Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 26, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:09:32

The David Knight Show -12/26/2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Talking about climate change, he is a geologist with more than 35 years of experience researching and studying various aspects of the Earth's processes.
	He was recently accepted as an expert reviewer for the UN IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and I'll have to ask him about that.
	Maybe he is somebody kind of like Scott Atlas on the COVID team.
	The lone dissenter.
	But his science and fact-based approach exposes many of the alarmist myths concerning our changing climate.
	Gregory is a strong proponent of the scientific process and believes that policy decisions should be driven by science, by facts, by data, not by a political agenda.
	The book that he has published is A Very Convenient Warming, How Modest Warming and More CO2 Are Benefiting Humanity.
	Great to have you on.
	Thank you for joining us, Gregory Wrightstone.
	Thank you so much, David.
	Actually, for the new book, my birthday was last week, and I woke up on my birthday and went to the computer, and lo and behold, a very convenient warming, my newest book was at number one bestseller on Amazon.
	Wow!
	What a birthday gift!
	I couldn't have asked for anything better.
	That's great!
	My first book was a regular there.
	So, we're trying to get the word out.
	I'm also Executive Director of the CO2 Coalition, which is the preeminent scientific organization of skeptical scientists.
	We have physicists, I'm a geologist, energy experts and the like, and they all believe, as I do, that CO2 is beneficial by a lot.
	It's hugely beneficial, and that there is no climate crisis, and we should celebrate how Earth's ecosystems are thriving and prospering.
	Well, I agree 100% with that.
	And yeah, this stuff about carbon sequestration is just the most astounding thing I have ever seen.
	But again, that website is co2coalition.org, and we'll talk a little bit more about that as well.
	But what we're seeing in the news, and you've experienced a little bit of this as well, they have all seized upon these hurricanes as climate change.
	Tell us a little bit about what you've been going through there in Florida.
	You're in Florida.
	Well, I've been pointing out, I use science facts and data to support my stances and my narrative, and it flies in the face of most of what you're hearing on the media, mainstream media.
	And in hurricanes, I've been tested.
	My beliefs that climate change isn't driving hurricanes have been tested in the last two weeks, but I still came through and I'm relying on my scientific work.
	To dispute a man-made driven climate crisis.
	I my home is a Apollo Beach about 12 miles south of Tampa and if you recall a day and a half or two days before landfall I was at a cat 5 and man my home was right in the crosshairs And we looked even some of the seasoned old salts in the area They looked at it, and they said man.
	We're bailing out.
	We've never left before it looked bad bad and because it was going to hit it but our experts in co2 coalition were saying no no no no no it's going to land as a category two maybe category three this is what's going to happen and they also predicted that there would be no instead of a storm surge at tampa they told me no we saw it at and and when the end struck this would be about to be similar there will actually be a negative surge
	in other words it would suck water out of the bay and that's exactly what they found.
	So, it made… We bailed out… We'd been hit the week before by Helene.
	We escaped any flooding, but the area around us was hit pretty hard.
	Our bookkeeper's home was devastated.
	We actually did a GoFundMe campaign for her and raised $33,000 in two days.
	And what a blessing that was to her.
	She says, in the darkest time of my life, You guys came through and you're brightening and making this so much more bearable.
	We can't help everybody, but we helped her.
	We made what seemed to be a reasonable decision, instead of fleeing north, to go southeast to the other side of the state.
	And we went to Vero Beach, a condo of a friend, and if you may recall, we couldn't have chosen a worse place to evacuate to in the United States, or probably the world, because this huge super storm cell at about 4 p.m.
	came through our area.
	It was giant, it was gnarly, and it was scary, and the tornadoes hit.
	And the tornado near us went right up along Highway A1A.
	If you're a Jimmy Buffett fan, you know Highway A1A.
	And it's right up about two miles swath of that.
	It actually hit the condo that was next, part of our building was next to us, and it was I was doing a live video interview with another host at the time, and there's like alarms going off, lightning, lights flashing.
	He said, this is great!
	I mean, you'll never have another interview like that, you know, with his guest.
	In the middle of being hit by a tornado and a hurricane.
	But bear in mind, that tornado hit at 4.30.
	The landfall didn't occur until 8.30, four hours later.
	So this preceded that.
	But again, I took a look in our newsletter for the CO2 Coalition.
	Go to co2coalition.org to subscribe.
	You'll love it.
	I give some more detail.
	We're having a newsletter go out today about my experience.
	We also have information.
	I took a look at landfalling hurricanes, and that's the best measure.
	If you want to look at long-term hurricane information, landfalling hurricanes for the United States are the best, because we can take that confidently.
	We know every single hurricane that's made landfall in the United States going back to at least 1850, and that's because they're so big you can't miss it.
	Right?
	We know.
	It's made landfall.
	It's been recorded.
	And so if we look at landfall in hurricanes, we find in the United States there have been in decline.
	I looked at Florida landfall in hurricanes and they've also been in decline.
	So that's a pretty good metric.
	The other thing they're saying is that Hurricane intensity is increasing.
	That's not borne out by the evidence.
	If you look at the globally accumulated cyclone energy that Ryan Maui and the NOAA do, that's basically an estimate of the intensity of the hurricanes, which translates to wind speed, and it's just been pretty flat.
	You could probably argue there's been a slight decline, but there's definitely been not a significant trend either up or down.
	Christopher Landsea, and what a great name for, he's a NOAA hurricane expert, or at least he used, what a great name for a hurricane expert.
	Christopher Landsea is almost as good as a geologist with a last name of Wrightstone, isn't he?
	That's right, yeah.
	So, Christopher Lansing, one of his last, he left, he told the truth about hurricanes.
	His last analysis said, well, you know, maybe hurricane intensity is increasing by maybe 1%.
	Okay, let me ask you, David, if you were standing on Siesta Key, could you tell the difference between 102 and 103 miles per hour?
	No, I don't think so.
	Okay, let's say he's right.
	It's so little that it's meaningless.
	Yeah, and can they measure that?
	But you see this panic everywhere.
	In the UK, the Express, this one person says, well, maybe I slept through this, but the headlines, storm tracker map.
	Shows a path of Hurricane Kirk with a monster 75 mile an hour gales to batter Britain and it is just filled with over-the-top bombastic alarmism.
	It's horrific.
	The UK is bracing for this.
	It's going to be brutal.
	A shocking weather forecast sweeping in with widespread destruction.
	Just panic, panic, panic everywhere.
	And he says why it didn't even notice that if it came.
	And that's what we're seeing, we're seeing that kind of hype.
	And they don't really, as you point out, a 1% difference.
	Can they even measure that?
	As you said, you can't feel it.
	Can they really accurately measure that and record it, comparing it to the types of measurements that they had a century ago?
	Were they accurate, even if they're accurate today?
	So we don't know that, right?
	Yeah, and it's all about creating a climate of fear.
	They have to create, two words I'm going to use here, fear and control.
	They need to establish a climate of fear.
	They need you and your viewers to say, Oh no, it's a climate catastrophe and it's our fault.
	Millions will die.
	There's a climate crisis.
	We'll have crop failure, pestilence and mass depopulation because of man-made global warming.
	So they have to establish this climate of fear because they're object.
	Is really what their proposals are, is to control every aspect of your life.
	That's right.
	They want to control how much water comes out of your shower, what kind of car you drive, how you heat your home, how cool you keep it in the summer, and how hot you warm it in the winter.
	We could go on and on and on.
	And what you eat, you know?
	I mean, all that.
	I mean, they're shutting down farms now.
	The EPA is going to start shutting down farms with this.
	It is absolutely amazing, and we understand that it's a, that's what the real purpose of all this stuff is.
	And they have a lot of different things that they throw out there, always with the same thing in mind.
	That's why I refer to it as MacGuffin.
	It doesn't really matter what the thing is, but it's about creating the fear so that you can bring in these controls, and it's always the same controls that you want to bring in.
	Those same people, aren't they so proud that we support choice?
	I support choice.
	Well, no, they don't.
	No.
	I would like to choose what kind of car to drive.
	I would like to choose what kind of dishwasher to buy.
	I'd like to choose all those things.
	And they don't want to give you that choice.
	That's right.
	Do they?
	It's fear and control.
	You fear and they want you.
	Why else would we voluntarily give up Yeah.
	our freedoms.
	Only if there truly is an existential threat to humanity, and it's just not there.
	And what we see, David, this new book, my first book was Inconvenient Facts.
	It's now sold almost 100,000 copies.
	In that book, we established pretty clearly that there is no climate crisis, but we've gone a step further in this new book and with the CO2 coalition, is not only is there not a climate crisis, but by almost every metric we look at, Earth's ecosystems are thriving and but by almost every metric we look at, Earth's ecosystems are thriving and prospering, and humanity is You have a Christian show here, and this really goes back to the heart of, you know,
	If we were going to have kill hundreds of millions of people, we should do something about it.
	But just the opposite is occurring.
	We're seeing huge benefits to humanity and their solutions, particularly in the developing world in India, Asia and Africa.
	They don't want to lift these people out of poverty by using affordable, abundant, reliable energy that can be derived from natural gas and coal.
	They want to keep them with their thumb down and don't let them prosper.
	And that's what they want to do to us as well.
	You now got the EPA is focused now on shutting down power plants.
	And of course, they've been shutting them down for a while now because, oh, well, can't have coal or whatever.
	But the EPA has come after them now with a vengeance with their emissions and so forth.
	And so as they shut down the grid and they need more power for the AI, so they're going to put these small nuclear reactors out there, but it's only going to be power for them, They're going to shut down affordable, reliable energy for us, and that really is the concern, and that really is the agenda, I think.
	That is, control and impoverish and austerity, that really is the way that they can control us is through poverty.
	It is.
	And you had two of the three words I used for electricity, what we should look for.
	It's affordable, reliable, and abundant.
	In other words, we can get a big bang for our buck.
	And that's what we get with nuclear as well.
	Nuclear, coal, natural gas.
	And again, since we are not going into a climate crisis that's driven by CO2, but rather CO2 is beneficial, there's no way we should be trying to do carbon capture or take the new carbon mitigation strategies.
	We're actually hurting ourselves.
	And the other thing that's really interesting, it's one of my pet, it's a section of the book, it's one of my favorite things to talk about, is the strong relationship between human history and climate history to find that it's completely opposite of what we're being told.
	We're being told, oh, we can't, we must fear the heat.
	The heat will cause terrible things.
	Well, look back over the last several thousand years to see what happened and find that, you know, we are in a warming trend, but it's been warming for more than 300 years.
	There were three other warming trends similar to what we're in right now, but all three were hotter, ended up warmer than what we are today.
	And all three were hugely beneficial and improvements we saw to the human condition during each one of those warm periods.
	Life was good.
	Food was bountiful.
	The great empires and civilizations rose up.
	The first of those was the Bronze Age.
	It was called the Minoan Warm Period.
	The first great civilizations rose up, the Assyrians, the Hittites, the Babylonians, the Harappan Empire in the Indus River Valley.
	All those great civilizations around the world rose up during a really, really warm time, and then it started getting cold.
	And really bad things happen in each one of the times when it started getting cold.
	And we see these cold periods are associated with famine, crop failure, pestilence, and mass depopulation.
	And so, That led to the Greek Dark Ages, and it really didn't get good until we got into the Roman Warm Period, the time of Christ.
	At that time, again, food was bountiful, life was good.
	North Africa was the breadbasket, you may not be aware, of the Roman army.
	It's not much of a breadbasket today.
	And so, it then, when it started getting cold again, there were a lot of reasons for the Roman Empire's fall.
	Cold was probably a contributing factor, and that led to what was called the Dark Ages, and then the Medieval Warm Period was again, Life was good, empires arose, food was bountiful, and then that led to the recent cooling period called the Little Ice Age.
	It was probably the coldest time of the last 10,000 years, and it was, again, maybe 50% of Iceland perished during that time.
	One-third of the population of the Earth perished during that time.
	And particularly Northern Europe, we have a lot of great records of just how terrible it was.
	Recall Valley Forge in George Washington.
	It was very cold.
	For example, not far from where I am right now is Mount Vernon.
	George, when they lived there, during this little ice age that was really cold, Martha liked to enjoy ice in her drinks in the summer, so George built an ice house.
	They dug in, and he would have his indentured servants and slaves go down in the winter, and it froze very, very thick ice every year.
	It doesn't do that.
	I mean, I think in the 80s, there was one winter where it did that.
	So, we can use historical data like that.
	People understand that and they'll go, oh yeah, if the Potomac River was freezing solid, nearly solid every winter, and it only happens once every 30 years now, well, it had to have been a lot colder then.
	And we can use that same historical data to show how warm it was during the medieval warm time period, the Roman warming period, and much more.
	But again, They would call me a science denier, but I would call them history deniers, because they're denying history shows conclusively that warm is much, much better than cold.
	We should welcome the warmth and fear the cold.
	And of course, it cycles through there, and especially if you've got a Roman toga, those drafts can get really bad, you know.
	There's a reason they wore togas.
	There's a reason they wore togas.
	Yeah, Washington caught a cold riding around and that was, well I don't know if that was what killed him, it might have been the bleeding and the mercury that they gave him, but that brought it all on.
	Talk a little bit about what happens, you know, because part of what we're seeing now We've had situations back in the middle of the 1800s, I forget the exact date, when Krakatoa happened.
	They had a little mini Ice Age at that point in time as well, because there was a lot of debris that was sent up by the volcano on land.
	Some people have talked about, and I forget where it was, in the South Pacific, it was recently, like last year or two years ago.
	Tonga Tonga.
	Yeah, that's it.
	A water volcano, and that puts up water vapor.
	That has a warming effect.
	If it's a land volcano, that has a cooling effect.
	We have so many natural processes that have amazing and direct influence.
	You know, we're talking about solar activity, or we're talking about volcanic activity.
	Talk a little bit about that.
	It's not all man-made and what's happening, right?
	Well, the increase in CO2 is man-made for the most part.
	The vast majority is from us using fossil fuels, but I'm okay with that.
	I'm okay with a large carbon footprint because what we're saying is CO2 is beneficial.
	We have a paper that I'm finalizing right now.
	It's actually a lengthy 92-page summary, but it's highly detailed science, and we use seven different lines of evidence To verify and conclude that the increase in CO2 of 50% since the Industrial Revolution is for man.
	There are some people out there saying it's not, but we're emitting huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, and if you do that, it's got to increase atmospheric CO2.
	And so, you know, we have that, and I I started rambling on and I forgot the original question you asked.
	I was talking about natural processes in terms of changing the climate and that type of thing.
	There's some false things out there that are being spread.
	One is that volcanoes provide huge amounts of CO2 and there's one report that Mount Pinatubo When it erupted, it put out more CO2 during the eruption than man's ever emitted.
	That's just categorically false, because we know how much CO2 was emitted by man that year.
	I think it was 1991.
	We also know pretty closely how much CO2 was put out by Pinatubo, and it turns out that that eruption put out two-tenths of The percent of the CO2 emitted that year, of man's CO2, so it's a small contribution.
	That gets a lot of play.
	They try and downplay our contribution to CO2.
	Well, what I was talking about was the ejection of material in the upper atmosphere, which would, you know, be a cooling thing.
	A lot of people think that volcanoes, two types of volcanoes, one's explosive, think Mount St.
	Helens, Pinatubo.
	The other type is called effusive volcanoes, which just kind of flows out.
	Think of Kilauea.
	We see that a lot.
	Some of the eruptions at Iceland, these are big, huge lava flows, and those tend to put out more CO2 than the explosive volcanoes.
	And some of these, there were a couple, two There were two huge lava flows that were effusive.
	One was called the Deccan Traps.
	The other was the Siberian Traps.
	These volcanoes flowed for millions of years and were emitting CO2 for millions of years and probably contribute a fair amount of CO2 to the atmosphere.
	These explosive volcanoes do not.
	And also, the explosive volcanoes, it's not the solids.
	You think, well, it's going to block out the sun.
	That falls out pretty quickly.
	It's the sulfates, the aerosols and the sulfates to get up into the stratosphere that last for three, four, five years.
	It has a cooling effect because what they're doing is the sun's reflecting off of those so it doesn't get to strike the earth and have that warming effect.
	And then we talk about the undersea volcano, the one that you mentioned, again, I can't remember the name, Tonga or something.
	Tonga, Tonga.
	Tonga, yeah, okay.
	Well, that one, you know, another greenhouse gas, of course, the big one, is water vapor.
	And if that increases the water vapor by significant percentages, that's going to also affect things.
	My point is that, you know, when you have solar activity, when you have something that is going to massively increase greenhouse gases like water vapor, you know, there's so many things that are natural out there, but they want to make it as everything is about man-made, right?
	Do you agree with that, or do you disagree with that?
	Let's be clear, since CO2 is a greenhouse gas, CO2 is increasing, so more CO2 has a contribution, has a warming effect on the atmosphere.
	It's just very small, very modest, and overwhelmed by those natural forces.
	So don't be a denier.
	Yes, CO2 has a warming effect, thankfully.
