Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 13, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:04:01

The David Knight Show - 02/13/2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	you
	using free speech to free minds you're listening to the David Night Show
	as the clock strikes 13 it's Tuesday, the 13th of February, year of our Lord, 2024.
	Well, today we're going to take a look at what is happening with climate.
	Are they really going to make a change?
	We're going to be joined in the third hour by Senator Frank Nicely, who's going to talk about how the natural asset companies that were unexpectedly shut down, How that agenda is still moving forward and how it's moving forward at the state level.
	Just as we have states making subtle changes to enable CBDC through UCC, through the Uniform Commercial Code, there is the same type of mechanism that is happening with conservation easements and other things at the state level here in Tennessee and in other states.
	You'll see the same thing as well.
	We're going to begin, however, with an update to the news.
	We'll be right back. You know, for the longest time we've talked about pesticides and their effect on our health and their effect on the economy and their effect on the food supply.
	Glyphoset has lost, well, Bayer, which owns it, it's created by Monsanto, they bought Monsanto.
	There's been several glyphoset trials now that resulted in multi-billion dollar judgments, but of course they believe they can appeal their way out of it.
	Bayer knowingly bought Monsanto, knowing that this was an issue.
	And of course now we have glyphosate has pervaded everything in the food supply.
	And I was just talking the other day about a study that showed that it may actually be responsible for transgenerational obesity.
	Skipping the first and second generation, hitting the third generation with massive obesity.
	They observed that in rats.
	And so it may not just be our sedentary lifestyle.
	And our junk food and the quantity of food that we consume, lack of exercise, but it may also have to do with the glyphosate that is in the food.
	And that multiple factors are perhaps to the reason why we're seeing such an explosion in obesity.
	All these things there.
	But there's also other pesticides that are similar to glyphosate.
	Decambra is another one of these.
	And understand that both decambra and glyphosate Poison the land.
	Poison the land for anything other than the seeds that are sold, not sown, but sold by these corporations.
	This has already been a big factor in India.
	And Pierre Omidyar made a great deal of money off of this very thing in India.
	Where the farmers would go in and they would buy these pesticides and they were great.
	At keeping weeds and other things out.
	It kills everything. Kills everything except their genetically modified seeds.
	Now, apart from the health issues, you know, what glyphosate does to us when it pervades the food supply.
	And, you know, same thing with these other pesticides.
	Apart from those health issues, which are being adjudicated in the courts now.
	There's also the...
	Typical globalist move to enslave people to make them renters.
	Because what they did was essentially by poisoning the land for everything except their seeds, you are now at their mercy.
	And every year you cannot create your own seeds.
	You must buy those seeds from Monsanto or nothing will grow in your land.
	Bayer now.
	Bayer, B-A-S-F, Military Industrial Complex Company, and Syngenta.
	These are three dicamba-based weed killers.
	I always have a tendency to want to say dicambra, but it is dicamba.
	I'll try to keep that under control because people always write me when I mispronounce things, and I appreciate that.
	I need to fix it when I mispronounce words.
	But... No, this is also kind of a sister idea.
	Again, you have to buy their seeds because it poisons it for everything else.
	And it's a big problem for dicamba because it drifts.
	It drifts in the air, it seeps elsewhere, and so it destroys neighboring lands.
	This is one of the reasons why for glyphosate and for dicamba, you had these big companies years ago Spent millions and millions of dollars to try to defeat local regulations that prohibited their use.
	And so the response they spent in one jurisdiction, there was a local election where they were going to outlaw it in that community because it was drifting, these pesticides are drifting and destroying the land of people who are trying to grow non-GMO stuff and trying to grow organic stuff and the pesticide was getting into their land and destroying that.
	And so they spent over $8 million on TV ads in this one small community.
	Saturated it. The problem is, when people know the truth, no amount of advertising lies will make any dent on it.
	You see, you can pay Travis Kelsey $20 million to push the next Pfizer injection, but if you've watched a family member die, or had friends who've died, if you've watched and paid attention to what's been going on these last three or four years, But Travis Kelsey in a football uniform pushing Pfizer poison isn't going to have an effect on you.
	And of course, in these communities where they had seen what happened with this stuff, they knew what the issue was.
	There was no amount of advertising that was going to stop it.
	And so this happened in jurisdiction after jurisdiction.
	These big companies are spending millions of dollars.
	Again, small community, eight million dollars.
	They did not want a trend to begin.
	Well, it was a trend, and so how did they stop it?
	They went to Washington, and they pushed the thing that many of us call the Dark Act.
	We said, we're not going to have a patchwork quilt of these things being prohibited.
	We're going to have the EPA approve it.
	Well, that still doesn't change anything.
	The communities could still criminalize that.
	But it's always, you see, that the influence is purchased in Washington.
	Washington is too far gone.
	It is a tool of the multinational global corporations that Washington is run by Cabal, the once global government, or governance, I should say, and headquartered, preferably, out of the United States area.
	But they're not for America.
	They're not for the Constitution.
	They're not for individual liberty.
	They don't want us to own anything.
	And this whole thing is a scheme to turn all farmers into essentially sharecroppers for these big chemical companies.
	And so, this trial now has yet again, this has happened before, yet again banned it.
	This is not the first time it's been banned by a court for being dangerous.
	Three weed killers, and the court also says that the EPA broke the law.
	So it says these corporations' product is poisonous, and the EPA broke the law.
	How did they break the law?
	The same way the Trump administration broke the law with the vaccines.
	And it was the Trump administration that reinstated these just before the end of the election.
	I wonder how much they paid him under the table.
	Trump. Because it already had a court that had shut this stuff down.
	He reauthorized it.
	He pushed the EPA really hard, just like he did the FDA and bragged about how he pushed the FDA to do this without any testing.
	He pushed them to do it without any testing and without any notification as required by the rules.
	But the rules don't matter. The law doesn't matter.
	The Constitution doesn't matter.
	All that matters is, do these people like me?
	Do these people pay me?
	That's the Trump calculation.
	It's a calculation of the Democrats as well.
	Just trying to get people to understand.
	He's not your savior. He's no different from Biden.
	He's no different from Hillary.
	He's no different from Bill Clinton or Jeffrey Epstein, if you will.
	These guys all hang out together.
	They're in it for themselves.
	You know, Nikki Haley is coming after Trump and rightfully so for his stupidity for attacking her.
	And again, it's not about issues.
	It's about personal attacks for both of them.
	And she claims that he doesn't respect the military.
	Of course he doesn't. Does she?
	She wants to send the military out to die everywhere.
	He calls them stupid.
	He says they're losers and so forth when they get injured, when they get captured.
	But she wants to send them to every war.
	So which one's worse?
	So, get back to this.
	The U.S. court this week banned three weed killers widely used by American agriculture, finding that the EPA broke the law in allowing them to be on the market, as they did with the vaccines as well.
	And so now they've just said, well, we don't even care about looking at any of these new vaccines.
	It's now set a precedent.
	It's established a precedent. Three Dicamba-based weed killers, which have been blamed for millions of acres of crop damage and harm to endangered species in natural areas across the Midwest and the South.
	This is the second time a federal court has banned these weed killers since they were introduced for the 2017 growing season.
	They were reintroduced.
	As a matter of fact, when I did that, as part of that contest, for the anniversary of Ayn Rand's book, Atlas Shrugged, I began by talking about this very thing.
	And that was back in 2009.
	So the corporations got together, they took over the controlled food, and everything was centralized, and it all went wrong, and it was, you know, start at 2030 was the time date that I had on it.
	And I showed this desolate desert where nothing would grow.
	This type of stuff.
	This has been known for a very long time.
	The reason I did that was because of glyphosate going back to the 1980s.
	Other things like that. But now this is a newer version here.
	In 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its own ban, but months later, the Trump administration re-approved the weed-killing products just one week before the presidential election at a press conference in the swing state of Georgia.
	That had nothing to do with the presidential election, I'm sure.
	That was all just a coincidence.
	But a federal judge in Arizona ruled on Monday, yesterday, That the EPA made a crucial error in re-approving Dicamba, finding the agency did not post it for public notice and for comment, as required by law.
	I don't like this system, but they don't even follow this system.
	You know, required by law.
	We have regulation without representation, as well as taxation without representation.
	The laws are supposed to be made by your elected representatives.
	Instead, you have these bureaucracies that publish rules.
	They put them up for comment.
	They're not accountable to any of these comments.
	You know, at least politicians, if they get a massive amount of response on something, they'll pay attention to it.
	And I know that's true.
	I've seen that happen at the state level.
	I mentioned it before, in North Carolina, where you had a completely Democrat government, both houses and the governor, and they were allied with the big teachers' unions, and they wanted to come for homeschooling.
	And the few homeschoolers that were there at the time organized letter-writing campaigns, just hammered them with it.
	And they backed off.
	They backed off.
	I mean, I truly was amazed.
	And it's the number of responses that they get.
	But the bureaucracy doesn't have to back off because they don't have to face re-election.
	They don't care what you say about the rules.
	They'll do what they want.
	And they've been captured by corporations.
	And so they didn't even bother to go through this rule thing.
	Why bother? I'm going to do what I want to anyway, right?
	Just a formality. But the judge said, you skipped that.
	And you also skipped the testing.
	This is rushed through.
	Yeah, that's how you got the warp speed vaccine.
	You skipped the testings, Trump.
	So, again, you know, do the vaccines, no tests, do this, no tests, no notification, no rules on the pesticides.
	You just need to know who's going to pay him.
	The judge wrote that the EPA did not allow many people who were deeply affected by the weed killer, including specialty farmers, conservation groups, and more, to comment.
	Again, that was like the lockdown.
	We've never had a lockdown of healthy people before.
	We've never had a lockdown where non-essential businesses, in other words, the businesses that are not big box retailers on Wall Street, those non-essential businesses, they were shut down.
	They didn't get a chance to...
	Weigh in on any of this stuff.
	You had a bureaucracy under Trump administration to shut them down.
	There was no comment, period.
	And, oh, by the way, if you made comments, you got in trouble.
	You got purged. And if you refused to comply with this, they would shut you down permanently.
	So all of this stuff seems to be the same procedure.
	Let's rush this through. No testing, no comments.
	I don't really care what you say.
	You're non-essential. Just like the lockdown.
	So this lawsuit was filed by farmer and conservation groups.
	They said time and time again, decamba cannot be used without causing massive and unprecedented harm to farms, as well as endangering plants and pollinators.
	In other words, bees.
	But see, this is also about the global agenda to turn everybody into renters.
	Because for all practical purposes, once you poison your land with this stuff, it's owned by Bayer, Monsanto.
	You can't do anything with it except grow their seeds.
	And you're at their mercy when they raise the price of the seeds.
	As a matter of fact, it got so bad.
	That with glyphosate, they would go out and they would look at stuff that was growing on other people's property.
	And if the seeds...
	Went on to another person's property, they would come after them for, you know, just like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act where you can't fix your tractor.
	They would come after them if these farmers tried to get off of it in some areas.
	Or if it went on to another farm, they would sue them for intellectual property theft.
	For these genetically modified seeds.
	It is the same type of scheme we see happening everywhere.
	Everywhere. Dicamba was introduced to American agriculture in 1967, but was never widely used during warm months because it was well known that the chemical can volatize and move long distances when temperatures climb.
	Volatization is when dicamba particles turn from a liquid to a gas in hours or days after the herbicide is applied, in effect turning into clouds of weed killer and causing landscape-level damage.
	So... That's the process.
	It isn't that they're out there spraying it and the wind is blowing it.
	You know, when it's hot, it turns into a gas, then moves out and drops down on neighboring property.
	That's the Dicamba drift.
	Need some kind of Brazilian music to go along with it, right?
	Dicamba is also prone to drifting on wind far from where it is applied, and it can move into drainage ditches, bodies of water as runoff during raining events.
	What do you think it does in your body?
	Oh, they don't care about that.
	They don't care about glyphosate either.
	So, Monsanto encouraged farmers to buy their newly created dicamba-tolerant crops, the seed stuff I was talking about, just like glyphosate.
	Farmers buying these specialized seeds could spray dicamba on fields while the crops were growing.
	Killing the weeds, but not the precious commodities.
	And again, the renter model.
	Poison the land for everything but their stuff.
	Dicambo-resistant crops have been planted on as many as 65 million acres, estimates the EPA, which is an area larger than the state of Oregon that they have now poisoned.
	Poisoned. In February 2020, a federal jury in Missouri awarded the state's largest peach farmer $265 million for damage to his farm, though that total was later reduced by a federal judge.
	So, that's February 2020.
	In June of 2020, Bayer, who now owns, you know, bought Monsanto, owns this.
	Bayer announced a $400 million settlement with soybean growers that had been damaged by non-target drift.
	And so...
	The Trump administration runs it through.
	That's February, then June.
	The Trump administration runs it through just a week before the election to reapprove it.
	You think they knew? Of course they knew.
	You think the EPA knew?
	Of course they knew. Months later, they authorized it, just a couple months later, without comment, for a globalist, corporatist, For years, Bayer and BASF have blamed other factors than their weed killers for the damage that we all see.
	You know, not just poisoning them, but killing bees, other things like that.
	Discovery documents, however, turned up in this litigation show that the companies knew that their decamba weed killers would probably lead to off-target crop damage.
	They think we don't know, but we do, right?
	We know that they know.
	We know that they're lying.
	We know that they know exactly what they're doing.
	Other documents filed in a lawsuit show the EPA was in a rush to approve the Canva in October 2020 to get it done by the election.
	Anybody look to see if any of these companies made any donation to Trump?
	Or to Trump PACs or anything like that?
	Scientists complained that they did not have enough time to do a proper analysis.
	One year later, the EPA issued a report that found decamba was still spreading for where it was applied to adjacent areas.
	It was doubtful that decamba used on tens of millions of acres of cotton and soybean crops in the U.S. could legally be kept on the market.
	But again, we see the same M.O. We see the Trump warp speed hustle for this.
	Just like you did for the plandemic, the global plandemic.
	The poison. Poison the land for everybody.
	Everything, like they're seeds.
	You know, as a matter of fact.
	This meme here.
	Okay, so after this injection, you may feel a bit ill.
	That's mainly because it's poison.
	Yeah, mainly because it's poison.
	Bayer dicamba-based herbicide.
	They inherited when it acquired Monsanto in 2018, and of course they knew all this when they bought it, just like they knew all about glyphosate.
	The news comes at a particularly bad time for Bayer because they just had the Monsanto trials happening there.
	Syngenta is also facing nationwide litigation over its Paraquat herbicide.
	Which thousands of plaintiffs claim causes Parkinson's disease.
	And of course, if the term paraquat sounds familiar, it's because they were doing massive spraying of marijuana fields with this.
	In Central and South America, paraquat.
	You know, give people Parkinson's disease.
	Meanwhile, perhaps...
	Perhaps Bear was grateful to Trump, and maybe Syngenta was grateful to Trump, but as I said yesterday, maybe he's wondering if Taylor Swift is going to be grateful to him for the copyright changes that he made.
	I haven't looked at those changes.
	The Music Modernization Act I seriously doubt anything coming out of Washington is going to benefit singers.
	But I don't know that he's necessarily doing this so that he can shame her into endorsing him.
	I don't think she cares.
	I think he's doing this for his base.
	I think his base can't stand Taylor Swift.
	And so he picks a fight with her.
	This is the way the whole thing works.
	If he can pick a fight with her, it helps him.
	They hate Taylor Swift, so if Taylor Swift hates Trump, that makes him look better.
	They hate the Democrats, so if the Democrats use lawfare against Trump and indict him for this stuff, they love him.
	Well, if these people hate him that much.
	He's got to be really good. If they're going to go to all this trouble, go to all this lawfare for this stuff.
	And, of course, they want Trump as the opponent as well.
	And then he does the same thing with the judges that he's doing right now with Taylor Swift.
	He mocks them.
	He hopes that they take the bait and come after him.
	That's the basis of his popularity.
	It's not based on what he did.
	He's now talking about doing conservative things, which he never did.
	He did the opposite of what he's talking about now.
	Now we've got candidate Trump.
	We're about to get Trump 4.0, I guess.
	You get candidate Trump the first time, then President Trump is Trump 2.0.
	Then we get candidate Trump 3.0.
	Then we'll get President Trump 4.0 if he wins.
