Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 5, 2023 - The David Knight Show

02:56:26

The David Knight Show - 12/05/2023

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Tuesday, the 5th of November, year of our Lord, 2023.
	Well, today we're going to have an update on what is happening in New Zealand.
	Also give you an update as to what is going on with Spreaker.
	We're back. That's the good news.
	And so we'll tell you what is happening with that.
	Also... Massive censorship programs rolling out.
	Microsoft, who has always been a front organization for government censorship.
	And not just for our government, for any government, Chinese government especially.
	News guard from DARPA and election guard from DARPA especially.
	Now they've got the CCPA, as I've said many times, the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authentication.
	Maybe it just stands for CCP America.
	Maybe that just stands for Microsoft.
	We're also going to be talking about the war.
	Many different aspects of war.
	Ukraine, Israel, even in Venezuela.
	And it appears that Israel has got an artificial intelligence targeting program that they call the Gospel.
	We'll be talking about that.
	We'll be right back. Well, on The Daily Skeptic, we had Igor Chudov has looked at the New Zealand whistleblower, and he doesn't think that the data adds up.
	And yet he did this before the guy was arrested, I think, and he's come back out with some, he's walked back at least one of the four points that he had.
	I have not had time.
	To go through this entire article, because it's very detailed.
	To his credit, Igor goes through and looks at the data and addresses it point by point, the issues that he has with it, which is the way it ought to be done.
	If the government has a problem with the accuracy of the data that was put out by the whistleblower, that's what they should do.
	And the fact that they didn't do it, I think, is key.
	As I said, I want to mention this, even though I haven't had a chance to read it yet.
	I don't know which one is correct.
	It's more important to be right than it is to be the first one or to have something that is sensational.
	And so I'll let you know if I agree with this or disagree with it when I had a chance to look at it in detail.
	But we already know that people are dying from the vaccine.
	I mean, one of our listeners has mentioned it multiple times and mentioned it again yesterday.
	Her husband was killed with the vaccine against his wishes.
	He was vaccinated in the hospital and he died within seven days.
	How many times have we heard that story over and over and over again?
	And I keep going back to the fact that in the 1970s, we actually did have some oversight of these drugs and some concern, even just a little bit of concern for public health and public safety that they prattle on and on about it.
	They use public health and public safety as a wedge to steal our liberty and to enslave us.
	They're not serious about that at all.
	Of course you understand that. All the drugs now are being given an obvious hand-waving.
	They're not even pretending to do any investigation of these things.
	And they've got some very new approaches that we're going to talk about.
	Self-amplifying mRNA.
	It's as dangerous as it sounds.
	And it's just going to be waved through by the FDA. They don't care about any of this stuff.
	And we saw from the very beginning, enough people were dying immediately after getting the vaccine.
	It should have been stopped. Going back to the 1970s, you had three deaths and it caused nine states to ban the vaccine.
	Not a single state, not even Florida, has banned the COVID-19 vaccine.
	How many deaths does it take?
	I've said this for the longest time.
	Look at cribs that they recall.
	Look at the Boeing 737 MAX. Out of 8,200 flights, you only had two of them that crashed.
	Of course, it killed everybody on board.
	Killed 500 people. We've had a lot more than 500 people die.
	A lot more than 500 people die.
	Just in a small country like New Zealand.
	And, you know, you could have said that if you take the approach that the FDA takes, that Fauci takes, if the FDA did that, they would say, hey, it's rare.
	You know, we only had two crashes out of 8,200.
	So what? So what?
	I guess the FDA is not in the pocket, but I have to say that that wasn't the worst case.
	The worst came after they started injecting the people in the nursing homes.
	I'll never forget that video that I played, although I didn't put it in the deck today.
	Forgot to look for it.
	But the beginning of January, there was, of 2021, there was a guy, as we were seeing the VAERS reports and everything coming out, he was a black guy.
	He was in his, I would say, early 30s.
	And he was crying as he was putting out this video, if you remember that video.
	He said, I took care of these people.
	All through this, we didn't lose a single patient throughout all of 2020.
	And then we started vaccinating people, and it was like a third of the nursing home died.
	And he said, other people who had been responsive and engaged with us, they're just kind of checked out.
	And he said, I can't do this.
	I'm a Christian. And so this is not anything, you know, when you look at this and what is happening in the nursing homes, we have other data besides this.
	And this all does not hinge on whether or not this New Zealand data is true.
	I've been saying this for three years.
	It's murder. It's murder.
	We knew it was going to be murder when Trump was preparing it.
	Untested. Are they going to shoot people up twice with this stuff?
	And they practiced this game for 20 years?
	We know what this is about.
	And then, okay, so let's move to the next objection he has here.
	The data has problems that are incompatible with the story of its origin.
	It cannot be a full snapshot from a working payment database.
	Therefore, the story of its origin is suspect.
	Well, again...
	You know, he hasn't had a reply from Liz Gunn, so this is open-ended.
	And then finally, he says the actual vaccine casualties may reside in the missing pieces of data that the database does not provide.
	So it's not really an objection.
	It's just kind of a disclaimer.
	Maybe there's other stuff here. Well, I think there may be other stuff about the working payment.
	When it comes to the nursing home deaths, we have other testimony.
	About how many more people died after the vaccine went out.
	You know, like I said before, Henry Kissinger, you could add to his bio accomplishments the fact that he survived the deadliest pandemic the world has ever known.
	And he did it when he was, what, 97?
	No problem. So, anyway, I'll look at this in more detail.
	But I just have to say...
	The very fact that we've got this article, that he's had a chance to look at all this stuff and have a detailed reply to it.
	The very fact that he says, well, I think this is easily debunked.
	Why doesn't the government do that?
	Does the government not believe that it's easily debunked?
	Why would they SWAT raid this guy?
	Why would they arrest this guy?
	As far as I'm concerned, these actions by the New Zealand government validate that What the whistleblower is saying.
	I know that what he was saying is true, whether or not his data supports it, but it looks to me like from the reactions of the New Zealand government that they are validating what he had to say by arresting him and charging him, putting Drittonian charges against him.
	He could serve up to seven years in prison.
	They anonymized all of that information.
	They didn't expose anybody to any criticism.
	And then I'll say this again.
	I mentioned this when I talked about it.
	I haven't seen anybody in this discussion going back and forth talking about the fact there's also been a whistleblower data released showing that the New Zealand government, which was one of the most draconian regimes anywhere under Jab, Senda, Arden, they were giving exemptions to doctors and to nurses and to politicians that they said were essential.
	And they refused to give exemptions to people even who had a severe adverse reaction to the first shot.
	No, you've got to take the second shot.
	That has also come out.
	That has largely been ignored for reasons that I don't understand.
	I've not seen anybody, you know, attack that or dispute that.
	But I have reported that, the documents released by another whistleblower.
	And so... As some people have responded to this, nobody has confirmed or denied that the data is real.
	This guy from Daily Skeptic is denying that it is real.
	But the New Zealand government's reaction speaks volumes, says Revolver.
	The government has gone so far as to arrest the whistleblower.
	And Toby Rogers, PhD on Twitter, says, a product so safe and effective...
	That the state jails anybody who publicizes any data that shows that it is not safe and effective.
	New Zealand is fascist, says Toby Rogers.
	100% right. And so the New Zealand News Hub, New Zealand establishment paper, It says Barry Young was arrested on Sunday.
	He is being brought up with maximum penalty being seven years of imprisonment with these charges.
	Just one charge of dishonestly accessing the databases.
	Dishonestly accessing the databases.
	No, that's not it.
	I mean, he had access to the databases as part of his job.
	What he did was he exposed their data.
	A public gallery full of supporters stood and clapped when Young entered the courtroom.
	The judge told them off, saying, any more displays like this and you'll be asked to leave?
	And then this from the New Zealand thing doesn't really make any sense.
	Young has been denied bail on Monday, will be released bail on Tuesday.
	So, you know, would make them stay in there for a 24-hour period or whatever.
	The government is currently making frantic efforts to censor the data, but it's already too late.
	It's akin to trying to put the toothpaste back into the tube.
	But again, I would say when we look at this, Liz Gunn, as I played for you yesterday, addressed an individual, I forget what his name was, It was well known.
	He was somebody who was put into a position of, well, we're going to investigate this stuff and get to the bottom of this and look to see if this is all done correctly and legally and all the rest of it.
	So she said, look, you know me, you know my father who helped you, defended you when you were unjustly accused and so forth.
	She said, I tried to give this data to you.
	You wouldn't take it. Why would you take it?
	If this guy is...
	You know, some kind of an auditor or inspector general or something that's been appointed for this stuff.
	Why would he refuse to take the data?
	Does he already know what the end result is?
	Does he not want to be complicit, obviously, you know, to look at this?
	I don't want to know.
	I know nothing, right?
	Just like Hogan's heroes.
	I do not see this data.
	I do not want to have anything to do with this data.
	Is that why he refused?
	What's going on with that?
	Why wouldn't he look at it?
	Why wouldn't the government refute it if it's false?
	By the way, they're not saying that it's false.
	They said that he had unauthorized access to a database.
	So, they're not accusing him of doxing anybody.
	They're not accusing him of fabricating data.
	They're accusing him of stealing their data and publicizing it.
	And so that should tell you everything.
	It's the same stuff that I saw with Michael Mann, going back to ClimateGate.
	You had these emails that were going back and forth out of East Anglia and the UK, some climate scam that was part of the East Anglia University in the UK. And these people are passing emails back and forth, quite a few of them, saying, we've got to hide the decline.
	And you had whistleblowers out there saying, these people are rigging this stuff.
	They've got nothing. And they could not, they filed a FOIA request.
	They couldn't get the information from them.
	And finally, that information showed up on a Russian server.
	The first ClimateGate was 1,000 emails.
	And in that, you saw what these people were doing.
	And then there was also communications with Michael Mann in the United States, who was featured prominently in Al Gore's climate nonsense and convenient lie.
	It's called an inconvenient truth.
	It's a convenient lie.
	And, you know, the big hockey stick, the exponential increase in temperature tied to CO2, which is a total lie.
	Total lie. This is the fundamental thing that everybody is still...
	See, that's why it's so important for them to hide that data.
	When you see the car companies or you see Republicans pushing back or you see conservative think tanks pushing back, they'll always accept this premise that CO2 is going to cause global warming.
	And we just have to talk about, well, the way that you want to minimize CO2 is just the wrong way.
	No, it doesn't have anything to do with any of this stuff.
	And these scientists were saying this.
	Back in 2009, we saw the data about their emails.
	And so I was part of a group that tried to get the emails from Michael Mann.
	He produced them while he was working for the government, while he was working for the University of Virginia.
	He did them while he was at work.
	He did it on a work computer.
	During work, he did these emails.
	And then he published the information.
	It wasn't like this is some super secret stuff that he's holding for publication.
	It was already published and they had already created public policy based on it.
	And he was successful in keeping it hidden.
	The University of Virginia caved, and they were going to give it over.
	And then he jumps in. He's now working at the University of Pennsylvania, or was at the time.
	And he jumped into the thing and said, no, keep that data secret.
	Well, that was a confession, wasn't it?
	But we'd already seen the emails.
	We already knew they were lying. We already knew they were conspiring to lie, to hide the fact that they weren't connected.
	And so when they start working to try to conceal the data, Isn't that the smoking gun that you need?
	It is for me. And by the way, there was a climate gate too that happened a couple years after that because the UK government ran an inquiry to cover it up and explain it away.
	And so they kept the data secret.
	They ran a government inquiry.
	And we're going to get to the bottom of this.
	I really need to talk to these people about these emails saying they're faking it.
	You weren't really faking it, were you?
	Well, no, I'm not. You know, that type of thing.
	And so they swept it away.
	And so then, you know, remember the first climate gate was a thousand emails.
	Then 5,000 emails showed up on a Russian server.
	They will tell you the truth about your government.
	They will lie to you about the Russian government, but they will tell you the truth about your government.
	They're very much like Satan in that way, right?
	Satan will tell you the truth about you.
	He'll lie to you about Christ, but he'll tell you the truth about you.
	So anyway, News New Zealand.
	One News New Zealand. As a health worker has been arrested and charged with allegedly misusing and disclosing vaccination data while spreading misinformation about COVID-19, police told One News this evening.
	Well, that's not the truth. It was indicted for access to the database.
	If we're going to elaborate on that, Let's just point out that he was arrested because the government didn't want to challenge or debate the data.
	They didn't want to explain away the data.
	It's easier just to arrest somebody and throw them in jail.
	Because New Zealand is fascist.
	America is fascist.
	Canada, UK, Australia, all these European governments, they're fascist and they're at war with us.
	They're trying to kill us.
	They're doing their best.
	So, they finish their little story with a final statement they have on their little story in the New Zealand paper.
	There is no evidence that vaccination is responsible for excess mortality in New Zealand.
	That's the official story, so they don't get arrested.
	But there is.
	That's a bold-faced lie.
	And I've been talking about this for three years.
	And I've given you example after example after example.
	And these people are still lying about it, which you would expect from accomplices.
	So, again, just trust them.
	The same people who have worked to conceal...
	Climate MacGuffin data that could disprove all of that.
	And to give you an example of how this works, we know this is a vast censorship network.
	I was surprised to see that Moderna had their own censorship stuff, not just the government telling people do it on the behalf of Moderna.
	But Moderna has hired former feds to do this.
	A former fed analyst also using an AI program to collect anything and everything that people are saying about vaccine misinformation.
	This is unprecedented that a company would do this.
	And, of course, it's unprecedented that the social media would do whatever they ask, just like they do whatever the government asks.
	because you have to understand the origin of social media.
	I'm not going to go into detail again, but it was created by a DARPA scientist.
	As soon as it became practical, you had CIE create their own venture capital firm.
	Intelligence community officers on the boards of many venture capital firms, they wanted to pick people to compete with each other and give them money so they could open this thing up, get everybody in there, and then use it as a vast psychological control.
	The internet and social media in particular, in particular, social media is a psyop.
	This is much bigger than Operation Mockingbird.
	It doesn't have a name as far as I can tell yet.
	Maybe the documents will eventually come out.
	They probably do have a name somewhere for it.
	They always name their babies.
	Their Rosemary Babies.
	So I don't know what the name is of this operation, but I do know what they're doing.
	I know this has been...
	DARPA psychologists proposed this stuff from the very beginning, back in the 1960s.
	According to an exclusive report by investigative journalists Lee Fang and Jack Poulsen, published November 20th, an unheard...
	Moderna isn't just manufacturing COVID vaccines.
	They have an entire team that is dedicated to manufacturing consent and shutting down dissent.
	And so when we...
	I know now how my podcast can get labeled as spam.
	It's pretty straightforward, isn't it?
	They're monitoring a wide range of social media platforms.
	Root cause of vaccine hesitancy, they said.
	We want to identify the root cause of vaccine hesitancy.
	Well, let me self-identify.
	I would like to take credit for some of that.
	We want to shut down misinformation that could negatively affect the vaccine debate.
	Well, then it's not a debate, is it?
	And it's gotten so obvious that Trump doesn't want to debate anybody.
	Biden doesn't want to debate anybody.
	The Democrat Party in Florida doesn't want to have a primary.
