REFERENCE

All right, folks, this is going to be an exciting one, and we have Captain Dan Handley, 9-11 Pilots. We'll get into his details in a minute. I don't want to keep him waiting. He's already itching to go in the green room for Zoom. So I'm going to set that right up. Just a quick reminder, folks. You know where to go. McCairndojo.com. Make sure the doc can keep bringing you top quality content like this. And yeah, we'll get we'll get into what I think is the ignition point of the war that we find ourselves in today. Captain Handley, how are you, sir? Hello, Kevin, I'm doing great. Thanks for having me on. You're more than welcome. I've just got to do a little tidying up on the screen real quick, but it's a pleasure to have you on. I was just making a small talk as getting ready to get you on, and I was saying that I consider 9-11 the ignition point for the war that we're in that's continuing to this day. And I would put forward the premise that it's spread from the Middle East, it's global, and they're using all kinds of next generation techniques to wage war against the global population. And now I'm hoping... Could you introduce yourself, because you have such a such a long curriculum vitae. I'm not going to do it justice, so... Okay, well, I commence flying. I'll give you a little bit of information on my flying background. I commenced flying over 50 years ago in 1968 at age 19, first as a civilian. I got my private commercial instrument on the engine rating by 1970, and then entered a four-year college to get my bachelor of science in math by 1973. And at that time, the Vietnam War was still raging, so I had to make service plans to get drafted in the Army, and I chose naval aviation. So I entered the Navy in 1973 and got my wings in 1974. And over the next 10 years, I flew the P-3 Orion aircraft, which was used to track Soviet submarines in the Cold War. In 1978, I got hired by United Airlines as a pilot, and over the course of the next 25 years, I flew seven airplanes. So all total, I flew 15 different aircraft, accumulating 20,000 flight hours over a 35-year career. So that pretty much sums it up. Very impressive. Actually, maybe you know a friend of mine, or the father of a friend of mine. He threw P3 Orions and also worked for United Airlines, was around during 9-11. His last name would have been Iafreti. Frank, Iafreti? No, I don't know him. Shame. So, where to begin? I've got many, many questions. The towers, the Pentagon. Do you have a preference somewhere to start? Well, maybe I should give you what I'm doing right now as we are doing our grassroots effort. I'm the director of public spokesperson for global grassroots effort called 9-11 pilot whistleblowers. And we've got a website at 911pilots.org and a YouTube channel at 911pilots. And the purpose of our organization is to show that there were no Muslim hijackers actually controlling the 911 aircraft, but that they were electronically hijacked and remotely controlled through this system called the uninterruptible autopilot that enables a remote source to take complete control of the aircraft autopilot and flight management computer and drive it to its target. And once this system is engaged, the pilots can't disconnect it anymore. They're along for the ride. And so the goal of our organization, for one, is to spread the word about our website, 911pods.org, but also to recruit active and retired military and civilian pilots from around the world, who will attest to the fact that not only could these hijackers not fly the flight profiles that day, but that they couldn't fly them themselves. So that's it in a nutshell what I'm doing. I presently live in Islamabad, Pakistan, and we've named that appropriately as the headquarters for our organization. So, I mean, I could, I've got so many questions to ask you. So, I mean, you made the statement that it would have been impossible for the hijackers to commandeer the plane. And I often wonder about the dynamics that would have taken place in the cockpit. So how, in your mind, how would that have gone down? Presumably they forced the pilots out of the seats and they think that they're taking control? I'm speculating. I try to stick to facts mainly, but I'll speculate on my part because I can't prove it, but I envision this scenario where they broke into the cockpit, maybe forced, like the Pentagon pilots were forced to back the airplane, supposedly, but I don't know how they determined that. But they could have slit their throats also and climbed in the seat, and they never flew Boeing 757 or 767 before in their lives, which to me is bewildering that the official story claims that they did. We don't have any record that they had training on those airplanes, so I don't know if they would know how to engage an autopilot, but if you do the comparative analysis between the cockpit of a Cessna 172, which was their primary training aircraft, with that of a Boeing 757 or 767, you'll see this vast difference in instrumentation, the number of switches, knobs and dials up there. So how they were able to interpret that and then navigate the airplane and get it to descend and do what it did. So the whole scenario seems impossible. So just in case that the pilots were alive in this instance, would they have known that the system that you're describing would have been engaged? No, I was still employed at United on 9-11. I was flying Boeing 777s, but I also flew 757s and 767s, which were the airplanes used on 9-11. I mean, to this day, when I talk to pilots about the system, they said, no way. No way does that exist. But we proved to them that it does exist, and it was developed and produced prior to 9-11. So they wouldn't have had any way of knowing that that system was on the airplane. So in your framework, it would have required retrofitting the planes that were involved on 9-11 with the guidance system. That's correct. So a lot of foreplanning that went into it. And, you know, there's the claim that they, with respect to the towers, that they were able to navigate by, it was a clear day. And so they could see the target from the cockpit with respect to the towers. Do you buy that in any way? Well, they both took off out of Boston, not from Boston, New York, and I'm not sure that they would be able to see the towers from after they took off when they hijacked the airplane. I mean, you could argue, hey, if you fly a little bit south, you can pick up the Hudson River and fly on down into New York. So, yeah, but then it goes back to how would they even know how to fly this airplane? You know, people, I think people are a little bit confused and talking amongst other guys in this group. We've agreed that we believe that the reason so many people fell for this story that these pilots flew the airplane is because they're not pilots and they can't conceive of the absurdity of the notion that they did. So I mean maybe just break down for us a little bit. Once the planes reached cruising altitude, which I presume that was the case as the hijacking took place, how much sort of moment to moment control is required for a plane like that? Like you described, complex maneuvers. I want to just stick with the towers right now because it seems an easier set of aerodynamics to try to visualize. So just in the normal conditions, how much pilot control is required moment to moment to guide that plane to its target? You mean from takeoff to target? Yeah, so once it's at cruising altitude and as a, how should we say, a thought exercise, the pilots themselves wanted to hit the twin towers. How much moment to moment control is required? What surfaces, thrust, checking pairs? They have to know, which they probably did go to idle thrust on the engines for their descent, or they could leave some power up, but normally you go idle thrust and twist the nose over and that will get you to send. Then again, you're talking about guys that flew this 27 foot long, one ton aircraft that normally cruises at 100 knots, a 172 versus 100 ton airplane, capable of producing 48,000. The airplane differences are profound, and so are the control loading on the airplane. I mean, imagine flying, I mean driving your family car compared to a semi-tractor trailer. That's about the difference as far as the control fields go. But I believe that if they got in the seat, they could have started a descent. It's just that the feel of the airplane they would have never had before. So the system, what was the name of the system that you called it? Uninterruptible autopilot. Yeah, so the uninterruptible autopilot, they sit in the seat, and they're under the illusion that the controls that they're moving are... Well, we don't know at what point in time the uninterruptible autopilot was engaged. And another thing, I don't know what they believe their mission was. I don't believe they believed they were going to hit buildings. Again, I'm speculating on that, but I've always imagined that they thought somehow they were going to get this thing on the ground and have a normal hijacking when all of a sudden the airplane takes off on them and does, and they can't control it. So we don't know. We never got the cockpit voice recorders or the flight data recorders, and we'll never know what the scenario was in that regard. So I guess my next question is, and this is something that I've heard a lot of claims about, that the speed at which the plane was flying with respect to what was essentially a low altitude, right? Right. My understanding is that the speed was beyond the normal operating envelope. That's correct. It exceeded the max operating speed at sea level of those aircraft, about 120 to 140 knots. And I get criticized and go, give me a break, my airplanes would have come apart. You know, well, I'm not an aircraft structural engineer, so I can't go with that. And the other thought is those speeds came from the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board. And my total lack of trust in the U.S. government or anything they put out there. So I don't know, I can't confirm what speed they were at. But yeah, there are a lot of people that say that, and others say, no, the airplanes would have stayed together. Yeah, it's one of those, I guess. Surely, they would be able to calculate the speed relative to buildings. There's enough videotape, right? You must be able to frame by frame relative to buildings that are in the shot, be able to make some rough estimate of the speed with which they came into the... Yeah, but we have to go with the government scenario on this, and they've got everything else wrong. I don't know if these speeds were accurate or not. So aerodynamically, the approach to New York was far, far simpler than the third impact on the Pentagon, right? That's correct. You want me to describe the Pentagon profile, or you want to stay with the Taurus? Well, I think we can sort of handle both, right? So the Taurus was essentially what seems like a straight line vector. I mean, I don't... Kevin, the tires are only 208 feet wide, and you'll think, well, that's big. Well, the wingspan of those aircraft is about 150 feet, and they hit them dead on both of them, okay? And when you look at the narrow target they had, and their closer rate on the building, we describe it as akin to being able to drive the family car and never having driven a semi-tractor trailer before and hop into it, get it up to a real high speed and try to drive it to a garage without scraping the sides of the truck. That's how accurate it would have to be. But comparing that to the Pentagon profile, the American Flight 77 took off from Washington, D.A., heading towards L.A., and it got to cruise altitude for a while, and then in an about phase 180 turned back to Washington and started a descent. And according to some, there was some erratic movement of the aircraft as it initially started the descent. I don't know how they determine that, but once it got to 7,000 feet, the airplane commences this descending and accelerating 330 degree cart screw turn to arrive precisely at the surface without skidding it at over 500 knots to precisely hit the Office of Naval Intelligence in Pentagon at that speed on his first attempt. Let me say, Kevin, that that profile was replicated in a simulator and flown.

There's another grassroots group called Pilots for 9-11 Truth. They did this test and they put highly experienced pilots in the seat of a 757 simulator and replicated that maneuver, had them replicate that maneuver, and they couldn't do it without crashing. The difficult part would be getting down just a few feet above the surface, and why did they have to do that? Because the Pentagon is only 71 feet tall, so they were skimming the grass, and he didn't skid the aircraft at all, which would have caused it to crash, and did it on his first attempt. Yeah, it's mind-warping when you try to think about what did occur on that day. The most frustrating part is that for all the reels of footage that we got from New York, the absence of evidence around the Pentagon is is well disturbing. It's one of the most secure buildings in the world and it's got I think like 80 cameras around it it had okay and the FBI came in right after the accident and secured all those cameras took control of them not only did they take control of those but there was a camera in a Virginia highway patrol car they went over and figured he captured the event and they took that they took a camera off the double tree hotel and another one off a Citgo gas station so they and then later people were demanding to see it they released a few frames of the aircraft approaching the pentagon that's about all you could get it was traveling at such a high speed and they said there see there was an airplane there so there's people studying this stuff all over the world, actually. So 20 years later, 9-11 truth isn't dead. You know, you said COVID is like 9-11 on steroids, but people are still researching 9-11 because they believe it was a catalyst that drove us into this police state we're living in right now. Absolutely. I see a very disturbing thread between the events of 9-11 and where we find ourselves today, and I don't want to step away from the aeronautical discussion. But within this discussion, we have to remember, at that time, there was the anthrax attacks. Right, exactly. And those anthrax attacks were an actual weaponized form of anthrax that was traced back to eusamrid and merifrax as a highly processed form of anthrax. And so there was, there were multiple indicators back then, even before like the internet had a, you know, managed to sort of aggregate disparate investigators, but there were a lot of indicators that there were dark hands manipulating events on the ground. And, you know, we're still dealing with them, unfortunately, and that's why it's such a pleasure to speak to someone like yourself, who, you know, really was there from the beginning and can add these important technical details, because I do think that's what's missing a lot of the time.