	Is a former President Trump making a play for Taylor Swift, writes Breitbart?
	No, exactly the opposite.
	He's pushing her, goading her, baiting her as a ploy to build up his base.
	I don't like Taylor Swift.
	You know that if you watch the...
	I'm sick of seeing Taylor Swift and I'm sick of seeing Trump in every article as well.
	Maybe you're getting sick of the two of them as well.
	Trump even said that he was a fan of his boyfriend.
	Travis Kelsey, even though he said he may be a liberal and probably cannot stand me.
	Well, they ought to be getting along together.
	Look, Travis Kelsey made $20 million for pushing this Pfizer crap.
	And, you know, Mr.
	Pfizer wouldn't have made $20 million if Mr.
	Trump, the father of the vaccine, hadn't put this stuff out.
	He's the Pfizer father.
	He's the father of the Pfizer vaccine.
	So, Mr. Pfizer ought to be very happy about Trump, don't you think?
	No, of course not.
	They will be on opposite sides of all this stuff.
	Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
	Karen B. on Rockfin.
	Thank you for the tip. I appreciate that.
	By the way, speaking of Travis Kelsey, look at this.
	Everybody's seen this by now.
	That's the head coach.
	I had to look at this guy. Everybody's saying Andy Reid.
	I was like, who is Andy Reid? Is he the offensive line coach or something?
	No, he's the head coach. He comes out, pushes him.
	Other players have to pull him off.
	And so, I don't know.
	You know, after... After yelling at the coach, I don't know that Travis Kelsey is going to be amenable to a Trump either, if he'll do that.
	The man that MAGA prays to, you know, our Pfizer father who worked in D.C., You know, how would be Trump's name?
	Anyway, an angered Travis Kelsey slammed into Andy Reid with enough force to knock him over.
	These other guys didn't catch him.
	Maybe this is a warning to Taylor Swift.
	Don't get on this guy's bad side.
	She's a lot smaller than that coach.
	That coach has got a good bit of mass on him, if you notice that, but she doesn't.
	She might not want to double-cross him.
	It was all over social media.
	A lip reader has said, well, this is what he was saying.
	And a lot of jokes.
	One of them, if we lose, she's going to dump me and then write a song about me.
	That was my favorite one that I saw with all these different ones.
	Most likely that will eventually happen.
	And as Valentine's Day is approaching, I thought this was interesting on Reason Magazine.
	Pull this picture up, Travis, and show this.
	Why are teens depressed?
	It's not social media, per se, says Reason Magazine.
	Show that picture. Yeah, look at that picture, and that got my attention.
	Because that guy on the left was me when I was a teenager.
	They're with my sacks. I had a lot of things that I was doing.
	I was in a band.
	I was socially active with a lot of different people in that sphere.
	I didn't participate in sports.
	We did a lot of water skiing and other things like that with friends.
	But today, the teens are like the guy on the right-hand side, doing nothing but looking at the phone.
	That's their entire life. The black mirror, as they say.
	That's the real issue.
	Social media is just one aspect of that.
	And it really is the isolation.
	And so this is a very long article I'm not going to go into from reason.
	Maybe the problem for the teens is not the screens, but what the screens are replacing.
	And they look at it from one aspect or the other.
	They talk a little bit about the damage that was done by the pandemic lockdown and things like that.
	And reason will say, well, but the screens were kind of a lifeline for some of those teens who were locked down with the pandemic.
	It really doesn't matter.
	They look at adolescent depression, isolation, and even when you look at things like teen pregnancy rates.
	Out of wedlock pregnancy, that has declined significantly.
	Driving fatalities have declined significantly because the kids are isolated and they're sitting in their homes.
	Those are things that happen when kids are out and about.
	But those are both signs, really, of increasing isolation.
	And it's not just there.
	So one study found that the social media does have an effect.
	They said that one study found that adolescents who spent more than three hours a day on social media faced double the risk of experiencing poor mental health.
	They said when Facebook was rolled out in another study across college campuses in 2004 to 2006, they found a 9% increase over baseline depression and a 12% increase in anxiety.
	After Facebook was put out.
	But of course, that's all just the beginning of all of this.
	And it all really is this program to isolate us.
	That was just a major, major push during the pandemic to have everybody isolated as they seek to have us.
	But the Washington Post jumps in on this.
	Because tomorrow is Valentine's Day.
	And so the Washington Post talks about the anti-Valentine Day movement.
	They're actually making a virtue of isolation and of not having a relationship because you could get hurt in this.
	Don't try to connect with anybody in a relationship because you could get hurt.
	Maybe the Washington Post for tomorrow, maybe they'll change their subtitle to Romance Dies in Darkness or in Isolation.
	And it is really about isolation and antisocial behavior that they're celebrating.
	They're saying this is part of people's identity.
	They say Valentine's Day has more potential to hurt, harm, terrorize, terrorize the students.
	Can you imagine that? Start of February is triggering for anybody who isn't feeling it.
	Again, more of this, you know, woke Marxist nonsense.
	They said there is a lot of t-shirts that are being sold that are anti-Valentine's Day.
	One of them is there's love in the air, try not to breathe design.
	And it shows somebody wearing a combat gas mask because, you know, that's what this is about.
	Mask up. Mask up.
	Keep yourself away from dangerous human beings.
	I mean, that t-shirt there.
	It's essentially a distillation of all this fear that was being pushed to this generation of teenagers for the last several years and done to them for years by everything.
	Another one. Fries before guys.
	Fries before guys.
	You see, men are evil, so you should be a lesbian.
	You should join LGBT. That's one way to enforce depopulation, isn't it?
	Declining birth rates, a lot of it is social.
	A lot of it is chemical and environmental that is happening.
	But there is a social component to it as well.
	Again, it's all these different things.
	Just like we're talking about the obesity epidemic.
	It's all these different things all at once.
	They don't try just one thing.
	These evil satanic plots, they don't just try one thing.
	They've got a confluence of events that hit us on multiple fronts.
	Valentine's Day, they said, to the distaste of many and to the delight of some, underscores the way our culture intertwines love with money.
	We talk about how people profit.
	But wait a minute. Weren't they just celebrating this anti-Valentine's Day merchandise?
	Yeah. This is, after all, the Washington Post.
	Marketing has pivoted to hosting Galentine's Day again.
	More lesbianism, more isolation of people from each other.
	You too can sit with your other single friends and drink wine until you're all weepy.
	No, I know. Oh, you could watch a Taylor Swift concert too.
	Same type of thing. I mean, Taylor Swift stuff is really kind of like Valentine's Day, isn't it?
	It's all women. It's amazing.
	And you know, when I played that video, I didn't talk about that yesterday.
	When I played that video of the silent disco, Where they took over this ancient cathedral, Canterbury Cathedral.
	It was all women in that picture.
	It was all women, wasn't it?
	I didn't see any men. It was all women dancing around in the dark, waving glow sticks and having headphones on, glowing headphones.
	Most guys are going to look at that and go, eh.
	Yeah, I know. That's what I was just about to say.
	I can't imagine any guy wanting to do that.
	It was a cathedral full of women dancing with each other.
	So, yeah, the dating trauma, you know, they have the next thing they go to is just how traumatizing this is.
	Terrorizing and traumatizing it is.
	And they talk about Maryland teens going through what they call connection counseling.
	This is an organization in Maryland there because Washington Post is out of D.C. And so these are kids who have been so traumatized by their dating experiences that they're going to see a psychologist.
	To finish them off.
	I mean, it's like the psychologists are just going to take you down the next...
	It's absolutely amazing.
	Don't get hurt. Isolate yourself from all human contact.
	And as I said, to do that is a good thing.
	And they call that an act of self-preservation and of self-love.
	I found pictures of the author of this article, and I understand why she's had a rough Valentine's Day.
	When I started reading this, I looked at this, and I thought, wait a minute, is this Taylor Lorenz?
	No, it's somebody else.
	Oh, yeah. It is truly amazing.
	Self-love. In the last days, people will become what?
	Lovers of self, right?
	Yeah. And it'd be promoted as a virtue by the mainstream media.
	Finally, they say, she says, finishes it up, says, it's all about choosing yourself.
	Bravo, teens!
	That's the way she finishes it.
	Well, my question about all this stuff is, what would Chuck Norris do?
	Chuck Norris on WND has a column saying, And he wrote about Valentine's Day, Chuck Norris.
	So we better pay attention.
	He says, a long journey to find my true Valentine.
	And so as an antidote to the Washington Post, let's listen to Chuck Norris on this.
	You know, do I have, I'm looking at, yeah, I do have that.
	Okay, I got that in the box there.
	He said, in a week when the world celebrates love, I was thinking, is love a battlefield, a blessing, or is it both of these things?
	He said, I recently read a poll, says Chuck Norris, that reported 86% of Americans believe true love really exists.
	67% said they themselves had experienced it.
	Most of the rest indicated that they had not found it yet, but were hopeful that they would.
	About two-thirds. One-third have given up.
	Not surprisingly, the older respondents were more likely to say that they had experienced true love.
	He said between the ages of 30 and 44, 65% said they'd experienced true love.
	It goes up a little bit.
	Between 45 to 64 goes up to 69% from 65%.
	But then it jumps up to 75% for those above the age of 65.
	He says, so what the poll seems to say is, stay alive long enough and you really will experience true love.
	Or it could say that maybe the younger generation's not even trying.
	They're listening to the Washington Post and the bad advice that's being pushed on them by the established media and schools.
	He said, like so many of you, I had lots of trials and errors in the earlier parts of my life.
	But at the ripe age of 58, I met my true love in Valentine when I was filming Walker, Texas Ranger.
	One of my best friends, Larry Morales, came to Dallas for a visit.
	He said, I was living a single life even though I'd had a successful TV series.
	I was miserable. I had devoted my life to fame and fortune.
	And I'd learned a hard lesson in those years.
	If your whole life is spent trying to make money and you neglect the important people in your life, you'll create a deep void in your heart and soul.
	Not to mention your relationships.
	And I fell into this trap, says Chuck Norris.
	Yeah. You know, of course, the teens are isolating not even for fame or fortune, just, you know, because of phones and because they're told, don't get hurt.
	But he said his friend Larry realized that he had everything, but he had nothing.
	So his friend Larry...
	Brought in a lady that he wanted to introduce to him.
	He said, I was at a restaurant with about 12 friends, and he had a date.
	Larry came in with this young lady.
	He began introducing her to everybody, but he says, I was engrossed in conversation with my date.
	I didn't even notice until Larry called my name and said he wanted me to meet Jenna.
	I looked up at her, and all I could see was an angel staring into my eyes, and I stuttered.
	I said, oh, er, hi, nice to meet you.
	He says, when I finally turned back to my date, all I could see were daggers in her eyes.
	She immediately left.
	And so they talked quite a bit.
	And so the next day, she invited him to a fashion show where she was going to be modeling wedding gowns.
	One particular gown had a long train, and as Gina was walking, it hooked on a potted plant, and she dragged it down the runway.
	She was quite embarrassed.
	Kiddingly, I said, well, I was thinking about buying that potted plant.
	It doesn't have any use for a wedding dress, right?
	And I saw that, and that really...
	Really resonated with me because the first time I saw Karen was months before I transferred to the University of Tampa.
	She was with the marching band there.
	She was a twirler. As a matter of fact, she'd had a scholarship that she turned down in Kansas, full scholarship for twirling, that she turned down because she wanted to go to Florida.
	And so she was very good at it.
	But I was there with a date, and we were watching the game, and I was kind of laughing at the band because the band was so tiny.
	It was a very small school, and they had a very small marching band.
	We marched about 150 people, and we had a very good marching band in high school.
	Uh, these guys sounded pretty good.
	Um, had a big sound, but it's few people.
	And one of the reasons for that used to, these two, uh, self deprecatingly build themselves as the biggest little band in the South, because even though they had a few players, most of them were playing professionally.
	Really good people.
	No Deadwood in that marching band.
	So we were looking at it, and I was kind of laughing about how small the band was, and then I saw this majorette trip on a flag and fall, and so we were laughing about that as well.
	That was Karen, and...
	Within a few months I was dating her and I was in that band.
	So that's how life turns things around.
	You know, never laugh too hard at something or you may wind up getting put into it by God.
	So anyway, that was the beginning of their relationship as well.
	But he had some interesting things to say.
	He said... They got married, and they've been married now for 26 years.
	Our 50th anniversary of our first date is coming up on St.
	Patrick's Day. We've been married for 44 years.
	He said, love is a battlefield, but it's also one of the biggest blessings in this life, and the blessings far outweigh the battles if you are doing it right.
	So Chuck Norris has some advice for you.
	Better listen. If you're dating, you must not leave your brains at the door.
	Don't merely consider the other person's outer traits, but discover what makes the person tick on the inside.
	Don't compromise your morals or your principles when searching for a soulmate.
	Make sure your core values and your beliefs align with the other person's.
	You know, we watched Shenandoah the other day.
	And Jimmy Stewart's character's got some great advice for his future son-in-law.
	And here's this scene.
	Yes, do you like her?
	No, sir. They expect things they never ask for.
	And when they don't get them, they ask you why.
	Sometimes they don't ask.
	And they just go ahead and punish you for not doing something you didn't know you were supposed to do in the first place.
	What, for instance, sir?
	Well, that's a very difficult question to answer, Sam.
	You're never quite sure.
	It's just that it's sort of, you might say, relative.
	Relative to what, sir? To how they're feeling at the moment.
	And how's that? You never know.
	I don't believe I really understand what you're trying to tell me, sir.
	I know, I know. I never understood it myself.
	I never understood it.
	It's just one of those things, Sam.
	It's around. You just don't ever see it.
	I suppose...
	Suppose Jenny started to cry one day.
	You don't know what she's crying about, so you ask her why.
	Do you follow me, Sam? Yes, sir.
	You ask her, and she won't tell you.
	And that's when you ask her what it was you did that caused her to cry.
	She still won't tell you.
	And that's when you start to get angry.
	Don't get angry, Sam.
	She won't tell you why she's crying because she doesn't know.
	Women are like that, Sam.
	And it's exasperating.
	It's... But don't let it make you angry.
	None. When she gets like that, just walk up and hug her a little bit.
	Because that's all they really want when they're like that, Sam.
	A little loving. You understand me, don't you?
	No, sir. You don't.
	Well, yeah, that's a lot of truth right there in that little two minute clip there.
	Uh...
	Ha ha ha.
	Back to Chuck Norris from Jimmy Stewart.
	He says, Socrates once said, by all means, marry.
	If you get a good wife, you'll become happy.
	If you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher.
	I guess his wife was not a good one.
	Chuck Norris said, same thing is true for husbands, right ladies?
	Speaking of humor, he said, entry number nine in my 101 official Chuck Norris facts book reads, on Valentine's Day, Chuck Norris gives his wife the still beating heart of one of his enemies.
	And being romantic, Chuck believes that every day should be Valentine's Day.
	Well, he said, Gina and I decided early on through thick and thin that we were going to stay together no matter what.
	See, that's why you have marriage.
	Marriage is that commitment.
	And I see that so much in this generation of people.
	Keep separate bank accounts and all the rest of this stuff.
	To me, you know, that type of stuff, like prenuptial agreements and separate bank accounts, that kind of backs off from this commitment.
	You need to commit or not.
	You need to make up your mind.
	We dedicated ourselves to fight for love, in us and in others, and to discover all the fruits that God intended to bless us with in our marriage, in our long-term love journey.
	Chuck Norris says, pray together, ask for divine help for you, for your family, for your country, for your world.
	He said, Dr.
	James Dobson once said, a great marriage is a union of two good forgivers.
	So be patient. Be kind.
	Don't go to bed angry without resolving it.
	Somebody asked me last week, you know, what does it mean?
	It says, don't let the sun go down on your wrath.
	Well, it was in that context.
	Don't let this stuff fester.
	Don't go to bed angry with this stuff.
	Finally, he says, William Penn, founder of Pennsylvania, once said, she is but half a wife who is not a friend.
	Yeah, going back to Jimmy Stewart.
	Do you like her?
	If you like her, the love will come, and it will grow over the many years.
	We'll be right back.
	Welcome to the World of Tanks.
	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.
	Well, I want to thank Eric and James on RockFam.
	Thank you both of you for the tip.
	I would ask all of you if you would like the stream, if you are following in, if you do like it.
	That helps us with visibility.
	That's very important.
