Mon Episode #2154: The EU’s War on American Free Speech

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a
revolutionary act.

Speaker 2 (00:36):
It's the David Knight Show. At the clock strikes thirteen,
It's Monday, the eighth of December. Here of our Lord,
twenty twenty five. Well, today we see that the EU
descends further into darkness as we see more censorship, more

(00:57):
desire for war, more barbarians being brought inside their gait.
As it's being done across Europe. And of course the
EU is a part of this. The UK is a
part of this as well, I should say. But we'll
take a look at a new book about C. S.
Lewis and Tolkien, their friendship, their working relationship. They're times

(01:19):
that were parallel to ours, you know, morality and heroes,
the types of things that are missing from Pete's Pentagon.
And yet the amazing cheerleading of these anti Christian, anti
Western value conservatives through out there cheering this what are
they trying to conserve? They're going to destroy, have destroyed

(01:41):
foundations of our society and me tooism, this idea that
because somebody else did it, because somebody else is a hypocrite,
now you can commit those same crimes. We're going to
take that on, stay with us, will be right back.

(02:09):
We also have another layer of the pharmaceutical onion poison
that's been pulled back. There's many, many, many more. We're
still just on the surface, but something to celebrate, and
we'll talk about that coming up. And there's more chatter
from Trump about not being happy with NATO. Don't believe

(02:30):
for a minute that he's going to get out of it.
He's criticizing Europe, but NATO is a These guys are
trying to be the tail that wags the dog. However,
but we'll get into that as well. But let's begin
with the censorship. Now, the French government has a plan.
They've all got a plan to censor people, but they

(02:52):
don't like they're going to label news outlets and this
is backfiring on him in terms of popularity in the country.
But does it matter at this point? I mean, who
likes Macron, who likes Starmer, who likes Trump? Well, there's
some people in the US that do like Trump, and
they're making all kinds of apologies for him, but these
other guys have less of a tribal following. Macron announced

(03:17):
a new media labeling system a few weeks ago. These
assurances that he's told people that we're only going to
label it, it's not going to be any sort of
state backed labeling. Well, you've got a lot of news
organizations pointing out that that is not true. And by
the way, this is what Candice Owens should be focusing on,

(03:39):
rather than trying to invite attention, which is really what
she's doing. She's getting attention now, she's getting a lawsuit
now over ridiculous claims, just like Alex Jones.

Speaker 3 (03:50):
But you live by the lie, you die by the lie.

Speaker 4 (03:53):
Anyway Candace owns is gone completely insane.

Speaker 3 (03:56):
Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (03:58):
Nevertheless, you know that is that she knows that that
gets her attention. She loves the attention. That's the addiction
to it, and of course the money that comes with it.
There was an article over the weekend. I won't go
in any detail about it, but I was absolutely astounded
and the astronomical sums of money that she was making

(04:19):
on doing ad reads, you know, and tens of thousands
of dollars for each ad that she reads. And it's
not that much different for Alex by the way, he'd
laid it into me one day because I just mentioned
something about somebody's business, and you know, they had done
something in the news. I don't even remember who it
was or what it was specifically about, but I just

(04:41):
remembered who it was and I gave them credit. And
he says, you know, that's like ten thousand dollars you
just gave that person. That's what I charged for that
kind of stuff. And it was like, I had no idea,
you're getting confiscatory phase, Like maybe should pass on that on,
you know, But anyway, it's amazing, but they get in.
They were saying that for conservatives, they find that they

(05:05):
have a more loyal following and they will buy the
products and more likely to buy the products. And they
are for the left wing podcasters, so they're getting paid
quite a bit more than the left wing podcasters. Besides
the fact they have a larger audience.

Speaker 4 (05:16):
I mean, most of the left wing podcasters viewer base
or broke liberal socialist college students. I guess there's not
much money in marketing to that crowd. They're just going
to steal it from the store.

Speaker 2 (05:28):
But if you want to get into an ad hominem
attack with Emmanuel Macron over his wife and just point
out the fact that she's a known pedophile. I mean
she pursued him as a student when he was under age.
Anybody that did what she did. If you do that
in the US, you go to jail. She has gone
to the equivalent of their White House for doing that. Anyway,

(05:51):
back to the issue at hand, this is what they
should be focusing on, because this is what is happening globally.
Why because the first casualty of war is the free press,
and they are at war with us in many, many
different areas. These assurances have only stoked fears of an

(06:13):
authoritarian creep into the media sphere. And the authoritarian creep
is named to Minuel Macron. It's like the Nixon and
the committee to re elect the President was called creep
fittically so so in November, he had told a press
organization that a labeling process carried out by professionals was

(06:34):
in the works to highlight the media outlets to respect
certain ethical standards and thus also those that are deemed
to lack ethical standards. So one journal that was owned
by a conservative organization said, this is just a project
for information control. That's the same type of excuse that
we have seen in the US as well. The difference

(06:57):
is now that when this all be going back to
twenty eighteen, when we look at it, it was being
done covertly. They were not doing it out in the open.
It was kind of a secret Cold War where they
were attacking people, but they did not agree. That continued

(07:18):
for the most part throughout the COVID stuff. Now they're
coming out and doing it openly. That's what's changing. The
tyrants have been emboldened by the fact they've gotten away
with this stuff, so now they're doing it openly. And
the DSA has had their first massive fine applied to
Elon Musk personally as well as to Twitter, and he

(07:42):
had some choice words for them, which we will get into,
and he was absolutely right. Look, I don't think that
he is an altruistic billionaire by any means. I think
he bought Twitter because this is a guy who was
the king of chronicapitalism. He he has made his money

(08:02):
through government, through government connections, through political means, and for
the same reason that Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post
for pittance tends of I think it's two h and
fifty million dollars or something paid for, which is nothing
compared to Twitter. But it also doesn't have the kind
of impact that Twitter does, but these guys get those

(08:25):
papers because of those reasons. Jeff Bezos wanted to be
in wanted to own the Washington Post because it's in Washington,
d c. And it has a lot of influence in
terms of politics. And Musk is playing the same game,
but in a different way. He is moving to the

(08:46):
rank and file people out there in terms of trying
to get political advantage. And so I understand what his
motives are. Nevertheless, in his political motives might align him,
might align him with the right thing in this particular case,
it does you know if he wants to be a
populist technocrat.

Speaker 3 (09:05):
I guess.

Speaker 2 (09:09):
I know it's a contradiction of terms, but he wants
to appeal to the popular sentiments so that he can
get through his technocracy. He may wind up being on
the right side of some issues, and he's on the
right side of this issue. But getting back to France,
this journal said this is a project for information control.

(09:30):
Another conservative spoke out there and said, the role of
the state is not to certify the truth with an
obscure label. It is to guarantee freedom of the press
and freedom of expression and so you know, we had
the same thing where they went to some pet project
areas and said, well, you're going to tell us what

(09:51):
is true what is not true for social media for
other things. We'll use you to vet information. If you
say that somebody had faults, will take them down. If
you go back and look at the Coalition for Content
Providence and Authentication, the CCPA, I say, the Chinese Communist
Party of Americas, Well we could also call it. That

(10:13):
was the thing that's put together with Microsoft. It's a
keep partner working with the government, so you could get
hardware and software. They get the apps that you use
to create information, whether it is a document, a meme,
a video, or audio. They're going to then work with
their trusted advisors in the media and they will decide

(10:36):
whether you are somebody that they want to be allowed
to speak. And if they put you on the blacklist,
then they can stop your stuff before you can ever
create it or upload it. They can mark you. That's
what the providence means, So they would authenticate who you
are and then they would say, well, because that is
coming from this person we don't like, then it's not

(10:59):
going to be posted. So they stop you even before
it gets uploaded, and all of those are still in
the works here in America as well. So another they're
they're saying that they've got to stop disinformation and that
they're fighting disinformation, and they will decide what disinformation is.

(11:22):
Of course, So I've now launched in retaliation, They've launched
a petition entitled media, Yes to Freedom, No to Labeling.
It's garnered forty thousand signatures. I don't see that as
a good thing, you know, the old expression, can fifty
thousand Frenchmen be wrong? Yes, they can also be apathetic

(11:46):
when they are being marched into the Gulag, which I
think is what's happening here across Europe. It's not just
the EU, it's the individual countries, and it's the UK,
which is not in the EU. So it is struck
back at the EU tyrants. After this something like one
hundred and forty million dollar fine. But that's just the beginning.

(12:10):
They'll keep adding to it, and they're going to add
other companies to it as well. X is the first,
but they will come after all the other social media
companies to get them to toe the line. He calls
them the fourth Reich, and he's not wrong. He's not
taking the outrageous fine lying down. He says that they

(12:33):
have Nazi characteristics oppressing their own citizens' best interests. The tyrannical,
unelected bureaucracy oppressing the people of Europe are in the
second picture. Puts up a picture of this is Europe,
this is EU. In other words, it's non existent. Musk
also re shared a post about an Irish teacher, Enick Burke,

(12:55):
who was jailed for refusing to use transgender pronouns and
later reply to another user, so many politicians in Europe
are traders to their own people. All true, All true
must highlid the fact that Meta was a verification program
similar to Exis. Yet the EU has onerously fined the

(13:15):
more censorship prone Meta. They haven't, I should say, he said,
I didn't do the Twitter purchase because I thought it
was a great way to make money. I knew that
bazillion slings and arrows coming in my direction. It really
felt like there was a civilizational danger that unless one
of the major online platforms broke ranks, and then because

(13:37):
they're all just behaving in lockstep with the legacy media
said literally, there was no place to actually get the truth.
It was almost impossible, So everything was just getting censored.
The power of censorship apparatus was incredible. And again I
don't think that he did this for altruism. I think
he did it for political advantage. But the political would

(14:00):
be to do the thing that everybody wants. Everybody wants
free speech. We're not on board with these leaders, not
in the EU, not in the UK, not in France,
not in the US either. He confirmed that another user's
report that ex terminated the EU Commission's advertising account, so
basically shut them down, and shut down the EU commissions

(14:23):
one account.

Speaker 4 (14:23):
All fine, you don't get to play, he says.

Speaker 2 (14:27):
For years, many in the free speech community, most vehemently,
and Jonathan Turley says, head, you've warned about the threat
of EU to free speech, particularly with the enactment of
the infamous Digital Services ACTSA. You know, we've talked about
it repeatedly.

Speaker 3 (14:41):
Here.

Speaker 2 (14:41):
The U has a virtually declared war on free speech.
Let's understand, they want a war against US, so they
also want a war against Russia. And you can't have
that kind of free speech that's out there. That's why
they're going full on open.

Speaker 4 (15:00):
Tyranny everything in Europe seems to be spiraling down and down,
getting worse and worse at a more more rapid rate.
So there's going to be more and more that they
have to crack down on, more people that they have
to censor. There's going to be more people getting thrown
in jail or talked to by the police because they
posted a photo on LinkedIn that somebody didn't like.

Speaker 2 (15:20):
That's right, and this has typically been coming with the
Dei values that they've been using that as justification. Ever,
look at what is happening in the US, and it's
also happening in the UK that they are increasingly doing
this on behest of Israel and in.

Speaker 3 (15:35):
Support of Israel. Just like that video we showed last week.

Speaker 5 (15:40):
Saw a thing about how cloud flairs are going to
be outsourcing their decisions about legality of what's posted to
something based in Germany that applies German free speech laws
to websites.

Speaker 2 (15:56):
Yeah, and that's the danger. That's the danger, and there's
and we're going to talk about a possible remedy that
we guess what be even state based, not federal based,
because the federal government doesn't like free speech either, many
states don't. So the war has just begun openly with
this DSA fine, and.

Speaker 3 (16:20):
The fine is.

Speaker 2 (16:22):
I'm still looking forward here and highlighted earlier. I think
it's one hundred and forty million dollars.

Speaker 3 (16:26):
But we'll get to it. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (16:29):
Back in January twenty twenty three, EU Commissioner a vice
president openly warned must that his quote freedom of speech absolutism.
Guess what, there's no other way to have freedom of
speech unless you have absolutism. If you don't allow absolute
values for freedom of speech. It is a fundamental value.

(16:50):
And you're not talking about free speech anymore if you
put conditions on it. So that would not fly, saying
the time of the Wild West is over. I grew
up liking the Wild West, and I like freedom, threatening
sanctions if Twitter didn't comply with the DSA rules. She
complated illegal content with anything that the elites deem to

(17:12):
be offensive, which at the stage for what is happening now.
And then, of course, I've shown many times when EU
Commissioner Theory Breton, I call him conspiracy Theory, fired off
a letter to X and of course he went to
Austin and I said, we'll see what happens with Musk
because Musk kind of bowed and scraped company said, well,

(17:33):
we've got the DSA thing that's out there. You're going
to comply with that? Oh, yes, yes, yes, I will. Well,
I'm glad that he's not doing it. I just don't
know if he will keep doing it. Will he stick
to his guns here? So theory Britain fired off a
letter demanding that X address back in October of twenty
twenty three illegal content and disinformation relating to the Gaza conflict,

(17:57):
there again on the side of the Israeli Musk fired back,
demanding a specific list of violations so the public could
judge for themselves. Breton's vague accusations, citing repurposed images and
unverified claims, highlighted the EU's preference for opacity of accountability.

(18:17):
List the violations you allude to on X so the
public can see them, said Musk. The EU's response was
not forthcoming, but they continued to threaten further. Musk brings
receipts showing that EU sent him a formal letter demanding
that he censor Donald Trump during the twenty twenty four
US presidential election, and he's posted the letter on X

(18:41):
so I thought he can see it. So this find
does not exist in a vacuum. It's part of a
chilling pattern of overreach and it's going to threaten privacy
and free speech across the continent and the world.

Speaker 3 (18:55):
And let me just say this, folks, if.

Speaker 2 (18:57):
They're going around locking up thousands of people in the
UK and in Germany, in France for things that they
said on social media, how much longer do you think
it'll be before they start doing civil lawsuit action against
people in the US for what they say. And I'm
not just saying that making defamatory statements about Macron's wife.

(19:20):
I'm saying because they don't like what you're saying about climate,
or what they don't like what you're saying about the
COVID situation, or about their particular war that they want
to push. These are all things that are coming. By
the way, I mentioned the climate mcguffin. We have on
third Hour today we have Alex Newman is going to
be joining us as a New American. We talked to
Alex frequently about homeschooling. He's at the forefront of advocating

(19:45):
for homeschooling and freedom and education, but he also does
follow the climate mcuffin. He goes to these cop meetings
that happen everywhere, and he just got back from the
one that was just held there. So we're going to
get his update, get the temperature as to how these
people are dealing with their setbacks in this area. Because

(20:05):
they have had some setbacks, that's good news. We'll be
talking to him in the third hour. Take the proposed
Chat Control law, which would mandate backdoors into encrypted messages
on apps like WhatsApp and Signal. Sold as a child
protection measure, it would scanned billions of private conversations, exposing
them to hacking, to fraud, and to government spying. The

(20:30):
heart of it all is the e use obsession with
controlling the flow of information. Remember if we go back
to January twenty twenty four speech of we have the
it was I'm trying to find it here which video
the Bond film film of here we go, Tavos, this

(20:53):
is Ursula vonder Lean or as I call her, Ursula
fond of Lyne.

Speaker 6 (21:02):
Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. Yet Laos, your annual Global risk
report makes for a stunning and sobering read for the
global business community. The top concern for the next two
years is not conflict or climate. It is disinformation and

(21:28):
misinformation followed closely by polarization within our societies.

Speaker 1 (21:45):
In a world of deceit. Telling the truth is a
revolutionary act.

Speaker 7 (21:51):
You are listening to the David Knight Show.

Speaker 3 (21:57):
Yeah, it is a revolutionary act.

Speaker 2 (22:00):
The EU, the UK and these government censors are evolting.

Speaker 3 (22:04):
Why aren't we?

Speaker 2 (22:08):
The latest EU assault ont X has infuriated of course,
jd Vance, you're coming after my friends here. But the
EU claims to champion democracy while it is building an
Orwellian apparatus that monitor, scans and punishes speech. It's not
about safety. It's about power. It always is about power.

(22:32):
It's never about safety. They always come for your liberty,
promising you safety, but it's always about enslaving you. The
EU should be supporting free speech, not attacking American companies
over garbage. She said, Well, he said that earlier in February.
He kicked off by going to the Munich Security Conference

(22:55):
and tearing into them about censorship. We'll see what happens
with this. No voter on this continent, he said, went
to the ballot boxed open the floodgates to millions of
unvetted immigrants, and he declared labeling Europeans as more interchangeable
cogs in a global economy. The German Defense Minister Boris
Pistorius is name Rimes called Vance's opinions unacceptable, but he

(23:21):
proved Vance's point about normalizing authoritarianism. Yeah, it was one
hundred and forty million dollars. Here it is one hundred
and forty million dollars. Hit on X is not just
a fine, it's a declaration of war against free speech globally.
Jonathan Turley said this is his first time under the DSA,
that the EU officials acknowledged that it will lay the

(23:43):
foundation for additional penalties to come to force companies to
comply with EU quote unquote values on free speech. They
don't have values on free speech. They have values they
value censorship and control. X has sixty days to develop
solutions to address the issues, ninety days to implement the changes,

(24:04):
or it may face additional fines. And you know when
I look at has been proposed by one person up
in New Hampshire calls it the Granite Act, but he
actually came together. We'll put together an acronym to oppose
censorship in it to use to come up with a name. Granted,
but I'm sure you could probably get AI to do

(24:26):
that stuff for you pretty easily.

Speaker 3 (24:27):
Now. People probably were really straining to do that earlier.

Speaker 4 (24:30):
But yeah, AI is great for that sort of thing.
It can coin many a backronym.

Speaker 3 (24:36):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (24:36):
So the EU imposed this crazy fine not just on X,
he said, but also on me personally, which is even
more insane. Therefore, it would seem appropriate to apply our
response not just to the EU, but to the individuals
who took this action against me. So I look at

(24:57):
this and I think about the fact that whether or
not you agree with his compensation, I mean, you don't
have to buy his products if you think he's overpaid.
But there was a judge in Delaware, where Tessel was incorporated,
that says you can't pay him that much. It's like,
what gives you the legal authority to decide that? And anyway,

(25:18):
because of that, they relocated the company to Texas and
incorporated in Texas. And wouldn't it be interesting if Texas
were to do this for Elon Musk basically was being
proposed by this libertarian in New Hampshire and the Granite
Act to say, well, what's your collection mechanism. Okay, you're

(25:41):
going to have to have Our banking system is going
to have to be used to try to grab this
money from them, and we're not going to recognize this
without a trial in court. Good luck with that. The
DSA the EU can impose fines of up to six
percent line Platform's annual global revenue if they fail to

(26:03):
censor for them. This is just the first salvo in
a war that some have warned is coming, and we
cannot be passive at this moment. Americans who will find
themselves subject to European censors, and I say that they
will probably do this directly eventually. I wouldn't be surprised
if the EU and the UK are going around and

(26:27):
arresting people in the middle of the night because they
posted something they find offensive. What do you think they
might do to me? In terms of lawfair? I can
imagine I would see that coming, you know, And how
do you fight that kind of lawfair against a country
that is coming at you. So Musk has called for

(26:50):
the abolition of the EU, which we could all sympathize with.
You argue that the EU bureaucracy is slowly smothering europe
to death. It has, and it is a smother effect
all government regulation and all governments do this. I mean,
you look at what our government has done in terms
of smothering home ownership or car ownership or the rest

(27:11):
of these things. Has it done. It's done by continually
piling on more and more regulations. And they're very much
like a book constrictor. They just keep tightening it until they.

