➡ The text discusses criticisms of the CIA and perceived manipulation narratives, concerns over the influence of TikTok and potential censorship, and disapproval of ongoing attempts to create a globally regulated internet that stifles freedom of speech and thought. There are also objections to banning things a society deems undesirable, arguing that issues like drug use are spiritual, not law enforcement concerns.
Do you trust anything about Osama bin Laden? I don’t, quite frankly, I don’t trust anything. But the other thing about it is that was this letter from Osama bin Laden. Do you care? Does it make any difference? It’s as if we got a letter from Anthony Fauci about vaccines and pandemics. Does that matter to you? Or if you got it from somebody that you would trust put in the name of one of these doctors or somebody that’s pushed back against this stuff, does that make it legit? It should never make it legit.
It’s just like when we’re talking about different news organizations, right? I’ve always had this discussion, you should never ban a news organization, which is what the CIA developed NewsGuard, working with Microsoft and Election Guard. That’s what they do. They give labels and say, don’t trust anything that this organization says. Meanwhile, their most highly trusted news organizations like The New York Times and Washington Post and others like that, oh, believe everything that they tell you.
No, you should be doing this on a case by case basis. New York Times and Washington posts are even capable of doing something accurate once in a while. Capable, but not usually doing it. And even though somebody else that may be overall trustworthy, everything that anybody says is not always 100% true or trustworthy. People make mistakes and then you have other people who deliberately try to lie to people, but they don’t make that distinction.
They just say, well, I don’t like the fact that they’re opposing our government narrative. And so we’re going to say that you don’t pay any attention at all to why these people do out there. But what difference does it make whether this letter is from Obama? Osama I always get them confused for some reason. I don’t know. Does that make it credible because it comes from Osama bin Laden? What does it say? You got to look at what it says and say, well, is this true? Because there’s a lot that’s in it that’s not true.
A lot that is opinion and conclusion. It’s an op ed piece. Whoever wrote it, it should stand on its own as to whether or not it’s true or not. I mean, I give references when I quote things because I don’t want to plagiarize people, but it doesn’t make something true because it comes from somebody that you generally agree with. But Osama bin Laden is becoming the new cheguavara of the TikTok generation.
And so Daisy Luther says, should we call them useful idiots? I call them youthful idiots because there’s nobody that’s more useful than the youth. And of course, Lenin knew that. I think he was the one who called them useful idiots. TikTok has now rehabilitated Osama bin Laden. 911, they say, was justified and an act of resistance, they say. Well, the reality is that what is really scary about this is that this is multiple layers of idiocracy.
Not only do these people believe it hook, line and sinker, but even though they believe that Osama bin Laden did 911 and was able to take down in New York three skyscrapers with only two planes, and they fell right into their footprint. Even though they believe that’s true, they support him, which truly is amazing. I mean, if you believe it, you would want to do something like go to war with, you know, not Afghanistan, but you’d want to go to war with Saudi Arabia or you’d want to go after Osama bin Laden, which, by the way, they didn’t.
It’s kind of like you see what’s happening right now with Israel and Hamas. You have these terrorists who organize this thing, and they’re living a life of luxury in Qatar, and everybody knows that they’re there. But you don’t have the US negotiating, turning over these people. You don’t have Israeli assassins going there to take them out. No, they’re going to use this to pursue their agenda of what they wanted, which is land and territory.
And I think that was a big part of what Afghanistan was all about. They wanted the poppy fields. They wanted the lithium that was there, and they used 911 as an excuse for that. But just as a reminder about while we’re talking about Osam bin Laden, let’s remember what 911 was about. Here is a retired chief with the Fire Department of New York. How did you come to the conclusion that 911 was a false flag for the first ten years? I did not.
New York Fire Commissioner other than the official narrative, then after being shown a close up video of building number seven coming down. And that got me going because it’s obvious to me that building seven was a controlled demolition. Because the building collapses from the bottom down. Can you basically break down? And it wasn’t even hit by a plane. Firefighting and construction for us, okay. I’ve been involved with heavy construction for over 30 years, been involved with the constructions of high rise steel frame buildings in Manhattan.
I’ve worked on bridges, and I know what goes into these buildings. I know what fire loads that they can handle, how fire is going to act. The Trade Centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the impact of a jet. From what I understand, the outer skeleton of the building, the outer columns, was like a fishnet. And you had these inner core columns, which were substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were.
Got it. The engineers always overdesign a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 911. So that should say something right there. I came across an analogy of the twin towers, and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked one on top of each other, the stoves up at the top, yes, there’s fire and they’ve been damaged, but the stoves on the bottom, they haven’t been damaged.