	Of course, you know, if you want to send a tip, that's great, too, somewhere.
	If you want to support us on Subscribestar, that has been a big base of our support for the longest time, and especially after we got shut down on PayPal.
	But we do have other ways.
	If you'd like to support the program, you can find those at TheDavidKnightShow.com.
	It will show you not only where you can find all the different live streams, the video archives that we have, as well as where you can listen to the podcast.
	And the podcast audio is not live at the moment.
	We're looking at a way to perhaps make that the case.
	But, of course, you can with Rumble.
	And, you know, that reminds me, I forgot to put up what Noel sent us about how to do that.
	Travis, we need to put that up on the website, the instructions of how to listen to the audio live on Rumble, even shutting down your phone if you want to do it that way.
	So we really do appreciate the support.
	That's what keeps this program going.
	Let's talk a little bit about what is happening in terms of the constant surveillance state to surveil us, to control us, to immobilize us.
	And when you look at what is happening in London, the anti-ULEZ campaigners, and that's the ULEZ, these are the ultra-low emission zones.
	In other words, What it means essentially is that nothing but an EV is going to be able to travel there.
	And if you have something other than an EV, it's going to cost you a little bit more than $15 a day to move your car.
	Well, people are not happy about that.
	This is something that was imposed by Sadiq Khan against the will of the London Council.
	He just overrode them and put it in himself.
	And he's got cameras all over London.
	And of course, London is broken into all these different boroughs, districts, very much like New York.
	All these different small towns that grew together, but they still have...
	Some local governance there.
	One of them, Sutton, has just had a major protest against these.
	And they had about 400 protesters in this one borough called Sutton.
	And they basically blocked every one of these cameras in that area.
	400 protesters took part in the borough-wide demonstration.
	Organizers say involved obstructing more than 80 cameras on a Sunday afternoon.
	A bus driver of the campaign group Action Against Unfair ULEZ, the ultra-low emission zones, says the demonstration meant that no ULEZ camera was functioning in the South London Borough, as at least 20 other cameras have already been damaged or removed.
	These people have been coming after these cameras and taking them down.
	London Mayor Kahn's expansion of the scheme last year saw about 90% of the boroughs fall under the ULAS rules overnight.
	And the decision was fiercely opposed by the council, and a petition was set up to delay the expansion until public transportation in Sutton, for example, had improved significantly.
	And they got thousands of signatures.
	But Sadiq Khan doesn't care.
	This guy is a foreigner that's been brought in to rule these people, to push this globalism.
	They want to ban private vehicles because they don't have sufficient public transportation.
	Banning private vehicles and then not having any sufficient public transportation, that's a way to just demobilize these people into the 15-minute city plan.
	See how it all works? Well, there's nothing I can do about that.
	Oh, well, if you can afford to pay for the more expensive EVs, Well, that'll be fine until the power grid drops to its knees because they are wrecking that as well over emissions.
	And that's already begun in the United States.
	You've got the EPA already now starting to play this emission game to shut down power plants.
	So if you buy the EV, are you going to be able to drive it?
	No. This is the scheme.
	Sadiq Khan was one of the founders of this C-40s thing.
	And of course, they're upfront about what they want to do.
	They want you to have no meat, no dairy.
	They want you to have maybe one trip under a thousand miles on a plane every three years.
	They want you to be able to buy three articles of clothing a year.
	I mean, it is draconian.
	It is taking us back to the dark ages.
	And these people are all about it.
	And so Sadiq Khan was a co-founder.
	A co-founder with Bloomberg in New York City.
	And so what is happening in New York?
	Do they have these ULEZ cameras there yet?
	No. But they've got speed cameras up.
	If you're going to measure speed or any of these other things, once you set up all these cameras to start monitoring the way people drive, or if they drive, or what they drive, It's a trivial thing to change it from speed to emissions.
	And so in New York City, they have what they call super speeders.
	People, not that they're going really fast, and I can't, I've driven in New York, of course, the last time I was in New York to drive was back in 2012, when I was there to cover the The UN Arms Trade Treaty that they were trying to ram through.
	And parking and traffic was so bad.
	I was there with my sons and we were doing interviews for National Association of Gun Rights and of people who are there from industry, people who are there who are politicians and things like that.
	And so we were there shooting footage and all that kind of stuff.
	It was so difficult to do it.
	We just had Karen Circle in the van, you know, while we were there at the U.N. What a mess.
	I can't imagine anybody speeding there.
	They did have signs saying, don't honk the horn, it's a $300 fine, and everybody's constantly honking horns and seeing anybody getting fined.
	But how in the world could you speed there?
	Well, speeding is going 10 miles per hour or more over the speed limit.
	So I guess, you know, if they got a speed limit of maybe, you know, 15 or 20 miles per hour, and if you're going 31 miles per hour, you know, the camera's going to snap you right there and you get hit.
	Maybe there's a spot, a little spot where you can speed up to 30 miles an hour before you have to stop and wait for two or three minutes again.
	Super speeders in New York are people who have racked up over 100 infractions for going 10 miles per hour or more above the speed limit.
	And so they got all these different speeding tickets.
	You know, it's like, you would think about a super speeder, you'd think somebody's going super fast.
	No, it's the quantity of tickets that these people are getting.
	Now, what I find interesting about this is that one individual alone has 373 tickets.
	And they never took his license.
	Now, when I was growing up, if you got, you know, every time you got a speeding ticket, you got points, your insurance goes up.
	But if you go over, you know, if you had like three tickets or speeding tickets or something like that, you would lose your license.
	This guy's got 373 tickets and he's still driving because they're making a lot of money.
	It's not about safety or anything else.
	This is about making money.
	And it's about surveillance and it's about control.
	So they said the city was equipped with 1,300.
	New York City had 1,300 automated traffic enforcement cameras spread throughout its boroughs by 2020.
	But only four drivers reached the super speeder threshold of having more than 100 tickets.
	But they said by 2023, as the number of these cameras doubled, so now they've got 2,600 cameras.
	2,600, just to measure the speed of cars.
	When are they going to change this to, again, ultra-low emission zones and things like that?
	You know, you have to have a...
	They can look at...
	And, of course, what they're doing, writing these speeding tickets, they have automated license plate readers.
	So if the automated license plate reader looks at your license plate, looks it up, oh, that's a diesel car, or that's a gasoline car.
	That's not an EV. Okay.
	Find them right there. All the mechanism is already there, you see.
	They just have to flip the little switch to start dinging you for something else.
	So they said by 2023, they doubled the number of cameras.
	So now they got 2,600 cameras.
	And now they, instead of four drivers who have racked up more than 100 tickets, they have 186 drivers who have more than 100 tickets.
	And the one, the top driver...
	The guy I would congratulate is the guy who's got 373 tickets.
	Cities are increasingly turning to automated enforcement.
	Yes, because it's going to go from speed to CO2. Surveillance control lockdown.
	That ought to be like an acronym.
	SCL. I did that for the genetic code injections of Trump.
	I used to call them GCIs, but we can call this SCLs.
	Surveillance control and lockdown, if you will.
	This all began because of something they call Vision Zero.
	Isn't it interesting? You see, you have zero emissions by Sadiq Khan in London.
	Then his sister tyrannical city in New York, they have Vision Zero.
	Vision Zero is not about emissions, but it's about safety.
	Safety. And we don't want to have any pedestrians injured or any automobile accidents, and so that's our Vision Zero thing.
	In order to do that, we're going to put speed bumps in, we're going to put cameras in, we're basically going to eliminate cars, because that's the only way you're going to get to zero.
	Whenever you've got freedom, it gets a little bit messy, just like we're talking about with dating, right?
	Zero hearts broken.
	Everybody stay by yourself.
	Don't connect with anybody else.
	Don't even try to talk to anybody else.
	You know, if you try to talk to somebody else, he gives you a cold shoulder.
	Now, oh, his heart's broken.
	Well, get over it.
	Get over it.
	De Blasio. They've got the 2600 cameras operating 24-7.
	And so these super speeders now represent a majority of speeding violations.
	They have outstanding fines that average over $11,000 each.
	Wow. See, this is for money.
	It's not for safety, right? It's for money.
	It's for them to make money fining you.
	And it's for the bigger guys up another level to make money by controlling you and renting everything to you and renting you transportation by the ride if you can afford it, right?
	That's what these self-driving taxis are all about.
	And again, all of these ride-sharing programs, as Travis Kalalnik said at the very beginning of it, the guy that started Uber, he said, yeah, what makes our rides expensive is that other dude in the car.
	We're going to get rid of him. We're going to have self-driving cars.
	But of course, it's not really going to be any cheaper.
	They will still charge you by the ride, and they will make a lot more money out of this.
	So, what I found interesting was that there's no pushback in New York City against these cameras like there is in London.
	Now, of course, London, they've gone to a complete lockdown.
	You're not going to use your car at all.
	And so, they've accelerated this a lot faster than New York has.
	But that is the goal for both of these places.
	Again, the two cities that were the foundation of this C40 stuff.
	40 cities, that's now 100 major cities or more around the world.
	New York is advancing traffic law enforcement with proposals to hike fines and lower speed limits.
	Yes, let's give everybody a ticket.
	If you even move this thing, right, you're going to get a ticket.
	We're going to lower the speed limits, raise the fines.
	We're going to make it impossible for you to drive, and we're going to make it unaffordable for you to drive.
	So your driving is either going to be useless because you're going to be going so slow and have to be so worried about getting a ticket, or they will make it unaffordable.
	Useless or unaffordable, which would you like?
	Despite challenges, New York's method of connecting tickets to license plates and its extensive camera network could inspire other cities.
	Oh, yes, it will.
	And this is why I keep saying Things are going to be better or worse for you depending on your local government.
	Let me hammer that in.
	You think Trump is going to do anything about this?
	Of course not. You think Congress is going to do anything about this?
	Of course not. This is a bad local government coming at people.
	And we've had situations, I think in Texas, they outlawed red light cameras.
	You had some bad jurisdictions where they put those things in.
	And they created accidents, people slamming on their brakes because they didn't want to get a ticket, causing rear end collisions and things like that.
	But you can have local governments can get bad with this, but you can shut down the state level.
	And if the state level allows that, then it's up to you to get some people in your jurisdiction.
	They're not going to be putting in speed cameras and red light cameras and emission cameras and license plate readers and all the rest of this stuff.
	You've got to fight this stuff at the local level.
	And the liberals have always known this.
	They said, think globally.
	That's their global agenda.
	But act locally.
	That was a motto. It's been the motto for 60 years.
	All my life I've been hearing this.
	And so we need to understand what the global agenda is that they're thinking about.
	It's not hard to do.
	But we're going to stop it locally.
	That's where the rubber meets the road, and that's where you're going to block them.
	And so, as I said, we're going to be talking to Senator Nicely in the next hour about that.
	And so, as we're talking about these self-driving taxis, they're despised and hated, wherever they are.
	And so in San Francisco, where they've already had situations where people have immobilized these things, you know, San Francisco and Austin, they've blocked traffic many times.
	They've all gone to the same intersection and blocked traffic there.
	They block emergency vehicles, other things like that.
	People hate them. So you've had situations where they put traffic cones on them.
	They're not destroying the car. They put a traffic cone on it, and it freaks out.
	It doesn't move.
	Made me think a little side story here of when Karen and I lived in Texas when we first got married from 80 to 83.
	And there was, if you ever saw Stir Crazy with Richard Pryor and Gene Wilder, there was a rodeo there, the Huntington Rodeo, if I remember correctly.
	I think that's the name of the city. It's a tough penitentiary for hardened criminals.
	They do their executions there.
	People there said when they electrocute somebody, the lights get dim.
	But... That's what they said at the time, in 1980.
	We like to go to rodeos, and we went to a rodeo up there, and it was kind of interesting.
	They had a whole bunch of inmates that were in a caged-in area of the grandstands, all wearing white.
	They didn't wear the striped suits.
	If I remember correctly, though, I think the people that, but it was a prison rodeo, and so the prisoners would actually participate in the rodeo.
	But you had to be, you know, found to have good conduct in order to participate.
	And I think, when we saw it, I think they dressed them up in striped suits, like the stereotypical thing.
	But one of these events, and they did different kinds of events than you would have at the other rodeos.
	PETA would not like this at all.
	What they did was...
	They would get some wild horses out there that had not been ridden.
	And they had a group, they put them in a group of four guys.
	And so they had to saddle this wild, unbroken horse.
	And one of them had to ride it across the arena there to score points.
	And what they did to a man was one of them jumped up and grabbed the horse around the neck and bit his ear.
	And when they bit his ear, the horse would just freeze.
	As long as he's biting his ear, the horse is...
	I don't know what's going on.
	I'm not moving at all. Totally still.
	And the other guys would race to put the saddle on.
	And more often than not, they wouldn't get it cinched up properly.
	So once the guy got on it and started riding, the saddle would come off and he would go underneath the horse.
	So some horses and animals and men were also injured in this thing.
	But it was crazy.
	It was a free-for-all. Whenever I think about these self-driving cars and they put the cone on it, it makes me think of that rodeo.
	It's just the way, I don't know, it's a...
	Story just springs to mind the horse that freezes there.
	I guess these prisoners never thought of putting a traffic cone on the horse's head.
	Maybe it doesn't work. Okay, so Google has the Waymo self-driving cars, and they're in San Francisco.
	I remember Cruz has already said, all right, we're done.
	We had a car that, you know, a woman was hit by another car.
	It didn't recognize that she was on the ground and it ran over her as well and drug her for quite a distance.
	And that was kind of the final traffic cone, I guess, in their saga of cruise cars in San Francisco.
	But Google is still at it.
	And so last week, people were celebrating China's Lunar New Year, setting off fireworks.
	One person jumped onto the hood of an empty Waymo vehicle, which, you know, these things are...
	We're still circulating around even though they've got nobody in them.
	How efficient. And so one person jumped on the hood of the Waymo vehicle, broke its windshield.
	Another person then jumped on the hood.
	30 seconds later, some of the people in the crowd clapped in approval.
	Other people were filming it. That's how they know all the details.
	They said that was when it went wild.
	They described people on skateboards breaking the glass, others graffitiing the car.
	They said there were two groups of people, those who encouraged it and those who were just shocked and filming it.
	You know, half of the people now anymore just don't react to anything except to film it.
	Waymo said that someone threw fireworks inside, which set the vehicle on fire.
	And then being an electric car, it just took it the rest of the way.
	It was a Jaguar I-PACE equipped with 29 cameras and other sensors, but I guess those were all burned beyond recognition.
	But it reflects a growing public hostility to all of this stuff.
	And that's the key thing.
	As we look at the hostility that is rising against the global agenda, the farmers in the EU, as Catherine Austin Fitz said when I interviewed her last, She said when they looked at 2023, an unexpected trend as they went back and looked at all the articles over the last year was pushback.
	People pushing back against this agenda.
	And most people don't really understand how dangerous this agenda is, and they don't really understand the full implications of it, but they're still angry about it.
	But the farmers, I think, know what's going on in the EU. The EU Commission now has bent the knee, kind of.
	To these protesting farmers.
	They said they're dropping key passages in this proposal for a new 2040 goal aimed at cutting greenhouse gas pollution.
	These people, nitrogen?
	Seriously? You want to stop nitrogen?
	And it's not even nitrogen. In the past, they've complained about nitrogen and fertilizer running off into water, creating algae and other things.
	That's not what this is. It's about nitrogen gas.
	It's about... What is it, about 80% of the atmosphere, 70 or 80% of the atmosphere is nitrogen?
	And they're worried about a little bit of nitrogen, a little bit more nitrogen going out there?
	It's absolutely ludicrous.
	It's just like CO2. CO2, including man-made CO2, 0.4% of the atmosphere.
	That's going to make a big change?
	No, it's not. They are gas-lighting you.
	Well, I tell you what, if that movie hadn't come up with that term, gas-lighting, This stuff about nitrogen gas and CO2 gas, that is the perfect analogy for this stuff.
	When are they going to come for the oxygen?
	That's what I want to know. The previously mandated 30% cut to agricultural production by 2024 is now gone, they said.
	The revised draft also has excluded a mandate for citizens to make lifestyle changes, such as eating less meat and a push to end fossil fuel subsidies, reports Politico.
	Well, maybe and maybe not.
	This thing has not been passed, and some of these European bureaucrats are not fully on board with this either.