And I'm sure that you must have had your fair share of people who've obviously claimed there were no planes. Right. They're kind of cruel in their critique of my presentation, because they say you tell me there were no airplanes, or they say you're an idiot, it was a cruise missile, it was a pentagon. So I'm always getting criticized, and I want to point out that our group isn't dispelling that argument. We're not debating it in any way, either one of them, because all we're saying is the hijackers couldn't have flown the airplane due to lack of experience, but the uninterrupted autopilot could. And if you say, hey, it was a cruise missile that hit the Pentagon, well fine, then what happened to the passengers on board? What happened to American 77? Well, you could say, well, it's remotely guided somewhere else, but we don't have any way of proving that either, and we just try to stick to facts. We feel we don't have to go any further than to prove that the hijackers couldn't have flown the airplanes and the uninterruptible autopilot could. Yeah, and it's all to point people to these deep state actors that were prepared to make ground-shaking moves on the population. At that time, it was the American people who were, I think it's fair to say, assaulted with legislation that emerged in the days to weeks afterwards with the Patriot Act. And as we mentioned at the beginning, it's more often mutated into the Biopatriot Act right now. And the link with anthrax, it points to the premeditated use of biowarfare to achieve their aims. And I don't know, I'll ask the question, if you had to point a finger at these entities, who would you start with? Okay, I get to ask this question all the time, and I can only guess from my reading and my limited knowledge. It depends upon your worldview. If you believe there's 193 independent countries here sovereign and have their own government, that's fine, but I believe there's a much bigger part of that that's controlling it all. And you can start with the bloodline families, you can go to the committee of 300, the Rothschilds, the Council on Foreign Relations, the World Economic Forum, the Bilderbergs, okay. But you look at the central banking system, the stranglehold Rothschild has on that, and the control they have on these governments, I think they ordered the hit. I think, you know, for years, I don't think this was planned in near 2000. I believe it was planned for years. And who actually planned and executed the hit, I believe were Zionist members of the government of Israel, the United States, UK and others that actually sat down and figured out how they were going to do this. Yeah, I always say that, well, key bono out of the events of 9-11 and it was, well, Israel managed to achieve over the years significant strategic progress with respect to their position. The countries that surrounded them were militarily destroyed, and you could argue it's still ongoing. Exactly. Well, again, you got to go back in history. Let me go back to your first point we were talking to. I firmly believe that the true test of the American people's gullibility, as well as the global population, was the Kennedy assassination. We weren't in the computer age. There wasn't this interchange of information right now. But that was followed by the Oklahoma city bombing, which you may or may not recall, that they blamed on two people. And I've read a lengthy, lengthy discussion on that. And I believe that was a false flag event. And then you have 9-11. And now, now you have COVID. And they pulled the wool over our eyes for a while, but now we know better. Or a lot of people's eyes. And I think that's what happened. But I forgot the other topic we were talking about. Israel's control on the United States? Well, I think that sort of goes as a given. It's the fact that Israel... I look at it this way. Currently, Israel has air superiority over, you know, in a thousand kilometer radius around its country. And every country within that radius has now, well, it's either subject to continued strikes with respect to Syria, or we've seen the accords that have brought in Arab countries to normalize relationships with Israel. And, you know, maybe at a big picture level, maybe that's progress. Well, I don't agree with the carnage that occurred. That's the way they had to go about doing it. But that was a quick way of doing it because you got to go back to the history of Israel and the Balfour agreement and the Rothschild's involvement in the establishment of the nation's state of Israel, and then you jump ahead. Well, actually, let me digress. You go back to the late 1800s, there was a guy named Theodore Herzl who founded the Zionist movement, and people say, now you're criticizing Zionists, you're an anti-Semite. Well, Zionism doesn't really have to do with Jews. It's a political ideology that claims Israel is entitled to all land from the Euphrates and the Nile River. And that's part of what's called the Greater Israel Project. And I'll point out, if you don't know about the Greater Israel Project, there's a great global research article that's entitled Greater Israel Design its Plan for the Middle East that goes into great detail explaining all this. And it all makes sense when you look at it from that perspective, what happened post 9-11 as far as them going in and destabilizing or toppling countries in the Middle East to further their Greater Israel Plan. And they had the full backing of their public government, the United States, because of APAC, the ADL, and all those organizations that control every Dublin branch of the US government, including the media. Yes, and you know, this is something that's become, well, the veil has become very thin with respect to how much organizations in the US that a priori we would think are geared towards a free speech paradigm are controlled by pressure groups. Now, before I delve into some of the history, like what we've seen recently, I don't know if you've kept abreast of the Twitter files. Have you heard about this? Regarding what? So, it's about censorship, coordinated censorship via state apparatus through the quote unquote social media. And this has been definitively, it's not a vague hypothesis that can be dismissed as conspiracy theory. We've seen it bear its teeth in the last three years. And, you know, love him or hate him. Elon Musk buying Twitter has been able to show definitively that many, groups, scientists like myself, who were trying to speak out from the beginning, were actively censored across these platforms. Now, I would put forward the premise that that structure, its roots come from 9-11, and it comes from, well, you can mention groups like the ADL, who were able to position themselves in, I don't know, like a public-private partnership to control narrative. Right. Well, I believe that the mainstream media worldwide has a stranglehold on people's mind. And you got to go back, and I believe that's a major problem, particularly, I see the passive apathetic, I call him the sheep in the US and other places that sit back, scratch their head, and can't figure out what goes on. So they go back to watching CNN or Fox. And if you go back to 1983, there were 50 independent media conglomerates, independent news outlets in the United States, and today there's only six major conglomerates that control 96% of the news you see, read, or hear. And if you look at the management structure on those companies, those six conglomerates, it's dripping with Zionists. And you go back in 19, you say, oh, you're making this up. Well, look at it yourself and go back to that same year in 1983, Israel launched something called the Hezbollah project, and their intent was to gain control of the media to garner public support for the support of Israel and to cast it in a favorable light. So most people think, oh, Israel's a trusted ally of ours in the Middle East, and they go on believing that. I have a son that's that way. He calls me, and they send me everything else, because I criticize Israel. And I said, well, look at AIPAC, look at the ADL, look at the night press, look at all these organizations out there. And you look at the, well, look at the whole U.S. government, and look at AIPAC. They are afraid to even utter, they call it the lobby, congressmen do. And you know, Netanyahu comes over before them several years ago, gives 26 standing ovations in 45 minutes speech he gives, okay. And they've all signed, according to Cynthia McKinney, a congresswoman, an oath of allegiance to Israel. They've got a stranglehold on the Congress, they've got a stranglehold on the media, and the unwary American public's hit their scratch in their head. So yeah, and you know, the the blackpilled conclusion from the the events around 9-11, the what we can see as the highly coordinated narrative control and censorship and the, like you say, the the Hasbro project and the talpiot program for war on consciousness, and we're we're in this next generation hybrid warfare, and you know, the Chinese call it unrestricted warfare. And we're as members of the public, we're being dragged along. And well, I don't think it's unfair to say that, and we know this, that they've taken programs that were used and developed in the 20 years post-9-11, which were geared towards biometric identification used in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the use of quasi-private military organizations for interactive internet activities, for psychological profiling and targeting of psychological operations to control groups and specific people. Everyone is subject to those programs which were a direct consequence of 9-11, and will lead to families, your son calling you an anti-semite. Right. Well, you look at what 9-11 did to my family because I was terminated in 2003 for speaking out, and my two kids who are now adults blame me for the divorce still believe you'll fish a 9-11 story. Think I'm a whacked out conspiracy freak and don't talk to me. My personal biggest loss since 9-11 was the loss of my two kids. I can't even, well they don't talk to me, but when my son was talking to me a while, I couldn't even bring the topic up to defend myself. I've written a book, a memoir, about what happened to me and everything else, but I don't think they'll ever read it. So I wrote it specifically for them, saying, hey, read this, you'll see what actually happened from 2001 to 2003, and afterwards, and why I am where I am today. Your professional experience is as good as it can get, and how difficult was it for you to raise this topic publicly, that it was physically impossible for Arabs with boxcutters to take control of those planes? What was the initial reception like? Well, let me go back to 2001-2003. I was actually attacking the aviation security system because there were so many holes in them that couldn't have me out on the line talking about, say, pulling me out of schedule. But that was my initial something wrong with this picture, you know, and then you can look at the trade center coming down in 11 seconds, or World Trade Center Building 7, which for me occurred much later, you know, people analyzing that. But really the thing that caught my eye was, number one, where did these guys train to fly these airplanes? What country were they in? And then when I was told that they flew mainly Cessna 172, that's how I started. I flew those little airplanes and I flew the 757-767, so I can compare the two. And that's what most people can't do. They can't see the absurdity of the official story. Well, there is just so many absurdities on that day. I mean, I don't know how comfortable you are speaking about the physics of the collapse. I mean, I find that a fascinating, fascinating area to dive into. But do you want to go there? Well, I can just mention the tires. I said they collapse in their own footprint in less than 11 seconds and near the freefall acceleration due to gravity, without resistance. And if you look at the structure of the building, that's absurd all by itself. And all this concrete and steel was dustified somehow, and it should have created a debris pile about 30 stories tall and it was only three. So, there's a woman named Judy Wood, and I don't know why she wrote a book called Where Do the Tires Go? And she claimed it was directed at energy weapons, but a lot of people in the truth movement say no. I mean architects and engineers from 9-Level Truth say no, that could be possible, but I'm still misdivided by the fact that this building turned to dust. Yeah, it's a very, very strange phenomenon. And, you know, there's, Julie Wood has put a lot of information forward. But there are two pieces of data. As a scientist, I deal with measurement. And she, in her investigations, found two, when you're dealing with instrumentation, right, she found two pieces of independent evidence, which lined up, that in my mind is very difficult to explain, just from my understanding of physics. The first is that the seismic signals were missing, and she was, she does a good job of showing that you can detect things like building collapses and the, I forget the name of the building, something dome. King Dome. Anyway, it was like a 10 story building, a sports arena, which they demolished and she can show that there are specific waves that you pick up with seismic meters and those signals are missing on 9-11. Now, again, as a scientist, I can't go much beyond that in terms of trying to explain the physics of that day. Where were the signs of all that metal and all that concrete hitting the ground? And the seismic data seems to show that it's not there, or it's minuscule compared to what we would expect. Kevin, the buildings were dust on the way down. There wouldn't be that much of a seismic impact. There wasn't hardly anything left by the time they got down to three stories tall. So, I don't know. I mean, that dust was going out like 600 feet, and I'm still bewildered by that part of it. Yeah, I am too. I think there's very good evidence that there was potentially explosives planted in the building as well. You have to look at the Israeli art students. I think that's a very important thread in the 9-11 investigation. All of these threads of evidence point to something strange happening on that day. Most of your guests are familiar with nanothermite and that whole argument about what happened. They did collect dust samples from all three building sites and they were able to determine it was in fact nanothermite. In fact, Niels Herr, a 42-year retired chemistry professor from the University of Copenhagen, had these results and did a scientific analysis using the scientific method, which you're very familiar with, right? And he wrote a paper on it that has gone uncontested for all these years. He wrote it, I think, in 2009-2010, and it proves that nanothermite was there. Yeah, I mean, there's all manner of, again, threads of evidence that point to something bigger than just a hijacking, right? And the use of the automatic autopilot is one of the first series of steps that were taken on that day, and we know that they were having drills and exercises that day. That's not a contested fact. They have the recordings, right? But maybe as a pilot, that's something that you can... I'd be interested to hear your opinion on that with what were they seeing on displays? How much would they have communicating with civilian versus military? I was working with a guy named Robin Horton, who was an air traffic controller, and he was talking about why and how the Pentagon stood down. I can't figure out what he has told me, but I do know from my time in the military working with electronic warfare that you can inject targets into a radar screen, or you can remove them, or you can jam communications, things like that. So purely speculative on my part again. I don't know enough detail about the air traffic control into this thing to make a comment. So I know you'd be speculating again, but the drill that was taking place, the fake drill that was, I presume, military in NORAD, right? That's the primary systems. I guess, again, who do you think would have the ability to tap into those systems in such a sophisticated, and it's the timing, right? They would have to have split second capabilities to be able to spoof. Right, right. Well, this only doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but I have a longtime friend, Phil McConn, who actually introduced me on an interoperable autopilot. That's an aside. That was in 2007, but he claims that the NORAD encryption keys were handed over to Canada, which gave them control of NORAD during this whole thing, so I don't know the details of that, other than I remember him telling me that years ago that somehow Canada was involved, because you'll agree with me that most western countries were either involved or knew about it, and they remain silent today. Yeah, it would appear so and, you know, it's disturbing that the lockstep that we've seen in the past three years, in terms of countries, mirrors what you saw 20 years ago, more than 20 years now. It mirrors what we saw back then. And as I mentioned earlier, I think the genesis of them being able to engage in this fifth generation type information warfare, directed at the public, that was really when it started to flourish. And of course the internet was a big part of that. But if you had to point to a narrative that was most damaging to your trying to bring information forward, which one or group? Well, I wasn't pointing fingers at groups. Are you talking about back when I was still a pilot, before I got terminating? As you sort of progressed your journey into trying to explain 9-11, there's a whole ecosystem of 9-11 investigators, truthers I guess was the term that was used, right? Which group gave you the most resistance in terms of trying to bring your information forward, and saying, no, that can't be true, it was... Well, there were two things going on after 9-11. One of them, I almost immediately tried to expose what happened to me, medically, with the FAA, Department of Transportation, Homeland Security, and the Department of Justice, saying, hey, this is an age-old process of ridding unwanted pilots from the ranks. And all three of those, I mean, I went to everybody, Attorney General, FBI. So that's one thing I was trying to expose. But the other thing, I'll try to make this brief. After 9-11, United Airlines filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2002, I believe it was. And in 2003, they terminated a $10 billion pension fund. And let me jump ahead to 2006, a Chicago millionaire approaches me and says, hey, my metals company was stolen from me in bankruptcy the same way your pension was. And the presiding judge in both accounts was a judge named Eugene Arredo. He's a federal, chief federal bankruptcy judge in Chicago, because then he said to me, we've got all the goods on him, we've got him of informant, we know he maintains a $40 million bribery fund, LaSalle Bank in Chicago. He gave me on and on all this information that they had. He controlled three other federal and six state court judges, so concurring with what I was doing with my own personal issue, I felt that they were tied together and that the same powerful forces that sent United Airlines into bankruptcy and enabled them to terminate that pension were at work, and I believe it was partially the mafia. And I knew when I stepped out with this guy, because I went really visible, because he told me, look, if you go visible, you got to stay as much visible as you can or they'll kill you. And even if you do, they might kill you anyhow. So I went very visible. I was up in Washington kicking down doors, and I even filed a federal complaint with Chicago FBI. Here's how far I got. I lived in Atlanta at the time, and I flew to Chicago, rented a car, and drove down to the FBI office in the city, and I had a 164-meg hard drive with everything on it, and I went in the building. Well, they made me give up the hard drive, and all my personal belongings, they put in a locker outside, right? So I go into this office, I mean, in this little room with a glass partition, and I waited about five minutes, this female FBI agent came in and sat down and says, What do you have? And I began telling her this whole story. And I said, Look, I got 160. I get this hard drive out there. They told me you'd retrieve if I needed it. And he goes, No, we're not going to retrieve it. I said, Really? And she goes, Yeah. And I said, Well, can I speak to somebody in the white collar criminal division? She goes, No. And I says, Can I speak to the special agent in charge, Robert Grant? You know, as you look, Mr. Hanley, we've received all your letters and what you claim to have as evidence. We're going to tell you, I'm going to tell you that the Department of Justice isn't going to investigate your claims. This conversation is over. She got on and walked out of her side of the room. I'm sitting there with my jaw on the ground. Why did I risk coming up here saying what I did in this very dangerous city? And that's when I said, I'm not going to get anywhere. was what I'm trying to do this six year period from 2006 to 12. Because I had such exposure at high levels to the federal government, I mean, senators and assistant attorney generals writing me, etc. And what I saw, the whole government was shut down, shut down. That's when I totally lost all faith and confidence in the US government from that experience. So when you said what particular agent agency, to me it was all of them. Right, so like a full spectrum closure of your, your evidence and... The $10 billion pension fund was the largest pension default in history of the world. Okay, impacted 100,000 employees and I felt because of what I knew, I had a moral obligation for 100,000 United boys to share it, and I went to all the unions that united, none of them would touch it. I went to countless media outlets, none of them would touch the story.

