The David Knight Show - 18Aug23 J6ers, Tortured/Life Sentences, Got Between Trump & Dems — Do Conservatives Care About THEM?

Episode Date: August 18, 2023

OUTLINE of today's show with TIMECODESTrump chose NOT to do anything to help J6ers before he left office, just as he ignored Assange. They been held for years before trial, TORTURED, and now given ludicrously excessive sentences with Joe Biggs facing 33 years. But "conservative" media is only concerned about Trump - Sentences (2:05)- Torture (14:55)How would YOU handle solitary confinement like this? How would YOU handle medical kidnapping like the hospital death protocols of the Trump administration? (22:26)UPDATE: Christian woman who was attacked on social media by both a Republican & Democrat Congressman for stating her beliefs is now FIRED BY PRO-LIFE organization she worked for. The wife of the Republican Congressman is on the board and see her husband and herself as victims (27:30)Planned Parenthood may have to pay back $1.8 BILLION in fraudulent claims. Here's the allegations… (39:19)AI Stock Bubble Will Burst Regardless of what happens with AI, the stock market hype will collapse as all the FOMO investors see big investors exiting. Look at the parallels between the DotCom bubble and the Real Estate bubble. (45:45)FT (Financial Times) on why it is skeptical about AI hype (52:02)AI Will Supercharge Censorship & SurveillanceAnd there are real concerns about AI imploding when it consumes too much of its own garbage. But its use as CENSOR and BIG BROTHER is where it will excel, created for that purpose by the governmentThe future doesn't look like TERMINATOR — it look's like Terry Gilliam's BRAZIL (1:00:19) Our fake reality best described in 1967 French book, The Society of the Spectacle (1:04:32)A new app to protect artists' work from being stolen by AI web crawlers and Irish musician speaks out about the need for musicians to band together to protect their work from being stolen. But here's how the music and movie corporations will respond (1:18:09)Michael Burry "The Big Short" billionaire, subject of book and film, made billions timing the real estate bubble burst of 2008. He's just bet 90% of his wealth on shorting the stock market (1:30:30))The "Ron Paul of Argentina" beat the established parties. He has some radical free market proposals but the Wall Street Journal decides to write a long piece about — HIS HAIR and only his hair. Style over substance (1:37:35)Listener comments, and a poem (1:52:14)It's amazing how secular America and Europe have become. Only a tiny percentage of people turn to God, religion or any kind of loosely defined spirituality to find meaning in life (1:58:02)US State Department's grant to promote atheism and secular humanism abroad — unintentionally shows they ARE RELIGIONS (2:06:56)"Doom Loop Walking Tour" of San Francisco is already sold out (2:20:32)BREAKING Another Death in the "Troubled Teen Industry" Marty Gottesfeld joins to talk about his breaking story on the very troubled "Trouble Teen Industry". $50 BILLION of private and taxpayer money poured into schools that have a VERY bad track record. Six deaths in just 4 years in Utah alone. Marty's Substack story can be found on Substack at MartyG (2:32:19)Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to TrendsJournal.com and enter the code KNIGHTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

Happiness. We all know what it feels like, but sometimes it doesn't come easy. I'm Garvey Bailey, the host of Happy Enough, a new podcast from The Globe and Mail about our pursuit of happiness. We know people want to live more fulfilling and positive lives, but how do we actually do that? Is there a happiness code to crack? From our relationship with technology to whether money can really buy you happiness, we'll hear from both real people and experts to demystify this thing we're all searching for and hopefully find ways to be happy enough. You can find Happy Enough wherever you listen to podcasts. Drive safe and obey the rules of the road.

Vehicle owners who receive a red light or speed camera violation can pay or dispute online at toronto.ca.aps. Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to The David Knight Show. As the clock strikes 13, it's Friday, the 18th of August, year of our Lord, 2023. Today we're going to begin by talking about what is happening to some of the January the 6th prisoners. It appears that the only media that is remotely interested in what is happening to the people that got thrown under the bus for Trump's ego. The only thing, the only people that are interested in this are the Gateway Pundit and they have an interesting article about the torture of one of the prisoners, but of course virtually all of

them are being tortured. Excessive penalties against them as the rest of conservative media only cries tears for Trump. And it looks like they're going to try to get 33 years in prison for Joe Biggs. We'll be right back. Well, as I just said, 33 years is what they're trying to get for Joe Biggs, for Enrico Tarrio, and massive sentences for the other Proud Boys that were convicted. All of them, their prosecutors are asking for more time than was given to Stuart Rhodes, although I think they asked something like 25 years for Stuart Rhodes, they got 18 years in prison. This is just beyond belief, quite frankly. Everybody talks about the over-prosecution of Trump, and that's absolutely true.

The politicized persecution of Trump. But it's nothing compared to what is already being done to ordinary people, and nobody cares about that. Really? Nobody cares about it. Like I said, you look, Breitbart never talks about any of this stuff. Uh,

the only people that do anything with it are the gateway pundit. And, uh, they have in the past, the only thing I've seen info wars do is, uh, uh, reprint, uh, repost gateway Pundit article. What Gateway Pundit did was

they talked to Joe Biggs and another proud boy who is a part of this roundup. And they gave their biography, their reasons for being there and what really happened. And, you know, Joe Biggs is not accused of any violence. Enrique Terrio was not even there. They'd kicked him out the day before. I was suspicious, and I said so, that maybe Terrio was a Fed. He had served as an informant in the past. They had a history of that. I thought it was really strange when they came up with some nonsense charges and said, you can't even be in

Washington, DC. So he was outside of Washington, DC that day, but they're not talking about the violence that was done. As a matter of fact, the one guy, out of all the Proud Boys that was convicted and is awaiting sentencing, the one guy who did commit violence, assaulted a police officer, stole a shield, broke out a window, which is where people started going in, he got recommended for the least amount of time. Joe Biggs is 40 years old. He's got a daughter. They want to put him in jail for 33 years. Just think about that.

It's just beyond belief to me. So, convicted in May for conspiring to block the transfer of presidential power in the hopes of keeping Trump in the White House. This is what I tried to warn the public about, everybody. I haven't talked to Joe Biggs for years before this because of, you know, he was no longer working there. I was not interested in what the Proud Boys are doing. I thought that was a useless exercise, frankly, dangerous exercise. And people need to understand

i'd seen some good things done by the oath keepers in terms of helping to protect businesses during these leftist riots arson and the rest of this stuff they were there as a deterrent they just showed up holding their guns and say, don't try it here. And people moved on and did it somewhere else. That was a good use of Oath Keepers. And again, Stuart Rhodes, from people that I've talked to that were part of Oath Keepers, there were real questions inside the organization in terms of the misappropriate use of funds and how it appeared that he was,

there are allegations that he was keeping all the money himself and that type of thing. So I had stopped talking to Stuart Rhodes over that, but I was not interested in what the Proud Boys are doing. It seemed to me like they were just looking for brawls in different places. That doesn't help anything. It really doesn't.

And so the violence is not going to work, and yet we're at the point now where, as I pointed out, It really doesn't. And so the violence is not going to work. And yet we're at the point now where, as I pointed out, 11% of the people want to use violence to keep Trump out, according to one poll. 7% want to use violence to put him in. By the way, did you guys notice that there's more people against Trump? Dead set, hard set against Trump. I mean he has been a real polarizing issue a lot of people really really love him or they really really hate

him and in the Republican Party it looks like he's going to easily walk through I mean this is we're very early and of course anything can change and there's this wild card about all these prosecutions and other things that are going to happen, but I think it's only going to help him and consolidate his popularity. Incredibly popular with the Republican Party, but not with independents, not with Democrats, of course. And I think what is going to, pretty obviously, what is going to happen, and this is the Democrats, by the way, that are playing 4D chess. Republicans are being used as pawns in that game.

Because he's going to become ever more popular with Republicans and ever more unpopular with everybody else. And it's going to be disastrous. And we're going to wind up with a completely controlled, a government that's completely controlled by Democrats. And that's going to trickle down even into state governments. Putting him at the top of the ticket is going to be poison. So you just might want to think about that. If you really want to push back against the Democrats, he's not the guy. He's damaged merchandise.

So give him your money. You know, send all your money to Trump. But let's not impose him on us as a political solution because he's not a political solution. Again, 33 year sentence for Joe Biggs. They're looking for 30 years for Zachary Ryle, 27 for Ethan Nordean, 20 years for Dominic Pozzola. And he's the one who, you know, assaulted the cop, took his shield,

broke out the window. The least for him. Amazing. Again, prosecutors allege that Tarrio organized and directed the attack by the Proud Boys. They'd made Joe Biggs a poster child in all these January the 6th hearings

in Congress. so I guess we shouldn't be surprised. This truly is political persecution. And it is amazing to see the government ignoring the Constitution when it comes to excessive punishment for these types of things. But of course, they're ignoring everything in the Bill of rights, aren't they? I mean, you know, fourth amendment TSA, all the rest of this stuff. This government has become nothing that you would recognize. And it's not going to get any better when we put Democrats in everywhere. It's going to only accelerate this. So think about that as you get behind Trump.

Again, they're treating this more seriously. Defense attorneys argued that there was no conspiracy, that there was no plan to attack the Capitol. They sought to portray the Proud Boys as an unorganized drinking club whose members participated in the riot as a spontaneous act fueled by Trump's election rage.

That's exactly my take on it. A drinking club. Let's go out and mix it up, light it up. I mean, it's very much like the soccer hooligans that you see in the UK. Tarrio's lawyers tried to argue that Trump was the one to blame for exhorting a crowd outside the White House to, quote, fight like hell, unquote. Norm Pattis, attorney for Joe Biggs, said they noted the chaos on January 6th was fueled by Trump's false election claims. The lawyer for Biggs and Roehl told the judges that believing the commander-in-chief and heeding his call should yield some measure of mitigation.

Norm Pata said the defendants are not terrorists. Whatever excess of zeal they demonstrated on January the 6th, no matter how grave the potential interference in the orderly transfer of power due to the events, a decade or more behind bars is excessive punishment. And I hope that they're able to take this to the Supreme Court. At some point, somebody's got to do something about this over-the-top political persecution and denial. But of course, giving people excessive punishment, Was it excessive punishment for us?

Were they giving tens of thousands of dollars of fines to people who had masks on their face? I mean, this is full spread tyranny coming out of Washington about everything, everywhere. Like in the case of Rhodes and other Oath Keepers, prosecutors are urging the judge to apply so-called terrorism enhancement, which can lead to longer prison terms, claiming that they tried to influence the government through intimidation or coercion. Wait a minute. If intimidation and coercion and or coercion, if that is terrorism, weren't we terrorized by the Trump administration

and Fauci and the Biden administration? Over the lockdowns, the masks, the vaccines, you take this, oh, we're not making anybody do it. We're just going to intimidate you or coerce you. You'll not have a job. Your business will disappear. You'll be kicked out of the military after all the years that you put in. That kind of intimidation or coercion. They went to war with us with the lockdown. It was sanctions.

And they continued it with intimidation and coercion. Both Trump and Biden did that. Both Trump and Biden were terrorists against the American people by their definition that they're using against the Proud Boys. That was terrorism. What was Joe Biggs thinking when he got behind this guy? I don't understand it. I mean, I know Joe. Why would you get behind somebody who has terrorized the American people and destroyed the Constitution and now has a long body trail to boot? I don't get it. I don't get any of this stuff.

Absolute insanity. He has absolutely no loyalty to anyone as his lawyer who knows him so well. Former lawyer, Ty Cobb said, deeply wounded narcissist Trump is, incapable of acting except out of his own perceived self-interest or revenge. You want somebody like that in the White House because that's exactly what he is. Look at what he did to the people who showed up on January the 6th. Did nothing for them because he didn't see it in his own perceived self-interest.

He brought them there because he was a narcissist. What did he do to Julian Assange? It was his administration. It was his CIA Attorney General Bill Barr, who immediately as he gets in, comes after Julian Assange. You don't think that he's CIA? No, he rebuilt it with George H.W. Bush. Trump put him in just like he put in Gina Haspel,

the head of the CIA, who ran the torture and the cover-up and produced the lies that put us into a rock war. Trump is the deep state. Figure this out. He is the deep state. He is a globalist. He's enacting the globalist agenda. Why are people willing to have a civil war over this? This guy, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta agreed with

prosecutors that the Oath Keepers' crimes could be punished as terrorism. Intimidation? Coercion? Yeah. Yeah. That's your government. That's your government at work. Your terrorist government. But he still sentenced Rhodes and others to prison terms that were shorter than what prosecutors were seeking. They wanted to get 25 years. They got 18

years. Still, essentially life sentence for these people. Terry O and his co-defendants will be sentenced in a string of hearings starting later this month in Washington. Theriault and three of his lieutenants were also convicted of two of the same charges that Trump faces. Obstruction of Congress's certification of Biden's victory and conspiracy to obstruct

Congress. I think it was Alan Dershowitz who said, I think we're getting up to like three out of four bananas in terms of a banana republic. No, we're five or six in terms of banana republic. Banana republics never had the kind of power that this banana republic has. The kind of technological power to surveil and to monitor us the nuclear weapons the massive military there was no banana republic ever that had this kind of power this kind of ruthlessness zero authority combined with nearly absolute power so the gateway pundit prison photos document the torture of January the 6th defendant. And as I said before, you don't see anybody in the conservative press

except for the Gateway Pundit even talking about this. Prisoner is Ryan Samsell. He's been held without trial now since January 2021. What was that in the Constitution about right to a speedy trial? No excessive punishment or fines even if you're found guilty, but of course they don't care about due process. As Trump said, you know, we take

do whatever we want, maybe we do the due process later. They do that with your guns, they do that with American citizens. During his two and a half years without trial, Ryan has been moved around to 17 different facilities. He's been beaten, abused, tortured, neglected since his arrest in January 2021.

This is what happened to the people that were associated. You know, Ammon Bundy talked about that, how they injured him. He still has issues and tortured. And others. He's not the only one as a part of that. And Marty Gottesfeld. The communication management units.

We've created our own Gitmos. I've got two of them now. CMUs. Domestically in America. They don't have to have the pretense of setting up Gitmo. Well, it'sically in America they don't have to have the pretense of setting up Gitmo, well it's not in America so we can do whatever we want and we're not limited by the

Constitution so we can torture people, we can take them to black sites around the world or to Gitmo or whatever, well they don't even bother with that anymore now they torture their political prisoners in Washington D.C. prisons and they have places to put their political prisoners in Washington, D.C. prisons. And they have places to put their political dissidents so they're cut off from everybody.

Schaefer Cox, another one. Communications Management Unit. You've had too much to say. We're going to keep you quiet. So this is taking place in America, says the Gateway Pundit. This is who we are. Yeah, lied into wars by torture. And then this war against the American people,

our terrorist government. I was kept in a hard cell, and in that particular cell, against the American people, our terrorist government. I was kept in a hard cell, and in that particular cell, about five, six months, I even told what was happening to the judge was actually calling and trying to get in contact with me because I wasn't in a named cell. They couldn't find me. They said I wasn't showing up to court. I was in prison.