	Farmers protests have broken out in many countries across Europe in recent weeks.
	Some of the largest demonstrations have been in Germany prompted by a cut to diesel subsidies. The EU's plan to be presented today, Tuesday, will recommend a 90% cut in total EU emissions by 2040 by 1990 levels. This is still crazy.
	When you're going to cut 90% of emissions...
	They're still going to be coming after your food and your mobility and your farm and all the rest of this stuff.
	By the way, well, I'm going to get to these at the end.
	I've got some comments here, people talking about Valentine's Day things.
	But the updated version of the plan, which is still subject to change, framed agriculture in a more positive light, They talked about food sovereignty, and as I've talked about this and the farmer protests and things like that, I said, you know, remember, these various European countries have always heavily subsidized food and farming because they wanted to make sure that they were not dependent on other nations to feed their own people.
	And so they wanted to have what they called food sovereignty.
	Part of that was heavily subsidizing French farmers, Dutch farmers, and all the rest of it because they wanted to know that the farmers in their country could grow enough to feed their population without relying on someone else.
	As a matter of fact, the Netherlands are so fertile that they are the...
	Second largest food exporter.
	That's small country. Second only to the United States.
	So, again, we're going to talk, coming up with Senator Nicely, there is, you know, as they shut down the natural asset companies, quickly and unexpectedly, he's going to talk about what happened with that at the, you know, that was a plot of, Why would they turn Tidal over to, say, the Smoky Mountain National Park?
	Why would they turn that over to some private corporation?
	What are they going to do to make it better?
	No, right? It's nothing, really.
	It's just that they can tap into that.
	But it also then gives them this financial construct to which they add no value whatsoever, but they get paid.
	This financial construct.
	We'll then be used for them to control things.
	And so, what Senator Nicely is talking about is how they're using conservation easements, which a lot of farmers thought was going to make sure that the deal was that they were going to get some tax credits, that this is going to remain as farming land, and they were going to do certain conservation things.
	But now this has turned to climate.
	And to environmentalism.
	That's what the bills are now, before the Tennessee legislature, and before probably the legislature in your state as well.
	Going back to the Netherlands, our farmers deserve to be listened to, said one person in Parliament.
	I know that they're worried about the future of agriculture and their future as farmers.
	So, again, let's listen to them.
	Let's assuage their fears.
	Always stick the knife in their back and cut everything by 90%.
	EPP environmental spokesperson said the 2040 target for a 90% cut over 1990 levels.
	We should focus on positive opportunities for farmers and less on these new instruments that rather see the farmers as an enemy of climate policy.
	You see, let's put them to sleep.
	Let's tell them that we're going to, this is going to be a positive opportunity for them.
	And these instruments that we've got, and we're talking about, you know, just like natural asset companies or doing these conservation easements or things like that, they'll subtly in the background and quietly change this stuff to target you, to make you the enemy of their climate policy.
	One EU official told Politico it really is hard to escape.
	The fact is the agricultural sector could and should contribute to climate goals.
	It's hard to escape reality.
	Well, their reality is based on these phony models.
	Their reality is not reality.
	It's not sanity either.
	And we need to oppose this. We cannot accept and start arguing about carbon.
	We can't start arguing with them about levels of emission.
	And their hypocrisy about all this stuff.
	That is not. That is the path to losing this stuff.
	We have to confront them on the absurdity of CO2 being tied to global warming to begin with.
	And so this official says, despite all the semantics, right?
	This is all just... Semantics to assuage their anger.
	Despite the semantics, there is an unequivocal impact assessment, making a very compelling case for ambitious headline target and for all sub-targets for all sectors.
	So this is just a head fake.
	And of course, when we talk about the diesel prices, they're already primed to rise really sharply this year.
	Coming to a head, global stocks of diesel have been declining.
	Why? Well, because of sanctions and other things like that and lack of manufacturing capacity.
	And when we look at how things have been transferred...
	How our economy has been and our manufacturing has been transferred to China.
	Here's a good example. Why are solar panels 44% cheaper in China than in the U.S.? Well, it's protectionism, and it's the China price of slave labor, currency manipulation, and things like that. However, you'll see this.
	It talks about four different stages of production.
	Of these solar cells.
	And what is happening in terms of China establishing dominance or even a 100% monopoly on these stages of production.
	And the way that they're able to do it, of course, is because of energy.
	Because of energy. The last steel plant, as I reported a couple of weeks ago, the last steel plant in the UK, it was in Wales, shut down.
	Why? For the same reason that the German factories are shutting down.
	It's a highly energy-intensive process to get these really high heats that they need for steel processing and metallurgy and all the rest of this stuff.
	And so that takes a lot of energy.
	And European countries like the UK and Germany cannot compete with China on that because China's got cheap energy.
	Why do they have cheap energy?
	Because of the Paris Climate Accord and the governments saying that they have to obey and comply with this.
	And so what that does is that shuts down our cheap available power.
	And it lets the Chinese and Indian companies Build more and dirtier power plants than, you know, way dirtier than anything in Europe or the U.S. And we shut down our cleaner power plants so they can build cheap and dirty.
	And they wind up getting very cheap energy.
	And then, surprise, surprise, we can't afford to compete with them in any kind of manufacturing.
	Not just in steel. Oh, steel, that's so yesterday.
	Well, no, it's not. But also in solar.
	And so they said every process of this is worth taking a closer look.
	This is Zero Hedge. And the U.S. trails significantly in every stage of production.
	Four stages. The first one, polysilicon.
	Polysilicon is a very high-purity silicon.
	It's 97% of the world's solar panels.
	That's the fundamental building block.
	And that is the most energy and capital-intensive piece because of the high temperatures and the expensive equipment used in refining.
	So there, like I said, just like steel, we have polysilicon raw material.
	Up until 2005, polysilicon manufacturing was dominated by companies from the U.S., Europe, and Japan.
	But with China's huge expansion in investment, By 2023, roughly 91% of polysilicon for solar panels was produced in China.
	If you take something that's extremely energy-intensive and you give them an advantage in the price of energy, you artificially advantage them by something like the Paris Climate Accord, this is what happens.
	And again, Mitch McConnell could have...
	Stood against us. This was 2015 during Obama.
	Remember, Kerry and Obama said we self-ratified it.
	That's not a thing. Everybody said that at the time, but not a single senator as I've said over and over again.
	Not Rand Paul, not Mike Lee, and certainly not Mitch McConnell.
	Push back against that and call for a vote.
	They could have shut it down. No, this is not a treaty that we're going to go along with.
	And then when Trump got in, there was a fight in his administration at the beginning of it.
	He decided that he would not get out of it.
	He said, well, all right, well, I'll declare that we're out of it after the election.
	And so he left it there for four years.
	And then the day after the election or whatever, he says, well, we're out of it.
	And then two months later, Biden puts us back into it.
	Nobody wants to shut it down.
	They're playing games with it.
	He left it there for four years to help establish, you know, meanwhile, for those four years, while Trump leaves it there, things are being shut down everywhere under the idea that we have to comply with this Paris Agreement.
	So that's the first process, the polysilicon thing.
	Very heavily energy-intensive.
	And so now...
	91% of that is being done in China because of the energy advantage.
	Then you get to the ingots and the wafers.
	So what they do, the next part of the process is also very energy intensive, very high temperatures.
	What they do is they take that polysilicon and they make it into long rods or ingots and then they cut them into wafers.
	You've seen the wafers on the solar panels.
	And 97% of the world's solar ingots and wafers are made in China.
	The U.S. makes none.
	None. So, if you want to go to zero emissions, you know, once you get these solar panels, this is what they're going, the little bit of rationing of energy that they're going to let us have, because you can't do manufacturing with solar panels on the grid.
	If you're going to shut down the so-called fossil fuels, and they're not fossil fuels, That's all, you know, the peak oil lies that were put out there by the CIA and the oil companies to tell you, oh, it's fossil fuels.
	There's only so much oil on the ground, all that kind of stuff.
	So, again, Trump left that Paris thing in there.
	Now we've got zero ingots and wafers being manufactured in the U.S. 97% of them made in China, just like 91% of the polysilicon is made there.
	And the bulk of China's solar manufacturing is in provinces where electricity costs are nearly 30% below the global industrial average.
	If you control energy, you control the economy.
	If you control the economy, you control the country.
	And you can take the country down.
	Folks, this is war against us.
	What would you say if an enemy came in and said, well, we're not going to allow you to manufacture anything anymore?
	That's what our own government is doing to us.
	Our own government. We're good to go.
	The next part of it, sand and other materials.
	High-quality quartz sand is used to make special containers called crucibles for melting the silicon.
	Most of the world's sand used in ingot production comes from where?
	Right here, Appalachian Mountains, around North Carolina and Tennessee.
	So we have the raw materials for this, but we ship it straight to China so they can manufacture and add the value to it there.
	We become a third world country.
	This is reverse colonialism.
	What are we missing? We're missing the permission to have cheap energy.
	We have a government that is shutting all that down.
	Then you manufacture the cells.
	This is where the silicon becomes a device that can convert sunlight into electricity.
	China controls 80% of the solar cell market, largely because of cost advantages in energy.
	The U.S. currently has no solar cell manufacturers.
	So again, this is to make us dependent upon China.
	And how are you going to bootstrap yourself out of this when we shut down all of our power plants?
	You're going to hook up a whole bunch of solar cells to superheat stuff?
	Ain't going to happen. Finally, you get to the solar panels themselves, which is essentially an assembly process.
	It's the least capital intensive and it is the least energy intensive, but China still has 83% of that market and the U.S. has less than 2%.
	And so the same thing is true in Europe.
	Same kind of de-industrialization.
	They are rapidly adding solar panels.
	They added the number of solar panels that they have in Europe jumped by 40% from 2022 to 2023.
	But, of course, they're all being made in China.
	And then you have the tariffs.
	Trump has been talking about 60% tariffs.
	But Biden has kept all of Trump's tariffs, and he's increased them as well.
	So they're both talking about raising the tariffs.
	But as this Zero Hedge article points out, it's not going to level the playing field by increasing the tariffs.
	It's not going to level the playing field for labor costs.
	They've already got slave labor.
	It's not going to level the playing field for electricity costs either, will it?
	Because of Paris...
	I'll always have Paris, sweetheart.
	Because of Paris, they've got the electricity, the cost advantage and electricity that is huge, just like it is in slave wages.
	And so what that means is that we're still not going to be able to compete.
	That means that we are still going to be buying this stuff from China.
	And they will mandate that.
	That we have to buy it from China.
	And when you look at adding these tariffs that Trump is talking about, he's not talking about cutting the income taxes.
	And the GOP is not interested in cutting the income taxes or the IRS agents that Biden is adding.
	They're going to keep all of that stuff.
	I've talked many times about how, and when I was talking to Tony last week, we were talking about the fact that, look, You know, having a free trade zone, you know, eliminating all internal taxation as Thomas Jefferson did, and just having the government that was very, very small, very, very small at the time. It fit inside the Constitution, unlike this gargantuan monster we've got now.
	By doing all of that, they eliminated internal taxation.
	They had taxation at the border.
	They're not going to do that with these tariffs.
	They keep raising the tariffs and they keep raising the income taxes as well.
	They've got both external and internal taxes now.
	They're not going to get rid of them.
	It's the same type of thing we used to see with the arguments about having a national sales tax.
	People say, well... Okay, but you know what's going to happen?
	They're going to add a national sales tax and they're not going to get rid of the income tax.
	Well, they're going to add these 60% tariffs and they're not going to get rid of any of the income tax stuff.
	No, they're going to come after us with an army of IRS agents that's seven times bigger than it is now.
	And the GOP is not doing anything about it.
	They said we're going to do something about it, but they didn't.
	The U.S. can easily catch up on tech know-how, but it's going to lose out on every other step of the process.
	And both Biden and Trump are willing to do this.
	Trump proposes 60% tariffs on China.
	To date, Biden has taken Trump's tariffs and retained most of them and even expanded on them.
	If the U.S. puts 60% tariffs on China, the final costs will rise at least 60%.
	It will rise more than that.
	And we will need much more electricity as well, but we're not going to be allowed to get it.
	So electricity costs will jump too.
	There's going to be huge inflationary pressures.
	We have to end this climate gas lighting.
	We really do have to end this.
	And it's no better when you look at the windmills.
	The true costs of hiding net zero are impossible to hide.
	A 48% surge in costs of these windmill powers, windmill power plans, and shows that it's not economical.
	It's not going to work at all.
	So, with all this happening, even as we had the natural asset companies shut down temporarily, I think they're going to come back, you got Moody's rolling out A new scoring system for ESG. ESG, Environmental Societal Governance, has been pushed by BlackRock and State Street and Vanguard.
	These massive holding companies that have about $30 trillion of assets that they control, and again, just like they want to do with natural assets, Vanguard and BlackRock, they control these companies by getting a controlling interest in them, enough that they can blackmail these people to do what they want.
	That's going to be the same mechanism that they will ultimately do with the natural asset companies, the same mechanism they're going to do with the conservation easements in the states and all the rest of the stuff.
	And so, as you've got attorneys general in many states are pushing back against this ESG thing and saying it's fundamentally fraudulent.
	You've got pension funds and you've got individual investors who are buying into this because they think these companies are in business to make money, but they're not.
	They're not. They're in business to push the government's social agenda or the government's environmental agenda.
	And they don't care if that causes them to lose money.
	And so that's fraud.
	Well, now that they started pushing on that side, the new way that they're going to come back to respond to that, to push the ESG, is to have Moody's, which does a lot of rating of companies.
	Moody's Investor Services is now going to start assigning We're good to go.
	The new NZAs, is what they call it, provide an assessment of the strength of a company's carbon emissions reduction profile relative to the global net zero pathway that is consistent with the Paris Agreement.
	Always that.
	That's why Trump's betrayal on this, as well as all of the GOP, was so important.
	Market participants confront considerable challenges in comparing decarbonization plans.
	All this is about standardized ratings of Paris Climate Accord compliance.
	And if you want to speak out against this, we now have in Canada a Member of Parliament there.
	Has rolled out a bill to criminalize anybody speaking against, well, not speaking against climate change, but anybody promoting fossil fuels.
	And it's kind of interesting because, you know, as we had Michael Mann, who came up with that fraudulent hockey stick thing, and again, we know it was fraudulent because the emails of ClimateGate were being passed back and forth between Michael Mann and people in the UK's East Anglia Climate Center, they were passing emails back and forth saying, our models don't work.
	How do we hide the decline? Oh, Michael Mann's got a great idea.
	Let's do this. And so as Mark Stein was poking fun at him, he said, well, that's defamation.
	He won a case against Mark Stein, and it is a tremendous loss for free speech and free press.
	Mark Stein, the jury said, has to pay him a million dollars.
	Interestingly enough, this Canadian bill, Would fine people up to a million dollars.
	Oh, and two years in prison for promoting fossil fuels.
	For saying that they're good.
	For saying that they work.
	For even talking about them.
	I mean, think about how insane this is.
	Think about how Stalinist this is.
	Even truthful statements that compare relative emissions of natural gas and coal would be banned and criminalized.
	For the longest time, I remember back in 1971, the first Earth Day, I was in high school, and I remember all these people saying, look at how we have all the emissions in America.
	And I said, yes, because we make everything in America.
	Nobody is talking about all the emissions coming out of China now, are they?
	Because everything is now being made in China, just like I was talking about the solar panel.
	No, nobody is going to complain about China and India.
	They get a free pass. And nobody even talks about it.
	So this is a rep out of Northern Ontario where Fossil Fuels Advertising Act, if you're in Canada's Bill C-372, prohibit the promotion of fossil fuels except in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
	And promotion is defined as a representation about a product or service, including any communication or information about the product or service and its price and its distribution.
	Don't talk about it. It doesn't exist.
	Complete censorship. Zip the lips.
	Anyway, that is likely to influence or shape attitudes, beliefs, behaviors about the product or service.
	Look, all ads are designed to do exactly that.
	All ads are designed to shape your attitude, your beliefs, your behaviors about the product or the service, right?
	That's what an advertisement means.
	Advert. You know, go back to the Latin roots of that.
	It means to turn to.
	You're trying to turn people to your product.
	So no advertising of any fossil fuel products whatsoever.
	And again, they're not fossil fuels.
	That's a lie from the CIA and big oil to promote scarcity.