	Just shut this stuff up.
	Do you like Trump?
	Do you like Biden? We're going to talk about their personalities.
	And you should vote for them based on personality.
	We're not going to have any discussion of the issues or what these guys have done.
	None whatsoever.
	The internal documents show a sprawling effort to monitor basically everything online on social media and in the news media about vaccine policy, COVID policy, anything about Moderna, anything about even any other vaccine companies.
	Mr. Fang told The Hill.
	Moderna's monitoring team includes what it calls its Global Intelligence Division.
	It's run by a woman named Nikki, not Haley, but Nikki Ruttman.
	She used to work for the FBI, worked for the government for 19 years in the intelligence community.
	Most of it was spent with the FBI, but she also worked for the FBI's office during Operation Warp Speed.
	Before that, she worked, before she went to the FBI and working with Warp Speed, she came from where?
	Well, the intelligence community.
	She worked for the Director of National Intelligence.
	Because, you see, this was a terrorist.
	This is not just mass murder.
	This is a terrorist campaign.
	You go back to the very first game, Dark Winter, CIA was all over it.
	You had the former CIA director playing the role of president in that game, Dark Winter.
	This is something that is coming to us from DARPA, the Pentagon, the CIA, the DNI, all the rest of these people.
	It's knee-deep in it. Operation Warp Speed, military operation.
	Going to be delivered by the military.
	Everywhere you look at this, if that wasn't enough of a red flag, you can take a look at the vaccine database, but the fact that this whole thing is being organized, practiced, run by the CIA and the Pentagon and the usual suspects, that ought to be enough.
	And so Moderna has hired some of these people, deeply embedded.
	Because, of course, Moderna was deeply embedded with DARPA. DARPA was working on this mRNA stuff, handed the technology off to them.
	DARPA is just the epicenter of evil.
	It truly is.
	Before her role with the FBI, she worked for the Director of National Intelligence as an advisor on terrorism.
	And so I guess she knows a great deal about how to terrorize the population.
	Ms. Ruttman is only one of many former law enforcement agents that are working on Moderna's monitoring team.
	Surveillance and control. Surveillance and control of information.
	And there's also a drug industry-funded NGO called Public Good Projects.
	And then they also are teamed with an artificial intelligence firm called TalkWalker.
	It uses its technology to monitor vaccine-related discussions across 150 million websites in nearly 200 countries.
	This is why I say the platforming of this show on podcasts is not far away.
	You know, we've been kicked off of Spotify.
	They already have the technology to monitor the content of podcasts.
	Most of the other places are not really bothering with that.
	Spotify is trying to sell that technology to other people so they can censor me.
	And it's going to be done, you know, it's already being done by these pharmakia and the intelligence agencies.
	They know what's there.
	Look, you know, some of the ads that were served there, and again, we're with Spreaker because most of the places where you monetize your ads, you've got to go find the sponsors.
	I don't know anybody that would want to sponsor this program.
	Because these people are just trying to make a profit.
	If you want to make a profit, you're going to cheer the vaccine.
	If you want to make a profit, you're going to cheer Trump.
	Just take a look at Tucker. He knows how to make money.
	Take a look at Alex.
	He knows how to make money, too.
	So, they just, you know, serve these things out.
	We had ads from Pfizer on our podcast for just a couple of weeks.
	But they're going to be able to shut this stuff down early on.
	And the whole Coalition for Content, Providence, and Authentication is there to identify somebody like me who's going to oppose the government narratives.
	If you dissent from their narratives, any of them.
	It could be the pandemic MacGuffin.
	It could be the climate MacGuffin.
	It could be the war.
	It could be any of this stuff.
	You dissent from any of that, and you're a marked person.
	That's what NewsGuard does.
	Well, you know, this news organization up here published an article we don't like.
	It opposed us on something.
	And so we're going to say that everything from that news organization now is bad, it's banned, it's forbidden.
	And so that's what the Coalition for Content, Providence, and Authentication is about.
	It's really to turn this country into communist China.
	The CCPA. We know from a separate batch of documents, the Twitter files, that I reported earlier this year, says Mr.
	Fang, that the same partners that are working with Moderna, PGP, that's the Public Goods Project, the Talkwalker, these other NGOs, had a direct line to Twitter's executives, and they also worked with Google and Facebook to shape content moderation policies.
	So, again, we know all this about censorship.
	We could discern all this about censorship from the way it was being rolled out, who it was being done to, and what these people were typically doing.
	We could discern all this stuff from the reports that we're getting from people, even things that showed up on the VAERS database.
	A tiny fraction of the real number of people who were murdered, but they just continue on with it.
	And so the data in and of itself is not all that important to me.
	Some people want to go in and look at the details there, but we certainly understand what is going on.
	And in other words, you can look at a medical situation.
	And if you don't understand the mechanism by which the vaccines are killing people, It took a while for them to say, well, you know what, it's creating myocarditis and pericarditis.
	They've now established that with epidemiological studies without a doubt.
	The blood clot issues and many other things.
	Ryan Cole looking at how it attacks the T cells and saying it's going to give people turbo cancer.
	Cancer is going to come back.
	It's going to come back and go very fast and all the rest of the stuff.
	So, you know, they've now identified some mechanisms of that.
	But look, from the very beginning, we knew it was killing people.
	I don't need to know the mechanism.
	I don't need to know which poison it is.
	I just need to know that there's somebody running around poisoning people.
	By the name of Donald Trump, by the name of Joe Biden, and all their minions, they're poisoning people.
	And we can tie it to that.
	You can go figure out the mechanism on it.
	I'm not interested. We've got to stop this stuff, and it's been going on for over three years now.
	Started three years ago, back in December of 2020.
	And then this from the expose.
	And I thought it was interesting.
	You know, they're going back and they do a deep dive on, so who was really behind this Deagle website that predicted massive depopulation by 2025?
	Who was it that did that?
	Well, they go back and they talk about the guy, Deagle, that they think did the website here, and how he had a lot of ties to the CIA, to the Department of Defense, to the Pentagon, to the Rockefeller Foundation, to the usual suspects, if you will.
	And I'm not going to talk about that.
	What I think is interesting is the fact that he forecast a 68.5% decline in U.S. population by 2025.
	And it turns out that 69% of Americans were fully vaccinated.
	Isn't that interesting?
	Because, you know, when you look at this, it really does look like the, really does look like the Ash experiment and the Milgram experiment.
	The percentage of people who got vaccinated, as a matter of fact, the people who got the first shot, And a stop in the United States was up 80 some odd percent.
	The people who were fully vaccinated, 69%.
	And the people who were foolish enough to get boosted in addition to it, 16%.
	And so, when you look at the people that, you know, the Ash experiment was a situation where you put one person in the room, the subject of the experiment is put in a room full of people who are in on the joke, and they're asked to give answers to obvious questions and simple stuff, like they show them three lines and which line is the longest one.
	And everybody in the room...
	Is told which one to select, which is obviously wrong.
	Obviously wrong. You look at these lines and it's like, that's clearly, you know, the shortest one or the longest one.
	And the people would, over a period, at first they would raise their hand and then everybody else is like, what's going on?
	You do a couple of those things and all of a sudden they start going with the crowd.
	That was the Ash experiment.
	And the Milgram experiment, of course, is a famous one where you've got the test subject is sitting at a console and you've got an actor on the other side of the window who is supposedly getting electric shock.
	And you have a person in authority who's telling you to administer that shock.
	And they found that they would continue to harm the other person on orders from authority.
	Up to when they were told it was going to be a fatal shock, they would still do that.
	And again, you know, it was about the same percentage of people.
	And I've said for the longest time that when you look at what social media is designed to do, It is a combination of those two experiments.
	You have the arguments from authority that we see.
	Oh, Fauci says this, and CNN says that, and Fox News says that, and so forth.
	So it's the argument from authority, and it is the argument of the mob, which, by the way, just like the Ash experiment, is filled with a lot of government bots who are telling you the lies.
	By combining both of those tactics, they were able to get people initially up to the 80% thing.
	But even when people knew that it was a lie, you would still have 69% of the people who would go ahead and get fully vaccinated.
	In a sense, what they were doing was they were doing the...
	What is so perverse about all this?
	Is that it's like the Milgram experiment, except that they were administering the fatal dose to themselves.
	Instead of to a stranger. So the CDC director now, this woman, Mandy Cohen, who was a state health public guru in North Carolina.
	And she joked about how she would call up other state public health directors.
	Are you going to let them do this? Well, then neither am I, that type of stuff.
	No science on any of this stuff.
	She's now saying the triple-demic of COVID flu and RSV is back.
	It never left.
	They renamed it COVID. We always had the flu and RSV and pneumonia and things like that.
	But this is just to sell vaccines because, again, these people are rubber stamp clowns pushing all this stuff.
	So here's a bit of positive news.
	And, of course, the New York Times does not see it that way.
	They're very concerned about the fact that we have, quote-unquote, they put it in quotes, medical freedom activists.
	Oh, well, you're a medical freedom activist.
	It's just like I was attacked for calling this medical martial law.
	Just like you had Scott Adams saying, it's getting harder and harder to distinguish these freedom lovers from sociopaths.
	Scott Adams of Dilbert.
	And so the New York Times is saying medical freedom, quote-unquote, activists.
	Take aim at a new target.
	Childhood vaccine mandates.
	Well, you know, people are waking up on their own.
	Some people don't need my help to understand what's going on.
	I'm trying to save people from the tragedy that this woman experienced.
	You know, because something that's been going on...
	I had a child that died of SIDS in 1984.
	For people that don't know what SIDS is, it's called Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, or Crib Death was another one.
	I've been saying this for 40 years, over 40 years.
	I don't understand this. He was just at the doctor's two weeks before.
	He got his shots. He had the perfect health.
	Everything was great.
	And then last night...
	I watched, have you been watching Mrs.
	G, the medical examiner?
	I can't say it now.
	Anyway, I watched her show, and she says, what's at rise right now is the sudden adult syndrome.
	Same thing as SIDS, but it's for adults.
	What happened lately that was forced upon people that they had to have?
	And all of a sudden, the rise of these adults dying for no reason is happening.
	And then it dawned on me that I poisoned my kid two weeks before with a vaccine that I was told was safe.
	What if that's the cause of sudden death syndrome?
	And they've been lying to us all this time.
	And they've been experimenting on our babies since 1984 and before.
	And it's just come to light because we get more education now.
	We can get reached education.
	We're not just told whatever they want us to tell.
	We can look research online.
	What if that's the cause of SIDS? What if...
	Me doing what I thought was good killed my baby.
	And it's just hitting me right now because I never put two to two together until now.
	Tell me what you guys think.
	Do you think I'm kind of off my rocker?
	Do you think I'm just being stupid?
	I don't know. Because his death shaped my whole adult life.
	Changed it completely. And I just wonder where I would be and what kind of person I would be if he didn't die.
	It made me very bitter and angry.
	It really did. Yeah, well, mainstream media will tell you, no, it wasn't poison.
	This is the way poisoners work, right?
	The sneakiest suit killers.
	They don't let you know what is happening, right?
	Backstabbers, well, you also got arm stabbers that are doing this.
	And so medical freedom activists are taking a new target, childhood vaccine mandates.
	Today, 2,100 Mississippi school children are officially exempt from the vaccination on religious grounds.
	500 more are exempt because of their health precludes vaccination.
	See, we shouldn't have any religious or medical exemptions for anything.
	And, of course, Donald Trump is 100% with that.
	In 2019, May of 2019, as they were rolling this stuff out in New York and New Jersey and other places, they got to get this shot.
	It's really going around.
	They got to get this shot.
	Talking about measles. Talking about measles.
	No respect from Donald Trump for your religious objections.
	No respect for your medical exemptions either.
	So Dr. Daniel Edney, the state health officer in Mississippi, warned that the total number of exemptions, if it climbs above 3,000, Mississippi will once again face the risk of deadly diseases.
	You mean like measles? You mean like the measles that my parents in Florida and Karen's parents in New York would?
	Yeah, you got measles, you got moms, let's get this around and get this over with.
	It's much easier to get done with these childhood diseases when you're young.
	They can be dangerous when you get older, so do it now and you'll have lifetime immunity.
	I don't have to worry about measles.
	Guess what? Donald Trump doesn't either because he is older than me.
	They didn't have those vaccines then.
	And like this whole thing, herd immunity.
	And you spell that H-E-A-R-D. It is a herd mentality, H-E-R-D. But you've heard that it gives you immunity.
	And what's this magic number?
	Again, this guy who's a state health officer.
	When are we going to get rid of these state health officers?
	Who needs them?
	Really, seriously. Especially when they're no longer serving in an advisory capacity.
	They're issuing orders to people.
	I don't take orders from government officials about my health.
	I don't take orders from a doctor that I pay about my health.
	I take advice from them and I make my own decisions.
	And I do my own research.
	My cardiologist in Texas, you say, oh, you've been talking to Dr.
	Google, have you? It's like...
	Yeah, you better believe that I'm not going to just trust you.
	I don't know who you are.
	I'm going to get a lot of opinions on the internet, and I'm going to sort those things out.
	I'm not just going to go with your opinion.
	You're just one person.
	And so, you know, when you look at all this stuff, herd immunity, in order for it to work, understand the term herd immunity.
	It was a concept that was put out before they were doing any vaccines.
	Child vaccines or anything else like that.
	And it was about people who really had immunity.
	It's trying to explain the curve.
	Remember the curve. Farr's law.
	Why is it that it goes up like a bell-shaped curve?
	Well, you start to get herd immunity.
	But you've got to have real immunity before you can have herd immunity.
	And when they vaccinate people, they still have these outbreaks.
	And they talk about this in the New York Times.
	They say that, you know, this got to be a really big deal after a measles outbreak in 2015 in California.
	And I know that happened.
	Are you telling me that they didn't have herd immunity in California in 2015?
	They had people who had exemptions, but they still had way above the number they said was necessary for herd immunity.
	And they still had an outbreak.
	You see, if the vaccine doesn't give you immunity, you can't have herd immunity.
	You have herd immunity when people actually get real immunity to something that is going around.
	The very fact that there is a measles outbreak in California amongst the vaccinated, that's what they wouldn't want to tell you.
	And nobody died, by the way.
	Nobody died. They had herd immunity, they still had an outbreak, and nobody died.
	And the same thing happened in New York.
	And New York a few years before that, and I talked about it back in 2015 when they were pushing through these new regulations in California, and then Trump talked about it in 2019 on the other side of the issue, of course.
	But they had already had a situation in New York where they had a quote-unquote outbreak and four or five people that got it.
	All of them were vaccinated.
	Some of them were vaccinated more than once, which they were not even recommending for measles.
	And patient zero had been vaccinated.
	The first person to have measles had been vaccinated.
	So all this stuff about herd immunity, you have to have real immunity conveyed before that happens.
	Now, the exemptions are highest in Idaho and lowest in West Virginia.
	In Idaho, 12.1% of the people there have exemptions to not risk their child's life with this poison.
	In West Virginia, they have the lowest, only one-tenth of 1%.
	So, 12.1% in Idaho and 0.1% in West Virginia.
