The David Knight Show - 6Jun23 Mainstream Media Won't Repeat What RFK Jr Said About School Shootings

Episode Date: June 6, 2023

OUTLINE of today's show with TIMECODES Mainstream Media Won't Repeat What RFK Jr Said About School Shootings In his interview with Musk on Twitter Spaces, RFKj went where GOP & Dem candidates fear to tread — and NYT and other mainstream media refuse to cover. (3:57) RFKj tells libs, Supreme Court expanded 2A to "expansive" individual rights. No, the Constitution prohibited interfering with God-given rights (15:58)RFKj goes there, thankfully, on SSRI's the murder/suicide pills and their probable role in school shootings (19:59)RFKj began Spaces interview by interviewing Musk on AI, self-driving (37:10) RFKj Spaces: UBI Universal Basic Income and border issues (40:13)NY Times and Washington Post double down on their role as lying shills, labeling everything as "conspiracy theory" and still pushing Trump injections as 100% effective and mercury in vaccines as safe. Incredible (57:36)Apple’s Apple headset rocked the market up, then down. But the Virtual Reality world is a trap. And the headset has a bizarre, ludicrous, laughable "feature" that increases its cost (1:11:03) The military is in damage control mode over report that in a simulation, the AI killed its human operator and engaged in other lethal activity to its own side. Which story do you believe? (1:25:13) How AI "Ownership of Stars" Will Change Hollywood Desc: Get ready for not just recycled sequels, but recycled movie stars. This latest hot topic that may lead to another strike was actually the subject of a film a decade ago. (1:32:02) New AI Tools to Censor Podcasts Tools to demonetize, shadow ban, and ban podcasts are already being deployed. The new euphemism for censorship by demonetization is "brand safety" and they assign a kind of "traffic light", "social credit score". The last bastion of free speech on the internet is about to fall (1:41:11) Report that US has retrieved craft of "non-human origin". Who are the people telling us this? (1:56:30)INTERVIEW Rob Travalino "Revolution Empire"Author Rob Travalino a Telly, Effie, Gemini, and Emmy Award winner, joins to talk about his soon to be released book that weaves the American Revolution into a tale of revolution against a high tech dystopian empire, a modern corporate police state."Revolution Empire: History Never Retreats" speaks to young adult audiences in a way that history books can't to convey the concepts of liberty (1:59:03)Find out more about the show and where you can watch it atTheDavidKnightShow.com If 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 through Mail: 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.

Come on, come on, yes, yes, come on. At this year's Cheltenham, glory rests in the lap of the gods. Oh, curses. Alas, our hero hasn't placed. But there are still divine offerings up for grabs, with all NoviBet customers getting a €10 free bet for every day of Cheltenham. And on top of that, we're paying up to seven places each way on selected races throughout the festival. I declare this a most generous offering.

No, we bet. More power to you. Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to The David Knight Show. As the clock strikes 13, it's Tuesday, the 6th of June, year of our Lord, 2023. Well, today we're going to take a look at the interview that RFK Jr. had with Elon Musk on Twitter Spaces yesterday. Something very interesting was said. I did a sub stack about it, but I want to go into it a little bit more detail and talk about some of the other things that were said

and some of the things that were not said. We're also going to take a look at the new Apple headset that is going to be introduced next year. One of the reasons why the price went up for the stock and then went down. So many, it was trending when I went on Twitter, I saw a black mirror trending for a reason. And we're going to talk about that as well as a lot of other dystopian technology. And we're going to have something a little bit different. We're going to have a

science fiction author on with us. Someone who has won an Emmy, a Tully, a lot of different awards, and he has got a dystopian, sci-fi, 1776-style revolution set in the future. We'll be talking to him in the third hour. Looks like it'll be interesting. Stay with us. One of the things that I thought was interesting about this, the interview that we're going to have about the book, is called Revolution Empire. And as I was looking at some of the reviews for it,

I saw one from a homeschool curriculum training and support program called HomelLink Yakima. And the person said, it's filled with concepts, challenges so increasingly familiar in today's chaotic world. Revolution Empire presents a thought-provoking, inspiring lesson into the often brutal truth of absolute power and the preciousness of the freedom that can defeat it. And many other things. So it piqued my interest. This author is very successful, so I thought let's get him on and we'll talk about that,

something a little bit different. But let's talk about the Twitter spaces last night. Now, this did not crash this time, interestingly enough. And from what we could see, and they didn't criticize it for not having as many listeners, the New York Times was very, very critical, as always, of RFK Jr. They really do hate him. They use every baseless slanders that they would pose against me or any of us, not criticizing him for the things that I would criticize him for. But one of the things that they said, and they didn't say it in a critical way,

was that it peaked with 60,000 listeners. At first I thought, when I saw that it didn't crash, I thought, well, maybe Musk fixed it. But he had a much, much smaller crowd than DeSantis did. So I thought that was interesting. But just to give you an idea of how visceral the hatred is at the New York Times of RFK Jr., here's what they say. He has used his campaign platform to promote misinformation

as during the discussion by David Sachs, a top DeSantis donor, who was also close to Mr. Musk, quote, what happened to the Democrat Party? Mr. Kennedy spent nine uninterrupted minutes attacking Mr. Biden as a warmonger and claimed that their party was under the control of the pharmaceutical industry. Where do you get these crazy ideas? A little bit of candid conversation from a candidate. Can't have that. Not on the New York Times. He said, I think the Democrat party became the party of war. I attribute that directly to Biden. He has always been in favor of very bellicose, pugnacious, aggressive foreign policy. And he believes that violence is a legitimate political tool for achieving America's objectives

abroad. Well, that's absolutely 100% true. New York Times hates that, though, specifically because it so accurately drives a scalpel into the heart of the problem. Yeah, Biden's campaign declined to comment, declined to debate, declined to comment. Of course, that's going to be the way that they respond to this. For more than 30 minutes, the event started.

This is what I thought was interesting. The person that I downloaded this from, and I didn't have time to actually watch it and listen to it, so I downloaded it and did a transcript. That's what I have to do if something, I mean, this is two hours long. I don't have two hours to listen to chatter. So I download the thing, I look at it, and I scan it for, search it for particular terms to see if they're covered there. Much to my surprise, They talked about gun control.

First time I've seen that. And that's what I wrote the sub stack about with some quotes from it and my comments. But I'll give you more. As I said, when I put it up last night, I said, I'll have more to say. So today, for more than 30 minutes at the event start, and that was the unusual thing. There was about 18 minutes that was missing. No, it wasn't Rosemary Woods who put this thing up on YouTube. I don't know why the guy, whoever put it up, cut that off.

But I know that at the beginning there was a lot of introductions. And as the New York Times said, for a half hour, he interrogated Musk, RFK Jr. interrogated Musk. And that was what was going on at the beginning of the clip that I got. I thought, that's kind of weird. But it was good in the sense that, you know, he was asking him some pointed questions about artificial intelligence, neural link, self-driving cars, and things like that.

Those are questions that need to be asked. But, of course, he didn't get really good answers. Musk was evasive in them. But they are questions that need to be asked. He was very flattering to Musk, of course. And I understand that. You know, he was kind enough to give him a platform when he had been kicked off from Instagram.

They just reinstated him, by the way, and brought back his users after an absence of two years. had been kicked off from Instagram. They just reinstated him, by the way, and brought back his users after an absence of two years. They cut him off on Instagram and Facebook because, for the same reasons they cut me off. They cut me off in 2018. They cut him off in 2021. So they did bring him back and said they brought him back because he's running for president. Maybe I should try that. No, I'm not interested at all. I've already done the

quixotic quest of running for Congress. That was enough. That was beyond the pale. It wasn't even my idea. I did it just so that we'd have a candidate in that jurisdiction. And I did get in a televised debate. But anyway, so that experience has taught me a lesson that I won't repeat. Anyway, they talked about that and eventually Musk said, well, these are very interesting topics, but let's talk about your candidacy and moved it on. Uh, so the New York times corrects him on one thing that he said, they went, they went to big issue out of that because they don't like what he had to say about guns. And I said, in my sub stack article, I said, there's a couple

of things here. Number one, it's going to really PO the left on this stuff. Because he said to them, forget about coming after the era of 15. Forget about the rest of this stuff. Now, he didn't say forget about gun control. He just said that's not going to happen and it's going to kick off a civil war. And that's very important to understand. And it's very important to understand that unlike Biden and so many other Democrats, he says he doesn't want a civil war. And I believe him. I think he doesn't want a civil war. And I believe Biden and Eric

Swalwell and these other people who, Beto O'Rourke, who do want a civil war. And they can kick it off by coming after the guns. No doubt about it. But anyway, he said that Switzerland has a larger percentage of people who have firearms. And they said, well, that's factually not right. So they were very happy about that. They caught him on a factual error. But that's beside the point. The second part of what he did, which was so important, is he brought into the conversation SSRIs. He said, you know, I want to stop these school shootings. Maybe we'll have to look at

what one of the foundational or the foundational problem is in all this. Why is this happening now? It's never happened before in history. Now, he didn't say, as he could have, probably should have said. As we've pointed out for a long time many many people who are second amendment defenders say why was it that we could bring guns to school at this year's cheltenham glory rests in the lap of the gods curses alas our hero hasn't placed But there are still divine offerings up for grabs, with all NoviBet customers getting a €10 free bet for every day of Cheltenham.

And on top of that, we're paying up to seven places each way on selected races throughout the festival. I declare this a most generous offering. NoviBet. More power to you. T&C Supply. 18 plus. Bet responsibly. Gamblingcare.ie. In the 1960s and 70s for target practice, why could people drive around with their pickup trucks and a gun rack in it?

And we didn't have these kind of shootings. Why was it that, what has changed in our society? Now he doesn't look at broader issues of society and that is certainly a factor. But a key thing in all of this is the murder-suicide pills, the SSRIs. And he brought that topic up. I'm very glad that he brought that up. See, this is the important thing about the campaign.

It's not so much that I'm looking for a solution or a savior out of Washington. And I've said that over and over again. And it's not that I support any of these people or I would even consider voting for them. If I go to vote in the next election, this is where I am now at this point. If I go to show up at an election, it's going to be because there's somebody local that I want to support. Otherwise, I'm not going to vote. I'm just at that point now. I'm so disgusted with this corrupt system. Both parties, I'm sick of it. I've pushed against this

thing for 30 years and I'm fed up with it. But we need to understand how they're coming after us. Different people will come after us in different ways. But the campaigns are an opportunity for us to talk about important issues and to bring them to the surface. And even the New York Times can't wish that away now. That's there. That toothpaste is out of the tube. And RFK Jr. is going to continue to say this, I think. Some of the other things he said, borders are a real problem.

They didn't like that either. Besides Biden being a warmonger. And he also said big pharmaceutical companies own the Democrat party now. He said it used to not be the case. It used to be the GOP, but now they own the Democrats. That's true. The New York Times said, well, the Republicans get more money than the Democrats do. Regardless of who gets more money, and who knows who gets more money than the Democrats do. Regardless of who gets more money, and who knows who gets more money, is this money above board? Is it reported? Is it under the table? Who knows who's getting the most money from Big Pharmaceutical? We know that they're both owned. That's the key thing. We know that Big Pharma owns the Democrats.

Big Pharma owns the Republicans. Big Pharma owns CNN. Big Pharma owns Fox News. They own all of it. He talks about free speech and how important that is. But let's talk about, oh, and the things that he didn't talk about. He did not talk about abortion. He did not talk about the trans agenda, the LGBT, the gay this and gay that,

the Pride Month. He didn't talk about any of that stuff. He didn't talk about crypto. He didn't talk about CBDC. He didn't talk about universal basic income. The only thing that was digital that he talked about was artificial intelligence, and they did talk about that. So it's interesting to see that there's still a lot of question marks

about what he would say about these issues. And frankly, there's still a lot of question marks about his character. He's been very candid about a lot of things, but he acknowledges that he's got a background that's very concerning. He's on the Epstein plane. He talked about his sexual addiction. He had a wife who committed suicide, all these different things. There's a lot of questions about character, just like there was with Trump, multiple wives and things like that. Those types of things, if he wants people to vote for him, I think, need to be addressed directly.

We can all admit that we made mistakes and talk about the change, but unless you want to actually talk about the mistakes that you made, the bad things that you've done, and I think that is something that needs to be discussed when it is so big. And, of course, the key one of these things is his call to lock people up. He talks about himself being a free speech absolutist, but if he talks about a decade ago locking up people who disagree with him on this climate MacGuffin. He needs to address that.

Well, I used to think that until I was the victim of censorship and that changed my thing. Something like that, you know. What was it that changed his addictions and things like that? These types of things need to be addressed. But perhaps he will still early in this. But let's talk about the gun control issue.

Because I said I'm really happy in this Substack piece, I said I'm really happy to hear him call out what I believe is a fundamental problem with the school shootings that is ignored by both Republicans and Democrats and even by Libertarians, capital L. Even they don't talk about it. Reason doesn't talk about it. Cato Institute doesn't talk about it. People go out and they'll attack the gun, or they'll defend the gun, or gun rights or whatever, but they won't talk about the

pharmaceutical aspect of it. It's amazing the amount of power that big pharma has over people. Look, even if you don't get money from big pharmaceutical companies, all of these media outlets know that they can shut you down. If you talk about their product, I know that I know that I knew that before I started talking about it. And then I experienced it. They can absolutely shut you down. So they don't want to talk about it. Republican Democrat parties, candidates, and the Republican Democrat media do not want to talk about it.

So I said in the article, I said, Substack, I said, but first, what did he say? Did you expect all politicians to say? Even the ones that want to take your guns? Well, they all say what he said. I'm a constitutional absolutist. And they all say that. You can hear somebody like Eric Swalwell or Joe Biden say, well, I absolutely believe in the second amendment. And, uh, but, uh, you know, uh, we got to save the kids.

So I'm going to take away your guns in the second amendment and uh but uh you know uh we got to save the kids so i'm gonna take away your guns in the next part but i believe in the constitution and as i said they'll then try to kill the second amendment by a death of a thousand cuts death by a thousand infringements or what is usually the case well they do, immediately they'll deny that the second amendment was what it was about, which is about individual rights. If you look at the bill of rights, it's pretty obvious that the first, uh, eight, I would even say the nine and 10, uh, are all 10 of them are about individual rights. And number 10 talks about the power of states and

the powers of the people collectively, but all the rest of them are about the rights of an individual. You know, to have due process, to not have excessive fines, to not have your free speech taken away by the government, and to not have your weapons taken away by the government. All the rest is, it's all about individual rights. And so what they'll do is deny that this is talking about individual rights. Oh no, this is about the collective rights of the state to do whatever we want. No, no. But then, um, uh, he went on to say, this is what would disappoint the leftists.

Um, he told the leftists that the Supreme Court has ruled in, quote, a very expansive interpretation of the right to own a gun, end quote. And then he offered an olive branch to them. I said, look, look, I understand. I understand the pain that families feel in all of this. My father, my uncle were killed by a gun. But then he said, I know as president that you're going to expect me and i'm going to do everything i can to reduce gun violence in this country i think one of

the tools that's been taken out of my hands however is taking away people's guns and he says because the supreme court said i can't do that. I commented and I said, well, that's true. The president doesn't have that power. Trump didn't have power to do gun control by executive order. Biden doesn't have power to do gun control by executive order. It didn't stop Trump or Biden, however. But the reality is it's not because of any Supreme Court decision. It's because the Constitution says so.

