Wed 10Apr24 David Knight Show UNABRIDGED

Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to the David Knight Show. As the clock strikes thirteen, it's Wednesday, the tenth of April. You're of our Lord twenty twenty four. Well as Hollywood. This week we'll push out its ideas for civil war. You won't believe what they say. Our only hope is there pushing that out. We're getting closer and closer to them pushing out the next mcguffin, the Pandemic Treaty, or more accurately, the

IHR rules we have. James mcguffin is going to join us in the third hour. We're going to talk about how to resist this, well, what is happening with current actions at the state level and other things that are going on with it, How are they going to enforce it? But we're going to begin by taking a look at what is happening here at home as they are pushing us in. It's the same people that are pushing the pandemic mcguffin. They now have a study coming out of the UK, out of the

Imperial College of London, no less Oxford Cambridge. Those people same people who produce the studies to produce the pandemic are now producing studies to say that within a decade there'll be no meat, there'll be no airports, the rest of this will be right back said, I said, James mc James Urguski,

I've got mcguffin on the mine. I absolutely do it. Truly is amazing to see it's the same people using the same tactics and strategies, and nobody can get their head around it. We're still going to elect one of the two clowns that ran this pandemic mcguffin on us. We're going to elect them to do it again and to also continue the climate mcguffin on us as well. But yeah, to be James Ruguski who'll be joining us in the third hour, not James mcguffin. Found that guy yet. So, as I

said this Friday, they're going to release this civil War. You've seen the

trailer. People said, so what's going on? There's like, as this thing jumps in, there's an alliance between California and Texas. Well, this guy said he deliberately wanted to make it ambiguous politically. He didn't want to pick sides conservative or Republican. Of course, they say rhet or Blue. I hate that, but that's what they're talking about. This director, Alex Garland has an interesting history. The only one of his films that I've seen

is Ex Machina. I thought it was technically good, I didn't care for it. But he's got some really weird stuff out there. As they do the film review on Yahoo, they said, whatever you think of his most divisive film, men, it's unlikely that anyone will ever forget ry Kanear giving birth to himself. This is the kind of twisted vision this guy's got. That's why they're making a great deal out of this director. A bellowing and

haunting big screen experience. The country has been at war with itself for years. By the time we're invited in, they're the gays of a few journalists documenting the chaos on the front lines and chasing an impossible interview with the president. So as they described the president, the guy Nick Offerman who was in Parks and Rex is a libertarian. He is a rising despot who has given himself a third term, who is like you know, like FDR, who's

taken to attacking his citizens and shut himself off from the press. Now, what they don't mention is, and it did come out in some interviews that he also abolished the FBI, so he's not all Bad'll get me on the list of nothing else. Anyway, they said, Oh, we really know is that we've got this alliance from Texas and California. They have seceded from the country. They're closing in to overthrow the government. We don't know why, we don't know what the other side wants. We don't know any of

this. And you start to realize that many of the characters don't seem to really know or care either. And so the interesting take about this is that they said, well, what you find out from this is that really our only hope is the journalists. Well, if we have journalists like we do today, you are not going to know why the war started, what anybody wants, all the rest of the stuff. They'll keep you in the dark

about all of that. They'll have. They'll pick a side and they'll tell you which side is, but they're not going to let you talk about the other side or debate anything. The journalists are not about exposing the truth. That's the ultimate naivete. Civil War film is more about war reporters than anything else. The vital importance of bearing witness and the moral and ethical dilemmas of impartiality. I've said this more than once. Impartiality, the idea that journalists

are impartial, has always been a fantasy. It's always only been believed by fools and liars, And while not liars, they don't believe it, but it's used by liars, and it's believed by fools that people who report the news are impartial. Nobody is impartial. The most obvious example that is Matt Drudge. He doesn't write anything on the Drudge Report nothing. All he does is link to articles. He's an aggregator. He doesn't produce any content.

He doesn't offer any opinions either. But what he does in terms of what he decides to report is very very political. And if all you did was to select what you're going to talk about, that is not impartial. He has clearly switched sides. He was strongly on one side, he's now on the other side. There is no impartiality, and the people who tell you that are either fools or liars, and if you believe them, you're a fool. It's never been about that. You need to look at a lot

of different sources, and you need to think about it critically. Don't just go with one source. You need to look at a wider ray of things and understand everybody's got their biases the best you can do. I came to this conclusion, as I said before, when I was in college, I'd see Time, I'd see Newsweek. They were supposed to be the objective sources,

but they were incredibly biased. I said, well, I would rather go to extreme right wing and extreme left wing publications that are obviously editorializing about everything. Here's what we see, here's why we think that this is what it's about, and where it's going and so forth. And interestingly enough, those people usually get deeper into the facts as well. Now disagree over what the facts mean, but they get deeper into the facts than the shallow stuff

that you get from Time and Newsweek in CBS and ABC and NBC. And I would say now a lot of the big conservative media same way. All they want to do is to cheer Trump. Civil War will be released on Friday. And here's what you really need to know, folks. Civil War are going to pay a lot of money to go see this in the theater. You know, set to it for a couple of hours. I don't know, maybe three hours. I don't know. It's thing long or short,

I don't know. But here in eighteen seconds, that's what you need to know about a civil war. I'm sorry, that's the wrong one. Let's here. It is right here. Okay, this is drone footage soldier laying in a field. This is an artificial intelligence drone. It's coming up. It's examining him. Well, no movement, it must be dead. Moves on, but then turns around. The soldier thinks that drone has gone and it was tricking him. It comes back and blows up. That's an

AI drone assassination right there. I'll let you see it again. Comes up to him, he's down and says a low battery light is flashing. But this is AI drone mapping out what it's going to do. This is in Ukraine, by the way, turns around. Up, he's up. He's okay, he was faking. It comes back and blows up itself and him. These things are being made on the cheap in Ukraine. This is not high tech. This is very simple and it doesn't even need to have AI

involved with it. When you look at these wars, and I have gone back and looked at a lot of different wars when they began. And now everybody, oh, it's going to be a cakewalk. We're going to just wipe up the other side and so forth. And you hear a lot of that talk from both Biden and the Democrats, and you hear it from conservatives. Look at how many of us are armed and all the rest of this stuff. You have no idea what weapons are going to be used to fight

the next war. Already it is rapidly changing in Ukraine and Russia, rapidly changing. And it's always been the case. They getting of the Civil War. The very first battle there at Manassas, the North called it bull Run because they named everything after after Rivers, which was a good insight on their part. But at Manassas, Virginia, all these people showed up like a picnic, and they show up in their dress clothes, They bring a picnic,

lunch and everything to watch the battle. They're absolutely clueless about the kind of carnage that was about to be released. And we still haven't seen that kind of carnage in America since then. If we were to have that kind of a war today. Civil war like that today, even if you were to just forget about the technology involved, they can kill a lot more people

at the same time. If it was just proportional to the population, you would have depending on who they're talking about north or south, you'd have like twenty five to fifty million people killed just in direct combatants, not counting the civilians that are there. You can't even imagine the kind of carnage that is.

And yet people flirt with this idea. I am so sick and disgusted of these people on the left and right, people like Biden and Bato Urke and Eric swollwell thing, yeah, we got jets and we got bombs and we can take your guns and all the rest of this kind of suff And then equally on the right hand side, all these people, well, if Trump doesn't win, we're gonna kick off a civil war, and we're fine with that. That type of thing. I'm disgusted with these people. They're

fools, they're idiots, They're completely detached from reality. Once you start a war, this is one of the reasons why you need to have a just war scenario. Once you start a war, there's going to be accidental killings all over the place, and then you're going to have people who do targeted killing. As I said before, just look at the collateral murder tape that was released by Wiki leaks and really put Julian nsanj on their hit list.

And we have a similar thing with what happened in Israel. They've had some people now that have been fired. Was it those or dismissed the people that were in charge of that, They dismissed them and took action against them. But then you have people like Ben Shapiro say, well, any criticism of that is blood liable against the Jews? Is it systemic? Is it to be excused by people who have never seen combat like Ben Shapiro? At least

it should be condemned. But that type of thing, whether it is being done by design or whether this is somebody who has an accident or maybe you've got somebody who goes off the rails. I mean, we had the Ali incident and the Vietnam War, go in and just shoot and kill everybody in

the village. Once you start killing people, once life becomes cheap. This is one of the reasons why we have to stand firm on abortion and there's been a big development on that as well, big political consequences for this Arizona court case. We're going to talk about that. But you have to stand firm on protecting life. You have to stand firm on saying we want to try to avoid war at all costs, and I mean all costs. You

better debate it. You better understand what it's going to cost you. You better make sure that you don't go to war unless it is in defense, unless the killing has already started against your people. You don't jump into preemptive wars. And you better make sure that you try to avoid targeting civilian populations because if you don't, your civilian population will be targeted as well. We've gotten away from all of that since World War two. Oh, world War

two was the last good war. Well maybe it was because we don't even care about preemptive attacks. We became the Japanese after World War Two. You have to be careful that you don't become the monsters that you fight, and

we truly have. Yeah, everybody's a kicking around this idea of civil war idiots, idiots without any moral backbone, and the idea the journalists are going to set all this stuff up. We had a long time editor at MPR National Public Radio and as I call it, propaganda radio yesterday challenged MPR. He's worked there, and he challenged them to diversify their views. He says,

we're producing news for liberals by liberals. This is bad when somebody who's worked there for twenty five years is saying this, Because I remember when I was listening to NPR when I was in college. I would listen they had a WSF that's where I went, but you could get it all over Tampa.

They were a really good classical music radio station. But they also is affiliated with MPR, and they kept putting more and more and more and more news on and even if you didn't want to listen to their morning edition or their drive home afternoon stuff, and then they started inserting things at other times, even if you didn't want to listen to that, they would always put the news break in at the top of the hour and give their leftist slant

on it. And that was fifty years ago, fifty years ago exactly when I started college anyway, So yeah, this guy's only been there for twenty five years, he said, with declining ratings, sorry, levels of trust an audience that has become less diverse over time. The trajectory for MPR is not promising. We can either keep doing what we're doing hoping that it will all work out, or we could start over with the basic building blocks of

journalism and we could face up to where we've gone wrong. Look, the bottom line is that you shouldn't even have a government news organization. They're not necessary. You know that a government news organization is there for one purpose, propaganda, and that is exactly what MPR is. It's government propaganda biased. But now we don't just have bias and a government propaganda news or the operation Mockingbird Press, like the main networks that were getting fed stuffed by the CIA.

That's everywhere. Search engines are propagandized. Artificial intelligence has a bias built into it. They pay people slave wages to put that bias in there. And so he said. In thirty five hundred word essay, the senior Business editor explained the changes inside MPR that have angered tax paying conservatives for years as it has turned from both sides coverage to uber liberal bias. Well, again, it wasn't both sides coverage when I was listening to it fifty years ago.

I haven't listened to it, probably for at least twenty five years at all at all. In twenty twenty one, he said, he looked up the party registration of staffers and found that eighty seven percent were Democrats, zero were Republicans. He said it was with profound indifference when he told other people in the organization. Race and identity became paramount and nearly every aspect of the

workplace. At MPR, journalists were required to ask everyone we interviewed their race, their gender, and their ethnicity and had to enter it into a centralized tracking system. We were given unconscious bias training sessions. This is struggle sessions. Denounce yourself, denounce your unconscious bias. I know you don't really harbor any any conscious hatred of people who have a different skin color, something like that, but unconsciously you have to be that way because your skin color is

white, so you have an unconscious bias. This is pure Marxism, so, he says. A growing DEI staff offered regular meetings imploring us to start talking about race quote unquote. Monthly dialogues were offered for women of color and men of color, non binary people of color, were included also. These initiatives, bolstered by a million dollar grant from the NPR Foundation, came from management from the top down, because this has been the long march through the

institutions. They've completed their march, they've won their war. They control the institutions, and it's time for us to start taking these institutions down. We need to pull down the pillars that are propping up the suppression. This marks the suppression because it is there to not only take everything from our lives, not only to take away our energy, our food, our clothing, our travel, everything. It is there to take away our lives. As a

matter of fact. When we get to it coming up here, when we talk about the reports that have just come out of from the Imperial College of London and Oxford and Cambridge and all these elitist UK organizations talking about how in just a few years they've got to eliminate meat and other things, kind of look at it and they say, well, this is going to be a hard thing. Certainly would be a lot easier if we had fewer people. That's going to be the solution, and all the rest of the stuff fails.

Are going to try to kill everybody. They've already begun with a pandemic injection, and that came from the same people that are selling this idea. Yeah, it doesn't matter what the excuse is, It doesn't matter what the mcguffin is. The solution, the final solution is the same, kill people. It began that way with Paul Airlick the first birthday that the people who are running that were all zero population growth, you know, reduce the world's

population. The Georgia Guidestone type of people, Paul Airlick, the population bomb. It was about depopulation from the very beginning. It always has been. You know, they want to enslave us, they want to impoverish us, they want to kill us. We have to take down these institutions. So it came from management, It came from the top down, and they were in sync with what was happening at the grassroots of producers and reporters and other

staffers. He said, NPR state away from covering, for example, first son Hunter Biden's scandalous laptop, which the media dismissed until after Biden was elected president. Who cares at this point, I don't even care. I don't even care about Hunter everybody knows that they're corrupt. We knew they were corupt then when they started talking about this in late October, I said, these guys have waited too late. There's no way they're going to get any traction

with us in time. All you're going to do an October surprise. Late in October. Oh, we've got this stuff about Hunter Biden. So this has been talked about to some degree for a couple of years at that point, and they needed to go further into it, deeper into it, much sooner than that, because you know, there's going to be a lot of pushback, there's going to be a lot of censorship. There's a big miscalculation on the part of the Republicans with that. But folks, that doesn't even

matter anymore. There is so much Jeffrey Epstein corruption. There is so much financial corruption from both Trump and Biden, it doesn't matter. Matters are other things that they're identical on, other things that are more vital to our lives than the scandals of the Biden's and the Trumps. Because now the next thing is going to be all about Stormy Daniel's payoffs, and then this other playmate

McDougall that was there. But look, the things that matter to us are the pandemic lockdowns, the jabs, the climate lockdowns and bands and all the rest of these types of things. That is what they are not going to talk about. They will talk about Trump's scandals and Biden's scandals so they can avoid the criminal mass murder of Trump and Biden. They're more than happy to talk about the rest of the stuff. It never cost Bill Clinton anything to

have all that stuff. They could easily dismiss all of his victims as Bimbo's despite our missteps at NPR. Defunding, he says, is not the answer. No, it absolutely is. It absolutely is nothing less than defunding these unconstitutional organizations. Well, we're going to take a break and when we come back, we're going to talk about some of the technology that has gone wrong.

