The David Knight Show - INTERVIEW When Driver ASSIST Becomes Govt INSIST

Episode Date: June 21, 2023

Eric Peters, EPautos.com, is the issue emissions and safety? Government controls are not for your car…they're for you, your liberty, your mobilityFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to TrendsJournal.com and enter the code KNIGHTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

All right, welcome back. And we have Eric Peters on the line, epautos.com. If you're interested in liberty and mobility, and you want to be interested in both of those, you can't go to a better place than EP Autos. And if you're in the market for a car, he will give you some practical car reviews. As a matter of fact, I thought it was interesting. I, I saw that Eric had, uh, just, um, uh, reviewed the new Mazda Miata. And, um, I know that Eric likes the Miatas. I, I love my Miata, but he was also because it's the driving experience, you know, but I know Eric, you just had a, an article that came out, you were talking about that very issue in terms of

when assist becomes insist. That's the title of the article. And you use the Mazda Miata of all things as an example. Tell us a little bit about that. Well, it's kind of a barometer for what's happening. And by that, I mean this embedding in every new car literally of this as they put it advanced driver assistance technology which is essentially preempting and parenting and controlling you and uh... second-guessing you're driving and even to the extent of putting it in a driver's car like the biata uh... and marta as you know uh... only sells them the automatic transmission in

the highest trim so in the two lower trims are three crimes you can even get an automatic so clearly this is a vehicle for people who want to drive and do not need assistance uh... just like you and i don't need a wheelchair to be able to get around because we can walk and yet it's in there and so it begs the question why why is it in there and it's because martha and every other manufacturer anticipating the next round of mandates which we've already been apprised of

that the federal government is going to require that all new cars have this stuff in them and then that begs another question well why do they want to do that and they want to do that because the end goal is to take the steering wheel out of your hand yes and take your foot off the gas pedal and the brake pedal and to turn these things into autonomous, as they're put, meaning controlled by the board, by the corporate government hive, and that you are a meat sack to be transported around in rather than a driver. Tell us a little bit about what have they put in terms of driver assist stuff on the Miata, of all things.

Well, it has what they call collision mitigation technology, and each manufacturer has its own trademark or brand name for what it is, but it's essentially all the same thing. There are sensors in the car that decide it's time to brake, even if there's no reason to brake. And so you'll be driving along, and let's say a good example is that up ahead of you, and you can see this with your eyes and your brain can process this, there's a car that stopped in the road. It has its turn signal on, and you can see that he's going to your brain can process this. There's a car that stopped in the road. It has its turn signal on, and you can see that he's going to be gone by the time you get there. So there's no need to brake. Of course, the car, its smarty-pants programming can't, you know,

can't grok that. So all it sees is an object in the path, and it applies the brakes. And, you know, that's accompanied by this glaring red flashing warning, brake, brake, that pops up on the LCD touchscreen. It's just incredibly annoying. Yeah, when we were moving a year ago, we got a rental truck. And it was a big truck, and I was up very high, and I felt like I was barely fitting into the lanes anyway.

And so I'm kind of biasing it over to the right side of the road. And whenever I get close to that line, I still have plenty of pavement over there, but I get close to that line and it started, um, you know, it like jerked the wheel and it made this noise that I thought, Whoa, what's happening? You scared, scared me to death. Even after I figured out what it was, that's lane keep assistance. Yeah. Turn it off. I mean, maybe there's a way to turn it off on this truck, but it wasn't my truck. I didn't know how to turn the thing off. So I wound up

letting somebody else drive it. Sometimes this stuff is going to start getting people killed. It's like the autonomous driving stuff. The other day I was out driving a new car that had the system. Sometimes you'll encounter a cyclist up ahead of you and you try to drive around the person, right? But in order to do

that, sometimes the left tire of your car will touch that painted line on the center line and then the car tries to jerk you back into your lane and you know the poor guy on the cycle if he's there he could potentially be hit by your car yeah oh yeah well i mean even when we're talking about this automatic emergency braking thing right uh i don't want to be rear-ended when i'm in a miata that's one of the things that i i you know the only thing i use my rear view i took out my rear view mirror but i've got like i've got my um you know side view mirrors i've got them angled in as a rear view mirror and i've got like a concave mirror there actually gives me better view than i did before and i took out that

rear view mirror because on the Miata, you know, it's a small car and it was obstructing when I would pull up to a, like a four-way stop. I had to like, look underneath the thing to see if there was somebody over on the right that was about to pull out. And it was a dangerous thing, you know, and a couple of times I didn't see somebody and I had to slam on brakes, you know, so I took, I said, get this thing out of here. I don't really need it. And, um, but you know, when you, when you, uh, look at a situation like that, I'm always looking behind me because I'm going to take evasive maneuvers. If I see somebody barreling down on me, uh, to rear end me in that car, cause I don't

have that much of a cushion around me. I don't want something that's going to increase the likelihood of that happening. And you remember when they had that self-driving car in Phoenix, Arizona, and they had the horrific video of it running down that jaywalking homeless person who was pushing the shopping cart at the dead of night. And it should have seen it, right? At first, everybody said, well, you couldn't see that. You know, you see her coming into the headlines, headlights at the last minute, and there's

no time to react. And it's like, but this thing was in autopilot mode, and it doesn't use visual imaging. It uses LiDAR to find the people there. So it should have stopped. And then you find out that they had disabled the emergency braking thing because it was so erratic and was about to cause an accident. And so that's another example of why I don't want to have something like that on my cars. No, nor do I.