	So, this is the good silver lining from the death and suffering that so many people have experienced, is that perhaps people can start to wake up to these vaccines in general.
	Meanwhile, this new CDC director, as I pointed out, Mandy Cohen, testified before Congress They asked her about vaccine mandates and things like this because, look, this is what Congress does.
	They could shut down this stuff, but instead they're going to have show trials.
	They'll have inquiries, and they'll pose for the cameras, and they'll ask some tough questions like, you know, that really didn't work, did it?
	But they won't do anything. This is why, don't focus on Washington.
	They are not going to do anything except preen for the cameras.
	Just like Trey Gowdy's Benghazi hearings.
	He used that as a vehicle to get on Fox News.
	And Jim Jordan is one of the key people to do this all the time.
	You can always count on Jim Jordan to have a show trial.
	And then nothing, nothing, nothing will ever come of it.
	They'll do nothing to protect us.
	And so they ask her some pointed questions.
	Jeff Duncan, Republican, South Carolina, asked her if she regretted any of the policies she put in place in North Carolina, like school closures.
	Well, I feel like what we did was very inclusive.
	Ah, there you go.
	A useful idiot. A clown that they put in this position.
	She said the good news is that we're in a different place than we were before.
	We both have different tools and we have different mechanisms to respond.
	And that's not good news.
	Because they consider the fact that they have now established these tyrannical actions as a precedent.
	And they're going to bring them back.
	Because these clowns in Congress are not going to do anything to protect us.
	To call them to account.
	Her answers got some of these lawmakers frustrated as they preen for the cameras.
	My neighbor would say, should I wear a cloth mask?
	I don't know from your answer what I should tell them, said Scott Peters, a Democrat of California.
	He's sitting there on the fence.
	Dan Crenshaw says, well, you know, you're in a position where you can help the CDC reestablish its credibility.
	Dan Crenshaw needs to reestablish his credibility, quite frankly.
	But he says, you know, if you want the CDC's credibility back, why would you want the CDC's credibility back?
	Why would you want to push back against vaccine hesitancy?
	These people have lied to us about masks and herd immunity and everything else.
	These big vaccine sellers, the CDC. Anyway, he says, it's okay to say, he says, look, you're in a unique position.
	You weren't there when this stuff happened.
	Oh, yes, she was. She was doing it in North Carolina.
	But anyway, he goes on the false assumption that, you know, you weren't part of the CDC, but she was.
	And, you know, part of this public health tyranny, this medical martial law.
	But he says, since you weren't part of the CDC, it's okay for you to say that it didn't make any sense to shut down schools.
	It's okay for you to say, well, the mask stuff didn't help.
	You know, you can push back against this and you should get some credibility for the CDC. No, she's not going to do that, because she did all of the things that the CDC did.
	She did personally. Let's talk a little bit about the self-amplifying mRNA when we come back.
	But I've gone for nearly an hour without a break, so let me take a quick break, and we're going to be right back.
	Elvis. Ladies and gentlemen, the Beatles.
	And the sweet sounds of Motown.
	Find them on the Oldies channel at APSradio.com.
	The Oldies channel at APSradio.com.
	The Oldies channel at APSradio.com.
	now, The David Knight Show.
	Self-amplifying RNA shots are coming.
	The Untold Danger, this article from Epic Times, you can also see it on Zero Hedge.
	The next generation of RNA-based injections will contain self-amplifying RNA. They refer to it as S-A-R-N-A, lowercase sa, for self-amplifying.
	And so this is essentially, you can think of this as cancer that metastasizes, really the way this operates.
	They say mRNA vaccines are not made with messenger RNA, but they're made with modified RNA. Moderna was originally pronounced at mode RNA, and then they changed the pronunciation, put the emphasis on a different syllable, and called it Moderna.
	Like we're modern. No, it's about...
	Modified RNA. These are actually gene therapy products, as we always said.
	You know, I mentioned this from the very beginning.
	So here's just asking for a friend.
	You know, when you have your little dog and pony show that you did, Trump, where you go around the table and you've got all the different vaccine companies lined up from the slowest to the fastest as you go around the table and finally get to Moderna.
	Well, we can do it right away because we'll use your body to manufacture this stuff.
	And I said, well, where's the off switch on this thing?
	Well, it's not only does it not have an off switch as we see this thing as persisting as they continue to test, it's like, oh, been six months, been nine months, been longer than that.
	We still see this mRNA in people.
	We still see the spike protein and the evidence of this in people.
	So this is, it is persistent.
	But now these people want to make it amplify, not just persist, but amplify, increase.
	So it hijacks our cells' software.
	That's what I said from the very beginning.
	I said, it sounds to me like cancer.
	Cancer goes in and hijacks the cells and starts replicating and destroying the cells as it replicates itself.
	So now let's amplify that.
	We have no possibility at all to gain influence on mode RNA, modified RNA, or self-amplifying modified RNA after it has been injected.
	So, compared to the old modified, genetically modified RNA, a small amount of self-amplifying RNA results in an increased amount of produced antigen.
	One shot of saRNA may be enough to generate sufficient antibodies against a virus, they say.
	But again, what turns this off?
	What stops it from amplifying?
	And you look at this and you say, oh, wow, you know, just one shot might do it, huh?
	So that means I don't have to get boosters?
	Oh, no, no, no, you'll have to get it annually.
	You'll have to get it annually.
	Understand, the pharmaceutical industry, like Pfizer and Moderna and the rest of these people, Johnson& Johnson, they're parasites.
	And like a parasite, they will continue to prey upon their host until they kill it.
	When you look at this and you say, well, it's not really in their interest to kill everybody, is it?
	Yes, it's in their nature.
	They're parasites.
	Parasites who want to kill us.
	And it's in the nature of these people.
	And it's in the nature of who they serve.
	This is a spiritual war, folks.
	This is a spiritual war.
	The intent is to kill mankind, or as many as they can.
	And the pharmakia are the tools in that spiritual war.
	So, the justification for it, they say, because mRNA is highly unstable and has only a short lifespan, too short for our immune system to produce sufficient antibodies.
	That's what they say. But the reality is that it's persisting because it is already self-replicating, continues to self-replicate, and now they're going to self-replicate and amplify.
	And as they're talking about this, they said, well, you can expect that BioNTech, which is one of the companies behind this, several of them are doing it.
	And you can expect that it's going to be given a hand wave and a rubber stamp, just like all the rest of this stuff.
	It can be expected that this process will be as quick as it was for the COVID-19 vaccines, because we don't test or check or stop any deadly poison for anything anymore.
	Here's a 35-year-old firefighter.
	He was now suing New York City for disability benefits.
	They leaned on him, made him get the vaccine.
	He had a really, really bad reaction to it.
	But again, we're not going to give you any medical exemption for any vaccines, right?
	You got to get this shot.
	This stuff is really going around.
	You got to get that shot. And I don't care if you had a bad reaction.
	I don't care if you got religious objections to it.
	You're going to get that shot. Or you're going to lose your job.
	So you're like, well, okay. I like being a firefighter.
	I don't want to lose a job as a firefighter.
	So he gets a second one, and he really has.
	It ramps up. And it damages his heart.
	And now he can't be a firefighter.
	You see, he lost his job anyway.
	Some of the people who refuse to get this in the hospitals or the...
	Firefighters, people in the military, they were kicked out.
	They have an opportunity to sue, but these people are desperate to have somebody come back in who can now do the job.
	And now they're being rehired because they have their health.
	He received his first dose of the vaccine October 29, 2021, after the FDA says it's approved now.
	We've approved this. And so it's not experimental anymore.
	And you can force people to do it, they said.
	So New York City did. He suffered immediate anaphylactic shock.
	He had hives, swelling of the lips, other symptoms that persisted for weeks.
	He was treated in an emergency room and later seen by a fire department of New York doctor who diagnosed him as suffering from the COVID-19 vaccine side effect, the Trump shots.
	They won't say that. The symptoms persisted and weren't intermittently severe, causing him to return to the emergency room and have to take time off from work.
	Despite all of this, and despite the concerns that he raised with his doctor, the fact that the doctor said it was a vaccine injury, the department required him to take a second shot, and he did that November 23rd.
	He said his health deteriorated significantly following the second shot.
	I was having shortness of breath, chest pain.
	I was super fatigued. I couldn't do anything.
	I was afraid I was going to die.
	He's 35 years old.
	His wife, a nurse, was worried that he had a heart condition.
	But he says, I was 35.
	I had no cardiac history.
	After another trip to the ER in February of 2022.
	So this is now three months after he had that second shot.
	They diagnosed him with myocarditis, and he was almost in heart failure.
	And they told me, you can never be a firefighter again.
	And so he applied for disability, and his friends there at the Fire Department of New York, who love him so much, they're so proud of him, right?
	We honor our firemen, we honor our policemen, we honor our soldiers, who they all inject.
	And then when these people die or they're injured, they walk away from them.
	And he's having to sue them for disability.
	Just amazing, isn't it?
	They won't even pay him disability.
	But the federal government paid media outlets to promote the COVID vaccine.
	This is coming from the Brownstone Institute, and he thinks that it's news to find this out.
	Of course, we knew this.
	Even when Trump was president, it was publicized, and I reported it, That he was giving $250 million to the Ad Council to push this stuff.
	And that was more money than they had ever been given in any ad campaign.
	You know, this is your mind on drugs.
	Or, you know, Smokey the Bear says only you can prevent forest fires.
	All these different ad council campaigns where they nag us about what we eat, what we smoke, and setting forest fires, which we don't intentionally do.
	Well, some people do.
	But, you know, the...
	The Ad Council, all these different campaigns, and they'd never had $250 million.
	So why is this news?
	And I talked about that in conjunction with the fact that Yale had already worked out a study, and they published it on the NIH's website.
	And they had about a dozen different lies that they would tell people.
	You know, do it for your friend.
	Do it for your neighbor.
	You know, if you're a Christian, you need to do it out of love.
	And as a matter of fact, you even had pastors like Curtis Chain.
	I don't know if he's a pastor, if he just graduated from theological school in Duke.
	But he was funded by the Ad Council.
	It was right there on his website.
	And he was pulling in people like Robert Jeffries, who has a big megachurch in Dallas.
	And Robert Jeffries is one of these Trump advisors.
	He's one of the inside ring of pastors who wants Trump to win, but won't open a Bible and show him anything.
	And they don't care about the lives of people.
	By the way, it's these same people who are also pushing us into a war in Israel.
	Same people who push this jab.
	Those same types of pastors out there.
	And he's still a Trump pastor.
	And so, you know, he was paid to run these ad campaigns and directed them at pastors.
	He gets Robert Jeffries. And of course, if you're a pastor, you should be impressed with Robert Jeffries, shouldn't you?
	I mean, here's a guy who's making, I don't know, his church is a big business.
	He's making millions, maybe tens of millions a year.
	He's got a really big, fancy church.
	He's got a lot of people who go all the time, just like Joel Osteen.
	So I guess he's doing right, you think?
	Broad is the way that leads to destruction, isn't it?
	Anyway, independent journalist Brianna Morello, who left Fox News because of a draconian vaccine mandate in New York City.
	Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
	Yeah. They were in New York.
	Fox News says, you can't work for us because we're in New York and the vaccine is mandated for everybody.
	You're going to have to get it. So the question is, Brianna quit.
	Brianna Morello quit.
	Did Tucker Carlson get an exemption or did he take it?
	He's been really silent about all that stuff.
	They cut a special deal for him because he's, you know, like they did for the government officials in New Zealand.
	Did they do that for Tucker? Or did he take it?
	You know, we had Dan Bagino at first said, I'm not taking it.
	Absolutely not taking it.
	You know, you kick me off and everything.
	And then after a couple of months of thinking about it, he said, all right.
	I want to take it. He took it.
	And now he's come back and said, I regret it.
	Where's Tucker? Can Tucker be that honest?
	Evidently not. Yeah, he's going to be cagey about all this stuff, isn't he?
	So, anyway, Brianna Morello, who was fired by Fox because she wouldn't take the vaccine, alerted me to a FOIA request filed by The Blaze, which found a number of major media outlets were paid to promote the COVID vaccine.
	What a surprise. What a surprise.
	If there's $250 million in ad money out there, and if you don't promote the vaccine, let's say that you...
	Push back against the vaccine, which nobody at Fox did, including Tucker.
	But let's say that you push back against the vaccine.
	Are they going to cancel your ads?
	Of course they will. They did for me.
	Like I said, Pfizer was advertising on my podcast, and then they, oh, wait a minute, they pulled it.
	So, you know, these people know that if they oppose the vaccine, The very least that is going to happen to them is that they're going to lose $250 million, access to that $250 million fund.
	But it's much bigger than that.
	Because Pfizer is their big sponsor there.
	And, you know, it really, it always goes back to...
	The brought to you by Pfizer thing.
	They've got their hooks on everybody.
	Every network.
	So you really think these people are going to push back against any of that stuff?
	Of course they're not. We'll take a quick break, and when we come back, we're going to talk a little bit about general news.
	A lot of miscellaneous things, but a lot of important stuff coming up.
	And we'll also talk about war when we return.
	Stay with us. Looking for better information?
	APSRadioNews.com features articles and commentary, along with audio from all the top news from around the world.
	APSRadioNews.com.
	APSRadioNews.com
	APSRadioNews.com And thank you to Doug Alug on Rockford, who gave me a couple of tips.
	First, he gave me a monetary tip.
	And then he says, please hit those like and subscribe buttons.
	Let's help spread the word.
	Which I should be doing. So that's a tip, you know, David.
	You need to tell people to spread the word on this.
	And look, as I said, you know, we're still at Spreaker.
	They put us back for now.
	And we chose to work with them.
	Some places would not even work with us.
	Others required us to go find sponsors and things like that.
	So we're there, and it is important.
	And as a matter of fact, if you watch the broadcast on Spreaker, instead of, you know, they push it out to all the different platforms, except Spotify, which won't accept it.
	But all the rest of them, they push it out to.
	So if you watch it, let's say, on iTunes, then there's some revenue that comes back to us.
	It's a very, very tiny amount.
	But it is something.
	And because of the volume, it helps.
	And if you watch it on Spreaker, We're good to go.
	But, of course, we knew they were always doing this.
	We know that Elon Musk bows and scrapes to Theory Breton of the EU, the sensory bows and scrapes to China.
	And, of course, I don't believe that he is the free speech protector that he pretends to be.
	I think this is a phony act, just like it was from Trump.
	The phony anti-globalist, well, Musk is out there, I think, is the phony anti-censorship guy.
	I think he's building your trust for whatever reasons that he's got.
	But he does everything the governments want.
	That's how he became the richest man in the world, by doing things that the government wants.
	By the way, I thought it was interesting that Jeff Bezos is having Musk launch some satellites for him.
	I didn't read the details of what was going on with it, but...
	This is one of the reasons why Musk can do what he's doing, because the government needs him.
	It's not that easy to put these satellites up.
	And I guess, you know, Jeff Bezos maybe is distracted with this new trophy wife that he's got, and his new trophy yacht that he's riding around everywhere on.
	And I guess he just can't be bothered anymore to launch these rockets, so he's going to have Musk do it for him.
	But I think it's also maybe not as easy as they've always made it out to be to launch this stuff, you think?
