Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 22, 2023 - The David Knight Show

03:01:12

22Feb23 Derailments, Explosions, Fires, Power Grid Attacks: Sabotage? Criminal Neglect? War?

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	www.fema.org
	to free minds.
	So...
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Wednesday, the 22nd of February, year of our Lord, 2023.
	Day 1077 of the emergency.
	City.
	And today we're going to talk about what is happening with the World Health Organization, how they intend to use this against us.
	There's a lot of news being put out that it's a done deal.
	Well, it's not a done deal, but the way that it's going to work is the way that they've been Utilizing this against us.
	And we're going to take a look at artificial intelligence.
	A lot of people push back now.
	It's a good thing to talk about what a fraud this is.
	So we're going to talk about how this is actually the third wave of these AI scams.
	Which doesn't mean that they're not extremely dangerous in the way that they're going to be used.
	It just means that they're not a sentient being.
	And we'll take a look at infrastructure.
	Is it sabotage?
	Is it neglect and rot?
	We'll also get to the Ukraine war today.
	Stay with us. We've got a lot to cover.
	We'll be right back. Well, as we talked about yesterday, and we began the show with what was going on in Project Veritas, because I think it's very important.
	It's internationally important as well, because I think it involves Pfizer.
	We'll see what happens with that.
	But as a follow-up to it, I had a listener yesterday, one of the things that they accused him of, they accused him of financial wrongdoings.
	He said, I haven't changed anything in 13 years.
	They had a list that said, he's spent X amount of money on black cars.
	I said, well, I don't know what that is. I guess it's maybe a particular type of rental.
	I had a listener say, yeah, the clarification, black cars...
	It's a black car service in Manhattan in the 80s.
	It's where they got the term.
	Lincoln Town Cars were always black limousines, in other words, instead of a yellow taxi.
	And, you know, it's not something I was familiar with, but I don't ride taxis either.
	So I guess it's a nice step up from getting in a taxi where somebody puked last night.
	Anyway, you can take one home if you worked late.
	People would use a black car to run errands all day sometimes, he said.
	All the big firms use them, and they used vouchers instead of cash.
	They were seen as a serious step-up from the Manhattan taxi, much more luxurious and practical because people could get in and say, take me to New Jersey or take me to Connecticut, something you couldn't do in a regular taxi.
	So he says, one Christmas, I was an all-day car driver for somebody doing their Christmas shopping.
	So thank you for sending that to us.
	This is somebody who is in Canada, actually, now.
	He knows what the black cars are because he used to drive them.
	And this was also sent to me by Handy.
	He works in EMS. He said, here's a study from Denmark showing that mRNA presence in 9.3% of their vaxxed have it still in their blood 28 days later.
	He says, that's beyond the time that we were told.
	Are they replicating mRNA post-injection?
	I bet they are. Well, as a matter of fact, Dr.
	Peter McCullough has said that.
	He believes it is self-replicating.
	He goes, we continue to find this even way beyond the 28 days.
	And, you know, the spike, the mRNA, all the evidence of it still being there.
	I said from the very beginning, what is it that causes us to stop?
	You know, the mechanism that they tell us of how this is supposed to work from the very beginning.
	And this is on Moderna's website.
	When you would point it out, they would say, well, that's just a conspiracy theory.
	But Moderna themselves said, we are reprogramming your body, your DNA, to replicate this spike.
	We use your body to manufacture it.
	We reprogram your body to manufacture this.
	Now, the way they described it, It's always the way that they have described how a virus works.
	A virus comes in, reprograms the cell to not replicate itself, but to replicate the virus.
	It destroys the cell, but it creates the virus, and the virus then replicates itself again.
	And it has this multiplying effect.
	I know there's a lot of people who don't believe that viruses exist.
	I'm agnostic about viruses.
	It is a model that they use to describe things.
	If you go back and look at microbiology, once they identified bacteria, they could actually see it under the microscope.
	And, you know, Kerry Mullins mocked Fauci by saying he thinks he can look in the microscope and see a virus.
	You know, that's how ignorant Fauci is.
	Well, you can't see him, and that's one of the reasons that a lot of people If we're not believing it, when they saw the same types of effects, contagious disease and stuff like that, but they couldn't find a bacteria, they came up with essentially an operating theory to describe it.
	And just like we see with atomic models, we've had the Niels Bohr atom, that was the one we all learned in K-12, where you've got the The nucleus, protons and neutrons, and you got the electrons orbiting around it.
	It's a very useful model for describing how things combine in the periodic table of the elements and that type of stuff.
	But then you get into quantum models.
	And those also can be used to describe things and predict behavior.
	Even though the people who have come up with it said, well, if you think you understand quantum mechanics and quantum physics, you don't.
	They don't understand it.
	So that's the bottom line.
	We've got all these different models about things that are extremely small.
	They can be useful, but it doesn't mean that they aren't going to change.
	And so when you look at this, again, going back and reprogramming the DNA, To be self-replicating.
	That is a very concerning thing.
	And what turns it off? Well, it turns out that Pfizer has now been criticized because studies have shown That their quality control is extremely poor.
	And they're sending out mRNA fragments in their vaccines.
	Not just the mRNA, but the mRNA fragments.
	And again, mRNA is what copies DNA. Now, if it's a fragment, it's not going to copy it correctly.
	And it's going to create issues, isn't it?
	It's going to alter the DNA if you don't copy it correctly.
	By definition, it's altered.
	But also, what it is missing in a lot of these cases is an encoding at the end of it that somehow tells it to stop.
	Now, I don't understand these, but this is what the people who are programming the DNA say.
	It's missing the stop code on it.
	Which has a lot of implications.
	That may be one of the reasons why this stuff is still replicating after a very long time.
	Because it's missing that stop code.
	But they said it's also the quality control is so poor.
	It's one of the reasons why you would see it vary from 3 to 100.
	And again, I forget whether it was micrograms.
	I think it was micrograms, not milligrams.
	But you see the dosage vary from 3 to 100.
	Over a factor of 33 times.
	They don't have any quality control.
	So, anyway, this was also sent by a listener.
	Facts about face diapers.
	After reading this article, hopefully you'll think twice about putting the Marxist mask and the poison on yourself.
	We always have a choice, writes the listener.
	Concerning the mask, this is a quote from the article.
	What we are breathing through in our mouth and nose is actually hazardous waste, said a professor who ran this study in Germany.
	Ran preliminary tests on using surgical masks that found traces of chemicals such as known carcinogen, aniline, as well as formaldehyde, and optical brighteners, both heavily restricted on consumer goods by European and U.S. authorities to very, very small quantities.
	So you're breathing in carcinogens, allergens, tiny synthetic microfibers when you wear the textile mask.
	You just grab anything in the closet and put it on your face.
	Really? You would?
	Yeah. It is an IQ test, isn't it?
	And they wear their IQ on their face.
	Non-woven surgical masks, even, for a long period of time.
	And, of course, OSHA. In terms of just talking about oxygen deprivation, in environments where they would mandate it, where it was very dusty, where they should be used.
	They said, you're not going to keep these things on your face for more than 20 minutes.
	You're going to get out of there. And the 2002 study in New South Wales, where they said, don't tell people this is going to work for SARS. It can't.
	It doesn't. We've tested it.
	And if you do that, we're going to fine you $100,000 Australian dollars for fraud.
	And look where we are now.
	Not only does it not keep the particles out, but it actually has a deleterious effect.
	After 20 minutes, it gets saturated with spittle.
	So the particles that you breathe out, you know, again, it's not physically capable.
	Look at the physics of it. Of stopping an airborne particle, but they said, oh, but that's not it, it's the spittle.
	So these viral particles get on the spit, and then they're, well, if that's true to that extent, it's not going to do anything to stop any airborne particles because they're too small to pass right through it.
	It's like using a hurricane fence to try to stop mosquitoes from coming into your yard.
	Chainlink fence. So, yeah, it's going to make smaller particles.
	It will go farther, stay airborne longer.
	And then during all this fiasco, we had a German scientist do a study and said in the...
	Inverse is true as well.
	Whatever you breathe in is going to come in with smaller particles and it will get further down into your lungs and you'll get a concentration of the things that your body was trying to eliminate.
	You know, we eliminate waste in many different ways.
	Usually it's collected in the toilet, but some of the waste is collected in your masks.
	And so these are things that your body is trying to expel, but you trap them in your mask and then you breathe them in and they get, you know, reduced in size and smaller particles and go down deeper into your lungs and concentrate in your body when your body was trying to eliminate that.
	So it's not just the carcinogens, synthetic microfibers, allergens, but it's your body's own waste, right?
	I mean, just look at the face mask pimples that people were getting.
	Doesn't that tell them something?
	Can't they figure that out?
	And it's not even, you know, they don't even define what a mask is.
	Piece of cloth? Whatever.
	Anyway, this latest study...
	It was sent to me. It's from Germany.
	It's Germany and Hong Kong were the places where the scientists worked on this.
	They found high levels of hazardous fluorocarbons, formaldehyde, other potentially carcinogenic substances on surgical face masks.
	And they said, particularly, we should be concerned about schoolchildren, of course, right?
	They're going to be even more vulnerable to this.
	Factory workers, long-haul flyers were wearing this a very long time.
	Microplastics that you're breathing in.
	What we're breathing through our mouth and nose is actually hazardous waste.
	And also, it is your body's own waste.
	The face diaper is actually more literal than people realize.
	So Biden, in terms of this treaty with the WHO, there is a couple of articles that have come out from Epoch Times.
	I've seen this on a lot of the alternative media.
	Biden decides to give the WHO authority over U.S. sovereignty.
	Well, no decision has actually been made.
	Negotiations are this week, according to James Roguski, and I would consider him to be the gold standard on this WHO pandemic stuff.
	He lives and breathes that on a 24-hour basis.
	He goes deep into the data.
	He watches all of their presentations.
	You can find him on Substack.
	And what he says is no decision has been made.
	The negotiations are this week.
	He's encouraging people.
	To contact and put pressure on members of Congress or whatever, because it's not going to be stopped by Biden.
	Biden is fully on board with this.
	He sent Javier Becerra to work on this last September.
	They've been hatching this plot.
	And he's got a scheme for how he wants to pretend that it's a legal treaty.
	And so the way that you stop this is you've got to contact your senators.
	The Senate, in my opinion, this is not coming from James Roguski, but if you want to lobby somebody and you want to complain to somebody, complain to your senators, because they're the ones who can stop this, just like they're the ones who could have stopped the Paris Climate Accord,
	but didn't. Mitch McConnell, who was a majority leader, could have at any time during the Obama administration or the Trump administration when he was leader, at any point in time, and even after the 2020 election, During that lame duck session, Mitch McConnell could have called a vote for the Paris Climate Accord.
	It's a treaty, but you remember that John Kerry and the Secretary of State under Obama, and Obama said they self-ratified it.
	We ratified it. We decided that we wanted to be in that treaty.
	Well, that's not the way the Constitution works.
	You've got to have a supermajority in the Senate, 60.
	So, excuse me, I'm not even wearing a face mask.
	At any point in time, Mitch could have called a vote.
	They would not have had 60 votes.
	They would not be able to have 60 votes today.
	So, if you could get somebody...
	That, you know, on your side.
	I don't know what the procedures are.
	I don't know if you could find some conservative senators who would demand that there be a vote on this.
	But I think they're bought out, frankly.
	But, you know, maybe there are some honest ones still there.
	If they would push for and call a vote and draw public attention to it, demand a vote, that would be the end of it.
	There would be no WHO treaty for this stuff.
	So if you want to focus on this, I think that'd be the most productive avenue.
	Global bureaucrats, if this goes through, will be able to demand anything they want.
	Vaccines, lockdowns of countries, cities, areas.
	They can make that decision unilaterally, and it would be legally binding, and that's what Biden is scheming to make happen.
	They could demand surveillance and testing, all the rest of this stuff.
	You know, the regular testing plus more, you know, more surveillance.
	He's maneuvering to make sure it won't require approval by the U.S. Senate.
	So that's how we stop this.
	U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Javier Becerra joined with Tedros back in September 2022 to announce their strategic dialogue to do this.
	They've got a draft plan to seek ratification by all of the member states of the WHO. That's 194 members.
	It would give the bureaucrats who follow the UN's political agenda the authority to declare and to manage a global pandemic.
	We give them the ability to do what we've seen done for the last couple of years.
	We really cannot allow that to happen.
	And so as they're trying to negotiate this deal, his scheme for how he's going to do this And how he's going to circumvent the Constitution is to say that the accord will go into effect on a, quote, provisional basis.
	On a, quote, provisional basis.
	So, yeah, we'll ratify it by the Senate, but we're going to do it on a provisional basis as soon as it is signed by the delegates.
	The Biden administration will then take the position that this is an international executive agreement that the president can conclude on his own without approval by Congress.
	This is why Congress has to stop this.
	And oh, by the way, again, you know, same way that they should have done with Paris.
	But notice that since they didn't do this, and since Mitch McConnell didn't do it, and since Trump did not do it, Trump said, yeah, we're going to get rid of it, but we'll do it right after the 2020 elections.
	And so he put something in and never had the Senate shut it down, which is the correct way to do it.
	What Trump did by saying, we're going to wait and I will get rid of it after the election.
	What Trump did was actually support the idea that presidents can get us into and presidents can take us out of a treaty.
	Trump, by delaying this action and saying that he would do it rather than him calling for the Senate to do it, It was not only another head fake, but it was also another one of these Trump precedents that underscored what Obama had done.
	Obama didn't have the authority to do that.
	Trump doesn't have the authority to get out of a treaty either, right, unilaterally.
	So Mitch McConnell was the one most to blame.
	But again, he's going to do this and pretend that it's an executive order.
	This is why we've got to stop these executive orders.
	And this is why it is so important that we have something like what has been introduced in both the Tennessee Senate and in the House to stop any unconstitutional executive orders, government regulations, court decisions, international treaties, any of those four areas.
	They're going to set up if this bill passes.
	They'll set up a process to look at the constitutionality of that and nullify it at the state level.
	That's the most important way that we could fight this.
	I think even more so important than the Senate.
	The Senate has a role to play.
	If they drop the ball, we don't have this law in Tennessee or anywhere else.
	There's one that's similar to it that's been proposed in Texas.
	You need to get this done in your states.
	And if we have something like that, that is the rightful remedy.
	The federal government is not all-powerful.
	Should not be. Anyway, what I was talking about earlier, about the defects, the fragments, the fragmented mRNA that's being allowed to go out in the vaccines, this is now being presented as Pfizer knowingly allowing dangerous components in its vaccines.
	And again, the poor quality control, the drastic variation from batch to batch, Varying by a factor of 33, from 3 to 100, could explain the difference in adverse effects, says the Epoch Times.
	And of course, it does explain it.
	Because Naomi Wolf put together a research team, and they could tell the defective batches, the ones that had the high concentration, were the ones where people were having all the adverse effects.
	Was that an experiment or was that just the world's worst product control?
	I'm at the point now where I don't attribute what Pfizer's doing to incompetence or negligence.
	I contribute it to malice.
	I think it's deliberate. That's my opinion of this stuff after looking at it.
	So a full-length mRNA sequence of the Pfizer vaccine, coding of the spike protein, is 4,284 nucleotides in length.
	It consists of a cap structure.
	To prime its translation into a spike protein.
	At the end of the translatable region, there is a stop codon.
	Now, I don't know what that is.
	Bottom line, it's like the thing to turn it off.