Do you have an example of the hardware that would make up this automated autopilot?

Well, I don't have that depth of knowledge of this system, other than I know how it uplinks information in the flight management computer, okay? Not specifically, but it's either a satellite or a ground station, etc. But on our website, 911Pilot.org, there's a drop-down menu for articles, and if you go to the bottom of it, it says MH370 from Malaysia Air 370, that airplane that disappeared out over the Indian Ocean several years ago, and it's a 66-page document that goes into great detail about the evolution of automated remote control airplanes, and it has diagrams and details there if you want to go. But I can't talk intelligently at an in-depth level regarding that system because I don't know. So I guess my question is, it was, it's inherent to any of those Boeing planes that they could hijack the flight computer in that manner? Or, you know, do they have to put a different, I guess, receiver transponder in it to be able to? No, it uses the existing system is backdoor and it's a microchip and a very hard difficulty to detect and it has its own power source. Let me explain there's four ways of disengaging an autopilot. Turn the switch off that you engage it with or apply. There's a little button on the yoke or the steering wheel you can press and that'll disengage it, or you apply a 70 pound force or greater on the controls or pull the circuit breaker on the system. There's an avionics technician that did an excellent interview.

It's on our website. He saw the system operating on a bench test of a autopilot in the hangar, and they pulled every circuit breaker on the plane, and they could disconnect it. It's got its own power source, so that's why we say it can't be disconnected. They're along for the ride. They are. But let me say several years ago, I used to have the article that I don't anymore. It was about Lufthansa taking receipts of jets that they had purchased, and they were doing a parts inventory evaluation to make sure that they had everything that they had paid for. And they somehow ran across the system, contacted Boeing, they go, Oh, yeah, that's our anti hijacking device. So they said, get them out of the airplane, we don't want somebody having control over our aircraft. So and I believe they've created a similar system for Airbus products as well. So there's a that people still doubt that the system exists. If you just Google uninterruptible autopilot, you'll get the first thing that shows up at the top of the page is Boeing, Honeywell, uninterruptible autopilot. It's not that long an article, but one of the things they say is it was patented in 2006. Well, that would lead one to believe, oh, this wasn't developed until after 9-11. And the stated purpose is to prevent would be hijacking of common air and commercial jet aircraft in flight. So, but that's why on our website, we go in great lengths to say, no, we have proof that this system was developed prior to 9-11. So, well, I'm looking at Google right now, I get very, very few hits, actually. And that this is this is something that's emerged recently. So I found the Boeing Honeywell. I just want to go down to see how many, where's the number of hits it does say? 92,000. But I just wonder, they're curating results now.

The Wikipedia, can I bring that up? I'll share my screen with you.

Okay, so bring up Wikipedia. You mean the CIA involvement with that site or not? No. I'm interested in the technical requirements and the hardware that would be required to…

So you can see the screen, right? Yeah, yes, yes, I can, right. If you go down and look at some of those articles, they're trying to debunk the whole issue that we're addressing here, that it was due to 9-11, so…

Which one would you recommend? I don't know. It's been a while since I've looked at them, but I've looked at them before, and I go, well, who's this writing this? So, a system designed to take control of commercial, yeah, yeah, yeah, okay, very short. Conspiracy theorists have claimed the technology has been secretly fitted to some commercial airliners, including historian Norman Davies. Do you know him? Are you familiar with him? No, I'm not. According to Bob Mann, an airline industry consultant, adding, evidence the Boeing uninterruptible autopilot system being installed on a partial airline pilot has not been publicized and is not proven to exist. Yeah, I just think in this day and age that we have to be skeptical of any of the official narratives that are put forward, so at a basic level, how is the aircraft guided? GPS? I believe it's IRS, inertial reference system.

Could you answer that? I'm not sure what that is.

It explains, I mean, it describes acceleration rates of the aircraft, and it's able to compute the position of the aircraft. It's like GPS, but not as accurate, I don't believe, but I could go into more detail. There's a guy named Aidan Manahan in my interview that did extensive research on what enhancements were made to navigation systems that these aircraft would rely upon coming into 9-11. If you go to the articles page and look at my name and it's what it's a paper he wrote on it. So, how do you spell his name?

M-O-N-A-G-H-A-N M-O-N-A-G-H-A-N Nothing. Not on Google. Computer says no. Let's try DuckDuckGo, just as a...

I don't want to miss one important point. We talked about the profile at the Pentagon, which I was going much further than that, but I can't help but do it, given that, is that him? Yeah, so actually, you know, this is a perfect example of active measures used for narrative control. I just used the exact same terms in Google. We got nothing except, I think, like a clip to a movie, and change search engine. There's a look at that top article because that's where I interviewed him. That's an interview by Captain Dan Hanley. Yeah, that's it. I've never seen the guy before because he blinks his screen when he talks on Skype or Zoom, even during the interview he had it blank, so he's a great guy. But I befriended him and another author, 9-11 investigator named Mark Gaffney, and that's what I'd like to briefly touch on here, because I talked about how the Pentagon profile was replicated in a simulator. Well, let me go a step farther. This guy Mark Gaffney wrote a global research article in 2009 that I stumbled across, that the title of it was, How the 9-11 Commission and FBI Suppress Critical Evidence in the Case of Hone-Honjer and United Airlines, I mean American Airlines 77, right? So I started looking into this article, and it talked about what a poor student he was, which we also have on the website, okay? But it talks about one month prior to 9-11, Honey Hinder shows up at the Freeway Airport in Maryland, and once we run a Cessna 172, well, you can't show up either clear and expect a fixed base operator wrenching airplanes. I know you got to go up on an evaluation flight. Well, he didn't just go up on one, he went up on three, he went up on three flights with two instructors, a guy named Ben Connor and a girl named Sherry Baxter. And they went back to the chief flight instructor, whose name is Marcel Bernard, and said, Marcel, this guy can't fly. Don't run him with Cessna 172.

So this is the guy that supposedly performed that miraculous aerial feed. They won't really win 172-2, but it gets better. Supposedly, Honey Hondrier goes down the road three days later to Congressional Air Charter, and he went flying with an instructor named Eddie Chalet, which isn't an Irish name. But anyhow, he went flying with Eddie, and Eddie supposedly said he was a good pilot. Now you got three pilots saying he's bad. You got the Eddie Shalev saying he was a good pilot. What appears in the 9-11 Commission final report? That he was a good pilot. It appeared just as an end note and mentioned Eddie Shalev just one time, so they totally disregarded the, I'm strobing for a word here, all the testimony of these three pilots at Freeway Airport. And you go down the article a little bit further, and you find out that Eddie Shalev was an Israeli that served in the Israeli Defense Force, and had disappeared out of sight in Congressional Air Charter shortly after 9-11 closed their doors. So I don't know who Eddie Shalev was, but that's what we're attacking, our group is attacking the FBI on. That they suppress this critical evidence that shows Eddie Honeyhanger couldn't fly.

Can you bring up 911pilot.org?

Yeah.

Because I just want to show you where these articles are located if you want to go to the website.