They were saying I wasn't showing up on medical either because they weren't giving him any medical care. They were pretty much keeping me there. Like I said, it was cold. The light was constantly on. There was no window. That's a form of torture itself. Sleep deprivation, keeping, you know, the types of things that they do, keeping people cold, keeping the lights on, keeping them, keep interrupting them. Oh, that can play havoc with people's, not just their health, but their mind, of course.

Sleep deprivation was what they were doing. That followed me. Those kind of conditions followed me from Virginia. When I was in Virginia, it was the same exact conditions, he said. So they keep moving them around, but of course, that keeps happening. There was a congressman who exposed crimes, and they convicted him, and he was exposing the crimes of the system. They put him, I forget what his name was now, Hanson, I think.

I can't remember exactly. I remember they called it dieseling. They even had a term for it. They put him in handcuffs and put him in a van and just keep driving him. And, you know, being caught up like that, it constantly driven, constantly confined like that. Just destroyed his health. He told the gateway punditit there are no books allowed, no letters, no photos, nothing.

He had a yellow bucket for his toilet. That was it. Very, very tiny room. No window. A light constantly on. He believes the government tortured him for months so he would rat on the Proud Boys. They even beat him numerous times and kept him locked down so he couldn't communicate with anyone. I've got to say, I'm not surprised. I got introduced

to the character of our government when I was in college. We had a lot of, that was at a time when the Iranian government was run by an American puppet, Shah. And he had a brutal regime. He had a secret police trained by the CIA they called the Savak. And they would arrest their political dissidents, torture them, beat them, and kill them but they also took their best students and sent them to the u.s to go to college and so and they wanted them they were not majoring in basket weaving or psychology or something like that they were majoring in engineering because they wanted them to come back and do something and so there were a lot of them in engineering classes that I had. And they started doing demonstrations against the Shah of Iran.

And this is before the Ayatollah Khomeini took over and kicked the Shah out, and then they took over the U.S. Embassy. Americans don't remember what America did to Iran. And so I'm not justifying it, but I'm saying it didn't surprise me at all to see them take over the American embassy, which was a nest of CIA spies to begin with, but the same people who had trained and equipped the Savak. And so when I saw them out there, they were demonstrating, you know, that's not all that in common in the 1970s and late 1960s, college students demonstrating about something, but they were wearing balaclavas, ski masks. And so I asked some of them, I said,

why are the Iranian students wearing ski masks? They said, because there's agents here, the SAVAK, and they will arrest our families and hurt them if they know who we are. This is America today, because that was America then. They just didn't do it openly. They assassinated presidents. They did coups against our government, just like they did foreign governments, but they pretended that they were James Bond or what was the guy, Felix, whatever, his CIA buddy, you know, James Bond's CIA buddy. Oh, they were the good guy. They were wearing

white hats. I saw that, knew that, a long time ago. But, you know, I look at this, I look at the American prisons, the CMU, and all the rest of this stuff. A lot of times people say, you know, if you were stranded on a desert island, like this guy has been put in a tiny jail cell. No window. No bed to sleep on. So, a concrete floor. cold concrete floor, no windows. What are you going to do? It's even worse than being trapped on a desert island.

But many times people say you're trapped on a desert island. If you were able to take one book with you, what would that book be? Now, he doesn't get to take a book with him. If you go back and you look at Fahrenheit 451, they were burning the books everywhere, weren't they? And each of these people in Fahrenheit 451, they would have clubs, and it would be their responsibility to try to pass this on,

wait this out, save the books, the knowledge of the books for future generations. And different people memorized different books. And they could recite those books to you. So what book would you be? What do you value? If you were in a situation like this. And you may wind up in a situation where perhaps, you know, you're strapped to a hospital bed and your family is not allowed to come and see you.

That happened to a lot of people under Trump, didn't it? Maybe you can't move. The lady we were talking about that was nearly killed by the Trump hospital protocol said they were starving her to death. They put do not resuscitate on her bed, even though she said no. And even though her family said no, they isolated her family from her. Even after her would not give her water, would not give her food, her husband brought in insurer and they kept it out of her reach

because she's confined on the bed so what if they kidnap you put you in that kind of stuff and you're isolated we may all wind up in that kind of a situation at some point in time not just as political prisoners but more likely they'll be prisoners of a hospital somewhere so what's your comfort? What's your book? Is it the Bible? That's the only one that's going to give you any comfort in the end. So, you know, memorize parts of it that are going to give you strength.

One of the things that I found useful is songs. The problem is most of the contemporary songs in our churches say nothing. Nothing. And they repeat it over and over and over and over and over again. They say nothing. Repeatedly. So find some old hymn that says something. I've written some songs myself about things that have happened to me in my life

that are very important. That's my strength. We'll be right back. The common man. They created Common Core to dumb 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 thedavidknightshow.com. Thank you for listening. Thank you for listening. Thank you for sharing.

If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. thedavidknightshow.com Well, I want to give you an update to what we talked about yesterday, one of the things we talked about. I've got a couple of updates. As a matter of fact, I've got an update about artificial intelligence as well. And you recall, we had a situation where a woman who is a Christian put out on social media, she said, there's no hope for any of us outside of having faith in Jesus Christ alone. And immediately, a Republican congressman in Ohio, Max Miller, who is Jewish, took exception of that and demanded that she delete it. And then another Jewish congressman, a Democrat from Ohio, said, well, we may be different political parties, but we can agree on that. Delete your tweet. It was truly amazing. Ilhan Omar, a leftist Muslim, said this is their religious

belief. What are you doing telling them to delete this? And many people hit them on that. She absolutely refused to delete it. And now she's been fired. And the people that she was working for was the Ohio Right to Life. They fired a Christian after she said that our only hope for any of us is faith in Jesus Christ alone. Now that is true ultimately, but I think it is also true of the pro-life movement. Are you going to stop people from murdering children and ripping them apart, and then if they survive, as soon as you get them in school, you're going to start coming after them

to get them to self-mutilate, transition to some other gender, chemically, surgically? How do you stop that? Do we pass a bunch of laws? People say all the time you can't legislate morality. It should serve as an example of what is right and wrong. And of course, you can never stop people from murdering by having a law against murder. And you'll never stop people from destroying babies by having a law against destroying babies. We need to stand on the side of what is right, but we also need to understand

that unless people value life and unless they believe that they're accountable to God, they're going to still do whatever they wish. You can have all the laws you want about abortion. You can prohibit it a hundred percent. And just as we saw with drug prohibition and with alcohol prohibition, people will continue to do it even though you prohibit it. It is a spiritual issue. Ultimately, morality is a spiritual issue. And so I don't say that to say that we should not prohibit murder. The government should step in and protect the individual rights of people. So that's a very different thing than telling you that you can't have alcohol or drugs or other things like that. That's things that people do to themselves.

I put that in the category of vice as opposed to crime. So I say Andrew Spooner, libertarian philosopher, he was not a Christian by any means, but I thought he was exactly right when he made a distinction between vice and crime. He said vice is something you do that harms yourself. Crime is something you do that harms somebody else. That's where the government needs to step in on this horizontal level. The government does not need to be establishing one religion or the other,

but it needs to be there to stop the murder, to stop the theft, and all the rest of this stuff. Just take a look at what is happening in California and these other places. We have the Soros DAs encouraging and enabling chaos by shutting down Thou Shalt Not Steal, for example. And look at the 60 million plus children that were violently murdered over 50 years because the government would not intervene. So I think we should intervene on the human-to-human level, that kind of violence. But you're not going to really be able to stop it until you change people's hearts. And so, in one sense,

there's no hope for stopping abortion outside of faith in Christ alone. Other religions will also have prohibitions against that. But that's not what our government is promoting right now. And so the interesting thing about this is that even though this woman who put out her Christian beliefs, stood firm on her Christian beliefs, said, no, I'm not going to delete that, and ultimately this Republican congressman backed down, it was his wife who serves as a board member of Ohio's right to life. And this Congressman,

Max Miller's wife, Emily, uh, looks like, uh, she had something to do with her being fired. Quite frankly, they responded to her back and forth,

uh, shaming this guy for his intolerance. And they said, well, uh, you can resign or we can give you an opportunity to, um, stay a little while and then we'll fire you. Of course, that would help them to say it didn't have anything to do with her post.

She said, no, you're going to fire me, uh, fire me now. Uh, Miller had said, this is one of the most bigoted tweets I have ever seen. Delete it. Lizzie religious freedom in the United States. He says applies to every religion. Delete it, Lizzie. Religious freedom in the United States, he says, applies to every religion. You've gone too far. Well, see, nobody was telling him that he didn't have the freedom

to say what he went on to say. He said, God says that Jewish people are the chosen ones, but you say we have no hope. So she didn't say take that down. She didn't get into a debate with him and um said that whether or not uh jewish people were chosen of god she didn't get into a debate with him over that she wasn't trying to shut down his religious beliefs not at all uh and um he said you say we have no hope no you do have hope you know the promises of God really culminated in the promises of the Messiah.

And you look at books like Isaiah, back and forth, My Servant, My Servant Israel, My Servant this. Some of those are talking about corporate Israel. Some of those are obviously talking about an individual. There's no way that you can read a corporate interpretation into Isaiah 53. Isaiah 53 sounds like a narrative of Christ on the cross if you read it. And I know Messianic Jews whose testimony is, somebody showed them Isaiah 53 and said,

well, that's about your Jesus, right? Read that to them. He said, no, that's about your jesus right read that too he said now that's your book that's isaiah that was written over 700 years before so again you're free to take that or you're free to reject that and she was not forcing her religion. She was just expressing her religion. You see, this Republican has bought in. I'm not surprised the Democrat did it, but this is what we've seen in the schools for the longest time. People who are expressing their religious beliefs are being banned,

and it's being done under the pretense, well, this is a government institution, so we can't have any religion here. That's not establishing a religion. As I've said over and over again, you had all these different states. At the time the United States came into existence, they were pretty much founded for religious freedom. People came to America and they set up congregationalism

where they had Catholicism in Maryland, or in Rhode Island they had Baptists and so forth. In Pennsylvania, it was the Quakers. And they did have established religions. And even after we had the U.S. government, and even after we had the Constitution prohibiting the establishment of religion, they continued to have established religion in Massachusetts and I think it was Connecticut. Into the 1840s, Massachusetts had it. establishment of religion. They continued to have established religion in Massachusetts and

I think it was Connecticut. Into the 1840s, Massachusetts had it. And what was that? That was requiring that you pay and or attend the state church. That's what establishment of religion is. That is, your religious expression has nothing to do with that. And that prohibition was there because you had this diversity of religions in these different states, and they did not want to have one of those picked and enforced on everybody from the level of Washington. And yet that is what we have today. That religion is secular humanism. And that is being picked. As a matter of fact, I've got an article here we'll get to later on where the biden administration is uh proselytizing people and funding it in foreign countries as well

as this one secular humanism that's the religion that they're pushing they've been doing that for a long time through the government institutions of the schools. And you want to see the product of that secular humanism and atheism? It's the critical race theory, the Marxism, the transgender grooming. That's the result of secular humanism coming to fruition. But Miller, the Congressman Miller, later publicly apologized. She accepted the apology. She said, it's not for me, however, that you need to ask forgiveness, but God himself, and not to ask forgiveness for attacking her,

but just forgiveness for everything that you do. She said, genuinely pray. I genuinely pray that you seek him and that you find salvation, she said. Emily Miller, his wife, meanwhile acknowledged

that her husband was, quote, wrong to ask someone to stand down from their religious views while asserting that the couple had been asked to,

back down from our Jewish faith. No, you haven't. Nobody told you to back down. Nobody told you to delete down. Nobody told you to delete any of your tweets. You deleted, he deleted his tweet because he shamed himself over his intolerance and his rejection of the constitution. So internal communications that were seen by the Sentinel, which broke this story, show that they were trying to, you know, they wanted to fire her for this. Like I said, you can resign right now or you can get a transition period before you're officially fired.

She said in additional comments to the Sentinel, she trusts God will continue to use the situation to bring glory and honor to his name. She expressed hope that the Ohio right to life would defend the lives of pre-born babies in the state without political entanglements. She said pre-born lives are being slaughtered every day, and Ohio Right to Life is one of the few organizations in the position to stop it, she said. I hope and pray that they will prioritize abolishing abortion in Ohio going forward and not be distracted by politics. So she takes a higher road.

She doesn't criticize them. She says they have important work to do. And I hope that they're successful in this. But again, if we're going to try to do this in our own strength, if we're going to try to do this without some kind of change in our society that turns the hearts of not just the fathers to their children, but the mothers to their children. Unheard of in history that we would see this kind of coldness to children from mothers. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood, as I talked about, was facing a $1.8 billion pullback in Texas for fraudulent claims.

They've already been hit several times for fraudulent claims. Those, however, were for a few million dollars. This one is much bigger. I did not talk yesterday about the basis for this pullback and why Texas is coming at them. A much larger fight has erupted during a years-long period when Planned Parenthood was not a qualified health care provider. They were still getting Medicare and Medicaid, and so that was fraudulent. It'll be very interesting to see how or if they can wiggle out of this thing again it's not going to come down i don't think to um uh legal arguments it's going to come down to you know political clout you know just like these january the six trials just like trump's

trial it's going to be political uh for the most part because if it were on the facts of the case, if they're collecting money for Medicare and Medicaid and they're not a qualified health care provider, end of story. But I do expect to see them wiggle out of this. Karen Reynolds, who worked 10 years as an employee at Planned Parenthood in Lufkin, Texas, said local offices bilked Medicare and Medicaid by billing for medical

services, not rendered. No, that's an even another level of fraud, billing for unwarranted medical services, um, uh, not covered by Medicaid and creating false information and medical records, which was material to billing for medical services. Again, I said Medicare, it's Medicaid. Medicare is for elderly people. Medicaid is for low-income people. So it'll be interesting to see what happens in this particular case, but it would be a major blow. Even Planned Parenthood is going to have a hard time recovering from something that is one and a half or whatever billion dollars. Over 40% of Japanese

women may never have kids. You see, this is the other way they sterilize and depopulate us. Psychologically. They can do it spiritually, psychologically, physically, as we see with these jabs. According to Japan's National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, the medium scenario projects that one-third of women will go through childbearing years without having children. The most optimistic case is that 25% of them, a quarter of them, won't reproduce. That percentage is even higher for men.

As many as half of 18-year-old males are projected to never have children. This is what they have done to our developed societies. First, they turned us to our careers. And again, that's a key thing. As I said before, men typically are more focused on the career, on providing, on focus on outside of the family. Women were typically, however, focused on creating a home, focused on raising children. And they've been able to turn their interest outside of the home as well. And now they've been able to turn the interest of both men and women away from each other and to same sex. And so it is, and then in addition to that, we have the electromagnetic radiation, the pollution, the vaccines, and all the rest of the stuff that are physically crippling people in terms of reproduction.