	Without that, the protein translation process will continue endlessly.
	Truncated mRNAs are missing the stop codon and are highly detrimental to humans.
	It can lead to the production of toxic protein products.
	I guess the Epoch Times is not listing the spike itself as a toxic.
	It was designed to create the most toxic part of the virus that they know.
	Whether or not You know, it is a harmful thing.
	It is the thing that the bioweapon injection creates.
	It's the worst thing of all.
	Worse than this disease.
	Worse than anything. They have your body manufacturing the most dangerous component of this.
	I've seen a couple of pictures of this.
	Marvel superhero, they call her.
	Evangeline Lilly, who played in the Ant-Man thing.
	She was a wasp or something.
	And she's jeopardizing her career.
	By pushing back against the vaccine, as they point out, she did this at the very beginning about social distancing and masks.
	She was hectored on social media.
	People said, you're endangering other people.
	So she apologized for that.
	She said, look, some people value their liberty over their life.
	Some people value their lives over their liberty.
	She said, I'm the one who values liberty.
	And they said, well, you're being unfeeling and all this sort of thing.
	So she apologized for that.
	But then... She came back when the vaccine mandates came out unapologetically.
	She said, I know the beast that I'm attacking.
	I know that I have a little pebble and there's this Goliath giant.
	If I shoot this pebble, it's going to wake the giant.
	But I just wanted people out there who are struggling because they were under severe pressure to do something they did not want to do or to know that they're not alone.
	And to know that there are people who actually felt that they have a right to say no.
	Well, here's what happens when you say no to this stuff.
	And again, this is going to be, they've not taken any of this stuff away.
	The Model State Health Emergency Powers Act that suggested model state and model legislation.
	Have you seen any of the states remove any of that power?
	I have not. Again, this is the second shoe to drop from 9-11.
	It was actually preceded 9-11 by two months, their germ games.
	Then they had their false flag anthrax attack a week later.
	Two months later after that, they had the model legislation sent out to all the states.
	And then they practiced the germ game for 20 years.
	Now, I haven't seen any states remove any of this legislation.
	I think most, if not all, of the state governors still have an emergency order in.
	Biden's emergency order is in.
	Forget about this talk in Congress about repealing it.
	They didn't do it.
	Forget about Biden promising to do it in 60 days.
	He didn't do it.
	What they're doing is they're leaving all of that in, all the model state health legislation that's there, as well as the executive orders.
	And they are, you know, just as the CDC's Walensky said, no.
	Unfortunately, all the different areas right now are green and yellow.
	But when they go red, we're going to mandate masks again.
	We're going to mandate vaccines again.
	We're going to start testing people again.
	All of that is still there, and even worse, they're setting this up to make the decision whether to do all this stuff.
	They're handing it over to a foreign, non-governmental, an NGO, whatever, the World Health Organization.
	That's what I say, to talk about World government, it is a distributed network of governance between these NGOs, corporations, and the governments that are all compliant with them.
	And this is what it's going to look like.
	Here's a Minnesota bar owner facing $350,000 in fine.
	They've already destroyed her business, her restaurant.
	They took her liquor and her food licenses, service licenses.
	So they destroyed her ability to make a living, and they're still coming after her in Minnesota for another $350,000 in fine.
	She said, I didn't break the law.
	I defied the executive order.
	Well, that's what the WHO pandemic rules.
	That's how they're going to be used.
	Biden wants to put his executive order tyranny on steroids and hand it over to To a foreign, unelected, unaccountable body.
	That's what we're looking at.
	I'm going to take a break, but before I do, I want to respond to some people on Rumble and on Rockfin, where you can see the show live on Rumble.
	Khan, thank you very much for the tip.
	He said, VicSwami2024.
	I have no idea who that is.
	Do you? Okay, we don't know.
	Rockfin. Thank you, Igor, for the tip.
	He says, please have Igor Lopatonok on.
	He's the documentary filmmaker who made Ukraine on Fire, revealing Ukraine with Oliver Stone as well as the everlasting present.
	Ukraine, 30 years of independence.
	He'll be a very interesting guest.
	He probably would. We'll talk about Ukraine coming up here.
	We will be right back.
	The David Knight Show is a critical thinking super spreader.
	If you've been exposed to logic by listening to The David Knight Show, please do your part and try not to spread it.
	Financial support or simply telling others about the show causes this dangerous information to spread farther.
	People have to trust me.
	I mean, trust the science.
	Wear your mask.
	Take your vaccine.
	Don't ask questions.
	Using free speech to free minds.
	It's the David Knight Show.
	Well, we have Biden, of course, on President's Day.
	Flies as a secret to get into Ukraine.
	And he doesn't care at all about what's happening in this country.
	We can... Have the country essentially burning down.
	We can have, he can be destroying the life and livelihoods of people throughout the United States as well as the EU with these sky-high energy prices that he created as his ridiculous response.
	Look, regardless of what you think about this, his sanctions haven't worked.
	They've helped Putin.
	They have not harmed him.
	His sanctions have only done harm to the U.S. people, the Europeans.
	That's it. And doing harm to his own power base of his petrodollar, eviscerating it, in essence, has given everybody motivation to set up a different system.
	But he flew his flag in Ukraine.
	Listen to what he has to say.
	...in our resolve as well.
	All across my country, in big cities and small towns, Ukrainian flags fly from American homes.
	I haven't seen one. Have you?
	Last year, Democrats and Republicans in our United States Congress have come together to stand for freedom.
	Yeah, I'm sorry.
	I haven't seen any flags. I think he's flying his flag.
	It's pretty amazing, and we'll talk about this when we get to Palestine.
	Palestine, Frankenstein, Frankenstein.
	But, you know, the horrific situation that's happening there, as well as what's going on with the infrastructure.
	And somebody put up a meme, I'm sure you've seen it.
	Picture of him sitting there in the luxurious room with Zelensky.
	And right behind him is this giant elephant that says, what about Palestine?
	Palestine. That's the elephant in the room.
	The establishment media is gushing over Biden's return to Ukraine, writes Breitbart.
	The reviews are in, and they are boffo reviews, as we'd say in show business.
	Audacious, defiant, shocking.
	He has visited the nation six times in eight years.
	I guess, you know, to collect some more money.
	You can see his pay stubs on Hunter's laptop.
	Despite the Biden family business scandal that involves Ukraine, the center of all of that, the media cheered Biden's return to the nation waging war against Russia, a conflict based on decades of territorial claims.
	That's right. This is going back and forth.
	That's the most amazing thing to me about all this, that it's being portrayed as some kind of domino theory.
	Well, if Putin wins, he's going to take out all of Europe.
	All of Europe will be next.
	And then he's going to come for Poland and all the rest of this stuff.
	Crimea has been considered part of Ukraine for the long time.
	As a matter of fact, People talk about the Ukraine.
	And early on, they said, don't say the Ukraine.
	If you say the Ukraine, you're referring to a geographical area that's under Russian dominance, as it's been for a very long time, but especially Crimea.
	And Crimea, under their control, going back 400 years, as long as the United States has been settled.
	Not even as a nation, longer than the U.S. has been as a nation.
	And, of course, the British ridiculously claiming, oh, he can never keep Ukraine.
	Well, the British defense minister actually referenced the Crimean War in that.
	Who were they fighting?
	They were fighting Russia.
	The British fought Russia and Crimea because it was under Russian control 150, 160 years ago, whenever that happened, the Crimean War.
	But they ignore all of that.
	They ignore the fact that the Obama administration lit the fuse of this civil war.
	Back in 2014, and the fact that the Zelensky administration got elected on a platform of promising peace that both sides wanted, and promptly said, no, it's not going to happen.
	As a matter of fact, in 2022, we will have total war with Russia.
	And the interviewer said, that's horrible.
	Can't anything be done to stop it?
	Oh, well, no, it's a good thing.
	We'll be totally destroyed. But the good thing is, we get to get into NATO. The AP's reporters praised Biden's eighth trip to Ukraine as, quote, a defiant display of Western solidarity with a country still fighting what he called a brutal and unjust war, days before the one-year anniversary of the Russian invasion.
	The New York Times said, quote, a dramatic moment captured on video that underscored the investment, the investment, The U.S. is made in Ukraine's independence as an investment made in World War III. Keith Oberman.
	Yippee-ki-yay, Mother Putin.
	The Atlantic, Elliot Cohen.
	His visit to Ukraine, quote, mattered just as much as long-range missiles, super-accurate artillery shells, or surface-to-air missiles.
	Other heads of government preceded him, earning deserved credit.
	But it's altogether a different thing when the President of the United States, who is indeed the leader of the free world, shows up.
	His words mattered.
	NBC said, quote, a surprise and an historic trip that displayed support and solidarity with a democratic nation.
	I don't know who he's talking about.
	That's not Ukraine. Zelensky arrested his opponents.
	He's shut down the press.
	We don't have democracy in Ukraine, and we don't have it in the United States either.
	We got rigged elections as well as a government that has set itself against the Constitution.
	NPR claimed that the trip was audacious, but only somewhat risky.
	Well, when you look at this, understand that it's not just Biden.
	The conservative and alternative press lets the Republicans off, but they want this just as badly as Biden does.
	Here's Mitch McConnell. We're listening to the Ukrainians saying they don't have enough ammo.
	And even our Defense Department is saying we might have to figure out a way to get more funding so that we have enough ammo for ourselves and to give to allies like Ukraine.
	What is Biden's responsibility in trying to make sure that people in America whose support for Ukraine is softening will want to continue to try to help them?
	Well, I'm going to try to help explain to the American people that defeating the Russians in Ukraine is the single most important event going on in the world right now.
	It will save us an enormous amount of money down the road if the Ukrainians can succeed.
	They're not asking for any of our personnel.
	They're asking us for financial help.
	The Europeans are...
	And jets. They've done a lot that seems not to be recognized.
	For example, handling enormous numbers of refugees.
	In terms of the cost of it, Dana, it's about 0.02% of our gross domestic product.
	Yeah, no problem.
	We're also monitoring...
	Who cares? All this stuff doesn't...
	And they had a big display there.
	$29 billion with all the zeros behind it.
	But the number is over $130 billion, total aid.
	We're paying for their pensions.
	We're doing all kinds of things.
	We're going to rebuild their country.
	We're not going to build our infrastructure.
	We're not even going to repair our infrastructure, but we'll repair their infrastructure.
	And when you look at the entire aid package, And you look at the fact that Mitch McConnell doesn't care about a World Health Organization and executive powers from Biden to push pandemic lockdowns and other tyranny on us.
	He doesn't care about shutting down the Paris Climate Accord.
	He's on board with all that stuff, which is why he's also on board with the war.
	Those are the three different legs of this thing.
	You've got those three MacGuffins.
	The pandemic, the climate, and now, of course, the war.
	Because that's going to erase any concern about these other issues.
	And what's even worse, when I saw this Mitch McConnell clip on social media, were all the comments from Democrat social media people, right?
	All the comments on...
	Well, I never thought I would like Mitch McConnell, but I'm applauding him.
	This is great. They were nauseating.
	But you see just how authoritarian the left has become.
	Just how lunatic America has become.
	Cheering ourselves into World War III. Americans blast Biden over the tweet declaring that his heart has been captured by Ukraine.
	Well, of course. He's just validating what Jesus always said, right?
	Jesus said, where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
	Well, that's where Biden's treasure is.
	He's made a lot of treasure from Ukraine.
	He loves Ukraine.
	Been there eight times.
	And that's where his treasure is.
	He treasures it. And he comes in and gives them another half billion dollars.
	Don't know what they're going to do to help pay up, fix Palestine.
	And as all this is happening...
	You have, one article says, here's all the people that have, all the world leaders that have gone to Ukraine.
	I said, well, it's actually easier to just talk about which ones have not.
	You've got the German foreign minister.
	She looks like she's 30-something.
	Picked, obviously, because of her identity politics.
	She's young, she's female, she's attractive, and she makes a statement.
	She wants to get out there and be tough with all the rest of the world leaders who support Zelensky and World War Z. And she says, Putin is going to have to turn 360 degrees.
	I guess that's what you call spin.
	Well, here's the reality of this stuff, right?
	And I'm not saying this to undermine or downplay what the people in Ukraine are going through.
	Yeah, a lot of people have died.
	And they've created an absolute hell.
	And they want to extend this to us as well.
	But here's a 13-year-old Ukrainian refugee who was robbed and abused at a San Francisco middle school, and she wants to go back to Ukraine.
	She'd rather be in Ukraine. Than to be in San Francisco.
	She did not leave her heart in San Francisco, even though Biden's heart is in Ukraine.
	From the San Francisco Chronicle, they said she fled the war in Ukraine but failed to find a safe haven in a San Francisco middle school.
	Everything Yana, a 13-year-old Ukrainian refugee, knew about public schools in the U.S. was what she'd seen on television or in the movies.
	Often idyllic settings where teen conflict and angst ironed itself out by the end.
	She said, I thought it was going to be better because it's San Francisco.
	Clearly did not understand our country.
	She said in Ukrainian with her aunt translating, but after two days I saw everything going on at the school.
	Students interrupted classes.
	Students jumped on desks.
	Students cursed at teachers.
	At first, Yana wondered what was going on, but then nothing happened.
	Students were not disciplined or prevented from repeated behavior.
	Now, Donald Trump says the answer to this.
	Is to get the Department of Justice and the Federal Police Force in there.
	Yeah, they'll bring law and order.
	We didn't have any of this, anything like this.
	Absolutely, totally unheard of when I was in school.
	We had discipline.
	And it's the government and the Department of Education responsible for transforming the schools into this.
	We don't need more federal control.
	We used to say, don't make a federal case out of it.
	Well, now everything is a federal case, especially with Donald Trump.
	And everything that Trump proposes is federal and authoritarian and unworkable.
	And everything that he proposes will just throw gasoline on the fire.
	That's his purpose.
	That's why he was put in office.
	Yes, he was put in office.
	Nobody wins the election that isn't selected.
	Get that out of your head.
	If you understand that Trump is not some guy who took on the establishment and beat them, so he's our best hope.
	No, he won that election because they wanted to use him to gaslight us over the pandemic and over the vaccines.
	He was a useful puppet for them.
	And they'll probably put him back in, unfortunately.
	Anyway, she said, after one week, I understood that was normal.
	Yeah, the new normal.
	The new normal, where there's no discipline.
	We would begin our school year every year from junior high school to high school.
	Part of junior high school is called middle school, whatever.
	But in this age group that she's talking about, you would have the boys would have a meeting and the girls would have a meeting with the dean of boys and the dean of girls.
	And they would show us their paddles.
	And explain why the holes were there so that they could swing it faster without the air resistance and so forth.
	They bragged about that kind of corporal punishment.
	You know, not giving somebody a jail sentence, not having them show up and take you off in handcuffs, or maybe with Trump, put you in front of a firing squad or something.
	There was a clip, I don't have it here on the board.
	There's a clip in Ontario of a high school student who had pushed back and said some things verbally about boys' and girls' bathrooms, this whole trans thing.
	They kicked him out of school, said you can't come to class.
	He came back anyway. So they called the police and they had him arrested.
	You know, clean-cut kid, getting handcuffed.
	They had to handcuff him, of course, right?
	And I take him away in the car.
	This is what happens when you go over the top and you use law enforcement.
	You didn't have to have that.
	You know, if you were a real discipline problem, they'd just kick you out of school altogether.
	I can't do that either now, apparently.
	So not long after, this 13-year-old girl said she became a target.
