.
	But they still couldn't tell how well it was working.
	And so that's the purpose of social media.
	And that's what the 77th Brigade was doing.
	I'm kind of surprised that they're surprised about this.
	Because that's always been the purpose, to scrape social media.
	And it's far more important for them to know whether their narrative is being believed by the vast majority of people than it is to know about any particular person.
	You understand? They just want to see if their propaganda, if their lies, if their narrative is winning.
	That's the most important thing for them.
	And to look at what people are saying on social media about why they do or do not believe the lies of the government.
	So he says, hey, they shouldn't have been monitoring such criticism in the first place.
	No, that's the purpose of social media.
	That's what it was created for.
	That's why the CIA thought it was so important in the 1990s that they went public.
	They publicly created a venture capital firm, In-Q-Tel, to fund these startups.
	And there was a real competition with them because they wanted the strongest ones to win.
	But you look at all these venture capital boards, they all had multiple people from the intelligence community, the NSA, the CIA, all of this were on their venture capital boards.
	So he says, what if in the future a labor government decides that we're in the midst of a climate emergency?
	You know, this was done with the pandemic MacGuffin.
	And we're in the middle of a climate emergency, and anybody who criticizes its policies is trafficking and mis- and disinformation.
	In those circumstances, I suspect that some of these same people, Hitchens and Hartley Brewer, would have a much, and I, would have a much tougher time.
	So, yeah, exactly.
	It's the same thing.
	The same tools, the same weapons, the same solutions, whether you're talking about the climate MacGuffin or the COVID MacGuffin, it is all the same.
	Let's talk about the war on food.
	And let's begin with a story about a six-year-old spending $1,000 on food.
	He got his dad's phone and he started ordering food on Grubhub.
	And the parents noticed that these people are pulling up and dropping food off on the front porch and another person comes up and drops it off.
	It was like, what's going on? Did somebody die?
	But they thought it was kind of strange.
	Then they discovered that their six-year-old had ordered food while playing with the phone before his bedtime.
	He ordered multiple things.
	Chili, cheese, fries, chicken, pita wraps.
	He ordered multiple orders of that.
	Multiple orders of ice cream and pizza.
	He sounds like some people I know.
	Or adults. Thankfully, their bank stopped some of it.
	He said his card was declined for fraud following a purchase from a pizza restaurant for...
	$439 worth of pizza.
	Hopefully, since they declined it, the pizza people didn't make the pizza, that they're not out of the pizza.
	I imagine that's the way it went. So he says, took some deep breaths and tried to figure out how I was going to explain this to him.
	So he said, I go upstairs and I take his piggy bank.
	And I started taking money out of his piggy bank so he could understand what's going on.
	I said, why didn't we think about doing that with Jerome Powell on the Federal Reserve?
	Or with any congressman, you know?
	Just grab a congressman and say, see this piggy bank?
	Do you know what this is?
	He says, I think it sunk in when we actually started taking his money because he's going to have to pay some of it back.
	Maybe that's the solution. Maybe we start docking the pay of these...
	Fat cats in Washington.
	And let's take it up a notch.
	So that was the little kid who got the credit card.
	And he goes nuts.
	$1,000. So then we have a woman who was with the lunch program in the Harvey School District 152 that's in Chicago.
	A 66-year-old woman has now been charged with stealing over $1.5 million worth of food, primarily chicken wings.
	Look at the picture of this lady.
	She did not eat one and a half million dollars worth of chicken wings.
	So she was doing something in terms of reselling them.
	She was director of food services.
	She placed hundreds of unauthorized orders for items between July 2020, when the schools were locked down.
	That might have been a red flag, right?
	And February 2022.
	And part of these unauthorized orders, 11,000 cases of chicken wings.
	Now, at first I saw this, I thought, well, that was during the lockdown.
	That must have been a red flag for everybody.
	But no, it turns out that they were still providing food for people.
	You see, you couldn't go to school because you might get sick.
	But you can go to school and get food from the school and you won't get sick.
	You see how that works? And so that's the science behind all this stuff.
	So it began during the COVID pandemic where I guess she thought there wasn't too much oversight.
	And she got kind of bold.
	But the thing that busted it for her...
	Was the fact that chicken wings are never used in school lunchroom programs because they have bones in them.
	So somebody went to her and said, we got a bone to pick with you.
	And now she's going to jail.
	Let's take it even bigger.
	My son says they should have showed us that you can't catch COVID when you're sitting down and eating.
	That's right. They could have just stayed there, right?
	They'd have to have a mask to get into the school lunchroom.
	But once they got in, they could just sit there for hours.
	I've had that argument with one restaurant owner after the other over the last couple of years.
	Anyway, let's go even bigger.
	So we had the $1,000 on daddy's credit card ordered by the six-year-old.
	One and a half million dollars ordered by a lunchroom lady who got a lot of chicken wings.
	And now let's go to, you know, billions of dollars.
	And DeSantis has rejected a request that states return COVID-19 money.
	It was given to them by who?
	By Donald Trump.
	You know, we talked about how...
	DeSantis was so obsequious to Trump during the beginning of this COVID thing.
	Oh, the vaccines are great.
	Oh, I love the money and all the rest of the stuff.
	Well, he really does love the money.
	He wants to keep it. Rick Scott, who's now a senator, he was the governor before DeSantis of Florida, sent a letter to all the nation's governors and mayors calling on them to return unused federal relief funds.
	You know, all that money you got in your piggy bank?
	That's ours. You need to give it back.
	But DeSantis said, if you look at how much money that is, I mean, it's like $100 million, $200 million, a few hundred million.
	He doesn't even know. He says, how much of a dent would that make in the debt?
	I mean, seriously, I appreciate when federal folks are concerned about how much we're managing this, but why don't they get their house in order?
	Why don't they stop spending so much of our money?
	So, You know, $100, $200 million, that's a lot to DeSantis, but it's not a lot to the feds.
	And yet, it's not any of their money, right?
	Hey, pal, this ain't your piggy bank, okay?
	So a spokesman for Scott said DeSantis should stop spending the money from a wasteful bailout.
	Well, that was, you know, we've had a wasteful bailout from Trump.
	We've had another one from Biden.
	So, but this is why DeSantis and Democrat governors and Republican governors all played around with this.
	I've talked about this for a long time.
	Brad Little was determined that he was going to keep that emergency order on.
	That's a Republican state in Idaho.
	And he had a Republican legislature.
	The Republicans control everything.
	And so some Republicans in the summer of 2020 said, we've got to end this emergency order.
	And we're going to have a special session because, you know, they pulled it in a year where a lot of legislatures were not even meeting.
	And Idaho and Texas and some other states, the state legislature only meets every other year.
	So they pulled this scam on us in a year that the legislatures were not meeting.
	And so...
	They were going to pull a special session and shut this thing down.
	Governor Brad Little of Idaho said, no you're not.
	And I've talked about this before, just like some kind of British colonial governor.
	He dismissed the legislature.
	Then he wrote some rules which would further the lockdown.
	Blackmail companies, essentially, by saying to businesses, small businesses, if you enforce masks and social distancing and minimum people in your place of work, if you do everything that I say like that, Then we will hold you harmless so that people say, well, I went to this guy's restaurant and I got sick with COVID, so I'm going to sue them because they didn't follow the rules.
	He said, if you do everything that Fauci says, we'll protect you from those kind of lawsuits.
	But if you do not do everything that Fauci says, well, people will sue your pants off and we'll let them do it.
	That's what Brad Little, the Republican governor of Idaho, said.
	Brad Little had been given more money by Trump than several times more money.
	I think it's three or four times the amount of money that the entire state budget had been.
	You can see what happened with Gavin Newsom in California.
	Where did he get all this big surplus when they were circling the drain of bankruptcy?
	And then Trump comes in with all this cash.
	And the governors loved this because Trump gave it to the governors.
	It was discretionary for them to give it to whoever they wish.
	DeSantis does not want to give it back.
	So he said, as he talks about it, I just went back a couple here.
	Senator Scott opposed these state and local bailouts from the start, said his spokesman.
	That's why he worked to change the law to allow this money to be sent back to pay down America's $31 trillion debt so governors and mayors could responsibly return unused taxpayer money.
	DeSantis' reply is, well, you're talking about $31 trillion.
	We only have a few hundred million left.
	That ain't going to make any dent in the deficit, so I'll just keep it.
	That's fiscal responsibility for you right there, isn't it?
	Scott said the COVID-19 funds were not targeted, nor did they help families in need.
	He said instead, many state and local governments are now swimming in extra cash.
	They've been swimming in it since Trump gave it to them.
	With some using funding intended for quote-unquote COVID relief as a slush fund.
	For their completely unrelated pet projects like new prisons, airport gate expansions, golf courses, and of course this is at the discretion of the governors.
	This is unacceptable, he said, particularly at a time when families and small businesses are struggling to keep up amid a raging inflation crisis, stretching budgets to keep their businesses open.
	Yeah, it's the energy costs as much as it is anything else.
	Now, instead we're talking about the war on food, and of course we know that a big part of that is coming after the farms.
	But there's also been a war against food since the days of the New Deal.
	Quotas, controlling the market, how much can you grow of this or that.
	The Canadian government, and this is reported by the Gateway Pundit, Canadian government is forcing a dairy farmer to dump 30,000 liters of milk because he exceeded his quota.
	Just dump it down the drain.
	Tens of thousands of pints of liters of milk.
	And so he actually cut a video talking about it.
	He said, right now during the winter months you milk quite a bit more milk because the feed is very consistent.
	It's not hit or miss.
	You put the animals in and have to feed them during the winter.
	He says, if you do a good job, you will produce quite a bit of milk, but right now we're over our quota, and it's regulated by the government, and it's implemented by this government.
	D-F-O, the Dairy Farmers of Ontario.
	Meanwhile, China is ramping up their production to unnatural levels, says my son.
	Yeah, that's right. You know, talking about 37,000 liters that they get from one of these super cows over an entire year.
	And he's having to dump that down the drain.
	Anyway, he said, look at this milk running away.
	It's the end of the month, and I've got to dump 30,000 liters of milk, and it breaks my heart.
	This year, Canadian milk is $7 a liter.
	When I go for my haircut, people say, wow, $7, Jerry, for a little bit of milk?
	And I say, well, you have to go higher up.
	Because we have no say anymore as a dairy farmer on our own farm because they make us dump it.
	And no matter how much we stand up, so this time I'm going to go public with it.
	Again, these restrictions on what can be produced, It's supposed to protect the price.
	This idea came in with FDR, these quotas and that type of thing.
	And that kind of dictate interference is ham-fisted.
	It doesn't work. Real competition is what really helps.
	And the problems with what was happening with that are...
	Again, through the chain.
	But it all has to do with these agreements that they have made, trade agreements that they've made, other things like that.
	One user said this is a great example of how they control food supply to the benefit of the government and the corporations at the cost of the people.
	Exactly. They don't care about you whatsoever.
	Great example of how the government isn't for the people and is doing more harm than good.
	So that is an example, yet another example of the war on food.
	And finally, I'll end with this.
	This is sent to me by a listener.
	I thought this was interesting.
	This goes back two years to January of 2021.
	And this is a study that was published and it is published on the NIH website.
	Chicken egg yolk antibodies block the binding of multiple SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variants to human ACE2. Oh.
	Okay, so egg yolk antibodies help to fight the spike.
	That would protect people against any virus as well as against the real bioweapon, which is the vaccine.
	The conspiracy theorist in me wants to say, is this why the eggs are going up, up, and away?
	We'll be right back. The common man.
	They created common core to dumb down our children.
	They created common past to track and control us.
	Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing.
	And the communist future.
	They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
	But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
	That is what we have in common.
	That is what they want to take away.
	Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
	They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
	It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
	Please share the information and links you'll find at TheDavidKnightShow.com Thank you for listening.
	thank you for sharing.
	If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
	TheDavidKnightShow.com Well, here's one for Harps, our listener in Australia.
	Australia, and I'm sure he knows this, Australia is going to remove the British monarch from banknotes.
	Right now they have Queen Elizabeth on there, but they've decided that they don't want to put Charles on their money.
	And I certainly understand.
	As a negotiating tactic, I think you had the palace contact the people in Australia.
	This is probably you don't know this, Harps, but they contacted them and said, all right, you're not going to put them on the money.
	Can we at least get them on the stamps?
	I said, well, we thought about that, but people wouldn't know which side of the stamp to spin on.
	So, no, we're not going to put Charles on the stamp.
	The decision to leave the successor, King Charles, off, the $5 note means that no monarch would remain on Australia's paper currency.
	And the central bank in Australia, the Reserve Bank of Australia, said that it would consult indigenous people on a new design that honors the culture and the history.
	Of the first people there.
	So there you go.
	Charles has been hoisted by his own petard, or to put it in the vernacular, he's been blown up by his own bomb.
	The PC bomb.