It's a full-on attack. And so what is the solution? Well, the American Medical Association, the AMA, is crusading for biological men to have uterus transplants. Uterus transplants. That's their solution. They will be going to test tube babies in no time at all. It is fully Aldous Huxley's world, isn't it? A brave new world. That is where they're adding, where

they're pushing us into all of this. And so you have the guy, calls himself Rachel Levine. His name is Richard Levine. And he's still a guy, by the way. He's a guy who, as he's been elevated to an admiral by Biden and given positions of authority in the Biden administration, he's still a guy dressing up like a woman. But he's also a guy who, for years before he was put in this political position, had been a child psychologist. And so Richard Levine, who I call Dick Levine, is saying that he's now touting a group that refers to women as egg producers. So, Dick Levine, this rooster in the hen house,

is now a group of the advocates protecting children. Yeah. Yeah. They're protecting children

just like Homeland Security is about security in the homeland. They always come up with some perverted twist to what they're saying. We'll be right back. Thank you. you're listening to the david knight show uh i've been saying that i think that this artificial intelligence You're listening to The David Knight Show. I've been saying that I think that this artificial intelligence stock market,

and that's what it is, it's an artificial intelligence bubble. This economy is being driven by an AI bubble on the stock market, and now other people are starting to say this as well. You have Financial Times out of the UK saying the skeptical case on generative AI. Hype is huge around the technology, but there's some uncomfortable truths that are being raised, they said. They said even by the breathless standards of previous technology hype cycles, the generative artificial intelligence enthusiasts have been hyperventilating hard. Trillion dollar companies, including Alphabet, that's Google's parent company now, and Microsoft, declare that AI is the new electricity, or it's the new fire.

And they are re-engineering their entire businesses around it. Never knowingly out-hyped, venture capital investors have been pumping money into the sector as well. 50 of the most promising generative AI startups have raised more than $19 billion in funding since 2019. Of these, 11 now count as unicorns with valuations above $1 billion. And of course, this is still chicken feed These 11 now count as unicorns with valuations above a billion dollars. And of course, this is still chicken feed compared to what Trump gave Big Pharma. The difference is that this is real money.

This isn't fiat promissory notes and kicking the debt can down the road, which is what he did with the money that he gave Big Pharma. And this is something that could evaporate because it has really hyped up the stock market. The stock market is not doing well except for artificial intelligence. Even the sober suits at McKinsey, says the Financial Times, estimate that the technology could add between $2.6 trillion to $4.4 trillion of economic value annually across 63 examples of use that it analyzed, ranging from banking to life sciences. In other words, in very rough terms, what they're telling us is that generative AI could create the equivalent of a new UK economy every year.

Does that sound like that's hype? $3 trillion in 2021. Now, it isn't so much a question as to whether or not this is something that might eventually happen. But I keep going back and looking at the dot-com bust that happened. In the late 1990s, the bandwidth started rapidly increasing, and people could see that there was going to be practical applications for the Internet, as we have seen. And the thing that had been hampering it was not having

sufficient bandwidth. And so as that was starting to come in, uh, you had this explosion, all kinds of.coms were being created and it was a bubble. And that was the bubble that happened before the real estate bubble. And now we're back to another tech bubble, but the thing that killed, uh, you know, and again, when you look at real estate as a very good investment long-term, it's a great investment. They're not making any more of it, right? As they always say. And you can say the same thing about technology. Look, the idea that the internet was going to be something that was big, there was no question about that. So this isn't about whether or not AI is ultimately going to deliver on the promises. The question is, have they gotten ahead of themselves?

And that's what happened with the dot-com thing. That's also what happened in the real estate market. Besides manipulation and securitization and the games that were being played by the big investors, that was, in a way, a different thing. But it was still nevertheless a bubble. The tech bubble that happened was an example of, um, too much too soon. And then when somebody realizes that the hype is overhyped, uh, they start to get scared. And some people say, well, I'm going to sell my stuff. And people say, Oh, you know, this big guy over here just sold it. And now all these people who piled into this thing because they were told it's going to be the next big thing. Now they,

they got in because of fear of missing out. Now they're jumping out because of fear of missing out of getting out of the exit. And so that's what happens to these bubbles. It always happened to them. And so the financial time says, but what if they're wrong in all of this? In a series of provocative posts, technologist Gary Marcus explores a possibility that we could see a, quote, massive gut-wrenching correction in valuations as investors realize generative AI does not work very well and it lacks killer business applications. Quote, the revenue isn't there yet and it might never come. And I'm Brian Shulhavi at Health Impact or VaccineImpact.com.

I'll give him credit for being the first one to call this out. And he talked about previous, he said, this is actually the third wave of artificial intelligence hype and bubbles. And you had lots of money poured into the previous two waves, not nearly as much as this and not nearly as much hype. And we didn't see the kinds of things like we have seen so far, but I think he's right. I think this is a third AI bubble, a bubble in the sense that it's not going to deliver as much as soon as these people are expecting, and they're going to panic, and the whole market will panic in the same way that it kind of panicked to get into it. Marcus is a co-founder of the Center for the Advancement of Trustworthy AI.

And he was the skeptic that testified to Congress earlier this year when they had Sam Altman of OpenAI come in. He's been a longtime skeptic about neural network models, such as OpenAI's ChatGPT, but he raises some fresh truths about generative AI as well. Take the unreliability of the models themselves. As is now clear to millions of users, one of the technology's biggest drawbacks is that it hallucinates. In his earlier book, Rebooting AI, Marcus provides a neat example of how this can happen. And oh, by the way, and the reason I wanted to follow up with what I had to say yesterday about the mad cow stuff, he talks about that as well.

This is not something that is new. This is something, the study that I talked about yesterday is new. And they kind of quantized it and said, well, you know, once the AI information gets out there and is a bigger part of the data that it's reading, and once it starts reading its own data, it's going to very quickly go to nothing. It gets really, really stupid. Just the opposite of what we're told. Oh, it's going to get so much smarter. It's going to be like Skynet. It's going to take

over everything. It's going to kill us all. No, it's going to put out massive amounts of data that are garbage. It's going to consume that garbage. And just like cows that are fed the brains of other cows and spinal cords of other cows, it's going to get mad cow disease. And then if we eat it, just like mad cow disease, you eat a diseased cow, well, you get the human equivalent of that. Of course, failed Yakov disease. Anyway, in his earlier book, Rebooting AI, he provides a neat example of how this can happen. He said, some AI models operate as probabilistic machines, predicting answers

from patterns of data rather than exhibiting reasoning. And he gives us an example, Google Translate. So there's a French word called avocat, which can mean lawyer, as in advocate, right? It can also mean avocado. And so if you type in the French phrase that should be translated, I eat an avocado for lunch. Google Translate picked the most statistically probable translation, which is not avocado, but advocate essentially, and comes up with, I'm going to eat a lawyer for lunch. And we all know that's not true. It's the lawyers that'll eat your lunch, right? But Marcus argues that hallucinations remain a feature rather than a bug, that it is unfixable using current technology.

He says there's this fantasy that all these problems are going to go away if you just get enough data. But you can't succeed in crushing this problem with data alone. And then the other part of the issue that I talked about yesterday is the fact that the data is going to be increasingly contaminated with its own garbage. And that's yet another problem. So just scraping the internet as open AI has said, we're going to go out there and we're going to start crawling the web and

grabbing all this information. Well, as it does that, it's got a big issue. If it can't distinguish between human and synthetic data for some users, this inbuilt unreliability is a deal breaker. That they said that Craig Martel. Us department of defense is chief AI officer said last week he would demand a five nines level of accuracy.

In other words, it has to be 99.999% accurate before deploying an AI system. Now, that's not all that unreasonable. As a matter of fact, if you look at text-to-speech stuff, for the longest time I've looked at things, oh, yeah, it's 95, 96, 97% accurate or whatever. And it can come across as total gibberish. You really do have to be 99.999% accurate in order for it to be reasonable. He says, I can't have some kind of a hallucination that says, oh yeah, put a widget A connected to widget B and then it blows up.

He said, many generative AI systems placed too high a cognitive load on the user to determine what is right or wrong. And that's really what you see with transcripts, computer-generated transcripts now. It's what I have seen. You got a better one than I've used. Let me know. Even more concerning is the idea that content produced by generative AIs is polluting the data set. This is what I talked about yesterday, and I mentioned at the very end of the show two days ago, very briefly then,

on which future systems will be trained, threatening what some have called model collapse. I think the analogy of mad cow disease is even better. This means that training sets will spew out more nonsense rather than less. It means that they get dumber and dumber and dumber, just like inbred royalty. Or inbred anybody, right? You don't have to be royalty to get inbred.

And examples of that in rural areas in the U.S. Undaunted investors typically make three arguments about how to make money out of generative AI, says Financial Times. Even with its imperfections, they say, it can still be a valuable productivity tool. There are also many uses, ranging from copywriting to call center operations, where a 2.9 level of accuracy is okay. But the bottom line is, we know how this stuff is going to be used. This is being pushed by DARPA. It's being pushed by the intelligence community. It's being pushed by the intelligence community.

It's being pushed by the military because it's going to be very, very effective as Big Brother. Big Brother doesn't even have to have two nine of accuracy. They don't care if they grab the wrong people. They just grab more people, right? They don't really care if innocent people are swept up. Just go out there and search for people and send them to me. And secondly, the latest advances in AI allow data to be analyzed in real time.

Again, surveillance. This is how it's going to be used. You know, you think this is going to be something that's going to help us? No, this is something that DARPA and the military are using, and they're going to use it against us. They may not use it on their, uh, on their jets in the way that he was talking about or, and other design, but you don't need to have a scalpel. If you're a big brother, you don't really care about it. Any collateral damage that's being done to people. They'll enable the creation of new services

and new business models yet unimagined. Well, we've had dystopian science fiction novels that have imagined it. It's not going to be Terminator Skynet. It'll be more like Terry Gilliam's Brazil. This totalitarian stupid society that just runs roughsh shot over everybody's lives. For the moment, it's only cloud computing providers and chip manufacturers that are

really making money in the generative AI boom, says Financial Times. But again, you know, even when you look at this kind of stuff, you know, what happens when you get down the road a bit. And the people who've been designing chips have retired and the upcoming generation has just been trained to rely on artificial intelligence. It's going to tell us the answer. And what happens when it says you connect widget A to widget B and then it blows up?

Are you going to have people who know how to pull this back? You're going to have very sophisticated stuff. You're going to take a lot of steps back to retrace those steps of what humans have lost. Mikio Kaku, if I'm pronouncing his name correctly, the guy who's a theoretical physicist, but he talks about all different types of things. Kaku said chatbots are, quote, glorified tape recorders. They take snippets, he said, of what's on the web, created by humans, splice them together, and pass it off like it, as if it created these things.

And people say, oh, it's human, because it's human-like. He says, no, they're just glorified tape recorders. This isn't intelligence, he said. This is basically a sort of warped mirror of what's on the internet for the last 20 years, designed to spit out things that seem plausible. But again, it's going to be very, very, very useful for a big brother idiocracy.

Again, Terry Gillen's Brazil. Other experts have been ringing alarm bells. Some of them saying AI is coming for all of us. I think we're not ready. I think we don't know what we're doing. I think we're all going to die. Said one AI theorist. We've seen this godfather of AI,

Jeffrey Hinton also pine this year. It's not inconceivable that AI could eventually wipe out humanity. We've this over and over again it's going to become self-aware it's going to become this god-like intelligence it's just going to crush us like ants elon musk saying we're going to have to become cyborgs you need to get into transhumanism or you're not going to be able to or you'll be made extinct by artificial intelligence. That's quite a lie that he's got there, isn't it? But it will be used by people to oppress us. And here's an example.

Open AI, Sam Altman, this guy has become one of technocracy's most dangerous dictator wannabes, Sam Altman. You know, he goes to the congressional committee, only people like me, and you know, maybe Microsoft, we're the only ones who should be allowed to do this. This is just too dangerous. It could kill us all, so you've got to give us a monopoly on this. And he is a handmaid of totalitarian government.

He is now saying, his company is now saying, they're boasting about how chat GPT-4 can do content moderation. Censorship. Censorship. It can watch us in real time. It can match our biometric data that they've got on us, our appearance and all this other kind of stuff. It can censor our speech.

It can do it in real time. This is how it's going to be used. And so already struggling to overcome its documented political bias. Give me a break. This is Breitbart saying this. Look, it's not struggling to overcome its political bias. That political bias was put in there deliberately. That political bias was put in there by humans who were paid $15 an hour to label data good and bad and true and false and all the rest of this stuff. They paid people to put the bias in. They're not struggling to overcome this. They're struggling to come up with a narrative to tell

people that but of course who needs the narrative to tell people that it's not biased when you can censor people who say that it's biased when you can censor people who show what chat gpt is doing on behalf of government open ai is now boasting of their AI technology capability to power content moderation. In other words, censorship. Praising content moderation as a tool for sustaining the health of digital platforms, quote-unquote, OpenAI claims that its powerful AI systems can reduce the need for humans.

See, it's benevolent. We don't need to go out there and get a bunch of Stasi people. We don't need to recruit everybody to spy on their neighbors as they did in East Germany. We can do this without human snitches. Isn't that nice? We can do it automatically.

Never gets tired, always watches. The ceaseless eye of an overseeing computer reporting on us to its masters at DARPA and the Pentagon. The much talked about tech company simply says that it wants to protect the mental health of the human moderators. Yeah, they'd go mad if they had to do all this stuff. Traditionally, the burden of this task, they said, has fallen on human moderators who have to sift through large amounts of

content to filter out toxic harmful materials so uh yeah it's bad work being a sensor but somebody's got to do it oh let's let the ai do it open ai concedes the biases of ai might be a problem when using this for content moderation what was designed for that but hey if it's going to be the censor, it can hide its own bias. I like this article from Charles Hugh Smith. His blog is called Of Two Minds. He talks about AI and the peculiar unreality of spectacle. And he goes back to a book that was written in 1967.

And it was a french philosopher uh who wrote the book the society of the spectacle in 1967 and here's what he said about the spectacle and see if that doesn't describe this ai world perfectly. And he says, because spectacle replaces real life with a mere mediated representation of life that cannot be experienced directly, it provides a framework where mass deceptions and lies can consistently and convincingly appear as true. And so we see that, don't we? We see that in our news.