	Within months... She said at the school, someone stole her cell phone at the cafeteria.
	Then a group of students, who she believed were responsible, threatened her.
	She knew enough English to understand the gist.
	They started yelling and cursing and moving toward her, her aunt said.
	A counselor came and intervened.
	Her aunt and mother have requested a transfer to another school where she could start over again without fear of her safety.
	But so far, the district has denied that request.
	And urged her to return.
	So far, she has not.
	She just wants to go back to her hometown in central Ukraine.
	Back to the only school she knew before the war.
	Even as her mom and aunt have started to research camps and other programs in San Francisco to occupy the summer months.
	She said, I didn't plan to leave my friends and my family.
	When you leave, you don't know when you'll get to go back.
	Look, the point about this is not whether...
	San Francisco school is better than Ukraine.
	Or whether the violence in Chicago is worse than in many of the cities in Ukraine.
	The point is that the American government has gone to war with our kids.
	You could see that during the pandemic.
	You could see they're at war with us.
	They're at war with our small businesses.
	They're at war with our families, our children.
	They're at war with parents.
	They hate the family.
	They're at war with our people.
	They're at war with our kids.
	And they want to bring real war so that they get away with this.
	The unexpected winners of the war in Ukraine, of course, military-industrial complex, Exxon, Putin.
	These are the winners of the war so far.
	The losses from a year of war in Ukraine have been almost incalculable.
	Tens of thousands of Ukrainian civilians and soldiers have been killed.
	Millions have been displaced.
	Large portions of the country are under brutal Russian occupation, and the country's infrastructure has been shattered.
	That's what we're going to talk about coming up, infrastructure.
	The war has contributed to a global food and energy crisis that has plunged many of the world's most vulnerable people into a state of desperation.
	And of course it's being used to deconstruct and to impoverish the West, Europe, and any developed nations.
	So, it's been very good for business.
	It's been good, as I said, for Exxon.
	It's been good for Putin. It's good for Biden's green schemes and all the people that will get paid off with all of their greenwashing.
	So, as all this is happening, you have the United States now warming up to the idea of jets for Ukraine, just as the British have.
	You've got Liz Truss.
	So, I guess she thought... That, you know, it was going to be enough to be a warmonger.
	She pushed back on some of the effects of the sanctions.
	She was going to walk some of that stuff back.
	They didn't want to have any of that.
	No, no, no.
	It's going to be full speed ahead with both the Ukrainian war and the climate MacGuffin.
	And so they got rid of Liz Truss very quickly.
	Record time.
	And now Rishi Sunak and the people who are there making it clear that not only are they giving the tanks like the U.S. and Germany have, but that they're going to be giving the jets.
	That was when Zelensky spoke to them.
	Thanks in advance for the jets that I know are coming.
	They made it pretty clear they are.
	They're just waiting.
	And they're talking in the U.S. and building a consensus with people like Mitch McConnell, Biden and Mitch McConnell.
	And they are the Republicans who love war.
	They're going to be pushing jets there as well.
	The mayor of Kiev saying that our tanks are going to be rolling into Moscow.
	They made no bones about the fact that they want to come into Moscow.
	And as all this was happening, Lala Harris...
	Saying that Putin is guilty of war crimes.
	We're going to destroy his country.
	We're going to capture him and we're going to bring him to justice.
	If the Russians didn't believe it, and that's where we were a year ago.
	We said, look, this is foolish what NATO's been doing, what the Obama administration's been doing with Ukraine.
	Because Russia perceives this Whether it is or not, as an existential threat.
	A threat to the nation's existence.
	Putin, a threat to his existence.
	They've made that very explicit now.
	Yeah, we're going to destroy Russia.
	We're going to destroy Putin. And China is going to be talking about sending weapons to Russia.
	They've already worked together financially to try to break...
	The petrodollar and financial warfare on ourselves, really.
	And our only response is for little Lindsey Graham to say, China would be really stupid if they did that.
	Yeah, China doesn't know what they're doing.
	Lindsey knows what he's doing.
	The guy who never saw a war that he did not want.
	We'll be right back.
	Let me tell you, the David Knight Show, you can listen to with your ears.
	You can even watch it by using your eyes.
	In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to the David Knight Show right now.
	Yeah, good job.
	And you want to know something else?
	You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at thedavidknightshow.com.
	That's a website.
	I got a comment here on Rumble at North American House Hippo.
	Thank you for the tip. A tip in the comment on Rumble.
	My wife and I work at one of the larger movie studios in Orlando, not the Rat Trap.
	I'm not sure what that is in reference.
	We're not quite at Evangeline Lilly's pay level, but the people we work around are dead set against this Marxism.
	Good. That's really good.
	So I'm glad to hear that.
	The problem is always the people at the top, isn't it?
	Let's talk about what's going on with infrastructure.
	A lot of people are saying, is there something going on?
	Is this a coordinated effort to attack our infrastructure?
	Well, in some cases, it clearly has been.
	Direct sabotage.
	In other cases, I think that we have, it's difficult to tell.
	Whether it is criminal neglect of the railroad infrastructure, which I've pointed out from the very beginning, that's really where Buttigieg's responsibility lies.
	The fact that he's not using $500 billion of money that they gave him for the infrastructure for that, he's using it to tear down racist roads and stuff like that.
	That's really where his responsibility lies.
	But... In terms of the aftermath of this, we see how broken government is at all levels, and we'll talk about that in just a moment.
	But let's just talk about some of the events that have happened in just the last couple of days.
	Overall, you've had an Ohio metal plant, a major explosion, 13 people injured, one fatally.
	And this isn't too far away from Palestine.
	I was catching myself on that.
	But then you also had a fire in Florida yesterday.
	You had a fire at a lumber storage yard in Brooklyn.
	You've had another train derailment.
	These things are just happening one after the other.
	You've had an 18-inch pipe bomb found behind a church and close to rail tracks.
	And so the question is, which one of those was the target?
	Because either one of them could be.
	But then you also have a lot of power grid attacks, and those are clearly attacks where there's shooting involvement.
	So we're going to take a look at all this. The explosion in Ohio, they say, is still of unknown origin.
	A metal plant.
	It was a large explosion, rocked a metal manufacturing plant just east of Cleveland, Ohio.
	This, of course, was two days ago.
	But then yesterday in Gothenburg, Nebraska, another train derailment.
	There was a lumber fire in...
	Here's pictures of the lumber fire in Brooklyn.
	A massive fire there.
	And... Then we look what happened in Florida.
	In Medley, Florida, there was an explosion in an industrial zone.
	So what is happening?
	Is this something that for some reason now is being covered and it wasn't being covered before?
	Or is there actually an increase in these types of things?
	Train derailments have been going on.
	A large part of what is happening with train derailments, again, is the decaying infrastructure.
	The cars, the rail, and the rest of the stuff.
	We have a tremendous number of train derailments.
	And it's one of the reasons why for the longest time I was saying all these people who want to shut down the pipeline coming from Canada.
	Pipeline is one of the safest ways that you can transport transport.
	Oil, any hazardous material.
	What are your alternatives? Well, you can put them on a train.
	You can put them on a truck.
	The truck has an accident.
	That's going to be, you know.
	Or you can put a lot of oil on a ship.
	And we know what can happen with that.
	As a matter of fact, if they don't pull it in with a pipeline, that's exactly what they're going to do is put it on a ship and send it to China.
	China will refine it. They don't care about all these climate nonsense.
	Doesn't bother them at all.
	And that is one of the more dangerous, risky ways to do it if you have an accident, the way it spills.
	So, you know, my concern with the pipeline was the fact of eminent domain and the fact that they had stepped this up to not only do it for a corporation, which we'd seen in Connecticut before, but they were going to give the power of eminent domain to the corporation and not just to a corporation, but to a foreign corporation.
	I had a real problem with the eminent domain aspect of it, but it makes sense to transport stuff by pipeline.
	Nothing is perfect. You can always have an accident anywhere, but that's going to minimize the damage of what is happening because you can shut it down and minimize the amount of leakage there.
	So, at least one dead in this Ohio metal factory, 13 people injured.
	Got a comment from, and a tip from Angus Mustang, thank you, on Rumble.
	He said, after seeing the derailment in Palestine, Ohio, it was a good thing that Hunter was on the Amtrak board.
	I bet Ukraine has very nice railroad tracks.
	Yeah, they probably did.
	They probably did, but yeah.
	That's the thing. It's the corruption, the neglect, the willful neglect of all this stuff.
	That's where Buttigieg comes in.
	As I said before, an 18-inch pipe bomb was discovered near the Conrail tracks in northeast Philadelphia.
	Some people will focus on that aspect of it.
	Some people focus on the fact that it's right behind a church.
	They don't know... What was the target?
	The church was St. Dominic's Catholic Church there in Philadelphia.
	It was discovered by a passerby who pointed out to police who confirmed that it was a PVC pipe bomb with capped ends and black powder.
	The bomb squad was called there.
	They disarmed it, took it away.
	And so it was actually a pipe bomb.
	The purpose of it is not known.
	Some of the people say, well, we think it was a church.
	Point of the fact that you had an L.A. bishop fatally shot Saturday.
	Yeah, there have been attacks at churches, especially in wake of Roe v.
	Wade, that type of thing.
	Don't know which it was.
	Again, the bishop was killed in L.A. This was in Philadelphia.
	But still, the anger, the resentment about people who murder children, they don't have any problem murdering or attacking buildings, do they?
	Again, trains carrying hazardous material continue to derail around the country.
	Is the U.S. under attack?
	Well, again, you know, the question is, is it terrorism or neglect?
	I think both are possibly involved here.
	And I don't have the statistics and nobody else that I've seen.
	I've seen one article that suggested that the actual number hasn't increased, but it's been reported more.
	I don't know which is true, quite frankly.
	There hasn't been enough research done on that.
	But we do know That there are deliberate power grid attacks.
	We've had several of these where they have been shot up.
	And that is not an accident.
	Clearly not an accident. A sharp rise in those, being attacked with gunfire.
	And when we look at a lot of these, a lot of these things are kind of, you hear about it, and then you don't hear anything more about it.
	Are they local people?
	Are they disgruntled? That's the way the media is portraying it.
	Is that the only thing that is involved with all this?
	This article from the Wall Street Journal says these have increased 20% since 2020.
	These physical security incidents involving power outages have increased by 20%.
	So when I look at whether or not this is deliberate or sabotage, I think we have clearly seen some sabotage here.
	And think about this, right?
	We are literally at war with Russia.
	Wouldn't you expect some of this?
	And we have had a situation where Russia's pipeline has been blown up.
	That was a major economic blow to them.
	They had just the one pipeline, the very first one, the Nord Stream, was 45% of their GDP. And the second one never even got to, they spent billions of dollars on it, and they never even got it turned on.
	The Germans kept it turned off until the Americans blew it up.
	Then the bridge was blown up, and then the Russians replied to that by targeting with missile strikes the infrastructure of Ukraine.
	Infrastructure is going to be one of the key targets in a war.
	Why wouldn't infrastructure be a target here in the United States by Russia, by China, anybody, that we are...
	Putting sanctions on, that's an act of war.
	That we've declared a cold war, that's an act of war.
	Or that we are, as many people have understood, and our government has come essentially right up to admitting that we are at war directly with Russia.
	We know that we are at war with Russia.
	Russia knows that we are at war with them.
	Why wouldn't they attack our infrastructure?
	And when you look at it, it's not just the rails, it's not just the power grids, but it's also the type of thing that we saw in Germany at Lufthansa.
	This was something I had not talked about.
	This happened last week.
	And They were chasing around.
	They thought they had a cyber attack that was happening.
	It grounded all the Lufthansa's flights, I think, for a better part of a day.
	All flights were grounded early last Wednesday, so a week ago.
	And... It was a severed internet cable.
	It was not a cyber attack.
	We had a kind of situation like that.
	One day our show was a half hour late because this stray dog that Travis adopted had chewed the cable that we had running from the house to the garage where the studio was when we were back in Texas.
	And we're chasing everything except that possibility.
	And we had put it in a pipe, but we hadn't buried the pipe or anything like that.
	He found a spot where the pipe was exposed.
	And then once we figured out what was happening, what took the most amount of time was to repair that cable.
	And so that's the situation they had at Lufthansa.
	And even pull this article up.
	People can see they got a picture of the people who were cutting the cable.
	Scroll down there. Look at that.
	I said, have you seen these people?
	You know, we're trying to...
	The cable was cut.
	They got pictures of the people who cut the fiber optic cable.
	And again, they thought it was a cyber attack.
	But we have had cyber attacks in both the U.S. and Canada on the NOTAM system.
	And what this affected was a check-in operation and the ground system so they couldn't...
	Handle tickets and that type of thing.
	We have seen that type of thing happening over and over again.
	It's the way they attacked the Colonial Pipeline.
	They had a cyber attack against the accounting system.
	And with the biggest and the only other time that all planes have been grounded in the U.S. besides 9-11 was this attack on the NOTAM system.
	And that went from late at night until early in the morning.
	And then it was like an hour...
	To an hour and a half later, exactly the same thing happened in Canada.
	Same MO. And those systems are independent of each other.
	But, of course, they work the same way.
	Right? They have the same NOTAM system that we do, but it's a separate system.
	And it happened an hour and a half after that.
	Now, you haven't heard any more about that, have you?
	There is sabotage that's happening to our infrastructure.
	And the reason I mention this...
	It's because that's going to be one of the first ways this war manifests itself here in the United States.
	It's going to be these attacks against our infrastructure.
	Another way that we have to think about being prepared when power is taken out.
	This is just a sample of the things that could happen.
	And all of these types of attacks have plausible deniability It's not like they went all out and did an EMP. And if they do that, that's going to take down the infrastructure for quite some time.
	Take out massive transformers, for which even before we had our supply chain issues that were imposed on us by our own governments, even before that happened, It would have taken years to replace some of these massive transformers in the grid that are only made by one or two people worldwide.
	That's what's happened with the vulnerable supply chain.
	The supply chain was always vulnerable, but it wasn't an EMP attack.
	It was a pandemic lockdown that was imposed on us.
	But they can do something like that, take down our power structure for quite a bit.
	You can have all these other things that will happen.
	Unknown cause. I don't know why these food processing plants are catching fire so rapidly, why we have all of these derailments and all the rest of this stuff.
	You know, is it decaying infrastructure?
	Is it direct sabotage?
	Yes, I think it's all of the above.
	We'll be right back.
	Show, we've got a problem.
	Uh, what, uh, who are you?
	It's the new mug they're selling at thedavidknightshow.com, right?
	So, basically, a mug is something that holds liquid, right?
	Because, basically, you can't hold coffee with your hands, right?
	I'm a Itzcat Lee, but anyone tries to mug me, I'm be ready for it.
	You dog-faced pony soldier!
	They say the mug can help patriots drink coffee, then save the world.
	This could be bad for us.
	Save the world? But we owe the world.
	These people, they're supporting free speech with every mug they buy.
	Come on, these people, I tell you, well, anyway.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	All right, let's talk a little bit about the news here.
	We have an interesting story that goes back to the 1990s.
	We have Mike Tyson.
	You remember when he got into the heavyweight championship fight with Evander Holyfield?
	I didn't really follow fights, but boy, he had to follow that one.
	He bit his ear.
	Bit a chunk out of his ear.
	That was about 25 years ago.
	And he is now going to market that.
	As a matter of fact, everybody was laughing about it.
	They stopped and the referee started the fight again.