	And then to justify this in this bill.
	They say, you know all those Canadian wildfires?
	Oh, that's because of fossil fuels.
	No, it's not. And it's not because of climate change either.
	We've seen, you know, the Lake Cabin fires in Quebec.
	Most of that is based on arson.
	The Barrington Fire in Nova Scotia, the cause was arson.
	It wasn't global boiling.
	And we just had a case that goes back to 2021, the El Dorado fire that was out in California.
	That was based on a gender reveal that went wrong.
	They had something that had combustible stuff, and that set off a fire.
	They just had a husband and wife that were part of that gender reveal.
	They just pled guilty to involuntary manslaughter because people died from that fire.
	It got really big. It had 23,000 acres that got burned there.
	But anyway, so this is where these people are on climate change.
	And it just continues to go because we don't have anybody, anybody in national politics who's going to even take up this mantle and talk about it.
	Isn't that odd in election year?
	The silence, the deafening silence about this thing that is going to be used to destroy climate.
	Everything in our society is going to take us back to the dark ages.
	And we don't have a single politician who is going to take up that and talk about it.
	We'll be right back. Using free speech to free minds.
	It's the David Knight Show.
	He feels a little chill.
	Can I bring him this blanket? Sure.
	All right. It's sad when a mother has to speak the words that condemn her own son.
	But I couldn't allow them to believe that I would commit murder.
	We'll put him away now, as I should have, years ago.
	He was always bad, and in the end he intended to tell them I killed those girls and that man, as if I could do anything except just sit and stare, like one of his stuffed birds.
	They know I can't even move a finger, and I won't.
	I'll just sit here and be quiet, just in case they do suspect me.
	They're probably watching me.
	Well, let them. Let them see what kind of a person I am.
	I'm not even gonna swat that fly.
	I hope they are watching.
	They'll see. They'll see and they'll know and they'll say Why she wouldn't even harm a fly Yeah, and of course that was Norman Bates We got another tranny insanity psycho killer as well.
	This is what happened at Joel Osteen's Lakewood Church on Sunday in Houston.
	And interestingly enough, mainstream media and the Houston Police Department insist on calling this guy a woman.
	I don't know how they addressed Norman there.
	Mrs. Bates, did they play along with the insanity there as well?
	And this one is not named Norman Bates.
	This one was named Jeffrey Escalante.
	Our shooter is identified by driver's license as Janice Marino, 36 years old, Hispanic female.
	But there are some discrepancies, said the Houston Police Department's commander.
	Some discrepancies?
	You mean between the driver's license and the body?
	The body? You've got a body here.
	If these people can't conduct an investigation to see what gender, sex, and gender and sex are the same thing, they can't conduct an investigation to see?
	So confused and confusing everybody else.
	And of course, the media is having a field day with that.
	We do have reports she, this is the Houston Police Department, we do have reports she used multiple aliases, including Jeffrey Escalante.
	So she has utilized both male and female names, but through all of our investigation to this point, talking with individuals, interviews, documents, Houston Police Department reports she has been identified this entire time as female.
	Are they afraid to deadname this corpse?
	This is just beyond absurdity.
	The fact that our police and the media and the government would all play along with this.
	And I told Karen this the first day.
	I didn't cover this because, you know, they were saying, well, it looks like a female shooter somewhere between the age of 30 and 35.
	There was no name or any identification.
	They said, and there was a, we think, and she was accompanied.
	She was in a trench coat with a long rifle, they said.
	I accompanied, brought in a five-year-old child.
	A five-year-old child has been hit.
	They didn't even, wouldn't say at the time, whether the child was the same child that she brought in.
	So I was like, I'm not going to talk about it.
	But I told Karen, I said, that's a tranny killer.
	That's a tranny killer coming after church again, just like the one in Nashville.
	And look at all the hoops that they jumped through to keep that stuff quiet.
	And now it turns out that, yes, it is that same child that she brought in.
	The child is seven years old, not five years old.
	So a lot of this stuff changes as they go through.
	And it's interesting to see what different organizations focus on.
	Because we have somebody who's absolutely as a nutbag, psycho killer like Norman Bates.
	But of course, there was also a Palestinian sticker on the butt of the gun.
	So some media has focused on that.
	Made that the focus of the reports.
	Some people have focused on the criminal record.
	Of this person who has a very, very long rap sheet.
	Some people have focused on the fact that this is an immigrant, perhaps an illegal immigrant from El Salvador.
	Some people focused on that.
	Of course, the New York Times focused on the fact that the killer was carrying an AR-15.
	Because all the rest of that stuff, the insanity, the illegal aliens in the open borders, the racism, the hatred for...
	Jews as well as Christians.
	None of that matters. It's the AR-15.
	That's the thing we need to focus on, according to the New York Times.
	It's absolutely crazy.
	Let me respond to some of the comments and tips here.
	I was going to do that before I went to break, and then I'll get back to this.
	On Rockfan, David Blackburn, thank you very much for the tip.
	He says, God bless, David. Well, thank you.
	That is a blessing. All of you, appreciate your tips.
	On Rockfan, Nancy Chambers says, my husband asked me to marry him the day after we met.
	Married five weeks later, and we were happily married for 58 and a half years until the vaccine killed him.
	I'm so sorry. But it is a blessing to have that.
	You had 58 and a half years, and that is a blessing.
	And I hope that you'll be reunited with him as well.
	Rockfin. Andy said, I experimented for a little while using the term genetic code injection.
	The GCI. When reporting if my patient took the jab or not, nobody ever kicked my paperwork back.
	That's right. That's good.
	That's good. I like that handy.
	On Rumble, Heatherram29, thank you for the tip.
	Thank you so much from Ontario, Canada, where they're trying to censor any talk at all about fossil fuels.
	That's coming out of Ontario. You're a beacon in the darkness.
	Well, thank you. And if these people get their way, that will quite literally be in the darkness.
	Literally in the darkness and the silence, the sound of silence.
	Jason Barker, good to see you.
	He says, I have 45 acres, mostly wooded.
	Can I get paid for scrubbing CO2? Oh, no!
	Bill Gates wants to come out and cut trees down because he said, you know, they're a fire hazard.
	And, you know, when they die, they're going to release all that CO2 that they've captured.
	So we've got to cut them down and bury them.
	Not make anything useful out of it, but cut them down and bury them.
	That's where these people are headed.
	Getting back to this shooting, though.
	Much to say. So, a seven-year-old child.
	When she pulls up, she opened up the door, pulled out the seven-year-old out of the backseat, as well as the bag, confronted a security guard who let her in along the west side of the building.
	So, I'm not sure that confronted, they don't say whether that was a threat with a gun or something, or if she just, you know, let me in.
	I don't know what the deal was.
	And I am saying she. It's not a she.
	It's a guy. Okay.
	Then he, this guy dressed as a woman, immediately starts firing, after entering the hallway of the church, off-duty officers who are working approved security jobs for the church.
	And again, what's the lesson about this?
	This is how you protect your schools as well.
	If you're going to have soft targets where there's a lot of people, most of them are unarmed, you do need to have hired security.
	And it's even better if you've got people that are caring that are identified by uniform.
	They engaged him in a gunfight.
	He and the child are brought down in a hail of bullets.
	The child was shot once in the head.
	They don't know who shot the child because there were two different groups of...
	They evidently had a lot of security there.
	It's a big church.
	They've got like 30,000 people there and lots and lots of money.
	In the hallway, multiple shots were exchanged by all three.
	She, they say. She eventually falls to the ground.
	It's a guy. It's a guy.
	The seven-year-old child falls to the ground as well from gunfire.
	One gunshot wound to the head.
	So, again, what is disturbing to me about this as well?
	I'm reading to you. There's many different accounts I could have read to you from.
	But they went through the blow-by-blow here more on thechristianpost.com.
	And yet, thechristianpost.com is using the killer's preferred pronouns.
	They're afraid to deadname this killer.
	The child remains in critical condition at the hospital.
	Two weapons were discovered from the scene, a.22 caliber rifle, which was not used, and an AR-15 with a Palestine sticker on it.
	On the butt of the stock.
	The butt stock under there.
	We do believe that she does have a mental health history, said the Houston police officers.
	Well, these guys are geniuses, aren't they?
	Inspector Lestrade's.
	I mean, you know, this is a tranny who's a man dressed up as a woman.
	Yeah, we think this person's got a mental health history.
	Yeah, wearing it all over there.
	We do believe there was a familial dispute that has taken place between her ex-husband and her ex-husband's family, some of whom are Jewish.
	So we believe that might have possibly been where this stems from.
	Isn't that interesting? This person goes to a church and sets it up and they're going to portray it as anti-Semitism.
	I don't know. What's going on with that?
	But I guess, you know, if you're going to talk about a hate crime, it's okay to hate Christians.
	But if they find a Palestine sticker on the gun indicating that the killer hates Jews as well, then I don't know.
	So as you look at this, as I said, the training insanity is everywhere.
	Including the fact that we're going to focus on the Palestine sticker and not focus on the fact that they're there to kill people in the church.
	You have WorldNetDaily, WND, says it was political.
	You have others that say it was anti-Semitic, and of course the New York Times ignores all the immigration, all the criminal records, all the politics of this person, and focuses on the AR-15.
	We don't understand why these things happen, said Joel Osteen, but we know that God is in control.
	This is a guy who sells a prosperity gospel.
	When bad things happen, he doesn't have an answer for that.
	He's a Mr.
	Smiley face. Prosperity gospel.
	Why do bad things happen to good people?
	He has no answer for that.
	He says, we're going to stay strong.
	We're going to continue to move forward.
	There are forces of evil, but there are forces that are for us.
	The forces of God are stronger than that.
	Well, that's true, but that's not the whole truth.
	And he misses a great deal of that truth.
	And so, you know, when we were talking about this...
	With my sons and with Karen.
	It was very interesting.
	You know, again, this individual, a crazy Norman Bates type of person, a documented history of arrests and mental illness, an illegal alien, all the rest of the stuff.
	But as we were talking about it, my son said, I don't think that was the most dangerous person in the church that day.
	Maybe the most dangerous person in the church that day was Joel Ostain.
	Phoenix, Arizona. Hello.
	Hello, Larry. You're the best.
	And thank you, Joel, for your positive messages and your book.
	I'm wondering, though, why you sidestepped Larry's earlier question about how we get to heaven.
	The Bible clearly tells us that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the light, and the only way that the Father is through him.
	That's not really a message of condemnation, but of truth.
	Yeah, I would agree with her.
	I believe that. So that's what a Jew is not going to happen.
	No. Here's my thing, Larry.
	I can't judge somebody's heart.
	I don't know. Only God can look at somebody's heart.
	To me, it's not my business to say, this one is or this one isn't.
	I'm just saying, here's what the Bible teaches.
	I want to put my faith in Christ.
	I think it's wrong when we go around saying, you're not going, you're not going, you're not going, because it's not exactly my way.
	I'm not going to be the God.
	I believe my way. I believe my way with all my heart.
	For someone who doesn't share it, it is wrong.
	Well, I don't know if I look at it like that.
	I would present my way, but I'm just going to let God be the judge of that.
	I mean, I don't know. I don't know.
	So you make no judgment on anyone?
	No, but I... About atheists.
	No, I just... You know what?
	I'll let... I'll let someone...
	I'm going to let God be the judge of who goes to heaven and hell.
	And I just, again, I present the truth.
	And I say it every week. You know, I believe it's a relationship with Jesus.
	But, you know what? I'm not going to go around telling everybody else.
	If they don't want to believe that, that's going to be their choice.
	God's got to look at your own heart.
	God's got to look at your heart. And only God knows that.
	You believe there's a place called heaven?
	Smile. God is not in the condemning business.
	He's in the restoration business.
	His sermons are relentlessly positive.
	And that's made him a target of critics who say Osteen sometimes sounds less like a preacher and more like a motivational speaker.
	You have to take the hand you've been dealt and make the most of it.
	You know, you've been criticized for church light.
	Yeah, that's right. For a cotton candy message.
	Do you feel like you're cheating people by not telling them about the hell part?
	No, I really don't because it's a different approach.
	You know, it's not hellfire and brimstone, but I say most people are beaten down enough by life.
	They already feel guilty enough.
	Well, you know, it's kind of interesting, wasn't it?
	Of course, that's a famous clip where he's on with Larry King, and he had many other things to say, but when the caller comes in and quotes him what Jesus had to say, this is what is an offense to people with Christianity.
	When Jesus said, I am the way, he didn't say, I'm a way, he said, I am the way.
	And then he says, no one can come to the Father except through me.
	And so, no one, the way, and except through me, those are all very exclusive, and that's the thing that is so offensive to everybody about Christianity, that exclusivity.
	But if you don't believe what Jesus says, don't call yourself a Christian, Joel.
	When you are shamed of the gospel, you're shamed.
	You don't want to offend anybody.
	Why? Because you're making millions of dollars.
	You bought a basketball arena, and you just retired that $100 million debt.
	He is selling the spirit of the time.
	The spirit of the time that says we're not going to judge anything that anybody does.
	We're not going to set up any standard for anything that anybody does.
	That is not a loving thing.
	You know, back when I was in school, people would talk about the Great Awakening that was a precursor to the American Revolution.
	And at center of it was a piece by Jonathan Edwards, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.
	That sounds like a real condemning piece.
	And he talks about the fact that...
	At any moment our foot might slide and we might fall into this pit of eternity.
	Are we right with God at that point?
	And Jonathan Edwards didn't scare people into a great awakening.
	As much as he offered out the idea that God is offering something better for you, he is offering, and the fact that God's mercy and grace is being extended to you.
	He says, you know, you could be dead already, except that God has given you more time.
	Are you going to thumb your nose at this mercy of God?
	Because if you do, there is a massive condemnation that awaits for you.
	That is not judging people.
	That is saying what Christ said.
	And that is, if you believe what Christ said, isn't it loving to tell people to try to avoid the worst thing that could happen?
	That's why my son said, Whistler, said, well, I think the most dangerous person at that church was not the shooter, but Joel Osteen.
	Because Jesus said, don't fear those who can destroy the body, but fear him who can destroy the body and cast the soul into eternal hell.
	That's what you should be afraid of.
	Not of the training shooters.
	You should be afraid of God.
	You should be afraid of a God whose wrath has not been appeased by Jesus' sacrifice.
	And that's the key thing. And when you offer that, that's a free offer for anybody who wants to take advantage of that.
	And we do all stand condemned.
	And he says, well, I don't want to.
	We're all, you know, everybody's feeling like, you know, there's certain things that they need to do.
	And then he starts talking about, well, it could be better parents.
	They could be better. No, we're all in rebellion to God.
	In rebellion to God. How does it get any worse than that?
	And so what do we do about that?
	Well, fortunately, God has provided Jesus to take away our sins.
	And to give us His righteousness, and so we can offer our lives then to Him, and the things that we do are now acceptable that would not be acceptable.
	It would be like sacrificing an unclean animal or some kind of a weird thing on the altar if we didn't do it.
	And that's what He's calling people to do.
	He's calling people to do something that God never called them to do.
	And as far as the obedience goes, As Jesus said, you know, when he was very merciful to people, again, he gave his life for people, but he said, if you love me, keep my commandments.
	He would engage people, but he would not leave them the way that they were.
	And so he would give them the power to change their lives.
	He would give them the power to change their relationship with God, and that God would change what they want out of life.
	Rather than being focused on prosperity or your best life now.
	Which is what made Joel Osteen famous.
	We had Super Bowl ads that $20 million worth of Christian ads for the Super Bowl.
	He Gets Us was one of these.
	And then Mark Wahlberg has got a Catholic meditation app.
	Telling people to get prayed up.
	I don't know. I didn't look at this Catholic prayer app, Hello, but I don't know.
	How did people pray before they had an iPhone?
	If we need an app to pray, maybe we don't.
	Maybe this is just something to kind of encourage you to do it.
	I don't know. But the thing I wanted to focus on was the He Gets Us ad.
	By the way, Wahlberg's company raised, or the people that he's with, Halo, the app, they raised $50 million.
	The He Gets Us thing is getting its money from the Hobby Lobby billionaire.
	Who is funding that.
	The Hello app from Mark Wahlberg, interestingly enough, the CEO's name is Alex Jones, and they point out that that is not Infowars Alex Jones.
	They raised $105 million in funding.