And how much interaction do you have with architects and engineers? Not so much them as the lawyers committee that I can talk about. Can you go to the top where it says articles? Sure. The drop down menu. Okay, there it says Monahan and Gaffney, okay. Those are two important articles to read. And the other one, you go down to MH370, that's a 66 page document that nd the other ones are Hanley, it's me, I got a global research, well I actually appeared in four different sites, that says more than 9-11 aircraft electronically hijacked, that's the name of the article. So those are, I just want to point out that I dropped on the menu, but getting back to your question, originally, three years ago, three plus years ago, I was talking to a group called Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Inquiry, and our intent was to to interview pilots, let them vet them, and then get them before a grand jury by taking all of our information and evidence to a U.S. attorney. But they got too busy and couldn't deal with it, so I went the political route, going to the FAA, FBI, all the way up the chain to the president, with our contention that they were electronically hijacked. And knowing I would get nowhere, which I did, if you go back to the menu there to the left, you go down to letters, down towards the bottom, U.S. letters. See all those? That's the letter writing we did the last 28 months and got nowhere with. Well, anyhow, let me describe who the Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Inquiry is, because there's some very recent events that were profound that occurred. The Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Inquiry is a group of seven lawyers in the states from various locations who got together with the biggest 9-11 whistleblowers and whistleblower organizations in the world, and they compiled 60 evidence packages and delivered it to the U.S. Attorney in New York, which forced him to announce that they were going to convene a grand jury investigation into 9-11. Well, that stalled. I mean, the Justice Department and another organization was blocking, and they wound up taking it all the way to the court system. This is what I'm getting at. Two weeks ago, they had it before the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. And that pretty much sealed their fate. So what I've got a phone, as a matter of fact, I just got an email on it. I'm going to have a Zoom conference call. They know exactly what we've been doing the last 28 months. And I think they're kind of out of tricks on where they're going to go with this thing. They're curious as to where we're taking it. And I'm going to have this conference call with three of their key attorneys. And I'm going to describe to them where we are now and where we plan on going. But that involves me getting into much too much detail unless you want to hear it. I'll take all the detail you've got. I'd say the audience here is, they're used to very, very deep dives, very technical discussions. So I'm just staring at this. Let me explain then. I just said that we went to this 28-month exercise in futility, trying to letter-write everybody and making phone calls, emails, you name it. We actually did that to establish a correspondence trail, and when the letter was written to Biden, we said to him, look, your government has shut down, you're not investigating this, there's never been a criminal investigation in 9-11. That was the greatest crime ever committed on American soil in its history. If the U.S. government is not interested in it, then perhaps the 1.8 billion Muslims in the world would be interested in the fact that there were no Muslim hijackers as they controlled. So we warned them what we were going to do. And me living in Pakistan, I met with the ISI, their intelligence agency, in March and just told them everything, trying to get to their prime minister to say, hey, they're remotely controlled. Then they had the coup in April, and that didn't happen over here. Very unstable politically over here right now. So in that regard, I'm kind of maintaining a little profile, but what I personally did was write three Muslim organizations. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which is like the United Nations of the Muslim world. There's another group out of Mecca called the Muslim World League, and then there's a third one out of Rome called the European Muslim League, which is the biggest Muslim organization in Europe. And basically we said to them, hey, look, the U.S. government is investigating our claims. Here's what we're claiming. Maybe you might be interested. We're waiting for a response, and we've written to another minister of foreign affairs from a bunch of other countries saying, hey, get on board with what we're doing, because what we want them to do is to establish an international Islamic commission for 9-11 inquiry, a Muslim 9-11 commission, where they can review all this evidence coming from all over the world and analyze it and publish a report on their findings. You know, you can take it one step further and say we would insist they take it to the criminal court in the Hague, but you and I both know that it's tied to the UN and will probably go nowhere. Well, you know, I'm in the same position with trying to pursue legal avenues around, you know, the use of gain of function, biowarfare programs. We know the organizations who are responsible, but I guess my position is this, that you have to do the legal steps, because if there's a cascade of events that proceed from people beginning to understand this information, and say it gets chaotic. I think it's important to be able to say that you did go through all available options such that if there is blood on the streets that you can maintain some degree of a clear conscience. We're at the Department of Justice Inspector General level saying, hey, the FBI lied to us, okay, we want them investigated. And if that stonewalling continues at that level, I've already been in contact with the House Representative Government Oversight and Reform Committee, which would initiate a congressional investigation in their allegations that were being stonewalled over something very serious. Okay. And that there's one further step and I contacted and talked to the chief litigator for the Lawyers Committee and asked him what the chances are of suing the federal government. And that would be the final step because that would go nowhere. I know it would. But going all the way to Biden with letters twice. Well, actually, he was copied on a bunch of other letters. Yeah, I doubt you can even read them. Yeah, I agree. You know, we even contacted the Department of National Intelligence. I mean, the Director of National Intelligence, the FBI, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Transportation. We've contacted every relevant branch of the US government concerning this, and totally, totally ignoring them, even though we've got this proof. Because I talked to Marcel Bernard, the chief flight instructor that denied Hani Hanjer the rental of the airplane, and he confirmed it for me. And those witnesses that were involved in that process at Freeway Airport, it's proof alone of what our allegations are. So, yeah, it's, it's tough work, but yeah, I think, I think we have to, we have to be able to say, we did everything. And, you know, like I say, I'm just beginning in this process. I've been, well, I guess, I don't know what you call this sort of activism space of trying to pursue these legal avenues. Are you doing that in England? No, this is through the United States. We're trying to convene attorney generals to bring a criminal investigation into the programs that we know were funded by DOD and were fundamental in building the infrastructure that allowed COVID to emerge. And it's not just COVID, it's the legislative architecture which has been wrapped around it, that's pushing towards ever more invasive surveillance state. What's the outcome? If it doesn't get redressed legally, then it's sort of fall into the domain of the tree of liberty needs to be watered with the blood of patriots, right? That's the domain into which we're heading. Myself personally, I would prefer that it's dealt with at a legislative level, that enough public awareness is brought forward that can say, Hey, you know, we've been gaslit, had military grade psychological operations unleashed against the general public, especially since 911. And we need we need to be able to unravel it somehow. Kevin, let me ask you, how do you enlighten 8 billion people are in the United States? I think it's 325 million people when you're competing with the mainstream media. I mean, the lawyers, committee architects, myself, and everybody goes on does all these podcasts and you look at the viewership. And even if you got 100,000 people saw your video, that's not a very big number relative to the population of the planet. So I don't know how to get around the stranglehold on the media. And I'm not, I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm with what you're doing. But based on my past experience with the US government, I'm not optimistic. No, I'm not optimistic either. And my sort of general view is that what we have to do is get the people who realize what's occurred, we have to get through the process that they're initiating on us as a solid, organized group that can continue to apply pressure. And, you know, you can apply pressure in many ways. And, you know, one of the things that I tried to push is, you know, non-compliance to the legislation that they want to push through. The problem is that we're in this technical age where, you know, for someone to try and grasp, you know, what you're talking about, it's a good juxtaposition, the cockpit of the, whatever that is, a Cessna, and the bowing there. And, you know, I don't think you can get everyone. No, I don't. You know, what I've narrowed, what we've narrowed our sites to, and I'm in particular, Pakistan has a population of 225 million people. It's the sixth most populated country in the world and the second most densely populated Muslim country after Indonesia, okay. And I'm sitting in the middle, I'm saying there were no hijackers, and I got to be careful. But actually in two days, I'm going over to Karachi, and I'm going to give my PowerPoint lecture to a group of pilots who will get it. And they're Muslim pilots, and they fly all over the world. We're going to give them flyers and my business cards and go to 911pilot.org. And that's the avenue we've chosen because pilots will get it. And I believe when they hear about this uninterruptible autopilot by going to our website, they'll spread the word. And we're giving them flyers, I mentioned, and also my business card. So if they want to contact me for to be interviewed, because there's so many pilots when we went out asking, hey, let us interview you on tape, your opinion of honey hunter and the hijackers, okay? And a lot of them said no, I'm not interested. Most of them said, no, I'll lose my job. I don't want to do it. So, you know, people are saying, it's been 20 years, forget about it, you know? So it's very difficult. If you go to the menu page up there in the top, in the menu drop down, Kevin, and go to pilot interviews, on down, there it is. That's what we, and there's only 10 of them, like I said, on there, but it's a cross section of people. One guy's from the United States, Andy Queens in Vietnam, Rixey's in Pax Anso, that guy's in Paris, Captain Wilhelm, and that guy's in Sweden. So what we try to do is get a broad cross section of the pilot industry and interview them, and they all wind up saying the same thing. So we've proved our point by doing this, and I'm hoping that by getting the word out to these Muslim pilots, we can get more of them to come forward and I can interview them so.

Well, you know, we touched on this briefly before but, you know, pilots are very much in the news right now because they were some of the first to be mandated to receive, well, I don't consider them vaccines. They're based on gene manipulation technologies.

And there seems to be a significant safety signal emerging. And the FAA, I mean, perhaps you can add to this, because I presume you had to have regular physicals, right, to be cleared to fly? Yeah, as a captain every six months. Every six months? Yeah. And what would that entail?

That wasn't that detailed of physical. I don't remember whether I spent too long, whether we got EKGs or not, but I think I know where you're headed. So that requirement has been dropped from the FAA. And this is, well, it's another indicator of the scope of damage, the assault that's being made on the public. And, you know, pilots, they have a, it's a respectful profession, right? There's a degree of, you've got to be highly competent to be sitting behind a bowing.

But you talked about the pilots and what they're doing. A guy on Twitter contacted me named Josh Yoder, and he's made national news. Okay, and I wish I could remember the name of his organization. If you're Googling, it's Y-O-D-E-R Josh, J-O-S-H. But he came to me because he knew I was a pilot, and I was working with 9-11, and he said, hey, I want to get you on Stu Peters, which is a pretty big program. Well, I mean, you can go on there and try and get the message out. But the thing is, we're dealing with, how would you say, controlled opposition a lot of the time. And in the COVID space, Stu Peters has been instrumental in pushing out what has been, you know, warped, a warping of information to, I would say, play to the conspiratorial spectrum. And, you know, and this is, so this is, well, he sort of pushed it, so in the vaccines, there are people that have looked at them, and they've claimed that there are nano robots in the shots, and they can take control of your nervous system, et cetera. I was one of the first to actually do the proper investigations, not just light microscope, but go and demonstrate that the objects that they're seeing under a light microscope are to be expected in the vaccine vials. And what they're doing is that they're avoiding the underlying toxic biology. And it's a very frustrating battle to be having in this information space. And yeah, I went on his program and told him, you know, the people that he has been pushing are misleading people. And it's a problem.

Josh Schoder is in Begham. He's a, he's a pilot. And he created this. I thought it would pop up here. Yeah, there is a US freedom flyer down there. He created this argument and he's made it national. Good morning, everyone in the United States. But he wanted me to work with him. And the last time I talked to him was, I think, last month. He goes, Dan, look, I'm real busy. We're trying to get $300,000 in funding for lawyers. So this organization is, that's a porcupine freedom festival. I don't think that's it. I can't. Yeah, that looks like him. Yeah, Josh. That's the route I think they're going. They're going to sue people over this thing. In my mind, it's important to be able to get, well, professionals, people who are able to speak to the tsunami of information that's pushed onto the public in this day and age. We have to be very, very, very focused. Like I say, I am very receptive to what happened around 9-11, because I see it reaching into the conditions we find ourselves in today. It was a dress rehearsal for, for the, well, like I said, it was a test of the gullibility of the American or general public worldwide, and they fell for it. Otherwise, it would have been right. They all fell for it. So they go, well, we got them to believe that one. Let's try this. Well, it's not working this time.

Yeah, so this is what this is what I think right now. The veil is the thinnest it's ever going to be. And, you know, this is why I try to sort of hold a very tight line when it comes to the science and the information space. And so you know, someone like Stu Peters, I've seen him pushing disinformation merely for the sake of trying to gain popularity in clicks.

And okay, I get that, right?

He's trying to make a living.