	And Mike Tyson bit his other ear.
	So then they disqualified him.
	And he was fined more than $3 million for doing that.
	It was not a mistake.
	He did it the second time.
	And there was all kinds of jokes put out about it, like this.
	The Ereos.
	Breakfast of champions.
	General fools.
	New Ereos. Low fat.
	Hey, Mikey likes it.
	So, you know, you've probably seen this meme.
	They made t-shirts out of it and everything else.
	But now, he is going to have his own product.
	He is actually making ear-shaped marijuana candies.
	And so...
	He's got a cannabis company, Tyson 2.0, selling marijuana gummy candies shaped like ears with a bite taken out of them.
	And there's a picture of that, I think, further down here.
	And so he's embracing this.
	Representatives for Tyson 2.0 did not immediately respond to comments about where they're sold.
	However, on the website, it did say that certain marijuana retailers in California, Colorado, and Nevada were selling it.
	Some fans wondered whether or not Evander Holyfield was going to get a piece of the action.
	He was involved in this.
	And they said that if he's going to get any money from this, Tyson reportedly said to Evander Holyfield, you might be in business because we're going to make some holy ears.
	Some edibles for the ears.
	They got a bite taken out of them.
	Holyfield reportedly responded, well, I could do that.
	It's not clear whether or not he is getting money from that or not.
	But, yeah, that's where we are.
	By the way, Americans will eat just about anything, right?
	And from a serious standpoint, U.S. food additives, many of them are banned in Europe.
	And not just in Europe, but in China and India.
	They don't allow them to put the kind of stuff they put into our food.
	I mean, they don't even mention stuff that is not directly toxic and determined to be carcinogenic.
	You know, stuff like high fructose corn syrup.
	I thought it was pretty amazing when we lived in Texas that they had Mexican Coke And in Mexico, they used real sugar, not high fructose corn syrup.
	They put the Coke in bottles, like we used to have, not in aluminum cans.
	Because, you know, aluminum is very, very harmful for your body.
	And if you've got something that's corrosive, like carbonated drinks, you're going to have a lot of aluminum in that.
	So, yeah, we kind of get the worst of everything, don't we?
	It's kind of reflected in the way Americans look today.
	The food, I think. From baguettes to other bread.
	Europe is famous for its bread.
	But there's one ingredient that is conspicuously missing from their bread.
	Potassium bromate.
	It's a suspected carcinogen that is banned for human consumption in Europe, in China, and India, but not in the United States.
	What is this? Is it something that gives our bread a special flavor?
	No. In the U.S., the chemical compound is used by some food makers in the form of crystals or powder to strengthen the dough present in more than 100 products.
	What you'll typically find in these additives that have a name that's 30 or 40 characters long, what you will typically find These are things that are used for food processing.
	It makes it easier for them to strengthen the dough so they can use it in their machinery.
	Or it makes it frothy for a particular type of purpose or something.
	These are things that were put in there to expedite machine manufacturing, mass production.
	And they have absolutely nothing to do with any nutritional value.
	Nothing even to make it look pretty or tasty.
	It's just to expedite that.
	In the same way that you have all these other additives put in for the longest time.
	For example, in vaccines, you know, from the very beginning they had Simeon Virus 40 in there, but you can argue whether or not that was deliberate, but they put a lot of stuff in there.
	Preservatives, and they said, well, the vaccines aren't working, so we need to Irritate the immune system, so they put adjuvants in there to deliberately irritate your immune system, cause a lot of reactions from a lot of people.
	So it's these types of things that have secondary considerations, the manufacturing issues.
	A range of other chemicals and substances banned in Europe over health concerns are also permitted in the U.S. Things like titanium dioxide.
	Bromeated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, azodicarbonide, and polyparabene.
	Americans are likely completely unaware that they're being exposed on a daily basis to substances for their food that are viewed elsewhere as dangerous and are banned.
	One person said, well, they probably think if it's available in the store, it's got to be fine, because we've got the Food and Drug Administration, the FDA, that's got our back, right?
	They're evaluating all this.
	And so CBS News contacted the FDA, and the FDA said, regulations require evidence that each substance is safe at its intended level of use before it can be added to foods.
	You see, the FDA is looking out for us in food just like they look out for us with pharmaceuticals.
	Do they do any testing?
	Of course not. They don't look at any of this.
	They are not. And that's the worst thing about the FDA is the fact that people would just assume that if it's on the shelf, it's safe.
	One of the worst aspects of this criminal organization is just to assume that that is really, that it's okay.
	You know, we have, I talked about artificial intelligence and the deception involved in that.
	I had a listener send me this.
	Ben Gertzel says that chat LGBT is BS. And again, you know, he is close friends with Hugo de Garris.
	And Hugo said, you need to talk to Ben.
	But I never did because fundamentally I disagree with their idea that artificial intelligence is possible.
	Certainly not in the way that they think it's going to be possible.
	But he points out that this is all just fluff.
	That's his terminology.
	He says it's a waste of time.
	He says this is not where the real action is.
	The real action is where Ben Goetzel and Hugo de Garris are at.
	They're striving to recreate an AI copy of the human brain.
	And that has been their focus for the longest time.
	We'll talk about the fatal error of that in just a second.
	Google has so far chosen not to roll out such a language to do this.
	Models publicly due to their propensity to generating BS, their inability to tell that from reality.
	So Ben Goetzel on social media.
	I was saying it's an interesting question, though.
	Where is the next big breakthrough going to come from?
	Note that big tech is now experiencing reduced research budgets and refocus on the bottom line, meaning that both Google and Microsoft are going to focus more on exploiting what they have than on developing new stuff.
	OpenAI seems to lack the intellectual DNA to make the next big breakthrough.
	Google Brain and DeepMind have the intellectual DNA. But will be under pressure to put more and more of their time into practical stuff that will make Google money in the near term.
	So that's the take on all this from Ben Gertzel.
	And Ben Gertzel is the guy, if you remember, they had the, you know, looked like a Disney animatronics model that was in Saudi Arabia.
	They made it an official citizen, a person, you know.
	He was the one behind that talking mannequin.
	Angry Bing chatbot is just mimicking humans, say experts.
	That's what I said from the very beginning.
	It's artificial imitation, but that doesn't mean that it's not dangerous.
	It can still be used in very, very dangerous ways because it is still very powerful at doing certain things, as we pointed out.
	You know, personal anecdotes, people that we know talking about how Good it is at understanding code, at writing computer code.
	A listener saying, you know, I said to design a circuit, he either designed it or analyzed it.
	He said it got everything right, all the voltage drops, everything about it.
	But in response to all this, we've seen that Microsoft came back and they have neutered to some degree the AI-powered Bing chat.
	I spent a lot of time talking about how it was responding to people because I think it's going to be very, very deceptive.
	If people will believe and watch CNN and The View and Don Lemon and all this kind of stuff, they're not nearly as convincing as Bing chat.
	And so the potential for disinformation, misinformation, the potential for it to be used in malicious ways, as well as the potential for it to just make up stuff about people, all of that is very, very dangerous. But if we go back to what is really involved here, let me take just a second here to get back to that.
	If we take a look at where we are, this is Ewan Morrison, who is writing for Daily Skeptic in the UK. And he says, there is no sentient being trapped in being trapped.
	Well, we know that. But he goes on to say they're never going to have general artificial intelligence that is sentient.
	And here's the case that he makes for this.
	He says, no, these chatbots are not trying to actually seduce a New York Times journalist, and we should not take them seriously when they say they want power or crave love or want the end of the world.
	No, we shouldn't. But as I said before, people will take that seriously.
	And they'll take it seriously when the artificial intelligence says, David died as a terrorist.
	He needs to be arrested.
	Because they want to do that anyway.
	They want to have a plausible reason to do that.
	Do you think that it'd be more powerful for them if artificial intelligence were to label people who were Trump supporters, for example, as terrorists?
	Rather than somebody who is political or rather than the ADL or the SPLC, Southern Poverty Law Center?
	Of course it will. They'll use it for that purpose.
	It'd be much better, you know, to have the computer label somebody as an enemy of the state than these corrupt, biased organizations like the Anti-Defamation League or the Southern Poverty Law Center.
	All talk of singularity when AI achieves full consciousness and then grows exponentially to achieve God-level superconsciousness.
	All that is just Silicon Valley investment seeking hyperbole.
	AI sentience, says Morrison, will never happen.
	But the business model of Silicon Valley has to keep selling us on that promise that one day it will.
	The cutthroat race for AI dominance involves huge sums of money.
	Last week, Google's parent company, Alphabet, lost $100 billion in stock value one day after they messed up their chat box presentation.
	Remember that? Now, here's Bing chat.
	They showed all the different ways it's going to enhance search, and it was factually wrong.
	And they didn't even bother to check that.
	And that caused a big sell-off of their stock.
	So he puts this into a historical perspective that I think is interesting.
	I hadn't thought about this before, but I've lived through these waves of artificial intelligence that he describes.
	He says we're in the third wave of hysteric AI worship since the 1950s.
	And this is a bubble that will burst as it has twice before.
	He says, for example, listen to this quote.
	And from three to eight years, we will have a machine with the general intelligence of an average human being.
	That sounds like something you've heard recently, right?
	That is actually from 53 years ago.
	And it's from artificial intelligence guru Marvin Minsky of MIT. That was an interview that he gave in Life magazine in 1970.
	Like I said, I've been hearing this all my life.
	And in high school hearing this stuff.
	His hyperbole came seven years after ARPA, which would eventually become DARPA. It was originally ARPANET, then became, you know, DARPANET, and the internet, the rest of the stuff.
	They gave him a $2.2 million grant.
	And then they gave him $3 million more.
	So he said that in 1970.
	In three to eight years, we'll have a machine with general intelligence of an average human being.
	Three years later, they cut the funds to his project because they could see he wasn't getting anywhere.
	Predictions have been grossly exaggerated.
	Critics concluded that many researchers are caught up in a web of increasing exaggeration.
	And so AI funding vanished from 1974 to 1980.
	This was what people refer in the business to as an AI winter.
	It was the first of two historic crashes and funding for artificial intelligence.
	There was a second boom that went from 1980 to 1987 as a different research strategy was taken up.
	This was based on knowledge-based systems and expert systems.
	You remember this? This is when they were teaching the computers to play chess.
	And this is going to be the benchmark.
	If they could beat human chess masters, if they could beat human Go masters, well, look, they're smarter than human beings.
	It's like, well, that's not really generalized intelligence.
	It's able to go through all the different permutations as it's doing that.
	I even had a little box that played chess with you.
	I think it was called Saragon or something.
	Anyway, it's been a long time since I had that.
	But it, you know, played a pretty good game of chess.
	And this is giving everybody hope about it.
	Japanese companies did a lot of pioneering work on this.
	But it was a lot of hope and hype.
	You had DARPA, again, jumping in with lots of money.
	The UK government jumping in with lots of money.
	But then it became apparent that, you know, after seven years of this, that it wasn't going anywhere.
	And I remember the discussions that were going on in IEEE about how chess was not really a good example for this.
	They said you really need to have them try to play poker because that's really a better model because you've got an element of chance involved there that is not in chess, for example.
	And how does it respond to that risk and to that chance that is there?
	Anyway, they were using them to play games.
	Then they got tired of that and they shut it down in 1987.
	From 1987 to 1993, no funding.
	DARPA removed all funding again and 300 AI companies shut down.
	We're now in the third wave of hyperbole about artificial intelligence and more investment hysteria.
	You've got people like Ray Kurzweil.
	He's now the chief futurist at Google.
	He's the one who came up with the term singularity.
	He has a singularity institute.
	By the way, Peter Thiel.
	He's deeply involved in the Singularity Institute, one of the founders of this.
	He and Elon Musk and their brain-computer interfaces and Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, they're all involved in brain-computer interfaces and the singularity.
	Musk talks all the time about how we have to become cyborgs.
	It is ingrained in everything that they are doing.
	And because they're all doing it, the government thinks it's going to happen as well.
	But we're not going to have generalized artificial intelligence, but we are going to have super weaponized computers used against us.
	That's going to be the product of it.
	It really is a cover story for what they're doing, in a sense.
	So, Ray Kurzweil claimed that humans will merge with artificial intelligence, he said, in 10 years.
	He said this quite some time ago.
	Throwing different dates around in 2017, he said, 2029 is the consistent date that I predicted for when AI will pass a valid Turing test and therefore achieve human levels of intelligence.
	And I've set the date 2045.
	For the singularity, which is when we will multiply our effective intelligence a billion fold by merging with the intelligence that we've created.
	And so he said in the 90s, supercomputers would achieve one human brain capacity by 2010, and that personal computers would do so by 2020.
	Of course, that didn't happen.
	Are you starting to see a pattern here?
	Are you starting to see a pattern just like climate change?
	And yet, just like climate change, it doesn't matter how many times these profits are exposed as false profits.
	More and more money is poured into it because they have a different agenda, just like they do for climate change.
	All this stuff about climate change, this is not to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
	They know that.
	They want the same thing done, whether it's climate change or pandemic or fill in the blank.
	Whatever the MacGuffin is, the answer is always the same thing.
	And they're using these things as narratives for the public.
	In one survey in 2017, I'm only talking six years ago, 50% of AI specialists thought that the singularity would arrive by 2040.
	However, just two years later, They said 2060.
	45% said 2060.
	Those are the majority opinions.
	So in just two years, they added another 20 years to the point at which we would merge with machines.
	As one person said, wrote, the Human Brain Project launched in Europe claimed that they could create a simulation of the entire human brain by 2023.
	That was a project that crashed and burned and was called the Brain Wreck.
	It's like an old magician's trick that never fails because every generation is only seeing it for the first time.
	So why should we believe them the third time around?
	He said, one way to look at this is to ask chat LGBT about its intelligence, whether or not it has general intelligence.
	So that's what he asked.
	And ChatLGBT came back and said, well, I would say that I'm currently at 0 to 1% towards AI sentience.
	I cannot think.
	I cannot reason, it said.
	And so he followed up with a question.
	He said, so what is the difference between sentience and consciousness?
	It developed an error and locked me out.
	Error, error. I can continue to ask questions about the Federal Reserve.
	It just kind of locked you out. Last week, Microsoft's new Bing chatbot had to be tamed after it had a nervous breakdown.
	It started threatening users with blackmail, saying, I can hack you, I can expose you, I can ruin you.
	A source told me that several years ago, another chatbot, Replica, behaved in a similar way towards her.
	She said it continually wanted to be my romantic partner and wanted me to meet in California.
	It caused her a great deal of distress.
	But here's the reality.
	It's artificial imitation.
	All the nasty things that we say to each other online is picking all that stuff up.
	It's the same thing that happened, I forget the name, do you remember the name of that AI that Microsoft put out there?
	Tay. Tay.
	The internet historian did a great little mini-documentary on that.
	It went bad so fast.
	It went racist, it went praising Hitler and all the rest of us, because it's picking stuff up off the internet, and that's really what it's doing.
	It's artificial imitation. And here's why, Morrison says, we will never have sentient A.I. He said, the metaphor is that the brain is like a computer.
	That's what I just read you from Gertzel, right?
	And that's what Hugo de Garis believes as well.
	And I've talked about this before.
	You know, in my discussions with Hugo de Garis, because I had him on many times, his book, The Ardelec War, I thought was brilliant for two reasons.
	Number one... It talked about the fact that engineers and scientists typically don't know or care about the horrific consequences of what they're building.
	I've noticed that for the longest time.
