C (2:58)

It's all right for some Clayton. Cause if you're a wealthy American, you can just buy it and have it shipped across the border.

A (3:03)

Yeah, you can just buy. That's great for Canada. So thank you. We discussed that. That was literally, I think, the first. The first organ harvested out of.

B (3:12)

Out of somebody that died through the.

A (3:14)

Maid program went to somebody in the US I believe he was in Florida. Yeah, yeah, exactly. So, you know, Canada. Thank you for the organs that you're harvesting through your MAID program and just shipping them to the United States.

C (3:24)

It's poor people need not apply.

A (3:27)

All right, we got all that and more.

C (3:28)

But first, first we want to tell you about our friends over at Bearskin because we are about to hit an Arctic blast. You're gonna need a coat. If you don't have a coat you like, if you don't have one that will hold up to all manner of weather, you need to look into our friends at Bearskin. Now, Clayton and I, we take turns every other week. One person has to walk the dog in the early morning hours. I lose this week because my turn is coming up on the Arctic blast. Clayton has had very temperate dog walking weather this week, lucky for you. But I'm coming up on the bad weather, and so I'm going to be wearing my bare skin all week long. Now, it holds up to all manner of wind, snow, ice, rain. It has several layered options that you'll really enjoy. Also, you can customize the sleeve with patches and things that you might want. It's. They really have something for everyone. We gave one to my dad and he was so stoked because he lives in Northern California, which can get colder than most people think. Us Californians are not as wimpy as you think. We need the hard gear, though. So head on over to Bear Skin. Bear skin redacted. I'll say that again, so you get the dot right? Bear B, A E R dot. Skin redacted. You can get 60% off the bare skin hoodie today or you can text redacted to 36912. You'll be so happy you did. So do yourself a favor and check them out. It's bear skin slash redacted.

A (4:57)

Well, October 7th was, of course, the ultimate false flag, designed for two purposes. To ethnically cleanse and destroy all Palestinians. And then after that was accomplished, the plan was, of course, to rebuild Gaza in order to make billions of dollars off of beachfront property and trillions of dollars off of all of the natural gas resources that sit off the coast. This has been the plan all along. Remember, this was planned before October 7th. Watch Jared Kushner's face when Steve Witkoff admits this on 60min. This was all a plan and had predated October 7th. Watch. We're working with a group of people.

D (5:33)

Who have been working on master plans.

A (5:36)

For the last two years.

C (5:38)

So there are plans already.

A (5:39)

We have plans already. We have a master plan already.

D (5:41)

And by the way, and Jared's been pushing this and we're working together.

A (5:47)

I love Jared's face. You just admitted you just kind of let the cat out of the bag, that we'd been working on this for two years before October 7th. We needed October 7th, of course, to carry this out. It's a great false flag for us to be able to put my master master plan in place. I mean, you can't make this up. We're all right. The whole world is a stage at this point.

E (6:05)

Right?

A (6:06)

Kushner was like, damn you, you just admitted it. More on that part of the story in a minute. But first, three more journalists killed by Israel last night. And the world is notably silent, of course. But this time it's a little different because among the three journalists killed by Israel was a CBS freelance reporter. Yes, the same CBS News that is now run by Israel first and wild Zionist Bari Weiss. But if you go to CBS's news website that she runs, she's in charge of CBS News. There is. You can look at it right now, and I did just a few minutes ago. Zero mention of it. There's plenty of stories about, oh, the House voting this, Trump's, you know, whatever, but body of a swimmer found somewhere. You can order a new indoor pizza oven if you want. No mention of one of their own journalists being targeted and killed by Israel. Of course.

C (7:02)

CBS was all over the Evan Gershwitz story when he was imprisoned in Russia for spying on the Russian government on behalf of the Wall Street Journal. That was a scandal. And he came Back alive. This is someone who was unalived. This is permanent. Who was a CBS affiliate. Crickets.

A (7:22)

Medics also said three people including a 10 year old boy were killed by a tank. Remember there's a ceasefire going on. So a 10 year old boy was killed by tank fire as well. 13 year old boy and a woman were killed by Israeli gunfire separately yesterday. So three journalists and civilians killed, including little kids. Once again, that puts the number of journalists killed in Gaza by Israel over 300 journalists now more than any modern war combined. So. But CBS News crickets on that.

C (7:58)

Meanwhile, at Davos, President Trump's son in law, Jared Kushner unveiled a sleek new plan for the rebuilding of Gaza at the World Economic Forum. So interesting to note who is releasing this? A real estate investor who is not an elected official. And who is he launching it to? The globalists at the World Economic Forum. Okay, so that's, that tells us a lot. We can surmise a lot. Now, he openly acknowledges that Gaza has been reduced to rubble, but he says we are, we're getting it out of there. No mention of who did it, who caused that destruction. But don't worry, we're clearing that out. We got the bulldozers, we're working on it. And pay a close play, close attention to the language he uses here. He only once refers to the people of Gaza as Palestine. Palestinians. He consistently though, calls them Gazans. Who's gonna live there? The Gazans? I feel like that is not just a semantic choice. As you watch this clip, consider what happens when a people with a national identity are reframed as just residents of a territory and why that distinction matters for this plan going forward. Now we're gonna watch it. It's about three minutes long. And don't worry though, don't get upset. He warns us at the end. Calm down, watch.

D (9:16)

So we did a master plan. We brought in. I thank you, Kirkabay, who's one of the most successful real estate developers and brilliant people I know. He's volunteered to do this. Not for profit really, because of his heart. He wants to do this. And we've developed ways to redevelop Gaza. Gaza, as President Trump's been saying, has amazing potential. And this is for the people of Gaza. We've developed it into zones. In the beginning we were toying with the idea of saying, let's build a free zone. And then we have a Hamas zone. And then we said, you know what, let's just plan for catastrophic success. We Hamas, signed a deal demilitarized. That is what we are going to enforce. People ask us what our Plan B is. We do not have a Plan B. We have a plan. We signed an agreement. We are all committed to making that agreement work. There's a master plan. We'll be doing it in Phasing. In the Middle east, they build cities like this in, you know, 2, 3 million people. They build this in three years. And so stuff like this is very doable if we make it happen. Rotha will start with this will show a lot of workforce housing. We think this could be done in two, three years. We've already started removing the rubble and doing some of the demolition. And then new Gaza, it could be a hope, it could be a destination, have a lot of industry and really be a place that the people there can thrive, have great employment. Once this starts going, we think there should be 100% full employment and opportunity for everybody there. And we have a lot of data on what can be. But we think that this really gives the Gazan people an opportunity to live their aspirations. But it all starts with security and it all starts with governance. Final note, I'll just say on the Board of Peace, which is that all the lessons we're doing is we're basically studying the best practices from all over the world and we're watching who does education the best, who does healthcare delivery the best. All these things are. It's not secret. Ip all this is IP that the Board of Peace is going to make public. And we want to encourage all the countries to be able to follow these best practices. A lot of the things that President Trump is doing in America, if they're working, we should all be copying them. If we find what's working in other countries, we should be copying them too. And so what the Board of Peace will have the ability to do if we're sexful with Gaza is really show how do you do peace implementation, which is something that when we got this deal done, we didn't really find too much expertise or know how in how to do it. So as we're creating this system, hopefully it's something that we can just document these learnings and make them available to all else who want to use them in the future. So demilitarization, this is something we're starting now. We have a new government in Gaza. This government will be working with Hamas on the demilitarization to really take the principles that were agreed to in the document to the next phase and hopefully that will be successful. Without that, we can't rebuild. So if Hamas does not demilitarize that will be what holds back Gaza and the people of Gaza from achieving their aspiration. And that's very important. So the next hundred days, we're going to continue to just be heads down and focused on making sure this is implemented. We continue to be focused on humanitarian aid, humanitarian shelter, but then creating the conditions to move forward. So thank you. Final point I'll just make is this is really only possible because of the work of so many people and President Trump's great leadership. But a lot of you have been asking, how can, how can we help? So the countries have all been incredibly generous. We'll be doing the first conference where we'll announce a lot of the contributions that will be made in a couple weeks in Washington from the private sector. There'll be amazing investment opportunities. I know it's a little risky to be investing in a place like this, but we need you to come. Take faith, invest in the people, try to be a part of it. And then finally, I'll just talk to people on the media and on the social media, which is this deal only happened because we worked with Israel, we worked with Turkey, we worked with Qatar, we worked with Saudi, we worked with Egypt. I mean, everyone worked together. We worked with uae, we all worked together to make this happen. I see a lot of people trying to escalate, you know, criticizing Israel or Israelis, criticizing Turkey or Qatar. Just calm down for 30 days. I think that the war is over. Let's do our best to try working together. Our goal here is peace between Israel and the Palestinian people. Everyone wants to live peacefully.