And because you don't have any authority to govern in any capacity from president to dog catcher without swearing an oath to the Constitution. And once you violate that oath, you may have power, you may have an army alongside of you of armed goons, but you don't have any legitimate authority. And we have the legitimate authority to resist you because you're an usurper, a liar, an oath breaker.

So anyway, uh, so, but he, he points that out to them. Uh, again, he appeals to the Supreme court for his authority, not to the constitution. That's worth noting, by the way. But he goes on to say, quote, taking people's guns, he said, I don't think that's the right thing right now, because it'll just polarize our country. Again, right now. Okay? But this is the bigger context of what he's saying, is that it'll polarize our country.

We're living in a time, he said, when the Constitution has been under attack. All the other amendments in an unprecedented way. And how would that be seen by the people who strongly believe in the Second Amendment as part of a systematic assault on our Bill of Rights? That was a great statement, he had to say. Because he's laying out for the left. He said, look, you want to come for the guns? At this year's Cheltenham,

glory rests in the lap of the gods. Curses. Alas, our hero hasn't placed. But there are still divine offerings up for grabs, with all NoviBet customers getting a 10 euro free bet for every day of Cheltenham. And on top of that, we're paying up to seven places each way

on selected races throughout the festival. I declare this a most generous offering. NoviBet. More power to you. T's and C's apply. 18 plus. Bet responsibly. Gamblingcare.ie. Do you understand that all of the Bill of Rights is currently under attack and everybody sees it. If you come after the Second Amendment,

well, you know, the people, millions, tens of millions of people who are armed are going to understand that it's over. And so he said, and it would be right to understand that. I wrote on Substack, I said, unlike the bellicose idiots, Eric Swalwell, Beto O'Rourke, and Joe Biden, who all threatened as candidates to use the military to go to war with gun owners, RFKJ de-escalates and isn't going to engage in this kind of bullying demagoguery. As a matter of fact, he says we need to pull this back or we are going to have a war.

Big difference, isn't it? And this is the kind of talk that we need to hear. This is a good thing for somebody to say, let's not have a civil war. Because you have Biden pushing for it. You have Trump pushing for it. Uh, you have the, the base of, you know, the activist base grassroots, both the left and the right pushing for it. Uh, so anyway, uh, then he pivots to something that people of both parties should be interested in, but the politicians are not interested in talking about, and that is why. Why the school shootings? I wrote, after every one of these school shootings, I remind people

the murder-suicide pills, the SSRIs. I've had several guests on recently to talk about it from SSRIstories.com. Also, Kim Witzak, whose husband committed suicide after being prescribed an SSRI simply because he had difficulty sleeping. I gave links to that interview. You can see it as a podcast, or hear it as a podcast. You can see it as a video on the video channels. Anyway, then this quote from RFKJ.

He stated, when I I said he stated the obvious that no other politicians will say. Here's what he said. And I quote, I also look very closely at the role of psychiatric drugs in these events. And there are no good studies right now. That should have been done years ago on this issue. Because there's tremendous circumstantial evidence that those SSRIs and benzos and other drugs are doing this. There's something happening in our country right now that is not happening anywhere else in the world and has never happened in human history. And you have to look at some of,

almost all of these drugs. If you look at our manufacturer's inserts, they include a side effect of homicidal and suicidal behavior. Let me insert here. Kim Witzak had to push really hard to get a black box label to warn people about that with these drugs. And it was a big fight for her to get that warning label put on there. But she was the one who got that put on. Anyway, going back to RFK Jr., prior to the introduction of Prozac, he said, we had almost none of these events in our country, and we've never seen them in human history, where people walk into a schoolroom, have children or strangers, and start shooting people. There's other nations that have as many guns per cabinet as we do, like Switzerland, which is one of the last school shootings was 21 years ago.

We have one every 21 hours. The one thing that we have, it's different from anybody in the world, is the amount of psychiatric drugs our children are taking. Now, the response of the New York Times was interesting. They're that dynamite statement. They completely digressed and they said, well, no, Switzerland doesn't have the same number of guns that we do in the U.S. We have, what was it, something like 125 per 100 people guns?

125 guns per 100 people, they said. And they said Switzerland only has about 27. And the number two, Yemen, is somewhere in the 50s, 57 or something like that. That's not the point. He was offering the example that why is it that Switzerland is heavily armed? Not necessarily as heavily armed as America, but that's, you know, that's number three. Why is it that they don't have these school shootings?

What's different in their society? Maybe we should ask that question. New York Times doesn't want you to ask that question. New York Times wants to say, well, he said this, and actually we can say that he's wrong, and we don't even mention the gist of what he was talking about. The SSRIs, the murder-suicide pills. Isn't that amazing?

The New York Times is such a dishonest paper. I cannot stand them. And the Washington Post, right there. And guess who's going to be deciding what is true or false? Shoveling that over to the tech sensors, hardware and software to put a, to mark you and mark your content and keep it from being uploaded. And not just me, you as well. You want to make a meme? You want to post an article somewhere? Oh, well, no, that's coming from so-and-so. We've already identified him as someone who is false and nothing that he puts up will be allowed to

go on. So anyway, it was an interesting, interesting what he had to say. Never in human history have we had people walk into a school room, have children or strangers start shooting people. One thing we do have, it's different from anybody in the world, is the amount of psychiatric drugs our children are taking and our people are taking. And we need to look at that. And I should have done that years ago, but they will not do it. And they will block other people from

doing it. And of course, the New York times will not report what he's saying. I mean, he went on for quite a while about this, uh, because they're working for the pharmaceutical industry. This is their major profit center today. Pharma does not want you to hear about any problems with SSRIs, but I will do those studies immediately when I get into office and we're going to get the truth. And it's something, you know, guns, the proliferation of guns is clearly abets violence, he said. No, no, he's wrong about that.

We had a very peaceful society when they were more widespread in use. Anyway, he says, anybody who tells you that they can remove it with AR-15s, whatever, by tinkering at the margins and get to the kind of situation that they have in Western Europe, anybody who tells you that is pulling your leg. We need to look now at other solutions. And we, and the only way we're ultimately going to get gun controls in this country is through consensus. You see, he's getting back to his core. You know that he wants gun control, but what he's saying is to the left, we don't want to have a civil war.

And so he says, we're going to have to build a consensus. And we're going to have to, first of all, try to focus on what is causing these shootings. And so let's take a look at the SSRIs. And then we can take a look at the guns. It's not that he's averse to gun control. And he is not a Second Amendment absolutist, as we began by saying. Because he said, only then, ultimately, can we get to gun control in this country. You see? He said, that consensus cannot happen when we're all at each other's throats.

We need to assure the public people who feel insecure about the Constitution that our Constitution is no longer under threat and nobody wants to come and take away their guns. And that will bring people to the table. We can say, okay, now how do we protect our children? And that's what I'm going to try to do as president. So there's both good and bad parts in this. And, um, you know, I'm not going to endorse him. I know that fundamentally,

I know where he is on big, important issues, parental rights, abortion, gun control, you know, all these issues. Um, and, uh, as I said, I'm not interested in endorsing anybody. I'm not even interested in voting folks, except for local and state offices. Uh, so we need to prepare ourselves for this, uh, because, um, you know, they are going to make some moves and we need to be able to not just defend ourselves, but we need to be able to feed ourselves, and we need to be able to have a community of like-minded individuals, and we need to be working on how that's going to be organized. And most importantly, we're not going to find any salvation in these secular saviors, these politicians.

The foundation of what we're going to do is going to be there because we believe in God. And because we have, as I said many times, a hope, a confident expectation of how this is all going to work out eternally. And that gives us a massive leverage point, a fulcrum that is outside of this life. That's how you change things. You have to have that foundation. You have to have that confidence. Confident expectation. And one of the things that that does

is that's going to turn your heart to your children and your family. You're going to take the longer view. You're going to understand this life is just a moment. And you're going to be judged for what you do. And you're going to be judged for who you trust in. You know, talk about his past. What was it that changed him around? I know he went to Alcoholics Anonymous, and that can be very powerful.

Part of that is looking at a higher power. But of course, the real higher power that gives you absolution from the mistakes that you have made, the rebellion, not just mistakes, but absolute rebellion to God that you've made. That is the thing that gives you the ability to start over. That has to be there. That was there in the people who built Western civilization. That was there in the people who built Western civilization. That was there in the people who built this country. And we're not going to rebuild it without that foundation, first and foremost.

And so it was kind of interesting to see, like I said, he began with a flattering musk. He went right up to the line of being obsequious, but he didn't cross over it, fortunately enough. And they talked about, you know, self-driving cars, artificial intelligence, Neuralink, and some things like that. Let me just read some of the comments here. I know people have been leaving comments. Angus Mustang, I don't trust RFK. He seems like a combination of Biden and Trump, but definitely a lying politician. Yeah, there's, you know, again, I don't trust him. You shouldn't trust any of these people. I don't trust Biden, DeSantis, any of them.

And certainly we know that Trump is not trustworthy. He's proven it. Or Biden. But the bottom line is that, again, it is important to have these conversations. See, it's important for people to understand this SSRI thing. You know, I talk about it constantly, but I have a very small audience because I talk about things like this constantly. And it's one of the reasons why he gets purged.

But now that he's running for president, he gets back on to Facebook and Instagram, and he laid out an important thing about the SSRIs. our eyes. And so KWD 68 on Rumble says, I would take RFK over Biden or Trump, but then bureaucrats and agencies are running the nation with support from corporations, media, and education. When the government wants to take your guns, nothing good follows. Mass shootings are the ruse to confiscate. Yeah. The reason is control. What our founding fathers knew was possible. Just like his father and uncle RFK Jr. is flying close to the proverbial sun and he's definitely on the radar and in the gun sights. That's right. Jason Barker. Hey, Jason, good to see you there. I hope the move went well. Apparently he doesn't understand that they

use school shootings to push for consensus. That's true. That's true. Yeah. That's, um, what this is about. And, um, every time they use that. And so, you know, if we were to do the SSRIs, I mean, they'd have to fall back on their MK ultra training exclusively.

It'd be a little bit harder for them, but look, we had the SSRIstories.com, 7,000 of these stories, murder-suicide stories. And, you know, it is huge. It's a big factor in what's going on in our society. Look, you're still going to have shootings in Chicago and things like that, the drug war, the culture that we have inculcated through our schools, our media, our drug wars, all the rest of this stuff. Those are things that are different about America as well. But it's a very important factor and it needs to be understood. Even to the extent that the effect of these things needs to be understood, not just to stop school shootings,

but to stop a suicide of somebody like the husband of Kim Witzak. It'd still be alive today if we understood how dangerous these pharmaceuticals are. He goes to a doctor. She said he trusts the doctor because he was an athlete. And he would go to them and, you know, he'd have minor problems with joints or muscles or what. They would fix the stuff. So, you know, that created a trust in the medical community that was misguided. And so he's having trouble to sleep. They give him the SSRIs and he had horrific experiences immediately. Oh, he collapses on the floor. A few days after he started taking them in a fetal position, my mind is outside my body.

He was in all kinds of pain and everything. And then not too much longer after that, he committed suicide. She wasn't there. She was traveling at the time. It could have been that because of these severe issues that he stopped cold turkey. If you do that, puts you into withdrawal. And that's when the murder-suicide stuff really happens. Syrian girl, Kennedy is overlooking the elephant in the room. Even if government steals all of our guns, the criminal alphabet agencies like the CIA that killed his father and uncle will still have them and use them against us and probably him. Absolutely right.

Absolutely right. Little Ford Schoolhouse. Thank you for the tip. It says from Michael's mom. Thank you for praying for him. He's home and doing well. Good. Unfortunately, we will go back for more surgery July 18th for his head

condition. Craniosynostosis. We hope and pray this surgery goes better. Thanks for spreading the truth and common sense. Well, thank you. So, pray for Michael. That sounds very serious. July 18th. Please keep us informed. Well, as I said, he talked to Musk about some of these

other issues. And I do want to get into a lot of technology today, not just politics, because of the Apple thing. We're going to take a quick break and we will be right back Thank you. you're listening to the david knight show well like i said the interview began with him interviewing elon musk so i thought that was kind of interesting. Here's some of what they had to say. RFK says, I want to thank you, sir. I do want to ask you a question about, I really started following you. I had to look at some of these things because when I do the transcript, some of the words do not, it doesn't, I started firing you, for example.

I started following you. I do want to ask you a question. I really started following you about an interview you did years ago where you said that we should be terrified of AI. You said, I think, and I quote that, you said, first it's going to take our jobs, then it's going to kill us. So you said, I see what you're doing with Neuralink, and it seems to me that that is a technology that could potentially be really ethically dented. That's a good way to put it. Ethically dented. Denigrating both democracy and human freedoms. Like I said, it's very flattering to him, but he didn't cross a line to being obsequious. It seems to me like what you're doing is ethically dented. It's going to be a threat to human freedom and democracy. And so, uh, Elon Musk goes in and says,

well, you know, we're, we're helping, uh, you know, going to help the blind to see in the lame to walk. Right. Oh, that sounds suspicious. Anyway. Um, we're enabling somebody who's a quadriplegic or paraplegic. If Stephen Stephen Hawking was able to communicate as well as someone with a full functional body, that would be incredible. But long term, he said, I think we have hopefully some chance of mitigating artificial intelligence's existential risk by enabling a closer symbiosis of AI and humans. This is his transhumanism. And he's made it clear. You've got to become one with a machine. Singularity. And all these people are the same.

Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Ray Kurzweil, all these Google executives, they believe they're going to live eternally by merging with machines. And of course, that's not for you, really. Just understand that. But that is the deception that they're following. And so, anyway, RFK goes on after Elon Musk talks about how important it is for us to head off AI.

You know, we have to be able to think as fast as it or faster, which means that we need to have Neural to have a brain computer interface that's going to have sufficient bandwidth so we can outthink the AI and that type of thing more quickly. But then he goes on, RFK follows up and talks about self-driving cars. He said, I think something like 40% of the jobs in America are from our driving jobs or involve driving. So what are you going to do with all these? He said, I think something like 40% of the jobs in America are from our driving jobs or involve driving. So what are you going to do with all these? He said, I'm using a very bad characterization, but, you know, surplus humans, said RFK Jr., because that's what a lot of people are going to feel like. Well, Elon Musk knows that.

Nowhere did they talk about universal basic income ubi and of course musk was the first supporter of andrew yang when he ran in 2020 because andrew yang's issue was ubi musk supported him because he wanted to put UBI out there in a positive light. And that's why I'm saying, you know, and he did, and it became a big thing and he was going to, uh, I wanted to interview him about that. He agreed to it. Then he realized where I was on UBI and he didn't want to come on. The whole point was to use Andrew Yang to put a positive spin on universal basic

income and all these billionaires, not just the people in Silicon Valley. Michael Bloomberg said the same thing when he was running for president in 2020. We had the farmers, we replaced them, put people in factories, and the factory workers, they're replaceable as well. None of these people are, to use a term that Trump used, essential. They're all non-essential people. And the smart ones of us, said Michael Bloomberg, just have to figure out how to placate them when we take their jobs so they don't come after us

with guillotines. That was his word, guillotines. And we're going to use your universal basic income. And so all these billionaires know this. They all know that. They all know about the fourth turning. And the mainstream media will go to such great lengths to talk about all these different generations. You know, we got boomers and we got millennials and we got the X and the Y and the Z, you know, generation, all the rest of this stuff. Why don't they talk about the fourth turning?