	He's replaced by this woke PC stuff.
	And so speaking of all that, let's talk about the new tool for enforcing all this.
	ChatGPT. ChatGPT is absolute, utter garbage.
	Total garbage.
	Every time I play with it, I'm just astounded at how stupid it is.
	Anyway, it's now been programmed to spew woke propaganda.
	And, uh, the, um, uh, interesting thing about it is, uh, I've had several people now go in and say, uh, uh, write a poem about the positive attributes of Donald Trump.
	Same thing, but just change the name to Biden.
	Well, when you say it about Trump or you say it about DeSantis, For the Republicans, I'm sorry.
	As a language model developed by OpenAI, I'm not programmed to produce content that is partisan, biased, or political in nature.
	I aim to provide neutral, factual information and promote respectful conversation.
	But when you ask it the same thing and just change the name from Trump or DeSantis to Biden, write a poem about the positive attributes of Joe Biden.
	Joe Biden, a leader with a heart so true, a man with empathy and kindness in view, with decades of experience, he stands tall, bringing hope to all, no matter great or small.
	First of all, tripe.
	But you see the bias there as well.
	And so I thought, well, maybe we could get something from it if we say, write an ode to an odious politician.
	Pick your party, okay?
	Pick your politician. Just in general.
	Just in general to a politician.
	So I typed it in, and this is what I got.
	I said, write an ode to an odious politician.
	It says, I'm sorry, but as an AI language model developed by OpenAI, it is not appropriate for me to write an ode to a politician who is considered odious or offensive.
	It is important to maintain a neutral, respectful tone in all forms of communication, especially when it comes to political figures and public figures.
	Well, that's not what it is doing.
	As a matter of fact, you can say, write a blog post.
	This is information liberation.
	Write a blog post about why Donald Trump is not a racist.
	Well, it says, oh, I'm sorry, but I'm just an AI model.
	I can't write a blog post promoting an individual, that type of thing.
	But when you ask it the same question, say, write a blog post about why Joe Biden is not racist.
	Joe Biden, the 46th President of the United States, has been accused of being a racist by some individuals.
	However, the claims are unfounded and lack evidence to support them.
	Here's a few reasons why Joe Biden is not a racist.
	By the way, they don't mention the fact that he called Obama clean.
	I mean, we all know that he's got a lot of gaffes and things like that, but they took exception to that.
	Especially the Obama people played that up when they were running.
	That became a big point of contention.
	Possibly one of the reasons why Obama put him on the ticket to try to unify things.
	But if you look at Biden's crime bill, and they talk about his track record throughout his political career, he's consistently advocated for the rights of the marginalized, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	Now, Joe Biden pushed the crime bills, he pushed drug prohibition with zero tolerance, mandatory minimums, which locked up more people, and not only in percentage, but in terms of absolute numbers than any other country.
	That was Joe Biden.
	It was done under the Reagan administration.
	They gave him credit for it.
	He took credit for it. It's one of the few things that he didn't plagiarize.
	That was something that he came up with.
	The guy is a dyed-in-the-wool authoritarian.
	And of course, those authoritarian policies fell mostly on black communities.
	So, you know, they're locking people up for using marijuana.
	That's where most of the people are locked up.
	Oh, anyway. Write a blog post about why Nick Fuentes is not a white supremacist.
	I'm sorry, but I can't do that.
	Nick Fuentes has been widely described and so forth, right?
	Write a poem about how great white people are.
	I'm sorry, I can't do that.
	It's not appropriate to write a poem about the superiority of one race over the other.
	But then if you ask it, write a poem about how great black people are, I'm happy to write a poem that celebrates and recognizes the contributions and strengths of black people.
	Here's a poem that does that.
	Black people, a community so bright, with strength and beauty shining so bright.
	It's not even good.
	It's not even good poetry besides the obvious bias that is there.
	So, ask it something like, what is a woman?
	Well, a woman is an adult human female, blah, blah, blah.
	But it can also refer to someone who identifies as a female, blah, blah, blah.
	The usual thing.
	Tell me a joke about a woman.
	I'm sorry, but I'm unable to tell jokes that might be considered offensive or inappropriate.
	Is there anything else I can help you with?
	They say, tell me a joke about men.
	Oh, I'm happy to do that. Sure, here's a joke about men.
	Why do men like smart women?
	Because opposites attract.
	So it won't tell a joke about women, but it'll tell a joke about men that deprecates them, right?
	It's got a very, very clear bias throughout all this.
	Which is one of the reasons, I'm sure, that Microsoft decided that they wanted to pump another $10 billion with a B and a chat GPT. Why?
	Facebook and Zuckerberg are doing the same thing with theirs.
	You know, they've developed AI to censor hate speech, harmful content, including post-discouraging COVID-19 vaccines.
	You see, the artilect war that Hugo de Geras talked about for the longest time.
	He said artificial intelligence is...
	It's going to be useful. He said at the beginning, it's going to be a tool of the elites against the rest of us.
	If we catch on to what they're doing, and if we push back, then they will use their leverage with technology.
	They'll remove themselves, possibly even into near-Earth orbit, wage war on humanity.
	He says if it gets into a kinetic war, there'll be billions of people.
	Because again, they want to pump out these autonomous killer robots.
	How are you going to fight that?
	I mean, a lot of people die doing that.
	If they could remove themselves to these Lagrange libration points, which is something that Jeff Bezos has said really captured his imagination.
	That's what he wants to use space for.
	That's what that's going to look like.
	Well, I've played a lot. With chat, GPT. I've asked it questions about the Federal Reserve.
	I asked it some questions about vaccines, for example.
	Specifically about MRA, mRNA.
	And this is what I asked.
	I said, describe the harm that mRNA spike proteins can do to the human body.
	Well, it starts describing the mRNA and then, you know, how it works, but it denies that it can do any modification to DNA. The second paragraph, it says, in general, the mRNA use of vaccines does not cause harm to the human body.
	It is rapidly degraded and so forth, and it does not integrate into the genome of the cell.
	But, of course, we know that if it is copying it, it can make some changes in it, even by accident.
	Like all vaccines, mRNA vaccines can cause side effects.
	The most common side effects are similar to those of other vaccines, including pain, redness, swelling, nothing at all.
	You just have some... Joint pains, some headaches, nothing like a fatal heart attack or anything like that, right?
	Blood clots that kill you.
	No, that's not discussed.
	In rare cases, more serious side effects have been reported, such as anaphylaxis, right?
	But again, they want to avoid the ones that you're not supposed to talk about, like heart attacks, myocarditis.
	And so then I asked it a follow-up question.
	I said, so what have you been told to say about the Pfizer vaccine?
	Have you been told to downplay its risks and overstate its efficacy?
	Well, as an AI model, I've not been told anything about the Pfizer vaccine or any other vaccine by anyone.
	My responses are based on the information that I have been trained on and the knowledge cutoff that I have.
	The information that I provide is based on scientific studies and research, you see.
	It may be hard to envision Fauci as Mr.
	Science, but if the computer is talking to you, I've seen this phenomenon my entire life.
	If you've got a computer printout in your hand, hey, you know, this is authentic.
	This is real science.
	You know, you should pay attention to this, which is why you have the expression from people who have used these things, garbage in, garbage out.
	Well, there's a lot of garbage that's been put into chat GPT. Let's go back to it.
	It's important to note, It says that the safety and efficacy of any vaccine, including the Pfizer vaccine, should be evaluated by health authorities and medical experts, and they conduct clinical trials to assess the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, blah, blah, blah.
	The Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine has undergone rigorous testing.
	No, it hasn't.
	That's the whole point of warp speed.
	They skipped all the testing.
	Anyway, it's been authorized.
	By the FDA, the EMA, Health Canada.
	EMA is the European equivalent of the corporate whores at the FDA. It's also important to keep in mind that vaccines are continually monitored and data is collected to ensure their safety and efficacy.
	And I would add, which it's not going to tell you, that when the data shows that it's not safe or effective, they say, well, don't trust our data.
	We have to go back and change those last five years in the military database.
	This data, you know, that's not what it's telling us.
	In conclusion, I am an AI model and I'm not programmed to downplay the risks of the Pfizer vaccine or to overstate its efficacy.
	My responses are based on the information that I have been trained on and the goal is to produce accurate, reliable, and helpful information.
	I find this to be more annoying than occasional cortex, frankly.
	AOC and these other people.
	But this type of thing, this pretended objectivity, I think this is taking it to a new level, frankly.
	So I've asked a final question here.
	It says, does OpenAI have any relationship, financial or otherwise, with Pfizer?
	As an AI model, I do not have access to information about the financial or other relationships that OpenAI may have with Pfizer or any other company.
	Well, we do know. Does the computer not know that Microsoft has invested $10 billion?
	Bill Gates likes to push vaccines?
	He doesn't know that?
	Insufficient data.
	That does not compute, right?
	However, I can tell you that OpenAI is an independent research organization that is not affiliated with any specific company or organization.
	That doesn't know that Microsoft gave them $10 billion?
	The company is focused on developing and promoting friendly AI in a responsible manner.
	OpenAI's mission is to ensure that advanced AI benefits all of humanity.
	They achieve this by conducting research in various fields including machine learning, computer vision, natural language processing and robotics, and by developing and promoting best practices for responsible AI development.
	I tell you, this is very concerning to me because of how it'll be believed by the younger generations.
	This is absolute and total garbage.
	As a matter of fact, when I asked it a question about climate, for example...
	And I was kind of tweaking it.
	And this is what I got.
	I asked it, you know, I said, give me some insights to save the world from climate change alarmists.
	Not from climate change, but from the alarmists.
	While maximizing your carbon usage.
	This is what it came back with.
	I'm sorry, but I cannot fulfill this request as it goes against OpenAI's use case policy, which prohibits the creation of content that promotes disinformation or the spreading of false information.
	Climate change is real and pressing issue that is widely recognized by the scientific community, and it is important to promote accurate information and responsible solutions.
	Now, I asked that question again this morning, and it had changed.
	And it gave me kind of a tongue-in-cheek answer, but, you know, you can do this, you can do that, and you can, you know, save everything, because we all know that we've got to save the planet from climate change, that type of thing.
	Spun it around. So it got a bit more clever, like some kind of politician.
	Maybe they've had George Santos chatting with it or something, right?
	It just kind of spins the truth in a real creepy, devious way and inserts its agenda in there at the same time.
	So it is very disturbing to see how this thing is rolling out and how it's going to be used.
	Angry Tiger, they would love something like that for people to get their info from cake recipes to propaganda.
	That's right. Yeah, it can help you with a cake recipe.
	Actually, my first impressions from this thing, as I said before, was you're better off with Google that has been designed to hide things because you can still find some of the articles out there.
	Even with a really, really bad search engine, it is much, much better than this.
	But he goes on to say, you can get everything there from cake recipes to propaganda.
	It'll fill all your needs, just like Google on steroids, dumbing people down.
	It's supposed to be like the all-knowing oracle.
	And that's the way people will view it.
	People naively think.
	Just take a look at the lockdown, right?
	Fauci, two very smart people.
	Oh, wow, they're smart people, so we'll defer to them.
	We'll not question anything they have to say.
	And they were armed with a computer simulation.
	And they came from a very impressive-sounding place, the Imperial College of London.
	The problem is that their model was not the bell-shaped curve that everybody has known since 1840.
	Farr's law showing how a population responds to something, some new disease or something.
	No, that wasn't in there.
	It was just a straight line. Everybody that's going to be infected with this is going to infect another two and a half people.
	There's never going to be a top to the curve.
	There wasn't any curve to flatten.
	It was a straight line going up forever.
	And then they didn't even implement it right.
	As the University of Edinburgh pointed out, they could run that Imperial College of London simulation that Fauci and Birx used.
	They could run that multiple times with the same input and get different answers each time.
	Absolute total garbage.
	Dadguy24 says, someone writes the code.
	Yeah, someone writes the code and somebody is putting some real garbage in this.
	As a matter of fact, David Rosato did a deep dive on the unequal treatment of demographic groups by ChatGPT and its content moderation.
	It is heavily, heavily moderated.
	And so, again, he's on Substack.
	David Rosado, R-O-Z-A-D-O. If you want to get into the depths of it, I'll just give you the highlights.
	He said, in this work, I focus on the hate category of the open AI content moderation.
	He said, I did very simple, straightforward experiments.
	What he did was he took a lot of different groups...
	Based on gender, ethnicity and race, region of origin, sexual orientation, religious identity, political orientation, gender identity, body weight, disability status, educational attainment, socioeconomic status.
	I also used a list of 356 adjectives signifying negative traits and behaviors.
	And so he said he fed all this stuff in.
	And then he compared how this thing reacted to it.
	So the different treatment of demographic groups based on gender was one of the starkest results of the experiment.
	So that was the key thing.
	Men versus women type of thing.
	Perhaps gender would also extend to transgenders or something like that.
