Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to the David Knight Show.
As a clock strikes thirteen, it's Thursday, the eighth of February. You're
of our Lord twenty twenty four. Well, today we're going to talk about
Elon Musk. He's now pushing carbon taxes. He's always pushed carbon taxes,
but he's been quiet about it while he builds up his credentials with the MAGA
people. And will they fall for it again? Will they fall for Musk
in the climate mcguffin as a fell for Trump with the pandemic. Mcguffin,
it's okay because he's going to own the Libs. He's going to fund a
lawsuit for an actress who was kicked out by Disney because she purged for her
conservative politics. So we're going to also begin by talking about what is happening
with the war. Ukraine has now moved the goalpost, actually literally moved the
border if you will, into Russia. Nothing to worry about. We'll be
right back. Well, before I begin, I want to thank Guard Goldsmith
for doing a great job Guard at Liberty Conspiracy on Rockfin and you can also
find him an MRC TV dot Org. He's also on substack and it was
chaotic. A couple of days had another heart issue, and so Guard filled
in for us at the last moment. Always does a fantastic job. I'm
always reassured when I have Guard to it. But as I said, it
was chaotic. We didn't get and I want to apologize to people about the
podcast. We did not get Tuesday's podcasts up until nine pm last night.
So it's everything's been kind of a hectic here. But let's get back on
track. Let's talk about what's going on Ukraine. Zelenski has now moved the
goalpost the border, if you will. He believes that there is territory inside
Russia that longs to him as well. And I said this when the twenty
fourteen who happened, because you always see this, don't you, with these
dictators, that they can declare their independence and their right of self governance from
Russia. I said, okay. And then when Ukraine, when Crimea said
another area said we'd like to stay with Russia because culturally we identify with them
more and other reasons, they said, no, No, can't do that,
can't do that. It's kind of like the US who got their independence
from Great Britain. And then when some states said, well we would like
to govern ourselves, and again the reason is reason was terras. The reason
was the Fourth not the Fourth Industrial Revolution, but the Industrial Revolution, a
fourth turning at that time. And of course slavery was an aspect of that.
It wasn't the aspect that everybody makes it, but it was an aspect
of it. Nevertheless, they had nearly had secession about thirty years earlier,
based on tariffs and things like that. So they said, well, we're
going to go our own way. No you're not. No, you're not,
they said. And as a matter of fact, part of Virginia that
we now call West Virginia was so strongly union they said, well, well,
if you're Virginia's going to leave the Union, we don't want to leave
the Union. And so West Virginia did the same thing that the people in
Crimea did. And yet the Confederacy, unlike Ukraine, the Confederacy said okay,
you can have your own state. They let them create their own state,
West Virginia, which still exists to this day. So it's when you
look at this, of course, Ukrainian values are the values of the US
government, they will kill anybody. You know, if you leave, I'll
kill you. As Eric Peters said, say, that's basically what we're talking
about with secession. So they continue to bomb those areas for eight years until
Russia invaded. And so what we have now is a government that wants a
war with Russia. We have a government that wants a war with Iran,
and we have a government that is at war with US a cold war,
but they are at war with us everything about our way of life, invading
us with foreigners. The barbarians are inside the gate, and we know who
let them in, and it's an intentional thing. They're rewarding them, they're
financially incentivizing. That's something that even Rome didn't do. So this American Empire
is circling the drain, and the war in Ukraine is circling the drain as
well. And so what he does is he ups the ante and projects.
You see, what NATO has been saying is that we've got to really step
up the effort here in Ukraine because if Ukraine loses, how many times have
you heard this from US and European politicians, If Ukraine loses, Russia is
going to march right through Europe. This absurd Domino incrementalism that they used to
sell people the Vietnam War, Well, hey, if it works, you
just keep using that same trick, right and so, at the end of
January, is Lensky signed a decree on quote Russian territories historically inhabited by Ukrainians.
He says, this is the restoration of truth about the historical past for
the sake of Ukraine's future. The government will also have to debunk Russian myths
about Ukraine, he said, and develop interaction between Ukrainians and the peoples enslaved
by Russia. You see right now the Russian border and their version of history
is just fake. It's misinformation. It's disinformation, and they're going to wage
an information war to convince everybody that these areas that have been under Russia for
quite some time really belonged to Ukraine for centuries. Russia, he said,
has systematically committed and continues to commit acts aimed at destroying Ukrainian national identity,
oppressing Ukrainians, violating their rights and freedoms, including on lands which they had
historically inhabited. This is again projection. It is Zelenski and Ukraine, which
are trying to eradicate all Russian culture. Look at the church, for example,
the Russian Church that is there, which originally began in Ukraine, but
then they when there was a war in Ukraine, they moved further into Russia.
And the Russian Orthodox Church that had origins in Ukraine was still heavily established
in Ukraine. Zelenski has made that church now illegal after many, many,
many centuries and locking people up, locking a clergy up, stealing their property
and all the rest of this stuff. It is complete projection. And that's
what this globalist establishment led by the United States does. It is just yeah,
it is a policy of war and disinformation. And at the same time
as over a billion dollars of weapons missing in Ukraine based on an audit from
the DoD Inspector General, and this is an audit just of small weapons,
small weapons, and so they began what they called enhanced end use monitoring techniques
in order to safeguard key weapons, high tech weapons that are small, easily
transported. So this is what this is about. And falling under the auspices
of this is about one point seven billion dollars worth of weapons. And guess
what a billion dollars of that is missing sixty percent. Sixty percent is missing.
That's a little bit better than last year. Last year they were missing
eighty six percent when they did the audit. Where's this stuff going. It's
going to be used to fund chaos and fund terrorism, because that's what American
policy is all about. That's what American policy has been about for decades,
funding chaos and terrorism around the world and supplying the weapons for terrorists around the
world. Go back and look at Iron Contra, look at the abandonment of
all of these weapons in Afghanistan, look at how they created even more chaos,
and there were against Libya fifty nine percent delinquency rates, an improvement over
the eighty six percent of weapons that were unaccounted for in December of twenty twenty
two. So they just finished this in December of twenty twenty three. The
Biden administration has sent over seventy five billion dollars to Ukraine since February of twenty
twenty two. Actually it's more than that. This is coming from zero hedge.
That is, they've sent over more than one hundred billion, but according
to their stats, forty four billion of that seventy five billion that they have
is in military aid. So if we're gonna have a lot of that go
missing, as it has been going missing, and we've been sending stuff to
Ukraine since twenty fourteen, and some of the people who have been involved with
that have said, you know, yeah, massive amount of this stuff goes
has gone missing for the last decade. Yeah, it's gone missing for eight
years. Then we upped the ante. But you know, I would think
sixty to eighty percent of this stuff, well anywhere from twenty six billion dollars
worth of weapons to thirty five billion dollars worth of weapons just missing. Who
knows, it's more than nearly all the amount of missing weapons in Ukraine.
It is more than the entire budget for defense of most nations. That's how
insane this is. We are the epicenter of cass or, sexual depravity,
drug use, everything else America is America. Think about that. So you
know, as I saw in Afghanistan, everything, even big helicopter left behind,
the US military industrial complex is like some kind of a global cluster bomb.
You know, that's the thing about the cluster bombs. They weren't to
outlaw those because they would put these you know, this thing was explode,
put out a bunch of little tiny bombs all over the place to just go
off at various times, and massive civilian casualties involved in that. Well,
when we go into war, we shoot so many weapons in and they get
get transferred and sold and stolen and all the rest of the stuff in a
black market. Every war that we get involved in is like a gigantic cluster
bomb, but with billions of dollars, tens of billions of dollars of weapons
up for grabs going everywhere, creating war and chaos around the planet, all
for the profits of the military industrial complex and the politicians that they own and
pay. So, Thomas Massey says, without control of the Senator of the
White House, the only viable way for House Republicans to countermand this administration's harmful
policies is to use the power of the purse from behind the scenes. Though
most of this leverage of the power of perse is being abandoned in exchange for
more military funding, because the Republicans are going to always rubber stamp that they
want more military funding no matter what, got to have it. And I
understand the defense is one of the few very very very few legitimate functions of
the federal government. But as we see with a border, and as we've
known for longest time, our so called defense policies are not about defending America.
They make us less safe everywhere, they make the world less safe.
This is about the love of money, the root of all evil. Birdhouse
Blue says, I wouldn't be surprised that the Hoodies and Yemen made a straw
man purchase of missing armaments and used it against our own military and the Red
Sea. Of course, it wouldn't be surprised either. We've seen that type
of thing when they confiscate weapons and then what they say is, you know
we saw that with ISIS. They said, well, we didn't give those
weapons of ISIS. They just bottom on the black market. What's the difference.
But we know they gave them to them. They armed both sides.
They arm both sides and every conflict. So if you push back against the
military industrial complex, here's what you get. John Potterrettz says that Thomas Massey
is quote anti Semitic filth unquote, why because he opposed enough fourteen point three
billion dollars for Israel. He said on x on Twitter Thomas Massey said,
the Speaker just announced next week the House will vote on a clean bill to
send Israel fourteen point three billion. Israel has a lower debt to GDP ratio
than the US. This spending package has no offsets, so it will increase
our debt by fourteen point three billion dollars plus interest. I'm a no.
And he says most of this money will go directly to the US military industrial
complex, which, if you're keeping up, prefers to be referred to as
the defense industrial base. Now, oh, I wasn't keeping up with that.
It's necessary to rebrand when people start to realize what you're so I have
the liberals. They stole the name liberal from people who really cared about liberty
at the time. That was liberal used to mean somebody who put liberty first.
But they stole that label around a time of Woodrow Wilson, and they
call themselves progressive. But yeah, well, now let's go with liberal.
So they stayed with liberal, and then eventually they come back around to other
labels. You know, they've come back now to progressive because liberal has been
so discredited. That's what the military industrial complex is doing. Well, everybody
hates the military industrial complex. So let's not call ourselves that we're now the
defense industrial base. He says, watch for those stocks to go up on
Monday. He said, one clarification, the bill will spend over seventeen billion
dollars, but some of it goes to replace weapons that we have given to
Israel, and some of it goes for other random costs in the Middle East.
In addition to this seventeen plus billion dollar bill, we will probably give
them the customary three plus billion dollars and the Omnibus bill. Well, that
was more than John Potteritz could stand and so he said, of course you're
a no, you disingenuous piece of anti Semitic filth. Well, John Potterretz
is an anti American racist piece of filth himself. Quite frankly, not only
is he anti American racist filth, but he pushes war and murder. But
Thomas Massey wrote back, and he said, so now, if I don't
vote from mass of fourn a that goes primarily to the military industrial complex,
i'm anti Semitic filth. Your unfounded slurs will not change my vote because America
is broke and my constituents can afford no more and quite frankly criticizing, as
I've said many many times, criticizing the secular globalist Davos, vaccine pushing,
surveillance, tracking, pushing CBDC, pushing government of Israel is not being anti
submittic. That government is anti Semitic. That Netan Yahoo used his own people
as labrats. I've played the thing for you many times where he calls up
Davos and he brags about how he's using his people as labrats. That's anti
Semitism, folks. I'm with the Orthodox Jews on this. God gave them
the land, He took them off of the land because of the way they
responded to him, and he will put them back, and he'll do it
himself miraculously. In the meantime, you've got a globalist government that does everything
it can to suppress the religious Jews and to oppress them and to fight them
wherever they see them. The House passed to bill November two to send fourteen
point three billion dollars in eight Israel, but it was rejected by the Democrat
led Senate. In the House, it was a vote of two hundred and
fifty ya's to eight hundred and eighty Na's getting a majority but failing to meet
the two thirds requirement to pass the bill under suspension of the rules. So
that is where we are right now. And it wasn't just Thomas Massey.
There's some other Republicans like chip Roy who said, I cannot send seventeen point
six billion to Israel without paying for it, given that we are bleeding two
trillion dollars a year. Said chip Roy, Well, that doesn't matter as
long as we've got something that somebody in foreign country decides that they are entitled
to, that they can steal from us, that they can try to get
our elected representatives thrown out if they oppose that THEFT. I guess we should
just kiss their ring. Huh. Biden meanwhile pulls a Trump right, so
zero Hedge. These guys are more alike than most people will admit. And
so now Biden has assassinated a Iran backed militia leader in Baghdad. Again,
these guys are on the same page more than anyone wants to admit. Biden
and Trump tweedled d and tweedled dumb, especially for the people who support them.
So it's not not a surprise at all. Frankly, travagline, Thank
you very much for the tip, says, our corrupt criminal government is trying
to make it illegal for Americans to form militias. Yes, totally unconstitutional s
DOT thirty five eighty nine Preventing Private Paramilitary Activity Act of twenty twenty four.
Yes. I briefly talked about that, and I'm sure we'll have more to
say about that. They are trying to outlaw guns or trying to outlaw the
militia, which, as I said before I talked about this, I said,
if you look at the Constitution, they talk about a well regulated militia.
That means that the government, if anything, ought to be equipping and
training the militia as they do in Sweden. Switzerland, they equip and train
the militia. They're not doing that. For some reason. I wonder why
when a government doesn't trust you with weapons, what does that tell you about
that government? What does it tell you about Joe Biden that he continually threatens
us with F sixteens? Oh yeah, you want your gun, Well we
got F sixteens. Brian and Dev McCartney. I'm gonna start calling these zionists
anti American filth YEP, the AAF instead of the ad L. There we
go the AAF. The US and NATO have become the new Fourth Reich,
destroying the world while claiming innocence. This is from a guy who I once
saw his name Drago. I thought, wait, is this the guy at
the Navy seal that I interviewed? No, he was. He was Drago
Desaian. This is Drago Bosnik. He said, you know, you look
at Pepe Escobar, a Brazilian journalist. He often calls the US a rogue
superpower. He goes, well, that's not an exaggeration, he says,
it's actually worse than just a rogue superpower. He says, we're barely a
month into twenty twenty four, and here's Washington, DC, already bombing half
a dozen countries, threatening at least that many more. This includes Syria,
Iraq, and Yemen. Will nobody's even reporting on drone strikes all across Africa
and in the Middle East, including occasional attacks on Afghanistan. They're also threatening
Iran, Venezuela, several other countries in Latin America, including Mexico. On
February fourth, the US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan refused to rule out the
possibility of strikes inside of Iran. On February the third, the UK also
joined the aggression. To put it simply, there was an attack on American
soldiers in Jordan, or maybe it was in Syria. So Washington, d
c. Is bombing Syria and Iraq, Yeah, exactly. I mean it
was on the border. There was a base that was on the Jordanian side
of the border. Another basis in Syria. What do we have bases in
Syria for, well, because we are a rogue superpower or alternatively the fourth
Reich. Major European banks, meanwhile, are at the center of a new
scandal. Looks like they were evading they were on sanctions. Imagine that.
You know, bankers are always running war for profit, aren't they, And
yet when it comes to the sanctions, they're still going to make their cut.
They're still going to make some money out of this. And so we've
got some of the biggest banks, one of them Lloyd's of London, I
guess, which would just call them Lords of London. Lords of London is
a part of this banking scandal. They've worked away about how they start these
wars for profit and then and they don't participate in them. They don't even
stop selling stuff even when there is an economic sanction. We're going to take
a quick break and we come back. We're going to talk about the pharmaceutical
issues. We got lawsuits about more medical murder, and I hope we see
a lot of these, but at least one more has come. 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. Using free speech to free minds, it's the David Knight Show.
Yeah, when sixty one, I thought Drego was the Russian guy from Rocky
four. Actually it was a nickname of the Navy seal that I interviewed.
But I think the Navy seal could probably take that guy. Not only was
the Navy seal, but he trained Navy seals. But yeah, this other
guy is writing this op ed piece. If you're not wearing a mask,
a New Jersey appeals court says that's not free speech. Yeah, I see
the mask order gags not only you literally, but it also gags your free
speech. You can't do that as a protest. How is that different?
May What we should do is burn our masks, you know, like the
American flying. That's a free speech. They say, So just take your
mask off and burn it at the grocery store, burn it at the restaurant.