	But again, it's overwhelmed by these natural forces, and we see through time that CO2 increases and decreases do not control temperature.
	Just going back through Earth's history to the dawn of time, we don't see correlation there.
	And so we have to look at the science effects and the data, put it in a long perspective to figure that out.
	And, you know, your book title harkens back to Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth.
	Your book is a very convenient warming.
	And as part of his documentary, I guess we could laughingly refer to it as, but as part of his film, let's just say, It played a very big role.
	I remember that he had the projections of what was going to happen to temperature driven and following exactly CO2.
	As you point out, CO2 is going up and down.
	But that direct correlation that was there, the hockey stick from Michael Mann, as everybody talks about it, he had that blown up into something that was about 30 feet tall and he gets on it.
	Elevated platform to go up to exaggerate that.
	And that really has Michael Mann's correlation there of his hockey stick thing really hasn't played out, has it?
	Well, let's talk about Al Gore.
	He used 800.
	He used 800,000 or 400,000 years of CO2 versus temperature.
	Well, there is a really good correlation over the last several hundred thousand years, but it's not CO2 driving temperature.
	It's temperature-driving CO2 changes.
	And that's because the oceans are the great sink and source for CO2.
	A cold ocean absorbs more CO2.
	A warm ocean expels it.
	Just think about it.
	It's kind of contrary to what you might say.
	If you take a liter jar of ginger ale and take it out of the refrigerator and open it up, it just goes But take that liter jar of ginger ale and put it out on your picnic table, on your patio in the sun in August.
	Let it sit there for an hour and then go open it up.
	And man, it'll be like a volcano with that CO2 that's in the ginger ale that's being expelled because it's warm.
	And that's what we see.
	Warming oceans expel CO2.
	And so it warms first and then CO2 increases.
	And it's delayed by hundreds of years.
	But if you compress it all, which Al Gore did, his interpretation was just backwards of what it should have been.
	It's not CO2 driving temperature.
	It's temperature driving CO2.
	That's interesting.
	Yeah, I was involved with a group that tried to get the data from Michael Mann.
	He fought like a banshee and was able to win in court and not show the data, which had already, his conclusions had already been published, he'd collected it, he'd done the science at the University of Virginia, so he did it on the public dime, and he'd published his conclusions, and they'd been used to create public policy, and yet we could not pry that data from him.
	And you have to wonder, why?
	He's a piece of work.
	He's a nasty, brutish person and he's very litigious.
	Yes, we have to be careful what we say about Michael Mann because we know... I was quoting someone else there when I just called him nasty and brutish.
	That was a quote from Mark Stein.
	He lost in court to Michael Mann, got a $1 million judgment against him.
	But Mark Stein said that the hockey stick is a reconstruction of temperature using proxies with two problems, the proxies and the reconstruction.
	He said, other than that, you can take it to the bank.
	So what he did, he used just proxies are things we use for Temperature reconstruction, or CO2 reconstruction, back before historical records.
	And Michael Mann used some really, really horrifically bad proxies to reconstruct temperature.
	And like you say, according to him, we had a slowly declining temperature up until about the 20th century.
	And then, man, it just took off.
	The temperatures skyrocketed.
	And again, he based That and his reconstruction on just bad, bad, bad proxies, particularly triggering data in the southwest of the United States.
	He was, yeah, pick your starting and your ending points carefully there, don't you?
	But he was also involved in ClimateGate.
	And that's one of the reasons why he was a focus of the group that I was working with.
	Because, you know, he was, even though that was kind of focused in the UK at East Anglia University, he was involved back and forth with emails where they were talking about, We gotta hide the decline based on our models.
	And that's the other thing about this.
	How did these people get a pass?
	For making all these predictions, you were talking earlier about the scientists that were affiliated with the co2coalition.org and how they were pretty accurate in terms of what they thought would happen with the hurricane, even the sense that the storm surge was going to be negative because it was going to land somewhere else.
	And so, you know, we have those types of things, and if somebody can make a prediction and it comes true.
	But we have these grand predictions that are kind of like trying to predict the weather 50 years in advance.
	They keep making these predictions, and yet they never seem to be held accountable for making these false predictions with their models.
	Exactly!
	Go back to May of this year, and see what NOAA was predicting for this year's hurricane season.
	They were predicting one of the highest number of storms ever in record.
	No, it feels, particularly for me and my wife, that it's been a bad hurricane season, but we're actually under the average for the hurricanes.
	We may get to the very low end of what NOAA predicted, but they're never called on the carpet for that.
	Yeah, DeSantis made that case to a journalist and, you know, and I had talked about that.
	I said, you know, when you look at the hurricanes that hit Tampa, there was one in 1848, took exactly the path that they were predicting, but, you know, which this one did not take that path, but that was, they had one that had actually taken that path in 1848.
	And then in North Carolina, in Asheville in 1921, they also had a hurricane that went up there and caused just about the kind of same level of destruction in terms of water accumulation and that type of thing.
	I hesitate to use the word flood, because if you say flood, the insurance companies won't pay them anything.
	So we have to come up with some other name for what happened.
	It's rain.
	And so it had that kind of rain.
	But, you know, we've seen this type of stuff, so it's not unprecedented.
	And, you know, these were situations that happened.
	There wasn't really any man-made industry that was doing that 100 years ago, 150 years ago.
	So, you know, that is the background.
	But no matter what they say, they're never held accountable to it.
	And no matter how dire and false their predictions are, it just keeps going.
	It must be an interesting thing to work with the UN IPCC because of that.
	Tell us a little bit about that.
	Well, I actually got in on that at the very end, and there was very little I could contribute or do at that time.
	I had signed up, was accepted, And then I joined the CO2 coalition as executive director, and I've been just, there was just, you got to set your priorities.
	And this is leading this group of eminent scientists.
	We just had John Clauser join us on our board.
	He's the 2022 Nobel laureate in physics.
	We've got Patrick Moore on our board, who's the co-founder of Greenpeace.
	He's wonderful.
	And Dr. William Happler, emeritus professor of physics from Princeton.
	And he was the inventor of the Soviet, yes Soviet, sodium guide star laser, developed during the Star Wars under Reagan.
	And if you remember SDI, Star Wars.
	They were trying to shoot down incoming missiles from the Soviet Union and intercept them in space using lasers, but they couldn't figure out how to do it because it was Will Happer, our chairman, that invented this ability to keep lasers focused through the atmosphere.
	And now his invention is used at every observatory around the world to get crystal clear If you ever see an observatory with a yellow beam going up from it, that's his sodium guide star laser that are used to figure out what's going on in the atmosphere.
	So they get crystal clear photographs.
	So these are the type of scientists that we have.
	They're incredible.
	It's great and we stick to the science.
	Yeah, and it's essential because if they're going to keep us afraid of the unknown and if they're going to say, as we saw throughout all this COVID stuff, I'm the expert and science is what I say it is, you know, that is the antithesis of science.
	That's what, as I say often.
	They promote consensus science.
	That's the big thing.
	And it's, as Michael Creighton famously said, if it's science, it's not consensus.
	If it's consensus, it's not science.
	And Richard Feynman, the great physicist, my favorite quote about consensus, he says, I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.
	And that's what we have today in climate science.
	They tell us what the answer is, and you dare not question it.
	And they need to silence me and my colleagues at the CO2 Coalition.
	We've seen that first with climate, and then we saw it with the COVID stuff, and with medications, and now it's everything.
	You know, anything, they will tell you what is true, and you cannot question that.
	And so that's the attack that we see on free speech that's happening everywhere.
	But it's now flowing out everywhere, but it began with the climate stuff.
	Yeah, and let me just, if we have time here, just to delve in.
	One of the things, one of the proudest things, we're doing scientific papers and we do the technical material, but we also, our members were concerned about the state of science education in America, and we decided to do something about it and put a committee of mostly PhDs together, and what they've done is incredible.
	I ended up hiring a full-time artist talented artist, Thiago Hellinger da Silva, down in Brazil.
	We're creating books, we're creating videos that are attractive to children and students, but most importantly, we're also doing lesson plans for homeschooling parents in charter schools.
	And they're not just a lesson plan, it's rare.
	We actually have a scientist doing that, Dr. Sharon Camp.
	PhD in analytic chemistry.
	She's an AP science teacher and reader.
	And so, this is science-based, totally vetted, the lesson plans.
	We've completed the first series of book.
	I've just authored the first of the next series.
	We call it the Sleep Well series.
	You're going to love this.
	So, the title is Chloe the Clownfish Sleeps Well at Night.
	And it's, oh, it's marvelous.
	And the art is fantastic.
	It's about Chloe that lives on the Great Barrier Reef, and she's told at school that, you know, the Great Barrier Reef in her home was going to be destroyed because of man's climate change.
	And we're able to use that story, we're able to use that story in an entertaining method to put out the facts about what's actually happening with corals on the Great Barrier Reef.
	And I was joined as a co-author, Dr. Peter Ridd.
	Who's one of the top coral and Great Barrier Reef experts collaborated with me on this.
	So we have top scientists that work together to make sure we get the story right.
	But we're kind of going, we're getting the nose under the camel's tent by getting this really interesting material out there.
	Oh, that's great.
	Yeah, that's one of their big failed predictions was the Great Barrier Reef.
	Before we get off of that, I'd like to give the website of ours.
	It's CO2learningcenter.com.
	CO2learningcenter.com.
	You can go get our books for qualifying homeschool organizations or charter schools.
	We've just brought in a shipment of CO2 meters.
	That we actually give to qualifying, at no charge to qualifying schools and homes and teachers, because some of our lesson plans involve experiments that require a CO2 meter.
	And, you know, a lot of these people, they don't want to spend $140 for a CO2 meter, so we've done it for them.
	And this is our mission.
	Our mission is to provide Fact, science, data, and now our mission, too, is to provide that information to students.
	Particularly, the homeschool parents and all three of my grandchildren are homeschooled, and it's important.
	They love to use this information.
	So, CO2LearningCenter.com.
	That's great.
	CO2LearningCenter.com.
	Yeah, if you don't want to be a clownfish, be careful of the school that you hang out with, right?
	So, it's wonderful that you seized on that, because that is really the key.
	You know, you say, Chloe sleeps well at night.
	Well, that's the problem.
	They are scaring these kids to death.
	They think that they've got no future, that the world is going to end because of CO2 emissions, and it is absolute insanity.
	And, of course, the only way that you're going to stop CO2 emissions is to starve us to death and kill all the people, but I think that might be what they're trying to do.
	There is that.
	Yeah, there is that.
	It certainly is amazing.
	Well, it's fascinating to talk to you again.
	Gregory Wrightstone, and the book is A Very Convenient Warming at the top of the list on Amazon.
	And I've got a couple of comments here.
	Brian and Deb McCartney, can you ask if he has heard of the Just Transition Task Force?
	I'm attending another meeting in northern Minnesota this evening regarding the killing of coal-fired power.
	So it's the JUST, J-U-S-T, Transition Task Force.
	Have you heard anything about that?
	I haven't.
	I don't like the word transition.
	Yeah, I know.
	It's transition, and I'm talking about transition of energy, and it's why should we transition away from something that's worked wonderfully, that's lifted big That's right.
	Oh, and did we lose it?
	We lost your audio.
	I don't know if you can still hear me or not.
	Something happened there.
	Still don't have it.
	There we are.
	Oh, okay, now we're back.
	Now we're back.
	Okay, good.
	That's good.
	It's those darn gremlins.
	Yeah.
	We shouldn't, why should we transition away from reliable, abundant, affordable energy to unreliable energy that's not abundant, that's not affordable?
	So the transition, it's a forced transition away.
	I like to let the free market decide, and the free market will tell you that it's coal, it's natural gas, and maybe nuclear for our electricity needs.
	Yeah, it is interesting, isn't it?
	You know, and I think that they were talking about that.
	I think they were concerned about the killing of coal-fired power is what their concern is, and so I think this other group is trying to transition away from it.
	Yes, absolutely.
	I mean, look, I've got magazines here that, Gregory, that I show people from 1979, Time and Newsweek, and they say, by the middle of the 1980s, we will have no more oil and no more natural gas.
	And it's like, I saved those because I knew that was nonsense.
	And then they say, well, we got 666 years of coal.
	So what do they do?
	They decide they're going to get rid of coal.
	You can make coal clean, but they're not required.
	When we talk about the UN, that's one of my pet peeves that I talk about frequently here, and that is the Paris Climate Accord.
	Even people who are alarmists were alarmed at the Paris Climate Accord because it said, well, you're not doing anything to stop this.
	You're going to allow China and India to build as many power plants as they wish and not have them be clean.
	And so this is not addressing what our global problem is, they think.
	They said this is simply a transfer of industry to China, and that's exactly what it is, isn't it?
	It is, it is.
	And boy are they, both India and China.
	I think President Xi in India, Prime Minister Modi, I think he does care about his people and he wants to lift.
	They still have 800 million people that are living in energy poverty without electricity.
	He wants to lift those people up and provide electricity to everyone throughout India.
	And they're going great guys.
	They're mining, breaking records mining coal.
	They're setting records building and producing more electricity derived from coal.
	Their natural gas isn't very well developed.
	We can talk a little bit about that.
	I traveled to India and spoke at the first natural gas, shale gas conference in India a number of years ago.
	And China, President Xi, number one, he's got to be sitting there right now rubbing his hands together.
	We're self-destructing.
	We're undermining our electricity, our economy.
	For no good reason.
	And he's advancing his.
	He's mouthing the words, we're going to go to net zero by what, 2070, 2080?
	He has no intention of doing that.
	And they're going great guns.
	I don't think he, there's no altruistic bone in his body.
	His goal is to mount and have an economy unrivaled in the world.
	And part of that's getting affordable, reliable, abundant energy.
	And he's doing it with coal.
	He's using everything.
	They're building a lot of solar, they're doing wind, but it's mainly coal that's really driving this.
	Here in the United States, most of our proposals here, we know about Kamala Harris, she was pushing electric vehicles until she wasn't, which occurred at some point.
	We don't know why or when, but now she's not.
	But their old energy solution, Jennifer Granholm and the Department of Energy, they want everybody to drive an electric car, which will only increase demand for an already scarce electricity and lead to It's going to be horrible, horrible, horrible.
	Yeah, well we can look and see what's happening as they're demanding that everything be electric.
	No gas ranges, all electric appliances, all electric cars and everything.
	As they're doing that, they're simultaneously shutting down the grid capacity.
	And so we know where this all leads.
	And you can see what's happening in the UK as well.
	Their electricity is already four times what it is in the United States.
	They just shut down their last steel plant.
	They just shut down their last coal energy plant.
	They can't compete and manufacture anything with China.
	I mean, China's always had the China price, which is, you know, their currency manipulation and copyright piracy and slave labor.
	Well, now they've got the cheapest energy of anybody.
	That's what's going to happen.
	You've got Germany.
	Look at what is happening to the German industry.
	They're having to shut down as well.
	If we follow this path of getting rid of CO2, it is a path of suicide.
	That's why your book is so important and the organization is so important.
	The CO2coalition.org that you put together got a lot of Nobel Prize winning scientists that are there.
	People ought to bookmark that and get that on your mailing list.
	The book is A Very Convenient Warming, again, by Gregory Wrightstone.
	This is a vital issue.
	It really is.
	Yeah, thank you.
	And that's, again, that's the mission of the CO2 Coalition.
	It's my own personal mission, is to get the science, the facts, and the data out there about what's actually happening.
	And I'm an optimist, David.
	I'm a true optimist in a lot of things, but particularly, I believe we're winning.
	I find, I talk to lots of people.
	I do a lot of Uber drivers.
	I'm converting America one Uber driver at a time.
	But I find just about everybody I talk to is thirsty for the information that we provide, that my books provide, that the CO2 Coalition provides.
	They're thirsty for this.
	They've never heard of it.
	So many times their eyes get wide open and they go, I've never heard that.
	Why aren't they telling us that?
	Yes.
	We need to be silenced.
	Yes.
	Because we tell a fact-based story.
	And we can see what is happening in European countries, but especially in the UK.
	They're a little bit ahead of us.
	You know, there's an article I haven't covered yet today that's about, I said, electricity rationing has already begun.
	They just haven't given you your coupon book.
	And they're talking about how they're measuring all of the time of day usage and all the rest of this kind of stuff.
	And people are scrambling to figure out how they're going to afford this.
	And we've got this offshore wind farm that is offshore Long Island.
	It's going to escalate the price by a conservative factor four or five times, because they're looking at their profit margin.
	is going to be about one and a half times what the current entire cost is.
	So it is amazing what is happening with all this, how expensive, how unreliable it is, and it really is going to be incredibly destructive for all of our lives.
	Yeah.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	And again, the book is A Very Convenient Warming by Gregory Wrightstone at the top of the Amazon list.
	Thank you so much for joining us, sir.
	And the co2coalition.org, also very important.
	And I'll put that and the resource into the description, the co2learningcenter.com, because we do have a lot of people who homeschool, and I know they'd be interested in those books and that curriculum.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	Thank you.
	It looks like it's a natural control for cancer.
	And he told me this story.