We see that in our political campaigns. We see it in the't we? We see that in our news. We see that in our political campaigns. We see it in the pandemic narrative. We see it in the climate narrative, a spectacle that replaces real life. Oh, you especially see it in the campaign, don't you? These gladiatorial contests between your champion, your David, and their Goliath. Of course, they see it the other way around. But they identify their guy as the David and the bad guys as the Goliath. But of course, it is the spectacle that this is really about. It's recreated our society, he said, in 1967. It has recreated our society without community and it has obstructed

the ability to communicate in general boy this guy was super sensitive to this stuff he saw this in 1967 i don't think you have to be very prescient to see it today or to see it in hindsight in 2020, in the Society of the Spectacle, 1967, he said the economy subjugating society first presented itself as a, quote, obvious degradation of being into having. So he's talking about what you want to be. You don't define yourself by pursuing virtue, which is what the founders of our country, society at that point in time said, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you're pursuing virtue, the virtuous state. Now, it's not you

becoming better or becoming something. It's merely about you having something. Possessions. Materialism. And so that is what is being presented to us. We've gone from you becoming something or improving yourself to just what can you acquire. He said human fulfillment was no longer attained through what one was, but instead only through what one had. As society's capitulation to the economy, the materialism, accelerated, the decline

from being into having shifted from having into appearing. And as I thought about that, I thought that's really profound. Because in a sense, it's really just a continuum, isn't it, of that. Because materialism itself is delusional. And so why wouldn't we just gradually follow that path into a totally diluted life of virtual reality? And where are we now? We've got the upcoming generation, two and a half million people, their mid-30s down to kids in high school, dressing up as furries and having conventions. We've got a bunch of men out dressing up as mermaids. We have people just begging for their face-sucking masks

that they can spend all their time in virtual reality where their fantasy life becomes even more real. We've seen this kind of fandom developing a long time over movies. This is just the next step. And it's all about the delusion of materialism, isn't it? Because you see, if it is something that you become, that's a spiritual orientation in a sense. It's a deeper orientation. But if it's just what you managed to collect, well, that's completely different. With respect to knowledge, therefore, experts no longer have to be experts.

They only need to take on the appearance of expertise. Well, I tell you, nothing sums up this age better than just the word fake. Everything is fake today. You know, we've gone through the atomic age of my lifetime, the space age, the information age. This is the fake age. Everything is virtual. Everything is nonsense.

The information, everything is nonsense. And they're trying to push us into a totally virtual reality. Thank you for the tip on Rockfin. I appreciate that Gregory. Uh, uh, thank you. He says, uh, keep bringing real news. Well, thanks. I will try to do that. Uh, anyway, um, I, when I look at this, it makes me think of when I was in engineering and, um, it really was the ethos. And a couple of guys had the t-shirt that said, whoever wins with the most toys, whoever dies with the most toys wins. You've seen that. Right. And they really did live like that. You know, they, uh, we were young. They had typically, uh, two incomes, no kids, um, income was good for engineers, you know, starting, you know,

engineers get salary compression unless they change jobs or, you know, they can get into other parts of it, but it starts out as a good paying job. So you had young people who were making good pay and, but they were not really satisfied with their work. Nobody I knew was satisfied with what they were doing. They didn't like what they were doing. It's like, I can't believe this is really stupid. Why are we doing this thing? You know, we should be doing that. They didn't have the clout to make that happen. A few people had those decisions. And so they got frustrated and they would take that money and they would go out and buy toys. And they would

even wear the t-shirt, whoever dies with the most toys wins. And it's that kind of materialism. It's that kind of love of money, which is a love of materialism that is the root of all evil. And one of the key things that that evil has driven us to is this delusional society where everything is fake. Everybody's going to fake it. It manages the population by turning everything into a spectacle, therefore. In a fake society, in this later stage, everything becomes a spectacle. What we refer to as propaganda, what we call marketing, what we call narrative,

like we saw with the pandemic and with the climate MacGuffins, all that propaganda, marketing, narrative, all of that are just different aspects of spectacle. Spectacle is a simulation, a facsimile of real life and the idea here is that it is inauthentic it is a facsimile a fake of reality a substitution of representation for substance a peculiar unreality he says ai experts i'm sorry sorry, all experts, of course, that'd be AI, all experts serve the state and the media. And the only way they do, the only way that they achieve their

status is by serving the state and serving the media. Every expert follows his master, for all former possibilities for independence have been gradually reduced to a present society's mode of organization. And so the most useful expert, of course, is the one who can lie. So you wind up with somebody like Anthony Fouch lie who ran this country. So the experts realize that their status comes from being servile liars to the state and to the media. And you look at who is the most highly paid government official in history. We've never

had, he made more than the president. And of course, the salaries are higher than they've ever been in history. So Anthony Fouchelie is the most successful, the pinnacle of federal employees. That's what they're looking for, is somebody like that. If you can lie really well for the state and for the media, they will make you an expert and you're going to get paid more than any you can imagine. And that's not even including all the cake bags and the patents and everything else that he got. And so Charles Hughes says, I'm not sure this reliance on spectacle to create a peculiar unreality is something that's really modern. He said, go back and think about the spectacles in Rome, right?

The gladiator events. We all talk about bread and circuses. We talk about that's really modern. He said, go back and think about the spectacles in Rome, right? The gladiator events. We all talk about bread and circuses. We talk about that's really spectacle and welfare or universal basic income. They can keep us in the future. It'll be giving you just enough basic income to feed you and then entertaining you with spectacles, as Yuval Harari has said.

We'll keep people busy with drugs, hallucinogenic drugs, which they're ramping up. That's why I talked about that yesterday. And keep you busy with that. Keep you busy with video games. Keep you busy with virtual reality. Keep you out of the game with addiction to sex and all the rest of this stuff.

And then just give you a little bit of bread to keep you alive, keep you from coming after them with your guillotines. Charles Hugh Smith says, if we think of late Rome, extravagant spectacles, staged battles in the coliseums, chariot races, they were representations of Roman power that was no longer real. And I think that's really true when we stop and think about it. You know, a big part of what they were doing in the Colosseum, one of the things that's always fascinated me as you look at the ruins, was how did they do this stuff? They restaged famous battles. They restaged naval battles even with that.

And that's in addition to all the gladiatorial combat and the, you know, fighting the animals and throwing Christians to the animals and stuff. The other stuff was, you know, reproductions like we would do today with movies and entertainment of their Roman power that really was no longer real. He said in the real world, Rome's power had flowed from its vast importation of wheat from North Africa, its lucrative trade with the Mideast and India, its silver mines in Spain, and its

well-trained and provisioned legions. But as these decayed, or as these collapsed, the Roman spectacles were no longer manifestations of power. They're representations of a power that had dissolved in the real world. And that's kind of where we are right now. He says as a final thought, consider how AI is being presented as automated expertise. See, that's the other aspect of it. It's going to be used as Stasi against us.

It's going to be used to monitor us, surveil us, to control us, to control what we see censoring and all the rest of this stuff. But it's also going to be presented. As we've said from the very beginning, this chat GPT stuff. And as everybody gets fascinated with the fact that it's a glorified tape

recorder, Oh wow. It's like a human or whatever. And as everybody gets fascinated with the fact that it's a glorified tape recorder, oh, wow, it's like a human or whatever. And the coming generations are going to look at this and think that it is authoritative. It's better than a printout, right? And we've always had to warn people as long as computers have been around, don't rely so much on the computer printout, garbage in, garbage out. If you've got a lousy model, if it's built in a bad way or you've got bad data or whatever, it's just what's coming out of the computer is nothing sacred or magic or even true. It could be garbage if your model and your data are garbage. It's going to be garbage. But they continue to look at the artificial intelligence is much more seductive than a computer printout.

And much more seductive than something that's going to be on your screen as a chart or whatever. AI is not just a shoddy facsimile of authentic expertise that serves the state and the media. It is the new theater of spectacle. He's absolutely right about that. Scientists say that a new tool is going to make images worthless for training AI. That's one of the things I talked about yesterday, you know, for both chat GPT and for the art programs,

they're going out there and they've got to have human data. And the catch 22 for them is that the more they do, and the more they put data out there, the more you have this chance of model collapse or mad cow disease or whatever. And now that artists are concerned about their work being taken and used without any compensation to them. Somebody has come up with an app. Scientists at the University of Chicago have come up with a new tool, an app they call Glaze. And they say that this is a way to stop the artificial intelligence from using your artwork. They said that it puts a level of something, it changes it in a subtle way so that humans don't see it.

But to the AI models, it looks like a dramatically different art style than it is. So it's a set of minimal changes done to the artwork. Glaze adds a second imperceptible layer to digital photo artwork, which effectively operates as an invisible disguise. What this reminds me of is the biometric cameras that are scanning people, and they put clothing on that has an interesting pattern of maybe a crowd or something like that, and it confuses software. It's going to be a constant measure versus countermeasure, back and forth. That's going to be something that's going to continue to go on. We've seen this for quite a while, really, in the automotive business, as you started having police get radar

detectors. And then you had the radar detectors, they'd use radar, and then you would have people buy radar detectors. And then there's this escalating uh you know measure and countermeasure that's been going on for quite some time with all of that and that's what you're going to wind up uh with this as well i think but just in terms of protecting the data from being copied glaze adds that second layer there uh it obscures the machine's understanding of what a human artist's work actually looks like. But it doesn't hurt humans from being able to see it. It's imperceptible to them.

And so it was like one person who was an artist says, this is, we look at what has happened here. The idea behind people like Sam Altman of OpenAI, he has this idea that, well, this mine now it's on the internet i'm going to get to use it i don't have to pay you anything for it which is ridiculous she said now of course when we look at how this is going to roll out the big copyright holders like disney they'll find a way to do something about this but i don't think disney and nbc universal they're going to they're not going to take this thing on and fight it head on.

What they will wind up doing is they will say, pay us a royalty. We can't stop you from grabbing this stuff, so pay us. And then they'll use our political clout to get something. But that's going to leave out the independent artists. It really is. So I think that's the way that this is going to move forward. Glaze would be something that will help individual artists. And you now got a musician in the UK, an Irish singer.

His name is Hosier. This is reported by Breitbart. He says he would consider a strike over the threat that artificial intelligence is posing to the music industry. Because it's not just grabbing text from people. It's not just grabbing artwork from people and recombining it. Of course, it's also doing the same thing with music. He told the BBC he'd be willing to join a strike similar to the one currently taking place in Hollywood. That's what we were talking about yesterday.

Our guest was on, and she had worked for the teamsters union and um you know i have um i i was in the teamsters union uh for a period of time i was not happy with it uh i remember the guys my age um several of them had fathers who had been musicians my dad wasn't but they had worked professionally as musicians a couple of decades earlier and they loved the unions because at that point in time there was a lot of live music and the musicians were not paid very much and they still were not being paid very well uh even when we were doing it uh compared to um you know to some other things, because they

would get paid well when they had a job, but they didn't have that many jobs, and the jobs were getting scarcer and scarcer, being replaced by recorded music. But they would look at this and say, oh, no, the unions negotiated much better contracts and all that kind of stuff. And I think that is a cycle that you see with institutions, just like you see that with governments, right? You bring in governments like our government to protect our God-given rights. And it would not have been any surprise to Jefferson to see what has turned into, what our government has turned into.

He would just be surprised that we haven't done anything about it. Because, you know, he said you're going to have to refresh the tree of liberty from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. But, of course, you know, the tree of liberty is dead because we haven't refreshed it. It's a lack of nutrition. But I think that all these human institutions, people can come together and they can act collectively to try to protect the individual.

That's the idea behind government, the American government, at least. That's the idea behind the unions and they can work very well at the beginning and then they become a predator. And so when we were, uh, doing jobs and, uh, in college as musicians, you know, we all saw the Teamsters, which was the musicians union. We saw that as a predator, you know, they're coming in, they're taking a cut of everything to do just like the government. Uh, and, uh, they have their arbitrary inflexible rules that got people in trouble. Like think I've talked about it before. One summer I worked at Busch Gardens in a band and we alternated with a group of belly dancers and the musicians who were playing backup for them. One of them was an anthropology professor who was just doing it as

a summer gig for fun. But the other guy was an accordion player who's a full-time professional musician, and he was having trouble getting jobs elsewhere. And Busch Gardens at the time was blackballed by the union because they did not pay union wages. Now, union rules were that you would work for 45 minutes and you'd get 15 minutes off. But Busch Gardens wanted to have two different acts that had constant entertainment. So they'd have 30 minutes on and 30 minutes off. And if you looked at what they paid us, it was only just slightly below what the union scale was. And if you looked at it and said, okay, but I'm only working 30 minutes instead of 45 minutes. So I'm actually getting paid at a higher rate for the time that I'm working. That was the way I looked at it. Uh, and, um, but I was not in the union at that

point in time. I got in the union after that band, uh, because, uh, the union, the band that I joined was a union band, but they had some people from the musicians union that saw this accordion player and working and they hit him with massive fines and you know uh he had to pay him or he was not going to be able to get any kind of jobs and really what there's how many jobs were there for accordion players in the 1970s really seriously in the early 1970s that's not something that's on a lot of demand. Uh, I don't even know why he was in the union, but, uh, you know, we saw, so we saw them as predators, you know, they had these inflexible rules. They took a big percentage of, um, you know, when the band would get paid, everybody would get a share. The leader would get a double share. Uh, you pay your booking agent, they'd pay the union and all the rest of this stuff. And it's like, what is going on? What's left of this?

The same kind of stuff that happens when you look at your paycheck at the end of the, you know, at the end of the day. And, uh, so, but when I was talking to her about that, again, I wanted to talk to her about what is happening with artificial intelligence. And a lot of people see this stuff coming. Screenwriters see it coming. The artists see it coming. Uh, people who are, um, uh, you know, the actors, I should say, the people creating art, the people, you know, visual art, the people who are creating music, they all see this happening. And it's not just going to be them. It's going to be doctors and lawyers. I don't know about Indian chiefs.

I don't know if they. But it's going to be coming after everybody. And, uh, so he said, joining in solidarity on action, we've got to do that. Absolutely. He said, but recently the financial times reported that Google and universal music are in talks to licensed musicians, melodies, and their voices for future AI-generated songs. And again, they will find a way, just like I said, Disney will probably do a deal with them and say, all right, you just pay us. We can't stop you.

Pay us a percentage on this. Google is looking and Universal Music is looking at ways to license people's voices as well as their music. It's been a thing for a very long time for musicians, pop musicians to sell their catalogs, you know, uh, uh, to a music company. And then they're going to own your voices as well, which is what that guy who bought, uh, uh, Fogarty's CCR, uh, Clearwater Revival. Uh, he bought his catalog and then came after him for copyright violations. He said, you sound too much like yourself.

That's exactly what's going to happen here. This is the future. They want to make everybody like that horrible lawyer. They got John Fogerty's catalog and thought he owned the guy as well. Oh, they will really will own you again. That was the whole premise of that movie called the Congress that had Robin Wright in it. It got kind of weird after about the first third, it turned into an animated film was really kind of strange. I'm not necessarily recommending it, but, um, uh, this is, uh, the way this thing is going. And I think it is interesting, again, this idea of the fact that

it's got to have human data or it's going to die. Maybe we should call this zombie tech. You know, it's out there. I need brains. I need human brains. It's got to survive off of our brains because if it starts eating its own brains, it dies. We'll be right back. Thank you. Succes! Thank you. Making sense common again. You're listening to The David Knight Show. All right, continuing on with what I said about the bubble market, let's talk a little bit about what is happening in the financial areas. We have a story here from Michael Snyder.