A (13:00)

Laura Loomer's flipping out. Criticize Qatar. That's my whole shtick. I'm going to calm down. Are you kidding me?

C (13:06)

Oh, we women love to be told to calm down. That's our favorite.

B (13:09)

Well, and he funnily didn't even mention that. He said he had worked with all these places and Palestine wasn't listed as one of them. And I also want to mention that in one of the aid packages that they were sending to Israel in 2026 and 2027 were a bunch of caterpillar bulldoz. So, you know, they've had this planned.

A (13:27)

Yeah, we covered that a few years ago on the show. Yeah, exactly. So this was all part of the plan.

C (13:32)

And interesting who he's pitching to be an investor. Right. You, too could become an investor, he says. Come and meet with us. Harrison Berger from the American Conservative joins us to discuss this. He's been writing, he wrote about Gaza extensively. He continues to do that for the American Conservative. So what do you make of this? What are.

A (13:51)

What.

C (13:51)

What is not being said? Let's read between the lines.

E (13:55)

Well, I could first comment on the murder of these three journalists today. And in your intro, I think what you said is spot on as usual, especially about Barry Weiss, who, if we can remember, yeah, she said nothing about this journalist who contributes for now, the outlet that she is editor in chief of. But if you remember, as David Ellison told the Financial Times over the summer, she was hired because of her slavish devotion to the foreign government of Israel. So I think it's just unsurprising that she has not commented on the death of. Or murder, I should say, by the government that she's slavishly devoted to. But these journalists, they were traveling in this vehicle to document aid transfers to Gaza, which, of course, have barely progressed for the sole reason that Israel doesn't allow them to. And the reason why these journalists were murdered, of course, was because Israel does not, one, allow foreign journalists into Gaza. They do not want anyone in the outside world to see what they have done to that territory, the genocide that they've committed. We've relied, as a result, upon the work of Palestinian journalists, like the ones murdered today to tell us exactly what Israel has done to Gaza. But even after the supposed ceasefire, as you said in your intro, Israel's mass murder has not ended. It slowed down a little bit. But again, they do continue to murder these journalists, like the one today. We've seen, as you said, up to 300 killed so far.

A (15:29)

It's horrifying, awful.

C (15:31)

Yeah. And no mention of this. And so this idea in Gaza is like, hey, it's a wasteland. No mention of how it got that way. Who continues to do it? Who's still there? It's almost. They're pretending they've got a blank slate. Look what we found, a way slate. Look, we're gonna rehab this.

A (15:48)

And Kushner tells everyone, just calm down. Don't criticize Israel, don't criticize Qatar. Just calm down.

E (15:53)

Harrison, you made the point about Evan Gershkovich in your intro, too, which I think is an important one. If you remember, every journalist on cnn, from Jake Tapper to I don't even know what the names of the other cable news anchors anymore, to be honest, because I don't watch it. I don't watch cable news, and most Americans don't either. But they were all obsessed with the release of this Wall street journalist reporter, Evan Gershkovich, as they should be. He's an American citizen. They've all been silent about the murder of these three Palestinian journalists today. They've also been silent about all the Americans who have been murdered by Israel in the course of their genocide, like Shireen Abdoul Akle. They've been silent about American citizens like Muhammad Ibrahim from the state of Florida, who were abducted, tortured, and starved for nine months in a dungeon in that country. And so they are absolutely selective, as you said, about who they advocate for and who they abandon.

C (16:54)

Now, I want to ask you about this board of peace, because President Trump has selected himself as the chairman, and he is irreplaceable unless he voluntarily resigns or is incapacitated. So this is a permanent role, whether or not he is President of the United States. What do you think his intention is there? And can we point out the irony that he's saying, we're gonna implement the democracy and things that work in the United States, but the people of Gaza don't get a democracy. They get President Trump.

E (17:30)

You know, frankly, I haven't really been focused too much on what his intention is. I've been focused on what Israel's intention is, and that's been telegraphed since the start of this genocide, which is to ethnically cleanse Gaza and move brand new Jewish communities into that beachfront property. And they've had lists all throughout the genocide of families that are basically, they've purchased lots of, or they reserved them for once. They've cleaned up Gaza from all the debris. They estimate it'll take 10 years, at least tens and hundreds of billions of dollars to clean up. But then it'll be ethnically Jewish communities from Israel who will likely be moving into there. Not Palestinians. The Palestinians.

C (18:13)

You can, like, put a deposit as an Israeli on a future business?

E (18:17)

Well, you can reserve. I don't know about exact deposit, but there are lists made by settler groups in coordination with different offices of the Israeli government. They have all sorts of festivals where Hasidic rabbis go out and look upon the ruins of Gaza and they celebrate their plans that they have to reoccupy. So this has all been out in the open. And I say that it's more important to focus on what Israel has planned for Gaza rather than Trump. What Trump has planned. Because so far in this genocide, we've pretty much done everything that Israel wants. Put Israel's interests before ours, before the interests of the Palestinians, of course.

A (19:02)

Is there anything to play off of what you just said? Is there anything of Kushner's plan here, this master plan, that Israel is not on board with.

E (19:13)

I mean, not really because they obviously helped him design it. Witkoff and Kushner, they're lifelong Zionists, very close to different Chabad linked organizations. And so they are very sympathetic to the Israeli settler and expansionist project. I think they obviously rhetorically are tamer than a Smotrich or Ben gvir, but I think their commitment to expanding Israel is just as well documented.

A (19:46)

Can I follow up on that real quick? Just because we, we've, we featured General David Petraeus on the show maybe about two years ago where he was talking about basically setting up mini Boca Ratons in Gaza where they would be sort of under. He, he sold it as this idea that it would be this utopia, but they'd be under basically 24 hour surveillance. So if any Palestinians live in these properties, they'll be under total security surveillance state. Is that, is that how you see this progressing?

E (20:18)

I mean they've already introduced the biometric scans that's already active in Gaza. It came from us actually, that we deployed it in Afghanistan, of course, under David Petraeus. He developed this coin insurgency theory where we were just murdering people based on photographs that we found in someone else's home. And so Israel has adopted those so called war on terror strategies, the ones that people like David Petraeus himself developed and are using it in Gaza in terms of constructing concentration camps. We've seen the images of them doing that already. They've been doing it since the summer. And so that's absolutely part of the master plan. And Dropsite, I believe, has brand new reporting on that as well.

A (21:05)

Well, and I can't remember, I don't.

B (21:07)

Know if you know, Anthony, I think.

A (21:08)

It'S Aguilar or something.

B (21:09)

He was said that in the IDF posts and stuff they had posters of the new Gaza, you know, in there.

C (21:16)

Right. I want to ask, I want to circle back to President Trump's role in this because there is a growing political movement inside the United States to decouple our politics from Israel. Now putting President Trump as a permanent member of the Board of Peace insulates Israel from American politics. So we could in theory elect the next president who does not want to support this. But now they've got President Trump as a permanent member and so it feels like they've future proofed themselves against Israel resistance which is growing inside the United States because President Trump has been so willing to do, to do whatever Israel wants. How do you feel about that assessment?

E (22:03)

It absolutely does solidify our long term relationship with Israel. The special relationship that we have that's completely one sided. We Give them everything. They give us nothing. They're a complete liability to us. Every action they take in Gaza, every war that they start puts American servicemen at risk of terrorism overseas. It puts us at risk of terrorism in the United States. Like me, if you know you're Jewish and you go to synagogue thanks to Israel's actions done in the name of Judaism, people are scared now. So I think that yeah, this is absolutely part of establishing that permanent relationship that is at risk. The polling shows that, that younger generations especially are sick of this basic, basically this leech of a foreign government that is just draining taxpayer resources while people are dying of fentanyl deaths at home, while people can't afford houses who are my age. In addition to other actions that Israel's taking, such as this proposed 20 year memorandum of understanding with the United States to finance that foreign government's defense industry, to give those people in Israel health care while ours don't have any. They want to make it 20 years for 3 to 4 billion dollars a year rather than just the 10 year that we have now. That's coming in 2028, it was announced.

A (23:27)

Harrison Berger. Read his great work at the American Conservative and Dropsite News as well. Thank you for, thank you for your honest assessment and great journalism as always. Thanks Harrison.

E (23:39)

Thanks for having me.