Okay? So the structure underneath all of that is intact. So it’s impossible for a building to collapse near freefall speed and increase without a controlled demolition. You’re running into the path of most resistance. Something else is going on. Again, that’s the New York fire department former fire commissioner. And there’s been no change in building codes or construction. There’s been no change in firefighting procedures. So obviously these people don’t believe any of this stuff.
The architects who are lying to you about that, they don’t believe this or they would change the way they build buildings. They don’t change anything in terms of firefighting tactics or fighting a fire in a skyscraper. As he pointed out, it’s the only time before and since that you’ve had a steel core building that just collapsed. I’ve shown pictures of steel buildings in other countries on fire for days, and there’s nothing left but this steel structure.
And it’s leaning a little bit, but it still didn’t fall. And so these people on TikTok are too stupid to understand that. And I say stupid. It’s stupid to believe the government narrative. This is beyond the magic bullet. Stupid, incredibly stupid. Daisy Luther says, let’s put aside for a moment all of our doubts about what occurred on 911, the actual culprit, because that isn’t the topic of this conversation.
This conversation, these young people believe, lockstock and barrel, that the biden bin Laden was a mastermind of attack on America, that he was able to kill 3000 innocent people. And they think that he is awesome. Awesome. These are the double down dummies, ignorant, haters, incapable of any critical thinking. And so she says, the letter is ravings about why they attacked. You know, when you look at the CIA, think about the fact that the CIA organized feminism campaign, they were very involved in that.
Using these radical feminists in the course, creating the drug war, creating many of the drugs, but running the drugs, the CIA is doing that. Even to the extent of pushing abstract art and architecture, removing beauty from our society. The CIA has been at war, a satanic war against us. The climate stuff that’s heavily footprints and fingerprints in that the poisoning of our minds everywhere. But of course they were also involved in the poisoning of our bodies as a CIA running these germ games, going back to two months before 911, bin laden hated Jews, americans and gay people just to name a few on his hit list.
Again. Unlike Daisy Luther. Unlike Gerald Celenti, I don’t even think this is bin Laden. I think this was written by the CIA. And if, you know, this is their attempt to sow discord and chaos and hatred and everything else, and it’s an attempt to shore up again in 2002 to shore up their phony war against their guy, Tim Osmond. He believed that anybody who died on 911 deserved it and wasn’t innocent because they paid taxes in a country that committed the acts against what he had grievances.
He was filled with hate because the first segment of this manifesto mentions the Palestinians. These kids think that he is now a beacon of truth. Well, again, the fact that they would celebrate this is bad enough and it’s compounded by their total ignorance and gullibility to believe this CIA narrative in the first place. Again, I don’t believe that this is bin Laden. It wouldn’t make it true if it was.
But they’re now making bin Laden another chevirah. The letter goes on to demand that everyone convert to Islam. It discusses how we’ve separated church and state in America and says that’s a bad thing. Well, it’s only a bad thing if it’s Christian, right? Yeah. See, the organizing principle left. My entire life has been, we got to get God out of our society. We got to get Christ out of our society.
We got to purge any free exercise of religion out of our schools and any other institution. And so when you look at this TikTok stuff, you need to understand the bigger picture here. Why is it that conservatives are so focused on TikTok and now all of this stuff about Osama bin Laden and you want to know what I think is happening? I don’t think this is something that happened organically.
In my opinion, this looks like a CIA operation. CIA going back and pulling up this letter that they probably wrote themselves back in 2002 and putting it out there, obviously anti Semitic as an excuse to take down TikTok. And so TikTok is saying, well, we’re going to aggressively take this stuff down and so forth. But you got all these people, all these conservatives who say we got to get TikTok down.
Look, I agree. It probably is a horrible piece of propaganda. So what? So what? These people, the ADL wants to censor and people like DeSantis doing it for them, going to Israel and signing a law in Israel, not in Florida, signing a law in Israel about hate speech. We’ll take down your opponents. Got some cash, can you pay me now? I’m sick of this type of thing being done.
And of course they want to take TikTok down because if they can ban an entire website, then imagine what they can do. They can take down Rumble, they can take down Odyssey, they can take down BitChute. They can take down Substac because you know that’s all content that they hate, that’s content that they’ve already been able to censor on YouTube and Facebook and other places. And so if you let this precedent of being able to take TikTok down, it’s going to go everywhere.