We're going to talk about the climate issues as well. It's interesting and we talk about climate, we talk about how they're manipulating things with Kim Trail's you know, they're geoengineering. Watch and a lot of other people have been showing videos for a very long time. I got a video to show you that was on social media yesterday. But even Paul Joseph Watson is now doing articles on Zero Edge about Kim Trail's. He used that used to be his

pet Peeve stop talking about Kim Trail. It was like, well it's real, Paul. But now even Paul Watson is doing it. It's amazing to me. We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back. Tell Alexa to add the APS radio skill and have access to the best channels anywhere from country to blues, classic hits to news. APS Radio curates incredibly diverse playlists for you to enjoy. Get details at apsradio dot com. Jordan listening to the David Night Show. Yeah, if you want to watch a

movie about Civil War, watch that one. Shnandoah on Rock fand Michelle Obaman, thank you very much for the tip. I appreciate that. Let's say, and I appreciate what was sent to me by Robert w Here he talks about Tesla's self driving problems and he goes elon Musk could easily solve his self driving hit or missed problem if you just employ people in India to drive the Tesla's remotely. What he's referring to as the fact that Amazon had they're just

walk out stuff. And supposedly it was going to be determining everything that you're buying and all the rest of the stuff with it's super smart surveillance technology. But it was actually a thousand people in India being paid very low wages to watch everything that you're doing and tabulate it down. It wasn't artificial intelligence. It was a different AI. It was an army of Indians instead of artificial intelligence. So he said, you think Jeff Bezos would have discussed this with

Musk at the last World Economic Form. I wonder if that's how AI is going to work as well. So we get some Indians driving our cars, I'll sign up for that. About the only way that you get to drive a car by remote control. As a matter of fact, he needs even more help than with the self driving stuff. The cyber truck rollout looks to

be a disaster. A lot of people are complaining about it, and of course they're talking more about all the ups and downs of Elon must now because of mainstream media hates him, The left hates him, so they're going to highlight every one of his faults. But there's plenty of faults out there to highlight. He's going to be fine. Don't worry about elin, and just

don't think of him as your savior. He is a transhumanist demon trying to rope you in, a billionaire who became the world's richest man by selling this green mcguffin the South There anyway, Tessa's long delayed and pricey cyber trucks are getting panned by furious owners from malfunctioning at alarming rate just months after it's hit the road. Tails of the stainless steel cyber trucks dying after traveling just one mile randomly hard breaking on a wide open road, already showing rest spots,

among many other gripes being shared by the Tesla Owners Club form. And guess what if you start talking bad about the cyber trucks, I'm mister free speech, the guy who is. We keep hearing this from our big conservative influencers. You know this is the guy who single handedly saved free speech in the West. Well, he'll kick you off of the cyber truck things if you criticize this product. If he doesn't like you on Twitter, he will keep

you shadow band, or he will make you shadow band. Worst delivery in my life, the truck died in five minutes, said one person made it one mile down the road, started getting steering air, a flashing red screen. This so different from Microsoft. We had the blue screen of death. Well, Atlease have a red screen of death. I pulled off. I'm pulled off side of the highway. Now the truck is dead and I'm waiting for a tow truck. Dealer couldn't do anything for me. It was great

for five minutes. I tried everything, tried restarting it. The screen is stuck black now and keeps beeping. The owner got the vehicle, which begins at eighty thousand dollars. Of course, you're not going to drive it out showroom door for eighty thousand dollars. If it's in high demand like these were, they're going to load them up with some features and you will pay that

price or not get the car. But one month after the highly publicized trucks went on sale two years behind schedule, the disappointed owner said, Tessa really rushed these trucks out. What a nightmare. Another user said he got a flashing red screen warned pull over safely, critical steering issue detected. He said a lot of trucks are having high voltage issue choose which makes the trucks unusable. Another thread, My cyber truck suddenly made a hard break stop when we

both have a clear, wide enough space between us, he said. Luckily there was no vehicle in the back, as it would have been a definite collision. Note the autopilot is simply a glorified reactive cruise control, he said. Call India, maybe they can fix this for you. On another discussion board, Tesla Motors Club, a cyber truck owner wrote a review so critical of Tesla's supposedly highest tech vehicle that he was barred from the cyber truck Owner's

form. So much for free speech, one another person says, no, it is not glorious. A cyber truck isn't a truck. It's a toy truck at best, an experimental concept at worst. I rented mine in La and spent twenty four hours with it. During the test drive, he said, I don't know what the heck happ into the suspension. It doesn't take bumps, it doesn't take potholes. Well, this is supposed to be like an apocalyptic you know, it's you can throw you can throw metal balls at

it. And of course the windows break, you know, but you shoot it all. The rest of these things is supposed to be your post the biocalyptic vehicle. It doesn't handle potholes too well, he said. The steering was actually nice, but the steering wheel is way too small, like awkwardly small, he said. So the vehicle says that it's got a range of

three hundred and twenty miles on a full charge. However, it can take anywhere from seven to fourteen and a half hours to get that three hundred and twenty miles instead of you know, like thirty seconds to pump up your tank with a gasoline. One YouTuber Kyle Connor, who has a YouTube channel out of Spec Motoring, was only able to reach seventy nine percent of its targeted

range about two hundred miles during a live streamed unofficial range test. And of course we've also seen video in the early days of it being it was stuck, it couldn't get up a snowy incline, was a little bit of snow on the ground. They had to get a afford internal combustion engine driven truck to pull it out, and you could see that was what was happening at one point in the video. But it's not the only technology it has failed

us. We have some people who have looked at the efforts to keep your data private on Apple and their conclusion is that privacy is virtually impossible on the iPhones. This is not news. Actually, this is something that has been around for a very long time, and it was something that the NSA even bragged about, and and some slides and some that was presentation side that they did that was leaked by Ed Snowden, and this goes back to before he

leaked the information in twenty thirteen. This is the key sides over there. I've talked about this many times. Who would have thought in nineteen eighty four the Super Bowl commercial about the Mac that this would be big brother Steve Jobs of the iPhone and that the zombies would line up to pay for it. So the NSA was bragging about all of this stuff even before Snowden. This

is nothing new. But what is new is the study that looked at some of the default apps on the iPhone, the iPad and the MacBook set it collect your personal data even when they appear to be disabled. This is the first study to research the privacy settings of Apple's default apps, specifically looking at Safari, Surrey, Family Sharing, I Message, facetimeation services, find My, and touch id to see whether the corporation is living up to a slogan

privacy. That's Apple and of course androids no better. Google is probably even worse. These apps are glued to the platform and getting rid of them is virtually impossible do the way the user interface is designed, users don't know what's going on. For example, the user is given the opportunity the option whether to enable or to not enable Siri, Apple's virtual assistant, but enabling only refers to whether you use series voice control. Siri still collects data in the

background from the other apps that you use, regardless of your choice. Bit deceptive unless you understand how to go into the settings and specifically change that. So it makes you think that you've not activated, when in actuality it is there now. Thomas Massey, as they're talking about the reactivation of section seven oh two to give them legal cover to spy on people without a warrant, Thomas Massey said, Congress is giving itself a carve out, and the reauthorization

defies a seven oh two warrantless spying on Americans. The bill requires the FBI to notify and to seek consent from Congress before violating the privacy of congressmen. And this will persuade many members of Congress to vote Yes. They've done a carve out for them. You see, you'll go to jail for a very long time if you do insider trading. But if you're a member of Congress or somebody who is part of their staff, yeah, you can do that

kind of stuff, no problem. And so they're saying, well, we're going to do warrantless surveillance on all of America, but we'll put in an exception that the FBI wants to spy on us, they're going to have to get a warrant. They're fooling themselves, absolutely. They are the people who are the most interesting ones. They are the people who are most likely going to be surveilled without a warrant, and they'll do it regardless of what these

guys put in there years and years ago. It's probably been about a decade now. It wasn't all that long after the snowed and leaks that Michael Hayden went to Washington Lee University talked to a legal class there, and you'll see in the background here he's got a post up and it's got like, you know, a single eye look anything. It's a pretty creepy guy. Anyway, this is what he said about who they do surveillance on. This is not about guilt in fact. In fact, let really clear, okay,

NSA doesn't just listen to bad people. NSA listens to interesting people. Who do you think is going to be most interesting to them? Are you going to be more interesting to them than a congressman? Probably not? Probably not. At least the congress person will be at least as interesting. We know from the FBI, Jaggar Hoover, and this is these are quotes from a

lot of different presidents. You know, Nixon talked about it. You had Truman talk about the fact that they were creating that Jaggar Hoover was creating dossier's and all these politicians to blackmail them, they'd have to be really naive. But I think there's a lot of politicians that are really naive and self interested narcissists. And so this is you know, this is going to get it passed, probably, but it is a deal with the devil that is not

going to really help them. As a matter of fact, here's what Snowden had to say about this program, which had been going on for a very long time, has continued to go on since his leaks, and they're giving legal cover to them to continue it as well. In my final position, working directly with the tools of mass surveillance, I can see anybody's emails.

I can see what you're texting back and forth. You know, the guys that are working at left and right of me are turning their monitor to show me nudes of the wife of one of their targets, and they say bonus. But then I see this picture. It was actually a video of a child in the lap of his father, and you know, it's like a toddler. They're smacking on the keyboard and they don't realize what's going on, but it kind of glanced at the camera and I felt like he was looking

at me. I mean, this really shook me, because when we talk about surveillance, we're talking so much about abstraction. We're talking about things that don't feel real. I realized that the machine I was a technologist in me an essay, all of the different parts that I've been working with, all of the systems they had stolen. And we're stealing not just one person's memories, they're stealing everyone's everywhere, all the time. And they still are right

now. And so I got up out of the chair. And you know, I didn't try to burn down the NSA. I didn't. I've published zero documents. I gave them to journalists and there's a long complicated thing in the book about how and why and where the lines are. But I wanted not to say this is the way the world should be. I wanted to give it to you. I wanted to say this is what's happening, and it really guys. The question for you is how do you want to live?

We are today being used against the future. We're being used against our children. Everything we do now lasts forever, not because we want to remember it, but because we're no longer allowed to forget. And of course only Benny said that Amon when they were talking about Russia, this and Russia. Then he goes, if they think there's something going on, they've got all this stuff. They got it stored at Bluffedel, you taught other places.

The NSA has got all this information. I'd speculate about it if they got to show it. But yeah, that's the key, folks, when you go back and you look at the Snowden documents, the key was they wanted this stuff released because they put that stuff out and nobody does anything about it, right, nobody in Congress did anything about it. The public didn't demand that this stuff be stopped, and so only a few people had an issue with it, and so that was taken as an endorsement as consent. This

is one of the reasons why they leak this stuff out. And the same thing is happening right now with the pandemic. It happened because we didn't demand that these people be fired or punished who did this to us. As a matter of fact, we're going to reelect one of the two guys who did it to us. None of that happened, and so they're going to make it worse. And that's where they're working on right now. We've not demanded that these people be fired or penalized. We're working to destroy our economy by

taking away our energy. Energy in the UK is now five times what it costs in China. So guess where everything's going to be manufactured? China. Of course, if the energy costs are five times as much. You can't manufacturing anything. Manufacturing takes energy. I've seen this all my life. I remember back in high school when this Earthday garbage was kicking off and everybody was saying, ah, we got too many kids, too many people. It's like, no, we don't you know which one, which ones are you

going to get rid of? You know you're going to kill Einstein or Beethoven or you know, you don't know in advance what anybody's going to be. You're going to be crippling society. And they said, well, you know, look at how much energy is being used by America. Look at this, and it's like we manufacture everything. Now, look at where all the

energy is being used as being use in China and in India. Why well, because they were given a pass under the Paris climbing a court, they can have as many as primitive, as dirty, as cheap and dirty energy plants as they want, and yet they're shutting them down left and right everywhere else. This is a planned, systematic takedown. They've planned it for a long time. They're doing it step by step, just like Fauci said, you know, how do you get everybody to take an untested vaccine, worldwide

flu vaccine. Well you do it from the inside with chaos, and you do it iteratively. That's the way this is going. Well, when we come back, we're going to talk about Second Amendment issues, hunting guns for school protection. There's been another state that has now jumped into that and the gun controllers are very upset about that. Will be right back. If you

like the Eagles on the cars and Healey Lewis and the news they say, then you'll love the Classic Hits channel at APS radio, download our app or listen now at APS radio dot com. If you were listening to the d Night Show on Rumble, thank you very much, Militon Melanchovic, Thank you very much for the tiples. God bless you, David. Thank you for sharing the truth. Well, thank you for supporting us. Without your support, we couldn't do this. And so I really do appreciate the people.