A (23:40)

Our pleasure. All right, coming up here on the show, we're going to talk about Greenland and Davos and maybe the behind the scenes workings that we have, you know, that we haven't learned the details yet as to how this is all going to unfold and US sovereignty inside of Greenland. We're also going to talk about RFK moving to ban cell phones, specifically in schools because of how disruptive they are. Not just from like being distracted distracted, but actually the electromagnetism of these devices on our children's brains. We're gonna talk about all of that and more. But first, you know, you think about that Dr. Squatch. You ever see that stuff? Or Burt's Bees or Native. You know when you go to Target, you see Native and you think that oh, these are some wholesome companies, think again. They've all been bought out by mega corporations and private equity firms who hijack these beloved brands and fill them with the same corporate slop as everyone else. But one company is doing things differently. The Van Man Company. They started the tallow trend a few years back. I, we are huge fans of beef tallow in this house. They use grass fed tallow moisturizers. They've been crushing it ever since with a hit after Hit of clean, nearly edible solutions to your everyday products. Here's the deal with tallow. I mean, I use it. I get out of the shower. We live in Colorado. It's super dry. I put it right on my face after I shave. I absolutely love it. The fatty acids in tallow are really similar to the oils your skin naturally uses. So it doesn't feel like you're smearing on a bunch of artificial slickness. It actually absorbs. It feels skin compatible. Your skin ends up noticeably softer, smoother, without that greasy coated feeling. And because it's not watered down lotion full of extra junk, you barely need any at all. You can use just like a little tiny amount in your finger. So one, you know, one jar lasts a very long time. And it's great for dry hands, elbows, face your post. Shave any rough patches you have on your knees or otherwise. My daughter had some really dry hands, like some eczema going on. And we put on beef tallow and she, the next morning she woke up, she said, daddy, look at my hands. They're like, I can't. There's no redness anymore. It was kind of crazy.

C (25:47)

We used it on a sunburn after our summer vacation. And it was. The sunburn was soothed overnight. It was amazing. It's like the gold standard. If you have kids who are out in a pool and get sunburned, beef tallow is really the best thing you can use.

A (26:03)

So if you're ready to dish the corporate chemicals, go to Van Man Shop Redacted news. It's right there on your screen. Vanman Shop Redacted news. The Use the code redacted News to get 15% off your first order. That's Van man dot Shop slash redacted news. Use the code redacted news for 15% off your first order. Van man real ingredients, no exceptions. Let's talk about Greenland and Davos. Now. Things are moving forward in Greenland. President Trump says that he had reached the framework of a deal with NATO over Greenland's future, including us obtaining sovereignty over land for military bases, of course. But how will this actually work in practice? Which EU leaders are fuming about all of this? Or at least putting on airs publicly that they're fuming on it, but behind the scenes they're totally fine with it. And why is Russian President Vladimir Putin saying, hey, just go for it, basically? So the lot we still don't know. Steve Kuhead is a Bronze Star veteran, founder of Take America Back. And we wanted to have Steve on to talk about how this, you know, how does this fit into America's foreign policy plans right now? Steve, great to have you on the show.

B (27:16)

Thank you for having me.

A (27:18)

So, you know, there's a lot of details we still don't know about how this is unfolding. We know we have the framework according to multiple sources and multiple reporting on this. But what do you think this will actually look like in practice for the US Having sovereignty in Greenland?

B (27:34)

Well, I don't know if you want to call it sovereignty, but we're going to have sort of the overhand to operate as we wish, apparently. But what I want to call out is that the, the uproar that they had in Davos about this and all of the pressure and all of the, you know, the posturing and everything and all the tough talk and how they were saying, you know, Trump is threatening us and everything. And basically what he did is he forced them to put up a shut up. And I thought it was a pretty, pretty smart power move. But in the end, apparently Denmark's going to have to keep paying Greenland the $600 million a year. So that's part of the deal as well. And we gain sovereignty over parts of it, but obviously not all of it. And through that, we have access to the, I guess you could say the entire Arctic Circle. From there, we have access to it, or I guess you could say we can reach it better. And apparently they're working on the US on the mineral exploration rights, which is a big deal, which most people said that was the reason we went in the first place. And then the big rule will be China and Russia aren't permitted to enter Greenland at all. So if, I mean, if, if he pulls this off, this is, this is crazy. But obviously we're going to be part of NATO still, and they're going to be in coordination with NATO and with the European nations that so much wanted, you know, to take control there, where they sent those 34 troops over to defend the island, or the Germans turned around after, after 11 hours and, you know, skedaddled back, back to Germany?

C (29:09)

Well, there was a surge as, as.

B (29:12)

An ex military man, I had to laugh about that. You know, I think Norway sent one soldier.

C (29:17)

Right. And so is this just performative like in a movie where you, you hear someone say, no, no, you can't have it, but, you know, eventually, like, cut to the part where they capitulate. What's that look like? When's that going to happen?

B (29:31)

Well, I, I've lived in Europe, in eight European countries for about 37 years currently. I'm In Turkey, though. But. So I'm very involved in German politics. I've been there since 2003. Started the civil alliance of Germany, which turned into the AfD. So I said, way to go, by the way.

A (29:48)

To go. I said, way to go. And applause to you, by the way. Right, yeah, right.

B (29:53)

Yeah. We were, we were surprised that it got moved so quick, but. Yeah, but the point is this. Ever since I'd say Merkel left and I, even at the end of Merkel in Germany, you know, Europe's turned into a puppet show and it's a circus. And you have leaders with no substance, no backbone, no credibility, no experience. And then you have the two that do have experience, they're criminals. So, you know, you know, the, the head of Europe, she was under criminal investigation in Germany as she was a defense minister for corruption.

C (30:25)

Yes.

B (30:26)

And they have no, they have no substance, no credibility. And, and this is why they were shut out of the peace talks, because they show up, they just posture and talk. And it's the same thing they did in, in Davos. It's the same thing they're doing with Greenland. They made a big threat. They sent, sent 34 troops. Now they're saying it was an exploratory, you know, mission, and it was planned months in advance, which no one heard of until now. So all of those plans were backdated, probably. And it's just a typical European, hey, look at us. And we know how to talk well, but we have nothing behind us. And they're threatening now on, on, you know, I, I made a post on Twitter and did like the Cliff Notes of the Davos meeting. And it's, I know it's got like130,000 views. It's just a post, it even a video. And the Europeans are just freaking out. Americans leave and, you know, all this kind of stuff, you need to leave now and we don't need you anymore and all this kind of stuff. And the funny thing is that's what Trump wanted. He forced Europe and NATO to arm up, to take responsibility, to take, you know, sovereign action in their own land. Because until recently, you know, they, they weren't even at 2% of their GDP for defense, and now he forced them into that. So in, in a way, he was playing tough daddy and he pushed them into, you know, arming themselves. So now we can recede our, our support a little bit, save some more money for America, maybe invested in Greenland.

E (31:44)

Right.

A (31:45)

Yeah, well, I mean, it'll be interesting. And also the Russian side of this I find really fascinating Vladimir Putin's side of this. In multiple speeches now over the past few days, he's just been like, so what? Do it. So what? Go for it. And he's like, oh, and by the way, and his little aside yesterday, I'm sure you saw it was, hey, by the way, Denmark has treated Greenland horribly. Horribly. And he called them, you know, a colony. They've been incredibly harsh against the people of Greenland. Maybe you can talk a little bit about that. But I think a lot of us, I think, were surprised maybe at Putin's response to this.

B (32:17)

Well, I wasn't surprised because Putin and Trump, you know, they've had quite a few meetings and also with Witkoff, and I'm sure there's a deal going on there somehow. You know, it's the same thing with Venezuela and, you know, cutting off all the narco money. And then it was locking in Mexico and then boxing in, you know, Colombia, and then they had that, that remarked tanker down there. It was all, it's all, you know, as we know, with Trump, he's all about a big show and a big game, and what actually really happens is something that he really wanted. And I don't, I wasn't surprised at all when Putin did that. They're probably laughing behind the scenes right now. But when it comes to Denmark, it's true, you know, they had forced sterilization years ago in, in Greenland through, through Denmark. And Denmark has treated them like a colony and just, just, you know, didn't, didn't treat the people very well. And, you know, there's conflicting reports, oh, 75% of people don't want to Donald Trump. But what I've heard and what I've seen in my intel buddies and what I've seen, you know, on the island, I guess you call it a continent so damn big is that they're all pro, like, bring it on. And apparently each, each, each green lender is going to get a hundred thousand dollars. There'll be a massive investment. Look, when I was stationed in Germany, they kept saying, once the wall went down, they said, you know, americans get out. Americans get out. We got out. Most of those cities where all of the bases were are now bankrupt, broke. Every, every shop is closed, every restaurant is closed. There's no GIs running around. Thousands of G have 57 or 87,000 troops still in, in Europe, which people forget, you know, that's part of NATO. Like, we're still gluing Europe together. Even though they're, you know, pounding on their chest, that they can stand alone. They don't need America anymore. Which, by the way, who was that? That was the prime. The, the president of Finland said on stage, europe can defend itself. We don't need America. And then when she asked him again on the same stage, in the same interview, he said, I didn't say that. I never said. Right, right, I did.

C (34:14)

I didn't mean it.

A (34:15)

Yeah, Europe can defend itself. Okay.

B (34:18)

Right.