Well, because they don't want you to know. For the same reason that they'll quibble over statistics with RFK Jr. about gun ownership in various countries, but they'll completely avoid talking about SSRIs. Won't even use the term in their article where they attack them. And that's why this is important. It's important for people to know, you know, Musk wanted people to see the good side of UBI. I want to see people seeing the bad side of SSRIs. And that could be a positive thing coming out of this candidacy.

But anyway, it's just a discussion part. So he says, Elon Musk says, well, I think it actually could end up being a good thing, you know, to replace drivers, he says with self-driving vehicles and that, you know, instead of driving one car, you could actually manage a sort of fleet of nine cars. Oh, wow. There you go. Hey, Elon, what happens to those other nine drivers? What happens to them? What do they do, right, if you get your way?

He says, I'm just saying, self-driving, I don't think it's an existential risk to civilization. Well, I think that it is a key part of a plan that is an existential risk to civilization. The climate MacGuffin, the COVID MacGuffin, all these things, and this is part of

all of this is part of a plan that is designed to depopulate the Earth. And it is, by definition, an existential threat to humans. That's what this is all about. So, yeah, every taxi driver is going to make nine times more money with self-driving cars.

Now, from the very beginning at Uber, you had Travis Kalalnik, when he was CEO. He said, we're going to have human drivers, but he said the reason that our rides are as expensive as they are is because that other dude in the car with you, and we're going to get rid of him with self-driving cars. And then you have the guy who's the CEO for Lyft, and he's all about that as well.

As a matter of fact, that guy, I forget what his name is, but he has a background of being an urban planner. And he wrote an op-ed piece that I talked about in length many years ago saying that cities are the best invention of mankind and that automobiles are the worst invention of mankind. And we need to maximize our smart cities and we've got to get rid of all private transportation. Now, I hate this urban sprawl.

These suburbs, that's a bad idea. Individual homes for people, that's a bad idea. We need to pack them in like rats in our city where we can control them. Yeah, that's an urban planner right there. That's the CEO of Lyft talking. Anyway, then he talked about the border, which I thought was interesting because he said some things there that not even the GOP has acknowledged when they criticized Biden on the borders. to be able to control immigration at its borders, having millions of people or hundreds of thousands in this case, millions of people flowing across the border

is not something any nation can or should put up with. And you know, worst of all, it's created a humanitarian crisis at the border. The notion that we have an open border is now a gospel around the world so that people are flying in from all over the world, from Europe, from China, from Asia, taking full planes in Ecuador. And then, you know, they're being assisted by non-profits and by government groups to actually make their way to the U.S. border. And it was in buses.

And that needs to be shut down. He talked about what Michael Yan has exposed down there at the Darien Gap in Panama and so forth. The mainstream press and not even the Republican candidates who want to talk about the chaos at the border, they don't even talk about that. And so it's good to have that spoken of. So we have people in this country who are poverty stricken, who don't even have access because the paucity of public assistance don't even have access because the paucity of public assistance don't even have access to public assistance. And you know, we need to be protecting

these people in our country, in our urban populations, rural populations. If the 7% of Americans that cannot put their hands on $1,000 if there's an emergency, we don't have the capacity to support a lot of new immigrants. And this huge flood of new immigrants is coming into our cities. It's stressing the school system, stressing the social service systems for people who are already, and Americans are already struggling with it. And it needs to be turned off. So my comments on this.

First of all, he doesn't understand that this is the Cloward and Piven strategy. Secondly, you see this paternalism that is so characteristic of Democrats. Even sincere and well-meaning Democrats are paternalistic, that it is the government's job to take care of the poor and needy. No, that's our job. That's your job. That's your job. That's my job at the local level.

We used to do that at the local level. We used to do that with voluntary organizations that we would create to handle that at the local level. We used to do it through churches and other things like that at the local level. But now even the churches are demanding, well, they see a problem. Instead of the churches, especially the, and I'm talking about the left-wing, mainline liberal churches who are all about social activism, they don't care.

They're functional atheists, if not total atheists. They don't believe there's a God. They don't believe in Christ. They don't believe there's going to be a judgment. They don't believe in his substitutionally paying for your sins, any of that stuff. They just believe they've got to be good people. They've got to be involved in social work. And yet they don't do it themselves. They hector the government to do something about it. And Alexis de Tocqueville, when he came to America in the early 1800s, it was after the socialists had taken power in France.

And he said, unlike France, where everybody calls on the government to fix every problem, in America, if they see a problem, they come together and they need a fire department, they create a volunteer fire department. They need a library, they come together and collect money

and they create a library. They see people who are poor or needy, they take care of it in their community. And that's how you address genuine need. Because, you know, people can't always, you know, this is why I disagree with the hardcore libertarian approach of Ayn Rand. Hey, tough luck, survival of the fittest type of thing. No, we all hit times when we need help.

And we should be helping each other. And that is something that time and chance will overtake each and every one of us at some point in our life, even if it's at the very end. But there needs to be something there to help people. But if you do it at a local level, if you do it with a local community,

if you do it with a church community, you can determine if these people are faking it, if they're just looking for a free ride. And so you can do it more efficiently and more effectively. You can help the people who really need it and not the people who are trying to game the system. And that's the problem with trying to do it through the government. And that's the problem with being a true believer in big government.

So then he says, I'll also open up legal immigration, so forth. And we've seen this. But the person also asked him about the regulatory state and how it controlled things. And he said, well, the role of these agencies in compelling behavior from U.S. corporations is appalling. And as soon as I get into office, I'm going to issue an executive order forbidding the federal agencies, whether it's NIH, whether it's the CIA, the FBI, from participating in any efforts to censor speech by the American public or to compel other behavior from the American public that is not legally required. And that's what we saw during the pandemic.

We saw it in the vaccine mandates. And we saw it through the censorship of speech. So he said immediately in the first week I'm in office, I will sign an executive order again. Uh, we need to burn some of these agencies down. Both the Santas and RFK junior are talking about the fact that we have, that have used corporations they don't use the term that i use deputized state it is a public private partnership they are deputies of the state as a matter of fact if you want to understand why we have all of these problems it was laid out for us in 2017 by larryink, the CEO of BlackRock.

He's not specifically mentioning the terms ESG, but he shows how this is being, how they use corporations. And of course he's at the upper level and he is pulling the strings of these corporations through BlackRock, which holds significant amounts of stock in these companies. Here's what he bragged about, boasted about in 2017. The guy that's there on stage with him who chimes in, the former CEO of American Express. You now make a point of that's an investment criteria for you. Well, behaviors are going to have to change.

And this is one thing we're asking companies. You have to force behaviors. And at BlackRock, we are forcing behaviors. Forcing behaviors. Fifty-four percent of the incoming class are women. We added four more points in terms of diverse employment this year. And what we are doing internally is if you don't achieve these levels of impact, your compensation could be impacted, okay? We're doing the same thing. And so it's just you have to force behaviors. And if you don't force behaviors, whether it's gender or race or just any way you want to say the composition of your team, you're going to be impacted.

And that's just not recruiting. It is development, as Ken said. And ultimately, it's still going to take time. But I am just as much shocked as Ken is that we have not seen more opportunities. And we're going to have to force change. We're going to force change. We're going to have to coerce people. We're going to have the corporations coerce people. Now he's one of the higher level people, right? And the reasons that we have all these different things happening with Target and with

Bud Light and all the rest of this stuff, or to even take NASCAR, right? You're not their customer. You just think you're their customer. They've got one customer to please. Actually, They've got one customer to please. Actually, they've got two customers to please. They have to please Washington and they have to please Wall Street. And if Wall Street is happy with them and Washington is happy with them,

they're going to be flush with cash. If you please Wall Street, you'll have Larry Fink and all the cash you want. If you please the Biden administration or even under Trump, if you please the established bureaucracy that remains there, even under Trump, you'll have all the cash that you need. Wall Street can manufacture cash out of thin air through happy stories on the stock market. Just like Washington can manufacture money out of thin air with the Federal Reserve. You're never going to run out of cash if you make those guys happy.

So as far as the customers are concerned, they don't care. You're not a factor in what they do. And so it is very important that we not play this game that corporations are somehow operating in a free market and that they're there to please the customer. Like how many times and in how many different ways do we have to have that naive notion jammed down our throat and into our face by these corporations before we finally catch on? What is happening with this. Anyway, um, that was the New York times forum there,

you know, pushing those lies. And as RFK was talking about the psyche, uh, psychiatric drugs and stuff, this is, again, there are a lot of people.

It's not just a local state, uh, paper that's there in Nashville, a Tennessee star pushing for this manifesto of this trans shooter. But you also have other organizations that are involved. You have a Tennessee gun organization, Tennessee Firearms Association, said we need to be able to see this. The law is that we have open transparency here in tennessee you're violating the law a wisconsin institute for law and liberty uh their acronym is

will w-i-l-l says this wants the fbi to allow access to this manifesto it's filed a motion that hey you know you're violating the Freedom of Information Act. Of course, the FBI always does. And so you've got several organizations that are out there trying to get this information. What is it that they don't want us to see? Well, certainly they don't want to portray trans in light of hatred against Christians, the insanity that's there. But I think there's also possibly some stuff about the SSRIs that they don't want people to see.

And that's one of the things that Kim Witzak said. He said, look, you've got to get over the idea that once somebody is dead, you've got to keep their medical records sealed. We're talking about mass murder here. And we need to start getting to the bottom of what the cause is here. And these are the people who are trying to hide that from us. Uh,

my son, as he heard me talking about Uber, uh, he knows, I've said it so many times, what Thomas Jefferson said, cities are a threat to the health, the wealth, and the liberty of mankind. He said, cars are a threat to the health, the wealth, and the power of the elites. That's absolutely right. Here on H, after telling him the bad experience that I had after weaning off of bupropion, a bad SSRI drug, I had written a suicide note, but thankfully didn't follow through. The doctor prescribed me a different antidepressant.

I didn't take it. Go figure. Yeah. Just be very careful. Again, uh, one of the big risks, if you're on SSRIs, you got to come off of that very, very, very, very slowly. Think of the analogy of a deep, of a scuba diver who, um, has to, uh, has been down for a long period of time and they have to come up very, very slowly, stay at different levels to decompress, or they'll get the bends. The pressure has dissolved the nitrogen into their bloodstream.

If they come up too quickly, that'll bubble out, cripple, or kill them. And so that's the issue with the SSRI. And many, many other drugs are like that as well. Dick on Rockfin said if they wanted to stop mass murder events, we'd have a law making all photo, video, audio evidence public instead of a police, FBI-owned state secret, as it always is. They tell us what happened on TV. Yeah, it's not just the revolution, but it's the mass shootings

that will not be televised or be out there for anybody to look at. So, again, the Washington Post, just as bad as the New York Times. Everything is conspiracy, conspiracy, conspiracy. Isn't that interesting how this weaponized term, weaponized against people who did not believe the obvious lies about the JFK assassination, the lone shooter, the magic bullet, and all the rest of this stuff, who saw that that also didn't just defy logic, but it also was contradicted by eyewitness testimony, by the Zapruder film, many other things. So the response of the government,

the FBI, was to create this thing called a conspiracy theorist. And that's the way that they're attacking after they use that to cover up questions about killing his uncle. That's the way they come after RFK. That's the Washington Post for you. Before long, Kennedy was arguing the 2009 tabletop exercise about mock pandemic, talking about a May 25th appearance in Indianapolis, actually revealed a secret plan involving U.S. spymasters to enrich drug companies and to suppress free speech. That's a very naive, inaccurate characterization of his book, Fauci,

where in the 12th chapter, he talks about the long history of these germ games. That's the way the Washington Post characterized it. You talk about fake news. These are the people who are fake news. And then listen to this. He then rattled off clinical data from a coronavirus vaccine trial that was not designed to measure mortality, falsely suggesting the vaccines killed more people than they saved. He made no mention of the abundant science,

says the Washington Post, the abundant science, that found that the vaccine prevented serious illness and saved lives. Well, the reason he didn't mention it in the Washington Post is because it doesn't exist, except in your lying narrative. I'm sick and tired of the lies of the Washington Post. Yes, democracy dies in darkness and it dies in the kind of lies that are being pushed by the mainstream media, Washington Post, New York Times, at the top of the list. And of course, they're the ones who vet everybody

for truthiness. That alarmist message, said the Washington Post, has given him a platform that he believes will remake the Democrat Party. Alarmist. Now, the alarmist message was part of the lockdown. The alarmist message was warp speed and all the rest of this stuff, all the panic. This is why I'm not even going to talk about anymore. I'm fed up of people talking about the Wuhan lab. That is nothing other than alarmism that is designed to under undergird the lies of the COVID pandemic to make it seem real. That's not real. The real issue is the vaccine. Anyway, he said people want the truth.

Uh, and, uh, and that's the key thing that people do want the truth. And that's the key thing. People do want the truth. It remains to be seen whether we will get it. But they are very, very concerned. And they just, throughout this article, conspiracy this, conspiracy that. And this is how they're coming after him. Anyway, one of the things that he said was after his father's death,

and this is in the Washington Post story. Of course, they put this stuff out and then they'll pull it apart. After his father's death, he became friends with Roger Ailes, the former head, now dead, of Fox News, who he claims once told him that he would fire any TV anchor

who reported about the dangers of vaccines because of the pharmaceutical company pressure. So what happened to Tucker? Right? Well, don't pay no attention to that. And Tucker, as I said, did that deliberately. He got nervous for Tucker as he was saying that. He did this long analogy. What if

Fox News told you that you had to get a MyPillow and everybody had to buy not one but two. You had to get a booster pillow and all the rest of this stuff. It's killing people or something like that. He said, no, of course, Fox News would never do that. He pulls it back. But as he's laying out this hypothetical case, everybody knows that he's accusing Fox news of pushing the vaccine on people knowing that the vaccine was going to kill people. And I think he did the same thing that Matt drudge did to get away from Fox news. He knew where their red lines were and he crossed them to get fired.

Same way that Matt drudge did. Matt drudge knew that Fox News would fire him if he showed a life-affirming picture of a young baby at 20-some-odd weeks reaching up and grabbing the finger of the surgeon who was working on him because he had spinal bifida, spina bifida. And he knew what hypocrites Fox News were. And Tucker knows that as well. But, of course, we're supposed to believe

that Fox News would not do that, according to the Washington Post. He went on to say, Senator Frank Church, who had the church committee hearing investigating the CIA's deepest secrets in the 1970s, he said, Frank Church's wife was my sister's godmother. I know all these people. So that's one of the reasons why they label him as a conspiracy theorist.

He authored a 2005 article for Rolling Stone Salon arguing that mercury and vaccines had caused a rise in neurological disorders like autism. It was later withdrawn by both publications. They debunked the claims that mercury harms in vaccines. Oh, that's right, yeah. That's right. Mercury is great for you. Did you know that?

Mercury is really, really good for you. I haven't had my mercury supplement yet today, but I plan on taking lots of mercury. And it's even better if you inject it intravenously, isn't it? I didn't realize for the longest time that thimerosal was mercury. So they use it as a preservative in vaccines. And I had tried contact lenses a long time ago, and soft lenses, and I would put them in my eyes and they'd immediately turn blood red.