Speaker 3 (27:26):
Till they smother you to death. Haven't.

Speaker 4 (27:32):
It's not slow anymore either. No, things have sped up
to a remarkable rate. Every single day there's something new.

Speaker 2 (27:39):
Yeah, all of the governments have turned into Burmese pythons.
They're not just book constrictors. We had when I worked
at Bush Gardens, we alternated with a belly dancer band,
and the girl that was one of the girls that
went out with them had a book instrictor that she's

(28:01):
very small. The book constrictor was very very large, and
she called him thing. And so it was like the
belly dancers and some costume characters and the woman with
a giant book and stricter wrapped around her would go
that alternate with us.

Speaker 3 (28:18):
It tells you something about what they thought about us, right.

Speaker 4 (28:20):
Anyway, yeah, you're right next to the snake act.

Speaker 3 (28:25):
So uh.

Speaker 2 (28:26):
She she she would bring him back in and and
she would drape him over the the costume racks that
were there in the break room. And one day Abdul,
the costume character, came crashing in and scared the snake
and he he chumped off, and she said, it's okay,

(28:49):
he's just molting. Well, I don't know what the excuses
for the federal government. I guess these bureaucrats are just
molting or whatever it is, or is that what they
call it molting when they shed their skin.

Speaker 4 (28:58):
Is some snakes, it's called in blue because they get
this film over their eyes make some kind of milky blue.

Speaker 3 (29:03):
So well, it wasn't that shitting. It wasn't the term
that she used.

Speaker 2 (29:06):
Yeah, but anyway, he was a little bit he was
a little bit touchy, and after that she brought in
some smaller stakes. Ever, unless she had a whole niagerie
of him at home.

Speaker 4 (29:15):
That's part of the reason they get cranky is because
the film of their eyes makes it so they can't
see very well, and so they just get very nervous
and skittish because they don't know what's going on.

Speaker 3 (29:23):
Yeah, what is this gigantic costant character of the big
head coming in anyway?

Speaker 2 (29:29):
Musk previously described the EU as a giant cathedral to bureaucracy.

Speaker 3 (29:35):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (29:36):
Rubio criticized ruling as an attack on all American tech
platforms and the American people by foreign governments. Jade Vance
said the EU had targeted X for not engaging in censorship.
Question is, what, if anything, are they going to do
about it. Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski reacted to Musk's high
raid by saying, go to Mars. There's no censorship of

(29:57):
Nazi salutes there. Well, it's also no war there is yet,
because you don't have people like this Polish Foreign minister
also pushing for war in Europe.

Speaker 4 (30:06):
I just have to say, if Musk were to become
a goose stepping fascist and fly off to Mars, they
would be upset and demand that we go there and
kick him off the planet, because we can't have a
goose stepping fascist planet. That's there is no place that
they would tolerate this ideology. I'm not saying it's a
good ideology, but this is a false narrative they're spinning. Well,

(30:29):
why don't you just leave. There's no place they could
go where you would not track these people down and
enforce your own ideology on top of them. You're like, no,
you can't think that. You can't say that.

Speaker 3 (30:39):
Well, it was that sci fi movie A Nazis on
the Moon or something.

Speaker 4 (30:43):
There's one called Iron Sky, if memory serves, where there's
moon space Nazis.

Speaker 5 (30:50):
Well, you don't have to go to Mars. We have
free speech right here in America where his company is based.

Speaker 2 (30:57):
Yeah, that's rights based on what So just how dystopian
could Starmar's Britain become? And again, it's not just the EU.
The UK is out of the EU, but they're still
doing this. And each and every one of these countries, folks,
if they were to get rid of the European Union,
each and every one of these political leaders, like the

(31:18):
leaders of France and Poland and Germany and so forth,
they would all be doing the same thing. They're all
fully on board with all of this stuff. This is
a dark time that we're going into. I mean, this
is not just the rise of Nazis and Germany. This
is the rise of that kind of authoritarianism across the

(31:40):
board and all the countries that used to be Western civilization.
They have now thoroughly rejected the values of Western civilization.
That's what this article is about. From naked capitalism. They
So we first asked this question, just how dystopian coul
Starmer's Britain become. We asked that about a year ago.
At that point in time, with the government just four

(32:00):
months in office, all we could offer as an answer was, well,
how long is a piece of string? Now, thirteen months later,
it's clear that the said string is very long, indeed
in getting longer by the day. On his election July
twenty twenty four, Starmer promised his government would tread let's say,
does that means stomp more likely on the lives of voters,

(32:22):
one of the growing multitude of pledges that Starmer has
broken during his seventeen months in office. In this particular case,
it took just two months for Starmer to change course,
telling delegates at the twenty twenty four Labor Party Conference
that the state would in fact take greater control over
people's lives. Plans run veiled to, among other things, launch

(32:43):
non mandatory digital identity, which will become mandatory, of course,
to expand the use of live facial recognition technology. By
the way, you know, we talk about mandatory digital ID,
mandatory ID, sof remember real ID was said, oh, it'll
never be mandatory, and yet they haven't made it mandatory.

(33:04):
What they have done is they said, we'll give you
forty five dollars fine if you don't have it. That's
the way it works here. So facial recognition technology resurrect
an old Tory policy to grand inspectors of the Department
of War Conpensions, increased power to snoop on claimants bank accounts,
and to intensify the British state's crackdown on lawful speech.

(33:24):
Especially that was just for starters. For the main course,
the government is now setting its sights on trial by jury.
Think about this, folks. This is one of the seminal
foundation blocks really of Western civilization and our individual liberties
is trial by jury. So much so Gilbert Sulvan even

(33:48):
did a little opera about it.

Speaker 3 (33:49):
Trial by jury.

Speaker 2 (33:50):
But it is the legal protection that's existed in England
for almost one thousand years, and it's spread to other
countries and now they're unrolling all of this stuff. And
the way it works in the UK is very similar
to the way that works here they say in theory
that you have it, but in practice you don't. Now

(34:11):
Here it's done by intimidation, by multiplying charges and threatening people,
basically blackmailing them into a plea bargain, and so you
have very few cases that go to jury trial here.
Same thing is true in the UK. But now they
want to formalize that. They've announced plans to limit people's
right to trial by jury in England and Wales. A

(34:35):
tier of swift courts, they call it, will be created
to replace jury trials for most offensives that carry a
likely jail sentence of less than three years, as well
as complex fraud and financial cases. Well, here we have
death by a thousand cuts. You know, you have your
traffic court, your tax court. Don't forget the FISA court

(34:55):
where they can put you on a no fly list
without you even knowing that you've been charged. That is
more like a star chamber. And you know when it
comes to traffic court at least I don't know if
it is in Tennessee, but in Texas they had in
their right to trial by jury, and you could use
that if you're in Texas. That is a tremendous lever

(35:16):
against the prosecutor to do a plea bargain with you,
because they want to avoid jury trials by all means,
they really do hate jury trials. So only the most
serious offenses murder, manslaughter and rape would continue to be
heard by a jury of one's peers unless the people
want to plea bargain out of it. There, I guess
like they have there, despite the fact that English common

(35:37):
law draws on the ancient right of trial by jury
rooted in the Magna Carta. They said, we must you
had one of the guys. They're saying, we must never
forget that Magna Carta employs us not to deny or
to delay justice, so we can't delay justice. So what
we'll do is will delay the jury trial aspect of Magneicarta,

(36:00):
who were complying with Magne Carter.

Speaker 3 (36:01):
He says, now.

Speaker 2 (36:04):
Bearing the ORWELLI and title swift and fair plan to
get justice for victims. Well, you know that's another thing.
You don't really get any justice for victims here in
the US. There is no victim or in the British
system either. There's no victim compensation for these criminal cases.

(36:25):
They may find them even the state may find them,
may send them to jail, but you don't get compensation.
That's why we look at the Law of Moses. It
was so much better God's law anyway, and there would
be compensation that would be given to the people who
had been injured. The origins go back to Magna Carta
in twelve fifteen, which promised that no one would lose

(36:50):
their liberty or property without lawful judgment of his peers
and the law of the land. Purpose of this and
the reason they talked about peers, it was the peers
who put this on the king forced him to sign it,
because that was a pushback against an authoritarian, detalitarian king,

(37:12):
a monarch, which is what all these people aspire to be.

Speaker 3 (37:16):
Why getting rid of it?

Speaker 2 (37:18):
If you call this and said, the name of the
thing should not be swift justice, it ought to be
evil King John's revenge or whatever. So, yeah, John's revenge.

Speaker 4 (37:32):
He's back and this time he's not leaving.

Speaker 3 (37:35):
That's right.

Speaker 4 (37:37):
It's truly amazing when you look at a little bit
off topic, when you look at Richard and John, neither
of them were good guys. Richard was a warmongering, brutal,
just thug and John was a more limp wristed, closer
to home thug. Richard wanted to go to the Holy
Land and do war there. John just wanted to simply

(37:58):
tax the people, and you know, slept with a bunch.

Speaker 3 (38:01):
Of their wives.

Speaker 4 (38:02):
And the nobility hated him because he kept doing that
and taxing them. They were both just terrible, terrible rulers.

Speaker 3 (38:09):
Yeah, and they've had several of those.

Speaker 2 (38:11):
As a matter of fact, we just recently watched Anonymous,
which is about there. Yeah, I think the very credible theory.
Most people are Shakespeare experts don't believe that it was
actually the guy from Stratford. On aon they made difference
to who they think it is, but for most people
they believe it was Edward de vere the Duke of Oxford.

(38:31):
And anyway, they did a movie that pretty much towed
to the line of research. One of the best books
on that was by Joe Sobran and it was Let's
see what was it called Shakespeare?

Speaker 3 (38:44):
That was it?

Speaker 2 (38:44):
Yeah, and he's another guy that was purged by the
Israeli lobby and unjustly so purged my William F. Buckley,
who was their National Review. Joe Sobrand's an excellent writer
and he had an excellent book about that.

Speaker 4 (38:59):
Sure meant they had purged William Shakespeare. I was like,
what is it is really lobby having against Shakespeare?

Speaker 3 (39:05):
Probably shy. Yeah, that's what they got to, I guess.

Speaker 2 (39:08):
But the anyway, it's an excellent movie Anonymous and I
had never seen.

Speaker 4 (39:13):
It before, and yeah, that one is really good.

Speaker 2 (39:17):
And we're getting back to this. What made me think
about it? We're talking about bad kings. And the theory
is is that Edward de Vere, who was you know,
William Shakespeare, the guy at Stratford on Avon, never had
a background where he would write from the perspective of

(39:39):
people who were in the king's court and I didn't
have the educational background, but he certainly didn't have the
social background. Obviously, the person who wrote these things had
a great deal of experience in court intrigue and other
things like that, and all these different life experiences that
were in Edward de Vere's life. You'll see elements of
them in the plays that he wrote, and they explained

(40:03):
very clearly why he would not want to own to it,
why he could not own to it. But at one
point in time he started to organize a coup against
the King James forces. And one of the things that
he did was the movie Richard the Third, movie the
play I think always think in terms of movies Richard

(40:23):
the Third, of course, you know, humpbacked, and everybody agreed
that he was an evil figure. The reason he made
him a humpback was because he wanted to villainize this
one guy who was on the other side of this
political intrigue, and everybody knew that it was targeted towards them.
But anyway, so we have a lot of twisted humpbacks. Now, yes, yeah,

(40:46):
that guy was hump back.

Speaker 5 (40:47):
And also Devi's had a history of being connected to plays.
He was the director of the Noble Play.

Speaker 2 (40:56):
Yeah, the Lord Chamberlain's Players, Yeah, which performed for Elizabeth
and others.

Speaker 3 (41:00):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (41:01):
I mean it's a very fascinating thing. And when you
look at the when you look at the movie, if
you watched the movie, it stuck pretty closely to the
theories about Edward de Vere fascinating the idea, but where
are the people like that that we need?

Speaker 3 (41:15):
Now? The judge and the.

Speaker 2 (41:18):
Legal philosopher, Lord Devlin described trial by jury as a
lamp that shows that freedom lives. I guess that lamp
is being snuffed out now smothered. In practical terms, jury
trials already form only a small part of the system,
accounting for only two percent in the UK of all
criminal cases. Most criminal cases are resolved in the magistrate's court,

(41:39):
in which there are three magistrates who determine guilt as
well as the sentence. So it's a bit different from
here where they blackmail you into a plea bargain. And again,
even if they don't do that, part of the problem
with the jury system here in the US is just

(42:00):
like jerrymandering, where they pick the voters, they pick the jurors,
and they can manipulate it that way. I guess we'd
call that jurymandering.

Speaker 4 (42:07):
If you mentioned if you get picked for jury duty
and you mentioned jury nullification, guess who's not going to
be on the jury. Yeah, if you are slightly conservative
at all, if you hint at that, they will throw
you out.

Speaker 2 (42:21):
Even if you bring it up explicitly in the jury deliberations,
sometimes you get thrown out and replaced with an alternate
that's there. In other words, this probably have a limited
impact on the court backlog. So what they're saying is
we've got to move this stuff through quickly because we've
got a huge backlog on criminal cases. And they do.
They have seventy eight thousand Crown Court cases.

Speaker 4 (42:41):
I have an idea and how it can reduce the
number of criminal cases that they're dealing with. I think
maybe if you get reportation criminals that you're bringing into
the country.

Speaker 2 (42:51):
Well, they have seventy eight thousand cases that are backlog there,
but since only two percent of them go to jury trial,
that is not a response. There's something else involved in this,
for sure. The main cause of the backlog is years
of budget reductions, court closures, maintenance backlogs, and limits on
the number of days that courts are permitted to sit.

(43:12):
For centuries, court juries have served as a Democrat check
on government power. Exactly why they made King John sign
the Magnet Carter requesting the crits that trial by jury
is a check on the King's total power. The renowned
English jurist, justice andry politician William Blackstone, which everybody refers to,

(43:36):
wrote the following about trial by jury and the commentaries
and the laws of England. He said, trial by jury
ever has been, and I trust ever will be looked
upon as the glory of the English law, so that
the liberties of England cannot but subsist so long as
this palladium remains sacred and inviolate, not only from all
open attacks, which none will so heartily make, but also

(43:58):
from secret machinai which may sap and undermine it, introducing
new and arbitrary methods of trial, which is what they're
doing again. The people who run our countries we are
talking about the US or the UK or the EU,
they're all death by thousand cuts. I mean, they're infringing
on these basic foundations of Western civilization, and in many

(44:23):
cases they've gotten so bold as to just wipe them
out the full stroke.

Speaker 4 (44:28):
It's truly amazing how realistically, for about the past two
hundred years we've lived in something of a golden age
for liberty. We don't think about it, but for most
of history it has been sort of subsistence living, where
people really don't even have the liberty to think about liberty.
They're mostly focused on their daily survival needs. They're focused

(44:49):
on making sure that they've stored up enough food for
the winter that their house is going to be able
to survive. And then for about two hundred years, the
West has been able to sit around and think like,
what is titled to a man? What should we focus on?
What should he be you know, I gues said, entitled
to what can the government not do to him? Most
other countries never cared about that. They were never interested

(45:11):
in discussing that or giving you know, the individual citizens anything.
And we've had for two hundred years, basically in Europe
and America, this Golden Age, and we're just throwing it
away and so many people just do not care.

Speaker 2 (45:25):
So new Dark Ages is coming in. Of course, the
Dark Ages were there after the Roman system, which did
have rules that were followed. I mean they were Sonoma gons,
but in terms of attacking other people. But once you
got into the Roman system, you had rules that were followed,
and that all just kind of went away into the

(45:46):
Dark Ages. So we're headed into another Dark Ages for sure.
Starmer himself, it's set in nineteen ninety two. The right
to trial by jury is an important factor and the
delicate balance between the power of the state and the
power of the individual's pocracy. Folks, that is true, and
he knows that's true, and that's why he's doing this
because he wants to empower himself and take power away

(46:10):
from you. It is a zero sum game.

Speaker 5 (46:13):
I can play that video if you want.

Speaker 3 (46:14):
Yeah, sure, go ahead and play it. Thank you.

Speaker 8 (46:18):
The entire house is concerned about victims, including attacks on
women and girls. But the entire house is also concerned
about the men and women who will undoubtedly suffer miscarriages
of justice if the right to trial by jury is

(46:39):
curtail and I would quote from a lawyer, the right
to trial by jury is an important factor in the
delicate balance between the power of the states and the
freedom of the individual. The further it is restricted, the

(47:02):
greater the imbalance. That lawyer is our current prime minister.
He wrote that in nineteen ninety two. It is true then,
as it is true today. How can the Chancellor stand
up and propose a limitation of the rights to try

(47:24):
by jury when he knows perfectly well the category of
defendant who will suffer the ill effects of it?

Speaker 3 (47:33):
Yeah, it is.

Speaker 2 (47:35):
And you know, when I look at what has being
done in Venezuela again, I see this in the context
of the destruction of the moral foundation and the rule
of law in America. And I'll show you exactly why
that is happening and what concerns me. There's a number
of people who are cheering for that, that are the

(47:55):
influencers and propagandists for the GOP and for Trump and others.
It's absolutely thoroughly disgusting to see what's happening with that. Again,
these principles of what a just war is those were jettison.
The idea of following the constitution. That was jettison with
the drug war, the just war theory and not attacking civilians.

(48:20):
We got rid of that during World War Two. So
this is a logical conclusion where we are with this.
Steve James writing about this, and one of the real
targets of the proposed legislation is something called jury equity
or jury nullification. That's right, that's what they really gets
them upset. This refers to the right of a jury

(48:40):
to determine whether their crime has been committed at all,
regardless of the opinion of the trial judge. Well, no,
that's not actually true. It is you can acknowledge the
fact that it is a violation of the law. The
nullification is really to judge the law and not just
the facts of the case. The whole point of it.

(49:01):
So you know, you look at the similar case in
that I've talked about many times, the ordeal of Edwin Bushnell,
who was the foreman of a jury that was setting
in judgment of William Penn, who deliberately and openly violated
the laws in the UK saying that you will only
go to the official Church of England. They were Quakers,

(49:24):
so they continued to meet in their Quaker church. They
locked the doors of the Quaker church and said, well,
that's fine, we'll just meet on the steps. So then
they arrested him for that. When he was brought up
for charges, the jury decided that they didn't like the law,
saying that you had no right of conscience, and so
they found him not guilty. The judge was furious and

(49:46):
through the foreman and the number two person on the
jury and to jail themselves. And they were there for
a month or so, and finally their lawyer came back
and said, what does this say in the law that
you can't nullify these laws with the jury, that the
jury has to follow the law, And that was habeas corpus,

(50:08):
And so the judge didn't have any law that was
just his own personal peeve, and so that case established
the idea of habeas corpus as well as dury nullification.
He says, very equity was famously exercised in nineteen eighty
five by the jury and the case against civil servant

(50:28):
who leaked details of the then Tory government's misinformation over
the circumstances surrounding the nineteen eighty two sinking of the
Argentine cruiser General Belgrano by the Royal Navy with a
loss of two hundred and seventy two liners. I remember
that very well, but you heard about that all the time.
The General Belgrano was a ship that Argentina had in

(50:48):
the Falkland Wars, and it was ancient. I mean, it
was World War two or older. And they took it
out with a couple of missiles. You know, that was
like their entire navy ship.