C (34:19)

I want to ask about the people of Greenland and what this would look like, because it seems like the framework of a deal means full rights of exploration and utility and rare earth minerals. But if we don't actually have Greenland, would they still pay taxes to Denmark while the Americans, you know, take their resources? That is not a good deal for the people who live there. They pay upwards of 40%, they're taxed like Europeans. So, you know, this, this is not a good deal for those people. What do you think of this?

B (34:58)

Well, I don't know if.

F (35:01)

It'S just.

B (35:02)

If you're talking about employees or you're talking about the business owners, that's two different things, of course, because business owners have loopholes. Yes, but employees, I think, just look at it this way. I don't, I don't know who's going to pay taxes to where, But I can tell you this. There's going to be a massive amount of jobs, right? The economy is going to have a massive upswing. If there's, if there's a lot of troops there or even employees, or they have to ship people in to do all the mining and everything, you're, you're going to be creating new towns, a whole new villages there that are going to just upswing to the economy, so it might even itself out.

C (35:29)

But you and I, we've lived in Europe. Taxes are horrible.

B (35:33)

Oh, yeah, I know.

C (35:34)

And Europe is like a financial cartel. They will come after you and find. And what do you get back for it? Right. And what rights do you have? It's, it's not a happy situation. So, you know, a lot of people are talking about how, well, their taxes would be lower overall if they were Americans, but they wouldn't get free health care. But so, you know, this is something to consider. Do you want to still have the bad part of being European, which is the taxation, and get no resources back for it?

B (36:06)

Well, if you're an average citizen that has a job, goes nine to five, Monday to Friday, Europe's not bad for me. I was always an entrepreneur. I always had businesses. I couldn't stand paying 30, you know, €3,500amonth. Sorry. Yeah, €3,500amonth for my paycheck, for my health insurance. Just didn't make any sense to me. 55% taxes, all included in Germany. And that's before you start paying VAT, which is 19% in Germany. But they do have, you know, if you're an employee, you have, you know, unemployment money, you have health care, you have all this kind of stuff. So it isn't that bad. But then you have the other side of the coin and that is, how long can that last? Because now with the, with the crazy immigration and you have, unfortunately in Germany you have the law that was passed that if you're Muslim and you have more than one wife, they can all go on, on, on Social Security or unemployment or welfare. And so you have, you know, some people having 10 people in their family all collecting welfare and it's breaking the system. So there's a lot of pros and cons there. I just got to say this. In, in Europe, in the end, when you, when you're done paying all the taxes and all the solidarity tax and they're still paying solidarity tax for East Germany, when the wall came down, they're still paying for that. Every, every Westerner, you might have 14 of your money left over. Can you imagine?

C (37:26)

Yes, I can. Because we've lived here. It's. Yeah, it's really tough. It's so sad for the working people. It's a gut wrencher.

B (37:35)

Well, but the thing is this. There's a lot of people that still believe the globalists rule. So they still believe Fund the line, they still believe maths, they still believe Macron and they're fighting like tooth and nail on X, like Europe's better and we're going to be, you know, we don't need you and all this kind of stuff. It's, it's a shame that we can't see that the normal people cannot see the, how these puppets in Europe are completely ruining their nations and gutting them economically as well as the energy. You know, that's, that's a whole other story, but we can talk about some other time.

A (38:06)

Yeah, I mean, Germany's in dire straits right now and. Yeah, yeah, most of Europe in that way as well. Steve, great to have you here. Thank you. I know it's like after midnight there in Turkey right now, so I think it is like 12:30 in the morning, so thank you so much for staying up late with us there in Turkey and sharing your thoughts on all of this. We really Appreciate it.

B (38:24)

My absolute pleasure. Looking forward to coming back.

A (38:26)

Oh, we love to have, you know. Yeah.

B (38:28)

Thank you.

C (38:29)

Mom says go to bed.

A (38:30)

Get to bed. You've been warned.

C (38:33)

Steve, I have three kids. I cannot, I can't help myself. I apologize.

A (38:39)

Oh, thank you, Steve. All right, coming up, we are going to talk about. What are we talking about next on the cd?

C (38:45)

Oh, we're gonna talk about the childhood defense. The children's health defense is dropped. The most aggressive medical accountability lawsuit over the childhood vaccine schedule that we've ever seen. And it's thrilling. Get thrilled and we're gonna talk about it with the CEO of the chd.

A (39:02)

We're very excited about that. Mary's gonna be here in a minute. But first, and we got a bunch of other stories, so stick around. But first, if you're an adult who uses nicotine pouches, Lucy breakers are the ones that you've got to be keeping around. A lot of our viewers love them. They're 100% pure nicotine, always tobacco free. And the whole breaker thing is actually what makes them different. Each pouch has a little capsule inside, so when you want a little hit of flavor, you just crack it and release it. I heard from our viewers, I said they love the, the Berry Citrus mint is always the go to, of course, but Berry Citrus, a top one as well. Keep them in rotation and you get, you know, whatever strength you want it, you know, it kind of hits your sweet spot there. Throw, you know, throw in one, you're just kind of hitting that mid afternoon slump after a meal while driving, maybe just on a. You got a long work block going on. Because it's simple, it's consistent, the flavor actually lasts. And if you already know you like them, the subscription makes it brain dead easy. Just set it up once and you have it delivered straight to your door in a subscription. Lucy's the only pouch that gives you long lasting flavor whenever you need it. And you can get 20% off your first order when you order today. That's right, 20% off when you buy online with the code redacted. And if you don't want to wait, just head over to Lucy Co Redacted to find a Lucy store near you. Or, sorry, excuse me. If you just want to go to a store near you, go to Lucy Co stores to find a Lucy near you and grab it today. But if you want to save that 20% off, you can just order it online. Lucy Co redacted there. These products are only for adults of legal age. Every order is age verified and the Warning, of course, on the label, this product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical. So Lucy co redacted. Get 20% off your first order.

C (40:48)

Well, the Children's Health Defense has filed one of the most aggressive medical accountability lawsuits in decades. They're comparing it to lawsuits against the tobacco industry. What we are litigating here is the childhood vaccine schedule. This is a RICO lawsuit against the American Academy of Pediatrics, accusing them of systematically misleading parents, suppressing safety science, and enforcing an untested childhood vaccine schedule through professional coercion and financial incentives. Here's the lawsuit, if you'd like to read it for yourself. Now, the case does not argue whether vaccines work. It argues something much more exciting, explosive, that the full vaccine schedule has never been properly safety tested. It's true. That is true. You cannot argue that it has. It's undeniable that those vaccines, as they are given in combination and the schedule and the ages at which they are administered, has never been tested, full stop. I don't see how you could argue that that's true. A lot of those also have never been given a full placebo test. Test each vaccine. Not all of them offer herd immunity, such as tetanus. But parents are not given that distinction. So this is not a scientific argument, it's a factual one. And here are some of the major claims of the lawsuit. They claim that the AAP substituted theory for evidence when they said that theoretically infants could respond to 10,000 vaccines at once. That's how they're promoting this safety, that pediatricians are pressured to comply or lose their careers, that parents who question this are misled and sometimes criminalized. There's that this is a financial ecosystem that rewards compliance. And again, they're drawing parallels to other RICO cases, such as the one against the tobacco companies, arguing that AAP has similarly suppressed evidence. So joining us to discuss is the CEO of the Children's Health Defense, Mary Holland. She joins us to discuss this bombshell. Move, boss, move. Mary, how did you decide to do this? You're really taking on a behemoth.

G (42:55)

Well, we really think there's very serious problems with the American Academy of Pediatrics, especially right now, because you know that 19 states are saying they're going to follow the American Academy of Pediatrics instead of the Centers for Disease Control. So this is a very timely and important question. And the sad reality is that the AAP knows that the schedule has never been properly tested. The Institute of Medicine, the highest medical authority in the country, has told them in 2002 and 2013 you can't say this. You actually have to compare unvaccinated and vaccinated outcomes, which they've never done. So they've been knowingly lying to people, to parents in particular, for decades that they're safe and effective. It's been perfectly well tested, and you should just shut up and get your shots.

C (43:47)

The thing that makes me so crazy is when you watch this on the news, on the mainstream media, they treat vaccines as a protective class, as a monolith, as if that. And you and I both know that some vaccines have better safety records than others. And parents are not taught to distinguish which ones are needed, which ones are safer, which ones have true placebo trials, which ones could need two or not. In the state of Colorado, they've just decided kids need two chickenpox vaccines. And there's no evidence as to why two is better than one. They just say they want to and that they just. That's what they want. And so why do you think that the media is in lockstep to treat vaccines as if they are all one thing?