I've got a list of people who have sent things by mail, and well, let me do it right now, do it real quickly. This is not as long as a list of people that have sent us contributions via zel, which I also want to get to. But this is what we received in April in terms of things mail to us Lois L, Jeremy W. Susan L. Mary N. Martin, T HD from NC, Molly p Anna, Maria A. Dale L, Tina g Ryan F and sent a

wolfpack, So thank you to Love of the Road. And so those are people who have sent checks and the people who support us on subscribe Star. We really do appreciate that that has and we don't read that off like we do the zel and I read the zel off and I read the mail off because we have no way of responding to people, but we have been so busy, we just have I feel bad about the lack of response on on subscribe Star. If you want to reach me, probably the best way to

do it is with email. It's difficult enough for me to keep up with the email and there's just so many different places that people can leave comments that I feel bad that I've not gotten back to the people at subscribe Star. It's been a very important base of support for us, as has Zel and the mail on rock fan Angus Mustang thank you very much, he says,

I've noticed since the eclipse that the night is dark. That's right. We celebrate the darkness, right, that's crazy and that was the craziest thing. That's CNN reporter who is in Fredericksburg, Texas. Yeah, Karen said, you should have played the clip from Howard Dean. There's probably a lot of people that don't remember Howard Dean when this primary just starts, ah and it completely blew him out of the running because it's so crazy, at least for

the CNN reporter. She was in the dark and people is not really sure who that is, I think, but we have some interesting stories in terms of guns and hunting and other things like that. In Germany, they are very concerned about the fact that Botswana is allowing controlled hunting of elephants and they want Botswana to stop because they know better. And so there were calls by Germany's federal environment ministers. Always the environmentalists, right, who wants a band

on trophy hunting? You see some of these people who go out and do a trophy hunt. And again, you know the economics of this. Why do we have so many cows? Well, because we have a use for them, because they're tasty and it actually helps in terms of the population. We're not looking at cows and chickens going extinct unless these environmentalist ministers get their way, in which case they may go extinct. We may go extinct if

they get their way. But the you know, the animals that you're using there for food or for you're using them for hunting or something, there's going to be a lot of them, and it's going to be a controlled thing. But don't expect the greens to understand this. And so they're complaining about

this. Botswana political leaders said, well, the hunting, when it is done sustainably, when it's done under control, it actually helps to protect crops because the elephants, if a population gets out of control, they're a lot more damaging than a lot of deer running through and eating your flowers or something actually eating their food. And they can actually destroy villages, cars and people and things like that. And we have we can boost tourism and all the

rest of these things. And so they said in response, they said, okay, tell you what, Germany, We'll send you twenty thousand elephants and you can take care of them. Yeah, you know where the expression of the white elephant comes from, right, So an in here where they had a lot of elephants, if they really wanted to punish anybody, because the elephants were sacred, like a lot of these animals, but especially the elephants

as part of their religion. So if the government, the Grand Puba, whatever he was, wanted to punish you, he would give you an elephant, and you would have to take care of that elephant. It would ruin you. You couldn't get rid of it. I mean, it's like tying this thing around your neck. You have to feed this thing for the earth. So how about twenty thousand white elephants that we'll send to Germany. Maybe since it's the environmentalist, maybe they could be called green elephants. How about

that, not pink elephants on parade, but green elephants on parade. Not since Hannibal would they have had so many these elephants in the Alps and everywhere else? You know, it is kind of interesting, you know, when you look at unless you control the population in some way, it's kind of interesting to think about the fact that lions used to be all over Europe, all over Europe. They didn't just discover them in Africa. Before people started

traveling to Africa, they were dealing with lions. There were lions all over Europe. There were lions all over in China as well. There were lions all over the Middle East. You can go to the British Museum and you can see pictures of the Assyrian king and chariots and the lion hunt. You know, they got getting chariots and then they would hunt them down with the chariots and with bow and arrow. They were everywhere and there was something of

a nuisance killing people things like that. You know, go back and look at the ghosts and the darkness and you understand why they got rid of lions. Speaking to the build newspaper in Germany, botswan and president said his country was suffering from an elephant plague after recent conservation efforts, and the Botswana people are dependent on some of the animals being called through controlled and sustainable hunting. We are paying the price for preserving these animals for the world, he told

the German paper. And he said for you to sit in Berlin and have an opinion about our affairs and Botswana. He explained the government had already offloaded eight thousand of the animals to nearby Angola due to their exploding population, and they threatened send twenty thousand of them to Berlin. So German politicians can quote live together with the animals in the way that you're trying to tell us to.

We would like to make such an offer to the Federal Republic of Germany, and we don't take no for ancer twenty thousand wild elephents for Germany. And he said, this is not a joke. That would be interesting. So as they point out the elephants, we'll have to then have something to eat. He said, again, we're back to the white elephant aspect of it. In Washington State, they passed a very restrictive ban on high capacity magazines, and that has now been turned over or overturned, I should say,

by a county judge. You know, all those local elections that you can vote in, you could vote a judge who's going to nullify some of these bad laws. Of course, this law, they've still put a hold on his ruling because they believe they're going to be able to get it overruled at another level. But it's great to have somebody who really understands what the

Constitution is, doesn't it. Twenty twenty two law bans a sale important manufacturing of ammunition magazines that hold more than ten rounds and the Cawlitz County judge ruled that this is unconstitutional. Wonder where you get that idea. Is there anything in the constitution that says you can infringe arms? Yeah, yeah, that's pretty explicit, isn't it. This comes after the Washington State Attorney General, Ferguson filed a lawsuit against a gun store in Kelso in September twenty twenty three.

Last September for selling the magazines after the ban went into effect. After the Monday ruling, his office, the Attorney General of Washington State filed an emergency stay that was a by the Washington State Supreme Court, so any purchase of the illegal magazines will still be a violation of the law until they have

more review of that. And then in Tennessee, we had the Senate passed a law that would allow teachers to carry concealed weapons, and of course they have to be trained, have to take a class, and other things like that. And this is not the first state to do it. As a matter of fact, they've been kind of dragging their feet on it compared to a lot of other states. But nevertheless, you had a lot of people who were being pushed by these Bloomberg gun control people. Moms demand action in

every town for gun safety. This is all stuff that's set up by the globalist Michael Bloomberg to try to take away our right to keep in bear arms. So they had about two hundred people go to the Senate and disrupt the proceedings. This is reported by the Independent out of the UK and the way they report these people who are anti freedom, anti law, anti constitution, anti self defense, they call them gun reform advocates. Yeah, they want

to reform completely change our government, don't they. The bill still needs to pass the Tennessee General Assembly House. If the new rule comes into effect, Tennessee would join over thirty states. That's what I'm saying. Yeah, already thirty other states have done this. Let's taken these guys so long. Glad they did it, you know, better late than never, But they are

late getting there. And so the people who are speaking on behalf of Bloomberg said, we should be listening to Tennessee law enforcement, teachers, superintendents and more who've spoken out against arming teachers. And most importantly, we should be listening to Tennesseeans who are worried that their children won't come home from school every day. That's why they wanted the teachers armed. If you think the teacher is so crazy that they're going to I don't know what would they do to

kids if they you got a crazy teacher. Would they tell them they're in the wrong body or something? Were they try to sexually molest them? Would they gas line? What? Yeah? They You might want to pay attention to what is happening in your school, even in a conservative state. A mother from Covenant School where they were shot up by a crazy tranny. It was a crazy training aspect of it that they don't want you to see. They tell you everything about the gun, but they didn't tell you anything about

the shooter, right, keep that under wraps. Don't tell anybody about that. Well, a Covenant School mother was at the Senate session and she said that active shooter training saved her kids from the shooter armed or an assault style rifle. Well, there are a lot of young kids who were not saved by active shooter training. And she's not specific about what that is. She said, you know this person had an assault style rifle. She said,

a handgun will do nothing against that. This is the stupidity, This is absolutely ignorant and stupid. She doesn't understand it. Hasn't paid much attention to these mass shootings. Do you remember the one in the mall? For example, we had some guy go in. He had an assault weapon, and he had extra magazines that are banned in Washington State. He had all of the stuff. He must have been a liberal, because it's all of this said, well, if I have an assault weapon, if I have a

large capacity magazine, that's it. I'm king of the world. Yeah, man with one eye as king in the Land of the Blind type of thing. And he would have been, except there was somebody else who also had a gun. But he didn't need to have an AK forty seven. He

didn't need to have all the extra magazines this guy did. This guy was carrying in a mall where they said don't bring your gun in here, and fortunately he did not pay any attention to that, and so he leaned up against the column and took aim, and he shot this guy and stopped it with a pistol. Well, I think it was a revolver. I didn't even have an older handgun. And so this ignorant mother says a handgun will do nothing against an assault weapon. She she didn't know what assault weapon is.

She doesn't know what's happened with these shootings, none of it. If what had happened on March twenty seventh had gone down the way that it did, with a teacher armed of the handgun attempting to put the perpetrator out, my children would likely be dead. She has no idea the purp might have been killed before other people. We've seen this over and over again. A good person with a gun. And here's why you arm teachers. And I said this from the very beginning as well. Look at the Parkland shooting,

for example, you have a uniformed officer. First problem with that is that if somebody was really serious, they might take that person out. Oh he's the only one here with a gun. I'll shoot him first, and now I can do whatever I want. So that makes that person target. Except this person was not inside the school, and when the shooting began, he went the other direction. Right now, he would have been a hero.

If he would have run into the shooting, into the building where people being shot, he would have been a hero because he would have risked his life to stop that shooting. That's why we honor people like that as hero. Some fireman who runs into a burning building to save somebody, or a police officer who is armed and he still goes into the unknown to try to take

this person out. However, it's a very different situation. If you were a teacher and you have a gun and somebody comes into your classroom to shoot you, you're not a hero to stop this guy. You're just trying to save your life or maybe save the life of the kids that you are yet you know, intimately in your classroom. That's just a natural instinct. And that's a you know, either me or him type of situation. That's not

a heroic thing. You don't have an option of going away. It's like kill or be killed, and that's what this is set up to do. But I wouldn't trust my kids a school teacher anywhere anyway, because there are things that are far more dangerous than firearms. The pen is more dangerous than the sword in many ways. These teachers who do not wish to carry a firearm will have to The teachers who do wish brother to carry a firearm will

have to get an enhanced handgun carry permit. They'll have to complete annual training with law enforcement forty hours of training a year. So you know that is that's not good enough for them. They don't, It'll never be good enough for them. We all need to be at the mercy of any thug who any criminal who gets their hand on a firearm. Congress could overturn a new rule limiting credit card late fees, and Reason thinks that's a good thing,

and Tim Scott thinks that's a good thing. Now this is coming from the Consumer of Financial Protection Bureau, and they say, well, you know, you might think that it's a good thing to have the fees of the credit card companies limited somewhat. But they said they would cap them at no more than eight dollars per month. But that's still pretty high. That's not much of a cap quite frankly. But anyway, they said, on the surface, it sounds great. Nobody likes to pay fees. However, they're going

to put them somewhere else. Yeah, we notice, because all of this is just window dressing and virtue signaling, because what the real issue is is the fact that they're charging you on any unpaid balance thirty to forty percent. Nobody will talk about that. Not the so called Consumer Financial Protection Board either Tim Scott's not going to stop that, Elizabeth Warren's bureaucracy is not going to stop that. The CFPB is not going to stop that. Reason doesn't talk

about it, folks. This usury is a crime. We used to that used to be one of the main rackets of organized crime in the mafia. They would loan people money at excessively high interest rates. We said, that's criminal. I think that there is a reasonable amount for people to pay. If you're going to loan somebody money, there is a time value on that money, and that actually helps to create a capital flow. But it gets to the point where when it's successive like it is now, it's totally fraudulent.

Especially when you look at what they pay people who put money into their bank. It's absurd. And they're dropping those interest rates now, the big banks are now dropping those interest rates. Somebody talked about it and said, oh see, look, the Fed will probably drop interest rates because the banks are already dropping interest rates and anticipation of that, Yeah, they know what's

going to happen. They know it's an election year, but you know, what, are they going to go from one tenth of a percent down to one half of one tenth of a percent, while they're charging people thirty to forty percent. And as reason says, well, if you just take away these fees, they'll just put it somewhere else, So maybe they'll go up to thirty five to forty five percent or something. On why they charge people, it's criminal. That spread has never been you know, people will talk

and do nothing about the transfer of wealth. Oh, look at how the richer getting richer, and we're transferring all this wealth from the class and poor

people to the rich and they just keep accumulating more. Well, well, of course, if they're going to pay you on the money that you can scrimp and save and put into a savings account a tiny fraction of a percent, and they're going to charge you thirty forty fifty interest on this stuff that you you know you don't have enough money, so you put it on a credit card and you carry that balance forward. That is absolutely criminal. Dave Ramsey is right, you get out of credit card debt. It's a scam.

It's a criminal thing. However, these people should not be allowed to operate that way. Yeah, certainly, don't put yourself in that position. Work do everything you can to get out of credit card debt because it is such a fraud. Why is the government allowing that to happen. Well, because they're criminals themselves and because it is crony capitalism at its finest. So

we're going to take a quick break and we will be right back. When we come back, we're going to talk about what happened with this abortion decision going back to eighteen sixty four, and you got people like Kerrie Lake running for cover because she was just like the last time they had, the last Senate candidate that was favored by Trump, who was also a celebrity with no principles whatsoever. As soon as she sees this, she's running for the hills.

We'll be right back. Whether you're feeling like the booze or bluegrass, APS Radio has you covered. Check out a wide variety of channels on our app at apsradio dot com. You're listening to the David Knight Show. All right, welcome back. We have when we go back to the eclipse, briefly, I played the thing from Trump and I said, well, you know, this is just his deranged Maga fan club that is out there.

But it turns out because I said, you know, if it's a Trump commercial, said this is paid for by numb But evidently that is not true for social media. And so it appears that actually he put together this piece of idolatry the most important moment in human history, because you know, Donald Trump is the most important person in human history. He's done more for Christianity than Jesus Christ, hasn't he. I sped this off because I couldn't stand it. Oh yeah, yes, yes, there he is the dawn,

the dawn of the fall of civilization. It just keeps getting worse and worse, doesn't it. The excitement about an eclipse, the excitement about a politician. This was an interesting picture. Look at this picture here that is the eclipse, and you got the two arcs that are formed there touching the top of the pyramid and the side there, and the pyramid is silhouetted. It's a really interesting picture. What is The caption says this photo from the eclipse

is funnier when you realize that the pyramid is a bass Pro shop. So this is the bass Pro shop that is in Memphis. As you go over the bridge there at Memphis, you see it. They put that there they thought it'd be funny. I forget what the original building was supposed to be, but it's original purpose stopped or they went out of business or whatever asked pro bought it, but they thought, you know, oh Memphis, like Egypt, we'll put a pyramid there. And it is an interesting oddity we've

stopped by that. We always passed that thing on the way to Texas when we drive out there. But it's not just the politicians that ran this stuff through. I thought, you know, when we look at all of the phony Bologne prophets who are a stinch to Christianity, one in particular was undeterred by the fact that the world didn't end yesterday. As a matter of fact, what he was saying was that the solar eclipse was going to release the

sixth Seal of Revelation and it was God's warning to America. I was like, there's so much wrong with this. Where do I start. Well, let's start with who this guy is. He's a guy who has was convicted nine years ago for what he had done about a decade go to people who trusted him. But you know when he said in twenty fifteen, he pleaded

guilty to defrauding elderly victims of millions of dollars in investment scam. And so now he's telling everybody the solar eclipse is warning from God to America, to America, and that it is connected to the release of the sixth Seal of

the Book of Revelation in the Bible. Well, you know, part of the problem is is that the Book of Revelation, if you actually look at it, if you actually pick up the Bible, look at it instead of listening to people like this guy, the title is actually a revelation of Jesus Christ, not a revelation of the end of time. It's not a revelation of America, which is the way people treat it. It's not about fundamentally about Israel. It's about Jesus Christ. It's a revelation about him. You

put something else in the center. You've got a problem with the way you're reading this when you're reading something else into it. Yeah, it's not about Trump either. And I guess he thought he could get away with this because he says it's a sixth Seal and we didn't notice what happened when the other five were broken or whatever. So I guess he figures he's not going to

be found out. He's warning America that our light will go out, says God is warning America that our light will go out and it'll go dark if we do not turn from our wicked ways. Well, again, like I said yesterday, you want a warning to America, just read the Bible. It's full of warnings. It's also got some it's got warnings, it's got corrections, it has grace, it has mercy as well. It's not just fire and brimstone. God has graciously paid for your sins with his son if

you follow him and trust him. So it's not just judgment, but there is judgment there, and people should be concerned about that. But you're not going to really get into the information about what it is that displeas God, or how you can pay for your sins, or how somebody else has paid for your sins. You're not going to get that from looking at the sun.