	All right, this gets interesting in the details.
	He had a dog that had cancer and he was about to put the dog down because, you know, he tried chemotherapy and everything else on the dog that the doctors do and it wasn't working.
	In fact, the dog was getting sicker.
	And when he heard about this, he says, I tried to use, I decided to use this substance on the dog.
	And he said, blow me down.
	The dog got well real fast because I couldn't believe it.
	I'd never seen that happen before.
	And then the next part of the story is that he said his nurse came to him, his head nurse, whose husband was, had terminal cancer.
	And she said, Dr. John, you know, my husband is not going to last very much longer.
	And I saw what happened to the dog.
	Would you please, Do that for my husband?" And he said, well, sure, I'd be glad to, but don't tell anybody because it's not approved, you know, for human use.
	And he tried it on her husband and he got well.
	This is how it all started.
	And so John said, I started using it very, very cautiously and very low dosages and very suspiciously, making sure that I was not risking anybody's life, using it only on people who really had terminal cancer.
	Joining us now is G. Edward Griffin, a real giant in the Liberty Movement.
	He's done so many monumental works.
	Of course, everybody knows Creature from Jekyll Island, but we wanted to also talk to him today about his book, A World Without Cancer, because I think that's a message that people are ready to hear after what we've been through for the last four years.
	But we've now seen, I think, really a convergence in medical, financial, and political, because it's all being swallowed up by the political stuff.
	But great to have Gerald Griffin on.
	Thank you so much for joining us, sir.
	Well, it's my pleasure.
	Thanks for inviting me.
	And I want to talk also about the Red Pill Expo that's going to be coming up in just a couple weeks as well, so I'll give you a chance to talk about that and what's happening with that.
	But your work is very well known by a lot of people, and we're going to try to get into maybe, you know, the medical aspect of this is maybe not as well known as the Federal Reserve, but we do want to talk about the financial stuff.
	That's very important right now.
	But I think it'd be good for us to talk about your biography.
	How did you get into Doing documentaries and books, and especially in terms of going against the grain of conventional wisdom.
	Tell us a little bit about your background.
	Well, it's a long background, of course, considering my age.
	And it's probably not very interesting.
	It's rather boring, actually.
	Yeah, you're correct.
	We've covered some ground and made some amazing touch points along the way.
	But I think it's only because we've been at it for so long.
	My life has been pretty much normal in the sense, by normal I'm almost afraid or embarrassed to say normal because unfortunately what is normal out there in the world today is not particularly attractive.
	An abnormal world, a normal person in an abnormal world.
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, it's not unusual, I guess I should say, in that I would start out in one direction and be confronted by some impossible barrier.
	or setback or tragedy, and it would be life-changing for me, and very uncomfortable, very painful, very frightening.
	But in retrospect, as the time goes by, I find out That was the best thing that ever happened to me because it forced me to do a right turn or change my direction substantially.
	And even though it was painful and I had to abandon my original plans and expectations, I found out that it was a better direction than the one I was on originally.
	And my life is full of that, and some of those tragedies along the way were very serious illnesses, too.
	I was still very young.
	I was in my early 30s, and I had a wife and a couple of kids to support, and I had a collapse, and I had two doctors tell me I had multiple sclerosis.
	I didn't really know for sure what that was.
	I knew it was bad, but when I looked it up in the In the encyclopedia I decided, oh man, this is a bad way to go out the door.
	And I thought I was dying, of course, but it was a misdiagnosis.
	I had exhausted myself.
	I had a rather I thought I was carrying the world on my shoulders.
	I thought I had to save the world all by myself.
	And so I was not getting a lot of sleep.
	I was a young guy, of course.
	I was doing a lot of traveling, making presentations, training sessions, all that kind of thing.
	So I would go from one town to the next and drive a good portion of the day to get there.
	Get there and be taken out to dinner and then put on an evening presentation and then meet at somebody's house afterwards and What kind of presentations were you doing?
	Was this political?
	Well, these were recruiting meetings.
	At that time, I was a coordinator for the John Birch Society.
	I know that scares a lot of people.
	They think that's a wacko organization.
	No, not me.
	Well, good.
	Anyway, to me, they're very calm and very Not wacko at all.
	Of course, they have some wackos in there, but the percentage of wackos in the Brit society, I thought, was smaller than the percentage outside of the Brit society.
	That's right.
	They're going to be everywhere.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	That was the safest place to be.
	But anyway, that's what I was doing.
	And, uh, so I was drinking, you know, everybody would want to buy me some wine and we'd drink wine and talk about life and the world events and so forth.
	And then I get to bed late at night or early in the morning, get up in the morning and drive and do that over and over again.
	I came back and I was planting some trees in my front yard and, uh, I just froze up.
	I became paralyzed.
	To make a long story short, I had just exhausted my physical strength.
	Malnutrition, toxic elements in my body, not enough sleep, and a bad mental attitude, always filled with anxiety and, you know, all the bad things.
	And I hadn't realized.
	I didn't think I had to worry about that because I was young, right?
	Young people don't get sick.
	So anyway, they diagnosed it as multiple sclerosis.
	It turned out not to be that.
	Once I got off of my routine and started to find out what this world was all about in terms of nutrition and rest and avoiding toxic things in your body and in your environment and so forth, I recovered rather rapidly.
	So in retrospect, it was very good because I learned how to how to live, and I probably wouldn't be alive today if I hadn't learned that lesson early in my life.
	At the same time, I was really pretty well stuck in bed, and I didn't know I could write.
	I had gone to school.
	I had learned about communications.
	I would stage plays.
	I was an actor, a little child actor.
	You can imagine anything worse than that.
	Especially today, I can imagine it being a lot worse today.
	Well, I don't know, it was pretty bad.
	I was right in the middle of that.
	And, you know, I was in Detroit, and we did radio in those days.
	And, you know, a lot of shows came out of Detroit.
	The Ford Theater and And the Hermit's Cave, and we had a Saturday show that was the same as Let's Pretend.
	Anyway, I did a lot of radio stuff, and I went to school and took more of the same.
	Television was just coming online in those days, so I was taking courses in television and radio communications.
	Let me ask you a question real quick.
	Your radio, I guess that was live radio performances?
	Oh, yeah.
	That's really interesting stuff.
	I love listening to the live things like that.
	Yeah, I was.
	I worked my way through college as a radio announcer for WUOM, which was the university radio station at the University of Michigan.
	You know, and all of that.
	So I was into that.
	So when I got sick, I thought, well, I'm not going to be able to make a living.
	I couldn't get out of bed for the most part.
	I had to practically crawl from one room to the other.
	And so I got this call from a publisher, and he said, Ed, I understand you've been giving speeches on the United Nations, and they're very well received.
	Would you like to write a book for us on that topic?
	We want to publish a book and we think you could do it.
	And of course at that time I had never written anything and that was not my, I did not identify as an author.
	I identified as a, as a communicator on television or radio or something like that.
	And my dream was to go to Hollywood and become a great Hollywood producer and motion pictures.
	So when this guy called me and said, how would you like to write a book?
	That was the last thing I felt I was capable or interested in doing.
	And, but I thought instantly about how wildly he's offering me some money and here I am in bed.
	I can't do anything else to support my family and we're running out of money.
	And so I found myself saying, Oh yeah, no problem.
	Yeah, sure.
	I could do that.
	I'm in that kind of situation as well.
	You know, God puts us in a position where you got one way out and that's it.
	One way out.
	Something that you would have chosen to do.
	Yeah.
	So I just use that as an example.
	So I took on the commitment and I started to do my hard research.
	I had done a lot of it already, but I knew that in a book you had to document everything.
	It wasn't just you could say, well, I know this and I know that.
	So I did research that lasted about probably two or three months of putting all the documents together.
	And then the day came when it was time to write.
	And it was kind of like looking at an old movie where you've, everybody's seen those scenes where the author has to write something and he's on a typewriter and he types a few lines and he pulls the paper out, crushes it and throws it on the floor.
	And it's, that's no good.
	And then this is no good.
	I went through that in spades.
	All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy, right?
	I was using a pencil.
	We didn't have computers in those days and I couldn't type.
	So I was writing things out and I'd tear it up and throw it out.
	I couldn't, how come, I can't write, I can't write!
	Give me a microphone!
	So, then, there's a point, an end to this.
	So, finally I said, I'm just going to write Mary Had a Little Lamb.
	I started to write things out, and first thing you know, I had this idea, I can't write this, because how do you approach a topic so huge?
	This is my book on the United Nations, my first book.
	It's called The Fearful Master, A Second Look at the United Nations.
	So I wrote down, how can you write about something like this?
	It's like a huge globe made of glass, so large that you couldn't grasp it in its entirety, and you couldn't hold it.
	How do you write a book?
	It's like having to move a mountain.
	How do you move a mountain?
	And then I found myself writing, well, you dig.
	And then, this is my first spade.
	And I looked at it and I said, well, that's kind of clever.
	And the first thing you know, I extended that and the next few pages came pretty fast.
	And by the time I got to page seven, it was roaring along.
	I found out, I wound up, I looked at the wall and said, my gosh, I can write and I'm having fun doing it.
	So I use that as an example.
	I wouldn't be here talking to you today if I hadn't had this illness and that event that forced me to make a right turn in what I thought was my career path.
	And at that time, I didn't think I was going to live anyway.
	So it forced me to make a change that affected my whole life.
	I hope for the better.
	That's a great story.
	We've had so many people, when they were faced with a decision, take the shot or lose your job.
	And I've talked to so many people who had that crisis.
	It's like, what do I do?
	I've trained all my life for this.
	I don't have any other alternative, but I'm not going to take that shot.
	And to a man, that has been, or a woman, that has been every person I've talked to about that.
	It's been a wonderful turning point for them.
	And so I think your life lesson, as well as a lot of other people, that's a real important life lesson, I think.
	Well, it is, and that's why I said it's, in a way, I'm very normal, because what I just said, although it's dramatic, for me it was dramatic, everybody goes through those crises, I think.
	Maybe they don't They don't think about it as having made a big change, and I suppose not every change in the direction is that dramatic, but most of them, or many of them are, the important ones are.
	So, with that as a background, I started off in one direction.
	All of a sudden, I'm writing, and I decided I wanted to go off on my own.
	I decided I wanted to do I wanted to reach out to a lot of people and I wanted to use my skills that I had acquired in communications, so I decided to produce some very low-budget documentary films on important issues.
	The first attempt was to write something on a documentary film on money and inflation, and then of course that led me obliquely to the topic of the Federal Reserve System, and I'm off on money now, and I had no idea how much voltage was in the wire that I was about to grab hold of on that one.
	If I had even an inkling of how Deep that topic goes and how broad it is, how many things it covers, and how profoundly important it is to our lives, our liberty, our lifestyle, everything.
	I would never have tackled it because it was far beyond my reach.
	I'm the last person in the world to write about things like that.
	I'm a kid that was a child actor, you know?
	Well, that makes the question, how did you, you're working with the, before you started writing, And before you wrote that book on the UN, you were also lecturing about UN and other things like that.
	How did you get into working for the John Birch Society?
	Or how did you begin to be skeptical about what the UN's purposes and agenda were?
	Well, that's another story similar to the one I just mentioned.
	I was working for a large corporation.
	I was in the corporate world.
	I had found out the hard way that Hollywood wasn't waiting for me.
	I had gone there and I wanted to make my splash.
	I wanted to get a job with some production company and I was looking for the grand opening and it wasn't happening.
	I looked around realistically and I saw that all these young people there, the guys and gals, had talent superior to mine.
	Really.
	And they were busing tables and washing cars, waiting for the big chance in Hollywood.
	And then I began to get a sense of the corruption that is in Hollywood, and the lifestyle, and all of the evil things that were there that I didn't like at all.
	And it became clear that if you didn't tolerate those things, or if you didn't participate in those things, your chances of getting that big break were pretty small.
	So I quit all that and I went to work for a large insurance company and I got a job in an underwriting department preparing group insurance plans for corporations and that kind of thing.
	So that's what I was doing when I decided to start speaking out on topics.
	And the reason I made that change is that I don't know who it was, but somebody handed me or sent me a little blue pamphlet Called the truth about the United Nations.
	I think that was the title.
	I thought the United Nations.
	Well, I'd gone to school.
	I've been to the university.
	I knew all about the United Nations and why it was wonderful.
	It was our last best hope for peace.
	They told me and I thought it was true.
	And so I was very much in favor of the UN and as a means of avoiding war.
	And about what year was that?
	That was 1960.
	Okay.
	Maybe 1959.
	Probably that, that pamphlet was in 1959.
	Anyway, so I read the pamphlet and I was incensed by it.
	I thought, well, this is ridiculous.
	I know better.
	But the things it said were hard for me to believe that these people were lying.
	That's how naive, you know, you come out of school, how naive can you be to think that your teachers would be lying or the people who would write books might even be lying.
	It's hard for us to believe that about other people.
	We want to believe the best of them and we want to think that they're like us, you know, and so we always overestimate their morals and we underestimate their technology, don't we?
	We certainly do, yeah.
	And of course, we're trained to do that.
	I went to the public school system and that was, I found out later, one of its primary objectives is to create that attitude in the minds of the students.
	So, they had succeeded and I found it, I was highly indignant over this pamphlet written by a college professor, no less.
	You'd expect he would know better, you know?
	Anyway, one day I went down to the library in downtown Los Angeles.
	It was only a few blocks from where our corporate office was, and I had some time on my hands that day, so I decided to just drop into the library.
	I never thought I'd go into a library again after I got out of school, because I thought that was where you punish people for doing bad things.
	But anyway, I went into the International Department, and I wanted to check out a few books on the topic of the United Nations, and in particular, these wars, these peacekeeping operations, as they called them, and to see if I could learn more about it, and prove that this college professor was wrong.
	So I checked out a few books, and even though they were all written from the friendly perspective, they were all friends of the UN.
	Many of them were either employees or former employees, or they had positions, professional positions, which depended on their being friendly.
	Some of them were academics, and academics, I discovered, would never dare go against the UN.
	Anyway, so I read those books, and I recognized that they were biased.
	And so that was the beginning of it, reading their own works.
	And some of them were quite frank, by the way.
	I learned about the war in Katanga with Patrice Lumumba.
	The war on Katanga in Africa was really an eye-opener for me.
	In fact, that's how I opened My book on the United Nations was with that section on what happened in Katanga.
	Basically what happened is that there was a communist revolution in in the Congo, Katanga province of the Congo, and the so-called colonial powers just left.
	There was betrayal, I think, at the highest levels in the government.
	I think it was Belgium, and they just withdrew their troops and all their law enforcement facilities and just gave the Congo over to the communist revolutionaries.
	And that was hard to believe, but there was an evidence.
	And so when the troops went out, there was mass slaughter going on.
	And it looked like it might be racial, but it was not.
	It was economic.
	It was getting the colonialists out, that was the word they used, the capitalists, get the capitalists out and get the socialists in power again.
	The Congo went into total chaos, blood all over the place and production stopped, the economy crashed, people were starving, people were robbing each other, it was total chaos.
	I fear we're in America going to get somewhat like, see some of that ourselves when we make that step toward total collectivism or socialism.
	Anyway, that's what happened.
	And so the UN came along and said, well, look at this chaos.
	We've got to put, put an end to that.
	And everybody said, yes, yes, that's what you're for.
	And you're the peacekeepers, right?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Well, the peacekeepers went in and there were multiple provinces in the Congo and they were all in total, Blood-drenched chaos, except one.
	The one shining exception was Katanga.
	It was headed by Moishanbe.
	And Moishanbe had been to some universities in London and had come to America, and he understood the principles of free enterprise capitalism.
	And he was standing firm, and his province was like it had always been.
	And chaos was all around him.
	So where did the UN send the peacekeepers?
	There.
	There.
	They didn't send them anyplace else where the chaos was.
	They sent them where the chaos was not.
	And they literally overthrew the Katanga province and put it into chaos also.
	And when I saw that documented so clearly, and in many cases by the employees and officers of the UN itself, Where they bragged about doing that, in their own words, and when I saw that, that changed my life.
	Because it was a red pill, you might say, that I saw life the way it really was.
	And in one book by the, I think it was an Irish general from Ireland, I can't believe his name anyway.
	A big thick book on how wonderful he was in the Congo doing all these things on behalf of international cooperation and peace and so forth.
	And he time and again said, well, you know, when this issue came up, we lied in the press conferences, as all bureaucrats do.
	And he was sort of like, well, that's the way it is, folks.
	I'm glad you're reading my book.
	Now you know how it works.
	So I, Conor O'Brien, that was his name, General O'Brien.
	And I realized that these people actually boast about some of the crimes they commit.
	And that was my changing point right there.
	And so my first interest was the United Nations and I did some research on it.
	I took that pamphlet that I talked about a moment ago and then my own independent research and added to it and that's what became the basis for my book.
	Uh, the fearful master.
	That's great.
	Yeah.
	Wonderful title as well.
	Uh, you talk about, I come from a, that comes from a quotation attributed to George Washington.
	Uh, I could never find an official source for it, but everybody seemed to agree that it came from him.