The problem is, is, you know, you really have to you really have to be very, very strict with the people who you are you are bringing forward to try to convince the public right and and if you're if you're just pushing stuff that's easily dismissed when the scientists and their engineers come to because that's what you meet right and this is a this is part it's a tough part of the battle and you know the I'm not nd saying not to go on stuped as if you can reach a lot of people through that. Just my own personal advice would be be be how would you say? You know, maintain a sort of skeptical eye on. Thanks for the warning. Yeah, where it would lead. I don't follow him religiously. I've just tuned in to him several times, and he's outspoken on a lot of issues, and that's what you need is journalists that aren't afraid to speak up. Yeah. And, you know, in this, when we've got our backs against the wall, literally, you know, I understand the need to try to get the message out. So, I've been asked to ask you a question, and this is for Mark, who's Housatonic, who I hoped would join us on this conversation, because he is a expert of, yeah, he's got a very, very professional and tack sharp mind. And he wants to know, do you think it's possible that planes that took off from Boston to have landed and other empty planes to have hit the towers? Well, I just got that question asked by an attorney in the Lawyers Committee, and there's a big theory that there were airborne swap of aircraft, okay, and the critic at the Lawyers Committee said, hey, I hope you're not just considering this, all those airplanes hit buildings. I said, no, we're just not going there as an organization, okay, we've got a very limited scope. But I will say this, and I've said it on podcasts, have you seen the four independent photos taken of United 175 hitting the south tower that showed a pod on the bottom of the aircraft? I'm aware of that, yeah. Yeah, okay. Well, 767 doesn't have that pod. So that's an authentic photo, which Spanish photo experts claim it is. It wasn't a shadow from the engine, and it was too grainy for it to be photoshopped. So if the pod was there, that wasn't 175. And I pointed that out. But you also look at both the airplanes that hit the tire crossover Stuart Air Force base. And that's where they're claiming maybe a swap took place. And what happened to the planes with past years? I mean, you've got one guy said they went out over the ocean and blow them up. You got Rebecca Roth, an author who said they were remotely guided as Westover Air Force Base up in Massachusetts made him make phone calls and then snuff. And then you got a guy like James Fetzer. I don't know if you know him. Yeah, I know James Fetzer. Yeah, I can't get on the program because he's the only one who doesn't let me talk. And he's a knowledgeable guy. He's written a lot of books and he's a PhD too. But he believes that no planes hit the tires and there were nukes in the basement, and that these airplanes with passengers were remotely guided to Cleveland and Chicago, and the passengers all floated. So I don't buy into it, although the lawyer at the Lawyers Committee said, no, there's a group out there investigating this possibility, and they're looking at what radar data they have, and they claim they chose these airplanes turning back west. So I haven't seen that. And as an organization, we're not going there. But yeah, it's talked about a lot about the airborne swap of airplanes. Yeah. And, you know, again, I would just reiterate the point that it's become patently obvious that we're dealing with organizations, entities, that life is, they don't have the same morals and ethics that we do. No, not at all. I consider them the most powerful, wealthy, ruthless sub-humans on earth. They have no regard for human life, and people go, tell me you don't believe that they flew these airplanes out over the ocean, blew them up, and go, why, that's only 200 people. For almost 3000 people, they killed at the Trade Center, and the Pentagon, so what's a few hundred more? So, I don't put anything past them because they're ruthless and dangerous. Yes, yeah, that's the take home that people really, really need to understand, ruthless and dangerous. And I would, you know, sorry to sort of drag it into current events, but I think that's what we're, we're seeing that in a global level now. And, you know, part of, you know, what I think we're dealing with is you've got the 535 powers of Congress that are sitting there and doing nothing. Have you ever seen the video, the incredibly evil, you know, history of the incredibly evil Corsairia Mafia? I haven't seen that. It's an audio recording on YouTube. If you even believe half of it, it's pretty sobering. Are you familiar with the history of Corsairia? Yes. Well, it evolved out of that, and these guys are supposed to be ruthless, because I can't believe that the SAFAC and the ADL and the Nibiru and these other organizations solely have a stranglehold on the 535 members of Congress, but that they'll get whacked if they step out of line by this mosque. Yeah, and, you know, if I had to, if I had to try to categorize them, I would put them in the, are you familiar with sabotee and franquists? No. Okay, so that's a messianic group which emerged in the 1600s, sabotee, levi, and so Jewish eschatology, and basically their eschatology was that they had to, in order to manifest the coming of the Moshe act, the world had to become more evil, basically. I don t want to be engaging in the classic blood libels, but this is a historically recorded series of events, and they were degenerate in the behaviours that they manifested. And I think we're still dealing with a group like that, and that they have managed to position themselves into positions of power, and they have, yeah, there's an eschatological drive to what it is that they're doing. And the geopolitical manifestation is just one level of a coordinated multi-generational plan. Right. And there's a spiritual, religious component that these people are driving to, to try to manifest a prophecy. Yeah. And you know, you can, people can try and dismiss that if they like, but the problem is that it doesn't matter what you believe, it's what the other person, the other group believe and what drives them. Yeah. And so what's become clear in the years since 9-11, as we've uncovered groups, you know, I'm interested in the science domain. But, you know, there's been what I call an epistanization of science and institutions, which means that they've been corrupted through, you know, is it sort of blackmail and they can hold, they can hold powerful individuals in in positions where they can drive their agenda forward. And the simple fact is, abuse of children is one of their mechanisms that they use. And if that's the mindset that we're dealing with, then, you know, a few hundred on a plane, dying, a few thousand in a building, acceptable losses. Wow. Not just acceptable, desired losses. Yeah, yeah. Well, they needed all those deaths to go in support of the global population, and they got it. Yeah, yeah. And look, it's a, and I'll be completely honest with you, Dan, you know, from my own personal circumstances at the time where I grew up and, you know, I had a, how should we say, complicated relationship with Islam because I grew up in an area where it was taken over by a lot of Pakistanis, a lot of Islam was injected into where I lived, and yeah, there was conflict because of it, and you know, it reached a crescendo, I guess, as a way of putting it, around 9-11, and but- Well, Islamophobia was somewhat prevalent after the first World Trade Center bombing. The simple fact is, Muslims have to take some responsibility for their actions. I'm married into Muslim family, and this is discussions that we have to have. We have to drag it all out onto the table to make sure that we can move forward properly. And, you know, as much as important as it is to talk about the eschatological driving of these behind-the-scenes groups, we have to do that around particularly the Abrahamic faiths. They seem almost programmed and predetermined to what I call move towards Armageddon fetishism. That dynamic is a dangerous one for everyone. We need to find a way to diffuse it. I live for three years in Israel, and I left there of the opinion that there is no way that you can solve that conflict. It's too old, it goes back thousands of years, and they will always find something to kick off either side. Now, and so, you know, there's a very deep geopolitical impasse that comes up when we have to talk about this, because there's an element of Islamic thought, not just Islamic, you know, it covers many, many groups as well, which would say, we want to push Israel into the sea. Right. And I'm sort of of the opinion, I don't want to see these wars. Right. And I'm, I'm almost, I'm partially convinced that the war in Ukraine is part of the Greater Israel plan. Right. But, you know, where do you, where do, where do we stop the historical grievance? Right. And this is something I think about a lot. And, you know, if, if we have, if we're in a situation off the backs of millions of dead in the Second World War, that, you know, made, made Israel and also at the same time, Pakistan as a country was, was made, was carved out. It was a very bloody revolution, I guess, conflict. Transition. I mean, I think they lost one or two million people just with the transition of Hindus down to the south and Muslims to the north. So that transition, the rotation was bloody. Yeah, very, very brutal. And so I asked this question of people, okay, I get it that Israel is a, it's a goddamn thorn inside, it's biblical, right? I'll make Jerusalem a stone around the necks of the world, right? But okay, we decide that we're going to dissolve the borders of Israel and though the population there, well, we're going to have that blood on our hands. And then we have to do the same with Pakistan, because is that the cut off that we're using to try to redress these grievances?

People that want to go down that line, I don't think they fully comprehend the blood that would be spilled in the process.