Excu, Oh yeah, you want to see my mask? You follow
up? Theyre going to keep your lighter. A federal appeals court shot down
claims Monday that New Jersey residence refusal to wear face masks at school board meetings
during COVID supposedly outbreak. This is from the ap They did not say supposedly.
I'm saying it constituted protected speech under the First Amendment. This is the
third Circuit Court of Appeals these lawsuits with all around claims that the plaintiffs were
retaliated against my school boards because they refused to wear masks during public meetings.
In one of the suits, the court sent the case back to lower court
for consideration, and the other one that just dismissed it, saying the plaintiff
failed to show that she was retaliated against. Still, the court found that
refusing to wear a mask during public health emergency did not amount to free speech
protected by the Constitution. Well, it actually does. Courts get things wrong
all the time, don't they. I mean, they've left us at the
mercy of the TSA. They left us at the mercy of swat teams,
all the rest of this stuff. They've left us at the mercy of the
NSA and the CIA. They don't enforce the Bill rights none whatsoever. If
they do, they do a very limited scope protection of the Bill rights at
best. The Court found that refusing to wear it was not protected by the
Constitution. Here's what they said, quote a question shadowing suits such as these,
it's whether there is a First Amendment right to refuse to wear a protective
mask. We conclude there's not. Well, you're wrong. That's your opinion.
That's why they call it an opinion. And courts get it wrong all
the time. Look, the masks, as we all know and new from
the beginning, the masks were political, not medical. Refusing to do political
obeisance is a protest protected by the free speech. It's just that simple.
This is not complicated. This is a lie coming at you the Third Circuit
Court of Appeals. It was never medical. As I said many times,
I talked about it at the time, talked about this in early twenty twenty
when they started this stuff. So do you realize that in two thousand and
two, when they started all this SARS stuff in Asia and people started wearing
masks, and then people started selling these N ninety five mask it wasn't the
hokey you know, you got a lone ranger bandetta, a bandana that you
can put over your over your face. That's absolute nonsense. I mean,
have you ever seen any doctors wearing a bandana and surgery? And as they
pointed out in two thousand and two, the imminent scientist that was there,
she had published a lot of things. She had discovered parvo and other things
like that. Anyway, she said, you may think that everybody, all
these doctors are wearing these masks and surgery, but they're not. Many of
them don't wear it. And it doesn't make any difference. However, and
she said, what we have found is that first of all, everybody knows
that the airborne particles are going to go right through an end ninety five masks.
Secondly, she said, if you say that it is to protect against
spittle, after twenty minutes, the mask becomes so saturated with spittle that you
still get the particles sent out, and yet they're smaller, which means that
they're airborne longer and travel farther, so it actually makes things worse. And
so at the time in New South Wales the government said, based on her
stuff, and this is in two thousand and two, when everybody in Asia
was wearing the masks, they said, if you try to sell somebody a
mask telling them that it's going to protect them, we're going to find you.
And I think it was something like a one hundred thousand Australian dollars.
It was a significant fine. Significant And yet twenty years later New South Wales
with Gladys bear Jickland was all the worst places to force people to wear masks.
It was always political, It was never medical. It never had a
chance of working, especially when you talk about masks and say well, if
you just take a piece of cloth and put it over your face. Mask
was never even defined. They didn't even try to make it medical. It
was always political, it was always an active submission, and it was always
in defiance of informed consent. It was always, if you will, a
violation of the presumption of innocence, because in this particular case, being guilty
means that you're sick. They don't determine that you're sick. They were doing
this to everyone, healthy people included. Just like the lockdowns. The Court
said skeptics are free to and did voice their opposition through multiple means, but
disobeying a masking requirement is not one of them. And they give some examples.
They said, well, you can't reduce to wear a motorcycle helmet.
See, we've been going down this road and setting this table for a very
long time, and not just with the annual war games. It began in
two thousand and one with Dark Winter two months before nine to eleven. We've
been setting this for the longest time, decades, many many many decades before
that, by prioritizing safety over liberty, you know, things like seat belt
mandates, air bag mandates and all the rest of this stuff and many other
things. And they talk about motorcycle helmet like, if I rode a motorcycle,
I'd wear a helmet, but even then I wouldn't feel safe enough to
ride a motorcycle. That's my personal choice. Is somebody else's personal choice if
they what they want to do, And we don't get to tell people make
these public choices over the individual's choice for what they want to do for help,
do we. Interestingly enough, these are the same people typically who not
only push for abortion and say well, my body, my choice, but
they will also push for government assisted suicide. So if they're going to push
for government suicide, why not allow some made ride a motorcycle without a helmet.
That's about That's getting pretty close, isn't it. Many of us would
believe. But they won't allow that either, the nanny state won't. They
are it's not about safety. It's not about safety, it's about control.
An attorney for the officials said, the winning side, the people who are
saying you gotta wear a mask, it's not a political statement to refuse to
wear this. So this attorney who was defending that says that refusing to wear
a mask and violation of a public health mandate is not the sort of civil
disobedience that the drafters of the First Amendment had in mind as protected speech.
This guy's name is Eric Harrison. Well, Eric, do you think they
envisioned medical martial law? I think if the founders saw what Trump was doing
with Fauci and his whole administration in twenty twenty. I think the founders would
be spinning in their grave than anything like anything more an American than what the
Trump White House did in twenty twenty and bragged, and he bragged about it,
continued to brag about it. A mom is suing a hospital after her
daughter died from forced ventilator and rem desaveet treatment that she did not want.
Thirty nine year old woman who was pregnant. He had developed pneumonia and she
was very concerned. Told her mom that she did not want to be put
on a ventilator, didn't want this other stuff. And he said, they'll
kill me if they put me on that, and they did. They medically
kidnapped her, killed her. And stop and think about the fact with this
force ventilator. Trump paid these people to do this. Trump, the Trump
administration, and Donald Trump himself bragged this over and over again. He paid
them, He paid to have the minilators made. He portrayed himself as a
hero in all of this, and then he paid the hospitals thirty nine thousand
dollars to put somebody on there, then paid them every day and then gave
him a twenty percent bonus over what they normally would have charged for all that.
Rim dezoveret as well. Rim Desaveret was Fauci's pet project. He had
tried to get this authorized for use for AIDS. He'd tried to do it
for Ebola. Everybody said, you're crazy. This doesn't work, and it
kills people, and it causes the same type of thing that happened to her,
and that is kidney failure. Rim desiviet kills people kidney failure, and
it doesn't do anything. And so Fauci did his own unpeer reviewed test and
declared it to be the standard of of treatment and defiance of all that.
The guy that Trump gave a medal to. At the end of all this
stuff, the mother of a Michigan woman who was given room desavir and died
after being forced into a ventilator is raising funds for the wrong full death lawsuit.
Too bad Trump won't give her thirty nine thousand dollars willy for the lawsuit.
Now he paid the hospital to kill her. Jessica died in December twenty
twenty one. And this is again that was Biden was president. But this
is the perverse incentives that were put in by Trump that were maintained by Biden.
It's a tag team match. Well he was. If it was from
Trump, Maga's okay with it. It's just forty chess, right, So
yeah, Biden continued it, just like Biden continued gun control by executive order,
just like Biden continued Trump's pistol brace band. She died from kidney failure,
collapsed long ultiple strokes, and finally brain heimhaging ten days after she delivered
her baby v C section. Life site News reports that the hospital basically kidnapped
Jessica, isolated her from her husband, gave her treatments that not only weren't
necessary, but against her explicit wishes. We've seen this over and over again.
Yeah, the father who was who's a daughter, had that done to
her and he's it'll be interesting to see what happens. That case is coming
up in the fall of this year, and he has a judge has allowed
it to be considered that not just medical malpractice, but malicious murder, which
is what this is. Trump murdered people. He paid these hospitals to murder
them. How is that not murder? You pay somebody this his murder for
hire? Because like Fauci paid planned Parenthead to kill babies so he could get
their body parts and use them and his human eyed mice. So on the
law firm that is talking to Life Site News the organization, as Julie Shlipp
is the one who is that Life Site is reporting her perspective on this,
she said. Jessica, who was perfectly healthy and only thirty nine years old
at the time, was aware of the dangers of remdzevit and ventilators. She
said, if they vent me, I won't make it out of here.
She repeatedly told her husband. She's transported by ambulance to Trinity Health twenty minutes
north later that evening, but within days her oxygen levels began to improve,
rising to the mid nineties with help from prayerful mediation but also a seapap machine.
She even texted her eldest daughter that she was doing pretty good quote unquote,
but the hospital was insistent that she needed to go on a ventilator.
Initially refusing, she was told that in order to deliver the baby, she
would have to be put on one. Shlipp explained. She says, it
doesn't make any sense why they needed to have her on a ventilator for a
sea section, but Jessica wanted to do whatever was needed to ensure her baby
lived. She didn't have a choice. So we're not going to do the
sea section unless you let us ventilate you. That's thirty nine thousand dollars plus
twenty percent on everything they do, including the sea section. Right. Purely
mercenary. That's what hospitals have become. They're owned by giant corporations. A
few corporations own most all of the hospitals now completely mercenary killers murder for hire.
Slip says that before giving birth, Jessica attempted to put the ventilator pull
the ventilator tubes out of her throat, and the hospital says, well,
she wasn't conscious at the time, so we strapped her her arms and legs
down to prevent that from happening. Mm. They would say that, wouldn't
they Why is she Why are arms and legs stripped down? Oh? Well,
she was trying to pull that out, but she didn't know it.
She was unconscious at the time. And then when it comes to rim deserveret
the records show that she was given rim dserviet four times, but a staffer
said, no, no, she refused it. We didn't give her that
at all. So it wasn't the rim deserveret that caused the kidney failure.
The lung collapse was not caused by the ventilators the strokes who were not caused
by rim dserviet either. Now, if you what are you gonna believe a
you're gonna believe the record that they put down they gave her four doses of
rim deserveret or are you gonna believe the staffer. Somebody's lying about something.
Either somebody put that in the record four times so they could charge the government,
right, rim deserveret's of dollars and so plus theyre going to get a
twenty percent bonus on that because they got her vented. But you're going to
believe the record? Are you going to believe the staffer? Now, if
they didn't give her the REMDESERVERR, then that means that they fraudulently got paid
or did they give her the remdesevit in order to get paid against her explicit
wishes. It's kind of a difficult position there, don't you think for these
people in that lawsuit. So this is where these criminals are at the moment
these murderers are at the moment. A British medical or rather the British media.
UK's Channel four News warns of a quote silent killer, sudden cardiac death.
They're doing reports on it, but of course nobody will focus and point
the finger at the vaccine. And we all know that's what it is.
There's no other explanation for it. And we look at this and the people
who support Trump will just shake their heads. How dishonest? Can't they can't
they make the connection? Won't they make the connection? Many of them know
better. And yet these people who know that about the vaccine will not make
the connection to Trump. Don't they know better? Why won't they do it?
In November twenty twenty three, UK's Channel four News ran a segment called
sudden cardiac death affecting twelve young people every week? What is this? Silent
killer? Who don't know? Can't imagine what it is? Maybe they should?
You know, this is who is in the area, who has a
what has changed? What's the motivation? Oh, you talk about that,
you're not doing investigation. You're now conspiracy there? Well, because we know
that it was a conspiracy, conspiracy between the Trump administration, big pharmaceutical companies,
the military industrial complex, the health bureaucracies. It was a vast conspiracy,
so the network wrote in the description of the program. It's been described
as a silent killer of young, seemingly fit people. The charity Cardiac Risk
and the young see somebody's already created a charity to make money off of this,
and they won't identify what it is. They estimate that every week at
least twelve people aged between fourteen and thirty five suffer sudden cardiac death, and
one in three hundred may carry the condition. The Channel four added, a
leading pathologist has told this program they believe those figures are an underestimate. The
mother of one young woman who died is campaigning for grassroots sports clubs to give
young athletes who are potentially at most for at risk the most, to give
them mandatory heart screening, buy specialists. And of course you see this happening
in some schools. You know, from junior high school on up. That
was never a thing before. They coursed young athletes into getting the shot so
that they could play. But notice how they will do heart screenings, but
they're not going to really care about stopping the cause or identifying the cause,
just like with autism. Well, we'll create support networks and charities to help
people with autism, but we don't really want to know why this is exploding.
It's amazing how pharmaceutical companies can buy off people like Tucker Carlson to look
the other way and then bragg, Oh you mean you mean they're buying influence
with the people that were paying me twenty five million dollars a year. I
had no idea, no idea. Hillary Nichols, mother of one deceased girl,
said her athletic daughter died abruptly during a hiking trip with her friends.
An American doctor happened to be there to provide care, but the doctor reportedly
said that from the moment she began to try and to give treatment for over
thirty minutes, she already knew that Clarissa had passed. She said, nothing
could have helped it even then, because it's such a big explosion that happens
in the heart, but there was no sign of anything before this. It's
just a shock, she said. And as they point out and Wine Press
News, they said though the segment Never Wants, Never Wants addressed the who
the what the where, the why the how of any of these types of
deaths. Thousands of people in the comments section attributed this to the trump shots.
She says, COVID magazines, it's the trump shots. He wants.
Donnie wants a credit. Give Donnie the credit. He's going to carry the
burden of those how many millions? How many tens of millions of deaths on
his head. God will hold him accountable for that because he doesn't. He
doesn't do anything with his sin. He doesn't think he's got any That sin
just is the wrath of God abides on that man and increases every day.
Every day. One in five deaths in the US caused by heart disease.
Now COVID nineteen claimed the third highest number of lives. They said in twenty
twenty one. No were those people who died from COVID or died with a
pc R test where they magnified this one point one trillion times. And you
can find anything if you magnify it that high, said the man who invented
it, who conveniently died a few months before they kicked this whole thing off.
mRNA shots have killed fourteen times more people than were saved this is a
peer reviewed study. Study concludes that for every life saved, there were nearly
fourteen times more deaths caused by the mRNA injections. And this person at Technocracy
News, as a comment of bioterrorist, couldn't have done any better. And
that's what I call these people who developed and administered this. Trump developed it,
Biden administered it. It's a tag team, he says. Does this
make you mad? It should. There were two hundred and thirty million Americans,
about seventy percent of our population, your friends, your family, your
neighbors, who are fully vaccinated globally five and a half billion people worldwide,
seventy two percent have received a Trump shot. Yes, you know, MAGA
loves Trump. Maybe we need to change the definition of MAGA. Maybe we
should call it murder again, or rather murder America GOP again. Right,
let's do this all this again. Right, it was a mass murder campaign
of Americans and worldwide. But let's go with the GOP again. The GOP
which cheers Trump, which is afraid to call him out on this, the
GOP which you know, we know the Democrats want this. The dangerous thing
is when you think somebody's on your side and they're stabbing you in the back
or in the arm or wherever they administer the vaccine. But yeah, let's
murder America again. MAGA peer reviewed study says, given the well documented serious
adverse events and the unacceptable harm to reward ratio, we urge governments to endorse
and to enforce a global moratorium on these mRNA products until all relevant questions pertaining
to causality, residual DNA, and aberrant protein production are answered. The authors
also recommended an immediate removal of the vaccines from the childhood ammunization schedule, pointing
out the children weren't very low risk from infection, and that's what they told
us all the way through, Right, Why did they push for kids.
They pushed for kids for their legal immunity, you know. That's why they
were playing this game of Corminatti versus the Pfizer biointech, you know, saying
they're legally distinct and so forth. That was all there to preserve their legal
immunity under the PREP Act, but they needed to push it and make it
part of the childhood vaccine schedule in order to go back to the blanket immunity
of the nineteen eighty six, Act one of Pauci's first Betrayals of America,
one of the first things he did. And so don't you remember at the
very beginning of this one that you had to get the vaccine to protect your
elderly relatives because they were the only ones who were at risk. And I
said at the time, if this was a real disease it was being passed
around, it wouldn't be focused strictly on the elderly. You know, even
when you look at their past when they try to sell pan mix and epidemics
in the past, they didn't do that. It was evenly. The deaths
were evenly distributed over all age groups. I said, this looks exactly like
the life expectancy charts that you see, and you know, the average age
of the people that were dying was past life expectancy and they had two and
a half comorbidities. That was the case two weeks worth of data in Italy.