It begins with a quote from CNN talking about Michael Burry, the big short guy. Again, there was a book and a movie about what he did. He became famous for correctly predicting the epic collapse of the housing market in 2008. He saw that bubble and now he is betting more than $1.6 billion that Wall Street's about to crash. Maybe we should pay attention. He is making his bearish bets against the S&P 500 and NASDAQ 100, according to the Security and Exchange Commission filings that were released on Monday. His fund, Scion Asset Management, bought $866 million in put options, in other words, to sell it short, against a fund that tracks the S&P 500

and an additional $739 million in put options against a fund that tracks the NASDAQ 100. So he's betting that both the S&P 500 and the NASDAQ are going to go down significantly. He's using more than 90% of his portfolio to bet on a market downturn. What does he know? They have both notched gains so far this year. They're both up 16% and 38% respectively. And again, when you look at economic activity, it's not warranted. You look at the measure that's CNN talking about that, and then Michael Snyder looks at some metrics of economic activity.

And the fact that UPS and FedEx and other people who are freight carriers are saying our business is down quite a bit. In other words, the economy is contracting, but the stock market is exploding. So it's a pretty reasonable thing to say, well, I think that the stock market is overvalued and it's going to have a big correction. And so he's put 90% of his money betting on a stock market crash. In the mid 2000s, he was famous for placing a wager against the housing market. The event was chronicled in the bestseller, The Big Short, inside the Doomsday Machine. It was later adapted into a film where

he was played by Christian Bale. So he called the housing bubble, is this stock market being driven by the AI bubble? Yes, I think so. Because what is the reality? The reality, as Michael Snyder points out, is that Cass Freight Index is down 8.9% year over year. UPS and FedEx are both reporting demand for package delivery way down as well. And UPS said it was down 9.9% in daily package volume. For quarter two, June volume was down

even more, 12.2%. FedEx reported an 18% drop in average daily shipments in its quarter that ended in March 31st. So again, the metrics of real economic activity are down, but of course everybody is excited about artificial intelligence. And then you have this interesting story. I talked about it briefly. The guy that's being called the Ron Paul of Brazil they had their primary election and they got multiple parties uh his party was the number one vote getter higher than the conservative party higher than the socialist Marxist party this there Javier Malai I guess is the way he pronounced his name. He describes himself

as an anarcho-capitalist. Very, very small government, if at all. And he's running for government. It's interesting. And he is vowing to shut down what he calls the thieving central bank. So exactly what is he proposing? I mentioned that he was going to do that. I thought it was kind of funny that he's going to shut down the, um, uh, the bank there. I'm sorry. It's not Brazil. It's Argentina. He's going to shut down the bank there and essentially shut down their currency and jump onto the U S dollar.

And he knows that, uh, you know, he's jumping out of the frying pan into the fed. Uh, but he says, you know, there's two kinds of central banks. There's the bad central banks like the Federal Reserve and the very, very bad central banks like the one we have here in Argentina. So he says he's going to make every effort to not default on the country's sovereign debt. He's called by the mainstream press a radical libertarian. He calls himself an anarcho-capitalist. His plans are kind of interesting. He's going to slash spending, he says, by at least 13% of GDP before mid-2025.

He wants to dramatically downsize public works, reduce the number of ministries, uh, number of, uh, bureaucracies remove subsidies and capital restrictions that would allow business to transact in us dollars. He also plans to shutter the central bank, which he says has quote, no reason to exist unquote. And he would take their economy, which in total is $640 billion. He would dollarize that. He said, if you do a fiscal adjustment, that's what's needed to avoid default, he said.

And the financing will be there. He detailed his plan to scrap the Argentine peso for the U.S. dollar as a way to bring down inflation that is running at 113%. So this is a very bad central bank. And he upped his criticism of the central bank, which he called the worst garbage that exists on this earth. Yeah. And then he had, he says, central banks, as I said, are divided into different categories.

He said you have the bad ones like the Federal Reserve, the very bad ones like the ones in Latina, the horribly bad ones, and then you have the worst category, the central bank of Argentina. Even worse than calling it very bad. He puts it in a category by itself, a bad category all by itself. Argentina would be following El Salvador's model to allow people to voluntarily choose between currencies. Once two-thirds of the monetary base is converted, the economy would become fully dollarized. The Mises Institute says its full plan, which he laid out in some detail in August the 2nd, is pragmatic,

especially from an anarchist point of view. And so they did a very long article that is part of this Zero Hedge article incorporated in it. And they talk about seven measures that he's looking at doing. The first one would be to reorganize the government and go from 18 different ministries down to eight. And so the eight ministries that he would keep are the interior, foreign relations, defense, economy, justice, security, infrastructure, and human capital. I think that's way too many especially i guess i'm an anarcho-capitalist i'd be much more uh prone to anarchy than he is i i would cut that list down to about three of those maybe four i don't even see you need a human capital ministry an infrastructure ministry you might need justice and that type of thing.

You don't need them doing anything with the economy. You don't have a central bank to hector you, so who needs to have an economy ministry? No career bureaucrats are to be fired initially, but they would be reassigned. The political appointees would not be renewed. They would be kept to a minimum. They would take away perks such as bodyguards and drivers, unless there is a real safety issue with these people.

And then they would privatize a lot of closed and state owned and state run companies. The second thing he would do would be a significant reduction in public spending. You start to sound like Jefferson. Yeah, We were able to eliminate internal taxations, said Jefferson, by getting rid of useless bureaucracies and cutting spending. So the second measure consists of significant reduction in public spending. For the first budget, they seek to eliminate expenditure items amounting to about 15% of GDP, taking it from a deficit then to a surplus. And then on the revenue side, they would seek to eliminate 90% of taxes to raise an amount equal to 2% of GDP. That would have, they would also, the taxes uh, they would also the taxes remaining. They would lower the rates of those taxes.

Third thing they would do is a flexibilization of labor relations, uh, to fire an employee is currently very costly in Argentina between litigation and compensation. So, uh, they would ease that up somewhat. Fourth measure would be liberalization of trade. Fifth measure, monetary reform. And then he would have reform which would eliminate subsidies to energy providers. Again, this is something RFK Jr. said, well, we don't have to ban fossil fuels. We just need to stop subsidizing them.

Well, they get subsidies, but nowhere near the kind of subsidies that we give to green organizations. And so just eliminate all these energy subsidies, two things. People need energy to operate. Get the government as a wet blanket trying to put out every fire that is creating energy, because that's the way real energy is created under all circumstances of some sort of a fire burning something. Seventh measure consists of fostering investment.

Eighth measure is agrarian reform. Again, if you're going to foster investment, I'm not saying that he wouldn't be a big improvement, but he's still got some blind spots there. We don't need, the government doesn't need to incentivize things. If you're going to have a market economy, the market incentivizes that. Then judicial reform, welfare reform. I'm not going to go into all these different things. Educational reform, I thought was kind of interesting.

It's going to give people a greater degree of freedom to choose the curriculum that their kids have and to also have a school voucher pilot program. But there's nothing at all mentioned that I see in this article about homeschooling, big blind spot, uh, health reform, security reform, or the other things he's got. So he's got 12 different areas that he's looking at here. Uh, but the key is, is he going to be able to do this on his own? And, uh, will he have, uh, you know, but, but in a situation like

that, it's actually a little bit more hopeful than it would be if you had this particular guy with that agenda running in America, because he could get elected as president. And, uh, then he would, um, not have anybody in Congress to help him or the judiciary and that kind of, that'd all be against him. By the way, that is not, people say, well, that's what happened to Trump. That's why he didn't get anything fixed. No, look at the people he appointed. If you can't even appoint people over the bureaucracy,

if you can't figure out that you can fire people in the bureaucracy, and he did figure it out. He fired the people that really offended him in the FBI, but he kept Fauci. He liked Fauci. Uh, no, that wasn't Donald Trump's problem. But I say that in comparison, you know, when you have these multi-party, uh, parliamentary type of democracies, he's going to come in with other people who are like-minded. If they're going to vote for him, they're not going to just vote for him on the strength of his personality. That's one of the weaknesses of the way our elections are set up. You can have a president that people vote for based on not his policies but on his personality,

and that's typically the case. So they said chief concerns are as a political outsider, he wouldn't be able to get backing for his plans. I don't think that's the case. I think a lot of people would sign onto it as he's the head of a political party. But one of the reasons I spent so much time on this was because I thought it was interesting to take a look at the take of the wall street journal, because the Mises Institute says, okay, let's talk about 12 different areas that he's going to change and, you know, what he would do to do this and that. The Wall Street Journal looks at it and this is their take. This politician just won Argentina's primary. His hair is baffling the world. These idiots at the Wall Street Journal write a several-page article talking about his hair.

Talking about his hair. It reminds me, you know, we've always made fun of John Edwards. We call him the Breck girl because satellite, you know, showed him, you know, whisking his hair around and getting it just right. Uh, you know, the other one with, um, Dan rather, uh, looking out over the horizon before the Iraq war starts. Very, um, pensive as he's looking out there. And he finally turns around and says to somebody that's there, how's my hair? Well, this is wall street journal there, how's my hair? Well, this is the Wall Street Journal. So how's his hair?

You know, here he is, he's talking about radical changes. And, you know, you would think that the Wall Street Journal is about market economics and things like that. You might think they might find some of this stuff interesting. But instead they say, beyond South America, his hair may have been the biggest shock. A 52-year-old economist, he sports a hairdo that isn't quite a mullet, a mop top, or a mohawk, but it is some complex combination of the three.

It seems to move in all directions at once, culminating in a swoop that resembles a treacherous alpine slope. Pull up some pictures of him so people can see his hair as we're talking about this. So, culminating in a swoop that resembles a treacherous alpine slope or a scrap metal John Chamberlain sculpture. It looks like a musk ox crossbred with Ozzy Osbourne. That rock star touch seems rooted in his background.

In his teens, he played in a group called Everest that primarily covered Rolling Stone's songs. While he's lately been seen more regularly in suits than in his once-uniform leather jacket, his hair remains as unkept as ever. And in Argentina, the commentators have nicknamed him the wig. This is what they choose to talk about in the Wall Street Journal. And of course, it's what they choose to talk about there because, you know, who wants to talk about policy or what the government should be doing, right? A representative for him did not respond to requests for comment, they said.

So the Wall Street Journal is on the phone. They want to talk to you about his hair. No comment. Can you imagine how the Wall Street Journal would cover Thomas Jefferson, George Washington? These people, look at their powdered wigs. They have wigs and they're powdered. Let's talk about that.

Let's not talk about the Declaration of Independence or anything like that. It's the essence, isn't it, of style over substance. Hairstyle over substance. Hairstyle over economic substance for the Wall Street Journal. His unkept, they go on, keep going. His unkept, moppy on, keep going, his unkept

moppy hairdo is clearly purposeful. A billboard for his devil-may-care style of politics, they said. And then they start to compare him to Boris Johnson's mop top or Donald Trump's swept cover-up. They say his helmet, Millie's helmet-like hair, resembles Boris Johnson's, but magnified by an order of two.

On his Instagram, though, he continued to repost articles about his primary upset. In each photo, his mountainous hair was as high as ever. That's all they talk about. Look, you can do something. You may have a media that's going to give you fake news and it's going to talk about nothing but hairstyles or the way people dress or the insults that they throw at other people. Along that same line, you know, we talk about the campaign, this Doug Burnham,

Burgum or whatever, who's a North Dakota governor. He's running for president. And there was an article on The Hill where they were talking about him and all they wanted to do was to talk about whether or not he was going to talk about Trump. They had absolutely nothing to say

about this guy's policies. I thought, that's really stupid. And so I was just curious. So I went to his website to see what his policies were. And he doesn't talk about any, he talks about himself. This is what we've come to. You know, it's this, it's all about me. It's all about my biography. I was a farmer. I was this, I was that. Doesn't talk about what he wants to do in our life. It's all about him. These people are all narcissists, aren't they? It's amazing. But look, you know, he wants to, this guy, Javier Malai wants to de-dollarize, wants

to, uh, you know, get rid of the central bank. Um, you know, federal reserve is a very bad one as he points out, but, uh, there are worse ones that are out there, but look, you can de-dollarize yourself. You don't have to wait on these people to do the right thing. You can start exiting this system in many different ways, learn skills, prepare with storage of things, make, again, the civil defense manual that Jack Lawson has, help you to make all kinds, uh, you know, again, the, the, uh, manual civil defense manual that, uh, Jack Lawson has help you to make all kinds of preparation, uh, for what you need to do to survive, to feed yourself and that type of thing.

You can make preparation economically, you know, you can de-dollarize yourself out of this system as they're trying to, uh, you know, this, this risky dollar, the petrodollar, the reserve dollar that is losing its status as they keep putting one spectacle after the other in front of us to hide how fake their fiat dollars are. You can get the real thing and you can hold it yourself and you can go to davidknight.gold and you can get that from Tony. And it really covers a couple of things all at once you can de-dollarize yourself even if the government's not going to do it and you can

support real news at the same time instead of getting uh stories about hairstyle from the wall street journal which you by the way have to pay to to get that story about the, about the hairstyle that's behind a firewall. This is not even behind a firewall. So again, if, um, we had, as I say, frequently, we've had several people have signed up, uh, for subscribe star and other things like that. Uh, if, um, uh, you look at this and you want to support what we're doing here. Uh, if people just send even one to $5 a month on a regular basis, that would more than cover our budget.

I want to thank the people who have supported us. We've gotten just past the 50% mark. So thank you very much to all of you who have supported us. I would just like to see it more broad-based rather than heroic efforts from a few people who have been sustaining this program. We'll be right back. © transcript Emily Beynon Thank you. Analyzing the globalist's next move. Music And now, The David Nutt Show.

And I want to thank on Rumble. Thank you, RCF2020. Thank you for the tip. He says, personnel is policy. That tells the whole story. Exactly. Exactly. You saw the people that Trump was putting in. It was a nightmare from the whole story. Exactly. Exactly. You saw the people that Trump was

putting in. It was a nightmare from the very beginning. The very first people he put in, horrific. Goldman Sachs, bankers, warmongering generals. It was the antithesis of everything he said he was going to do. And then, of course, we saw how his pharmaceutical takeover eventually expressed itself in the Trump administration's fourth year. On Rockfin, Michael Gregory, thank you very much. He says, hi, David, love hearing you. Guard, Tony, I would love to hear how you connected with those guys. I got to know Tony years ago when I was at Infowars, I interviewed him several times about what he was doing. And always an interesting guest.