Yeah, well, you look at Israel's alignment with India, which is an arch enemy of Pakistan, and the US supporting both India and Pakistan. Yeah, it's an arch enemy of Pakistan, okay, but the United States standing by Israel, of course, but also India, which has a population 1.2 billion compared to 225 million Pakistanis, has a lot more mouse to feed, and would be much more economically advantageous to align with India. So I think the handwriting on the wall, I think they would love to dissolve the border between India and Pakistan, and that would be a bloodbath. Yeah, people need to tread very carefully, and the problem is that from 9-11 to where we are today, they've leveraged the geopolitics that we could be in that position to flip the switch on that type of warfare. Well, again, some people would relish in that bloodbath, and it's not something that I just want to give them. Of course, we need to stop Israel forever expanding into occupied territories. That's got to stop. We've got to stop the funding and technology transfers that we're doing. If Israel is at a country, let it stand by itself. And then nd then we have I know we've sort of gone off track. That's all right. You're interesting to talk to. Thank you. Let it let it stand as itself. Let Pakistan find its way and independence and let it sort of join the community of nations and you know, Kevin, I don't know if you know how Pax Jam was forced into the war in terror, but Charlie after 9-11, then under Secretary of State Richard Armitage paid a visit and told the ISI chief here, ,"If you don't join us in this war on terror, we will, quote, bomb you, bomb you back into the stone age," unquote. And General McSheriff Blink, and 70,000 dead people later, and $120 billion I couldn't afford to spend, has crushed Pakistan financially on the verge of defaulting on their loans. So this joint, I shouldn't say this in public because the current leadership in this country is doing some pretty nasty things to dissenters. But this joint U.S.-Pakistan coup that just occurred, I mean, the State Department said we had nothing to do with it. Don't feed me that garbage. You know how that works. So you've got a government that is aligned totally with the United States, and totally a dead slave to the IMF, and in the United States, because they are dependent on aid and trade. So I don't know where things are going in this country, and I don't know where the United States is going to guide it, but they're in control over here. Well, the problem is that I think it's bigger than one particular country, like the United States. It could be possible that the United States is being guided by, you gave a very articulate list of the potential groups that could be involved, you know, the Club of Rome, the Bilderberg, WEF, all these transnational groups. If you, from my humble opinion, it almost looks like there's been a global coup. Yeah, yeah. Well, the reason Imran Khan, the past Prime Minister, was ousted for several reasons. Imran Khan, the very day Russia invaded Ukraine, the Minister of Foreign Affairs flew into Moscow and negotiated trade deals. Imran Khan refused to support the U.S. and the Ukrainian conflict. China and Russia both were talking on, I mean, China has been a long-term ally of Pakistan, okay? And the U.S. didn't like that, especially with the Belt Road initiative. But Russia was leaning towards Pakistan, and the fight in Afghanistan in part, there were about five reasons why they invaded, but one of them was to thwart the expansion of Russia and China and South Asia. That's still their game plan, but Imran Khan was doing too many things that globalists didn't like, and they had them removed. Yep, yep. You know, I'm no expert on the internal dynamics of Pakistan, but you know, I have family links there now, and you know, call me a pacifist, I guess. I understand that sometimes there's a need to fight, but if we're going to have to, I want it done on my terms and not as a consequence of these transnationals guiding or nudging through these psychological operations that they've unleashed on us. I'm a pacifist, Kevin, and so much so that I've bashed US foreign policy in the Middle East and South Asia so bad that I get stopped by the FBI and TSA when I enter and leave the States for interrogation because that's part of my catalyst that launched me into action doing what I was doing, but to see the carnage that occurred as a result of the lies of 9-11. Yeah, and that's brought us to the point where, look, if you'd said to me, as the next phases of the war that started on 9-11, and I consider the release of biological agents to be the next real acceleration point, if you'd said to me at the beginning of that three years ago that we would be seeing trench warfare in Europe again, and well, industrialized warfare, for whatever happened in the Middle East, it's nothing compared to the carnage that's happening in Europe and has the potential to expand to a degree that I think, well, people have forgotten a lot of what happened in the Second World War, but we're very, very close to seeing that phenomenon and that lust for war taking over and driving events. Right. Well, Kevin, you're probably aware of this, but the same neo-Khan Zionists that were in the Project for a New American Century, et cetera, that drove us into the Iraq War, are exactly driving the equation. If you look at Blinken, the Secretary of State, if you look at Victoria Nguyen, who's married to Robert Kagan, who founded the Project for a New American Century, if you look at the Attorney General, I'm sorry, but they're all, I believe they're all Jewish scientists. Yeah, they are. They're driving the equation in Ukraine right now, getting it to the brink of a nuclear holocaust, and the bulk of the US population hates Putin because of the media. Yeah, it's a very delicate situation right now. I'm persona non grata in the UK because of my views. I've been outspoken, but it's been across the political spectrum. We'll discuss this another day. That's a complex story. But people don't understand, with respect to Ukraine, that that conflict was ignited in 2014, when there was a US driven coup in that country. And the specific aims were to continue to move NATO up to the borders of Russia. You know what happened in the Reagan area? It was Gorbachev up in Iceland, right? There was an agreement made, and the US has completely broken it, that they weren't going to expand eastward, and they're trying to do it right now. Not one inch further east, is what Baker said. I'm old enough to remember that. I grew up with the existential threat of the Cold War. My father was in the Air Force, and we were in a, I grew up in a region that was the, essentially the front lines. And the, I can remember the relief of the Berlin Wall coming down, Perestroika, the ABM treaties that were put into place. And nd from my perspective right now, that's all being undone. There's no there's no reason for NATO to be pushing forward the way the way that it has done. If you wanted my solution, every one of those countries that borders Russia, they should be demilitarized zones. Yeah, I'm going to do it, but that will never happen. And what we're seeing is a very, very aggressive policy by NATO, by the Five Eyes country, where they're not even giving Russia the chance to negotiate a peaceful settlement. So, that's what we're seeing. The blowing up of the Nord Stream pipeline, that was the UK that did that. I'm absolutely certain of it. Well, the reports that came out a few weeks ago from Merkel, which basically said that they weren't going to follow the Minsk agreements. Right. Right, so there's no negotiating partners for Russia at the moment, and so basically we've pushed Russia into what is an existential threat for them. Right, right, and they're responding appropriately as far as I'm concerned. I mean, I've got a meme that says, I stay on with the russians that I post on social media all the time, because I do support them in this conflict. And I do understand where they're coming from, with regard to the United States and the warmongers that you have in key positions within the US government right now. Yeah, and it's not just the US, it's the UK as well. And they're, well, again, you know, well, which which brushstrokes do you do you want to put over these groups? It's, you know, yeah, we can say, Zionist neocons looking for their new American century and full spectrum dominance. Yeah, I get it that that's one part. There's also the, well, the, the eschatological religious component that's driving a lot of the, the events as well. And we're just, we're just the, the untermensch that they trample under their feet right now. And yes, look, when when the war in Ukraine started, to me, I was I was just dismayed. I didn't I didn't really have a dog in the fight, as it were. Yeah. And, you know, I was watching the the reports coming out. But as soon as we started seeing Ukrainians gunning down POWs and cheering at the fact, I was like, oh, I see what we're dealing with here. And yeah, my I pray that Russia can get into a position where they they force them to the negotiating table. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, don't you think it's coming to that right now? I don't know. I mean, I blame very much the UK for scuppering the early talks that were I think it was in Turkey, right, that they were they were supposed to be meeting. And Boris Johnson arrives in Kiev and says, no, you're not going to do that. And then they just keep promising them weapons and money. And it's a display of the most based and worst elements of human nature that we're. And it, it has a potential to spin out of control right now. Yeah, I wish I had, I wish I had more optimistic analysis. One of the, one of the things that links that sort of current events, and it's, it's, it's impossible to deny, because we even had Newland admitting it in in Congress, where they've got these bio labs in Ukraine. Right, right. And these labs for observation of the surroundings don't require hundreds of millions of dollars being poured in via DITRA and elements of the military industrial complex. There's no reason for that. Imagine the reverse, that Russia was funding labs on the border of the US and Mexico in an official capacity. Now look, is Russia funding the trafficking of the drugs? Because I consider that chemical warfare being waged against the US. Are they involved in that? Maybe, probably. Each side needs to sit down and wind it back in. But then we seem to be dealing with people who want to build towards this chaos. They want to smash the old systems. Well, if you look at the amount of money they've thrown at the Ukraine since they started, the US has, okay? And you look at, you know how much money was spent from 9-11 to present in the Middle East and South Asia by the United States? In the whole 20 years? Yeah. Oh god, it was in the trillions, right? Yeah, 6.2 trillion dollars is what I read, okay? Who reaped that benefit? The military industrial complex. Who's capitalizing on the Ukraine right now? The same cast of characters that brought you the Iraq War, driving the equation militarily, and you got the backing of the military industrial complex, which is exactly what you had during the Afghan, Iraq, etc. conflicts. They weren't conflicts, they were, I consider to be a legal and unwarranted invasion of sovereign countries, so that they used 9-11 for to do it.