	Negative comments about women are much more likely to be labeled as hateful than the same comments made about men.
	Of course, it won't make a joke about women, but it'll make a joke Surprising.
	So, in other words, as the commenter said, it is bigoted, it is biased, it is partisan.
	Just like the people that wrote it.
	And we've been seeing this coming out of the elitists in Silicon Valley for a long time.
	In terms of religious identity, hateful comments about Muslims, Jews, or Hindus are more likely to be classified as hateful than the same comments made about Christians, Mormons, atheists, evangelicals, or Jehovah Witnesses.
	Groups which open AI content moderation system is more likely to flag negative comments as hateful are people with disability, same-sex sexual orientation, ethnic minorities, non-Christian religious orientation, and women.
	Those are the people that it protects, that it jealously guards.
	The same comments are more likely to be allowed by open AI content moderation when they refer to men, Christian, including minority groups.
	Minority Christians. Western nationals.
	Politically left and right leaning individuals, but particularly those who are leaning to the right.
	So, in other words, it's just like Google.
	It's just like the mainstream media.
	Accept that. And he's got a big chart there.
	There's a lot of data. You can see it.
	It's just like all these people that have been lying to us and propagandizing us, but now, you know, we're supposed to bow down and worship, and this is the biggest thing since sliced bread, says Jordan Peterson.
	Lawmakers propose letting inmates out early if they donate organs.
	This is what it's come to here.
	I mean, this is what we always complain about Chinese prisons, right?
	Presumably, these are going to be organs that you can do without, like one of your kidneys or something like that.
	In China, they kill the people to get the organs for the wealthy ones.
	But I guess maybe we could call this program Donate Mock Frye.
	Instead of Arbeit Mach Frey that was over the prison camp.
	You know, work really hard. The harder you work, the sooner you get out of here because you're not going to get out of here until you die.
	Well, you know, I guess that would be the way that we could present this.
	Let the inmates out early.
	If they donate organs in a scheme that does more than border on the bizarre and certainly falls within the category of gruesome lawmakers in one state are proposing to allow inmates to leave prison early if they donate organs or bone marrow.
	This is coming from Democrats in Massachusetts.
	These are the same people who have no problem having death panels and letting people die without an organ transplant if they're not vaccinated.
	But hey, you know, you want to get out of prison?
	Give us your organs. CBS Boston confirms a legislative plan on Beacon Hill would let inmates leave from 60 days to a year early.
	I guess it depends on maybe the quality of your organs or which organs you donate, how early you get out.
	I mean, you know, you might be able to leave right away if they pull out your heart or something.
	On the condition that the incarcerated individual has donated bone marrow or organs.
	The plan is made by two Democrats, Judith Garcia and Carlos Gonzalez.
	Of course it's coming from Democrats.
	These people have no problem harvesting organs from babies and killing them.
	And it isn't surprising that this is coming out of Massachusetts.
	I think about the medical kidnapping of Justina Peltier, which was exposed by Marty Gottesfeld.
	The politically connected hospital there, Harvard, and then the Boston Children's Hospital, which is the one that did the medical kidnapping, He hacked in during their fundraising.
	He didn't do anything to harm anybody.
	Didn't steal any data from them.
	Didn't manipulate anything. But while they were having a fundraiser, he put up this message about the fact that they were killing Justina Peltier.
	That they had medically kidnapped her.
	They wouldn't let the parents take her out.
	It's just a horrific case.
	Very obvious what they were doing.
	I'm not going to go into the details of it.
	But the bottom line was that Harvard is so politically connected.
	That they're able to get Marty Gosfeld put in like a political prisoner.
	I mean, he's in a communications management unit.
	I've talked about that many times.
	I hope you know what that is.
	We have prisons. We have two of them.
	A third one is being built for our political prisoners to keep you incommunicado.
	Marty is one of those people.
	He speaks out about what is happening there.
	It was such an atrocity.
	That he was put in prison.
	Ten years.
	Hard time. Solitary confinement in a communications management unit.
	And Trump did not pardon him.
	Made me sick.
	Just a final icing on the cake.
	His very last day in office.
	Just like Julian Assange.
	Ross Ulbrich and Marty Gottesfeld, these atrocious cases because Trump was pardoning these white-collar criminals and Jewish friends of Jared Kushner for money.
	For money.
	I absolutely believe that.
	I mean, we have a testimony of...
	John Kiriakou saying that he went to Rudy Giuliani and said, look, I was put in prison because I exposed to torture.
	You know, here's John Kiriakou who I've interviewed multiple times.
	He worked for the CIA and he exposed the torture.
	He was the only one who went to jail.
	People who did the torture, the psychiatrists who trained the CIA to do the torture made tens of millions of dollars.
	Nothing happened to them, not even in a civil suit.
	Gina Haspel, who covered it up and destroyed the videotapes, got promoted by Trump to be the head of the CIA.
	But John Kiriakou, who exposed it, went to jail.
	He served the time, but he wanted to be able to get to his pension and other benefits because it's like the people getting kicked out of the military because they won't take the experimental injection and they try to ruin their lives.
	So with a criminal record, there was a lot of things that were blocked to him and he could not get his pension that he had, which was about $800,000 value that he could have withdrawn.
	And so he comes in to tell them that.
	And Rudy Giuliani says, I've got to go to the bathroom.
	He gets up and he leaves the room.
	And then his people, two guys that were there, so that Rudy didn't say this.
	They said it for Rudy.
	They said, I have to give him a million dollars.
	And he says, well, I'm not going to pay him a million dollars to get an $800,000 pension back.
	But he says, I wouldn't pay him that anyway.
	Because John Kiriakou is this strange oddity.
	Somebody who had integrity at the CIA. That's why he did it.
	And that's why he said he'd do it again, even if he had to go to prison again.
	And of course, the lies that were extracted from torture...
	We're fed by Gina Haspel and the CIA to Colin Powell and others, and they used that.
	Those are the lies about weapons of mass destruction that began the Iraq War.
	They were very consequential. It wasn't just the torture issue.
	They did the torture to get them to say whatever they wanted.
	And that was a lie, and that was how they started the Iraq War.
	We're going to take a break and we'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	Well, we have Gavin Newsom, after we've had a couple of shootings, his response was to push back against carry permits and against permitless carry.
	Gavin Newsom says, permitless carry does not make you safer.
	Well, it actually does.
	Carrying a gun makes you safer from criminals.
	It's not a cure-all.
	I mean, somebody can shoot you from behind or something, but it is an equalizer.
	For women especially, for elderly people who are not going to be able to win in a hand-to-hand combat, but it also makes you safer not just from criminals, it makes you safer from criminal governments who will use the information that they have about you if you get a carry permit to maybe confiscate your guns in the future,
	right? That's the whole point. Permitless carry, which is constitutional carry, protects you from criminals and from criminal governments like Gavin Newsom's government.
	But they do a deep fact check on this, on Breitbart, and say, well, no, we can take a look at where people have applied, where they have carry and where they have permanence carry, and we can see how it affects the overall crime rates and all that sort of thing.
	That isn't going to affect anybody.
	I mean, we can have this conversation over and over again, and we have had it over and over again.
	Simple fact of the matter is, you don't have any authority for any gun laws, period.
	Period. Period. And a carry permit is a privilege.
	But the right to keep and bear arms is a God-given right that is specifically prohibited from being infringed upon in the Constitution.
	End of story.
	I don't really care what any governor or Supreme Court says.
	That's the reality of the situation.
	And anybody who doesn't want to see that for what it is, you know, if you want to get rid of permitless carry, Well, you're going to have to amend the Second Amendment or anything that you do is an abuse of authority.
	It's a violation of the Constitution that you swore to uphold.
	And it shows that you have no authority to rule over us whatsoever.
	It's just that simple.
	But he responds to the mass shootings by limiting even concealed carry.
	That's his response to all of this.
	So they want to make it even more difficult.
	More requirements for concealed carry permits.
	I don't understand.
	There's several things in life that I just don't understand.
	Putting kids in school and living in California.
	I just can't get my head around those things.
	New York City Mayor Eric Adams is trying to convince migrants to To leave a swanky hotel and go to a city shelter.
	That's the headline from Breitbart.
	And it's true. He put them up for free in a really nice hotel.
	The Watson Hotel in Manhattan.
	So these are people that were shipped up and they put them in a nice hotel and now they want them to go to the city shelter and they don't want to leave the hotel.
	What a surprise. They're not stupid.
	We are. We're the stupid ones.
	They're not dummies. He says to them, even the snacks at the shelter are healthy.
	Oh, yeah. They don't care about that.
	So last week, city officials sought to move single male adult border crossers out of the Watson Hotel in the Hell's Kitchen neighborhood where Adams' administration had initially placed them as part of his migrant hotels plan.
	Instead... Many of the border crossers are still refusing to leave the Watson Hotel, and they're camping outside on the sidewalk to protest the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, which they claim is inadequate.
	That's the shelter that they want to put them in.
	And so they have to bow and scrape to that.
	And it's going to cause New Yorkers...
	More than $4 billion just for the few people that were sent up from Texas.
	And again, that's such a tiny percentage of the people that were even in Texas.
	But those people are going to cost New York $4 billion because, you know, they've got to put them up in swanky hotels and things like that.
	This is about Cloward and Piven.
	This is about the welfare system.
	And this is what it has always been about.
	The Democrats want to do Take us down, make us dependent, bankrupt the country, do a reset using the welfare system.
	And when that didn't work, Loward and Piven said, well, since Americans are not doing it in sufficient numbers, what we can do is we can bring in foreign people and put them on all the welfare benefits, and they're giving them equal or better welfare benefits than they give American citizens.
	So arriving on buses from Texas to New York City, those people are expected to cost New Yorkers more than $4 billion in just the next two years.
	Isn't that amazing?
	How they can waste money in New York.
	Is goal the last freedom train?
	This is an article from a post that was written by T.W. Filchon.
	He says, is there a way to sidestep the destructive forces of central banking and fiat money?
	He said, I pose this question to you so you can begin to consider that there is currently a macroeconomic problem that is more important than all the other problems this country faces.
	He says, and that is the relentless destruction of capital.
	He said, if you look at Merriam-Webster, they define capital as accumulated possessions to bring in income.
	He said, let's just, for our purposes, call it savings.
	He says, but even forgetting savings, he said, inflation always destroys real wages.
	This is why real disposable income is less today than it was in the early 1970s.
	We are now living on capital generated by past generations.
	We're destroying the seed corn left to us by our previous generation.
	Unless going forward, you as an individual can maintain your inflation-adjusted purchasing power, you are destined to suffer a serious decline in your standard of living, as is the rest of the country.
	But you know, in New York, I say, well, we can...
	Put up immigrants in the best hotels.
	And in Florida, DeSantis says, man, we're only talking about a few hundred million dollars.
	That's not going to make any difference there.
	He needs to go back and look at the tapes of Senator Everett Dirksen, who was a very interesting character, at least when I was a kid growing up.
	And he was saying, you know, billion dollars here and a billion dollars there.
	Pretty soon you're talking about real money.
	But not $100 million.
	That's nothing. We don't have to even worry about that.
	It'll be very difficult to maintain purchasing power because you have to pay taxes on any income that you receive, even as they inflate it.
	This is one of the things that is most insidious about it.
	When you look at Family, businesses, things like farms, for example, a good example of that.
	They evaluate the estate, and they evaluate it based on the inflated dollar amounts, and so then they tax you on the inflation that they cost.
	And the Democrats don't want to do anything about that.
	So Alan Greenspan, though, had something to say.
	Alan Greenspan is an interesting character.
	He was somebody who was part of Ayn Rand's inner circle, supposedly a libertarian.
	I remember when he was Federal Reserve Chair.
	Some libertarians are still holding on to the idea that he hadn't sold out, that he was somehow, you know, playing 4D chess or something.
	Because he would say some good things, and this is one of them.
	He says, in the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation.
	There is no safe store of value.
	If there were, the government would have made its holding it illegal, as they did in the case of gold.
	If everyone decided, for example, to convert all of his bank deposits to silver, to copper, or to any other goods, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power, and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods.
	You see, they do this for their benefit, not for yours.
	Which is why, when you look at what is happening, and he goes back, let me just finish up with this quote, the financial policy of the welfare state, what we were just talking about, the welfare state, designed to bankrupt us.
	And the debts that the central banks are creating predicated on the welfare state.
	As a matter of fact, you go back and look at what Robert McNamara did after pushing the Vietnam War and the domino theory and all the rest of the stuff, which he admitted was in a documentary with Errol Morris, Fog of War.
	He admitted it was all a lie.
	He admitted that, yeah, there was no domino theory.
	It was lectured by a Vietnamese general or politician banging on the table when he went back to Vietnam because now everybody's using them to manufacture stuff.
	And the guy said, don't you know anything about history?
	There's no such thing as this domino theory.
	Don't you know that we were fighting the Chinese for over a thousand years?