And the doctor said, oh, that's the thimerosal that's in there. And I just couldn't wear them unless I got something else to sterilize them. So I had to boil them and stuff like that. And I eventually just quit wearing them. But, you know, decades later, I had an ophthalmologist that, actually he's an optician, said, have you thought about using contact lenses? And I said, no, you know, thimerosal. And he goes, oh, we don't put that in anymore. That's mercury.

I was like, what? A lot of people did not have their eyes turned blood red when they injected the mercury. I did. So maybe some people don't have a reaction when they inject the mercury into their bloodstream. That doesn't say that it's good for you, right? It just says that they can deal with that disruption, but it's not necessarily good for them. And, of course, that was one of just many toxins that he said have caused the disorder. And they said, well, we debunked this because we saw that after we got rid of the thimerosal, autism continued to rise. Well, it could be a delayed reaction, but it's also a lot of other adjuvants that are in

there. It's preservatives and it's also adjuvants. I had somebody challenge me on the radio one day calling in about that. They didn't even know what an adjuvant is. An adjuvant is put in the vaccines because they admit their vaccines are not working. So what do we have to do? Well, we got to irritate the immune system. So let's put a bunch of stuff in there that's going to attack the immune system and wake it up and get it to fight. Well, the problem with that is that you, in many cases, create autoimmune disease in a lot of people with those adjuvants. But then you have other things like mercury and formaldehyde

that they have used as preservatives. And so when you look at all of this stuff, you can't dismiss it, as the Washington Post does, as a bunch of nonsense. It's a bunch of nonsense and a non sequitur to ignore this. And at the same time, they're pumping these lies. Here's an example. This is Washington Post and the same article. The mRNA vaccines were found to be more than 95% protective against symptomatic illness

of early strains of COVID during the clinical trials. That is a bold-faced lie. A bold-faced lie. Look at how many times, and I've showed, somebody put together a video over the, in the Hall of the Mountain King from Peer Get by Grieg. Dun, dun, dun, dun, dun, dun, dun. You know that one? And they just have this countdown. Oh, it's 100% effective.

It's 99%. It's 95%. It keeps falling. 25%. I mean, what a lie. And this is being sold now. This article was just written by the Washington Post. Washington Post, New York Times, their subtitle ought to be,

Never Let the Facts Get in the Way of Our Government Propaganda. So, yeah. Then they go on to complain about him talking about the Milgram experiment and some of his things. Well, of course, they don't want you to understand the Milgram experiment. He hasn't talked about the Ash experiment, which is what social media is. But Washington Post is a partner in the bigger Milgram experiment that the

government authorities are pushing on you the entire time. Well, I do have an interview that's coming up and we're getting kind of long on this, so I want to get on to some of the technology stuff and talk a little bit about virtual reality and the reality behind virtual reality that they're trying to force on us. But a couple more questions. Audi MRR, in the 1970s, several FBI indictment recommendations had to be tossed because the FBI violated so many laws to obtain their intelligence. The FBI should have been defunded decades ago.

Absolutely. Just look at the name. Federal bureaucracy, right? Federal Bureau. It's a federal bureaucracy. That was the lifetime project of one of the most corrupt people we've ever had in government in american history jagger hoover and uh it's no longer a federal bureaucracy of investigation it is now a federal bureaucracy of instigation they do more instigation than they

do investigation they set these things up you, they're like the pyromaniac fireman who lights a fire so he can then put it out and be a hero, right? That's what the FBI is. There's no constitutional authority for it to exist. And it was created in the early 20th century by people who had absolutely no

respect for the Constitution whatsoever. People like Woodrow Wilson and the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover got his start as part of the Palmer raids, all of this stuff that fractured this country and broke this country so that the warmonger, Woodrow Wilson, could get us involved in World War I. A Syrian girl, conspiracy theorists, a weaponized label against people who don't believe government conspiracies.

That's right. They keep us silent. Well, we're not going to be silent. When we come back, we're going to talk a little bit about this virtual reality headset from Apple. 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 sharing.

If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. The David Knight Show dot com. Well, let's talk about the Apple headset. And it rocked the stock market yesterday, as a matter of fact. It was going to be the subject of the Worldwide Developers Conference 2023. This is something that really began as, you know, explaining to developers where they were going with their hardware and that type of things. Now, under Steve Jobs, it became a massive media event. Consumers were as interested, if not more interested, than the developers were because the developers get some advanced information anyway. I used to, 40 years and a lifetime ago i was an apple certified developer but the um you know apple's

been developing this for many years they called it the reality pro it's not real uh and it doesn't exist yet and then they severely disappointed their stock hit an all time high ahead of this launch. And the people, as they wrote about this in anticipation, they said, well, the expected price is around $3,000. And if they surprise on the come in on the small side, if they come in less than $3,000, that's really going to be very positive for the stock. Well, it wasn't $3,000. It was 3,500. About one sixth, 17% more. Right. So that was a big disappointment for wall street. And then they said, well, it's not going to come out until 2024. Hmm. That was even more negative. And so by the end of the

day, their stock had dropped quite a bit. So it was a big seesaw up and then down. A lot of people are calling it the Appulus, you know, kind of combining Apple and Oculus. Uh, the other headset, as a matter of fact, that guy who put that together created a lot of buzz a couple of weeks ago. He said,

I've seen it. And I forget the exact term he used. He said, it was just awesome. You know, and, this is a guy who became a billionaire in his teens, I think. But anyway, he was really hyping it. But the big story was that, and it

really upset people when they saw that it was going to be $3,500 and another year to wait. And so the Wall Street did not like that. But what is this thing? Well, here is the demo that they put together. And the only reason I found this yesterday was because when I got on Twitter, I saw hashtag black mirror was trending and everybody was referring to this as black mirror. Well, it looks like the new season, uh, looks insane at Black Mirror. And then they referenced this video. Introducing Apple Vision Pro.

Vision Pro is a new kind of computer that augments reality by seamlessly blending the real world with the digital world. Oh, yeah, it's real, huh? It's the first Apple product you look through and not at. Vision Pro feels familiar, yet it's entirely new. You can see, hear, and interact with digital content just like it's in your physical space. And you control Vision Pro using the most natural and intuitive tools, your eyes, hands, and voice. With Vision Pro, you're no longer limited by a display. Your surroundings become an infinite canvas. Use your apps anywhere and make them any size you want. Capture photos and videos and relive

your most important memories in an entirely new way. Watch your movies, shows and sports and immerse yourself in games on a giant screen surrounded by spatial audio and connect with people as if you're sharing the same space. As if, as if, but you're not, you know, they call it vision pro, not reality pro. And of course, when you look at this, uh, one person said, um, when you realize that black mirror and ready player one become so close in just one event, sorry, put this up here. This is a still picture.

Vision pro is a new kind of. Let me put it up. Introducing Apple Vision Pro. I keep hitting the wrong button here. Okay. This is going to be the right button. Ready, set, go. Ready player one. It says, okay, ready player one and Black Mirror all come together in one event. Because yeah, you can just drop out of society, set in your little, you know, storage shed and imagine that

you are anywhere in the world and you can be anything that you want. You can be a furry, you can be any kind of gender, any kind of imaginary being. And you've got this immersive situation where it creates a massive display. So you can turn your living room into an IMAX theater and it'll be so captivating and it will be it'll be captivating and it will be addictive and it'll be like shooting up some kind of crack cocaine or something in a different way that's the trap that's the trap that they're laying for us Yu Yuval Harari has been very, he's already told us, right? This is not just my understanding of this, but he said the quiet part out loud. He said, we're going to control these people. He said, we don't need them. As RFK said, you know, they're going to have these,

what are you going to do with these surplus humans? Well, Yuval Harari said, we just keep them entertained. We will keep them subdued with drugs and with games, you know, virtual reality. It'll be so compelling, it'll be like a drug. And they will get you to drop out of society. You'll be happy just to stay inside your little solitary confinement hovel and play games and live a fantasy life. What a sad thing, you know, when you come to the end of your life,

and then after that, you look back on your life after it ends. That's what I did with my life. I played games. I sat in a room. I didn't have any connections with real people. I didn't do anything real. I didn't make anything real. What a tragedy that is.

And it's the way that they want to control us. And of course, that also controls the population. You know, you stay in your little hovel and play video games. You never have any kids. And so they don't have to worry about the next generation either. It takes care of itself, doesn't it? It's a very clever strategy. And as I've said for the longest time,

I said as soon as they started talking about the transgender stuff in 2013, I said this is a pedophile agenda. If a child can consent and has the maturity to consent to mutilating their body permanently, permanently, then of course they'll say that that child can consent to have sex. This is a pedophile agenda. But I also said that this is, that's not where it stops. Because the purpose of this is to put us into a fantasy world. Now that we've seen how widespread transgenderism is, and you see how detached these people are from reality,

and how they demand that you play their game along with them. This is about putting people into a virtual reality, the transgender thing is. And so that's building the mindset that, you know, hey, I shouldn't have to do anything difficult. I'm entitled. I need to have all this stuff. And just putting you into a mindset

where you just want to be catered to. And so if they give you a little bit of food and lots of games, they don't even have to give you the drugs. And you'll pay for your own imprisonment, right? It was the NSA that said in some of the files that were leaked in 2013, so I don't know at what point in time the nsa created these three um slides that were part of a slide presentation uh again this was never publicized in the us it was only publicized in germany and der spiegel and i've shown it many times but it was three slides the first one was

a clip from apple's 1984 commercial where they introduced the macintosh and i said who would have thought in 1980 in 1984 that this would become Big Brother? And they show Steve Jobs holding up an iPhone. And the third slide is, and that the zombies would line up to pay for it themselves. So will the zombies line up to pay for this virtual headset themselves? It's not a black mirror. You know, the guy who came up with that said, really referencing the smartphones. He said, we look at it, and he goes, it's really a black mirror. You can see your face in it before you turn it on. But this is not something, as I said, that you look at.

You look through. So maybe in reality, this isn't a black mirror. It's a black window. A black window that cuts you off of reality yeah as jesus said if the eye is darkness how dark is the soul uh you know if you black out the light that comes in if you cut off the reality that comes to us. How dark is the soul in that case? Yeah, it is a sad commentary on where we are at this point in time. One of the things that I thought was interesting,

well, let me get some of the comments here. Angus Mustang, a Zoom meeting strapped to your head. Yeah, that's right. Syrian girl, wow. People will never have to leave their 100 foot apartment again. If they have all that reality to experience in their pajamas. That's the point. John Henry,

three, seven, seven, seven, the matrix at it. So right. Yes. And then there's this from futurism.

They said the bizarre headset has front facing screen that shows the user's eyes. You know, you saw that picture, and they were doing it from a distance, and so it looked like it was translucent, and you could see through it to see the person's eyes. But that's not what is happening. They actually went to, maybe this is why it's $3,500 instead of $3,000 or less. They went to the trouble of putting a camera in there

to look at your eyes because maybe they're tracking your eyes and then projecting your eyes and your face onto the headset, the front of the headset. Apple has finally announced its long-awaited AR headset at today's Worldwide Developer Conference. It looks even stranger than we anticipated. Perhaps its quirkiest feature

is its front-facing display, which shows its wearer's expressions to people nearby by displaying a live view of their eyes on a front-facing screen. I can just see the applications coming coming out now. You know, uh, you've got all these, uh, apps that change people's faces. And as they're zooming, uh, most famous one, I guess, was that lawyer who called in and didn't know how to operate the, his computer. And he put on a filter that turned him into a cat as he's talking, the cat's mouth is going. So I guess that'll be the next thing on this. That'll be a feature, not a bug. A front-facing screen confirming previous leaks.

The feature Apple is calling EyeSight. It's a seriously strange decision, they said. Making it look like the wearer's eyes are stuck to the front of the ski goggles-like device. Like a pair of googly eyes. And it immediately made me think about Ernie Kovacs and his character, Percy Dovetonsils. Go at Laura.

There you go. I'm angry. He's got the... Somebody flipped a brown martini in on me here. He's got the eyeglasses that have... They're all eyes that stand out from his head. So it looks... That's immediately what came to mind when I saw that.

Ernie Kovacs made an indelible impression on me as a very young child i gotta say and he goes on to uh read poetry with that strange those strange glasses that make his eyes look like they've come off of his head there uh i guess it's one of the reasons why i can never take poetry seriously percy dove tonsils ernie kovacs ruined it for me or maybe maybe he helped me. I don't know. Uh, but, uh, the people will pay $3,500 for that experience and we can laugh at them when we see them, uh, given what we've seen today, they said, we've got some serious questions about the company's execution. Will anybody actually shell out a whopping $3,500 for this thing? Will Apple single-handedly revive an industry that has failed to bring VR headsets to the mainstream for years?

Social media had a field day with the high transparency feature, mocking it in a series of memes. We'll be right back. decoding the mainstream propaganda it's the david knight show all right let's do a follow-up on a story that I, I think it was Friday that I talked about this. Uh, we had the, um, us military is now in damage control mode over this report that came out. They were doing, um, simulations and you had a, um, the guy's rank is a Colonel. He's a Colonel. guy's rank is a colonel. He's a colonel.

It's pretty high ranking. He doesn't know what he's talking about though, right? A U.S. Air Force colonel, Tucker Cinco Hamilton, the chief of AI test and operations, gave a presentation to the Royal Aeronautical Society at a summit last month. As I pointed out yesterday, he said, look, we've had, you know, what do we do about artificial intelligence?

It creates a real problem because, you know, we told it that, you know, it gets points for killing people. It's an autonomous killing machine, but it does have a human in the loop. And so it gets points when it successfully kills the enemy, but it has to get permission from the human operator. And so it worked out that the human operator was keeping it from getting points. And so it decided to kill him in the simulation. And so then we told it, no, no, no, that's really bad.

It's going to cost you a lot of points if you kill the human operator. And so then it decided that it would take out the communications tower, that type of thing. And so the military, the Air Force, has now come out with strong denial after this news story broke. Air Force spokesperson has now denied any simulation of that kind was ever taken place, according to a statement made to the press. Quote, the Department of the Air Force has not conducted any such AI drone simulations

and remains committed to ethical and responsible use of AI technology. It appears the colonel's comments were taken out of context and were meant to be anecdotal. Well, I guess he can forget about becoming a general. The Royal Aeronautical Society has also updated its summary of the conference to reflect the sentiment so it was done about a month ago and they thought that that was what he was saying he apparently seemed to think that that was what he was saying when he recounted that you know when he was quoted on doing that but even he came out and retracted this. He said, I misspoke.

This was a thought experiment. We've never run that experiment, nor would we need to in order to realize that this is a plausible outcome, he said. However, as this article points out, it's worth pointing out, though, that his original quotes sound unequivocal, that he was recalling something that actually happened, and that the language of the summary seems to buy into its veracity. The title of the presentation was, Is Skynet Here Already?

And so when he says this in a very emphatic declarative way, well, he said, AI decided to go after the humans that it saw interfering in the ultimate mission. He said the system started realizing that while they did identify the threat at times, the human operator would tell it not to kill that threat, but it got its points by killing that threat. So what did it do? It killed the operator. It killed the operator because that person was keeping, it sounds like he's talking about a simulation that he ran but you know you get that call from above it's like you better take this back because now this has gone public you know it was there and it was reported by the society that he gave the speech to And it stayed that way for a month or so until somebody picked it up and then it went public last week and then they immediately pulled this back.