	So a lot of that going for this app.
	I guess maybe this Alex Jones could call it maybe Stop the Kneel.
	Yeah. Take out my app and pray instead of kneeling to pray.
	I don't know how people got along in the past without having an app.
	But anyway, the point of that was to get more people to pray.
	He gets us campaign, though.
	He said, well, we're just trying to reintroduce people to the Jesus of the Bible.
	Now, what they're trying to do is reinvent the Jesus of the Bible.
	Maybe we could call their movement to stop the kneel.
	Ha, ha, ha. And kneel to each other, because the whole thing is a bunch of, it looks like a bunch of AI-generated artwork, but they paid a fortune to a photographer to actually take those pictures.
	And that's one of the issues of this.
	You know, when people have this money that's been given to them because it's a Christian organization and they want to push people in that direction, people kind of wonder, well, what are you using the money for?
	Are you using it wisely or are you just kind of throwing it away?
	Well, it appears like they were just kind of throwing it away.
	Spending massive amounts of money on these still photographs.
	And then there's the content of the photographs as well.
	They ran two ads.
	One of them was called Foot Washing, a modern take on the biblical story of Jesus washing the twelve apostles' feet to tell them to serve each other.
	That was one of the things that people were saying, well, you didn't quite get that right.
	But primarily it is a man-centered message.
	Not a God-centered message that you're seeing from He Gets Us.
	So you've got a policeman kneeling before a black man.
	How many times have we seen that, right?
	We know where these people are coming from politically.
	You've got a protester before a woman who is visiting a family planning clinic.
	You've got a white woman kneeling to a migrant mother and washing her feet.
	And so...
	Now, that's their commercial.
	I'll play a little bit of it for you here.
	We're not going to play a whole lot of it, but here's what it looks like.
	A still picture that they're zooming in on.
	It's a police officer washing the feet of a black guy in an alley.
	And that's in the school.
	Here's an Indian having his feet washed by a European man.
	Family planning clinic, there you go.
	So it's just a bunch of...
	I don't know why they think that's going to be effective at changing anybody's life.
	Again, what changes your life is to understand that you have a relationship with God, that you have eternal life, that your sins have been forgiven, that you're now free to, your past has been removed from you, but you're free now to obey God.
	That's not going to be perfect, but you're always going to be forgiven, as long as that is your goal to do this.
	They don't have anything about the gospel in it.
	So they say, well, he gets us.
	Well, do they get God? I don't know.
	Have they even read his message?
	It ended with a slogan, Jesus didn't teach hate, he washed feet.
	How would our contentious world change if people, especially those with opposing ideologies, took off their shoes and washed each other's feet?
	So what we're seeing here, this is simply the social gospel of the left.
	Always about man to man.
	Never about man to God.
	What about my relationship with God?
	Ah, don't worry about it. You know, he's going to not judge you for anything.
	Well, that's not the message of the Bible.
	The message of the Bible is that we stand condemned before God unless we do something with our sin.
	A second 15-second advertisement, Who is my neighbor?
	shows a homeless man and a man working in a shop and asks, What if we treated them accordingly?
	Again, it's all about man-to-man stuff.
	Well, man-to-man stuff is great, but the man-to-man stuff is going to, they're putting the cart before the horse.
	You're not really going to be able to get that done properly unless you've already taken, unless you've got a different basis for this.
	When I talk about doing social change and having the guts to stand up to something, even if you know that it's going to destroy your life, maybe even take your life, That's because you've got a fulcrum point that is outside of this life.
	You have a different perspective on things.
	And I think that's true even when you're talking about social issues like this.
	So they said they expected that these two ads together could have cost them $17.5 million before looking at the cost of hiring actors and production.
	And again, their production costs.
	They had to get some special photographer to make this stuff look like it was AI generated.
	The AI images for free.
	One viewer wrote and said, You do realize that Jesus, the one I've known all my life, would not approve of commercialized glorification Super Bowl commercials costing millions of dollars, money that could be used to actually help those in need.
	You want to wash somebody's feet?
	You want to help your fellow man?
	Fine. Don't waste $20 million on an ad.
	You want to talk about, oh, well, look, here's somebody in front of a family planning clinic, and you're washing the feet of this pregnant woman who was thinking about getting an abortion.
	Well, take that $20 million.
	How many of the 4D ultrasound imaging machines could you scatter around the country at these crisis pregnancy centers for $20 million?
	Nothing that they say they support, even if they're going to be focused on the social gospel.
	They're not even doing the social gospel.
	They're doing Super Bowl commercials.
	They're building up their organization.
	They continued, let us be clear in our opinion, Jesus loves gay people and Jesus loves trans people.
	Yes, he loved them enough to die for their sins.
	And he loved them enough to give them the power to change their lives.
	And then he said, if you love me, you will keep my commandments.
	And it's pretty clear. These people want to normalize what Jesus says is not normal.
	So they could have focused on the pro-life aspects of this as well, but of course they didn't, and so you have a pro-life organization that did talk about this.
	This is the liveaction.org.
	They said, you know, even though you've got this Super Bowl ad talking about, well, we should love other people, we should serve other people, we should do it with humility, they said, you know, this is what the pro-life movement does every day.
	One of the scenarios in the ad was a young woman sitting on a bench in front of a building labeled Family Planning Clinic, while another woman washes her feet in the background.
	A group of what appear to be pro-lifers stand holding signs.
	The pro-lifers do not appear to be hostile or angry, and their signs are not threatening.
	And as they pointed out, you know, this is abortion activists frequently denigrate the pro-life movement by accusing them of being hate-filled misogynists.
	We want to control women and to force them to breed.
	But in reality, the abortion industry itself has consistently failed women.
	The pro-life movement serves women daily with love and humility.
	For pregnant mothers, resources from pro-life groups abound, from maternity homes that give women a safe shelter to on-campus resources.
	And again, when we look at all this stuff, you want to help the homeless, you want to help people have crisis pregnancies and all the rest of the stuff, they could have spent some of this money on that.
	Instead, they wasted it on this say-nothing ad.
	Can't we just love everybody and give everybody hugs?
	That is not the basis for changing our society.
	They really don't have any basis for people doing that.
	What changes our behavior?
	What changes our heart?
	It is Christ that changes our heart.
	Changes what we want out of life.
	Changes us from being lovers of self.
	That takes a transformation.
	That's not something you're going to gin up, and it's not something you're going to even understand listening to a pastor who's all about smiles and prosperity.
	We'll be right back. 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.
	You can download the app from the link in the description.
	Download the app.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Yesterday, I played for you a clip over the weekend, President Trump talking about how tough he talked to the NATO countries.
	He said, well, you need to pay your fair share.
	And if you don't pay your fair share, 2% of your GDP, I don't think we should come to rescue you if you're attacked by Russia.
	As a matter of fact, I would encourage Russia to attack you.
	He said that, encourage Russia to attack you.
	Well, that created a lot of pushback.
	You had a lot of pearl clutching from the GOP and from Democrats.
	You know, for the most part, his base, the people in America, don't want entangling alliances.
	So, they didn't really care about what he had to say in terms of coming to people's rescue.
	We don't like NATO because, as Pat Buchanan pointed out, we've got tripwires all over the globe that require us to come to the rescue of people.
	But, of course, we don't wait for that.
	We start wars preemptively, don't we?
	Wait for somebody to attack us.
	We'll attack them first. But it was all just blustering from Trump.
	He did nothing of the sort.
	I said, when I talked about it, I said, well, you know, you look at this, one way that you could understand this is that maybe this is a fundraising drive to precede the Ukraine war, which everybody knew was coming.
	Putin knew it was coming.
	Anybody who watched what NATO had done after the fall of the Soviet Union knew it was coming.
	As a matter of fact, I've played for you in the past, Arrestovich, who was, Zelensky was elected on a campaign of stopping the war that had been going on at that point in time for five years after the coup.
	For five years after the coup, the Ukrainian government that was installed by the CIA had shelled civilian areas in the eastern part of Ukraine, bordering the people who wanted to remain with the Soviet Union.
	So they've been bombing civilian towns for five years.
	And they wanted peace.
	Everybody wanted peace.
	And so that's what Zelensky ran on.
	And then he sends this guy, Alexei Arrestovich, As the peace envoy.
	And he was interviewed by the local Ukrainian media.
	And they said, so what are the chances of peace happening?
	He goes, none. None.
	As a matter of fact, he said in 2019, it's going to get worse.
	He said in 2022, Russia's going to invade.
	And he said, it's going to be full on war.
	She said, that's horrible. And he goes, no, that's good.
	Well, he said, they're going to invade and Ukraine will be devastated.
	He used a more comprehensive word.
	Not annihilated, but, you know, demolished.
	She said, that's horrible. He goes, no, that's good.
	We'll get into NATO. They knew it was coming.
	Both sides knew this was coming for a long time.
	And so, you know, was Trump far from he didn't get out of NATO? His base thought of him as getting out of NATO, just like his base thought of him as being anti-vaccine.
	His base thought of him as being pro-wall and all the rest of the stuff.
	Maybe he was just pushing it up.
	But somebody looked at, actually, the...
	What the European nations are contributing after Trump had his tough talk with him and told them to pay up and pay their fair share.
	Are they paying their fair share?
	No, only a third of them are paying their fair share.
	So he didn't get them. He didn't do anything.
	Again, this is his imaginary presidency, just like his imaginary building of the wall that didn't happen, which is why we've got, one of the reasons why we've got the mess at the border.
	But again, I don't think that the border mess is going to be solved strictly by interdiction or by border patrols.
	It's necessary to have some of that stuff there.
	But it's not going to be solved by that.
	It's the welfare magnet that's bringing people in.
	It's the policies that say, come in and we'll give you everything, including the right to vote.
	We'll give you unemployment checks.
	We'll give you free medical care.
	We'll give you free welfare.
	Just come on in. You don't have to ask permission at all.
	Anybody who wants to come in can come in.
	That's what's creating the crisis.
	And unless you stop that welfare magnet, nothing is going to do anything about it.
	But getting back to this, Statistica's Katrina Buchholz said the goal of 2% of GDP and military spending that NATO has set for itself was not reached in many of the European countries as of mid-2023, even though some improvements have been made, especially in Eastern Europe.
	NATO members Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia are also planning to fortify their Russian border with bunkers.
	Oh, so they're gonna do something about their borders?
	And oh, do you think that's gonna be effective?
	You're gonna put bunkers there? Do you remember when France did that after World War I? They created the Maginot Line?
	We got invaded by Germany before, so we're gonna set up these bunkers, and we're gonna have guns in them, and we're gonna stop the Germans from invading us again.
	Well, they just flew over them and attacked them from behind.
	They couldn't turn their guns around. It's ridiculous.
	Think that you're going to stop them with these bunker things there?
	Again, imagine a line mentality.
	But it is an imaginary defense, right?
	Just like Trump imagined building the wall, just like Trump imagined getting NATO to pony up the money for their own defense instead of charging us for it.
	The concept that NATO countries should spend 2% of their GDP on defense was debuted in 2014.
	While the definition as agreed upon during NATO's Wales Summit 10 years ago is vague, the 2% target has nevertheless been considered a hallmark of NATO's success as well as a point of contention and of public discourse.
	Again, what else happened in 2014?
	That was the year that we had the coup.
	So as they have the coup, they're pushing for this 2%.
	Okay, we start a coup in Ukraine.
	That's a precursor to a war.
	We want you guys to build up your defenses.
	Well, they did a little bit, but not much.
	So let's hector them with Trump.
	Still, they don't do anything.
	Still, only a third of them are doing it.
	But it's tied back to the fact that NATO wants to have a prolonged war with Ukraine.
	That's why they're pushing this 2% stuff.
	Again, Trump is not anti-NATO. He's pushing the NATO agenda, just like he pushes the globalist agenda.
	For the World Health Organization, for the pandemic stuff, for all the rest of this stuff.
	He's pushing the globalist agenda.
	Meanwhile, if you look at this bill, J.D. Vance, the new senator, says that there is an impeachment time bomb that is aimed at Trump and the Ukraine aid bill.
	That's what they care about.
	They don't care about forever war.
	They don't care about getting us involved in a war.
	You know, there's some stuff in here that if Trump, you know, in this bill, there's some things that Trump did in his first administration that if he were to do them again, they could say they wanted to impeach Trump for this.
	That's all they care about.
	They don't care about war.
	They don't care about our death.
	They don't care about the violation of the Constitution, murder of people with Trump poison.
	They did nothing. The GOP did nothing about any of that.
	Instead, oh, this could hurt Trump.
	This could be a trap for Trump.
	Let's pay attention to that, right?
	That's all they care about.
	It is only Trump and Trump only.
	It's the only thing that any of these people pay any attention to.
	Well, Nikki Haley is paying attention to Trump.
	Again, the stupid remarks that he made.
	As I said, criticizing her, always ad hominem attacks against everybody.
	Angry about her disloyalty to him as he perceives it.
	Now, he's the king. How dare her run against me as the king?
	And she came to Mar-a-Lago.
	She said she wasn't going to run, all the rest of the stuff.
	And now, where's your husband?
	Where's your husband? He's gone.
	He's gone. Where did he go?
	He's gone. Well, he's been deployed.
	As I said, this is, first of all, it's projection because everybody was asking, where's Melania?
	Where's Melania? You know, for the last six to nine months, where's Melania?
	She finally just showed up.
	After being absent all that time?
	And so now he's got to project that onto Nikki.
	Oh, you must have a messed up marriage like I do.
	Well, maybe she does.
	But he's in military deployment.
	And so she hit back pretty hard against Trump because it was a very foolish, stupid line of criticism.
	Does he not know? She hasn't made any secret of it.
	She's talked about his being in the military as a badge of honor for quite some time.
	So he doesn't have anybody in his organization that knows that?
	He doesn't know anything about it?
	So... She hit back and said he showed that kind of disrespect for the military.
	He's not qualified to be president of the United States.
	I don't trust him to protect them.
	Do you trust her to protect the military?
	She wants to send them off to die everywhere in wars that have not been proclaimed or legitimately started.
	She said this was not a slip of the tongue for Trump.
	When he goes off of his teleprompter, that's him speaking from the heart, and it's a pattern.
	She brought up other examples of Trump calling military members suckers and losers.
	According to his former chief of staff, John Kelly, he disparaged comments that he said to made while visiting Arlington National Cemetery.
	Losers, people in wheelchairs, people who are prisoners, nah, they're losers.
	We don't want to talk about them.
	In 2020, Haley praised Trump's record toward the military and defended him when then-candidate Joe Biden tweeted a video citing the losers and suckers remark, but now she was on the other foot.
	Now she is going to, after she defended that conduct, now she is going to call it out.
	She said at the time, all of us who worked with Trump witnessed the tremendous amount of love and respect he has for a military.
	But now she's got a different story.
	She cannot be trusted either.
	But she says anyone who will put down members of the military, anybody who will say that while they're deployed, which is pretty disgusting, do you really want that kind of person being the leader of all those who may have to go fight in a war?
	He's already put out global democide with his poisonous shots.
	You want to talk about that, Nikki?
	You want to talk, and I call her Nuki because there isn't a war that she doesn't want to start, and she wants to, she'll be fine with a nuclear war.
	She doesn't want to limit the killing just to the military.
	She wants to involve us as civilians as well.
	It's unbelievable, the projection of both of them.
	He projects his marital problems onto her family.
	She projects her desire to kill everybody onto him.
	What a pair. We've got a great choice, don't we?
	She said that, actually, Trump's press secretary came back and said she advocates for greater foreign intervention.
	Kill them all. And she supports endless wars that would leave more American heroes dead.
	It's a good thing she will never be commander-in-chief.
	Look, they all treat all of us as non-essential, as deplorable, as expendable.
	They treat us all as animals.
	Hillary calls us deplorable.
	Trump called us non-essential.
	They all want to send us to war.
	Meanwhile, you see it as Trump is pushing out Mitt Romney's niece for not being loyal enough.
	He wants to put in his own daughter.
	And then we have RFK Jr.
	who ran this Super Bowl ad and is now apologizing for it.
	It's a 1960s ad for JFK, but they changed JFK's picture, exchanged it for RFK Jr.
	Gives you an idea just how bad the commercials were 64 years ago.
	Do you want a man for president who's seasoned through and through?
	A man who's old enough to know and young enough to do?