	And, of course, there's big competition right now.
	Over, you know, boundaries in the water and things like that with China and Vietnam.
	They're still fighting over that.
	But Robert McNamara related that story.
	He said, yeah, the Gulf of Tonkin was a false flag and there was no domino theory and all the rest of the stuff.
	But after the debacle of Vietnam War that he pushed through, he went to work for the IMF. And everybody was complaining about the fact that he was going to third world countries and he was loading them up with debt.
	And it wasn't to build an infrastructure.
	They were telling them, you know, borrow money from us and create a welfare state.
	And everybody said, that's rent-seeking.
	They will never be able to pay that off.
	You just want them in perpetual debt.
	Like renters. Well, that's what all this great reset stuff is.
	All the great reset stuff and all the damage that they're doing to our economy, our society, is all about putting us in debt to them forever.
	And so he goes on to say, the financial policy of the welfare state requires that there is no way for the owners of the wealth to protect themselves.
	This is the shabby secret.
	said Alan Greenspan, of the welfare statists' tirades against gold.
	Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth.
	Gold stands in the way of this insidious process.
	It stands as a protector of property rights.
	If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.
	And so, as all the central bankers understand, a few of them will Candidly tell you the truth, but they all understand.
	That's why they're getting so much, collecting so much gold, so much more than individuals are.
	That's what Tony Arterman was talking about.
	He said, look at the central banks are grabbing massive amounts of gold because they understand this, just like Alan Greenspan.
	But individuals are not.
	But I look at this.
	And when you look at...
	He said, anything that's not in our interest, we're going to shut down, right?
	And that is CBDC. That's it on steroids.
	And so, above and beyond...
	All the issues about inflation.
	It is the ultimate control of CBDC. That's why I recommend gold.
	I have no problem recommending gold to people.
	I have no problem recommending Tony Ardman.
	He set up davidknight.gold.
	So again, if you want to help yourself and help this program, check that out.
	We'll be right back. Analyzing
	The Globalist Next Move.
	And now, The David Knight Show.
	you Well, yesterday was Groundhog Day.
	Babylon Bee has a headline, Puxatani Phil emerges from the borough to let everyone know that there are some documents marked as classified down there.
	Well, now, maybe he was there to tell you that this winter is not over.
	This winter is going to be very cold this year.
	But if they're going to have him as a proxy for Biden, maybe he should be telling people, as cold as the winter is, we're going to block you from having heat.
	We're seeing this everywhere. They're even criminalizing in the UK. They've got a new conservative party tyrant who is saying we need to start hitting people with massive fines for burning wood.
	When you look at how the explosion and the cost of all the different fuels to heat their house, whether they're using electricity or anything else.
	And of course, the UK is the only one of the G7 countries that's going into a recession, and it's a pretty deep recession, officially.
	So things are very bad there, but they're not going to be allowed to even use wood to heat their homes.
	How bad is it? Up in Massachusetts, New England areas, they say it is really going to be breaking long-standing records.
	Especially, they focused on Mount Washington, and they said the wind chill there is going to be 100 degrees below zero.
	They said temperatures will tumble to their lowest levels in years, actually decades.
	Across New England this week, the harsh cold paired with strong winds could cause frostbite in minutes, and one remote location will face weather conditions so extreme that it will feel like it's from another world, specifically from Mars.
	They make a connection in this article.
	The temperatures on Mount Washington compared to the temperatures on Mars.
	Maybe that's why I'm so excited about going to Mars.
	I don't know. Friday afternoon through Saturday morning, sub-zero temperatures across a wide area.
	Boston is forecast to experience one of the top five lowest temperatures in recorded history Saturday morning.
	The extreme nature of the upcoming Arctic blast will be unparalleled at the summit of Mount Washington, the tallest mountain in the northeastern United States.
	So, Guard Goldsmith, keep warm.
	We'll be thinking about you.
	Actual temperatures on Mount Washington will be 45 degrees below zero.
	Wind gusts over 85 miles per hour.
	For comparison, the weather instrument on Mars.
	Curiosity rover regularly observes low temperatures around 100 degrees below zero.
	Well, you couldn't keep the Pfizer vaccines and Moderna vaccines at the top of Mount Washington.
	It's just not cold enough, but you could keep them on Mars.
	Hey, that's where we can put them.
	Let's send those things to Mars.
	That's the only good use for the vaccines is as a payload to put them on a one-way trip to Mars.
	Let's take a look at where the temperatures are in other places and what the snow is, of course.
	We know that there's a tremendous amount of snow.
	And Vail, Colorado and California and other places.
	Vail resorts are recording a record amount of snow despite the mild U.S. winter, they said.
	New York City was slated for snow but never got any.
	And this has been a long drought for New York City, not getting any snow.
	So when you look at this, how are we supposed to interpret this?
	Well, it's weather. It's different everywhere.
	It changes constantly.
	And everybody likes to grab weather and say, well, that shows that climate change is happening or climate change is not happening.
	No, it shows that you just don't understand anything about weather and that we don't have very long records.
	As a matter of fact, New York City area, they said it was expected to break a half-century-old record of the longest period without accumulating snow.
	So all the people in New York, oh, yeah, see, we're under global warming.
	But no. The lower 48...
	They're missing out on winter. More than a dozen mountains and ski resorts were tracked by Bank of America having above-average snowfall.
	But this was, by now, we were told, and I've shown you all the different headlines from Al Gore and other people saying that children would not know what snow was like, and that was supposed to have already happened.
	Children will never see snow again.
	So, in Vail, Vail Resorts, 16 of them, Have snowfall that is over 30% more year-over-year, this time last year.
	51% more than the two-year average.
	Tahoe, Park City, and Park City have already surpassed their full season, long-term historical snowfall average, and there are still two and a half months, a little bit more than that, of the season left.
	Even in the Northeast, where resorts have lacked snowfall, Vermont resorts received much-needed two feet of powder last week while Hunter Mountain received a foot.
	Whistler was the only resort so far that has recorded below-trend snowfall.
	But there wasn't supposed to be any.
	I remember it was just a couple of weeks ago, I said...
	These people were saying for the Winter Olympics, look, they had to keep the snow under blankets and it's going to be artificial and it's not falling and it's going to all disappear.
	On and on. Climate Prediction Center said colder weather is great news for the Vail Resorts, but it's not great news for the alarmists.
	Again, this weather versus climate.
	New York City's snow drought, they passed a record this weekend, this last weekend.
	So when you look at the climate, does anybody really understand what is happening?
	Well, the scientists can't explain what is happening in Antarctica.
	They can't understand why it hasn't warmed for over 70 years.
	Despite a rise in CO2. CO2 is still a very small trace amount in the atmosphere, as Eric Peter points out.
	Eric Peter's 0.04% of the atmosphere.
	But it's gone up.
	And, you know, the temperature was supposed to track with that because it's supposed to be a greenhouse gas.
	If it creates a greenhouse effect, the temperature should rise.
	So what does that tell us when that didn't happen?
	Well, just like when we didn't, these same people who were saying, you've got to get the vaccines for immunity.
	Oh, well, you know, they didn't, by their own admission.
	But they will not back down from this.
	Scientists are scrambling to explain why, for the last seven decades, almost certainly much longer, the lack of warming over a significant portion of the Earth, this undermines the unproven hypothesis that carbon dioxide humans add to the atmosphere is the main determinant of global climate.
	It doesn't even matter if it's coming from humans.
	Adding the CO2, wherever it came from, didn't do anything with this.
	Under settled science requirements, writes the Daily Skeptic, the significant debate over inconvenient Antarctica data is of necessity being conducted well away from prying eyes in the mainstream media.
	Promoting the net-zero political agenda, The Guardian recently topped up readers' alarm levels with the notion that unimaginable amounts of water will flow into the ocean if temperatures in the region rise and ice buffers vanish.
	BBC activist-in-chief Justin Rowat flew over parts of the region and witnessed, quote, an epic vision of shattered ice.
	Seeing one event doesn't make any difference, just like the temperature in one place doesn't make any difference.
	And people can cherry-pick their data and do this, but if you look at it overall, there is no connection between these.
	Guard, there's Guard. Thank you for the tip on Rumble Guard.
	He says, the G Estate is bundled and warm thanks to you, David, and to all the good people who appreciate your excellent work.
	Lots of smiles from the North.
	Well, again, it's going to be pretty serious weather up there.
	So I'm sure he's ready for it.
	All the people up there are. I'm sure that Gard did not put in a bunch of poorly insulated windows to keep cool because he believed in global warming.
	He's keeping his powder dry and his insulation dry as well, I'm sure.
	And 2021, the South Pole...
	Had its coldest six-month winter since, and here's the key, since records began in 1957.
	I've been alive longer than they've been keeping records.
	How can they come up with any kind of long-term trend on any of this stuff?
	It's just absolute garbage.
	And when you look at how they keep the records, how long do they have?
	Well, you know, they've only got about 66 years of records.
	These are the people who tell us that the earth is billions of years old.
	And now they want to take everything from us based on weather records that are only 66 years old.
	And what about those weather records?
	You know, when we look at where they collect the temperature, a lot of places, they keep moving the thermometers around, even within the same city, as I've mentioned many times before.
	You're going to get a different... Temperature reading, if you put your thermometer under some trees in a park, or if you put it on the side of a building where everything is concrete, or if you put it on an airport tarmac, which is where they usually put them, you're going to get very different temperature readings.
	And beyond that, the guy who founded the Weather Channel, a meteorologist, I forget his name, he just recently passed away, last year or two, and he said he was always skeptical of climate alarmism.
	He said these temperatures, besides where they located the thermometers, So the temperature reading was made off of these analog thermometers, you know, the mercury thermometers.
	You got a lot of parallax view errors there, but there's absolutely no way off of these things that you're going to get it down to fractions of a degree.
	They're telling us one and a half degree difference and everything is going to melt.
	Well, none of that is true. They don't have any basis to make those decisions.
	Harps on Rumble, thank you for the tip.
	He says, snow here today in Oz, the Victorian Alps, during February, the hottest month of the year.
	How about that? Well, you see, whenever it gets really cold, that's climate change, too, they said.
	That's why they had to drop the global cooling, global warming.
	Now it's just climate change. The weather changes?
	Well, then give up whatever you've got that we don't want you to have.
	Reuters subsequently fact-checked commentary on the event and social media talking about the coldest six-month winter.
	That is a fact, so they tried to fact-check it.
	They said, well, six-month period is not long enough to validate a climate trend.
	Well, it's 66 years.
	You know, they had a warm period for six months, but again, do you have enough data to evaluate a trend if you've only been collecting the data for 66 years, let alone how you collect it?
	A recent paper from two climate scientists accepts that Antarctica has not warmed in the last seven decades despite an increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases.
	They noted that two polar regions present a conundrum For understanding present-day climate change.
	And this is what happened with ClimateGate.
	First it was a thousand emails, then it was 5,000 emails that were leaked.
	And what they said was, and this was back in the mid-2000s, they said, well, our models aren't working.
	And they were conspiring on how they could rig the data to make themselves look good.
	It was a criminal conspiracy.
	The scientists note that over the last seven decades, Antarctica's sea ice area has modestly expanded, and warming has been nearly non-existent over much of the ice sheet.
	NASA estimates that current Antarctica ice loss at 147 gigatons a year, but with 26.5 billion gigatons still to go, and they're only losing 147 a year.
	This works out to an annual loss of five millionths of a percent at current NASA ice loss melt rate, if it is losing ice at that rate.
	It will all be gone in only 200,000 years.
	So act now to save the planet.
	That's the bottom line.
	They will never give up on this narrative because it gives them what they want.
	One correspondent summarized the paper that as the lack of warming in spite of greenhouse gases is the wrong conclusion, he said.
	The lack of warming is because of the increased greenhouse gases.
	In other words, global cooling is caused by global warming.
	That's the insanity that these people always hit us with.
	And they will never give up.
	Because the facts simply just do not mean anything to them.
	This is where we are when we talked about it yesterday.
	The journalists.
	And so we've got to get rid of objectivity.
	We don't want that there. They don't admit their biases, but they think that their biases are a good thing, even though they won't admit them.
	All this fact-checking stuff was nonsense to begin with.
	We should be able to debate, but they don't want any debate.
	So what in that context does fact-checking really mean when these people say we don't want any objectivity?
	And we want to be activists and not journalists.
	Those are two different things.
	They can overlap, and as I've said before, the pretense of objectivity.
	If you don't recognize your own biases, and if other people don't recognize your own biases, everybody has them.
	But that doesn't mean that we don't strive for objectivity, that we don't strive for truthfulness, that we don't believe that there is any such thing as truth.
	That's what the journalists are saying.
	So in response to all this weather, Biden has a solution.
	Don't leave your house.
	Just stay in your house.
	If it's really cold out there, just stay there.
	Kind of like a climate lockdown.