Speaker 4 (51:01):
It also now just sounds like a Taco Bell menu item. Honestly,
the General bel Grano Now at Taco Bell, go get
yourself one.

Speaker 3 (51:09):
Oh that's an on sale. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (51:11):
So this guy was acquitted after a two week trial,
despite admitting that he had leaked the documents in question,
and the trial judge's insistence that he had no defense
in law. The person leaked it claimed, and the jury
agreed that were leased any documents which exposed government lies
over the circumstances of the sinking was in the public interest.

(51:34):
How history repeats itself right in rhymes. They should say,
we have another scandal about the sinking of ships. And
it's not just a second strike. It was reprehensible from
the very first missile, not just that they circled back
and killed the survivors who were shipwrecked. The principle has
become an irritant to governments ever since, particularly following a

(51:55):
series of cases in which members of climate and anti
genocide protest organizations such as Extinction Rebellion and Palestine Action
have been acquitted despite instructions from the Bench.

Speaker 3 (52:07):
But it's not just.

Speaker 2 (52:08):
That you may or may not agree with these particular issues,
but it's how they ended alcohol probition. For the most part,
jury started nullifying it by refusing to send people jail
for drinking whiskey or selling it or whatever.

Speaker 5 (52:24):
So why they don't want people planning about this to
undermine their drug war nonsense prohibition?

Speaker 2 (52:33):
And that's why they don't want to call the drug
war prohbition because they don't want to point out the similarity.

Speaker 4 (52:39):
Hey, wait a minute, we tried this once before.

Speaker 5 (52:42):
It's all the people tearfully and reluctantly sending peaceful people
to prison because they had a little bit of marijuana
or something.

Speaker 2 (52:51):
Yeah, we've seen that over and over again. You know,
that mandatory minimum stuff came up in regular administration that
was pushed by Joe Biden. Interestingly enough, when we get
to this stuff about what's going on with the ships
and everything, you've got the apologists for this reprehensible policy saying, well,

(53:14):
Joe Biden said that we needed to attack the cartels
of the military. So there you go. You know, Joe
Biden hated the constitution. Joe Biden was authoritarian, one of
the most authoritarian senators we've ever had. I said that
about him when he was running for president. I said,
watch out. You know, this guy is unbelievably evil. I
said it when he ran the first time as well.
Not only was he plagiarists and couldn't think. I mean,

(53:36):
he wasn't such a bright bulb even before he had
old age dementia, but he was guilty of plagiarism, and
he was also one of the most authoritarian people out there,
and so they're now using now the Conservatives who were
haranguing Biden for the mandates about the Trump shots, Oh
look at how authoritarian he is. Now they're going back

(53:58):
and saying, well, look, he said that we needed to
execute people if they were drug dealers, and so we
should be doing it because the other sides already embrace this.
I am so disgusted with this whole idea that because
the other tribe engaged in criminal activity, because the other
tribe are hypocrites, therefore that gives you a free pass

(54:21):
to be hypocrites yourself and to engage in criminal action yourself.
But that's what we're seeing from all these influencers who
are trying to tell you that there's a coup against
Pete Hegseth. If only there were, I wish there were
a coup against him. We need to get people like
him out of the Pentagon. Oath breaker, that's what he is. Anyway.

(54:44):
One of the things that is going to apply to
is financial crime and fraud cases. Those that involve hidden
dishonesty or complexity outside the understanding of the general public
will also be exempt from trial. By jury if the
proposed bill is and acted deeply troubling because this is
not getting much attention at all on the media. They're

(55:05):
just focusing on violent crime. So that's time.

Speaker 5 (55:09):
You've got a Sam Bankman Freed type that they want
to let go. They don't have to do any sort
of legal nonsense to pretend that that's right actually giving
him a trial.

Speaker 4 (55:22):
I cannot believe anyone anyone ever trusted Sam Bankman Freed
with their money. You could have pointed them out to
me in a crowd, be like no, absolutely not never.

Speaker 5 (55:33):
Or you can say the same about any of the
two thousand and eight people or many others that are
government connected criminals.

Speaker 4 (55:39):
Yeah, you know, I'm saying like you should viscerally physically
be able to look at Sam Bankman free to go. No,
this man is untrustworthy, Like there should be something in
you that rises up and goes No. He looks like
he's going to eat my money, just consume it like
a little rat.

Speaker 2 (55:52):
Well, as I said, the present system is an open
invitation to fraudsters. And they said that, they point out
that it's going to become even worse with it person right,
this says this is after all the UK that we're
talking about the country that arguably perfected the art of
financial crime. Well, I don't know if that's true or not.
I think maybe we had a lot of contributions in

(56:15):
that as well. Kirs Armer said, one person has to
be the most unlikable prime minister in my lifetime, and
he's got some stiff competition. He's a compulsive liar, he's
drunk on power, and he's a sanctimonious hypocrite. I got
to say I could say that about pretty much most
of the presidents in my lifetime. The difference is how

(56:36):
open they are about it, and I think Trump has
been the most open about being a compulsive liar, drunk
on power and a sanctimonious hypocrite. But they are laying
the foundations of authoritarian states everywhere, and freedom of speech
is one of the key things. That is the thing
that is primarily under at tech in the UK, in France, Germany,

(56:59):
the EU and guneral. There is one example. The former
UK ambasstor Craig Murray put a blog and he said
the terrifying case of Natalie Strecker. She was charged with
eliciting support for Hamas and Hesbela. Why because eight tweets
cherry picked by the police and prosecutors from around fifty

(57:21):
one thousand tweets and they found eight out of fifty
one thousand that she complained about what was happening in Gaza,
So that makes her a terrorist? Does that sound like
the labels being thrown around at these Narco terrorists? So
we can do whatever we want to, right, I mean
in the UK they're only locking people up. We fire

(57:44):
missiles at people if we call them a terrorist. Now,
So Judge John Saunders interrupted the prosecution and her child
asked whether they were saying that he would be guilty
of support for terrorism if in a lecture he told
an international law class that Palestinians have the right to
armed resistance according to international law. And so the prosecution said, yes,

(58:09):
there would be an offense for you to tell law
students that you can't quote the law to them. You know,
we've seen this type of thing before. A New Jersey
weed man who decided, you know, he was very heavy
marijuana users. As a matter of fact, when I interviewed him,
he started he lit up a joint. I was interviewing him.
But he said based on the quantity of marijuana that

(58:30):
they had. They automatically started referring to him as a dealer.
He goes, I'm not a dealer. I use it all.
But he had enough brain cells left that he realized
that there were enough people out there who didn't like
the marijuana law that if he made the argument about
Durdy nullification, that he would be likely to get off.
Says his first trial. He and it's actually in the

(58:53):
state constitution of New Jersey that you have a right
to judge not only the facts of the case, but
also judge whether or not you agree with the law
and whether or not you agree with the penalties that
are going to be applied. For instance, you know, if
Joe Biden and Richard Nixon have decided that they're going
to send you to jail for ten years for mandatory

(59:14):
minimum for possession of plot or something like that, a
lot of people might think that that is excessive, so
they might just nullify that. And so he put that
up and started to talk about it. The judge had
take that down, or I'm going to come after you
for contempt of court and you're going to go straight
to jail. And so he took it down. But it
was too late. They had already seen it, and so

(59:36):
he had seven of the twelve jurors vote to quit him.
And so then they decided they would come after him
a second time. When they came after him, the prosecutors
came after him a second time, because they can do
it three times. When they came after him a second time,
the judge allowed him to keep it up because it
is after all a part of the state constitution, and

(59:57):
that's what they're saying here. You can't tell you, judge,
could not tell your law students about the international law
that says that the postings have right to armed resistance,
and we would send you to jail. And so that
judge left it there. He got acquitted twelve to nothing,

(01:00:18):
which meant that they could not come after him anymore
for that.

Speaker 5 (01:00:22):
But yeah, I like defense line from the well offense
line I guess from the prosecution. Yes, judge, you also
would be going to prison under this if you convict
this guy.

Speaker 3 (01:00:34):
That's right. Well, he didn't get off. I think that at.

Speaker 2 (01:00:38):
Least they told the truth, because it was pretty obvious
that they would have come after him.

Speaker 5 (01:00:43):
So I didn't get this story to you last night,
but I saw something that I thought is very relevant
to this.

Speaker 3 (01:00:52):
Let me pull it up.

Speaker 5 (01:00:55):
It's a.

Speaker 7 (01:00:58):
Wrong one.

Speaker 5 (01:01:00):
This Swiss man was jailed after saying that men and
women have different skeletons. This apparently is transphobic. It was
a comment on social media, and he apparently got ten
days in jail for it.

Speaker 2 (01:01:16):
That is a proven fact as a matter of fact.
Maybe it was in relation to that, but I was
looking at scrolling through Twitter pretty quickly and what is this.
Somebody's taking a metal ball and passing it through a
skeleton's pelvic area. And I paused to look at that
and say, what is this about? And what they were
saying was this is a ball that is like the

(01:01:38):
size of a baby's typical head. And see it passes
easily through a woman's pelvic area, but it will not
pass through a man's pelvic area. The bones are closer
together in a man's pelvic area. So that's you know,
that's basically what he's saying, and it is true.

Speaker 3 (01:01:54):
But the truth is no defense. Now there is a law.

Speaker 5 (01:01:58):
Right was convicted of hate speech, fine sentenced to ten days.
And here's his post right here.

Speaker 4 (01:02:08):
I said in a Facebook post, if you excavate LGBTQ, lesbian, gay, bisexual,
blah blah blah people. After two hundred years, you will
only find men and women among the skeletons. Everything else
is a mental illness that was fostered by the curriculum.

Speaker 3 (01:02:21):
Very true, very true.

Speaker 4 (01:02:23):
Yeah, it is amazing the amount of time and effort
we have to spend sitting around and telling these mentally
ill people know, you're not a man, No, you're not
a woman.

Speaker 5 (01:02:33):
Well, I mean it, do spend that time and effort
in the wrong country. You get ten days in jail
on a fine.

Speaker 2 (01:02:40):
Yeah, that's right. Well, this article here talking about cure
Starmer facial recognition and every city, town and village, every village,
every village like the prisoners village, and that's exactly what
these people are looking at. Starmer's government is planning to
unleash live facial recognition cameras across the UK's urban landscape,

(01:03:03):
completing a project has begun some years ago into the Tories.
I mean, they've already got cameras everywhere. Now what they're
going to be able to do is wed that to
artificial intelligence and next thing you know, they'll be wedding
that to their robot armies of cops who are going
to come and arrest you based on how it has
flagged you for a particular thing. Well, I said earlier.

(01:03:26):
This is from Preston Burn and you'll find it on
zero Hedge. The Granite Act how Congress could strike back
against foreign sensors. Please find below the draft text of
the Granite Act, a bill I've offered to New Hampshire
legislators for consideration for enactment in that state. It could
serve as a template for the US fight back against

(01:03:48):
global censorship if adapted for federal use. The gist is simple.
The only real defense a foreign censor has from injunctive
relief in the US court, as we saw with Offcom's
recent fine letter to four Chan and the strategy employed
by Trump media and technology groups attorneys in their case
against Alexander de Morey in the Middle District of Florida,

(01:04:10):
the only strategy to have his sovereign immunity. Foreign countries
can bully American citizens and companies because they know that
US law potentially protects them from consequences for doing so.
And so you know, basically, I think what he is.
The gist of what he's doing. If I get condense
it is to say that it's.

Speaker 3 (01:04:29):
Illegal to.

Speaker 2 (01:04:32):
Do a they call it a slap lawsuit, you know,
kind of something that is quite obviously just being done
out of intimidation, and that is recognized as I forget
the acronym for the slap thing is.

Speaker 3 (01:04:46):
But there are.

Speaker 2 (01:04:48):
Pushbacks against that, laws prohibiting that. There should be laws
prohibiting this, and he said, we should take the immunity
away from them. Such a move would have teeth because
these foreign countries' economies a breakdown if they didn't have
access to the U S banking system. The Granite Act
would make foreign censorship in bound to the US a
very simple cost benefit exercise for these countries. You can

(01:05:11):
try to censor an American citizen or a corporation, but
if you do, they can sue you, and you and
mister foreign censor are not judgment proof because your country
needs access the financial system to survive. Well, the other
thing you could do is you could come at it
from the law fair perspective, and this could all be done.

(01:05:32):
I don't think it has to be done at the
federal level. I mean you could do this at the
state level. And he said.

Speaker 5 (01:05:38):
I it seems like it's some sort of anti slap thing.
I mean, I suppose, granted act is essentially an anti slap,
but there's already a law for that.

Speaker 2 (01:05:49):
That's true, But you know it's this is what he's
focusing on, is to say that if somebody comes after
you like that, a foreign entity, then you can sue them,
and they don't have immunity for that, so you could
theoretically get compensation out of their online stuff. But again,

(01:06:12):
I think it's only just a matter of time before
they start coming after US individuals whose opinions and whose
speech on social media they don't like. When you look
at how nitpicking and trivial they are to their own citizens,
you can imagine that if it is something of consequence
that you were talking about, their war policy, their pandemic policy,

(01:06:33):
vaccine policy, whatever it is, that, their climate policy, whatever
it is that they're pushing, if they think it is consequential,
even their transgender policy, because remember they're doing that, they're
the ones who are pushing that. But they would come
against anyone who is making comments or writing articles or
doing podcasts in America that conflict with their interests. I

(01:06:57):
think it's just a matter of time before that happens.
Let's take a quick break here.

Speaker 4 (01:07:01):
We have quite a few comments though. Pezovante seventeen seventy
six says, Elon bys Twitter slash X, he loses up speech.
Conservatives flocked to the site. They and their speech are
identified and monitored and eventually will be controlled.

Speaker 3 (01:07:13):
There's a trap.

Speaker 4 (01:07:16):
The ropidope, Pavante says X. Control will come because must
cannot be trusted not to sell out freedom of speech
for money.

Speaker 3 (01:07:23):
That's it.

Speaker 2 (01:07:24):
It's all about what's in it for him, And I
don't believe that he is altruistic fighting for principles. He's
fighting for Elon Musk.

Speaker 3 (01:07:34):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:07:34):
You know, hey, his interests may converge with us for
a while, but just be careful. Right, It's just like
Stalin and Hitler converge. Their interests converged for a moment
til Hitler attacks Stalin.

Speaker 3 (01:07:47):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (01:07:48):
Henry Kissinger that said, we don't have allies, We just
have permanent interests.

Speaker 3 (01:07:53):
That's right.

Speaker 5 (01:07:54):
It's the same thing.

Speaker 3 (01:07:55):
We don't have permanent dinciples.

Speaker 5 (01:07:57):
They just have interests.

Speaker 2 (01:07:58):
Yeah, we don't have permanent allies, have permanent interests. That's right,
misters Machiavellen.

Speaker 4 (01:08:06):
We have three Little Birds says free speech allows complaints
about government actors and corporate stooges. Steve Swan, Candice Owens,
and Tucker Carlson recovering crazy things in order to delegitimize
true patriotic I agree, are.

Speaker 3 (01:08:21):
You, Steve? I think so. Yeah, that's one of the
ways that you do.

Speaker 2 (01:08:24):
It's one of the things that Oinkuy introduced Alex Jones,
that he makes the truth unbelievable. I thought that's the
best introduction to Alex Jones I've ever seen. Just turn
the frogs Gate for example. Right, the truth is in there,
but the way that he phrases it makes it subject
to ridicule and unbelievable.

Speaker 4 (01:08:45):
Everything Candie Owens has done this year has been ludicrous.
She goes in on the Bridget McCrone is actually a
man based on this research from these French people that
doesn't really hold up too much scrutiny.

Speaker 2 (01:08:58):
And there's yeah, otherwise, thing is fine, Right, there's really
nothing going on in America that we should be concerned about.
Let's be concerned about Emmanuel Macron's wife and whether she's
really a woman.

Speaker 4 (01:09:09):
Now, just she's on there talking about how what is it?
Oh a bunch of world leaders gotten an Egyptian troop transport,
flew to the town where Charlie Kirk was assassinated, stayed
for like a week, and left the morning before Charlie
Kirk was assassinated, despite the fact they were there to
watch him get assassinated. Because she couldn't figure out the

(01:09:30):
time zones and thought that the plane was there after
the assassination, but really it had left like four hours before.
She has gone completely insane. The French are apparently sending
assassins after her. But she was at Dollywood over a
weekend or two ago over Thanksgiving. Yeah, she was out
in Dollywood having a great time. I guess the French
assassins aren't too good at their job. I don't know.

Speaker 3 (01:09:52):
But you know, she's doing it for the money. She's
doing it the right way, I guess. You know.

Speaker 2 (01:09:56):
You look at the astronomical amounts of money that she's making.
That explains it all from one aspect of that. But yeah,
they are being used to delegitimize certainly, that's the way
everybody else is using them. They might be out there
doing it simply because you know, they're con man and
grifters and they want toy like a lot of money,
or they could be in on the con But that's

(01:10:17):
why everybody else is using it.

Speaker 3 (01:10:19):
That's absolutely right.

Speaker 4 (01:10:21):
But yeah, canus owen's gone completely insane. Yeah, Niberu twenty
twenty nine, Larry think we will be forcing behavior whackjaw.
The World Health Organization is proposing a Gates funded global
digital ID framework that would link newborns, vaccinations records to
lifelong tracking through inter interoperable registries, socioeconomic data and AI.

Speaker 2 (01:10:42):
You know, that's the thing. The World Health Organization, the
World Economic Forum, the Chinese, all these different all of
them have plans to censor us. All of them have
plans for digital IDs, all of them have plans for
travel control. And that's really what's going on with the
TSA and this real ID stuff as well. But everybody's
got a plan. They've all got the same plan. They

(01:11:04):
all call it something different, and the amazing thing is
how they are all on the same page and the
timing is all the same. But don't call it a conspiracy.

Speaker 4 (01:11:17):
So Bogus says, no freeman shall be seized or imprisoned,
or stripped of his rights or possessions or outlawed er
exiled or deprived of his standing in any way, nor
will we proceed with force against him, or send others
to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his peers,
or by the law of the land. The Magna Carta
twelve fifteen.

Speaker 3 (01:11:37):
Yep.

Speaker 2 (01:11:37):
Yeah, words that we could have lived by, but they
don't want to live by them anymore.

Speaker 4 (01:11:41):
Guard Goldsmith and of course Guard Goldsmith hosts Liberty Conspiracy
Monday through Friday at six pm. You can also find
him on substack as well and Twitter. Go check out
Guard Goldsmith. He says, back and the cat is happy.

Speaker 3 (01:11:55):
You know. JD.

Speaker 4 (01:11:55):
Vance's stance on EU pre speech smacks of hypocrisy. Yeah,
he says, Sakespeare never taught his daughter to read, never
owned a library, little indication he was into reading writing.
But his name was on the productions as putting on
the plays. Interesting.

Speaker 2 (01:12:07):
Yeah, and actually one of the things they point out
was that his name was actually Shakspear without the e,
not a shake. But yeah, it's it's it's amazing when
you look at how Edward de Vere, how his events
line up, even the people he was. His family was
the first peerage in the UK, so I mean they

(01:12:29):
were involved in the court intrigues and stuff from the
very beginning. And a lot of the kings that come
across as villains were their political rivals as well, So
just keeps going on and on and on when to
look at all different aspects.