G (44:33)

Well, let's not Forget that about 70% of the advertising revenue on television and in print media comes from the pharmaceutical industry. The pharmaceutical industry is a extremely powerful. They have two lobbyists for every member of Congress. There is almost no industry that is more powerful in terms of ad dollars and in terms of lobbying. But beyond that, I think there's a whole mythology, right? Vaccines save lives. Vaccines are safe and effective. We've created this mythology and treat vaccines completely differently than we treat drugs. And there's liability protection. They're coerced. They're mandatory to attend school. Vaccines have been put in this really amazing category for way too long. And I hope that this lawsuit helps to dispel some of that mythology. The hard fact truths are the American Academy of Pediatrics, just like the Tobacco Research Institute, is a front organization for industry, this is a pharmaceutical front organization. And their clients are not your children. Their clients are pharmaceutical behemoths.

C (45:40)

Right now, you can't really. From a legal perspective, it seems smarter to me to go up against the American Academy of Pediatrics rather than the vaccine makers themselves, because they enjoy an extreme amount of immunity. And so it. And it's maybe not on them if they make a chickenpox vaccine, it's not on them to test it with a tetanus vaccine. At the same time, they don't have to. The government doesn't require them to. And so talk about the tactics of going after the American Academy of Pediatrics and what you think? Well, what do your lawyers say? You know, is the strength of this lawsuit realistic? Because a good lawyer will tell you what is the uphill battle? Do you have good lawyers advising you that this is the part that will be hard?

G (46:27)

Sure. You know, and I am myself an attorney and so have been very involved in looking at this. And the strength of this is that it's going after the AAP for fraud. They have been knowingly lying. That is very clear. There's very clear evidence that they know that what they're saying is a lie. And we're not actually asking them to change the vaccines. We're just saying you have to tell people the truth. They set the standard. The AAP is saying to be a good pediatrician, you have to be a member of the AAP and you have to follow the AAP guidelines. And up until Secretary Kennedy, the AAP and the Centers for Disease Control were in lockstep about what the vaccines are. And frankly, there's never been a vaccine that was blessed by the advisory committee at the CDC that the AAP didn't like. So the schedule has only gone in one direction since liability protection came into play in 1986. But they really have been kind of this scientific patina, this scientific front organization, so that it doesn't look to the public like this is just commerce and this is just like, you know, a steamroller. It looks like, oh, we're pediatricians, we care about your kids. And we're really trying to hammer that that's not true. And we really see very strong analogies to tobacco. And this D.C. federal court and the D.C. circuit, they upheld the rulings against the racism, racketeering of the tobacco organism. The companies and the front organizations, the research organization, and we think the analogy is very strong. In fact, it's not. It's stronger here, not only because we're dealing with children and not with adults, but also, as the complaint makes clear, not only do they sell the vaccines, then they buy the companies and they sell the medicines that arise, the chronic diseases that arise from the vaccines. So what we know is that autoimmune conditions, neurological conditions, these are often chronic conditions that develop from vaccine injuries. Most people aren't aware of that, but certainly the pharmaceutical industry is very aware of that. And so in the complaint, we talk about the billion dollar acquisitions that these companies have made for asthma medications, for inflammatory bowel disease medications, for ADHD medications and so on.

C (48:48)

Right? And so if past is prologue, we, if we pay attention, we could get from this discovery, from this Litigation, all manner of communication from the American Academy of Pediatrics saying, this is real. This data shows this. Let's do this with this. I mean, we have that from the fluoride industry, from the American Academy of Dentistry.

H (49:15)

So.

C (49:16)

And it's incumbent on us. We have to pay attention because this could be huge.

G (49:20)

Right. This is like tobacco. You know, ultimately the information came out, they knew that tobacco caused lung cancer. They weren't in the dark about that. It was just all about how do we. How do we prevent people from knowing that? How do we have some doubt? And, and it's. They, they haven't even gotten to that here. They've just been saying and, and gotten away with it. The, the, the sketches schedule is well tested. You know, there are no such things essentially as vaccine injury. And that's sadly, totally untrue. The first two plaintiffs in our case are parents of children who died from their vaccines. Died from their vaccines. And sadly, that's not so rare.

C (49:56)

It's in their black labels. They know it. They. This is undeniable. It happens. I want to ask you about Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. He now says he's launching an investigation into the childhood vaccine schedule. What do you make of this? Do you think that he might be also successful in receiving and publicizing some of this information so that parents have it?

G (50:20)

We're very excited about this. So what he's really focused on are the financial kickbacks. Right. So pediatricians have to have about 90% of their practice get all of these vaccines so that they get these bonuses. And if they don't get those bonuses, they literally can't stay in business. And our complaint deals with that. And the attorney general.

C (50:39)

I don't think I understood that financial. So that's why if I tell my pediatrician I'm not doing this, that's why she's so annoyed. Okay.

G (50:48)

And she might even kick you and your children out of the practice because she has to make certain thresholds, like 90% and then she lower her right. Correct. So you're threatening to her making her bonuses, and without those bonuses, she can't really stay in practice. And so that's what Ken Paxton is going after. And he has things as a state attorney general that we don't have. So he's already put out 20 requests. And they're not really requests. They're essentially like subpoenas. You have to turn over these documents. So again, people are going to be waking up. This is a big business, and it's fraught with perverse incentives. It's not about your child. It's about meeting these thresholds that 90% of the kids are. 95% of the kids have gotten all these shots.

C (51:31)

How can that be legal?

G (51:33)

It shouldn't be.

C (51:34)

They're kickbacks.

G (51:35)

They're kickbacks. They should not be legal. They've gotten away with it. It's through the insurance industries, and it's something that has to come out. And, and we're getting there.

C (51:44)

You have a good faith conversation with the doctor and say, like, let's say a COVID vaccine. And you say, well, I already have heart inflammation. And the doctor says, but this will hurt me if you don't do it, so let's do it. That's. That's literally the incentives that play here. I don't, I'm flabbergasted, clearly.

G (52:06)

Well, it's actually throughout medicine, right? So there's, there's, there are websites that show, you know, doctors get kickbacks from the medical device makers and from the drug ones. And if you prescribe, you know, X percentage of our drug rather than the competitors, medicine's full of this. There's a lot of corruption in medicine, sadly. But we have to get back to the idea that it's all about the individual. It's about the patient, it's about the child. It's about the parent and the child and what is best for this child. Not what is best for this pediatrician's economic bottom line. What is best for the health and well being of this child. And we hope that this lawsuit will take us in that direction.

C (52:46)

Well, I'm wishing you luck. I want to see a lot that you get to see in the discovery process. I hope you don't settle it, but I know it's. It's a tough, it's a tough hill that you've got to climb because you're up against deep pockets. So keep us informed, please.

G (53:03)

Absolutely. Thank you so much.

C (53:04)

Yeah. All right. That's. That's badass is what she's up. That's. That's big.

A (53:12)

Yes.

C (53:12)

She's rolling a big ball up a hill. And so let's cheer her on. So we have more to get to. We're gonna talk about the data again. Speaking of our children, RFK Jr says he'd like to get cell phones out of school nationwide. He says there is evidence that cell phone radiation is harmful to which now the media response. No, it's not. We don't know that. We do know a little bit about that. So to say that science is settled is ignorant. And Dishonest. So we're gonna talk about that in a second. Before we do, though, we wanna remind you about our friends over at Lear Capital. You guys have how gold and silver are going through the roof. Let's take current prices right now. Gold over $95. That's wild silver. But I'm sorry, silver over $95 an ounce. That is crazy, toad. At this time last year, it was half that. We now are seeing gold over 94,900 per ounce. You know, many of us never thought we'd see this, but we knew that volatility in the geopolitical market was going to lead to high prices and precious metals. Boy, were we right. So, you know you hate it when people say, I told you so, but this is something we've been keen on for a long time because we continue to watch the American dollar devalue by paying for war, by paying for welfare programs. We showed you yesterday what the new spending package is. 1.7 trillion only. Only through September. What's that going to do to your savings, to your American dollars? It's going to make it worth less. It's going to make your purchasing power shrink day by day by day. It is unequivocal that that's happening. So if you would like to learn how to invest in gold and silver, it is definitely not too late. Let our friends over at Lear Capital help you. You can call them, and this is the way that I suggest that you do. Call them at 800-613-3557 and have a conversation. It is not formal. They will just help you from soup to nuts. No matter what your level of expertise is in investing in precious metal, they will help you. You can also go to learredacted.com and there are a million ways to invest. They'll teach you the bullion. They'll teach you the various asset classes. They'll teach you how to do it either inside an IRA or outside whatever you've got. They can teach you. You can get a free investor guide. You also also can receive up to $20,000 in free bonus medals with a qualified purchase. So Again, go to learedacted.com or call them at 800-613-3557. No need to be intimidated. Call them at whatever level and they will help you. They are friendly and knowledgeable. Learedacted.com all right, all right.