	And he said, um, government is not, uh, let's see if I can get this straight.
	Government is not wisdom.
	It is not benevolence.
	It is force.
	Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
	That's great.
	Yeah, whoever wrote that, they nailed it.
	So it's absolutely true.
	Now you were with the John Birch Society.
	You were talking about how they like to paint, portray birchers as crazy.
	And I guess a big part of that, I think a big part of that war against the John Birch Society was coming from William F. Buckley.
	Talk a little bit about that.
	Was he the point man publicly or was there other things that were happening?
	No, I don't think Buckley was a point man at all.
	That's an interesting observation.
	Buckley did come out publicly against the Birch Society.
	The militant left, left-wingers, attacked the Birch Society vehemently.
	They called us, you know, fascists, Nazis, extremists, anti-Semites, wackos, you know, any of those things.
	And they just kept repeating it and repeating it.
	And a lot of people believed it because they read about it in their newspaper.
	And, of course, it was none of those things, but that didn't make any difference.
	Perception is the important thing.
	But Buckley was not from the radical left.
	There were a few people like Buckley that also jumped on the bandwagon from what people considered to be the right wing.
	Of course, we could talk about the impropriety of thinking there's a difference between right and left later, but I learned that the hard way too, that the right wing and the left wing are merely two Two wings on the same ugly bird called collectivism.
	That's right.
	Anyway, I hadn't learned that yet.
	So anyway, Buckley was one of those guys who was associated with the so-called right wing, but they believed pretty much the same thing.
	And they would attack any serious challenge to collectivism, which is what they believed in.
	Yeah, he's a big establishment.
	I remember I was thinking that I was trying to get polar opposites.
	I'd read National Review and I'd read The Nation when I was in college.
	I'd read these and kind of try to figure out what's going on.
	I didn't want to read Time and Newsweek, so I wanted to get these opposing views and everything, but then I eventually found out They were also very much alike in many ways.
	I thought it was getting extreme, but I wasn't, you know?
	Yeah, what's the supposing business business?
	People have to learn that lesson yet.
	They still think, especially as we are living right now through a period of great political intensity, they really think that the political parties are going to be their salvation.
	It's just a question of who you're going to vote for.
	And it is the most important election of our lifetime.
	You've had a lot of those most important elections of your lifetime, haven't you?
	You've probably heard that more than once.
	Every one of them is the most important.
	Last chance to do it right.
	It's going to be the end of the world if we don't get this right.
	Yeah, we've heard that so many times.
	Well, so you start out with the UN and you're working with JBS and how did you get over to the Federal Reserve?
	How did you move over?
	I decided I had to produce some little documentaries or documentary films as we call them today, but back in those days Unless you had big bucks, which we didn't, you used film strips, film strip projectors.
	And it was a projector where you roll a little roll of 35 millimeter film with just still pictures on it.
	One, you know, I think we had 98 pictures or so.
	And you click them one at a time and it projects up on the screen.
	You play the soundtrack on a, like an LP recording on a phonograph machine.
	And when it's time to change the picture, there's a beep that comes onto the sound.
	The operator turns the picture and the narration continues.
	And then there's, it's like a PowerPoint presentation with the beeps.
	And so that's what we did in those days.
	And I did, oh, I don't know.
	Nine or ten of them.
	And I decided I wanted to do one on inflation and the money supply.
	I didn't know much about it, but I knew that there was something fishy going on because everybody was accusing the other guy of being responsible for inflation.
	Everybody accused the farmers.
	They were getting too much for their food.
	And the farmers said, no, we're starving.
	We have to eat our own food to just stay alive.
	We don't make any money.
	It's the distributors that take all the money.
	And the distributors, not us, it's the truckers.
	And the truckers, oh no, it's not us.
	It's the grocery stores and the groceries.
	Oh, it's not us, it's the labor unions and so forth.
	And they're all, you know, everybody's pointing to somebody else as the cause.
	And they were all correct in a sense that it was not them, but they didn't know who it was.
	And there's that hidden element that nobody had looked at.
	And so I was curious about that, so I started to do research on inflation, and of course that leads directly to the engine of inflation, and that's the Federal Reserve System, because that's the power that creates money.
	out of debt and they can just create as much money as people are willing to borrow into existence and it's not their money, they just create it out of nothing or worse than nothing out of debt.
	So the money supply expands much faster than goods and services expand and therefore the relative prices for those goods and services in terms of the It's just a very simple formula.
	A high school kid that knows anything about math can figure it out.
	But the American people still don't understand it, pretty much, because it's deliberately compounded and made to look very complicated.
	So I got into that, and I created a couple of banker boxes full of research on it, and I was ready to go.
	And then I realized, hey, this topic is getting too big for me.
	And meanwhile, I had to get on and produce some faster film strips, because I have to put groceries on the table, right?
	So I put the Kemp banker boxes in my closet for now, and then one day I got a call from a Little old lady in tennis shoes from Pasadena.
	You've heard about those ladies.
	This was a real one.
	And she was a widow and she obviously had some money because she lived in a big house in Pasadena.
	And her husband had passed away, of course, and had this car in the garage.
	It was probably about 12, 15 years old, but I think it had like 800 miles on it.
	Well, that's a little side story, but she was a wonderful lady and she had a monthly class that she was, or meeting in her home on taxes.
	And she'd heard that I was giving speeches and showing film strips and so forth.
	So she called me and asked me if I would give a speech to her group on the weekend on taxes.
	And I said, well, I don't know much about taxes, except that they're too high, and I'm a guinea pig.
	What else can you say?
	But I might be able to talk to your group about a hidden tax.
	Would that be of interest to you?
	And she said, a hidden tax?
	What is that?
	And in my supreme wisdom, I said, well, I guess you're just going to have to retain my services so I can tell you what it was.
	And she laughed.
	She said, you got me.
	She said, let's do it.
	So, all right.
	I committed to do a presentation on the Federal Reserve as the hidden tax.
	And that forced me to open up my banker boxes and go through this stuff again.
	And the second time through, I was amazed at what I picked up that I didn't catch the first time through.
	And I became electrified by how really important this was, how many areas in our lives it reached that I hadn't really focused on.
	So I got excited about it, and I spent some time putting together an outline.
	I gave the presentation, and it was very well received.
	I was happy to see.
	And some people approached me afterwards there, and they said, Ed, that was good.
	You ought to put that on the road.
	Well, you don't do that to a child actor.
	You say, oh, I'll put it on the road, which I did.
	I ramped it, got it all well organized and I called it the crash course on money.
	It was a one day seminar.
	I thought, you know, I could probably sell tickets to this if I was smart enough.
	And so I tried that and by golly, it worked.
	And I was selling tickets and I put it on the road.
	I was going, From town to town to town.
	Um, this time I'm not doing what I did in the old days.
	I was taking care of myself.
	And, uh, so we did that crash course on money and then I'm, I'm, I'm probably giving you more information than you want, but this is what happened at the end of, I think it was probably about the ninth or 10th, uh,
	At the end of the meeting I was approached by another little old lady and she said, Mr. Griffin, and that was always a shock to me because here she's an elderly lady and I'm still in my twenties, late twenties or early thirties.
	In my 30s, I guess.
	She's calling me Mr. Griffin.
	I've always got a kick out of that.
	She said, after what I've learned from you today, she said, I'm really concerned about what I should do with what limited resources I have.
	My husband passed away and he left a small stipend and insurance and we can get along.
	We have a small investment in a small apartment building or two apartments, I think she said.
	But we're in debt.
	Should I get out of debt?
	Should I take what we have in assets and put it in gold and silver?
	What should I do with my assets?
	It hit me at that moment what a fraud I was, because I did not know the answer to that question.
	I knew what the Federal Reserve was doing.
	I knew how they created money out of debt.
	I knew the impact it had on the purchasing power of money.
	I knew all those things, a lot of them.
	Not all, but I was still learning in those days.
	But to answer the question of what she should do to avoid the consequences of that, I had no idea.
	I was a fraud, and she was expecting me to know.
	So I stopped doing the seminars, and I enrolled in the College for Financial Planning, which is a course done by A Chicago outfit, an educational group.
	It was like a CFP designation.
	It normally takes a couple of years to get it.
	So I enrolled in it.
	It was all by correspondence.
	And then you had to go to a physical location and take the exam.
	That's an all-day exam and so forth.
	So I did that and I got my CFP designation as a financial advisor.
	Not because I wanted to do that.
	I just wanted to know how to answer this woman's question.
	How do you protect your assets under these conditions?
	So that's what I did.
	And then I came out of that with another realization, which I never would have had had I not been taking that course.
	And that is that these people were teaching bunk.
	I was learning bunk.
	Now, they were teaching How to invest in markets that is in the best interest of the financial planners, not in the best interest of the investors.
	Yeah.
	And that was really what it was all about.
	And of course they always said it was for the group, for the best investment for the, I'll get this straight yet.
	It's always best for the investor himself, but it was always an investment that paid a commission to the person that recommended it or something.
	And none of it really took into account that the value of the money was constantly being depreciated.
	They didn't really understand inflation.
	Or they said, well, this has a better interest rate and therefore better to fight inflation.
	But they never talked about inflation itself and what the long-term consequences might be over 20 or 30 years for you.
	Do everything they recommend, but still in 20 or 30 years you have zero because the dollar is zero.
	Things like that.
	So that's when I decided, Somebody ought to write a book on this.
	I looked around and there were books on the topic, but they were all kind of written from the point of view of somebody who wanted to go into banking.
	If they wanted to be a banker, the book was there on the Federal Reserve.
	How to use the Federal Reserve, how it works, and the terminology, and it was all good, but it didn't, the books didn't, Help the average person at all understand the fraud that was built into the banking system.
	And not even the bankers.
	I had a friend of ours, and I would make remarks from time to time about the Federal Reserve.
	And we got together, and he had his brother, who was a branch manager at a bank.
	And he says, whatever his name was, I don't know, it was Fred or something.
	I met him once, and that was it.
	But he said, Fred, Dave's got a lot of issues with the Federal Reserve.
	He said, tell him about the Federal Reserve.
	They just cash checks.
	They just process checks.
	That's your understanding of this.
	So yeah, it's one of the most clueless people I've ever seen in terms of finance.
	I mean, I wasn't even aware of the impact of setting interest rates even, for example.
	None of it.
	Well, you see, you don't have to understand that to make a killing in the banking industry.
	That's right.
	All you have to do is just know how to cash checks and move the money around.
	That's right.
	And collect interest.
	That's it.
	Yeah, that's absolutely right.
	So that's how it all started.
	And so, as I said earlier, it's, it's kind of a boring story actually, because it's the same thing over and over again, that you'd stumble into things that you had no idea where you're headed.
	And if I had had any sense, literally any common sense, knowing what I know now, I would never have tackled it because it was, it was so much over my understanding over my head.
	I didn't know any of this.
	Well, It's a good thing I didn't know, because I've talked to bankers since then, and especially when we get into the topic of cancer and things like that.
	I have no medical background yet.
	I'm writing a book on cancer therapy and so forth.
	And I've had people tell me, like doctors in particular, say, Ed, you had an advantage that we didn't have.
	I said, what?
	What do you mean an advantage?
	How could that be?
	You went to school.
	That's the advantage.
	We had to unlearn.
	All you had to do was learn.
	We had to unlearn first.
	I thought, oh yeah.
	Because when you go through the institutions and they teach you these things, you believe.
	You become a true believer.
	Trust these people.
	Before we leave the financial stuff, I mean, you know, we got a lot of people looking at what is happening now.
	It looks like, you know, they've been kicking this can down the road for a long time.
	Looks like we're getting towards the end of the rope.
	They've openly talked about how they want to re-engineer their entire financial system.
	CBDC is on the horizon and all the rest of this stuff.
	What, in general, is your advice to people?
	I know you're not a financial advisor.
	Just in general, in terms of preparing for what is coming, what would you say to people?
	I guess it depends on to whom I'm talking because for many people, if you tell them really what's happening, it's so beyond their world of understanding that they can't, they cannot believe it.
	Or if they believe it, they don't understand it.
	And so you're wasting your time.
	You have to get dependent who you're talking to.
	But, um, I guess my simplest way to explain it is to be totally honest, but to not be dramatic about it.
	So, let's see if I can put that together.
	That's some pretty dramatic stuff.
	Yeah, without being too dramatic.
	What is happening in my view, David, is that the old system of money is coming to an end.
	And that's an important fact to know, because up until now, All you had to know is, well, what has always worked?
	You know?
	Like, should we invest in gold or silver or something?
	In coins?
	And there could be arguments pro and con, but the most overriding argument was, it's always worked.
	No matter when you look in history, no matter what the problem was, those that had gold and silver always came out on top.
	So, it's always worked that way.
	It's a really powerful item.
	But now, it isn't, in my view, because the system itself is changing to the point where money will no longer even exist in the way that we think of it.
	The essence of money, in order for it to have any use to us, is that we have to own it.
	It's got to be our money.
	It's not somebody else's money.
	Because if it's somebody else's money, they can just take it back.
	And we don't have it.
	And this is what's changing, is the fact that, and most people don't see this at all.
	They think, well, no matter what they come up with, it'll be just like it always has been.
	No, no, because there's CBCDs, the Central Bank Digital Currencies that all of the nations now are committed to adopting in the very near future.
	In the next decade for sure, and possibly starting in the next year or two.
	That quality of private ownership is gone.
	Those tokens or whatever they call them, the digital currencies, they'll have different names, whatever the name is, they will be owned by the banks.
	And they'll be allocated to you and me and everybody else to use As long as we have a good social credit, which means as long as we behave according to what they think we should.
	You and I are going to be pretty poor, aren't we?
	We're going to be out on the street, sitting on the curb with a tin cup, asking somebody to put a coin in the tin cup, but there'll be no coins.
	There are no coins anymore.
	They're just digital.
	Impulses in a computer.
	So forget the cup and people can understand that we're actually approaching a change in the entire system.
	So the rules of what you do are different now.
	I would say normally without this upcoming CBCDs that we should have a nice stockpile in gold and silver.
	And I still say that, by the way, and I have not as nice a stockpile as I would like, but I have some shekels put away in gold and silver and in food and other physical tangibles, other assets.
	that people will need and you can use as barter.
	But in terms of how you come out of it okay and still maintain your lifestyle, it's a different game.
	And the chances are we're not going to come out of it at anywhere close to how we went into it.
	And we have to be prepared for that reality.
	Nobody wants to hear that.
	Yes.
	And I think what we're going to get is a heavy dose of reality.
	You know, it's going to be skills and it's going to be commodities and things like that that are going to be negotiable.
	And, you know, it's going to be really it is going to be a reset.
	And then the question is, how do we how do we cope with that?
	I think.
	You know, in terms of people talking about a parallel society, Americans have not really had any experience like people in third world countries have in terms of operating black markets and things like that, but I guess we'll learn pretty quickly.
	Yes, well even the black market has a problem with it because in order for a black market to work, you have to have money that you own.
	You still have, you go into the black market and you have money that you can give to somebody who's going to give you something.
	Or you can, barter is the only thing left.
	And that only works in your local community among people you know and trust.
	So it's, it doesn't allow you to put gas in your car.
	It doesn't allow you to pay your rent or to buy clothes in the big store, the big box stores or anything like that.
	If we don't turn this around and prevent it, We're going to be very much like little children who are completely dependent on the state for everything.
	And that includes food, shelter, health care, clothing, everything.
	And under those conditions, most people will buckle and they will be like slaves in Egypt.
	That's right.
	The thing that concerns me, Is that this is all based on surveillance, that is their overriding desire to know everything about us.
	And what concerns me about it is how apathetic so many people in our society are about privacy and about surveillance and about free speech.
	And you got people across the political spectrum, all these people that are so eager about the The election, and you see both of these candidates talking about how they're going to shut people down that disagree with them.
	And because of that, people downstream from them are also buying into this kind of censorship stuff.
	And I think if we could develop and get back a respect for free speech and for privacy and things like that, that really has to be fundamental as a guard against some of this stuff, because that really is the essence of how their controls are going to run out against us.
	What do you think?
	Well, you're absolutely correct.
	And in other words, we have to be dealing with ideas.
	And ideas, that's the basis of our war.
	This is a war of ideas.
	I mean, yes, they have these powerful weapons that frighten us and can be used to eliminate us.
	And that's the ultimate weapon, of course.
	But in the meantime, they're conquering us not with weapons.
	They're conquering us with fear of weapons.
	And that fear of weapons makes us very compliant.
	And, of course, if they didn't have the weapons, we wouldn't be afraid of them.
	That is true.
	But they could pretend like they have the weapons, and that's often what has happened in the past, as you probably know.
	In Russia, particularly, in the Soviet Union, they would parade these huge missiles in the street on trucks.
	You know, they were like 80 feet long, and these huge missiles like We sent to the moon, or supposedly sent to the moon.
	Supposedly.
	I don't know what to think about that one.
	But those weren't really missiles at all, I'm told.
	They were just made of wood and painted up and so forth.
	But Americans, oh look, they got missiles too!