Yes, it does tell you that everything is precisely organized. It does tell you that there is an intelligence that a creator God, and creation night after night is testifying to the fact that there is an intelligence, a designer that created. But did he speak, Yes, he did in the Bible,

and these people don't want to look at that. Instead, he said, there were only eight total solar eclipses that have happened over the United States since our founding in seventeen seventy six, and incredibly all of these are connected to war and pestilence. Well that's not true. Those are the most notable ones, but there's been more than eight, so it's not always associated with

that. And what he's doing, he's actually engaging not an astronomy, which is fine, you know, looking at the mathematical precision of what the Creator has done in the universe. But he's going into astrology. He's going into the occult. And he says things like, oh, this is a very bad omen. Well, i'll tell you what's a bad omen is if you're starting to take advice from somebody who has built elderly people out of money.

As a matter of fact, confessed in twenty fifteen that he cheated investors out of three point three million dollars and he pocketed five hundred and seventy thousand dollars for himself. He called his church that he set up Passion for Truth Ministries, and now he's out there selling a cult astrology to people. A decade later, he said he told the congregation that he didn't confess what he had

done, that it was wrong. He says, well, I didn't even realize I'd been arrested, and so he did make a confession to the judgement, not to his congregation. There. The attorney that was defending him stressed that the crime had nothing to do with his role as a pastor. No one had everything to do with his role as a pastor, and had everything

to do with his character. The assistant US attorney said some of the investors trusted him because he was quote a nice religious man unquote who referred to several of them as Grandma. So this company that he was selling and by the way, he started selling the stuff at the same time he started the church

there. How did he scam people the church? But this organization that he was, this financing company in California that he was doing it required the lender an investor to invest in the insurance policy for a fixed period of time varying from eighteen months to two years. During this period of time, he represented to the clients of this company that they would sell the bundled insurance policies on

the open market with guaranteed returns. However, he was aware that if they were unable to secure a buyer for the bundled insurance policies, that his clients would lose all of their money that was invested in the expensive product that he sold. He cheated people out of three hundred and third million dollars and made five hundred and seventy thousand himself. That bothered to tell his church. So the question is when we look at what is happening to the morality in our

country. Yeah, we really should be concerned about what is happening. A lot of things are wrong, and they're wrong, not just because we had an eclipse. This is an interesting article, and I thought I would just mention a couple of these things. I'm going to go through all ten reasons, at least not today, ten reasons why our kids are leaving church. Maybe it's because he got crooks like this inside the church. People need to

understand there's a difference between God and man. Right, A lot of these people who represent themselves as God are actually representatives of the devil, and you need to make that distinction. You know, God doesn't change. God is different from the people that you interact with. That's a difficult thing for us to understand. But this guy says, you know, I work in a major college town. A large number of twenty somethings, nearly all of them

were raised a very typical evangelical churches. Nearly all of them have left the church with no intention of returning. He said. The statistics are jaw droppingly horrific. Seventy percent of youth stop attending church when they graduate from high school. Nearly a decade later, only about half of them return to church,

only about half. For all the talk of children being our greatest resource, he says, being our treasure, and for all the multimillion dollar day of Inmbusters, Starbucks type of knockoffs that we build in these churches and fill them with all kinds of entertainment and rock bands, he said, the churches failed them. And so he said, so here's some of the reasons that I saw. He said. Number one, here, kids leave the church because the church is relevant. He said, I didn't say irrelevant, but I

said it's relevant. We've taken a historic, two thousand year old faith and we've dressed it up in plaid and skinny jeans and tried to sell it as cool. It's not cool. It's not modern. What we're packaging is a cheap knockoff of what's real. He said, kids are leaving church because they never attended church. A lot of kids will go to something called children's church or something Noah Arc type of nursery with pizza parties and cookies and all the

rest of this stuff. I think there's a lot of value kids sitting there and hearing it. I don't think we need to speak down to kids. I think they can understand things. I never spoke down to our sons. They always understood it, far more than we give them credit for. I know, when I was a young child had set there and color crayons in the pew, but I was still listening to it and it was still having an effect. So he says, it's not quite the church when you put

them in some of these entertainment facilities. And is it any wonder that when you go to such trouble to entertain them as children, that if they stick around, it's like, well, you know, so now what do I do for entertainment? You mean I now got to go in and just sit there and listen something like that. He said, kids leave the church because they get smart. They didn't get smarter, but they went to college or somewhere. People treated them as if they could think instead of giving them this

dumbed down stuff. He says, they have questions about things that are going to come up as they get older. People going to bring up these questions if you don't teach the controversy. He said, over thousands of years people have looked at this, and they've got good answers for this. As I said before, whenever somebody challenges your faith, that's an opportunity for you to dig deep and to say, well, is this the real stuff? And

if you dig deep, you'll find that it is. But a lot of times that's not what we do. And so instead we don't give them an answer. We don't teach the controversy, or we might show the controversy, we might show the challenge as a straw man argument. No, give them the full thing, and they say, this is why I don't believe it. I never taught the kids about Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny because I knew I was going to have to teach them about Darwinian evolution. I didn't

want them to think I'm just making stuff up. I didn't make up any stuff with them. Kids leave church because we send them out unarmed, ignorant of our faith. How many times are we seeing kids or families that I've talked to tried to convince them to get their kids out of school forty years ago, oh, thirty years ago, and they said, well, I think I need to send my kid in as a salt and light into this system. It's like they're not ready for that yet. There'll be a time

for that. They're not ready for it yet. In North Carolina, the Homeschooling Association was called the Greenhouse Report. They had a monthly magazine they put out called a Greenhouse Report, because that's the metaphor. When your kids are young, you treat them like you would a delicate plant in the greenhouse. There will come a time when you're going to have to put them out in

the real world and they're going to have to face everything. But when they are young and tender like that, they can't handle it, and most of them will not survive it. Some might if you don't put them in a protected environment. And so what do we wind up with what we wound up with a situation in Idaho where you've got a teen accused of planning a church attacks. He's now loyal to the Islamic state. I don't know if he

ever went to church or not. He's eighteen years old and he had a plan to attack churches with guns and flame covered weapons, explosives, knives and a pipe and all the rest of the stuff. Is maybe facing twenty years in prison. I looked at this and I thought, well, that's a that's kind of strange. How the FBI know about all this stuff. Well, they know about it because they're the ones who set it up. I mean, you know, there is a lot of hatred and anger that has

been inculcated. It doesn't really show up this way. It usually shows up in ostracism and canceling and things like that at the moment, but yeah, it's eventually going to show up as violence like that. And as information points out, looks like the FEDS are trying to drum up support for American Israel's wars in the Middle East by trapping an idiot eighteen year old and a plot to attack churches on behalf of Isis. Yeah, that's your Federal Bureau of

Instigation. Instigation. The FBI is famous for this, matter of fact, years ago judging Apolitano a very long essay just rattling off all the times that they had taking a patsy or a dupe, and you know, they talk about all this stuff, and then they give them a plan, and they give them weapons, and then you know, they stop them at the last minute. Like their heroes. These people nothing but a bunch of arsonists who

dress up like firemen and then stop it at the very last moment. It was absurd, but still there's a lot of hatred that has been inculcated. But here's how it typically manifests, not as some young guy equipped and armed and even given flags and photographed by the FBI and then arrested. Doesn't typically manifest that way. It typically manifests and feminism. Sixty one percent of gen Z women identify as feminists. And these are I think gen Z, the

oldest of gen Z in their early twenties. But this is what it looks like in one state legislature. This person who was speaking was actually elected, and fittingly enough, her last name is Marx. Senator Marx. Thank you, madam. Chair. So I am a mother. My children call me mother, they call me quite a few other things as well. And I just to the proponents of this amendment, if we are going to be inclusive, would you also add then pregnant father, pregnant surrogate's mother. I truly

believe that pregnant person covers everybody. This is not about me. This bill is not about me, and this bill is not about any of us sitting here. This bill is about children with mental health. And that is what we have to remember. And we have to remember that the families that this bill is addressing are made up of lots of different kinds of people, lots

of different colors, lots of different identities. And I just ask that if you must add pregnant mother, that you be inclusive then, and I believe, go down a slippery slope and add every other person that will show up with a baby in their womb and will not identify as you do. This is not about us. This is about children with mental illness. I will

adamantly oppose an adult with mental illness. Everybody really thinks about the children and families that this bill is affecting, and not about what we think and my, my, my. As we sit here debating this bill, thank you now. My first response, as you heard there, just yeah, eye roll, laugh, walk away, that's my first response. We can't do that, though, you see, this is where our war is. Our war is not with a guy who's got to There are people who will do

that and go run and shoot up churches. They've done that in the past, and we need to be aware of that. But here that that is an exception to the rule. Where our warfare is is with people like Senator Marx who are selling these lies that capture our children, these lies that capture our society and destroy our society and destroy our children. That's really where our war is. And you've got Christians who are afraid to engage in that because

I don't want to hurt somebody's feelings. I don't want to They've got their truth, and I don't want to step on their toes. I don't want to have a confrontation with anybody. I don't want to get canceled by anybody either, And I'd like for them all come and be happy, and you know, we can all listen to rock music and eat ice cream and whatever we do with their churches, right, and and that's the that's the issue. Yes, we need to understand there's going to be some people are going

to get physically violent. We need to be prepared for that. But that is the key fight that we're in. That's the spiritual war that we're in. You got to take those thoughts captive. You've got to resist these things in society. And we're not doing it. And so as a result, we're losing our children because we're sending in places where people like that are writing the criculum, people like that are teaching your kids. Yeah, a lot

of different people going to present with wombs besides women. No, they're not. That's just lunatic idiocy and it needs to be opposed. So they said, as long as we've been conducting poles and religion, men have consistently demonstrated lower levels of religious engagement, but something has now changed. A new survey reveals that the pattern has now reversed. It's now women that are walking away

more than men. Older Americans who left their childhood religion included a greater share of men than women, and the baby boomers fifty seven percent of people who disaffiliated were men, while only forty three percent were women. But gen Z has seen this pattern flip. Fifty four percent of gen Z adults who left their form religion or women, and forty six percent are men. Sixty one percent of gen Z women identify as feminists, not feminine. Younger women are

more concerned about the unequal treatment of women in American society. They're more suspicious of institutions that uphold traditional social arrangements. Nearly two thirds sixty five percent of young women said they do not believe that churches treat men and women equally. Well, they're not equal. We've had this conversation for the longest time. They ought to. Did they not get the memo about what's going on with sports? When you put men and women's sports, they're not equal. Men

and women are different. News flash for these people who been gas lit by the feminist movement. Feminist movement was telling everybody that Billy Jean King beat Bobby Riggs. No, it was rigged. He'd beaten another tennis player before that, Jimmy Carner beat somebody else. But that debate has been and buried by this transgender stuff. Men and women are not equal, they are different. They're created for different purposes. They compliment each other. Compliment with an eye

should be with an e as well. But you know they have different purposes. Yes, they are treated equal before God. There is no male or female, or Jew or Greek, as the Bible says. In other words, and we all created in the image of God. We've all sinned before God. We all need a way to have that sin removed. We all stand unable to meet God's standards. That's what Jesus came to do. And from that standpoint we are equal. But in other ways we are not,

and we have different purposes. That message has not been given to women. They have been given a very different message from Marvel movies and from Hollywood and from people like Senator Marx and so part of this is what is causing the issues with abortion, because this is that's another part of the feminism. Well, men don't have to have kids. I shouldn't have to have kids either, I want a career instead or whatever, and I don'tant kids getting in

my way. I just saw a really heartbreaking story about about Jay Leno and his wife has Alzheimer's or something like that, and they were covering it because he had to go before the judge and get guardianship of his wife because she's mentally incompetent, and there are professional health people. They're talking about how good he treated his wife, and it was a very sad story. But of course the tabloid press shows up, it makes a big deal out of it.

But they didn't have anything at all bad to say about him, and they did have anything bad to say about either one of them. They'd been happily married for nearly fifty years. She had done an interview a few years ago before she started to have the mental illness, and she said, I told my mom when I was in elementary school that I didn't want to have any kids because that's how they trap you. I thought, that's just pure feminism. That's a lie. You know, the two of them are very

happy with each other. I know Jay Leno would be very have a lot of fun with his kids. He missed all of that, and she missed all that because they didn't trap her with kids. They trapped her with lives of feminism. And she said, yeah, Jay understands that, and you know he he honors my wishes on that and that type of thing. So they remained childless. But this is a story from the UK. A nurse who was traumatized by an abortion survivor, and she's pleading with legislators to not

allow the abortion pill to continue to be dispensed through the mail. She actually wrote an op ed for the Daily Mail. Her name is Nadine Dorez. She said she was there as a nurse helping with an abortion at twenty seven weeks. She said the baby was born alive. The expectant mother, who was only sixteen, had been injected in her uterine cavity with a hormone. Several excruciating hours later, the fetus, the little boy, was delivered.

He was dropped in a bedpan, and the ward's sister handed him to me, saying, take this into the sluice room and leave it there until I come. Stay with it. As I closed the sluice room door, I removed the paper covering over the bedpan. I've never forgotten what I saw. There lay a tiny baby boy, blinking, covered in mucus, blood, amniotic fluid, gasping for breath, his little arms and legs twitching. I was shocked to core, weeping. I rocked the bedpan in my arms.