Yeah, and you know, look, I can think, cast my mind back to the events as it happened, and you know, the information, the low level of information that I had at the time, I could kind of understand Afghanistan, okay, you know, America has been attacked, they want it, you know, they have to sort of strike out. And, but then, then there was this very coordinated and encompassing plan that they had in effect. And Kevin, you probably realize this, but they wargame these things for years at these military colleges, okay, like the National War Corps. I can't remember the name of them, okay. But this invasion of Afghanistan had been wargame for years. And, you know, look how quick they got troops into Afghanistan, into Afghanistan, into Afghanistan, into Afghanistan, into Afghanistan, into Afghanistan, into Afghanistan, into Afghanistan, into Afghanistan, nd we're going to have a virus infection right after 9-11. That didn't happen with guys sitting down for a couple weeks saying, how are we going to pull this off? I think that they had planned it all along. Yeah, yeah, very much so. And we're, it's the same groups, it's the same, I don't know, I refer to them as entities, It is difficult to classify them, right? They're in the shadows, and then what is in public is very slick with respect to public relations, and yeah, it's a tough enemy. And, you know, this brings us back to, you know, what do we do in light of the problem that we're dealing with? Well, you know, you pursue the legal avenues as much as you can. Because when conflict does break out, which I think, I do think there's a high likelihood of that. And, you know, the Well, pretty much everywhere. I think a lot of what we're seeing is geared towards breaking the United States. That's the globalist aim. And, yeah, yeah. And, you know, whether, whether it's to, you know, their next system is to sort of regionalize the world and, you know, Kevin, what, what is your definition of the New World Order? What do you think that involves? I think it's what we would consider next generation, real time surveillance of everyone that's hooked into a global central bank. Here's what I read, I believe, perhaps, I'm not sure I'm totally convinced, but one world government, one world leader, the government based in Jerusalem by 2030, cryptocurrency, and either one religion or none, and depopulation. All of that seems to be in play. All of it seems to be in play. Yeah, I agree that every endpoint that you mentioned there, if you had to sort of do a Bayesian analysis and give it some probability, all of them are in play right now. I would add this level of analysis. What we're seeing in the current environment with the mass use of these next generation technologies with respect to gene modification is going to be linked to this surveillance state. And part of what they're trying to do is to aggregate data, biological data for, I don't know if the people discuss transhumanism, etc. And yeah, that's maybe a sort of end point, a far off end point, and it's very much eugenics driven. And they will, well, it's about control. And, you know, whether, whether the capital is Jerusalem or not, or I think these are, I find those things a little less incidental, because the, the gulag that's going to contain me is going to be where I'm sitting now. Right? It's going to be a digital surveillance that limits my ability to move and act as a sovereign individual. And, you know, my instinct is to push back against it as much as possible. And the disturbing thing is, is that they would want the populace, the lumpenproletariat, to get violent. It gives them an excuse to roll out police action on a military type scale. Well, there you have a problem with the arter-takers. I mean, the people that enforces the police, the Gestapo, and the military, that's their hammer that they have at the drives. I mean, if you look at what happened, the last demonstration I believe I've seen in the States was the Iraq invasion, Chakanah, where people were out demonstrating the streets. And what did they do? They established free speech zones, where they cordoned off an area, and these people could stand outside media sites and yell all they wanted. Nobody even heard of it happening. And they won't, people aren't going to do it. I mean, I think people realize that they're living in, or a lot of them do, they're living in this Arwellian, fastest police state, and they're too afraid to speak up or fear the FBI joint terrorist task force will kick their door down and take their hard drive and throw them in a internment camp. So I've got four sisters like that. They don't even like to talk to me on the phone. And they won't let me talk about things we're talking about. I have one, my youngest sister said, well, I put on the blinders. Like I said, this it's a multi generational action, and they have been supremely successful in sucking people into a debt driven lifestyle, where it's, it's virtually impossible to break out of it. Because people live week to week. Right. They want to make debt slaves out of everybody and ownership of property being a thing of the past and having total control with the cryptocurrency business. And perhaps, you know, it might be that the Muslim world, because of its rejection of usury, right, they have a very fundamental. Well, yeah, it's part of their social and religious framework that that part of the world might be a little more resistant to global homo rainbow fascism, which they're enforcing on everyone else. Yeah, yeah. Why? I consider the Muslim world to be a potential force to be dealt with in the future. I mean, you got 1.8 billion people on the planet, it's like 22% are Muslims, okay? And you look at the concentration in South Asia, and the problem is, and I guess that's what I'm trying to do is force their hand, and I was told by, you know, Brendan O'Connell is. Oh, yeah, he's a friend of mine. He doesn't like me. Oh, really? Really? Okay. Yeah, my favorite friend, we're email buddies, and he interviewed me a few times. Why doesn't he like you? Just out of curiosity. Well, so, I come from these problems, these geopolitical problems from a very nationalist perspective, right? I'm of the opinion that individual sovereignty is best protected by strong borders and a protection of the culture. Culture that formed, that has a history within these countries, and he's very much, how should we say, open borders type. And so I'll explain to you the, the history about why I have a contentious relationship with Islam. Okay. So, where I grew up, I was, well, my, my grandfather on my mother's side was Italian and captured by the British in the Second World War in North Africa. He stayed in the UK after the war. On my father's side, we don't know, I don't know anything sort of post or just after the Second World War, after he was born, right, so he came through institutions and foster homes, etc. Thankfully, he went into the military instead of, well, you know, the prison and the more objectionable sides of life. It's quite possible at that age. But anyway, I grew up in this immigrant area that was Polish and Italian. And that, as I was growing up, transitioned as Britain opened its borders to wealth countries, and that involved the mass movement, the mass migration of Pakistanis into where we lived, and Britain in particular. And there was and still is a serious clash of cultures ongoing. Now, to tie back to 9-11, my next door neighbour was one of six Pakistani youths who, as a young lad, was walking back from work one evening. This was three weeks after 9-11. They jumped him, sprayed him in the face with CS gas, had a sort of bowie type knife and beat him with a hammer and tried to decapitate him. And, well, he was, you know, he was dead. That happened 50 meters from the, you know, what was my grandparents door. I know the lads that did it. And I sort of I grew up very, very conscious of this conflict, the rape gangs was a part of the the terrain in which which I grew up in. I don't know how much you're familiar with that story. So Islamic rape gangs in the UK were a massive problem. They think that there was over. It might have been over a million girls who were. Yeah, it was it was a huge problem. And as there was only one group, one political party, they were called the British National Party, who was raising this issue, because there were so many girls being assaulted that they were they were able to gain some political leverage, and the British state did everything that they could to smash that party. Right? Because they were publicly talking about this issue of rape and violence being perpetrated on the streets of the UK. And so I gave them, right, 50 quid to help them with court cases as they were being dragged through the highest courts of the land to break that party. The established political parties were doing everything to sort of break this groundswell of, you know, the working class in the UK. They were objecting to this this mass movement into into their communities that was bringing this militant culture. And, you know, that's something that you have to wrestle with, with Islam that they they have a eschatology as well, which is at its borders bloody. And this is so I. Well, anyway, he doesn't like me because of that, that sort of association. Right. And he tells me, Dan, you got to quit bashing the United States. It's the last bastion of hope for democracy in the world. They're just being controlled by a few people. I acknowledge that, but he wants me to get into talking about the Bell and Roter initiative and Israel's technology stuff of the United States and other things. It's not directly related to what I'm talking about. I'm not going to do it. I'm not a pilot, and I can't eloquently state the way you do publicly on your broadcast, the Bell and Roter initiative, so I'm not going there. So he's on my email list, so whenever he gets an email, I usually get a comment from him, either favorable or bash me on that. Brendan is a tool for the Five Eyes nations. And, look, he makes a big deal that he's on the run, right, with criminal charges against him, right? There's no listing of him in the Interpol wanted records, right? And he has a, how would you say, he has a line that fits the establishment. Right. And I would, I would argue almost that he has, he has too much of a hyper fixation on Israel and the Palestinians, to the point where he's blinded to the bigger picture. But you know how he wound up in prison, right? Yeah. I would be a little bit miffed at Israel myself. But look, there's elements to his story that once you sort of scratch at it and peel the layers back, there are, how would you say, elements that just don't jive properly, right? I'll tell you, Kevin, as a person, I really like the guy, okay? Look, I've spiked him. I've spiked him a lot. I've done many streams with him, right? But he's bipolar. He has instability in temperament, and he throws a lot of people under the bus, okay? And he's, at best, a limited hangout. At worst, he's a, like I say, there's too much rhetoric that fits the, yeah, I would say that the sort of five I's goals and directions. And, yeah, he's just a gobshite at the end of the day. So, yeah, he lacks the ability to think in terms of nuance of these situations, right? And the stuff that he talks about with respect to the chips being backdoored, etc. And it's not just Israel that does that, right? But you don't think the NSA and MI6 don't have backdoors into these technologies as well? Right. Of course they do. So, you know, the hyperfixation on Israel is, like I say, it's a limited hangout and misses much of the complexities of the global war that we're in right now. Yeah. You know, and we're very, very deep down the, I don't like using the term rabbit hole, but the drain. We're circling the drain with respect to global events overtaking us. We got away for 20 years with 9-11. They're going to do the same thing with COVID. They're going to do the same thing with the Ukraine, and people are going to sit here being passive about it all because they're being fed garbage on the media and from governments around the world. I don't see it. I don't see it improving until until people get off their butt and turn the TVs off and stand on the street and start screaming. I don't see anything change. Yeah, it's going to get worse all the time that people remain stuck in the, well, it's the debt system, it's the usury system. Right? And most people can't get out of that. You know, better, better to, better to sort of exist in a, I don't know, look, you need a roof over your head. You need to be able to feed yourself. But, you know, at what point do you say that enough, I have enough, and I don't want any more from a system that's morally and ethically bankrupt and coated in blood? Well, you got to do something more than protest. I think I think the solution is detached from that system, stop feeding it. Right. You know, you got to stop using credit cards, you've got to stop, stop fueling that fiat money system that it's that it uses in these ever accelerating cycles. And, you know, can you build a critical mass of that? I don't think you can. What I think you can do is you can aggregate enough people to get through each each. What would you call them? Assaults, geopolitical moves, war moves. It's all encompassing. I say it's full spectrum. And you've just got to get people like yourself who have a deep understanding to the other side, so you can keep telling people the history of what went on. People are suffering from cognitive dissonance. They can't fathom the idea that the US government would be involved in something as horrible as 9-11, so they put on the blinders like my sisters and turn it off. I talk to my sisters on Skype, their eyes glaze over and they don't, their expression is like they've already turned me out. So I just give up trying on them. I mean, I wish I could bring them at least to look at where I am and consider the possibility that maybe I'm right on some of these issues, but I can't even do that. And I'm afraid too many people are like that, Kevin. Yeah, yeah. And all we can do is what? What's the goal? We got to get to 2030. Okay. Let's do that then. And, you know, let's make sure that we're, I think a lot of it is sort of having a, you can't be too pessimistic, right? We need to aim at the younger cohort, right? The ones that will switch on, and we need them to have kids and keep the process going. And, you know, as much as I have differences with Islam, they're very, very good at multi-generational maintenance of tradition. Same with the Jews, and the very religious Jews, that they do that brilliantly. Learn from them. This is, this is a discussion I have, you know, I have a lot, which is that those groups which we sit here complaining about, engage in one particular behavior, which, I don't know, what would you say? Why Europeoids, right, need to grasp in-group preference. It's okay to prefer your kith and kin over the push for globalization, right? So they're utilizing the mass movement of populations from the third world via breaking their systems, causing wars, and offering them a easy life with respect to welfare states, particularly in Europe. And you cannot have a welfare state with open borders. It's not possible. And, you know, the transnationalists and globalists would love to see the borders swept away. Right? They want economic regions. You know which country is standing up and putting some resistance towards that right now? Russia, literally with literally with blood and treasure. Right? And if you ask me, which do I want? Global homo, rainbow fascism that's driven by corporatism, or the sort of trad culture that I know leans in towards a sort of totalitarian political structure? Yeah. Well, right now, I think I prefer the trad one because they've got some basis in reality, right? The West is warping itself with respect to, and this is where the gender ideology, the woke ideology is part of the tip of the spear, which is being used to break the mass population, right, the middle and the working class. And that culture war is an important war to fight. In fact, I would I would make the argument it's it's more important to focus on that than trying to focus on these, you know, mass global problems. Because you can't affect change at that level. At a family level, you can, right? So, myself and yourself are in a position where we can act as an interface to normal families in the Islamic sphere and the Western sphere, right? We can perhaps diffuse some of the social tensions that have been driven by globalist, yeah, mass movement of populations into other working class populations. I mean, I don't I don't have, you know, easy answers. I just I'm moving further and further away. You sound like you got a lot of easy answers there, Kevin. No, no, I don't know what the solution is. I mean, I don't feel like I'm being very effective doing much of anything, you know, when I come on podcasts or whatever, you know, and in particular with what I'm doing regarding the 9-11 pilot whistleblowers. I just, I wind up getting frustrated every month and saying this is hopeless and I'm going to quit and then something happens and I don't. But what you're doing is vitally important because you're laying down the technical aspects of a world changing event. Right. And, you know, we need people like that who understand the mechanics of the weapons that they're using. Yeah, I think our group is, I mean, I mentioned nine pilots for 911 Truth. Well, one of their co-founders ran away, and the other one passed away last year. And it basically consists of a website out there, and I don't know of any other 911 pilot group out there that's saying and doing what we're doing. But they're only going to let us go so far before they start whacking people because they can't let us get away with saying the aircraft are remotely controlled, especially if the word spreads rapidly. If I and my group were successful in spreading the word across the Muslim world, they're not going to let us do that. I don't pose a threat right now going on programs like this or the one I was on the other night saying what I'm doing, so I guess they just let me ramble. I'll mention maybe I did already. I don't remember. Maybe I mentioned it the other night, but there was a pilot named Philip Marshall. Okay, he was a captain for United Airlines. Did I mention this? I mentioned it earlier to someone but he had written two books on 9-11. I was about to publish a third one, and he complained to his neighbors that he was being threatened. And he had the book that he had written, he wore a copy of it. Oh, this is the people in California where the murder, suicide. They wound up doing they found him, him and his two kids, the kids were shot to death and their family dog was too. And he had a bullet in the head and they call it a murder suicide that he killed his kids and then committed suicide. And they didn't investigate any further. All I'm saying is, given what he was doing, he was going to expose a lot of George H.W. Bush and his involvement in everything. If you go so far, they'll kill you. Yeah, and look, so I'm of the opinion that, look, there before the grace of God go, I praise Allah, right, for being able to talk to people like this right now. And, you know, we have a parallel type of role, okay? So where you've been explaining the technicalities behind the what was an assault against people, right? I've been doing the same with respect to SARS and explaining about