	And it was the fear of missiles, not the missiles themselves, that caused us to not confront the Soviet Union and try and make friends with them and abandon our own interests and so forth.
	It's kind of a Simpkin parade, right?
	Yeah, yeah, exactly.
	So anyway, this is new, and I guess that's my message, that the old answers to that question are not reliable anymore.
	But that still doesn't mean you shouldn't give them up.
	I mean, you shouldn't use them, I should say.
	Because I think that even though Even though we don't have money because we're not obedient enough and they cut us down and we did have coins, we could probably find somebody who would take silver coins if they're a small denomination and gold coins in return for food or something that they have a little surplus on in their homes.
	But this is not living, this is not surviving, this is slavery.
	And I think, though, if we fall back on the fact that what's going to get us through this, one way or the other, is going to be the ideas.
	It's going to be the principles on which we base our life.
	I think people who have a relationship with Christ are going to have a foundation that's going to carry them through this stuff.
	And it's going to be very difficult if you don't have something like that.
	You are going to, if you don't have any, the sand is going to be shifting.
	The earth is going to be quaking.
	And if there isn't some foundation that is rock solid in your life, And if they've got you afraid, they've got you.
	And that's what we saw four years ago.
	That was really panic and fear.
	But that brings me to the medical stuff, because I don't want to finish the interview without having you talk about the book, World Without Cancer.
	I think this is really a time for people's eyes to be open to this, because prior to what happened in 2020, a lot of people were taken in by the white coats.
	When they first started this thing, you had a public health person come out.
	I played that clip over and over again.
	Comes out to the podium, but before the person who's going to speak comes out of the podium, they had six people come out, three on each side, all of them in white coats.
	And they march out in a line, and three of them stand on one side of the podium, and three of them said, look at this, they're just putting this in your face, like we got white lab coats, we're medical, and we have authority, so listen to us.
	And I think people have seen that now as a fraud, and they have seen the self-interest in all this stuff, so they're open to questioning the authorities on this.
	And I'm sure, you know, you must have quite a story behind A World Without Cancer, because I know they came after Laetrile and B-17 and amygdalin and all that in a very, very heavy way.
	I didn't realize that you had written this book until I interviewed John Richardson at rncstore.com.
	When he was talking about the books that they have there, and about your book especially, that's one of the main reasons I wanted to get you on, because this is so key, and it is a time that people are ripe to hear this message.
	Tell us a little bit about that, how you got into it.
	Well, there you go again.
	How did I get into it?
	Well, John Richardson Sr., Dr. Richardson, and I were very close friends.
	In fact, we had both worked together on projects in the Burke Society.
	And he put up some money to open up a little bookstore in the San Francisco area.
	And that's where I got involved, because I was with the Burke Society in those days.
	But we soon developed a personal friendship that went well beyond that.
	And it got to the point where, after a while, We want to get away from the regular routine of our daily lives.
	We like to get away from town, go out in the countryside and tell people we're going fishing or something like that.
	But we just go out and talk and do some hiking in the hills.
	We're out doing that, and Dr. John says to me, Ed, I need your help.
	He took his briefcase with him on that trip I thought was strange.
	He opened up his briefcase and pulled out some papers and fumbled through them.
	He says, I'm trying to write an article for the local newspaper or magazine, and I need your help.
	Writing, could you help me?
	I said, well, sure, of course, that's what I do.
	You're the doctor.
	If I get sick, you help me.
	I'm the writer.
	And if you're silly enough to ask me, I'll help you with the writing.
	And so he said, well, I asked him, I said, what is it?
	He said, well, I'm in trouble with the local medical association.
	They're threatening to take away my license.
	I said, what did you do?
	You know, like the typical, what did you do wrong?
	Yeah.
	Well, what I'm doing wrong is I'm saving lives.
	Oh, this was, this was now we've seen that story over and over again.
	People are ready to hear this and understand what's behind it.
	Yeah.
	I said, what do you mean?
	So naturally he told me the story.
	He says, he said, I'm, I'm an eye, ear, nose and throat specialist, as you know, but I've been getting people with cancer and throughout their body is systemic and they want me to treat them because they hear that I've got something that works.
	And I said, well, do you?
	He says, yeah, I do.
	Well, tell me about it.
	So that's how the whole thing started.
	He said, well, I found out there's a substance that's found in nature that I didn't believe in at first, but my office manager convinced me to look into it.
	So I did.
	This is a substance that occurs in nature.
	And, um, If you eat it, it turns out to be a natural control or prevention, a natural resistance against cancer.
	I said, how can that be?
	He said, well, I'm not sure how it can be, but I know that it works.
	So he's told me the story of this amygdalin, or laetrile is the more popular name for it, that's found in some 1,200 edible plants, actually.
	But anyway, it's primarily found for commercial purposes in apricot seeds and peach seeds.
	Any fruit in the rosacea family has this stuff called amygdalin in it.
	It's bitter to the taste.
	And that's why most people in the Western world or in affluent societies don't like to eat foods that have this substance in it because it's bitter.
	If you've ever bitten into an apple seed, you know what I'm talking about.
	That's the flavor.
	And he said that stuff in low quantities, it looks like it's a natural control for cancer.
	And he told me this story.
	All right, this gets interesting in the details.
	He had a dog that had cancer and he was about to put the dog down because, you know, he tried chemotherapy and everything else on the dog that the doctors do and it wasn't working.
	In fact, the dog was getting sicker.
	And when he heard about this, he says, I decided to use this substance on the dog.
	And he said, blow me down, the dog got well real fast.
	And I couldn't believe it.
	I'd never seen that happen before.
	And then the next part of the story is that he said his nurse came to him, his head nurse, whose husband had terminal cancer.
	And she said, Dr. John, you know, my husband is not gonna last very much longer.
	And I saw what happened to the dog Would you please do that for my husband?
	And he said, well, sure, I'd be glad to, but don't tell anybody because it's not approved, you know, for human use.
	And he tried it on her husband and he got well.
	This is how it all started.
	And so John said, I started using it very, very cautiously and very low dosages and very suspiciously, making sure that I was not risking anybody's life, using it only on people who really had terminal cancer to start off with.
	And he said, I was getting way, way better results than anybody I know.
	But the word got out.
	He said, I never advertised it, never talked much about it, because I knew what the establishment would say about it.
	It was quackery or something like that.
	But the word got out because these patients that are dancing out of the office when they came in on a gurney.
	They talk about it.
	And so patients started coming to his clinic and it was no longer by this time an eye, ear, nose and throat clinic.
	It was a cancer clinic and people were coming from all over the world.
	And I didn't know that at that time.
	So that's the story he told me.
	And he said, now, now the medical professionals found out about it and they threatened me that if I don't stop this immediately, they're going to take my license.
	He said, I need to tell the story.
	Will you help me write it?
	I said, sure.
	That sounds interesting.
	I thought it would be it.
	three-day project, you know, just to read about it a little bit and ask a few questions and then just write it up.
	But it turned out to be, I don't know, a three-year project.
	Yeah, something like that.
	And it changed my life.
	It just changed my life.
	I wouldn't be here today if I hadn't learned about that because it made me realize That almost everything that we think we know that is really important in our lives is a lie.
	When I realized that money was a lie and now I found out that cancer treatments were a lie, what's more important than that?
	Yes.
	So that changed my life and In my own family I've seen, we have some members of our family that are alive because of the treatments.
	So I wrote the book.
	It took me quite a while.
	I sat at the feet of listening to the great The great scientists and doctors who really knew about this stuff.
	Dr. Richardson was very open about it.
	And of course, I met the originator of this whole treatment, who was Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., who was the inventor of all that.
	Not the inventor, but the discoverer of it, the pioneer in using it for cancer.
	And I sat in his office many, many an hour.
	He's a portly gentleman.
	He would sit back and he'd put his fingers together.
	He'd say, well, let me think about that for a moment.
	And then he'd go off.
	How did he discover it?
	How did he discover it?
	Well, okay, his father was a doctor, an M.D.
	He was not an M.D.
	doctor.
	He had his Ph.D.
	degree from some smaller institution, which they like to hold it against him because it wasn't from Harvard or something like that.
	He was a PhD, but his doctor was a pioneer in that.
	So his doctor and his father and he worked together on all kinds of herbal constructions.
	from nature, because they had already discovered in their minds that nature has the cure, not the test tube.
	Yes.
	So that's where they were experimenting, and they found that the use of laetrile or the substance.
	Now there's this whole big story behind it, so that's what the book was about.
	I'll just give you one quick example.
	One of the clues to this was the fact that in the Midwest, It was quite common for farmers to see that their cows would develop cancers of the mouth and lips and so forth and other parts of their bodies in the wintertime.
	But they would usually go away in the spring.
	And they said, why is that?
	There must be something about the weather, you know?
	Then they got to observing that it happened shortly after the green sprouts came up through the snow in the spring, when the snow started to melt, and the first green grasses started to come up through the snow, and the cows would eat the green grasses.
	And it turns out these broadleaf grasses are very rich sources of amygdalin.
	So that was the kind of clues that they had, how they discovered this, is by, you know, scientific method.
	And so anyway, that's how it started.
	And so John asked me to help him write the article, and I did.
	And that led to the book.
	And then what happened?
	When we look at what happened in the last few years, if anybody comes up with any treatment other than the one that they've decided they're going to sell you, they come after you in every way.
	We've seen that with ivermectin, HQ, anything else that anybody comes up with.
	And so everybody, this has been on public display now, but you lived this, I guess the book was written in 1970.
	You've done an update, I think in 2010 or something like that.
	Yeah.
	But, you know, this is back in the 60s, I guess, where this was happening, but, you know, when you were publishing it.
	So what happened after you published this?
	What was the firestorm?
	Well, that's an interesting story.
	I published it and we sold it as a little, I had a little publishing company by then, American Media, and we had a very brisk sale on it.
	And I went to a book convention in San Francisco shortly after the book was published.
	It was, and that's where all the biggies came, you know, these big exhibits that Half a block wide.
	And let's see, which one was it?
	It was the little pocket books.
	Bantam, Bantam.
	Bantam was there.
	And I thought, well, maybe we could convince Bantam to reprint this and put it on the big market.
	So it just so happened on the morning of the first day, the president of Bantam was there on the floor when I was there.
	And I saw this cluster of people around him.
	So I thought, I'll get in line.
	So I did.
	And so I went up, shook his hand.
	I said, I'll make this short, Mr. Smith, or whatever his name was.
	I said, we have this book here on laetrile, and it's curing cancer.
	You probably have heard about it in the newspapers.
	There's a big controversy over it.
	And I'd like to give you a copy and see if it sounds like it's something that Bantam would like to run with.
	So he gave it to his assistant, who was standing next to him.
	And he said, yeah, well, look at this.
	Well, they called me later in the afternoon, and they wanted to have dinner with me.
	And they wanted to talk to me about printing the book.
	So, to make a long story short, we did.
	We signed the contract.
	Wow!
	We got Bantam to publish our book.
	And they put it out, they made it, they had a special name for it.
	It was a special edition that they can produce a book in, I think it's 48 hours, something like that.
	And they just work around the clock.
	They have teams of people and they work 24 hours to get the thing out in 48 hours or something like that.
	And they did that with this book.
	And it went on the book stand and it was selling like hotcakes.
	And then all of a sudden we got this message that it's out of print.
	Nobody can get the book.
	It's out of print.
	And so we checked it out.
	Sure enough, it's out of print.
	How come it's out of print?
	And I called the publisher and they said, well, there's no demand for it.
	There's no demand.
	Bookstores are clamoring for it.
	Well, our statistics show there's no demand for it.
	Well, we couldn't convince them otherwise.
	They just didn't want to reprint it.
	So it was clear that somebody on the board of directors at Bantam got the word.
	Hey, you guys made a big mistake.
	You published the wrong book.
	And so we were clamped out.
	We had one printing and that was it.
	It was glorious for a few weeks, but after that it was dead in the doornail.
	Story of my life.
	You talk about the pharmaceutical companies, they come after you and they get you shut down.
	It is amazing, but again, you know, people can find that at rcstore.com.
	I know that he sells it there.
	And very important for people to take control of their life, to question what they have been taught, and to think critically.
	And that really has been the story of your life, I think.
	Questioning what a lot of people just accept as fact.
	And you have done your research, and you gave people your opinion, and I think when their response is to just shut things down, that's something of an endorsement of your research, I think.
	When their only response is to censor you.
	Yeah, in sort of a backward way, that's a pretty good recommendation.
	It depends.
	I've been centered by the best.
	That's right.
	Well, tell us about the Red Pill University and the Red Expo, which is coming up November 16th through 17th, right?
	Tell us a little bit about that.
	Yes.
	That's a big flagship event.
	We started the Red Pill Expos in 2017, and they've been just roaring success as we were very skeptical about it at first because, you know, the Red Pill meme, in case there's anybody listening that doesn't know what that means, it's based on a sci-fi movie.
	About 21 years ago now, called the Matrix.
	And the whole theme of the story was that humans were now living in a fantasy world.
	They were all wired up to machines and they were dreaming about their lives.
	They weren't really living them.
	And they thought they were going to work every day.
	They thought they were raising a family, going on vacation, eating meals and so forth.
	But it was all programmed into their minds.
	And they were controlled by the Matrix.
	That's what they called it.
	It was this computerized reality.
	The only way to get out of that was to take the red pill.
	There was the blue pill, which you could take if you chose to, which would put you back into the...
	into the illusion.
	But to get out of the illusion, you had to take the red pill.
	And it turns out that many people chose the blue pill because it was more comfortable.
	They'd rather not know that they were wired up to a machine.
	They'd rather think they were living a normal life.
	It was more pleasant than knowing that you had to fight the matrix to exist.
	So it was kind of a good parallel to the reality.
	So we thought we would call this the Red Pill Expo and deal with topics like that, We wanted to expose the reality that's underneath the illusions.
	And as I said a moment ago, it seems like the more important something is, the more likely it is that we are in illusions about it.
	Because it's to somebody's best interest to do that to us.
	They profit from our naivety and our false beliefs.
	Now, where can people go to get this?
	You've got redpoll.org?
	Yeah, we have done physical events from the beginning and they were very well attended and very successful.
	But this time around, we've decided to go 100% live stream.
	Primarily so that we can cut expenses on the overall production and make the event absolutely free instead of having to charge tickets for it.
	Because we want, this is not about money, it's about getting the word out.
	So that's what we're doing this time, and it's working pretty well.
	We're very impressed by the response.
	But we want as many people, this is globally now, around the world, to sign up for it.
	And you can find all the information, who's going to be speaking, what the events are, what the topics are, and a lot of Insights as to the themes and so forth on redpillexpo.org.
	Redpillexpo.org.
	So sign up.
	It's free.
	And we do have an option for those that want to come in on a VIP basis.
	They get some extra goodies if they want to do that.
	Like they can ask questions of the speakers and We've got a raffle going on and all that kind of thing.
	That's great.
	It would be nice to be able to pay the bills, but we want this free if necessary to anybody that can't afford $10 or $20 or whatever it is as a donation.
	It's free.
	That's what our goal is, you see.
	Good.
	And one other question I've got about it.
	I see that you've got a new book coming out.
	It's called The Chasm, The Issue Behind All Issues.
	When is that coming out?
	Well, the latter part is a tough one.
	Yes, I do have a new book.
	It's been coming out.
	It's been coming out ever since the day after 9-11, actually.
	Oh, okay.
	That's when I started.
	That's when I started to write it.
	The day after 9-11, that was, you talk about a red pill.
	Oh, yeah.
	But the whole purpose of the book is to provide historical support for the fact that our war today that we're in is a war of ideas.
	It's an ideological war, and it's not between the left and the right.
	It's not between the Republicans and the Democrats or the liberals and the conservatives.
	Or the Nazis, or the Communists, or the Socialists, or all of these labels that we've been given to worry about.
	It's not the Masons, it's not the Catholics, it's not the Jews, it's not the black people, it's not the Christians, it's not the Muslims.
	All these divisions they want to get us focused on, you know?
	It's not about any of that.
	Those all little subsections play a part in it, but the overriding Controlling, dominating force behind it all is an idea, and it's a conflict of ideas, I should say, between something called collectivism and individualism.
	I found out in my research that those words were well known and used quite extensively a hundred years ago.
	You find them in the old books and in old newspapers, too.
	But modern?
	No, it's all been scrubbed.
	And for good reason, because those two words, as strange as they are to the ears of most people today, are fully describing the conflict between left and right and all these things we mentioned before.
	When you peel off the labels, you find it's collectivism versus individualism.
	What is that?
	How do you define that?
	That's what this booklet is all about.
	I took all the issues in the big book that I'm working on, To illustrate support for these principles, I've taken just the principles themselves and put them into a 50-page document, and I'm giving them away free because I'm afraid I'm not going to live long enough to get this bloody book finished, although I'm making progress.
	I want to get these principles out now, so I About 10 months ago, we made this little booklet.
	Here, this is 50 pages.
	Yeah, it's the chasm, collectivism versus individualism, and it's everything I have learned about those two topics.