And you'll, for that reason, particularly love this advanced speed limit assistance technology that they're embedding in the cars. So, you know, and it's designed, you know, initially they're trying to present it and habituate the populace to it in terms of, oh, you know, this way you'll know if you're driving a little faster than the speed limit. You know, a little icon will pop up on the dashboard to let you know that. But the end goal of it is to make it not possible for the car to drive faster than the speed limit. So in your example, you see the semi-parallel down in your Miata and you try to punch it and get out of the way. But the car doesn't want to let you do it because it's trying to keep you safe. Well, you know, this whole thing, Adam, we've had a lot of discussions about artificial intelligence with different people. I've had them on and different guests have different opinions about whether it's real or not and to what extent it's going to be real and to what extent it's going to be used against us because all technology is being used against us.

But, you know, when we look at self-driving cars, that's a good example, a good argument for why this AI stuff isn't going to happen. That was the big promise that was sold to everybody. And you still have self-driving car companies in San Francisco, but you've had situations where the, the cruise self-driving cars, all of them went to one intersection in San Francisco and then stopped at that one intersection. It's like some kind of a hive mind or something rebellion. And, and remember they used to always tell us,

well, our cars are all learning and we have this collective experience so when one car experiences it they all experience it and they all learn from it and so it's getting smarter and smarter all the time and and yet that's not what is happening you just had another incident that reported on uh yesterday i think or uh and uh the end of last week we had a guy guy who was so angry at a Toyota self-driving car that he rear-ended it and kept rear-ending it and followed it as a human took over control and drove back to the base. He followed him back and got into an angry argument with their employees there. And they're not working, right? And so when you look at this uh it's something that is a

technology that um has failed but they the key thing that you and i see is they don't really care if any of this stuff works that's not their objective their objective is to shut down our mobility and to shut down our that's right right that's right now what this stuff is my understanding it's not really ai that term is way overused. People take it to mean literally an intelligence that's comparable to us that can evaluate data and make decisions. It's just highly sophisticated programming, and it operates within certain parameters. And if a situation arises that's outside of the parameters of the programming, then it doesn't know what to do. And that's why you have these incidents that occur, because there are variables that can't

be accounted for. The real world is like that. You can't anticipate everything that's why you have these incidents that occur because there are variables that can't be accounted for the real world is like that you know you can't anticipate everything that's going to happen when you're out there driving along yeah that's right yeah it's a different you know when you look at ai and again i'm not an expert on it my sense as to what is happening with this is that it's a it's a change a big change in the way the computers operate uh just like you used to have procedural languages and then you went to object-oriented languages this learns things and operates in a different way it's a neural uh network and it's got parallel processing but it still is kind of mimicking and repeating and regurgitating stuff and it doesn't always get it right and so that's one of the reasons why you know we see this self-driving car stuff and it doesn't always get it right. And so that's one of the reasons why, you know, we see the self-driving car stuff and

we see the hallucination, they like to call it, I just call it outright lies because there's a lot of bias that is intentionally put into these chat programs and then they make their own mistakes in addition to that. But, you know, when you see that everybody really ought to ask a question as to, you know, how is this going to be used against us? And I think that it is going to be very effective adjunct to some real criminal things that our government wants to do in terms of anticipatory intelligence and identifying people and false identification of people, tracking of people,

giving a weapons, uh, putting them under control of this program. There's all kinds of really bad stuff coming down the pike from this AI, but it's not, uh, it's not going to be rational, sentient being type of thing like Terminator, Skynet, or something like that. Well, and it's important to bear in mind as well that a lot of this is not coming from governments. It's coming from who owns the governments. These extranational, supranational entities, the WEF being an excellent case in point, that sets policy somehow for the governments because it owns the governments

because it has the financial means to do that. And they're being quite brazen now, quite open about what their agenda is. You know, you and I have talked about it for years, that this electrification thing has always been a stalking horse for the elimination or the great reduction in personal mobility. Well, they came out just a couple of weeks ago with a paper that announced that boldly

that their goal is to get rid of the majority of personally owned cars by I think 2050. Yeah. Yeah. What was it like 75% or something like that? Yeah. Yep. And, and it's all unworkable. It is all nothing more than they don't even try to disguise the tyranny anymore.

They admit it. And they're getting away with it. That's the amazing thing. They just keep progressing on to their goal. And it's like what we saw with the pandemic. I had seen them talking about this all the time. And it's as if you talk about the fact they want to trap us in the cities and limit our movements, and then people see them putting the bollards in for a 15-minute city and saying, well, we're going to block this off from cars, and you can't travel from zone one to zone two and that type of thing. People are watching this being built around them.

Well, we've watched them talk about they're going to build this around us, and then they actually start building it around us, and you still can't wake the people up to do anything about it. It's amazing. Well, there's a built-in lag time here, and I think it's a function of people being shell-shocked. What I mean by that is it takes a while for people to process that these people really intend to do that. It's hard to grasp that, to think that could they be that? Could they actually be evil as opposed to just dizzy bodies

and control freaks who perhaps mean well, but we don't like what they're doing? No, they're actually evil. They're actually malignant people who mean us harm. That's a hard thing to come to grips with. It is. Yeah. Normal people can't put themselves in the mindset of a Norman Bates, for example. Yep. Right. Or a Ted Bundy. Oh, Ted Bundy. He seems like such a nice guy. You know, that Anthony Perkins, isn't he sweet? You know, no way you would ever think that he could do anything like this and that's how they get away with it right i wouldn't hurt a fly getting away particularly with regard to the most brazen things because it's unfathomable yeah you know

because ordinary people would never have the effrontery to to put something like that out there because they just would find it absurd and they'd be ashamed it's ridiculous who would do that well these people would do that. Yeah. That's like the big lie. You know, was it Goebbels that talked about that? You know, the big lie is the one that's the hardest for anybody to understand is not true. The bigger the lie, the more believable it is, you know, and you get people in a position

of authority to sell that stuff to you. But, you know, we're talking about the safety stuff. We're talking about the problems with self-driving cars. More than 17 people have been killed with the Tesla self-driving cars. And isn't it interesting that they haven't shut that down? You know, I talked about that when I saw that stat. And of course, hundreds have been injured in accidents involving failures of the Tesla self-driving car. We know that that was put on as the cherry on top to really sell the EV as the thing of the future, right? And so that was a sizzle on the steak, and yet it was half-baked, if baked at all.

Yeah, well, they're indifferent when it suits their agenda. If it's contrary to their agenda, then, as the saying goes, if it saves one life, then it's worth any cost and any imposition is worth doing, if it serves their purpose. But when the contrary is the case, who cares if some people are killed? It's no big deal. In the grand scheme of things, it's worth it to them. That's right. You've got an article, something that no EV is ever likely to be. What is that?

Old. I was in the garage the other day, and i was just pondering some of my old stuff and i've got a number of old vehicles that are almost half a century old now my 76 trans am and my 76 kawasaki and i've got an older bike and i got to thinking gosh you know these things i can get in them or get on them in the case of the bikes and i could go for a ride and probably these things will still be around after I'm gone 50 years from now. And EVs are fundamentally like cell phones in that they are disposable appliances. They're not designed to last a long time.

And that's a function of many things, but the chief thing is that they have these battery packs that inevitably wear out, and the problem with that is that these battery packs are enormously expensive, and over time the value of the vehicle itself depreciates, and you reach this point after which nobody who's in the right mind is going to spend $10,000, $15,000, or $20,000 on a battery for a vehicle that's only worth $10,000 or $15,000. That's right. Have you seen that picture of the Chinese picture of the sea of abandoned EVs? Yeah, I have. Field of schemes. That's what happens when you get five-year plans.

That's right. Field of schemes, I call it. That's all the best laid plans and schemes of these communists come to that. Yeah, it is amazing. And you point out in your article, you said this is the antithesis of sustainability. Isn't it true? How they always use these labels that they're exactly the opposite of what they're trying to do, right? This is the most unsustainable approach to anything that they're doing now, these disposable cars. Of course.

It's a psychological tell. And if they were not malignant people, what they would be doing is encouraging simple, basic, reliable vehicles that will go 15 or 20 years without needing a major repair because that is sustainable. That does not use a lot of materials to manufacture. It doesn't create a lot of emissions. The vehicle is efficient. It's affordable. Most people can have one. That would be the rational goal if the goal were not malignant. Yeah's right have you seen that toyota which has been a holdout on a lot of the ev the battery ev stuff have you seen that they've got a new technology they claim a solid state battery that doesn't have the fire capabilities and it's got

you know unbelievable charging times of course the time for comparison that they had for a tesla i still found that hard to believe they said tes Tesla could be charged for 300 mile range with a supercharger. And I think 15 minutes. I don't believe that. Uh, maybe, maybe I'm wrong. You could probably give me a better idea of that,

but they were saying that the Toyota thing could get a 900 mile range and, um, in 10 minutes. But, uh, of course this is yet to be done. And they're talking about something they plan on putting out in a few years. And so this is vaporware that they're selling at this point in time.

But what do you think about that? Well, what I think about it is that I've been covering this stuff for 30 years and I've been hearing about the breakthrough battery now since the 90s and it has yet to happen, you know, and with regard to the Tesla thing, yeah, you can put 80% charge into that thing in 15 minutes to a half hour depending on uh where you are in the condition of the battery but here's the asterix and the catch and if you read and dig into the owner's manuals and find out it will advise you to not heavily discharge and then regularly fast charge the battery because that will reduce the service

life of the battery so it's a catch-22. All right, you're going to, instead of sitting for an hour or two waiting, you'll only have to wait for 15 minutes or a half hour. But now your battery is going to last several years less long than it would have otherwise. I actually had a listener who's an engineer working for Ford, and he says, you know, there's been discussions as to whether or not we should track how often people use a fast charger and then adjust our warranty based on that right because they know how that really burns up the battery to use a fast charger right it's literally in the owner's manual when i had the um i tested the tester of the lightning back in december

and i'm going to pour through the owner's manual i always do that because sometimes you find interesting stuff in there and there it is in black and white. It tells you to avoid fast charging, and the term that they use is to preserve the health of the battery. Yeah, how about preserving your time? That's something that is disposable. Yeah, and that's another thing that's kind of hallucinatory. This etymological abuse that we've been gaslit into somehow characterizing as fast, having to sit and wait for 15 to 30 minutes

to do something that takes three minutes to do in a non-electric car. Yeah, exactly. Even if you, even if their stuff was correct, you know, to get 300 miles of range, uh, takes me once I go through and you're gonna have to go through all the stuff in terms of, uh, here, here's how I'm going to pay, you know, all the rest of the stuff you've got to do that with any way that you fill this up. But when you start with the amount of time, uh, that it takes to fill this stuff up, you know,

for my 10 gallon gas tank, it takes me about 30 seconds or so typically to fill it up. Uh, and not 15 minutes, not 30 minutes, not an hour. And another really important point that they, they studiously avoid mentioning is that if there's another guy in front of

you filling up his vehicle, well, he'll be out of there in a couple of minutes and you can gas up. But if you're in your Tesla and there's somebody else ahead of you at the electric charging station, you're going to wait 15 to 30 minutes for him before you can wait 15 to 30 minutes. That's right. Well, you know, we're talking about all this stuff.

And again, Toyota is saying, hey, we got a new solid state battery technology. We're going to roll it out in four or five years. And but, you know toyota has been kind of the holdout on this it's one of the reasons why they put out the press release they were getting a lot of flack because they weren't joining with the one single solution that's going to be approved by the government whether or not it's a good solution whether or not it works whether or not it's safe or effective right just like the vaccine and so they decided that they were going to look at some other things right they were going to look at some other things, right? They were going to look at fuel cells or they were going to look at hydrogen cells or something like that.

They were either in hybrids. They were the first to market with a mass market hybrid and they have been the dominant player in that segment because the things work and people buy them. They make money selling them, but they got ESG'd. This happened several months ago. The grandson of the founder, a man named Akio Toyoda, was removed from his position of authority, replaced with a much younger man who, of course, is all in on this ESG agenda of foisting electrification on everybody. So now they announced that they got a brand new battery design that's going to be available in four or five years. And they're essentially probably going to give up on trying to get the

technology and the distribution network for these other technologies. And the key thing about the hydrogen thing is that you wouldn't have this issue because it's a deliverable. You can pump it in. You don't have to wait forever. To me, that's a big thing that makes a difference. But I think Toyota made the fundamental mistake of thinking that this is really about emissions.

It's never been about emissions. You know, they look at it, the company looked at this as an engineering problem. Oh, okay. You say your problem is emissions and you want to get rid of them entirely, minimize them or get rid of them. We can do that. And they come up with a solution, but I'm sorry, you know, you've got the ivermectin or the hydroxychloroquine solution here. We can only have the vaccine And that's not ready yet. That's exactly right.

But, you know, that's got to be that way because that's the ultimate control because we all know that if it's got to be charged off of the grid, they're shutting the grid down. And so that's the back door to taking everybody's mobility, whether you've got an EV or not. If you've got an EV, they're going to say, sorry, there's not enough electricity for you to get charged, and only the special people can drive their cars today. That's right. In their

innocence, now this goes back many decades, the companies and the engineers, as you say, thought that this was simply an engineering problem. Okay, we're going to figure out how to make engines that produce very little, even to the point of almost no harmful emissions. And at the same time, we're going to figure out a way to make them more reliable and more fuel efficient and more powerful. And my God, they succeeded. And we got to the point now where we have the highest output engines ever. You know, routinely, we've gotten used to having family cars that get to 60 in five

or six seconds, which is quicker than most V8 muscle cars that got nine miles per gallon back in the 60s. That's right. It truly is. It's magnificent. But what they never really truly understood, because they didn't understand the motives, is that it was never about that. You know, this was just the excuse, the emissions boogeyman, which, of course, they shifted

once they solved the problem of genuinely harmful emissions, meaning the ones that cause pollution. Once that problem was solved, they changed the definition of emissions to include carbon dioxide, which has nothing to do with pollution. But they continue to use that term to trick people and imply that cars are dirty because they're emitting this inert, nonreactive gas. Yeah, that's very analogous to what happened with all this pandemic stuff. There were a lot of people who were doctors in the medical profession and stuff like that, and they're looking at this, and they're trying, just like the engineers at Toyota or some of these other places, and saying, all right, your problem is emissions.

We can do something about this. These people are looking at it and saying, okay, your problem is a pandemic. All right, we can do something about it. How about if we do this? No, you can't do that. How about if we do this? No, you can't do that either. How about if we do – well, that's horse medicine, right?

Well, it was horse. Yeah, it was, uh, it was, it was a lie from the beginning. And those of us who are not caught up in the details of the, uh, the medicine involved in it, we could see the overarching control mechanisms, the political mechanisms, the germ games that these people have been running for decades and practicing for decades, that gave us an advanced insight to this. It took a lot of these doctors quite a while to get to the point where they look at it from a medical standpoint and to say, this is what's going on. We knew what they were doing because we looked at the fact that they ran these games for 20 years and it was always lock everybody down until we got an experimental vaccine and we knew what their depopulation agenda was we knew all of this stuff and so it's a different way of looking at it and so i understand

you know why the people at toyota some of these other places get get fooled by that because they don't understand what the agenda is and that's why you know you got to make sure that you don't miss the forest for the trees that are there. Well, the upside is that once you learn to understand the tells or see the tells, it only really takes one, and you notice it. And after that point, it's like something clicks in your mind and you get it. You begin to question and see. So, for example, during the pandemic, you know, I remember when they kept hyping, the cases, the cases, and it was such a dishonest thing to put it that way, you know, rather than, well, who's actually getting seriously sick as opposed to testing positive, supposedly on one of these PCR tests. And I

thought to myself, that is just a fundamentally disingenuous, dishonest way to portray it. And why are they doing that? You know, and the answer of course is self-evident. And once you realize that and you understand what you're dealing with, you begin to apply that same kind of Occam's razor to everything else going forward. That's right. Yeah, we knew Fauci's background. We knew what he had tried to do with the PCR test with HIV and how the inventor called him out on it. And when they started talking about the cases, this and the cases, as you point out, cases of people who are not even sick. And then the real issue was going to be, well, what is the case fatality rate?

And, of course, they're playing games with that as well. It was a really big tell, and I think the good thing about it is that there's a lot of people, especially I see now a lot of these doctors who were late coming to work. They worked in the medical field or the pharmaceutical field. They were late coming into it, and now they are sounding like the conspiracy theorists among amongst us uh as we were they're saying the same kind of stuff that we were saying years before this stuff pulled out so you're not going to fool them a second time but they're there's they're trying to ostracize them censor them make sure that nobody listens to them uh

but it keeps getting larger the number of people who understand what this is about keeps getting larger That's why they keep coming up with more and more ways to try to shut down our content, to censor us, and that type of thing. And it's, you know, Barack Obama's digital fingerprint stuff. That is also... Yeah, it's, you know, it's a good thing, but it's also a very scary thing in that I do think the, you know, the awakening is happening and there's panic on the Ted Bundy side. They understand that people see them now. At least a lot of people see them, certainly far more people than did before. And they've got to do something about it because their tricks don't work any longer on those people,

and there are more of them all the time. So in my mind, that increases the probability that they're really going to go for broke and do something almost unimaginable at some point within the next few months or a year. I agree. And that's kind of the premise of Hugo de de garza worked in the ai field a long time ago and i i'd interviewed hugo de garza i read his book the art of like war and he was one of these people like ray kurzweil who thought that if he made an exact replica of the human brain that's going to spring to life type of thing you know this is the naivete of mary shelley in the frankenstein novels now if i just get the spark of life, well, where's that going to go? Oh, lightning. That'll do it.

You know, but, uh, you know, I thought that was very naive, but where he was very, um, where he's very accurate, I believe was you talked about the art of like where he said at some point. The mass of people are going to catch on to what these people are trying to do and the danger that is presented by the initial stages of artificial intelligence. And they're going to demand this stuff gets shut down and they're going to come after these people after they realize what's happening. And so they will retreat, uh, perhaps even to space and use their technological advantage to go to war with us. And, uh, there's a number of ways that they could do that. They could even just start a global nuclear war. They don't even have to retreat to space, but they got to, you know, they got their underground bunkers and things like that to protect them.

Sure. So there's any number of things that they could do. And I agree. I think it is a, it's coming to a tipping point. And I think all this stuff is going to be decided one way or the other by 2030. Uh, that's their goal. And they're going to make it happen one way or the other. They can either get their way or they can pull the nuclear triggers and get their way. Uh, but they're going to have it by 2030 way or the other. They can either get their way or they can, you know, pull the nuclear triggers and get their way,

but they're going to have it by 2030. That's their goal. It's been their goal for a long time. Yeah. Yeah. You know, it's, it's discouraging, but it's also in a kind of weird way, exciting in that we finally may have an opportunity to,

to turn this ship around maybe, you know, and that's something that hasn't been possible for decades, if not longer. Well, to quote Tolkien, I guess, when they have the Council of Elrond, it's like this quest is on the edge of a knife. It could go either way, or we could just fall and get cut in half. It's nice. We've got a lot of allies, much more so than we had, say, back in the 90s, because, again, more people than ever realized this is an existential threat. It's no longer a question of,

eh, I don't like that, you know, that particular brand of politics, or I disagree with this, or I, you know, I agree with that. This is an existential threat. And the understanding of that is beginning to really, I think, percolate among the general population. Yeah, I agree. I agree. We still have a long ways to go. I still saw that way over 50% of the people don't have any understanding as to what CBDC is. If you break it down on a function-by-function level, should you have digital money where they prevent you from getting more than X amount of meat per month and things like that,

you start asking those individual questions. Of course, everybody is radically opposed to it. Yes. But they don't know what it is, and they don't know the structures that are being put in place, and they don't know that the Biden administration came up with a detailed plan six months ago, and they've been marching relentlessly towards this thing. Everybody's got one aspect of it.

He put it out there for all the different bureaucratic organizations to figure out which, you know, here's your area of responsibility, gave them four different areas of responsibility. And of course, climate change was one of the four because that's the way they're going to sell it to people. But people don't realize what it is. They don't realize how far down the path we've gone with that. They don't, but boy, this is one subject on which, and I'm glad you mentioned it, that it's imperative that people be made to understand at least a sufficiency of them. I think if you could get a third to ideally half

of the population to simply say absolutely not and draw a line in the sand, they will not accept the CBD, CB thing. We may save things. That's the event horizon. If we cross into that, they own us literally. They will, you know, have the ability to enforce everything down to the most minute detail. If you want to get a preview of this, you've seen these things.

People who are listening can go to YouTube and look and see what it's like in China, you know, where a person will go up to a vending machine and let their iris be scanned or their fingerprint or show their QR code on their phone. And then if their social credit score is good enough, the machine will allow them to buy a can of soda. Yeah, that's right. Well, we do have some good people that have seen this coming. There's a legislator here in Tennessee, Frank Nicely, who's pushing to get like a Tennessee reserve system so we can get parallel to the federal system. And he said there's other Southern states that are working,

trying to get a compact together where they can get gold and silver depositories, where they can have essentially a, a real constitutional money system that is parallel to this other system. And, um, you know, they understand what is happening in some areas. Uh, even when you look at something like the pistol brace, they had already acted proactively here in Tennessee. They said, you're not going to. some areas, even when you look at something like the pistol brace, they had already acted proactively here in Tennessee. They said, you're not going to.

And of course the non-commandeering thing is, is established by a Supreme court case. And so they say, you're not going to commandeer and use our law enforcement to enforce your laws if we, if we prohibit them. And then they went in and prohibited the pistol brace. So there is something we can do at the local level. There's something that we can do at the individual level to try to get out of this monetary system with gold and silver that we own and things like that. Just like there's ways that we can prepare for it. But the big part of the issue is that people got to wake up to the threat or they're never going to prepare for it.

And they're never going to take any steps at the local and even at the state level. And that's the key thing. Because you can forget about what's going on at the Fed. They're just an arm of the World Economic Forum at this point, I think. Sure, but another piece of good news is that these Ted Bundys have, by revealing themselves, delegitimized themselves. I think very few people anymore trust the so-called mainstream media, the corporate media. They're suspicious, and they're looking for alternative sources of information, which is something very few people did if you went back 20 or 30 years ago. They're doing that now.

And so the whole system is ultimately going to totter and creak, and it already is at that point. And it relies not on voluntary compliance but on fear and force. And that ultimately is a much more difficult thing to sustain. Yeah, like I was talking about just before you came on, I was talking about how NBC NBC news and they're typical of mainstream media, how they are responding to RFK Jr. He's a real threat to the Democrat establishment and, um, you know, they want to keep Biden there and, you know, he's a convenient puppet for them, but they come after him with the vaccine criticism and the criticism that they have are juvenile. I mean, it's as ridiculous as Trump calling his opponents names. I mean, the kind of stuff that they're doing to attack what RFK Jr. said about the fact they do everything to not talk about it. And I think it's going to have an actual blowback effect, the same way that people can smell the BS from a mile away, just like they did in the Soviet Russia.

Sure, it's hard to impugn a Kennedy, isn't it? It's hilarious that you've got the left going after a Kennedy. I know. And ironically, Kennedy is the one adult in the room. I don't agree with him on a number of things, including his stand on climate change, but he's a thoughtful, articulate adult person who speaks in complete sentences, and it's so refreshing versus the orange man and then the senile grifter that they've propped up as the front piece

for Obama's third and potentially fourth term. Yeah. And they don't want to, but they're deathly afraid of him. And they use this, instead of trying to engage him on the issues, instead of trying to debate him, they use the same tactic that they've used everybody for the last several years. Oh, we'll just marginalize, we'll tell lies about him, and we will purge him out of the system. And that's going to backfire on them, I think. I think it'll backfire. I hope so, and I think so too. Because again, it's very difficult to do that to a Kennedy. You know, a liberal will reflexively recoil from somebody like Trump,

or DeSantis even, or anybody else, because, oh, they're conservatives, they're Republicans, they're, you know, ipso facto vile people. But he's RFK's son. He's, you know, I mean, it's really difficult. They're in a real bind, and I'm smiling and enjoying every minute of it. What I look at this, one of the things that I think my takeaway from is, like, why are they doing this? Because it's not helping their cause. But I think, as we see with so many other things, I think there's a lot of hubris here. I think they believe they can rig the election regardless of what people want.

Well, no question. It's a combination of desperation and arrogance. They got away with it last time. That's right. And they know they're going to have to get away with it again. Do they really think that in any kind of a quasi-fair election that the country is going to put back into office. This, this 81 year old grifter. Yeah. Even a majority of Democrats don't like him, but it's almost unanimous on Republicans.

It's like, you know, even when they asked just simple questions, he's too old. It's like, he's obviously too old, but look, they elected or claimed that they elected Fetterman. Uh, and, and I thought it was a funny thing. I played the clip yesterday. I thought it was hilarious that Biden with all of his gaffes goes and stands next to Fetterman, made him look like Einstein. It is that bad. But, you know, that's the hardcore woke left that will support anything that has a D behind it on Election Day.

But that doesn't constitute, I don't think, the bulk out there of people who would potentially want to support a Democrat, a sane, mentally competent Democrat. And Biden is neither thing. Yeah, yeah. Let's talk, going back to cars, you've got an article, the ersatz thing, and we're talking about Toyota again. What is that ersatz thing? Boy, boy. So they're coming up apparently with a way to simulate a manual transmission in an electric car, which is a couple of things. The first thing is that it's preposterous on a purely functional level because electric cars don't have transmissions. Therefore, you don't need a clutch. You don't need a torque converter.

The motor connects directly to the drive wheels. So it doesn't stall when you come to a light so they're just going to try to create kind of the game boy experience i guess inside these cars where you'll you know be playing with buttons and things and accompanied by sounds but to me it begs the more more depressing and sorrowful question well if that's what people want then why not give them the real thing yeah exactly it kind of reminds me i was talking earlier in the program about the submarine that went missing you know around the titanic and the guy's controlling it with a uh a logitech uh a game controller and it's like seriously this this is what you're doing with this thing you can at

least have some sound effects with it you know like you're talking about a sound effect for the thing but uh yeah it is crazy you know what they're doing i i drove a friend's uh tesla and uh and that was a really interesting experience because of the way the transmission was right because it's got a lot of acceleration power and because you know you step on the gas and and it really goes and you pull off the gap and it automatically starts to stop with the regenerative braking and things like that. So it's a really interesting thing because there was no coasting. I do a lot of coasting to save gas with my Miata and the clutch and everything. And so it's a very, very different feel. And it was almost game-like in a sense, you know, this rapid response and acceleration, deceleration based on your pedal. It's an entirely different experience,

and why not just simply rely on the merits of that? You know, I ask the question of people who buy these burgers, and I put them in air fingers quotes, the fake meat burgers. Well, if you want something that looks and tastes like meat, why don't you eat meat? Exactly. Get the real thing. That's great. When the real thing. Yeah, that's great.

When you, let's see, let me get to another one of your articles here that you've got. It is interesting to see the lengths that they will go to avoid doing what would be so simple. Your article, The Winnowing, talking about getting rid of cars with internal combustion engines. And, of course, they're well on their way to do that in the U.K., aren't they? Yeah, well, they're doing something even worse than that. They're trying to shame people and marginalize and pariahize people who would have the temerity to buy a gas-powered car. In California, there's a bureaucracy called the California Air Resources Board,

and it issues these regulations telling the car companies how big or how small their carbon footprint is, and if it's beyond a certain size, then they get punished. So Stellantis, which is the corporation that owns the Dodge, Chrysler, Jeep, and Ram truck brands, finds that its footprint is too large in California. So its solution is to no longer stock vehicles california that are electric or hybrids so if you want one in california now you've got to go to the dealer and virtually look at it i guess on a screen you can't actually test drive it you can't no kick the tires

and then you have to order it so you know you're made to feel like you're some kind of a dirty person asking for a dirty magazine behind the counter it's even worse than that because there are 13 other states, California is bad enough, but there are 13 other states, which together encompass about 35% of the entire car market in this country who have decided they're going to do exactly the same thing that whatever carb says they're going to do too. Wow. Yeah. I remember looking at aftermarket parts, uh, for my Miata and I'd say, this is not CARB approved, that's not CARB approved, and all the rest of the stuff.

But you live in Virginia, and Virginia is one of those states that married themselves to the standard, but the Republican governor there, Glenn Youngkin, is saying they're not going to be part of it. Is that going to work, or are they still roped into that? Can he get them out? Well, it's still up in the air here. You know, I think with Youngkin around, probably we'll be able to escape the worst effects of it, but it still has ripple effects nonetheless because it is discouraging not just Solantis

but every manufacturer from sending non-electric cars to its dealer network. I mean, they've been put on notice. I mentioned in the article there was a term called Unerwunsched that was used in Germany in the 30s. In the context of Jews are not welcome here. They would put signs out in front of a town that said that, you know, so that they wouldn't be put on notice. You know, you better not come here. Well, that's what they're saying to everybody who doesn't want an electric car.

They're putting them on notice and letting them know that we're going to punish you. We're going to marginalize you if you don't buy into this EV thing. Yeah, very much like a social credit thing. You know, they do that on social media. Oh, you're bad. You're a conspiracy theorist or you're an anti-vaxxer or come up with any kind of a silly little label like that. But it's not just the cars.

I mean, take a look at what they're doing with the trucks. Newsom's got this new rule about electric trucks and they're just going to roll it in. I think it's next year. It's coming in right away. This is not a few years off. And California has been one of the major ports for imports and since we've offshore most of our stuff manufacturing anymore that's a really big deal and and the people the trucking companies say we can't comply with this because nobody's selling these

trucks that you're going to mandate you know and that it's another tell, I think, that this was never designed to do anything other than to make us immobile, unsustainable, and to destroy our supply chains. Yeah, you think your groceries cost a lot now. Wait. Yeah, yeah, it is amazing. It's going to get a lot worse. And, you know, these trucks, not only do they have all the hobbles that afflict an electric passenger car, they have additional hobbles because the batteries. You're talking now potentially about 10,000 pounds of batteries to propel one of these things. And that means 10,000 pounds less cargo that they can carry. That's right. Yeah. And you

know, in addition to that, they don't, you know, they can't go as far and then they have to wait longer. So you think about all the cascading effects of what used to be a pretty straightforward transaction. You know, some, I would go to the port of Los Angeles, load up its stuff, and, you know, within 48 hours, the stuff would be in Walmarts and in Missouri, and that's not going to happen anymore. And, of course, the trucking industry says, well, look, I can tell you exactly what the cost is per mile of my vehicle. I have absolutely no idea what the cost is.

These things haven't even hit the market yet. How do I know how to price stuff? So you know what they're going to do. They're going to go up astronomically in terms of price to make sure they don't undercharge people. They will overcharge them. They'll err on the side of staying in business. And so it's really going to send a massive inflationary spike through the country. It's crazy, but it's just another one of these things that California in general and Newsom in particular.

It's kind of interesting, isn't it, how Newsom has gone out of his way to pick a fight with DeSantis. What do you read into that? Well, clearly he's angling for national office. And DeSantis is probably the weaker and more compromised candidate. And so maybe he's doing it for that reason. All I know about Newsom is he's kind of an archetype or avatar for everything that's wrong with this country. You've got this enormously rich, entitled, narcissistic person who glibly and almost with glee, you know, his cap-toothed smile is doing everything he can to immiserate the serfs, the average people, you know, the ones that he doesn't associate with because they're not operating in his rarefied circles. That's right.

Yeah. Former mayor of San Francisco, uh, you know, doing homosexual marriage and defiance of even Arnold Schwarzenegger and, you know, the California law at the time. Yeah. He does what he wants and he knows how to get a lot of national attention. Uh, he's looking at this and I think he's making a calculation. I don't know if Biden's going to make it through the election. And, you know, Lala Harris never got more than 1% of the vote when she was running for president.

So maybe I could weasel my way in there. And I think he may also be looking at the orange man and thinking, well, you know, he might be out as well. Nobody likes Biden or Trump in terms of the majority of people. I've got to say, you know, Trump has got a very loyal following, uh, but it is still small. I'm saying the majority of people don't want to see either one of them running. And so he goes, so that would mean, you know, I need to attack the number two guy because it might be the two of us in this next election, 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 Thank you.