The plausibility and the popularity of Hamilton's story, whether it is hypothetical or actual, at the very least accentuates the public's general fears around AI that the industry leaders are beginning to echo. As a matter of fact, they have an interesting meme. The people who are AI experts, they continue to refer to it as a horrifying monster with a friendly mask. When I first saw that, I thought, well, that sounds like Fauci.

Horrifying monster with a friendly mask. No, actually, they refer back to this H.P. Lovecraft character that he imagined in a novel from 1936, The Mountains of Madness. This thing, I don't know if I'm saying it the right way, the Shoggoth, something that's like an octopus with beings with razor-sharp teeth and that type of thing. But it was always depicted as a grinning, smiley face sticker pasted over the monster's hideous face like a mask.

As if to say that behind the surface level guardrails lurks an otherworldly, unpredictable monster. And that's now become a meme with the people who work with AI to refer to their work. Oh, well, that's kind of interesting. This dark satanic monster lurking under the surface of a smiley friendly mask. They said it is a potent metaphor that encapsulates one of the most bizarre facts about the AI world that the people working on the technology aren't totally sure

if it's going to be good or bad for the world. Well, I'm totally sure. I can already see that it's evil, that it's satanic. Why? Well, because it's deceptive, because it potentially has great power to deceive and also great power to control us, to be used as a means of control.

That is its greatest power, quite frankly. And if we take a look at these means of control, you don't have to look too far. And I'm going to talk about the real threat to podcasts that's coming from AI. So it's going to be a big extension on their ability and their capacity to censor everything. And that is the primary directive now, apparently, of technology, is to create this panopticon of control in every way possible and to shut down every avenue of speech. And of course, podcasts have been one of the last remaining ones where you can get on a large platform. YouTube has monopolized the video platform. That has been denied to me and to some others

and to some content. But before we get into that, I wanted to play you something else that was from Hollywood. I thought it was kind of, this is about AI as well. Hollywood's next big fight, because, you know, they're fighting right now, I think, over the scriptwriters. I don't know if they got the screenwriters, have reached a settlement or if they're still on strike or not. But the next big fight, they said, is over how actors will get paid for work that is done by their AI digital doubles. Now, I did a report in 2013 about a movie that came out in 2013. It starred Robin Wright,

and they used her name, and they referred to movies that she had been in like The Princess Bride and stuff like that the movie was called The Congress and it was really a strange movie I've got a clip of it here the the trailer for the movie that I'm going to play for you here in a moment but it presented this exact scenario and you'll hear them set this up in the sense that she was a very successful actress. Robin Wright is there as Robin Wright, very successful actress. But then the fictional part, she's got a child who's got issues and she's kind of pulled back from all of this. And they said, look, we can have a situation where you can continue to make money. We'll create an AI double of you that will continue to work,

and you can stay home with your child who's got issues, health issues. And so then they start to explore what this is really about, and they go in and they completely digitize everything that she does. All of her movements, her facial expressions, the way she speaks, all of the rest of this stuff, so they can essentially create an AI clone. And this is what these people are concerned about. They said, Hollywood is gearing up for another union battle this week. A big topic will be how actors are paid for work done by their digital doubles. Quote, the rapid advances in generative AI technology over the last 18 months have been something that we've been observing in real time, and it's already affecting our members,

said a chief negotiator at SAG, the Screen Actors Guild. They said for actors, it might even be more vital because the AI future is already here. We've had convincing deep fakes of Keanu Reeves, of Tom Cruise, have popped up on TikTok. De-aging technology has become standard on projects like the upcoming Indiana Jones sequel with Harrison Ford. James Earl Jones even allowed his voice to be recreated by AI, so his iconic rendition of Darth Vader could live on in perpetuity. Actors want to ensure that they're paid appropriately for their work by their digital doubles,

that they're able to give informed consent about how those doubles will be used. The performer's name, likeness, voice, persona, those are the performer's stock and trade. It's really not fair for companies to attempt to take advantage of that. And it's not fair to compensate and fairly compensate performers when they're using their persona in that way.

And so again, this was something that was touched on by this movie, The Congress, 10 years ago. I thought that was very significant. It didn't get very many views. People didn't really watch the movie. They didn't watch my report about the movie either. Just in case you're interested now that it's coming true, here's what was being talked about 10 years ago.

You had it all, Robin. Movie queen at 24. And you slammed all the open doors, crushed all the dreams. Then Aaron's condition started going downhill. Eventually, you will be completely blind. This proposal won't be on the table again. Robin Wright for Jeff Green. You were the future, Robin.

You were Princess Rai. And now, and now I'm in this situation. What situation are you in, Jeff? The situation of offering you the last contract that you'll ever have. We want to scan you, all of you, your body, your face, your emotions, your laughter, your tears. And we want to own this thing called Robin Wright. I have to take care of my son. Robin, things are changing quickly. You're entering a new age. Once we've scanned you,

there's no going back. Yeah, and this is where it gets really weird. So you're here too. She gets into a virtual reality where she's animated and everything else is animated. And I think that was part of the problem with that movie. But the reality is, as we see everything being pushed into virtual reality,

that she finds herself trapped into this cartoon universe after they scan her, you know, again, you know. But that is the reality that we could find ourselves trapped in this cartoon universe. Not just the actors who are scanned, but the audience as well. As we live not in virtual reality, but in a sick kind of voyeur reality. And that's what they've been establishing for a long time. This is a long, drawn-out process.

If you stop and think about movies, and I've, you know, unfortunately seen way too many movies in my lifetime because we had a video store back there. I didn't have time to watch all of them. I would watch trailers, and I could get a gist between watching the trailers about the quality of the movie, looking at the director's history, looking at the actors that were going to be in it in the box office,

I could pretty much figure out what to purchase. But the bottom line is that if you look at this long trajectory of movies and look at how from its crude beginnings, how much more immersive it is, and it can draw us into a universe that seems to be more real than reality itself and hold us there. And with all this technology is becoming even a more powerful draw, isn't it? Actors could end up being in multiple places at once because these tools could help them execute different projects at different stages. Said one of the people who was part of these negotiations

going on in Hollywood. Well, that's fine. So we'll have Tom Cruise forever. We'll have Robin Wright forever and some things like that. And it kind of reminds me of what happened in the music business as well. When I was in high school and college, it was already becoming very difficult to do any live venues and get paid for it. And of course, that's pretty much disappeared as music technology has advanced a little bit. Everybody's using canned music instead of live music. It's very predictable. As a matter of fact, everybody knew when I was in college that if you wanted,

there's going to be a few studio musicians who are incredible musicians and they could pick everything up and get it right the first time and sight read everything perfectly. They were going to be operating in the studios and everybody else is not going to be doing anything. And now we've progressed to the point as humans become weaker and weaker, we see that artificial intelligence is not just artificial intelligence, but you know, computer capability has come in to do auto tuning and stuff like that to an extent that really surprises me when I turn on the radio occasionally and hear

it being done with all different genres, you know, even country and Western is doing it. Uh, but you know, rap music and all these different singers. With MTV, it became very visceral. They started bringing in people who looked great, dressed them up, sexy costumes,

and then synthesized their voices because they couldn't sing for the most part. And so now you have a situation where they made that synthetic, and now the next step is that they made that synthetic. And now the next step is that they go in and they sample songs that have been around for a very long time. They don't even bother to auto-tune some new thing. They just go back and clone what was previously done before. And that's what we're going to see in the visual arts as well. What's happened in musical arts. So you're going to wind up having nothing new. Everything is recycled.

We're going to have some favorite performers, like we have some favorite musicians. First it just starts contracting, studio musicians, and now even the studio musicians won't have a job as much because they just go back and sample stuff that's already been done. That's what's going to happen with this other stuff. The other aspect of artificial intelligence I think is very negative, and this is a report that was done by Reclaim the Net.

And they talked about this new thing that is the justification for censoring podcasts. The term is called brand safety solutions. Brand safety is what they're going for. And what that means is Microsoft coming in with several different applications to label your content as to whether or not it's going to be safe for advertisers to be involved with it. You don't want to get involved with somebody like me.

I talk about politics. I talk about religion. I criticize the government and the CIA. You don't want to associate your brand with me. I talk about things that if you were to advertise on this, you might get your funding cut off by the government or by BlackRock because that's who these people increasingly work for. So the big money out there for advertising coming from the big corporations is looking for brand safety, brand safety. And I'll say it again. Anytime you see the term safety used, it is antithetical to liberty, antithetical. So new tools are now being used by some of the largest advertisers in the podcasting

space to ensure that ads only run against brand safe content. Various flags are out there for different types of speech and podcasts. They don't want, for example, things that are firearms-related content. No, no, no, don't put my ad on somebody who's talking about the Second Amendment or firearms. Or speech that we hate, which they call hate speech. Or if you're going to debate sensitive social issues, well, you want to talk about parental rights and abortion and the transgender and the LGBT. Oh, no, no, no. We don't want to talk about that. Or profanity.

Well, hey, I've got one area there that I don't have to worry about. Except that's not really the one they're concerned about. And so Microsoft has got a couple of different apps. This first one will assign a risk, low, medium, or high risk to podcasts. And it's able to do that because it is able to suss out this stuff pretty quickly. I Heart Media, the largest podcast publisher in the world and one of the USS's biggest podcast platforms, Odyssey, not to be confused with the video platform, which is spelled differently. Digital Ad Exchange, an audio advertising platform that reaches over 100 million listeners per month, AudioHook, the leading demand-side platform for audio advertising, just some of the large podcasting companies that use this tool, Soundr, to help their advertisers target brand-safe content. And this is why I can't get on those.

I can't get on YouTube. And even where I am right now, as I said before, it's, uh, you know, the days are numbered on this, not just for me getting any advertising, cause I've already seen the advertising drop about 40% this year. I don't know if that's that they're bringing this on board or if they are cause the downloads have not dropped, but that has dropped significantly. Downloads are up slightly, but the ad revenue is down significantly. Because when I go there, I see the podcasts that they are always pushing are things like Latter-day Lesbians. Because we all want to know the day-to-day ruminations

of two lesbians who used to be Mormons, right? That's what they want to push. They don't want to talk about the issues of the day. Of course, that is an issue. And so because of these things, you know, because we talk about debated, sensitive social issues, guns, speech that they hate, all the rest of the stuff. They use the same type of tactic we saw during Trump's lockdown.

Churches were labeled by the CDC as being the highest risk activity that you could engage in, right? More so than a casino and all the rest of the stuff. No, they had three different you know, three different levels, green, yellow, and red, just like they have now for the podcasts to tell you what they don't like and what they don't want you to hear.

And the information that they want you to miss, they call misinformation. NewsGuard has launched these two brand safety things to target podcasting. The ratings give a podcast, in addition to Soundr, they give the podcast a trust score ranging from 0 to 10. So big companies can avoid advertising on podcasts that regularly convey false information.

No, misinformation, information they want you to miss. Avoiding advertising, quote unquote, heavily biased or politically slanted news shows. That's the key thing they're focused on, what I do. Um, so promoting highly trust news, new trustworthy news and information podcasts, you know, things like latter day lesbians, uh, news guards.

Second brand safety product for podcasting was launched in collaboration with barometer. It's an AI powered podcast scanning tool that can, quote, detect potential misinformation at the episode level in merely seconds. Seconds. Make sure it doesn't get any reach at all. Barometer has partnerships with several major podcasting companies, including AudioHook, Cats Digital, a podcast hosting and monetization company that reaches 90% of Americans in the streaming audio space.

And this is one of the reasons why I haven't really tried to focus on getting advertisers. Because I could see this coming. But it's now here. And the bottom line is that there is no way to monetize this based on advertising. They're going to cut us off of that. It's only going to be if people want to hear it and support it directly. That's the key thing. Reclaim the net says a proliferation of these brand safety tools is likely to

create a YouTube like environment where those who talk about topics that are deemed to be unsafe will find it increasingly difficult to monetize their podcast. And of course, you'll be kicked off. It isn't just that I would get my ads shut down on YouTube. I never had any ads running. They just shut me down. And they shut me down when I put up a Christmas music channel.

Because it's me. That's the other part that they don't even talk about in this. That they mark you as an individual to be censored. According to podcast analytics company PodTrack, 33.7% of Americans now listen to podcasts on Spotify. Compared to 27.6% on Apple Podcasts. Spotify is where I have been most heavily censored. It is the YouTube of podcasts.

And as you see, those two have the lion's share of what is happening. There's a lot of other podcast places that are out there, they work just fine, but people don't look for them, right? That's why we have a lot of links at the David night show.com where you can get podcasts. You know, if Apple cuts me off, uh, that, you know, there's still other places out there, but the question is, will people even look for it? People look for it on Spotify, can't find it. Apple podcast market share has declined by 9%, while Spotify has increased by 21%. Spotify doesn't let listeners subscribe to podcast RSS feeds directly. And it has the capability to use AI-powered brand safety scores that determine whether the podcast within its walled garden get amplified, suppressed, or deleted. And in my case,

deleted. When I changed hosts, they would always, of course, put it out to a lot of, you know, immediately send this out to a lot of different podcast platforms and Spotify being the biggest one, they would send it to them. And, um, so I've, I've been banned by Spotify now three times. And before I was banned the third time, I was contacted by an advertiser who said, Hey, I've listened to your podcast. Would you really like to get you on? And, um, you know, they, uh, had a great program for monetization. It was a lot more than I was making where I was before it dropped 40% even. And, um, so I said, sure, I'd be interested in doing it. But I said, they've already banned me twice.

And I don't know if they're going to allow me to be on there. Well, while she was putting together a package, she contacted me back and said, you've been banned. Can't do this anymore. Just like PayPal. So not only does Spotify have direct access to the technology that makes this AI powered censorship possible, but it has also demonstrated that it is willing to police speech in podcasts

and to offer their services to other podcasts to do the same. And they do this while they're paying Joe Rogan tens of millions of dollars for him to push psychedelic mushrooms to people, another garbage, information garbage. What a limited hangout that guy is. Just amazing to me. Totally owned by these people. Now, that's the real pharmakia, psychedelic mushrooms and stuff.

That's quite literally it. Certainly does apply when you look at the pharmaceutical industry, but you talk about psychedelic mushrooms to take people out of reality, to have a quasi-religious experience, to connect with the occult, all the rest of this stuff. That's what he's pushing. Oh, it's great. It's great. You should have that, yeah. The beginning of the end started with the rise of closed platforms like Spotify,

as it has eroded the openness of podcasting. And now that AI-powered sensors are here, it will accelerate the decline, says Reclaim the Net. Well, it is going to be there, and we will be here as long as you choose to support us. We know what the future looks like with this. Not concerned about it. God knows what the future is, and if he wants me to do this, he will make a way for it. We're going to take a break, and we'll be right back. © transcript Emily Beynon Thank you. Analyzing the globalist's next move. And now, The David Knight Show.