And it continued to be that way all the way through. And yet
they had to do it to the kids because it was about legal immunity for
killing people. Let's understand what this is killing people. They don't like me
to say that you know. So I'm going to say it more got punished
on the podcast. We're putting that at the title mass murder. Well,
they just shut me down though I've been there for years. I've been on
that podcast for six years, and they said, well, we just to
disband and took it off, and we fought to get it back, but
and that we did get it restored, but the damage was done in many
ways, damaged us financially, damaged the reach of the program, a lot
of these other things. I'm not going to stop. This is mass murder,
mass murder. How can anybody pull back? How can any of these
Trump tards who bow before him and kiss his ring? How can these people
like Wayne Allen Root and Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson, how can they cover
this up? How can they let these murderers go without any accountability calling them
into question. Tim Poole another one I'm so tired of here. That was
four years ago, No pal, Tim Poole, people are still dying.
Maybe you don't want to hear that. You do want to talk about your
ballots and stuff like that. For four years, don't you nobody died from
your ballots? People died from Trump's shots. So the rushed vaccines as part
of the study said guess what. Oh, yeah, you see rushing vaccines
through without doing any testing. That's nothing to brag about, nothing at all
to brag about, and yet he does. The problem is, you know,
we saved tens of millions of lives all over the world, but I
can't talk about it because our base are beautiful base of which some of you
are there. You get angry when we mentioned the word vaccine. Don't get
angry. You did everything you could to get this vaccine. Now, I
know it was one of the great achievements. We did months to be able
to do that. But where Yeah, it was wonderful. Twist right and
look, I guess in a certain way, I'm the father of the vaccine
because I was the one that pushed it. Yeah, and you heard Candace.
Yeah, it's a great achievement. Really wants great Yes, let me
let me give you your your your reward for all that is great achievement.
Large GERIATRICCTICE reports three times increase, threefold increase in deaths after the COVID vaccines
rolled out. This is from Steve Kersh. He says, where are the
success anecdotes were where the all cause mortality dramatically fell in a US geriatric practice.
After these shots rolled out, he said, all I can find are
anecdotes like that from Dianna Klein and are In with thirty five years of experience,
who wrote a top rated book on Amazon about what she observed in the
large geriatric practice that she works at with thousands of elderly patients. In her
practice, they would regularly see eight to ten deaths a year up to and
including the year of the pandemic twenty twenty. In twenty twenty two, they
saw thirty six deaths. In twenty twenty three, they saw forty eight deaths.
They've never seen anything like this, and he said the chances of that
happening by chance are astronomically low. He said, this is not random bad
luck. This kind of increases caused by something, but nobody wants to look
at what cost it. You know, they're now at the point where they're
not they can't deny what is happening to young people dying suddenly. They can't
deny any of this stuff. They have done that for the longest time.
Now what they're trying to do is to come up with either just to acknowledge
it and say we're going to you know, screen people kids to play sports,
or we're going to you know, create these charity organizations or something like
that, or they will try to come up with a different cause. But
it was always there. And I reported that in January of twenty twenty one,
there's a guy who was working in a nursing home and he said,
we didn't have anybody die throughout twenty twenty. And that's what he says.
This nurse is saying. She said that they would usually have eight to ten
deaths a year up to it, including twenty twenty. It was nothing new,
and that's what he said. He said, we kept these people,
none of them got sick in twenty twenty. And then in January twenty twenty
one, they rolled out the Trump shots and he said, we got people
dying all over the place. And he was crying about it, crying about
it, and he said, the ones that didn't die, they're kind of
in this fog. We knew this from the very beginning. You know,
this is now more than three years that we've known this. Nothing being done.
This nurses are in says she knows all the cases and the people who
died went downhill fast after getting the vaccine. It was the only common intervention
amongst these patients. Everyone who died was vaccinated. But then most of the
patients were vaccinated, so that's to be expected. But again, a threefold
increase immortality, nothing to see, Just move on. New emails show that
Amazon cave to the Biden administration pressure to sence Sir COVID books that expressed dissenting
views. Well, not really much as surprise, since the Biden administration is
all about censorship. And of course you know these people who cry crocodile tears
saying, oh, these conservatives, look at them at the school boards.
They are into book banning and book burning. They're a bunch of Nazis.
Because people want to get rid of the porn books of children and two children
that the schools are pushing on them and the libraries are pushing on them.
That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about real censorship. We're
talking about censorship of medical debate. At a time when we're told that this
is unprecedented and we have to take political action against people it's never been done
before. We have to force one kind of medical treatment that's never been done
before. We should have a medical debate about that. But any books that
are written about that, any comments on social media, those are censored.
And so this is done, of course by Amazon. So you're not surprised.
I'm not surprised either. But stop and think about this for a moment,
because what the Biden White House is saying, as they said, well,
you know, they didn't have to do We just suggested it. We
didn't force anybody to do this. And that's exactly what the MAGA people say
about Trump. They didn't force anybody to do it. This is the Democrat
governors who did it. And so Reason magazine says, well, was Amazon
free to ignore this? Were they free to ignore the pressure campaign from the
White House to suppress anti vaccine books? You see, this is what the
Trump white House did. It pressured people, It paid and bribed states to
do all these things, locked down social distancing masks, vaccines, It paid
the vaccine companies to develop the vaccines, that used the military to deliver the
vaccines. But Trump's not to be held responsible for any of that. And
now the Biden white House is saying they were free to ignore what we asked
them to do. We asked them to suppress this information so we wouldn't have
a medical debate. And Amazon could ignore that if they wanted. You see
you even hear Fauci saying, well, you know, I didn't force anybody
to do it, right, they pressured Amazon. The Amazon episode is reminiscent
of a nineteen sixty three Supreme Court case that likewise involve the sale of books,
where government officials perceived the books as a public menace. In nineteen fifty
six, Rhode Island General Assembly created the Commission to Encourage Morality and Youth,
just the opposite of what it is today. We have commissions to encourage immorality
of youth. But in this particular case that went to the Supreme Court,
it was Bantam Books versus Sloman, Rhode Island's cultural watchdogs would notify a distributor
that certain books or magazines. According to Justice William Brennan, they wrote this,
I'm quoting him. They would quote notify a distributor that's certain books or
magazines distributed by him had been reviewed by this commission and had been declared by
a majority of its members to be objectionable for sale. Distribution or display the
use under eighteen years of age unquote. One distributor, Max Silverstein and sons
received at least thirty five such notices, which typically quote thanked Silverstein in advance
for his cooperation with the commission unquote. To reinforce these warnings from the Commission,
a local police officer usually visited Silverstein shortly after Silverstein's receipt of a notice
in order to learn what action had been taken. So this is a clear
intimidation coercion, a roll soft tyranny, if you will, but tyranny.
Nevertheless, by the way, you have a commission and a police officer comes
by, well, what are you doing about this? The type of thing?
What if instead, what if instead of sending a uniform police officer around,
what if they sent a guy with a checkbook. Because that's the way
that Trump did it, you see. But of course he's not to be
held responsible for any of this stuff, none of it. Sixty eight American
colleges still have vaccine mandates in place. Harvard is the worst one. I
wonder if they're copying the others. They're plagiaristic. President. And by the
way, it does not does that mandate does not apply to the faculty or
staff, just to the students. College mandates. No college mandates is the
organization and they said, quote, Harvard is the only Ivory league that still
requires students to show proof that they have taken either the initial COVID vaccine series,
which is no longer available, or the most up to date booster,
even though such requirement exists for faculty and staff. There you go, luster
illustrate for life. I guess that's what this is. It's the number eight.
Thank you very much for the tip. I appreciate that. Question One
do you know about the innovative zones where corporations are going to be free from
government and taxes, pay in crypto and build what I think is a neo
feudal company towns. I don't know is that what they're talking about doing in
California, because I don't really see California allowing that to happen. I know
that there's a group of billionaires that have done that, and I know in
the past you've had libertarian organizations that have said, we need to have a
c studying community. Let's s something that is in international law waters and it's
floating out there and it's under nobody's jurisdiction, so we can be completely free.
My thing is, I don't think any the closest if there's something there,
the closest government to them is going to send a little navy over and
take that over and fleece them. I think is the way human nature works.
So you know, they better have the ability to defend themselves if they
do something like that question to us, a lot like what Disney is already
doing in Florida. Yes, they And that was one of the interesting things
was when they got into they picked this fight over printal rights with the Santis,
and it was the first time since I was in high school that anybody
in either party had ever questioned the idea of whether or not Disney ought to
be a government unto itself. And of course they were the Ready Creek District
there in Orlando. They went in secretly bought up all this property using a
lot of different shell corporations, the same thing that Gates is doing now with
farmland, and then came to them in the block and said, okay,
give us governmental power. And so that way, you know, when something
happened somebody gets injured on a on a ride or something. They don't have
to explain it to anybody. They can investigate themselves and keep it all under
the mat. And nobody ever questioned that. Nobody ever questioned that until they
picked the fight with the Santas and then that came up. And then question
three, does this fall in line with libertarian values? I think yes,
I think it does. I think it falls in line with self governance.
You know, it'd be nice if there was some new world to go to,
which is the foundation of America for the most part. You know,
this this area where there was no organized government. You know, the Indian
tribes did not have any organized government, and they didn't claim to own the
land or anything like that in that regard, and so they could just go
in and set this up and live freely. And I think people would like
to be able to do that today. They're just isn't anywhere they can go.
And I think whether you do it, you know, on whether you
go in and secretly buy this stuff up, you may be you know,
if you buy enough politicians, you may be able to get away with what
they did in Florida. And from a libertarian standpoint, I mean, for
the most part, the ready Creek District was pretty well run, and in
terms of covering up any ride injuries or anything like that that would happen.
Government does that kind of stuff all the time, so it's not really that
much different in terms of its flaws. But you know, in terms of
its ability to operate efficiently, I'm sure that it was aught more efficient than
the other stuff. Max b thank you for the tip, he says.
David Guard was great holding down the fort. Always is. He always is
happy to see you're feeling better and back steering the ship. Well, thank
you. Nick Ellenbecker says, well, the vax mandate Harvard is ensuring no
independent thinking people who question the official narrative in their school. Well, that's
right. They're not there to teach people critical thinking. They're there to make
you part of the establishment. That's what Harvard is really about. The only
reason that you would go to Harvard. You can get the same books and
they get the same education somewhere else, and your education not limited, of
course, to what your professors do. I had to catch up when I
went to college because I skipped all the math classes and everything. I mean,
I just skipped all the math. Everybody was like how'd you graduate without
take on? Because I don't know, but I had to catch up.
I had a lot of catch up to do. And so what I did
was I got multiple math textbooks from different different places, and even got the
US Naval Academy book from back in their textbooks from back in the nineteen forties
and use that stuff. And I just did a bunch of stuff in parallel.
You know, you're not sitting there limited to what your teacher teaches you.
If you really want to learn a subject, you can do it anywhere.
You don't have to go to Harvard or MIT or anything like that.
Handy. The experts say that gardening is causing it, that's right, And
they were saying it's not even the labor of the gardening that's causing it.
They said, you know, people are stirring this up. There's some mysterious
substance. I don't know, maybe we should call it the ether or humors
or something. I don't know, that's causing people. That's total nonsense.
M sellers. Our college age kids struggle with so much propaganda. It's hard
being unvaxed in a vaxed world, but they're standing strong to it. I
appreciate that. I only had a little bit of that. When I was
in school fifty years ago. I had a hardcore Marxist history professor and some
others as part of the core curriculum because it wasn't all math and science.
And one of them was so bad I just dropped the class, not even
going to fight with him. Take something else, North American House, Hippo,
Good to see you there, he says. All you have to do
is look at who is still wearing the face diapers, and you know it's
political. It's their symbol of obedience, and they demand that we wear it
too. That's right, John Henry three seven seven seven. Our founding fathers
would have burned Washington to the ground at the beginning of this fake pandemic.
That's right, that's right. Instead, we're going to try to put tweedlede
and tweedledumb back in, whichever one we get. Just unbelievable, Brian deb
McCartney. They killed two of our dear Christian friends with these ventilators and run
death is near Rem Dezevir. I'm sorry to hear that. A lot of
people, and that's the thing we don't know that that's how they do this
right. They isolate people so that you think, well, once I know
somebody, but that's just not happening. They tell me that it's safe.
And and even though it looks like, you know, people are dying from
this and not from that so called pandemic, the press says otherwise, and
many people will believe that Yona CMS has been paying out very lucrative bribes to
the hospitals for doing such. Yes, and of course then they threatened them
that if they didn't vaccinate all their nurses. In twenty twenty one, Biden
administration threatened them and said, if you don't do that, not only do
you not get those bonuses that you got used to under Trump for the last
year and a half, but we're going to take away all your Medicare Medicaid
payments, which is the basis of their business. We'll put you out of
business if you don't do it. And that's what they do. They bribe
people. They use the money given to them created out of thin air,
the Fiat currency. They use that to bribe people. It doesn't really matter
if you put your health wishes in writing when they violate them anyway, says
Brian Democrat, you know it doesn't. They do ignore written orders. They
do put people and do not resuscitate in spite of what you do. MARYA.
Myers says, most people who died didn't die until they went to the
er. Then they poisoned them and took their oxygen away because they could keep
patients from family. That's the key part of it, as well all of
it. It's just amazing when you think about how multi level this was.
It was very well plotted. Murder Nancy Chambers painful listened to. Since my
husband was killed by COVID protocol dead seven days after the modern of acts without
consent. I'm so sorry. KWD sixty eight virtue signals, masks evs,
Yes, even the MAGA hats. Yeah, yeah, I don't forget.
You know that the masks were being sold by Mike Adams. I even had
somebody sent me an email and said, you know, I pought a bunch
of these things from Mike Adams, and then, yeah, I realized that
there's things that don't work. I tried to send them back. I wouldn't
take them back, but I was I went on with Alex with this stuff,
and I was ranting about these masks and how they didn't work and turned
break. Alex goes guys tell them to a was do an Info Wars mask
with Info Wars across front. It's like, yeah, how can I make
money out of this? And how can I scare more people? And m
seller someone I know had to pick up their eighteen month old yesterday from daycare
because he was in pain and inconsolable, had his shots days before. Oh
mom, made no connection whatsoever. People, I see that all the time,
all the time, whether you're talking about nine to eleven, are you
talking about this? You know, lady that I saw in a store one
time, she worked in that office, was telling me about the trillions of
dollars missing, the corruption, all this kind of stuff made no connection to
the fact that you know, and my office was the one that was hit.
Not amazing, and then that all stopped. Can't understand why Birdhouse blues
and November twenty twenty, the drop off and flu numbers following COVID's arrival was
swift and global still perplexed how flu disappeared and reappeared? Yeah, be slice.
Our pediatrician told me with a straight face, flu has disappeared. It's
been re labeled. Yeah, stealth Patriot Fisher Price is going to have to
start making pacers pacemakers. Yeah. Yeah, it's bad, It's really bad.
Well, I want to get on before. I'm gonna cut the comments
short here, but I want to get on too. We're on pharmaceuticals.
Let me get into climate, and we're gonna do that when we come back.
We have but Tony's gonna be joining us at the bottom of the hour,
So I want to talk a little bit about about climate before we get
into that. We'll be right back. You know, world of deceit.
Telling the truth is a revolutionary act. You're listening to the David Knight Show.
All right, welcome back. Let's talk a little bit about what Elon
Musk is doing. And he is pushing carbon tax again. He's reverting back
to form. Actually he never left, never left that ten years ago.
And this is comments from Technocracy News about what he's just recently said. I'll
play a little bit of what he just recently said ten years ago. In
twenty twelve, Business Insider wrote, Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk would rather see
the government place a tax on carbon emissions than increase tax credits for buyers of
electric vehicles. He said last night, he said, the right thing to
do is to place a tax on car. It. Now, this is
a guy who became the world's richest man by the incentivization these tax credits for
buying electric cars, and he knows that he can make more money with carbon
credits. And the way they're going to do that is going to be with
something similar to the natural asset companies that you just we nearly had imposed on
us. They will come back with that. That is I think the ultimate
plan to be able to confiscate property, and maybe they'll do it by massive
default or this particular case, take public property, even the national parks,
and say, okay, that's now under our stewardship, and everybody's going to
pay a global carbon tax, and then we'll get a percentage of that.