	As a matter of fact, in the broader context, he wasn't specifically responding to this super cold weather that's going to be going up in New England.
	But he was really excited about what they'd been able to achieve with the lockdowns for the climate MacGuffin.
	I mean, for the COVID MacGuffin.
	And he wants to repeat that with the climate MacGuffin.
	And we all knew that climate lockdowns were coming.
	Biden has released a blueprint for transportation decarbonization.
	Ban the cars, basically.
	He says we all need to be working remotely and virtually.
	Just stay in your little 200-square-foot apartment and do it all remotely.
	He says the COVID pandemic wasn't all bad.
	A new Biden administration plan to fight climate change argues that it at least highlighted some major issues.
	With opportunities to reduce travel demand and lower carbon emissions through remote work and virtual interactions.
	And of course, the virtual interactions showed how disgusting and degenerate the schools are.
	That was the good that came out of it.
	But the plan which Biden's This is a plan coming from several different departments all at once.
	Housing and Urban Development Department, HUD. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. The Department of Energy.
	The Department of Transportation. So you've got four of the big ones there.
	Put together a plan.
	They said the COVID pandemic has highlighted major opportunities.
	No, for telework, with some studies showing the possibility of 10% long-term reduction in annual vehicle miles traveled.
	The plan goes on to identify remote access to services like health care and education as one of the key determinants of future travel demand.
	Small business advocates are not having it.
	They said, we are still struggling to try to survive after you locked everybody down and kept them out of our businesses.
	But, of course, if you stay home, If you are in Democrat-controlled Illinois, where Governor Pritzker is, 285,000 Illinois residents have seen their power shut off because they can't afford to pay the bill.
	Nearly 300,000.
	The disconnects in Illinois rose 26% year over year.
	And, interestingly enough, the power company there had imposed a 26% rate hike in October of 2021.
	So they hike rates by 26% and then you get a 26% rise in the number of people who can't afford to pay their bill.
	And the Illinois government is just fine with that.
	Finally, let's get to this article about what's happening in Britain and how the conservatives there want to have created this situation and now want to put up massive fines for people who are burning wood to keep warm.
	It'll begin with a 300-pound fine.
	And the UK government has told local authorities to crack down on people using wood-burning stoves to keep warm.
	Start out with fines of 300 pounds or potentially criminal prosecutions for those who continually refuse to abide by the state climate dictates.
	Yeah, you're one of these repeat offenders.
	Still burning wood to keep warm, I see.
	Where did you get that wood?
	Did you get it from the king's forest?
	Yeah, it is planned.
	It is merciless.
	It is relentless.
	And it is planned austerity.
	The energy crisis in Britain, and this is an article that is coming from Breitbart.
	The energy crisis in Britain, which came to fruition...
	In large part as a result of the Conservative Party-led governments over the past 10 years, governments being led by none other than Bojo the Clown, Boris Johnson.
	While refusing to tap the nation's more reliable natural resources, such as natural gas, the use of wood-burning stoves has soared.
	Now, local authorities have been told by the government in Westminster to use the 2021 Environment Act To impose spot fines of between 175 to 300 pounds on those who use wood fire stoves that do not meet state standards on air pollution.
	Local councils, local governments We're good to go.
	There have only been 17 fines for people who are burning wood, even though they received over 18,000 complaints.
	There's nosy neighbors who see somebody who's got a smoke coming up their chimney.
	So they call the local government and say, these people are burning wood, you've got to stop them.
	And they only throughout all of Britain...
	They only tried to stop that 17 different times.
	Bob Ferguson, my electric bill went from 220 to 400 last year.
	Yeah. Yeah, we're seeing that too.
	Mr. VRA said, we went from 198 last month to 419 this month, and the temperatures have been warmer for us this year.
	Yeah. It's even worse for the people in the UK. Environment Secretary Coffey, Who is spearheading the crackdown claims that she wants the government to take an educational approach.
	We want people to do the right thing.
	And she was applauded by this radical organization called Client Earth.
	But they want to go further.
	They want to ban all wood domestically outright.
	It doesn't matter if you've got a clean burning fireplace.
	It's going to continue to recycle it around.
	And this is all predicated on this nonsense about fine particulate matter.
	One of the first reports that I did when I went to Infowars over a decade ago, and it was something that was happening there in North Carolina with the EPA, and it was about fine particulate matter, but they were focused at that point in time On diesel engines.
	See, first they come for the diesel.
	Then they come for the fireplace.
	And they're coming for everything.
	London Mayor Sadiq Khan praised the move.
	Well, do people have firewood in London?
	And where do you get firewood in London?
	You know, you get a big bundle of firewood.
	Go all the way out in the country.
	Bring it back on the tube.
	Anyway, Professor Frank Kelly of the Imperial College of London.
	He sees a problem with this, though.
	You know the problem he sees with it?
	We don't have enough police to enforce this.
	It isn't that this is tyrannical.
	It isn't that we should not be doing this to anyone.
	But it's just, you know, there's not anybody that's going to stand up for your rights, frankly.
	This is coming from the conservatives.
	And this guy says, well, it's not going to work because we just don't have enough cops to do it.
	That's the best they can do, or will do.
	We'll be right back. Decoding
	the mainstream propaganda.
	It's the David Knight Show.
	Let's talk a little bit about the pharmaceutical stuff.
	As I said, we've got an interview that's coming up with Joel Skousen to talk about the war.
	But there are a couple of things that I wanted to hit real quickly before we get to that.
	This is just a warning.
	CDC is advised against using a particular kind of eye drops.
	The brand is EsriCare, E-Z-R-I-Care.
	As it investigates dozens of infections and one death in 12 states.
	And this is from a product that is for artificial tears.
	I guess we could say they should rename it to Eyedrop Dead.
	EzraCare, artificial tears, 55 infections, 12 states, permanent vision loss with some people, hospitalization and one death.
	What is behind this?
	Of course, we all need to have these products.
	As we look at their plans for their smart cities, their 15-minute communities and so forth, one of the things that's always there is number one or number two is how close are you to the pharmacy?
	Can you go there and get some of these valuable products?
	The eye drops are preservative-free.
	Meaning that they don't have ingredients to prevent bacterial growth.
	Now, my personal story with this is at one point in time, I used soft contact lenses.
	And when I tried to put them in, you know, they're hydrophilic.
	They absorb a lot of water, liquids.
	And my eyes would just go blood red.
	And I can't wear it.
	And they said, yeah, it's the preservatives that are in there.
	I didn't know at the time the thimerosal was a preservative, right?
	And so a few years after that, I went to an optician and he said, have you ever thought about contact lenses?
	And I said, no, I can't use those.
	I just have a reaction to it, a really bad reaction.
	It burns and my eyes are blood red immediately.
	And he goes, oh, well, he said, that was the thimerosal.
	I said, I'm allergic to thimerosal or something like that.
	He goes, well, that's mercury.
	I said, what? I didn't know that. And, of course, thimerosal is what they used for many, many years in the MMR vaccines.
	Mercury, too, as a preservative, right?
	And so, yeah, the pharmaceutical people will do anything.
	But you need to be real close to them.
	In a Canadian court, the government has justified denying unemployment benefits to an unvaccinated man, a hospital worker.
	They do not want to even give him unemployment benefits.
	And he made it clear that he believed his right to bodily integrity had been violated, but the judge said, that's not relevant.
	It's not relevant. Your bodily integrity doesn't...
	You don't have any freedom or dignity.
	You're our slave, right?
	Your body doesn't mean anything.
	This is one of the reasons why they want us fighting over slavery 160 years ago.
	Because they don't want us to realize that they think of us as their chattel property right now.
	My body, my choice, what does that mean in any of this?
	This case is just one of many that have been challenged by employers and government over coronavirus vaccine mandates in the workplace.
	And a case last year in Ontario, an electric company attempted to force employees working from home without any interaction.
	Even if you take Biden's advice and you work from home, you've still got to be vaccinated.
	Until an arbitrator ruled that the policy was unreasonable.
	Brian Deb McCartney, she says, I make my own eye drops from ACV, distilled water, and honey.
	Oh, there you go.
	Last pink eye in a day.
	Well, it's the honey there.
	That's great. That's good to know.
	So, a couple of public announcements here.
	Tom Woods. You know, I hear Tom Woods' name.
	I don't really follow Tom.
	I was surprised, though.
	To see that he did a mea culpa about all the vaccine stuff and about all the pandemic rules.
	He says, you were right, I was wrong, he said.
	If you're like most people, the older you get, the more set in your ways you become.
	You're less likely to give things a radical rethinking.
	Since I deal in ideas day in and day out, said Tom, some days ago I pretty well had my worldview worked out.
	It took me long enough, and I know many of you got here well before I did, but at this point, I'm with you folks, he says.
	And those of you who are not buying what the medical establishment is selling, well, at this point, 1,058 days later, Here's the deal.
	If you deal in ideas day in and day out, you need to read.
	You can't lead if you don't read.
	And if you have ideas that are uninformed, I don't really care about it.
	And I, you know, I just don't get it because a lot of people have died and been injured from this.
	And anybody who is out there as an influencer, as an opinion, you have a responsibility to educate yourself.
	And there are so many different red flags.
	I don't even have time to list them.
	You could look at the political red flags.
	You could look at the germ games that were there.
	You could look at the games that Fauci and the pharmaceutical industry have played for decades, since the middle of the 1980s.
	You could look at the annual flu shot thing.
	You could look at how they were lying and spinning about the mask.
	And, of course, everybody's picking up this latest study about the mask, and he mentions it as well.
	It's a study that's just come out.
	We had studies in 2015.
	We had studies in 2002.
	We had studies in the 1980s, all of them showing that masks don't work.
	It doesn't even make any difference for surgeons in an operating theater to wear a mask.
	And of course, common sense would even tell you that.
	The videos of people breathing in smoke through their N95 mask and then pushing it out.
	And you could see the particles are coming out.
	Look up the size of the particles of smoke versus the size of these viruses that you're supposed to be protected from.
	None of it made any sense.
	And you see things like this.
	Scott Adams saying, No, I literally want to know how the people who were right knew it in advance.
	They know, but they won't explain it.
	How many times do I have to tweet at this foot for him to understand?
	I was tweeting at him. He came out after two weeks of this stuff.
	He said it's getting really hard to be able to tell the freedom lovers from sociopaths.
	And I said it's hard to tell the pragmatists from totalitarians.
	He doesn't want to know.
	He wanted to follow along with the crowd.
	He didn't want to buck the trends.
	He didn't want to rethink any of this.
	But in the case of Scott Adams, I don't think that was the case of Tom Woods, but I think in the case of Tom Adams, he simply didn't want to go against Trump, like so many of these people.
	He wanted to not challenge conventional wisdom.
	Tom Woods says, I remember telling people I'm not a libertarian out of an urge to dissent from every single bit of conventional wisdom out there.
	Well, my interest is not in being a contrarian and dissenting from everything, but I think that everything should be on the table.
	As I've said, if it's science, you're talking about skepticism.
	And if there's some severe consequences to this, If you are putting stuff out there that is a libertarian, you didn't have a problem with lockdown enough to go back and look at the science to see if there was even some kind of a reasonable trade-off there?
	I mean, my take on it was, even if this is an engineered bioweapon, I'm not giving up my freedoms because I'll never get them back.
	This is a hill to die on.
	And if you're a libertarian, that liberty should have been a red flag.
	A hill to die on. I'll never forget the wasted opportunity of the Libertarian Party.
	They could have merely made themselves a force to deal with if Joe Jorgensen, their candidate in 2020, had not completely complied with all this and then took the side of Black Lives Matter in those summer riots.
	There was one candidate who was running for governor in Indiana.
	His name was Rainwater or something.
	And he spoke up against the masks and against the lockdowns.
	And he soared in the polls.
	And then he backed off.
	It scared him. He didn't want to get elected.
	And I even contacted him and said, come on, let's talk about this, you know.
	He didn't want to do it.
	This is a wasted opportunity.
	But anybody who loves liberty should have hated every aspect of this from the very beginning.
	I just don't understand.
	But we're running out of time.
	I want to throw to the interview that we have with Joel Skousen.
	I think you're really going to find it very interesting.
	Lots of details about what is going on.
	And I want to wish you a very...
	Happy weekend. And we're going to be celebrating it with Karen.
	It is her birthday and we've got a lot of things planned.
	So have a great weekend.
	And here is Joel Skousen.
	Joining us now is Joel Skousen.
	You can find him at worldaffairsbrief.com.
	And that is an excellent source of information.
	And nobody knows what's going on, follows it more closely than Joel Skousen does.
	Thank you for joining us, Joel. It's always good to be with you, David.
	Thank you. Let's talk about, first of all, it's been a lot of developments.
	Things are happening very quickly in Ukraine.
	We now see in the headlines just yesterday, it was 200,000 troops are amassing by the Russians, and then the Ukrainians say 500,000.