And he guest hosted for me at Infowars several times. And by the way, they're having their anniversary. Well, not anniversary. Hit a milestone in terms of the number of shows and i'm going to be on with uh tony and um uh the people that he does uh his show with on saturday i'm going to be on with them tomorrow i think they i think they hit 100 shows and so uh billy ray valentine and uh tony and um all of them i'm going to be on with them briefly tomorrow and uh in terms of guard uh guard was commenting and everything and then i got a chance

to really talk to guard when i was in new york at one of gerald slinty's events i was speaking at and we talked for a very long time and um Gard has an amazing background as both a screenwriter and in politics. He's got a very extensive background, all that stuff. And so I'm really blessed to be able to have them do backup for me when I need to take some time off to go do something. So it really is a blessing to have them there. I wanted to also say I got a couple of Subscribestar tips and comments. This one from Andreas, who's in Germany, says, I'm a German listener. I love the show. It's a great mix of politics, news, history, and culture, all delivered

without cursing from a Christian perspective with the appropriate outrage sprinkled with a sense of humor. So thank you very much for that. That was very kind. And from Kristen. Thank you, Kristen. That's very generous. I appreciate that on Subscribestar. And she says, because of your commitment to Jesus, truth, integrity, culture, music, humility, and God's natural order. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate that. As a matter of fact, I also got this message. This is an email I got from a listener, AD, I'll just call him. Actually, Aaron is what he, is his first name. He said, a few days behind listening to the show, he said, I heard you talk about how if we're faithful in Christ that all things will work together for good.

He says, I also believe that our faith must be made equal to the day in which we'll be required to use it as society collapses and this Babylonian system continues to fall and to fail. And he sent me a poem here. But yeah, I think that is a way to think of this. I think of it as being in Babylonian captivity. You know, Judah was being in Babylonian captivity, you know, you had, uh, uh, Judah was taken into Babylonian captivity and they were told, um, you know, the passage that everybody

knows. I know the plans I have for you plans to prosper, not to harm. Uh, and, uh, what God tells him there, he says, look, you know, you're going to be here for 70 years, but, you know, build, grow food, grow your family, all the rest of this stuff. And he said, you know, seek me and you will find me. But he tells them, you're going to be here for 70 years and continue with your life. And so we're kind of in the same situation, aren't we? We're in this Babylonian captivity. These different regimes last typically for about 70 to 80 years. You see the fourth turnings that are happening. So who knows what's going to happen?

If the worst happens, it's going to be another, it's going to be 70 years of captivity for us all. Some of us aren't going to make it that long. Even in your, regardless of what happens in society in general to some extent our life on this earth is a babylonian captivity isn't it and we just make the best of it and we search for god that's what what we do with it but i'll read you his poem here i thought it was good uh aaron uh his poem is uh tomorrow's never promised for us. There are some things we cannot control. Don't waste the time you have worrying and hardship or sorrow.

God will console. Be calm in the midst of the storm. With patience and endure as we should. Keeping your eyes fixed on Jesus and all things shall work together for your good. So many distractions and countless lies comprised to destroy our common sense. But those who seek truth will not be misled nor time for sitting lukewarm on the fence.

The trials you suffer, bear them in love. Afflictions will come. That must be understood. Set forth the good example of charity, and all things shall work together for your good. The days of this dying world are numbered the earth groans because of wickedness many will desire to curse god and die but his people he will he prosper and bless be up in doing do not sit idle the fiery darts being constantly withstood steadfast in christ shall be delivered and all things shall work together for your good well thank you aaron i appreciate that it's interesting, this article from Zero Hedge, Americans more likely to turn to religion for meaning than people in 17 other advanced economies. This is a survey by Pew Research, an open-ended question.

They said, while many people find meaning in their surroundings, both in terms of society and nature, some of them also mentioned religion. And this is very inclusive because this would be anything that you could remotely call religion. So this would be, you know, your belief in God, or it could be a church type of community, or it could just be, in general, spirituality or something like that.

So it's pretty inclusive. And so when you look at how inclusive it was, I surprised at how low the numbers were even for the united states which is far and away above others uh so they said religion and spirituality was mentioned more frequently among u.s adults compared to those living in other uh advanced economies as they put it in the u.s religion came up as the fifth most highly mentioned topic. It was only number five. Because, you know, you've got Trump above that, or if you're a Democrat, the Democrat Party, or something like that.

Right? It doesn't have to be ranked up there. Only 1% of people in France said that religion, spirituality, faith, again, very broad and inclusive. And only 1% of France looked at that. Isn't that interesting? How secular that society is. So even for this 1%,

they said the topic was less front of mind than it was for their U.S. counterparts, ranking them in 15th place. And there you see the chart there. So the U.S., by far and away, there's France at the bottom, only 1%. Italy, 2%. The U.K., 2%. Germany, 2%.

Canada, 3%. Australia, 4%. New Zealand, 5%. U.S., 15%. people who turn to religion for meaning I said this about Hillary Clinton she talks about well you know we have the politics of meaning for her politics gives her me gives meaning to her life I've talked about how sad that is and when you look at that chart you know we're not gonna you know god doesn't grade on a

curve we can't say you know we were we were 15 times better than france it's like yeah but 85 of you don't turn to religion at all yeah maybe 99 of the people in france have never turned to religion but you don't ever even think about this. And again, that's any reference to God or spirituality or any kind of a higher power of any type of thing was counted in that pretty broad. According to Pew Research Center, mention of religion was fairly similar across age, income, education, or gender categories. There's only two gender categories apart from in the U.S. where the older adults are Republicans, Republican-leaning independents were more likely to mention this than were Democrats. Well, because we know the Democrats are secular humanists.

The DNC, the Democrat Party, has become home to the self-obsessed people who are lovers of self. And, you know, when you look at the school systems versus the parents, for example, they both say they love kids, don't they? The difference is the school system, that kind of love is described as eros. And for the parents, it's agape. So it's a very different type of love. And just to underscore where the Democrats are, the GOP is investigating State Department grants to atheism.

I thought we weren't supposed to establish a religion. And of course, secular humanism and atheism, they are a religion. I've said this for the longest time, and now the Democrats are proving it. Because it has its own set of rules, and it has its own morals and its own ethics. They even have things that they really demand that you do. If you don't do these things, then they're going to ostracize you, criticize you. After we've had the FBI memo targeting anti-abortion Catholic activists as, quote, potential domestic terrorists, they said now Republicans are questioning this program

from the State Department that is promoting atheism overseas. They've become atheist evangelists, secular humanist evangelists. Mike McCall, a Texas Republican, a real warmonger, by the way. But I'm glad he's doing this. Reviving a nearly year-long inquiry into the 2021 State Department grant, they say, is designed to expand the influence of atheists and humanists in the Middle East and North Africa. Now, you know why they're doing this. They're going to say, well, this is because we're worried about Islamic extremists. Let me

just say that when I was doing research on asymmetric warfare centers, and they have asymmetric warfare centers that they practice on fighting in intact American cities. The one that I went to with Joe Biggs was the one at AP Hill. I guess they've renamed it now. That was a Confederate general. So I don't know what they call that base there. But inside the secure military base they had another secure area that we were able to get into and film live

and uh in that area you can stand there at the corner of first and main street and they have all these different buildings that you would find in an urban area they have other ones that are set up to model suburban America or rural America and different military bases. And so they practice where they plan on fighting. And again, this is not, um, they've always done house to house combat and things like that, where you would have burned out buildings or bombed out buildings. And, you know, you, you come in with air superiority and you, you know, you essentially bomb the place and then, but you have to have boots on the ground to actually occupy it.

And they got to go through and clear these things out. So that type of thing, you've always seen that, uh, in terms of, you know, the house house searches in the military, this is a very different thing. And so we were looking at that and I was looking to see what they've been doing with asymmetric warfare. I started looking at their seminars, which you could find a lot of them on YouTube. Most people don't watch them. They'd be around for, you know, a couple of years and they might get 50 to a hundred views or something. People typically don't watch them. They're as dry

as you can imagine. But they would say, and they said this over and over again, I saw this in one of them after the other, said the issue is not radical Muslim extremists who are religious. They said what drives these people is the fact that they don't have any control over the future. Why? Well, because we've bombed the place out, we've now occupied it,

and they have no control over their future. And so the typical people who are going to be organizing this, it's going to be the opposition, are typically going to be in their mid-30s, highly educated, having come from the upper economic strata of society, who have now had all that stuff taken away from them. And they said they may, as part of, that's the core profile of the people

that they're worried about in asymmetric warfare. You see, that's why they're training to fight in American cities, American suburbs, and rural areas, because they know what they're going to be doing to us. You see, they're going to take everything away from us. They're going to leave us in a situation where we feel we have no hope. And I said, now, subsequent to that, subsequent to that, a lot of these people will turn to religion. And now you understand why they're doing a lot of the things that they're doing.

That's the core insight that I got from all of this asymmetric warfare study that I was, you know, what I was watching, what they were about. Now, they're not going in to attack these Muslim extremists and stuff. No, they've taken away people who were successful, secular, affluent. They've taken away their future. Then these people turn to religion. And so they're going to defend that on that basis. But that's really, I think, what is not happening with this. And I think that they have different motives as well. I don't think they have the motive to try to stop religion because they think that it fuels terrorism. I think that they have, they want to promote their own religion. The State Department's April 2021 decision to solicit bids for a $500,000 grant titled Promoting and Defending Religious Freedom Inclusive of Atheists, Humanists, Non-Practicing, and Non-Affiliated Individuals.

Oh, okay. So the atheists and humanists are practicing religion. They finally admit what I've always said, and that atheism and secular humanism is a religion to combat discrimination, harassment, and abuses against atheists, humanists, non-practicing, and non-affiliated individuals. But, of course, they're not interested in stopping discrimination and harassment, abuses, murder against religions. They just hosted the Hindu president of India, Modi, who has been going after every religion but his own, simply because of religious persecution, murdering massive numbers of Christians and Muslims in that country. They have no problem with that.

And then, of course, you see other countries where the religion that is in charge does not only just discrimination and harassment, but actual murders of the people who are there. The only place where you don't see that is countries that are run on Christian values, really. So there's not discrimination and harm against any religion that they're worried about. No, they only want to protect the atheists and the humanists from this kind of religious persecution. The State Department told the three GOP individuals, McCall, Smith, and Mast, that the Office of Religious Freedom and Human Rights Bureau

do not provide funds to any organization with the aim of using such funds to promote or advance specific religious ideologies or beliefs. In their most recent letter to the department, however, the House critics assert that, quote, even a cursory look into the operations and the mantra of Humanists International calls the agency's questions into dispute. That organization, Humanists International's website, they require all their member organizations to pay dues. See, that's real establishment of religion. Like I said before, when you had establishment of religion, some of the places you had to attend on a regular basis.

But even if they did not require you to attend, you still had to pay money. And I've always looked at that as a parallel to what's going on with the schools. Today, you're not compelled in America to go to the actual school to be indoctrinated into the seminaries of Satan, but you still have to pay money to the seminary of Satan to indoctrinate kids in that whose parents choose to let them go. So on Humanists International, their website, the organization requires all of its member organizations to pay dues, and they have five objectives that you have to sign on to. The very first one of these is the advancement of humanism. They're evangelists. You look at the Mayflower Compact. One of the reasons they said they came was for their own religious freedom

and to promulgate the Christian religion, to bring it to the natives there, to help the natives there by giving them the Christian religion. So that's what these people are doing. You've got to pay dues. You've got to advance humanism. In Humanist International's application, they specifically stated that they would award subgrants. They put in an application to get money from the federal government.

They said, well, we will then in turn grant this money that you give us for, quote, organizing events and seminars to promote the positive aspects of humanism and other ethical, non-religious worldviews. So besides promoting humanism and atheism overseas, Humanist International has close ties to member organizations that engage in U.S. litigation to promote humanism domestically. And that has, for the longest time, been the foundational religion and philosophy of our government schools. Founded by human schools, founded by humanists, run by humanists, for humanism, to great kids that are humanists. The American Humanist Association,

which has the initials AHA, which is also initials of the American Hospital Association, and that was an AHA moment when I saw they were getting bribed by the Trump administration to identify somebody as having COVID. Not only did you get the bonuses right up front for, you know, finder's fee, you get bonuses for the ventilation, but we'll give you a 20% bonus on everything that you do while that person's under your care until you kill them. That was an aha moment. But anyway, the American Humanist Association is also AHA. Far from advancing religious freedom, they said, AHA often takes actions that are antithetical to the ideas of religious freedom. Yeah, that's the thing, you know. They're very, very, very, very intolerant

of other religions, just like Prime Minister Modi and his Hindu party. HI's close association with AHA speaks volumes about the true objectives of HI. So we've got two organizations. We've got HI and AHA. It should be a grave concern to the department. Yeah. So who knows what's going to happen? You know, I think Bob Dylan got it right. One of his songs, um, you got to serve someone. He said, uh, in other words, you got to worship something. Bob Dylan said, it may be the devil. It may be the Lord, but you're

going to have to serve somebody. He said, you might be a rock and roll addict prancing on stage. You might have drugs at your command and women in a cage. You may be a businessman or some high degree thief. They may call you doctor or they may call you chief, but you got to serve somebody. It may be the devil. It may be the Lord, but you're going to have to serve somebody. That's what these people in the Biden administration are doing. We've got a New York state Senator who wants biometric digital ID scans for alcohol and tobacco purchases. Well, you know, why not just have biometric ID scans for everything?

Let's just go to CBDC. Every day you look at this and every day and and in every way, we're getting better and better. No, actually, in every day and every way, we're getting more and more enslaved. So here's somebody, some Democrat in New York, state senator, who says, well, we're going to have to have biometric ID scans for any alcohol and tobacco purchases. And it's all converging into the CBDC environment. You have facial recognition tech led to the wrongful arrest of a heavily pregnant Detroit woman.

But, you know, hey, who cares? The Detroit Police Department is now using biometric scanning. And like I said before, if artificial intelligence gets it wrong, the totalitarian state doesn't care. They really don't care if they arrest the wrong people. Just jail them all. Kill them all. That's their attitude. So they don't care about that. And by the way, we have this DSA that's coming out of Europe.