Speaker 4 (01:12:44):
But yeah, pez on Avante seventeen seventy six, those gray
wigged magistrates need to be dragged out of those courtrooms, immediately, arrested,
charged and jailed. Alien poop evolution. Small towns have a
jury trial once every five years. You were going to
engage in a jury trial in b caves in Texas. Yeah, yeah,

(01:13:06):
got a speeding ticket.

Speaker 2 (01:13:07):
They don't like that. No, yeah, they don't like it.
They'll do anything to that. That's when they'll start negotiating
with you.

Speaker 4 (01:13:14):
Don't make me deal with the bureaucracy that's supposed to
be for you.

Speaker 2 (01:13:17):
And I can say it now I'm not in Texas,
but I really you know, I couldn't really take off
of work to go fight this thing, because they also
play the game that you know, you can't be sure
that you're going to actually you go there and you
camp out all day and maybe we'll get to your case,
maybe we want you know, that's their their their side
of the thing, so it's it's kind of a negotiating

(01:13:37):
tactic really.

Speaker 3 (01:13:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:13:39):
That or they change the date of your trial last
minute and send you a parcel that shows up.

Speaker 7 (01:13:45):
Like a day earlier.

Speaker 3 (01:13:46):
Yeah, so continually.

Speaker 4 (01:13:47):
Playing all kinds of games.

Speaker 3 (01:13:48):
That's right. The whole thing is a game.

Speaker 4 (01:13:50):
Guard Goldsmith says. Nobody expects the EU inquisition, the US inquisition,
the UK inquisition. They want to stop those jury trials.

Speaker 2 (01:13:57):
We have three primary weapons. Going to make it four,
we have the Germans as well. Yeah, nobody's saw that coming.

Speaker 4 (01:14:06):
The real octo spook. American courts are trail trial by
pocketbooks or richest wins.

Speaker 3 (01:14:13):
Yeah, that's right.

Speaker 4 (01:14:14):
That's a part of the reason that we when the
whole Alfred Hitchcock thing happened, just like, well, there's not
really anything we can do about this. The Alfred Hitchcock
estate has millions upon millions of dollars. That's just not
a fight you can win. They'll simply bleed you dry,
you'll never see trial, you'll bankrupt yourself and won't accomplish anything.
Be my Valentine finds make money from plea deals. Too

(01:14:36):
expensive to run jury trials Cletis five five five. I
never had to mention jury not nullification. I just told
the court that I didn't think that anyone should be
arrested for having marijuana, and they let me go and
have never called me back since. Hell on, guys, he
believes in freedom, Get him out of here. He's got
to go. Guard Goldsmith. By the way, the state Senator

(01:14:57):
Keith Ammon here in New Hampshire proposed the Granite Act
is a free State project member.

Speaker 3 (01:15:01):
Good guy, Well, good for him, Good for him.

Speaker 4 (01:15:04):
If Guard like someone thinks he's good on liberty, you
can believe he is good on liberty. The real octo spook.
I am sure when judges and attorneys wake up, AI
will decide the verdicts.

Speaker 2 (01:15:14):
Yeah, well, you know what you're saying. Getting back to
the Granite Act, Guard and that kind of stuff, we
really do to our own detriment. Not realize how much
can be done at the state level. So many of
these things can be We could even fight against this
kind of international tyranny at the state level. That's where
the rubber meets the road, and we ignore that to

(01:15:36):
our peril.

Speaker 4 (01:15:37):
Zoksaw of Oxhaws. That's anatomy and physiology. Every nursing student
knows some basics on skeletal differences. There's so many obvious
differences and the fact that we pretend there aren't so
for the benefit of a small, small minority of mentally
ill and sick individuals, is I mean that's right.

Speaker 2 (01:16:02):
Well, we're gonna take a quick break and I'm gonna
play you Christmas Carol.

Speaker 3 (01:16:05):
Here.

Speaker 2 (01:16:05):
We'll give you the uh the Jimmy Stewart add and
I've got a clip here of Jimmy Stewart talking about
about talking about it's wonderful life. I'm gonna play for
way after that.

Speaker 3 (01:16:15):
Stay with this. Will be right back, and.

Speaker 7 (01:18:26):
You're listening to the David Knight Show.

Speaker 9 (01:18:30):
I wish I had a Christmas Night album. You can
get the Christmas Night Album at the Davidnightshow dot com
for just thirteen ninety nine. It's right in the second
floor there.

Speaker 10 (01:18:41):
Say what'd you wish, George, Well, not just one to
wish your little hat flog.

Speaker 9 (01:18:49):
First, I'm going to the Davidnightshow dot Com and purchase
the Christmas Night Album. Then I'm gonna listen to Christmas
classics like who are you gonna throw it?

Speaker 5 (01:18:57):
Rog?

Speaker 11 (01:18:57):
I want the Christmas Night album too.

Speaker 10 (01:19:02):
That's pretty good.

Speaker 12 (01:19:07):
Hello, girls, can't you come out to me?

Speaker 13 (01:19:09):
Can't you?

Speaker 9 (01:19:12):
David's Christmas Night Album includes twenty one instrumental Christmas melodies
like God Rest You, Merry Gentlemen, Silent Night, and It's
all New.

Speaker 10 (01:19:21):
I'll be home for Christmas. What do you want? You
want the moon?

Speaker 12 (01:19:26):
Just say the word and I'll throw a lasshole around
and pull it down.

Speaker 14 (01:19:29):
I'll take it and what and then I'll buy you
your own download of David Knight's Christmas Night album.

Speaker 13 (01:19:50):
What trouble are you getting back into movies? Because you
started with a bang, with a marvelous movie made by
Frank Capra. It's a wonderful life that I mean, did
you want to get back in the moon?

Speaker 2 (01:20:00):
Oh?

Speaker 12 (01:20:00):
I certainly did, but I uh, it was sort of.

Speaker 2 (01:20:05):
A again, this is after you took a leave because
he fought in World War Two.

Speaker 12 (01:20:10):
In my career, because I didn't exactly know whether the type.

Speaker 3 (01:20:16):
Of thing that I'd done.

Speaker 12 (01:20:17):
Before, whether that would be accepted, and it turned out
that it wasn't very accepted.

Speaker 3 (01:20:23):
That It's a wonderful life didn't do very well, didn't it?

Speaker 12 (01:20:26):
I The next picture didn't do very well and it
was sort of falling back on that, on that sort
of thing that I'd gotten into the romantic comedy and
people didn't want that.

Speaker 3 (01:20:38):
So but before you.

Speaker 13 (01:20:39):
Go on the Jimmy, come up a look at seen
them from from Wonderful Life.

Speaker 3 (01:20:43):
Yeah, I didn't realize it.

Speaker 10 (01:20:44):
Fact it didn't.

Speaker 13 (01:20:45):
It wasn't a commercial success because it's it's it's a
nice little isn't it.

Speaker 12 (01:20:49):
But it's amazing, it's it's my favorite picture and Frank
Capri's favorite picture.

Speaker 10 (01:21:05):
You're a father in heaven. I'm not a grand man.
But if you're a player, and you can hear me,
show me the way. I'm at the end of my robe.
I show me the way God didn't wanna, right, George

(01:21:31):
or somebody take your hard Why you're dreaming so much?
My friendly Please go home, mister Bailey. This is Christmas
Eve Bailey.

Speaker 12 (01:21:43):
Wish Bailey this mister George better.

Speaker 13 (01:22:00):
You said, Jim that was your favorite movie of all
of all the movies you made.

Speaker 10 (01:22:05):
That.

Speaker 13 (01:22:05):
Yeah, still, why is that?

Speaker 12 (01:22:07):
I don't know a lot of reasons. I just noticed
that that scene there, Uh, that scene I remember when
I when I first read the first draft of the
script and that scene the Little Prayer affected me and
when I read it, when I did it in the movie,

(01:22:31):
it did and it did the same to me right now.

Speaker 3 (01:22:39):
And this.

Speaker 12 (01:22:41):
Is a theory that I've always had that creating moments
in movies, this, I think is the important thing. Nobody
knows exactly how it happened.

Speaker 3 (01:22:59):
Uh, but.

Speaker 12 (01:23:02):
What you should do is to prepare yourself as best
you can to make these moments happen, because in a
movie it's it's really not so much the performance, it's
really not there are moments. There are moments just like

(01:23:24):
like there, I think.

Speaker 2 (01:23:28):
Yeah, and in that moment he was not so that
was not in there that he would be crying like that. Yeah,
it's a genuine so yeah. Actually, according to the code,
you know, they had their own code, the Hayes Code
they put in, and it was put in primarily to
pull back some of the abuses that were there in

(01:23:48):
Hollywood from the very beginning, From the very beginning. This
stuff didn't come in with a sexual revolution in the sixties.
Hollywood was as scrupt as could be from the very beginning,
and so they had a lot of nudity and sex
in the early silent film days and so they were
going to shut the whole thing down, and so Hollywood
kind of did its own policing thing. A similar thing

(01:24:11):
happened with comic books. They came up with the comic
book code and everything, so they had different codes that
were there. And in this particular case, what was relevant
about it was that they had said that it wasn't
just about sexual things or nudity.

Speaker 3 (01:24:24):
It was also that you.

Speaker 2 (01:24:25):
Will not have any characters praying, and that was still
in effect, and so what they did was they kind
of skirted that and did an in run with the
way they wrote that end too, the end of the script,
so that it was kind of on the side. But anyway,
let's talk about how we have lost our foundation.

Speaker 4 (01:24:47):
Here really quickly.

Speaker 3 (01:24:48):
Though.

Speaker 4 (01:24:48):
Also, just Jimmy Stewart did some fantastic movies. If you're
looking for a great Western Winchester seventy three is an excellent,
excellent movie. It's an excellent film and always worth a
watch or a rewatch.

Speaker 3 (01:25:02):
We watched that many many times.

Speaker 4 (01:25:04):
I've seen Winchester seventy three. I don't know how many
times we had it on VHS, And that was one
of those ones where you know, put it on and
just watch it every so often.

Speaker 2 (01:25:16):
I like Liberty Valance man who shot Liberty Balance with
him and John Wayne, until one day it kind of
dawned on me. Wait a minute, what they're saying is that,
you know, the Liberty is an evil thing. You know,
we don't want the wild West, and it's like, no,
I want the wild West. Like I said earlier, I
think the wild West is good. You can handle people

(01:25:36):
like Liberty Balance. But you know, the whole thing was
that we had some other everybody with laws. It was
kind of a backdoor slap at that. But anyway, that's
just my opinion. Poor Pete. The war on Pete hegsath
and this is something that was done by a guy
who operates under an alias who writes on American Great

(01:26:00):
and zero Hedge thought it was so good that they
published it as well, And I got to say, I
think it's one of the most disgusting things. The only
thing that I've seen more disgusting take than this is
the article I'm going to cover after this.

Speaker 4 (01:26:14):
So get ready, folks, this is about to be a segment.

Speaker 2 (01:26:17):
Poor Pete. Pity him right, I've had enough. I can
no longer sit still while the deep state does its
very best to smear murdering Pete Hegseth and have him
remove from his post via lies, rumors, propaganda. Talk to
me about lies. This guy has changed his story more
times than Hillary Clinton changed their story about Bengaza. So

(01:26:41):
you know they can't tell the truth. Take a look.
And yet you've got zero Hedge, you got bright Bart,
you got Info Warris, you got American greatness.

Speaker 3 (01:26:49):
They're all out there. It's a coup.

Speaker 2 (01:26:50):
It's a coup, and it's got to be the Soros
people as well. Same narrative all the time, right, Yeah,
it's a far side doesn't win. It's a coup by
the deep state. I'm so sick and tired of this trope.
It's disgusting. It's a rerun over and over again. I've
seen this movie before. In this particular case, it does

(01:27:11):
not apply. He is not a victim. He is a liar.
He's a criminal.

Speaker 4 (01:27:16):
Hey wait, I've seen this one. It's a classic.

Speaker 2 (01:27:18):
Yeah, he's guilty of premeditated murder and they're trying to
get him off. He said, clearly, this is an orchestrated,
carefully constructed character assassination campaign against Egsath well before he
can assassinate his character. He's got to have some and
this guy is as bad as Megan Kelly, who was
out there saying I want them to suffer, you know,
make them bleed.

Speaker 5 (01:27:38):
Yes, she's saying that, but he's the one actually killing him.

Speaker 3 (01:27:41):
That's right.

Speaker 2 (01:27:42):
We now know, of course that it was all a lie,
and they're not talking about what Hegseth had said. The
Democrats and national media want you to believe that two
fishermen survived a first strike on their drug laden speedboat
and we're then floating in the water helplessly like Rose
and Jack at the end of Titanic. Well, actually they were,
and if they violated your illegal war on drugs, there

(01:28:06):
is no death penalty for it. So when you look
at this, we were just talking about getting rid the
foundations of Western society, free speech, trial by jury, the
Magna cart, all these things being purged. These people in America,
this American greatness and zero hedge. These people, they are
pushing this something that is far more dangerous now, that

(01:28:28):
is getting rid of the idea of a just war.
They have nothing but contempt for that and for the
rules of war. And let me tell you, yeah, it
may sound like an oxymoron. But if ever there was
a place we need to have rules to try to
mitigate the slaughter that's in war, and we abandon all
that to our demise. Really, newsflash. They admitted all this stuff,

(01:28:53):
folks after boasting about striking the ship. And that's the
key thing in Reason got it right about this.

Speaker 3 (01:29:02):
They said.

Speaker 2 (01:29:04):
The danger of all this talk about the second strike
is that we don't realize that as it was originally
presented and as Pete hegg Seth boasted about it, it
was still a war crime. It was still murder. There
was no conflict, there was no threat. There was no
legal justification under US or international law to execute people

(01:29:25):
on the mere suspicion of drugs. There's no law international
or domestic that allows you to execute them, even if
you gave them due process. It's not a capital offense.
I don't know what's the matter with people like this
during this but the damage has done, and too many
Americans are still clinging to the lies on the Washington
Post heg Seth, Levitt Trump, all of them have changed

(01:29:49):
their tune. All of them have changed their tune. They've
all walked back their statements which means that they were
all lying and it's just become the lies have become untenable.
That's why they change the story. Just like Hillary Clinton,
I'm Benghazi.

Speaker 5 (01:30:04):
What a ridiculous article to say that. Oh yeah, they're
saying two fishermen survived, as though yet being a drug
runner makes you more likely to survive getting your boat
blown up. Yeah, a drug runner, I could believe he
could survive that attack. But a fisherman, Well.

Speaker 2 (01:30:22):
They're saying it because they said, well, these people are
not innocent. The reality is is that, as ram Paul said,
from the very beginning, when the Coastguard interdicts people and
searches their boats, as they continue to do in spite
of the fact that in this particular area, because it's
not about the drugs at all. It's about it's about bullying,

(01:30:42):
corrupt capitalism, the kind of stuff that was called out
by Smedley Butler. War is a racket really is, and
you know we still use that word rico, the racketeering
and influence and corrupt organizations. It's organized crime, and the
entire drug war is organized crime run by organized criminals

(01:31:05):
that we call the federal government. And this only exacerbates
all this. So this one is from the Daily Signal.
I believe it's a Heritage Foundation daily wire. I think
is Ben Shapiro saying Daily Signals Heritage Foundation. These are
people who are cheering, hegseeth. Matter of fact, three cheers

(01:31:27):
for the Pentagon's two step boat attack. They said, all
week long, I've tried to cry for the narco terrorists.
See this is the childish labels that they throw on people,
just like the leftists do. Oh, we'll call them narco terrorists.
Now I gotta because I label you a narco terrorist.
Now I have a right to jail you, to gas

(01:31:48):
you at a protest or whatever. I'm going to label
your organization in a terrorist organization. That's why people showed
up on the No King's Day and said, I am
antifah if you're going to just arbitrary label them as this,
we don't like that principle. But they use that label
and now they can kill you if they wish. So
it's however, I tried to cry for them, but my

(01:32:10):
eyes are stayed totally cry. Yeah, well, maybe you ought
to weep for the loss of due process, the loss
of the constitution, the loss of the rule of law
and the loss of morality in our society because people
like you at the Daily Signal have pushed this. The
only thing wrong with Venezuela and two step is the

(01:32:31):
Secretary of War Pete Hesse did not hold a press
conference and take full credit for this operation. A newsflash.
It's not the Secretary of War. That's going to cost
two billion dollars if they do it. But they haven't
done it yet. He calls himself that it's just an affectation.
He's like a little I think Kelly got it right.
He's like a little boy playing war. I probably could

(01:32:52):
go into his office.

Speaker 3 (01:32:52):
He's got little toy soldiers all set up around the
place there.

Speaker 5 (01:32:55):
But yeah, not only did he not take credit for it,
he's repeatedly lied about it and changed his story.

Speaker 2 (01:33:00):
That's right, Yeah, he lied about it because it's worse
than a war crime, and it's cold blooded murder. And
what we found in this statement, we found that it
was premeditated murder. They talked about it for forty one
minutes to decide what they're going to do, and then
what they did was still murder. So this premeditated murder,
planned and malice of forethought. So this off ed piece

(01:33:23):
as the bad ombres and those narcotics stuffed boats are
not Venezuelan sailors. They are private sector criminals, namely drug
cartel thugs, for which I would add no death penalty law,
and there is no declaration of war to identify them
as combatants. There was no conflict, there was no combat,

(01:33:44):
and so from the very beginning, this is equivalent to
killing civilians. You know, we just had a video that
I haven't shown it on the show, but it was
taken by somebody as from a distance as Israeli soldiers.
We're arresting someone in Gaza. The person's got their hand
up and the Israeli soldiers just executed them. That's what

(01:34:07):
this is about. And it's no wonder that we support
Israel in that war, because we do the same thing.

Speaker 5 (01:34:13):
I do have that video. I don't know if you want.

Speaker 3 (01:34:16):
To play it. It's long. Let's go.

Speaker 2 (01:34:19):
We've got a guess that's coming up. I want to
get through this trendy. Rugua and their lawless associates did
not sign the Geneva Convention, and as non state actors,
they're not entitled to its protections. Bothers me a great
deal that a a think tank, the Heritage Foundation, the
biggest of the conservative think tanks, would put out something

(01:34:42):
like this.

Speaker 4 (01:34:42):
I just have to say, it's just I'm I didn't
sign the Constitution, I didn't sign the Bill of Rights.
Does that mean that I'm not entitled to that protection
of my individual freedoms and liberties.

Speaker 3 (01:34:52):
That's a good point. Yeah, the point.

Speaker 5 (01:34:53):
That KARDA isn't there to legislate the victims, like it's
there to restrict the people that are committing the war crimes.

Speaker 3 (01:35:02):
That's right. It is not.

Speaker 2 (01:35:04):
You know, we've said over and over again, the Bill
of Rights does not give us rights. The Bill of
Rights recognizes are God given rights and it prohibits the
government from infringing on those. The same thing is true
of the Geneva Convention. The Geneva Convention recognizes the morality
of what was informed by Christian thought, and that is

(01:35:25):
the just war theory. That you don't attack people who
are non combatants. That means civilians, and that means even
soldiers who are now out of combat, sailors who are shipwrecked.
This is the exact case that they use. So you
don't get your human rights because you sign a Geneva convention. Again,

(01:35:45):
I find it very troubling that the Heritage Foundation would
publish something like this. But the Heritage Foundation never really
got the gist of what was happening with social media
censorship either, and by the way, neither did the Cato Institute.
The biggest concern did, the biggest libertarian think tanks did
not support free speech against censorship when it's being done surreptitiously.