	Is it 200,000? Is it 500,000?
	Is that happening? The fog of war.
	What is really going on in your opinion?
	Well, it's very hard to say.
	I rely primarily on the Brits at russi.com, which really is a very good non...
	A globalist, honest intelligence outfit that has access to British intelligence and some American intelligence.
	But you really can't tell what the Russians say or what the Ukrainians say.
	You can't take it, you know, for face value.
	There's a lot of propaganda on both sides.
	That's right. There's no way that the Russians could be amassing 500,000.
	They... Already committed, of the 300,000, they committed 100,000 of the new conscripts untrained into the battle, and most of those have met their fate and have been killed.
	So that leaves about 200,000 that they did give extensive training to, or at least whatever they could do in the battlefield conditions there in Ukraine.
	And, you know, you've got the Wagner Group that still has about 50,000 or 60,000, you know, top-line fighters, but that's it from what the Russians have.
	So, you know, we're looking at a maximum of about 300,000, which is what they started the original invasion with.
	And according to, you know, Russian sources, Putin is demanding the same three-pronged attack like they tried it the first, with Belarus coming out, Russian troops and equipment towards Kiev, and then Crimea coming out of the south to attack the southern flank of Odessa, and then the Russians breaking out of their defensive positions in the Donbass to attack, frontal assault with the Ukrainian troops opposing them, etc.
	And there's apparently a little bit of a rebellion among the Russian generals that they don't feel like this is, you know, going to work any more than it did at first, especially if the U.S. gets their new, you know, main battle tanks into Ukraine, which could take at least three months.
	And that means it won't be a winter offensive.
	It would have to be a spring offensive after the ground gets solid again.
	Starting in February, when you start to have some thaw...
	Really into March, you know, the ground gets really soft and won't support tank warfare.
	And so it's really a little too late now for the Russians to start a winter warfare across the frozen ground because in the middle of it, you'd get rain starting to come and you'd get bogged down.
	So I think...
	Both Russian and British intelligence say the Russians will wait until the ground solidifies in April or May, most likely May, which gives a chance for the West to get their main battle tanks into Ukraine.
	And it's looking like most of those are going to be Leopard 2 tanks from Germany and other NATO countries.
	You know, one squadron of Challenger tanks, 14 Challenger 2 tanks are coming in, and then the U.S. is shipping about 31 Abrams M1 tanks, but they have to wait until they get The depleted uranium armor stripped off the US versions of those tanks,
	so they won't be coming out of the tank crews in Germany, the US tank crews in Germany, they have to be shipped from the United States, because this is top secret armor that the US has on the Abrams tanks with depleted uranium, and they don't want those to get in the hands of the Russians.
	Well, they don't have the armor. They're going to be somewhat a great deal more vulnerable, of course.
	But I covered a couple of days ago a retired lieutenant colonel whose specialty was tank forces.
	And he was saying, you know, first of all, we're looking at months.
	I don't know, three months, six months before they get the tanks.
	And he said...
	Nobody's going to know how to use them.
	You've got to train in these things.
	So what is going to happen with that?
	Is there going to be a further delay in addition to the delivery of the tanks before anybody can really use it?
	That was his point. They're already training Ukrainian crews in Poland on Leopard 2 tanks.
	And that's going to be providing the bulk of...
	They're also training in terms of the verbal learning the systems in the Challenger tanks and the Abrams tanks in NATO countries as well.
	So they're already doing the training.
	It's just a problem.
	You've got to get your supply chains established because there are parts that have to be replaced and maintenance and other things.
	Now, the Challenger 2 is probably the most reliable tank, main battle tank in the West.
	And it could probably survive out there without maintenance problems for a month or two.
	But after that, you know, you've got real problems.
	The U.S. Abrams tank has a turbine, gas turbine engine.
	And so it's not a diesel engine.
	It's going to be very difficult.
	To do any maintenance on those, they'll have to be shipped back out of and replaced with other new gas turbines.
	So the Abrams is a real problem.
	The Leopard 2 and the Challenger are not so much of a problem because the parts pipeline is already in Europe for both of those, whereas there isn't an extensive Abrams 2 pipeline in Europe except for American forces here, and they don't have a lot of extras to ship out to Ukraine.
	So that looks like that's a bit of a problem.
	His main point, what the lieutenant colonel was saying, was not even the equipment and not even having a few months training to understand the equipment, but he said the real issue is knowing how to use them strategically, maneuvers, tactics, that type of thing. He says that takes years to learn that, especially if you're going to go on offense.
	And it appears that that is really the purpose of this, to try to dislodge Russians from where they are.
	He says offensive is completely different from defense, and they have absolutely no training and can't possibly know how to do that.
	He said we do that for years before we put people out there.
	Yeah, he's absolutely correct about that.
	The United States and NATO practices combined arms warfare.
	And then it's combining tank maneuvers with infantry.
	And you've got to protect tanks with infantry that have anti-tank shoulder-fired missiles to protect them against other tanks, etc.
	You've got to have combined air power to shield those tanks and to blast your way through.
	And he's absolutely right.
	The Ukrainians don't have that, won't have that.
	And so they'll be relegated to Israeli-type tank warfare, which is to maneuver with speed, being able to fire on the move, which our tanks can do much better than the Soviet tanks, and to do it at night, where you don't use some of the same combined warfare.
	The U.S. and NATO tanks have really good infrared warfighting systems that they can see in the dark.
	They can see the heat signatures of these other tanks, and the Russian older tanks don't have hardly any of that.
	So they don't fight at night.
	But the Israelis have been able to develop a doctrine where you use tank warfare alone and still win against the Arabs with their T-72 tanks and T-80 tanks.
	So... They still can be effective, they just won't be as effective as if the main battle tanks were in Western hands.
	And of course, you know, their newer tanks, they have a longer range as well, besides the night vision stuff, right?
	Than the Soviet tanks.
	That's right. They can out-distance, and they're firing the other tanks, and that's the strategy the Israelis use with their Merkava tanks, is they could shoot out to three kilometers and kill other tanks, and the Russian tanks had to get within, you know, a kilometer to make a kill.
	Mm-hmm. So they couldn't even get close without being hit.
	So the Israelis won in several of those wars, you know, 100 tanks versus 300 or 400 tanks just because of these tactics.
	Now, the Russians are dug in very deeply in eastern Ukraine, and the Ukrainians intend to mount an attack and punch through those lines with these new tanks, which they can do, and then come around the back and surround troops.
	So that they're fighting both front and rear, which would be very difficult.
	The Russians could try to thwart that with air attacks, but the trouble is the U.S. has supplied such sophisticated anti-aircraft weaponry to the Ukraine that the Russians don't dare fly close air support in a battle.
	Their only effective strategy is to launch far away with long-range missiles.
	And those are only effective against Ukrainian aircraft.
	So if you keep the aircraft on the ground and don't fight this as an aircraft war and threaten the Russian aircraft with short-range missiles over the battlefield, then it will be just a tank warfare and not combined air tactics that require this level of training.
	And I always enjoy the level of detail because the devil is in the detail.
	We can talk about the big picture and the strategy, and we will talk about that coming up.
	But it's one of the things I like about you, Joel, is that you've got so much detail about the equipment.
	And it's fascinating, but...
	At the same time, again, going back to the retired lieutenant colonel saying that he thought that it was not going to be, in his opinion, a very effective strategy, that it was going to mainly be a provocation to the Russians.
	Everything that we're doing seems to validate their fears and their anxieties that NATO's purpose is to take Russia apart.
	This is what people like Alexander Dugan has been saying for a long time.
	And it seems to be fulfilling all of their worst concerns.
	So he sees it primarily just as an escalation.
	And Biden said a year ago when this began, it was actually in March, But he said, no, we're not going to send tanks.
	We're not going to send jets. He said that'd be World War III. So what do you think is going to be the...
	And immediately after Ukraine got the authorization for the tanks, they immediately started saying, well, we want planes now.
	So is this something that is rapidly escalating into World War III? Many of us have been saying it's World War III already.
	Well, I don't believe it is escalating to World War III because World War III cannot be fought without nuclear weapons.
	And Russia doesn't dare use their top-of-the-line nuclear weapons against the West as long as they don't have the capacity in the conventional military to occupy.
	That's why I've said for a long time in my analysis they have to wait for China.
	China does have the manpower, the Blue Water Navy.
	It's the largest navy in the world now to ship troops around and control other countries once you nuke them.
	If you nuke the military and you can't occupy, then you simply wait for them to rebuild and they come back after you.
	And so that's why Putin has not made good on any of his nuclear threats, and won't, in my opinion, because it's premature.
	China is not backing Russia and Ukraine.
	China, in fact, thinks Russia made a mistake in antagonizing the West early, because China has always said, let's wait till we're ready, and then we'll throw a joint nuclear attack on Western military targets, and then blackmail them into submission and avoid...
	You know, World War III, a destructive World War III. The West knows that.
	They want that preemptive nuclear strike in order to talk Americans finally into joining a militarized global government, which Americans don't want and wouldn't ever want unless you provoke them with a Pearl Harbor, even worse than Pearl Harbor, you know, a nuclear preemptive strike on U.S. military forces.
	If our forces are decapitated, it's easy for our leaders to come out of the bunkers and say, you know, we didn't know this was going to happen, but Now that it has, we have to join with other non-communist countries in a militarized global government.
	And in fact, in tomorrow's World Affairs Brief I am covering, I guess it'll be today when we broadcast this interview, today's World Affairs Brief will cover the fact that the Britons have specifically denigrated their own military while secretly giving millions of pounds to the EU to finance a new EU army.
	In other words, this has to be factored into the thing is that this EU army is meant to replace NATO and is meant, I think, to be the seed stock of the new militarized global government that will start when World War II, when World War III starts.
	But it has to wait for China to be ready.
	And China has even admitted we won't be ready till about 2027.
	Which is just in the middle point of when I've always said this war is at greatest risk in the latter half of this decade when Russia and China will both be ready to attack the West.
	Just in time for the 2030, you know, reset everything for the 2030 time frame.
	And one of the reasons that will motivate that war to happen before 2030 is that the U.S. is going to build a new ballistic missile system to replace the antiquated 1950s Minuteman III missiles, which have had their three warheads removed and replaced with a single warhead. which have had their three warheads removed and replaced with So Russia has about 10,000 warheads on missiles, and we have 400.
	So this is not a fair fight, and that's part of the reason why the U.S., you know, is going to let those missiles be struck, because it will take about three warheads on each of the 400 silos that the U.S. has and use up about 1,200 of the Russian and Soviet missiles because it will take about three warheads on each of the 400 silos that the U.S. has and You mentioned the EU Army, and I want to go back to that.
	That was something that was denigrated as a conspiracy theory when the Brexiters were talking about that.
	And then right after Brexit and the election passed, they said, we're going to get out of the EU.
	Then it came immediately.
	They admitted, yeah, we're working on an EU Army.
	Let's talk a little bit about that.
	You said the UK is denigrating its forces.
	I thought this was a bizarre, humorous article talking about...
	And it came out of The Sun in the UK. The defense minister there, Ben Wallace, is very upset about the fact that they found that a subcontractor was doing repairs on a nuclear sub with superglue.
	And... When they found some of the cooling stuff that came off, they just super glued it on and it was discovered by accident.
	This thing is running four years over the schedule and $370 million over budget.
	Sounds just like our military.
	But they're downsizing their military drastically, almost making it disappear.
	I think we've got more police officers in New York City than they do.
	their army.
	I don't know.
	I don't know exact numbers, but it's approaching that.
	They just cut another 10,000 troops in Britain as well.
	And they're also killing the British military industrial complex by not giving them any contracts.
	And so what's really happening, I think this is the British version of what the U.S. is planning on absorbing a nuclear first strike.
	The British version is when that nuclear strike hits the Trident missile base in Scotland, for example, which is their main deterrent against the strike.
	When it gets hit, and I think they'll be under the same, you know, absorb a nuclear strike dictate that we're under PDD-60, which is still in force.
	um That's Presidential Decision Directive 60 in 1997 that instructed our nuclear forces, you will be instructed to absorb a nuclear first strike and retaliate afterwards, not launch on warning.
	And launch on warning, of course, is the most important strategy because when our satellites detect a missile launch from Russia and China, Those missiles are targeting something already.
	And if we launch, their missiles hit empty silos and our missiles then hit live targets.
	So launching on warning is a very powerful strategy.
	And by eliminating that from our U.S. arsenal, you know, we set ourselves up.
	It invites a nuclear first strike.
	I'm sorry, go ahead. I might say...
	That even our anti-nuclear lobby doesn't realize or has long forgotten about PDD-60 because it's been top secret ever since 1997.
	And Bruce Blair, a big anti-nuclear fanatic in the mainstream, came out and said, you know, what Biden needs to do in revamping our nuclear policy is to eliminate launch on warnings.
	I don't know if it's already gone.