A (55:53)

So let's talk about Canada. So Canada has an organ harvesting problem. Or if you maybe want to look at the globalist elites, it's probably A for positive thing for the Canadian government and for the United States government, which gets to reap the benefits of this organ harvesting of maid patients. It's demonic. It's deeply satanic. We are looking at the transhumanist agenda unfolding right before our eyes in Canada. David Crayton joins us now from Ottawa, Canada to talk about that and so much more. David, we're getting some deeper facts now about this organ harvest that has been unfolding because of the MAID program. Maybe you can walk us through the mechanics of this and how this is actually affecting people.

F (56:36)

Well, you know, Clayton, we predicted that this was precisely what was going to happen with the Medical Assistance in Dying program. That it was not only going to become inevitable in expanding its scope of so called eligible people, but that organ harvesting was going to become part of this practice. So now I don't think we know know where legality begins and illegality ends or illegality begins and legality ends, because now we have a heart, an organ harvesting program that has essentially been started because of the euthanasia program in Canada. So I can tell you how much you can trust the Canadian government to do the right thing, to do the honest thing, to do something with any scruples behind it. And that's exactly zero. We have the most corrupt government ever in Ottawa right now. The liberal government of Mark Carney is the most corrupt government. And I predict this is exactly where the founders, the progenitors of the MAID program wanted this to go into organ harvesting. And so now, therefore, we can start selling these organs at tremendous profit to the United States and to other interested countries. And this is beyond disgusting. You called it demonic, Clayton. That's precisely what it is. Canada is a demonic cult of death headed by the high priest Mark Carney. His predecessor, of course, was Justin Trudeau, where all of this began. Canada is a country that has no abortion law, for instance. We have abortion on demand, unrestricted abortion on demand up till the birth and including, I believe, the birth of the child. We also have a euthanasia program that is so accessible now, it just keeps expanding. And of course a couple of years ago it was going to be expanded to the mentally ill and the addicted and even the children. But the liberal government sort of put the brakes on that. There was such pushback from psychiatric associations and psychologists. They decided just to. Just to slow things down a bit. I predict that expansion is coming in the near future and they'll do it very quietly and they'll do it behind doors, closed doors, because Mark Carney has passed Legislation now that this kind of activity can remain cabinet confidential and does not have to be revealed to the media or the public. This can all be done in clandestine activity. And this is exactly where they wanted to go with this program. Clayton, it is horrifying, but this is the end result of a society that does not value life.

A (59:48)

Well, and we got some new information from Jim o' Neill, who is the Deputy Health and Human Services Secretary and he has condemned this. So I think one of the reasons we're getting maybe some more information about this over the past few days at least is from actually from Jim o'. Neill. And he's saying that this is a permissive program for ill patients. And he says that this has crossed ethical boundaries by increasing the deceased organ donation rates. And you know, we point to these statistics, he points out, he says, we thought we'd seen all the possible horrors, you know, in America. And then Canada has this strange new horror that was really just shocking. He says, end quote. We have from 2018 to 2022, the number of deceased donors who died by physician assisted suicide increased from 4.9% in 2018 to 14% in 2022. That's four years ago. I can only imagine that it's exploded since then. David, what has?

F (60:49)

Canada is the assisted suicide capital of the world. And the problem here, Clayton, is that you can't get an operation in Canada under our so called free healthcare system under Medicare, which so many Americans lusting after because they think, oh, it's the answer, Canada's Medicare, it's just so good. Well, the problem with that, Clayton, is that you can wait six months for a hip replacement operation, never mind if you have stage three cancer. So what are the authorities saying? I'm sorry, we're not going to be able to stop your cancer growth in time. We just don't have a surgeon available. We can't get you on the operating table. But guess what? We have medical assistance in dying and we're going to offer that to you. And by the way, maybe you can donate the organ to us afterwards. That's exactly where we're coming to. Clayton, I have talked to people who have been offered maid simply because they're depressed, simply because they're waiting for an operation. And it's not necessarily even a life saving operation. They're just waiting. So the people come around and say, well, you know, you have an option here if things get just too heavy for you. Have you considered medical assistance in dying and people who are suffering from the COVID shot? I have had People on my program talking about this Kayla Pollock, who is a quadriplegic as a result of the COVID shot. She was an athlete before COVID She's been offered maid twice instead of getting any help with her sickness from the federal government. So never mind trying to help people's lives, let's just offer them death. That's where this Liberal government has gone under Justin Trudeau and now is continuing the same course under Mark Carney. And it is horrifying.

A (62:50)

And now in the United States, 11 states are now also getting on board with this because it's all part of this liberal globalist demonic agenda to just push people to kill themselves and then to harvest their organs. Deeply, deeply disturbing. David, you've got some other news that I want to get to too, in Canada because we just got some information on the Emergencies act. And I also want to talk about the ostrich farm that we've been covering for the past few months. They got hit with a big fine, unfortunately, by the government. But let's talk about the Emergencies act first, because a big court ruling has now come out against the use of the Emergencies act, which of course squashed the Freedom Convoy truckers. This sets enormous precedent. Can you tell us what happened here?

F (63:35)

Well, this is perhaps the best news of the month. Well, it's easily the best news of the month. The Federal Court of Appeal rejected an argument, rejected an appeal from the Liberal government saying that a previous decision by Justice Richard Mosley In January 2024, a federal court judge who said the invocation, the use of the Emergencies act, which is essentially for those who unfamiliar with this concept, it's martial law. That's what the Emergencies act is. Justin Trudeau proclaimed it on February 14, 2022, Valentine's Day, to crush the Freedom Convoy, to crush the trucker protest. Justice Mosley said in 1-1-20 that was inappropriate, unjustified, wrong and unconstitutional. The Liberal government under Trudeau at the time appealed that decision. The decision came down last Friday. They rejected that appeal, and they went even further. And this is what I find fascinating, Clayton. The Federal Appeal Court went even further than Justice Mosley. Not only was it unconstitutional, it broke charter rights. It violated foundational charter rights, the charter of rights and freedom in Canada, which is part of our Constitution. And the judge, the judges involved in this appeal decision all said it violated charter rights. Now, this could have tremendous ramifications and consequences for a lot of people who suffered as a result of being in the Free Freedom Convoy protest. Bank accounts were frozen. Remember that. People were not able to access money. Lots people were jailed. And I'll tell you, this could have extremely positive consequences for a lot of people in the freedom convoy.

A (65:37)

Well, that's great news. Well, we got some bad news, so we have to pour some water on all of it, though. It's what happened to the universal ostrich farm and our friend Katie Pasitney, of course, who dealt with the horror there of them slaughtering all the ostriches. As you alerted me just a short time ago, they just got hit with a fine on top of having all of their ostriches slaughtered.

F (65:58)

And just literally 12 hours before the federal Appeal Court came down with this decision. And talking to Katie over the last couple of days, you know, she has said to me, what's really going on here? This is look over here, not over there, because the government can still punish you if you disagree with them. I believe she's right. This looks like a coincidence. However, why did they come down with this fine within 24 hours of the other decision being made that was in favor of freedom in this country? I think it was a direct single and symbol of how this liberal government hates freedom and likes to oppress people. So, $10,000 fine for what, you might ask? And of course, it's been over two and a half months now since this massacre of the ostriches. Well, the cfia, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, is arguing that the farm did not properly report sickness at the farm in December 2024. Yes, that long ago. And that they were only informed. The CFI was only informed as a result of a random tip in an anonymous tip. Now, within minutes, perhaps an hour of this decision being made, Katie Pasitney, spokeswoman for the farm, had all of the call logs on her Facebook page. She had all of the evidence posted that the cfia, true to form, not only do they do massacres very well, they congenitally and chronically lie. This is an agency of deep mendacity. And it was completely erroneous, completely untrue, that the farm did not seek veterinary advice as to the sickness on the farm, which of course has never actually been conclusively shown to be avian influenza. It was based on two PCR tests, which we now know are hugely inaccurate, as Redacted has reported, but on two dead birds. So we never even actually substantiated what the sickness was. But then the CFI has the gall to say they didn't report it, which they did. And they have the proof. They've got the receipts for that one. And then this anonymous tip came after they had actually reported it. So they've got them dead to rights. They've got the cfa. Katie has proven that the farm once again is innocent. The CFIA is up to their lying ways and trying to, what, extract another $10,000 from this family? Their farm looks like a war zone. They have ruined the farm. They have left bales of hay all over the place as the snow descends for winter. They have done everything possible to destroy the lives in the livelihood of this family. They failed at that, but they destroyed the farm in the process. And today they've got the absolute nerve to suggest this has something to do with public health fighting this farm. Now after they've destroyed all of the animals, they destroyed the ostriches. So this, you know, as Katie says, this makes absolutely no sense, except if you think it's about punishment. That's all this is to hold the farm up again to absolute ridicule and hatred from the people who believe somehow this was all necessary and they brought this on themselves. And that's who the CFI is trying to appeal to. They're trying to appease. It's not working, Clayton. People are looking at this, and they're saying, there they go again, terrorizing this farm, trying to humiliate this family and trying to push them further down.