	All these lies that we've lived with all of our life, like the moonshot.
	It was the video put out by the Russians where they fed in the pictures from the moon landing into Google's program that says, well, this is synthetic and it's fake video.
	And Google said, that's fake video.
	We've had a lot of analysts who have been labeled as conspiracy theorists over the years who pointed out the same thing, but now we can believe it because AI said so.
	Anyway, Microsoft has helped Chinese state-run media outlets disseminate propaganda as part of previously unreported partnership agreements.
	Well, I've been reporting forever about their partnership agreement that they have with the Pentagon, with DARPA. As a matter of fact, DARPA was the sole funder of ElectionGuard.
	$10 million grant that they gave the company that is a Microsoft subsidiary to create ElectionGuard.
	But NewsGuard, similar provenance, shall we say, for that.
	But the thing that really is concerning is this CCPA, Chinese Communist Party of America, which they call the Coalition for Content, Provenance, and Authentication.
	The great firewall that just as Bezos is having difficulty getting up satellites, this will make it impossible for you to get up your content, whether it is text, a picture, a meme, audio, or video.
	Meanwhile, an Irish journalist says media should suppress debate about migrant crimes.
	Is there anything that the press should not suppress, right?
	laughs Freedom of the suppress.
	That's what it's now become.
	Instead of freedom of the press, we have freedom of the suppressed.
	It's interesting to watch how Google has become a search engine that is now designed to hide things and how the journalists have now openly Talking about the fact that they hide stuff from us.
	That they tell us whatever the government wants.
	I mean, this used to be something that they tried to keep secret.
	They used to deny it.
	People said, you know, there's Operation Mockingbird, right?
	Where you're repeating all the lies that the CIA is feeding to you, to people like Walter Cronkite or whoever was, you know.
	And so they, oh, no, no, not us.
	No, not the New York Times or CBS or Walter Cronkite.
	No, we're not telling you CIA lies.
	And now they are open about it.
	They don't even have any shame about it.
	Because we're in late stage, as they're about to take this over and turn it into, I've already taken it over, it tells you that they're already fascist.
	The media has a responsibility to not report views that are an incitement of hatred.
	Well, who are you to determine what it is?
	This is pre-crime.
	This is pre-hate.
	It's pre-speech.
	We're going to shut you down preemptively.
	And again, that's the Coalition for Content, Providence, and Authentication.
	We'll do that. They'll go to people like this Irish paper, this reporter, and they'll say, so who should we shut down?
	And the Irish reporter will point the finger at whoever the government has been telling them to shut down.
	Meanwhile, as I mentioned, you know, Spotify has always banned this program from the very beginning.
	And I'm not so sad to report that they've had to have 17% layoffs of their workforce.
	Schadenfreude. There we go.
	Government shilling does not even help their business.
	You know, they'll pay Joe Rogan.
	Why, when you look at this, why will they pay Joe Rogan $25 million but they won't even let me on, right?
	You can say, well, you know, Joe Rogan is so entertaining and all the rest of the stuff, but they won't even let me on.
	I'm not trying to entertain anybody.
	You know the empire's crumbling when they can't even properly pay their propaganda arms.
	Yeah. Can they just print some more money?
	I mean, it's like Ukraine or something.
	Well, that's the other thing. You know, it's like, well, we just don't have any money for Zelensky.
	It could be that it's crumbling.
	It could be this de-dollarization.
	That's coming up. We'll talk about that in a minute.
	Immigration talks collapse.
	And so they're threatening to sink the aid to Israel and Ukraine.
	That's exactly what I was saying.
	Republicans have vowed to filibuster Biden's aid package unless Democrats agree to tighten the U.S. asylum and parole laws and immigration proceedings.
	This is something that, again, from the very beginning, Johnson linked this to Ukraine.
	So maybe he's on the right side.
	We'll have to see about this.
	I said it concerned me a great deal.
	He had opposed the war in Ukraine as a congressman, but immediately as he becomes Speaker of the House, he says, yeah, we'll do that Ukraine stuff.
	But now he's come back and he said, well, okay, we'll do the Ukraine funding, but you're going to have to protect the U.S. border at the same time.
	Maybe he knows that the Democrats...
	Don't want to, as much as they want to have a war with Russia, it's even more important for them to have a war with America.
	And so the Democrats hate America and Americans, even when they hate Russia and Putin.
	And they would love to have a war as a distraction.
	But the key thing is, and they want to stick with this, is this open border, migration stuff, Great Replacement.
	Maybe he's playing, dare I say it, 4-D chess.
	We'll wait and see what happens.
	He is on the wrong side in terms of foreign aid.
	Even, as I said before, we'll give $14 billion to Israel, but we're going to take that from Biden's IRS thing, and the Democrats are having a problem with that as well.
	But we shouldn't be giving them a $46 billion increase, the IRS, as I pointed out yesterday.
	So there's still issues with that.
	But anyway, this is kind of interesting how this is shaping up.
	A Democrat source familiar with the negotiations told NBC News that Senate Republican demands, quote, have moved in the wrong direction.
	Or I guess we should understand it's moved in the right direction, the direction of not giving more money to Ukraine.
	And so when you look at these negotiations back and forth, They told White House Budget Director, sent a letter pleading with Congress, said, I want to be clear.
	Without congressional action, by the end of the year, we will run out of resources to procure more weapons.
	Isn't that awful? What are we going to do?
	The war machine's going to run out of fuel?
	And equipment for Ukraine, and to provide equipment from U.S. military stocks, wrote Shalana Young, who's the White House Budget Director.
	There is no magical pot of funding available to meet this moment.
	We are out of money and nearly out of time.
	But as they say on NBC News, Mike Johnson, the speaker, was unimpressed.
	Good. He said this in a statement.
	He said the Biden administration has failed to substantively address any of my conference's legitimate concerns about the lack of a clear strategy in Ukraine, a path to resolving the conflict, or a plan for adequately ensuring accountability for aid provided by American taxpayers.
	Meanwhile, the administration is continually ignoring the catastrophe at our own border.
	House Republicans have resolved that any national security supplemental package must begin with our own border.
	Good. That's excellent.
	We have, as an exercise to show people the danger of runaway bureaucracy, you have a member of a city council in Brazil used ChatGPT to write an ordinance that was then passed and enforced on 1.3 million people, And he did it as an exercise to show people just how over the top this could be.
	He crafted a proposal.
	He asked a chat GPT to craft a proposal to prevent the city from charging taxpayers to replace water consumption meters if they are stolen.
	He then presented it to his 35 peers on the council without making a single change or even letting them know that it came from artificial intelligence.
	He said, if I'd revealed it beforehand, the proposal would not have been taken to a vote.
	And so he says his silence about using it was intentional.
	He wanted to spark a debate over the use of artificial intelligence to write laws.
	Imagine how quickly, you know, we've talked about the fact that without this massive bureaucracy, which they call the deep state, which is completely under the executive branch and the president.
	So, you know, the fact that Trump didn't reform the executive branch.
	We talk about draining the swamp and getting rid of the deep state.
	That is all under the executive branch.
	And Trump didn't do anything about that.
	But Congress has abdicated their authority because, as I said, they don't want to be responsible for anything.
	If it goes really bad sideways, then they can always act as if they're the heroes and come back in and try to fix things.
	However, the fact that you have this massive, massive bureaucracy under the presidency, There's out there writing rules and regulations.
	As I've said many times, we've got now taxation without representation and regulation without representation.
	And so they're writing all of these rules.
	These rules, they say, are not the same as laws.
	And so they say that we don't have, when the government comes after us with a bureaucratic rule, we don't have any assumption of innocence.
	We have no due process.
	We have no protection against excessive fines.
	But now consider the fact that That now that we've abdicated all of the laws or rulemaking to the bureaucracy, now the bureaucracy can send it to AI. And think about how AI can multiply this.
	If you look at the mess of regulations that have come out of every one of these bureaucracies, whether you're talking about the IRS or any of the rest of them, or the ATF, any of them, just imagine if they can automate this process even more so.
	It truly is concerning.
	By the way, you know, when I look at artificial intelligence, and we have a couple of stories about how it's being misused and abused by government, but I kind of think of, you know, George Santos, who just was kicked out.
	I kind of think of him as a human version of chat GPT. He just hallucinates over all this stuff and comes up with all this.
	I mean, he's just as detached from reality as ChatGPT.
	So we should call him, I guess, ChatGS.
	Anyway, California gave nearly $100 million in tax credits.
	And that's just to two streaming programs.
	One of them was to Netflix.
	The other one was to HBO. Gave about 50 million each.
	These two TV shows...
	I've been accused of promoting suicide and teenage sexual promiscuity.
	A government watchdog organization called Open the Books reported that California's film and TV tax credit program awarded $45.8 million in reserve tax credits, not deductions, but credits, to the first four seasons of the Netflix drama 13 Reasons Why.
	And they gave $48.4 million to the first three seasons of the HBO drama Euphoria.
	For a combined total of $94.2 million.
	Now, you may or may not be familiar with these TV shows.
	I wasn't. I don't watch TV anymore.
	13 Reasons, and this is a story from LifeSite News, 13 Reasons, the Netflix one that got, you know, just under $50 million.
	13 Reasons is about the litany of factors contributing to a high school student's decision to take her own life.
	13 Reasons Why I'm Going to Commit Suicide.
	Pitching that to teenage students.
	Wow. You think about how much influence that has on teenagers, you know?
	I mean, when you're a kid and you watch television, you know, my mom had to stop me from jumping off the roof wearing a cape, you know, because I watched Superman.
	Yeah. But they're going to push the teenagers.
	This is a long-form drama over four seasons to try to push the idea of why suicide is justified.
	That's criminal. And, of course, California has given them $50 million to do that.
	It was associated, says, a study that was funded by the NIH. This program, 13 Reasons Why...
	It was associated with a 29% increase in suicide of Americans between the age of 10 and 17, a month after the show's debut in 2017.
	It's an uptick of 30% in suicide because of this.
	So it's pretty good at what it does.
	And that was a study that was done in 2019.
	Euphoria follows a queer teenage girl's struggles with drug addiction, sexual relationships, and various other issues.
	It is extremely graphic, has sex, violence, profanity, drug use, showing it with teens and preteens, and a level of full frontal nudity and graphic sexual depictions.
	That prompted one actor to quit the production.
	And, of course, Newsom gives up money.
	This is what is coming out of California.
	Speaking of giving money, Bob Menendez, you know, the New Jersey Senator who's now got his second rodeo of corruption accusations.
	It turns out that some of his gold bars that were part of his personal stash were gold bars that were reported stolen in an armed robbery a decade ago.
	He's getting paid off by crooks.
	What is the provenance of that?
	Can Microsoft tell us about that?
	You want to track the providence of those gold bars?
	Well, evidently they've got serial numbers on them.
	So it looks like maybe he's involved with organized crime outside of his involvement with the federal government, of course.
	That would be redundant to talk about that.
	And then in Canada, we have Trudeau is forced to admit that Christmas is not racist.
	And of course, there's a good reason for them to ask him this question.
	This article is also from LifeSite News.
	And I had read the talking points that were put out by their Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
	It was making the argument that Christmas was racist.
	It's part of his administration.
	So does he believe that?
	You know, they asked him that on the floor.
	And he's like, chuckles. It's like, ha, ha, ha.
	And they said, well, you know, this would be funny if it wasn't so serious.
	And as I've pointed out multiple times, I've had at least two other stories talking about, in the United States, we've had both a small town telling us city employees, you know, don't, any of this Christmas stuff, it's racist, it's white privilege, it's colonizer things, and all the rest of the stuff. And you keep it quiet.
	Don't say anything about Christmas.
	And they were called to heal by a conservative legal foundation that challenged them on that.
	And then the same thing happened with a school jurisdiction telling all the teachers, you can't put up anything about Christmas.
	So, you know, this war on Christmas stuff, It's not a joke, because this is a Marxist.
	They're pushing this struggle session type of thing, this colonizer type of thing, this anti-exercise of religion.
	They're pushing it out everywhere.
	I find it interesting when you look at these things like what came out of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
	They talk about Christian hegemony and colonizers and all this stuff and all this language.
	And again, in both of those cases in the United States, both the town council and then also in the school.
	And then there was actually a third one where there was an advisor in a school.
	But they're referring and they're pushing out these publications and they're all using the same talking points.
	It's coming from a little Marxist shop that is turning this stuff out, this propaganda stuff out.
	And so it's not just an aberration in Canada.
	It's not just an aberration in that particular town, that particular school.
	These are publications.
	That these people who are associated with academia recently are grabbing this stuff and putting it out there.
	It's a program, if you will.
	It's an agenda. And when they talk about Christian hegemony, I find it interesting.
	These same people are so adamant to make sure that nobody says that America has a Christian foundation.
	America was never based on Christian principles, and yet they talk about Christian hegemony when they oppose Christmas decorations or whatever.
	Blanchett, who is in the Canadian Parliament, and in this back-and-forth questions here, said, just because you laugh doesn't mean it's funny, he said, in the House of Commons.
	He said, according to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the simple celebration of Christmas, the tree, the family, the music, the gifts, is systemic racism.
	I wonder if good old Santa Claus is racist.
	Why, yes, he is.
	Because, again, some of those publications aren't there.
	Why is Santa Claus white?
	Well, it's because of white privilege and all the rest of this stuff.
	They haven't said, does this guy, I wonder if snow has become racist, he said.
	Well, that's not it, but the Santa Claus thing is.
	So as LifeSite News previously reported on October 23rd, the Canadian Human Rights Commission published a discussion paper on religious intolerance, characterizing celebration of Christmas and Easter as discriminatory and religious intolerance, and saying that those are not holidays that should be recognized by the Canadian government because it's based on an evil religion of Christianity.
	Well, their stuff is based on an evil religion.
	It's based on an evil religion called Marxism.
	It's a worldview. It's got its rules and the way that they react to things.
	The Canadian Human Rights Commission said that observing the birth of Jesus is an obvious example of a type of religious bias rooted in colonialism.
	Now, this is a new aspect of it, but I had somebody the other day say, well, I don't think David's a Christian because he celebrates Christmas.
	You know, one person holds a one-day special.
	Another one thinks that all days are alike.
	You know, there's nothing in it, as I said, that I believe that I am compelled to do.
	I don't justify my position before God based on the holidays that I keep or anything else that I keep.
	My position before God, as somebody asked me yesterday, is based on the finished work of Christ.
	It's not on any good works that I do so that you don't boast, right?
	But it's also, you know, your salvation by grace through faith is not going to be without works.
	You know, Paul says it's by grace through faith and not of yourself so that you can't boast.
	But then James says, but a faith that is not accompanied by works is a dead faith.
	So there's that mixture there, and people fall off that horse either side, I think, as Christians, and don't really understand how to get that imbalance, or that both of those things need to be there, I should say.
	Maybe a better way to put it.
	But when you talk about the celebration of Christmas, this type of thing that we see here now, being honed into a Marxist wedge, Has been around for a very long time.
	And it's not just about, like, Megyn Kelly and Bill O'Reilly.
	They would always focus on this kind of stuff.
	And, you know, Santa Claus is white and all this.
	I never cared about any of that stuff.