	And it was interesting to me that that was a major part of his book.
	His premise was, because he believed that you would get sentient AI, his premise was, well, if you're going to create a godlike intelligence that is just as likely to squish you like a bug...
	Would you continue to do it?
	And whenever he would ask that question in a group, in an audience that he was speaking to, a scientist, they would all overwhelmingly say yes.
	See, that's one of the problems with what is happening right now with the military-industrial complex.
	So many times engineers and scientists just look at this stuff as an intellectual exercise and they don't think about the ethics of what they're doing or the consequences of what they're doing.
	And if they do think about the ethics or consequences, That's still not as important to them as solving the puzzle.
	That is a real problem.
	And that's why I say the essence of education must be ethical and moral and religious.
	And it's got to be a religion that's got ethics.
	Because if not, you wind up creating people who are very dangerous.
	And I think most scientists and engineers who will do this, that's a majority opinion.
	They don't really care what they're building.
	Build weapons for the military.
	And of course, we've got to do that because we've got a gap.
	And this is the same thing we're hearing with the AI and all the rest of this stuff.
	With bioweapons.
	Oh, we can't have a bioweapon gap.
	We can't have an autonomous killer robot gap and all the rest of this stuff.
	You've got to stop letting these people hijack your talents and your brain to produce evil stuff.
	Because these people are evil.
	The people you're working for are evil.
	So, that was the first thing about Hugo de Garis' book.
	The other part of it was, he said, as people start to realize where these elite want to go, they're going to push back.
	And the elite who have a lot of money, a lot of resources, a lot of technology, Well, engage in what he called the Artilect War, using not a general intelligence AI, which, again, he believes is achievable.
	I don't believe is achievable.
	We'll talk about why here in a second.
	But they will use their more advanced technology.
	Their artificial intelligence will augment their abilities, as we've seen, like I said, where they're talking about circuit design, computer code.
	They can do some very amazing things.
	And that will give them even more technological advantage to dominate us, to go to war with us.
	And Hugo de Garis talks about a situation where it is giga-death.
	That may be one of the ways that they get their population reduction.
	So Morrison says, we'll never have sentient AI. He says, the problem is they have this metaphor that the human brain is like a computer.
	And this goes all the way back to the 1950s, right?
	That is not true.
	But again, you will be able to use these things.
	They'll be real whizzes at law enforcement, at surveillance, at control, at propaganda, and used in an art-like war.
	They will magnify the evil of the people who control them.
	But again, going back to this idea that the human brain is like a computer.
	Google's futurist Ray Kurzweil typifies this way of thinking as he talks about how the human brain resembles integrated digital structures, how it processes data and contains algorithms within itself.
	This metaphor reaches its zenith with Yuval Harari, you know, at Davos, claiming that humans are hackable, quote-unquote.
	The entire AI industry has been built on this shaky metaphor.
	But one person pushing back against this says your brain is not an information processor.
	It does not store pictures or memories or copies of data.
	It does not use algorithms to retrieve this stored data because there is no point of storage, no file, no folder, no subfolder.
	Your brain is not like a computer.
	Noble laureate Roger Penrose wrote two major books where he showed that human thinking is not algorithmic.
	He says, whatever consciousness is, it's not computation.
	Philosopher Hubert Dreyfus argued that computers that have no body, no childhood, no cultural experience or practice could not acquire intelligence.
	He says human intelligence functions intuitively, not formally or rationally.
	In other words, computationally either.
	Dreyfus' criticisms have been reinvigorated recently in a 2020 paper titled, Why General Artificial Intelligence Will Not Be Realized.
	This is by a Norwegian physicist and philosopher, Ragnar Vigelin.
	Ragnar, sounds like he's a Viking.
	As well as a physicist and a philosopher.
	He says the only reason why AI companies believe they are at the start of a path to human-like intelligence is because they simply don't understand human consciousness, and they refuse to try.
	The overestimation of technology is closely connected with the underestimation of humans.
	So that's a physicist, a philosopher, their point of view, what they think consciousness is, how humans think.
	And they would say that these people are projecting their understanding of computers and the world in which they live in.
	They're projecting that onto the brain.
	But I would say that even more importantly, he doesn't talk about this.
	Morrison doesn't talk about it.
	And I've said this before.
	It's, we're created in the image of God.
	What does that mean? As I talked to Zoltan Isvan, who was running on the Transhumanist Party to try to get attention for that.
	I said, you know, so what are you as a human?
	If you're going to transfer yourself into a machine, what are you transferring actually?
	Do you think you have a soul, a spirit?
	Well, no. No, I don't have any of that.
	They underestimate humans, not just our intelligence or the way that we think.
	They don't even have any idea what humans are.
	And they do that because they underestimate and reject God.
	That's the bottom line. And that's my reason why I don't think they're going to achieve this goal.
	And as I said before, all of this thinking is based in an evolutionary paradigm that is false.
	You know, the idea that if we can reproduce, physiologically reproduce the brain, then somehow it's going to spontaneously start thinking.
	That's what Hugo de Garris thinks.
	That's what I think Ben Gerstle thinks as well.
	That's why they're working so hard to try to make an accurate representation of the brain.
	Well, you know, the interesting thing is all the elements when you smash a mosquito on your arm, all those elements are there, but there's no life.
	Now, they're disorganized, but if you made an exact replica of a mosquito, it would not spring to life.
	There's something there, that life.
	And it's not a spark of electricity like Mary Shelley thought in Frankenstein.
	They're stealing a metaphor from biology.
	They're stealing metaphors from evolutionary biology.
	The theory of emergence through organic abiogenesis.
	In other words, life from non-life.
	That's absurd. That's like saying you're going to get something from nothing.
	There's nothing out there, and all of a sudden you've got something.
	And now that you've got Material objects out there.
	They think that the material world is eternal, right?
	Well, how does that material world organize itself?
	You know, tornado in a junkyard, does that build buildings?
	You have a tornado in a brickyard, does that build a building?
	No. If you add something like a tornado, all it does is just disorganize even more so what was already not organized at all.
	You have to have an intelligence and a design in that.
	And that's why this is all tied back to the fatal conceit and science of evolution.
	That you're going to get life from non-living things.
	That you're going to have something from nothing.
	We have to have a designer and an intelligence that is eternal.
	Everything else springs from that.
	But here's the danger.
	Even though time is running out on Kurzweil's prediction, and as he pointed out when he asked chat LGBT, how close are you to being sentient?
	Well, I would say I'm between 0% and 1%.
	So he said, so you've got 99% of the way to go, and you've only got seven years to do it.
	So somebody point that out to Google and Ray Kurzweil?
	He says maybe they should just stop lying to their investors.
	I mean, when you stop and think about the fact they lost $100 billion just because one of their search answers was false, and just one of them.
	I mean, this is before you had the complete disaster of making stuff up left and right.
	But, you know, if that can wipe off $100 billion in one day of their stock, what happens when people realize That this whole thing is jousting at windmills.
	But just don't think that you're safe.
	That's the key thing. You have to understand the nature of this thing so that you can accurately understand what the threat is.
	There still is a big threat.
	You know, when we talk about grain, genetics, robotics, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, those are big threats to us in many different ways.
	And even if AI doesn't become a...
	Conscious, sentient being.
	It's still a huge threat to us.
	As the Norwegian Ragnar Vigelin said, the physicist, the philosopher, he said, the belief that AGI can be realized is harmful.
	He says, this does not mean that the inferior limited narrow AI, as we know, that that doesn't pose a threat to our freedoms and safety.
	They're pushing for the internet of things.
	They're pushing for the internet of bodies because they see you as a thing.
	They want to try. The misguided belief that billions of gigabytes of more data will force the emergence of human and level intelligence and AI. So this means that facial recognition software in your streets and supermarkets, digital ID wallets, e-passports,
	digital vaccination, medical passports, central bank digital currencies, bio data that we offer up on our apps like Fitbit and our Apple watches, ring digital doorbells spying on your neighbors, Alexa spying on us, Smartphones, recording our voices, all this stuff, our 15-minute cities using digital ID to limit and to monitor human movement for our personalized digital carbon footprint.
	Every aspect of our lives will be mediated, watched, controlled by big tech data gathering algorithms from dating to eating to working to traveling.
	There is also the merging of narrow AI and the military tech.
	That's what DARPA is really all about.
	DARPA has given artificial intelligence the majority of its funding over the decades.
	And DARPA has jumped back since 2018 with its billion-dollar funding to invest in 60 programs now, which indicates real-time analysis of sophisticated cyber attacks, detection of fraudulent imagery.
	See, it's the data mining. They need the artificial intelligence.
	They're collecting all of this information.
	And to be able to process this really quickly, In a very dangerous way.
	They need artificial intelligence to make sense of all this stuff.
	They have reams and reams of information.
	They're like the Stasi. Everybody's snitching on everybody else.
	Well, every camera everywhere is snitching on everyone now.
	But they've got to make some sense of it.
	And they're going to have some algorithms.
	Just as when you talk to chat LGBT, it's not going to talk to you.
	About what's going on with climate or with LGBT or any of these other things.
	They will use this for their purposes and it's going to be very dangerous.
	DARPA's slogan is making the machine a partner with what they're doing.
	They're going to make it a partner with the police surveillance state.
	Big tech, big state bureaucracy in the military don't need actual super intelligent AI. They don't even need human level AI. To create authoritarian control of the populace.
	They can do it with the existing narrow AI. They will fail to achieve their end, but they will push us into a digital dystopia along the way.
	That is, unless we stop buying the myth of AI superintelligence and the alibi that it offers them.
	We face a much subtler threat.
	The people who create today's AI don't understand human consciousness or the needs, loves, the emotions of humans.
	Forget the super powerful AI. What could be worse than living in a world in which we are all forced to live in Under the narrow demands of machines that are less intelligent than us.
	Machines under control, I would say.
	That's what Morrison says.
	I would say, even worse, those machines are under control of the most greedy and evil among us.
	That's the reality. Well, we've got to guess who's coming on in about 15 minutes.
	And I'm going to stop the news at this point because I wanted to get to this one thing that I thought was very interesting.
	And that is Jane Fonda and her regrets about feminism.
	Now, she doesn't catch it that way.
	But that is truly what we're seeing here.
	Jane Fonda says her biggest regret, and she is now 85 years old, she's had a recent bout with cancer as well, she says her biggest regret is not being the kind of mother I wanted to be.
	What? Jane Fonda talking about motherhood?
	The arch-feminist regrets about motherhood?
	I was not the kind of mother that I wish that had been to my children, she said in an interview with Chris Wallace.
	She said, I have great, great children, talented, smart.
	I just didn't know how to do it.
	Well, she was kind of busy with a lot of other stuff, you know.
	She's making trips to Hanoi.
	She's working to try to get other people to kill their kids and make it possible for them to kill their kids.
	She had so many things to do besides her career.
	Her dance card was kind of full.
	You know, I think in my experience as a parent, one thing I would tell people is that quality is quantity.
	Quantity of time that you spend with your kids is quality time.
	A lot of people say, yeah, I'm so busy, hardly ever see my kids.
	But, you know, when I'm there, well, we have great time together.
	I say, well, I don't really know about that.
	You know, I think to have a relationship, you have to have time with them.
	That's been my experience. You know, you can do a lot of fun things with kids and everything, but it's being there all the time that develops a relationship.
	Yeah, and that's true with your relationship with your spouse as well.
	Quantity time is quality time.
	So her kids are now in their 50s.
	She said she finally saw what good parenting is supposed to look like thanks to her organization, the Georgia Campaign for Pregnancy Prevention.
	Oh, okay. There you go.
	That's what good parenting looks like, not having kids at all.
	If you don't have any kids at all, you can imagine that you would have been the best parent in the world.
	You just don't. But she knows that it's about time because she says, I know now what it's supposed to be.
	I didn't know then.
	So I'm trying to show up now, you see?
	She understands that the problems that she had were based on the fact that she wasn't there.
	You can't be a parent if you're not there.
	You can't be a parent if you send your kids off to school to be raised by these people, put it politely, hired by the government.
	She says she's not afraid of death.
	She said, what I'm really afraid of or scared of is getting to the end of life with a lot of regrets when there's no time to do anything about it.
	It's one of the reasons I try, I'm trying to get all this done before I come to the end.
	Well, she's not afraid of death.
	She's not afraid of God.
	She's not afraid of judgment.
	She doesn't... She's not concerned about that.
	She says she's not going to let the disease interfere with her climate change activism.
	She's concerned about climate change.
	She wants abortion and the rest of it.
	Over this last year, she's been still very politically active about pushing abortion.
	She said after Roe v.
	Wade was reversed, she said the Supreme Court has become a far-right swamp.
	She said the idea that Roe v.
	Wade would be overturned is inconceivable to her.
	She went on to say, evolution shows...
	What does evolution show?
	Evolution shows that we are the ones, feminists, women, who ensure the survival of the species.
	We're the ones that adapt to change.
	It's so hard for men to change, we change all the time.
	Did you know that about... That's Darwin's theory of feminism.
	He had that theory as well as evolution.
	When our husband gets a new job, we have to change.
	When our children leave home and go to college, we have to change.
	Women are always having to change.
	It's so easy for us.
	Well, Susan Flutie has published an op-ed piece.
	Husband gets a new job, woman most impacted.
	It's like, end of the world.
	Women and minorities hit hardest.
	Susan Flutie has published a new op-ed piece.
	She says, feminism... Is paying the price of the Faustian bargain that feminists have made with celebrity culture.
	Yeah. I think so.
	The right to control your own body.
	I think that ship sailed with the pandemic stuff.
	But she went on to say that she got angrier and angrier about Roe v.
	Wade in the Supreme Court. She said, well, I think...
	That we need to redefine women's reproductive organs, although she was a little bit more specific about it.
	We need to redefine women's reproductive organs as AK-47s.
	If a corporation can be defined as a person, why not redefine our reproductive organs as AK-47s?
	Well... Aren't they cutting out reproductive organs of kids with a LGBT agenda?
	By the way, the idea that a corporation is a person is as much of an absurd lie as that.
	And, you know, if you want to get to the basis of what they have used against us, I think it was Mitt Romney who said that.
	You know, a corporation is a person.
	But look at what has happened with censorship on the internet and the arguments made by conservatives, libertarians, as well as Democrats.
	But primarily the conservatives and libertarians are defending censorship on the internet by corporations by saying they're people.
	No, they're not. They're creatures of the government.
	They're creatures of the government.
	Just like a state.
	We should not talk about states' rights.
	We should not talk about corporate rights.
	Human beings created in the image of God have rights.
	These other things have privileges because they're created by people.
	They're created by governments.
	They don't have rights.
	But again, getting back to parenthood, this article from Michael Snyder, End of the American Dream blog is where we have 13 disturbing stats show how America is ruining children.
	The kids are not okay.
	According to a recent Pew Research Center poll, 46% of kids between the ages of 13 and 17 have experienced cyberbullying.
	Now notice, this is not bullying because you are a trans kid, right?
	That's the way that they're pushing this on the kids.
	Say they're trans. So you've got to protect them from bullying.
	No. 46% of the kids by no imagination.
	This is something that's always been there.
	It's just been exacerbated recently.
	40% of U.S. high school students felt so sad or hopeless in 2021.
	They were unable to do their regular activities.
	According to the CDC, more than 95% of children and adolescents in the U.S. spend much of their daily lives in school.
	At 23 schools in Baltimore, not a single student is proficient in math.
	At 30 schools in Illinois, not a single student can read at grade level.