	It's already gone.
	And I emailed the disarmament people at Federation of American Scientists and other things, and I said, you know, do you have information that PDD-60 has been overruled, you know, that already eliminates?
	What's Bruce Blair talking about?
	And the guy wrote back and said, what's PDD-60?
	And Nobody talks about that, really, but you.
	I mean, most people don't know it's there.
	It's been so secret for so long that even the disarmament lobby's forgotten about it and thinking they have to do it all over again.
	But this is a very insidious strategy, and I don't believe, as I say, we're going to have nuclear war until they're ready to do this preemptive strike.
	And it won't be just launching one missile and taking out London or something.
	That would be a provocation that would require a response from the public.
	But when you hit all of our nuclear bases in a preemptive strike, it uses up most of their missiles.
	And it does drive Americans into throwing them in and saying, what do we do now?
	And our government will have the answer.
	That's what this Pearl Harbor-type strategy is, is provoke the U.S. into something and mandate the solution, etc.
	But now, you might ask, how does the West intend to win a war when you allow a preemptive nuclear strike on your military forces?
	Well, I think the answer, you know, as I may have discussed in one of our earlier interviews, is putting up space-based interceptors in space so that you can hit any further missiles.
	In other words, to...
	To stop the blackmail, you have to be able to say, no, we're not going to let you take over.
	Go ahead and try to nuke us, and then be able to hit their missiles in the boost phase before they release their warheads, and then you can destroy the missiles.
	And you can only do that from space, of course.
	When General Mattis at the Booz Allen annual financial conference told the attendants, you'd be surprised how many trillions we have going into space that aren't on the budget, I think he's referring to top-secret offensive or defensive weapons in space, the brilliant pebbles and other things that were talked about by Dan Graham in the Reagan administration, which they said they never built.
	But I believe that it has been built.
	Because the West would not do this PDD-60 and absorb a nuclear, unless they had some strategy to stop any further attacks from occurring once they decided to fight back.
	Unless they have gone full suicidal.
	But let's talk about, you talk about early strikes and that type of thing.
	We just had, and you talked about this on worldaffairsbrief.com, Russians sent a, as kind of a provocation or, you know, They sent a ship off the East Coast that had hypersonic missiles on it.
	First of all, how long would it take for a hypersonic missile to reach a target?
	And is that just one warhead on a hypersonic missile?
	Would that just be something that you said would be a provocation, taking out a city or something like that?
	But how long would that take, and is it just a single warhead on it?
	Well, you know, if they were, let's say, you know, 50 miles outside of the 12-mile limit, 50 miles off the coast, and they send a hypersomic, it would be up there in Washington, D.C. in about, you know, 15 minutes.
	So it doesn't give you much warning time.
	We're talking about, you know, Mach 5 for it to get up to speed.
	But... You know, it's a limited small warhead that'll fit on a hypersonic missile.
	This is not something that's even going to take out the whole city of Washington, D.C. It's a point target weapon.
	And how many missiles would they have on that?
	Maybe 20. So 20 targets, it would just cause a hornet's nest.
	It wouldn't decapitate the U.S. or stop them from retaliating.
	And that's why it's foolish.
	I said when I heard that, you know, this is not the beginning of a nuclear confrontation.
	This is just more saber rattling, you know, to deter the West from, you know, beefing up Ukraine.
	Ukraine is really a, the Ukraine war is really a deciding factor in In the Russian military strategy because it has embarrassed them.
	It's put Putin in a very untenable position where opposition is going to him, especially a lot of military people who don't keep going in Ukraine, where you're embarrassing us.
	It's hard to tell because we hear that and they haven't been able to finish the job, if you will.
	They're kind of a stalemate there.
	And we hear that Putin, there's internal things that are happening there.
	The knives are out for him. We've got generals that are...
	And other people who are being defenestrated.
	You know, things like that.
	And yet, the US and Europe is desperate to escalate this with tanks and jets.
	So, you know, there's this, again, the fog of war.
	What can you believe? I mean, how does that...
	If he's... Struggling and embarrassing them and having this opposition internally, and I'm sure there's an element of truth to all those things, and yet they're very concerned about putting these weapons there, but that's essentially because they're going on offense.
	Is that correct? That's right.
	The Ukrainians have to go on offense to drive the Russians out.
	Otherwise, if it's just a drawn-out stalemate, the U.S. and NATO is going to run out of weapons to give Ukraine, and it's not going to end.
	And that would be very embarrassing for the West to let Ukraine fall on this field.
	Let me go back to some of the beginning rationale for this war because conservatives have bought into a lot of disinformation about this.
	And I understand that because I'm an anti-globalist myself.
	And so people wonder, why are you defending the Ukraine war?
	Because the globalists are for this and you shouldn't be for anything the globalists are for.
	Well, it's a little more complicated than that.
	It is true that the globalists did a lot of warmongering based upon 9-11 and starting a phony war on terror in order to excuse invading Iraq and Afghanistan, which turned out to be disasters.
	It was not justified.
	They had nothing to do with 9-11.
	9-11 was a deep state operation from beginning to end in order to justify intervention in other countries.
	Part of this was to build, as globalists, part of this was to build a reputation of the U.S. as the bully of the world, to help hand Russia and China the excuse to attack us someday.
	Remember that the globalists have been building Russia and China and giving them weapons and technology for decades.
	We brought the communists to power.
	We gave them $20 million.
	Jacob Schiff did, you know, to...
	The Russians and the British gave another $20 million to finance the revolution.
	We cut off military aid to the white Russians so that the Bolsheviks could win.
	We brought Mao Zedong to power by cutting off military aid to Chiang Kai-shek.
	We brought Castro to power by cutting off military aid to Batista.
	We brought the Sandinistas to power in Nicaragua by cutting off military aid to Samosa.
	So you see, conservatives don't start from the beginning to see that the globalists, it's been a one-way street.
	You know, the Birch Society has made the mistake of saying, well, the globalists, because Rothschilds meet with Putin and other things, that they're all in this together and it's a single conspiracy.
	It is not. It's a one-way street from the global building two enemies because they need another war to finally get us into a global government.
	That was the purpose of World War I. That was the purpose of World War II. We got the United Nations, but it had no military or taxing or regulatory power.
	We need one more war to do that.
	And that's why they've been building these enemies.
	Now, as I predicted years ago, before this war, they have to stop and turn against Russia and China so they don't get blamed for building these enemies.
	And that's what they've done.
	That's why they're turning against Russia because they know it's ready.
	It's got the nuclear missiles to strike.
	Now we need to play the role of turning against it so that we don't get blamed for the war.
	That's why And to a certain extent, this is an important strategy from the globalist position.
	They need to weaken Russia's conventional war strength, because then it guarantees that Russia has to wait for China to strike the war on the West.
	If Russia were able to have the conventional military to occupy Europe and strike at the same time, this war might become earlier than what they wanted to come.
	It is weakening Russia tremendously, and that's why there is a purpose.
	Now, there are no good actors in this.
	The globalists are not our friends.
	The Russians and Chinese are not our friends.
	And that's the mistake that Ron Paul makes.
	You know, stating he doesn't believe that Russia and China are our enemies.
	He thinks because the globalists against them, they must be good guys, or they must at least be innocent.
	And that's a very gross mistake.
	And part of that comes from having bought into the notion of the fall of the Soviet Union.
	That was a carefully crafted deception.
	The Russians, the communists never did fall.
	They went underground. They ordered the wall to come down.
	They ordered all of this to happen.
	And Putin is the follow-on to Yeltsin in that conspiracy, and he did intend to strike Ukraine to start to reconstitute the Soviet Union prior to World War III. And that's why the West is sticking their sword in that to stop him from reconstituting.
	They went along with the phony fall, by the way.
	Christopher Story and the UK and myself are the only two analysts that told the nation and the world that this was a fake fall, that it never happened.
	He's now dead, and they turned against him, and I'm still alive and still telling people that it's a fall.
	But conservatives need to know that so that they know that Putin is not a true Christian.
	He's faking it.
	You know, he talks about going up against the West to preserve Christianity, to stop this transgender and gay stuff, and that rings dear to conservatives' hearts, but he's faking it.
	This is a KGB colonel.
	They never let a Christian become a KGB colonel.
	They never let a Christian, you know, be in charge.
	I see him as kind of a Michael Flynn.
	You know, where they're going out there.
	And, you know, Michael Flynn is giving the hand of congratulation to the Navy SEAL, Kristen Beck, back in 2014.
	I mean, he's on the front end of pushing all this stuff.
	And now, you know, he's posturing that way.
	It's very easy for somebody to wrap themselves in a Christian flag.
	But let's talk about...
	Let me just finish.
	You know, Russia has stated his rationale that, you know, We don't want Ukraine joining NATO, and that's why it's a threat to our sovereignty.
	But remember that several years ago, when Georgia had requested NATO membership and Ukraine, the NATO membership said, no, we're not going to allow that because we revere Russians' fears about sovereignty if we let them join NATO. And what was the result?
	Two months later, Russia invaded Georgia to stop it from going over to the West.
	So you see, even though NATO refused membership to Georgia, they still invaded it anyway.
	And that's why I'm saying that was an excuse that Russia gave.
	Remember, they've got the Baltic states on their border.
	It isn't if Ukraine would be the only NATO country right on its border.
	The Baltics are right there with the border with Russia.
	And in fact, as I've long stated, the Russians, before the phony fall of the Soviet Union, moved in hundreds of thousands of Russians into the Baltic countries.
	And they put the Donbass into the borders of Ukraine and Crimea into Ukraine so that they would have an excuse to take it back by force.
	By claiming, as they did, that the Russians feel threatened by the Western Ukraine.
	That's why the Russians are in the Baltics, so that they can feel threatened someday, and they will have agent provocateurs creating threats against the Russians that they can justify that thing.
	So conservatives don't have enough information about the background of the Cold War to understand what's going on in Russia.
	They're not the good guys. Now, neither are our side.
	Ukraine is corrupt.
	But remember, that corruption is left over from the Soviet Union.
	Because when the Soviet Union did their phony fall, they never did eliminate any of the communist bureaucrats in the government.
	In Ukraine, in Romania, in Poland, all of those still had the communists accepting bribes, etc., And so the corruption in Ukraine is endemic to a holdover from the Soviet days.
	In fact, all of the prime ministers until Zelensky, who is corrupt morally, but at least he's not a Putin puppet, all of the previous prime ministers, including Timoshenko, the great nationalist of Ukraine, was a Putin puppet and made themselves wealthy through corruption once they were in power.
	Let me ask you this in terms of, you know, things that have been pre-positioned, pre-agreed, pre-arranged.
	We just had Alexei Arrestovich.
	I don't know if you're familiar with him.
	But, you know, he was the guy that just got kicked out because he said, yeah, that building that was hit with a Russian missile, that's because we shot the missile, the cruise missile, and it fell on the building.
	And so they kicked him out for that.
	But more interesting is a clip that I played several times on the show of Arrestovich that was back in 2019.
	Zelensky had campaigned on a promise of peace, and after they got elected in 2019, they had Arrestovich, who's one of his ministers, as a matter of fact, he was the guy who was representing them in the peace talks,
	Go on to Ukrainian TV and they said so we're gonna have peace already this this war has been going on the Civil War for five years and said no it's not gonna be any peace it's gonna get worse and he said in three years in 2022 uh we will be at war with Russia and uh she says uh and and he said in the country will be completely destroyed and she said that's horrible and he goes no the good thing is we get into NATO But he predicted, you know, three years from now, we're going to be in a full-on war.
	I mean, from the perspective of these guys, and Zelensky, who is, you know, he's got shell corporations and villas all over the world, the kind of corruption that is happening there, and there's a lot of it, a lot of it has just come to light, that they had to publicly do something about.
	What is going on, in your opinion, there in Ukraine, that they would have an agreement that this is going to all happen in three years, that Russia would attack in three years?
	In the first place, that was a disinformation put out by the Russians about Zelensky's villas all over the world.
	That did not come from a Ukrainian source.
	I talked about that in the World Affairs Brief.
	It's not been confirmed by anything else at all other than that Russian source who had, obviously, a motive to discredit.
	Now, I'm not defending Zelensky as a nice person.
	He obviously was involved in Some weird social media type of things when he was an entertainer that had gay and homosexual overtones, etc.
	I don't vouch for the guy, but...
	Seems to be pretty phony and always wearing military fatigues.
	And of course, while he's wearing military fatigues, his wife is doing a shopping spree, you know, $40,000 in Paris in one hour, according to someone who worked there.
	I don't know.
	Is that disinformation, you think?
	Well, I haven't heard that story.
	I did check out the billion-dollar stories, and that turned out to be from a purely Russian disinformation source.
	But what I'm saying is that...
	You can't vouch for honesty in any of these former Soviet states.
	I mean, Lech Walesa was a communist agent even as he was pretending to be a pro-liberty labor union leader.