And so I think that the CIA is pushing this bin Laden thing. I think they wrote it. I think they resurfaced it and resurrected it. Oh, look. It’s anti Semitic. So now we can take down TikTok. You got UNESCO out there launching an action plan to regulate all internet content and social media platforms. Let’s see, who was it that was at the UN under Trump? Oh, that’s right.
It was Nuki Haley, who’s now the darling of Wall Street investors. They just love her. She’s going to be so good for business, for the military, industrial corporations. The plans were announced on November the 6th. The UN says the action plan its action plan outlines the principles which must be respected as well as the concrete measures which must be implemented by all stakeholders. Whenever you see that, understand that these people are holding stakes that they want to drive through our hearts.
They see us as vampires and vermin and a virus and everything else that they’ve labeled us. So UNESCO is going to organize a world conference of regulators middle of next year. A world conference of regulators who will do regulation without representation, just like our bureaucracies do. Now we have taxation without representation from the bureaucracy in Washington all under the know. The entire swamp was under President Trump. That’s the executive ranch.
He did nothing about it, by the way. And so this swamp that taxes us without representation, this swamp that regulates us without representation, now they’re going to get a global swamp. A conference of regulators in mid 2024. Seven, tenets. Number one, the impact on human rights at every stage will be examined by every stakeholder. Yeah, it doesn’t say that they support these rights. It’s going to be the compass for their decisions, the impact on human rights.
But they very carefully don’t say they support human rights. If they did, they’d be lying. Number two, independent public regulators are set up everywhere in the world with clearly defined roles and sufficient resources to carry out their mission. This is what the UN wants. So they want public regulators set up everywhere in the world, taking orders from them about what to ban. Number three, prevent digital companies from taking advantage of disparities between national regulations.
In other words, we’re going to have one set of global rules. We’re going to have some unelected global regulators who are going to tell every sovereign nation what they must do. Centrally controlled censorship. Number four, content moderation is feasible and effective at scale, thanks to artificial intelligence and other things that are coming along. Number five, accountability. They hold people accountable to them. And transparency. Not transparency for what they do, but transparency for what we do.
Transparency at all these platforms. Take a look at all of their algorithms. And why are you hearing that with the FCC regulation as well? Number six, platforms must take more initiative to educate and train users to think critically. Yeah, start with the Osama bin Laden thing. And finally, number seven, the bureaucrats and the platforms must take stronger measures during particularly sensitive, you know, elections and crises. Well, it’s always an election is a cris for them.
They’re worried that it’s going to get out of control. Now you see people on the right, like this article from Epic Times on Zero Hedge. Millions of Americans are walking into a Chinese made trap, and they talk about how bad TikTok is, and it is it’s stupid. I’ve never been to it, though. I mean, I know how stupid it is because I’ve seen what Libs of TikTok has pulled from there.
But look, do we ban everything that’s bad? Is that a response? Everything that’s bad needs to be banned and needs to be banned by the federal government. Well, you know, there is another option. You don’t have to use it, or you can do something that is positive, or you can oppose it publicly. It’s very much like drugs. Drugs have not been over 50 years. They’ve not been able to stop the drugs by force of prohibition, by banning.
They did try to do it legally. They understood that the 10th Amendment didn’t give them the power to ban anything, and it still is there. So they don’t have the authority to ban TikTok any more than they have the authority to ban anything else without a constitutional amendment. And that’s why everybody went to the trouble of putting in the 18th Amendment when they wanted alcohol prohibition, because the federal government doesn’t have the authority to ban anything, whether you’re talking about alcohol or tobacco or pot or TikTok or anything.
They have no constitutional authority. The emperor has no clothes. That’s why Jeff Sessions was afraid to push that. As much as he hated pot, the states could make it legal and say, well, we’re not going to enforce those federal prohibitions. And there was nothing he could do about it. He did not want to have that argument. He didn’t want to expose the fact that this is naked tyranny, that the Emperor has no clothes.
But the whole idea that everything that we don’t like needs to be banned. This is essentially cancel culture. Do you think that cancel culture began with the Left? No, the Right was doing that as well. We don’t like drugs. I don’t like drugs. I don’t use drugs, therefore but I understand that it is a spiritual issue, not a law enforcement issue. And after 50 years, maybe the other people might understand that as well.
The David Knight Show is a critical thinking super spreader. If you’ve been exposed to logic by listening to The David Knight Show, please do your part and try not to spread it financial support or simply telling others about the show causes this dangerous information to spread favour. People have to trust me. I mean, trust the science. Wear your mask, take your vaccine, don’t ask questions. Using free speech to free minds.
It’s the David Knight show. .