	Well, it's up to you, it's up to you, it's strictly up to you.
	American Value 2024 is responsible for the content of this advertisement.
	Old enough to know and young enough to do.
	To do what? Again, it was Pablum then, just as it's Pablum now.
	After he tweeted that out, he said, well, that was a political action committee.
	I didn't have anything to do with that.
	I'm sorry to all of my angry Kennedys who are Kennedy relatives who are very angry at me for using my uncle.
	So he's apologizing profusely.
	I'm so sorry if the Super Bowl ad caused anyone in my family pain.
	After he tweeted it out on X, he says on X, the ad was created and aired by the American Values Super PAC without any involvement or approval from my campaign.
	FVC rules prohibit super PACs from consulting with me or my staff.
	I love you all. God bless you.
	And of course, those rules that prevent PACs from coordinating with the candidates, one of the reasons why the Democrats are starting this lawfare against him, they said, well, you got a PAC that has raised $15 million to get you on the ballot everywhere.
	An astronomical figure, if you stop and think about it.
	But he just dropped $7 million on an ad.
	One 30-second ad.
	It's absurd that you'd have to pay $15 million to collect signatures across the country.
	And of course, Shiva Ayodure was talking about that.
	And in fact, he's got big donors that are going to do that for him.
	But now the Democrat Party is going to sue him as well.
	So he's going to have to get some more millions.
	It is a scam.
	Everything about it, this election, focusing on presidential elections is truly a scam.
	Majority rate Biden's mind poorly, but they say Kamala Harris is not the answer because she's in la-la land as well.
	Well, you know, the answer is that we don't want to focus on politics at all.
	As a matter of fact, Caitlin Johnstone out of Australia says, when will Americans finally realize that it doesn't matter who the president is?
	Oh, I hear you out there.
	You're screaming at the radio right now, right?
	You're crazy. It does matter who the president is.
	No, it doesn't, actually. There's an evil cabal in Washington, D.C. that's been running this country since at least the JFK assassination, if not before.
	And they're bent on the destruction of American liberty, American society, American culture.
	They want to keep America somewhat as a power for the military industrial base.
	But what they're after is global governance, and that means that they've got to keep us in line as well.
	Caitlin Johnstone said, the president's brain doesn't work.
	It's shot. The leader of the free world, LOL, is rusted gray matter like Swiss cheese.
	Anybody could hold that office, and it's not meaningful.
	The fact that the U.S. President has dementia exposes the uncomfortable truth that the functioning of the empire is too important to be left to the hands of voters.
	The globe-spanning power structure, she says, that is centralized around the United States is not run by an official elected government of that nation, but by unelected empire managers who filter in and out of each administration and maintain a steady presence in government agencies and government-adjacent institutions.
	These empire managers, from alliances with corporate powers and working relations with many nations, assets, and partners, function as an undeclared U.S. empire, which means there's not really any way for Americans to vote their way out of this mess.
	If you've got a problem with genocide, militarism, economic injustice, authoritarianism, or any of the other critical building blocks of the U.S.
	centralized power structure, you will never be permitted to have influence over those things, not as voters.
	We've got to stop hanging our hopes on the electoral system first.
	Every four years, we see American attention get sucked up into this empty puppet show about which soulless empire manager should be the temporary official figurehead at the front desk of the permanent imperial machine.
	And if you want to vote, by all means go ahead and vote, but don't let that performative ritual distract you from a real project.
	To wake up our fellow humans and to begin forcing real change.
	And we do that at the local level.
	And that's what we're going to talk to Senator Nice about when we come back.
	Real quickly, I want to thank DJ in Ohio.
	Thank you for the tip.
	He says, DK brings discerning words to our present times, addresses Truman's, how is it going to end?
	Keep looking to and exalting the Lord Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith.
	Amen to that. Well, we're going to be right back with Senator Nicely, who is going to, we're going to talk about things that are going to be happening that you can do something about at the local level, because the global agenda is going to be implemented at the local level, or it's going to be stopped at the local level.
	If you like the Eagles, on a dark desert highway, the cars, the You'll love the Classic Hits channel at APS Radio.
	Download our app or listen now at APSradio.com.
	Joining us now is Tennessee Senator Frank Nicely, and of course he's been on the show many times warning people about what is happening with CBDCs, trying to establish a gold depository and some other things.
	In case we have a financial problem which seems to be building on the horizon, how do we keep things going at the state level?
	And this is a problem that several states are faced with.
	This is not something that's just Tennessee, and it's also a solution that many states are trying.
	But we wanted to talk to him today about natural asset companies, and we talked about this about a month or so ago.
	It was up for approval with the SEC.
	It was up for approval with the SEC.
	The Newark Stock Exchange was part of the, one of the three talked to him today about natural asset companies, and we talked about this about a month or so ago.
	The Newark Stock Exchange was part of the – one of the three big sponsors for this.
	They pulled out at the last minute, and we'll talk a little bit about why that happened.
	But I said at the time, I think this thing is going to come back, and it looks like they were perhaps laying some foundation for how they were going to take over private and public land, and that is now being passed around in a lot of different states.
	And so you're going to see this type of bill very much like we saw CBDC legislation via the UCC, the Uniform Commercial Code legislation in all these different states.
	We're seeing this type of legislation that may be in your state as well, even if you're We're going to talk about some of the specifics in Tennessee, but also how you can identify this in other states.
	So joining us now is Senator Frank Nicely.
	Thank you for joining us, sir. Anytime, Dave.
	It's always a pleasure. It was very surprising to see this thing disappear abruptly.
	It looked like it was going to go through.
	They quietly put it in back in 2021.
	And then there was some pushback from some organizations.
	And so they delayed the SEC approval.
	But it wasn't the SEC not approving it.
	The New York Stock Exchange pulled out.
	What do you know about that and what happened with that?
	Well, the word on the street is that the New York Stock Exchange is owned by an international group.
	I see three initials.
	I can't remember. IEG, maybe?
	Is that because that was one of the groups?
	Yeah, that owns a New York Stock Exchange.
	But the couple that owns that, the guy used to be a U.S. Senator.
	And he and his wife were big hunters.
	And at the last minute, he realized that he was not going to be able to hunt on any of this land.
	Yeah. We're good to go.
	They want to control 50% of the land by 2050.
	And so, how do you control the land?
	Well, I don't know how they did in Europe, but somehow in Europe and Netherlands and France, they got control of the land.
	I don't know the mechanism they used over there, but the farmers over there are riding it, plowing up roads, burning buildings all across Europe.
	The mainstream press won't credit.
	We've got to go to TikTok to find out how bad it is, but evidently the farmers over there about had it.
	You know, they're sending all that money to Ukraine, but they're cutting their diesel fuel, and they're restricting how much nitrogen they can use per acre, and, you know, they're telling me they can't have cattle on the land because of climate change, which is all ridiculous.
	I mean, cattle will save the world, not destroy the world.
	Cattle are very beneficial to the land, the topsoil, the microorganism, the microbiome in the soil.
	It's all improved by cattle.
	The hoof action restores the prairies on the side, where they fenced off the prairie outrest to keep the buffalo and the cattle off.
	It all died. It takes that hoof action to keep the prairie alive.
	Yes. But the United Nations, they've been trying for years to do this.
	And the first time, 20-something years ago, a coal miner told me about it.
	He said, Frank, they're trying to turn Middle Tennessee up through Kentucky and Virginia into wildlands.
	They're called the Wildlands Project.
	Wildlands are lands that the United Nations, they don't want any human footprint, only animals.
	And then they'll have these corridors, you know, for a while everybody talks about corridors, where these animals could get in this corridor and go to another wildlands.
	And it all sounded crazy to me, but I did remember it.
	And then years, a few years later, I had a guy by the name of Henry Lamb.
	He was the smartest man I ever saw on the United Nations and what they're really trying to do.
	I was chairman of the Ag Committee in the House, invited him to come in and tell us.
	And he said at the time, he basically told us what the plan was.
	But it was so new and crazy, we didn't really know how to even think about it.
	But I do remember him saying that the only thing worse than you having your land taken by the government, confiscated and, you know, condemned.
	The only thing worse than that is to go into a partnership on a conservation easement.
	He said, don't ever sell a conservation easement.
	Well, now we're beginning to realize why.
	See, they changed the wording and the Farm Bill regarding conservation easement.
	It used to be about stopping erosion and helping production.
	Now it's about climate change.
	It's all about climate change.
	So, the Governor's Bill, I don't know if...
	I'd like to think the governor doesn't even realize what these fields do because I'd feel better about him if he didn't really understand it.
	Let's talk about this. There's two different bills.
	So there's two bills in the Senate.
	There's two bills in the House here in Tennessee.
	Both of them have been brought by the governor, so they're being brought forward by the leadership in both houses.
	And so that's a lot of prestige and pressure put on your fellow lawmakers there.
	You've got something that's coming from the governor and pushed by the leader in their legislative body.
	And there's two bills in the Senate and two bills in the House because one of them It is about public lands, and the other one is about private lands.
	And you began to talk about the private lands of the conservation easements, and I want to get back to that.
	But let's begin by talking a little bit about what these bills would do in terms of public lands.
	Well, Senate Bill 2069 is relative to the management of state forests.
	And that's the one that would turn over the management of all the state forests over to these NACs.
	Mm-hmm. These would have control of all of our national parks or national forests or Bureau of Land Management and all the national stuff.
	This would facilitate turning over our state forests and state parks over to be managed by the high bidder on Wall Street when these NACs come back.
	And they will. They'll be back.
	They'll get over to the high bidder.
	And so they securitize this stuff in the same way.
	They always come up with these new scams and get these things for when anybody takes a look at it, like they did the securitized mortgages back in the early 2000s that blew up in the mid-2000s.
	And so this is a way, as we talked about before when this was up, the natural asset companies is a way for them to...
	money off of global carbon taxes, but it also gives them control over the land, and by doing that they can shut this all down as the UN has been planning to do for quite some time, as you just pointed out, right?
	Yeah, you did a great job explaining it.
	The other bill, Senate Bill 2099, is the one that deals with the private land.
	I guess what we've got to do, David, is we've just got to make sure these landowners, and I've seen it time after time.
	I've had a family member put their land in a conservation season with me telling them not to, but they believe that it's going to be protected forever and be able to farm it forever.
	In reality, it doesn't stop the county from coming in and condemning your farm and use it for a landfill or an industrial park or anything that they can condemn it for, for the common good, they can condemn it and use it.
	It's a lopsided contract.
	But now, they'll give them some tax credits.
	But most farmers don't make enough money to take advantage of the tax credits.
	So these tax credits, you can sell them, and you can sell them to a rich Bill Gates or somebody who had a lot of money.
	They'll pay you maybe 50 cents on the dollar, maybe 25 cents on the dollar for these tax credits.
	And then they can bounce these tax credits against profits that are They're making another business.
	And that's the way of letting the taxpayers in America fund rich people to actually bind rights to your land.
	It's kind of circular but sinister.
	Yeah, and then of course we've got these other projects, you know, going back to the Connecticut case quite some time ago.
	You had land that was condemned under eminent domain for the use of a corporation.
	Then we saw that being done for a foreign corporation.
	Even though I agree with the oil pipelines, I wasn't happy with the way they were doing it with eminent domain.
	They gave the power to a corporation.
	Trans-Canada, which is a Canadian corporation, to condemn American farmland that had been in the family's many cases for centuries.
	Now they're doing it again.
	Summit is a corporation and seems to have ties to Republicans.
	Trump has had the CEO there many times, and then, of course, they want to pump We're good to go.
	Taking over the use of the land, eminent domain, but this allows them to make a tremendous amount of money and to exert control without going through this eminent domain process because that at least gets attention.
	This is kind of a subversive way, the way I see it, to do this with kind of an investment scheme and still have control of this without really taking possession of it, in a sense, isn't it?
	Yeah, it is. And the landowner will still get to pay taxes.
	They may raise cattle.
	They may say, well, these cattle, you know, these batches, it's methane, too much methane.
	We're going to have to cut. You can't raise cattle any longer.
	That's what they're telling them in the Netherlands.
	You know, they say you can't raise cattle because of climate change.
	There you go back to the...
	The language in the Farm Bill, the new Farm Bill, instead of being in for stop erosion and help with production, it's all about climate change is the new language in the Farm Bill.
	So it's all sinister.
	But the globalists, they move so slow and they're so patient.
	And they've got this thing planned out for decades.
	And it's hard for the average person to...
	Really grasp how sinister and slow moving this whole issue is.
	You know, it's like John Kerry, you know.
	He said the American farmer needs to go extinct.
	They want us to eat bugs.
	They call it, what do they call it?
	There's a word, you look on the ingredients.
	K-E-C-E-R, I can't remember what it is.
	Well, think of something. It is like they had, you know, the Alaskan king crab.
	They used to be called spider crabs or something like that.
	People don't want to eat that.
	But now they're going to give us probably real spiders and crabs.
	I don't know. And crickets.
	I'll tell you what. There's all kinds of research.
	They say the ectoskeleton on these crickets are really hard on our joints, especially the old people's joints.
	So I don't need anything else that's been hard on my joints.
	Well, when we look at this, you pointed out that this is being put forward in a lot of different states.
	The change to UCC's Uniform Commercial Code to prohibit cryptocurrency specifically and to specifically accept a CBDC, Central Bank Digital Currency, we first heard about that.
	Christy Noem talked about it in South Dakota and said, I vetoed this.
	And then the next thing we saw was DeSantis said that he not only vetoed it, but he went the other way.
	He said, we're going to prohibit CBDC, but we're going to accept cryptocurrency.
	He said that cryptocurrency will be acceptable in the uniform commercial code as payment.
	And so, this bill, this type of bill, has been sent out for the CBDC to a lot of different states.
	This has as well.
	How do people identify this?
	You know, that scheme was to change the UCC code.
	If somebody is looking for this, and we'll give people, let's say, the Senate bill, you told me, is $2.
	Those are the Senate bills in Tennessee.
	But for people that are outside of Tennessee, how do they identify this scheme?
	Because they're running this through multiple states.
	What would they look for in terms of a change in a bill?
	How is it inserted in there?
	For what kind of purported purpose?
	Tennessee, I mean, Kansas, they're going up in Kansas.
	In Kansas, it's House Bill 2541.
	And Texas, it was House Bill 3165, But it was killed in the Texas Senate.
	That's good. That's good.
	And they withdrew the bill.
	So it's killed in Texas.
	Still working on it in Kansas.
	We're working on it here.
	We've got a UCC bill that's 75 pages long.
	The sponsor can't really tell you what it does.
	It can't tell you why we need it.
	So... I'm going to vote against it.
	I mean, we can't take a chance on this.
	You know, in order to have central bank digital currency, they've got to get rid of cryptocurrencies.
	Right. They've got to get rid of those guys.
	So, it's so sinister.
	And in Washington, we can get nothing out of Washington now.
	So, the whole burden is on the states to try to blow this stuff down.
	Luckily, we've got some good states and good governors like Christy Knoll.
	I watched her all the way through.
	I would love for her to be vice president.
	She never wavered through the COVID. She just seemed to know right off the bat what was good, what was right, and didn't waver.
	And after all these years in politics, I pay attention to things.
	That's right. You've got to watch what they do and know what they say.
	And so we got this UCC bill that is done and the parallel to it is kind of this state-level NAC. Even though that has temporarily been put on hold, they're going to go back and rebrand it and make some minor tweaks. And of course we know that that'll be back because it is the perfect way for, you know, the NACs, once they put it on a stock exchange, the billionaires can Any foreign country can invest in it.
	So it is a way to take away control of the land and monetize that, monetize the carbon taxes.
	It's a perfect vehicle, so we know that's going to be back.
	Now, in terms of the state-level stuff, as it manifests itself for both public and private lands, what type of things would people be looking for if they're trying to find out if this bill is happening in their state?
	What is the cover story for it, or the way they label it?
	Well... One of the headlines here on this is Acquisition and Administration of Agriculture Real Estate Interest.
	Okay. That's the headline.
	Okay. So it'd be something like that because they do use that same type of, you know, the language.
	It's almost like, you know, they get together and they do at some of these exchange councils and stuff.
	They will give them some legislation and say, here, put your name on it and hand it to them.
	Sign it and hand in this legislation.
	And that's how they get the UCC legislation out to 25 different states at a time.