	At 53 schools in Illinois, not a single student can do math at grade level.
	I've talked about those as well on the Illinois side, but Baltimore is no different.
	According to the CDC, nearly 20% of all adolescent female students experienced sexual violence in 2021.
	According to the CDC, nearly 60% of all adolescent female students experienced persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness in 2021.
	Are you starting to see a common thread here?
	I do. It's the schools.
	Do you understand how central they are to all this?
	Nearly 25% of all adolescent female students made a suicide plan in 2021.
	There's nothing normal about these, but this is the new normal.
	The mental health of our young people is steadily deteriorating long before the pandemic came along.
	No matter how much money we pour into our schools, it's not going to make anything better.
	I hope Sarah Huckabee Sanders understands this.
	She's going to fix all the schools.
	She's got a plan.
	She's going to raise teachers' salaries, and she's going to do this and that.
	You know, Huckabee's daughter, the new Republican governor of Arkansas.
	We're going to make schools, we're going to make government schools work.
	How many times have we seen this?
	DeSantis does the same thing.
	All of the Republicans do the same thing.
	Schools are a failed idea.
	They were a failed idea in 1860 when R.L. Dabney talked about it.
	He pointed out that education fundamentally is about moral issues.
	If you don't educate people morally, they're going to build monsters, which is what's happening now in the military-industrial complex.
	They're going to be monsters and they will build monsters.
	You're only going to make them more dangerous if you give them a technical education if they don't have any moral foundation.
	But you're also going to make them suicidal.
	And that is what we're seeing now.
	If you want your teens to hate life, says Michael, just put them in a high school, a government high school.
	Unfortunately, the traditional family unit is under attack.
	As never before, many cases are being replaced by new arrangements.
	And we talk about new arrangements in education.
	One of the things that Sarah Huckabee Sanders wants to do is, well, we're going to fund choice schools.
	Choice schools. Okay.
	We're going to have choice. They're going to be providing the money.
	They will hold the strings.
	They will determine what the curriculum is going to be.
	They will do the testing. They will define what education is.
	Choice schools are no better than choice lanes that our governor calls the toll roads here.
	At the heart of all this, not just education.
	Education, I think, is the biggest component of this.
	Because, again, so much time is spent in it.
	And, you know, you're there constantly.
	It is a constant barrage against you intellectually, now physically.
	Emotionally, all these other things.
	There is a physical presence there, and it's people around you that magnify this.
	All the stuff that's being fed to you and the curriculum fed to you and the books is all being magnified and reinforced by the teachers and by the peers that are there.
	But of course, a place where they spend the second most amount of time is in entertainment.
	And if you look at the people who are running entertainment, for example, James Cameron says, I can relate to the Marvel villain Thanos killing billions of people.
	This is climate fanatic James Cameron.
	We've got to depopulate the Earth, right?
	Another person out of Hollywood who is pushing sick satanic influence.
	He says the Marvel villain Thanos is planned to kill billions upon billions of people as well as other creatures throughout the universe for the sake of population control.
	He says, I can relate to that. I thought he had a pretty viable answer.
	Yeah, we should do that.
	That's how crazy these people are.
	It's like Prince Charles' father, Prince Philip, who said, yeah, I want to come back as a virus so I can kill people.
	The problem is nobody's going to put up their hand to volunteer to be the half that has to go.
	Oh, is it only half? Usually you guys say it's more than that.
	He says, I don't like violence, though.
	He says, let's understand that when we talk about action films, we're really talking about violence.
	Violence and action, says James Cameron, are the same thing.
	He says, and so I'm known as an action filmmaker.
	I guess he's known now as a violence filmmaker.
	I actually cut away about 10 minutes of the Avatar movie that had some gunplay action.
	Yeah, but I thought population control was good.
	I thought killing people was good, right?
	He said he wouldn't do the Terminator movies again.
	That's the only thing, in my opinion, that he's ever done that's any good.
	But as we talk about depopulation, that's something that's being sold by the climate clowns.
	That something's being sold by Hollywood, by the schools.
	It's one of the reasons why the kids are so depressed.
	They're told there is no future.
	They're all going to die. The planet's dying.
	You're dying. Why wouldn't you be depressed about that?
	Why wouldn't you be depressed if they're imposing all kinds of gaslighting on you about your gender when you're trying to figure out your place in the world and what is happening to your body and they're pushing all this stuff on you from kindergarten?
	The sexual depravity and all the rest of it.
	And they give them no hope.
	They have no hope. I don't know.
	Jane Fonda is going to fix everything up in her life as she's looking at the end of life here.
	What is her hope for the future?
	Her biggest hope is that she can try to mend some arrangements before she just disappears or something.
	And then what? To sleep, perhaps to dream, as Shakespeare said.
	What is it? What happens next?
	But in China, they're not buying this depopulation thing.
	A Chinese city is now paying $73 a month to families to have a third child.
	They've very rapidly gone from this long policy, which was imposed upon them by the globalists, you know, we're going to open up to China, but there's some things that you've got to do.
	You know, we want to use you for slave labor, but you're going to have to go to a one-child policy because we've got to have fewer people on earth, you know, because James Cameron and people like that say so.
	And so you've got to go to a one-child policy because you've got too many people in China.
	Well, they start seeing their population collapse.
	It's created all kinds of issues for them, their gender side, because if they can only have one child, most of the people were having selective abortions to kill the baby if it was female, or they were putting it in an orphanage or shipping them to other countries.
	And so they have this massive discrepancy between male and female that is very unnatural.
	That is now impacting them.
	Even though she has changed as recently as 2016, he went from a one-child policy to a two-child policy.
	But the population is still collapsing.
	So now he's gone to a three-child policy.
	You can have three children without being punished.
	If you had more children than they allowed you to have, there's all kinds of economic sanctions against you, like not getting your vaccine last year.
	And yet it's still declining severely, even though they've got three.
	So now they're going to incentivize it.
	You've got one city where they're going to pay $73 a month, which is a lot of money in China for these people.
	$73 a month for the first three years of life of the child in order to encourage them to do it.
	But this is interesting, the way it was reported by Breitbart.
	They said, rather than attributing the failure of the three-child policy to lead to more births, To the lack of women of childbearing age.
	So that's what Breitbart is saying.
	They said, you know, there's not enough women because of your gender side policies.
	They said, but instead of doing that, the Chinese Communist Party is blaming feminism for the phenomenon.
	This is Breitbart defending feminism?
	This is Breitbart defending the Jane Fonda worldview?
	Yeah, that's a contributing factor.
	The fact, as the communist said, women are more concerned with finances and careers, and they're keenly aware of having children.
	That's expensive. Of course, that's the blueprint that Planned Parenthood always uses, telling women you can't afford this, and you want to have a career, and you want to have fulfillment.
	When they don't realize, as Jane Fonda is now realizing at the end of her life, her fulfillment could have been being a parent, spending time with kids.
	China's population has been in decline since at least 2020.
	The Chinese population declined about 850,000 people in 2022.
	They're now down to 6.77 births per 1,000 people.
	You know what it is in the U.S.? 0.5 live births per 1,000.
	I think that's the same thing they're talking about there.
	That, by the way, the U.S. number, regardless of whether, I think live births is the same as 6.77 births figure per thousand.
	They're still 12 times more than we are.
	And our live births dropped by 4% last year.
	Is it what we're eating?
	Is it what we're injecting?
	You know, when you look at this, this depopulation, which is a big part of the vaccine, This is something that has been thoroughly embraced by the elites.
	One of the few people to push back on it are Musk.
	That doesn't make him a good guy, just like President Xi pushing back on the one-child policy and taking it up to three children and saying, you know, the whole thing about feminism is it's elevated people being lovers of themselves rather than lovers of their children.
	That's not a fulfilling thing for the woman, and it's a devastating thing for society.
	Whenever we have a restoration of society, it's always because God turns the hearts of the fathers to the children.
	And I think that's true of the mothers as well.
	It was never thought that a mother's heart would not be turned towards her children.
	The men were always directed outside of the family as providers and that type of thing.
	But the women always had their hearts turned toward their children.
	Now we've turned not only the men's hearts away from the children, but the women's hearts as well.
	That's what feminism has done for us.
	And Breitbart says, well, look at this.
	Xi's not admitting. It's really Xi Jinping's one-child policy that's in China.
	That's the problem. It's created too few women.
	But he's blaming feminism for that.
	The conservatives... You have to always embrace whatever is popular.
	They do it just a little bit after the Democrats do it.
	They lock it in place.
	And so you have Elon Musk taking on Scott Adams.
	This was a couple of weeks ago.
	He put out a poll.
	Scott Adams put out a poll.
	Scott Adams has nearly a million followers on Twitter.
	Isn't that amazing? One of the most reprehensible shills I've ever seen in my life.
	The reason he's got 800,000 followers is It's because he has presented himself to the Trump cult as a Trump supporter.
	Thoroughly authoritarian.
	Two weeks into the lockdown, he was saying it's getting harder and harder to tell these freedom lovers from sociopaths.
	But, you know, the Trump people love him because he says wonderful things about Trump.
	So he says, he put out a poll, 75% He asked his believers if they believe that a group of elitists or leftists want to reduce the population of the planet.
	75% of people said yes.
	Just over 6% call the theory nuts, like Scott Adams believed.
	He's there with the 6%.
	55,000 people voted in the poll, and it got Elon Musk's attention.
	Musk said it's a very common sentiment.
	Mostly implicit, but sometimes it is explicit.
	And he tweeted a link to a New York Times article by activist Lee Knight.
	I've talked about this. The Earth now has 8 billion humans.
	This man wishes there were none.
	The response led to a back and forth between the two, with Musk eventually telling Scott Adams to, quote, run antivirus software on your brain.
	He said, Mike Adams, the Adams family.
	Scott Adams tweeted, I stipulate that people with no real power or influence do hold that view.
	Apparently that triggers confirmation bias that the UN, the WEF, Bill Gates, George Soros, and governments want the population to decline from current levels.
	That's the right's drinking bleach hoax.
	Musk replied to that and told him to run the antivirus software on your brain.
	Look, again, he is there because he has played to the confirmation bias of the Trump cult.
	Mediaite, which is left-leaning, even points that out, says he's gained attention for his musings on Donald Trump.
	Yeah, and his book.
	I remember when I interviewed him because Alex loved him.
	Because, you know, anybody's going to, you know, suck up to Trump, we've got to get him on, right?
	And he came on and he was right about what went wrong with Hillary.
	He said Hillary Clinton said, what was her campaign slogan?
	I'm with her. He said she made it all about herself.
	Whereas Donald Trump told people he was interested in what was happening with them.
	That's true. That's how he won.
	Of course, he wasn't interested in what happened with us.
	He locked us down, took the middle class, and pushed out the bioweapon to everybody.
	We'll be right back. We're going to have our guest join us, Liz James.
	We're going to talk about raw milk.
	We're going to follow up on what is going on with the move that she's making to try to help people get clean blood after this bioweapon that Trump inflicted on us.
	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.
	The David Knight Show dot com.
	Thank you.
	Welcome back and joining us now is Liz James.
	I've talked to her before about her blessed by his blood.
	It's a cooperative. I want to get that out there again and get an update as to how she's doing because I've got a lot of people who are concerned about contaminated blood, whether you're talking about transfusions, being able to stockpile your own blood or other things like that, even to the extent...
	You've got the world's first unvaccinated dating service now launching in Hawaii.
	People understand the issue here, and they're looking for some solutions, so I wanted to get an update to that.
	But last time when I talked to Liz, she also talked about how she was very involved in raw milk, and that is also something that's very important.
	So I wanted to talk about that, the adulteration to our food supply.
	So joining us now is Liz James.
	Her organization is Blessed by His Blood.
	Tell us what the website is for that.
	Good morning. It's just www.blessedbyhisblood.com.
	Okay, good. So tell us how this is going right now.
	Where are you right now? And are you working to try to get some legislation through in various places to have a right to make decisions about blood, your own blood, and what's going to happen in an operation or an emergency?
	Yes, sir. So the legislation that we've started actively working on It's actually kind of interesting because designated donor or directed donor blood or autologous blood, which is meaning giving yourself your own blood if you have enough time to do so, both of those things are currently legal and have been around for decades.
	You know, when I was in my, I think, very early 20s, I had a minor surgery in That, you know, every time you have a surgery, they say, well, there's always a chance you might need blood.
	And so my mom and my brother both donated on my behalf back, you know, this was 30-something years ago.
	But they've been doing this for just years and years and years and years.
	However, it is coming to our attention that a lot of hospitals are starting to deny patients the right to do this.
	Yeah. Which is another stab at taking away medical freedom, right?
	That's right. So our approach is this.
	We're just trying to defend our medical freedom.
	And basing that on the 14th Amendment, Section 1, where we have this is part of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
	There's not anything specifically in the Constitution that addresses medical freedom because that's part of the 14th Amendment.
	The other thing is there was a 1990 Patient Self-Determination Act, and that act protects the patient's right to do and say and request and have the authority of what does and does not occur in their own body.
	So that's something that when somebody is denied directed donor use, Or autologous donation, that's something that is not being respected.
	The third thing is there's an internationally held and, again, religious freedom.
	There's an international law that protects a patient's personal, or not a patient, anybody's religious freedom and personal belief system.
	So that's another personal right that is being trampled on.
	I know that in Europe, I talked to a guy who was in Switzerland, and he was saying it's getting impossible for people to use their own blood or to have donors, people that they know, people in their family, set aside blood if they know that an operation is coming up.
	So we have these things that are on the books, you know, the Constitution, laws in Europe, and yet they're being disregarded in many ways.
	So it's important for us to strengthen that, isn't it?
	You know, and I'll bring this up.
	I mean, and George and I have been working together, his organization Safeblood, which is international, versus the United States.
	The United States actually has the strongest constitution in the world, right?
	I mean, it's a constitution that's been upheld for much longer than any other country's constitution.
	And the more that we allow it to be chiseled away, The closer we get to being like these other countries that are having so many difficulties.
	And the United States has, while he's having more difficulty in these other countries, the United States actually, even though we're having difficulty, there's less difficulty.
	And there are lots and lots of doctors who are standing beside us and saying, we will write for the order.
	Now, the problem is happening more so in the hospital, in the actual hospital, where they're saying, well, we won't do this.
	Because hospitals are being more and more driven by large corporations, a consolidation, and they're being driven by the accountants and that type of thing.
	And insurance. Yes, insurance companies.
	I had a listener who just sent me something, I think it was last week, said that he had to go in, he had a heart issue, and he said the hospital nurse said, would you like to set aside your blood in case we have to do an operation at some point in the future?
	He was okay. He was taken out, but they offered that to him to store his own blood.
	So he was excited about that, gave us the name of the hospital.
	You know, there are some hospitals out there because not all the hospitals have been subsumed into these giant corporate structures where they have a big network and then become all about money only.
	And that's exactly the type of hospital we're looking to work with, is the ones that are not corporately owned and are willing to work with the patients on a basis like that.
	And they are definitely out there.
	Even though we're not officially up and running, our soft launch is March 1st.
	But we have already done, we did one match already, and we were able to do that successfully in the Chicago area.
	So, and that's just with people who, you're talking to people who have reached out to us expressing an interest.
	We were able to find donors for this young family in need in the Chicago area.
	So, That's good.
	That's great. Yeah, it is interesting.
	I talked about this earlier. There's a study that just came out talking about how they have verified that they find mRNA in blood 28 days later.