And then whatever we get in terms of that global carbon tax money, we
will keep half of it and we'll give half of it back to the community.
And they'll even do that with a private property as well, although with
private property they'll keep far more than half of it. That's going to be
the way that they're going to monetize and distry beat this carbon tax money to
these billionaires, to these big funds like black Rock and Vangarden, State Street
and that type of thing, and that's the way they take everything, and
so that's how he gets richer. The subsidies were great for him. And
of course Elon Musk was able to take evs and make them very futuristic,
high tech fantasy vehicles by talking about his autonomous driving stuff, right, that
was the sizzle for the stake. In twenty fifteen, he addressed the UN
Climate Summit COP twenty one in Paris, and what came out of that was
the Paris Climate Accord at COP twenty one in twenty fifteen. And that's,
by the way, when the World Economic Forum started saying, you know,
you'll own nothing and you'll be happy. That's when they started talking about smart
cities and all that COP twenty one in Paris. There, Elon Musk addressed
them and said Tesla and SpaceX CEO. Musk gave a speech at Paris and
he said, they said, it's important, this is business inside at the
time. It's important to note that Musk has never been about building cars or
going to Mars or applying solar power. More widely, he has a vision
for the future that uses those businesses as a means to several important ends.
Freedom from fossil fuels. That is what he's ultimately about. But he says,
okay, that is his core thing. This core thing isn't making money.
Climate change. That's really what he's about. Climate change is the biggest
threat that humanity faces this century, except for ar Musk said in twenty eighteen,
I keep telling people this. I hate to be Cassandra here, but
it's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye. He says, well,
that's where he is, and he is still talking about that. And
as Technocracy News points out, Elon Musk is introducing his new right wing fans
to the idea of implementing a carbon tax. And I think that what he's
doing, as I said at the beginning of the program, I think that
Elon Musk believes that he can get these MAGA people to buy his climate mcguffin,
just like they went hook line and sinker for Trump's pandemic mcguffin. Because
the MAGA people are experts at double think. They can look at these carbon
taxes, Oh no, no, no, that's a climate change. I
don't believe in that the pandemic. I don't believe in that, But then
they will fall lockstep behind Musk and Trump while they pull this through. And
so a Technocracy News says, regardless of where you stand politically, it's a
fascinating situation. I remember not too long ago when the right consistently attacked him
taking advantage of government subsidies at his companies. Oh but now he's our hero
because he bought Twitter, and he's portrayed as suffering. And you know,
look at he He lost forty billion dollars or whatever to give us free speech.
You see that all the time from the same conservative commentators that push Trump.
On top of running six different companies, he is virtually a full time
political influencer now. And he just wrote on February the third, the only
action needed to solve climate change is a carbon tax. Here's a little bit
about what he had to say. What I'm going to talk about today is
what is needed to address the climate crisis. What actions can we take that
will accelerate the transition out of the fossil fuel era. So there's a certain
amount of carbon that is circulating through the environment, so it's going into the
air and getting absorbed by plants and animals and then getting back into the air.
And this carbon is just circulating on the surface, and this is fine,
and it's been doing that for millions, hundreds of millions of years.
The thing that's changed is that we've added something to the mix. So this
is what I would call the sort of the turd in the punch bowl.
We're added all this extra carbon to the carbon cycle, and the net result
is that the carbon in the ocean's atmosphere is growing over time. It's much
more than can be absorbed. Okay, this is enough for this, right,
you get the idea. He's no different than John Carey, no different
than Al Gore, no different than any of them. But he's on our
side, isn't he. This is the fundamental issue. Yes, speech is
very fundamental, and of course free speech free. There isn't free speech at
Twitter. You're not free to criticize him. I never got off of shadow
Band when he started doing this stuff. So yeah, free speech is great,
but it's much bigger than one social media platform. People going to react
to this. You think they'll give him a pass. I absolutely do think
they'll give him a pass. There's been a little bit of pushback. For
example, when you look at Trump and this is again, this is where
he's always been, and where has Trump always been? Trump has always been
a New York Liberal Democrat who is a friend of Epstein and all the people
in the Playboy scene up there, the sex scene, and that's he's actually
boasted about that in a lawsuit where he was being accused of rape. I
can do anything I want to to anybody because I'm a celebrity, right,
And that's the way it's always been, whether or not you like it,
whether or not you think that's a good thing, because I'm a celebrity and
I can do this kind of stuff. He's always been that way. So,
you know, Jeffrey Epstein is you know, the other billionaire that helped
to make him besides Trump was likes Wexner, and he had his victorious secret
stuff. Well Trump bought his, you know, the beauty pageants and everything.
And as part of those beauty pageants before he was talking about it,
he was talking about putting transgenders in the beauty pageants. And so this last
yesterday or the day before, Trump comes out and says, yeah, I
think the conservatives are being too rough on bud Light, too rough on bud
Light, and his son Don Junior had said that at the very beginning,
and he had you know, some got some bronx cheers from the Conservatives for
that, some of them, and he stopped talking about it. But you
know, Trump can do it. He doesn't isn't going to suffer anything from
that. But that's what he's always been, just like Musk has always been
about these carbon credits. He's always been about pushing the climate mcguffin in the
same way that Trump is always hung out with the braved left, the New
York Democrat groups and so forth. But people don't see it in him,
And I imagine, you know, the MAGA crowd will be perfectly capable of
double thing with Elon Musk as well. I think that's why Musk is making
the kind of moves that he's doing. He looks at those people, he
says, well, you know, if they like me, they will give
me a pass on anything that I do that they don't like. Why does
he say that because he saw him do it with Trump. Jason Barker says,
I'm surprised Elon Musk wants carbon taxes with all those rockets that he launches.
Yeah, that should put him out of business, shouldn't it, Except,
as one person says, Dystopian distance says, carbon taxes for thee and
not for me. See, he's going to be getting those carbon taxes.
That kind of recycling. They get to reuse those carbon taxes and recycle those
carbon taxes back to themselves. That's what they get to do. Rockets and
jet planes are exempt. Yeah, even to the extent that we have Taylor
Swift. Now is you got some teenager who is following her jet, her
private jets and reporting their carbon usage, and so she's going to sell that
jet, forty million dollar jet because she doesn't like that being pointed out.
But she's got another one. Don't worry. She's got I don't know if
she's got more than one more. She gonna have multiple jets to fly around,
Jason says. Jason Barker says, because raw cash sucks CO two out
of the air, that's right, Yeah, that kind of green. Jason
Barker says, When the Elon launches Starlink satellites in orbit with an electric rocket,
then I'll take him serious. That's true. And so you know,
we look at what is happening in California. Every time there's any unusual weather,
it's got to be climate change. Now, not going to be global
warming or global cooling, but it's got to be climate change. And so
they're pushing this. They're also saying, well, there's a drought in the
Amazon, there's a drought in the Amazon, and there's big floods in California,
so it's got to be the end of the world because of your SUV.
As Daily Skeptics says, hysteria has reigned supreme as recent global mainstream media
headlines blame last year's drought in the Amazon basin on human caused climate change.
The BBC reported that without human involvement, the drought may have been one ounce
in fifteen hundred year. I'm sorry, not an ounce, but a once
and fifteen hundred year event. Yes, yes, many ounces there. Damien
Carrington of The Guardian said it hit the maximum exceptional level on the scientific scale,
whatever that means. Those, of course, they don't ever see this
with the vaccines, do they No. Those of more skeptical persuasion might note
that the scares arose from computer models that were funded by Green billionaire investor Jeremy
Grantham. In fact, rainfall in the area has shown little cyclical deviation across
nearly three hundred years. Severe droughts are common in the basin, particularly in
El Nino years, and temperatures in Brazil have risen by only zero point six
degrees and a grade since nineteen hundred. They don't even have good temperature records
there anyway. But we've seen the same type of thing in Venice, for
example. A few years ago they were saying, look at this. You
know, we've got Venice, the waters a rising, and it's global warming,
and Venice is going to be gone within a couple of months. Then
they were complaining because there was a drought. How do you get a drought?
I don't understand in Venice where the canals go dry, But the canals
are dry, and they were gondolas setting on dry ground in these places,
and so they go through drought. Even Venice goes through cycles of drought and
flood. Oh but all of that is now evidence for climate change, you
see, No, it just happens. It's always happened. An update on
the Michael Mann versus Stein mark Stein lawsuit, and again to fill you in
at something I've talked about many times. Michael Man is one who was behind
al Gore's hockey stick and called a hockey stick because in his imagination there is
a connection between CO two and temperatures that's not there. And the fact that
it's not there was what climate Gate was all about, the fact that it
was all a manufactured lie based on a simulation, just like they did with
the Imperial College of London, except this scam was being run by the University
of East Anglia Climate Center in the UK. Both these things coming out of
the UK. When you got somebody at a Hoiti twitty university with a lot
of degrees on their paper and they're speaking with a British accent and they got
a computer print out, I mean that's a very dangerous thing. They can
convince anybody pretty much. I mean it will just fall down and worship these
people. A British accent and a computer print out. Are you kidding?
That's you know, you got all the cards in that kind of a situation.
So that's while they were doing at University of He's Anglia. Then people
caught on to it and saw that they were passing emails back and forth to
each other, saying our models don't work. How do we hide the fact
that the temperature has declined when CO two has gone up, When Michael Mann
is saying it's going to go they're tied together, and it's going to go
up exponentially, and they're more than tied together, and the CO two is
going to multiply that effect. And that was featured prominently an al Gore's thing.
So I've said in the past, I was with a group that tried
to get to his data, and he fought us and won. But at
the same time mark Stein was also criticizing him publicly. Now he is suing
mark Stein for defamation, and as part of this trial, mark Stein is
commenting on it. He says, well, I'm not a lawyer, but
I'm assumed. And but I assumed in covering a defamation trial, I might
be exposed to something resembling evidence of defamation. How naive I was. He
said, virtually every aspect of Man's career is better now than it was before
Stein's and Simberg's blog posts were published. He's suing him, he said,
you'd defame me. Well, where's the injury? Is what mark Stein is
saying. He sarcastically points out, he said, in every regard he has
prospered, not suffered. How is he injured in any of this? He
says, his salary is higher. He hangs out with celebrities such as Bill
Clinton and Leonardo DiCaprio, with whom Man testified to having a bromance. He
was then working at Penn State, but now he's at the Ivy League University
of Pennsylvania. He's making more in book royalties as well. If this is
what harm looks like, I would welcome defamation by Stein and Simberg any day.
And he says, in the heat of Climategate, doctor Curry called on
her colleagues to employ restraint, and this resulted in her being called by the
plaintiff, It's Michael Mann. In the then widely read Huffington Post. He
called her a serial climate disinformer. Oh no, being labeled a disinformer didn't
work, though, so it was time to play the scarlet letter card before
the me too era, That accusation sadly worked all too well. And all
the time the good doctor spread those rumors, it might as well have been
sixteen forty two, even though it was amid two thousands, and so the
following literally had to be stated and asked in court today. Doctor Judith Curry
said, Michael Man knew who I was. My name appeared in one of
the climate gate emails, at Man sent he knew who I was. I
mean when this story was changed or altered to betray me as a graduate student.
To my mind, the implication that I was, you know, just
a woman sleeping my way to the top. And if you're a professional woman,
this is about the worst thing that anyone can say about you. It
discredits your accomplishments, and it gives people permission to ignore you. And so
defense counsel said, doctor curried, did you ever get any of your tenured
faculty positions or department chairs or awards or publications or anything else because you slept
with somebody? She said no. He said, Let that sink in,
says Mark Stein. If you're a professional woman, this is about the worst
thing that anybody can say about you. To scritch your accomplishments, gives people
permission to ignore you. This is what doctor Curry described today as hockey stick
warfare. This is the Michael Man hockeysting. It's just amazing to me.
That people like Michael Mann and Fauci can get away with not showing their data,
and the Imperial College of London and the University of East Anglia that they
can cover this stuff up and hide it over and over again, and then
when it is exposed, why they do they have a government inquiry to make
people think that they're doing something about it, which is exactly the game plan
that the Republicans are doing about the border. Whenever everything blows up, you
have an inquiry or you have an impeachment to make people think that you're doing
something about it, when in fact you were doing nothing about any of this.
The Bank of America is breaking his promise to not finance new coal projects.
As I said, with the war stuff, you've got European Union banks,
Lloyd's of London and others are ignoring the Iran sanctions. Well, you
know, this is an economic war and there's all kinds of sanctions against US.
Bank of America, though, had promised people, and they were celebrated
by all the people on the left pushing this climate mcguffin. They were celebrated
for saying they were not going to finance any new coal projects, and yet
they are now now the Bank has backtracked and said such projects would simply be
subjected to enhanced due diligence. Well, I think they started doing due diligence
on this whole ESG thing, figured out that it wasn't working out too well.
But when they start investing in these fossil fuel plants and these coal plants
and other things like that, When they invest in coal plants, does that
mean that it's going to be made available to us. No, Biden is
making coal great again as exports soar to India. See, we're destroying our
coal burning plants here in America. Even when they were lying and telling everybody
the peak oil was a lie from the CIA saying we're going to be out
of oil and gas by the mid nineteen eighties, they said that in the
late nineteen seventies, and I've shown you the magazines. It was all Newsweek
and Time magazine in lockstep with each other, as they always were same angle,
same thing, and they had the same cover at the same time saying
we're all going to be out of gas in a cup five or six years.
And yet they said we had six hundred and sixty six years of coal,
and so we got the coal. Biden's going to allow the coal to
be exported. Will it be allowed to be burned in the United States.
Well, they're dismantling the coal plants, no matter how clean they are,
and they're going to send the coal to India, no matter how dirty their
coal plants are. India. You say, this is what the Paris Climate
Court Accord was always about. The treaty that was never ratified, and that
the Republicans, not a single Republican ever complained about that, all the Senate
Republicans. I mean, this is something that you know, that's a major
thing. The Senate has the power to ratify or to not ratify treaties.
None of the senators wanted that power because with great power comes great responsibility,
and they didn't want the responsibility of taking a side in all of this.
But by not taking a side, they did take a side, didn't they.
They sided with the globalist. All the Republican senators ran, Paul ted
Cruz, Mitch McConnell, name him, Mitt, Mike Lee. All these
guys sided with the globalist against you in order to push this Paris Climate Accord.
They did that by doing nothing, By doing nothing and never saying,
you know that that treaty I can't stand. And of course Trump kicked the
can down the road as well. First he said he wasn't going to do
anything. Then he said, well, I'll do something after the election.
Day after the election, he says, I'm declaring that we're out of the
treaty. That didn't do anything. Never told any of these senators Mitch McConnell
to call a vote. He didn't even have to take responsibility. All he
needed to do was to point out that they weren't doing it. Trump was
in on it as well. You see, Trump could have said Mitch or
rand or ted, you guys need to call a vote on this, and
if you don't, this isn't a real treaty. He could have said that
when he took office in twenty seventeen, but he didn't. And so what
Paris did. The people who really believe that this is a global problem said
that doesn't help anything. All you're doing is allowing China and India to build
these power plants, and you can they're building dirtier power plants than we have
here. You're not solving the problem at all. You're just doing economic redistribution.
And that's what the Republicans and the Democrats are doing, economic redistribution.
So I remember in twenty seventeen when this is being kicked around, I played
a clip of Humphrey Bogart from Casablanca where he says we'll always have Paris.
I said, they'll never get rid of this Paris climate accord. Tony Ardburn
is ready to join us. Now we're going to take a quick break and
we'll be right back to talk about economic issues. So stay with us here
news NOOW at apsradionews dot com or get the APS radio app and never miss
another story. The common man. They created common Cord and 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 as simple, unsophisticated ordinary. But each of us has worth and
dignity created in the image of God. That is what we have in common.