	It mattered to me that they wanted to tell me that I couldn't exercise.
	They wouldn't tell anybody.
	They couldn't celebrate Christmas.
	That in and of itself is enough reason to do it.
	If you don't exercise your rights, you lose them.
	So I want to exercise my religious freedom to do whatever I want to, to celebrate whatever I want to.
	But from a religious standpoint, it's also an opportunity to talk about the incarnation of Christ, and I think we should always embrace that.
	We should embrace the good stuff.
	I always made sure that I told my kids there is no Santa Claus, and there's a lot of things about even the Christian story about the birth of Christ, including the date, you know, that it's not going to be a hill to die on, and we understand that this is something that's not in the Bible.
	So we'd always take that approach, but I always wanted to exercise my use as an opportunity.
	And if these people recoil in horror, Like a Hollywood vampire, when you pull out a cross, maybe you should pull the cross out and stick it in their face.
	That's always been my opinion.
	It's like, well, there's something about this that really is disturbing them, so let's get to the bottom of what this really is about.
	So, anyway, the...
	Well, the Canadian Human Rights Commission claimed, and I've read this to you before, they said the history of these holidays, quote, manifests itself in present-day systemic religious discrimination.
	An obvious example is the statutory holidays in Canada.
	Statutory holidays related to Christianity include Christmas, Easter, Christmas, As the only Canadian statutory holidays linked to religious holy days.
	As a result, non-Christians may need to request special accommodation to observe their holy days.
	So therefore, what we need to do is remove this stuff.
	That's where they were headed with that.
	Well, I think what we need to do is we need to oppose that.
	And then one last thing here from the news before we go to break.
	I thought that was kind of an interesting, just kind of, Entertainment story here.
	Brenda Lee has a holiday hit rocking around the Christmas tree.
	She recorded that when she was 13 years old, back in 1958.
	And so after 65 years, this year, it hit number one, which is truly amazing.
	I remember seeing an article just this last week about Mariah Carey and how she's got her song, All I Want for Christmas.
	She heavily promotes it. She makes like $3 million a year.
	Now, every year, offer royalties for that.
	Truly amazing. And it's been number one for a very long time.
	This year, rocking around the Christmas tree, went to number one.
	Again, she is now 78.
	It is the oldest anybody has been to have a number one hit.
	At 78. If it had gone to number one when she was 13 years old, she would have been the youngest person to ever have a number one hit, but it didn't happen then.
	She did have some...
	She did have a lot of success with it.
	It's been platinum five different times.
	It's come close to being number one several times.
	Never got higher than number two.
	Did that as recently as 2019 and 2022.
	What does that tell us about the state of popular...
	I know that at Christmas time, people will go back and they'll listen to very old songs, you know, Bing Crosby, things like that.
	And that's one of the things I like about Christmas music, is it opens up people to a lot of different styles that they would normally not listen to.
	So they'll listen to a wide variety of music from a wide variety of times, you know, even going back to Handel's Messiah.
	But what typically is number one, Are things like Rockin' Around the Christmas Tree, which, by the way, was written by Johnny Marks, a Jewish songwriter who wrote Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer and did all the songs that, you know, was that Rankin and Bass production.
	He did all those songs. And one of those is in sixth place, Holly Jolly Christmas by Burl Ives.
	But Jingle Bell Rock.
	It's in the top ten.
	And Andy Williams' That's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year is number ten.
	George Michael's Beloved Last Christmas.
	That's another one I don't know. I've never heard Mariah Carey's song, interestingly enough.
	I go out of my way...
	Just like Taylor Swift.
	So it's not by accident that I haven't heard it.
	I guess they, I don't listen to MTV. I don't listen to regular radio.
	So I've never heard it.
	So I don't know what it is. I know that it's, yeah, I've seen the feature of it.
	And I imagine that it's mostly, it's more MTV and visuals than it is musical, I suspect.
	Anyway, we'll be right back.
	Hear news now at APSradionews.com or get the APS Radio app and never miss another story.
	APS Radio
	APS Radio You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Just saw this. Geesebusters, thank you very much for the tip.
	He says, David loved the bird picture.
	I'm like, what bird picture? Oh, that's not right.
	Karen does that. So I'll pass that on.
	I think she's listening, as a matter of fact.
	So thank you very much, and thank you very much for the tip.
	Geesebusters, love it. That's a cardinal, by the way, so you don't have to bust a cardinal.
	They're not as annoying as geese, I think.
	Especially if you've got them allaying, as they tend to do this time of year, we're told in the songs.
	I don't know. On Rockfin, Stephen Casper.
	These people can launch rockets, but I need a license to fly a drone.
	Yeah, exactly. And, of course, Jeff Bezos...
	He wants to be able to deliver product by drone, and he wants to have a monopoly on that.
	He doesn't want you delivering products by drone either.
	So we were just talking about a platinum record.
	Let's talk a little bit about gold.
	I mentioned the gold bars of Menendez, but this is a little bit different.
	A lot of people are talking about what happened with gold over the weekend.
	It hit a historic high, not adjusted for inflation, of course.
	A little over $2,100.
	I checked this morning when I looked, it was still above $2,000.
	It had been struggling to try to break that psychological barrier of $2,000 for a while.
	It finally did. And so a lot of people are talking about it.
	As this one person points out, in inflation-adjusted terms, gold still has not surpassed the top that it hit in 1980s.
	And as I'm looking at it, you know, that top was, it looks like on this chart, was like $2,600.
	But I remember gold being over $800.
	I don't remember the exact high.
	I didn't look it up. But if I go to some of these inflation calculators and type in $800 in 1980, I get just under $3,000 today.
	So it's only about two-thirds adjusted for inflation of where it was at that point in time.
	But as he says, this has been years in the making.
	We watched what happens usually when it has a new all-time high.
	There's usually an intermediate top signal and an imminent significant pullback, followed by lengthy sideways grinds that could drag out for years.
	But he thinks at this time it's different.
	And I think that it may be as well, because when we look at what is happening with both gold and with Bitcoin, And even to some degree with silver, as many people are saying, is this a situation where we're looking at de-dollarization?
	Is that really what is really involved here?
	And many people are pointing to silver.
	Tony Ardman at Wise Wolf Gold, and again, he set up davidknight.gold to get you there, and we talk to him on a weekly basis.
	But he said for the longest time, he said, look, the thing that's really undervalued is silver, historically.
	And a lot of people are talking about that.
	And so when you look at silver, especially as gold has made its move, and when we were talking last Thursday, I said, it's kind of interesting what this...
	One person has said, watch silver.
	Silver may be the trigger or the pin.
	You pull that on the gold grenade to get that to really explode.
	But silver to gold ratio is currently over 81 to 1.
	Historically, it's been between 40 and 60.
	And Tony has said this many times.
	And so, in other words, that means it takes 81 ounces of silver to buy one ounce of gold.
	And in the modern era, it's been between 40 and 60.
	Historically, the ratio has always returned to that area of 40 to 60.
	And when it does, it does so with a vengeance.
	The ratio fell to 30 to 1 in 2011 and below 20 to 1 in 1979.
	But when the spread gets this wide...
	Silver doesn't just outperform gold.
	It goes on a massive run in a short period of time, as they're pointing out.
	So it's kind of interesting to look at that.
	And, of course, both gold and silver have industrial use.
	Silver, a lot of industrial use.
	Because of the solar panels and things like that, but it's hard to say which one has a higher use.
	I still look at it, though, as a hedge against not just the dollar losing its value, or as I talk about, de-dollarization, or as it's put on RT, a rebellion against the dollar.
	I don't just look at it from that standpoint.
	I look at it from the standpoint...
	of trying to escape their control.
	And that's a unique thing that we've never seen before.
	We've never had a move to try to establish a global currency, a global government, and a digital ID that will surveil and control everything that we do.
	But again, hit $2,100 on Sunday, and it is still here on Tuesday, still just above $2,000 this morning.
	Bitcoin broke through its psychological level of $40,000.
	And as this person who's writing for RT, and his publication is Russian Market, they don't say who he is, but he says his target is for Bitcoin to end the year, he thinks, at $50,000.
	So he thinks it's really going to go up from here.
	And all this is happening because, as he put it, the Federal Reserve's anticipated dovish pivot.
	As well as a weakening dollar.
	This is something that's been also talked about.
	Gerald Salenti saying, yeah, election year is coming up.
	They're going to do it. Some people say in the summer.
	Some people now believe that it's going to be earlier.
	And that's why you're seeing these moves in gold and in Bitcoin.
	Recalibration of the likelihood of the easing of interest rates with the odds of a March rate cut.
	People now...
	Think that there's an 80% chance of that.
	People are looking at it based on, you know, the tea leaves that they're reading from what Powell has said.
	But just five days earlier, only 10% of the people thought that there would be a rate cut in March.
	Gerald Slenty was saying that, but he was the 10% that was saying that.
	And now it is as high as 80% of the people who are looking at this think that it's going to happen as soon as March.
	And so that's why you're seeing the big moves in both gold and in Bitcoin that we've seen for the last couple of days.
	So when we look at the money issue, it really does come back to the global ID.
	And when we come back, we're going to talk about that.
	Yet another organization.
	We have all these different organizations.
	Davos, Bilderberg, Club of Rome has done its thing.
	But, you know, there's all these different organizations right now, COP28.
	All of these globalists are constantly crisscrossing the globe and their private jets going to these meetings.
	And they're openly talking about what they want to do with us.
	And so we're going to talk about one of these other meetings that is the first time that I've seen this particular meeting mentioned.
	We'll be right back. Whether you're feeling like the blues or bluegrass, APS Radio has you covered.
	Check out a wide variety of channels on our app at APSradio.com.
	APSradio.com
	The End You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	All right, and I should mention that I mentioned Gerald Slenty and his economic forecasting.
	If you want to get a subscription to Trends Journal, and you can see it at trendsjournal.com, if you want to get a subscription there, you can save 10% off of that if you use the code KNIGHT. And so that helps you, helps this broadcast.
	I thought I'd just mention that as well.
	And don't forget, Tony Arterman, davidknight.gold, if you want to get gold or silver.
	It's a great place to do it, and you can buy it in any amount, and you can even do it on a monthly subscription basis, and even very small amounts as well with that.
	Let's talk about the global ID. Finding your identity.
	How three governments are developing digital ID. And, of course, this is coming to us from a website that is called globalgovernmentforum.com.
	How many times do we have to see these people openly talk about how they're creating global government, not even just global governance, but global government?
	How many times do they have to openly talk about this before they stop calling us conspiracy theorists for pointing it out?
	Oh, yeah. You say there's going to be a global government?
	Well, you're a conspiracy theorist.
	At the Global Government Digital Summit.
	There you go. So this is a website that talks about all the different global government stuff.
	And this is yet another one of these.
	Like I said, you know, Davos, Bilderberg, COP28, all of these are about global government.
	And many times they will have forums that say this is about global government.
	But we're not supposed to notice that.
	So he had digital leaders from Germany, Catalonia, Azerbaijan, and this was taking place in Canada, by the way.
	So a lot of different, and the person who was doing the keynote speaking was from the UK. He was the former head of UK government's digital service.
	And this is something where they meet on an annual basis.
	He said, to realize their vision of seamless services wrapping around the user.
	I noticed that.
	Yeah, like they're going to service us, you know, kind of like a bull does.
	Or you could say the twilight zone, you know, to serve mankind.
	Yeah, they're going to cook us and eat us.
	Countries must develop two essential capabilities.
	Strong digital ID systems and high-quality cross-government data management.
	It has to be global, right?
	You ask yourself, why is that the case?
	If they're going to set up a welfare system and require an ID to participate in it, which is the plan that Bill Gates worked with the Indian government on, their Adhar system, They went to the poor people and said, you want welfare?
	You want health care? Fine. Take a number.
	The mark of the beast.
	Take that government number and we'll give you free stuff.
	If you don't take it, you won't get the free stuff.
	And so when you look at this, you say, okay, well, what's the just for you?
	Well, we just have to do a better job of giving you welfare and a better job of giving you health care.
	And we need to personalize it for you because we're just here to serve you.
	Yeah, I'm from the government.
	I'm here to help you.
	As the guy from the Department of Education laughingly said.
	You know, I keep telling people, we're from the government.
	We're here to help you. Reagan said that.
	Yeah, Reagan said they're the most evil words in the English language.
	Hi, I'm from the government.
	I'm here to help you. The nine worst words.
	And so, you know, they're just there to service.
	But if that is the case...
	Why do they need to share this with other countries?
	Well, because they want a global government, and they say it.
	This is a global government summit.
	But that's just a conspiracy.
	So we need to have strong digital ID systems, and we need to be able to transfer this information across different governments.
	Because, you see, the governments, as we know them, have already become, have already become, Merely jurisdictional subdivisions of a global government.
	We saw that because of 2020.
	We saw every country, including America, including under Trump, that we all did what the UN and Davos and these globalists had been talking about at all their meetings like this, and like Davos and like Bilderberg for years have been planning this stuff out.
	And so they all did exactly the same thing in lockstep.
	And so, we already have global governance.
	And the individual nations, if you want to think about them, yeah, they have certain things that they're allowed to do still.
	In the same way that in the United States, we have individual state governments, and there is some variation between them.
	But they've all been subsumed under this, you know, giant corporation we call the American government.
	And so the Global Government Digital Summit in Ottawa, he says that we need to have this digital ID system that will permit users easy access to a wide range of public services.
	Well, that means that they can also not give you permission.
	They cannot give you access.
	These are privileges they're talking about and restrictions.
	It will allow the providers to connect services around the user.
	These are a lot of euphemisms and a lot of different meanings on these words than I would read into them.
	They're urging digital leaders to roll out their digital ID programs to focus on building a customer base.
	And, of course, Gates has been a part of ID2020. That's when we're going to roll it out, and that's when they did roll it out.
	To get everybody an ID in 2020.
	That's, you know, the vaccine IDs.
	That's when they really started rolling out this program.
	And of course, he wants by 2030, every person everywhere, every age vaccinated.
	That's the IA 2030 Immunization Agenda 2030.
	Both of those coming from Bill Gates, or I should say through Bill Gates.
	And so he said, less than 10% of the public make use of the digital ID system that Germany introduced a decade ago.
	And so how do we lure them in?
	How do we get them to take the bait?
	How do we get them to trust us?
	That's what they're talking about in this thing.
	And you stop and think about it, right?
	When they put out LifeLog and they said, we're going to keep a record of everything that everybody does throughout their life.
	It's like, no, you're not.
	We don't want that. Total information awareness?
	LifeLog? No, no, no. So they shut that down.
	They opened up Facebook.
	And had you put the data in there.
	How about that? They don't even have to populate it with data.
	They want every citizen, every resident holding an EID card.
	They said it's already happening in Germany.
	Everybody there has got an EID card, and yet it is, they said, a great technological foundation, but it's not being used by people.
	I guess they understand what this is really about.
	So I said we're going to set up these pilot programs, They start talking about how it's done in different places.
	Catalonia, where they have 7 million people there.
	So they're working alongside a local authority and universities that are in Catalonia and in Belgium.
	And so this is a global network of how they can inventory and ID every single person, share this information with everybody.