I wanted to pick him up, but he was so small I didn't know how. After a minute or so, I couldn't bear it any longer, and I was about to run for help when I heard the ward sister's unmistakable footsteps approaching. As she took the bedpan from me, he stopped breathing. I checked my watch. This little boy had been born, lived, and died in the space of seven minutes, and mine was the only face that

he had seen, and my sobs the only sounds that he heard. Distressed, I turned to the ward sister and I said he was breathing, and through her dark rimmed glasses, she glared at me and said, no, he wasn't. You didn't see that. Interesting thing about this is she says she still supports safe and legal abortion, even though this event scarred her for

life. She said, I don't understand that. I don't know understand that there's so many different alternatives, she said, but the move to allow women to receive abortion pills in the mail, no matter how far along they are, is a step too far for her, and it's going to be a step too far from many mothers who are going to see their own child in

that same condition. Blinking and struggling to survive and not able to. They will suffer mental and spiritual trauma, as she did, but they may also have physical trauma because they will be using these abortion pills without the oversight of a professional who will look to see whether or not they should have that kind of abortion, or whether that kind of abortion is a threat to their health. The people who are providing this stuff don't care about the women any more

than they care about the child. Infants Surviving abortions are often derided as a myth. I've played you clips of people who survive, but it happens all too often, And as she pointed out, giving women access to abortion pills at home, without medical supervision and at any point throughout pregnancy could very well

mean that women will see their babies born alive after an attempted abortion. Women who have undergone chemical abortions themselves have said that seeing their preborn children struggling to survive is deeply traumatizing. Once said, I delivered this baby. It was like the baby was like this big laying fetal position, and I saw the little tiny limbs, a little arm, like everything. There was a tiny umbilical cord. Tiny It was like this big in motions to the size of

her thumb so small, and the baby's heart was still beating. That killed me. That was a lot, I screamed. So that's the reality behind these political fights, these political fights about who's going to win an election and the rest of this stuff that frankly, I don't care about a pox on all of these murderers who are running for president. Trump fumbles badly on abortion.

This is from al Mohler, the guy who was telling people a couple of years ago that he's ahead of Southwest Theological Seminary, some of the Southern Baptist seminary, that one of the biggest ones. And he was telling everybody. He went right down the talking points, the psychological gaming talking points that Yale had put out there. Oh, you got to do it to love your neighbor, you got to do it anything, how guilty you'll feel if somebody gets sick because of you. This is like a moon shot. Yeah,

it was like the moonshot. This is like the moon shot. And we should thank God for modern science because modern science is a miracle. Wow. Well, I tell you I've talked a lot about that. What al Muller said about that. But now, well, he's now on abortion, and he's upset because Trump said that this is a state's rights issue. Now, Trump didn't say that because he believes in the Constitution. Trump didn't say that because he understands the tenth Amendment. Trump said that because he doesn't want

to take a stand on anything. And as I said yesterday when I talked about it, he's just as likely to change his position yet again because he doesn't care. He simply wants to get elected. And so it's a waste of time really to talk about this, except that we need to understand both the principles of pragmatism the law of the Constitution. Those are real things. And so a lot of these people really don't care what the constitution says.

They just want to get what they want. And that's true of people on both the left and the right. They just want what they want and they don't care what the constitution says. They don't care what the law says. I want my guy in there to dictate, and I don't care what the constitution says. The Conservatives are doing that now. The Trump campaign had been hinting for weeks that the former president would release the statement on abortion. Over

the weekend, Trump teased the issue, promising a major announcement. Thus far in the campaign, Trump had made comments on abortion that were confusing and confounding, says al Moller. He claimed credit for making his three strategic nominations to the Supreme Court for the versal Roe v. Way, but he dismissed Florida's ban on abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, calling it terrible. He also called it too harsh, It called the santis sanctimonious, and all the rest

of this stuff. But the statement he said where he says, my view is now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it. From a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or by legislation, or perhaps by both, whatever they decide must be the law of the land. Al Muhller says that statement is factually wrong, since the pro abortion side does demand national legislation ensure virtually unrestricted abortion rights throughout the nation. And see, this is the

other aspect of this. Look many pro life people want to see want to reduce because we're never going to eliminate it, just like we're not going to eliminate murder. We're not going to eliminate poverty. We're not going to eliminate war. We try to minimize these things. And so you know, you could show people a video of kids being ripped apart and you would still have people do it. I mean, that's just the way things are. A lot of people that would stop them, but a lot of people it's not

because people still commit murder. But if we if we nationalize it, if we raise the limit Florida at six weeks, if we raise it to fifteen weeks, you're going to have more people killed in Florida. You're gonna have more people killed in Arizona and a lot of other places where it's going to be a relaxing of that. And if you make get a federal issue, it's just a matter of time before all abortion restrictions go away. Folks.

That is the reality of this, because you will have established again that it can be determined at the federal level, and there won't be any opportunity for people to protect life at the state level. That's why I oppose it.

You know, the Constitution is important. The Constitution is not more important than one baby's life, but it's still important, and from a pragmatic standpoint, Well, these people ignore is the fact that you're going to have a lot of pro life states where you're going to have more abortions if you federalize it, even if you federalize it with what some of these Republicans are talking about.

So that's what Molar and other people don't get. He says, it doesn't matter what It doesn't matter that some pro life advocates argue for their issue to remain in the states. Well, again from a pragmatic standpoint, from the standpoint of the Tenth Amendment, from the standpoint of the Supreme Court that ruled on Dabbs about the Tenth Amendment, I think all of those things matter, he says. He says, what's going to happen is there is going

to be a federal policy in the end. The only relevant question is what that policy will be. Yet, again, we see that everybody wants everything decided at the federal level. Why do we do that. Isn't the federal level the most corrupt level of our government. Isn't it the level of government that we have the least amount of control. Why would we want to put these babies in the hands of the federal government or anything for that matter.

And it is an indictment of the Conservatives that they have now abandoned the idea of limited government, of distributed government, of checks and balances. They have now fully embraced this fantasy of a benevolent dictatorship in Washington, and it is an absurd fantasy that they have embraced. It will never happen. It has never happened, and it will never will happened that we're going to have a benevolent dictatorship on this or any other issue. Al Mohler is just as wrong

about this as he was about the moonshot jab. He is absolutely clueless about politics, and he needs to either get an education. He's a head of a university, get an education, molar, or shut your trap. You don't know anything. You're talking about unbelievably ignorant about everything. So other people talking about the same thing, other people of pro life. Again, this is ultimately not about politics. This ultimately about a spiritual war. And you

got somebody who's head of a seminary. All he cares about is the politics, and he doesn't know anything about politics. Maybe he doesn't know anything about spiritual issues either. You might want to start questioning him on those issues. If he's so clueless about politics, is he that ignorant about spiritual issues? Maybe he is because he didn't understand the issues that were there with a vaccine at all. He didn't understand any of those issues. He wasn't pro life

when the vaccine came around. He didn't care that babies were being aborted for these medical genetic code injections. He didn't care about that at all. Where was his moral compass when all that stuff was Happeningump thump, that wasn't working. This thing stuck somewhere. It's stuck all the way over to the right. I can't figure out why my moral compass is not working here. So we have this law now in Arizona, the eighteen sixty four law. I

guess we can go to civil war over. Arizona Supreme Court ruled four to two yesterday the state's strict abortion law can take effect, effectively banning abortion in the state for any reason, except when allegedly necessary to save a mother's life.

This is Life Site News. Current Arizona law limits abortion to the first fifteen weeks of pregnancy, but the state also has on the books abortioned ban that dates back to eighteen sixty four, decades before Arizona even became a state in nineteen twelve, which had been blocked from enforcement because of the supposed idea that Roe v. Wade was the law of the land. So the ban

was codified, put into law in nineteen thirteen. But then you know, a Supreme Court decision supposedly erased state constitutions, state laws, the Tenth Amendment, all that was just swept aside with Roe v. Wade, And we were told for decades that it was the law of the land. To date, our legislature has never affirmatively created a right to or independently authorized elective abortion, said the justices. We defer as we are constitutionally obligated to do.

We defer to the legislature's judgment, which is accountable to and thus reflects the will of our citizens. Now in Arizona, they've got a far left democ governor, Katie Hobbs. They have an Attorney General, Chris Mays, who was also hard left. They have declared that they will not prosecute violators of the state's current abortion laws. Pro abortion activists in the Grand Canyon State Arizona

hope to render the outcome moot by putting it on the November ballot. Putting on the November ballot a proposed constitutional amendment that would establish a quote fundamental right to abortion. Well, this has already been portrayed as grossly out of touch. Oh, this is from eighteen sixty four. Everybody's complete, so it must be out of touch, right, because we know that in every way we're a better country than we were in eighteen sixty four. We're more intelligent,

we're more moral people. Are we are? We is America in twenty twenty four better than America was in eighteen sixty four. I'm not so sure about that quite frankly. But the Democrats are going to use this. They're hoping that this is going to be a big help to them in the election

because they're going to portray everybody as being backwards that supports it. And you already got Carry Lake there in Arizona struggling and struggling trying to do backstrokes to try to get away from this thing, just like Blake Masters did when Dobbs came out. Both of them celebrity candidates without any principles, pushed by Donald

Trump, and you know these other people. But they grabbed these celebrity candidates like Blake Masters and Kerry Lake. Blake Masters, Oh, he's proudly pro life and all the rest of the stuff, until the Supreme Court said, well, Rovi Wade's gone, it's up to the States, and it's like, oh no, and he quickly scrambled and changed all the stuff on his website. Carry Lake is doing the same thing. She's already running away from

this, rejecting this trash, talking this like Trump. Carry Lake always was a leftist Democrat at always was until she realized that she could take these conservative rubes and she could mold them like putty in her fingers. And that's exactly what she's been doing. We'll be right back. Elvis, the Beetle and the Sweet Sounds of Motown. Find them on the Oldies channel at APS radio

dot com. You're listening to the David Knight Show. Well, it wasn't that long ago that we had all the mainstream media laughing and mocking Tennessee legislators who said, and also it happened in New Hampshire. If you're going to inject something in the atmosphere, what we need you to let us know about that or we're going to hit you with some really big finds because we know that something's happening here. All those crazy conspiracy theorists with their Kim Trail ideas

and all the rest of this stuff. Well, researchers at the University of Washington have covertly carried out what is being talented as the US first ever. They never did it before, No, they have. They've been doing it for a very long time, supposedly the first ever outdoor tests to curb global warming by increasing cloud cover by launching a mist of salt crystals into the atmosphere from the deck of a decommissioned aircraft carrier in San Francisco Bay. They've been

doing this kind of stuff for a very long time. As a matter of fact, here's one of the videos. You'll see a lot of videos like this if you go to a geo engineering watch there. It is okay, well, it's a plane. He's going lingering behind a really thick contrail and then he just turns it off and all of a sudden it stops. I guess if this is due to weather conditions. All of a sudden, the weather conditions just stopped abruptly and so did his contrail that was there? Oh

contrail or kim trail, what is it? It's very persistent there, And of course we have in the past. There was a old documentary as well as an app they called it skyder Alert and they said, look, if you see a big crisscrossing pattern of clouds in the sky, take a picture of it and send it to us. And they were forwarding that to Congress, and they actually did a correlation and they said, well, we have a really big cross hatching of these things in a particular area that we're reported

by some of our people. We actually see the temperature goes up a little bit. So could they be using that to create their narrative that there is global warming or something? New York Times has special access to watch this experiment that they're now admitting as it was taking place, indicating that the secrecy was intentional. The idea of interfering with nature is so contentious that organizers of the test kept the details tightly held, concerned that critics would try to stop them.

Who are you to be able to inject stuff into the atmosphere an experiment on us? Why? Why should you be allowed to experiment on the public. Well, that's what we saw happen in twenty twenty, was it. They used us all as labrats, not just in America but everywhere. And this has been happening for quite some time. And so the White House distanced itself from this and said the US government is not involved in the solar radiation

modification experiment taking place in all California or anywhere else. By the time said well, if it works, the next stage would be to aim at the heavens and try to change the composition of clouds above the earth. Well, they have been doing this for a very long time. As a matter of fact, we've had things like Operation Popeye, a cloud seating during the Vietnam War to increase the storms that were there. They thought there was going to

be in their advantage. They actually gave a medal to the guy who was running that after the war for doing weather modification. They had a Jeo Engineering treaty that was signed after the Vietnam War. Why would they do that if there wasn't the ability to change the climate and change the weather. Well, they are changing everything else as well. As a matter of fact, as

I said at the beginning of the program, in the UK. You've got the elite universities, the Imperial College of London, the very college that gave that flaw, ridiculously flawed, an absurd study that was proffered by Fauci and Berks to Trump. Two very smart people gave this to me, he said, And as I said before, it doesn't have a curve in it. They weren't trying to flatten the curve in the model. It didn't have a curve. Every person that got exposed was going to expose two and a half

other people and that was going to happen forever. And it also was complete garbage. It was like a random code generator of the University of Edinburgh said, we run the same input into your model, we get different answers every

time. What's going on with your code? It was like fifteen thousand lines of Fortran and other lot of But this is coming from the Imperial College of London, Well, the imp College of London, Oxford, Cambridge, a lot of name universities in the UK have put together a new report and in it they are saying that by twenty twenty nine, we're talking about five years and five years they want all airports in the UK closed. I'm not exaggerating.

This is what they're saying. This is their conspiracy, a conspiracy of academics, a conspiracy of globalist, conspiracy of various politicians and countries in every country of the world. It's just that they got this report from the UK. They want all airports closed by twenty twenty nine. They want beef and lamb band and many other things. And we've seen it. There's so many different organizations that have exactly the same plan. You have C forty. That's

a lot of urban cities that have joined it. Originally it was like forty cities and it was started by London and New York. It is Bloomberg and it was Sadik Khan. But now a lot of other cities have joined. It's more than forty. It's up to at least one hundred. Last time I looked, the UK government reveals at all airports will be ordered to close,

eating beef and lamb will be made illegal. Construction of new buildings will not be permitted because in order to meet the legal commitment of zero emissions by twenty fifty. I talked about these mcguffins, and of course it was zero COVID that was so destructive to China. Oh we're not going to have even a single case with a positive PCR test where we magnify it by one point one trillion, And whatever they're looking for, they wouldn't give it to other

people. Do you have an isolation of this virus that you're looking for? Well, I can't give that to you. No, no, I can't give that too. But we know what we're looking for. Oh you do. I don't even know what they were looking for, but whatever they were looking for, they magnified it by one point one trillion times. Same game that Fauci had run to say that AIDS was caused by a virus HIV. But this is the same people who gave us the pandemic mcguffin. The lockdown.