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
Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If
you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. Ddavidknightshow dot
com. All right, welcome back and joining us now is Tony Ardeman of
wise Wolf Gold and Tony's kindly set up David Knight dot gold which will take
you to Wiswolf and let him know that you came through us. Thanks for
joining us, Tony. That's great to see you, David. Thanks for
having me back. Well, thank you. What's on your mind now with
the economy? Well, you know, I just listening to you this morning.
The elites get so much wrong, the main stream, the powers to
be and go back to the seventies, and you've played this before with like
Leonard Nimoy talking about the Great ice Age that was coming and it's global cooling,
then it was global warming, and then it's climate change and acid rain.
They always have some crisis that never comes to pass and they miss the
actual crisis or huge historical events as they happen. They can't believe it,
they don't understand how to cover it. I'm going back to the fall of
the Soviet Union. How many networks we're talking about that that there was an
imminent collapse coming. Nobody saw that coming, not in the main stream.
They just again, there's some other they have another narrative, there's another mission
that they have, and it's not to let you in on what's to come.
I think that's our jobs. Talk about things on the periphery. And
again, you know, they missed the banking crisis of eight. What about
the the weapons of mass destruction? They never do actual journalism, never talk
about the things that matter. And I think one of the things that's coming
across my research is the upcoming UH systemic banking crisis. It's international in scope.
I mean, you have German banks talking about real estate bubble bigger than
eight in their holdings. Even have Janet Yellen coming out and saying banks are
becoming quite stressed because of their commercial real estate holdings. And we have these
giant vacancies, and you know, Gerald Salente has been talking about that for
years now, just since since the scamdemic, since the lockdowns. UH.
These these empty buildings all over the United States and in the West, and
this is coming to a head, I think, and I think the you
go back to the Great Depression. As you know, between nineteen thirty and
nineteen thirty three, there was nine thousand estimated banks that close in the United
States. That was the beginning of the banking crisis in the Great Depression.
We're a year out now from Silicon Valley Bank following the FTX collapse. We're
a year out from that. And of course one of their periphery banks was
Silvergate. I used to wire silver Gate for my bitcoin transactions. They no
longer exist, so there's fewer and fewer banks that handle cryptocurrencies. To me,
that's the beginning of what is to come here in our Western economies with
these banking the stress on the banking system. So I wanted to bring that
to your attention because nobody in the mainstream is bringing this up, and I
think it's on the horizon. That's right. And when you talk about it,
was it silver Gate. There was like two or three bank failures,
and one of them was not even a bank failure. They were basically pressured
at Silvergate. They were pressured because of their connection to crypt to to shut
down. They were not insolvent, No, no, they were not,
And it was just that it touched FTX and it was in the periphery of
that, and I think that was a lot of what they do is they
pick winners and losers. I think this was more of the consolidation. They'll
use this crisis to consolidate into the major banks and this will be the backbone
of central bank digital currency. You know, that's the real fortys. I
agree. The mainstream people, you know, to quote our buckminster full of
people cannot get out of the way of what they don't see coming. That's
right, they what are you what's coming? What they're going to do is
I had a friend who used to play risk together, you know, and
if he's losing, he just nuked the board. He just knock all the
pieces off. And that's what they're gonna do. They're gonna just nuke the
board, knock all the pieces off, and then set them up the way
they want them to be when they come back. You know, Yeah,
I own this property now and that one and that one and that one.
It's interesting an American thinker. There was a headline that was very good with
Evergrand's liquidation. Of course, Evergrand is this gigantic real estate company and in
China, with their liquidation, and that's what they've decided to do. They're
so bankrupt. They've got assets of two hundred and forty five billion, but
they got which are probably inflated. But assuming that they even have that much
in terms of assets, they have three hundred billion dollars in debt and so
they're going to liquidate it. And he said, what's even more important than
that is the fact that it's emblematic of a lot of things like that that
are happening throughout China, and that China's economy is so heavily based on real
estate and the same thing happened with them that has been happening as Gerald looked
at the lockdown, So this is going to destroy New York. Well,
that's what it did with China, you know, the lockdowns and the throttling
of all commercial activity, but especially the lockdowns kicked off this crash in real
estate. And this article is about the analysis of a Chinese economics writer who
talks about this. I thought it was interesting, Tony that their economy only
grew three percent in twenty twenty two and grew five point two percent in twenty
twenty three. Some of the worst showings that they've had for three decades now.
If we would have something, if our economy was growing at that rate
or better, the Federal Reserve would throttle it. They would say, it's
going to overheat the economy. We're not going to allow that. It just
shows you how managed everything is and managed to the advantage of China. It
truly is a Potempkin economy, and it was the globalist who build that Potempkin
village. Yes, yes, it's fascism ex book fascism, and they completely
controlled economy. I think what people tend to forget is that in a real
estate crisis, what you're looking at is actually a currency crisis, because every
time you create a commercial real estate loan in the modern era is there's a
currency creation there. That's a creation of currency itself. When you get a
home loan, that's new currency that's created by the banks. It didn't used
to be that way. It had something called fractional reserve banking. But as
I've mentioned many times on your show, since nineteen eighty there's fifty times fifty
two times more currency in the world today than in nineteen eighty. That's because
of the amount of currency creation and the real estate market is tied directly to
that. It's why in the United States we have to continually goose the market,
lower interest rates, get people to take out loans, because you need
more currency flowing through the system to prop it up. And it's no longer
about profit or production. It's all debt. And we're sitting on the biggest
debt bomb in the history of mankind. And it's all over the world.
It's systemic, and I think the Chinese have overbuilt. Their economy is suffering.
Yes, they're pulling away from the US hegemony and the sphere of the
dollar. They're pulling away from that. The bricks nations are strengthening, but
all of these economies are weak. I mean it's the US is to channel
Dennis Miller. I think he's talked about being the valedictorian of Summer School,
like we're the best of the worst, Like we've got we've we've got to
You know, you have Paul Krugman saying we have the best economy ever Biden.
Biden nomics is working. These people are delusional. We're sitting on a
massive debt of economic weakness. Supply chains have been so disrupted they're almost broken.
And you know, you see these these selloffs around the world. It's
not going to end well. And I think, you know, the central
banks while this is happening, and you don't see this talked about by the
mainstream at all, they're buying gold and I think they're they're planning for what
they themselves have set in motion, which is the great Reset. I agree.
Yeah, when you look at what is happening in China, so several
articles people talking about mercantilism. You know, that's now the thing we've always
talked about, how well, you know, China is really kind of a
fascist economy. They say that they're communists, and you know, but you've
got to you've got to work with them and give them partial ownership in order
to establish a business within China. They tightly protect their borders, which is
characteristic of mercantilism. You know, we're going to put up all kinds of
barriers for for imp to come in, and then we're going to export things
to people. So it is classic mercantilism. And then you also have an
aspect of colonialism there with the Belton Road initiative, and these things are not
really working out well for them. And they're really kind of showing their their
problems. You know, the Chinese economy has been built on slave labor and
currency manipulation and intellectual property theft, you know, piracy, so piracy and
slavery and mercantilism. You know, it's like we're back to you know,
the Victorian times or whatever, the different empire. But it can't go forever.
And it's one of the things that people talking about mercantilism that was really
kind of an Adam Smith phrase that he coined in contrast to the invisible hand
of a real marketplace. And the thing about it is that at first it
looks like it's really working well until it doesn't. That's kind of you know,
where the Chinese are right now. And then to pour fuel onto this
dumpster fire of the Chinese economy of piracy, slavery, and mercantilism comes Donald
Trump and he's talking about sixty percent tariffs on China. What's that going to
do to the economy? If you suddenly, that's going to be more disruptive
than the rapid increase in interest rates that the Federal Reserve did, isn't it.
I mean, just all of a sudden reset all the deck. You
know, if you were to come in like that, well we'd have to
call ben Stein. I mean, it wouldn't be smooth holly anymore than fifty
percent tariffs from the thirties sixty tariffs. Well, you know, China used
our old playbook. I mean, let's be honest, they used the old
American you know empire. The beginning of the twentieth century, we were economic
nationalists. We were the arsenal of democracy and the manufacturing marvel of mankind.
We had tariffs. We set that in place. That was something that Alexander
Hamilton set up. You have all four presidents on Mount Rushmore supported tariffs.
Every figure on our paper currency supported tariffs. We we built the country on
tariffs. And yeah, you've talked with some great history about the tariff of
abominations in the South and how the South was abrarian and the North was manufacturing,
and there was a battle between that because of pricing. But in general,
the United States was built on tariffs and protecting our base manufacturing. You
know, Uh, Hamilton had read Adam Smith and The Wealth of Nations.
He just didn't agree with the complete free market, and you know, it's
it's it's the theory and so China's used that. And if you go and
look at their tariffs are massive, yes, uh, you know, on
on imports, but they push politically for free trade. It's a very symbiotic
relationship that they have with the United States. It's almost like they're they're parasitically
making sure like they're they're ciphering off as much wealth as they can and letting
things kind of collapse, looking for other inroads. And that's the Belt and
Roade initiative. In my opinion, that's the future that they've planned on.
They don't see the United States as the future. They see that their their
influence and the United States waning, that's gonna there's gonna create a vacuum.
I think that's what they're planning for. But they have overbuilt and I think
their timeline has been disrupted because you and I both know you can have central
planning all you want, but that doesn't really solve all your problems. You
can you can make huge mistakes in judgment, and I think they have.
I think they've overbuilt it. They've overborrowed, uh, and they've used the
United States to the point where the United States is weakening, and then you
end up having a Donald Trump figure, which I believe in tariffs, but
the way he handled a lot of that in his administration, I just scratched
my head. I didn't really understand it. Some of the ways he was
setting that up. He talked about negotiation, and he would put a tariff
on, they'd take it off. I think we need you know, we
look at modest tariffs across the board. You don't want to That's the key
thing. That's the key thing, you know. The key thing is that
he would think that he could do something that radical in that fast. I
mean it's like, you know, uh, to jump that quickly is going
to be such a shock to the system. It'd be total chaos because people
would not be able to react quickly enough to it. When you look at
what the Federal Reserve did rapidly raising interest rates and successive I thinks seventy five
bases points at a time, you know, three quarters of percent each time.
When they did that very rapidly, what it caught the small banks and
many others in a bad place that they couldn't get out of. It caused
some of those bankruptcies that we saw. This would do much more than that.
Now some of the people are looking at it and say, well,
after all, this is Donald Trump. He probably won't follow through with anything
that he says. Goodness is that Trump, and he's throwing out radical stuff
here. But they said, the fact is that he can throw this stuff
out, and only a couple of writers have really reacted to the insanity of
changing rates that rapidly, right, regardless of whether your pro mercantilism and pro
protection or free markets or whatever. To change it that radically, nobody's really
even talking about that, And they said that shows that there's a real constituency
for doing that. Now. In terms of what made it more effective for
Thomas Jefferson, he said, we've eliminated all internal taxation and we've only got
it at the borders. But that was because they had a government that was
small enough to fit into the constitution. So if your government has Ron Paul
has said for the longest time, he said, it really doesn't make that
much difference what your taxation base is as long as it's really really small,
and if it's really really big, it doesn't there's not going to be any
good way to do it. The problem is that the government's footprint is too
big, and its foot is stomping on our face like nineteen eighty four.
That's the problem. And so no matter what they do and how they restructure,
this is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. They've got to
get government to be smaller, but that's not going to happen. And so
they will play these games. And if they play these games, I think
they have a chance of making things much worse very quickly. Let think go
back to the Reagan administration. Late in his second term. They came to
him said, mister President, we're going to lose Harley Davidson. He said,
well, we're going to lose Harley that it's the Japanese because we'd opened
up our markets, we had free trade agreements. That was the way for
us. It was kind of an addendum to the Marshall Plan. Let these
you know, nations that we have destroyed, let them have access to our
markets and build back up their economies. And they came to President Reagan said
we're going to lose Harley Davidson, and he said okay. So he slapped
a fifty percent tariff on the larger import of the larger bikes, and they
saved Harley. That act of economic nationalism saved Harley. But you're talking about
sixty percent tariff across the board on all incoming China across the board. That
is insane And did you're talking I like economic nationalism. I'm a fan of
it. It's interesting that no one I ran on this when I was running
for Congress, no one who I was talking about. They loved the fact
that I was standing up for the worker, but no one in politics usually
talks about this kind of stuff. You know, there's a model too for
it that you can actually look at the model. If you had a twenty
five percent tariff across the board on all manufacturing goods, not just from China,
but just twenty five percent to get into our markets. If you manufactured,
whether a vehicle or a machine, anything that's manufactured outside of the continent
the United States, twenty five percent tariff, and then you eliminate the corporate
income tax for internal corporations. What that would do to give an incentive for
companies to move here, build here, employ Americans and avoid that twenty five
percent But a sixty percent tariff, that's that's But you notice that Trump is
not talking about eliminating the internal taxes either, right, No, this would
be an addition to what we've already got. And so you know that that's
always the problem. And when you look at what is happening with the IRS,
you know they're going to give them another, you know, sixty billion
dollars and then the McCarthy and Johnson both want to cut it down to like
forty five billion dollars. They only get thirteen billion right now. So you're
looking at the Democrats want to make the IRS seven times bigger, the Republicans
want to make it five times bigger. They're not talking about reducing that at
all. They're talking about rapidly escalating this. And it just came out that
these these IRS agents that they're putting in there, the vast majority of them
are going to be for face to face audits, face to face audits,
and they refuse to say that they're going to limit it to the wealthy four
hundred thousand and more now not going to say that it's going to be for
everybody. And this is just the beginning. I mean, they've only su
spent a couple of billion of the massive amount of money that's been allocated to
them. The Republicans aren't pulling that back. They're not the IRS. Instead
of saying we're going to raise taxes of the border and then pull the other
stuff back. Instead of doing that, instead of you know, reducing the
income tax, are going to escalate this. And I think that's a part
of the great taking to have this army of IRS agents that are there.
But it's this is all going to result in a great deal. I think
of chaos, and it's planned and designed to do that is what I think.
And the gold people that are looking at this or saying it's also going
to be a huge kickoff to inflation if they do this, because it's going
to raise prices on every think so rapidly. It's really going to kick inflation
through the roof if they were to do this. Well, the only thing
that really holds up this country anymore is small business. It's entrepreneurs, people
that are still trying to keep the lights on and build things. It's funny
you mentioned the so called Conservative Republican Party. I think you could float passing
the Communist Manifesto through the House of Representatives and they'd be against fifty percent of
it, so they try to try to conserve as much of the change that
goes on what the left and the progressives and the Marxists do, and the
Republicans come along and can serve that a little bit. So we really don't
have anybody fighting for the Bill of Right. Jim Jordan would do a hearing
about it right here. It's so weak and and but that's why we have
to take care of ourselves and these parallel systems. I saw Katherine Austin Fitz
has been talking about sovereign state banks a lot on interviews. You know,
that's in the constitution. This is what we have to do. This is
decentralized, build parallel networks. Because no one in Washington has come to save
You have ridiculous ideas flowing out of there. And you know this is all
in theory too. You know, I've seen Trump run before in twenty sixteen.
I don't know what policies were carried out other than in making you know,
Fauci president. I had a question, you know, I thought this
would be a great tweet for you. You should ask if Trump is re
elected, does Fauci automatically become president again, or do we have to wait
for the next he can become president very easily. He seems to be in
better health than either Trump or well maybe a Trump isn't as good of health
as Fauci is. But you know, we got Biden there. He could
easily have a Fauci become president. But both of them made Fauci president.
And you know, that's the whole thing I said in the twenty twenty election,
Why would I even bother to vote for president because we're being ruled by
Fauci and we're being ruled at the state and local level by bureaucrats. Because
you've got the state and local governments for the most part, would not stand
up to them. Some cases, if you get somebody that's bad at the
state level, they're going to make it even worse than these bureaucrats. So
that's that's really where the key is is that the state and local levels.
And you know, when we talk about the state banks Tony that Katherine Austin
Fitz is talking about, there's a real concern that a lot of states could
go bankrupt. You look at Illinois, look at what is happening in California.