(01:36:09):
They came back and said, well, this is being done
by the social media companies and their private entities, so
they can do whatever they want to take somebody's free speech.
No they can't, No, they can't, And I don't care
if the Supreme Court says it or not. Those were
not rights that were given to me by the government.
Their rights that are given to me by God, and
the corporations cannot take those rights. Ever, we can never

(01:36:31):
give them that kind of power, just like we can't
give it to the government either. If the US armed
forces are no longer may kill narco terrists who survive
single tap strikes, then these individuals suddenly have grown a
right to life that must be respected. Think about this

(01:36:52):
conservative think tank talking about how somebody has grown a
right to life. Anyone wonder that we struggled for so
long to stop abortion that the right to life people
couldn't get the kind of traction that they needed from
Heritage Foundation. Welcome to post Christian conservatism, where you supposedly

(01:37:16):
grow rights to life. No, it is not something. These rights,
as I said, even about the Bill rights, these rights
are not granted by the government. They're not granted by
the document. They're not granted only to citizens. We have
these rights because we're human, and that means that people

(01:37:38):
who are citizens of other countries also have human rights
and were not allowed to kill them wantonly if they
are if it's not in self defense. This is clearly
not in defense. It's an unjust war.

Speaker 3 (01:37:52):
It was an.

Speaker 2 (01:37:52):
Unjust strike, and the first strike was unjust. Yeah, the
second one just drives at home.

Speaker 5 (01:38:00):
He's saying that if you're okay for the first strike,
then surely you should be okay for the second one.
He's pointing out that it's ridiculous to think that someone
could suddenly grow right to life. The only thing is
he's saying that they never had a right to.

Speaker 11 (01:38:12):
Life by what ease?

Speaker 3 (01:38:14):
That's right.

Speaker 2 (01:38:15):
Yeah, welcome to post Christian conservatism quote unquote, the neo
cons and the never christ.

Speaker 3 (01:38:22):
That's what these people are.

Speaker 2 (01:38:23):
They want war and they pretended they're conservative, but they
don't want to conserve anything, especially Western civilization.

Speaker 3 (01:38:32):
He says.

Speaker 2 (01:38:32):
So, imagine that Navy seals. This is the most absurd
straw man argument I've ever heard, the most absurd. Listen
to this how he justifies this. Imagine the Navy seals
aboard the USS gerald Ford swoop in to save these survivors. Surprise,
an enraged narco terrorist opens fire on the incoming gringoes.
Three seals tumble into the Caribbean dead. What would those

(01:38:56):
bashing excess say.

Speaker 3 (01:38:57):
That, Well, I would say to you, that's the most
absurd argument I've ever seen in my life.

Speaker 4 (01:39:03):
Look at this scenario I made up, Look at what
could have Look at this thing that I'm imagining.

Speaker 2 (01:39:09):
Yeah, they were not model citizens.

Speaker 3 (01:39:11):
There you go.

Speaker 2 (01:39:11):
So you don't like them and they're criminals, so just
execute them. Where do we draw the line? When do
we stop executing people that are not model citizens? According
to the Daily Signal, I wish this person had put
their name there. I would like to make them a celebrity.
This is just crazy. According to a source familiar with
the incident, the two survivors climbed back onto the boat
after the initial strike. Well, what else do you think

(01:39:33):
they're going to do. They're trying to survive in the ocean.
They were also waving for help, by the way, that
has also come out. They said, well, they believed that
they were potentially in communication with others and that they
might then salvage the drugs, so they determined that they
were still in the fight with the valid targets. Understand

(01:39:55):
that the way they have defined conflict, right, they have
defined conflict mean these people were possession of illegal drugs.
Therefore they were a threat. Therefore there was combat, Therefore
it was conflict. None of that is true. It has
never been true, and we better hope that it never
becomes true. When are they going to start executing people

(01:40:16):
on the streets like du Terte did in the Philippines.
There is a simple solution to all this. Those who
prefer not to get obliterated in narcotics boats or wind
up clutching wreckage after being shot need to not do
any drugs.

Speaker 3 (01:40:30):
Right.

Speaker 2 (01:40:31):
Isn't that amazing? And then here is Steve Watson and you.

Speaker 5 (01:40:36):
Said you wanted his name. This was written by Deroy Murdoch.

Speaker 3 (01:40:41):
Really wow wow, Okay, I missed that. Thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:40:45):
How pathetic that is, Manhattan based Fox News contributor.

Speaker 3 (01:40:51):
Well there you go, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:40:54):
Deroy, you are a pathetic excuse for a human being.
Just to disgusting to see this. And here's another one,
Steve Watson, Paul Watson's brother Modernity News.

Speaker 3 (01:41:06):
Watch this.

Speaker 2 (01:41:06):
Here's Biden calling for a strike force to crush drug
dealers in nineteen eighty nine. Okay, well, then if Biden
did it, I guess we can do it too.

Speaker 4 (01:41:14):
Here's Joe Biden, known purveyor of good policy.

Speaker 2 (01:41:18):
Yeah, Steve Watson repeat after me. Okay, hypocrisy and crimes
of the other tribe do not mean that your tribe
can do the same type of thing. It was deplorable
when Biden said it, Biden. If you knew anything about
history and America, Steve, you would know that Biden has
been one of the key instigators of this criminal, illegal

(01:41:40):
war on drugs and the authoritarian over the top tactics
things like mandatory minimums and things like that, as well
as the civilized at forfeiture. This is all coming from
Joe Biden. Joe Biden, as I've said over and over again,
when Clarence Thomas was having the hearings, the Democrats got
very angry with him because they wanted him to focus
exclude Civilly on this. He said, she said thing about

(01:42:03):
Anita Hill, and instead he focused on attacking Clarence Thomas
because Clarence Thomas supported natural rights and the Constitution of
the Bill Rights, and Biden hated the thing.

Speaker 3 (01:42:18):
You know, he doesn't even remember.

Speaker 2 (01:42:19):
What it's called decoration Independence and the rest of that stuff.
He hates the founding principles of this country, the Decoration
of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution. He despises it.
He is one of the worst authoritarian gangsters out there.
And of course that's why he was picked, and that's
why Trump was picked, because they're both alike in that regard.

(01:42:41):
So a clip, Steve Watson found a clip where Joe
Biden is demanding the same aggressive action decades ago, proving
that their opposition as pure partisan sabotage, as cartel poison
floods America unchecked, Steve, they would be so proud of
you with our first czar in America, William Bennett and

(01:43:01):
the Reagan administration. They'd be so proud of you towing
the line for this. You know, we got to do
whatever it takes for the war on drugs. It was
the guy that Steve A. Chennick was working with Tom Clancy,
who came up with clear and present danger. They were
selling that idea to people a long time ago. Yeah,
let's just choose the CIA in the military to kill
all these cartel people. That's the way. Let's turn the

(01:43:24):
war on drugs into a real war. You know, it
wasn't long ago that conservatives dinged Biden for his anti
human rights, his anti Bill rights mandates. Well, okay, this
is poison and we all know it was poisoned that
Trump put out and Trump says he's the father of

(01:43:44):
but it was Biden who mandated it, and violation of
the Bill rights and violation of our human rights. He
mandated it. Now these same conservatives are out there saying, well,
Biden did it, so now we can do it. Right,
this is the way it's going to operate. No hipocrisy
and crimes of the other tribe. Do not excuse the
hypocrisy and the crimes of your tribe. So, in addition

(01:44:11):
to calling for more prisons and more cops. Biden says,
the Democrats want the creation of a strike force to
do all this stuff. And again, the explosion of prisons
that we had because of mandatory minimums and things like that,
did that stop drugs? No, you have people who die
of overdoses in these corrupt federal prisons as well. And

(01:44:32):
what is it going to I've said this all along,
What does it say if you can't even stop drugs,
if people can get enough drugs to overdose on them
in prison, what kind of a society are we going
to have If you're going to try to stop this
spiritual problem by force by police, we'll all be living

(01:44:53):
in a prison. Now that's worth they taking this. They're
using this as an excuse to put us all in
a prison. And so the clip from February seventh, nineteen
eighty nine Senate hearings on Crime and Drug shows Biden
pushing for swift, severe punishment of dealers and international operations
to dismantle cartels before they infiltrate the US. This is
like arguing that, well, you know, Hitler said that we

(01:45:17):
should do such and such, so let's do it. You know,
he's he's he's bought into this, so let's it gives
us the permission to do that. I look at Biden
as somebody who as authoritarian as Hitler. He would do
all these things to us if he could. This psycho
is Trump's designation of cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, a

(01:45:38):
move that Biden never pursued, despite his tough talk. Yeah,
it took the left right thing. And they always pull
this stuff with a Republican. You know, it was Biden
who was pushing all this stuff behind the scenes really
hard and in the Senate when Reagan was president. And
of course, you know they need to put in Donald

(01:45:59):
Trump because it can. Conservatives will applaud this stuff because
the conservatives, just like the liberals, want government to do
whatever they think is important. Conservatives don't like drugs. You
shouldn't like drugs, But because they don't like drugs, they
will allow the government to do whatever the government tells them.
Will stop the drugs, no matter how disconnected that is

(01:46:22):
from reality, no matter how much it destroys our society,
no matter how much it erodes the foundation or destroys
the foundation of our country. So he says, one person says, well,
that's the Biden. I remember he was pro America back
when Dems could be patriots. Now you have to piss

(01:46:43):
all over everything that's rb of Jonesborough. Actually he's I
think he's living in Jonestown.

Speaker 3 (01:46:48):
The cult.

Speaker 2 (01:46:49):
Isn't that amazing? So now they're cheering Biden because he
was about killing people without due process, just like he
was about locking you down and taking away your job
if you didn't get the vaccine. They hated him for that,
but now they like him because he doesn't respect any
principles of liberty or law. And this is Steve Watson

(01:47:10):
putting this in here as a look at this. You know,
people are making the point for him. He goes and
collects tweets about it. It's amazing. Trump is everything that
Democrats ever wanted in a single package, and yet they
hate him. I agree, I agree. I've said this for
the longest time. He is a New York City Democrat.
He has a casino owning, organized crime thug, and that's

(01:47:33):
the way he runs the country as well. He is
a New York City Democrat. Why do they hate him
so much? Well, Stephen Miller said, this is the first
time I can ever think where a major political party
has sided with narco trafficking, murdering terrorist scum. Well, Stephen,
you need to get a little bit better educated. Both

(01:47:54):
parties have sided with a CIA, which is all of
the above, go trafficking, murdering terrorists, scum. That is the
job description there at the CIA. And if you think
that the major parties haven't sided with this, they've both
done it. They've both done it, he added. A Democrat says, Oh,

(01:48:15):
there's no such thing as a narco terrorist. They're just
narco persons. ISIS and these narco terrorists in our hemisphere
use the same tactics. We're going to go off running
around the Middle East, he says.

Speaker 3 (01:48:27):
Sorry.

Speaker 2 (01:48:27):
Miller says, we that means the Trump administration, we're not
going to go off running around the Middle East trying
to build democracies in caves and deserts and in distant
lands that have never known democracy.

Speaker 3 (01:48:39):
Oh you're not.

Speaker 2 (01:48:41):
You just had the thug that was put in by
the CIA and Syria, an ISIS thug.

Speaker 3 (01:48:48):
He wants to equivocate these.

Speaker 2 (01:48:52):
These people that he labels as narco terrorists, he wants
to equivocate them with ISIS, and yet it was actual
ISIS Kaida terrorist that the US government both parties supported,
and Syria both parties armed. Biden gave him escorts to
beat a sod out of Syria, the A ten warthogs

(01:49:15):
that were there. Have these people forgotten that they just
put Isis in charge of Syria? Has Stephen Miller forgotten
that Trump honored him in the Oval office? Seriously, we're
supposed to believe that these people have got such short memories.
They want to ding Biden for dementia. Maybe they've got dementia,

(01:49:39):
or maybe they're just machiavellian liars, people like Steve Watson
as well as Joe Biden and Steven Miller. I'm going
to want to get answers on what the pete hegseth
order was, said Democrat Senator Warner. And again this is hypocrisy,

(01:50:00):
but it is true. He said, we haven't seen the
whole unedited video. If there's nothing inappropriate here, you could
have cleared this up without the admiral coming in. Just
show us the video. And again that tells you everything,
the fact that they don't want to show the video.
And it's a very awkward moment when a Fox reporter

(01:50:23):
pressed Warpeat on all of this. Now, where's the video?
You're going to release this video? Oh, this national security issue?
You know knows job security issue for you, pow. And
yet when the truth comes out, Oh a Soros who's
doing a coup against Tike Seth. Give me a break.

Speaker 4 (01:50:41):
Also, it's just so blatantly obvious. What on earth could
be related to national security? And footage of a drug
boat being blown up. Let's assume even if it is
a drug boat, it's not fishermen, they are actually smuggling drugs.
What is going to be on that footage that is
going to be detrimental to the United States government.

Speaker 2 (01:51:03):
He was pushing out that footage and boasting about it.
The initial strike, which I say is the initial crime,
that was as criminal as going back and hitting the
people who were shipwreck Although that is a little bit
more clear to most people. I think we need to
not focus on that. That's the point that Reason had made. Anyway,
going back to Watson, he says, fresh reporting dismantles the

(01:51:24):
media smears.

Speaker 3 (01:51:27):
He said.

Speaker 2 (01:51:27):
The New York Times revealed that Hegseth authorized the strike
to kill people on the boat and destroy the vessel
and eliminate its drug cargo. Which, by the way, Watson
is murder to start with. There was no war, there
was no conflict, there was no threat. This is no
different than if you have an army going to Gaza
and start lining people up against the wall that are

(01:51:48):
civilians and executing them and saying, well, you know they
are Palestinians, so it's just a matter of time before
they joined forces with the mas. I'm going to kill
them first, which is what that Jewish woman said. We've
got to stop in the lawn and just kill them,
all right. In addition, ABC's Martha Raddits gave key updates
and said the survivors climbed back on the boat. Well,

(01:52:09):
to him, that's admission that they're still dangerous, not that
they're trying to survive in the water. They tried climbing
up several times, as they point out, and they kept
falling off of the boat. They couldn't get on the boat. Well,
I think you're trying to write that boat so that
you can bring drugs in the country. So therefore you
are still in conflict with us, because again, remember, the

(01:52:33):
possession of the drugs is taken the same as if
they were shooting at the US Navy. It's not it's
not conflict, it's not a threat, and it wasn't coming
to the US either.

Speaker 5 (01:52:45):
What but imagine this scenario, to paraphrase the other guy.
The Navy shows up and these people give them drugs
and then they take it and die.

Speaker 3 (01:52:56):
Yeah, any man, I get some good stuff here. Take this.

Speaker 4 (01:52:58):
What if they got all of US Navy seals addicted
to cocaine, They.

Speaker 5 (01:53:02):
Had enough vatanol on that boat to kill an entire battleship.

Speaker 2 (01:53:08):
You just wait, they're going to use that at lance.
That's that's a good point. They've actually used that kind
of logged logic quote un logic. So they believe they
were potentially in communication with others and they might salvage
some of the drugs. Well, again, there's no true conflict
in this. But that's the fundamental lie behind all this

(01:53:28):
is that having the drugs makes them enemy combatants. So
Andy War says, US military blows up another boat in
Latin America amid scrutiny or the bombing campaign. It happened
at exactly the same time as he's going in there
on Thursday, and he's answering questions about their premeditated, cold
blooded murder of people who are not a threat to them.

(01:53:52):
And again, how many times you have to go through this.
You can't shoot somebody in the back, even if they
come into your home, if they're running away, if they're
not a threat to you, you can't shoot them in
the back. Police are supposed to abide by those same rules.
They get away with it too frequently, But the military
is definitely not allowed to do that because they have
so much more force. They have to be held to

(01:54:13):
a higher standard. The government has to be held on
a higher standard than the homeowner. Southcom claimed the strike
killed four more quote unquote narco terrorists, a term used
to justify attempt to justify the extra judicial executions at sea.
They've got all kinds of catchphrases, a lethal kinetic strike,

(01:54:36):
illicit narcotics, all the rest of this stuff. What I
saw in that room is one of the most troubling
scenes I've ever seen in my life in public service,
said Democrat Jim Hines. You have two individuals in clear
distress without any means of locomotion, and a destroyed vessel
who are killed by the United States. Well, again, I

(01:54:59):
would say to him, since we're talking about somebody attaining
the right to life, perhaps Jim Hines, who is a
Democrat a Connecticut I imagine he has supported over and
over again abortion right, and that kind of hypocrisy does
not mean that it's still not a crime for Pete

(01:55:20):
Hegseth to murder people in the water. But again, when
you're talking about abortion, you're talking about if you go
back and you look at that video of it's called
the procedure based on the first hand person account of
a guy he was called in to do ultrasound, didn't
realize it was for an abortion. He talked about what

(01:55:42):
he saw and they animated that. This is the same
thing in principle, folks, same thing in principle. Conservatives are
cheering this. I'm disgusted. I'm not a conservative, not a conservaive.
I rechecked that label. Not a conservative, not a Republican.

(01:56:05):
They aren't trying to conserve anything of any value. So
again we're going to grow into human rights and grow
into a right to life. The bombing campaign says anti
war is clearly illegal under US and international law, but
more importantly, it is immoral under a law that is

(01:56:27):
higher than human law, a law that is higher than
the law of the land higher than the constitution, God's law,
and pete Hegsteth continually takes God's name in vain when
he wears his tattoo sleeves. About all his Christian symbols
to him is just gang symbols, it really is. I mean,

(01:56:49):
all the stuff that's there, you know, it's just, oh,
there's this cross that represents that, there's this and that
it's just a bunch of gang signals symbols that are
out there. The threat that's a suposedly justified killing two
boat attack survivors was entirely speculative, says Reason. And again,
you know, imagine if some Navy seals had gone to

(01:57:11):
rescue them and somehow these guys who are struggling to
survive in the water. Imagine if they then pull out
their machine guns that they've kept concealed and start shooting
at the seals. Can you imagine if they did that.

Speaker 11 (01:57:23):
Well, we want to drown.

Speaker 5 (01:57:25):
We don't want to be rescued.

Speaker 2 (01:57:30):
So the Reason says, the confluence of these two developments,
that is the fact that he was testifying and at
the same time they were doing yet another one of
these strikes highlights the risks that the debate about Bradley's
second strike will obscure the broader issue of whether Trump's
reality defying assertion of a quote armed conflict unquote with

(01:57:52):
drug smugglers, which supposedly turns criminal suspects into combatants, is
enough to transform murder into self defense. While the renewed
congressional interest in the legal and moral justifications for Trump's
bloodthirsty drug strategy is welcome, the inquiry should not be
limited to the question of whether one particular attack violated

(01:58:14):
the law of war. They've all violated it. And I
said that from the very first day, they have committed
twenty two unwarranted attacks. They have killed eighty seven people.
Don't forget that. Eighty seven murders by Warpete and Trump,
and they're owning it now. Bradley's defense nevertheless illustrates the

(01:58:36):
outrageous implications of conflating drug smuggling with violent aggression. We
cannot allow them to do this, because, folks, if we
do this, there's absolutely nothing to stop Trump from going
into the cities and start executing people like Dutte. And
remember Trump praised Duterte in the Philippines for doing this

(01:58:58):
very same thing. So if they're going to say that,
if they believe that you're doing drugs, we can just
shoot you on the street. We have people getting shot
on the street because of the or of the illegal
prohibition that's being done. It's a un agenda. So I'll
never forget that.