I have some comments here. Audi, MR, has got a couple of comments. He said, the solution is parallel societies and independent platforms. Yeah, that is a solution. And of course it's the walled gardens like Spotify, like Facebook, like Twitter. It used to be that people would use search engines and it used to be search engines would be honest. Now they have become tools designed to hide things that's what google has become designed to hide it's a search engine designed to hide stuff and matt drudge talked about this before he switched sides he used to say it all the time he would say you know we've got these walled gardens

that are being built in social media people go there for information because you know that's what he did he created a a news aggreg site, but people were going to social media to get their news. And of course, uh, you know, that was going to be a walled garden for him. So he could see that trend that was happening. He was very concerned about that. And, um, and that's the key thing. People aren't going to go to a site to find the stuff, like thedavidknightshow.com. They'll go to social media. If they don't see me on Facebook because I'm not there, well, I guess he's gone.

I guess Alex was right. He just disappeared. That type of thing. He also said, I'm a musician, and my band partner and I find it odd that so many of our music peers use software in lieu of playing instruments. We're old school. We recorded the guitars, et cetera. If we screw up, we start over and get it right.

Absolutely. Well, you know, I'm one of those people that use, cause I don't have any way to play an orchestra and some of the instruments like you just heard on that, that song there, you know, all those instruments were keyboard instruments. So I play the keyboard and I do the arrangements. And actually, that's the technology that's there. That's kind of different. It can be very hard to make that sound realistic.

And one of the things that I enjoy doing is going back and taking songs I used to play when I was a kid. And I say kid, you know, high school, college, and stuff, and going back and doing a cover of those, like we would do in the past, you know, where I was just the only person, I was only one part in the band,

and now I can play all the parts, or to go back and take something that was a piano piece, like a Christmas arrangement that I used to play, and to go back and reorchestrate it with different orchestration. I find that to be interesting. But again, technology is a two-edged sword. It can be good. It can be bad.

And there's always good aspects to some of the stuff, and there's ways that we can turn it around. This was being pushed pretty hard yesterday in the press. Intelligence officials say the U.S. has retrieved craft of non-human origin. And as I read this article, it struck me how all these people were former intelligence officials and people that were deep into the intelligence community and the rest of this stuff. And I started thinking, wait a minute, aren't these the same people that lied us into the Gulf War? Aren't these the same people who told us lies about weapons of mass destruction? Aren't these the same people that tortured people

and then tortured the data to put us into a lockdown situation? The key whistleblower is a guy who's 36 years old, a decorated former combat officer in Afghanistan, and a veteran of, wait for it, drum roll, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. Oh, there it is. That's the agency that James Clapper rose to prominence in. Geospatial intelligence, the vastest growing part of the intelligence community. The people who are there to monitor us and to map our political and religious beliefs

and to map our relationships with people and institutions and all the rest of this stuff, those people. He worked for those people. Same bureaucracy, the Pentagon and these intelligence communities that were just selling us the stuff about the Chinese spy balloon, now they want to tell us about UFOs. Well, maybe they're telling you the truth. Maybe they aren't.

But either way, it doesn't really affect me. It doesn't affect my theology one bit. We've got our guest who's ready to connect, so we're going to take a break and connect with him. I think you're going to be really interested in this book. It looks like a very interesting premise, and he is a very successful writer. We'll be right back. ¶¶ In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. You're listening to The David Knight Show. All right, welcome back.

We're going to be talking to an author who has, as I point out, he's an Emmy Award winner and many other types of awards like tellies and things like that, but he's also a writer. He's got a new novel out. It's called Revolution Empire. I read you one of the reviews from a homeschool curriculum training and support group, Homelink Yakima said, uh, it offers offers the brutal truth of absolute power and the preciousness of the freedom that can defeat it.

Another review said serious, though its themes are revolution empires above all entertaining, highly readable. It will find a big audience. And so his ideas will be deservedly spread wide stories like revolution empire. Give us hope that the young will leave behind a better world than that which previous generations have handed them.

And then finally this. To pull the reader deep into a web of dystopian oppression and thrilling intrigue, Rob has created a strange new world that will be eerily familiar to careful readers and students of history. And I would say probably to careful observers of what is happening to us right now. So joining us now is Rob Travolino. Thank you for joining us, Rob. Pleasure to be here, David. Thanks for having me. Let's talk a little bit about what inspired this.

I'm sure there's a lot of parallels to contemporary events and dystopian novels. What inspired you to write this? Oh, man, it's been a long journey. Part of it really just comes out of my career. I started off at a college in advertising and marketing. I had intended to be a journalist. And during my senior thesis, I got to interview some people high up in a major network news organization. This is back in the late 80s who actually told me because I was trying to determine whether news was still news or whether it had become more entertainment based. or something else because the network news had sort of been hijacked a little bit by corporate sponsors telling them what they wanted them to say and and sort of approving copy and improving stories and you know the what was the movie that the russell crew movie the insider certainly talked a lot about that showing the the the trouble they had exposing big tobacco um because

the network was trying to censor the story or the sponsor was trying to censor the story. And oddly enough, I was drafted into advertising. Just basically I interned at an ad agency in college and they hired me on the spot. And so I went on this really strange journey in advertising for a number of years. I worked a lot in the kids space. I worked on G.I. Joe, I worked on Transformers, I worked on transformers i worked on batman i worked on bringing all of these really big franchises to market and while i was there and this is kind of a convoluted journey but i'll tie it all together um i started to see from inside the sort of the boardrooms of kids the kids business as um the corporate concerns in the 90s and in the mid 90s started buying more and

more of kids companies that there was an agenda driving the narrative in the in the country in terms of how entertainment was being sort of steered toward something and i didn't know what it was but it wasn't it at some, it wasn't as much about kids and their power and their empowerment. It was more about somebody else's sort of molding into the message they wanted, if that makes sense. Oh, yeah. And so rather than selling toys and games to kids and teenagers, I wanted to sell them

what kids and teenagers play with toys and games for. They play because they want to learn about good and evil. They want to learn about changing the world. They want to learn about their personal power and not the brand they're being sold. The brand that they want to develop is themselves, their own sort of determination, their own ability to sort of make their own life.

And so that sort of molded into my entertainment career. And where Revolution Empire came to be was after selling a tv show to disney and developing tv show for discovery i sort of got the the the gist in the sort of in the entertainment space that again there was an opportunity to to give kids stories that were um self-determinist that were that were sort of about core rights and core principles and about the things that kids can do outside the system and within the system to change the system if that makes sense yeah and as i watched the world sort of change over the last you know 10 15 years especially um i saw the you know changesot Act, things coming up.

I saw rights being sort of stripped away. I saw things in the culture and in the entertainment space and in the that the more you can control discourse and narrative, the more money you can make, if that makes sense. Oh, yeah. I just played a clip earlier in the show about Larry Fink saying that six years ago. He said, we're going to force corporations to do this and that because you've got the purse strings and you've got unlimited amount of money if you do what we say. Otherwise, you're not going to get anything.

And even so, that really becomes what they're focused on. They're focused on satisfying the people at the top of the economic food chain, you know, who are above the corporate level, and they're focused on selling a narrative that the government likes as well. So that's really a prescription for disaster, a prescription for a kind of dystopian society that you talk about in your novel, and you have a lot of parallels into the American revolution. Talk a little bit about that. Well, it's set in kind of a,

is that a parallel universe or is it a, a, um, a kind of a recapitulation of the American revolution that, that you see in this empire? I kind of looked at it like a thought experiment. And the idea being that I, I don't define whether it's a parallel universe or if it's a future time.

I kind of leave that open for the reader. But ultimately, as I looked at the world changing, and this is interesting you brought up, Larry, but the idea that if you look at the way the world is sort of headed, you see a large sort of globalism component to it. You see a lot of um a recipe for tyranny you see a lot of recipe with surveillance with you know you having to register all of your you know your devices a certain way you there's a there's a i'm not saying that we've hit tyranny yet but there's an incredible danger and potential for it and when you look back at the revolution of the United States in 1776, it was the largest corporate entity on the planet was the East India Trade Company. And the British Empire was the largest corporate banking entity on the planet.

And so it's almost like history is repeating in a way. I see you smiling because that's what the danger is to me. And so when I looked at that and I look at the way from inside the advertising marketing space, how people are segmented and divided. When I hear people talking about systemic racism and I hear people complaining about it in the context of the present day. I watched corporate America for years segment minorities, blacks here, Hispanics here, whites here, Asians here, and everything else, and they sold to them that way. They sold to them that way because it made more money.

Whether they did it on purpose or whether they did it by accident, the quest for profit created a systemic inequality and those things are all tyrannical in their own sort of sense when they're taken far enough if that makes is am i yeah you know correct a little too off the rails but but as i looked at things, I looked at a present-day version of royalty and elitism in celebrity culture, in, excuse me, expert culture. You can't make a decision without an expert telling you what to do. You can't make a decision without government computer reminding you that you shouldn't do this or your software telling you, hey, step back and you can't say this or you shouldn't be mindful of your words. I use a program called Grammarly, which constantly tells me, be aware of the worry about your speech and you're not being inclusive here and you're doing this. I'm like.

So they folded in the Associated Press's terms that you're allowed to use for this and that. They've kind of permeating into everything and you know and and and you look at the core and and i look at the to go off on another small little tangent um there's a there's a effort in the last 20 years to make socialism seem like it's a wonderful thing and historically and again this is leaving the the the ideologies out of it and the current political discourse out of it historically socialism had socialism communism have killed more people um than most wars combined that's right and so why are we talking about that why are we suddenly making it look like it's okay and then when you look at that in the context of um you know how control systems

work and how you know altering language for example cancel culture and altering altering language is a version of of marx that's that's a marxism playbook it's right out of the playbook of socialism and marxism that's right make some hijack the word make it not okay create another word and make that word okay and then make everyone go in line and at some point you're actually giving away your right to speak by association and so there's a and that's a very slippery slope between losing your right to speak freely out of association to losing your right to speak by mandate, by law, by some official decree. And when you look back at the back of the revolutionary days, people were jailed for pamphlets that they said they were unjustly, and taken prisoner during the American revolution for, you know, during the early, early stage of the American revolution for speaking out against the King and speaking out against the, you know, taxes and speaking out a bit against the infringements

on their rights. And so I look at the world today and I go, I hope we're not heading that way, but a lot of signs point to the fact that we're heading that way now. Well, you know, human nature doesn't change. That's one of the one of the reasons why as you point out you know the corporations change in the nature of the business changes you know we don't have the east india company anymore uh you know but we've got big pharma we've got other things that are out there and they're going to be allied with uh the government that is there and kind of uh you know a lot of these um ideological labels are there kind of as a distraction i I think, to keep us from really seeing what's happening here. Because there's a merger between the government and between these

corporations. And we even have this, you know, we have some people over there who say, well, you know, the corporations can do no wrong, the government can do no right, and vice versa. They don't understand how they have merged together. And so that's a key thing. And so in your book, uh, you know, human nature does not change, but it's interesting to be able to reach a younger audience, uh, to, to show them and to put it in a different context because you start telling them, uh, some of these things and going back in history. And it's like, oh, I can't relate to that. Uh, they didn't have phones and they didn't have cars or whatever, virtual reality. So I can't really relate to that. They didn't have phones and they didn't have cars or whatever, virtual reality. So I can't really relate to that world. So you put in some of the trappings that we have now,

because human nature doesn't change and you still have the, essentially the same story is going to be repeated again, right? And that's the fascinating thing. That was always a fascinating thing for me because the idea that when I looked back at the, if you Google, you know, some of the founding, you know, founding father's words and the documents and the Federalist Papers and everything else, you tend to get 20 search results that are irrelevant or are why they don't apply, why they don't work in today's world, or they're bastardized and changed and almost manipulated versions of what they are, or they're spun to an agenda. And again, it's not like, again,

I'm not saying that there's some concerted effort going on, because I don't know and I can't prove that, but it certainly seems like there's an effort to disempower the founding principles of this nation, whereas, but in the meantime, they were the truths they were the truths that were unassailable in the 1700s and in the 1800s. Those truths could not be, at some level, could not be argued with. You could not argue with inherent, born with inherent rights. You

could not argue with, you know, some of the core principles of the ownership of private property are what actually are tied inextricably to freedom. Because if you can't own things, you have no freedom at some point. And they don't want us to have any freedom or dignity. That's one of the things you look at, especially over the last few years. It's like a B.F. Skinner type of world that they've created. And he said, you know, we need to move beyond freedom and dignity. And they want to move, in order to move beyond freedom and dignity, they want to move beyond these principles that were put there

because people had lived under tyranny and they knew what it looked like. Yeah, they're pretty obvious about the fact, when you listen to these people in academia, they're upfront about the fact that they want to deconstruct everything about our society and our our culture and and government and everything else and institute uh you know what we have seen in the past is pure dystopian societies and we can it doesn't history and doesn't isn't history full of you know examples every few decades every hundred years every millennium where that does not work and and eventually human beings who have a an inherent sort of drive to to believe in greater things and an inherent drive to be free to choose ultimately end up saying i we can't do this it's against my nature you know human nature has again

the double it is a double-edged sword you know if you look at you know in the john milton faustian sense it's a double-edged sword because you're either gonna sell yourself for some security in the ben franklin sense you know you're gonna give up some for security and liberty in the you know the interest of security and then you're gonna lose these things forever and at some point you're gonna like i want them back because that's who defines who i am and so revolution again you can't teach that necessarily to a kid and in a young adult novel space you can't just go out and and say here's the here's the article here's the bill of rights here's this and you could teach them in a classroom here's why these things matter here's where these things worked here's why these things were took down tyranny globally for a period of

time um they took down authoritarianism globally they took down communism you know in in every instance until maybe recently yeah and so you know ultimately the best way to teach those things or at least give people the choice again because that's for me that's that's the birth of Revolution Empire came out of what I saw was we're losing the choice. We're losing the free will we're supposed to be born with, and we're losing the free will that the country had instilled and enshrined in its very founding documents and core principles. And so these things, you can take these things in small doses. I'll get to the book in a second. And you can say, you can look at the 1619

projects and go okay here's all the bad things we did but you can also look at the fact that all those documents and all those core principles are how we ended the bad things that that we that human nature allowed us to do um like talk a little bit you mentioned uh franklin you know of course franklin talking about people who are willing to trade essential liberty for the promise of safety, because he knew that that wasn't going to be safe. And that you enslave yourself to the extent you enslave yourself, you're not safe, you're not prosperous, none of this. And of course, they never deliver on that. But how does that, I'm sure that plays a part in your book. Talk a little bit about that, the trade. Yeah, so I looked at the world around me, and I saw that we were moving sort of in that book. Talk a little bit about that. The trade-offs between liberty and safety. I looked at the world around me and I saw that we were moving in that direction. We're moving

in the direction, as Ben Franklin said, and again, it's an illusion of security in a lot of ways, because all the things that are being sold now were not anymore secure, were actually less secure. So I looked at the world. I noticed that there was an incredible parallel between the way things were headed and the royal kings and queens you know uh you know giant financial concerns that everything about them was being in control dictating what my subjects could do defining their freedoms and then holding the purse string so that if they were bad citizens or they didn't do what you wanted to we would just take away survive their their very ability to take away their livelihoods or take away their money and if we had to willing will will constantly increase

you know their expenditures in the form of different taxes in different ways and so when i looked at that i was like well this is something that I think we all really feel because as adults and as taxpayers, we always know that it's always a battle of each little slice, whether it's coming in inflationary. It's inflation, sort of a hidden tax. There's a fee for this. It's a tax. And now corporations are on board. They're charging a fee for everything. You used to have all these things on a navigation system in a car that now you have to pay extra for there's, you know,

you're constantly being reduced in your choices unless you pay for them or unless you play nice to get them. And that's very similar to the, you know, the British empire in a lot of ways and what happened with the colonies and the natural struggle between, you know, the population and the people with the rights they feel they have. So I wanted to construct a world that would allow kids and teenagers and young adults to learn the concepts as they read them and as they saw them, as opposed to reading them off of these old documents that to me are relevant, you are relevant but to a 17 year old or 16 year old maybe not so much but the concepts under them are timeless the concepts under them still apply

the concepts under them when you really study them and actually learn them and realize what they say and don't read the cliff notes version or the version somebody told you to read you say this way second this is what this is what this is my struggle is this is this is childhood this is adolescence this is young adulthood this is all the stuff i'm doing i'm trying to define who i am i'm trying to find my power i'm trying to find my right to be who i am and instead of having it being sold to us well you can be you can be this or you can be that or you can be this no no you're not supposed to be sold a menu of things you can be you're supposed to decide what you want to be if you have to create something new to be to be that's what you should be able to do um or create a new you know create a new you're

supposed to be able to create a new world starting with yourself and so a revolution empire basically is a dystopian um thought experiment on what would a surveillance state technologically advanced society look like blended with the world of the 1700s and so i yeah so i use some of the, the slang of the period. So there's colonial slang throughout the book. I used, um, For example, what kind of colonial slang? Uh, um, colonial slang are things like you would call the boxman. You'd sit and call it an undertaker.