Other report states that all airports must close between twenty twenty and twenty twenty nine, including Heathrow, Glasgow and Belfast airports. They can only stay open on the condition that transfers to and from the airport are done via rail. You better believe that they're going to have airports open for these politicians to go anywhere they want. Oh well, I've got to go for a climate change

conference. All remaining airports must close between twenty thirty and twenty forty nine because to meet the legal commitment of zero emissions by twenty fifty, every citizen of the UK must stop using airplanes for a significant period of time. Now see forty. Agreement with these cities has said that you'll be allowed to have every three years one flight of about nine hundred miles max. That's it, every three years, and you get three articles of clothing, not even talking about

that in this article, three articles of clothing a year. In addition to the report, they state that to obey the law of the Climate Change Act, the public will be required to stop doing anything that causes emissions, regardless of its energy source. This will require the public to never be for lamb ever again. To do this, a national consumption of beef and lamb will drop by fifty percent between twenty twenty and twenty twenty nine, by fifty percent

in five years. Then between twenty thirty and twenty forty nine, beef and lamb will be phased out. And that's exactly what C forty had. They said, We've got two different ways here. Here's the less aggressive thing. We're we reduce it by this amount by this amount, and then this is our ideal goal. Where's zero meat, zero meat. And it's all because we've got this law. We're going to let these people, these corrupt politicians,

enslave us with a document. Look, folks, if the Magna Carta and the Constitution aren't worth the paper that they're written on, neither is their Climate Change Act. Rip it up, burn it, do it in their face. I'm sick of this stuff. The report also confirms the construction of new buildings must cease by twenty fifty. The underlying point is that any asset

which uses carbon will have essentially zero value in twenty fifty. This, in turn, may encourage greater use in the run up to twenty fifty, for example, putting up new buildings at a much faster rate for the next thirty years. Oh, we can build them all at warp speed, right, watch them all fall down and then we just have to stop. Well, if this is a crisis, and again you notice when you this is again

like the pandemic thing. Well, you know, we're going to have to do this and this and this, but we're going to do it in stages, and so we're going to here's the next stage we're going to do. We're doing this today, and of course France and the United States and Canada are also doing it at the same time, and then in two months all

of us are going to do this next thing. It's like, hey, if this is an emergency, if we're all going to die because of a climate emergency, we're all going to die because of some pandemic, don't you think you ought to do it now instead of waiting another couple of months. If you're going to wait for months or for years to do this kind of stuff, you don't have an emergency. You have an agenda of gradual change.

Can't we see through this? Then the construction must halt. So University's of Cambridge, Oxford, Nottingham Bath, Imperial College of London, which is where Neil Ferguson was that you report is titled absolute Zero. It's absolute stupidity, It's absolute tyranny. Is a prescription for absolute authoritarianism. Research collaboration which the authors reveal what the UK must do to meet it's legal requirements to reach net zero missions by twenty fifteen. It makes for herowing reading. This is

one of the reasons why I want to have James Orguski on. Nobody has followed this in more detail for longer than has James Ruguski. And so we want to find out what's going on with this other scam because they're going to

play that scam. Well, you're legally obliged to do this and that, you're legally obliged under the Climate treaty to do this and that or under our climate law that we just passed, and it's like no, no, So the timeline events may speed up significantly because the government enshrined a new target law in April twenty twenty one the slash emissions by seventy eight percent by the year

twenty thirty five. That's only nine years away, folks. The report says there are two key implications for how we live our lives, talking about jobs and things like that. First, buildings will become much more expensive because the restrictions on buildings which generate substantial scarcities. Second, transport will become much more expensive because a limits on air travel will generate excess demand for other forms of transport. Now I see they're going to be more expensive. Who are we

paying this to? This is a massive wealth transfer to a few people. It's such an amazingly obvious scam, isn't it. Oh, well, you know everything's going to be a lot more expensive. Well, who are we paying this extra money to. Oh, well, we've got to pay it to these mandarins out there who are telling us that we're all going to die from a one and a half degree temperature, and when they don't even have

any proof that it's going to go up. It goes on to say those who are starting secondary school now in twenty nineteen will be forty three and twenty fifty. Thinking about what education is appropriate for a very different set of industries is a key question. Should we still be training airplane pilots or should we be training aeronautical engineers. No, we should be training people that two plus two equals five. We should be training them that there is no correct answer.

That math is racist because we want dumbed down idiots who aren't going to be a challenge to us. They don't want to have pilots or engineers. They want to have slaves, ignorant slaves. And that's why people like Bill Gates are bringing these types of a curricula together, the changes in behavior to achieve absolute zero again, that's what they want. Absolute zero are clearly substantial in principle, these changes could be induced through These are the people plotting all

this. These are the conspirators talking. These changes could be induced through changing prices, thus providing clear incentives for behavior to change. The alternative is that the government prohibits certain types of behavior and regulates production processes. So we either tax this and send the money to me, or you just ban it outright. We could argue that they're already were all on their way to ensuring the

closure of many airports. And you know, when you look at all the stuff that's happening with United Airlines and the DEI stuff with pilots and the planes that are falling apart in mid air, you think that they're trying to nudge

us in that direction. I do. Is it just a coincidence that four months after the release of the report, the UK government brought in the Coronavirus Act and implemented a national lockdown, which decimated the travel industry, also decimated small mom and pops and small farms and all the rest of this stuff. A quick read through the report certainly suggests the real reason for lockdown may have been so the government can meet its legal commitment to reduce emissions. That's the

mcguffin. The purpose is to steal your money to enslave you. They manage all the above through psychological manipulation and coercion. That's non opinion. Its fact, documented and official government documents from the UK. And they've got a lot of links. By the way, this is from Expose, a news out of the UK. They are going to use the exact same tactics to ensure that you allow all airports to close, that you never eat beef or lamb.

Again, this is what the report recommends and whether UK government implements to achieve their legally required targets, they say, and then they go on to say in their report there is a misalignment between the scale of actions recommended by government. Notice that they say recommended. Now what they said about Trump. Trump didn't lock us down. He just recommended things, and it was those bad Democrat governors who locked us down. He just recommended things. FACTI says

that too. I just made recommendations. Don't get mad at me those other people who did it. They're recommendations. So scale of actions recommended by government for energy conservation, for example, those that are most commonly performed by individuals, such as recycling. They said, so there's a misalignment between the scale.

So the government wants us to conserve energy, but the individuals are not their recycling and of course that's always been a c from the very beginning, and they're not even pretending to do that anymore, certainly not with wind turbine blades. That's a big use of plastics, isn't it. How many of these little plastic bottles do you have to collect in a container to equal one

blade from one of these turbines. Actions which can have a big effect, such as better installation in houses not flying, are being ignored in favor of small, high profile actions such as not using plastic straw. As they said, this is enabling individuals to feel satisfied that they're doing their bit without actually making the lifestyle changes required to meet the Zero Mission's target. If large scale social change is to be successful, we need a new approach, says the

government. While the thought of society taking radical, meaningful steps to meet zero Mission targets could be criticized for being idealistic, we can learn from historical cultural changes, not long ago, smoking cigarettes was encouraged, it was considered to be acceptable in public spaces. How do we do that? We did it

with propaganda campaigns, and I've argued that that's far more effective. The psychological approach has been far more effective with tobacco use reduction than has government prohibition. You know, they didn't they The closest that they came to anything was this these ludicrous just say no campaigns and things like that. But it was.

They were very effective in terms of stopping tobacco by using psychological attacks. Evidence from behavioral science and the long experience in public health of changing behaviors around smoking and alcohol shows that information alone is not enough to change behavior. To make the types of changes describing the report, we'll have to think more broadly, and we will have to help the public make decisions to determine carbon emissions.

In other words, to get this done quickly, we're going to need to have a little bit of not so much carrots, but more sticks, starting with the difficult decisions. An educational setting should provide a timeline for actions to be taken by humanity in order to ensure that we hit our carbon reduction targets by twenty to fifty. They're going to do it propaganda through the schools.

They're going to get everybody on board with this goal that we've got. And these people got very specific actions that they want to have happen by very specific dates. They are good at accomplishing things. You know, if you've got some things that you'd like to see happen, but you don't have a specific date that's going to happen by, you don't have a goal, you have a wish list, Well, these people are going to make this into a

real goal. So they've got a very specific timeframe and they're going to get you on their agenda and embracing this date. You don't think they can do that with crowds. Just take a look at what's going on with all the mania about different things where there's a solar eclipse or whatever. They can pump

up enthusiasm about anything like this. Everybody's all hyped about it. Across a secondary school system, this roadmap is essential and eliciting the questions which will inevitably come from school children like why do I have to go back and live like the dark ages? Oh well, Johnny, we're all going to die if you don't This will enable an exploration of real changes in the mindsets of those who will need to embrace the change more than ever before later in their lives.

Now others, You're going to start with these kids, because they are going to be the ones who are going to live with nothing, and they're going to be asking why can I live? Why can't I have the things like the people had in the movies that I see. Oh, well, we would have all died long ago if we hadn't taken away the automobile. Huge questions will emerge, such as will internal combustion engines disappear? Will airplanes

disappear? Will meet and dairy agriculture disappear? We need to stop building things. These people are insane, folks. This is what they're saying. No meat, no dairy, stop building things. You can't go anywhere, you can't do anything. This is what they want. And they say this change

will must be embraced through education. And when we go back and we look at the communist revolutions, we look at the Hitler youth of them, propagandizing of malpeople, Well, they are a long way down this road already in America, and we can't even see the similarity. Most people are calling it, Oh, this is something new. I guess what we call it. I guess we'll call it woke. These people are aware. No, they're

not at all aware, and the population is not either. When you consider a population of sixty eight million people in the UK alone, this is a commentary. This is not their report. It's a commentary from expos. When you consider sixty eight million people in the UK nearly eight billion people world wide, all of a sudden, it sounds like, in order to meet a target that is enshrined in these new laws, it may be easier just to

reduce the population. Because it was always about population reduction. It was always about killing everybody else and stealing what we have. The Absolute Zero Report, authored by Oxford University and Imperial College London. Oxford University was the inventor of the Astrazenica COVID vaccine. Imperial College of London was the one that was used

to justify draconian lockdowns to Trump and then to everybody else. Once you realize that the past two years have been part of a much more sinister agenda that has only just begun, and that's where we're going to be talking to James Orguski about the other side of this, and that is the Pandemic Treaty or more specifically the HR, the International Health Rules, Because as I pointed out the other day, they've got these two documents and once you start to say,

well you're going to do this, oh no, that's not in that document, because it's in the other document, and they pretend that it's not there in either. Biden as we look at the that was the UK Biden same thing. He's spelling out how to decarbonize American buildings. He's got a plan for it, and folks, he's not going to stop getting rid of air conditioning. He's not going to stop at getting rid of gas ranges and things. He's going to get rid of buildings as well. No new building,

sweeping changes to appliances, power grid, smart control systems. That is what the Biden administration is talking about as part of a whole government, whole of government approach. And where else did we see that a whole of government approach with CBDC as well. The DOE, the Department of Energy, is outlining for the first time ever, a comprehensive federal plan to reduce energy in

our homes, schools, workplaces, lowering utility bills. No, it's not going to lower utility bills, says Jennifer grand Home, Secretary of the Department of Energy. Where did she get her engineering degree? Oh, that's right, she doesn't have an engineering degree. She doesn't know anything about science. She's got a BS degree and political science, which is not science. Yeah, she's full of Bolshevik. That's what she's got her. She's got a

Bolshevik degree and political science. The DOES report also describes grid responsive smart thermostats, water heaters, and other appliances as key measures. That's what RFK Junior was talking about. You see, they've got us boxed in with these presidential candidates. No matter which way you turn, these people are all on board. They're all on the same team. They got different faces, they talk, they say some things that are different. You know, they have a

different person so that you can think that there's really something. But they're all on the same page. They're all marching to the same destination. I also talk about bi directional EV charging infrastructure. In other words, they are not going to let you drive your EV. Your EV is going to be a big, expensive battery for them. To use for their grid virtual power plants. While they mean by that are these massive battery energy storage systems. I

think what would better term for what would be a massive arson device? It even has a nice acronym mad, because it's insane. You're going to take I just showed you yesterday the e bike and how these things are spontaneously catching fire in all the cities and things like that, killing scores of people, setting you know, hundreds of fires. That's a little e bike. Let's get a battery collection here that's big enough to back up the grid for hours.

What is that? That is a massive arson device? It's crazy, it's mad. The Biden administration is setting its sits on these major changes while simultaneously moving to reshape the power grid by twenty forty using regulations crafted by the EPA. You've got the EPA, You've got the Department of Energy. These things have to be shut down or they're going to kill us. It's just that simple. The EPA dies or we die. The Department of Energy dies

or we die. These are things that were created in my lifetime. They're not that old. They're only about fifty years old. They've already done enough damage. It is regulation without representation, it is taxation without representation. The plan for building electrification will save Americans one hundred million dollars in energy costs, says the DOE. That's absolute nonsense. It's a total lie. It's going to cost us everything, and so it's so bad. As a matter of

fact, there's another article out of the UK out of exposa. So oil is running out. So think about what you're going to do as a personal survival plan. And we're running out of time. So I won't go into any of the details here, but it's basically they're starting to look at prepping, prepping without having What are you going to do when there's no power grade, when you can't get the food that you want to eat, that you need to eat to be healthy, because they're going to shut all this stuff

down. As I said earlier, these net zero policies have already made electricity five times more expensive in the UK than in China. Why because of the Paris Climate Accord. Supposedly this is global warming, but it doesn't matter when the CO two is put up by China or by India and Canada. Trudeau is acting like an imperial colonial government governor in terms of he won't even meet

with the premiers from these various provinces about his oppressive carbon tax. Again, this is how we're going to affect We're going to propagandize the kids in school and we're going to steal money from the adults with carbon taxes. Trudeau's refusal to meet with five Canadian premiers who have demanded a meeting with him to discuss the ever escalating carbon tax that shot up by twenty three percent April Fools on

April I shows that he lacks leadership, said one of them. They have respectively respectfully asked him for a meeting, but he gave us a snarky answer. I've already met with you before. That's not leadership, they said. And so you've got a lot of different ones. Here's Doug Ford. He says, this carbon tax has got to go, or in a year and a half, the Prime Minister is going to be going. It's as simple as that he will be going. I guarantee you. He said. Taxing

people doesn't reduce emissions, and that's what they're doing. They're hurting the economy, they're hurting people. It's unacceptable. That's the plan and they have been doubling this stuff. Know that he's a Klaus Schwab's boy. We got our people in all these different administrations very clear what they're doing. One last thing and then we're going to go to our guest, James Raguski. Two thousand

elderly Swiss women have now won a landmark climate case. They've been this is a lawsuit's been going on for eight years and all these women were over the age of sixty four when they began this thing, and they said, you know, climate change is hurting us the most. You know the world is going to end and women and elderly people are affected the most. That was actually a national a national lampoon headline that they made fun of that in the

nineteen seventies. But look, it is a human rights issue. They don't want us to be able to eat, They don't want us to be able to build anything, travel anything, have clothing, have buildings, none of this stuff. They want to take away all of our freedoms. They want to lock us down, and they're using lawsuits, just like we see in Hawaii, using lawsuits to try to shut all this stuff down. It's not a theory. These people are not in any threat, but what they are

saying must happen is a threat to people. We have seen fifteen years ago when I was talking about the climate stuff, we had retirees in Germany who were on a pension and didn't have enough money to pay for the increased electric bills due to renewable so called renewable expensive energy. They were turning off their heating and they were dying. We had a hurricane they went through Florida took out the electricity. We had a lot of elderly people in nursing homes who

died from the heat. They will die with extreme weather, but of course if they get their way, there won't be any heating or air conditioning for people. It's just amazing to me that people can't think this through, that they can't see the massive transfer. But it all fits together, and we have these so called treaties that they say that we are obliged to obey. And so we're going to take a look at the other side of this. It's now coming. After we come back from break, we'll be talking to

James Ruguski. Stay with us, we'll be right back. If you like the eagles on the cars and Huey Lewis and the news. They say the Hot and You'll Love the Classic Hits channel at APS Radio, download our app or listen now at apsradio dot com. The common Man they created common Core. They dumbed down our children. They created common past to track and control us. Their Commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing, and the

communist future they see. The common man is simple, unsophisticated, ordinary, But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God. That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know everything about us, while they hide everything from us. It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide. Please share the

information and links you'll find at the Davidknightshow dot com. Thank you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. The Davidknightshow dot com. All right, welcome back and joining us now is James Ruguski. You can find him on substack at James Roguski. That's r O g U s k I. James Roguski dot

substack dot com, and I wanted to get him on. As I said earlier in the program, nobody has Who was the first person to really to alert everybody to what was going on with the WHO, the so called Pandemic Treaty, and then the second document that they're using to kind of muddy the water, which appears to be the more dangerous document, the International Health Regulations.