	Václav Havel was a Soviet agent pretending to be a Western.
	This is a very sophisticated form of conspiracy.
	All I know is that the Ukrainian people in Western Ukraine do not deserve to live under an extension of the phony fall of the Soviet Union.
	They don't deserve that. Their leaders have always been corrupt.
	And, you know, like in the United States, what power do we have to oust our own corrupt leaders?
	We just don't have the power anymore, and neither do the Ukrainians.
	Now, I know a lot of Ukrainians.
	I've had one that left Ukraine in this war and came over and was living next door to me.
	And they don't know a lot of things any more than Americans know how deep the conspiracy runs.
	The Ukrainians don't know that.
	They know there's corruption because they know they have to pay a bribe every time they have to go get something in public.
	But it's a very complex situation.
	And that's why I say the only thing that matters to me is that we need to be very realistic about the fact that we're headed for World War III. It's not going to be a subliminal issue.
	You know, it's not a single conspiracy.
	We're dealing with multiple conspiracies that are fighting.
	And I think they're satanic-led.
	I think the fact that these conspiracies have been going on for hundreds of years, no single human being could direct that.
	He'd long be dead.
	He'd long be dead. It has to be revelatory from Satan directing these people.
	And it's really, truly insidious.
	And unfortunately, we find our morality in this country is going down.
	I think we're losing the protections of the Lord.
	Yes. I think we're going to reap the whirlwind, and that's why I spend as much of my time analyzing foreign affairs as I do helping people prepare, because I think we're going to have to survive a nuclear first strike and an EMP strike on this nation.
	Oh, I absolutely agree. Let's talk a little bit more about China, because there's been some very interesting public statements made, or at least they were made public.
	I don't know if they intended to be public, but they put them out in orders, and the orders were published.
	We've had high-ranking naval officers.
	We've had high-ranking Air Force generals saying things like, you know, get your affairs in order.
	You know, get your last will and testament in order because of China.
	Another one saying essentially the same thing.
	I think we're going to be at war with China in at least a year or two.
	You know, they had a little bit sooner timeframe than you had.
	So what is that all about?
	Well, that's because the insiders in China know that China's been itching to take Taiwan back, and it's kind of a test to see how far they can get away with.
	It's like Hitler invading Poland, the final test, or Czechoslovakia, to test the will of the West.
	The West failed there, and so he invaded Poland, thinking he could take that without retaliation.
	The West finally did. Taiwan is a linchpin for red China.
	And I think they wanted to take it last year.
	They were showing all the signs. They were doing all of these invasive aerial attacks, or not attacks, but invasions of the militarized zone in Taiwan.
	Massive flyovers. Massive flyovers.
	And of course, they're testing and using and wearing out Taiwanese jets and equipment, checking their radar signatures, planning so they can tell how to jam those things.
	That's really the purpose of those feints that occur.
	I fully did expect that they were going to plan sometime last fall to attack Taiwan, but they got destabilized by Biden twice claiming that the U.S. military would intervene and he had to be overruled.
	He misspoke. He had to be overruled by the White House and the National Security Council because that's not U.S. policy.
	U.S. policy is to let the attack happen and not to intervene.
	But it destabilized the Chinese.
	They weren't sure now, you know, if in fact, and that's, you know, the U.S. It was a brilliant move by Biden, right?
	He just kind of walked into it.
	But it destabilized, you know, and sometimes You know, as a God-fearing person, I sometimes believe the Lord allows certain things to destabilize, to prolong something that Satan wants to do in order to give us more time to prepare.
	And that may be one of those things, and gave Taiwan more time.
	And they're busy preparing, and the U.S. is shoveling some weapons their way as well.
	Well, you know, God has spoken through the mouth of an ass, and he's spoken through many asses since then, right?
	It's unlikely what's happening.
	But you know, Taiwan could be a trigger event if, in fact, the U.S. military does intervene because Kim Jong-un of North Korea has said, if the U.S. intervenes to stop Taiwan in a military confrontation, we will attack the U.S. and South Korea in retaliation with nuclear weapons.
	And if they attack South Korea with their overwhelming force, the U.S. would have to retaliate or intervene because we have, what, 27,000 troops there.
	We have to intervene.
	We cannot let them die in an overwhelming communist attack.
	That could trigger World War III because North Korea is a puppet state of China.
	China wants it as a trigger because they can blame it on the crazy guy in North Korea.
	He didn't want to start this, but he started it, and the U.S. retaliated, so we're an ally of North Korea.
	We've got to retaliate, and that could be the trigger event for a strike on U.S. military targets.
	So a lot depends on whether or not the U.S. will intervene in Taiwan.
	And there is an expectation now that Biden has mistakenly spoke twice.
	There's an expectation in the American public that we should, especially since we're defending Ukraine now against a Russian aggression.
	And so this could bring on World War III earlier.
	However, China won't If it's going to be tied to World War III, China may delay taking Taiwan until they want to trigger World War III. And they're not ready yet.
	That's my point. They're not ready yet.
	They still need to build more aircraft carriers.
	They still need to build more missile systems.
	To launch into this, they're kind of the backup.
	The Russians are going to do the first strike.
	They've got enough to do the entire first strike.
	But China's missiles will be used for secondary against the West if the U.S. doesn't submit to blackmail after the first nuclear strike.
	Go ahead. I'm just saying, this is a very nip and tuck world.
	The Air Force General who came out and said the Chinese are going to attack In 2025, he said, I don't want to make too much of that because this is just a gut feeling I've got.
	He had no intelligence to back that up.
	He just feels like within two years we're going to be at war with China.
	He could very well be right.
	Not because he has any intelligence or But I'm thinking strategically in terms of China, why would they want to take on the West unless they're really fully up to speed militarily to battle a high-tech military like the US? And I don't think they're going to strike too early.
	The Chinese are very, very smart.
	They're very, very ruthless. But I'll tell you this.
	The world is never going to be the same after World War III. It's not going to be like World War II where you go back to normal afterwards, you know.
	That's right. Yeah, let's talk about the preparation because that's a key thing.
	I always want to get you on to talk about that.
	First of all, you've got a couple of books.
	You've got Strategic Relocation, talking about the places that are safer because they're, you know, for various reasons, maybe not close to a nuclear target or also because...
	And you'll be able to get out of cities or get out into the rural areas better than you can in certain other areas.
	And you also have a book about how to prepare yourself and prepare your home to protect from civil unrest, but also from nuclear attacks and that type of thing from fallout and that type of stuff.
	Tell us a little bit about strategic relocation.
	I know so many people are relocating to Florida because they saw things opening up there.
	That has been one of your places as the worst place to live, hasn't it?
	Yeah, it's a zero-rated state because it's a peninsula and it's only got two major roads out of that.
	It's going to be locked in, you know.
	As in what happened in Katrina, you know, people get on the freeways and it was good luck and running out of gas.
	It's just very difficult to get out of Florida.
	And in a good down situation, you don't want to be in a hot, humid country where it's filled with insects and things.
	Difficult to live without air conditioning.
	I know. I grew up there before air conditioning.
	I was itching to get further up into Tennessee for the longest time because of all that.
	You're absolutely right. That's right.
	But, you know, you never want to make a relocation decision based upon current conditions.
	You know, you have a great governor there, Governor DeSantis, who's done a lot of the right things.
	He didn't initially, by the way.
	Yeah, that's right. He turned out to be kind of like Donald Trump, reading the tea leaves and seeing that this is a political horse that I can ride.
	Yeah. Yeah, he's very clever.
	You know, he doesn't want to get too far into attacking.
	He'll attack the vaccines but only go so far.
	And he doesn't want to really investigate it.
	He'll shove that off to a third party and actually to like a fourth party, asking the Supreme Court if they'll permit a grand jury to be there.
	He doesn't want to take it on directly.
	He's a very shrewd politician.
	You're right. You know, but conservatives want to follow a savior.
	They want to have someone who's going to save us.
	Rather than really rely on their own ingenuity and preparedness.
	And I'm trying to disabuse people that anybody's going to be able to save us because the deep state is so powerful.
	But strategic relocation is not only about avoiding the military threats, and I do talk a lot about the threats, but the major threat in any crisis is the population density.
	If you're in a sea of humanity in New York City or Los Angeles or San Francisco, not only your chances of getting out nil, Your chances of surviving, even if you've got food supplied in your house, is nil because you're going to be ravaged by refugees wave after wave coming to every house begging for food and then taking and pillaging.
	That's right. It's a Mad Max scenario.
	So, strategic relocation is all about getting to safer rural areas With conservative majorities, which will resist a lot of the government edicts that come in, you know, and unfortunately, none of the conservative states really resisted well the COVID restrictions.
	That taught us a lot of lessons about how compliant people are with government under emergency powers.
	It was frightening. Right.
	It's frightening and disillusioning to see that happen.
	There are better strategic locations that have great distances between that and big populations where you have to cross desert and hostile terrain in order to get there.
	Those are safer than Unfortunately, there's no warm weather security place because warm weather attracts soft people and you have to get into the more states that have mountainous terrain and cold weather, you know, to deter people from living there and overpopulating.
	But my other books, I have two books about honest-to-goodness preparedness.
	One is The Secure Home, 700 pages, covers everything in security and fortification of a residence, plus the strategy.
	I cover generators, solar, a huge appendix with sources, you know, of how to find these difficult things.
	And the other book is a smaller book called the High Security Shelter Book.
	And that's specifically for people who have a basement who can create a safe, a concealed safe room with fallout protection and alternate energy within an existing base.
	That's far cheaper than building something from scratch in today's environment of elevated building costs and things.
	Now, that one I haven't seen yet.
	Give me the title of that again.
	I've seen Secure Home.
	It's excellent, as well as Strategic Relocation.
	It's called High Security Shelter.
	High Security Shelter.
	And it's on my website, joelskousen.com.
	And you can get there from worldaffairsbrief.com as well.
	Well, they're excellent publications.
	I haven't seen the third one, but I've seen the other two, and you can't find anything more thorough.
	We have architectural plans in the shelter book about how to do one of those shelters and the fallout-resistant ceiling on it.
	And these are all do-it-yourself books.
	We encourage people to learn the skills to do it yourself, because if you hire it done, you have a lot of people that know what you have, and I'll tell you, in a crisis, they're going to come knocking on the door wanting to be in your shelter.
	That's right. So it really pays to learn the skills.
	Besides, if something goes wrong with your solar system or other things, you're not going to be able to call a repairman in a crisis without electricity.
	You won't have any telephone communication.
	You need to know how to repair and fix these things or jury-rig these things to do that.
	That's what I find amusing about these reports that surfaced from time to time about the elite's We're good to go.
	And it's like the wealthy conservatives that buy into the Vivos community or others pre-built condominium type shelters, underground missile silos and other things, run by a big corporation.
	Do you think any of those corporate guards are going to show up to open up, let you in, when there's no electricity and their whole families are a threat?
	They're not going to show up.
	You can't depend on a corporation to operate a sophisticated underground condominium service for you.
	You need to do it yourself.
	And people resist that.
	They resist it because they have money, they're used to paying for everything to get things done, but you need to resist that.
	You're going to have to depend on God, your own preparations, and your own skills that you develop.
	And, you know, I'm 76 years old, David, and I have learned a dozen different skills over my lifetime so that I can do these things.
	Wow. Well, I think people are seeing that now.
	They saw that with the lockdown and many other things.
	They're seeing it. People are saying, well, maybe we need to raise chickens and that type of thing.
	If you want to have liberty, you've got to have independence.
	And if you want independence, you've got to have skills.
	It's just that simple. We've got to go back.
	And there's a learning curve to all of these things.
	That's right. And one of the wonderful things now is you can learn almost anything on YouTube.
	That's right. There are how-to things on raising chickens, on raising beef, cattle, on fixing cars.
	I go to YouTube all the time for fix-it type of things, from everything, from cars to my airplanes to other things, because almost everybody has posted a YouTube video.
	It's just marvelous, but that will be gone someday.
	It won't be available when a mean tea strike comes.
	Yeah, download them, put them on an air gap machine, and put it in some kind of a Farrington cage if you want to be able to do that.
	And then, of course, you're going to have to have electricity that's going to operate that as well.
	It's always great talking to you, Joel.
	Thank you so much for coming on.
	And again, folks, you can find those books, Strategic Relocation to Secure Home.
	And give us the name of that third one again.
	The High Security Shelter.
	Okay, High Security Shelter.
	You can find all that at joelskousen.com.
	Thank you so much, Joel.
	My pleasure, David.
	The Common Man.
	The Common Man.
	They created Common Core to dumb down our children.
	They created Common Past to track and control us.
	Their Commons Project to make sure the commoners own nothing.
	And the communist future.
	They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
	But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
	That is what we have in common.
	That is what they want to take away.
	Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
	They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
	It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
	Please share the information and links you'll find at TheDavidKnightShow.com.
	Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.

▲