A (70:08)

Well, and not only that, but the.

B (70:09)

Irony of, if I can, the irony.

A (70:11)

Of finding them for not reporting it.

B (70:14)

But threatening to find them when they.

A (70:16)

Were trying to get their own vets to find out if the animals were sick, like that's. They were going to.

B (70:22)

They were off.

A (70:22)

They were. They're going to find, what, $250,000 if they.

F (70:27)

If they got their own vet. $250,000 in six months in jail if they had tested their ostriches without the approval of the cfia, which the cfi, of course, refused to give because they knew those birds were healthy. This was the game they were playing. So you're quite right, Philip. What an irony.

A (70:47)

Awful. Poor woman. What's happened to them up there is just absolutely awful. Well, David, thank you so much for shedding light on it, as usual. Thanks for your great work. Thanks for covering a couple of stories for us today that we wanted updates on. So my. You know, anyway, my thoughts go out to Katie and the team over there, but thank you for your great work up there in Ottawa. David, as always, great to see you.

F (71:13)

Always nice to see you, too, Clayton. Thank you so much for having me on.

A (71:15)

You bet. Thanks, David.

C (71:17)

All right, well, let us know your thoughts on that coming up. We're going to talk to an expert on this ban on cell phones, radiation exposure, and our children. So we're going to do that. How are you doing?

A (71:30)

I'm doing good. This is a story that's going to be uncomfortable for a lot of parents, but I know that a lot of these students, a lot of these teachers, they put them in a sleeve when you walk in the front of his classroom to, you know, for the. The distraction purposes of it. But it goes. As RFK Jr is making the point, it goes beyond just a distraction. Just like, oh, you want to text your friends or something? No, it's far worse than that. From an electromagnetic.

C (71:54)

Yeah. And I think we should also ignore. Acknowledge other things that he said. Low academic performance, suicidal ideation, substance abuse. There's the gamut. Right. That we're trying to not not see. So we're going to get to that in just a moment. Clayton's gonna go to carpool while we do that.

A (72:10)

I am.

H (72:10)

Yeah, I am.

C (72:11)

I thought I had to sneeze. I don't. Okay, so we'll just get through sometimes. You ever feel that? Like it's coming, but nope. Abort mission. I'm gonna be okay for a while.

A (72:19)

Or someone just yells at you, you know, if you're about to sneeze. You ever hear that, like in someone, you know you're about to sneeze. You're about to sneeze.

C (72:28)

That's the hiccups.

A (72:30)

Oh, it's the hiccups.

C (72:32)

I don't think that.

F (72:33)

All right, I want to see that.

A (72:35)

I want to see the study on this.

B (72:36)

Clayton.

A (72:37)

I want to see the study on this. I don't. I don't know if this is.

C (72:39)

That's like looking at the sun.

A (72:41)

I don't know that we have the science on this just yet. I'm going to. I'm going to commission a study on this.

C (72:46)

Or not sneeze.

D (72:46)

Yeah.

A (72:46)

You're here. Just yell at you like that.

C (72:49)

And I wonder if there's. If that even is an old wives tale about hiccups, because I get the hiccups quite often. I don't think the scaring. Actually.

A (72:57)

I'm just going to keep trying to scare you and see if that works.

G (72:59)

What works for me.

B (73:00)

Spoonful of sugar.

C (73:01)

Is to take a big gulp of water and then swallow it upside down. Isn't that funny?

B (73:06)

Like standing on your hands.

A (73:07)

It's an old wives tale too. I'm just gonna hold you upside down.

B (73:10)

While you drink water.

C (73:10)

You drink water and then you bend over and Put your head upside down, just standing up, you bend over and you swallow the water.

A (73:17)

Yeah, a guy. You know what?

C (73:19)

Back me up.

A (73:20)

A man must have come up with that story.

B (73:22)

Come on, honey.

C (73:24)

Okay.

A (73:25)

All right. I got an idea to stop your hiccups.

C (73:28)

Go to carpool. That's what you need to do. Okay. Well, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Said says he is working with each state to ban cell phones in school. He cited concerns about depression, low academic performance, suicidal ideation, substance abuse and radiation exposure. Watch.

B (73:49)

Cell phones also produce electric magnetic radiation, which has been shown to damage, to do neurological damage to kids when it's around them all day and to cause cellular damage and even cancer. So cell phone use and social media use on the cell phone has been directly connected with depression, with poor performance in schools, with suicidal ideation, with substance abuse. And, you know, it's the other countries that have done this. The states that are doing this have found that it is a much healthier environment when kids are not using cell phones at schools.

C (74:33)

Mr. Secretary, you've talked.

B (74:34)

The teachers loved it.

A (74:35)

I bet.

C (74:36)

Yeah, the parents do, too. Well, immediately this clip on X was hit with this community note saying, oh, no, cell phones do not cause cancer and we know it. Do we have that community note? It's okay if we don't. So this is what they're doing, is collapsing a scientific debate into an absolute claim, which is far stronger, suggests that there is a negative effect of cell phone radiation than we care to admit. And in fact, the US government's own National Toxicology Program conducted a $30 million study decades long, exposing rats to cell phone type radio radio frequency radiation. And the results did show evidence of tumors in these rats and DNA damage. The World Health Organization classifies radio frequency frequency as a possible human carcinogen on the same category as lead and ddt. So to say that there is absolutely no evidence is reckless and frankly, ignorant. This is not settled, not by a long shot. So to walk us through what the science actually says and what gets ignored in the debates, I'm joined today by Theodora Scarato. Thank you for joining me. Oh, you're muted, are you? Do you know that? Or maybe you didn't. Is that our fault, guys, that we can't hear her?

B (75:57)

No, I think it's on, on her end. I'm not getting it from Zoom.

C (76:01)

Okay, we can hold on. We'll hold on. Yep, that's great. Okay, now I can hear you.

H (76:06)

Okay, I'm sorry about that.

C (76:07)

No problem. So, yeah, why don't you I'll just give you the floor to respond to this. What do you think and what do you. What does the signs actually tell us?

H (76:18)

Well, there are hundreds of scientists who are calling for action on this issue and have been for decades. This issue is not. In fact, it's one of the last nonpartisan issues that there is cell phone radiation. There's the EMF scientist appeal where you can see over 250 scientists who are saying that in fact the science is clear that safety is not assured. There are effects that have been documented as you talked about in a national toxicology program study in actually laboratories all over the world that have found reported not only cancer, but also impacts to the brain to development, especially with prenatal exposure, cellular impacts, oxidative stress and impacts to sperm to the reproductive system. And for example, reduced testosterone has been documented in some stud. So we have a situation however, where the US government used to be studying this issue. The EPA had a laboratory with several scientists. They were also measuring and monitoring the levels in the air from cell towers as an example. But that was fully defunded in the 90s. So what's happened is reckless is the perfect term because there's really been been very little oversight, accountability and transparency on this issue for decades.

C (77:50)

I don't know if you can see community notes on X because I have the ability to rate them. But one of the things that this community note on this video when it went viral was it literally said there is no evidence phone radiation causes cancer of any neurological damage. And it links to cancer.gov and I thought, who would say, why would you say it in such a declarative way? Because you have to then go out of your way to ignore nor uncomfortable science. Here's the the community. I screenshot it and you know, it's infuriating to just say, nope, absolutely no, no, no, nothing to see here. That seems crazy.

H (78:30)

It's a fairy tale. There's this fairy tale of cell phone safety that has been spun by the wireless industry which attacks studies which find effects, does replications which aren't replication studies in order to discount downplay when there are effects that have been reported. When I came onto this issue many decades ago, what I wanted to find was report a review. You know, like, well, where's the review by our federal government that looked at all the science and made a decision about is it safe, is it not safe? Or what level is safe? And I could not find it. That's what led me down this road 15 years ago. You know, I guess the question I would ask you is who do you think? Like, how do we know that cell towers are safe, what agencies are involved and what kind of checking do they do?

C (79:26)

Right.

H (79:27)

What your thoughts are on that?

C (79:29)

Well, I guess, you know, we live in towns with cell phone towers and that's anxietizing enough. But what the HHS secretary is saying, can we at least get the devices that are receiving the radiation farther away from our bodies more often? And so do we have a differentiation in those kind of studies, the towers versus the device?