So I wanted to get an update from James about what is going on with this as well as people pushing back with it, because they keep doing the same things. It's very similar what they do with these different tactics. And so here we got another another so called document, global document that they're going to claim gives them some kind of illegal mandate to control US. So joining us now is James Guski. Thank you for joining us. James, good to have you back on. Oh, David, thanks for having me.

You know, I think you were the very first person to give you an opportunity to have a you know, a platform to share this with probably about two years ago now. Yeah, and you know, I actually want to start off by talking about the image behind you with all the trees, because I think I think I can give an analogy to what is really going on. So let me see if I can paint a mental picture, well, be able to see the forest for the trees, well, you know

exactly, that's the other that's the other one. If you could imagine walking down the little lane there in like sort of a wooded area with your dog, and your dog breaks off fleash and sees the squirrel and goes and chases the squirrel up one of those trees. You noticed that the squirrel went up to the top and was going across the tree tops and was way on the other side of the woods, and your dog is still barking up the tree that he's all okay, this is what we're dealing with right now. Okay.

A slightly different analogy. If you can imagine being in a contract to negotiations and you're you're looking for a job, and you put your demands down. You know, somebody wants to hire you, and you want a certain wage, and you want vacation, and you want healthcare, you want benefits, and and you know, you throw in there a couple of things like, well, I want to use the company Maserati and the company yacht, and you know, I want to have you know, twenty personal assistants and

all these many other things. Negotiations often start out with some crazy demands that you know, if nobody's paying attention and you sign off on it and it's given, Wow, that was great. I never were expected to get those crazy, crazy things. But then you know, at the end, when it's push comes to shove and you've got to make it, you know, a decision and sign the contract, you goah, okay, I'll do without the maserati, but I want all these other basic things. This is what's

going on. I don't know if people watched the TV show from a decade or so ago. I didn't really watch it, but I know about it. It's called pumped, right, everybody's getting pumped. Oh look over here, Look over here, there's a squirreld. Look at these look at these horrible, horrible things. But what's really going on in the background nobody's paying attention to. So you know, there's a lot of decoys being pushed around, a lot of things that a lot of things that were in the documents

when we first talked two years ago. There are a lot of things that were in the documents a year ago, four months or four weeks ago, I published a leaked version of the negotiating text of the amendments. I thought

I found the holy grail. I was actually looking for a new version of the other document, the quote unquote Treaty, and one of the local Geneva Civil Society organization's nonprofit whatever, you know, one of the insiders who has a seat at the table, made the mistake of publishing something that they weren't really supposed to publish. I was, you know, blessed by the heavens

to stumble upon it. I republished it, and they quickly took theirs down because somebody must have said, hey, you let it out, what are you doing? And David I might as well have dropped it into a black hole. People still want to look at the old documents. They're still barking up the wrong tree, chasing the old squirrel who's long gone. And last week I published, I should say I republished because of all places, Politico was the first one to leak it a leaked version of the other document,

the amendment. And we can talk about both of these things. I'd like to get into just a little bit of a detail about the secrecy behind them. When I published the secret version, or I should say again republished the secret version of the new proposed treaty, it was almost a year to the day that I published an article about someone that most people probably don't even know, Ambassador Pamela Hamamoto. She went to the same school in Hawaii as Obama,

so make of that what you wish. But she was nominated over a year ago in October twenty twenty two. I think it was to be the lead negotiator for this pandemic treaty, and over a year ago. The Chinese delegate stood up in their April meeting in twenty twenty three and said, we want, meaning China, we want these negotiations to be secret in the sense that we don't want to publish the terms that each nation wants to put into

the agreement. And who stood up to second the motion other than Ambassador Pamela Pamela Hamamoto from the United States saying, yeah, yeah, let's keep this all under wraps and keep it secret. Well, the documents that leaked out that I republished have the edits of this nation said that they want to change this, and that nation said that they want to change the other thing.

So you know, the secret is out, and there's a very good reason why they don't want anyone to know what each nation is saying, because despite what everyone is saying, you know in the alternative media about the old squirrel that ran up the tree and is long gone with the documents from well over a year ago, the nations are having a really difficult time. So the

last meeting that was supposed to be for the amendments was in December. When they set up their original schedule, they were going to be done the first week of December. They were going to hand over their package of amendments to the International Health Regulations Review Committee, and it was supposed to be submitted before January twenty seventh of this year, twenty twenty four. Well, in October I reported that their co chair said, we're not going to make our deadline.

They know that they were not able to reach agreement. You know, get invite one hundred and ninety four delegates from nations around the world over to your house for a pizza party and see how long it takes to figure out what they wanted on their pizza. Now, let me ask you that you saw some of the edits and it said, some of you know, this is what one nation wants, this is what another one wants. What are

the points of disagreement that they can't come to consensus on. We'll talk about the two separate documents, because there's two separate things going on in there, and in the amendments, they were supposed to be done by December, supposed to be public four months in advance of the May meeting, and so what ended up popping up in there that is not in the original documents is they want to strengthen the ability of nations to quarantine foreign travelers who are traveling internationally.

Now, we could go way down a rabbit hole, but just imagine the irony and the hypocrisy of having an open southern border and you're negotiating, you're negotiating to This is often confused, So I'm going to take my time and try to be very precise. This is not the who saying that the

nations have to do this, that or the other. This is a gentleman's agreement amongst one hundred and ninety six nations in the IHR, where they are essentially saying, well, we know that we can't force our people to do jabs or you know drugs or you know quarantine or all those sort of things. But we have all of the right in the world to do it to all of the members of the other one hundred and ninety five nations. We

can use foreigners who want to come into the country. If you're familiar with the story with Novak Joy convictor tennis player, yeah, you know his name is Novak, but he's living up to it because he wouldn't get the vaccine and so he wasn't he wasn't allowed in to play. I think it was the US Open and other countries. I think Australia wouldn't let him in, not just because he wasn't jabbed, because he wasn't a citizen. His rights are not protected by our Bill of Rights. And so there's a lot of

talk going around right now. People are trying to get states to pass resolutions or laws saying, oh, the who doesn't have jurisdiction in Louisiana, right, there's a Senate bill one thy three. Well, no shit, Sherlock, right, of course, the who doesn't have jurisdiction in any state in

the Union. That isn't the issue. There's no state law that is going to protect you when if you're from Louisiana, you go on a Caribbean cruise and you want to disembark in the Bahamas, and the Bahamas say, well, you know, we're going to institute our quarantine on your ship because you know, somebody didn't pass a rapid antigen test and there might be some scary disease on board. Mm hmm. Everyone is barking up the tree on the

left and they're sneaking in stuff that nobody's paying any attention to. And there's a certain symmetry to that to what happened with us between the federal government and the states in twenty twenty. And you go back and you look at after the anthrax attack, a week after nine to eleven, which is two months

after their Dark Winter simulation. But then they put out two months later after the anthrax attack, they put out some model state health legislation and they said, here's what if we declare there's a pandemic, here's what we would like for you to put into law so that you can implement this at the state level. And so after all this stuff runs, you know, we hear from people trying to make excuses for Trump or trying to make excuses for Fauci,

or Fauci making excuses for himself. I didn't order anybody to do anything. I don't have that power. I made recommendations. And of course we've got FIAT current to back up our Fiat orders and flood them with cash, declare an emergency, flood them with cash, and let the rest of the stuff happen. It's going to be, as you point out, it's going to be a very subtle way that they get exactly what they want, whether

they do it with the international stuff. One thing that concerns me is you're pointing out the hypocrisy of the absurdity of having a wide open southern border, and it's got a lot of different issues with that. But one of the problems is a lot of people who oppose that are coming after it from the disease standpoint and saying, oh, yep, we've got all these people coming

in with measles and all the rest of the stuff. We've got to lock that down and we have to have stricter controls, and that kind of thing can backfire just like you know, uh, well, we've got all these people coming in that are illegal aliens. So all of you need to get an ID, all of you need to get some kind of a vaccine ID or permit or something like that, because we've got people coming in from the

border, so they can use things like that to push their agenda. And we've got to be careful that we don't become suck for that, and that we take a look at what the longer term agenda is. I think, what do you think I'm going to have to charge you rent for, you know, taking up residence inside my head? Take the words outside, take the words right out of my mouth. That's exactly the point. What happened with the decoy with the original documents were language that was convoluted because it came

primarily from Bangladesh in India, India. I can still remember I was sitting right where I'm sitting right now when I read the document for the first time, and India had proposed a change to Article three. They proposed crossing out language that was in you know, is currently in the International Health Regulations. They would cross out the words that said the regulations have to be implemented with full respect for the dignity, human rights, and fundamental freedoms of people,

they would cross that out. Well, I remember my jaw hanging open, going oh, well, that's crazy, and I pushed my jaw back up and it came right back down, and I'm like, okay, this is insane. There's no way in Oh wait a minute, that's a decoy. That's them saying, oh, look over here, and so you got to dig in deeper. It's like, well, what are we not looking at? And so I've spoken to people in India and at some point they said, oh, that was just a misunderstanding. We've retracted that. Okay.

Now, Bangladesh and the African nations. The reason for these negotiations they called for them on December one, twenty twenty one. It's not the who said we want to take over the world, it's the relatively poor nations. We're dealing with something that, you know, you have to erase the blackboard of your mind and forget everything you've talked about and everything you know, because that's going to get in the way. You've got to let yourself be stupid for

a moment. And here's what is actually going on in the end of twenty twenty one. After twenty twenty and COVID and then a year of everybody getting jabbed like that was going to save the world, the relatively poorer nations. Think about you know, South Africa and Botswana they identified Omicron and they handed over the genetic sequences, just like you know, China the WHIV one was handed over. You know, think about that genetic sequence and how many hundreds

of billions of dollars that data file was worth. It's the new gold rush. They turned that into you know, Pfizer, Maderna, Astrozanica, everybody else billions of dollars. So when South Africa and Botswana handed over Omicrons, you know sequence, believe about you know, vaccines or rather viruses and terrain theory, whatever you want, it is undeniable that there was a digital file

that was said to be this new variant. Well, they were not happy because they were greeted with travel restrictions, hurt their economy, and then they washed Spfizer and Maderna turned that into a couple of more billion dollars by putting it into the booster. So what they're actually negotiating It says in the Treaty Principles that sovereignty includes sovereign control over biological resources in the amendments, they said,

you're not getting any more sequences unless we share in the benefits. They want to create what they call a pathogen Access benefit sharing system. Will give you our biological weapons data. You could go turn it into drugs and jams, but you're going to have to share the profits with us. So this is, you know, the treaty is a corrupt business. Still. I've dubbed it the New OPEK. I'm sure you're familiar. You know, the

oil producing and exporting countries. The new OPEK is the Organization of Pandemic Emergency Corporations. What they what they want with the treaty is thirty billion dollars a year coming from nations in the global North. Because they're the ones with the money, or they're the ones who know how to print money or digitally create money. They want to put that into a fund that would be governed by either the WHO or most likely the Conference of the Parties, which should be

reminiscent of, you know, the Framework Convention for Climate change. You sign on to a framework empty convention, and then you have a bunch of elected bureaucrats have a party once a year, get together and decide the fate of the world. And since you signed on to the Blank Agreement, whatever they decide, you know, somehow finds its way into your local laws. They want to distribute up to thirty billion dollars a year to go looking for pathogens.

You know, they refer to them as pathogens with pandemic potential. Whenever I hear that, I hear pathogens with pandemic profiteering potential. So then they set up they want to set up a WHO coordinated laboratory network so that you know, you have a Wuhan Institute of Virology on every street corner. Bring in your pathogens that you find in your septic system or your you know,

sewage treatment wastewater. The CDC is monitoring wastewater around the country. Just go look it up, you know, wastewater surveillance CDC all around the world. They're doing that there. They're taking blackwater out of the bathrooms and airplanes when national flights come in looking for pathogens they might want they might want to check your your chicken coop, or your pigstye, or your dog or cats stool sample when you go to the veterinarian's office, because you typically find pathogens in

excrement. They might need to go to the local bat cave and get some guano to bring into the lab so that they can find a sequence that could be turned into money, make some products. And then in the amendments. Currently people maybe are aware that the Director General can declare what's called a public Health Emergency of International Concern e H, e I C or faith. You can't take your stuff up. He can declare faith. That's that's in the

International Health Regulations from two thousand and five. Well, what they're adding with his latest leaked version of the amendments is an early action alert, which has fewer requirements than the zero requirements to declare a fake just if he wants to, so I call that a pre fake, and then he can also declare

a post fake, which is called a pandemic emergency. So if you can go looking for pathogens, tweak them a little bit in the lab, turn them into drugs and jabs, and then find some compliant local officials who will attempt to coerce and overstep their authority and do some kind of you know, fear mongering and say, oh, we found this pathogen. Oh, one bird died in the flock of a million, and we cranked up the PCR

test to one hundred. And you know, they had bird flu. We got to kill all your birds, or we got to jab all your people, or we got to you know, put you in quarantine or whatever it might be. If you keep falling for the Hypnosis Psychological Operation for the World Hypnosis Organization, the WHO, they're going to keep doing it because it's really really profitable, and the treaty is essentially a trade deal. It is constitutional. Now this hurts people's heads. I know. Article one, Section three,

I'm sorry. Article one, Section eight, Clause three, it's the commerce clause. The federal government was given the enumerated authority by the original States

to regulate international commerce with foreign nations. So if we want to give billions of dollars to the WHO to redistribute to oligarchs in the Third World, who are going to be building laboratories and testing equipment and mRNA manufacturing facilities so that they can get in on the deal to scare people and make products to jab the black and brown people that the big farmer missed the first time around.