	They've got people at this conference in Ottawa, from Azerbaijan, from Belgium, from Catalonia, UK, Germany, all these are the presenters, UK, Germany, Canada, presenters there at this thing.
	But notice what they had to say.
	They said, we recently undertook a self-sovereign identity pilot program.
	Oh, if you identify yourself as a sovereign citizen, that's equivalent to being a terrorist.
	And the law enforcement people have been given that beyond the lookout for somebody who calls himself a sovereign citizen.
	They're probably going to try to kill you.
	So, you know, the They see anything that looks like sovereign citizen literature on the back of somebody's bumper, and they take the safety off of their gun, that type of thing.
	But now they're talking about a self-sovereign identity pilot.
	This is trying to fool people into thinking that they're in control of their data.
	You are not in control of this data.
	They are. And they said there's a pilot program that's going to work alongside a local authority.
	So this is coming from multiple countries.
	This is being presented in a summit talking about global government.
	And so you've got multiple countries.
	You've got universities involved in all this stuff, of course.
	But notice that they say they have to work alongside a local authority.
	For years, the left has said, think globally, act locally.
	That's what these people are doing. They're thinking about global government.
	They're thinking about a global ID. But how do they do it?
	They work alongside a local authority.
	And that's what we have to do.
	We have to oppose this at the local level.
	And we can. We first have to understand what is being done, what their goal is.
	But we also need to understand that these people that we're so focused on at the federal level are not going to do anything for us.
	They've already been co-opted.
	And that's especially true of anybody who is running for president.
	They've already been co-opted into this thing.
	And so, forget about that.
	You know, we would like to imagine that we're going to get our government back by having some savior in the White House.
	That is not going to happen.
	Newsflash. I learned that a long time ago.
	And they're always holding up somebody like Obama to the left or Trump to the right.
	To get people to believe in that idea of a benevolent dictator or savior in the White House, that isn't going to happen.
	You're going to have to do this at the local level.
	You need to understand what they're trying to do globally and understand that they got their plans globally.
	They have to enact it at the local level.
	We have to fight it at the local level.
	That is where that is going to be happening.
	Ultimately, it is hyper-local.
	It is hyper-local to us because ultimately this is a spiritual war.
	And so you need to understand that.
	But the Global Government Digital Summit was hosted in Ottawa.
	A private event, and the globalgovernmentforum.com says, even though this summit is a private event, we will produce some of these reports to share as much of the discussion as possible, as much of it as they want you to know.
	And no more than that.
	And so experts are predicting mind-controlled devices may be common by the 2040s.
	A smart brain or a brain-machine interface, BMI, typically you see it as brain-computer interface, BCI, but same thing, whether they call it machine or computer.
	And you've got so many different companies and countries that are funding this.
	It truly is amazing. It would allow people to navigate the net, to send texts, and to adjust thermostats.
	Really? You're going to get a brain implant for that?
	You're going to give up your privacy for that?
	You're going to buy into the surveillance network so that you can navigate the internet, send texts, and adjust thermostats by merely thinking?
	I don't know.
	I'm hoping that this whole thing is going to come out like the self-driving car debacle.
	A lot of hype and nothing happens.
	But really, you're going to give up your privacy.
	You're going to take a brain chip for that even if it's not invasive.
	You're going to wear the device or something like that so you can do this by thinking about it.
	So then they pivot to something that people really would want to have.
	You know, people who have lost the use of their arms or legs or paralyzed or somebody who is blind and And other treatments.
	Devices for chronic pain and inflammatory bowel disease.
	Now, this is a different thing than the brain-computer interface.
	They're conflating these things, but they're very different.
	Because this is electroceuticals.
	And as I said before, when I went back and investigated the background of Monsef Slaoui, he's been in all these conferences that they have with...
	He was always there with Fauci and Francis Collins and the usual suspects, and he was always there.
	And most of these conferences that we're talking about in the years before 2020...
	We're always about electroceuticals.
	How are we going to use electricity to treat disease and to, you know, do this and to do that?
	And so when you look at it and you realize that they're focused very much on using electromagnetic forces one way or the other, not just to read your mind, but also to manipulate you physically, you have to ask, so what about 5G? You know, if you're going to use electroceuticals to treat people, then what about the negative effects of 5G or just EMF in general that is all around us all the time?
	Many people have done reports talking about, you know, looking at how we become more and more of a sick society as we have more and more electromagnetic fields and wireless things around us.
	Devices like these can collect huge amounts of data as they continuously monitor the person wearing them.
	That's the mind-reading stuff.
	AI could be a big help with this, analyzing these big data sets to identify relevant help information, and then sending it to a patient's treating clinician.
	Or maybe they send it to the government.
	Which one would you think?
	Or they said doctors, or maybe it's the police.
	Could then intervene in near real time when people are unwell, or maybe when they're thinking the wrong thoughts.
	You see how this cuts in both ways, but they want you to believe that the AI and the robots are going to be helping little ladies cross the street who can't see or walk right now.
	Brain data is arguably our most private data set because of what can be inferred regarding our identity and our mental state.
	Yet, private BCI companies may not need to inform users about what data is used to train their algorithms.
	Well, of course, it's the same principle that the internet always operates on.
	You are the product.
	They make a tremendous amount of money by scraping the big data.
	That's what they're using to train artificial intelligence.
	But it's also what they can monetize and send to the government or send to companies.
	For instance, should individuals in the military be equipped with neuro-enhancing devices so they can better serve their country and protect themselves on the front line?
	Or would that compromise their individual identity and privacy?
	Perhaps this is what the vaccine mandates for the military were really in preparation for.
	You work for the military.
	I mean, look, if you are willing to take the vaccine on orders, even if those are not legitimate legal orders, even if you strongly believe that it is dangerous,
	it has not been tested, or if you have a religious objection to that, Well, if you're the kind of person that doesn't care about science or religion or the Constitution, then maybe you would be the type of person that they're looking for in the military today.
	The kind of person that they could tell to put this brain chip in or to wear this other thing because we're going to enhance you.
	And it won't necessarily be voluntary.
	We'll be right back. Looking for better information?
	APSRadioNews.com features articles and commentary along with audio from all the top news from around the world.
	CBSRadioNews.com. CBSRadioNews.com.
	CBSRadioNews.com.
	CBSRadioNews.com.
	Alright, we're going to talk a little bit about war, but before we get to that, I want to talk a little bit about politics, because it's the politicians who take us into war, of course.
	And on Rumble, Honor Seeker says, they may or may not get their global or digital ID system, but one ID or fingerprint that we will answer for is on Judgment Day.
	Even the rich and powerful will answer for their deeds, good or bad.
	That's right. That's what we need to understand.
	And if we understand that, that really does change everything.
	About the way that we see the world, the way that we interact with the world, and what we are looking to get out of this life.
	It changes everything.
	So let's talk a little bit about politics.
	You know, I talked about George Santos, and he's now on Cameo.
	And in case you don't know what Cameo is, for $200 a pop, You can get personalized messages from celebrities.
	I don't know.
	So... Pep talks, gossip, roasts, advice messages from Santos himself.
	And they have verified this on Wired Magazine.
	They said, yeah, we looked at it, man.
	He really doesn't have a real profile on here.
	He hasn't done any content yet, but, you know, that's what they charge.
	All the video messages are promised to be delivered within 24 hours of an order.
	I don't know. Could you believe anything that George Santos says?
	If he says he's going to get it to you in 24 hours?
	Initially priced at $75, but now the cost has increased to $200.
	This is a guy who has lied about everything.
	He lied about his finances.
	He lied about his personal background.
	He lied about where he went to college.
	As a matter of fact, he said that he was a star of the Baruch College volleyball team, but he didn't even go to Baruch College.
	He said he was Jewish. And then when they called him on that, he said, you're not Jewish.
	He says, well, I said, I'm Jew-ish.
	Jew-ish. I'm like a Jew, but I'm not Jewish.
	This guy is just an ongoing joke.
	He said he worked for Goldman Sachs, and he never worked for Goldman Sachs.
	He said his mother had died as a result of 9-11.
	She did not. And on and on and on.
	on.
	But the things that got him into big trouble were his lies about money and about campaign financing.
	He got multiple federal counts of money laundering, identity theft, theft of public funds he set up to face trial next September.
	He spent $50,000 in campaign funds to pay off personal debts.
	He made other unlawful purchases, and he used campaign money to subscribe to OnlyFans, the porn site.
	He even ripped off a fellow congressman, Max Miller, Republican from Ohio, has accused Santos of defrauding him and his mother by charging their personal credit cards.
	Wow. I guess maybe Max Miller probably voted to kick him out, I think.
	Don't you think? The Ethics Committee said, yeah, he's horrible, but we're not going to do anything about it.
	But they did have a vote, put it up to a vote.
	And you had, of course, all the Democrats who would not do the same thing for their people.
	And they had about half of the Republicans voted to kick him out.
	About half of them said to keep him in.
	I was surprised.
	Thomas Massey was one of the people who voted to keep him in.
	I can't understand.
	To me, you know, they want to talk about precedent.
	To me, it's a horrible precedent to try to keep somebody like that in.
	So I may have my first disagreement with Thomas Massey.
	I've not looked to see why he said he voted that way.
	I can't imagine any explanation that would get me to vote to keep George Santos in.
	Like I said, he's like a human chat GPT. But other people have been on...
	On Cameo, offering to do videos, Chuck Norris, Sarah Palin, and even Roger Stone.
	So I guess you could get Roger Stone to do a voice for you, but you could also get Travis to do a voice for you.
	He does Roger Stone.
	Do something like an answering machine.
	You've now reached the residence of John Doe, and you can finish it up with I'm Not a Crook.
	Thank you for calling the number of John Doe.
	He is not available right now.
	And John Doe was not a crook.
	Not a crook. Just like my friend Nixon was not a crook.
	Probably cost you a lot of money to get your face tattooed on his back, though.
	Anyway, talking about strange things in politics, like George Santos, Chris Cuomo, he is now open to Trump.
	This guy is desperate for viewers, isn't he?
	He's open to voting for Trump.
	Chris Cuomo. In a recent podcast, Cuomo was asked about whether the U.S. would survive another term of Trump, to which he replied, Well, we survived a Trump administration, and we would survive another?
	Yes, we would. He said, Nobody was trying to kill us when Trump was president, and the way they are now.
	What? Of course, you know, he doesn't...
	It was his brother who was killing...
	People in nursing homes by putting sick people in there and denying them treatment that was effective.
	And, of course, Trump was trying to kill us when he was president.
	Killed a lot of businesses.
	He drove a lot of people to suicide with his lockdowns.
	And then he was the father of the vaccine.
	What is this thing with Chris Cuomo?
	But, again, I think he's trying to pivot.
	He sees how much money...
	Can be made if you suck up to Trump.
	And he says this.
	He says the first vote I ever cast was for a Republican.
	Is this a pivot for Cuomo?
	I think so.
	As a matter of fact, you know, he's got a big lawsuit going on.
	He doesn't like CNN. CNN is failing except for when Trump is around.
	That's the one thing that he must have learned when he was at CNN. Nobody wants their perspective on the news, except their audience gets electrified by Trump because they hate Trump so much.
	So they made a lot of money off of that.
	As I said yesterday, when Trump was attacking Drudge, and of course Drudge puts that at the very top of the Drudge Report.
	You talk about Drudge, you get a link, you know.
	And so Trump is saying, you know, look at what has happened.
	And as I said yesterday, the Drudge Report is down.
	It's down because he's flipped left.
	But if he didn't have Trump, just like CNN, if they didn't have Trump, they'd really be down.
	And so Trump is actually helping with their leftist base.
	It gives them a reason to tune in.
	So what's going on with Trump today?
	Are they going to get him in jail today?
	That type of thing. And CNN played that game.
	CNN fired Cuomo, and he is suing them for $125 million.
	They said they fired him because he helped to cover up his brother's sexual harassment allegations.
	And he's responding, and what they have found with their discovery, they say, they found information that proves that CNN's highest-level executives not only knew about his involvement in helping his brother, but they actively assisted his brother.
	They did the same thing that they fired him for, in other words.
	And CNN is more than willing to cover up the sexual harassment of...
	Cuomo and CNN, just like Fox News and MSNBC, and just like Cuomo, they're all more than happy to cover up the crimes of Donald Trump.
	The real crimes, not the stuff that they're coming after him for, but the real crimes, the poisoning of people.
	And the fascist suspension of the Constitution with medical martial law.
	That's what they're not apologizing for, what they don't want to talk about.
	So as we look at the election, we have DeSantis was asked by...
	He went on NBC's Meet the Press.
	And he's gotten some attention because he did...
	I don't know if it's that he did such a great job in the debate with Newsom or that Newsom just beclowned himself so poorly.
	I mean, he wouldn't answer any questions.
	He had no answers.
	Instead, his tactic... Was to evade, but also when DeSantis was talking about something substantive, you know, he would just shout at him.
	You know, as DeSantis is saying, you people are tools of the teachers' union.
	You shut down the schools during COVID and kept them locked down.
	And you're no different from Biden and Lala Harris.
	And he goes, you pronounced her name wrong.
	It's not Lala. It's Kamala.
	But anyway, you know, he just keeps shouting.
	It's Kamala. It's Kamala.
	It's Kamala the whole time. He didn't have any response for any of that stuff.
	And he didn't have the decency to deny that he was in the pocket of the unions.
	He's fine with that. And so it was the fact that Newsom did such a bad job.
	And so they get DeSantis on.
	NBC's Meet the Press.
	And when you look at the polls, again, polls don't necessarily mean anything, especially at this stage in the game.
	It doesn't mean anything until they vote.
	And Iowa is a special case.
	And Trump did not do well in Iowa in 2016 when he was running.
	I think it was Ted Cruz that beat him there.
	I don't remember exactly.
	But, you know, he was not well-liked.
	And the Iowa Republican Party is very much a Christian party.
	And at that point in time, they could pretty much smell that Trump was a fraud on that.
	So they have on NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday.
	They asked DeSantis about impeachment.
	And he said, so here's what I think.
	He said, I think the Biden family, because this is something that's being pushed now by Mike Johnson, he says, we got the stuff for impeachment, and we are compelled, when the president has committed crimes, we are compelled to come after him.
	I agree with that.
	But here's what DeSantis said.
	He's looking at the bigger picture here, I think.
	So I think the Biden family and the amount of money that has flowed into that family, to me, is corrupt.
	I think that it's not been explained in ways that make any sense.
	And so opening an inquiry based on the facts that we have, I think that would be justifiable.
	However, I think they run the risk of doing an inquiry that doesn't necessarily lead anywhere.
	He's talking about the fact that you've got people like Trey Gowdy when he was there, Jim Jordan now, always doing inquiries, always doing hearings, and never doing anything.
	And when I saw DeSantis say this, it's like, bingo.
	Bingo. I'm glad to hear him say that.
	He's the only one who's talking about CBDC for the longest time.
	Now it's been brought up.
	Ramaswamy also talks about it.
	But he took the lead on that.
	It was just amazing to me that when he does...
	A press conference and he talks about CBDC is big brother money and all the rest is digital big brother.
	And he finishes and the first question is, but what about Trump and the Manhattan indictment?