H (79:51)

Well, wireless, be it from a phone or from a tower or from your wi fi router, it's all radio frequency radiation. There are a lot of different kinds of frequencies. And now we have 5G. In fact, we're on to 6G, which is being already tested in China and the U.S. the White House put out a statement that they're going to be supporting that as it moves forward. So all of it is non ionizing radiation. There's also power lines, for example. But what I learned and what I published in my recently published paper in Frontiers is that there is no oversight in terms of research for say pre market safety testing. Because I assumed, of course, there's pre market safety testing before new technologies or phones come on the market. We don't have that or wireless technology. There's not even testing to see if the radiation from our phones is within the limits that we have in the government. Limits which are from 1996 have not been updated since then. In fact, they go back even further and they're based on studies of small animals exposed for under an hour, under an hour of microwave radiation. So the limits that we have only are only designed to address overheating because the animals, when they were overexposed to the microwaves at high levels, which of course heat, they stopped pressing a little lever for food. And that is the level that the US government limits are based on as the level of adverse effects, not on preventing cancer or neurological impacts or cellular impacts or long term health effects that have been reported in some studies.

C (81:48)

Oh my gosh, that's terrifying. That's terrifying. I know because I started my career as a writer for PC magazine.

E (81:57)

That.

C (81:57)

A lot of technology is not tested for safety. It's put out for, for instance, you know, Apple had to be litigated before they would limit the levels of volume for their AirPods and their phones. They, you know, didn't have a standard based on what was healthy for a human. It had to go to court. And so, you know, what do you think needs to happen in order to get this, this research?

H (82:26)

Well, there you. There was a bill that was put forward many years ago which was about funding having research institutions that would be actively working on this issue, even labeling cell phones and cellular devices so people know that one, they emit radiation and how to reduce exposure. Because in fact, when you take a phone, here's another fact that blew my mind when I learned about it, which is that when a phone is in body contact, touching your body, people, you know, women put them in their bras, people put them in their pants pocket or maybe in your shirt pocket tight against your body, they can exceed our government limits. But we're not being informed about that. But it is actually. It's in, in the manuals of the cell phones or in the settings. If you go deep in your cell phone and look at the RF exposure information, they'll say that the phone was tested at a distance from the body, not in body contact.

C (83:32)

And skin to skin or one thin.

H (83:34)

Layer of clothing, skin to skin or a thin layer of clothes would be about 2 millimeters. And in fact, the FCC, which is the authority with no medical, biological expertise, which is in charge of this issue and has the regulatory authority, they did testing of phones at 2 millimeters and found levels that exceeded the limits which we have in the United States. And they withheld that information for years until I did a public information request, a FOIA Freedom of Information request, and got the reports showing that the levels, the numbers which they measured exceeded limits. Now in other countries, they actually have post market surveillance where they go out and they measure cell phones. What are, what are the emissions? How about cell towers? They measure and audit cell towers to make sure that they are compliant with government limits. Whereas in the United States, we don't have that. We don't have a post market surveillance. And in France, there's over 60 phones that have been either taken off the market or software updated because they exceeded limits or violated the regulations to some degree.

C (84:51)

Wow. Okay. So you're saying there is a bipartisan support to get this information, to start regulating it, but why hasn't it happened?

H (85:03)

Well, I think. I don't know if there. I think there's a bipartisan support of the people who understand that cell phones, you know, they're addictive by design. Right. I mean, we know there's like a whole laundry list of reasons why cell phones and kids are not the perfect mix.

C (85:19)

Yeah.

H (85:19)

But also when it comes to this radiation, I worked with communities from all over the United States and internationally, and this is not About Republican, Democrat. This is about public health safety, transparency, accountability, and really people being informed, informed consent. So a lot of times there'll be parents who contact us because there is a cell tower going up at their child's school and they were never notified.

C (85:53)

Oh my gosh.

H (85:53)

That happening?

C (85:54)

Yeah.

H (85:56)

So. And children are more vulnerable.

C (85:59)

Right. So what do you think are best practices then right now to demand accountability? Maybe for one. But you know, just in our house. What. Until we know for sure, since there's so much damning evidence suggesting ill health effect.

H (86:17)

Okay, so I'll talk about phones and also other ways to really address this. So with phones, don't put the phone near your head, keep it at a distance. Use. Don't sleep with your phone. These are some easy first steps because when you sleep, that device is always radiating a wireless device. Most of them, even when they're not in use, they are emitting and pulsing. So don't sleep with it by your bed or charge it by your bed at night. Have turn off things that emit wireless radiation in your home from your phone to your WI fi router. I use hardwired Internet. That means that the. It's faster and safer, more secure. And I don't have drops with my. Yeah. When I'm on a zoom, for example. And the important thing that's happening now is in the middle of all of this, we have hhs, which is moving forward with a study on cell phone radiation in children. And then we have Congress and the FCC proposing bills that are going to fast track streamline cell towers across the United States by eviscerating local control, local city, town, county control over where and how cell towers will be placed. I would urge everyone to go to our website at Environmental Health Sciences, ehsciences.org, our wireless program. We have information about these, about what's been proposed. And the House and Senate have been sent letters calling for more transparency. There needs to be more awareness of this by our lawmakers so they can have. What's needed is an open conversation about this where just the whole issue can be aired, fully aired in the public.

C (88:22)

Yeah. Okay. Well, thank you. I just popped over to Environmental Health Sciences and I'll make sure I get on your newsletter and follow this. So thank you so much for this. It's uncomfortable to hear, but there are practical steps that we can take and also, so just pay attention to where these towers are going up. So it was a pleasure to talk to you. I hope you'll come back and talk about this another time with Us.

H (88:45)

Thank you so much. I'd love to. And I'd also say that there are a lot of ways that phones can be designed to emit less radiation. So if there's incentive for that, this can be solved by R and D. By the telecom companies themselves.

C (89:00)

Yeah. Awesome. Hadn't thought of that. I wish I had thought to ask you, but thank you for bringing in. For bringing it up.

H (89:07)

Thank you so much for having me.

C (89:08)

All right, well, you guys let us know what you think of that. It's anxietizing, but, you know, you have to continue to think about this, even. Just don't keep it in your pocket. Hadn't occurred to me. Put it in your purse. If you don't carry a purse, get one. Get a fanny pack. Get a briefcase. Let's bring briefcases back. Gentlemen. What do you think? Shall we do that? Put your phone in a briefcase.

A (89:30)

I'm down.

B (89:30)

I have a case won't fit in my back pocket.

C (89:35)

Okay. Why? Yeah, Philip has got a briefcase. Is it your dad's? Did you inherit it?

A (89:41)

Yes, actually, it was. It was. I believe it was my dad's. And then now it's. It's my daughter's. She keeps art stuff in it.

C (89:49)

Love it. My dad still carries a satchel. It's like a briefcase, but it's softer. So, you know.

B (89:55)

Isn't that called a immerse?

C (89:57)

No, it's a satchel. It's. It's like file folders. It's not a. It's got, like, folders. Like, he has literally a day planner in there and his laptop. It's like. It's like a glorified laptop bag, but a little bit softer. So, anyhow, I should have asked her about this. This is making me anxietized now that we think about the Apple Watch.

H (90:18)

Right?

F (90:18)

I'm sure she's still here.

C (90:21)

Well, we could ask her to. Can she hear me? Is she laughing?

B (90:25)

Doria, can you unmute and answer that?

H (90:29)

Well, the Apple Watch also emits radio.

C (90:32)

Frequency radiation, and it's right up against your skin. It's constantly reading vitals.

H (90:37)

Right.

C (90:38)

So, yeah. Okay. All right. I knew the answer to that. But thank you for being kind and smiling and you know what? I even had an acupuncturist while I was pregnant and was like, I wouldn't wear that if I was pregnant. So I. I understand. Thanks for coming back and smiling while you deliver that bad news. Okay.

B (90:59)

I wear mine around my ankle.

C (91:01)

Oh. Yeah.

B (91:02)

So, yeah. Just so it's further away.

C (91:03)

You don't. But you know. Yeah. Okay. I'm not going to make excuses. We need to see this. So I will. I will take the uncomfortable treat. Truth. Okay, well, that's going to do it for us on redacted today. We will be back next Monday. But we also have content for you all throughout the weekend. So please come back. I want to remind you that, hey, we have a newsletter. If you have not already subscribed, you can do so@redacted.inc. it is free. There is nothing that's behind a paywall. We really try hard to make sure that we link you to original source material. If you'd like to study something that we're writing about and we use use it to prep for the show. It's sort of a companion piece. So go to redacted.inc. put in your email address, totally free and you can have it. You can have it. Other things you might want to have. If you head on over to the redacted store, it's redacted store.com. you can find all sorts of ways to support the show. We have T shirts, hoodies. We have mugs. We have stickers. So things that we think that our audience might appreciate and enjoy. Head on over to redaction. All right, well, I will talk to you guys on Monday. We'll be available on social media on and again, we'll have content on these channels throughout the weekend. So please subscribe. We appreciate you being here. Have a good weekend, everybody. We'll see on Monday.