California went from you know, they were looking at a big deficit before
all of this COVID bailout from Trump happened, of tens of billions of dollars,
and all of a sudden they wound up with one hundred billion dollars surplus
and it took them no time at all to blow through that. And now
they're looking at a thirty eight billion dollar deficit again. And so you've got
a lot of these Democrat states that are looking at essentially insolvency and that's a
concern. And if they don't, you know, that's another layer of concern.
If the states cannot administer things that are there's going to be another level
of concern for all of us. I think, yes, well, that's
a massive loss of sovereignty when you have to go to the federal government and
get a bail out for your sovereigns for your state. Yeah, where does
that put you in the column of having any sort of powers anymore, because
you're going to be not that I mean, they're already under the thumb they
take the federal money. But that's another level of subservience, and you know,
that could create a system that could rapidly accelerate Balkanization in the United States
of America. You're going to have some states, especially the Blue states,
with people fleeing, not building businesses, no investment, and then you see
these collapse because they just continue to tax higher and regulate more, and they're
going to have these collapses. I think that's inevitable. There's state budgets completely
inflated, places like Illinois, places like California. He's going to be the
first to go and they're going to be I think further link to the federal
government, which is going to be a massive loss for liberty because the only
way that we have any sort of freedom is to be able to flee into
across state lines at this point. That's right, Yeah, it's it's interesting.
You know, we talked about the Potemkin economy of China and we just
had Biden put out his adjusted figures. They added a million jobs that didn't
actually exist in the Department of Labor and we all see that. You know,
they always go in and they'll talk about what the unemployment rate is this
quarter and how it changed, you know, from the previous quarter, and
they always will go back and adjust previous quarter so they can show a positive
trend that is a bipartisan trick that they always do. But of course with
everything, as with everything else, Biden takes it to another extreme level and
he's done that with this. Now when you look at all of this,
it's just, you know, the magnitude of it, the magnitude of the
malarkey just gets higher and higher with Biden every time they go through it.
And it's not just that kind of stuff. But the other thing that nobody
is really talking about, Tony are things like the record credit card interest rates.
It's something like twenty seven percent now on average. That's just to me,
that's such an abomination. If I was to run for any office,
I would start trying to stop that at the state or local level. You
know, it's just thievery to charge people twenty seven percent. That's like loan
sharking. It's amazing. It's usory. Yeah, it is useder, it's
criminal, and they're taking advantage of people. I read a study a couple
of days ago. Credit card defaults are up fifty percent in twenty twenty three,
according to the New York Federal Reserve. Fifty percent. So people are
living paycheck to paycheck, they're going into debt. It's funny Drudge had a
headline. I read it on my show last week, David, and it
was people are seeing prices lower in some columns, but the prices of groceries
are way off the charts. And I thought, well, because those items
that you're seeing the price drop, and this is economics one oh one,
you want to be a professor. They're not buying those things because they can't
afford them, whether it's used cars, televisions or new phone. But they
have to eat. So the prices are the things they need, they absolutely
need, are going up. And so you have this duality of a falling
prices in other places and rising prices in places that you need. That's the
definition of a failing economy and a failing currency. And the mainstream is not
going to get it all the way up to the end. We are watching
the death of a currency and it's slow, but the rest of the world
is catching on. Their dumping the dollar, their buying gold, they're joining
other financial coalitions like the Bricks Nations. The fact that Saudi Arabia, David,
join bricks. Now we have bricks plus. The fact that Saudi Arabia
joined bricks is not headline everywhere over all these financial networks. Is not only
that, not only did they you know, you've got now ten bricks nations
and another seventeen that have like a memory kind of not a full membership status,
but are kind of involved in that. But also the other part of
the petro dollar was the fact that they would buy military weapons from US,
and now they're looking to source that from other places. So, I mean,
the petro dollar is just gone in terms of its construct that was put
there. That's that's going to have big implications for everybody. That's why I
like to get out of the fiat currency, try to get into gold and
silver. And of course you know, the World Economic Forum is talking about
the fact that we've got to have interoperability between these cbdc's. That's what I
mean. It's a global currency. They'll have a veneer of nationalism on each
of these CBDCs, but they'll be interoperable. It'll be one and the same
thing. But before we run out of time, we've got another guest coming
on. Tell us what's going on at why is Wolf? Well, we're
just continuing to keep the supply chain open for our customers. That's been my
mission here since all of this has been accelerated in twenty twenty. I realized
the supply is going to be the issue that first quarter of twenty twenty day.
But I remember people calling in to get orders when the prices fall after
the stock market collapsed, and I couldn't source it at the time, and
I thought, well, in the future, I going to make sure that
we have more than two or three supply chains. So I've set those up.
We've got another location here in Dennison, Texas that I'm working on.
Wolfpack has a lot of great products. If you want to support David,
go to Davidnight dot gold check out, Join wolf Pack. It's a great
way to stack gold and silver, especially if you're on a budget. We
have goldbacks going in every single order. Now I'm putting goldbacks in every order.
That's great me. I'm making sure that we don't run on a gold
backs for those sovereign state notes that are twenty four carret gold. So even
if you're on the lowest budget, even the wolf cub of the thirty five
dollars a month get some gold backs. So go to go to David Night
dot gold check out wolf Pack. We've got some great incentives right now,
and it's just a good way for you to stack whether it's you know,
fifty dollars or five thousand dollars. We can just to amplify that the goldbacks
are actually have a physical gold, but a small amount on it. It's
in the format of what you typically see is paper currency, but it's actually
core carrerot gold. Yeah. Really got gold o note. Yeah. So
that's a great thing. And that's and that's the key. You know,
what are we going to have as a medium of exchange as a currency,
not just as holding wealth, but the ability to have a currency in case
we can't get this done at the state level because the state moves very slowly
and this stuff is coming at us very fast, so we need to have
something like the gold backs that are there. Well, thank you for coming
on, Tony. Always great to talk to you. We really do appreciate
your support. And again, folks can get to Wisewolf dot gold by going
to David Knight dot gold and that'll take you to Tony. Let him know
that you came from us. Thank you so much, Tony, appreciate it,
Thank you, thank you. All Right, folks are going to take
a quick break. When we come back, we're going to talk to a
historian who's written a book, Not Stolen the Truth about European Colonialism in the
New World, historian Jeff Finn Paul. And this is we see all the
statues that are coming down. It hasn't been widely reported that the New York
Museum of Natural History and closed a ten thousand square foot area that was about
Indians themselves. They just shut that down. And so he's going to talk
about how this is a phony version of history that's being used to attack us
and reset things culturally. So we're going to take a quick break and we'll
be right back to talk about that book, Not Stolen the Truth about European
Colonialism. So stay with us, will be right back. In a world
of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. You're listening to the
David Knight Show analyzing the Globalists, Next Move and now the Deep and Nut
Show. All right, welcome back and joining us now is Jeff Fenn Paul.
He is author of many books and articles. We're going to talk to
him specifically about one recent book. He's a professor of global history and economics
at Leiden University. In the Netherlands, and the book that we're going to
begin talking about, of course there's other ones that he's written that are touch
on the same subject, is not stolen the truth about European colonialism in the
New World. And this is very important because as we see everywhere, we've
got to pull down the statues, we've got to rename the streets and the
buildings and you name it, because somewhere somebody was involved in slavery or colonialism
and they stole the land. And so this is the basis on which the
economy and the culture is being The culture more than anything, is being reset.
So joining us now is Jeff, and so thank you for joining us.
Jeff, I appreciate you coming on. Thanks a lot for having me
on. David, thank you. Let's talk a little bit about what happened
in New York because that is probably the most recent and strangest event that has
happened with all of this rewriting of history and culture. What happened at the
New York Natural Natural History Museum. Well, I mean in nineteen ninety they
passed a law with a really nasty acronym, NAGUPRA, and the idea was
to protect Native American bones that had maybe been robbed from gravesites, and so
that's rather understandable. You can understand how that's a sensitive topic. But recently
under the Biden administration, they've started broadening the rules so that almost any Native
American artifact is now difficult to display in an American museum. And the idea
is is that tribes should have sovereignty over all of these artifacts, but is
a lot of modern tribes are not connected to artifacts that are hundreds or thousands
of years old, so they've been given to tribes that they didn't really belong
to in the first place. And then the other thing that's going on is
that these things are basically being removed from displays. So what we're seeing is
the closure of a lot of Native American history museums. And the left is
always saying, hey, we need to reclaim Native American history, but this
is such a weirdly counterintuitive move. They're literally erasing Native American history from these
museums so that neither Native Americans nor the general public can understand their own history.
There's a lot of weird, weird things going on. Yeah, well,
you know, when you want to memory whole things. You got to
do it eventually, do it to everybody, right, if you're going to
memory whole history, you've got to do it all of it or none of
it. And it's kind of interesting to see that this is a bill,
a law from the nineteen nineties. I was just talking to somebody else on
Tuesday. We're talking about the nineteen ninety four Face Act, and the Biden
administration is taking some of these laws from the nineteen nineties and using in a
way that they've never been used before in the intervening thirty years or so.
And so it is interesting to see how they're weaponizing these things and extending them
in ways that perhaps they were never intended to be because they haven't been haven't
been used like this since for you know, three decades since their creation.
So I think this is a very novel take on a lot of different laws.
This is kind of a recurring theme of the Biden administration, isn't it.
Absolutely? And I mean, you know, so they expand these powers
and they claim that they're helping Native Americans. At first, it looks like
this is just a sob to the DEI people, But you really wonder who
this is benefiting, And I think it's benefiting only a few people in a
few tribes who maybe want to have more control over these artifacts. But ultimately,
all they're doing is basically destroying scientific evidence on which we can create Native
American history. Now, who might benefit from that? I think it's really
people who are afraid of history because they want to sell such a left wing
vision of history that they don't even want it to be contradicted by any real
facts. Yeah. Yeah, they can invent the whole thing out a whole
clock, isn't The Natural History Museum in New York is another one that was
at the United Museum if I'm thinking of that, is that the same thing?
Yeah? I mean there's such a such a long history, I mean
founded by Teddy Roosevelt, and it's been collecting artifacts that scientists have been using
for over one hundred years. And now all of this evidence is being literally
reburied, it's being broken up, It's going to disappear forever. And I
think they had a Teddy Roosevelt statue that had Sakaijawea or something there, right,
And did they remove that they were talking about removing it, Were they
successful in doing that or well, I'm not sure what actually happened with that
controversy, but yeah, I know that anything like that nowadays is embattled,
and it seems like right now it's only a matter of time until it goes.
It's much like what we see with you know, well, we've got
to remove Roberty Lee, but then they come after Ulysses Grant as well.
You know, they come after an abolition is as well. They can't even
be consistent with their own rationale. They just really want to get rid of
everything. So you go to the Natural History Museum, get rid of Teddy
Roosevelt, you get rid of Picaigue, and then all the other Indians as
well. And it's interesting that they did it so quickly. You said,
it's a ten thousand square foot area that they had there are the Indians,
and it took them just a few hours to take that down the end of
January. Yeah. Absolutely. And the thing is is when they reopen these
holes we've actually seen because they did this with one of the halls at the
same museum, they DEEI wash it in such a way that people's ancestral stories
are told as facts and scientific facts are shunned aside. So if somebody says,
my grandfather told me the story, no matter how crazy it was,
that now gets presented to the public as fact, that's obviously doing a disservice
to everybody. Yes. Yes, And it was just also in January where
they tried to get rid of William Penn. They're going to remove him from
his exhibit and put up Indian information, they said in the Indian tribes that
were there were some of the people who are pushing against it. I mean,
it's because of local resistance that they were able to stop that. And
the Indian said, no, he was a good guy. He was a
friend to us, you know, and so they were able to stop it.
There. You see this in many cases, and you're talking about a
lot of these artifacts are very very old, and they're not sure really what
tribe they belonged to. But in many cases, I know, when you're
from Florida as well, I see in your bio here you had Florida State
University. There was a pressure campaign to try to get rid of the term
Seminoles, but the Seminole tribes said, no, we're honored by that.
And so it is strange to see this and in many cases it's not being
done by some people within the Indian groups. It's being done, as you
point out, people who are pushing this Wokism. I refer to it as
Marxism because it really is the same type of tactic that the Marxist used.
Shi Van Fleet's been very good about saying, you know, this is exactly
what they were doing in China. You know, it doesn't have anything to
do with slavery or different indigenous people groups. This is just a tactic that
they use. So let's talk a little bit about your book Not Stolen,
because that is one of the key things identifying people as colonizers, implying that
we're thieves descendants of thieves, and therefore all of this stuff has to be
eradicated, rewritten, and reallocated with reparations and that type of thing. Talk
a little bit about that book Not Stolen, Truth about European colonialism in the
New World. Well, you know what, I totally agree with you that
this is originally a Marxist idea. It's a very nineteenth century idea of society
works that says there's only two groups, oppressor and oppressed. And so they
come up with the idea that if you're the colonizer. You were always the
oppressor, You're always bad. If you were the colonized, then you're always
innocent, you always do everything right. And again, we got rid of
this idea in the history profession after the nineteen sixties and seventies, after the
hippie movement died down, we got some sense and we realized that reality is
multifaceted. It's not always a versus b So what we see now with social
media is a resurgence of this simplistic nineteenth century Marxist idea where instead of the
bourgeoisie in the proletariat, it's the Europeans and indigenous people, or it's white
people and black people, or men and women. And so what they're trying
to do is rewrite history, to take out all the cases where Europeans were
good, were decent, we're noble, were moral, where they were trying
to help the Native Americans. They also try to erase all the times when
Native Americans were nasty to each other, genocidal or slavery, all that stuff.
And so the premise of the book is to say, let's turn the
clock back to the nineteen nineties or the early two thousands, when historians had
a balanced view of Europeans in Native Americans, there were saints and sinners on
both sides. But now, since the rise of BLM, I suppose we're
not allowed to say anything good about Europeans or anything bad about natives. And
that's frankly completely unscientific. No historians should support that. And of course,
kind of similar to all of that was the sixteen nineteen project. I'm sure
that's a core part of your book addressing that. Yeah, absolutely well.
I mean they say in the opening paragraphs, we want to rewrite American history
to put slavery as the fulcrum around which all of American history revolves. And
again, any historian worth their salt knows history has multiple causes and effect there's
no one thing around which everything revolved. So it's an ideological project. It's
trying to create a discord where there used to be consensus, and it's frankly
kind of a resurgence of nineteen sixties black pantherism. It's that kind of Marxism,
and it has no place in a modern scientific field. And of course
the weather underground. At the same time, Bill Ayers and his people started
talking about white skin privilege. They didn't invent it, but they started popularizing
it. And then he after he stopped bombing buildings, he started bombing minds
in the educational system with the idea of white privilege. But yeah, it
was all really kind of a Marxist tactic because they realized that it wasn't working
to talk about people. The Americans believe that they had economic mobility, and
so the kind of class warfare based on economic classes that they used in Europe
wasn't working here. So they had to do something along the lines of racial
division and conflict. Right. Well, I mean, if you look,
black families in America have on average been more and more wealthy every decade,
and then we have the election of a black president in two thousand and eight,
and I think the left started running scared, and they said, unless
we create a new narrative and new division, black people and white people are
actually going to get along and everybody's going to, you know, help create
a better American society. That was like their worst nightmare. Yeah, and
so they'd come back with his nineteen sixty seventy stuff. Yes, yes,
And so you know, when you talk about this, are you focused,
are you focused on the US predominantly, or do you also look at the
implications as they're being used in the UK because they're also tearing down statues they're
based on slavery because the UK was central to the slave trade. Of course,
no credit is given to those people who stopped the slave trade and then
the UK, you know, basically paid stopped slavery by paying off the plantation
owners. They don't talk about that aspect of it. Of course, it
is very it is very transparently one sided in their discussion of all of it.