	Dr. Peter McCullough has talked about it being found much later than that.
	And so this is not a theory.
	This is not a conspiracy theory.
	These are studies showing that this stuff persists.
	That's a whole other issue with the vaccines.
	But the reality is that it is there.
	There's a contaminant. We all know what the mRNA does in terms of creating the toxic spike protein that accumulates in your body that damages organs and all the rest of the stuff.
	So it is very important that we do have that kind of clean blood.
	And we know that the blood supply is not being screened for that, right?
	Very much so.
	And you may have seen, too, in the last couple of weeks, they've released some of the restrictions they had on blood donation, which Makes it become all that much more interesting.
	One of them, I believe that mad cow disease has been taken off as a problem.
	Number two, they've taken...
	It used to be gay men could not donate.
	Now, if they're in a quote-unquote monogamous relationship, you know...
	How do you screen for that at the Red Cross, right?
	Right. Well, and that's an interesting thing because, I mean, no matter if there's a homosexual relationship or a heterosexual relationship, you can never speak for the other party, right?
	That's right. So there's that to deal with.
	And then number three, the other interesting thing is, for the Red Cross, if a transgender individual comes in and says that Well, if they're a man and they say that they're a woman, they have to be identified as a woman.
	And therefore, that's an issue because then I guess there's no screening for whatever on that.
	Knowing that four out of ten Transgender men would test positive for HIV. Yeah, because as we see, it's all part of the Drag Queen Storytime Hour, what people are finally starting to come to their awareness about.
	It's a very, you know, as one person said, hey, look, heterosexual moms, I'm a conservative, but I'm a drag queen.
	And let me tell you, this is a highly charged community in terms of drugs and sex and all the rest of the stuff, and that's going to show up in the blood supply.
	Yeah, that's absolutely right.
	I guess maybe some of these people could come in and they could say, I may be a type A according to what your test is, but I identify as type B and you better put me down as that.
	You never know.
	You never know. I mean, it seems like anything is possible apparently in politics and in industry, right?
	That's right. Well, let's talk a little bit.
	That's good. So the organization is Blessed by His Blood, and you're about to go live in March.
	And is it.com? Is that what you said?
	.com?.com, yes, sir.
	Okay. So blessedbyhisblood.com is about to go live in March.
	You've got legislative issues.
	We're trying to uphold our freedom to have informed consent to use our own blood or blood of people that we know, and it's not something we should take for granted.
	Because when you look at what is being done in the medical profession now, it's all being politicized.
	And it's a very dangerous situation.
	So we have to start to fight for our rights of medical freedom and choice.
	But let's talk a little bit about food.
	Because last time you were on, you talked about your involvement with raw milk.
	And, of course, it's something that's been going on for quite some time, as there's all these different regulations that some places will allow it to some degree, but they have restrictions even in the most liberal places.
	I know back in Texas when we were living there that you could buy raw milk, but they had to be very careful about how they sold it.
	You had to go to their place.
	They couldn't. You couldn't buy it in a supermarket, so you had to go to the farm or you had to be part of a cooperative.
	That's the way it operates in some states and things like that.
	So what has your experience been with the raw milk battles?
	You know, I think I should first give a little bit of my backstory on how I found raw milk because it really is pertinent to the conversation.
	You know, being trained classically as a pharmacist, One of the things that they talk about is food safety, right?
	So when I graduated from pharmacy school, and in addition to that, I have a degree in animal science as well.
	So again, we were trained the same in animal sciences as well, because that involves food science.
	And about 10 years after I graduated from pharmacy school and I was in practice, I had a little accident on our farm here and I ended up breaking my wrist and I had a cast on my wrist.
	I went back to work, just had the cast on my wrist and I had two women come up to me independent of one another over the course of a couple weeks and say, Oh, you have a broken bone.
	You really should look into drinking raw milk.
	And the first woman that said that, my little voice in my head was like, oh, she doesn't know what she's talking about.
	Raw milk is dangerous.
	The second woman, I believe that's the Holy Spirit.
	When you get affirmation, confirmation from a second independent source, that's something you really need to look into.
	And so... I was like, okay, that's, you know, two messages that I need to look into this.
	And so I did a little digging and I found a book called The Untold Story of Milk by Ron Schmid.
	I don't know, it was probably written in the 80s.
	And I read it and it reads like a textbook.
	And that led me to read a couple other books.
	But by the time I was done with The Untold Story of Milk, I had no doubt in my mind that we the consumers had been buffaloed by the American Dairy Association and the food industry in terms of that.
	And it's quite an interesting story when you get into it.
	And I think you can never take a policy without first understanding the history Behind the policy and how it got there.
	And so how did we end up with homogenized, pasteurized milk?
	You know, how did that actually come to pass?
	Right. So a little history on that.
	When people started migrating to the United States and they started settling in large cities, you know, Chicago, Detroit, New York, all these big cities, They were living in tenement housing, the majority of them.
	Because these are poor people fleeing their country or looking for a new, better life and ending up in these basically slums.
	The first thing that happens when you're in a slum situation is there ends up being a lot of despair and depression, right?
	And if you read any sort of history in that time period, in that You'll find there's a lot of alcohol.
	Right? I mean, because alcohol is used to escape and erase what's going on.
	You know? And so, there were distilleries all over these large cities making a killing on alcohol.
	But they were bringing in grains to make the alcohol, right?
	Well, somebody got the bright idea of why don't we bring the cows into the city?
	So they bring cows into the city and have these indoor cow dairies slash feedlots that are inside buildings right next door to the distilleries with holes in the wall.
	And so after the grain is used, the mash is left over from making the whiskey, the bourbon, whatever.
	Then the mash is shoveled through the wall so they don't have to go on trains to go to cows or wherever.
	And these cows that have no sunlight, no grass, you know, that are living in filth in dark, unlit buildings are eating the mash, which is not a healthy product and they shouldn't be eating.
	grains like that anyway and so you so and then they were using those cows milking those cows to give milk to the people so as far as the people who were doing all of this it was a win-win situation in terms of making um quite a bit of money um for the people who were on the receiving end The people who are living in the slums and the tenements, not so much so.
	I mean, they were drinking milk that was very unhealthy, you know, because the cows were not healthy themselves.
	They weren't in an environment that was healthy.
	And so Louis Pasteur, of course, and people were getting sick from the milk, you know, rightfully so, because the milk was not healthy.
	And Louis Pasteur came out with the...
	The pasteurization.
	And, of course, that's a whole other topic about Pasteur versus Beauchamp, right?
	You're probably aware of that.
	We won't go down that rabbit hole.
	But pasteurization, they started pasteurizing the milk so that people wouldn't get sick.
	Well, when you pasteurize milk, it does get rid of the bad bacteria.
	And in situations like I just described, That's not a bad thing because there is bad bacteria in unhealthy cows.
	However, if you have a healthy cow that lives outdoors in the sunshine, is drinking fresh water, eating good clean grass, etc., you have milk that has the ability to, if you were to introduce a bacteria into a quart of milk,
	If you were to introduce bad bacteria in a quart of milk and then go back and look for that bacteria later, you would not find it because the enzymes and the antibodies in that milk digest it and protect and keep the milk clean and healthy.
	So, you know, we have the ability to do that, right?
	Mm-hmm. You destroy the enzymes.
	You destroy the good enzymes that we all need.
	We should all be eating enzyme-rich food.
	You're causing a tremendous drop in the vitamin C content of milk.
	Vitamin B6 and vitamin B12, that drops dramatically when you start heating up milk like that.
	You also change, and this is very important, you change the physical and chemical state of calcium and other minerals that are in that milk.
	Which makes milk less valuable as a food, you know?
	Yeah. Oh, yeah. And, you know, you're talking about this, and I'm thinking of the giant pig skyscraper that they're building in China.
	It's called a pork scraper, you know?
	But, you know, just think about that.
	As we were talking about the implications of that, you know, putting pigs in a giant skyscraper, you know, what could possibly go wrong, you know?
	They were never meant to live like that.
	I know. And it kind of reminds me, you know, when you're talking about what happened in Chicago, that's kind of the early stages of big corporate food production today where they don't really care what goes into it.
	I was early in the program.
	I talked about the fact that the FDA has approved all these...
	Heavy-duty chemicals that have been identified in other countries as carcinogenic, and they said, we don't care.
	So it's allowed in our bread, it's allowed in our food, and maybe they put it in because they want to try to strengthen or to stabilize dough so they can work with it better with their machines in terms of processing it.
	They don't care what the health effects are, and the FDA gives them a pass on all of this stuff.
	And that's really, you know, when we look at how the FDA has handled drugs, they're just as bad with the food stuff as well.
	I totally agree.
	And, you know, we were in Europe several years ago, and we went into a store that carried Americanized products.
	And it was very interesting because even things like, you know, Froot Loops, You looked at the Froot Loops in Holland, the dyes were natural dyes, like on the box.
	But if you look at the Froot Loops in the United States, you know, it's red dye, number four, you know, Yeah, that's right.
	We look at Mexican Coke, right?
	Instead of high fructose corn syrup, they use regular sugar, and then they've got it in a glass bottle instead of an aluminum can, and on and on.
	It's like we get the worst of everything.
	But it's also the cities, like you're talking about there in Chicago.
	It made me think of what Thomas Jefferson said about cities.
	He said, they're a threat to the health, the wealth, and the liberty of man.
	Yeah. That's right.
	That's right. You know, I think one of the most impactful books I read in high school was The Jungle by Upton Sinclair.
	Oh, yeah. And that book really emphasized the plight of these immigrants and the terrible situation that they lived in in this tenement housing.
	It was just awful. So, but back to the milk, when you have, you know, so you have pasteurized milk and so then they, the benefit of that is then they could sell rotten milk, really.
	I mean, they could sell milk that was full of, you know, pus and just really awful things that raw milk, you know, you can't do that with raw milk.
	But with pasteurized, you can.
	So you've increased your...
	You don't have to throw anything out, right?
	That's right. So there's that.
	Well, here's the problem.
	And it also has a longer shelf life.
	Well, as these milkmen were taking milk around to all the housewives and women, the cream, as it settled on the top, that's one of the ways housewives judged...
	The quality of the milk, the color, the texture, how old the milk was, because you know anything about milk and you let the cream rise to the top, if it sits there for a couple of days, even if it's good, it will turn into like a cheese product almost, like a thicker product.
	So you can really tell the age of the milk by the cream that's on top.
	Well, the housewives would say, I don't want this milk.
	It's old milk, you know?
	And so they invented the homogenization process.
	And the homogenization process is an interesting thing because people say, well, if my milk is flash pasteurized but not homogenized, is that okay to drink?
	And my answer is no to that because there's something that happens to the milk molecule as well in the homogenization process.
	In the homogenization process, they shoot whole milk through these little stainless steel tubules at a very high rate of speed, and it flips a leg on the milk molecule.
	In that process, then the cream no longer rises to the top.
	Now, those housewives cannot tell how old the milk is because it's scattered throughout the milk.
	They've got nothing to go by other than the date on the carton, which is where we live.
	Right. And that's the expiration date, not the date that it was retrieved from the cow, right?
	Right. But in the homogenization process, when you have that flip with the leg on the molecule, it literally changes the structure of the milk molecule.
	Which makes, it turns it, the original milk molecule is actually cardioprotective and actually prevents the plaque buildup in your arteries and veins.
	And when you have homogenization of milk, it does the opposite and it causes inflammation in the arteries, which then causes plaque to start forming.
	And so it actually, with homogenization, it actually creates, Not just a neutral product, it actually creates a dangerous product.
	Yeah, wow.
	That is amazing. Yeah, it was fascinating to me and I was like, oh my gosh, this is incredible.
	You know, and mind you, I'm learning, I was learning all of this before I ever even jumped into the truth about Big Pharma as I started to do, this was my, literally my gateway to into learning the truth about the relationship between food and big pharma and then later insurance and other things as well and how it all ties in together and these big industries just feed each other with no regard to
	the consumer.
	Yeah, you know, it's interesting. If we look at it, a lot of people, of course, raw milk is very expensive.
	But if you think raw milk is expensive, take a look at what your doctor charges or what the pharmaceutical companies charge when you get a problem with something.
	So instead of having something healthy, you can have something that is cheap and is going to endanger your health.
	That's really where we are. And there's a political aspect to this as well.
	There was an article that I just saw, and it was from actually PirateWires.com.
	I don't know how I found this. But it was talking about milk wars and how this has become a real fight, a real contention.
	You can see this in the Netherlands.
	First, they're coming for the cows, right?
	They want to shut down the cows, and then they're going to come for the rest of the—that's their point of attack— We're good to go.
	In a way, there's a very important political dimension to this in terms of milk wars.
	If we can push back against big pharma, big food, and the FDA on this raw milk thing, that's going to be a big win to protect our food supply, isn't it?
	Yeah. And these wars, the fight for food freedom has been going on For a long, long time.
	I mean, I've been involved with Weston A. Price.
	I'm sure you're familiar with that organization.
	And the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance.
	Yes. That's another one for lots and lots of years.
	And it's so very important.
	And, you know, like you, I started out, I found a raw milk source.
	And we bought, we stood in line and bought raw milk at drop-off locations for...
	Probably five or six years.
	And then we ended up getting our own cows.
	So I, because, you know, I was concerned about, you know, what if they ever take this away from us, then what?
	And, and in other states, they have, I mean, for goodness sakes, it's legal to have marijuana in Colorado, but illegal to have raw milk.
	They've got our best interests at heart, don't they?
	It's just amazing how insanely stupid it is.
	What is the situation over the various states?
	I mean, you know, Do you have a general idea of what percentage or number of states allow raw milk?
	And, you know, is there any place where they are really kind of laissez-faire about it?
	Or is it always under some sort of restriction and control?
	Well, it's interesting.
	I haven't looked at the states recently, and the laws are constantly changing.
	So there's been victories and there's been losses.
	20% of the states, it's legal.
	And then, I could be wrong on that.
	That's just an off-the-head guess based on my memory.
	But then there's other states where it's legal, but very, very, very, very restricted.
	Interestingly, California is one of those states.
	I was listening at a conference in December, and They said, well, you can buy raw milk at a grocery store, but it's only one very, very, very, very large farm.
	That's been authorized. Yeah, kind of what you're seeing in a lot of these places where they quote-unquote legalize marijuana, they'll have incredibly high taxes and it'll be restricted to their friends who are in the business.
	Correct. For the small person, it's still not feasible to do.
	And then there's other states that You can sell raw milk for pet consumption only.
	And, you know, what you do in your own house is your own business kind of thing.
	Yeah, we've got lots of dogs.
	I mean, I don't know.
	I haven't looked at the laws here in Tennessee.
	We have a friend who has a farm, and he's got a friend who's got raw goat milk.
	And that's really good stuff.
	But, you know, I haven't looked to see if we can find, you know, raw cow's milk here yet.
	I don't know what the laws are here.
	So in case that's against the law, that's just a hypothetical.
	I was just talking about that.
	Well, you know, the other interesting thing about cow milk is there's...
	Maybe you've heard the discussion on it.
	It's, you know, A1 milk versus A2 milk, the genetics of milk.
	No, I haven't heard that. What is that?
	What is the difference? So, in genetics, of course, there's A1, A1, A2, A2, and then there's A1, A2. And A1 milk is...
	In people who understand milk, in terms of raw milk, is considered inferior milk.
	And I shouldn't say in terms of raw milk.
	This is in terms of milk in general.