You would call him the boxman and an undertaker at the time was an undertaker slash pawnbroker because he would take, I mean, you see like the little Christmas carol scene where the undertaker is selling off property from the person who died because they had no relatives or they had nobody to bequeath to. And so that's what undertakers were. They were boxmen. They would just box up you and your stuff, and then they would bury some and, bury some and sell the rest. That's great. They, they call, accuse people of being a nutmeg addict. Yeah, exactly. So fire cake is a, is a, is a, is a, you know, hard baked, like hard tacked. It's just kind of, it's just, you know, whatever dough you got, throw them together and baked it to like a hard biscuit that can be stored and held for long periods of time. And because the kids in the story, Robin Shampire also,

the entire, the entire story is, are teenagers. Everybody's teenagers in their twenties that are, that are the critical aspect of the story, because people don't realize or recognize so much that there were people who signed the declaration of independence that were, you know,

22 years old, 24 years old. There were people fighting in the war that were 14 and 15 years old. There were, you know, there were people who were, you know, founding players to be that chose to do this at, you know, 14, 15, 16, 17 and left home. Some people disguised themselves as adults. Some women disguised themselves as men to join the, to join the fight. You know, it's, it's, it's a remarkable story that we don't have told in the detail, uh, that it really happened. So I've, I'm faithful to a lot of the things that

really took place. And that's an important thing as well, because, you know, we are so babied in our society. You know, we live in this, you know, for 12 years. You go to this institution where everything is highly structured, highly structured. You got one authority figure up in the front of the room and that type of thing. But in the real world of a couple of hundred years ago, just or even less than that, people would grow up very, very quickly. They would be given command in some cases of ships as teenagers. And, you know, it was done on the basis of merit, but they would mature very, very quickly.

They'd stay in a babysitting environment for that long. And I think that's one of the reasons why it seems like the longer you stay in school, the number you get, because it's like a babysitting. It dulls your imagination. It actually dulls your inquisitiveness and critical thinking and all the rest of this stuff by just kind of keeping you in this controlled environment. But that's a real important thing for people to learn. And I think that is something that is very beneficial for young kids to see. I know my son learned to read by reading G.A. Hinty novels.

He was a novelist back in the Victorian period. And he would take a 17-year-old, and he would put that 17-year-old in a historical context. And he would be interacting with these historical adult figures that you know of, right? But he would be right there in the midst of it. There's always a coming-of-age novel. I imagine that's a key part you talk about characters being uh 17 years old and around that age uh yeah God of Russia is the main protagonist of the story and

he's kind of a blend of George Washington uh Thomas Paine and and uh and Benjamin Rush well that sounds great yeah and what and what basically the the premise revolution empire is is is there's an underground society that is is literally under the empire the the empire is kind of like a giant city state and it's and it's miles miles high and and literally buried under it is the remnants of a previous world and previous civilization. And that civilization lives kind of a disenfranchised. And since I've had to set it up in a present context, it's kind of like the disenfranchised masses. It's anybody who's at or below the poverty line or at or below the cultural line in the

world today, whether they're refugees, whether they're Native Americans, whether they're inner city kids, black, white, Hispanic, because in one of my documentary filmmaker, I did a documentary in the South in the late 2000s, and I found unbelievably depressed and poor cities in the south that were um incredibly integrated because they were all they all had everything in common they were all struggling together to survive and when you look at the world from that perspective you realize especially now

that we're so top heavy with a small group of people controlling, I forgot what it is, it's 90 something percent of the wealth is controlled by like 5% of the people in the world. And so in a lot of ways, we are all in some form of debt streamitude and we are all in sort of the same boat in a lot of ways. And there's, there's something very similar in that regard to people who leave home to go to a new world for the hope of finding a way to build a better life because they were sort of the castoffs of society, or they were disenfranchised, or they lacked the freedom to be who they wanted to be, whether it was religious freedom, whether it was economic freedom, whatever it might be. So the world is literally underground called the sewers. These people live in near perpetual darkness. And all they have left behind is a book written by a guy

named Dr. Princeton Rush, who's kind of like a Thomas Paine, Benjamin Rush character. And he's the father of Donovan Rush. And he wrote this long treatise on rights and on inherent rights and on property ownership and on liberty and all these concepts that these kids have no idea of. Because they live in this oppressed under society where they're not allowed anything. They're basically allowed what gets thrown down from Empire City into their midst. Except for Empire City has a form of a lottery, which is which is again vaguely familiar to today's world these floating magnetically floating ships will come down once in a while find groups of kids that shouldn't be assembled or find kids to pick and they'll literally lift them up into the light and it's called becoming an empire builder you're brought out into the light of empire city and

offered a chance to serve his magistrate in a much more sort of you know advanced way you can get coveralls on you get dressed in the empire garb and you get a chance like it's like winning a lottery ticket so that you're suddenly being granted the opportunity to get out of your miserable state and into a land of opportunity where you can quote unquote be wherever you want to be but it's only if you succumb to all the rules that are in the empire system that's that's above you and very few kids get up here and get accepted and get kept so donovan in his following his father's book um looks for a way out of the sewers um for his people for his kind for all the people that are there that are sort of aligned with all the kids all the people who are just ranchized and he gets taken in an empire

builder transport and dumped into the city and brought to the magistrate's tower and meets um a guy named dr richard franklin who's a sort of rakish character in the empire who is a friend of his father's and got his father a pardon from a death sentence and thrown in jail and donovan is finding his way to the empire and franklin was hoping because he's sort of a franklin character that some kid would break out at some point and lead a change because franklin thinks the empire is unjust and so he's working sort of clandestinely to undermine it. So when this kid appears in the Empire City

he sees the next level of prison. So his father always says that freedom the one place they can't take freedom from is in here. That's where the only the one prison you can put yourself from is in here that's where the the only the the the one prison

you can put yourself in is in your own head and once you're in the prison you'll never get you're never going to get out so once you realize that you're free there you can free yourself everywhere else so once it goes back to the sewers he organizes a a channel crossing which is kind of like washington crossing the delaware where these kids break out of the sewers and they sail across this massive channel and they land on the shores of the colonies. The colonies are an industrial business sort of suburb of Empire City where the people there aren't allowed to go to Empire City either.

They're the commerce, commercial engine, factory workers, all the people who do all the working to support the empire. So they are separated like the American colonies, but they can't go back and forth. Some of the people in power can go back and forth, but most people work there their whole lives and some of their money goes to the empire. So when Donovan realizes that the world is unjust, based on his father's writings, he leads a landing in the colonies. And that's the first book, because the empire realizes they've got a problem, and they don't know who caused it. And they suspect that Richard way they can quell it is by giving some of these sewer rats a foothold in the colonies as long as it makes money for them, as long as it helps them stay in control. And so it's out of one trap into another trap, waiting to get into another trap.

That's kind of how the book is set up. Interesting. Kind of like some of the people who came to America as indentured servants. It was being run by those. Interesting. Kind of like some of the people who came to America as indentured servants. It was being run by this interesting fellow. And they actually employed them as indentured servants once they landed in the colonies. Yeah, interesting. Show the cover of the book there. Again, so the first book is Revolution Empire, and there are several books in the series, right? How many of them are there?

There's three. The first one is called revolution empire history never retreats and um that tells the story of donovan rush escape from the sewer and leading some of his some of some of the sewer rats as they're called to the colonies and then there's this there'll be a second book which is already written called the wild colonials which shows uh what happens there and another thing that's really important to the book is that all of the main characters keep journals. And so the book does a very unique thing where there's journal pages spaced throughout it. So every once in a while, you get an internal dialogue from Donovan, an internal dialogue from Richard Franklin, an internal dialogue from various other characters. And all the words and all the dialogue are based upon the writings, speeches, and letters of Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, because all the characters are in the story. So you learn, as a reader, the concepts that these, again, to circle it back again, I know I talked about a lot of things because they tend to globally go all over the place but you learn the concepts of the federalist papers you learn the concepts of you know the motivations

behind george washington john as you see what made them tick and you hear their own words through the journal entries but you don't absorb it as the dense information as it is you you learn it on the fly as it applies to the situations that these characters are in and you look at a world that's reflective of today and you go oh crap that matters this matter like this this matters and this matters this is why it matters this is why people break out of a prison to try to instead of just to be free but to change the world this is why you know this is this is why people take the stands they take this is why people recognize inequality it is true forms this is

why people recognize tyranny so why people can recognize authoritarianism because you know there are standards but there's standards of individual power and individual rights that without them you can't measure authoritarianism and tyranny you can't you can't expose it and recognize it until you realize what it does what it actually takes from you personally that's a great way to put it sorry and that's a really ingenious idea that you've got there i mean you're giving them the philosophies and the writings in a way that you know is is being put out there gradually and in a context that they can relate to. And they're not realizing that they're really learning this kind of stuff.

That's one of the difficult things about educating kids or anybody. You put stuff out in a didactic way, like a lecture, and you say, well, this is this and that is that. And that doesn't really get through to most people. It's like handing them some kind of a pamphlet or something like that. But then the next step is to do a documentary. And a documentary is more engaging because you see visceral pictures and you hear people and you see things. And so that brings it in a little bit more.

But when you do it as a work of fiction, you can really draw them in in a very visceral way because they can get inside the characters heads and uh and that's a really ingenious way to to educate these kids about these principles that are so vital and uh so timeless that are now being destroyed and uh that that's a great approach i really love what you're doing with that i appreciate i appreciate that that's my that's my worry my worry my worry is the you know some of these things have been lost some of these things are being taken away some of these things are under attack and the way that the way the the

the narrative discourse is going you know in terms of the medium you know obviously uh yourself and and those and those who are you know talking about the same subjects as you and and examining the world the same way you are you we're you know the your voice is getting um people try to distract people from what you're talking about people try to distract people away from there's an agenda trying to silence the discourse yeah one of the things that you know Elon Musk talks about in in Twitter in terms of the restoration of free speech whether he's done it or not um or whether you know what is whether what his ultimate intentions are although I'm

fascinated by what he's been doing you know without the discourse without the free speech without the without without the ability to discuss these these things um and really look at them um you know freely and fully um we're going to lose them and we're already losing them to some extent so the book is really designed you know not to push a certain agenda, but just to make the comparison between, I mean, obviously every writer has an agenda to some extent, but my agenda is to expose again, where the dangers are in the present world, where those dangers are historically, where they've always sat, where they've always been, the damage they've caused, but what they fundamentally take away from us as individuals, the rights they really strip, the control they really exert, all the flavors of the control and all the flavors of servitude they put upon you so that people, kids will learn through the course of an adventure, they'll say, wow, I agree with this thing that Donovan's fighting about.

I agree with this thing that John A. is about i agree with this thing that john a is talking about he's that's the john adams character i agree with this thing that richard franklin is talking about i see what they're fighting against it's actually kind of like what i see going on around me and then at least have the conversation and say well if this applies in this narrative concept in this entertainment concept that I'm looking at, but it's reflective of the world, like all good entertainment is always. I've got to think about this. Because if I'm being told this all the time, but this feels true, we've got a problem.

We should be talking about this. And that's what I'm hoping. I'm hoping the book is a conversation piece. Oh, yeah. And, of course, it's key. We go back and we look at the middle of the 20th century. Orwell, Solzhenitsyn. They understood that it was about control over your mind, right? Which is language.

Yeah, language and getting you to say even what you know is not true. So Solzhenitsyn wrote, you know, live not by lies because he knew that was the ultimate thing to get you to live by what you knew was not true. That's how they control your mind. That's what totalitarianism is. But of course, Jefferson understood that as well. That's not a new insight. You know, one of his most famous quotes is inscribed there at the monument to him in Washington is, you know, fighting every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

And so he knew that tyranny's ultimate throne was to take control of your mind. And these people, you look at it, one of the things I find interesting about the American Revolution is that these people were very wealthy and elitist, and yet they didn't accrue all that power to themselves because they also saw themselves as the underdog to an even higher tyranny that was there. What you talked about, the East India Company and the big bank and the big corporations and the big empire and all the rest of this stuff. And they didn't want to recreate that because they knew what it was like to live under that in the same way that people who have lived under a communist government can smell that a mile away. These people knew what totalitarianism was about. They knew it was

a tyranny over the mind of man and all the rest. That's why they enshrined freedom of speech and religion as the very first thing. But they understood that. And so they weren't going to reinvent that. And we're coming up to a time where things are getting very difficult. And if the population doesn't have this understanding of what tyranny looks like and the reason that we had these things in there we're in big trouble that's why what you're doing uh in terms of reaching uh to kids that way and and you know putting it in this context where they can understand assimilate and identify with it that's really important uh and uh so i can understand why uh homeschooling

foundations would recommend your book so there's going to be three of them, right? The first one's about to come out in July? Yeah, and the third one goes up to a surprise ending, but I obviously can't tell you about it. But the idea is that there's way more than three books to tell the story fully because the story parallels the American Revolution. So it parallels an story parallels the American Revolution so in parallels and uprising in the colonies you know a stand against the Empire at some point um and and all

the players are involved in you know I don't know how into the details of history are but even even characters on the other side are are represented you know uh General Burgoyne is is in the story there's a guy named Benastry Tarleton who is a notoriously vicious British officer. Oh, yeah. War crimes. He's a central character to the story. And I've added other characters into the story. There's a gang leader named KZ who is loosely based on the Marquis de Lafayette, but a combination of the marquis de lafayette

and and sort of confucianism and and because there's a there's a there's a component of the empires outside of empire outside of the empire itself there are other geopolitical players that are reminiscent and reflective of today's world because they need a france and they need a spain and a portugal in the story but if you look at today's world, we have all that stuff still going on because we used to have all the great seafaring, you know, nations. Now we have the nations that have, you know, giant, you know, navies and nuclear arsenals. So they're the same.