	So I'm sure this type of thing is happening as well at the state level to implement this natural asset company type of scheme, right?
	Yeah, it's, like I say, these globalists, they never give up.
	They just keep pushing. They're patient.
	If they don't get it this year, we'll get it next year.
	It may have to wait a generation.
	We'll finally get it. And the goal is, you know, the club of Rome, you know, openly state, they want to reduce the population from 7 billion down to half a billion.
	And I apologize, they don't stutter.
	I mean, when people tell you what they're trying to do, you probably don't believe them.
	That's right. That's right.
	And we know what they want to do.
	The problem is that they're still doing it surreptitiously, right?
	Their goals are out there in front of everybody.
	But they have these things.
	Again, this natural asset company thing was kind of under the radar for a full two years.
	And then it was a group that you told me about, actually, the AmericanStewards.us.
	They reported on it about two years after it was introduced.
	They had an article called Monetizing the Air We Breathe.
	And that's a good way to understand this because they're going to monetize everything.
	The air that we breathe, the water we drink, the food that we eat, everything is going to be controlled by them.
	We will own nothing. And so they're creating these financial structures, doing it at the Wall Street level, doing it at the state level, and as you pointed out, our best chance of, we got lucky, I guess, temporarily at the stock market level, but they're going to come back with that, and our best chance of stopping this stuff is when it comes in at the state level, Susan.
	Well, I tell people, if America is saved, the state's going to have to do it.
	I mean, Washington's paralyzed.
	It just no longer functions.
	My congressman, Tim Burchett, when he speaks to the Lincoln Day dinner, when you leave, it's like leaving a funeral.
	I mean, it's so sad what he talks about.
	That's right. He can't do anything done.
	And I don't know.
	It's... We can do some good work at the state level, but we need people calling us.
	And here again, if you're an old couple and you want to put your land in a...
	A lot of young people buy this land and put their conservation easement on it, especially if they've got a profitable business on the side.
	Mm-hmm. Say you have a business over here that's very profitable, then you can buy a piece of farmland for $4,000 and you get $2,000 worth of tax credits and you can bounce that off your profit over here.
	A farmer couldn't do that because he doesn't have the profit.
	But if you've got a rich company over here that's making lots of money, you can bounce that 2,000 tax credits against your profits from another company.
	So you actually bought the land for $2,000.
	So it's a way for taxpayers to help rich people buy more land.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I imagine a lot of that is going on.
	Yeah. He'll put it under.
	And, of course, I'm sure he's right in on all this.
	He can buy that farmland and then get a conservation easing on it and then bounce those tax credits against his huge profits.
	And so he's actually buying land by half price.
	Yeah. Oh, yeah. Absolutely.
	And then he can... Then he can take it off limits to farming and get people to switch over to his other thing that he got in on the ground floor to sell us bugs in some form or the other.
	It truly is amazing how these guys have laid this stuff out.
	And the key thing is for people to understand that, as you pointed out, one of the key things is for them to understand really what is happening with the conservation easements.
	Many times they don't understand what that is.
	They might be doing it even to try to think that this is going to preserve the farm forever and keep this as farmland rather than seeing it lost to development so they could pass that down to future generations.
	I think David is in Texas, they don't have zoning, but they have a lot of deed restrictions.
	If you want to leave your farm to your children and grandchildren, you put a deed restriction on there. No liquor stores, no subdivision, do whatever you want to do with deed restrictions.
	You don't have to get tangled up with this third party that can sell the management rights to your farm. Another party can change that three or four times and then sooner or later the high bidder can tell you you can't raise cattle.
	Mm-hmm.
	That these farmers, these landowners, they know what they're getting into.
	We need to get a good real estate attorney that understands and realizes that there is a global movement to do this.
	I mean, until you realize that Mr.
	Global is trying to take over the whole world, none of this makes sense.
	That's right. But when you realize that the globalists control Washington, you know, they...
	The Bushes are all big globalists.
	I mean, they're all globalists.
	And you get somebody that comes along that's not a globalist, like Tim Birch or somebody, and they demonize them.
	I mean, it's Well, I've interviewed, I can't remember his name.
	I was trying to think of his name, but he produces the Tuttle Twin books, and he's out in Utah.
	And he said he's been involved in politics quite a bit.
	He helped to get Mike Lee elected as senator, but he goes, you know, he says, I don't disagree with him on stuff.
	I helped to get him elected. But he really can't get anything done in Washington because, as you point out, it's so broken.
	He said, we found that we could do far more at the state level.
	So he created a think tank, Libertas, and they've gotten, you know, a couple hundred bills passed through there to help enhance freedom and to control the growth of government.
	And I think that really is the right path.
	We need to focus on the state level, local level.
	I think people could clearly see that, as I say, on a daily basis.
	You could see how that worked out in 2020.
	When everybody was locking down, local government could either make it a lot better for you or they could make it a lot worse.
	So people need to pay attention to what's going on at the local level.
	But everybody's just totally obsessed with the presidency where they're going to have the least amount of influence at all, both as a voter and certainly in terms of follow-up.
	It's important to make connections to the state and to local politicians to understand what is happening there.
	Well, the state has one thing going for us that the feds can't change.
	They can't make us spend money.
	They can pass laws, but we don't have to enforce them.
	And we have done that in the past.
	Now, there's a lot of talk about notification.
	I fully believe that notification is legal.
	Any action that is unconstitutional can be notified.
	We can't The states can't notify things that are constitutional, but the feds do plenty of things that are constitutional, and we can notify those.
	That's right. And all it takes is backbone, and like I say, they can't make us spend money.
	They can't make us enforce the laws, and that's powerful.
	typically do it with bribery and blackmailing it was it but Halsey that introduced the bill say that we're gonna you know not be on the hook to taking a lot of this money from the Department of Education or other things like that to control what we do in schools because that's a key way that they always control people what did he introduce a bill to stop that I believe it was him maybe with somebody else but towards that idea of a
	They did a study down here, and what they found was that we've got more problems with our State Department of Education than we do the fakers.
	We need to clean up our own house first.
	No, that's not good.
	We know how bad the feds are.
	If the state is worse than that, that's not a good thing at all.
	of their money from the feds and I said yes but the feds get all their money from the states.
	They get all their money from us, the income tax and road tax and everything.
	Even on our gas tax we send them 100 million more than we get back.
	Now a lot of liberals they say, oh Tennessee's a receiver state.
	I said, well, you know, I don't believe that.
	I think we're about the middle of the pack.
	I think we send in about as much as we get back.
	There are states that, you know, I think I lie to you, for every dollar they send in on road tax, they get $5 back.
	You know, we send $100 million more than we get back.
	We send the Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of Transportation, $100 million, roughly.
	I mean, that was just three years ago.
	We're roughly $100 million more than we get back from them.
	So we can opt out of the Federal Road Program.
	We can set our own speed limits.
	We can do a lot of different things.
	But like I say, it takes leadership and backbone.
	And I tell people, Washington's not held back by a lack of brains.
	They know they're sorry and they know they're doing wrong.
	It's backbone is what they don't have.
	They got plenty of brains.
	What they need is backbone. Well, you know, when you're talking about nullification, it's not even a theory.
	It was done extensively.
	If you look at marijuana laws, for example, that was nullification.
	And Jeff Sessions, as much as, and, you know, regardless of what you think about marijuana, I refer to that all the time.
	So people think I support the use of marijuana.
	I don't. But what I'm saying is, is that from a legal standpoint, what we saw was when the states nullified it, said, you're not going to enforce that here.
	Jeff Sessions, as desperately as he wanted to do that, I mean, they had to have the 18th Amendment to prohibit alcohol.
	They didn't have any constitutional authority to prohibit anything.
	And when they called his bluff on it, he didn't do anything.
	And that's what you're talking about, calling their bluff, talking about non-commandeering, the fact that they can't commandeer state resources to enforce their laws, and the fact that, you know, it just isn't going to happen in the state if we get control.
	That's why it is so important for people to pay attention to what's going on in the state.
	It is, and Governor DeSantis has done a great job in Florida.
	He says all the right things, but he just doesn't catch on.
	There's something politicians have to have.
	It's a trait.
	There's no word for it in English language.
	There might be one in France. I don't know, but there's something.
	There's a word. I can't pull the word out of there.
	That you've got to have.
	And it's hard.
	I can't describe it.
	But he says all the right things.
	If someone else read his speeches, they would love it.
	But sometimes it's not catching on.
	And... He would have made a good vice president.
	At one point, I was hoping that he could get together with Trump and we'd have Trump for four years and just satisfy him.
	I don't know who he's going to get for vice president.
	I think that's a very Well, if you go back and you look at people and their ability to make speeches, you know, we would have never had a President Jefferson in today's market, that's for sure. Everybody talked about how he's great at writing stuff and, you know, he's a great thinker, but everybody hated his speeches.
	They said it was almost effeminate.
	And they said Washington was not a great speaker.
	The first time he was called on to speak when he was in legislation in Virginia, he panicked and ran out of the room.
	Must have been his teeth. I don't know.
	Maybe that made him self-conscious.
	I've seen some of his false teeth.
	They were primitive.
	Well, that's the thing. Back in that time, people knew who they were.
	Now we only know people from a distance.
	We only know We know them through their media image, and that is something very easy to manipulate.
	But, you know, talking about the threats to farms and how this is metastasizing, and of course, it's much further along in the Netherlands.
	They're, as you talked about, they're banning nitrogen, banning fertilizer.
	I mean, these people are smuggling fertilizer, and they're treating it like it's fentanyl or something, you know, coming into the Netherlands.
	And then you've got people like Bill Gates, who, you know, there's something fishy about When they say that CO2 has to be controlled to the extent that you're going to...
	I have to cut down trees and bury them.
	That's the most absurd thing I've ever seen.
	They were given tax credits for growing trees.
	They're a giant sink of CO2. I don't think CO2 is a problem.
	You know, it's necessary for plants to grow.
	But they want to cut down the CO2. They want to, you know, use geoengineering to take out sunlight and everything.
	These people are absolutely crazy.
	There doesn't seem to be anything that they're not capable of trying to do.
	And so what other things have we seen here and we need to be on the lookout for at the state level in terms of some of these things attacking farming, attacking the ability to farm?
	Well, you mentioned, maybe not exactly on that, but you mentioned geoengineering.
	And we have a bill this year, and of course, the people who are pushing the bill, they want us just to outlaw it.
	I say, well, in politics, you've got to consider what's doable.
	So what I'm pushing...
	Just say, if you're going to spray something in our Department of Environment, Tennessee T-DEC, Tennessee Department of Environment Conservation, we need to know what it is and how much you spray it.
	I mean, that's the first step.
	What is it? Might be good.
	We may say a little more of it.
	We don't know. But we need to say, what is it and how much are you spraying?
	And anytime you're spraying, you know, if you've got a factory out here, if you're making tires, and anything that goes into the air, they have to report that to Mm-hmm.
	Mm-hmm.
	Now then, they said, oh, they're putting these ions in the sky to make their satellites communicate with your cell phone better so they can track you better.
	It's to enhance our communications with the satellites.
	So, I don't know what it is.
	I mean, I'm just telling you what I hear, but...
	We do know they're spraying something.
	You don't have contrails until you're up about 28,000 feet.
	All these things are lower than that.
	So we know they're spraying something.
	And I think the first step was just to try to find out what is it and how much.
	That's good. Yeah, there was something done by that in New Hampshire as well.
	And again, that is the beginning, you know, to say, well, tell us what you're doing, and then we'll talk about that.
	I think that's very wise, and I'm glad that that's coming up in Tennessee as well.
	I have one thing I want to talk about.
	You know, up until the year I was born, 1947, we had a state property tax.
	No sales tax, but a property tax.
	And you paid your property tax to the county, and then you sent the county your state tax, and the county sent it on to the state.
	In 1947, they passed the sales tax.
	They said, if you'll let us have a sales tax, we'll do away with the property tax.
	So they rolled the property tax back to zero, but they didn't do away with it.
	I'll introduce the resolution.
	It's already passed in the House.
	And what it would say is that we'd have to pass it with a simple majority this year.
	Then next year, we'd have to have a two-thirds majority.
	Then we'd put it on about it with the governor, and it would have to get a majority of the people to vote for the governor.
	with state constitution to outlaw a state property tax.
	Good.
	So that's a big push this year.
	We got several big things going on.
	We got our gold and silver.
	We're trying to put some of our rainy day funds instead of storing it in stocks and bonds with State Street, put it over in gold and silver and store it in Texas till we get our own depository.
	Gold and silver is one of the, not the only thing you ever buy.
	It's hope it doesn't go up. Because if it goes up, everything else you've got has gone down.
	So it's kind of like a new policy.
	That's right. Yeah, it keeps its value.
	We talk about that many times.
	We talk about, you know, how much gold did it take for somebody to get a custom-made suit, you know, 150 years ago or something like that.
	It's still about the same.
	It's amazing how it's been a store of value at a dollar.
	That's right. Well, those are all good examples, and it's one of the reasons why I like to have you on.
	And to get people to understand that Washington is dysfunctional.
	It's like trying to push on a rope to get anything done.
	There's too much big money and special interests have taken it over.
	Can't really get anything done there.
	But there still is a possibility, at least, to get something done at the state level.
	You're a very good example of that, Senator Nicely, and so I really do appreciate the work that you do and the warnings that you give to people.
	Everybody needs to be on the lookout for these types of sister bills to the natural asset company idea, things that are being pushed through at the state level so they can take control of state lands as they wish to do with all the federal parks and other things like that.
	So it's very important that people keep their eyes open and their ears open to what's going on.
	It's so sanitary. It's like the derivatives back in the late 80s, like when they started the derivatives.
	I can't explain to my grandkids what they are, but for every trillion dollars worth of real assets, they 100 trillion ballots got it.
	And who knows when it's going to all come crashing down.
	By putting those things together, they hide stuff as well.
	When you've got an ETF for gold or silver, do they really have the gold and silver in those vaults in Shanghai?
	And when you look at these real estate derivatives, we can't separate any particular property.
	You just mix them all together in a blender, essentially.
	And so a big part of this is creating confusion and ambiguity about what is really there and what it's attached to.
	And that's what we're seeing in these NACs as well as these types of structures to try to surreptitiously and quietly take over control through financial instruments of the land because they want all of the land under their control and they want to essentially own everything.
	This is a way of taking ownership away in a very sneaky way.
	If someone bought the management rights, the great spoke about National Park, what could they do that would make it I mean, the trees are going to do what they're going to do.
	Yeah, that's right. And so the whole thing is a shell game.
	Yeah. And it's a way of getting us to pay them for something that we shouldn't have to pay them for.
	You know, I've always said this about the carbon taxes.
	I said, so we're going to pay, carbon taxes are going to pay like an indulgence, you know, like some kind of religious indulgence.
	We're going to pay to sin.
	We're going to pay to use energy.
	Who does that money go to?
	Well, how are they entitled to have that money?
	Oh, well, they're going to do good things with it, like they're going to plant trees.
	Now I guess they're going to cut trees down and bury them.
	But, you know, it's going to be whatever the approved activity is, which is all stuff that doesn't make any sense.
	It's not necessary. The whole thing is a show game.
	Anybody that thinks cutting trees down and bury them is a good idea.
	I mean, they don't understand the carbon cycle.
	But I've always said this CO2 they use out there.
	There's a question out there.
	They will be selling all that for this fracking.
	Some of these fracking, depending on what shells you're in, like our shell here in East Tennessee, they tell me that the best thing to Maybe it's just a giant plot by Dr.
	Pepper to make more carbonated drinks.
	That's right. We're going to take over the world of carbonated drinks.
	Senator Nicey, it's always great talking to you.
	Thank you so much for warning us about this.
	And if people want to contact their representatives here in Tennessee, that's Senate Bill 2099 and 2069.
	One of them is about the public lands, and the other one's about the private lands.
	Yes, go ahead. Let me give one shout out to American Stewards of Liberty.
	Yes. They're out of Texas, and they're on the front line of all this, and American Stewards of Liberty, and I thank you.
	Keep up to them. They'll probably keep you posted.
	Yes. I need to contact them and get them on as well.
	They were the ones who started sounding the alarm to this NAC stuff about a year and a half ago, so that's good.
	Well, thank you very much. Thank you.
	Have a good day. Thank you, Senator Nicely.
	Thank you very much. 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.

▲