Is that how you would prevent the next pandemic? Or is that how you would set up, you know, a racketeering organization, you know, a crime syndicate to profiteer from the next scary thing. Well, do you recall I'm sure you probably do event too OH one. Yeah, Okay, the

same group that did event to oh one in October of twenty nineteen. In October of twenty twenty two, same group put on catastrophic contagion and what they were simulating in their tabletop exercise was an outbreak of an enterovirus that hits children in, of all places, Eastern Venezuela. I don't know if you've reported on it, but you might want to pay attention to east east eastern Venezuela, which is the country of Guyana. That Venezuela has been rumbling that they

claim to have annexed two thirds of Guyana. I wonder what they will be. Yeah, could it be that in the Caribbean off the coast, there's you know, all kinds of oil. Well, interestingly enough, the land or I should say, the simulated outbreak scheduled for twenty twenty five is in eastern Venezuela. Catastrophic contagion. So I noticed, And this is back in October of twenty twenty two that they neglected to reserve the domain name catastrophiccontagion dot

com. So I'm the proud owner of catastrophiccantagent dot com. So if anybody wants to know what they're planning for twenty twenty five, go check it out.

And I think it's amazing, you know that they're still doing these germ games because they got away with it, you know, the first one two months before nine eleven, and they've done one every year and they're still doing it after this COVID routine still during their annual germ games, and as usual suspects is usually Hopkins and you know people from the CIA, people from DARPA, Barda, all these different people there, they're all there still doing the

same germ game, and so you know, they know where and when and what is going to happen. And so the idea is they want to have the who be in charge of the global distribution and logistics network TEDROS gave a talk at the World Government Summit and proudly said that they have a twenty thousand

square meter distribution hub in Dubai that's about four football fields. So if you're the godfather of pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, and you had you know, four football fields in each of your six regions that you had to fill up with pandemic related products. Who do you think is going to get those contracts? Day? Oh right? You think? Do you think they're going out to bid or do you think your cronies who are sitting around the table

trying to get a piece of the pie. Why do you think all of the small nations want this agreement to go through? It's because they want a piece of a multi billion dollar pie. Now I want to ask you a rhetorical question. It's a trick question, and I don't want to mess with your head. I'll give you the right answer. In my opinion, the

right answer is none of the above. Would you rather have the WHO set up a search and exploration mission with billions of dollars looking for pathogens with pandemic potential to bring into the WHO coordinated laboratory network so they can run it through the pathage access and benefit sharing system, So whoever found the pathogen get some of the profits when they ease the regular tory restrictions and all these drugs and

jabs get put into play. Real quick, and then they could distribute all of the products and have their leader be the one who could declare a pre fake, a fake or a post fake or option B. Would you rather have? The United States Defense Department pledge five billion dollars over the next five years in the December twenty twenty two National Defense Authorization Act to do pretty much

the same thing. And in twenty twenty three they doled out about three hundred and forty million dollars to thirty seven countries around the nation to start building, you know, the biolabs in there were twelve career Oh imagine that twelve Caribbean countries were first on the list. Maybe that's connected to catastrophic contagion, and

you know others in Africa, South America and so forth. Do you would you prefer to have the who in charge charge of the research, development, distribution, and proliferation of biological weapons or do you think that we should keep that as part of the United States Defense Department? Yeah, exactly, Yeah, it's yeah, you're right, none of the above. It is very dangerous. And you know, let me before we run out of time. We talk about these treaties, and this is one of the reasons why it's

been so concerning to me. You know, we go back and we look at the Paris Climate Court, for example, on the climate side, when they put this thing together, all these different nations get together at their conference, you know, the cop whatever the number was, and John Kerry comes back and says, yeah, Obama and I self ratified that. You know, well that's not what the constitution says. So all the people who think that, well we've got to have something ratified here, that's not the way

they're going to use it. They have these agreements, they say, well, we've agreed to this. Whether or not, whether or not they have followed any legal procedure, they will still use it. That's the key thing. And so regardless of you know, once there's an agreement, and that's I guess the key thing is, well, not these countries can come to an agreement, But once they do come to an agreement, then what the United States government will do is say, well, that's it. We're part

of that treaty. And nobody in the Senate ever, no Republican, not Mitch McConnell, not Rampaulton, nobody ever came back and said, you know, we never had a vote on the Paris Climate accurt that was supposedly ratified by John Carey, Biden Secretary of State. But that's not how this works. Nobody ever called their bluff, and they're not going to call the bluff on anything that's coming out of this this World Health Organization negotiation, either,

are they. I completely agree with you, but it's actually even worse than that you could imagine. So let me let me try to explain. I know, we got maybe ten minutes when we first met, when you first had me on two years ago. What I was talking about then, what had happened, what I had uncovered was after the Nations on December one, twenty twenty one, said that they wanted the WHO to oversee negotiations for equitable

access to pandemic related products. We don't want to give you our pathogens anymore. That's a sovereign resource. You guys aren't paying us for all the money you're making. After the Nations said that, and they said that they wanted to have, you know, manufacturing be distributed all around the world, the Biden administration a month and a half later, in January of twenty twenty two,

submitted amendments to the International Health Regulations putting stricter requirements on nations. And you know the problem that they have and they still have, is there's very strict you know, four nations shall do this, and shall do that, and shall do the other thing. All of the comments or suggested edits from the United and the EU are like, well, you guys have to do what we want you to do. But you know the shells, right, it's a shell game. When you see the word shall in the document,

it means you must unless there is a qualifier. And so for all of the requirements on big pharma, it's like, you shall consider making your contracts, you know, transparent, you shall, you know, share intellectual property if you kind of want to, right, you got to look at the qualifiers. But what happened in twenty twenty two is the Biden administration was planning

ahead. Got to give them a little credit. They were planning ahead, saying, well, any amendments in the future, rather than going into effect in twenty four months, they wanted to shorten it down to six And if you look at the calendar, if the Assembly ends on June first, six months from June first, is still in the Biden administer if it was you know, twenty four months or whatever, that would go into whoever's going to be the next president. And so they were trying to speed this process up

so that they could ram through something in the future. Well, the poor nations looked at that and they said, no, not doing it, not going to have it, mostly about the requirements. And then what happened is in violation of our Article fifty five, which it should be called the anti Nancy Pelosi rule, because they say that any amendments have to have four months advanced notice. So the deadline, you know, you can't just real you know, roll the bill in one thousand pages, you know, Obamacare,

And Nancy famously said, oh, just vote for it. You can read it later. Yeah, you got forty eight hours to decide what you want with us. Then, so, in the middle of the twenty twenty two Assembly, the United States, United Kingdom, European Union, and full of other countries illegitimately submitted new amendments to be considered, and four days later, the World Health Organization published a document that said they had adopted these amendments.

Well, a little problem. They didn't bother to vote. They just said they were adopted. Now, I know we have election integrity issues in the United States. They at least pretend you have a right. We're at that point now. It says in the document that it's certified by their legal counsel, and then then on the bottom it said it happened in their eighth plenary session. Well, you could go watch the eighth session and they never even

talked about it. So eighteen months to the day after that, on November eighth, twenty twenty three, we did get a dozen members of the European Parliament to write a letter to Ted drus and say, you know, we see these amendments, and you know we got a deadline to reject them. But there's no proof that you ever voted. These are all all and void. Rob Ruce who's the member of the European Parliament, and Philippe Crusoe, who's a lawyer in Switzerland, you know, talking to him all the time.

They flew to the United States and presented this to Senator Ron Johnson at his last meeting that he had about a month or so. And it was a collective eh whatever, really, and so you know the issue here is it's a boys club, meaning the members of each nation, the delegates, they decide what the rules are amongst themselves. It's not the who saying you

have to do this. And so if all of the nations agree to have stricter quarantine requirements on foreign travelers who are coming in legitimately, and they say, well, we'll abuse your people and you'll abuse ours. That way, we can still be within our constitution, but we get planet lockdown whenever we want it, because people are going to be afraid to travel. They don't want to sit in quarantine and get forced JEB. So this game is far

more sophisticated. Everybody wants a simple answer, Well, it's very similar to what you're talking about. Is very similar to what they already do with their intelligence agencies. The Five Eyes for example, you know, the five English speaking countries, the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand. They will say, well, you know, we can't legitimately spy on our own people, but you can and then you can give us that information.

And so it's the same thing as that they were. You know, they like you point out it's like a club, a cartel, a mafia. You know, they come up with these little workarounds that are just semantics really, yep. And so there's a lot of panic and fear mongering, and there's I heard a little bit of into before we started this interview. And if what is going on in the world is you know, analogous to a thousand piece jigsaw puzzle, and maybe the Treaty and the amendments and who or

like one or two pieces in that puzzle. People are rightfully talking about central bank, digital currency and digital ID and geoengineering and the Pact for the Future and the Sustainable Development Goals and all these many, many, many things. But then they're saying all of that is in the treaty, and it's like, well, you know, the Treaty is a piece of the puzzle,

and it is connected to all of those things. But you do yourself a disservice by quoting, you know, horrible things about some other aspect of what these demons are doing. And when people go to look in the treaty, you're not going to find anything in the treaty that isn't attacked act on national sovereignty. That's a lovely red herring. It's not an attack on national sovereignty.

It's actually strengthening national sovereignty so that nations can abuse individuals. Yeah, and very similar to what we saw again between the FEDS and the States. It actually strengthened. Here's some legislation. Strengthen your authority because at some point in the future, we're going to tell you there's a pandemic and we'll give you some money if you do this stuff. But you're going to be the

ones who get to do this. You know, it's going to be your state and local public health officials that are going to be able to do this. We'll help you with that. But yeah, it's very interesting how they have have set this thing up. They will keep these these entities that are around now that everybody likes so much. Well, you know, we got our flags, and we got our national anthems, and we got our official state bird or whatever, and they'll keep these different artifacts around so people have

this sense of continuity. And yet the reality is is that it's it's control from top to bottom. And they're all kind of kind of on this. But we won't see like a global government that is set up over here. It'll just be this global governance network of people who are kind of you know, working behind the scenes to make sure they're all on the same page.

I think, to summarize it in a sentence, the local tyrants who abused you over the last four and a half years didn't need any amendments to the international health regulations, and they didn't need any stinking pandemic treaty to overstep their authority and trick you and coerce you and hypnotize you and just you abuse you. So those local issues are not going to be solved by a little one paragraph state resolution or state law that says, oh, the who doesn't have

any jurisdiction here. I want to give a shout out to Catherine Watt. If you haven't met her, we should introduce you Catherinock Rights, Bailiwicknews dot substack dot com, b A I l I w I c K News, you know, like a Bailey Wick like in England, like the trees behind you. She's put forth a sample state legislation to repel all these crazy laws and actually address you know, why is it that the laws have been corrupted

to take away liability from companies that produce our products that are harmful. And all of the emergency rules you know, give dictatorial powers. So if you want to work on a state by state basis by all means, give me a phone call three one zero six y one nine three zero five to five. It's not easy. It's not Oh, you know, they can't touch us. They're not the ones who abused you the first time. It's your

local officials and your local laws. In the in the amendments, they want to strengthen international travel restriction, quarantine and make for the process of quarantining people, and have a pre fake to add to the fake, and a post fake. But the treaty is just a bunch of mob bosses trying to set up a cartel to go looking for pathogens with pandemic profiteering potential so they can scare the bijeebers out of you again and again and again. And because there's

going to be so much money, they'll financially incentivize it again. You know. That's the other part of it. People don't realize that. And you're right, You've got to go back and remove a lot of this legislation that was put in. A lot of it was put in at the end of two thousand and one in response to the anthrax thing. That's the stuff that's got to be pulled out. I keep telling everybody. Their motto for the longest time has been think globally, act locally. So we got to cut

off those hooks that they've got into us at the local level. You're exactly right. That's how it will happen. That's where the rubber meets the road, and that's really where the work needs to be done. And we need to root that out because they'll they'll do it again as long as they've got their hooks on us, and it'll be financially driven with the money that is there. That's one of the things, the key things that they're working on

right now with the WHO is that money aspect. Now you've also got exit thewho dot org and there's a I swear break, I'm gonna charge you rent. You're inside my head. Those are the next words out of my mouth. Exit to who dot org is an activist toolbox, Okay. I've connected to people in dozens of countries around the world, obviously including the United States. If you go to exit the who dot com that's dedicated specifically to the

United States. Andy Biggs Representative Andy Biggs from Arizona. Well over a year ago put forth HR seventy nine, which is the with WHO Withdrawal Act, very simple page and a half. Stop giving them money, tell them we're leaving and get out of here. When a relationship has gone so bad,

you know, sometimes you just need to get divorced. Yes, and so we need to exit the Who. You know, I think we need to go further and abolish the Who. But if you go to exit to who dot org, exit to who dot com and my favorite, if you want to take action, record a little video of your opinion about this, put it out on the internet. I've collected several hundred videos along those lines and they can all be found on screwth who dot com. So have a little

fun with it. You know, if you don't, if you don't speak up, you're not doing your job. Absolutely absolutely, exit the WHO dot com for the USA information, exit the WHO dot org for world information. Screw the Who. And also you can find James Roguski at substack and his last name is r. O. G U s k I. Thank you so much, James for the hard work that you do. You've been on this like a bulldog for a long time. Thank you very much. Everyone, have a great day. Thank you thank you. Let me tell you

the David Night Show you can listen to with your ears. You can even watch it by using your eyes. In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to the David Night Show right now. Yeah. Good job. And you want to know something else, You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at Thedavidnightshow dot com. That's a website.