	It's all there in type, and we got some good illustrations.
	You can see those in the back.
	They sort of illustrate the points that we're making.
	I think I have found very few, very few open-minded people, and that's hard to define, but very few people who I would have considered to be on the other side politically, from my position, that after reading this and going over these principles, doesn't come to the point where they say, hmm, hmm, I guess I've been an individualist all along and didn't know it.
	It's that simple.
	It's that clear.
	We get to thinking of, well, let me back up.
	The mantra of collectivism, is this.
	The individual must be sacrificed.
	As fully stated, the group is more important than the individual, and the individual must be sacrificed, if necessary, for the greater good of the greater number.
	Boy, didn't we see that with public health?
	We've seen that with everything!
	That's a good example because they don't care about individual health, right?
	We don't really care if you've had any issues with any of this.
	You're going to do it for the public health, for the public good.
	Everybody's going to have to do this.
	And I talk about that bureaucracy, the public education, and once they start talking about that, it is the collectivism that is there.
	You'll find this issue underneath all of them.
	That's why I say this is the issue behind all issues, literally.
	And look at Pearl Harbor, look at 9-11, look at COVID, look at everything.
	I don't care what it is.
	You'll find that collectivism is the answer, what makes all of that seem justified.
	Yes.
	Lenin put it this way.
	Vladimir Ilyich Lenin said, if you want to make an omelette, you have to crack some eggs.
	And now it can be said many different ways, but the greatest insults of history, the greatest outrages of history have been justified with this mantra.
	President Roosevelt and his team justified withholding information from American commanders on Pearl Harbor so that they were literally surprised by the Japanese attack.
	And they justified that, and they justified keeping the information unknown to the American people because it was a mark of statesmanship.
	It was a means of bringing about a greater good, because it was necessary to convince the American people that we needed to get into World War II as quickly as possible, so that we can sit at the peace table afterwards, and when we do, re-divide the world, and we'll make it a better world.
	And we probably would save millions of American lives, too, because the Japanese surely would have come over and bombed our cities, and so forth.
	And you know, the average American says, oh, oh.
	Yeah, I guess the 4,000 sailors we killed deliberately in Pearl Harbor was worth it because it's the greater good of the greater number, you know?
	Everything, everything that happens in this world that's horrible is justified by the perpetrators on the mantra of collectivism.
	Yes.
	And it's time to recognize that.
	It's time to break that hypnosis that that idea has over us.
	I learned that in school.
	They taught me that the greater good for the greater number was the ideal political position.
	And most people still think it is.
	Yes.
	Oh boy, we saw it in spades, didn't we?
	Absolutely amazing, yeah.
	And I think you're spot on with that and so many other things.
	It's so interesting to talk to you.
	You've had so many important insights throughout your life and your work has been very valuable to so many people.
	And I haven't read The World Without Cancer, but that's my intention to read that.
	That's very, very important, especially when we look at the last four years, how the veil has been pulled back on what the pharmaceutical industry and what the government supposedly oversight people are doing for the greater good.
	You know, people die miserably and it's like, well, it's rare.
	It doesn't matter, right?
	It's for the better good, for the greater good, the common good.
	So we're going to approve this drug that is out there.
	Yeah.
	Thank you so much for joining us, and again, it's redpilleuniversity.org, but you have redexpo.org, is that the one where people go for the Red Expo that's coming up?
	What is the website?
	It's redpillexpo.org.
	redpillexpo.org, okay.
	Yeah, redpillexpo.org.
	If you go there, you'll see who we have as the upcoming speakers.
	We still have three or four that we haven't put on the page yet.
	They're all dynamite.
	These people I'll have a red pill to share with you.
	And they're all really, really important.
	And, uh, so it'd be two days.
	I mean, you'd be prepared to be blown away by information like this.
	It'll change.
	It'll change your life.
	That's great.
	Thank you so much for joining us, G. Edward Griffin.
	It's been a great pleasure talking to you.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, David.
	I really appreciate it, and it's good to see you again on the screen, and we'll be talking later.
	Thank you very much.
	Bye-bye.
	Well, what an inspiration G. Edward Griffin is.
	A real critical thinker, a visionary, a man with the courage to go wherever the truth leads him, and again, landmark books.
	The U.N.
	A Fearful Master, Creature from Jekyll Island, A World Without Cancer, and of course, the Red Pill Expo that is coming up.
	Thank you for joining us.
	Have a good day.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Joining us now is Catherine Austin Fitts.
	Always a pleasure to have her.
	Of course, her website is solari.com.
	Always a pleasure to have her here.
	Keen insights about everything.
	And of course, coming up, we're going to talk about hijacking Bitcoin.
	And Roger Ver, as we all know, people call him Bitcoin Jesus, and we look at the way that they have railroaded him.
	But he also wrote about Hijacking Bitcoin.
	When I had Aaron Day on, we mentioned it a little bit, but Catherine has gone into a great depth with that.
	They did a review of the book, and she's now published her interview with him that you can find on slurry.com.
	It's with Steve Patterson, who's the co-author.
	Oh, okay, that's right.
	The interview.
	Ver's got a bit of a problem now, I guess, doing interviews with the government on his back, and I don't know if he's in prison now or not.
	So we did an interview with Steve and it's excellent.
	I mean, if you really want to understand what's going on in Bitcoin, it's absolutely excellent.
	And we made it public because this was one that the subscribers wanted to send on to their network.
	Oh, that's great.
	It's public.
	Just come to Solari and you can get the book review.
	You can get a link to an article I wrote on why the Bitcoin reserve fraud is a scam, basically.
	And you can get the interview and send all of those on.
	So if you want to understand sort of the current baseball on Bitcoin, it's all there.
	And we're going to talk a little bit about that.
	I want to get your take on what's going on with crypto and the new Trump administration, where this is all headed, the tokenization, the securitization that is out there, and we want to talk about that.
	But when I got you on, I'd just been talking about marriage and family and how that is all unraveling here in America, and you said, I'd like to say something about what I've observed with men and women in various fields that you've worked in.
	Tell us a little bit about that.
	So I'm really glad you brought this up because I think there is nothing more important.
	The way control is instituted is through divide and conquer.
	And the most important divide and conquer is turning men and women against each other.
	Yes.
	And then it's turning the generations against each other.
	And if we can turn that around, You know, we dramatically exponentially increase our power and I think that's part of what I was hearing you saying is your understanding of that, but I wanted to tell you sort of my background.
	So, many years ago when I was, I went to my first few years of college and then I studied Chinese in a Hong Kong for a year and I came back as a transfer student to the University of Pennsylvania and got a job working first as a busboy, then as a waitress and then I got promoted up to be a bartender.
	And it was in a French restaurant next to the University of Pennsylvania.
	And it was a two-person bar.
	And my tips and gross were so much bigger than everybody else's that the owner of the restaurant, who was very meritocratic, I was the only woman, he decided to make me bar manager because whatever I was doing, it made a lot more money for the house.
	Anyway, so the bartenders went on strike because they didn't want to work for a woman.
	And so they went to the owner, who was a very interesting guy, and they said, we're going to strike.
	And he said, it's not my problem.
	She's the bar manager.
	Go tell her it's her problem.
	So they came to see me, and they said, I said, why are you going to strike?
	They said, we don't want to work for you because we think you're going to feminize the bar.
	And I said, well I am, but you're going to make a lot more money.
	So, you know, so anyway, long and short of it, everybody stayed except for the Thank you.
	the strike leader and um and so for the next two months i made the changes that that i wanted to make but one of my rules was there had to be a man and a woman you needed it it was a two-person bar and you had to have a man and a woman anyway but sometimes we you know we couldn't get a man we couldn't get a woman it was So sometimes we'd end up with two women, sometimes we'd end up with two men.
	But I have very detailed records of how the bar performed and how the pits performed.
	So here's what we learned after, you know, about six months.
	If I had two men on the bar, the house made X and the bartenders made 10% of that, so 0.1X.
	If I had two women, the house made 1.5X and the bartenders made 0.15X.
	They're 50% better, two women than two men.
	If I had a man and a woman, the house made 2X and the bartenders made 0.2X.
	So, literally, if you were a man and I put you on with another man, you made half as much that evening as if I put you on with another woman.
	I mean, literally.
	And it was very interesting.
	Two months later, I was down in the wine cellar doing the wine order, and the former deputy strike leader came down screaming at me.
	It was a Thursday night, which is our biggest night.
	How dare you put me on with another man?
	You're going to cut my tips in half!
	And I looked at him and I said, I couldn't get another one.
	I just couldn't get another woman.
	But do you see the irony in this?
	What do you think was behind that?
	Let me keep going.
	So many years later when I started Hamilton Securities, it was an investment bank in Washington.
	And one of the things we did, we thought with new technology we could radically reduce the number People that it took to bank and market a deal and We we literally had we had two people running each deal one was sort of so go back to the James Bond movies One was the James Bond person who was going to do the deal The other was the Q person who was going to build and capture all the tools, right?
	They needed you needed a tool and software and intellectual capital engineer and then you needed a deal door So we always had two people who were kind of running the deal So I kept the same records on and we had a rule that unless we could make 10 times for the client what we could make for ourselves, you know, we didn't want to do the deal.
	So we felt we needed to get at least a multiple of 10.
	Anyway, so we track what the client made and we track what we would make.
	Well, it turned out to be almost the same as the bar business with a twist.
	You just had to... So if I had two women on the deal, the client would make 10x and we'd make x. If I had two men, the client would make 15x and we'd make 1.5x.
	So it was the opposite of the bar business.
	Men were better.
	at transactions than client customer service, you know, in the bar.
	So when it came to relationships, it appeared that women were better.
	When it came to deals, men were better.
	But if I had a man and a woman, then the client made 20X and we made 2X.
	So it was the same thing.
	Now, here was the interesting thing.
	Both initially at the bar and certainly at the investment bank, the men always wanted to work with other men and the women always wanted to work with other women.
	So, I had to be a dictator.
	It's like, no, you're going to go get a man or you'll be fired.
	That's how it is.
	But here's what I saw, and it wasn't sexual so much as energetic.
	There is something, you know, men and women are very different.
	And I don't know if you remember that Mel Gibson movie where he says, yeah, women have 5% more water.
	But, you know, whatever the difference is, if you're going to deal in a human situation and, you know, a big business situation with a lot going on, You know, a man and a woman team are going to know more, see more, understand more.
	They're going to see things that the woman, you know, the man's going to see things a woman won't see.
	The woman's going to see things.
	And what you realize in a family, you know, after going through those two experiences, I realized, you know, trying to have a family with two men or a family with two women, it's just not the same.
	There is a wholeness in terms of seeing the world, understanding the world, managing risk, understanding, you know, a lot of times in my experience as an investment advisor, the women understood the living equity issues and the men understood the financial equity issues and you needed both.
	You know, to integrate and do both.
	The other thing I discovered, I saw it with financial fraud because I had so many jobs cleaning couples up who'd been hurt by financial fraud or health care fraud.
	What I discovered is I can trick a man or I can trick a woman, but it is almost impossible to trick a man and woman working together.
	No, I used to have so many women who would tell me, look, my husband does the finances.
	I don't want to be involved.
	I don't like it.
	And I would say, no, you have to be involved.
	You have to be involved because the family has to integrate the financial equity issues with the living equity issues.
	But the other thing is, he's going to get tricks.
	You know, he's going to get tricked, and it's going to be your fault.
	So you get involved, because you need both.
	You know, at the end of the day, I can't explain it.
	What I will tell you is, there's a magic.
	There's a magic to it that is...
	It's really divine.
	Well, yeah, exactly.
	A lot of people call it complementarianism, right?
	The fact that men and women complement each other, and they're in complementary roles, and we complete each other, and we have different perspectives, and we perceive things very differently, which is what you saw with all of that.
	Right, but it is real easy to You know, to back up and say, oh, it's too much work to work with a guy.
	I'm just going to get another woman.
	It'll be so easy.
	And, you know, there'll be a lot less controversy.
	That's a really fascinating insight.
	That's amazing.
	Let's talk a little bit.
	Where would you like to go next?
	I mean, I would like to talk about the Bitcoin stuff.
	Is there anything else?
	Yeah, so let's talk about the Bitcoin stuff, because I've, you know, I've had an interesting history.
	I worked very hard in 2017.
	I did a very serious due diligence as an investment advisor.
	My clients kept asking me about Bitcoin, and I said, okay.
	And I called up a very dear friend of mine who has a PhD from MIT and used to run research at one of the big Silicon Valley companies.
	And he's the smartest guy I know.
	And I said, I need your help.
	I need to do a serious due diligence on this and I need somebody with a strong technology background.
	So we spent like a hundred hours working on this.
	He did a hundred hours because we did a lot of research separate and then we'd come together.
	And finally I really felt like I understood but I took all my final questions and I flew to Baltimore and had a three-hour lunch with Bill Binney and just grilled him on all my questions.
	And I came away feeling I had a very good understanding of Bitcoin.
	And anyway, but since then every time I talk to somebody who's a Bitcoin Enthusiasts, they say, you don't understand Bitcoin.
	And I say, well, what aspect is it you think I don't understand?
	Is it I don't understand the exchanges and how they work?
	I don't understand the custodian issues.
	I don't understand the technology.
	I don't understand, you know, how the market works.
	I don't understand the regular... What specifically is it you think I don't understand?
	And what I discover is I don't understand the religious faith.
	You're a Bitcoin denier!
	You're a denier!
	No, it's like a religion, and I don't get the religion.
	And you're right, I don't get the religion.
	Anyway, so this is going on for years with people telling me I don't get Bitcoin, but they won't be specific about what that means or what I might read or study that would educate me some more.
	Anyway, but one of our subscribers posted on Solari a couple months ago, you've got to read this new book, Hijacking Bitcoin, by Roger Ver and Steve Patterson.
	Our subscribers usually have very good intelligence and very good recommendations, so I immediately got the book Reddit.
	You know, and I cannot say enough good things about this book.
	It is so beautifully written.
	It is so clear and coherent.
	It's very rare to read a book I found on Bitcoin or crypto that's really coherent and accessible to a financial professional who's not a technologist.
	Anyway, Let me interject here and say, you know, it's interesting because you're talking about Roger Ver and they call him Bitcoin Jesus because he was an evangelist for it.
	I mean, we're talking about the religious aspect of it and everything.
	So, you know, where is he now?
	Has he lost his faith or has it been strengthened and all this stuff?
	So here's, and I have to tell you, I'm very impressed with Roger and his work, and Steve, and his work.
	And, you know, Bitcoin started out as a design that, when it began, it was really a pilot program for a payment system, a global payment system, that had potential.
	It had potential to turn into something pretty wonderful.
	But it didn't.
	It literally got hijacked.
	If you look at who controls Bitcoin, it's a very small group of people.
	And they were able to limit its liquidity in a way that made it very useful for pumping and dumping.
	It's very useful for speculation, but it's not useful as a payment system.
	It's very, very illiquid.
	And of course, it's still an immature industry.
	So if you look at the custodial issues, And the fraud issues, you know, it's a very unregulated sort of wild west market.
	The FBI says 5.6 billion reported losses in crypto reported to them in 2023.
	2023.
	I had a listener who said, yeah, it reminds me very much of the NFT stuff, right?
	You know.
	When they were selling NFTs.
	And that's kind of what I think they did with Bitcoin in a sense.
	They took something that was designed to be a currency and they started turning it into essentially an NFT.
	Well, they've been playing a pump-and-dump game with it, and there's a lot of serious talent and money behind that pump-and-dump.
	And anyway, so I read Hijacking Bitcoin, and I wrote a review of that.
	If you just go to Solary, you can get that.
	And I just did an interview, which we published yesterday with Steve Patterson.
	Which really helps you understand the evolution.
	Now, what happened to Roger, he saw the potential.
	And one of the delightful things about this book is it took me back to when I was at Hamilton Securities and I realized the potential for digital money and creating our own currencies.
	I got really excited and we invented a product called Just-In-Time Money.
	And I remember those days when we just thought, And I tell this story in the book review.
	Eric Hughes was the software developer who hacked ClipperChip, which was Al Gore's thing to control the internet.
	Anyway, so Eric came to Hamilton, and Eric and I spent a whole day with literally the whole firm working on inventing just-in-time money.
	And it was so heady because we saw the potential for what decentralized, you know, something like a cryptocurrency could be.
	Anyway, and when you read Roger and Steve's book, you get back that enthusiasm of what is, you know, theoretically possible.
	It's easy after you've watched the pumping and dumping and the tremendous crime around these things that are going on, and all the lies and disinformation.
	It's easy to get jaundiced, and I love the fact that sort of Roger and Steve got me back in that mood of, you know, You know, there's a new world possible.
	There really is.
	Anyway, so what happened was, this book makes very clear something else.
	And it's very highly documented, very heavily footnoted.
	It's a very serious treatment.
	I am absolutely sure that there is significant counterfeiting of Bitcoin.
	You know, part of the power of Bitcoin was supposed to be that you could only create 21 million.
	But now, what Roger and Steve document, the creationists, call an inflation bug.