It's the same struggle, right? It's the same. It's always the same struggle. It's a struggle for resources, a struggle for hearts and minds. It's a struggle for resources it's a struggle for hearts and minds it's a struggle for you know for influence and so all these things are incredibly reflective you can look at you know you can look at if you look at the if you look at the american revolution in the context that i want to find everything that's wrong with it you can if you want to look at you know if you want to look at any point in history and find what's wrong or right in it, you can. But at the end of the day, you really can't assail the principles.

And I'm glad you talked about the fact that some of these guys were very wealthy. Some of these guys were very elitist. They understood, above all else, human nature. They understood, above all else, how they got there. They didn't want to get there to be in control of it. It's a difference between an authoritarian and a person who believes in liberty and freedom

and God-given rights. One person wants to lift everybody else up or give everybody else the opportunity to come up to their level. One person wants to control how they do it. That's right. One person wants to mete it out to them in little doses so that they will always and forever be in control these guys understood their own human nature as well as any as well as anybody ever has or may or may

may to you know to the future the way we're going they knew to build in safeguards that prevent the world and even themselves from taking control. Did it work entirely? No, because people chipped away at it. People started using lawfare as early as like, you know, 1780 and 1790 to chip away at these principles because they knew these principles, when they worked, prevented people from assuming authoritarian control. And so we've been doing this, this country's been doing this battle

for over 200 years. Oh, yeah. We're starting to slide with global help. It's a constant battle. It's a constant battle. It has to constantly be renewed. And Jefferson said that as well. You know, constantly,

tree of liberty, constantly refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It's Mothansk. It's like, if you sell your soul at some point, you're, you know, good luck getting back out. You know, once you go far enough into hell.

You know, the ad, it was George Churchill. If you fight, you're going through hell, keep going. There's no exit sometimes. You can't get deep. You're not coming back. I know. I said that at the very beginning, you know, that when we went into lockdown on that Monday

following the Friday the 13th, I said, you know, keep calm and carry on. Remember, that was a sign that was there as they had this massive army right across the channel. And also freedom is in peril, defended at all your might. I said, look, these guys knew they were going to die. It isn't any question if there's some disease or something like that. But they were concerned about preserving liberty and freedom. Just as Jefferson was. He said, look, life is not, you can't take away life and liberty. You can destroy those, but you can't separate them from each other. And so that was what gave us

a free society that respected freedom and dignity and all the rest of these things. I can't even imagine anybody in today's world saying the kinds of things that Jeff Kay said, for example, he said, look, a rising tide floats all boats. Can you imagine anybody thinking like that anymore? And that wasn't just him thinking, saying this on his own. That was really kind of the whole zeitgeist of our society and of our government at the time. Let's let, let's help everybody get a home. Well, that's not what they're doing anymore. Uh, they're all in it for themselves. They're all a saluting

mentality that is happening at this point in time. And they all think that they're going to come out on top. That's a part that I, and then, and you know, it's, it's, I'm glad you brought that up there because that's a part that I saw, you know, again, I even saw it back when I was in school because my, you know, I was, my family worked very hard to move to the suburbs. Both my parents worked. My mom went back to college. You know, I was, you know, the, you know, by the time I went, you know, by the time I was in late in elementary school and high school, I was home alone most of the time. My brother and my sister went off to school and I was, you know, raised myself in a lot of ways and you know we came from a very you know from a very you know lower you know upper lower class lower middle class you know sort of beginning

when I went to school I saw and when I went to school in affluent suburb of New York I saw as a kid the agenda sort of switch I saw the the way they were teaching us change. I saw the, I saw myself being given choices instead of being given opportunities. I taught myself, I saw myself being taught by some teachers in an increasing manner through high school, especially you weren't, you were taught about the things, the things you could, again, like I said before, the things you could pick from a list as opposed to the things you think the list you could make if that makes sense and that sounds it sounds a little weird but oddly enough i went to a

catholic college and the most freedom i had to argue with my professors or my teachers the most freedom i had to choose what i wanted to study the most freedom i had to you know to disagree or agree was in a Catholic school, which my entire high school taught me was not the case. Or you go to a Catholic school, they're going to ram religion down your throat, and they're going to control your mind, and you're going to do this. And then when I, it was an eye-opening experience for me, because I went to Iona College, and when I got got to iona college i was arguing theology with my you know with with my because i had to take you had to take one class in you know theology i was arguing you know you know god and theology with my professor and he was like great bring it on this is the conversation we should be having yeah exactly

which is completely different from what i happened what happened when i was in high school people were telling me like you know oh you can't have that conversation. You should know. Yeah. If you really believe, if you've wrestled with this stuff yourself, and we all should, and you understand, you know, you cared enough to look into it. Is there a God? Is this stuff true? And you've looked into that. You welcome the discussion that is there. You don't try to hide, run from what is true. You unleash it, as Augustine said, right?

Truth is like a lion that you unleash. Let's have that debate. And it really is out of those kinds of religious foundations that our society said, well, the answer to bad speech is more speech. And we're going to continue to want to free things up. We don't want to have some small clique of people who are going to control everything. You had Francis Bacon who said that. We want to have a scientific method.

We don't want to have experts. But now we're going in the other direction really hard, and we've got to push back hard against that. That's a key thing to reject this idea of scientific dogma that's going to be put on people. That's an intolerant religion that can't stand scrutiny uh and a lot of scientists a lot of scientists complaining that's become a dogma to religion i mean a lot more and more scientists are complaining every day that's a dogma to religion but we're turning everything and listen again is this marxism

it smells and it sort of smells and looks like it because at the end of the day, making everything a division, a quantification of the division, making everything into a dogma is literally straight out of the Saul Alinsky, straight out of the Marxist playbook. And it's really funny too because when I went into advertising, I studied Edward Bernays and I studied all the tools of propaganda I could use because that was my job. But when I got into it, I had to learn the human nature behind it. And I'd taken psychology in school. I actually majored in it for a while. But when I saw it in operation, I was like, wow, this is really dangerous stuff. Like this is, and I did, at that point, I chose to use it for, you know, I'm going to teach kids.

I'm not going to sell my, my clients products. They're not going to sell their toys and games. I'm going to sell why kids come to, I explained people, but there's no such thing as a brand without people. You can make a logo. You can do a million,

you know, commercial television commercials. You can bombard people with the message, people you can make a logo you can do a million you know commercial television commercials you can bombard people with the message but unless people join and they're seeking some kind of experience or empowerment or some kind of benefit that's where the brand lies the brand lies in the consent of the governed for lack of a better way to put it and so you can govern them all you want and but when you go off the rails with your brand you know the way some some companies have in the last two or three years let's say oh yeah um the people just go we're not having it this is not who

we are we don't care what you are this is not who we are and again that's a big component of of of what i wanted to take away from revolution empire this you know we have consent we were born with consent we're born with the ability to make the choice and and make the decision that we are free to do so that it's that's our call and when we when governments are built they're supposed to be built what gives five people the right to rule over 500 people or 5,000 people? That's right. Only if those 5,000 people agree that those people can, can govern.

And that's the, you know, that's again, that's a big central premise. Well, I want a boardroom. I want a boardroom telling me what I can and can't buy and what I should do. Do I want a wall street telling me what I can and I can't buy and,

and what I can do? No. It's like, I want the choices. I want, I want my choices. I want my choices. I want my freedom. That's right. a wall street telling me what i can and i can't buy and and what i can do no it's like i want the choices i want i want my choices i want my choices i want my freedom that's right and that's typically sold to us as these people who are experts they know better than we do you know it's a paternalism that is there and that enables the socialism that is what they come in with marxism oh we're gonna you know do this for the good of the group right trample over the rights

of the individual and it was a very different approach that Jefferson and others took where they said, we are going to, what is government's purpose? Well, government's purpose is to protect our God-given rights and otherwise leave us alone. And so that's a fundamentally different approach than any of these other systems or any of these other historical governments had. And, of course, we have gotten away from that in our paternalism. You know, when you talk about your book, that's a key thing, and I think it's important for people to see this type of understanding, this approach, this philosophy in a futuristic standpoint, because that's another thing I see people despairing of.

Well, look at this sophisticated technology. We've never wedded this kind of totalitarianism with technology and we need to understand that the human nature can overcome that technology or anything that is created uh to control us by other humans we can overcome that listen uh 95 of the universe is invisible and can't be measured dark matter that's That's right. And so a lot of scientists are looking at intelligent design now, cosmologists, because they're going like, well, wow, we can't figure out how this universe came to be. We don't know where it came from. We know that it started. That's all we know. But the complexity of it and the sheer mind complexity of that in DNA seems to have an imprint of a predetermined design.

But we're only as good, the takeaway is we're only as good as the tools we have to measure, right? And so in terms of science, science is limited by our powers of observation and our materials that we use to measure. I'm going to shift this over to what you were just talking about. When you talk about totalitarianism and you talk about new technology, you talk about new things that we can use, which may or may in terms of government, in terms of rights, is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Because those are the one group of documents and group of thoughts that restored power from the few to everyone. It gave power to everyone. The idea of these documents was to give power to everyone equally, in a sense.

You had your power. Those are now measurement tools. They're almost like scientific tools. If you look at AI, we should be measuring that against rights. We should be measuring that against our rights as sentient beings, our rights to determination. At some point, giving away any of that is a danger. Giving away any of our choice is a danger. These things, like everything else, are tools.

I'm using AI right now in various things. I do a lot of consulting work, too. And I'm using the AI in the consulting work. I keep it in a box because that's where it should be. I keep it in a box over here. I use it for what it is, but I use it so I can evaluate it. Because the dream is, what's the guy named Noah Harari? Is that the guy's name?

Yeah, Yuval Harari, yeah. Yuval Harari, right. Oh, the machine should just make up i'm sorry go ahead not to say just what a wacky thing to say the machine should make all the decisions for us you know i remember back in the day i didn't believe it a friend of mine sent me a thing that said that the slogan of the world economic forum was you'll own nothing and be happy and i didn't believe it and i looked it up on the site and there it was and i took a screenshot be happy and i didn't believe it and i looked it up on the site and there it was and i took a screenshot of it because i couldn't believe that i saw it and it's been taken down like long ago two years ago or so it was taken down um and the un had a site up that said the same thing i had screenshots of it it was taken i couldn't believe that it

was there and i'm going like if that's the vision that we're going towards, then this book needs to come out. Oh, yeah. And we can see how that is rolling out. We can see how that's rolling out as well, because we look at this foundation of individual liberty, how it was used to create prosperity, and you look at the middle of the 20th century where we started having the ability to have a home, and that necessitated people being able to commute, the suburbs that they hate, and all the rest of the stuff. But now, even the appliances, not just the cars, but now they're even coming for the appliances, coming up for waste, take everything away from us. And so we see this.

It's like a bell-shaped curve. We got up to the top, and now we're on the way down where they're stripping all this stuff away from us that were essentially accoutrements of the liberty and freedom so that they can get down to that foundation of liberty and freedom and take that away from us and completely enslave us. That's what it's all really about with what they're doing. It's a pretty clear agenda, I think. For sure.

And David, just, I mean, like flashing back to the, to the, to the revolution, to the post revolution, you know, let's do a flashback to the early 1800s. Some of these things were stripped away. We're being stripped away then by decisions that were being made by people. But the thing,

the thing that people forget when you, you know, you can look back at the country and if you want to be a person who, who pooh poohs the U S and says, look at all the bad things they did and blah blah you can pick these things out as individual moments and say well freedom was taken away here and this was then there but these were always done by people who had authoritarian or controlling agendas and wanted things to be controlled or or you know or or parsed out in a certain way and they damaged the cost damaged our rights they they switch things in the constitution they switch

things a little bit again they they change laws they they maneuvered around things so the again the the fundamental rights and principles always apply, applied from the beginning, still apply. The only way authoritarians can get a hold of this country is to bastardize them and run around them because they can't be fought directly. Yeah, that's right. Let me ask you, because there's so many parallels in your book to 1776. You understand that.

You're teaching that in this in an interesting way. Uh, as we mentioned before, you know, we talk about God given rights and of course their, their faith in, in God was a key aspect of that. Does, um, does that play a role in your book as well? Absolutely. Absolutely. Good. Yep. Good. Well, that's a key thing. Yeah. It's too, it's too big of a, it's too big of a part of human history and it's an important part of human history you know again behaviorists uh psychologists and scientists again admit for the most part that human beings for whatever reason i don't know what it could be are wired to believe in in a higher power they're what we are literally genetically evolutionarily wired to believe in

a in god and predisposed to believe in god well why do we have that you know why why would we we do do we why what's the evolutionary purpose of that what's the if you put purely scientific perspective like if i was elon musk well what's the purpose of why would we have that so we have it for we've evolved it for some reason what did it serve what did it serve well you know it's funny i just did a consulting or i did some consulting work on this and um you know it turns out statistically people are healthier they live longer they live better together they live better with each other if they are if they are believers in in god they're believers in the divine they're actually better people um

not better people it's a bad thing bad way to say it but they have a better life we just put it that way they end up with a better life and they end up better to each other and they end up doing better things in the world and so let's well i don't understand why why why i didn't understand why churches were shut down during the pandemic and and you know bars and strip clubs were open i didn't i i couldn't process it i couldn't process why that was a big hell wasn't telling what we're selling all religion and all faith when we're and meanwhile we're we're you know as as some global governments they are fighting against nations and people who are fiercely religious and god-believing and so at some point you're like

like what's going like just go what's going on so i had to put that in the book because it's a huge component of life that again is under attack religious liberty is under attack the same way personal liberty is and you can't leave that out of the story of america you really can't leave that story or the idea of freedom and individual liberty either well the book is called uh revolution empire uh and it is book one history never retreats and it's going to be a series and uh that it looks like a a wonderful book and we've got um a writer here rob who says uh guard goldsmith is a listener he's got uh uh shows of his own liberty uh conspiracy stuff he

said i can't wait to get those novels uh and i think uh it's going to be a very popular series and uh it truly is uh has been interesting talking to you uh I can't wait to see it myself either. So thank you so much for joining us, and good luck with this. And I hope it gets a wide audience. We'll do what we can to push this out there. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Have people look it up on Amazon by name, because Amazon has a weird sort of thing where new books,

sometimes they bury their little heart or five. So if you look at Revolution Empire, you might see 12 other books with it. If you're looking for Revolution Empire with my name. Rob Travalino, T-R-A-V-A-L-I-N-O. Rob Travalino. Look that up on Amazon to find it. That's great. And it's coming out in the middle of July, right?

The first book. It's out July 25th. Okay, great. Great. Look forward to seeing that. Thank you so much, Rob. I appreciate it. Thanks, David.

I appreciate it. Thank you. Before we cut, folks, I just want to say thank you to Gmo. Thank you for the tip. I appreciate that. And KWD68 says, technology is a two-edged sword, but I would gladly reset to 1960 or even 1860 tech compared to where we are and where we are going. Well, that absolutely is true. Because I think, you know, when I look at technology, I went into engineering because I was interested in technology. But as I look at the way that it's being used,

and it really goes back to the warning that Eisenhower gave us of the military-industrial complex, talking about how not just the military-industrial complex, but also including academia, saying they were going to be taken captive by the government, and it was already happening at that point in time, that they would be directing the research and these other things. And when you look at what is happening with technology, with the Internet and all the rest of it, every bit of it is not just contaminated with authoritarian control, but it is the very essence of everything that they do at this point.

Well, thank you for joining us again, Rob Travolino. It's going to be an interesting series. Thank you. 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 The David Knight Show