Speaker 4 (01:59:17):
We have our guests ready before we get to the guest,
So I'd like to run through these comments really quickly.
We have Niburu twenty twenty nine. Behind all censorship stands
criminal money attempting to hide its criminalities. Be my Valentine.
It's a wonderful life festival this weekend in Seneca Falls,
New York. Zu Zoo Child actress from the movie, will
be there. She has a great Christian testimony.

Speaker 2 (01:59:38):
She's probably the last one alive, probably because she was
one of the youngest person.

Speaker 3 (01:59:42):
Yeah, she's even the youngest of the kids.

Speaker 4 (01:59:44):
Yeah yeah Wowovante seven Yeah, Seneca Falls, New York. If
you're in the area, I'm not Povante seventeen seventy six.
US bombs and creates enemies and displaced migrants, and after
the radicalization from bombing over there, the US opens the
door here to displaced Muslim masses.

Speaker 3 (02:00:02):
And That's what's going to happen in Venezuela.

Speaker 2 (02:00:03):
After they're dirty war, after they lose, because it's asymmetric warfare,
they're gonna lose it, just like they lost in Iraq,
in Afghanistan, Lies about weapons of mass destruction, lies about
fentanyl being weapons of mass destruction. The bottom line is,
after a lot of blood and money is spent in
Venezuela for corporations to get the oil, then what's going

(02:00:24):
to happen is you're gonna have massive refugees brought in
and we're gonna see this whole movie done over and
over again.

Speaker 4 (02:00:31):
Roy mh says they aren't model citizens, are politicians. That
is so thinking. Emoji defy tyrant seventeen seventy six, drug
dealer kills two gets life in prison, White House drug
dealer kills millions gets a second term. That's right, well
played by different rules.

Speaker 2 (02:00:47):
Yeah, if they're gonna kill millions of people and call
it salvation with a jab, I guess you shouldn't be
surprised that they're doing.

Speaker 4 (02:00:53):
This, right, Yeah, minute man militia, these idiots actually believe
those folks are tying to grab drugs from this Royd B.
Well I mean, if you've only got a few minutes
left to live and you're surrounded by a bunch of cocaine,
you might as well have a good time. I guess
that's right. Well, our guest coming up is Alex Newman
of The New American. He's been on the show many times.

(02:01:15):
He does a lot of great research and we appreciate
him being on. Get ready, we're going to take a
quick break and then we'll be back with Alex Newman.

Speaker 3 (02:01:23):
Yes, we'll be right back.

Speaker 7 (02:02:14):
And now the David Knight Show.

Speaker 15 (02:02:23):
Tell Alexa to add the APS Radio skill and have
access to the best channels anywhere from country to blues,
classic hits to news. APS Radio curates incredibly diverse playlists
for you to enjoy. Get details at apsradio dot com.

Speaker 2 (02:02:40):
Well, welcome back, and our guest is Alex Newman, Senior
editor of The New American, award winning international journalist, educator, author, speaker,
nationally syndicated radio host and consultant. He's an award winning
international journalist, educator and consultant. So we've had him on
many times, talking mainly about education, but I always get

(02:03:00):
him on every year. He goes to wherever they have
these cop things. We're now up to number thirty and
this time we covered the road that they were building
for the elites to go down and cutting down massive
numbers of trees. I don't know, what was it, one
hundred thousand alex where'd they cut down with those trees?

Speaker 11 (02:03:21):
Yeah, that's the number I heard as well.

Speaker 3 (02:03:23):
Yep.

Speaker 2 (02:03:23):
But now you know they have these people are constantly
flipping their story. And it used to be that trees
were our salvation and you would pay an indulgence to
pollute so they could plant trees somewhere. But now Bill
Gates wants all the trees cut down, not used for anything,
but buried in the ground because they're going to release
all that carbon that they have absorbed. This is the

(02:03:45):
most insane thing I've ever seen. But there's a lot
of insanity with that. Did you get to go down
that road?

Speaker 16 (02:03:51):
Well, we wasn't ready yet, so nobody was able to
go down it, except you know, the machinery that was
building it.

Speaker 11 (02:03:58):
But it was quite the story.

Speaker 4 (02:03:59):
You know.

Speaker 16 (02:04:00):
They literally cut down an enormous swath of the rainforest,
protected virgin rainforests. This was supposed to be untouchable, and
they decided that hey, we've got a climate summit coming
in the city's not very nice. The traffic's horrendous, so
why don't we build these people some nice new roads
so they don't have to mingle with the riff raff
and wait in the traffic like the rest of the suckers.

Speaker 11 (02:04:22):
And fortunately for the.

Speaker 16 (02:04:24):
Suckers, they actually didn't finish the road in time for
the climate summit, which is very typical of the socialist
powers in Brazil.

Speaker 3 (02:04:34):
So that's our salvation.

Speaker 2 (02:04:35):
These people can't build anything, not even a road, in time,
all of this for the bent and then they missed
the time window there, so they.

Speaker 11 (02:04:43):
Have very embarrassed about it.

Speaker 4 (02:04:44):
David.

Speaker 16 (02:04:45):
They actually put out military and police to try to
guard this so people couldn't get to it.

Speaker 11 (02:04:49):
We rented a car.

Speaker 16 (02:04:50):
And we snuck through the rainforest in the middle of
the night, very very late, so that we would be
able to get through there. We actually had to go
all the way out past where there's cell service, passed
where there was even GPS reception, which I don't even
know how that works, but we did finally find it,
and we found one of the local residents that lived
in the jungle, and he was very upset. He said,
we don't need this stupid road. What we need is
water and electricity.

Speaker 2 (02:05:10):
Please, Yeah, we need water and electricity. But they're building
AI data centers. That's what we get over here about, sir,
because now they don't care about energy usage or heat
generated as long as it's for AI, because that's going
to give them their control over us.

Speaker 3 (02:05:25):
But tell us what else you saw there.

Speaker 2 (02:05:27):
I mean a lot of people are saying after Bill
Gates moved back, they're saying, well, you know, this is it.
These people have basically played out all their lies and
they're on the run. Do you see that or does
it look like these people are going to still keep coming.
I think they're going to keep coming.

Speaker 16 (02:05:42):
What do you think, No question about it, David. I
was going to say that all of this reporting, and
we even saw some of it in the fake media. Oh,
the climate thing was a failure. Nothing to see here.
Go back to your regularly scheduled football games. There's nothing
to worry about. You know, Bill Gates says it's over.
And I think Bill Gates just made a strategic decision.
Like you said, he needs AI data centers to enslave

(02:06:03):
humanity more than he needs the climate.

Speaker 11 (02:06:04):
Hoax at this particular moment.

Speaker 16 (02:06:06):
But the idea that they're going to give up the
climate hoax is utterly ludicrous. They actually did get an
agreement this year. You know, the Trump administration boycotted it.
State Department told us it was because they the conference
was designed to bankrupt the United States and we weren't
going to participate. But there was a lot in the
final agreement, David. One of the things that got in
there was the carbon budget for humanity. It turns out

(02:06:27):
there is a carbon budget that we can be allowed
to admit.

Speaker 11 (02:06:29):
And this this is crazy, David.

Speaker 16 (02:06:31):
They got this in the final tax degree to by
every government in the world. We've already gone through four
fifths of it and most of that has come from
the United States and Europe and the West. And so
what's left, the one fifth of the carbon budget that
we still have left, needs to be allocated to the
mass murderingy dictatorship in communist China, and the Indian government
and the Brazilians and the South Africans and so on.

(02:06:52):
So the biggest that's right and prepared to have your
CO two emissions rationed slaves, because that's coming down the Pike.
They got the infrastructure in there to eventually create the
enforcement mechan They went into this with the Marxists would
be dictator of Brazil Lula saying that he wanted to
create an enforcement body. He was calling it the Global

(02:07:12):
Environmental Council. They didn't get that, but they got all
of the metrics and tools and monitoring frameworks that they'll
need to be able to get that going forward.

Speaker 11 (02:07:21):
So that was big progress.

Speaker 16 (02:07:23):
And there was also a lot of side agreements. David,
a whole bunch of US allies got together and signed
a Declaration on Information Integrity, basically promising to work together
to censor US. They got more than half of the
governments agreed to create a fossil fuel phase out road map,
so were having the first meeting for that in Columbia

(02:07:43):
in April. And then, for me, one of the biggest
takeaways David, it always is and nobody ever pays attention
to this is the religious angle. This conference to me
was the place where it was most clear. And I've
been going to these for fifteen years watching here an
attempt to repaganize the world. Basically, the paradigm, David is

(02:08:06):
Christianity is to blame for the environmental and ecological catastrophe
because Christianity holds that man has made in the image
of God, that the planet is here for our benefit,
that we are calling Genesis to take dominion of the
planet and its animals and things like this for our
benefit and for the glory of God. That's the reason
why Mother Earth is suffering so much. And so they paraded,

(02:08:27):
I mean literally an endless parade of Native American pagans,
you know, a lot of them from the rainforests. That's
why they held it in the rainforest who came to
enlighten all the delegates about how Mother Earth is angry
at us for our co two emations, and we need
to go back to appeasing the forest spirits and the
river spirits and the rock spirits, and we do that

(02:08:49):
by basically repaganizing the world and cleansing it of Christian civilization.
So this was a very, very very significant motif throughout
this conference, and I think it's one of the big takeaways.

Speaker 2 (02:09:01):
You know, it's been that way for a while, and
we've had again they're making it, you keep propagating this,
but we've had bits and pieces of this. I remember
Jennifer Lawrence, the actress, was very serious about Mother Earth
being upset with us, so you know, we had some
natural disasters or something like that. They take that very seriously.
The Gaia theory that was done by James Lovelock. I

(02:09:22):
remember we were in the UK in two thousand and
one and it was everywhere. It was, you know, science
magazines that we saw left behind on the train from people.

Speaker 3 (02:09:32):
It was all over that.

Speaker 2 (02:09:33):
And I took the kids to a children's museum and
they had this loop playing that was saying that, you know, guya,
mother Earth is this sentient being and that humans are
like a virus, and so therefore we need to be exterminated, right,
and so that type of thing has been going for
quite some time now. Interestingly enough, Lovelock, who came up

(02:09:54):
with that analogy based on pagan religion, Guya mother Earth,
he has now moved back away from that. He's now
recanted that. But these people are doubling down and going
on with it, and it is a religion and they
pursue it religiously. You know, that is the worldview in
which they frame everything. You know, I think, Alex, I

(02:10:15):
think what is going on the way it might take
on all this. I want to see what you think
about this. I think one of the reasons that they're
pulling back on this is because they've got to get
the infrastructure in with AI, and they've got to get
the infrastructure in with digital money, you know, not CBDC,
but they'll be doing it through through stable coins. That'll
give them the same kind of control and you know,

(02:10:38):
being able to observe everything that we do and control
and prevent us from making certain transactions. I think they've
got to get that infrastructure in and so they're going
to wait and do that, and then they will roll
in the come back to the population control stuff, and
it is population control in every aspect of it, making
sure they don't have as many people, but then the

(02:11:00):
people that are there, they want to control every aspect
of our life. What do you think about that? Did
you see stuff there about Sea forty, for example, you
know the thing that was put together by City, Kahn
and Bloomberg. When I saw all the angst about mom Danny,
and I thought, well, we've already had a Muslim mayor

(02:11:21):
and a communist in London and New York putting out
this prescription for how they're going to ration our lives
to us. They call it Sea forty initiative. So I
didn't really see that anything was different about that. But
what do you think, what do you think in terms
of why they have stepped back away from this climate
mcguffin and I think they're going to step back into

(02:11:42):
it once they get these tools in place.

Speaker 16 (02:11:45):
Yeah, My take, David is that they realized that the
bitter cleaners in America are not going for it. You know,
they've done the polling. I've seen the polling results. They
know the majority of Americas don't even believe that human
activity is responsible for climate change. And then when you
when you drill down even further, even the people who
do believe, even the kool aid drinkers, don't care enough
to actually do anything. There was an interesting poll by

(02:12:07):
ap Nork Center for Public Affairs. Less than one third
of Americans were willing to pay one single solitary US
dollar on their monthly electric bill climate change. Okay, that's
how little Americans care, even though ones who are dumb
enough to fall for this. So their strategy was really
clear to me, David. They're working through a variety of institutions,

(02:12:28):
but education is one of the critical ones. UNESCO had
a big, big, big event there. They called it Greening Education.
They partnered with the Marxist Brazilian government and the OECD,
and they talked about how we are going to brainwash
the children in every single country to believe this, and
it's not going to be optional. Right, You're going to
include it in your nationally determined contributions, your NBCs that
you got to update every five years. Under PARIS, they're

(02:12:50):
going to be including what they call climate literacy on
the International Standardized Assessments.

Speaker 11 (02:12:55):
The PISA as it's called PISA.

Speaker 16 (02:12:58):
And so basically, if your God isn't brainwashing the little
ones to believe that we're all doing from climate change
and that they need to become climate activists, you're going
to look stupid right when you come out on.

Speaker 11 (02:13:08):
These international assessments.

Speaker 16 (02:13:09):
So they were saying this openly the top officials at UNSCO,
the UN Education Agency.

Speaker 11 (02:13:14):
So I think that's their plan. You're right.

Speaker 16 (02:13:16):
The data centers and the AI is a critical component
of this. They can't restructure the whole economy around carbon
credits and your carbon footprint until they've got the computing
power and the data to go with the computing power
that makes this all trackable, and then you've got to combine.

Speaker 11 (02:13:32):
It with the social credit scores.

Speaker 16 (02:13:34):
So you're right, the AI and the data centers are
a precursor to the ultimate flip. But they are one
hundred percent committed to this. I think the only reason
it wasn't covered in the American media is because they
now know. The more we talk about this, the more
angry Americans get, the more likely they are to call
their congressmen and demand into all this foolishness. So I
think that's where they're going. But you know, to go

(02:13:54):
back to the religion thing for a moment. The first
time I saw the paganism, I was just a young
whippers snapper journalists fresh out of journalism school. It was
in Cancun. The head of the UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change. In case down, if you get is opened
up with a prayer to ex Jail, whom she described
as the goddess of tapestries and creativity. So you know

(02:14:15):
I'm dead serious. She opens up and says, we need
a pray to each shell that she'll give us the
wisdom and creativity to create a creative tapestry of climate
solutions for this crisis whatever.

Speaker 11 (02:14:24):
So I whip out my laptop and look up this
each shell.

Speaker 16 (02:14:26):
And she's the goddess of cannibalism and war and human sacrifice.

Speaker 3 (02:14:29):
Oh not just basket weaving, right, it was prayer.

Speaker 16 (02:14:35):
We've got to get rid of the disease on this planet,
which is humanity. And so you know, they've been set
back by the fact that nobody believes them.

Speaker 11 (02:14:42):
But they're going to go for our kids.

Speaker 16 (02:14:44):
They're going to go for our churches, and they will
be back with a vengeance as soon as enough of
the older population dies off and they've got enough of
the younger dupes ready to move into positions of power.

Speaker 3 (02:14:55):
I agree you're talking about the OECD.

Speaker 2 (02:14:57):
It's almost like inserting education in the e of education,
inserting that into OCD, obsessive compulsive disorder, because that's what
they have done with the kids, and they can get
a sizable percentage of kids if we started from an
early age, can brainwash them into this stuff. That's why
they had that guy of video running in the children's museum.

(02:15:19):
But you know, when you talk about the religious side
of it, I remember Pope Francis when he was first
first getting in this. One of the first things he
did was a climate encyclical, and then he got people
upset with him because he had that pacamama thing from Amazon.
I remember some people then threw it into the river
there near the Vatican. But was Poppy Pakemama was that

(02:15:40):
featured in this particular one in Brazil.

Speaker 16 (02:15:43):
I didn't see Pacamama, but I didn't watch the papacy
very closely because you know, Francis has now gone on
to Trinity.

Speaker 11 (02:15:50):
I don't know what that looks like for him, but
he did the new guy.

Speaker 16 (02:15:54):
I was like, well, let's see, is he going to
continue the environmental crusade, the environmental holy war? And sure
enough he doubled down on it. I mean before the conference,
I'm sure he saw the video of him blessing this
big block of ice. Might have been the weirdest ceremony
I ever saw, except for the time of mom I think.
But then he releases this He's got the biggest delegation

(02:16:14):
ever at a climate center. All these cardinals and bishops
and the Secretary of State gave the big opening speech
on his behalf and he produced a video and I
mean people should watch.

Speaker 11 (02:16:23):
It was only like two and a half minutes.

Speaker 16 (02:16:24):
He's like, to the religious people gathered in the Amazon
to save the climate, you know, keep it up, but
we can't just have hope, you know, now we got
to have action and really really blatant collaboration with paganism.

Speaker 11 (02:16:36):
And you also had the Muslims there, which was really
interesting too.

Speaker 16 (02:16:39):
You had one Muslim leader lecturing everybody about how Mohammed
was really a great environmentalist because this one time he
said we shouldn't drink all our water, we should conserve resources,
and clearly he was a climate activist. You know, even
had a word.

Speaker 4 (02:16:53):
I forget what the word was in Arabic.

Speaker 16 (02:16:54):
But they're bringing all the religions of the world and
I say religions of the world in you know, the
evangelical biblical sense, and all the religions of the world
are uniting behind this climate foolishness. And you had organizations
purporting to represent over one hundred Christian denominations there a
lot of them led of course by the Vatican.

Speaker 11 (02:17:15):
But this is dead serious and Americans aren't seeing it.

Speaker 2 (02:17:18):
Yeah, they talked about climate justice and things like that,
and yeah, it is amazing. And so that's all alive,
and wealth still with a religious people, and it's becoming,
as you point out, kind of a world religion where
they can pull them all in. I wonder if it
never occurred to anybody that maybe what Mohammad was saying
about conserving water was because they're in the middle of
the desert.

Speaker 16 (02:17:36):
Right, Yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely yeah.

Speaker 2 (02:17:39):
So what is the status with the Paris Climate Accord?
I have talked about this over and over again. I
was so disappointed because in many regards, even the first
Trump administration, there was some very positive stuff in terms
of pushing back against some radical environmentalism, and of course
we've seen some good moves in this one as well

(02:18:00):
for whatever reason. But one thing that they did not
do was to just say that the Climate Accord was
null and void. And it was null and void because
you remember it was John Kerry who said, yeah, Obama
and I just self ratified at ourselves and so and
I say, the Republicans are just as guilty of this

(02:18:21):
as the Democrats are, because I remember had I can't
remember his name now. He had somebody that I'd worked
with before in terms of climate stuff, and he said,
what needs to happen is the Republican Senate needs to
come in and say we're going to have a vote

(02:18:42):
on this presumed treaty. We're going to put it up
for a vote. There's no way that it was going
to get the sixty percent votes that it needed, so
so they needed to do that, and so they could
shut it down, but they never did. And the fact
that there was never a single Republican that pointed that out,
that said this is a bogus, bogus treaty. It is

(02:19:04):
null and void, it has no effect. And then throughout
the entire Trump administration, they pretended that they couldn't get
out of it because I think it was deliberately put
in saying if you want to get out, you got
to wait four years, knowing that that's the term of
the American president. So this time they say, well, okay,
he got out, and then Biden puts us back in immediately,
again violating the idea of treaties. And then when Trump

(02:19:25):
gets in, now he's going to get out. But since
it's the second time he's getting out now, according to
the treaty, he only has to wait one year, but
we're waiting that year to get out. Have you seen
that has a Trump administration ignored these principles. Have they
done anything to violate the Climate Agreement or are they
still complying with it for this year?