	And now there are reports, not just of the one they reported, but of inflation bugs since.
	I'm absolutely convinced with the inflation bugs they can counterfeit, but now that they're doing the ETFs with BlackRock, you know, I did a deep dive on precious metal ETFs.
	Let me tell you, the counterfeiting was real.
	Collateral fraud The financial system we have does collateral fraud every time they have a chance.
	You know, it's kind of like, you know, like not asking a dog to go eat meat.
	They just do it every time.
	Anyway, so I think they've got their company called Securitize because they were securitizing things and creating derivatives.
	And, of course, we talk about, you know, derivatives of gold and silver, things like paper gold and paper silver, which I didn't really understand.
	Naively, everybody thinks, well, they've got some gold and they're now going to sell it to you at a tenth of the price or whatever.
	I didn't realize that that was a derivative until you started seeing changes in the price of gold.
	That it didn't track the spot price of gold.
	It was completely divorced from it.
	And so that was a key tip.
	And then when I researched it, it was like, oh, now I get it.
	You know, what it says is another derivative.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Here we go.
	So right after, so this book makes very clear that the official story on Bitcoin is not true.
	You know, what you've got is you've got a pump-and-dump tool.
	It has no fundamentally utilitarian purpose other than it's a pump-and-dump tool.
	And of course, with a pump-and-dump tool, if you have enough backing for it, you can make a fortune.
	You know, and people have been.
	But also that it's not limited to 21 million Bitcoin.
	Now they don't come out and say that and document, but based on what I've read about inflation bugs in their book and since, and what I know about ETFs, the counterfeiting is on.
	So Bitcoin is basically a speculation and it's rooted in nothing other than the belief that you can get 10 more people to come in tomorrow and buy in.
	It's basically a tool above ball mania.
	And it would have some value if it was a successful global payment system, but it's never become that.
	And it's highly unlikely that it's going to become that.
	So this thing is only as good as sort of the scam.
	Now, let's go back.
	If you look at what's going on in the economy, David, here's what's going on in the economy.
	We did a tremendous amount of work this year on plunder capitalism and land grabs, and the techniques used to do land grabs.
	Now, we've spent decades now creating more and more debt, more and more debt, more and more debt, more and more paper.
	The game of musical chairs is over, the music has stopped, and now everybody's racing to grab the real assets.
	Okay, and that's now if you want the real assets who's got the real assets Howard Luckin just gave an interview You know is the nominee for Secretary of Commerce and had been in competition for Secretary of Treasury where he said Don't worry about the debt.
	You know the debts 36 trillion the US balance sheet has a hundred 500 trillion dollars of land and mineral resources, and that's true, okay?
	And in fact, in the last Trump administration, the US Geological Survey started doing a survey of all the land and mineral resources of North America, including what the government owns.
	So, and if you look at the state governments, I mean the federal government owns a lot, the states own a lot too.
	So if you're sitting here and you've run up the Bitcoin market, you have a small number of people have a tremendous amount of Bitcoin.
	They can't possibly get out at the current situation.
	You know, they can't get their money out without crashing the market.
	Right.
	Now, what do they want?
	They want real assets.
	So what you want to do is you want to swap your Bitcoin for land, for real estate, for precious metals, for real businesses.
	You want real assets.
	So how do you get out of your Bitcoin and get into the real assets?
	Well, it's real simple.
	You get the government to buy your Bitcoin and you get the government to sell its land, right?
	Mm-hmm pretty simple.
	So you want them to get they have the real and you have the unreal So you flip in the unreal and you get the real so what's being proposed?
	What's being proposed is the government announced long-term buying programs to buy Bitcoin So, the federal government buy Bitcoin, the states buy Bitcoin.
	If you announce a long-term buying program in a highly illiquid market, you're going to send the price to the moon, and all the guys who started and built this speculation can sell into that.
	Okay?
	And not only can they sell their 21 million Bitcoin, they can sell more than their 21 million Bitcoin, right?
	Right?
	Because there's counterfeit.
	Okay.
	You've got to be careful that you're not their exit strategy, right?
	Get into this thing.
	And where's the government going to get that money?
	All the people who don't want to go into the marketplace and want to buy Bitcoin, the government is going to sell bonds to their retirement funds.
	The money's going to come out of their retirement funds and go into Bitcoin, you know, held in the treasury, the state or federal government treasury.
	So you're going to take from the poor and give to the rich, or you're going to take from the middle class Yeah.
	us and give to the rich yeah it's um you know it's and now if the oil industry said we want the government to start long-term buying of our oil or the agriculture industry said we want long-term buying of our agriculture or the pharmaceuticals said we want the government long-term buying of our pharmaceuticals we would all know what that's about right yeah
	but for some reason when the bitcoin enthusiasts say the vast majority of people don't want to buy our bitcoin so we want to have government mandate to make them buy our bitcoin with their retirement savings mm-hmm That's about as ugly as it gets.
	And it's very ugly because if you look at how much money those guys poured into donations, they're basically saying we can bribe the politicians and get them to use your retirement savings to buy Bitcoin because you won't.
	You won't buy it.
	So we're going to make you buy it.
	H.L.
	Mencken said, an election is an advance auction of stolen goods.
	I quote that all the time, and that is really what we're looking at here, isn't it?
	But let's look at a chart.
	Go back to the going direct reset, which was reviewed by the central bankers in August of 2019.
	If we do a chart of the U.S.
	stock market, what we see is the U.S.
	stock market is up over 100% since that date.
	And the Treasury, if we take the 20-year Treasury ETF, it's down by 35%.
	So what's the game?
	The game is the government, Treasury, sells Treasury bonds to our retirement funds and our IRAs and 401ks and retirement funds around the world.
	And then it takes that money and it spends that money, it gives that money to Elon Musk to do SpaceX.
	Or it gives that money, you know, the Chinese are subsidizing Tesla.
	Or it gives that money to, you know, to invest in tremendous amounts of AI.
	Or the CHIP Act.
	Tremendous money to drive, you know, Taiwan Semiconductor.
	So all the guys who are getting that money out of our retirement fund are getting huge up in their companies while we're We're going down 35% financing the game.
	Now, if you think it's bad in the stock market, because all that stuff, for the most part, is real.
	You may disagree with how it's priced or how it's organized, but it's real railroads, real satellites flying around, real chips being put into computers.
	You know, and so you're still financing something that has to do with the integration of technology and productive activities.
	If you take this and buy those guys out of their scam, And they're free to turn around and buy the land and other real estate.
	So if you look at some of the trial balloons, RFK at Bitcoin 2024 proposed that the sales of Bitcoin should be tax-free and secret.
	So the Treasury is buying it, but they're not saying who they're buying it from.
	Right?
	It's secret.
	And the people who are selling it don't have to pay taxes if they roll it into real estate.
	How did he justify making it secret?
	What did he say to justify that?
	I had not seen that before.
	I finally wrote a commentary up and I said, this is so outrageous, I'm not going to even send it to him, I'm just going to write it and publish it.
	But I sent it to him and his advisors and said, you know what?
	This is a take from the poor and give to the rich scheme.
	The worst take from the poor and give to the rich scheme I've ever seen.
	And what are you leaving the governments with?
	Instead of having 500 trillion of land and mineral resources, they end up with a bunch of Bitcoin.
	What are they going to do with that?
	It's going to be worthless.
	Yeah, one of the things that bothers me about all this stuff, too, of course, is tokenization.
	You know, you're talking about the Bitcoin swap-out for real assets and land and things like that.
	And I call Howard Lutnick, I call him Lucky Lutnick.
	He got real lucky on 9-11, you know, but he's all about tokenization.
	He's like the tokenization king.
	And I'm very concerned about, you know, it's great if you get, I think the government under Biden was coming directly at him, going to just prohibit it in their face.
	I'm concerned about what is happening with the Trump administration, as you're pointing out, you know, this one aspect of it here, which is very key, which is a switching out of assets, but it's also the privacy.
	And I know you're about financial privacy and the importance of cash and things like that.
	All this fascination with blockchain exposes all of that, and so that's another aspect Yeah, well it sets up a two-tier system where everything we do is public and everything, you know, there's a second system that's totally private.
	Yes, yes.
	Right.
	And increasingly it's that way with government all the time and they've just, as part of this continuing resolution thing, as the listener pointed out, They've got a clause in there to hide data that is being passed around within various committees and things like that within the House.
	So, again, they're always trying to hide what they do and have more information about what you're doing.
	So let's look at a couple of key strategic points.
	So the first thing they need if they're going to get financial control is they need a digital ID.
	And Trump has been promoting a digital ID and the conservatives and Trump together, you know, they use immigration and election fraud as an excuse for digital.
	We do not need a digital ID system.
	We had honest elections and we had tight borders before digital technology existed.
	I don't want to hear, you know, that's a bunch of hooey.
	So, so, you know, but they're using that as an excuse.
	And I just saw one of the business newsletters I get said that Congress will start off by doing, addressing election fraud and immigration right off the bat.
	And my fear is that's an excuse to do a digital ID.
	Now you have the states pushing the real ID.
	They've been trying to push the real ID ever since Since 9-11, but it's been going slow at the states, and we need to do everything we can.
	You know, if I was a state legislator, I'd just get the Real ID thrown out of the DMV, and we need to do that.
	And now TSA is going to be pretty much demanding that.
	They said this next year.
	We'll see what happens with that.
	If you have a passport, they can't demand a Real ID.
	You have a passport.
	But they're also setting up their biometric thing, and that's one of the things when Trump is talking about digital ID.
	Yeah, air, land, and sea, and it's going to be biometric.
	I mean, it's very concerning.
	We saw DeSantis in Florida, and the rest of them saying, we've got to have mandatory e-verify because of immigration and illegals taking people's jobs.
	It's not true.
	It's absolutely not true.
	So the first thing is you've got to stop a digital ID.
	The second thing you've got to stop is an all-digital monetary system.
	Because if you have a digital ID and an all-digital monetary system, then we're saying, okay, then we can control where you go, what you buy, And we know everything there is to know about you.
	It's a complete surveillance system.
	And if you don't behave, we can turn off your money, or we can limit your money in a whole variety of ways, and we can institute taxation without representation.
	Then the third thing we need to stop is what we want is we want the people's representatives to control and operate fiscal policy.
	We don't want the central bankers controlling fiscal policy in addition to monetary policy.
	The rise of the deep state correlates almost perfectly with the rise of private corporations and banks doing government operations.
	Okay?
	The idea that somehow Doge is going to go in there, fire all the civil servants, and put in big tech contractors and things are going to get better?
	Nope.
	It's the opposite.
	If you finish getting rid of the civil service, you will end up with the central banks and intelligence agencies controlling and running everything, because that's who the corporations and the defense contractors and the big tech companies are going to report to.
	They're not going to report to Congress.
	You know, Congress is, you know, that's game over.
	So those are the three... That's a really good point.
	That's a really good point about Doge.
	Yeah, that's very important.
	Right.
	So those are the three things.
	You want to preserve the legislature's controlling fiscal policy.
	You want to stop an all-digital monetary system.
	And you don't want to let a digital ID take effect.
	Because if you get those three things, boom, boom, boom, boom, then we're talking about living in a digital concentration camp in a slavery system.
	Yeah, that's absolutely right.
	It's that simple.
	And they came out and said, you know, before the election, a few months before the election, we're not going to do CBDC, the five I's, states, countries.
	You can do it with credit cards and crypto.
	Yeah, they can do it with these pieces, and a lot of that is already in place with MasterCard.
	What you want to stop is an all-digital monetary system.
	Yes.
	An all-digital monetary system.
	And it's not, you know, it's not, forget CBDC versus, forget all these different products in the digital realm, you know, all of which could be wonderful or terrible depending on how you do them.
	Yeah.
	So, technology in a way is agnostic.
	It's how we use it.
	That's right.
	So, all these things could be wonderful or they could be terrible.
	What we cannot afford is an all-digital system because it will be controlled by the people who control the hardware.
	That's right, yeah.
	You know, I'm seeing a lot of states got on board a couple of years ago, they were talking about it very heavily, CBDC, and so you've got a lot of different states that are putting out stuff still to say we're not going to have CBDC.
	They just rename it and it morphs into something completely, you know, they just spin it a little bit and you still get, but the essence that you're talking about there, There's a digital ID and the fact that we have digital cash.
	That's what they need to be focused on.
	The CBDC, they realize, because they watch conversations on social media, they realize that we're on to that game.
	So they spin that game in a different way and come around in a different angle.
	So I want everybody to go to Solari and we have a big new memo that we published.
	It's up on PDF.
	You can download it.
	You can forward it.
	You can link to it.
	It's called What the States Can Do Building a Legal and Financial Infrastructure for Financial Freedom.
	It's a very serious look at all the different areas that a governor or state legislature can implement to protect financial freedom within their jurisdiction so that no matter what the guys in Babel, Switzerland or what the guys in Washington or Wall Street do, you can have financial freedom within your state.
	And the beauty of the states, as you know, is they, under the Constitution, the powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states.
	The states have the power to protect our financial freedom in a way that protects our governmental and individual sovereignty.
	And that was, we've, the Solari team's been working night and day for two years to figure out, working with different legislators and state leaders, how to do this.
	And that information is up I encourage you to download, read it, send it to all the legislators.
	There's so many great things that can be done and for everything we cover, David, we give you links and citations to the states that have either done it or proposed it so you can find your counterparties around the country who are working on this because there's a lot of Good coordination between the treasurers, the AGs, and the different state legislators.
	It's almost like by 2022 we figured, okay, we got to do this.
	We're on our own.
	We got to do this.
	That's right.
	And that is important, and that's a big, I mean, there's things that we can do as individuals, and I'll ask you about that in a second, but it's very important that we fight them at that level as well.
	Do you have information besides the people who are on that board, you know, information on a state-by-state level as to people who are open to this type of thing as well?
	Yeah, so get in the game.
	We found that a fair amount of our subscribers were reticent to contact or communicate.
	They didn't know their state senator.
	They didn't know their state representative.
	We kept saying, hey, listen, those are the most important elections this year, so get in the game.
	Get involved.
	But right beneath what the states can do, the PDF, we have another PDF called Working with Your State Legislators.
	It's a guide to if you feel, you know, I don't know what to do.
	I don't know how to get to know them.
	I don't know, you know, that's a guide for you to get to know, help you get to know your state legislators and know sort of how to get into the process.
	And how to get yourself acclimated.
	So that's there as a resource too.
	I also want to mention we've announced we're going to take one of the briefings I do in Ask Catherine and the Solaria team and do a briefing in the second Thursday of every month We're reserving that time to brief state legislators, and the first briefing is on January 9th on Thursday.
	It's for state legislators, state officials, and their staff, and state bankers if they want to invite the state bankers with them, and of course the subscriber who arranges it is invited as well.
	And that's the first one in January 9th is going to be on the Bitcoin Reserve scam.
	And we have a lot of state legislators who are receiving, they're getting asked to refer females.
	And so they need to understand what is this?
	How does it work?
	Is it a good idea?
	Is it not a good idea?
	If it's not a good idea, why?
	And how do I explain it to my constituents who think it is a good idea?
	And that's key because, you know, January 9th you're going to do that, January 21st when Trump becomes, he says, first day we're going to do a Bitcoin reserve.
	Very first day.
	So it's important for people to understand what that is before that.
	So he doesn't have the legal authority to do a Bitcoin reserve.
	What he can do is the marshals, Department of Justice has seized 200,000 Bitcoins or 210,000 Bitcoins.
	And I'm assuming they're holding those in the asset forfeiture fund.
	He, in theory, could say, I'm moving them to Treasury.
	I'm not sure how he does that without an appropriation, but he certainly has those 210,000.
	He can say, I'm not going to sell them.
	Yeah.
	And that's a Bitcoin reserve.
	And he said at Bitcoin 2024 that he would do that.
	And I think he has the power to do that.
	If you look at the idea of moving it to Treasury and moving in accounts without Congress's approval, I mean, if I was Congress, I would nail him on that, number one.
	But number two, the idea Kennedy proposed by executive order that he would free them from the capital gains tax, which, you know, that is unconstitutional for a president by executive order to make a radical change in American tax law without Congress, without a comment period from the public.
	I mean, that's, you know, hello Stalin.
	I know.
	Well, I mean, look, just because it's not legal or constitutional doesn't stop these guys.
	I mean, look what Trump did with, well, we can take the gun and do the due process later.
	I can do gun control by executive order, and they established that as a precedent.
	Well, there seems to be, and this is what happens when you get these kinds of financial pumps.
	Because I've lived through so many pump and dumps, it's unbelievable.
	And, of course, when you're in the pump, everybody thinks you're the master of the universe and a genius.
	Over and you know, but in the pump, you know, there's no everybody feels so great and there's so much entrainment and subliminal programming It's a religion.
	Yes, and you know, you've seen it before and and suddenly of the Constitution that's not important laws that are not important financial practices You know good financial practices and rules.
	No, we don't have to do that.
	It's young.
	It's innovative.
	It's creative It's the future.
	Yeah And they're saying all that about the tokenization stuff.