And we've seen even the very first time, at the very beginning, when Elon Musk said he was going to buy Twitter. And I've played that clip many times. It's very, very cringy the way Musk groveled before this EU bureaucrat, Thierry Breton, I think is his guy's name. But he's made at least three big public appearances coming to Musk to cow him down and saying, you know, when this thing comes through, you will censor who we tell you to censor worldwide. And so it's going to be kind of interesting to see what happens with Twitter. Because we're just days away from this thing taking effect, finally. And again, for over a year,

the EU bureaucrat has been threatening Elon Musk about how he's going to come along with censorship. So we're going to see what that's going to look like pretty soon. And when you see what has happened on podcasts with Glenn Beck, very concerning for me. You know, Apple, iTunes podcast removed all of Glenn Beck's shows from the platform. And I think this is the beginning of censorship for podcasts. They've talked, that's another use for artificial intelligence. They haven't been able to identify the content as readily for podcasts

as they have been in other places. Even if you go to broadcast radio, they can have boycotting of your sponsors and that type of thing. But social media, we've seen this rampant. In every other venue venue they've been able to do a lot of censorship podcast was the freest thing and just one of the reasons why we went there rather than trying to pursue something with radio for example um yeah i like the fact that i don't have to take rigid breaks with commercials i don't do enough breaks as it is, but, um, the, um, because I know

a lot of people will reproduce the show for, for radio and, uh, they would like me to have more breaks in it, but the, uh, you know, something that is supported by donors. So I don't have to worry about, uh, sponsors pulling the rug out from underneath us, uh, because they get pressured, but, uh, it's long been about, and they've complained about the fact that they don't have enough censorship of podcasts. Now, Spotify is the only one that has censored me, and they've always censored me. And they have an algorithm, and they're trying to farm this out to others,

offering it for sale to censor people. And so I don't know if this is the beginning of it. It's eventually going to come. But they removed all of his shows. No warning. No reason given. Eventually, because he's complaining loudly about it, they relented and restored his stuff.

But maybe a harbinger of what's to come. All he got from them was they said, quote, we have found an issue with your show. He took a screenshot of that and put it up. No definition. What is the issue? When I was kicked off along with everybody else on all the different social media things

and off of YouTube back in August the 6th of 2018. It's just a few days short of the first anniversary of the show. I got an email from them, from YouTube, said a complaint has been received and we've terminated your channel. Well, no three strikes and you're out. You get one complaint and you don't tell me what that complaint is or who made the complaint. And so I tried to contact them. They would never respond to anything. But they kept sending me that email 8,000 times. They sent it about, and the funny thing about it was that it wasn't exactly the same amount of time in between these emails.

They would vary just under 10 minutes up to about 15 minutes. I'd get another email. And so I stopped deleting them and I created a, an email rule to stuff them in a folder to see how long this is going to go. And they kept doing it for a couple of months. I got over 8,000 emails from them eventually, but would never respond to anything. Uh they kept doing it for a couple of months. I got over 8,000 emails from them eventually, but would never respond to anything. Uh, wouldn't respond to any communication I had to them through there. Um, through YouTube, they would not respond to the email. I even said, uh, stop sending this email to me.

They don't care about any of that stuff. And of course, same thing happened when I got kicked off of PayPal. No reason given. I spent a couple of hours with a guy on the phone. He said, I can't find anything. All I see is a thing here that says terminate this channel immediately. No reasons given. That's all we could come up with. And so I think that's eventually going to happen with a podcast. And so I wonder when they did this with Glenn Beck, if that is the beginning of this type of thing. Maybe Spotify is being successful in terms of pushing out this stuff. If they don't do it, it will happen with artificial intelligence. Looks like Apple restored my 3,000-plus episodes, said Glenn Beck,

to their platform, but still don't have clear answers as to why this happened. Hope to have an update for you tomorrow on the radio. So, again, it'll be interesting to see what happens with it, but I think we know this is where it's headed. In San Francisco, they now have a Doom Loop walking tour, and it sold out immediately. So this is going to be a guided tour where they're going to take you through the drug addict infested places, people living on the street,

the crime, and the rest of this stuff. I hope they got security. They call it a downtown doom loop walking tour. To, quote, discover the policy choices that made America's wealthiest city the nation's innovative leader of housing crisis, addiction crisis, mental health crisis, and unrepentant crime crisis. It's set for Saturday the 26th, already sold out. Yeah, this is not some kind of voyeurism of societal collapse. This is not slumming. This is being done to expose what has happened in San Francisco. In terms of promoting it, they said, you'll find no better expert.

Your guide is an urban policy professional card-carrying city commissioner overseeing a municipal department with an annual budget of over $500 million and co-founder of San Francisco's largest neighborhood association. He spent hundreds of hours on both sides of the government Deus shouting into the opposite abyss. So I imagine we're going to see some pretty interesting, uh, videos coming out of that. It certainly is a horrific situation.

We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back. decoding the mainstream propaganda it It's the David Knight Show. Well, we've got about 10 minutes before I'm going to throw to an interview that I recorded for Marty. Marty's very busy. He's trying to earn a living and work as Marty Gottesfeld and work doing investigative journalism. And he's got a real heart for helping kids who've been kidnapped and abused and it is a report uh about um what is happening in uh what they call the uh troubled teen industry and he wasn't able to get any comments directly from paris hilton but she has commented on some of these hearings about abuse especially in utah and places. She spent a lot of time in it. Her parents didn't want to be bothered with her, I guess. So they just shipped her off to one of these places for troubled teens.

So he talks about it, but it is a very, very big industry. Reminds me in a lot of ways of CPS, $50 billion a year industry, nearly half of which is paid out of public funds. And the average cost for a stay is more than $500 a day. As a matter of fact, one of these young kids that just died out of complete neglect. She got sick and they said, mind suck it up there's nothing wrong with you she died of sepsis and total neglect her parents are pursuing them but they were paying twelve thousand dollars a month to have her there and i was talking about this afterwards uh with my wife and my son i said said, yeah, what? If you got $12,000 a month to spend,

even, and I don't know if all that was coming from the family or if half of it was coming from taxpayers and half of it was coming from them, but even $6,000 a month, you know, you find somebody to live in and be a companion. If you don't want to spend the time with your kids, you could find somebody to be a live-in companion. I mean, there's a lot of different options that you could do rather than ship them off into the desert to die, which is what happened. I've had, I think, six kids die in four months or something like that. But anyway, he wrote a story, got published by Daily Mail, and he also has a Subscribestar channel. And so I'm going to, I got a couple of things I want to talk about here before we run out of time. And just a reminder that I'm going to be on the show tomorrow with Tony and Billy Ray Valentine and Don Jeffries. And so, you know, check that out. It'll be interesting to

be their 100th show that they've done. I had several people send this to me. This is an Amazon book. It's available for sale on Amazon called Fire and Fury, the story of the 2023 Maui fire and its implications for climate change. They published this on August the 10th. Pull it up and show people what this looks like there. It is, oh, can't find that page. Oh, they must have taken it down. Well, good for them. Because everybody was just complaining about this. People were pointing to it. And the people on Amazon, everybody's giving it a one-star review.

Fire and Fury, the story of the Maui fire and the implications for climate change. A gripping and eye-opening account of one of the most devastating wildfires in Hawaii's history, how it reveals the urgent need to address global climate change. Total nonsense. Again, don't miss the fact that this was intentional sabotage. You think about this fire, think about somebody coming, think about the government coming to your house, restoring a bunch of, you know, wet linseed rag oils and waiting for coming to your house, restoring a bunch of wet linseed rag oils and waiting for them to catch fire, and then coming in and saying, well, now we're going to confiscate your property, because that's the other aspect of this.

And so one of the things that was interesting about this book was the author had no picture, and that's not necessarily unusual, but the name of the author was Dr. Miles Stones. Dr. Miles Stones. And under the bio of Dr. Miles Stones, it says, I'd rather not say. This is obviously, as many people pointed out a chat gpt book total garbage as everybody said and what was even more interesting is that there's a a book then that was written in response to it regurgitating that uh by the way it got 60star reviews. And just to show how people will manipulate the ratings on Amazon, it got 20% five-star reviews.

It got 60% one-star reviews. And then you have this book that came out in response to it that said it was going to comment on, and it put itself out there as a commentary on that particular book. But I don't want to spend any more time on that. I want to talk real quickly about this German military plane and the green foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock. This is from Eugipius, and it was really hilarious. She left for a week-long tour of Australia, New Zealand, and Fiji. The purpose of the trip was, as usual, fairly hazy.

They wrote down that despite the great distance, Germany and the Pacific Islands are closely connected by common values and a common view of the world. And we can rely on each other and support each other. So Eugipius says, well, apparently, performing these close liberal connections for the media requires the massive carbon emissions of long airplane flights, even for a green politician who, in general,

is opposed to air travel for ordinary people and once proposed to ban all domestic flights in Germany. So she's going to fly all the way across the other side of the world to New Zealand and Australia from her. The centerpiece of her junket was set to be a tedious post-colonial liturgical exercise in Canberra at which she would oversee the return of cultural assets from a museum in Leipzig. She was going to return it to the aboriginal people.

These objects included a fishing net, a long thin stick reported to be a spear, two shorter sticks variously described as a club and a digging stick of a wooden sword club. The truth is that they're just sticks. Nobody knows what they were for, nor were these quotidian hunter-gatherer accoutrements stolen from these people. They were acquired legitimately by German missionaries between 1838 and 1839 in the course of ethnographic research. Then they donated them to the historical museum in Dresden

and eventually it went to the museum in Leipzig. Alas, Baerbock was unable to play the part of self-flagellating Western colonial transgressor and to reinvest the people with their sticks at a ceremony yesterday. A German embassy official had to fill in for her because the planes used to transport the highest office holders in the Federal Republic were too old and unreliable to get there. You see, the interior minister, a woman who has dibs on that stuff,

had already decided that she was going to take a trip to Australia for the Women's World Cup. She canceled her, as Eugipius puts it, her girl power spectatorship exercise after the German team got eliminated. But then they didn't have enough people there. Personnel was an issue for this green minister to take her around the world trip. And so they wound up getting one of the older planes. It's been around for 23 years, an Airbus A340.

The plane was once called the Conrad Adenauer, but they dropped that, he said, after they had a lot of mechanical problems with it. And so they took off on this flight. And as they're flying, the landing gear is stuck. And so they have to turn around. They have to dump 100,000 liters of fuel, which when you do that at altitude, he says, it gets aerosolized. And so the droplets eventually decay into water vapor, ozone, and carbon dioxide. Normally, this would all contribute to the greenhouse effect, but in this case, the fuel was released on behalf of Germany's leading green climate botherer. So we can

assume that the action had anything other than an emissions-reducing effect. So they go back to the Abu Dhabi airport and instead of taking a commercial flight which would get her there she decides to take another uh uh effort with this plane and the same thing happens again so she she does this not once but twice and uh so he's just talking and this thing is a really funny read you should read it he's just talking in this thing. It's a really funny read. You should read it. He's got a great way of speaking and writing. Great writer. But he says it just shows the sad state of the European social welfare states, Germany being one of the worst ones, the kind of decay that we're seeing.

All right, we're going to go to the interview that we did yesterday with Marty Gottesfeld. Again, this is about the troubled teens industry, and it is quite an industry, very big, $50 billion a year. Here's Marty. Well, joining us now is somebody that we've been talking about for years, Marty Gottesfeld. He has a real compassion for helping kids that have been stomped on in the system, medically kidnapped and others. And he's got a breaking story. He's been very active as a reporter, even when they put him in jail for breaking the story about Justina Peltier and the actions that he did to try to expose medical kidnapping of Justine. But now there's a new story, and it just broke on Daily Mail.

And so we want to get Marty on right away with this breaking news about a story that actually he's been following for a while, but this is a new death, a 17-year-old who died last year. The Diamond Ranch Academy, though, has been shut down after an investigation into her death. But again, it's not the only one. We're going to let Marty explain this to you. You'll find the story at Daily Mail, but you'll also find it at Marty's Substack. And you can find Marty on Substack at Marty G.

Thank you for joining us, Marty. Thank you for having me, David. It's an amazing story. Go ahead and tell people what's going on. And again, I do appreciate your passion for trying to help kids out there. This is happening everywhere, isn't it? Yeah. Utah kind of is one of the leaders in these programs and also one of the leaders in deaths at these programs, but it does happen nationwide. We have these programs in Massachusetts. They're in red states, they're in blue states. It is unfortunate. There's probably about 200,000 kids moving

through these programs at any given time. And what are these programs called and what is their stated purpose? So the name that you hear in our circles is the troubled teen industry. The programs market themselves as therapeutic boarding schools, residential treatment programs, wilderness programs, boot camps. But really under that umbrella come like also psych wards, juvenile detention centers, pretty much anywhere where a child is taken out of the home and held away from the family

for the supposed like medical treatment, development or rehabilitation of the child, right? So the psych ward where Justina Pelletier was held, you know, is one of these types of facilities, even though it's not, you know, technically for profit and it's not private in the truest sense of the word. But when you look at the whole umbrella of all these places, like I said, it's 200,000 American kids moving through them and the abuses are horrible and the deaths are often horrible. So you mentioned Diamond Ranch Academy. That was one of the

most famous, wealthiest, and also most notorious of these programs. The girl who died last year, her name was Taylor Goodridge. She was actually the third known child to die at Diamond Ranch Academy. And it took those three deaths and it took a lot of coordinated action by the survivors of Diamond Ranch who put a lot of pressure on the state licensing agency at the same time that some celebrities like Paris Hilton and Paris Jackson also applied pressure. And, you know, nonprofits, the Utah Disability Law Center, which is a federally mandated advocacy agency, you know, released a very harsh report about the state's oversight of these programs. And that culminated at the same time with a division of professional licensing

report that was part of the Goodridge litigation because the family had sued Diamond Ranch. And that all kind of culminated together. And what the state did, it didn't revoke Diamond Ranch's license. That would cause a long running administrative process. So what the state did was they waited for Diamond Ranch's license to come up thing on the part of the state. Like to revoke a license, they have to show cause and there's due process and all that. I think there's still some level of due process and declining the renewal, but the state has a lot more discretion at that point. So that's what they did. Diamond Ranch closed on Monday. But last month in July, around the same time the state announced that it was going to deny Diamond Ranch the ability to continue operating, news broke this and speaking to some of the former clients from Daniels Academy. We learned that there had actually been a previous suicide of a Daniels Academy client by gunshot two and a half years earlier in December 2020 that had gone completely unreported. So we were able to find and identify that prior suicide, as well as the more recent suicide last July.

And Utah had placed Daniels Academy on conditional licensing until this coming Sunday. And now we're not sure what the future of Daniels Academy is going to be. But we've spoken to current and former staff. We've spoken to former clients. Our sources say that Daniels Academy has taken no meaningful preventative action to stop a third suicide. It took three deaths to close Diamond Ranch.

I'm really hoping that we will not have a third death at daniels um it's so daniels is um it markets itself to parents of autistic children as a residential program and so like in the troubled teen industry one of the ways that one of the tells that a program is one of these kind of less legitimate faux rehab places as opposed to like a legitimate program is they claim to have the fix to everything. No matter what your child has, oh, they can fix it.

And there's a price. It's usually on the expensive side. And you said something about Paris Hilton being involved in this. You said, is it because, I think you said that she was involved in this at some point in her, previously as a child, they'd put her in one of these troubled teen academies or something? Oh, they sent her to a whole bunch of them. She kept running away, and they kept sending her to more and more restrictive places. She ultimately landed at the Provo Canyon School in Provo, Utah.