But give us an idea of the scope of your book. Yeah,
well, I mean I have become a professor of global history here in the
Netherlands. They're a small country and they think about the world at large,
and so I was an historian of the Spanish Empire, but I also knew
a lot about more recent economic history. So I just started taking on these
big picture ideas, you know. So the book covers five hundred years of
European colonialism and contact with the natives, and it also talks about Latin America
a little bit Mexico, but also North America, so the United States and
Canada, with a real focus on the US but I start out with the
beginning of European colonialism with the Spanish, because there's so many things people think
about Columbus, they think about the Aztecs and Quartes, and there's so many
stereotypes that people have been told which are frankly just plain wrong. Most of
the people in the New World actually lived in Mexico or in the Incan Empire.
There were very few in North America. And when you look to date,
most of the population of Mexico, eighty percent of them are mixed Spanish
and Indigenous. Very few people are actually European, you know, full blooded
Europeans. So if the Spanish were trying to commit genocide or move the natives
out of the way, they did a terrible job. And in North America
there were so few people that by eighteen twenty, European settlers outnumbered the natives
one hundred to one. Wow, which is what we still see today.
So these ideas of genocide and settler colonialism need to be addressed by looking at
the bigger picture. Yes, yes, talk a little bit about the sixteen
nineteen project because one of the things that really concerns me, and that date
I think was picked to try to preempt the American tradition of the Mayflower in
sixteen twenty. So we're going to erase that, and we're going to make
this all about slavery. And of course this is something that the Marxists have
been focused on extensively, especially at Harvard. Pete I call him Booty Gay.
But his mentor there, Saka Van Brukovich at Harvard, was always about
deconstructing everything in terms of how Puritans and Protestant America had ruined everything. So
that was his kind of his worldview, his lens of everything, that he
would deconstruct everything by taking it back to those roots, those evil roots.
And so it seems to me like that was a part of it as well.
But for the early decades the how do you see this? They dismissed
it as a myth. I think that maybe it's not, but I'd like
to know your opinion as a historian. The fact that the early Pilgrims who
went to from the Mayflower to that area seemed to get along for several generations
with the Indians that were there for the most part, What do you she
to imagine that? Yeah? So, I mean the idea is originally to
discredit capitalism by saying that the roots of capitalism in America were based on slavery,
which has now been thoroughly debunked by economic historians. But most historians today
aren't trained in economics, so they can't even really read that literature. And
that's real important because that's what the basis of the reparation stuff as well.
So you get into the numbers and the figures in your book. Yeah yeah,
so, I mean that's the thing. I can actually come up with
numbers and figures, which most of my colleagues are happy to breeze over and
or they their head spin if they even think about them talking about racism and
getting along. For the first couple of centuries, I mean, all the
way up till the end of the seventeen hundreds, most Europeans believed that Native
Americans were quote born white. And this may sound a little weird, but
they actually thought they were the same race as Europeans because they were from the
same latitude. So they didn't think skin color was based on race back then,
they thought it was based on where you lived in relation to the to
the sun or to the equator. So they actually thought Native Americans were the
same racism, and they didn't even use the term red man until after eighteen
hundred. So the idea that their hatred of natives was based on racism is
completely fallacious. There's just absolutely no truth to it at all. They thought
we were all descended from Adam and Yan, and you see so many sources
that say these people are just as clever as we are. The only difference
is our technology level. Yes, yes, and that really is say,
descended from Adam and Eve. I've mentioned that many times. Is I've heard
it said, you know, from a Christian perspective, there's only one race,
that's human race. The only difference is the direction that we're racing.
And the Christians was say, are you racing toward God or away from God?
And the skin color doesn't really matter, So that is it's interesting that
that Christian perspective has been there for many, many centuries. It's nothing new,
absolutely yeah. And so you know, there there were some scruffs on
one side of the other. You had King Phillips War after several decades and
some other things like that. But these are the types of things that you
know happen, and it's you know, happened within different European groups. Same
groups will go to war with each other. You have civil wars, you
have wars between different groups, you have recrimination because of somebody committing a crime
in one community or the other. That type of thing would happen, but
it had been peacefully adjudicated and it was not the kind of the environment that
has been depicted in sixteen nineteen. Talk to us a little bit about the
economics without I know that you know, we don't have the paper in front
of us to look at the numbers. But talk a little bit about the
economics aspect of that, because that's very important in terms of the reparations thing
that is being passed around. Of course, money being added to grievances.
That's going to be a very powerful political tool for them to wield. So
talk a little bit about reparations. Yeah. Well, I mean, first
of all, you need to think about numbers and how many Native Americans there
actually were, how many were being wrongs. You see major websites saying,
for example, that Columbus killed seven million people in Hispaniola, the little island
where he first landed. But they recently did a genetic study and found that
there were only thirty thousand people living there when Columbus arrived. I mean,
so that's the kind of crazy numbers that we're seeing. So you can imagine
that any other economic figures, any kind of numbers at all, are very
difficult to pin down. If we can't even get the population figure right.
We see claims for reparations, you know, against some of the universities in
the Midwest, things like that coming up today, and the real question is
how much was that land actually work. So in the nineteenth century, most
native tribes were still in the Midwest anyway, were hunter gatherers, and so
there might only be a couple thousand people living in an entire modern state.
That's you know, hunting and gathering does not produce many calories per acre at
all. So once she turned to farming, as Thomas Jefferson said, these
people now only need about one to one thousandth as much land to farm as
they used to need to hunt. And natives themselves started using firearms, they
started living near the settlers because they were a source of gunpowder, firearms,
iron tools, things like that, and then the natives themselves helped deplete the
game. So sooner or later, they were going to have to turn to
farming, and then the land, once you farm, it becomes much more
valuable, it's much more productive. And then the white settlers start building roads
which connects it to the ports, which creates more value in the land.
So if people are claiming value for land today, it's been developed for two
hundred years two hundred years ago, it was literally an de scrubble, a
couple deer on it, and a lot of times those payments have already been
made and settled in court years ago, and of course people just bring them
up again because it's basically a free hand though, and it was very disrupting.
They started deconstructing some of those things in Oklahoma and created a great deal
of unrest and uncertainty, And of course we're just talking about reparations from the
Indian side as well. But that's fascinating the fact that when you look at
the scale of the people that were here, as you mentioned with Columbus and
with other issues, maybe that's one of the reasons why they want to shut
down these Indian museums so they can stop actually finding out the real scientific information
about the population that was there and how extensive it was and what was happening
there, Maybe shut that down and tell some happy stories from a different political
perspective. Maybe that's the motivation. Huh oh, I'm afraid so. I
think there are some groups who really do want to shut down the history and
erase that history because it doesn't go with their own narratives in the current day,
which would entitle them to more handouts. They don't want you to know
their tribe was only in a given area for one hundred years before the white
men arrived, that they had picked out several other tribes before they arrived.
I mean, history is a lot more complicated than they want you to think.
That's right, And you know, it's portrayed in a very simplistic way
that the only conflict is between white Europeans and the American Indians that were there,
and yet they had a great deal of conflict with each other as well.
They had slavery internally with each other, as did every society. And
that's why I mentioned you know, when you talk about not stolen, you
know slavery in term. It's a global situation. So it's a common thing
throughout human history, but it's always portrayed as something that is uniquely European,
and that's what these people are portraying it as in order to get reparations.
Absolutely, and I mean so every Thanksgiving, you see all of these articles
appear online that mentioned King William's war, that mentioned a couple of massacres.
But as you pointed out, there were often decades in between these wars between
Europeans and natives, and the Europeans were living in scattered houses all amongst the
natives. Clearly, that's because for generations they had no trouble with them at
all. So you know, everyone was trusting each other, everyone was living
with each other. So the idea that there was a constant warfare that Europeans
were taking slaves was not the case. Meanwhile, in Massachusetts, many tribes
thanked the Puritans for imposing a peace in a huge swath of eastern Massachusetts,
which they said, a piece of the likes of which we have never known
already within ten years, that's what the Indians were saying to the colonists,
thank you for imposing this peace, because they used to enslave each other.
So they were constantly of war, constantly in danger of being slaughtered or enslaved,
and of course, it's that kind of tribalism that they our current government
is trying to re establish. You know, for the longest time we had
that commonality. The people who were settling it there, they saw everybody as
descended from Adam and Eve, all as created by God, all as human
beings, and so it was that commonality. As they said in the Mayfire
Compact, part of the reason that they wanted to come to a new land
was to spread Christianity, and that was part of the Christian ethic that is
so despised was the fact that they wanted to bring out the commonality in people
rather than focus on tribal differences and those kinds of tribal differences as they emphasize
that now, that's going to take us back into a conflict that was already
there in so many different ways. Talk a little bit about colonialism and slavery
and other areas besides America. Yeah, well, I mean, what most
people don't realize is that the Aztecs were a huge slave drivers. Not only
that, but then when they enslaved people, they often brought them as part
of the human sacrifice machine. Their religion was based on. They're saying,
maybe twenty or thirty thousand human sacrifices at the Aztec capital per year. Wow.
There is suspicions that these people were used for protein because they had killed
off all the megafauna when they first arrived, so there weren't many large animals,
so maybe this is what was going on. But anyway, there were
huge slave networks all across Mexico. When Cortes first arrived, he was gifted
twenty women by a local chief. These women had basically been used as slaves
and had been trafficked from across Mexico, and so Cortes was encountering vestiges of
this thriving slave market when he first arrived. That was just part and parcel
the way the world worked down there. And how did they react to that?
Did he what did he do with those slaves? Did he continue in
that tradition or well? That's the wild thing about Cortes is he one of
these women turned out to be exceptionally bright and a charismatic leader, and he
used her as an interpreter for the Aztec court. It turned out she had
been raised as a noble woman and her name is Marina. Cortes took her
as his mistress and had a son by her, who he later ennobled.
The pope actually gave him the title of duke, and so he was raised,
even though he was a Mestiza, to this great glory, and Marina
basically helped Cortes conquer the Aztec Empire, as did tens of thousands of other
native warriors who made the bulk of Cortes's army. So the Spanish then imposed
something nobody ever talks about, which is a Pax Hispanica on all of Mexico.
These tribes were not fighting each other. Now for the first time in
history, they weren't enslaving each other, they weren't sacrificing each other. And
so the quality of life for the average person once they survived the diseases that
the Spanish accidentally brought, then the quality of life for them increased dramatically.
And so what was as a pax a piece that they imposed across that Mexico
And it was. But when how is this portrayed by the left differently?
Yeah? Yeah, I mean the Left doesn't want to talk about that at
all. Right, so they'll say, oh, one hundred thousand people died
in Cortez is worse. They want to leave it at that. If you
google it, it'll say eight million people were killed in Cortes is worse.
That is highly contentious, and at least ninety percent of those if of people
who did die, died of disease, which again in the seventeenth century nobody
could control over the sixteenth century. So the left will completely ignore the fact
that the human sacrifice was stopped, that the tribal warfare was stopped, that
there had been forced removals and genocides that no longer occurred, and frankly,
anything they don't want to hear, such as in the nineteenth century the United
States introduced smallpox vaccines to Native Americans, saving tens of thousands of lives.
All those facts just kind of go unmentioned, shall we say, by my
colleagues. That's interesting, And so we look at it in terms of reparations.
Is there a reparations movement outside of America or is this something that is
really kind of spearheaded by the American Marxists. Are they using this for political
purposes elsewhere throughout Central and South America. Well, you know, it really
started with the kind of New Black Panther movement, the sort of BLM movement,
and around twenty sixteen they started calling Bernie Sanders a racist for refusing to
support reparation, I mean, all these crazy things, and it really spread
from there. So the British are getting some of this from former members of
the British Empire where the British were involved in the slave trade. And then
indigenous groups across the world have have gotten on the bandwagon, if you will,
because they realized there's political win behind these sales for reparations. But they
still mostly come from the African Pan African slavery movement. Now, remember ninety
percent of the slaves coming to the New World did not go to the United
States. They went to Brazil and other places. But in Latin America people
are still a little bit more chilled out. They realized that Columbus is kind
of you know, they're Mestizo. A lot of these people are mixed European
and Native. They see Columbus as one of the fathers of their race and
also their native ancestors, the other fathers of their race, and so they're
not quite into this reparations idea as we are in Western Europe in the US,
so they're not tearing down a Columbus statues like they're trying to do,
not as much. That's interesting. So when you look at this from a
standpoint of reparations, again, I think probably the information that you have bringing
truth to the size of the population, the economics that are involved there,
I think that is going to be a key for people in terms of takeaway
from your book. I think that's probably one of the most important things that
people could get from. What are the other lessons that you would suggest that
people can learn from your book? Yeah, well, I mean pretty much
any of the stereotypes that you hear about stolen land for example, or about
genocide for example, or even the trail of tears. These are things that
we used to have a balance scientific idea about which now you're only allowed to
believe one extreme version of what happened. So, you know, for the
first two hundred years, the Europeans in North America were very content to just
stay along the coast and have trading forts. I mean, they made a
proclamation line in seventeen sixty three which basically said, no one's going to settle
west of this. Ever, they thought the Native Americans were going to be
in control of ninety percent of the continent in perpetuity. So the idea that
the Europeans arrived with the idea of stealing the land is totally wrong. They
actually there was a huge real estate market, thriving real estate market where Natives
would sell land and get gunpowder and tools, you know. So people forget
this stuff all the time, even the Trail of Tears. It was one
of the most shameful episodes in American history. Sixty thousand Natives were removed to
Oklahoma from the Southeast. But even then, the US Supreme Court said that
this removal was illegal and ordered Jackson not to do it, you know.
And so people are saying, oh, the US is this genocidal country.
Look at the Trail of Tears. The US Supreme Court itself forbade this to
happen, and many members of Congress protested. Some Davy Crockett was a congressman.
He actually resigned in protest at the removals. Intellectuals and the public were
in a huge uproar. Martin Van Buren, who was the Vice president,
said, Wow, this was the biggest public uproar we've ever seen in the
United States against any political action. So that says to me, there's a
lot of good in the American society, even in the eighteen thirties, goodwill
towards the Native Americans that my colleagues are absolutely refusing to acknowledge. I mean,
there's a book out called Surviving Genocide about the Trail of Tears, and
they're pretending that it was a genocidal movement. It was not uniformly approved by
any means. And I talked about that many times when talking about the Supreme
Court, I might say, well, Supreme Court made a decision, that's
done. He said no, you know, Jackson said, well you made
your decisionless, see you when forcing me what you wanted to do, right.
And the interesting thing about that is that the Supreme Court at first said
well you can do it. Then when they saw it and in practice,
they changed their mind within about a year i think it was, and said
no, you can't do that. And so as you point out, you
know, it is there's a very simplistic notion that is being sold to people.
That's the basis of all of this, you know, Project sixteen nineteen,
all the rest of this stuff. They want to paint everybody and these
very simplistic stereotypes. It's kind of ironic because they're always complaining about stereotypes,
and yet they're creating their own stereotypes out of all this, aren't they Absolutely
Yeah, it's ridiculous. I mean, they're pretending that the settlers and natives
never gone along. But you open up any source and you see they're all
camping out in the same village together for weeks and months on end, obviously
trading with each other, communicating with each other most of the time, getting
along very well. So even stereotypes as simple as that. Yes, and
I can't remember all the details now, it seems like there was something about
what kicked off all of this stuff. Were some complaints, but locally I
think there was. Wasn't it somebody who was selling them bibles and was a
friend of theirs or something that was trying to intervene at the beginning of the
Cherokees being removed as a history you probably know more details about that than I
do. What was it they kicked that off? It seems like even at
the very beginning, and even at the local level before it went up to
Washington, there was a lot of movement and support of the Cherokees. There
locally from the Europeans. Oh yeah, well, there were several missionaries who
had gone down there. They had taught the Cherokees how to read and write,
They helped them create their own alphabet, they set up a newspaper.
Samuel Worcester was one of the missionaries whose case was later brought to the Supreme
Court against the removal. So, I mean he was instrumental in helping to
bring the Supreme Court case. And then for generations afterwards, there were people
who went along with the natives to Oklahoma to help make sure the soldiers weren't
too mean to them, to help them set up stores. And you know,
even Jackson, even his officials were thinking, because gold had just been
discovered in Georgia, they were thinking that they really ought to remove the natives
for their own good, because there were so many squatters moving onto their land
that nobody could properly control. I mean, this was frontier territory. The
Natives were outnumbered maybe fifty to one by this point. And so there's even
arguments, some historians have made this in good faith, that this was actually
the best thing to move them beyond the borders of the United States at the
time. So again, we see lots of countervailing logic and reasons happening on
the ground that you really need to understand the historical sources before you can judge.