Speaker 16 (02:19:46):
Yeah, So this is a really important subject, David, and
I'm going to try to break it down as simply
as possible. They make it needlessly complicated so that normal
people and even people who follow these things closely can't
understand it. So there's an underlying treaty. This is approved
back in nineteen ninety two. It came out of the
Earth Summit that was held in Rio de Janeiro in
nineteen ninety two. George HW Bush signed it on behalf

(02:20:07):
of America, and that's where we got the Earth Charter,
that's where we got the Agenda twenty one. But we
got this nineteen ninety two treaty that was called the
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which is very confusing
because that's also the name of the bureaucracy that's in
charge of implementing the treaty. So every year these climate
summits are hosted by the UNF Triple C. It's headquartered
in Bond, Germany, And that treaty was, at least according

(02:20:31):
to the Congressional Record, ratified by the US Senate. I've
heard some legitimate questions about the whether the ratification was legitimate.
But nineteen ninety two, the US Senate officially ratified this
monstrous treaty that George hw Bush, mister New World Order, signed,
And so each year they hold these annual climate sumits.
This was the thirtieth one, as you pointed out, the
cop thirty. And each year they come up with a

(02:20:53):
new agreement, and each year they like to pretend like
they're just going to tack that onto the back of
the nineteen ninety two treaty. And so we don't need
the Senate to look at this again. It's just part
of the.

Speaker 11 (02:21:03):
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, right, because this is
the mechanism that they set up.

Speaker 16 (02:21:08):
And so every year comes and they try to take
at least one giant leap forward on the climate scam,
whether it's set up a carbon market, set up a
loss and damage fund, have the United States plead guilty
for causing the climate crisis. So each year they take
a big new jump into usurping more power, etc. Now,
the Parish agreement was one of these supplemental agreements. They

(02:21:31):
did not treat it like a treaty they treated it
as just an addendum to the nineteen ninety two treaty.
So here's where we're at now. And I talked to
a lot of people in the Trump administration about this,
including at State, including at EPA, to try to get
a handle on what's going on. And I'm told by
multiple people who are very well informed, people who were
very much involved in getting U out of the Paris
Agreement the first time, that there are now discussions about

(02:21:53):
the possibility of withdrawing from the UNF Triple C. That
would be, as far as I'm concerned, checkmate for the
climate cult that LEASA is far as the United States
is concerned.

Speaker 11 (02:22:02):
But here's the kicker. We're not out of the UNF
Triple C.

Speaker 16 (02:22:05):
So we're down in Brazil at this un Climate summit,
and you've got some of the top globalist puppets at
this summit, likely Stana Piagatas so I mentioned earlier, former
Executive Secretary of the UNF Triple C, said it's great
that Trump didn't come. You know, his administration would have
just been a big obstacle. It would have been a
big roadblock. We might not have even been able to
pass these agreements. By consensus, which is what they do.

(02:22:26):
And so frankly, it's fantastic that Trump is not here.
You had Gene Sue, a very prominent legal mind on this.
Right now she's with the Center for Biological Diversity, but
she'll almost certainly work for the next Democrat regime when
they get the White House again, says, hey, this is
fantastic that the Trump administration didn't send anybody. We're going
to pass a super ambitious agreement. And then the US
is still in the unf Triple C. So as soon

(02:22:47):
as Trump is gone and we get the next president in,
this will all be binding on the United States and
we'll we'll enforce it all on the United States. So
that's essentially the situation right now. Trump has his executive
order on day one, this was January twentieth, twenty twenty five.
Putting America first in international environmental agreements did get us
out of Paris, It did get us out of all

(02:23:09):
of these subsequent agreements that have been tacked onto the
back of the nineteen ninety two treaty.

Speaker 11 (02:23:14):
But as of right.

Speaker 16 (02:23:15):
Now, it's only a temporary measure. As soon as we
get a Democrat or a Rhino Republican back in the
White House. All they got to do is whip out
their pen say we're back into all of it.

Speaker 11 (02:23:24):
And that's what they're planning.

Speaker 16 (02:23:25):
By the way, that's what Gavin Newsom talked about, you know,
Gavin Newsom and his hair showed up in the Amazon
and said that, hey.

Speaker 11 (02:23:31):
Don't worry, we're still in.

Speaker 16 (02:23:32):
You know, Trump is an invasive species. He's not a
permanent fixture of American politics. As soon as he's gone,
we'll be right back in. And by the way, in
the meantime, me and most of the American population and
most of the American economy are still part of this. Right,
California is going to keep implementing Paris and all the
other ones. They have this coalition, it's called We're still in.
It's mayors, governors, CEOs, And technically they're correct. If you

(02:23:57):
look at their jurisdictions, like the state of California, you
add them all together, they do have most of the
American population, most American GDP, and they're pretending like we're
still in all of these subsequent agreements that we're added
on to the back of the unf tripleC.

Speaker 11 (02:24:11):
So I know that's super confusing.

Speaker 16 (02:24:12):
That's where we're at. I just want to add one thing, David.
I am not a lawyer, but I play one on TV.

Speaker 10 (02:24:18):
No.

Speaker 16 (02:24:19):
But I have read the Constitution, and I think anybody
is capable of reading the Constitution. With a third grade
level of education and intelligence, you should be able to
understand this. The Constitution does allow the President to sign
and the Senate to approve of treaties which are binding
on the United States of America. But there's a big
kex that nobody ever talks about. And most of the
lawyers haven't even read the Constitution, so they probably don't

(02:24:41):
even know this. But if you go to Article six,
where it says that the statutes passed by Congress and
the treaties are part of the supreme law of the
land along with the Constitution, it says that they need
to be made in pursuance thereof. So statutes and treaties
that are made in pursuance thereof, in other words, that
are made constitutionally. Show me where the Constitution and grants
the federal government the power to regulate my co two emissions.

(02:25:03):
Show them where it grants me them the power to
shut down my power plant, create new emission standards for
my cars.

Speaker 11 (02:25:09):
Right, they don't have that power.

Speaker 16 (02:25:11):
If they want that power, they need to go to
Article five. There's two different options there for passing a
constitutional amendment. And this has been by the way, very clear,
very ironclad, from the beginning of our republic. Thomas Jefferson explained,
if the treaty power is boundless, in other words, if
they could just grab new powers by signing a treaty,
there's no point in.

Speaker 11 (02:25:28):
Having a constitution.

Speaker 3 (02:25:29):
And we have right.

Speaker 16 (02:25:31):
Even in nineteen fifty seven, the Supreme Court ruled in
Read versus Covert, the federal government cannot grant itself new
powers just by approving in the international treaty. So, top
far as I'm concerned, the unf Triple C is totally illegitimate.
Federal government never had those powers, and we need to
treat it that way. It's a user patient. It's null
and void. As even Alexander Hamilton said in the Federalist Papers,

(02:25:52):
this is a fraud.

Speaker 11 (02:25:53):
We have no obligation to obey this thing.

Speaker 2 (02:25:56):
I absolutely agree with you, and you know I would
say what they're trying to do with this is kind
of akin to what they did with the authorization for
the use of military force. So we've done this one thing.
Now we can have wars without having a declaration or
discussion or vote on it or whatever. So now we
got into this treaty once back in nineteen ninety two,
and now we can amend it and extend it, and

(02:26:18):
we can do all these different things that are in
violation of the US Constitution, and we never have to
go back and relitigate this or reapprove any of these treaties.
I reject that, just like I reject the authorization for
the use of military force. But the point that you
made is that these treaties cannot amend or suspend the
US Constitution, that is the controlling document. The problem is

(02:26:42):
that we've let them get away with this in so
many different areas, just like we're talking about the war
on drugs and the way this is extended. Honestly, I
think alex they called it a war on drugs instead
of prohibition because they don't want people to think, well,
wait a minute, we had prohibition. There was a constitutional
amendment required for that, the eighteenth Amendment. So they play

(02:27:02):
these games where they just assume these powers and then
it's up to you to stop it and to somehow
stop it using other lovers of government as they continue
to say that they have those powers when they don't
really have them. That's the whole fraud behind this. But
it really is, it really is about power. It really

(02:27:23):
is about depopulation. I mean, I remember when this whole
thing started. I was in high school when they started
had the first Earthday, and I remember it was all
about depopulation. And my friends who bought into all this stuff,
they were just constantly wringing their hands. There's too many people.
There's too many people. There's too many and paul Erlick
is out there, how do we get rid of people? Well,

(02:27:43):
wars are good, but disease is even better, you know,
And so we need to have all these different ways
that we can kill people. But the governments look at
it and although they like to kill people, they like
to control the people who are still alive as well.
And so I think it really checks all the boxes
for the people in power. It gets them exactly what

(02:28:04):
they want. And of course it's checked the boxes where
a lot of people have made a lot of money
off of this stuff. What does it look like they're
lining up to do now? With this some what kind
of financial schemes are they rolling out.

Speaker 11 (02:28:17):
On the climate change front.

Speaker 16 (02:28:18):
Yeah, well, a lot of the governments of the world
are moving ahead of this, ahead on this without us
for now, right. And the assumption is, as I just explained,
they're saying this openly. The assumption is that they'll just
impose this on the United States later. So they've got
several really significant financial arrangements, and they got a lot
of these into the.

Speaker 11 (02:28:35):
Cop Thirty one point three trillion dollars.

Speaker 16 (02:28:38):
A year is the number that they put in the
final agreement, agreed to by consensus. By the way, the
United States wasn't there to object so implicitly, since we're
still part of the unf Triple C. We agreed too.
This is something nobody wants to talk about, but it's true.
One point three trillion in well three distribution per year
by the year twenty thirty five, so we're talking ten
years from now, they're going to be extracting one point

(02:28:59):
three trillion from whatever's left of the American middle class,
if we still have one, whatever's left of the middle
class in Europe. That's in addition to a tripling of
climate adaptation finance which is basically bribing third world cleptocracies
to pretend like they're adapting to climate change by putting
money in their Swiss bank accounts and buying nicer limousines,
building themselves nicer mansions and things like this.

Speaker 3 (02:29:23):
That's exactly right.

Speaker 16 (02:29:24):
And so Joe Biden agreed to a loss and damage
fund him and John Kerrey, where we're going to be
paying climate reparations apart from all.

Speaker 11 (02:29:31):
These other things.

Speaker 16 (02:29:32):
And a huge development that almost nobody in the American
media talked about. They're now integrating carbon markets. So the
European Union and the Marxist Brazilian government came up with
this big special event. They got a new agreement. I
forget the whole title of it was like open carbon market,
transparent reform mechanis something where they are bringing together the

(02:29:53):
European Union carbon market, the Brazilian carbon market, the Chicom
carbon market. They're all going to start using the same
standards so that they can all be integrated, so that
a carbon credit in the European Union is the same
as a carbon credit in Brazil is the same as
a carbon credit. Eventually in the United States of America,
when they think they can pass this abomination on us
and for all people who think this isn't a threat

(02:30:15):
for the next three and a half years while we
have Trump in office, I would just remind everybody that
there's a lot of people in the administration who have
publicly expressed support for these things in the past. Howard Lutnik,
the Commerce Secretary, has actually been deeply involved in creating
the infrastructure for the carbon markets.

Speaker 3 (02:30:31):
Now.

Speaker 16 (02:30:31):
Elon Musk has been blabbering about carbon markets for years,
and it'd be a big boon to Tesla, but he
has suggested that carbon markets carbon taxes are a really
efficient way of reducing our carbon emissions. You've got a
lot of people in the administration, and I'm sure Scott
Bessent is among them who think these kinds of ideas
are good and proper.

Speaker 3 (02:30:50):
So to George Soros, yeah absolutely.

Speaker 11 (02:30:54):
Of course.

Speaker 3 (02:30:55):
Yeah.

Speaker 16 (02:30:55):
And the CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations, I mean,
the guys I think through and through suspect. But we
need to realize that this is this is not a
threat that's over And I think that's one of the
dangerous narratives that has gone through the alternative media in
recent years, is like, oh, we won All right, you know,
let's go back to focusing on more important things. The
climate change hoax is still the pretext, not a pretext,

(02:31:18):
the pretext for completely restructuring the global economy, completely undermining
national sovereignty and transferring power and authority to the UN
and bringing all the religions of the world together so
that we can save Mother Earth. And nothing has changed
about that. They've just stopped talking about it in the
fake media in America.

Speaker 3 (02:31:35):
That's right.

Speaker 2 (02:31:36):
And when you look at Lutnik, you know the fact
that he wants to common you know, I think about it.

Speaker 3 (02:31:40):
How do we get the EU?

Speaker 2 (02:31:41):
Well, it all began with the common market, right again,
so with the economic unification, and then before you know it,
you've got a common currency. Well what's that common currency
going to be. It's going to be some stable coins
that are being done by Lutnik, so they can monitor
everybody's use and stop you from being able to spend
if you don't, you know, do it the right way.
So it's basically the way that they're going to bring
in the CBDC. When you look at people getting very

(02:32:05):
upset about this, it's primarily the power bills and they're
going to continue escalating these power bills by leaps and
bounds for the purpose of artificial intelligence. And so they're
going to have that fight. They're going to build that
up as a necessity, and you know, once they get
that in, they're going to use that to impose all

(02:32:26):
of these these carbon markets and carbon credits and everything
for individuals. And that's really where this is all headed.
It is the perfect I talk about it as being
the mcguffin. You know, Hitchcock always had he said, it
doesn't really matter what it is that they're chasing. It
could be a multie falcon or whatever. They've got a
different eject. You know that that's what we're using as

(02:32:46):
our plot device for the for the movie. And so
they got these different plot devices and they just keep
moving them around, but they always seem to go in
the same direction. You know, we had the COVID mcguffin.
It was all about getting some kind of a vaccine
ID so they could track you in that time. So
we've got to have the infrastructure to be able to
track people's movements. We've got to have the digital biometric

(02:33:09):
infrastructure so we can see what they've done and keep
records on people. So they always have this always comes
back to the same solution for all these different mcguffins,
and they just have a different panic mode that they're
trying to put people into.

Speaker 16 (02:33:24):
Truly is amazing, yep, absolutely, And you know fear is
of course, so one of the tools. Be afraid of
climate change, be afraid of a COVID, be afraid of
you know whatever. The pretext is, be afraid of drugs,
be afraid of you know some people group in another
part of the world that so lives in caves, you know,
whatever it takes to make you very scared so that
you'll give up more of your money, more your freedom.

(02:33:46):
And so this is the oldest trick in the book, right,
I mean, you can go back two hundred years. Look
at Frederic Bastiat, the great French philosopher lawmaker, said that
these totalitarians are constantly concocting the poison and the antidote in.

Speaker 11 (02:33:57):
The same laboratory. Climate change is the ultimate example of that.

Speaker 16 (02:34:01):
Create a fake crisis over here, and then create fake
solutions to the fake crisis over here, and pressed that
you take away people's money and freedom.

Speaker 2 (02:34:08):
How about that Frederick Bastiat knew about the Dark Winter
and operational works feed long before it ever happened.

Speaker 11 (02:34:15):
Right, that's all right.

Speaker 16 (02:34:17):
He knew the pattern of politicians well enough to be
able to identify it, right, And unfortunately today people don't
know this because they've been brainwashing a government school. You know,
they really don't know much of anything. They haven't been
trained in logic, they haven't been trained in history, they
haven't been trained in analysis and reasoning.

Speaker 11 (02:34:34):
So you know, someone on TV said.

Speaker 16 (02:34:36):
Climate change is going to get you, and a big
percentage of the population says, oh, no, what do we
need to do master to save me from this boogeyman?

Speaker 3 (02:34:43):
And here we are.

Speaker 2 (02:34:44):
Yeah, and that gets us, really, I think to the
real anecdote of this, and that is education, which you
focus on quite a bit. You've written a book, The
Indoctrinating Our Children to Death, and of course you also
have a blog. The Newman Report is that on substack.

Speaker 16 (02:34:59):
The new Report is on Freedom Project our substack. People
can find it at Liberty Sentinel and we'd love to
have people sign up.

Speaker 11 (02:35:06):
Two times a week we send out the most important
stuff that we're working on.

Speaker 2 (02:35:09):
So that's great. Yeah, yeah, what do you see happening
in terms of education.

Speaker 3 (02:35:13):
Where's your.

Speaker 2 (02:35:16):
Where are the threats that you see developing? Or do
you see any good news in education?

Speaker 11 (02:35:20):
Well, there's good news and there's bad news.

Speaker 16 (02:35:23):
As you mentioned, you were kind enough to have me
on to talk about indoctrinating our children to death about
a year ago. I think more relevant today than ever.
And amazingly it's been endorsed by you know, a lot
of great American patriots, including you, and so a lot
of the things that we warned about that we're going
to come in this book are now materializing. So we've
got another book coming out in January. I wrote it

(02:35:43):
with Robert Borton's he's the CEO of Classical Conversations.

Speaker 11 (02:35:46):
It's the biggest homeschooling organization in the world.

Speaker 16 (02:35:50):
Yes, over one hundred and thirty five thousand students, over
a million graduates so far. And the book is called
wocan Weaponize, How Karl Marks won the Battle for American
education and how we can take it back. And it
does focus some on the history. You know, we go
back to the first guys that seriously proposed that the
government ought to be educating our children, and they were occultist,
they were totalitarians, They were comedies, they were weirdos.

Speaker 11 (02:36:09):
They were talking to.

Speaker 16 (02:36:10):
Spirit friends, and you know, we got smoking gun evidence
of all that.

Speaker 3 (02:36:14):
But we're still going on today. So oh absolutely, And.

Speaker 16 (02:36:18):
I mean they don't even hide it anymore, right, Shirley mccoon,
who George H. W. Bush put in the Department of
Education and start nationalizing education. She's she's running around telling
people she's talking to spirit ascended masters who are giving
her the secret wisdom into the New Age and the
Fifth Dimension and total bonkers.

Speaker 11 (02:36:35):
But that's what they're up to.

Speaker 2 (02:36:36):
Well, you got you got General Flynn who was leading
people in prayers to ascended masters in the Seven Rays
or something like that. He was plagiarizing Elizabeth Claire prophet.
He's doing it.

Speaker 3 (02:36:46):
This is your awaken American things.

Speaker 2 (02:36:48):
So yeah, there's a lot of discernment that needs to
be hot out there and a.

Speaker 3 (02:36:51):
Lot of education.

Speaker 2 (02:36:52):
And that's what I like about your your book Indoctrinating
Our Children to Death. You go into the history of
this and so we can the trend lines and where
these people are coming from and what they said they
wanted to do. Very important. Yeah, so you got a
new book coming out in January.

Speaker 3 (02:37:08):
That's great. Yes, we do.

Speaker 11 (02:37:09):
Yeah, and the big threat right now.

Speaker 16 (02:37:11):
You know, the good news is millions of families are
continuing to flee from this corrupt, decaying government and doctrination
system mass writing as a school system. The bad news
is the UN knows this. The globalists know this, and
they've got a plan, and we've got the reports where
they outline their plans that we're going to give you
free money and all you got to do is surrender
your freedom and take our tests and teach our curriculum.

Speaker 11 (02:37:32):
The UN actually just released a report.