That is one of the most notorious, harshest of these programs. A federal judge in 1980 actually issued a permanent injunction against Provo Canyon and its medical director because he found the school had been physically abusing children, had been placing them in solitary confinement, had been reading and censoring their mail, and also subjecting them to polygraph examinations, like lie detector tests, to try and suppress criticism of the program. And it was actually two plaintiffs who were able to kind of sneak information out of the program to their parents, kind of like Justina had to do in the Boston Children's Hospital Psych Ward that started that case. And, you know, you'd think a permanent injunction would lead to some reform, but it's not as effective an item as it might sound at first glance. And Provo has remained very controversial. It's under new ownership now. United Health Services owns it now. And they consistently declined to comment on any allegation regarding the prior

conduct of the facility. Wow. How big is this troubled teen industry? Do you have any idea about how much, they're getting government money, right? As part of this? Yes. Yeah. Okay. So do you have any idea about how much, I know there's private money and government money. Do you have any idea how much even the government side of this is? I think the government side of it is very significant. It's at least half. Kids get sent to the industry through special education placements, through individual education plans for special needs kids. That was how my wife's little brother ended up at one of these places in Utah.

That was how I got started in this whole thing. It's a multi-billion dollar industry by all accounts. Oh yeah. How come there's so many of them in Utah? What is it about Utah? Do they have just really lax oversight or what's going on with Utah? Historically, yes. They had very, very lax oversight. And the Utah, like it, so there are a lot of wilderness programs and they need wilderness in which to operate right so utah is is very conducive uh in terms of that uh they also have very lax oversight uh historically speaking although it looks like public scrutiny is starting to maybe turn a corner with utah and they're starting to take a harder look at these programs um but then uh in addition to that so there's the the barrenness right so if

you look at like diamond ranch we have a picture of it in our articles right you see like a baseball diamond and a football field surrounded by desert right and so like one of the things with these programs is the kids try to run away you know that, that's what Paris Hilton did, right? They run. So they put these things in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the desert, right? To try and discourage, you know, the children from running. But the kids run anyway, and then they end up lost in the wilderness and they die. Like, it's not, it's, you know, it's not as effective a deterrent as they would like it to be.

And it's very, very dangerous, actually. Like, if you're going to have your kid run away from the program, you'd rather have a run somewhere where there's water and food and not like squelching desert. Wow. Wow. Yeah. Because these kids have problems in the first place to begin with. Uh, what, and you talked about, you know, one of the red flags of one of these programs, the fact that they claim that they can, uh, cure everything. What should people look for if they've got a troubled teen in their family and somebody is recommending one of these programs? I mean, what should they look for as a red flag? First, I want to address something.

Some of these kids are troubled for sure, but a lot of them are sent away for kind of bogus reasons. So like what happened to Justina, right? She was not troubled and she ended up in one of these places, right? We've seen divorce courts use these programs when you have an influential parent and the child is maybe going to testify to abuse by that influential parent. The court orders the child placed out of state far away where the child is unavailable to testify.

So we've seen that in quite a few cases. You know, my wife's little brother was sent away because he was staying up late and, you know, doing regular teenage things. And just, you know, the family didn't respond to that in a way that, you know, other families might have. And that's the key thing. I think if you've got a family that, you know, you got a problem with the kid who doesn't have a problem with the kid at some point in time, but if you're going to just that, you know, you got a problem with the kid, who doesn't have a problem with the kid at some point in time? But if you're going to just kind of kick them off to an institution, that in and of itself is not generally going to be as good an outcome as you're going to get with the family that

God created to take care of these kids. I mean, nobody's going to take better care of your kid than you are. Nobody's going to have a better insight into their problems than you do. And so that's a given. As you point out, a lot of people are putting kids in there that's just because it's a convenience thing or because it's part of a legal fight and a divorce, various other issues. That's the really the key thing. But, you know, if you have a situation where some kid gets put in there or they're going to do that anyway, maybe there's some concerned family member that doesn't really have any control over this.

What could they look at with this? There would be special danger signals. I don't know. Are there any of them that you think that are earning good or is the entire troubled teen industry a lot of trouble for teens? I mean, is that the bottom line? This whole thing is messed up?

I mean, I would have a very, very hard time ever endorsing any residential treatment program. The amount of due diligence that I would have to do to arrive at that conclusion. I mean, and frankly, like you said, right? Like most of the time, the best solution is at home. And if you're not going to solve it at home, you're just kicking the can down the road. Like you're still going to solve it at home, you're just kicking the can down the road. Like, you're still going to have this problem later. So, you know, and there are some children, though, you know, who might really need an out-of-home placement, where the situation, the amount of care involved, and I'm not insensitive to that either, but you have to do your due diligence, right?

And if the program is promising to be able to treat every kid for everything, if there is a very vocal group of survivors who are claiming abuse, and that's one of the big smoke signals for me, right? When you have 100 kids saying this place abused me, you need to listen to that. They're not making that up. One kid, two kids, you might have a couple of bad, but with some of these places it's hundreds. There are generations of survivors that come out of some of these places, it's hundreds. There are generations of survivors that come out of some of these places. And they're not all making it up. And then, like, so you have, you know, in Pennsylvania, two state judges, two state juvenile court judges, shut down the local juvie jail.

They bought into a for-profit juvenile detention center. And then they accepted kickbacks from the juvenile detention center for sending 5,000 teens into the private facility. They were caught. They pleaded guilty or tried to plead guilty. The Justice Department gave them such a sweetheart deal for this awful thing that they had done that the federal judge overseeing the case, who was like an older federal judge he was appointed you know many many moons ago he was not part of the the bush uh obama you know kind of uh machine right he said this plea is way too lenient the court's not going to accept it and he forced he basically forced him to go to trial uh and then the justice department let one of these crooked judges out during covid uh but about like about

a dozen or so of the kids who were affected by this ended up committing suicide either during their detention or shortly thereafter uh and so kids can end up in these in these places you know for any and for very corrupt reasons it doesn't really reflect it's not safe to come to a conclusion about the child just because the child was placed in one of these places and it continues to haunt them because like when your diploma is from you know what i mean like the juvenile attention center like that's on your resume for life like that's you know what i mean like that's that's a real issue you know going forward if people find out about that and the sad thing is that you have a lot of these troubled kids because again the parents have have not

paid attention to them or have uh you know uh made, uh, made a lot of, um, we'll just say, uh, uh, bad decisions about parenting. And then it only gets worse. You put them in these types of situations. It's like pouring gasoline on the fire. It very rarely ever gets any better. And very rarely like institutionalizing a child very rarely improves anything. Now, again, I'm not going to say that there's never a case, but they are exceedingly rare. And like you would, you would know it, you know what I mean? Like if the child has trouble going to the bathroom and cleaning up after himself, right? Like,

okay, if you're in a situation like that, I'm not going to say that an institutional placement is never appropriate. But for most of these cases, you know, this is not a situation where a licensed medical professional would recommend residential placement or institutionalizing the child. And what they usually do is they try to go around and they try to make sure that no licensed, you know, knowledgeable medical professional has a chance to review the placement before it's done. Right. And so usually there's not a sign off from a qualified professional saying this child needs residential treatment. It's usually done by the family, sometimes with help from the school district on like

an individual education placement. But you will not see, you know, a competent medical professional signing off on most of these. Some of them you will like the Pelletier case, but for the most part, no, you don't see that. And so like really, really high tuition right lack of like high level care right a lot of these kids that their families are paying top dollar and they're getting therapy what they call therapy from like a licensed clinical social worker someone who doesn't even have an advanced degree in psychology someone who's not a doctor has no prescription pad, right? And if you're paying top dollar for once a week therapy with a social worker, like that's warning number one, right? If you send your kid to some place and

you're spending, some of these places are $10,000 a month. And you're spending that kind of money and your child is not seeing MDs, you know what I mean, every week, that's a huge warning sign. Another huge warning sign is the troubled teen places, the bad ones, almost uniformly move to restrict the family communication very severely. The child is not allowed to stay in contact with friends, with former teachers, with church staff, clergy, you know what I mean? Like they will tighten down very much.

And when the kid does complain, they'll say, Oh, the kid's just manipulating the kids lying. Don't believe them. Right. But that, that restriction on communications is a dead giveaway.

Like I'm very dubious of gag words. It was part of what got me upset about the Pelletier case on the first plate. This is America. You should be able to speak freely. yeah right so yeah when you look at that communication it's a huge warning sign that is a big red flag i mean we saw that all through the pandemic and everything well we can't show you this and i'd seen it before with people pushing climate change show us your data you published it we've used it to create policy now i can't show

you the data i'll sue you if you try to get the data and all the rest of the stuff somebody starts hiding that stuff and we see it now in their schools. We say, don't tell your parents. Shh, you know, that's a sign of a groomer. You know that somebody knows that somebody is trying to pull something over you or they're over on you or they're trying to do something illegal when they try to keep everything hidden. That's an absolute red flag there. In this particular case, in Diamond Ranch, uh, your headline says, um,

you got other schools for troubled teens in Utah thrive despite six student deaths and four years in this particular case of a Taylor Goodridge. Uh, that is the headline story here. Uh, tell us what happened in her particular case. So she, um, I'm trying to remember what the actual cause of death was, but she was very physically ill. She, her blood rate or her heart, her blood pressure was high or, you know, she had obvious cardiac symptoms. I think she had GI symptoms as well. She was vomiting all the time.

The articles say she was vomiting all the time. Yeah. Yeah. And, and Diamond Ranch did not take her to outside medical care until it was too late. Wow. Wow. And she died. And they thought that she was faking it.

And that's another kind of telltale with these programs is, you know, they always say the kid is faking until the kid is dead. Wow. And there was some very compelling testimony by the government accountability office in front of Congress about 15 years ago. That is just a gut-wrenching clip where they go through about seven of these cases and you know, the GAO called it torture. And when Congress pushed on GAO to say, did you really mean to use that word? GAO said, absolutely. Yes. Some of these cases were

torture. Wow. Wow. And you point out in this, uh, in your article, you say they were paying $12,000 per month to send her to this academy. And now there is a lawsuit from that family against that academy. How big are these schools approximately? How many students do they have there? I mean, some of them are very small, only a handful. Some of them are very large, into the hundreds. Diamond Ranch was one of the larger ones. I don't know off the top of my head how many kids were there,

but they fielded a football team and a baseball team wow i mean like they were large enough to and and they competed in the division 1a in utah that's a lot of money you got that big student body and they're paying twelve thousand dollars a month that's amazing well yeah and and now now you see the issues that's a lot of political donations that's a lot of donations to the sheriff's office or to the you know to the governor's re-election campaign. PBS did a big investigation of the programs in Montana, and they found hundreds of thousands of dollars of lobbying on the part of the programs in Montana. Wow, yeah. It is really a disgusting situation that is happening.

And let me ask you this. You know, sometimes they get counselors and stuff like that. Do they ever have any chaplains or clergy or anything like that? Or is it all drugs and psychology and brutal discipline? What is it that they typically do at these places? So there is some level of religious service. And some of the programs, you know, that were religious service and, and some of, some of the programs,

um, you know, that were the most controversial were the kind of like pray away the gay programs were also a lot of kids died. So some of them are religiously affiliated to my knowledge, diamond ranch was not to my knowledge. Daniel's academy is not, I don't think,

um, religion really plays, uh, you know, an active role in, in most programs, but it has in some disastrous results as well. And as you point out, it can be used either good or bad in terms of the way that it's

hit on people. Well, this really is an amazing story. And as you go through this article, you point out the people that are there, not licensed mental health and so forth, and they've been operating these things for decades. A lot of these, I guess, as you point out, Utah, Montana, are going to be wilderness places because they can say, well, you know, it's going to. And typically it does help people to get out of a city environment and to get into a wilderness environment, the open spaces and that type of stuff. But again, you know, it also presents a risk to them. If these kids, these troubled kids get out of that and try to run away.

Um, what happens? We can't die in those wilderness programs just on the regular hikes. Yeah. It's without running away. Some of them have been marched to death. Really? Yeah. The Aaron Bacon story is awful.

I mean, he, it was a similar one to, to, to Taylor. You know, he had a perforated ulcer. Um, they kept him marching. They had a perforated ulcer. They kept him marching. They would not believe him until he died. And that was in the Utah wilderness. Wow. Just get used to it. You're fine type of thing.

Yeah, you know, it's that kind of discipline. You know, Donald Trump was sent to a military academy. He was a troubled kid, I guess. And look at how he turned out. That's a cautionary tale, I guess. I'm not going to comment on that one. I know I'll go there by myself. Um, but it's, uh, that should be the warning sign to everybody. Uh, your child could turn out like this. The, um, uh, it is, uh, it is truly amazing. But again, people have been doing that type of stuff,

boarding schools, military schools, and now we have this troubled teen industry that is there. Yeah, there's a world of difference between a regular boarding school and the troubled teen industry. You know, I went to a boarding school for high school and like they use that, right? Because at first when I heard, you know, my wife's little brother's at a boarding school, I thought of what my experience was like, you know, in a New England boarding school and a prep school. And it's not like a regular boarding school. Like if you, if you sent your kids to, you know, like a good prep school or something, this is, this is not the same thing. This is a very,

very different environment. Yeah. I think there's probably all, you know, there's a big difference from each one of those categories as you jump down. And I've, I've not heard of this troubled teen industry before. So it's very important that you get this out there to people. And very important article. And people can find this on Marty's sub stack at Marty G. And it's also on the Daily Mail. It just broke today. And so thank you so much, Marty, for coming on.

Before you leave, though, give us an idea how things are going now that you've gotten out of jail. We're all so happy to see that you're out of jail now. And you're pursuing journalism. And you're doing a lot of good original breaking of stories. How are things going? Things are very well. So far, I've not had an issue with the government on home confinement. I'm kind of knocking on wood that that continues. The journalism has been great. I love doing it. But I don't think it's going to be me in the long term. In the long term, I'm going to transition to some kind of cybersecurity role somewhere where I can have, I think, an even larger impact and be able to do and fund the kind of efforts that I want to do. And I'm exploring that actively.

And I think I'm going to have an announcement by the end of the year. Oh, good, good. Well, I know that you've got a real passion for helping kids. That's what got you in trouble and unjustified. I can't think of a better reason to get in trouble. That's right. That's right. And so I appreciate your heart in terms of trying to help kids.

It really is a very important thing. And we can all see that. And so, again, if people want to know more about this, hopefully you don't have a child or somebody that's a relative in your family that's in this type of situation, but a real red flag for all this stuff and a very serious warning about something that people may not have been aware of. I haven't seen anybody else talking about this. So kudos to you for pointing this out and bringing this to people's attention. Thank you so much, Marty. Appreciate it. Thank you for having me, David.

All right. Have a good day. Thanks. You too. Bye-bye. Okay. We'll be right back. Stay with us. The common man. They created common core to dumb 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 thedavidknightshow.com. Thank you for listening. Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. TheDavidKnightShow.com Terima kasih telah menonton! សូវាប់ពីបានប់ពីបានប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពីប់ពី you're listening to the David Knight show