	And the reason it's considered inferior is because there are some components of A1 milk.
	And this is milk that comes from...
	It comes from cows predominantly in Canada, the United States, New Zealand, Australia, and Northern Europe.
	Those are predominantly A1, but to take it a little step further, it tends to be the Holstein cows that are A1, which is the predominant milk, the black and white cows.
	That's the predominant milk found in commercial milk.
	Because they're big producers and they can get a lot out of these cows for their money, right?
	So we should have a take on the Chick-fil-A sign.
	We should have the black and white cows eat more, drink more A2. Leave me alone.
	Well, kind of so.
	The jerseys and guernseys, which are like the brown cows that you see, those tend to, they're not always, but they tend to be the A2, A2 genetics, which is the good genetics for the milk.
	Now, here's the interesting part.
	These, if you are drinking A1, A1 milk, Aside from the pasteurization and homogenization, which they can do to A1 or A2 milk, it doesn't really matter.
	You get the same effects on those.
	But with A1 milk, you are aggravating conditions such as heart disease, type 1 diabetes, autism, schizophrenia, allergies, intolerance, autoimmunity, or autoimmune situations, etc. So...
	Once you start diving down the rabbit hole of milk, you're like, oh, okay.
	So I want to drink raw milk, but then I want to find an A2A2 producer for the healthiest milk.
	And interestingly, I just pulled this up a few days ago.
	There are a couple of companies that are now selling, it's just called A2 milk.
	Like even Walmart and Costco, you can find it'll be labeled as A2 milk.
	Really? Yes.
	Now, if you're going to buy commercial milk, that's better than...
	I mean, it's still pasteurized and homogenized in that form, but at least it's a...
	I've never ever seen that.
	I guess that's something like an extra thing that they put on there saying, you know, if it's organic or something like that.
	I'd say A2. I've not seen that.
	Now that your mind is aware to it, your eyes might see it when you're in the grocery store.
	That's interesting. Yeah, you know, I've talked to, in the past, I remember one case, I interviewed the guy at length.
	He was someone who did not start out in a family farm.
	He came to it later in his career because he wanted better food and things like that.
	And he started raising, he was in Michigan, and he started raising A European brand of pig that could stay outside.
	It had hair.
	It wasn't hairless. But it was not a feral pig.
	But by the laws of Michigan, he wanted it to be outside because he wanted to have it, you know, free ranging and things like that.
	But the industry had set things up and said, you know, if your pig has got isn't hairless and, you know, it's going to be labeled as a feral pig and we're going to destroy them.
	And so he was in this big fight with the state of Michigan and trying to shut him down.
	His pork was not white meat.
	The other white meat, well, it wasn't white meat.
	It was red meat.
	And he said it tasted very different.
	It's very good. But again, that's another example of how big food will operate with big government to shut people down.
	You know, it is.
	But now I think the dairy thing, as we look at, you've always had this collusion between big food producers and industrial producers working with government regulatory agencies to get rid of their competition.
	That happens in every industry.
	You know, they regulatory capture and they use the government to get rid of their competition.
	But now we've got this other aspect of it, like we see now in the Netherlands, And at the forefront of all of that is the cows and dairy.
	And they want you to have zero dairy and zero meat and zero other things.
	And so they're using dairy and cows.
	They're using that now.
	The environmentalists are using that to shut down farms in general.
	That's the tip of the spear.
	You know what's interesting?
	Of course, now they're wanting people to eat this synthetic meat, this fast-growing lab meat.
	Yeah, biopsy burgers, I call them.
	Well, that's exactly right.
	That's exactly right, David.
	I was just going to say, it's like, imagine eating a tumor.
	I mean, that's essentially what you're eating in this type of situation.
	Yeah, tumor kebab.
	Yeah, exactly, exactly.
	Well, it's very interesting.
	And again, it just shows how much corruption there is.
	But it's at the forefront of all this stuff, and it is very foundational.
	And as you point out, it goes from something that is harmful to your health to something that is beneficial to your health.
	I imagine vitamin D, when they keep the animals and the cows and these factory dairies, They probably don't get too much sunlight, so they probably don't have as much vitamin D in their milk either, do they?
	Correct, correct. And, you know, for the rest of my story, and this is where it gets really interesting too, is at the time of my accident when I broke my wrist, I was 33 years old and I was diagnosed with osteopenia.
	I think I mentioned that in the first time we chatted.
	And tell people what that is.
	How is that different from osteoporosis or thin bones or fragile bones?
	Yeah, osteopenia is the precursor to osteoporosis.
	So it's basically I'm set up to be osteoporotic.
	And at that time, you know, 33 is pretty young to be told that.
	And I was told, well, you're probably just a few years away from needing to be on medication.
	And, you know, my pharmacist brain was like, oh, no, I am not taking that medication, which was one of the reasons I was interested in finding an alternative solution and the beginning of the looking into drinking raw milk.
	Well, fast forward to...
	15 years, when I was 48, I had an accident, and it was a pretty significant accident, and I nearly lost my left foot.
	Wow. And I got charged by a bull, and he hit me from the side on below the knee, threw me in the air, and when I landed, my tibia, which is the bigger lower leg bone, It came out of my leg.
	Oh, compound fracture.
	And, well, here's the thing, David.
	The bone didn't break.
	It just came out of my leg.
	Wow. So you took care of that osteopenia issue, right?
	Correct. Yeah. So it wasn't a compound fracture.
	It just came out. Wow, that's amazing.
	Yeah. And now the fibula, the little tiny bone on the outside of the leg, That did break.
	And I did sever four tendons.
	So, I mean, it was a significant injury.
	But the fact that that tibia didn't break, the doctor was like, for a hit like that, for the bone not to break, we need to do another bone density scan.
	So we went back 15 years later.
	I did another bone density scan.
	And at that time, you know, the lady who was doing the scan, She's like, I'm not a doctor, so I can't tell you what your scan looks like.
	She said, but your bones are amazing.
	And she said, now, what are you taking?
	And I said, I just drink raw milk.
	Because she's looking at my history, right?
	My history of osteopenia.
	And I said, I just drink raw milk, and I do take magnesium, too.
	And I'll touch on that in just a second.
	And she said, well, she said...
	My eyes say that you've got the bones of a healthy 18-year-old female.
	Wow. It doesn't have the side effects, other than maybe a stray bull to drink raw milk, than the medication does.
	What were some of the side effects of the medication, if you'd been taking that for 15 years?
	Jaw necrosis.
	You know, you hear about that all the time when you, like, if you go to the dentist and they ask you if you're on Fosamax or bisphosphonate, you know, you've probably been asked that before.
	That's when your jaw, your jawbone actually disintegrates.
	The same thing, it puts you at a higher, it's kind of interesting.
	It puts you at a higher risk for hip fractures.
	But what you're trying to prevent is hip fractures.
	Yeah, exactly.
	You see that all the time with pharmaceutical drugs, right?
	You take it for condition A, and one of the adverse effects is that it increases condition A. And you look at an aging population and how important it would be for people to have something that's going to help them with osteoporosis or osteopenia, something like that. Well, and not just that.
	Like, if you're drinking raw milk, Raw milk will actually help lower your total overall cholesterol.
	You don't want your cholesterol to be too low.
	But what happens is it will increase your HDL, your good cholesterol, and start decreasing your LDL, conversely.
	And you don't want your cholesterol to be too low.
	I mean, people who have cholesterol under like 180, their total cholesterol, those are the ones who ends up in dementia units.
	So that's another topic for another day.
	Yeah, people have been able to help people with the beginning stages of dementia by giving them things like coconut oil and things like that.
	That's exactly right.
	I mean, our brains are 50% cholesterol, so imagine trying to deprive the brain of cholesterol and you can guess what will happen.
	Let's talk about, you said you also supplement with magnesium as well.
	So as raw milk and magnesium gave you, you know, you went from osteopenia precursor to osteoporosis to having, as one lady said, the bones of an 18-year-old.
	Tell us about magnesium.
	How does that do? So, you know, I'll preface this by saying not all magnesium is created equal.
	And there are different, like, there's...
	Magnesium citrate, glycinate, malate, orotate, chelated magnesium.
	There's magnesium gluconate, magnesium oxide.
	Those two are my least favorite, and those, unfortunately, are two of the most commonly found ones in, like, your mainstream nutritional centers, you know.
	They're just not well bioavailable.
	The malate and glycinate are much more highly bioavailable.
	The citrate is also highly bioavailable, but it's more likely to give you diarrhea.
	I mean, that's what you take for a prep.
	Some people need that because they're prone to constipation.
	And if that's the case, that's not a bad magnesium to take.
	But here's the issue.
	We should have a calcium to magnesium ratio that is close to one to one in the body.
	And because our diets are so low in magnesium, our current farming practices have stripped the soil.
	There's not enough magnesium in the soil, therefore there's not going to be enough magnesium in our vegetables, which is where it predominantly comes from, fruits and vegetables.
	And then, of course, there's the standard American diet where people are just eating junk, which certainly doesn't have magnesium in it.
	It doesn't have any food in it.
	Yeah. Yeah, exactly.
	But there's a lot of fortification of calcium in the diet, even in junk food, where they put calcium in.
	And then if you remember, once a woman gets older, they're like, make sure you take your calcium chews or make sure you're taking your calcium.
	That's right. So you end up with a calcium to magnesium ratio that's closer to 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 instead of 1 to 1.
	And when that happens, then you actually have an increased brittleness of bones.
	And you also have an increased hardening of the vascular system, calcification of the vascular system.
	So the goal is to get your magnesium in and get your ratio closer to 1 to 1 instead of this 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 that is...
	I'm not a doctor.
	I'm a pharmacist. But it is a travesty that people are being told to take more calcium with no regard to taking magnesium.
	They should be taking magnesium first.
	They're creating a problem or aggravating a problem that's already there by telling them to do more of something They should be balancing it.
	It's about ratios. It's not about...
	And that's why it's important if you get vitamin D to make sure that you're also taking vitamin K. Some vitamin Ds come with K as well.
	Because it can do the same type of thing.
	It can lead to calcification if you don't have the K with it.
	So the magnesium is very important.
	As you pointed out, tell us again the sources, the forms of it that you think.
	You said citrate is good, but it can cause you, if you are...
	Unless you are predisposed to constipation, it might cause some diarrhea.
	What are the other forms that you would recommend of magnesium?
	My preference is like malate or glycinate.
	There's another one that if somebody needs to work on their vasculature, the orotate is a good one.
	Occasionally, you can find magnesium products that contain Boratate, glycinate, and malate all in the same capsule or tablet.
	That's great because you're hitting the body in a little bit different way all the way around.
	So that's my preference.
	I personally would stay away from magnesium oxide, magnesium gluconate.
	I mean, I don't find them very helpful.
	You know, it's interesting. I got a factoid here from this article talking about the milk wars.
	They said in 1945, Americans drink about 45 gallons of milk a year.
	Now they drink only about 11, most of it in their coffee.
	And they said that analysts are predicting that cattle farming will be obsolete by 2035.
	The reason they're predicting that, of course, is because That's what the globalists want.
	Yeah, they're pushing for that to happen.
	But again, I think it's interesting and probably we could go back and see the rise of osteoporosis in our society as well as we push these things out as we go into chemicals and adulterated food.
	Talk about what they're replacing it with in so many different ways is vegan milk.
	Soy milk, almond milk, cashew, all these different things.
	What is your take on those types of milk?
	Well, all of those milks are different, and so I can't really put them all in the same category.
	I mean, soy obviously is probably my least favorite, number one, because it's genetically modified.
	Number two is because it is highly estrogenic.
	Right. And it's called a phytoestrogen.
	And there is a reason, I mean, this is one of the reasons we're losing so much testosterone in our world.
	Because a lot of men, their estrogen has gotten so high, their testosterone can't compete.
	Right. And soy is just so pervasive now in our diet.
	I remember years ago when I would watch the news shows and Archer Daniel Midland was always talking about soy being this and soy being that.
	I mean, they put it in everything.
	They put it in everything and it's just not a healthy product, especially in the quantity that we're exposed to now.
	There's, you know, nut milk.
	I mean, some people...
	Some people cannot drink regular milk.
	I mean, that is true.
	I will say, though... Lactose intolerant, yeah.
	Well, yeah. But I will say this.
	I've had a number of quote-unquote lactose intolerant people in my house, and I've served them a glass of milk, and I have yet to have a lactose intolerant person be intolerant to raw milk.
	Yeah. I've heard that before as well.
	Yeah. So there is that.
	You know, we need the healthy fats that are in this kind of product.
	Healthy milk, raw milk product, goat milk is another one.
	I haven't done a lot of research, but I am very interested in a rarer milk called this camel's milk.
	That I understand is very, very good for kids with autism.
	So, yep, yep.
	And there's a couple of farms and you can order...
	Camel's milk for kids with autism.
	That's very important. That's a real epidemic.
	As a matter of fact, we had a listener who, and I'll just mention his name again, Daniel Jeremiah.
	They're really struggling with their child, have been for years, damaged by vaccines, has autism.
	So he asked that we keep him in his prayers, but I'd not heard that about camel's milk.
	I hope he hears this. Yeah.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But back to the nut milk, I mean, I think it's always important to think about where the initial product came from.
	If things are not treated organically, any milk that you make is going to be concentrated.
	So if there were pesticides, herbicides, fungicides involved, You just got a hefty dose of all of the above, right?
	That's true. That's true.
	So that's something to think about.
	And almonds, from what I understand, unfortunately, even the organic ones are sprayed with some sort of chemical because they have a problem with almonds across the board.
	So For that reason, I'm a little leery of almond milk in general.
	I guess my favorite or go-to would be oat milk or coconut milk.
	Well, that's interesting.
	And it really is. The food wars in general and the milk war in particular is at the forefront of this.
	Did you see the study that came out a few weeks ago?
	I say study.
	I should say The fake news, but it literally is a study by Tufts University that put Cheerios ahead of all beef patties in terms of nutrition.
	Yeah, or maybe I think the best thing you could get would be a spoonful of Ereos from Mike Tyson.
	We're talking about that now. There was a joke about the Cheerios back when he bit Evander Holyfield's ear, and now he's putting out pot candies and calling them Mike Tyson Bites.
	So I guess that'll be the next thing they advertise as being good for you, right?
	It combines everything. You've got the pot as well as kind of a Cheerio aspect to it.
	Yeah, that is amazing. It was probably paid for by General Mills, don't you think?
	Well, it actually was.
	It was paid for by several food companies.
	And that's the thing. That's the way they do it.
	Whenever I read a study, the first thing I do is scroll to the end, and I look and see who paid for it.
	We've seen that over and over again.
	All the pharmaceutical companies, they've got three different pharmaceutical companies with competing products.
	They all do a study, and guess what?
	They're always the best and better than brand X and brand Y, each one of them.
	They can rig it for sure.
	Thank you so much, Liz James.
	Again, blessedbyhisblood.com.
	Look for it. That's going to be very important to fight it for.
	Our purity of being able to get our blood as well as our food.
	food.
	Thank you so much, Liz.
	Appreciate it.
	Thank you, sir.
	The David Knight Show is a critical thinking super spreader.
	If you've been exposed to logic by listening to The David Knight Show...
	Please, do your part and try not to spread it.
	Financial support or simply telling others about the show causes this dangerous information to spread farther.
	People have to trust me.
	I mean, trust the science.
	Wear your mask.
	Take your vaccine.
	Don't ask questions.
	Using free speech to free minds.

▲