Speaker 16 (02:37:34):
David, about three weeks ago, maybe a month ago now,
where they said homeschooling must if it's going to be allowed,
it must be under the control of government. They have
to be taught you and approved values, they have to
use you and approved education content. It was literally prepared
under a North Korean communist and it says so in
the acknowledgments. So they are absolutely coming for our children.

(02:37:55):
And if we don't take this threat seriously, I think
all the other fights were engaged in. You know, we
might as well just raise the white flag because we're
going to lose over the long term. We've got to deal.

Speaker 11 (02:38:04):
With the education issue.

Speaker 2 (02:38:05):
I agree it really is about the hearts and minds. Yeah,
I mean that was what they kept saying during Vietnam War.
It's about the hearts and minds. Well, that's what the
education system is really about, hearts and minds of your children.
They're coming after them, and it is a war to
take that. That's why you know when you look at
and again, they'll do it with money. They always do
it with money. And that's why I was absolutely flabbergasted

(02:38:27):
when people didn't get that, about the lockdowns and about
the COVID pandemic and everything that everybody would say, it's
not Trump, it's the bad democratic governors.

Speaker 3 (02:38:35):
I said, he's paying people to do this. He's subsidizing
the hospitals, and he's giving everybody else money for this.
That's the way they always get around the Tenth Amendment
or any illegal requirements. They give you money and then
you do whatever they want. Once they give you that money,
then you get accustomed to it. And they own the
printing press.

Speaker 16 (02:38:53):
They've got infinite money, and they know that as long
as they can print some new money, you'll dance to
their tune.

Speaker 11 (02:38:58):
I mean, it's the greatest scam concocted in the history
of man.

Speaker 2 (02:39:01):
Well, I tell you you know, Alex, I've said many times,
it's going to be really, really difficult for us here
in America once we lose that magic money tree, that
they can just print it all out of nothing, right,
But that's the only way that you're going to break
the power of the federal government is if you break
the printing presses. And so it's going to be a
good news bad news thing. It's kind of like the

(02:39:21):
silver lining of the of the school like towns. I
still think it's funny to go back and look at
people talking about the pandemic and the ill effects of that, and.

Speaker 3 (02:39:32):
Look at it kept the school It's kept school schools for.

Speaker 2 (02:39:35):
A long time, and it's like, yeah, to me, that
was one of the big advantage, the only advantage of it,
the only silver lining that and the fact that people
could finally see what was happening in their child's classroom.
I can't tell you the number of times I've talked
to people and they say, yeah, yeah, I understand what's
going on over there in that other state, or maybe
even here in this state, or maybe even in my
particular school, but not in my kids classroom. Well, this time,

(02:39:57):
they could actually see what was happening in the classroom,
and that was the big impetus. So the co author,
there's someone who's running Classical Conversations. That's an excellent program.
We didn't do that when we schooled our kids, but
it really is an excellent, rigorous curriculum there it is.

Speaker 16 (02:40:13):
Yeah, we've actually got our own kids enrolled in there.
That's how I originally connected with them. It's such a
good program. Watching the kids coming out of this, they're
so far ahead of the poor victims of the government schools.

Speaker 11 (02:40:24):
It makes you want to cry.

Speaker 16 (02:40:25):
But you know, if you're a parent and you're looking
for a good program to get your children a real education,
that's the one.

Speaker 3 (02:40:31):
Check it out.

Speaker 11 (02:40:31):
Classical Conversations.

Speaker 3 (02:40:33):
I agree.

Speaker 2 (02:40:33):
Yeah, I think it's got a lot of great content
in it. Well, it's always great having you on and
again people can find you at Liberty Sentinel, is that correct.

Speaker 16 (02:40:43):
Liberty Sentinel dot org, and then the Newamerican dot com
is where most of our climate coverage is going to be.
So for the folks out there who haven't signed up
for the magazine and encourage them to do that, at
least the free daily headlines, the Newamerican dot com and
then my website, yeah, Liberty Sentinel dot org.

Speaker 2 (02:40:55):
Okay, and I just remember the name of that guy,
Steve Malloy. Steve Malloy was one of talk About Junk
Science dot com. I worked with Steve prior to Info
Wars and he's a really good guy and he's really
had his finger to the pulse of what's going on
with the environmental stuff, just as you have. Thank you
so much for joining us. And it's always a pleasure

(02:41:16):
talking to you, Alex. And let us know when you
got that new book on, like to talk to you
about that when it's ready.

Speaker 16 (02:41:21):
Absolutely, thank you so much. It's an honored a pleasure
to be here. Thank you, David, God bless you. And
Merry Christmas.

Speaker 2 (02:41:26):
Thank you, Merry Christmas to you as well. We'll be
right back, folks. To stay with us.

Speaker 7 (02:42:29):
You're listening to the David Knight Show.

Speaker 15 (02:42:33):
Here news now at Apsradionews dot com or get the
APS Radio app and never miss another story.

Speaker 2 (02:42:42):
Well, I want to think, don't frag me, bro. That
is very kind. I appreciate that. It's very generous. So
three chairs for Dka's perseverance, faith and conviction to overcome
the health challenges. Well, thank you and thank you for
your prayers to do that a great example, he said,
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year to the Knight family to
more good years, sprang the t thank you so much.
And speaking of prayers, I want to pass this on

(02:43:06):
from Ryan for Love of the Road. He's someone who
has been a big supporter of this program and we
really do appreciate the things that Ryan has done and
he is in need of your prayers right now. His
family is. Let me just read you what he sent us.
He said, my dad is currently in the hospital waiting
to undergo open heart surgery this week. He's been complaining

(02:43:27):
about a toothache. Turns out it was a blockage in
his arteries. They said he's got triple vessel disease. Thank
god he didn't have end up having a stroke. Apparently
was a mini heart attack or whatever it was that
you had after yours. The heart attack that's not as
life threatening, so they were going to do a heart stint,
but some of the blockages are just too much. My

(02:43:49):
mom's doing better after her surgery and she's with him now.
They're doing a bunch of tests and might need to
move him to Detroit. So always appreciate your prayers, and
so please keep Ryan and his family in your prayers.
Prayers for his parents' circumstances, and also prayers for Ryan

(02:44:09):
and his family as they deal with these issues, because
it's always a strain on the rest of the family
when these things are happening. And I want to pass
on another situation. He hasn't well. He has in a
way asked for his producer has asked for prayer support.
This is Clyde Lewis, and I've been on Clyde Lewis's
program about once a month or so before the stroke.

(02:44:32):
It's always a difficult thing for me to do his
program because it's extremely late at night for us. He
comes on nighttime on the West Coast, so I'm up
to like one o'clock in the morning, and I would
wind up getting like two or three hours worth of sleep,
and I was dead for most of the rest of
the week. It was difficult to do. So Travis contacted
him and said that I'm up and I can can

(02:44:56):
try to do that again. And then his producer said, well,
Clyde is in the hospital right now and there is
a GoFundMe that's been organized for him and he's looking
for He's got a goal of seven thousand dollars and
they're about sixty five percent of the way through. So
if you need a reminder just how independent from corporate media,

(02:45:18):
Clyde Lewis really is. Ground Zero has been off the
air for several days because his host is in the
middle of a serious medical crisis. As a result, he's
asking fans to help him again. Not only has bills
and living expenses, but that is his entire source of income.
He doesn't have a contract with the radio network. It's

(02:45:41):
just what comes in at the moment, in the same
way that we are. It was really blessed to have
Travis and Lance step in and do the broadcast when
I was gone, but his broadcast has been shut down.
That means that his advertising revenue has gone to zero
as well. His producer Ron Patten said that Clyde recently
countered a medical emergency due to kidney failure. It's been

(02:46:03):
in the hospital for about a week on dialysis along
with getting physical therapy. The good news is that his
health is gradually improving and there's hope that he'll get
back on air with the show soon. Thank you very
much for your support through prayers and good thoughts. As
Clyde does have medical insurance, there are miscellaneous bills associated
with his medical issue. Our primary income source is subscriptions,

(02:46:26):
but unfortunately that is stagnated due to his illness. Furthermore,
our advertising revenue is on hold until he's back on broadcasting,
and we don't receive any money from our radio syndication.
We also pay for studio rental and have a staff.
So can you please help us with donations? That's what
they're asking for. So I would just recommend him for prayers.

(02:46:51):
I don't know Clyde that well, but you know, whenever
we go through things and our circumstances, we always pray
for God to help us in our circumstances and to
relieve of these things. Sometimes we go through them just
because it is a growing experience that God wants us

(02:47:13):
to go through. So we'll never know, really in this
life exactly what is behind these things. So sometimes in
his kindness, God says no. And I'm not saying that's
the situation here, but I'm saying, please pray for him,
and please pray that God will bless him in these
circumstances and that God will bless us to make him

(02:47:35):
closer to him going through this type of thing. And
that'd be my prayer for anybody who's going through something
like that. Real quickly, let's take a quick look at
some news that we skipped over. We were just talking
about grabbing Newsom or the nuisance guy. As we talk
about him. I thought it was pretty amazing to hear
him say that them that that basically the Democrats need

(02:48:01):
to be more culturally normal.

Speaker 17 (02:48:03):
I mean, look, you know, we could talk about why
Kamala lost, which is separate. I mean it's part derivative
of the larger narrative, but issues around inflation scars. We
don't talk enough about interest rates. We didn't talk about
incumbency issues related you said, be beyond related, Israeli politics, immigration,

(02:48:25):
the border in particular. You could talk about all those things,
not just one hundred and seven days, not just talk
about Biden.

Speaker 3 (02:48:30):
Yeah, you are not with the people on any issued Newsom.

Speaker 17 (02:48:34):
I think there's a broader narrative that we often address.

Speaker 3 (02:48:37):
That is, we have to be more culturally normal, we.

Speaker 7 (02:48:40):
Have to be a little less judgmental, we have.

Speaker 17 (02:48:43):
To have to be a party that understands the importance
and power of the border substantively.

Speaker 3 (02:48:50):
Yeah, right, politically, we.

Speaker 2 (02:48:53):
This is I talking about the border and talking about
culturally normal. Remember Gavin Newsom as mayor of San Francisco
was doing homosexual marriage when it was illegal everywhere. Arnold
Schwarzenegger was governor at the time, and he called him
out on it, you know, and they said, well, if
you want to do that, we've got to have we've
got to change the law. Right, got a constitutional amendment

(02:49:15):
or something, and for the state of California. And they
did try to do that in California, and you know,
it was so out of the cultural norm that it lost.
Even in California, homosexual marriage lost. And this is even
with Tim Cook contributing millions of his own money and
pledging matching amounts from Apple for homosexual marriage. It's still lost.

(02:49:39):
With all that, and he has the audacity to talk
about culturally normal. It was imposed by the Supreme Court
and defiance of state laws and defiance of state constitutions,
and they had no authority to make that determination. And
the Tenth Amendment was precisely to stop that type of thing. Yeah,

(02:50:00):
is pretty amazing to me that he was talking about
being culturally normal, and of course he can say anything
he wants and he's running, and you know what he's
going to do once he gets in based on his
past behavior. Well, Biden was also giving illegal aliens FAHA
backed mortgages. We just find this out from the current

(02:50:21):
administration's HUD. Illegal aliens got federally backed mortgages during the
Biden Harris regime years. Scott Turner, who is now Trump's
HUD secretary, characterized this as a significant policy failure, evidence
of what he called misplaced priorities that favored illegals over
American home buyers. There were over twelve million illegal aliens

(02:50:44):
that came over the border, straining our housing supply and
making the costs go up, and the government was helping
them to get loans, something that it wasn't doing to
all Americans. Even so, he worked with a gnome at
DHS to make sure that only Americans did us are
living in HUD funded housing. Well, again, the government doesn't

(02:51:06):
really have the authority on the Constitution to give loans
to people and subsidized loans for people. But if they're
going to do something like that, it is truly outrageous
that they would do it to illegal aliens. But of
course we know why that happens. Even though this is
bad for citizens, even though citizens are paying taxes and

(02:51:26):
on the debt that they are incurring, subsidizing housing for
people coming from other countries and raising the price of housing,
it's really good for the banks. And that's one of
the reasons why it's happening here. Taxpayers subsidizing government ensured
home loans for illegals just what the bank's ordered. Biden's

(02:51:46):
policy amounted to a generational betrayal of citizens and prospective
home buyers, pushed aside over the last four years, amid
the worst housing availability and a generation, and driven by
an out of control climate crisis spending and an invasion
of illegals that strained an already tight housing market.

Speaker 3 (02:52:06):
Well, that's true.

Speaker 2 (02:52:08):
A major climate crisis study has been retracted over inaccuracies.
But the doom narrative, they say, collapses, But it is
going to continue as well. It doesn't matter.

Speaker 3 (02:52:20):
Really.

Speaker 2 (02:52:21):
They have propagandized kids from elementary school on and they
will impose it by force once they get the proper
infrastructure in. But this is a widely hyped climate doom
study that was published in Nature in April twenty twenty four,
amplified by corporate media outlets like CNN and Bloomberg. It's
been embarrassingly retracted as a matter of fact, that people

(02:52:44):
put it up said that it was so bad they
were not going to try to make a correction to it.
They were just going to retract it in total. The
Economic Commitment of climate change as the title of it.
The economists discovered that flawed data from Uzbekistan.

Speaker 3 (02:53:05):
Had been used to skew the results.

Speaker 2 (02:53:09):
Again, when we look at this, think about this, how
they can skew the results based on the obscure country Uzbekistan,
which doesn't have a really large population either.

Speaker 5 (02:53:20):
And I'm sure the people that put this together didn't
notice that Uzbekistan's data was so heavily skewed that it
skewed the entire thing that and then choose to use
that as a key part of their study. I'm sure
that was just a coincidence.

Speaker 3 (02:53:36):
That's right.

Speaker 2 (02:53:37):
Yeah, As a matter of fact, it tripled the effect
by the data that they used from Uzbekistan. Kind of
reminds me in a lance of when they talk about
the journal population and they said, well, you know, the
populations like this and if it gets to this number,
we're all going to die. Well, it turns out that
they have severely underestimated population. Population has already passed the

(02:53:58):
point of no Bible according to them, and they underestimated it.
These are not they're not going out and doing a
global survey. But when they did actually go out and
do a detailed survey, when they looked at areas where
the government was going to come in and build a dam,
for example, and they looked at when they did that,

(02:54:19):
they were going to be very specific because handing out
people money as they relocate them. And so they compared
that to the way that they had estimated these other things,
because the government would typically, as George Bush would say,
misunderestimated the number of people that they're going to have
to pay off. And so when they looked at that misunderestimation,

(02:54:39):
they said, if we if we extrapolate this out, which
again when we do this with the vaccine, they have
a fit, but that's really the way that it works.
So for twenty months, the study was touted by Bloomberg,
sand in Forms and countless mainstream outlets. They helped to
manufacture wildly misleading narrative of an impending climate catastroph How

(02:55:01):
many times have we seen the world is ending and
never never happens. Headline like this climate change to cause
thirty eight trillion dollars a year and damages by twenty
forty nine. I think they got that wrong. I think
they make climate change policies are going to cause thirty
eight trillion dollars a year and damage by twenty forty nine.

Speaker 5 (02:55:23):
Now what they really mean is climate change is going
to cause us much profits for us by twenty.

Speaker 2 (02:55:29):
Yeah, they're going to They talk about reparations, but it's
really a massive wealth transfer, not to third world countries
but to them, and that's really what's going to happen.
So there's an element of truth and that, just as
there always is. But the you know, they think that
they're winning now because Bill Gates and al Gore have

(02:55:50):
pulled back against some of this stuff, But that is
not really the case. I think they're just regrouping and
they're waiting until they bring in the heavy artillery. You know,
we have these people calling for ceasefire. The Russians said, oh,
they're just calling for a ceasefire in Ukraine because they
want to regroup and build some more weapons. That's really
what I think is happening here. I don't think that

(02:56:13):
that they're trying to move on from this. And so
Trump has filed for divorce from NATO over Ukraine. I
don't think that's going to happen either. As a matter
of fact, I haven't seen this reported except with RT,
and even they are skeptical, and the subtitle they say, well,
it remains to be seen if Washington is serious about this.

(02:56:35):
But it is a document that was produced out of
the White House. It is the twenty twenty five National
Security Strategy of the US, the document that was released
on December fourth, which is pretty amazing because the stuff
that is saying is true and it would be good
if it were true. It's basically talking about pulling back

(02:56:58):
Europe from war and distancing ourselves from Europe as they
go into this suicidal circling of the drain that they're
involved in, downgrading China from a pacing threat to a
competitor in economic issues. But I don't think any of
this stuff is really going to happen with the Trump administration.

Speaker 3 (02:57:18):
I think is very much like.

Speaker 2 (02:57:19):
The document that they had about insurance. Remember when Trump
ran the first time, the two big issues were the
border and Obamacare, and then Obamacare really just kind of
ceased to be an issue after that. The border was
still there and the wall that they didn't build and
so forth. But when you look at Obamacare, they had

(02:57:40):
a great detailed, structured plan. Basically it involved market choices
and involved through tax code structure and savings accounts and
things like that, giving people the economic power to make
these decisions, giving them the information to make these decisions,
eliminating the some of the anti competitive rules have been

(02:58:03):
put in at state and federal level, so there was competition,
but also giving people information about health providers and insurance
companies that have been hidden from people. All those types
of things were there. They were all necessary. They would
have reduced costs, that would have made us more intelligent
consumers and given people economic power to do that. And

(02:58:25):
that was all just deep sixth memory hold right after
the election. This I don't understand what the purpose of
this is unless when I saw that it was this
is an article that's published by RT. Perhaps this is
aimed at Russia, at Europe, and perhaps this is kind
of a carrot and a stick approach to these two organizations.

(02:58:48):
I don't think that's really going to happen. The document
is unapologetically partisan, crediting Trump personally for brokerang peace and
eight conflicts, but organizes US strategy around three pillars homeland defense,
the Western Hemisphere, and economic renewal. Secondary forces focuses rather
include selective partnership in Asia, Europe, Middle East, and Africa.

(02:59:12):
But it is basically the way they summarize it is
that it moves from global cop to regional hegemon and
a ideological retreat where democracy promotion is explicitly abandoned. Quote,
we seek peaceful commercial relations without imposing democrat change, and

(02:59:33):
as Russia says, tell that to the Venezuelans. So basically
they're paraphrasing George Washington and his farewell address. And I
don't believe that this is the policy of the Trump
administration at all.

Speaker 3 (02:59:46):
I wish it were. I wish they were trying to.

Speaker 2 (02:59:49):
Get a divorce from NATO, but I think NATO's got
something on them, just like Milania does.

Speaker 3 (02:59:55):
Have a good day.

Speaker 2 (02:59:56):
Thank you for joining us the common man. They created
common Core and dumb down our children. They created common

(03:00:18):
Past to track and control us. Their commons project to
make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist future.
They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated ordinary. But
each of us has worth and dignity created in the
image of God. That is what we have in common.

(03:00:42):
That is what they want to take away. Their most
powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know
everything about us, while they hide everything from us.

Speaker 7 (03:00:55):
It's time to turn that around.

Speaker 2 (03:00:57):
And expose what they want to hide. Please share the
information and links you'll find at the Davidnightshow dot com.
Thank you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you
can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
D Davidnightshow dot com

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Mon Episode #2154: The EU’s War on American Free Speech

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

Mon Episode #2154: The EU’s War on American Free Speech

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang