The David Knight Show - Wed 14Aug24 David Knight Show UNABRIDGED - EU Demands Control of US Elections

Episode Date: August 14, 2024

(2:00) EU Demands Control of US ElectionsWas it just the action of an aggressive bureaucrat or the longstanding policy of the EU Commission and The EU Commission President, Ursula Fond of Lying?Who is "Conspiracy Thierry" Breton, S.O.B. (Son of a Bureaucrat)Why "Conspiracy Thierry's" Ministry is an amalgam of two of the worse ministries from Orwell's 1984What policy statements did Trump make in the 2 hour long conversation? Has anyone kept count of the number of times GOP politicians have talked about ending the Dept of Education?  Have ANY of them been SERIOUS?(45:34) Trump & Musk Talk Causes of Inflation.  Which one was right?What IS inflation?  Is it higher prices?  Is it fiscal policy?The price OF gold vs the price IN gold of various things from iPhones to beer Federal Reserve doesn't own ANY gold and why they never willThe central bank of China PBoC lied about ending gold purchases in May to keep the price from rising(1:14:18) Centralization, complexity, and fragility in infrastructure and internetWhat an organized attack on our infrastructure would do to the USAThe internet and free speech is already under attack by our own government.  A new product may empower of us to defeat the control that comes with internet useDepressed?  Here's why music is MUCH better than drugs.  How it works and why the music doesn't need to be "happy"(1:42:29)  "I will be free because I have understanding of….digital watches" — The Singularity and Marooned Astronauts A quick look at the Boeing clown show in space for those who place their hopes in becoming gods and living forever through technologyWhat's the plan and the risk of getting the astronauts marooned on the Space Station back safely?China's harebrained scheme to force robo-taxis on the poor, vexed people of Wuhan.  Haven't they been locked down enough?A new plan for a supercomputer that will bring AGI.  It's even in the name — "SingularityNET"(1:59:55) INTERVIEW The Final Pandemic: An Antidote to Medical TyrannyDoes what you have been told about viruses and contagion stand up to scientific scrutiny? Science is never settled. In the case of virology, holding it to the standards of science with controlled trials and objective data would have saved us from the "pandemic" — and it is the only thing that will save us from future "pandemics" fueled by fear and tradition      Two physicians from New Zealand, Dr. Mark Bailey & Dr. Samantha Bailey join to explain their book "The Final Pandemic: An Antidote to Medical Tyranny"  and why their paradigm shifted when they applied science to the conventional wisdom behind "pandemics" Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: 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.

With all the perks of the Planet Fitness Black Card, we've got your back, massage chairs are included, your legs, to walk into any Planet Fitness in the world, and even your friends. That's right, bring a Plus One every time you come in. Come on, let's go. Enjoy all the perks with the Planet Fitness Black Card. Get started at Planet Fitness with zero enrollment, then $29.99 a month, plus one month free. Offer ends March 13th. $49 annual fee applies. See Home Club for details. At BetMGM, Ontario's

best casino action is just a click away. Play thrilling games like Premium Blackjack Pro, the dazzling MGM Grand Emerald Knights, or try to score in Gretzky Goal Lucky Tap. It's all here at BetMGM. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly.

If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor. Free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to The David Knight Show. As the clock strikes 13, it's Wednesday, the 14th of August, Year of Our Lord 2024.

Well, today we're going to talk about not what Trump and Musk said, but we're going to talk about the efforts to try to shut it down. We really have seen perhaps the European Union jump the shark, and it is a sign of desperation to control free speech. But we're also going to talk about a new decentralized system for people to be able to share information that is out of the grasp of these grabbing technocrats. We'll also talk about what is happening with technology. We have a new supercomputer that's being designed called Singularity.net. These people never give up on their fantasies.

And we'll talk about the tyranny of Tim Waltz. Not only shutting down businesses, but sending the National Guard around to shoot people with paintballs if they're even out on their porch. We'll be right back. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, your annual global risk report makes for a stunning and sobering read. For the global business community the top concern for the next two years is not conflict or climate, it is disinformation

and misinformation followed closely by polarization within our societies. In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. You are listening to The David Knight Show. Telling the truth was considered to be a revolutionary act by these EU tyrants. And of course, I had to play that there because the person doing the talking was none other than Ursula, fond of lying. So fond of lying that she wants to shut other people down. But after you had Theory Britain, and I like to call him conspiracy theory britain after conspiracy theory britain decided that he was going to interfere in our elections wait a minute what

what's going on with this we've got foreign actors i mean not only do we have multinational corporations and foreign billionaires buying into our election but we've even got foreign bureaucrats who are going to tell us that we can't have debate. And he literally said that in his letter. Sorry, we can't have this kind of debate. Well, we'll see about that, right? And although we may have weak, ineffective leaders who won't stand for free speech, there are things that we as a people can do and i i've got as i said before uh coming up uh talking about a platform that doesn't have we got all these different platforms and there's some

that are good and some that are bad they have different degrees of restriction you know the worst ones are are giggle you know the search engine designed to hide things. It's a real joke But you know from Google to some of these others. There's still always somebody That is in control How are we going to be able to pass information around without centralized control? It's always about the centralized control just as you see with these people You know the EU everything is they're trying to centralize control into a global governance. So how do we escape that? Well, there's people who are working on that.

We may have something of a solution to it. By the way, in the third hour, stick around because we've got a really interesting interview. I think you're going to find this very fascinating. I recorded this yesterday because they're New Zealand and the time differences are radical even a different day that's they got us we're going to do it for yesterday but we got confused so the um uh because it's a different date as well as a different time. But anyway, we recorded this interview with Dr. Mark Bailey and his wife, Dr. Samantha Bailey. And they're both medical physicians. And both of them were first fed up with the medical system and the way that it worked.

It's basically, I just don't want to do this anymore. But then when all this stuff started happening with the pandemic, they got very involved in terms of pushing back on the PCR narratives and other things. And then going upstream from that. And so they have written a couple of books. He put together a book that was over 400 pages, 1,400 references, talking about virology and whether or not these people have isolated any viruses, which means that they haven't done science if they haven't isolated. If you don't do that, you wind up with circular logic. And we'll talk about that.

And we talked about that in the interview. But the book is The Final Pandemic, pandemic an antidote to medical tyranny because at some point we have to address the root lie just like with climate change at some point we have to debunk the lies about the hockey stick about global warming being caused by CO2, let alone man-made CO2. At some point, you've got to stop saying, well, wait a minute. Your solution to man-made global warming is wrong. Let's do this other thing. No, at some point, you've got to say,

your whole premise of man-made global warming is wrong. The whole premise of the pandemic is wrong. We've got to attack that at the root level. And so I think regardless of what your opinions are, and this is a very difficult thing for us to get past this paradigm. There's been so much that has been put there. I mean, we talk about computer viruses. We talk about content that goes viral and all the rest of this stuff. But as I've said many times, times and i say at the beginning of the

interview science has never settled it is always open to discussion it is always open to being proven and many times we'll have somebody who will prove something conclusively they think to one generation and then somebody else will come along and look at this and say you know what that isn't a proof um this is constructed on a foundation of lies and sand and so science always advances when we're skeptical so be skeptical open your mind think about this stuff and i'm not saying uh you know uh just don't think i'm saying be critical be critical critical of everything. Question everything. Question all of this so-called science. We should be able to have those debates.

We should be able to have political debates as well. That's what they do not want. When you look at this guy, theory, Breton conspiracy theory, Breton. This is a background. He was born and raised in paris so we've been talking about paris and the pagan uh jacobin origins of paris uh this week uh born in paris the son of a bureaucrat yes he is an sob if ever was one. You call somebody a son of a bureaucrat, that's perhaps a worse insult than to call them what it originally was intended. He is now a big SOB, a EU commissioner for the internal market.

And he said, put out this tweet on Twitter threatening Elon Musk, but also sent him a threatening letter. But the tweet said, with great audience comes greater responsibility. Well, he might want to look at himself in the mirror and say, with great power comes great responsibility. Who is he responsible to right is uh theory breton responsible to the people of europe is responsible some written law or does he just do as he wishes i think that's what he does i think he just does as he wishes i don't think he sees himself as responsible to anyone but he sees everyone as responsible to him. He said, as there are risks of amplification of potentially harmful conduct, content rather, in this interview. So it's not even saying you've done something wrong.

He's threatening them pre-crime, pre-crime, before they commit the crime of hate. Isn't it interesting that Orwell chose the ministry of truth to cynically talk about the censors in the Orwellian society? The ministry of truth that shuts down all truth, that memory holds truth, that censors truth. And then the people, the police in the police state, who would be the enforcers, the torturers, and so forth, we call them the ministry of love.

And so we have the ministry of truth and the ministry of love. Now, what do we see happening all the time? As we saw Ursula fond of lying, saying we have to control disinformation and misinformation. Truth, right? And we have to stop hate speech out there and racism, hate and Racism. Love. You see, these are the twin pillars of the Orwellian society. Pretending that you're talking about truth when you're really talking about lies. And pretending that you're talking about truth when you really are the font of hatred and the font of racism. We have more racism in our society than we've ever had. And I mean that.

Coming out of the government. They are promulgating this. They're training people in this. Yeah, we've had racism in the past that was kind of de facto that was within society, different groups that didn't like each other and that type of thing. But our government has now taken that over. They've taken that under their wing. They've decided which groups are evil and which ones are not, and they are teaching that to your children if you put them in the government institution we call school.

And so what is Theory Britain? Why is he sticking his nose in the American election? Well, because we can't even have, we can't have anybody, not even somebody like Trump who didn't do anything about it. We can't have anybody even talking about doing the right thing for their country. That's nationalism. We can't have nationalism. We have to have globalism, internationalism. We can't have nationalism. We have to have globalism. Internationalism. Don't let anybody out there get the idea that as a political leader,

they should do things for the good of their own country. No, we have to destroy anybody that would even pretend that they want to do something for the good of their own country. We don't want that message going around. So he says, as there is a risk of amplification of potentially harmful conduct in the EU in connection with events with major audience around the world, I sent this letter to Elon Musk musk he's proud of it uh he said um uh we are monitoring the potential risks in the eu associated with the dissemination of content that may incite violence hate and racism the ministry of love so who is he representing at this point is he the ministry

of love or the ministry of truth yes he is both he's the ministry of love and truth right there in conspiracy theory breton he said so anything that might incite violence, or racism in conjunction with major political or societal events around the world, including debates and interviews in the context of elections. This SOB thinks that he is in such a position of authority that he can interfere with debates. He can interfere with elections anywhere around the world. And he wants to do it openly. That's his big, that's where he jumped the shark. He did it openly. He boasted about it.

You're supposed to do this quietly. Don't tell people what we're doing. You know, he actually came out and said the quiet part out loud. Now we are going to his his he thinks that his brief uh lets him get involved in major political debates major political interviews and major elections around the world not just in europe these people need to be shut down and we have just the thing to do i think coming up um so again uh you know one thing we could look at is like well maybe we need to have localized media well not and it needs to be

hyper localized right not national not state not even community individual and that's what we're going to talk about your individual control of the media to get past these totalitarian firewalls and these totalitarian gatekeepers like this SOB, son of a bureaucrat. I therefore urge you to promptly ensure the effectiveness of your systems and to report measures taken to my team. You know, again, who does he think he is that he can control our elections well um he is trying to take the mantle of global governance and because twitter x is a multinational corporation all these multinational corporations can only be answerable to globalists, right? All your speech belonged to us now. And so the CEO of X, Twitter, Linda Iaccarino,

responded directly to his tweet and said on Twitter, this is an unprecedented attempt to stretch a law intended to apply in Europe to political activities in the U.S. It also patronizes European citizens, suggesting they are incapable of listening to a conversation and drawing their own conclusions. Boom. That's exactly right so conspiracy theory bretons uh threats says um information liberation are astonishingly stupid arrogant and a clear attempt at election interference the u.s should put sanctions on him yes personally yes for interfering in our elections and for threatening our free speech rights i absolutely agree but of course they won't because the biden administration

is a thousand percent into this then of course trump stood by and allowed this type of thing to happen, both to others and even to him. Completely ineffective. And so the result of this is that the EU has disavowed conspiracy theory Breton. They called him an attention-seeking politician over the election interference letter uh but yet if we look at what is happening in our country is it really any different you know i mentioned yesterday uh the guy cleve wootson um sounded to me like he was from the uk but he's uh you know, he's an American. And he had this to say at the press conference. He says, isn't there anything the White House can do to stop Musk and Trump from having a conversation? Elon Musk is slated to interview Donald Trump tomorrow, tonight on X. I don't know if the president is going to, in. Feel free to say if he is or not.

But I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue. It's an America issue. What role does the White House or the president have in sort of stopping that or stopping the spread of that or sort of intervening in that. Some of that was about campaign misinformation, but it's a wider thing, right? Yeah, no, and you've heard us talk about this many times from here about the responsibilities that social media platforms have when it comes to misinformation, disinformation.

Responsibility again. Anything to read out from here about specific ways that we're working on it, but we believe that, that they have the responsibility. These are responsibility. We're also mindful of that too. But look, it is, I think it is incredibly important to call that out as you are, you're doing.

I just don't have any specifics on, on what we've been doing internally. As, as it relates to the interviews's not something that I'm tracking, and I'm sure the President's not tracking it either. Okay, and that was from MRC Newsbusters. They pulled that out. Good for them for pulling that out and doing the article on it. Look, you heard it say multiple times, responsibility, responsibility. Just like that son of a bureaucrat, theory breton they think everybody is responsible to them but they are not responsible to anyone or anything

is uh did you hear her say anything about the first amendment that she is responsible to that biden is responsible to that anybody who works for the federal government has taken an oath as a condition of their office. We're not electing dictators, folks. That's why we have a republic. We are electing people who serve conditional to their oath to the Constitution. The law is king. Lex Rex. The law is king.

They're not king. They're not dictators. Anybody who thinks they are needs to be removed needs to be ignored needs to be nullified no she said we got private companies and we're mindful of that they're mindful of private companies they're not mindful of the first amendment so matter of fact they use private companies to subvert the first amendment they use private companies as beards to subvert the first amendment or maybe you should say masks so uh yeah um he said uh rather she said i think said, misinformation is not just a campaign issue.

It's an American issue, he said. Well, the paper that he works for, the Washington Post, their subline is, democracy dies in darkness. Well, democracy dies if you are going to ignore free speech. Look, free speech is the American issue. As I've said before, extremism in defense of free speech is no vice and moderation of content is no virtue.

I need to get a t-shirt of that. People can wear it to these meetings and let it anyway politico europe said that four separate eu officials said that conspiracy theory bretons threat to musk caught many of them off guard within the commission yes you see ursula fond of lying even though her number one priority she said to her claus her claus it's the number on the priority of this like i it's full dr strange love everything but the arm up in the air right so disinformation well the uh that that's her number one thing. He's just trying to help her do it. She's the president of the EU Commission. He's just a minister underneath her.

But he said the quiet part out loud. DSA implementation is too important to be misused by an attention-seeking politician yes if you go too far if you jump this shark you're going to lose that power people are going to figure out what you're all about so um trump campaign official chris lascivita did not give a civil response to them, unlike his name. His response was the European Union is attempting to meddle in the U.S. election. They can go to hell. It's kind of succinct and not too civil from Chris LaCivita. So the EU is trying to get us to think that conspiracy theory,

Bretton went rogue. I'm trying to put this stuff out. No, no. Here, Klaus, this is our number one priority. I was wondering if the letter has been agreed or coordinated with president

fond of lying. If so, were you aware of this letter sent before a couple of hours before the live event? A reporter asked a spokesperson for Ursula Fond of Lying. Well, thank you for the question, she said. What the commissioner has represented in the letter, that'd be conspiracy theory Breton represented in the letter, is a general concern, as I was saying, by pointing out the rules that have to be complied

with by very large platforms on the European Digital Services Act. For what concerns the letter specifically, the timing and the wording of the letter were neither coordinated nor agreed with the president, nor with the college of the commission yeah well you see they're really desperate and as i showed you the you know the guy from the washington post and you had the biden press secretary there saying well you know we were mindful of corporations we don't want to step on their toes doesn't care about the first amendment isn't responsible to the first amendment and of course waltz has said the same thing as ursula fond of lying i think we need to push back on this there

there's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or or hate speech and especially around our democracy yeah there is there is and there is protection for any kind of speech especially around our democracy there is protection just the opposite of what that petty tyrant and uh well coming up we'll show you how he sent the national guard out good illustration of why we don't want a standing army why we don't want them to have a monopoly of force they're walking down the street like a gang of thugs screaming at people who are on their porch get back in your house and the people who kept taking pictures and said light them up and they all started shooting paintballs to this person and who was taking the pictures that's under tim waltz's orders. See, Tim Walz doesn't want you to have even a paintball gun

to shoot back at these people. Only the military should have weapons. No, only the militia should have weapons, and you're Exhibit A as to why we don't want to have a standing army, because tyrants like walls. So the problem with these people, the problem that they have, they're desperate. They really are. You may think they're winning, but they're not.

You see, what they're doing is they're waking up the sleeping giant. And they know the sleeping giant is waking up. And here's evidence of it. You know, they have, for the longest time, they've used the mockingbird media. I mean, it worked like a well-oiled machine in the United States when there was only three networks. You know, one of them, Walter Cronkite. And that's the way it is. You know, every day they would cover the same stuff and they would say the same things about the same issues.

And there'll be three news programs i know because my family watched all three of them in sequence pretty much set them up in sequence they might have had two of them on at the same time but nbc had the best theme song it was beethoven's ninth symphony the skirt so anyway they didn't know it at the time but i really loved it i thought wow these guys write great music for TV. They just appropriated it. Anyway, it worked great with the Mockingbird Press when there's only three channels. But they began to lose control of it.

And so they're getting more and more desperate because they lost control because people like CNN were losing control of the narrative. They started out with the censorship stuff. And then you had late night comedians used to have funny late night comedians like Johnny Carson. But then the late night comedians became political commentators, not good political commentators and not funny comedians good example of that is steven cobert and so steven cobert had a cnn reporter on and i want you to hear what happened when he said well you know you at cnn are doing serious news in other words he's doing comedy news comedy commentary um comedy terry i guess we know anyway uh he's doing funny commentary but it is serious what he's doing and it's not funny but he says you're serious news and listen to the audience laugh when he says that and it took him and the cnn

person took them both by surprise the audience's reaction to immediately break into laughter at the idea that CNN is serious news. I know you guys are objective over there that you just report the news as it is. I know, I know. Is that supposed to be a laugh line? It wasn't supposed to be, but I guess it is. Yeah, you do say it. I've got to play that again. I know you guys are objective over there, that you just report the news as it is.

Oh, I know. CNN makes it. Was that supposed to be a laugh line? It wasn't supposed to be, but I guess it is. Yeah, you guys, we're laughing at you. You see, it's just like the Soviet Union. They had two news outlets. It was Izvestia and Pravda. Izvestia meant news, Pravda meant truth.

They said there is no, but the Russian people said there is no news in Izvestia. And there is no truth in Pravda. There is no truth at CNN, and there's no humor on Stephen Colbert's show. Except when he tells you that CNN is telling you the truth. That's the only funny thing that he said that night. Natural laugh line. And it took them by surprise. See, this is why Conspiracy Theory Breton is doing this. They're desperate.

We're on to them. We don't believe this garbage. And so they're getting more and more authoritarian. They're trying to force us, trying to shut down people's debates, even political debates, even in other countries. And so, in defense of his warning, conspiracy theory Breton cited recent civil unrest in england which erupted after three school girls were stabbed by the son of a rwandan immigrant did trump or elon stab anybody i mean was there some concern about that no see the issue is that speech is violence they don't want us to believe

and you shouldn't talk about immigration policy that brings in a lot of people from other countries that have absolutely no love for the country that they're living in, no resentment by the government institution we call schools. Goes out and commits violence, not the first time, won't be the last time. That should be talked about, even though Trump and Elon Musk didn't talk about it. An EU official who spoke to the Financial Times says, theory has his own mind and his way of working and thinking yeah they're trying to distance himself from him that's not what we intended we're not really

trying to take over the United States election yes you are and he ought to be punished for it and not just him personally the commission so Musk the way, extended an invitation to Lala Harris to come on as well. She has not responded to that. You think she ever will? Good luck getting a response from her. She doesn't want to talk about issues whatsoever. And so they're saying that Musk and Trump had been viewed or heard a billion times. This is WND talking.

What counts as a view? What counts as a view on Twitter? Just scrolling past something. Does that count as a view? I don't know how long you have to watch it or even if you have to watch it. I mean, that's part of the seduction of these social media companies for people people who crave the view count I saw it happen firsthand at InfoWars with Alex Jones they begged the same people who kicked him off a couple years later begged Alex Jones to come on Facebook he

was one when they started rolling out the video stuff. And so we're going to do it as a test case as a beta test case. We'll get some well-known people. So we'd like for your channel to be able to put out content video, that type of thing. And so he did, uh, and, and they did that before they rolled it out for everybody to be able to do that. And he was looking at it and it's like, he's getting millions of views and all this, and it's just people

scrolling through it you don't have to watch it but it was very seductive for him he got so addicted to facebook and the view counts that he would see there that was absolutely crushing when they kicked him off a couple of years later uh but anyway, Lala Harris, who has gone seven weeks now, seven weeks without answering any questions, one-on-one or in a press conference. When she does speak, she avoids real issues, just like all presidential candidates do, and instead resorts to identity politics. But rather than call on Lala to give a similar interview, Musk has offered to her liberals and foreign countries attempt to censor freedom of speech. For example, it's not just Theory Breton. It's also the UAW, the United Auto Workers leadership.

So we're going to sue them because Trump quipped about telling workers something similar to you're fired. And so, again again that ought to be protected speech especially see unlike tim waltz we don't want to censor people especially when it comes to political stuff no we want to have free speech especially when it comes to political stuff that's why you have it's always going to be politics it's always going to be religion that they come after that's why both of those things are right there in the first amendment and then the protests being able to peacefully protest the london police chief has also vowed to extradite

americans if they make comments on x and so you know there is uh you got bureaucrats everywhere and um a son of a bureaucrat like uh theory everywhere they are looking for how they can exercise global control over everybody and you know what this is this is a lead-up to saying well you know we just have to have a global authority on speech. We've got to have some global policeman on speech. I can't do it as a police chief in London. I can't do it as a minister of the EU Commission. We're going to have to have some global organization that's going to do this, what they're building up to.

Trump added that the U.S. has already spent at least $250 billion on the Ukraine-Russia war when they finally got to a few issues. They went on for two hours. So he's complaining about the fact that the U.S. has spent $250 billion on the Ukraine war and European countries have only spent $71 billion. Is that the problem? Is that the problem? Is the problem that the U.s has spent 250 billion

and the eu has only spent 71 billion or is the problem the war is that a problem is the problem killing people is it the problem isn't the problem that we got a war that could spin out of control into a nuclear war especially with ukraine going into Russia, finding that Russia doesn't have any defenses, really. They've been on offense, but they haven't really set up any defenses. People said, well, we sent 1,000 troops in. They're just able to just go wherever they wanted to. There's nothing in their way. How's Russia going to react to this if they perceive this as an existential threat?

Which is what it is. It has always been an existential threat. Ukraine has always been. That's why this has been developing for quite some time. Anyway, that is the issue. It's not that we spent nearly four times as

much as they did. That's not the issue. And then when the interview turned back to the topic of education, Trump vowed to shut down the Department of Education and return to the states their ability to make their schools great again. Isn't that interesting? We have that catchy addendum. Great again.

Make this great again. Make that great again this make this great again make that great again because we are a an empire that is declining everybody knows that that's why is everything make it great again make that great again make this thing great again make america great again because america is a declining empire why well because of things like foreign wars. Because of things like centralized control of education and on and on. All of these fundamental existential issues that Trump won't address. And of course, La La won't even take any questions about anything.

About anything. He says, talking about La La, Trump said she believes in defunding the police. She believes in no fracking zero. Yeah. Zero, everything, zero energy, zero people,

zero food. If they got in the day she got in, she'll end fracking said, um, um, said Trump, which is essential. He said to Pennsylvania's economy,

you know, she might also end the Second Amendment, or try to, with executive orders, just like Trump did. Because that's what she said. When Trump did executive orders, first set up that precedent to ban bump stocks, which nobody cares about, and the NRA didn't care about the precedent. Gun owners of America did, however, care about the precedent and sued. And others did.

And, of course, Michael Cargill in Austin took it all the way to Supreme Court with the help of some other people and fought that. But when Trump came out with that executive order i said that's it he said a president and the democrats going to the next day lala harris said when i become president i'm going to give congress a hundred days to enact this list of gun control items the standard list that bloomberg and all the rest of them have and if they don't do it within 100 days i'll do it by executive order. And of course,

Biden has used that executive order. So yeah, they're going to rule like tyrants. Do we really want that? Or do we want people who are responsible to the Constitution? Not just responsible to the voters, but responsible to the Constitution. That's a republic,

if you can keep it. That's a republic if you want to make it again if you want to make make america a republic again um mara so uh yeah this is this is where we are right now the um we take a break, Babylon B jokes that Lala's team has a new campaign slogan. We decline your request for an interview. That would be the one that you would expect. And then Thomas Massey, he he said last night trump endorsed the idea of eliminating the department of education of course you know so did reagan in 1980 you know 1980 was an election year jimmy carter was president and in 1980 as the election was underway jimmy carter created the department of education ronald reagan immediately said you're

like me president i'm gonna get rid of the department of education and every republican since reagan has made that promise and not a single republican including reagan ever did anything about it they've all made it bigger all made it bigger reagan grew up quite a bit in his first state in his first eight years so thomas massey said last night trump endorsed the idea of eliminating the department of education on february the 7th 2017 the u.s senate 899 a bill to terminate the department of education and he did this in a threat see massey is serious trump is not serious about getting rid of the department of education reagan was not serious about getting rid of the department of education

and massey and his thread said you know the first time i met uh betsy devos it was at a white house christmas party and he said it was a very uncomfortable moment when i told her that i wanted to eliminate her department i i like this guy uh He meets Betsy. Oh, yes, Department of Education. I want to eliminate the Department of Education. He said, however, to my surprise, she quietly agreed. And he said, now she is saying it in public.

Well, isn't that interesting? You know, the things that they know need to be done. And they say them when they are candidates, they say them after they're out of office, right? Trump says it as a candidate, just like Rick Perry. Yeah, I've got three different agencies I want to get rid of. Let's see, Department of Education, Department of Commerce. And what was the other one?

I can't remember. He said Department of Energy. Oh yeah, Department of Energy. And what was the other one? I can't remember. He said, Department of Energy. Oh, yeah, Department of Energy. And so when Trump becomes president, Trump makes him head of the Department of Energy. What did Rick Perry do? Did he shut it down? You know, we've had situations where we had one situation. Howard Phillips, who started the taxpayer party,

he was actually put in charge of a small department in the reagan administration he shut it down he shut it down betsy devos could have shut it down rick perry could have shut down his department howard phillips did only time that anybody's ever shut down their department only time before or after anybody shut down their department but um yeah it is um they will say that before they take office they'll say that after they're out of office but they won't say it while they're in office because even though they know what is right even though though they know what is constitutional even though they know what is good for the country, they do what's good for them. They always do.

You know, before we take a break, I thought it was kind of interesting that Nikki Haley, they went back and they dug up an interview that she had in February. And she said, you know, the American people are sick and tired of Biden and Trump. And she said, whichever party replaces them will win. So she said, the next president is going to be either Lala or me. Going to be a woman. Going to be a woman from India. You know, it's basically what she's saying. But, you know, it is true that people are sick and tired of these guys that have been around for a very long time.

And so I suggest that, you know, just as Ronald Reagan, when he ran in his second term, he ran, remember, this morning in America? And it was a really good feel good thing because he had a good four years everything was working really well reagan i think won 49 out of 50 states and his central campaign was upbeat you know america's back things are working and yada yada it's morning in america well maybe what Trump needs to run on, maybe he can kind of riff on that. Instead of it being morning in America, he could say, it's a new dawn. And maybe he could start being inspirational.

Maybe he could start acting like a leader instead of a troll. Nah, he won't do that. We're going to take a quick break and uh we'll be right back stay with us Thank you. Analyzing the globalist's next move. Music And now, The David Knight Show. Well, and Rock fan Amos Poole, thank you very much. That's very kind, generous. He said, thank you for addressing the viral germ control system. Well, it's there.

It's there and it's being used against us. And we have to say, you know, how many times and how many ways are these people going to be able to lie to us? And what else are they lying about? You know, once you find something like that, you need to start looking at it. So I think we all need to be concerned and investigating this. And especially the foundation of this stuff. The PCR we've talked about many times.

It's time to talk about the virus itself and viruses in general. On Rumble, Michelle Obama, thank you for the tip. We at West Michigan Gallows and Stocks appreciate you very much as we work. Well, thank you. Thank you so much. Let's talk a little bit about money, specifically inflation. Musk and Trump, as they were talking about it, had some comments back and forth. And Mises.org was watching it.

They said, well, you know, when they talked about inflation, it's kind of interesting and is, I guess, a teachable moment. Because they both made statements about inflation. Musk said what he thought was responsible for inflation and what inflation was and trump had his comments they were different and so mrs looks at it and said trump sat down with musk on x uh there are a lot of very nice promises about mass deportations crime crackdown promises which could completely reverse the demographic trends of the country a lot of anti-war rhetoric, including acknowledging the tragedies of wars in Ukraine and Gaza. But one recurring key talking point, a soundly winning point for Trump's campaign was inflation. Everyone has noticed a sharp decline in their purchasing power.

The only people who aren't so concerned are either coddled by the state or otherwise the ones who receive new dollars hot off the presses yeah just like uh just like the donut place crispy cream they're hot and fresh come and get your hundred dollar bills we're just minting some new ones right now despite this focus on this winning issue, and by the way, yeah, inflation, a winning issue. Whenever I see that, I always think of Gerald Ford, who printed up the win buttons. Whip inflation now. We're going to win.

We're going to beat inflation. Whip inflation now. He did not get reelected. There was some confusion over the cause of a general price increase and the corresponding fall in purchasing power. This may seem like mere quibbling, but I would argue that the exact opposite is true. Not much time is left to fix the country before it crumbles, says Mises. Misunderstanding the causes of our problems could prove fatal for our progeny.

It could determine whether they inherit a peaceful and prosperous nation or an impoverished wasteland. Well, I would just, I agree with what he has to say about economics. I will say, though, that we should have discernment. Absolutely should have discernment. Absolutely should have discernment. But we also need to understand, let's go into this with the understanding, when we look at these things, that God is in control. Everybody likes to talk about the founders. Oh, yeah, they were deists, or they were this, or they were that. But they acknowledged God and his providence and his blessing god controls everything

god either blesses us or curses us there is no neutral position from god there isn't like well i'm gonna just leave you guys alone to figure out inflation uh our monetary policy is either a blessing or a curse from god our government is either a blessing or a curse from God. Our government is either a blessing or a curse from God. So you might want to look at our lives right now and say, why is God cursing us? What have we done to offend him as a society? There is no neutrality where we work it out ourselves.

But let's look at this so we educate ourselves and so we have some discernment in case we get an opportunity to actually have an input in this. That would be a blessing, wouldn't it? If we had the understanding to fix this and if God gave us the opportunity to fix it or if he gave us leaders who had the understanding, we could see that because we understand understanding we could see that this because we

understand we could see that the leader understands and that god would bless us with a leader like that to understand anything we must first know what our words mean does inflation refer to an increase in the money supply or to an increase in prices. And this difference matters. And there is a right answer. As Mises himself pointed out, he said, the semantic revolution, which is one of the characteristic features of our day, has obscured and confused this fact.

In other words, the words that you choose and how you use them. As AP has said, you're not going to have anybody who is pro-life. They will be anti-abortion rights. Well, your semantic revolution there has already set the field. The term inflation is used with a new connotation. What people today call inflation is not inflation. In other words, the increase in the quantity of money and money substitutes. But inflation, as they refer to it, is a general rise in commodity prices and wage rates, which is the inevitable consequence of inflation.

This semantic innovation is by no means harmless. There is no longer any term available to signify what inflation used to signify. It is impossible to fight an evil that you cannot name. So in other words, if they redefine real inflation to mean something else, and we, that's the problem with conservatives. We don't coin new words, I guess. Where's our Shakespeare? Coin so many words to describe what he wanted. Mises and most Austrians view this redefinition of inflation

away from the issue of monetary policy, the existence of monetary policy itself, for that matter, to an issue of rising prices as a pernicious tool to obfuscate the consequences of a government-monopolized, constantly increasing money supply. Statesmen and politicians no longer have the opportunity of resorting to a terminology accepted and understood by the public when they want to question the expediency of issuing huge amounts of additional money.

The prices of some goods or even many goods can naturally rise due to changing tastes or to production structures or to available resources in a society, even when it's entirely unhampered by state intervention. Increases in prices would represent changes in supply and demand of a good, allowing entrepreneurs and consumers to rationally economize according to the goods scarcity. This is entirely natural, and as entrepreneurs accommodate for these changes in tastes and resource availability by producing more goods at the now higher price, prices would correspondingly drop as the good becomes relatively more abundant. This would counteract the effect of natural price increases.

As to the other definition of inflation, simplified as an increaseact the effect of natural price increases. As to the other definition of inflation, simplified as an increase in the supply of money, a society without state intervention would not experience sustained monetary inflation. The only means by which monetary inflation could occur in the unhampered free market is through counterfeiting and fractional reserve banking. Counterfeiting is a concern for every monetary and legal system, and the penalty is usually so severe that few people engage in it. As a result, the effects of counterfeiting are so minuscule compared to everything else in our analysis, it can be ignored.

Fractional reserve banking, however, could cause a bout of monetary inflation in an unhampered market. But there is no reason to believe that this would be sustained or that the perpetrators would make it out unharmed if history has anything to go is anything to go by. If a bank maintains less than 100% reserves, and certainly as that percent trends towards 0%, there's greater risk that some entity, perhaps a rival bank perhaps the public redeems enough deposits at once and causes a bankruptcy as such only those banks which maintain full reserves would survive in the long term more on the point the unhampered market inflation would be harshly punished if however the state entirely cartelizes the banking sector and monopolizes the creation and the curation of money,

no recourse is available against fractional reserve banking. The law is on their side, and all the banks that are in the same system and are now on the same side. Only bank runs from the public, now highly discouraged, can lead to a bank's insolvency. Even then, through financial necromancy on the part of the state bringing back the dead,

the bank can be zombified and kept afloat through bailouts and forced mergers. So, he said, both Trump and Musk sense that something is direly wrong with inflation yet they have a scattershot of answers as for the cause trump blamed price inflation on energy costs

whereas musk criticized the state's reckless spending policies noting that they are only enabled by inflationary monetary policy as i said let's take a look at these two. If an input like oil, as Trump mentioned, is suddenly expensive, entrepreneurs will either move away from it or drill more oil. Even if the United States government entirely prohibited more drilling in our borders, like Lala wants to do, foreign entrepreneurs would fill the gap all american entrepreneurs found new energy sources profits would decline as a result of the increased cost but once again

prices are not determined by cost and you know that if you've run a business a supply and demand that determines prices musk on the other, was far closer to the truth. He specifically blamed inflation on government spending financed by an increase in the monetary supply. He then offered the popular phrase that this causes more money to chase after the same amount of goods. As soon as he gave this explanation, a phrase came to my mind. Every successful entrepreneur is an Austrian, whether or not they know it. Musk very clearly understands the state is impoverishing us all. And yet, just like Betsy DeMoss, it's in his interest to do this right uh you know he has become the world's richest man by working with the state in terms of doing things for which there is no real demand they're

going to incentivize demand they're going to punish the competition and so forth perhaps he'll soon graduate says mises from the unknowing austrian economist to a man willing to tell the public what the government has done to our money no he will continue with all of that and uh he will um continue to make money uh with all of that as a matter of fact um when we look at the creation of money and we look at gold there was an interesting back and forth interview um and it was reprinted on zero hedge uh the person that he interviewed and i don't know how to pronounce his last name is ronald peter stufor I guess is how you pronounce it. But anyway, he said, I did study economics and I did study finance in Vienna. So he said, you might think that I'm an Austrian economist or that they would teach us from the Austrian School of Economics.

So that wasn't true at all. He said it was only after working as an analyst in a bank for a couple of years that I discovered the Austrian School of Economics. And that was an aha moment for me from a professional point of view, but also from a personal point of view. He said, at the same time, I discovered the works of Ludwig von Mises, Hayek, Mary Rothbard, especially Karl Minger and others. And he had some interesting things to say about money and gold. He said, in gold, we trust, is the name of his report. No, we don't trust in gold. But it's, yeah, he says, actually, it's not about even gold, the newsletter.

He said, gold is just there. It doesn't change at all everything around gold is constantly moving and it moves with bigger momentum and it moves more and more dynamically or in a more chaotic way this is what tony arteman has said many times we've been talking you know just look at i've given examples of it that other people have come up with as well you know go back a century and look at what gold bought, a certain quantity of gold and everything. You know, what does that quantity of gold buy today?

If you adjust for some, sometimes a change in production costs or something like that, you know, maybe now you've got slave labor in China or something like that, or something is subsidized. But outside of that, gold just sits there. It has kind of the same purchasing power. And that's what I found interesting about this interview that he had.

He said, gold is just this solid, simple, anti-fragile thing that is basically the center of our monetary world. And he said, that's super fascinating for me, and that's why I love doing what I'm doing, he said. He says, so what inflation does for your portfolio construction, I think will become more important for the Western world as well. He said, just look at a couple of numbers. For example, he said, since the year 2009,

gold on average is up 7.6% in dollar terms. It's up 9.2% on average in euro terms. And in a currency like the Japanese yen, it is up 10.4%. While in the last three years, gold in Japanese yen terms was up 15%, then 21%. He said, we can see that also in big developed market currencies, the momentum is clearly increasing. And if you look at the price of gold in Japanese yen terms, it's a perfect chart. So he said, I think that instead of asking about the price of gold, we should start talking about the price of other things in gold.

That's key. So talking about price of gold and which currency. Because as he pointed out, varies radically. From the dollar to the euro to the yen, the Japanese yen. So talk about the price of something in gold. He said we did a chart on this in his report. We did the gold iphone ratio and we did a gold gasoline ratio and we did a gold to beer ratio and we did a gold to ski ticket ratio we just have

long-term price series and then we look at how those different items whether it's an iphone or a beer at the munich oktoberfest we look at how it is measured in fiat currency and how it developed in gold terms so i said what we found was that gold protects your purchasing power in the oktoberfest gold protects it measured in iphones or driving a car or on the ski slopes. He said, I think it's really crucial to understand, but still most people don't really get that change of perspective. And so he gives another example. He said, talk about the Venezuelan Bolivar, their currency in Venezuela. Everybody agrees that the currency became very low in value relative to other currencies very quickly.

Rapid inflation. And so he said people would now say, well, your house, he said, was 1,000 bolivars before. And now it's a million bolivars. No one in their right mind says, oh, wow, your house must have become much more valuable. Well, no one except for the IRS, right? Yeah, you have an asset that you picked up. They don't adjust that for inflation, do they? Oh, well, you bought that for a thousand and you're selling it and now it's worth a million.

So you got a big capital gains tax you need to pay me. That's why I said, you know, when we look at what is happening with investments, with businesses, with family farms, they tax us on the devaluation of our currency that they created. But outside of the IRS and the tax man, no one in their right mind would say your house is 10 times more valuable today than it was 30 years ago because of the inflated value, inflated price. would say your house is 10 times more valuable today than it was 30 years ago because the inflated value inflated price they would very honestly say your house is the same value as before or less because it's now older the currency is now much much weaker so when you look at something like gold that's a much more objective way to look at prices to say has the value of this asset, or the value of my portfolio,

or just the value of my life and my work, has that increased or decreased? Because that's what money essentially is. It is a store of your work. A store of your life, if you will. When you value it in local currency, a paper currency, you have a lot of issues trying to disentangle what is actually appreciation of assets and what is depreciation, appreciation of assets and depreciation of currency. And you don't have that with gold. So, again, they did the gold ratio to a lot of things.

I talk about gold as being wealth insurance or just keeping the value of your work and your time if you want to start accumulating gold and moving into gold go to david knight.gold that'll take you to tony arteman's wise wolf you can buy small or large amounts of gold or silver and he's getting ready to do something with bitcoin as well we'll probably talk about that tomorrow um if he's got it ready i don't know what the status is of it but um if you go to wise wolf gold you can also just gradually start accumulating gold on a regular basis he's set up a buying group where you get uh the discount by being in the group uh you get the discount by being in the group you get a little bit better price and you can regularly save fifty dollars on up what you want to do each month and so you'll find

all that at wise wolf and you can get to wise wolf if you go to david knight dot gold let tony know that you came through us um so just one more thing here before we take a break. The Federal Reserve does not own gold. It's another article from the Mises Institute. Several of them here. Historically, Ryan McMakin wrote this one. He said, historically, as during the days of classical gold standards, central banks maintained stocks of gold to facilitate the conversion of gold-backed national securities. Those days are long gone, but in modern times, many central banks continue to own gold.

Many central banks buy gold as part of their open market operations. Many times, Tony and I have talked about, look at all of the central banks buying gold, except the Federal Reserve. And so he said, the U.S. Central Bank, the the federal reserve is not among these banks buying gold the fed has no interest in buying up gold as a means of de-dollarization as tony said the the dollar is at war with the gold uh with gold and um you know they're trying to do things to keep gold from rising you know playing with the interest rates and things like that. So these other central banks are going to be accumulating gold because they want to lessen their exposure to this fiat currency that is being destroyed, but not the Federal Reserve. Moreover, the Fed is presently concerned with purchasing more dollar-denominated government debt to keep interest rates low on the federal government's huge deficits.

But we also have to note that there's another reason that the Fed is not buying gold, is that the Fed hasn't been in the gold-owning business for a very long time. The Fed has owned no gold since 1934, when the Fed handed over all of its gold in exchange for gold certificates. This is how the Fed's Board of Governors summarized the situation. The Gold Reserve Act of 1934 required the Federal Reserve System transfer ownership of all of its gold to the Department of Treasury. In exchange, the Secretary of the Treasury issued gold certificates to the Federal Reserve

for the amount of gold transferred at the then applicable statutory price for gold held by the Treasury, artificially pegged by the FDR administration. Gold certificates are denominated in U.S. dollars. Their value is based on the statutory price for gold at the time the certificates were issued, 1934. Gold certificates do not give the Federal Reserve any right to redeem the certificates for gold. The statutory price of gold is set by law. It does not fluctuate with market price of gold, and it has been constant at $42.22 per troy ounce since 1973.

The book value of the gold held by the Treasury is determined using the statutory price. Although the Fed does not own any gold, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York acts as the custodian of gold owned by account holders such as U.S. government, foreign governments, and other central banks. A small portion of the gold held by the U.S. Treasury, about 5% of it, is held in custody for the Treasury by the Federal Reserve Banks as fiscal agents of the United States. It is possible to imagine that the Fed could start buying gold, but it's hard to see why they would want to.

Given that the Fed's gold certificates have essentially no connection to the actual market price of gold, the only way gold prices would become relevant to the Fed's portfolio would be if Congress were to change the statutory price of gold, or to break that pegging to the statutory price. If the Fed wanted to actually take possession of that gold, the Congress would also have to authorize the Fed to redeem its certificates in gold. Again, underscoring the fact that the Federal Reserve is not a government agency. It is a private conspiracy. It conspired to fix all this stuff. On the other hand, the bank of china is very interested in accumulating gold

and so interested in accumulating gold but they'll lie about accumulating gold so they can get the gold at a cheaper price um the shipments from london to beij Beijing that happen when they buy Western bullion are disclosed in customs data in the UK. The customs data reveals that the People's Bank of China continued to buy gold in May when it communicated to the market that it had discontinued buying. But even though it said we've stopped buying, they still bought 53 tons of gold. The Central Bank of China stated that it stopped buying in order to dampen the gold price so that it could acquire more gold. We should say the Central Bank of China lied about stopping buying so they could keep the price of gold from going up so they could buy even more gold. We'll be right back. Unlike most revolutions where the people rise against a real economic oppression, in our case here in Boston we are fighting for

purely an abstract principle. It is however not nearly so abstract as the young gentleman supposes. The issue involved here is one of monopoly. Today, the British government will monopolize the sale of tea in our country. Tomorrow, it will be something else. © BF-WATCH TV 2021 Liberty. It's your move. You're listening to The David Knight Show. Well, I want to thank ACSAB. Thank you very much for the tip. And they thank us.

But thank you for sustaining the program. And let me give you a tip. Let's talk about Patriot Be Best and what you can do to try to preserve the natural food chain. This becomes even more important as we start to look more and more locally at things. To understand what you can do to maintain the bee population. They have a lot of information at patriotbeebest.com. They've done extensive research and study about this important issue. They've created educational online digest to help spread the word about the challenges facing the American bee and

educating American patriots to engage as advocates to inform others and to band together to help solve this problem. Patriot Bee Best is a digital bee sanctuary for education, entertainment, and engagement and real change. These people know bees and Patriot Bee Best is laser focused on restoration and preservation of the American bee population. You can learn about how the honeybee benefits all of us, discover bee friendly initiatives and other helpful resources. You can get a worker bee subscription and that level each issue of the buzz offers educational information, advocacy opportunities, bee-friendly products, bee rescue activities, and more.

At the Queen Bee Subscriber level, you'll get access to bonus content on patriotic topics related to restoring and reinforcing American values. Joined to learn about restoring the health of the American bee population? Check them out at PatriotBeeBest.com to subscribe and to see all the cool bee-related products that they have to offer. Patriot Bee Best is the best destination for all things American bee. Check out the buzz today and look at their video, Why is our American bee population under attack? That's at PatriotBeeBest.com

Well, let's take a look also at why the internet is under attack. That's at patriotbeebest.com. Well, let's take a look also at why the internet is under attack and all these different systems. You know, when we look at our infrastructure is getting more and more complex, that also makes it more and more vulnerable. Our society is far more vulnerable today to an EMP attack or to a cybersecurity attack. There's an excellent article at Wine Press, winepressnews.com, how a cybersecurity attack would cripple America and send the people into chaos and justify more war. Yeah, you can also do it from the inside too, create chaos and do iterative change.

Not that long ago, we all saw the hiccups that happened with the update from CrowdStrike, how it shut down banks, it shut down especially airlines and other things like that. And of course, even though it wasn't labeled as they didn't want to tell people that it was a deliberate cyber attack prior to that, the CrowdStrike thing, I believe, was a careless software update and not deliberate unless it was some kind of a test case.

Who knows? But there absolutely was a cyber attack that shut down all air traffic for 24 hours the biggest shutdown that we'd had since 9-11 the only two times they shut everything down that went out for 24 hours and then they were telling people it was something else right it's some kind of a hardware failure or something like that or computer failure but it was a telling people it was something else, right? It's some kind of a hardware failure or something like that, or computer failure, but it was a cyber attack. It was a ransomware attack. I'm absolutely certain of it because once it got restored, the same exact MO happened in Canada.

It was only the U.S. and it was only Canada. It happened in Canada. Canada's only lasted for about an hour or an hour and a half because I think they paid the ransom. Just like in the U.S., they paid the ransom. And what was it that they took down? They took down this system that was kind of on the side, the NOTAM system, which is a messaging system that lets pilots know if there is some kind of an issue near an airport or anywhere. You know, it's just like, be be careful this runway is on fire something like that uh it can be trivial they can be serious but without having that ability to notify people of problems they just shut down all the flights

in the same way that when colonial pipeline was hacked they didn't actually hack the the the pipeline itself they could still deliver oil what they did was they hacked the accounting system so they couldn't deliver the oil and get paid and so then they shut it down uh but you know the question is if it's uh by accident or if it is deliberate if it is domestic uh terrorism or if it's by accident or if it is deliberate if it is domestic terrorism or if it's foreign terrorism the consequences are going to be huge the daily mail explained it in an extensive post what would happen if an even larger attack or outage happened on the grid system cyber criminals could cripple the u.s by targeting only 10 critical components in an electrical network experts have revealed and as a matter of fact that you know i think

we've talked about this uh jack lawson his book civil defense manual.com i think we talked about this very thing 10 just 10 critical areas if they take that down they take down the entire grid and then what happens? Well, you want to be able to prepare for that. And you want to be able to prepare for it if they don't do it with an event. If it doesn't happen suddenly. If it just happens gradually. Because they are taking down the grid gradually. They're demanding and mandating that everything that is decentralized, everything that is off the grid, be removed, be banned, be shut down, be taxed out of existence or whatever.

Whether you're talking about cars, you're talking about heating and air conditioning, you're talking about cooking, you name it. It's all got to be on the grid. And at the same time it's on the grid, you now got the EPA deliberately attacking power stations for emissions, shutting them down. So they're shutting down. And when you look at artificial intelligence, when you look at the computer resources that they continue to pile on, as well as telling us that everything that we have that uses any power must be electric.

When you look at the combination of those things and the fact that they're not trying to build up the electric infrastructure, they're trying to tear it apart. You know where we're headed, and so you have to get independent of that one way or the other. Again, CivilDefenseManual.com has got some great stuff

which will help you to get independent. It's prepping stuff as well as stuff for emergency. But they said the attack on the infrastructure could begin with a series of cascading failures, first shutting down essential service providers like 9-11 call centers, then spreading to critical infrastructure. Americans would lose access to energy, to water, to financial services, to public transportation, cell phone networks. It would result in severe ramifications.

Morgan Wright, a former senior advisor in anti-terrorism at the State Department, told the Daily Mail that civil unrest and breakdown in the social order would soon follow. A former FBI counterterrorism and counterintelligence operative told Daily Mail, foreign spies have spent over a decade looking for security holes in infrastructure to leverage conducting catastrophic cyber attacks. Now, these are people coming from the State Department, the FBI. What they're saying is true. And of course, they know that as well.

And so it could come from a foreign power. It could come from our own government as a false flag this could be predictive programming either way what are you going to do about it you need to prepare they've already found ways to disrupt america's fuel power water communications education systems as they look to exploit our reliance on these essential resources and I would say our reliance on an increasingly complicated and fragile infrastructure. This would, I said, deliberate large-scale attacks on critical infrastructure would not be executed with a goal of inconveniencing people.

They would be executed to cause domestic turmoil as a means of power projection. That's why our government is doing this as well uh describing an attack on this scale as a significant act of aggression against america reese suggested it would require a serious response from the government yeah what they would do is they would strike out at somebody anybody so they could be seen to be doing something i don't know it might be iraq that we'd go to war with, or maybe Iran or whoever. Pick the enemy of the day. We're going to have to show that we're tough. Be a prelude to war of some sort.

Obama laid this foundation quite some time ago when he said a cyber attack will be treated like a real attack. The problem is, unlike a real attack, you don't know where a cyber attack is coming from. Vault 7 was leaked from the CIA. It showed the CIA and NSA had developed, have in their possession. Now, the software code was also leaked. So, everybody has that in their possession. The U.S. government and now anybody in the world can appear to be anybody in the world.

They can make it look like the attack is coming from Russia or from China or anywhere. Fill in the blank. And nobody can know. And when they come on after there's been some kind of attack, this is coming from Russia. You know you're being lied to. You will know that you're being lied to because they will not know where it is coming from. They won't know.

They won't know if it was an inside job with a company. They won't know if it was our own government. They won't know if it was a foreign government, and they won't know if it was an anarchistic uh freelance uh group that was doing it they won't know and especially when they come out right away and they tell you they're lying um this was experienced in 2021 when a hacking group uh known as dark side shut down the colonial pipeline that i talked about again it was a side system just like the notam system that shut down all flights we saw a microcosm of how citizens would respond

during that colonial pipeline ransomware attack they admit that one was ransomware they will not admit that the notam attack was a ransomware attack there was a run on gasoline because of a perceived shortage of energy, not an actual one. It only took hours for this to happen because of social media. To conduct such an attack, O'Neill said the perpetrator would likely target the supervisory control and data acquisition networks

which help to manage industrial equipment because that is all a very easy target due to outdated software due to insufficient cyber security you know as uh goat tree has talked many times about the railroads and how easy it is that you know the manuals are online you can get the information online with that you can pretty quickly figure out how to hack into the system many times they never change the default password the default password is there in the manuals and they don't change the default passwords in so many cases that's why you see so many of these roadside signs that say watch out zombies ahead you know or raptors ahead or something because they ship

these signs and the people who are working putting them out don't change the default password and sometimes even if they do change the default password as goat tree said they'll write the new password right there in the shack right over the computer so that everybody's not nobody's inconvenienced with it including a malicious actor. An orchestrated attack would require numerous synchronized attacks against different components of the power grid. But with our networked economy and our supply chain, taking down just one major section of the power grid would throw the country into chaos. Attackers would only need to attack nine or ten key nodes to potentially collapse the entire grid these types of outages show a lack of resilience and an over-reliance on single sources of

technology and software can disrupt essential industries and lives Centralization is an evil word, folks. It's bad when it comes to computing power. It's bad when it comes to electrical power. It's bad when it comes to political power. Centralization is evil. Our founders understood that. That has been lost, that information. So we want to put everything on the grid they tell us well no

actually we don't um so uh when we look at um and again uh wine press news says yeah uh to me this is mainstream media propaganda spelling out what will probably happen or at least what their declared narrative will be you know we don't know who's going to put this up so let's talk about how we decentralize the internet let's talk about the infrastructure of information there is a program system called noster and jack dorsey has been pushing this with a lot of people. And because he's pushed it and because he's left, he was saying he wasn't happy with Twitter, with the way social media was set up.

He wanted to get out of it. He sold it to Musk and everything. But he started working on something called Blue Sky. But then he saw Noster and he thought it was superior. And so this is an interesting article that is on Reason Magazine. Jack Dorsey said, Nostra is 100% what we want.

Open and ownerless network. Nobody owns it. You don't have a king. You don't have a Zuckerberg. You don't have an Elon Musk. You don't have a conspiracy theoryberg you don't have an elon musk you don't have a conspiracy theory breton to manipulate it either it's it's very interesting as he points out you know these all these different social media platforms are getting more and more controlled by the government of course that was

what they were designed to do and the reason magazine article they say these platforms became tools for spying and censoring their users well that was what they were designed to do from the very beginning the internet was designed by a darpa psychologist in the 1960s and once they became practical because of the hardware switching speeds in the 1990s they openly created venture capital firms they openly put their own people on the boards of venture capital firms that they didn't uh set up i mean cia had his own venture capital firm incutel so it was designed to do this it's not an accident it's what it was designed to do and so So at the 2024 Oslo Freedom Forum that was attended by this writer at Reason, they said Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey told the audience that the problem was actually guys like him. He said the very fact that Twitter, now X, has a CEO makes it a single point of failure.

What we're just saying about centralization of the grid centralization about information control and all the rest of it. I said, government's routinely pressured Dorsey to censor content. He says that under the new Musk regime, X complies with whatever the governments want. Yeah, we have the situation we saw happening the other day,

you know, when the CEO comes back and says you know stay in your lane to this son of a bureaucrat conspiracy theory breton but you've also seen as soon as he bought it you saw conspiracy theory breton come to austin and elon musk was there bowing and literally bowing and scraping to this guy it was cringy literally bow yes yes we will do whatever you know i'll just want to remind you that in a year we're going to have the dsa and you're going to have to do it we say yes yes i will do whatever you say uh and he will and that's what dorsey says he says that they're still complying with whatever

the government wants the x network is proprietary they call it a silo matt drudge used to call it a wall a walled garden walled community right and once they get you in there well they shut the gates and they turn on the gas right uh known as a silo, this construct traps a user's identity, a user's followers, and a user's data. X also has the power to evict anyone from the platform and delete what they've written. We all know that, right? We talk about my followers. You know, it's interesting. I've talked about X even, you know, under Musk.

How do you know you're being shadow banned well if you got 136 000 followers and somebody who's got less than a thousand uh gets more views on something that they post i'm talking about likes i'm talking about retweets but just views more people see it from somebody that has under a thousand view uh followers then somebody's got 136 times that so what's going on with that no it's being curated it's being hidden from people who follow me right building a non-proprietary architecture was dorsey's original vision for twitter i started doing blue sky there but uh then musk bought the company it became about um making money over over it and so he got disenchanted with it uh and so dorsey said i asked a question what open source initiative should i be funding it would be helpful to the public internet and people kept tweeting at me

that i should be looking at noster n-o-s-t-r noster i found the github that described it and it was 100 what we wanted from blue sky but it wasn't developed from a single company it was completely independent its paper diagnosed every single problem that we saw and had but did it in a grassroots and in a dead simple way that felt like the early twitter where any developer could get on and really feel it nostra was created in 2020 by the pseudonymous brazilian programmer that goes by the name of fiat jeff who described who's described as the he described it rather as the simplest open protocol that is able to create a censorship-resistant global social network once and for all. Nobody is in charge.

Nostra works as promised and is thriving. It is the solution we've all been looking for, said Bratishevvic, founder of Primal, one of two dozen plus clients that are now available to use the Nostra protocol. So in other words, a client, it's like how you have a browser to go through the internet. You would have a couple of dozen of these types of things that would allow you to access and use the Nostra environment. Nostr is not a Twitter competitor or a Mastodon competitor. This is the biggest misconception at the moment. That's just the tip of the iceberg. Nostr is nothing less than a foundation for a new internet, meaning that

almost every conceivable app we have today will be built on Nostr. Bratasevic's prediction is echoed by at least a dozen other prominent developers. Marty Malmy, the first coder to work on Bitcoin alongside Satoshi Nakamoto, is now a Nostr developer. There's a lot of overlap with these developers who are working on this stuff. Now it could be because these are people who are passionate about freedom could be because it's controlled by the ci time will tell yeah a lot of rumors about that always have been about bitcoin and other things but when you look at it uh it is certainly worth taking a look at. And it is more promising than the silos that we currently deal with. So you can decide what you want to see.

You can decide who you want to follow. You can set up your algorithm that will filter the types of things that you're interested in. Or you can have no filter at all. If you are offended, you know, if you're somebody who works for the Washington Post and New York Times or Conspiracy Theory of Britain, you can set up all kinds of filters to make sure that there's all kinds of things that you don't see, but other people can make that termination for themselves. And so you wind up in a situation where you've got a public and you've got a private key and you set that up and you own it you have sovereignty you

can set up hate speech controls if that is something that you don't like or you can remove all of that stuff as well it's just a network that you control a network that you own a network that you can join anywhere in any country even if that country is supposedly controlled by some son of a bureaucrat. It only had a handful of users until Dorsey joined it and started promoting it at the end of 2022. Since then, it's been on a slow but upward trajectory in terms of activity. Besides Dorsey, Ed Snowden has promoted it. They've been the big boosters. And there is a way for people to make money

on it. They said it is kind of an open source Venmo. Of course, you get paid in Bitcoin. But, again, it is some way to get outside of the system to an extent. And in this article, and it's very long, I'm not going to go into all the details of it.

Get that detail. But, again, you can find this article on Reason. I would suggest that you take a look at it, because this may be a very important thing for us in a very short period of time. When you look at the amount of censorship that is out there, how everybody is competing, how these little petty tyrants from a London police chief to this Orwellian minister with the European Union. They all want to get in on the act. And, of course, it is our government. And I think that there's a likelihood that it's going to be la-la

and it'll be pedal to the metal. They're going to move things pretty quickly. Dorsey cautioned patients. He said, create a profile on Noster client like Primal, and then go to your big traditional account on X or Facebook, make a post there saying you're going to continue to be on this platform, but you're also going to be over here on this new network. Maybe you can tell them that you'll put out some special content there.

Only a small percentage of your followers will come, but those are the most important ones. They will be committed. And the more you post, the more will come. Dorsey said the free speech debate is a complete distraction. I think the debate should be about free will. We feel it right now because we're being programmed. Now it really is about free speech and um um you know your ability to do that they're using speech when he talks about free will uh what he's saying is is that they're using their superpowers of propaganda manipulation uh censorship they're using that to control what you think. And we certainly can see that in the electorate. And we can certainly see it with the people,

the effects with the people who consume way too much mainstream media content. One last thing before we take a quick break here. And I think this is a very positive thing. Classical music is medicine. Music therapy has been around for a very positive thing. Classical music is medicine. Music therapy has been around for a very long time. They found it to be very useful for people. And now they are talking about making it a little bit more specific.

There's been some studies done by a university in Shanghai trying to figure out what it is about music that really helps people, especially when it comes to depression. The traditional way to handle depression is to give somebody an SSRI. And, of course, I can't remember her name right now, but the lady that we talked to whose husband was driven to suicide by an SSRI, it wasn't that he was depressed even. He was just having trouble sleeping.

And he went to see a doctor, a pill pusher, and the pill pusher gave him one of these SSRIs. And she was about to go on a business trip, and he took one of these things, and he said it felt like he was on fire, like his skin was burning. But she went on the business trip. He hung himself. he hung himself he hung himself now it could have been a direct effect of that or it could be that it felt like his skin was burning

so he decided not to take it and if you get off of that stuff that's when these people have murder suicide events and so there's better way to handle depression quite I said, what if the key to feeling better was as simple as pressing play on your favorite song? Use Strauss instead of an SSRI. And the interesting thing about this article is that it doesn't have to be happy songs like Johann Strauss. It doesn't have to be nice Vienna waltzes.

It could be something that's really kind of heavy and interesting like ricard strauss but uh something that would engage your mind uh that's the key that they found it isn't and that's what i thought was a key insight about this it wasn't necessarily happy music but it was music that engaged your mind so don't listen listen to Paris, to what's their name? Taylor Swift. I want to call her Paris Hilton. Don't listen to Taylor Swift.

They're cut from the same cloth, I think. Shanghai School of Medicine uncovered fascinating insights in how our brains process music and why certain tunes lift our mood. The study published in Cell Reports focused on patients with treatment-resistant depression, a condition where multiple standard treatments have failed to provide relief.

The team discovered that it's not just any music that does a trick. The key factor is how much a person enjoys what they're listening to. It doesn't have to be happy music. It has to be something that challenges you and engages your mind, something that you enjoy. So it could be something that's kind of heavy, like Beethoven's Fifth or something like that. Ultimately, we hope to translate our research findings into clinical practice, developing convenient, effective music therapy tools and applications, they said.

But they said when patients listened to music they enjoyed these brain regions showed increased activity and improved communication with each other this enhanced brain connectivity was associated with better mood outcomes it's as if the music creates a harmonious symphony within the brain itself helping to restore balance in areas disrupted by depression uh they said sometimes the bnstnac circuit so it's all uppercase uh initials i have no idea sometimes referred to as part of the extended uh migdala underscores the close relationship between the circuit and the brain uh this part of the brain this is central structure and emotional information processing and so um anyway they're trying to look at the ins and outs of it i think it's

interesting that we've seen this kind of response by a lot of different animals um i've seen videos over and over again on youtube where you got of course donkeys are kind of friendly you know they always kind of come over to see humans and they cows, typically, they might look at you, but they don't come. You have somebody standing in a field and playing a saxophone or a trumpet or an accordion. Not particularly interesting music or aesthetically pleasing to us, but the cows are just fascinated. And they would all look and they'd start walking, and they would get as close as they could and surround this person.

We've had anecdotes about how music like Mozart would increase milk production for certain dairy cows. Not heavy metal, though, right? I guess cows have better taste than some people. We're not Taylor Swift anyway, right? Of course, Travis is in there kind of rolling his eyes. But they call it entrainment instead of entertainment. They call it auditory entrainment. So again, you know, the benefits of some things we have to decentralize and listen to music.

That's the takeaway from today's program. We'll be right back. © transcript Emily Beynon you're listening to the david knight show by the way since we are heavily censored i'd like to remind you to like the stream that really is important and necessary for us i just got an email from someone who said uh i used to watch you years ago. And he said, I just realized that you've got your own program. And so here we are. We're coming in on four years of this. And some people still don't know that we're here.

So if you like the stream, that may help people to find the broadcast. And certainly we are not going to get any help at all from Elon Musk or any other technocrats the broadcast and certainly we are not going to get any help at all from uh elon musk other technocrats that are out there on rock fan guard goldsmith good to see you guard thank you for the tip i need to send me a tip uh the david i'm just getting to send this with thanks for discussing the trump musk difference on understanding inflation that was the largest segment of their chat oh i didn't realize that uh largest segment of their chat oh i didn't

realize that uh largest segment of their chat i got to play it last night when i streamed and a guard streams liberty conspiracy he's got it on rockfin as well as uh on twitter um he said it's good to see that both you and the mises folks uh focused on that musk got it regarding spending and money printing yet it was amazing to see both both you and the mises folks uh focused on that musk got it regarding spending and money printing yet it was amazing to see both him and trump then push big government projects like the moonshot like trains of course because even though they understand they know what's going on but they're going to do what's in their best interest, not in yours. That's why I keep telling people don't focus on national elections. These people don't care about you.

They're bought and sold. There's they're there in Washington because there's a giant pot of gold at the end of that LGBT rainbow. And they're all there to grab as much of it as they can. And they're not going to do anything for you. None at all. And on rumble nights of the storm. Oh,

good to see you guys. Uh, Jason Barker and angry tiger there. Um, thank you so much. Appreciate that playing. I think it's Jason Barker, uh,

playing Taylor Swift to a cow makes it scream. Yeah. And it curdles a milk too. I mean, it's jason varger uh playing taylor swift to a cow makes it scream yeah and it curdles the milk too i mean it's it's just too stupid even for a cow uh let's talk a little bit about big tech nasa may be forced to send boeing's busted spacecraft back empty it'd be a major vote of no confidence. And, uh, I, to me, I think one of the bravest acts that I've seen. And decades was these two astronauts who climbed into that Boeing spacecraft, which it had one delay after the other with malfunctions and leaks and everything, said lighter up, you know you know i mean they're either suicidal or two of the most optimistic and bravest people you have ever seen and they actually made it to the international space station but they can't make it back they

are lost in space their journey was supposed to last only two weeks but ongoing technical issues with their ride and boeing's much maligned Starliner spacecraft have delayed their return indefinitely. NASA still hasn't announced a return date. But now NASA is discussing the option of having Starliner return back to the surface with neither of them on board. Come back empty. And leave them there that scenario would then allow them to send up a spacex crew and bring them back as opposed to using boeing's starliner sending the capsule back empty would be a major vote of no confidence in Boeing following years of delays, technical issues, and a failed launch attempt.

Not to mention a PR disaster for both NASA and Boeing, which have been adamant that everything's been going according to plan. We intended this to happen. Whether an empty return would seal Starliner's fate remains to be seen. Boeing and NASA have already committed a whopping $6.7 billion, with a B, to the project since 2010 and are unlikely to give up too easily. Well, of course, they don't care. Not their money. It's just printed and they send the payoff bill to your kids and grandkids. Several of the capsule's 28 thrusters failed during the docking procedures in early June. The space agency and Boeing have painted their ongoing investigations as a way to collect more data.

Yeah, we're just here. We're extending the trip so we can collect more data like how do we fix this piece of garbage but now there's a new concern if they were to disengage the starliner from the international space station and have it return they can do all that by remote control um presuming that it works but the problem is is that they had a lot of thrusters that were not working when it went up there the first time and they nearly had a disaster trying to dock it the first time and so um while nasa works on figuring out how to get the boeing starliner astronauts home experts are concerned that it may straight

up crash into the International Space Station. A Business Insider report notes that there are concerns inside and outside of NASA that once the plagued spacecraft undocks from the International Space Station, malfunctioning thrusters could cause it to spin out of control and ultimately crash into the station. First floated by sources who spoke to Ars Technica about that issue on condition of anonymity last week, this seeming worst-case scenario was not entirely dismissed by the NASA spokesperson that Business Insider spoke to. We have also reached out to the agency about whether or not those concerns are being discussed internally, and have yet to hear back. With an interview with Business Insider, famed Harvard astronomer Jonathan McDowell

explained how such a fiasco could unfold. He said if you're undocking from the ISS and you lose more than a certain number of thrusters, there's a chance you might be stuck, drifting, and or even crash into the space station. Indeed, even as the Starliner astronauts Butch Wilmore and Sonny Williams marooning on the space station, it's potentially being extended into 2025. The Space Launch System is part of this so boeing has a starliner they also have the space launch system uh it has cost more than 700 million dollars more 700 million dollars more than it was supposed to um so they said i gotta think that the higher ups of boeing are regretting ever getting into this game. This particular program has been a financial disaster for them,

a public relations disaster for them. With so much going wrong for Boeing here on Earth, there's no doubt that the nightmarish Starliner saga is making internal waves at that company. What's worse, once the Starliner system, the space launch system is actually finished, the astronomer McDowell predicted that it is unlikely to fly that many times. So, explain to me how we got to the moon 60 years ago.

Please explain that. It's becoming, getting more and more laughable isn't it meanwhile china is flooding their cities uh specifically wuhan as if wuhan hasn't been plagued enough with bat soup and other phony narratives now they're going to plague those poor people they're going to inflict upon them robo taxis to cause traffic jams and we were there it's been almost 20 years now the traffic that we saw there in naning which was a small city i'd never heard of it before small city by chinese standards had six or seven million people though uh you know not even worth talking about in china if they only got six or seven million people though. You know, not even worth talking about in China if they only got six or seven million people.

But the traffic there was horrendous. It was like total gridlock and anarchy. And, you know, to get somewhere, to get across an intersection, it took a great deal of hubris. And that's one of the problems that the robo-taxis don't have. You know, they get to a four-way stop and it's like well

can i go now i don't know they're very passive they uh they can't look uh and determine you know just as we do we look to see if somebody's looking and we kind of have a sense as to whether or not it's our turn or not but we're all so ready to stop in case the other guy is going to push through they can't navigate that way hundreds of driverless robo taxis are causing mayhem in wuhan this plagued city the fleet of vehicles deployed by the chinese tech giant baidu is triggering traffic jams by driving too cautiously frustrating the city's residents similar driverless robo taxi services in the u.s as we've seen san francisco and elsewhere uh struggling to follow the rules

of the road getting involved in crashes getting pulled over by baffled human police officers all of them going to one particular intersection for example We've seen all that stuff done. The Chinese company has deployed more than 500 electric robo-taxis in Wuhan. Yeah, maybe they're going to have a lockdown worse than COVID. Who knows? While the fleet only makes up a tiny fraction of the total number of cabs in the city, the gig workers there are worried that they could lose their jobs and of course they should because they should worry about that that is the very purpose of these things you remember when uber began the company founder travis kalalnik was saying you

know what makes our our taxis expensive is that other dude in the car you know the driver that they have to pay and so we're going to get rid of that driver he was one of the earliest pushers of this stuff and um you know he's going to use people and use their cars until he can figure out a way to cut their throats and get rid of them whether tesla can swoop in and change this picture remains to be seen musk recently announced that they would be unveiling a robo taxi later this year but whether it stands a chance of catching up with the competition remains anything but certain i don't think the competition is that far advanced but we will see meanwhile we have a new supercomputer network that's going to go live in september and it could usher in uh uh full um uh

artificial um what they call agi um general intelligence in other words thinking right and i don't believe this at all as a matter of fact the person who's putting this together the name of this supercomputer that they're calling it singularity net so they're calling new company singularity net and the person who's running it is ben gertzel now ben is you remember that the saudis had this female robot called sofia they you know it's very wooden you know moving around and everything and they gave it citizenship and a little gimmick thing. Well, Ben Gertzel was the one who created Sophia. And everybody was saying, oh, it is so advanced and everything.

Well, whatever. I remember when I talked several times to Hugo de Garis, who wrote The Art of Like War. And I was not interested so much. I thought it was, I thought the ethics of what he presented to people about artificial intelligence was interesting. He really believed that he was going to create a godlike super intelligence. I never believed that at all. But I thought it was interesting when he asked engineers and other people in the field, if you knew that this was going to become a super computer that had generalized intelligence, a godlike intelligence that could and it would

squash us all like a bug would you continue to build this and most of the scientists said yes the only time the first time that he got to know was when he was speaking to an audience that was predominantly christian that i was um uh speaking at also and they said no the first time but within the scientific community they all said yes and he also posited the idea that as the elites get more and more power and technology control monopolize things more and more that the general population would rise up against them they would withdraw using their swarms of drones and all the rest of the stuff, and there would be an art-elect war,

a war over artificial intelligence that was going to be weaponized against us. I thought that was also very true and a very interesting insight. But he always said to me, he said, you really want to talk to somebody who knows artificial intelligence. You talk to my friend, Ben Goertzel.

I was never interested in talking to Ben because Ben is a true believer. I've talked to true believers in artificial intelligence before. I talked to Zoltan Isvan, who was a true believer in artificial intelligence, a true believer in transhumanism. He actually created the transhumanist party in 2020 to try to spread the bad news of transhumanism to people. And he was a true believer. Very wooden discussion and not very interesting at all. So I don't believe this. But I look at it and I think that it is going to be, now he's moving away from robots

and he's moving to this supercomputer, the Singularity. And, you know, I really think that he's doing this tie-in with artificial intelligence because, really, it's all about marketing. It's about the marketing, baby. Let's throw some AI in there, and the stock market is going to line up to invest into our product. Singularity Net is also building its own software that oversees the federated compute cluster they call it which will allow for the simplification of data and protects its most sensitive aspects from exposure so um you know this supercomputer in and of itself will be a breakthrough in the transition to artificial general intelligence,

like something that really thinks. Gertzel boasted on the website, he said, before our eyes, a paradigm shift is taking place. Well, let's talk about a paradigm shift. We're going to have a paradigm shift. This interview that I have with Mark Bailey and Samantha Bailey, we should always be open to paradigm shifts. Many times we have the wrong paradigm. We should always demand that people show us their data,

which means as many people started to look at it, it's like, where is this isolated thing? And they go through, you're going to hear this. They go through the four different ways that they deceive people and have been deceiving people about these viruses and pandemics and vaccines pcr is just the latest addition to it that gives a veneer of real data but it's also when they create a genetic sequence

rather than isolating something how do they know that genetic sequence is real? Well, there's a lot of circular data that is involved in all of this. And so I think it's a very interesting discussion. The two of them have, I think, a great deal of integrity. They truly believe what they have found. They're trying to stand on the scientific method and they are inflexible in that and they have paid the price for that as well i think that's a very important thing so we're gonna play that right after this but i wanted to play for you something that was sent to me by somebody from the movie time bandits and i thought it perfectly encapsulated uh this is supposed to be uh satan and you know but it

perfectly encapsulates the satanic pride of all this big tech stuff so uh from that we will go into the interview i will be free and the world will be different because i have understanding understanding of what master digital watches and soon i shall have understanding of what, Master? Of digital watches. And soon I shall have understanding of videocassette recorders and car telephones. And when I have understanding of them, I shall have understanding of computers. And when I have understanding of computers, I shall be the supreme being. God isn't interested in technology. He knows nothing of the potential of the microchip or the silicon revolution. Look how he spends his time.

43 species of parrot. Nipples for men. Slugs. Slugs? He created slugs? They can't hear, they can't speak, they can't operate machinery. I mean, are we not in the hands of a lunatic? Sir, look!

If I were creating a world, I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils i would have started with lasers eight o'clock day one sorry i just can't wait for the new tech technical well the science is settled we've heard that so many times right that's kind of the refuge of a scoundrel. As I've said so many times, science is never settled. The only way that science advances is if people question some of the long-held assumptions. And so that's what we're going to do today. You know, when somebody tells you something like a good math teacher, they should show you the work. They should especially show you the data. If they don't do that, you ought to get ever more skeptical about this.

And after four years of this nonsense, the masks and the lockdowns and the six-foot distancing and then the vaccines that weren't tested, if you're not skeptical about this stuff right now, this show is not for you. But I think most of you who watch this show are. And so I wanted to cover the book. We have a couple of doctors from New Zealand. The book is The Final Pandemic, An Antidote to Medical Tyranny. And it really is the antidote to medical tyranny. We want, however, to make sure that we have answered the questions and the objections, and that's why I wanted to get them on. That's a very thorough book. My guests are Dr. Mark Bailey and Dr. Samantha Bailey.

They are married. Both of them are physicians in New Zealand. So thank you for joining us. Thank you. Thank you. And, of course, let me give the website as well. It's drsambailey.com. And so that's where you can find more information you can find the book

everywhere uh but thank you for joining us and it is fascinating i haven't been able to read the entire book uh but i've read a great deal of it you've done another book that was 400 pages long had 1400 references this one's about 180 pages long and it's got, so I got it wrote down here, 444 references. So you document stuff very well. People can do their own research. It's a great beginning point for somebody if they want to question the foundation of what has happened to us for the last four years. But let's begin by letting you give us a little bit of your background as physicians. What caused you to question something that most people say is an unquestionable orthodoxy? Well, thank you, David, for that really great introduction to introduce this topic. And

as you mentioned, Sam and I were both conventionally trained doctors. I graduated in 1999, one of the last doctors to graduate from the last century, and was in the medical system for two decades. Now, during that time, there were definitely speed bumps for me. I questioned what we were doing a lot of the time. Many of the things we did with regard to pharmaceuticals, vaccines and surgery were not things that I would do to myself or to my family. So there was always that uneasy relationship. Now, despite having an established career in medicine, I decided to leave in 2016. I hated the structure of the medical system, was having increasing amounts of conflict with other practitioners within the system because of disagreements about what we were doing

and decided to completely get out of it. Now, the best thing to come out of my medical career was meeting my wife, Sam, next to me here. So we met in 2007 when we were both hospital doctors and we worked in all kinds of specialties including clinical trials so we were research physicians supervising first-time human dosing of new pharmaceuticals and spent quite a few years getting to grips with how the biotech industry worked and how the pharmaceutical industry worked and how they funded studies and how they got new products to market. So that was a fascinating insight for both of us. Now, in 2016, I was so done with medicine that I said to Sam,

I think you've got to get out because I really believe it's going to get worse. And Sam said, yeah, it's pretty bad. But she had some work that she was enjoying. And I'll hand over to Sam. Before we get to 2020 and what happened, I'll hand over to Sam. Okay. Yeah, so basically I was still working in clinical trials. And I had great patients. And I loved the work.

And I wasn't ready to kind of leave. And anyway, and then I formed my own business which was like an online doctor business and this was kind of the first of its kind in New Zealand before all this became normal and by chance I got kind of invited to become a TV presenter on a health show like in a mainstream network in New Zealand so I did that and I really loved it and one of my friends suggested that I should start my own YouTube channel so I did that at the kind of end of 2019 going into 2020 and then this is the real start of my awakening when you actually hit the kind of wall of what you're allowed to do and so people were asking about coronavirus and what you know what it meant and I didn't know and I'd hunker down with Mark and we'd kind of

research and answer a lot of these questions and we came across this book, Virus Mania, which was a huge shift in everything that I once thought to believe and it was actually Mark who sat me down because he read the book first and and yeah yeah it was one of those situations david where i was i'd been out of medicine for four years when this whole covered thing started and i wanted to stay out and as sam says she started this youtube channel and by january 2020 people are saying what's this rumor coming out of wuhan can you

talk about it can you talk about these things? And I started researching. And the first thing I looked at was the World Health Organization documents. And I said to Sam, there's nothing here. These are just so-called expert opinions. They refer to some protocols. They refer to historical events. I can't find the foundational science behind what they're talking about here.

Then around February, we start seeing publications claiming that they've found this novel virus and it's causing a new disease. Now, Sam and I as clinicians looked at these papers and said, what new disease? This is pneumonia. This is all of the same things we've seen before. There's nothing special about these patients and then people would say well look at the ct scans and we'd say yep those lungs that's generic kind of findings for people with pneumonia this place wuhan is obviously highly polluted there's plenty of reasons why people are going to get sick there and we don't see anything novel going on here. So that led, as Sam says, to the discovery of Virusmania. Sam subsequently became a co-author of that book, but at that time it was new to us.

And we started looking into biology, and we just couldn't believe it because there were two things that were apparent. One was that when we were at medical school and working as doctors, the wool had been pulled over our eyes. We had not been shown all of the failed experiments that had taken place over a century. And also we didn't realise that people had been trying

to get this information out for years. So we had the Perth Group in Australia. We had Dr Stephen Lanker, David Crowe, other people, out for years so we had the perth group in australia we had dr stephen lanka david crow other people carrie malice who you know had various views but one of them uh was that there were major problems with aspects of virology so we discovered this and our audience just kept saying go deeper go deeper and so before long in 2020 we found that we were at the tip of the spear with Andy Kaufman and Tom Cowan and Mike Stone, Christine Massey, and all of these other great individuals that decided in 2020 that they'd dedicate their time to researching these issues.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It is amazing. I came at it from a different angle, which we, you know, my audience is familiar with. I came at it from a different angle, which my audience is familiar with. I came at it from Dark Winter and the Germ Games and things like that. And when they started doing this and there wasn't really anybody dying and they declare a pandemic, like, wait a minute, this is not even an epidemic. So it truly has been an amazing thing to see how they were able to pull this off and how long it lasted. But I want to get to the root of the cause. been an amazing thing to see how they were able to pull this off and how long it lasted. But I want to get to the root of the cause, and that really is the pandemic. And when we're talking about a pandemic, we're really talking about it's not so much even really the existence of a virus or a germ, but it's about being able to prove that this

is being transmitted, that you've isolated this, that it's able to transmit it as a contagion, that it can make people sick, that it can replicate, that type of thing. Talk a little bit about what the problems are with that. Yeah, well, I guess contagion studies itself are one of the best first windows to get into because it it opens people's minds because you don't know well most people don't know that there have been major studies that have been done in the past exposing the problem with contagion and the best example i always because this is what really woke me up was the rosinow experiments that were done in the

states where they had a group this is during the spanish flu time so the spanish 1918 yeah the gold standard of all the pandemics that's one that everybody wants to talk about yeah and we've actually made quite a few videos on these subjects because it's i think it's really important to unravel because there's lots of things going on. But what people understood, so with these Rosenau experiments, was that they had a group of about 50 patients that were prisoners who, on a condition of getting out of prison early, they could partake in the study, which was to be around extremely sick Spanish flu patients.

And these are usually young men and at the height of their illness. And then they had to basically cough in their faces, take mucus secretions from their nose and eyes and rub it in the prisoners' eyes, these healthy volunteers. They took samples samples blood samples they did everything you can imagine to try and make these prisoners these healthy prisoners sick and none of them got sick and they've repeated the these experiments were repeated and again they could never transmit the so-called illness and we have to remember here, David, these were allegedly the most infectious diseases

that humanity has ever seen. And yet when it gets put into the experiments, no transmission. And then from there, we looked into everything. So there are two different things to consider. One is the microbes that we can see, bacteria fungal cells etc and the other is these imagined ones which are the viruses and they have tried uh transmission studies with all of these things and it is just astounding how the evidence relies on things take polio for instance that was a case of taking diseased tissue from a dead child and inject, mashing it up, some spinal cord tissue

and injecting it into monkeys brains and if it killed them or gave them paralysis they would conclude well that's evidence of transmission, completely nonsensical, no control experiment and we all know that injecting foreign material directly into an animal's brain is likely to cause a massive reaction and possible death through the things like the measles and chicken pox now we're all told that you're in the same room as someone you're going to pick it up or someone's going to pick it up it can travel through the air over distance etc this has never

been shown in a scientific study instead what they refer to and everyone relies on this the cdc wikipedia the textbooks wherever you look the medical schools what they rely on is studies like with the measles and chickenpox they will take fluid from a diseased human so you know they have the skin rash and the fluid build-up, take some of that fluid, inject it into an animal, and then if that animal gets a rash, declare that that shows contagion. Complete nonsense, because these are not natural roots, and these are not controlled studies.

And also, with regard to the germ theory, there's no independent variable. So they haven't shown that they found a germ that by itself could cause all of these problems. And people will be astounded. I mean, this is everything. This is things like gonorrhea, the so-called sexually transmitted infections. We've made presentations about this. Sam's done videos about how these things have not been shown to transmit via natural routes in settings that you would see in nature.

So it really is an incredible state of affairs. And the problem is, is that everyone comes at you with the anecdotal stories and says, well, explain this. And we've spent a lot of time saying, well, that's not a scientific study. It's an anecdotal story because we go to the scientific studies, which shows something quite different. Yeah. And the foreword of your book, you talk about four different things, circular line. Well, kind of explain that, the logical fallacies of this before we talk about some of the anecdotal stuff,

because I do want to come back to the measles things that that's really the obstacle. Things like that are, I guess, are the obstacle that we in the general population have in terms of, you know, leaving this paradigm, but, but talk first about what you have in the forward about the,

the four key errors that are there when when they're trying to present this as a pandemic. Well I think so are you talking about the forward the circular logic yeah the circular logic the you know isolating something instead of having an isolate having some kind of a computer sequence that they kind of guessed at, the PCR test, you know, things like that. Yeah, well, in his excellent foreword, Professor Tim Noakes basically summarizes what us and other researchers have been exposing over many years now and this is the fact that the techniques of virology are not adequate enough to show what they are claiming so what they are claiming is that they're the definition of virus for one has changed so many times and they continue to change it so oh yeah they changed it with a just before the the so-called, they changed it. Significantly. They changed the definition of pandemic.

Yeah. The definition of virus, the definition of pandemic, the definition of vaccine, they all changed right before. That's nothing suspicious at all, right? No. And the word virus is so ethereal that even the virologists don't seem to know what it means half the time. And I suspect if you asked many doctors or scientists what it actually means,

they wouldn't know because we actually spent ages researching this stuff and you find documents all over the place which talk about all these different things. But essentially what people imagine is that there is a particle, an infectious particle, tiny little thing that you can only see within an electron microscope. And that somehow the virologists have been isolating this. And when we say isolating, most people will think physically isolating, not changing the definition of isolation. And then using these particles to do an experiment, using it as an independent variable.

So, for instance, we could say if you suspect that a bacterial cell like E. coli, which is found commonly causes disease, you isolate E. coli and they do this all the time. And then you run your experiments and see, is it pathogenic? Can it cause disease by itself can it attack healthy tissue so that's all fine the virologist can't do that because they can't find the independent variable so when they take diseased tissue and extract it directly they can't identify the viruses in there it doesn't look any different than tissue that's

said not to have viruses in general. So instead they resort to the cell culture technique which Professor Noakes talks about in his introduction. Now the problem with this technique is that it's indirect. They didn't identify the virus in the first place so they start conflating things and instead of finding an independent variable they look at the results of the experiment which is the breakdown of tissue and their cell culture and then say well that must have been due to the virus but this is a complete circular reasoning logical fallacy but i've seen the virus it's a little spiky ball it's on all the articles every time they talk about it we got a little spiky ball there what's that sam did a whole video on electron microscopy because that is an issue in itself

about the nature of what what you can image whether it represents um living tissue but here's the biggest problem with it those images appear after the fact not before so those little particles that are imaging are the result so they're the dependent variable in the experiment they're not an independent variable that was identified at the start. Now, this is not permitted in science. You can't create an independent variable after the fact. You have to start with it because that's the thing

you're supposed to manipulate. But because they can't do that with viruses, they get into the circular reasoning. Cell breakdown equals virus. You know, virus equals cell breakdown. and we keep pointing out to them where is the independent variable how can we prove that this is what happened so so yeah a lot of the introduction is professor nope's outlining summarizing what many of us have pointed out over the years is that these techniques that they are using and that's from everything through to the cell culture

through to the genomics and pcr etc are invalid because they don't follow the scientific method they are not controlled experiments and they should never ever have been permitted to go this far because what we're dealing with here is a hypothesis that has been refuted it is not a theory because a theory implies that it has been tested and found to with withstand all attacks you know all falsification which is simply not the case but there was another aspect a very i'm sorry um i didn't mean to interrupt you. Go ahead. Did you want to finish? Yes, certainly let us know if there are other aspects, genomics, PCR, etc., that you want to discuss because there are just so many areas to this, but people need to understand it's all been

built up on the foundational forward that a germ theory and contagion was never shown to be valid. And with regard to virology, the single biggest issue has been they never found these particles in nature. They were artifacts from experiments. They were imaginings in people's minds. They were not solid scientific evidence. Yeah, and I want to talk about those other aspects, but I just wanted to interject here with the first one of these logical fallacies and the foreword that was uh written i forgot the uh dr tim noakes okay uh but um when there was an interesting article and they taught they made

parallels between virology and physics and they said the people who were doing um the physicists will tell you that uh they don't know and they're trying to get so give them more money because they got to do more studying the virologists will tell you they know everything give them more money and uh and i when i look at it it seems like when you say that they're inferring the existence of something that they haven't actually been able to isolate or measure or directly observe that it's very much like what the physicists do with dark matter i think you know where they look at it they see some kind of an effect and then they create an abstraction a theory to try to or hypothesis to try to explain what they're observing but they can't directly observe that thing they can't observe dark matter they They can't observe directly the virus and they see the after effects of it.

And then they come up with this hypothesis that it existed. Is that right? Would you say that's the correct way of looking at it or am I wrong? Definitely. And I mean, I've had people reach out to me who are theoretical physicists saying that they realize the problems with virology because it parallels exactly their own experience with theoretical physics and the trouble is there's all these other things that make it real for people like you've got PCR tests which make it real for people you know the

the lateral flow or rat tests people have one of those and they go oh I'm sick so this makes it real they see pictures of it of which are just computer drawings of what a virus is supposed to be and they think that that makes it real and this is the problem is that um was it the perth group once said that they have the virus yeah meaning that once they introduce this word into the public's imagination, it takes a lot to reverse it because everyone has witnessed people getting sick in clusters. They have seen what they believe is chickenpox and influenza, etc., which are all conditions that the body goes through, no doubt. But the problem is an explanation was given to them and most people have accepted it.

And we have to be honest, Davidid that when we were at medical school and practicing physicians we believed this too and now we can see that it is so incorrect and that there are other explanations for these things but um that's why one of sam's ideas was to systematically deal with every uh virus that i've ever invented but we realized that this this is a big topic. This would be like going through the Lord of the Rings and writing dossiers for every single character, writing about their background, da-da-da-da.

And this is what we have to do. But we've sort of covered the main ones, Epstein-Barr and measles and influenza, common colds, obviously COVID, all this kind of stuff hiv and making videos about every single one to show people that there are other explanations and that the entire foundation and people can find that at dr sam bailey b-a-i-l-e-y yeah you you didn't do the silmarillion you just kind of stayed on Sauron. You kind of focus on that.

And I think the genius of the PCR test abused by Fauci from AIDS on is that it gives us illusion of objective measurement, which is not there at all. The way they magnify this stuff is absolutely absurd. But I think that's the real genius, as you point out out the pictures that they create uh of you know the little spiky ball and and everything and and so you know they create these pictures computer animated pictures they got pcr which is about as connected maybe not even as connected to reality as the computer generates stuff but then talk a little bit about the, um, computer generated genetic sequences

that they use, because since they can't observe this, they create a genetic sequence and they send that around. Right. Yeah. Well, what we focus a lot on here is the origin and significance of these sequences and, um, I wrote a paper, a farewell virology a couple of years ago it's about 29,000 words it carefully lays out the problems of the virological techniques including a lot of it being dedicated to genomics now and we've shown that take something like these coronaviruses for

instance and they say well we've been sequencing these, typing them for years, we can go back to our databases, we can trace their evolution through their so-called phylogenetic trees, all this kind of stuff. Well, we don't get distracted with that because, you know, a lot of people will get stuck in the weeds and they'll go, well, look at this sequence and look at that sequence and look how that's mutated. Sam and I just go, all very very interesting but show us the source documents

here and what i did in a farewell to biology with alleged coronaviruses was traced back to the original papers where they claimed that they were coming up with the genomes of these entities. Now I carefully document this, this is around 1982 to 1984. Those papers are complete pseudoscience, there's no controls in them. They simply have diseased tissue that they're doing experiments with chick embryos and such tissue and then they are sequencing the genetic sequences but at no stage did they find any viruses they just assumed they said oh we've got tissue breakdown we've got these lesions that are forming we suspect that there's a virus in there we're going to take sequences these were

mixed tissues okay these are got all sorts of things in them with the chick embryos and other fluids etc and they said well these sequences they don't seem to come from where we expected so we'll call them quote viral sequences and they were deposited into a database then other people all around the world started doing sequences and said, hey, we've found very similar sequences. Therefore, we have also found the virus. And the thing is, David, you can do this anywhere. And this is the whole problem now with what we call metagenomics, which is simply taking environmental samples. So this could be the snot up someone's nose. It could be the sewer. They seem to love

taking samples out of the store they do it could be an orange cow's milk it could be charismatic wherever you want to go and you look for these genetic sequences now the power of pcr to amplify sequences is incredible so it can find the tiniest amounts now so there so there are two issues here. One is, well, where did they come from? Because they never ever showed that there was a virus that contained these sequences. And even if they did show such a particle, where was the evidence that that is the cause of the problem in the organism?

Because we know, and every scientist who's involved in genomics should accept this because it is fact, that different sequences can appear when organisms are sick. So when you get sick and have a cold or a flu, your body, your cells will start expressing different sequences and they will start coming out in your snot and fluids, etc. It doesn't mean you got attacked from the outside by some microscopic entity. It just means that your body is going through a process where it will produce these sequences. And again, we've been very careful with this stuff. We traced back things.

So for instance, the spike protein sequences, which caused a lot of excitement in recent years. Well, these are nothing new. These are just sequences that were described as far back as the 80s or at least 1990 from our investigations. And you find them in tissue breakdown experiments, you find them in mammals and birds, you will find them in humans etc. But it doesn't mean that you've found the virus, et cetera, because the same techniques have failed over and over again. They can't isolate these particles.

They can't use them as an independent variable, et cetera. But, yeah, you'll see, like, I've been engaged in debates with genomics experts and stuff, and it's really difficult because I think they honestly believe this stuff, and you can't get them to just go back, back, back to the foundational studies. Where's the virus? We always say, because it's simply not there. Yeah.

And when you talk about the spike protein, the spike protein that seems to be generated by the mRNA vaccines, what do you make of that? You know, and the fact that it seems to be replicating uh is that our first virus yeah i mean yeah we there's a whole lot of problems here is um one it's not sure if it does generate once it's been injected because a lot of the experiments are done in vitro in test tubes so when you do that you've got single cells and you can transfect them. You can put genetic material in there and get them to start producing proteins. So that's technology that's been around for a long time. I mean, what would we say is that it's an inflammatory type product,

whatever it does inside the body. But I guess for us, David, we always focus upstream and say you don't ever inject these products because their effects are unpredictable. Even, quote, regular products that they inject in the childhood schedule, the effects are highly unpredictable even though much, much more is known about what they contain. But you'll get anything from no reaction to children that are permanently disabled by the injection.

So I think like all things, we don't focus too much on that except to tell people who think that the spike protein is something new and novel, et cetera, is that it's not. It's simply a class of protein that's been described for many decades now. And, yeah, if it does get produced in your body, not a good idea. But we would emphasise that that's the same principle for every single injectable product in this category.

There is no possible health benefit to the recipient. It bypasses the natural route of um how we you know how we deal with uh i guess foreign material into our body so like every time an injection you're just bypassing so many natural routes and this is the problem the biggest problem with vaccines is that if you get loaded with aluminium we can deal with it if we ingest it because it just passes through our system but if it's injected it doesn't it's sequestered in the bone in the brain and that's the problem with it yeah and so an analogy for people is that the reason you can swallow snake venom but you cannot inject it because

that can be potentially fatal whereas most people wouldn't notice if they swallowed a bit wow yeah i didn't know that about snake venom, but I'm not going to try. I'll take your word for it. You know, just out of curiosity, just out of curiosity, we, I think last I saw we were over 90 injections that they put into kids in

America. I know we've got more than any other country. What, what's the ballpark figure there in New Zealand for childhood? Yeah, it's, it's high. I don't think we're quite as high as America, but it's the worst part of New Zealand is that we have a very high uptake percentage wise anyway. So that's the, I think, but it has gone down in saying that

people have woken up to so many different vaccines since COVID. They've started questioning everything. I don't know. Yeah, I think, I mean, we're still in the dozens and dozens here. And the one difference is the United States starts right from day dot, whereas in New Zealand they tend to wait a few weeks. Not that either approach is the correct one. But, I mean, as we point out in the final pandemic this is one

of the biggest scams in history and if you want to expose it people can simply ask their family doctor well what is in these injections like so my child's coming in you're the expert apparently tell me please what is contained within these injections that we're putting in um and also you know perhaps asking what is the the history of this disease you're supposedly presenting because i mean it's so apparent that most of these things and there are problems with diagnosis of entities called smallpox and measles and they're all just conditions that the body goes through but even on their own terms the work of the team of dissolving illusions the charts that have been produced by Greg Beatty and Jordan

Henderson are so damning for the whole vaccine story some of these diseases were down in mortality by over 99% before the introduction of the vaccine. So what a preposterous situation. Yeah, I think that was a flipping cough, wasn't it? That was down by 99%, I think, in the book here. Yeah, lots of them were. And yeah, we include some charts from Christianic and Humphreys from dissolving illusions there, which is just superb.

And the crazy thing is here, David, is that last century, it was so apparent that these so-called infectious diseases had all but disappeared. They were not significant at all. And yet here we are in 2024. The narrative is that they're worse than ever. And we're being attacked by even more germs now. And you need to have 10 times the number of vaccines that your grandparents have. Yeah, when I was going through and looking at the childhood schedule here in the United States, I was surprised, first of all, to see how many there were.

And then when I saw the schedule, the fact that they're giving the same vaccine over and over and over again, I thought that was something that was new with the COVID stuff. I'd never seen that, that they're doing something on like a quarterly basis or a six-month basis for young kids. It's no wonder that we have this epidemic, so many epidemics of illness, autism, and other things like that when they load it up. And it's simply for profit. Now, in the United States, we've had, I think it was Children's Health Defense talked to a physician, a pediatrician, who was explaining the economics of it and the fact that the insurance companies would actually require a high uptake percentage from the patients,

or they would basically destroy the practice financially. Now, in New Zealand, they have government is paying you if you're a physician, is that correct? And they're setting all the different policies for how many vaccines, is that correct? Exactly. Well, they have in New Zealand what they call a socialist system where it's capitation. So the doctors get a three-monthly slab of money if they do what the government says. And one of the requirements is a certain uptake of vaccines and what's really interesting with it too is that how they classify whether someone's been vaccinated or not so for example with COVID what people keep getting reminders you know to say come in come in come in

because it's to do with their funding and how the the target they're supposed to reach. And so the way to get off that system from the medical practices perspective is to say we're going to class you as what? What was it? Ineligible. So this is why in New Zealand you'll see these ridiculous statistics and they'll say all this area of New Zealand had 98% uptake. It's because many of the people who were not injected said they didn't want it

and then they'd put an eligible. No, that's a refusal is how it should have gone down. And, I mean, this is nothing new. We've exposed this before with the CDC statistics, with things like tetanus. They will say things like you're unvaccinated if you couldn't remember when your last vaccine was done. So this is a long-term trick that's been done.

And it's often used to try to make out that vaccines are effective and safe and all this kind of stuff when statistics simply do not back that up. And the big teller is, and we didn't know this either until we started researching in 2020, just look up randomised control trials involving vaccines and there are virtually none and

the ones that they do have are so preposterous, like the follow up is for a week or a month, that's it, they don't follow them after that or they do crossovers where the people that didn't get it then get it so that you can't see any of the long-term effects that might have happened. Because otherwise it's unethical.

And also there are a couple of randomised control trials that Sam and the team mentioned in Virusmania where they had worse outcomes for the ones that were getting very bad in terms of death rates but of course they don't publish or they do publish but then they quickly sweep them under the carpet and pretend that it didn't happen so and you probably you may have got to that chapter of the book where we point out what happened when the united states dr paul thomas collected his own statistics on childhood vaccines.

And he said, guys, major problem here, that all the kids getting vaccines are having far more of these so-called autoimmune disorders and allergies, disruptions in their behaviour, et cetera. And he said, this is one of the biggest data sets ever being collected. What was the response in the United States? They revoked his medical licence and said they would prosecute him.

So, I mean, this is the outrageous situation. And people have to understand that, that if you're going to see a licensed MD, most of them are restricted by legislation. And by money. Yeah. A, they are incentivized, and B, they will be punished severely if they go against the vaccine narrative.

Well, and so I really appreciate both of you, you know, putting your career behind you, in a sense, so that you can tell the truth and follow the science wherever it goes. Let me, let's get back to the contagion stuff. We definitely all agree on the vaccine thing. I thought it was very interesting when you talked about the UK's common cold unit. I'd never heard of that. Something that they operated for about 50 years, 1946 to 1990. So about 45 years, 44 years.

Tell people about that, what they did at their common cold unit well it was a bit of a holiday park really it was a it was a it was a getaway for involving coronavirus apparently the housewives and things that were just a little bit wanted a bit of a holiday they could book into the common cold unit where they were discovering lots of different, you know, trying to find out the cause of the common cold. It was really funny, David, because they did all these attempts at transmission. And I should point out an excellent book too, by the Australian author Daniel Reuters, just published recently, Can You Catch a Cold?

Because he looks at this stuff in great detail. And he looks at 200 plus transmission studies which really go against this whole contagion model anyway the common cold unit so they were convinced that because common colds you know cause the british population to have so many days off work that wouldn't it be great just to get to the bottom of it and work out what caused them and how to stop them etc and it became apparent you know pretty early on that they were not really getting anywhere with um a trying to work out what exactly caused them will be how to prevent them so instead what they resorted to was discovering, quote, viruses.

And this is where everything you've heard about adenoviruses, rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, it all stems, or a lot of it stems from this common cold unit that was operating just after World War II. And what they were doing was basically just people would come in with symptoms of a cold and the virologist would take a sample of snot from their nose and he would put it in a vial and he would say i have just isolated a new virus and uh we were looking at it going how what how did well, he said, look, I put it in this file and I put a label on the side. And I'm going to call this one an adenovirus or a coronavirus. And they simply did experiments by adding things like ether, et cetera, and saw if it broke down.

And on these sort of indirect measures, they said that they were discovering these contagious entities but i mean it was it was farcical because for four decades um they basically came up with nothing now keep in mind they were trying to invent vaccines and when they closed the unit down they basically said look it's it's not possible we've tried it with um these entities and entities, and there's just nothing doing, basically. And it was the same with the pharmaceuticals. They came up with no drugs, et cetera. So we didn't know about this. I mean, at medical school, they don't teach you these things,

and what they show you is the fake highlights reel, which just shows you all these papers purporting to show quote viruses. But when you look at the methodology, all of the problems we've just discussed, no isolation in the physical particle, no independent variable in any of their experiments. And many times they found that people, and this is really important, would get the symptoms if they expected to get the symptoms. So they were sneezed on by someone and they were told, this person has a cold and you may now get the cold. And the next day the person would say, yes, my throat is a bit scratchy

or whatever. And then they would say, oh, well, actually the original person didn't have a cold, so we're not sure what's going on there. Or they would put inert substances like just saline just salt water and drop that up someone's nose and you know they did attempt to do some uh well you can't really call them controls because they still didn't have an independent variable but they tried to they would put completely inert substances up people's noses and then say we've just infected you with the virus sure enough within hours the person's coming down with what looks like a cold

and then they tell them oh no sorry actually that was just normal saline and then within hours the everything disappears and they go back to normal so amazing the psychological effects and to see but in general these so-called highly contagious entities were not shown to be anything of the sort, and most of the time they really struggled to get sick people, to make well people unwell and perhaps too, I think we should point out some classic examples here of particularly men who have worked in stations around the Arctic Circle

and these highly remote areas where they are not in contact with anyone for weeks, months at a time. They also get these cold and flu symptoms. Yeah, well, it's very cold there. That's what you're always saying. It was like the temperature. That's why people called it a cold. George Washington goes out riding by himself in and um and he he gets very sick and they bring the doctors in and they basically remove most of his blood and gave him massive amounts of mercury and

he died that's the kind of uh but i said you know when we look at all this stuff it really is talking about the psychosomatic stuff there uh the science in this is really mostly behavioral science that we saw uh throughout all this but we've been told all these years that um you know they can't find a common cold a common cold cure because it keeps mutating and we saw we heard that same stuff uh throughout all the covid stuff we've heard it throughout all the years when they try to sell the flu shot. The same type of thing. And the way that they marketed the COVID pandemic and the way they marketed the vaccine at the beginning was very similar in the United States to the way they always marketed the annual flu shot. we got a massive number of cases here, and you're going to have to get this because it's going to minimize

how bad this case is going to be for you. Same stuff recycled that they've been doing for years and years. Yeah, and I think another important point to bring up is the psychological priming that goes on with things like movies and press release science. So the public is conditioned to expect this is what's going to happen with a pandemic and there were so many movies like that

that were brought out to kind of so that when we actually see it we're kind of expecting it and go oh yes this is this is in my memory i there's something there that um you know it feels really familiar and so conditioned response to that. Yeah, and I think too, not only within the Hollywood and TV sector have they been preparing the public, particularly since the 1990s, that's when a whole lot of, and we were coming off the back of the, you know, the fake HIV epidemic. You know, AIDS is something that's a real syndrome,

but the cause of it is not what they've been telling people and so we had these movies of course like Philadelphia and you know they really did scare the public and then on top of that we had Outbreak and Contagion and all these other movies which were massive massive blockbusters and they became almost more popular in 2020 when people started watching them again, thinking that that represented some kind of reality. And as you say, I mean, they will just make up a story like it's mutating. So that just simply means that you can take some samples and detect some new genetic sequences and then claim,

hey, presto, it's a variant or it's mutated. But all of these things come back to these unfalsifiable hypotheses it's not scientific even the whole concept and i know this really pushes people and it's it's taken some unraveling for us as well given our training and immunology etc is that we don't believe in this concept of immunity that they have presented in medical science because it's unfalsifiable. They just say to you, well, why didn't I get it? So people will look at the human transmission experiments like the Rosemar one Sam talked

about from the Spanish flu era, and people will say, well, obviously they were immune. That's why they didn't get it. How can you prove that so now that's the excuse they're using they're saying well you know we'd say to people why didn't we get this entity called covert because we didn't do any of the face masks or social distancing we were out and about in the community we didn't take any of the products and the vaccines and yet we didn't get sick well people say you must be immune and this is just how could you possibly how's that a scientific notion you can't falsify it and we've done deep

dives into the antibodies for instance which they try and claim indicate immunity and that simply is inconsistent because they are not specific they do not relate to some sort of clinical condition necessarily and uh yeah so no some there's there's so much unraveling to do and uh certainly for us there appears to be years of work ahead but you know given and and we point this out in the book look what we're up against here these are billion dollar industries you know there's hundreds of billions of dollars that people are making and covid19 was one of the biggest wealth transfers of all time it's one of the all-time record holders the population just got absolutely fleeced most people don't understand how it happened or or exactly why it happened but you could see from 2020 what they were doing

and why the population was going to end up poor. And a small number of corporations and vested interests were going to end up with far more resources. Yes. It is so ingrained in our language and our concepts. We talk about something going viral, a video or a meme going viral. Or we talk about a computer virus. And there's just so many different ways that they have put that in there. And, of course, massive marketing, the drumbeat that we have seen in the last four years of obvious patent lies.

I mean, but just repeat it over and over again. It's very effective. But let's talk. And we mentioned it just briefly. So one last thing I'd like to cover before you go. And we mentioned it, and as you're talking about, the fact that we don't have an isolation, we don't have, you know, the proper scientific studies, it's kind of anecdotal. But just a simple case, I you've got a an entire video about rabies that you have on your website where you talk about that and again the website is dr

as dr sam bailey b-a-i-l-e-y.com so you got a video about rabies but let's talk about something that's really common um you know these childhood diseases that kind of began all of these vaccine movements. When I was younger, we didn't have measles vaccines and everything. So we would get together and then all of a sudden, you know, red spots start appearing. What is your idea about what is going on with that? That's the, I think, the real, the experiential hurdle that's difficult for people to get over. Yeah, so I guess with children, they've got a very large skin surface area. And our skin is the largest organ.

So it's one of the easiest ways for the body to eliminate toxic buildup, I guess, filth from inside the body. And so rashes are essentially an expression of that. And you often see children have rashes at kind of, you know, the end of a healing crisis because it's trying to eliminate. We've actually made videos on measles and chickenpox parties specifically to address this such a common yeah a common a common thing but in terms of it's uh we tend to uh as we grow up we

we have other ways that are more efficient at removing you know builder but essentially that's the yeah and i guess david it comes back to what we talked about earlier is that Sam and I always go to the foundational documents and say, well, where is a controlled study that shows the spread? Because we know about these anecdotal stories and it's easy to counter with other anecdotal stories. For instance, when I was about 10 or 11, I was diagnosed with chickenpox.

I was in a household of six. No one else got sick. None of my classmates got sick. Apparently, it's highly contagious, and yet nobody around me seemed to have it or get it. But that's what the family doctor told us is what I had. And the other thing is we do not deny that people get sick in clusters so if you go to a birthday party and afterwards half of the kids break out in a rash probably the best thing to do is to look at what they were exposed to at the party because if they were eating things that have colorings whether they're soft drinks or lollies

etc that's enough for a child to break out in a rash if they ingest these synthetic chemicals that are now put into foods there are all sorts of factors that Daniel Reuters has outlined in his book can you catch a cold about clusters of illness that were put down at the time to germs but later were found to be environmental toxins, psychological influences, and nutritional deficiencies. So a whole lot of, yeah, and this is what we find. One thing that has really encouraged us, particularly in the last year or so, more and more people around the world are now contacting us saying,

look, we recently had this sickness in our family. Once upon a time I would have put it down to a gym or a virus etc this time I put that aside and thought what did we do what exactly did we do in the last week and people are starting to identify things you know whether it's something they ate or whether it's a place they went to visit and possibly got exposed to some sort of chemical, etc. So that's what we need to encourage, not this silly, it's a germ, someone else made me sick. We're no further ahead. Nobody knows anything at that point.

We're stuck in the same silly model. So, yeah, I would encourage people to, if you're thinking measles, chickenpox, what about these parties, et cetera, please watch Sam's videos where she does a dive into these topics and exposes the actual science and the actual claims behind these things. Because another thing, just really quickly, I wanted to bring up is that there was something I didn't realise with virology and just infectious diseases in general is that all the assumptions are based on just a couple of papers. So these scientific papers that were made and everything

else, they just constantly cite back to those original studies. Because people sometimes say, well, we've got new studies now that show that. So it's the same with COVID and SARS-CoV-2. There's literally thousands and thousands of studies, but the only ones that are important are the original foundational ones. And that's what we always go to and unpick for people and show how farcical it is, because then everything else follows on from it. And people can see that all these are just assertions.

These are assumptions and say, well let those guys did it so you know we're going to carry on from those assumptions yeah it is a group think it's an echo chamber and as you point out and you show many examples of it in your book uh the fundamental um uh you know papers are are something that uh they didn't do science at all. And when you talk about the anecdotal thing, it made me think of 2009. I was diagnosed with swine flu. I had really bad pneumonia, and they diagnosed me with swine flu. But nobody else in the family got it. My wife didn't get it.

Nobody got it. So, yeah, it is interesting. And I think it's very important for us to look at it. And your focus is now on what we can do to make ourselves healthier instead of, as you said before, instead of a focus on disease or focused more on health. Is that correct? Yeah. And just my biggest focus from the beginning is to reduce people's fear because I think fear is the massive driver of illness and people get in behavior. They do crazy things because they think

they're going to get circle and once you understand that this is a myth this germs don't cause disease it's so empowering and enlightening and it makes you see the world in a different way and I that's my focus is just to reduce people's fear and go you don't need us and i mean we're reformed doctors we're like you know we're not i don't want to be associated with that group anymore but i'm like become your own doctor you know we want to teach people how to be well so they don't need us anymore yeah and it is i mean for us, David, it was amazing that our health as a family has improved so much since 2020. We always thought we were healthy and we thought,

well, we're trained doctors and we know this and that. And we didn't actually. We missed a huge amount of it. And since that time, we've reformed the way we eat, the way we interact as a family, the water that we drink. And nowadays. And spiritually. Spiritually as well, much more connected

and much more understanding of this beautiful world that God's given us, that it has been created in perfection and it's up to us to make sure that continues rather than ruin it. And one of the big things for us is, and I think all parents should take this message home is that there's no such thing as these childhood diseases there's just parental neglect and i know that sounds harsh and it took us a bit of time to get used to this but when your children do get sick you have to reflect well what did i do you know i've missed something here and we have

found with our own children that they have just got they've thrived more and more as mom and dad have moved out of the old allopathic germ theory paradigm and into the paradigm of saying, what can we actually do to make things better? And it has worked. That's a great note to end on. Yeah, fear is contagious, isn't it? That's one thing we can attest to the psychological fear that is there as you're talking about connecting spiritually that's um i've been told that is the one phrase that is in the bible more than anything else fear not uh so we will end it on that uh it is the mind killer it destroys us and that's the thing that we need to push back again people uh the um the website is dr

sam bailey dr sam b i b a i l e y.com the book is the final pandemic and uh this is the way that we end medical tyranny it's the antidote to medical tyranny by dr mark bailey and dr samantha bailey thank you so much for joining us. It was great talking to you. Thank you, David. We're big fans. It's been a pleasure. Thank you, David. Keep doing what you're doing. Thank you. I appreciate that. And again, their website as well as their books are a wealth of information. They lay it out there for you, but they have references to all these other things and videos about

the measle parties and things like that so a great source of information and we really do need to get to the bottom of this i am tired of being uh jerked around by these people that i know were lying to me and ripping me off and stealing everything that we've got i think it's enough we need to figure out their game and expose it. And that's a great resource to do it. Thank you so much. And thank you all for joining us. Have a good day.

Let me tell you. The David Knight Show you can listen to with your ears. You can even watch it by using your eyes. In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now. Yeah, good job. And you want to know something else? You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at the David night show dot com. That's a Web site.