	It's like, you don't care.
	You don't care that they're going to put CBDC on you.
	You only care. But what happened about Trump today?
	And then when he says, look, I'm not involved in that, then Trump attacks him because he didn't defend him strongly enough, that type of thing.
	But anyway, he goes on, he says, I think if they do the inquiry, They run the risk that it won't necessarily lead anywhere.
	While they've been ignoring a lot of the problems that our voters are talking about.
	And when I'm going through Iowa, Republican voters are not fond of Biden.
	Yes, they're concerned about Hunter and all of his money.
	But they're more concerned about what is happening at our border.
	And they're more concerned about what is happening with the economy.
	They're more concerned about federal agencies that are overstepping their bounds.
	So, if you're going to do the inquiry, Which, again, I think is justifiable.
	You also have to address all these other issues, and I think that there's a feeling out here that they're not focused on the key issues that they wanted to see addressed.
	Clearly on the budget, there's been no progress with that.
	So make sure that you're not ignoring all these other issues, and don't use that inquiry as a kind of Trojan horse.
	To not then meet your responsibilities on all these other things.
	I don't know how that's a Trojan horse.
	But regardless, he is right about the rest of this stuff.
	They need to get the IRS under control.
	You know, the problems that we have are coming from the federal government itself.
	And instead, what they want to do is play partisan games.
	And so, again, when you look at the response from the people who don't want to do debates, like the Trump camp, how do they respond?
	They respond with dirty tricks and rumor and innuendo, and they always make it about ad hominem attacks.
	And you saw this last week.
	Again, our friend Roger Stone put out a statement because he said, Casey DeSantis is going around talking about her family.
	Can you imagine that? And he called her a very filthy name for that, for mentioning her children and for being on the campaign trail with her husband.
	I wonder where Melania is.
	Maybe we should ask Roger.
	Maybe he knows. Casey DeSantis has not only supported DeSantis' bid for the White House, he's also played a strategic role as an advisor to the campaign.
	But... One person in response said, I can see why the Trump team would be upset about Casey highlighting the fact that they have a happy young family and her husband's opponent is almost twice his age, one person wrote on Twitter.
	So, where do you go with this?
	Well, the next thing that the Trump campaign, the Trump team, the dirty tricksters there, come up with is to say as...
	In Iowa, again, it is the Christian vote there in Iowa, the conservative Christians.
	And so they're putting out all this stuff.
	As I said, you know, you've got this group of people who are praying for Trump and not praying that God would open his eyes to get Trump to open his Bible.
	They're praying that God would remove all the obstacles so that Trump could become emperor again or whatever he sees himself as being.
	That's the saddest thing about it.
	These people are all pastors that are out there.
	But they're putting out this kind of stuff.
	Oh, look, he's getting prayed for.
	That must mean that he's a Christian.
	Not anywhere close.
	And so, as they're trying to do damage control to Trump, who's, you know, his reports about what he said when the evangelical leaders or whatever and political leaders in Iowa endorsed Ted Cruz, He called them pieces of excrement.
	These Christians are just, you know.
	And so that kind of stuff came out.
	So he's got to do some damage control.
	So they show pictures of him being prayed for.
	And then they put this out.
	DeSantis staff bought a Bible for his inauguration as governor because the family didn't have one.
	I was surprised. I didn't realize that a gubernatorial, that an inauguration was a BYOB affair.
	Not your own beard, but your own Bible.
	I didn't know they had to bring their own Bible to get sworn in.
	I guess I should have figured that out because you had somebody who was elected, was it in Michigan, who was a Muslim, and he got sworn in on the Quran or something for the first time.
	So I guess you do bring whatever it is that you want to be sworn in on.
	But they said, I guess they're supposed to shame him on this.
	But do we have any politicians who have ever opened a Bible?
	Mike Johnson has, but I'm talking about the presidential candidates.
	Have any of them even opened a Bible?
	You know, they occasionally touch it when they take an oath or they do what Trump did.
	He held it up.
	It's like, see, see, look at this.
	I've got a Bible.
	It's like a magic talisman here.
	You know, stand off, back off.
	I've got a Bible in my hand.
	You know, that type of thing.
	No, no.
	As a matter of fact, you know, Trump loves every book in the Bible.
	Even though he can't name a single one.
	He loves them all. So they have found somebody, and just as they found somebody who leaked on Trump and said, yeah, he called the Christians a bunch of dirty excrement and all the rest of the stuff.
	Well, they have somebody who has leaked on DeSantis, And says that when they realized that he was going to get sworn in on the Bible, they had to order one from Amazon.
	And, you know, here's a receipt for we ordered this from Amazon at the last minute.
	And they did that to counter what he was saying in terms of, you know, he may not have had a Bible, he may not have read it, but he certainly has more of a story than Donald Trump does.
	Whether it's true or not, I don't know.
	He said, we were married and we were doing our thing.
	I was in the Navy. My wife was busy as a TV reporter.
	And we wanted to have a family and it didn't happen.
	And so we prayed and we prayed a lot to have a family.
	And lo and behold, we get back to the U.S. from Israel.
	And a little time later, we got pregnant.
	And so he said, we just kept the faith, even though that first baby died.
	And we kept praying and we knew that there would be a path that God would lead us on.
	And lo and behold, a short time afterward, we had our first baby girl.
	And he says, life has a long and winding road.
	Keep the faith. So again, you know, the issue...
	Is character.
	And if we can see character in these people.
	And so, again, don't put any excessive hope in any of these politicians.
	You need to focus on people at the local level.
	But most importantly, you need to have a Bible.
	And you need to read the Bible.
	God's Word will not return to him empty.
	He has made that promise to us.
	And it is something that will put your life in order even if you can't get the government in order and you're not going to get the government.
	In any order. But you can make a connection to the throne of God.
	And that's really what you need to do.
	We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	Looking for better information?
	APSRadioNews.com features articles and commentary along with audio from all the top news from around the world.
	APSRadioNews.com.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Wow.
	Well, in response to what we just talked about on Rumble, Chevkin321 says, Elections and politicians are nothing more than self-parody.
	Yeah, again, we don't take any of them seriously.
	And we should not.
	But unfortunately, a lot of people do.
	On Rockfin, Brandon Bennett, thank you very much for the tip.
	I appreciate that. Let's talk a little bit about war.
	I thought it was interesting that And I mentioned it briefly.
	I said yesterday, I said, well, they had an election in Venezuela.
	Maduro asked his people, do you want to go to war for oil?
	Now, I said, who in their right mind would vote yes for that?
	That's the type of thing that politicians do.
	Let's spill blood for oil, right?
	They do that all the time. But I said, we also know that Smartmatic began in Venezuela.
	It was created by pals of Hugo Chavez, and he never lost an election after they created Smartmatic.
	And so I said, they will probably win.
	Well, yes, we're supposed to believe that 95% of the people in Venezuela want to go to war with Guyana for oil, to invade it, to take it over, to steal their oil.
	Because, you know, we all wanted to do that to Syria, right?
	Trump said, well, we should go there and take the oil.
	And that's what they're doing there in Syria, taking the oil.
	And no word about it from our wonderful media, except when somebody launches missiles at the soldiers who are there stealing the oil in Syria, and they get hurt or killed.
	Then we hear about it.
	And then they beat the drums and say, well, we need to expand this war in Syria, that type of thing.
	So... There's 168,000 square miles of extremely oil-rich land in neighboring Guyana.
	And Maduro wants it.
	And he claims that he has a mandate.
	I thought that's a curious idea, that he would have a referendum on that.
	Politicians typically don't do that because they know ahead of time what the answer is going to be, unless you control the results that are there.
	We've heard so many times, haven't we?
	No democracy has ever gone to war.
	Well, have you had any honest elections in any democracies lately?
	I think this is a good example of where we are right now.
	It said oil is transforming the Guyanese economy.
	Their economy grew at 62% last year.
	According to the IMF. And they're projected to expand another 37% this year.
	Think about that. Can you even imagine that?
	Our economy grows maybe 2% or 3% a year.
	If it starts to get up to where it's going to get 5%, the Federal Reserve will come in and say, oh, oh, oh, economy is going to catch on fire, tamp it down, right?
	Of course, you know, China is allowed to grow twice that rate, three times that rate.
	That's okay, but not in America, right?
	And here you have, of course, they're starting from a small base.
	Probably in Guyana, they probably had pretty much a zero economy.
	And so you can grow up pretty quickly to get to 62% if you're starting out with something that's very small.
	Nevertheless, it's been transformative.
	We have about 11 billion barrels in reserves there and a population of only 800,000 people.
	The country has the largest amount of oil per capita in the world.
	And Maduro wants it.
	Even though Venezuela has the world's largest proven reserves, he wants more.
	Always the case, isn't it?
	Just like these billionaires, you know, these control-agarchs that are out there.
	They've got most of the money in the world, but they want it all.
	And so Venezuela's got the world's largest proven reserves.
	At the turn of this century, they were pumping about 3 million barrels per day.
	But because of socialism, mismanagement, corruption, and sanctions is what they pointed out.
	You know, the sanctions are coming from us, but the mismanagement and the corruption comes from communism.
	Because of all that, it led their production to collapse.
	And in September this year, they pumped only 735,000 barrels per day instead of 3 million.
	And so, for their incompetence, they've decided that even though they've got the biggest oil reserves, and they can no longer...
	They're only getting about a fifth of what they used to have.
	Instead of increasing their production and doing something about it internally, they'll go to war.
	Again, blood for oil, a very familiar equation that we've seen over and over again.
	When we look at what is happening in Israel...
	As I've mentioned briefly, and we talked about it on Friday, the New York Times released some documents showing that Israel had known about the Hamas attack plan for over a year.
	And of course, if you said that, that this was a Pearl Harbor, you know, they kept saying, it's a Pearl Harbor, it's a Pearl Harbor.
	I said, yeah, let's think about that.
	What was Pearl Harbor? FDR knew about it.
	He stood down. Let it happen.
	That doesn't justify the attack.
	It doesn't justify the attack from Hamas.
	But it tells you that they wanted this to happen so they could use it for their purposes.
	A bigger war.
	For their purposes.
	And so it was dismissed by anybody who talked about that as an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory.
	But I said from the very beginning. I said it beggars belief that this was a surprise.
	And now it's not a surprise.
	As a matter of fact... It was a 40-page document, and it's called Jericho Wall, and it outlined point by point exactly the kind of invasion that was going to happen.
	And they knew about this for more than a year before it happened.
	Israeli military and intelligence officials dismissed the plan as aspirational, considered it too difficult for Hamas to carry out, but they did it exactly the way that it was in the plan.
	And not only, and there's some people who are inside of Israel who are very angry about that, just as there are people in America who are very angry about Pearl Harbor and how that was used.
	And so some of these people have released some emails, they've released the 40-page document called the Jericho Wall document, but some of the emails show arguments back and forth between a lower-ranking analyst and a commanding officer, the commanding officer just dismissing all but some of the emails show arguments back and forth between a lower-ranking analyst and a commanding officer, the commanding officer just dismissing all this stuff, and the analyst Could not get anybody to pay attention to it.
	Hamas followed the blueprint with shocking precision.
	They called for a barrage of rockets at the onset of the attack, which then used drones to knock out the security cameras and automated machine guns along the border, and gunmen to pour into Israel en masse, and paragliders on motorcycles, on foot.
	All that happened on October 7th.
	And of course, the barrage of rockets provided, you know, noise cover, and other, you know, confusion to allow them to take out the automated machine guns on the wall and that type of stuff.
	But it's also an example of how incompetence in leadership, a lack of human intelligence, and a lack of an over-reliance on complex technological systems can actually lead to vulnerability. and a lack of an over-reliance on complex technological systems The document circulated widely throughout the Israeli military and intelligence leaders.
	Experts, however, said that the attack of that scale and ambition was beyond Hamas' capabilities, according to documents and official that they spoke to.
	It is unclear yet as to whether or not Netanyahu saw the document, but he is still responsible nevertheless.
	Even if he didn't see the document, he was responsible for the people that he had underneath him.
	And I think that it is more, it is such a coincidence that This all happened at a time to strengthen his hand when he is dealing with a very politically divided country that is, as many people inside Israel said, was in virtual state of civil war.
	In July, just three months before the attack, a veteran analyst with Unit 8200, Israel's Signals Intelligence Agency, warned Hamas had conducted an intense day-long training exercise, exactly as outlined in the blueprint.
	So, first of all, they get the intelligence, which, you know, you would expect that they would have that intelligence.
	I said, how in the world, in such a small area, can they practice this kind of stuff right under their nose?
	And nobody noticed? Well, they did notice.
	And the people at the top said, never mind, which is exactly what happened with Pearl Harbor.
	They have their own agenda. Meanwhile, as we look at this escalation that is happening there, the Pentagon has confirmed that on Sunday there were four attacks in the Red Sea against, well, they were going to be against ships.
	They had the U.S. warship that was there was able to shoot down the drones, and that's where it stands right now.
	But imagine that one of those drones gets through.
	That's going to be the thing that's going to kick off another war.
	The U.S., by the way, has sent Israel 15,000 bombs since October the 7th.
	The transfer has included thousands of 2,000-pound bombs used in Gaza.
	The U.S. has provided Israel with 57,000 artillery shells.
	57,000?
	15,000 bombs, including over 5,000 who have 2,000-pound warheads.
	Mike, or rather Mick Mulroy, a former Deputy Assistant of Defense and an officer in the Marine Corps, described the weapons being used as those that the U.S. would use in non-urban areas.
	He said they're kind of the weapons of choice for the fights that we had in Afghanistan and Syria.
	They were out in the open and non-urban areas.
	He said the U.S. may use them in more urban areas, but first it would do a lot of target analysis to make sure the attack was proportional and that it was based on military necessity.
	Now, of course, the U.S. government, this U.S. government, the Knows that it's going to be used in an urban area before they sent it.
	They still sent 15,000 bombs, 57,000 artillery shells and everything to be used in an area that is only 140 square miles and has 2.3 million people there.
	They know how this is going to be used.
	As a matter of fact, Israel is talking about the fact that they said this is going to be our new Munich, referring to the PLO that attacked the Israeli Olympic athletes in Munich, kidnapped and killed them, and then they hunted them down.
	And so they've said this is going to be our new version of that, and it's exactly what they should do.
	They ought to go after the people who did it.
	Rather than shelling civilians.
	15,000 bombs, 57,000 shells, provided by the U.S. government, knowing that it's going to be used in a very high-density civilian population.
	And so, I saw this article, and when I first saw it, I thought, well, this is kind of sarcastic, but it actually is not.
	Killing Palestinians with U.S. bombs is now called the gospel.
	And I saw this on Brian Shulhavi and his account, and I thought, well, he's coming after Christians whose eschatology they think is more important than explicit commands that God gives us.
	And I've said that before.
	I don't, you know, whatever you think...
	The end of the world, even when you look at the book of Revelation, it is frequently referred to as revelations by people who think that it's revelations about the end of the world.
	It's not. It's a book about the revelation of what?
	Of Jesus Christ.
	This is not a book about what happens to Israel in the future.
	It's about seeing Christ.
	And that's the way you try to read.