	Oh, this is going to be so wonderful.
	Well, here's what the tokenization stuff.
	The WEF says it's 2030 and you have no assets.
	If you create a token for everything and then start to trade it, it's a great way to take everybody's assets.
	I mean, it's just a taking system.
	Well, just look at what they did with the securitization, which is essentially tokenization as well, with the mortgages.
	You know, you've got something that's a real tangible asset, and look at the destruction that they did with that in 2007.
	Well, but here's the thing, and I know this because I was Assistant Secretary of Housing.
	We had houses, I had one house in Chicago, I found, that had refinanced and defaulted five times in a year.
	Now, that is the pattern you have when you have ten mortgages on one house.
	Yeah.
	And they mix it all together so nobody can see any of that stuff as well.
	Well, but the reason, go back to Hamilton Securities, the reason they seized our office and stole our software and would never give it back is, you know, our databases were going to show that there were a lot more mortgages than there were homes in America.
	You know, the mortgage fraud was off the charts.
	So here's the thing.
	I think you know, I wrote during the election, I wrote a paper called Salary Paper No.
	1.
	It's up on our Missing Money website.
	And it's a review of the federal credit, and it shows you all the things that are wrong with the federal credit.
	David, we have run the federal credit that I know of since 1996, and we have refused to obey the financial management laws.
	We have run the government significantly outside of the financial management laws, in a way I would describe as criminal.
	And we know that there's 21 trillion that we've identified missing, and we know they announced under the last Trump administration to take the book stark.
	Now, if you're serious about reform, the first thing you do is you say, I'm going to bring the government back into compliance with the financial management laws.
	That's number one.
	Number two, I'm going to find out where all the 21 trillion went, and I'm going to get it back, or I'm going to get the related assets back, and I'm going to hold liable and responsible for people who stole it.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	I mean, I'm going to reverse the financial coup.
	And then the third thing I'm going to do is I'm going to take a look at all of our assets, and you know, whether it's our people or our land, and I'm going to say, how do we get back to being productive?
	Step one is we've got to stop poisoning our kids.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	So, you know, if our people aren't, you know, aren't our talent, then that's what's wrong.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Right?
	They're an FDA.
	So what do you think?
	Because I think of FDA now, I talk about it as being free to do anything.
	You know?
	And so, but at the center of that is the poisoning, the food and the drugs.
	What do you think R.F.K.
	Jr.
	would do?
	Assuming that he gets through confirmation, I think if they get a sense that he's serious about anything, they'll find some way to not confirm it.
	What do you think?
	I think he's going to be confirmed, and I'll tell you why I think he's going to be confirmed.
	The system on this issue has lost its credibility, and if it doesn't reaffirm its credibility, it's going to lose the channel.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	So what you see, there's always, you steal, right?
	And then you, you know, you have a period of reform, and everybody says, ah, see, we can, good, we can trust the government, and then you steal again, and then you reform.
	You know, it's like a pendulum, and you swing it back and forth.
	It's like a harvesting machine.
	And of course it was important for Trump to try to recoup some of that lost trust after he was bragging about his vaccine, to put the guy that was a vaccine skeptic in there, you know?
	And I looked at it and I always thought, is that going to go beyond the election?
	You know, will he actually put him in there?
	And if he does put him in there, will he do anything?
	So it's funny, I will tell you, I saw the, I don't know if you saw the interview he did with Meet the Press, where they were giving him a hard time about vaccines, and he looked at the woman, it was like she was like an economic hit lady, he looked at the person doing the interview and he said, you know, I'm going to forget his exact words, but he said, you know, we have a real problem, and we have to do something about it, you can't.
	You can't.
	And she said, well, you're going to can't.
	He said, I want to just get to the truth.
	He said, but we used to have, you know, one in every hundred thousand was autistic.
	Now it's one in every hundred.
	My numbers say it's one in every, there's differences in the people I know between 20 and 30.
	But whatever the number is, what he was saying is you can't, you can't, you have no future as a civilization.
	You have no future.
	You can't let that go.
	You have to get to the bottom of it and you have to fix it.
	And she couldn't have cared less.
	No.
	She put out all the talking points.
	Well, we're just better at measuring this stuff now.
	It's not really that we got more, you know, all that kind of nonsense that we've heard for a while from these people.
	That doesn't hold up.
	No, but you know something?
	You can murder with a pen.
	You can kill people with a pen.
	Yeah.
	And what she is doing, you know, You never want to make the Attorney General of the United States, because there are a lot of people who are going to get prosecuted.
	But that's murder.
	That's murder.
	That is really murder.
	And that's wrong.
	Some people should go to hell.
	Yeah, that's why I could never support Trump because of what happened with the vaccine and the fact that he continued to cheer it, you know, and to push this other stuff.
	But it'll be interesting to see what happens.
	You know, we talk about pump and dump.
	One of the things that immediately comes to mind over this last year is artificial intelligence.
	Is that going to be a big bubble that's going to burst the stock market?
	Because I've never seen a pump-and-dump like AI ever.
	And all the amazing things it's going to do, and of course it will have some useful purposes, but we already saw the dot-com bust, you know, the internet was going to be a big deal.
	Let me make some guesses here.
	I think the reason you're seeing the AI stocks fly is because government's shoveling so much money at them figuring it out.
	Because you need AI to build the control grid.
	And, you know, one of the things, the feedback you get from businesses is that businesses can't figure out a way to use this stuff to make them profitable.
	So they're struggling to turn it into real productivity, which is, you know, and in part that's on any new technology, that's always the truth.
	But I think one of the reasons the talks are flying is the government is throwing so much money at it because they need it for the control grid, not because it creates fundamental economics.
	Did you see Mark Andreessen talking about why he flipped to Trump?
	He said, first of all, they told him, the guy that created Netscape, they tell him, don't even bother getting into AI.
	We're going to control that, and we're going to shut this down.
	He goes, what?
	You can't do that.
	That's pretty outrageous, and you can't do that.
	Well, we did it before.
	You know, we put entire fields of physics off limits to other people, they told him.
	And he said, wow, I learned a couple of things there.
	He was really taken aback by the frankness of the bide administration i just kind of have people they are they're so incredibly that is frank but if you look at the deep state they are going to control one yeah that's right i mean that you know these guys the goal of the ai is to help them do the you know their version of the new governance system oh i agree and it's it's back to the control grid and i you know one of my big questions we do a section
	every you know we do a wrap-up every quarter and and every year and we have a whole section called unanswered questions and Because there's so many mysteries in the world we live in, David.
	One of my unanswered questions is the reason these guys want total, complete control is so they can bring out free energy.
	Because they're terrified of bringing it out.
	Free energy can be weaponized.
	It can be very dangerous.
	So, do they want total control so they can finally bring out free energy?
	You know, I don't know.
	How would they weaponize free energy?
	So, I don't understand the physics.
	You'd have to talk to the guys who really, you know, who do it.
	I have one member, two members of our team were the guys who did the Breakthrough Energy Conferences.
	If you go to GlobalVem, and they dragged me along to a couple of them, but that, you know, that technology can literally create weapons that can do huge destruction.
	True, true.
	And, of course, it's a big part of their control grid.
	You know, when you look at their ability to control things, it comes back to not only their monopoly, essentially, on money and financial assets, but it's also a connection to energy, the ability to manufacture things.
	But in the past, they've even talked about how, well, you know, we just need to kind of switch over away from these fiat currencies and start trading in energy credits.
	And so you see things like carbon taxes.
	We don't have a fiat currency problem.
	Carbon sequestration, which is another scam that I see developing there in the background with Trump and these people around him.
	I mean, that's going to be a...
	They're going to come out and tell people, you can buy it.
	You can use any kind of energy you want, but you've just got to pay us, right?
	We don't have a fiat currency problem.
	I mean, the currency that we have the problem with is debt-based.
	But we could easily evolve a dollar system into something without debt-basing that could be great.
	The greatest currencies throughout history have been fiat currencies that had good governance systems.
	But if you have a powerful fiat currency that is basically run by a secret governance system who wants you dead, that's a problem.
	But, you know, there's a difference between the problem being a currency problem and an organized crime problem, or a secret.
	Our problem is we have a secret governance system.
	We don't have a financial problem.
	We have a political problem.
	We have a secret governance system, and it's trying to centralize and control in a way that we don't want.
	We want to be free.
	I agree.
	That's our problem.
	I agree.
	And it's just not a financial problem.
	We've got about five minutes left, and I want to ask you in a little bit of time that we've got, what's your take on all this drone stuff?
	Certainly looks like a setup to me, and of course they've got a reauthorization thing that's been folded into the continuing resolution.
	They could have gotten that passed by putting in a continuing resolution, but it's looking more and more to me like perhaps they, as they start putting out this narrative about radiation, I get concerned about a false flag, dirty bomb or something to escalate war.
	What do you think is going on with it?
	Bill, this is a wild guess, but my guess is one of two things are going on.
	One is they have those drones out.
	It's clearly a military intelligence operation.
	So it's either the military and the intelligence agencies, or it's their contractors doing it for them.
	So they're either concerned and looking for something, You know, so they have a real concern about some kind of risk.
	And they're doing the surveillance to figure out what's going on.
	You know, it's a legitimate national security concern, whatever that is.
	We can speculate about that.
	Or the second thing is if you look at how much money they've put in the defense authorizations to build drone capacity and where those people are, you know, it's a lot of this is happening in those corridors.
	And this could be sort of prototyping to get people ready for the control grid.
	Mm-hmm.
	Mm-hmm.
	So, you know, so they're planning on using a lot of drones to run the control grid.
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	So it could just be prototyping and getting folks used to this kind of invasive drone.
	What do you think of the idea that, you know, they're kind of planning this out there about it being radiation.
	What about a false flag dirty bomb so they could escalate some of these wars?
	What do you think about that?
	Well, I think they're really concerned about, you know, on the number one scenario they're doing surveillance.
	I think they could be really concerned about dirty bombs or, you know, whether it's a false flag or a terrorist attack.
	Because we're in a world of asymmetrical warfare.
	Yeah.
	If you are basically engineering the death of Russian generals in Moscow, then they feel free to come and do the same here.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	And the Russians have warned, if you keep doing this, if you invade our sovereign territory and kill our military on our soil, whether it's a missile or an assassination like this, two can play this game.
	Yeah, I agree.
	So we're in a world of asymmetrical warfare.
	Anything's possible.
	I've had more than a few people over the years tell me, you know, if so-and-so doesn't get his way, he's going to set off a dirty bomb in Chicago.
	Yeah, I remember I had one member of the intelligence agency who tried to persuade me that when they thought they couldn't get Iran-Contra to really, you know, I think the lid on it that they were prepared to blow up a small, you know, a suitcase nuke in Chicago.
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, go back and look at Operation Northwood.
	I mean, they were willing to do 9-11 type stuff, you know, back in the 50s, 60s, I guess.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	So, I think those drones reflected military intelligence concern that, you know, there was risk and they had to find it.
	Yeah, it is very concerning.
	You know, when I first looked at it, I thought, well, maybe this authorization thing, but the more I look at it, the more I think, well, they're going to get that through anyway.
	They've already got it.
	Very quickly.
	You know, the situation has moved to a real out-of-control state, and there are far too many very powerful people who think chaos is good for business.
	That's right.
	They make money going up and coming down, especially if they know when it's going to go up and come down.
	That's the key thing for them, isn't it?
	Well, part of it is the hubris.
	If you look at what has been gotten away with, the organized crime hubris is bad, and you have many factions.
	So I think we're in for, there's going to be plenty of chaos in 2025, and it's not all just going to be engineered.
	When a society loses its You get real madness.
	And we're dealing more and more with people who are literally losing their mind.
	Oh, I agree.
	Well, let's talk a little bit about Solari and the Solari report.
	I've got a copy of the one on... Oh, you've got our latest wrap-up, great!
	It's amazing the breadth of information that you get in these reports, and of course you're always ahead of the curve there at solari.com.
	Tell people a little bit about the membership that's there.
	So we have a subscription service.
	We'd love to have you as a subscriber.
	As David pointed out, every quarter we publish, we do a big wrap-up of the news, news trends and stories.
	We do a big wrap-up of the equity markets and the financial markets, but we also deep dive what I call a primary theme.
	I'm a great believer, coming out of the investment community, that at any given time, there are 20 to 25 primary trends that are driving our world.
	Like the growth in space, or the shift of economic activity to Asia.
	These are long live trends, or the bull market and gold.
	These are long live trends.
	If you take the time to understand them, learn about them, You know, you get that knowledge and then it's good, you know, it's good for 20 years because it's a long live trend.
	And you're looking at the one we just did on water, and everybody said to me, water?
	Why is this so important?
	You know, you're laying this money, why are you doing water?
	I said, the number one most important thing to the financial value of a place in real estate It's good water.
	If a community has good water... Remember that town in California where they stopped the water system?
	They said, we can't afford to do it anymore, and suddenly these $500,000 houses were worth nothing.
	That's right.
	There was no water system.
	That's right.
	You know, imagine.
	So anyway, but water is very, very important to the health and well-being of the place.
	And one of the things I always say The families, if you're going to reverse your situation in the Great Poisoning, if you want to, you know, get out of the Great Poisoning and get really healthy, the first thing you have to pay attention to is, you know, what is the water you're drinking, what is the water you're bathing in, what's the water you're putting on, you know, on your garden, on your food.
	Yes.
	So, anyway, so this, the last one was on water.
	The next one coming out will include all the material on what the states can do, but we also did a deep dive on land grab.
	What are the tactics used to do land grab?
	And anyway, there's a wealth of information that can help you at the state level really deal with the fact that there's a whole group of people trying to grab our land and in the meantime stick, you know, Ponzi schemes into our pension funds.
	Well, they told us that we're going to own nothing, we just have to figure out how that attack is going to come, and how we defend against it, and that's what the apology is.
	So here's to Larry's vision.
	It's 2030, you have more assets and are more prosperous than you are today, and Klaus Schwab is in his chateau in the Alps in a state of deep depression.
	That would be great.
	I like that vision.
	Thank you so much, Catherine.
	It's always great to have you on.
	Solari and Solari Report is solari.com and you can find Solari Report.
	And I would underscore for everybody, I'm definitely going to take a look at your article there about hijacking Bitcoin in your interview.
	I'm very interested to see that because it's going to be a big part of the next year that's coming up.
	This guy, Steve Patterson, he is brilliant, so is Roger Ver.
	You're really going to enjoy listening to him.
	I'm going to try and get him back again, because these are both... You know, I never explained what happened to Roger, but after he published the book, the feds went after him.
	Oh yeah?
	And I think, given the scams, the last thing they want is the truth about Bitcoin.
	And there's no... If you look at Roger's qualifications to... And the book speaks for itself, because if you look at the research, the footnoting, the material, it's impeccable.
	Yeah, it's amazing.
	Let me just ask you real quickly, before the show ends, and we've gone over a little bit here a couple of minutes, but I got you on.
	I got to have you on more often, because it's always fascinating to have you on.
	What do you think about gold?
	Are you talking about long-term trends of this?
	We're in a long-term bull market for gold.
	I don't see anything fundamentally changing either, do you?
	No, I don't think there's anything new, anything changing, other than there's a major marketing push to get everybody to not buy gold, to buy Bitcoin and crypto.
	But it's working!
	Imagine if it hadn't been for Bitcoin and crypto, gold would be through the moon.
	So it's been very successful and the central bankers are free to buy and buy and buy.
	That's right.
	Absolutely.
	Well, thank you so much, Catherine.
	Always great to have you.
	Solari.com, fascinating information, great insights.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	And let me just get to a couple of these comments here as we play the music rolling us out here.
	We've got Gard Goldsmith said, what she says is so true I recall Reason reported, men tend to look at large systems in politics, federalism, etc.
	while women tend to stay more local on school, kids, and politics and so forth.
	And yeah, again, Gard Goldsmith, Liberty Conspiracy every night and on Rockfan and on Twitter.
	Andromeda1, thank you very much for the tip.
	Says Katonji Brown Jackson identifies as a woman, yet she can't explain what a woman is because she's not a biologist.
	We're living in the twilight zone.
	Merry Christmas.
	Thank you all.
	I wish I had the Christmas Night album.
	Hot dog!
	You can get the Christmas Night album at thedavidnightshow.com for just $13.99.
	It's right on the second floor there, see?
	What'd you wish, George?
	Well, not just one wish, a whole hatful.
	First, I'm going to the davidknightshow.com and purchase the Christmas Night album.
	Then I'm gonna listen to Christmas classics, like... Are you gonna throw her out?
	I want the Christmas Night album, too.
	Hey, that's pretty good.
	Buffalo girls, can't you come out tonight?
	Can't you come out tonight?
	Can't you come out tonight?
	David's Christmas Night album includes 21 instrumental Christmas melodies like God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen, Silent Night, and as all new I'll Be Home for Christmas.
	What do you want?
	You want the moon?
	Just say the word and I'll throw a lasso around it and pull it down.
	I'll take it.
	Then what?
	And then I'll buy you your own download of David Knight's Christmas Night album.

▲