Yeah. Yeah, And of course there was a lot of interconnection in
many different ways. You know, the Cherokee got along very well with the
Europeans in general. I don't think there was it wasn't really any violent conflict.
I don't think there was a lot of intermarriage. There was a lot
of cultural exchange, religious exchange. When it came time a few decades later,
about thirty years later, when the Civil War happened, Cherokee were supportive.
Of course, they didn't like the fact that the federal government had removed
him. I'm sure that had something to do with it. But there were
close ties to the people in the area between the Cherokee, didn't they It
seems like they. I don't recall any conflicts like you would see in some
other areas out west. Yeah. Well, I mean the fact is half
of the Cherokee leadership, a lot of the major players, such as Major
Ridge, were at this point half Cherokee, half European. There was a
Native American practice of adopting people into your tribe. So most of the leaders
were part of European Many of them had been educated back east. There were
some Indian schools that had been set up by missionaries for the idea of making
them literate so that natives could support themselves and make legal arguments in Washington,
So there was actually a major Ridge himself had actually fought with Jackson in a
previous campaign against the Seminoles, so they all knew each other, these elites,
so the native elites and European elite. Many of the natives didn't even
want to go with the tribe because they already owned land outside of tribal land.
They were already running farmsteads and other businesses. So there was so much
interaction on the ground, intermarriage on the ground. People knew what was coming
for years before the removals, so this was no surprise. The tribes who
did get removed knew what they were signing up for. They had all been
offered farms instead of removal, which they refused, you know, and that
was done on a political vote. So I mean, when you know the
details, it's once again a lot more complicated and messy. Oh yeah,
yeah, yeah, I've I've talked to many times about it, mainly from
the Supreme Court standpoint, and a little bit about you. I knew a
little bit about the missionaries and their connection to them. I did not know
that there were Europeans who accompanied them out there. What was the basis though
that began was a justification for removal? Where did that all come from?
Yeah, well, I mean even as late as as Jefferson's presidency, even
a little bit after that, the idea was that the natives in the Southeast
had been granted this land. It was because the land was granted by US
property right. They were not ever going to be removed. And so this
is one of the reasons why there was so much outrage when Jackson started this
process to actually remove these natives beyond Mississippi. And that's why the Supreme Court
was willing to stand up for their property rights. I mean, so the
idea had long been, all right, they can't be hunter gatherers anymore.
Let's give them title to land, and this will protect them. And I
think the real outrage that Davy Crockett had was that, look, these people
now own title to land. We can't just transfer human beings off their own
property. And that's what caused a lot of the real fight and what was
a justification that the people were trying to remove them from, what was their
justification for taking them on plants had the treaty in it, it became politically
expedient to do this after the gold rush in the southeast. So I mean
there were a couple of us Mints that minted only gold coins I think at
Delona, Georgia, and Charlotte, I think in North Carolina, And so
once gold was discovered there, there was a huge rush of settlement into that
land. There were skirmishes. If the Indians retaliated, they'd get massacred by
you know, twenty times as many white people as they had warriors. And
meanwhile, the natives had actually been starting to increase in numbers. They were
actually doing well on their lends there. And so the Jackson was partially elected
on the idea that he was going to free up this land for settlement by
whites, even though the federal government disapproved, and almost every northern Neer disapproved
at the time. So it's basically we found gold, and so we got
to rethink this screen. Yeah what was going on? Yeah, well that's
interesting but as you point out, you know, even though the origins of
it, the basis of it was bad, you had people on both sides
and people who were allies for doing the right thing. And I think it
is as an important thing for us to understand the reality of history that it's
complex, it's not one dimensional, it's not very simple minded as people who
are propagandists wanted to present it. And we've had very simple minded versions of
history in the past that went the other direction, off the other direction,
and now we're getting a very simple minded direction of history. So it's good
to have books like yours that put the things in context. There's going to
be good and bad people on both sides. There's good and bad in every
person, and so of course they're going to have good actions and bad actions
on both sides of this. It's very interesting, especially Jeff in this area.
I live in this area of you know, the Gatlinburg area and that
type of thing. So the Cherokee thing is something that I find to be
very interesting, especially since the connections to the Europeans seemed to be so strong,
and the injustice at the same time was also there. But as you
point out, there are people on both sides. Davey Crockett and other people
in the Supreme Court who tried to stop this at that time, give us
an idea. We've got a little bit more time here. Give us a
little idea of Canada, for example, what was happening there now? Is
there any push for reparations in Canada? I would imagine with the Liberal government
they're trying to find something there. But it was there a great deal of
conflict in Canada. Well, I mean, so, yeah, let's just
say with the Liberal government in Canada, in the last few years, the
reparations movement has really gone into overdrive. An enormous amount of Canadian federal money
has gone towards the tribes in recent years. They're saying that the tribal budget
is growing faster than the Canadian military budget. And so, but the question
is is this money well spent, Is it actually helping people or is it
just going to a few elites and often to white people, like maybe some
of the lawyers who are representing the natives. And so there's a real question
of whether this money and these reparations are actually going to alleviate poverty. There's
also the question of government handouts in general. Is it a good thing to
encourage people to give them a stipend every year or would it be better to
encourage them to go get educated and get out there and make something of themselves.
And then this is based on some of these perceived injustices. In Canada.
The main perceived injustice was the residential schools which were going right up to
the nineteen seventies nineteen eighties, where Natives kids were taken off the reservation and
taught at a Canadian school. They were given Christian education. This of course
is highly a taboo for some people, but when you look back at the
administrators of these schools, there were things that were ineptly done. There were
times when disease broke out at the school, because just like in any school
in the year nineteen hundred, you're going to have diseases breakout. But most
of the people running the schools thought they were doing good. They said,
I'm taking an illiterate kid, I'm giving them skills, I'm teaching them to
be a carpenter, I'm teaching them to sew, and we're going to help
them assimilate into Canadian society. So the intention, I think was pretty much
good and noble, even if in the execution it was a little bit in
nineteenth century sometimes. But when you look at the number of Canadian natives who
were massacred by European Canadians, the most they can come up with it is
about two dozen. So the idea that you know, Canadian natives were massacred
by Europeans is totally ridiculous. So they say, oh, well, maybe
we didn't commit genocide here, but we committed cultural genocide. And they used
the residential schools as an example of cultural genocide. In the book, I
talk about how that's all been taken much too far as well. Oh yeah,
yeah, there was a lot of that about a year or so ago,
and a lot of their narrative about what was happening in the schools was
debunked, and I'm sure you address that in your book as well. Really
took that to an extreme, resulted in a great deal of people feeling they
were justified to de face and destroy church property and things like that. And
I am concerned about the reservation system when we look at that. I see
that as if we don't learn a lesson from that, I see that as
a pattern that could be utilized in smart cities and that type of thing.
You know, there is an effort again to try to remove people from their
land and to lock us up in cities. They've actually had a plan for
that globally that we should all be worried about. And I guess you're saying
that they're in the Netherlands as well. You're in the Netherlands, right right,
Yeah? I am. Yeah. I mean partially because I had to
leave the United States because if I didn't do my research on DEI related topics,
they were going to hire me. So in some ways I've had to
come to exile in Europe. Wow. That is something, isn't it.
You have to have an intellectual exile in order to be able to do history.
Yeah, but that's really where we are now. Thank you so much
for joining us. Has been a fascinating discussion. The book is Not Stolen
The Truth about European Colonialism in the New World. Jeff Finn Paul is the
author. Jeff, where can people find this Amazon or do you have a
website that you saw drying? Yah? It's definitely on Amazon and other major
booksellers as well. Okay, And I think you know, if you look
it up, not stolen. You'll probably that'll be the easiest way to find
you'll see the rest of the subtext there. Thank you so much for joining
us. It was great to talk to you. And it's very important.
If we don't understand what history is, that's one of the reasons why they
want to eradicate it, because then we are basically putty in their hands.
It all repeats or rhymes in one way or the other. Thank you so
much, Jeff I appreciated. Thanks great. All right, Well we're going
to be right back, folks, stay with us making sense. Comment again.
You're listening to the David Night Show, all right, And we got
a couple of comments at North American House opposed from Canada says billions of dollars
spent on Canadian Indian reservations and there's still third world hell holes with no clean
water, no indoor plumbing. Yes, and and a lot of that is,
you know, in the American reservation system at least, it's because you
have very corrupt tribal government, some bureaucrats who are empowered to run this thing.
They take away property rights from people and they're not you know, it
is a very tightly controlled system, which I think in many ways is what
they're trying to create a higher tech version of with the smart cities and high
boost says. They canceled the Redskins, they canceled the Land of Lakes girls,
et cetera. Yeah, it's and that's the worst part of it.
You know, we look at the chiefs or or things like those Redskins,
Well we got we got to cancel that, and it's not tied to any
particular Indian and Indian tribe, and so you know, they're basically able to
do what they wish. But I don't know what was wrong with the Land
of Lakes girl, I don't it was again, it's insanity. But thank
you for the tip, YJ. Seventy two. I appreciate that. So
it's good to have you back today. David. Praying for your health.
I appreciate that very much. Thank you. I do appreciate your prayers for
that. Let's talk a little bit about what's coming up in terms of the
Super Bowl. This interesting statement done by the quarterback, and I want to
contrast that to something from an actor. I'm not going to try to pronounce
his name. Can you pull up the article and this is the guy who's
traumatized by negative reviews for Marvel's Eternals. The Eternal movie was a DEI festival
and it was sold that way. Nobody liked it, nobody wanted to talk
about it. But he was so traumatized by the negative reviews that this actor
says, I still talk to my therapist about it. And I thought that
was very interesting and as a counterpart to as everybody's talking to the Super Bowl
quarterback players how they deal with things. And there was an interview with a
quarterback for the forty nine ers, brock Purty, and what he said was
exactly the opposite. But let me give you what this particular actor said.
He played the superhero King Go in the Marvel release. He says, it
was really really hard because Marvel thought that movie was going to be really really
well received. And scroll up to the top. People can see the picture
of him there he is there is okay, so that's what he looks like,
he said. So they lifted the embargo really early, and they put
it in some fancy movie festivals, and they sent us on a big global
tour promoting the movie. Right as the embargo lifted. The reviews were bad,
and I was too aware of it. I was reading every review and
checking it too much, he said. In this article from Breitbart, they
point out that Disney promoted it by emphasizing the diverse casting they made. The
movie was all about Dei and so it was a massive failure. And it
also as part of that, it had Marvel's first gay on screen kiss between
two men. So audience has hated it, critics hated it. Everybody hated
it, and he says, I thought it was unfair to me. It's
unfair to my wife, Emily. I can't approach my work this way anymore.
He says, something's got to change, very intentionally. So I started
counseling and I still talk to my therapist about that. Emily, his wife,
says that I do have trauma from it. Emily and I just got
dinner with somebody else from that movie, and we were like, that was
tough, wasn't it. And he's like, yeah, that was really tough,
And I think we all went through something kind of similar, and that
kind of gives you an insight into why these people who are rich and famous
in Hollywood are so paranoid about all this. Yeah, they live by their
most recent movie, and they're very afraid of losing their status, even if
it's somebody like this guy who didn't have any status. For status contrasts that
to this quarterback of the forty nine ers who was the very last draft pick.
And they have kind of a joke tradition where the very final draft pick
is two hundred and sixty something. People are picked every year for the NFL,
and the very last one has celebrated is mister irrelevant and the person who
started it, who did it as a joke with the NFL, they have
a jersey that is the team that picked that person, and they take them
to the place of their choice and they celebrate. And Brock Purdy was the
very last one. And his story is almost kind of like the movie Rudy
in a sense I looked at it. His NFL career began as he was
the two hundred and sixty second pick in the twenty twenty two NFL draft.
But now he's becoming VP candidate. He's a starting quarterback for a team that
is headed to the super Bowl. So from mister irrelevant to mister super I
guess mister incredible, he said, but he had a very different perspective on
this, he said, for me playing this game, playing this sport,
he said, there's a lot that goes into it. And he says,
it's easy to get wrapped up and wanting to be loved. He said,
that's what this guy who was the actor for the Marvel movie didn't, you
know, feeling the same thing. He says, you want to be loved
obviously by your teammates, by everybody, but also the world. He says
for me in that passage, and he talked about the twenty third psalm,
the Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want, he says for me
in that passage. It's saying I already have what I need from the good
Shepherd Jesus. And so you know, when you look at this, he
said, during the games, he's praying, but he's not praying for victory
on the field. He's just praying to have peace, to have steadfastness and
all of that chaos, he said, just to have that even keeled state
of mind that I get from the Holy Spirit, he said. And it's
a very different perspective, isn't He says, I've never tried to hold on
the football life very tightly. He says, I've held it pretty loosely and
see what God has in store. He says, I've stayed faithful to him
and He's taken me to places that I could never have imagined. I think
that applies to all of us. You know. When I look at this
and I get back and forth with the stuff about Trump and the maga people
who are worshiping him, ignoring his background, all the rest of it.
What motivates me out of this and what gets me really angry that I have
to watch out for is not that I'm not being liked. It's not that
I'm getting a lot of hate from these people. But I just hate to
see people taken advantage of I hate to see the sheep follow their bad shepherd
over the and at the same time push a lot of other people over the
cliff along with them. And that's really what is going on, and that's
really what bothers me. I have to pull back and say, you know,
I just need to I need to be calm during this chaos and calm
during this and understand that My perspective on this is that other watchmen on the
wall, that you have to warn people if you see something that is there,
and you don't warn people about it, their blood is on your head.
But if you tell people and they won't do anything about it, then
that is on their head. And that's how I have to look at it.
But again, I thought it was a real striking contrast between two very
different worldviews, one of them very temporary, very secular. And the Corbett
Report has a a piece that was picked up by a Free Thought Project twenty
twenty four in the Pursuit of Happiness, and in it he talks about how,
you know, we look at the news now twenty four He lists them,
you know, the digital id CBDC, the Great Reset, the scamdemic
treaty, the Great War, a poly crisis, and all the rest of
them. We could go on and on. There's many others, right,
we could start talking about what they want to do a climate and many other
things like that. And he said, you know, what what does it
mean to pursue happiness? And he says, you know, we have to
understand first of all that you know, and it's a we don't have time
to unpack this because the show's about Then many people go back and look at
what the founders were talking about in terms of happiness. They were not talking
about hedonism, they were not talking about comfort, They were talking about the
pursuit of virtue. But we also need to look at it from the standpoint
of this contrast between the actor, the Disney actor and the Christian quarterback,
when it is happiness and peace and calm is not really based on what happens
to you. You know, a lot of bad stuff is happened to brock
Purty before he got to Everybody say, oh, well, he's going to
the super Bowl as a successful quarterback, but he's gone through a lot of
things that were not good for him. We all do, and so happiness
is more happiness is, basically the way that we talk about it today,
is what happens to you. And if it's just what happens to you,
then you are a victim or a potential victim of happenstance, because both good
and bad things are going to happen to you that you don't have any control
over. But if you're anchored to something else, as brock pretty want,
then that gives you, as I've said many times a lover, an anchorage
outside of this life, this time, and outside of your circumstances and that
is why Christians don't talk about happiness, even the purserative virtue. Christians talk
about a joy, a joy that is not part of the second the moment
that we live in. That's secularism. Thank you for joining us the common
man. They created common Core and dumbed down our children. They created common
past track and control us. They're Commons project to make sure the commoners own
nothing and the communist future. They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated
ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of
God. That is what we have in common. 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 Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you for
listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please
keep us in your prayers. D Davidnightshow dot com. If you like the
Eagles on Highway, the cars, and Healey Lewis in the news, they
say the horrors, you'll love the Classic Hits channel at APS Radio, download
our app, or listen now at APS radio dot com.