	When you pick up the Bible, instead of putting your hand on it and taking an oath and then denying that you took an oath like Trump did.
	I didn't take an oath. I didn't do that.
	It goes full George Santos on it.
	I was president, but that's not an official office of the U.S. government.
	So I can't be held responsible for anything that I did, he said, in defense.
	His attorneys did in Colorado.
	But, you know, when you read it, you should be looking for Christ in there and how you can connect with Christ.
	Instead of reading it when putting your Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other, which I've heard a lot of people who talk about, you know, put a premium on eschatology and say, that's the way you ought to read your Bible.
	No, it isn't, because you're going to be reading into, you're going to be reading the newspaper into the Bible.
	That's not what you want to get out of it.
	That's the wrong way to look at this.
	Anyway, I thought that was what he was talking about, but he's not.
	Instead, when he's looking at this, the gospel is actually what Israel is calling their AI program that selects bombing targets in Gaza.
	They call it the gospel.
	Isn't that interesting? Again, I thought it was people like Ken Hagee, I don't even know his first name, and San Antonio.
	I mean, he's all about end times and Israel and all this stuff.
	He's turned his church into just a political bully pulpit.
	Of, you know, here's the future.
	Come here and find out.
	I've got the future. I can tell your future here.
	You don't even have to stick your palm out.
	You know, you can just go to Hagee's church and he'll tell you what the future is going to be.
	Presumably, right? No, the gospel is a computer program that Israel is using to choose targets in Gaza to bomb.
	And this was just published this week.
	And several different media outlets have it.
	A mass assassination factory run by artificial intelligence inside Israel's war against Gaza, according to the investigation.
	Another reason for the large number of targets and the extensive harm to civilian life in Gaza is the widespread use of a system called Habsora, or translated, the Gospel.
	Largely built on artificial intelligence, it can generate targets almost automatically at a rate that far exceeds what was previously possible, you see?
	This is why I said artificial intelligence may not be able to drive your car, but it can drive you into slavery.
	It can drive you into war.
	It can be used as a mass murder machine.
	It can be used to run autonomous killing machines, whether they're drones or whether they're on foot or on wheel.
	That's what artificial intelligence can do.
	Artificial intelligence can scrape all the data off of the internet and data mine it for information about you because somebody identified you as an enemy of the state, as a dissonant.
	So it can be used for all those types of things, and that's what they're using it for here.
	That AI system, as described by a former intelligence officer, essentially facilitates a mass assassination factory.
	Now, if they were going to use this, again, to go after...
	The Hamas leaders, they know that this guy is living a life of luxury and high-rises in Qatar, and they don't go after him.
	They deal with him. So if they're going to use this to go after the people in Hamas, I don't have a problem with it, because those are murderers.
	But if they use it for civilian populations, it's very different.
	And we should understand, as Brian points out, he says the word gospel is an old English word.
	Which means good news.
	Good news. Which is the same thing the evangelical comes from, right?
	We talk about EU, the Greek.
	So gospel is like Old English.
	But, you know, when they talk about people who are evangelicals, it's like, you know, we talk about eugenics or euthanized.
	Those are not good things, but the EU means that it's a good death or it's good genetics or something like that.
	And so the evangel was like an announcement news.
	And the E-U in front of it, in the Greek word, meant good news.
	And so that's the Greek for good news.
	Gospel is the Old English word for good news.
	And what is the good news?
	Is the good news that we're about to go into a tribulation or something and we're all going to be helicoptered out of here?
	Is that the good news? Or is the good news the fact that Christ paid for our rebellion?
	Paid a bill that we could not pay?
	Is that the good news?
	Is that what these churches should be focused on?
	Instead of politics and war and pushing war?
	As if that can somehow accelerate God's time frame?
	God doesn't need your help.
	He needs your obedience. Why do you call him Lord and you don't do what he says?
	The essence of this gospel message is that both Jews and Gentiles can receive all of God's promises, says Brian, as given to Abraham.
	So, again, when God tells Abraham through you, all nations will be blessed.
	The blessing is not through the wars that are happening in the Middle East.
	The blessing that came to us through Abraham, through Israel, is Christ.
	The good news is Christ.
	The good news is not an approaching Armageddon.
	The good news about Christ is what you turn to when you see Armageddon coming.
	We will be right back.
	Tell Alexa to add the APS Radio skill and have access to the best channels anywhere.
	From country to blues, classic hits to news, APS Radio curates incredibly diverse playlists for you to enjoy.
	Get details at APSradio.com.
	APSradio.com
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	All right.
	Well, we're just talking about the good news.
	Let's talk about the bad news for Ukraine.
	The bad news is that NATO people are looking at ways that they can throw Zelensky overboard.
	Have him walk the plank, essentially.
	NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.
	Has warned that Western powers should be prepared for bad news from Ukraine in the wake of the, as he puts it, failed counteroffensive.
	Everybody is admitting it now.
	Everybody knew that was going to be the case.
	And again, as Jocelyn said from the very beginning, you think that you're going to be able to beat Russia?
	They have shown that they can absorb quite a bit.
	That's a massive country.
	And that's a big, you know, of course, Ukraine is big.
	And Russia's still struggling on the offense against Ukraine.
	But as Chris Christie said, you know, we can spend a very small amount of our budget and look at the big effect that we've had in terms of destroying a lot of Russia's military capability.
	Let's double down on it. We've destroyed, we've spent like, what, 10% of our budget and we took out 50% of their military.
	Let's keep going. Let's double down on this stuff.
	That's been the calculation.
	They're saying the quiet part out loud.
	This is a surrogate war against Russia.
	They said they were going to fight them to the last Ukrainian, and apparently now we have reached the last Ukrainian.
	I showed pictures of the—I think I played the video.
	I saw the video. I think I played it on the show—of this entertainer, like a USO show.
	And they show this person, that really horrible performer, and she's walking through the audience, and so they got the camera is focused on her, and you see all these guys sitting there, and they're like, you know, and they're really old.
	They're sitting there looking at their phones, or they're just staring out into space.
	They're not at all entertained, but they're extremely old.
	And as I pointed out when I talked about that, I don't know if I showed that video or not, but, you know, they've actually got women on the front lines of combat.
	They've extended the draft age way up into, I think it's right up to 70 or beyond.
	I mean, so they really have fought them to the last Ukrainian for the likes of people like Chris Christie and Nuki Haley, who can never get enough war.
	Got to have more war.
	So, last month, reports emerged from Washington that U.S. officials have quietly begun pressuring Kiev to come to the negotiating table with Moscow, expressing concerns over the ability to draft more men into the fight.
	More men into the fight? You mean we're going to have men doing the fighting now?
	We're now admitting when push comes to shove?
	You've got to have men in the army?
	That's why the U.S. army is now running recruitment films with men.
	Instead of their rainbow LGBT stuff that they've been doing.
	So, despite these reported concerns, Biden is continuing his lobbying effort in Congress to supply billions more military aid to Ukraine.
	With the White House warning that U.S. funding for the proxy war could dry up by the end of the year.
	This is the game that Johnson is playing.
	It's to say, well, we're not going to fund Ukraine unless you defend the United States.
	That's a smart move.
	Now, Biden is going to try this thing because it's going to collapse.
	His approach is going to be, well, it collapsed because you guys wouldn't give me the money to give more money to Ukraine.
	We weren't supporting them sufficiently, and it's your fault that we didn't support them.
	That's what he's probably going to push that for the election.
	Good luck with that.
	Public opinion does not want to be involved in this war.
	And so he's currently seeking $61 billion more in additional aid.
	But again, there's the push back and forth.
	And as we've seen in the past, there's been evidence produced that even when Ukraine wanted to talk to Russia about a peace talk, Biden said no.
	Not that it would have done any good, because we had already had, as you pointed out, Zelensky ran and got elected on a platform of peace in 2019.
	And his representative to the peace talks, Arrestovich, Alexei I think is his first name, he came back and told a Ukrainian TV reporter that was interviewing him.
	She said, what's the chance for peace?
	Because by that time they voted for peace by electing Zelensky because they'd already had five years of civil war.
	With a Zelensky puppet government installed by the U.S. shelling civilian areas that wanted to be independent, wanted to stay with Russia or whatever.
	And so he said, there's no chance.
	He said, as a matter of fact, in 2019, he said, in three years, 2022, there's going to be open warfare with Russia, and the country's going to be devastated.
	He said, that's horrible. He said, no, it's good, because we're going to get into NATO. And so whether or not they had peace talks, Regardless of whether they go to do the peace talks, they want to fight them to the last Ukrainian.
	The question is, are they going to set up Zelensky as the guy responsible for the downfall?
	That may be what they're doing, because I don't think it's really going to be doable for them to talk about people, the politicians in America, who don't want to keep spending these billions of dollars that we know are going to a corrupt regime, which is now funneling the arms out everywhere.
	And enriching themselves. But the most amazing thing that I saw, and this is just this final closing statement here about the war, the most amazing thing that I saw is a statement from the Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, who, if you recall, he was in the military.
	He got out, and he went to work for Raytheon.
	And there was a rule that if you were out of the military for more than a certain amount of time, And so he just gave a speech at the Reagan Library this weekend.
	And he blamed chaos, bloodshed, and terrorism worldwide.
	He blamed it on people like me.
	He blamed it on Americans who opposed the U.S. global military empire.
	And he said, non-interventionists are the real enemy.
	Yes. That's his equivalent of war is peace.
	Is that a willing thing?
	Yeah, you want peace? Yes.
	You want non-interventionism?
	Well, you're the person that's responsible for all the wars, the chaos, the bloodshed, the terrorism, everywhere.
	Not us! Not us.
	But I tell you, these people will tell you lies no matter how obvious they are.
	They'll double down on that.
	And this is happening at the same time that Michael Hayden, that despicable head of the CIA and the NSA, was out there saying that there's no difference between conservative Christian gun owners and Hamas.
	And Lloyd Austin says that those of us who want peace are the ones who are responsible for war.
	Well, Mr. Goldfold, thank you very much for the tip.
	He says, yeah, genius.
	Bennett was president, not Netanyahu, when that information was revealed regarding the Hamas attack.
	Do some study, please.
	Good grief. The left was in power that time, not the conservative Netanyahu.
	Well, you can make all the excuses that you want.
	Netanyahu is making excuses, Mr.
	Goldfold, for this, wrapping himself in the Bible.
	It makes me want to puke when I see people like Netanyahu and Ben Shapiro trying to justify this war for territory by using the Bible.
	These are people that don't believe it at all, and say it out loud.
	Ben Shapiro said, I don't believe any of that stuff.
	Did God part the Red Sea?
	No. But he gave us the land on the other side.
	Yeah, well, you take it all or you take nothing, okay?
	And I stand by my comments.
	I stand by... He was in and out of that government all the time.
	Nobody told him when he came back in?
	Yeah, exactly.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	No, we're not, because we're at just six minutes before the end of the show.
	Let me talk a little bit about what's going on with cars.
	We've got electric vehicles that are almost 80%...
	More problems than gas-powered ones, Consumer Reports says.
	Well, of course, that's why people don't want to buy the cars.
	One of many reasons, besides the fact that even if they wanted to, they can't afford to.
	Not in this market. When you look at the premium, when you look at the high interest rates, can't afford to do it.
	So GM is slashing their budget on electric cars, just as they're slashing their budget on self-driving cruise vehicles.
	I think this is very good news.
	And think about the fact that Cruise, the autonomous driving segment of GM, you know, they had all these problems in San Francisco.
	People were putting cones on them because if they had a cone on them, they would freeze and they would not move.
	And it's like, okay, these things are blocking neighborhoods.
	They're going to intersections, all of them going to one intersection and stopping, clogging the place up, concerned that it would prevent people from getting to an emergency or something like that.
	So they...
	A lot of people were pushing back against that.
	Then it ran over. Actually, it didn't run over the woman.
	Somebody else hit the woman, knocked her in front of the car.
	It got confused and didn't realize that she was under the car and drug her for quite some time.
	And that was the last straw.
	And, of course, the motto of Cruz, the General Motors Autonomous Car Division, was zero crashes, zero crashes.
	Zero emissions and zero congestion.
	All three of those have been proven false.
	They've created massive traffic jams, both there and in Austin, when they get confused and just stop, when they all go to one intersection.
	So, so much for the zero congestion.
	When you look at the zero crashes, I just talked about that, when you look at what is happening with the Tesla autopilot stuff, and then when the zero emissions is even nonsense.
	You know, you're picking a point at which you start to measure emissions that is bogus.
	You want to start looking at the emissions and what does it cost to build these things in terms of emissions, right?
	There is a manufacturing cost which they conveniently ignore that is much greater for these electric cars than it is for the conventional internal combustion engines.
	And so they arrive at the showroom floor with a massive amount of energy put into them, if you want to put it that way, or carbon or whatever they want to say.
	And it takes about 60,000 miles before you reach the break-even point.
	So it's not zero emissions.
	And it's not zero congestion.
	And it's not zero crashes.
	And it wouldn't even be zero emissions in terms of its operating emissions, depending on where the electricity is generated.
	As I said, in India, they have such dirty power plants because they're not required to make them clean, just like China is not under the Paris Climate Accord.
	They have such dirty power generation places there.
	That if you've got an internal combustion engine car that gets 35 miles per gallon, that is cleaner than an electric car that gets its electricity from one of these power plants that kind of operates like a diesel generator.
	The spending cuts have people questioning the economics of cruise as a business.
	GM had bought out SoftBank's minority share and segment for $2 billion last year, now owns 80% of cruise, and they get to write it off.
	And they really don't care.
	Because, again, this is ESG, Environmental Societal Governance.
	And that's what they want to use the corporations for.
	They want to use the corporations to govern us.
	But the corporations don't care about their customers, and they don't care about profits.
	All they care about is doing what the government wants with its environmental and social agenda.
	So, the big question...
	As to what extent is 0-0-0 also hinged on zero rates?
	We're talking about zero emissions, zero crashes, and all the rest of this stuff.
	They can't sell it if people can't afford it.
	But it's also got some real big issues, not just recognizing whether or not it's got a woman under the car, but as we have shown in the past, it can't recognize children.
	They got a lot of response when they showed the car crashing through a bunch of people.
	So, anyway, the public are also recognizing that being unwitting guinea pigs to unproven tech that is desperately unregulated is not what anybody has signed up for.
	Yeah, it kind of sounds like the jab, doesn't it?
	It all comes back to the same types of approach.
	Whether you're talking about the COVID MacGuffin or you're talking about the climate MacGuffin, it's all getting people signed up for technology that has not been proven, technology that is dangerous.
	And so people are desperately asking Biden to please pull back.
	These are auto dealers who can't stay in business, and they are desperate for this.
	But, again, we've got John Kerry who is signing us on to this agreement to get rid of coal according to many newspapers.
	The U.S. signs this agreement.
	No, it didn't. And we need to understand that it is John Kerry, John Kerry, who has unilaterally signed a piece of paper, which is absolutely worthless and of no authority, just like these orders they were issuing in 2020.
	Thank you for joining us.
	If you like the Eagles, the Cars, and Huey Lewis and the News, you'll love the Classic Hits channel at APS Radio.
	Download our app or listen now at APSradio.com.
	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.

▲