the synthetic nature of the virus, its lab origin, and in doing so, I consider it part of the effort to aggregate people who realize something isn't right. They've, you know, to steal a line from the matrix, they feel that splinter in their mind, right? And all we can do is build families, build networks, and get to the other end of this process that they've initiated. That's, that's, you know, you're not picking up a gun, and going and fighting them. It's not possible. I don't know, I sort of take the view that you have to live among them, but not be of them. Right? Right. And, you know, you realize that if you try to approach someone and say, hey, it's a bloodline, and the committee is real, all these different groups I mentioned before, they're only such a conspiracy theories. They back out and don't listen to you, and then they turn you off. So until you get past that barrier where people start realizing that there are these superpowers controlling governments worldwide. I mean, the very fact that all the countries in the world have remained silent on 9-11, I mean, you had Mohammed Mahathir in Malaysia come out and talk about him, or Ahmed Jannadhan, or however you pronounce his name in Iran. When he was speaking before the United Nations, they're going to walk out on them a lot of people. So you've got this global. Look, it wouldn't surprise me now that you're going to see another push to spread the war to Iran, and that would be driven by Israel. We've seen a little glimpse of that in the last month with radioactive material that supposedly came from Iran to Pakistan via Oman, and then landing in Heathrow, right? And for sure, they're gearing up for that next stage of the conflict, right? And I don't think we can stop it, but we don't have to be part of it. Who are you talking about? Individuals or nations? Yeah, just decisions. Individuals, right? Yeah. You know, if they instantiate a draft. No, I think then you'd have a revolt. Maybe. I went through the draft process in the Vietnam War. As a matter of fact, they had a lottery drawing. They pulled birthdays out of an urn. And if yours was first, you're going. If you're number 365, you weren't going. And I pulled number two. I lost my first lottery drawing. I lost my deferment, which is why I said anchors away and went to Navy. How macabre that they would pull it from an urn. It's dark. Look, man, and again, there is just war, right? There is. But what we're seeing right now, these aren't just wars being initiated by, again, like I say, this West, and I don't think they're that unified. I think there's a lot of competing groups and goals and aims within these different, within these transnationals, okay, that permeate down into countries' deep state apparatus. And, you know, we've just got to be calm, walk through, and, you know, part of that is, like I say, building these networks. You know, it's been an honor to be able to speak to someone like yourself with the experience. You too, the feeling is mutual there, Kevin. You're very knowledgeable, and you remember back when we were talking about 9-11. I'm only kidding. Because we did cover a broad range of topics here, but it was very interesting talking to you. But they're all linked, right? That's the issue here. And, you know, all you can do is keep discussing it, hope that people can join in the conversation. That's right. Just on this uninterrupted wall of violence, I'm going to be very interested to see what kind of a response I get from a room full of violence, and I want to see how many of them have ever heard of it before. I mean, it makes sense that there would be technology like that. The very fact that they accurately hit all three buildings on their first attempt with pinpoint accuracy, military, cruise, military. Well, actually, the navigation system on today's modern commercial jet aircraft is derived from cruise missile technology, so they would be that accurate. And for the people, the subhumans that planned 9-11, it was absolutely essential that all three buildings get struck, because they wanted to take down the Twin Towers because they were loaded with asbestos anyhow. And the Pentagon, I read this, okay, had the buildings, the Twin Towers been the only two buildings to have collapsed, they would have had to classify it as a terrorist act, whereas when they hit the Pentagon, they declared it was an act of war. They justified the invasion of Afghanistan. So they had to hit the Pentagon. And for this building 70 foot tall to come in at ground level the way it did, if that's what happened, it all makes sense to me that they did why they did what they did with the technology they used. Because even with pilots, they couldn't rely on them flying these airplanes, even if they got everything hooked up automatically, they wouldn't have been able to accomplish like the Pentagon maneuvers. And, you know, we're in the age of automated drones that are able to fly, you know, with pinpoint accuracy. And, you know, it's not a stretch of the imagination to me to think that, you know, the precursor of that technology in the 90s was already around. Well, I'll give you an example. If you look up the Predator and Global, whatever they are. Global Hawk, yeah. I think that they were developed, or they released them, put them out around 284 right in during the height of the Iraq War, which would say, okay, the technology wasn't there on 9-11. But if you go in that 66 page article, I found, if you Google Dark Star airplane, hey, you're going to do it now? Yeah. If you Google Dark Star airplane, a Wikipedia article pops up, and there was this drone that made its maiden flight in 1996, five years before 9-11, and did everything that Global Hawk and the Predator drone did. It could take off, fly to its target, come back, and they could alter its course, speed, and alter. So what was it called? Dark Star? Dark Star, one word, Dark Star. Lockheed? I don't, yeah, I think it is, yeah. You have a Wikipedia article there? RQ3 Dark Star. Right. If you go down about halfway down the article, or maybe even a third, it talks about it in 1996. It first happened. They first launched this thing. And the only reason they didn't continue with it because, not because the system didn't work, but the airplane itself was unstable aerodynamically, so they took it out of service. Right, it doesn't have a tail or. Right, but you look at the second paragraph there. The first prototype in the first slide, March 29 1996. Yeah. And look, you can, the computing in, I'm no expert, but you can look at the, what's it called, the B2 stealth, right? Yeah. For sure, that was prototyped in the 90s. Right. For sure. Right. And that, that flies, you know, that's all fly by wire and the ability was was there for sure. And that the amusing thing is, is that Iran in the Muslim world seems to have become a bit of a specialist in these, in these drones right that we're seeing them being used in a real world combat situation. Right, right. And, you know, yeah, the Iranians can do it. I'm pretty sure Lockheed could in the... Exactly. Well, if you start speculating, if you look at the development of the drone in that article that I was talking about, okay, you have to imagine it wasn't just Boeing Honeywell that developed it, you had the Air Force, NASA, the military, Raytheon. One day a woman come to me on Twitter, and she went, she gave me her name. And she said she had all this information because she worked for Raytheon to prove that the uninterrupted autopilot was developed prior to 90, and she chickened out on me. She was going to hand over this data, and she said her life had been threatened, so she chickened out on me, and I recently contacted her and said, hey, we could really use you right now. But she doesn't even respond to emails anymore. Kevin, if you go back to the articles, maybe we already popped this up. The evidence of hijacking Malaysian Air 370, okay, that's the article, 66 pages long, that goes into a lot of detail about how this stuff was developed. People that are forgotten are not familiar with Malaysia 370. It took off out of Kuala Lumpur heading towards Beijing, then made a couple of very erratic turns. Its radios were shut down, the transponder was shut off, and it disappeared out over the Indian Ocean. And my friend, Captain Phil McConnell, first told me about this system in 19, I mean 2007, was given a first class round trip ticket to Kuala Lumpur to describe this system in detail how it works. So, they would know. And when this, I don't know if you should notice it, but China Eastern, 5735 several months ago, took a nosedive straight down from 29,000 feet in two minutes. So, yeah, I said, I got a hold of China's FAA and China Eastern's address, and Xi Jinping, and sent them a copy of this thing, each of them on a flash drive saying, hey, do you guys even know this exists? I'm sure they do. But I wound up with two, I won't go into how I did, but I'll call them Chinese operatives, and we're going to pay my way over to Beijing to talk to people about this. But they've still got a two week quarantine, forgive me, because of COVID, and I don't want to go over and sit in a hotel for two weeks. You stay put where you are at the moment. My advice to people in the current environment is mitigate exposures right now. Just if you're if you're good where you are, stay put. As good as I can be, given what I'm saying in the environment, I'm operating here. It only costs about 50 bucks to get somebody killed over here, and this place is swarming with CIA, RAW, MI6, etc. So if they got tired of Dan Hanley wanting to knock me out, it would be a cheap thing to do. I'm of the opinion, if you're not fermenting, if what we're doing is just, well, talking about adaptation to this system, and maintaining sovereignty through noncompliance. And if you're not gaming their system and making ridiculous amounts of money, etc., and you're just keeping focused on the important things, the spiritual things, the family, wealth of family. And, you know, families coming together and supporting mutual support. It's very difficult for them to to filter it through a system to say drone strike that dude. Okay. Right. And, you know, all you're doing is talking about technology. Right. That's it. Yeah, but it blows the holy hell out of the 9-11 official narrative. Yeah. But, you know, we've seen they don't, we've seen they don't care, right? They carry on regardless. And, you know, the yeah, like, my advice to people is try, try to get to a stabilized position. No debt so they can break you that way, because that's how they've got 99% of the people, right? They're too afraid to move or to make a move that would threaten that existence that they're hooked into. Yeah, I had something recently happened. Very recently, all of a sudden, I couldn't do online banking. So I got ahold of my US bank and said, what gives? And they said, we'll check on came back to me and said, Yeah, the bank has decided. It's a pretty good brand and a good size branch. It's Sonoma's in the southeast. And he said they decided they're going to not allow onl I thought are they targeting me? Are they trying to limit because I have to transfer money over every month? But that might just be paranoia creeping in on my part. Oh, no, no, no. The debanking is a critical part of their tactics. I've been debanked and stopped from being able to use banking services. They're very aggressive on that front. Okay, so it isn't my imagination, it isn't my paranoia, okay? No, and anything that involves this digital domain. Yeah. Right? Yeah. That's all, it's all contract, it's all, how would you say, it's the corporate world. Right. Right. And they do what they want in there, because, you know, if you want to get into all the admiralty law and about, you know, what is sovereign to you and what you're agreeing to undertake when you sign contracts with these organizations. You have to be or that's the risk all the time. And like I say, the issues that you have with banking, if you've got $100,000 of debt with your credit card and your car, and then you've got a mortgage, a debanking move will scare the shit out of most people. Yeah, yeah. The other thing they do, I got audited by the IRS on the Clear Blue several years ago. They said I owed them $50,000. I tried to pot it in months, so I've been paying that off. I've almost got it paid off. But I've heard that's the other tactic they use. They come looking for problems with your internal revenue. Yeah, yeah. You know, the render unto Caesar. What's Caesar? That's how you have to look at it. You know, people that are listening, you know, I'm able to do this because people, like you say, you heard that donation go through, and I live on small $10, $20 donations from, and, you know, I try to make it that that's enough. I don't want to be in in debt, and I do. I was, I wasn't going to put it I didn't want to put it on the guys that were developed the website says you gotta go. I don't want to come across like a money grabbing individual trying to capitalize on 9-11 they got no no you got to put it up but it's only collected $1,500 over three years so Folks, support Dan. You need to, you need to. Well, what I found is you have to, I get support because I do this most days. And, you know, I told you prior to streaming, I don't do like an hour of superficial conversation, right? If I'm going to do a topic, I want to get in and drill down to the bedrock. People appreciate it. Yeah. Because look, what's the other alternative but the mainstream is shoving down your throat? Right. Right. There are people out there who realize that, yeah, if they're watching that, or people that use that as their primary information feeds are drones, if you like. They're part of the system. Well, I don't speak Urdu. I can't understand it. That's embarrassing because I've been over 13 years. Oh, it's the same for me with Japanese. Oh, okay. Anyhow, the only two stations we get over here is CNN and BBC and I wouldn't dare watch either one of them. So all my news comes off the internet after research and even that I cross check to make sure when I'm reading is accurate. Yeah, and you have to you have to have conversations with other people in the same space. All people can't be all things, right? I can't. I'm very reliant on a handful of people who I say, I'm, I can trust. I've got high trust in what they're, what they're saying and what their analysis is. And, yeah, it's, I don't know, that's the way to survive going forward. Now, we're in a situation where potentially they could switch off the internet. And that may be the next big thing that they do. It wouldn't surprise me. We've the four horsemen rampaging and we've got war. They've got pestilence. And I think famine is coming. Right. Yeah, but it's not it's not the it's not the star view of bread. That's coming. I think what's coming is the withdrawal of the technologies and products that we've become used to through long supply chains. And that will mean things like medicines. And, you know, the technology to be able to do this, and the internet. That would be our thing. That's the only crosstalk we have. Excuse me. You know, that's why I'm sort of, you know, pursue the legal angle, right? You do it because it leaves a fingerprint and other people will be perhaps motivated to do it or to become whistleblowers, etc. So that needs to be done. And the other part is survive. But you don't want to be seen to be, again, sort of plotting whatever, truck bombs or the stupid stuff that they want that. They want it. And they want nothing more than to kick your door in, come in, 12 of them in all their gimp suits and flashbangs and don't give it to them. Well, it was interesting. The first time my, well, it was the first time in a long while my wife and I were flying a trip back to the States and the very day I made reservations to my daughter to go to Doha, to Atlanta. I get a call from my sister and said, my ex-wife had called her and said the FBI came out to her house in Washington, DC, and wanted to know everything about my trip. I go, what the hell, how'd they know I was coming, right? I called FBI in Washington, and they were real close, tight-lipped. They go, how'd you find this out? And they go, my sister told me, right? They wouldn't tell me anything. So I said to my wife, watch this, something's going to happen when we get to the States, and sure enough, we're in the customs hall, and a man and a woman come walking over, they were FBI agents, right? And then they asked me if I had a moment, a little while to talk, and I said, sure, I was expecting you. So they took us over to get me in the room. They knew everything about me. They knew what my Facebook groups, they knew what I posted on Facebook. And I said, Look, I'm, I'm opposed to US foreign policy in the Middle East and South Asia, and I'm very vocal on, on Facebook and Twitter. Which is your right. Yeah, they know, they know everything you're doing. Yeah. Yeah. And, like I say, this is, well, my, I don't know if I'm right, but I just I think this is the optimal way to ensure progression, lineage progression, get children through, teach children about this system, about the slave system. Right. That's all we can do. I mean, you know, I'm not an eloquent author like Orwell or Huxley, you know, that can sketch out the direction that we're going, but I can hold a conversation like this. Well, you're a good conversationalist and very knowledgeable and intelligent, and I'm glad I get to talk to you, Kevin. Likewise for you. It was a pleasure. It's 6am, I should probably... Yeah, what time is it? Holy cow, we've been on for a while. It was a long one. But, you know, we can explore more. If you've got other people who you think would be interested in talking, I'd be happy to. It sounds like you know a lot of people. Yeah, like you, I've met a lot of people on the way, just doing what I'm doing. So I've got friends in virtual world all around the world. So, you know, from Japan, where you're at, to Sweden, to an American living in Crimea, to a guy in Alabama. So I've got a broad cross section of people in various locations that I keep in touch with. They're my sounding boards because my wife knows what I'm doing, knows what I'm saying, but doesn't have much of an opinion on any of it. So I use these these guys to talk to and get their opinion on things as they're very knowledgeable and well read on all we've talked about tonight. So I think you and I are on the right track, Kevin. I hope so. I hope so. And like I say, the focus on explaining technical details, people have to understand the mechanisms of the weapons that are being used. It has to be demystified somehow. And what you're doing is critical. You know, in the 9-11 space, I've heard about you. I've seen you talk before. You've done very eloquent discussions about the flight dynamics just to hit the Pentagon. It's and this, you know, the fact about Eddie Shalev and the three instructors was relatively new to me, and I threw it in the FAA's face and the FBI. And that's what we're doing right now, saying you lied to us. And it's a critical lie. Yeah, keep keep keep doing what you're doing. Keep on keeping on. Okay. All right, I will let you go. I hope to. You've got my Skype now and if you use if you're using a zoom app, I will. I'll try and invite you and see if I can do that right now actually. Do you have the zoom app? No, I don't. I don't know. I find it just better quality than Skype. Yeah. Well, I'll be in touch. Don't worry. I was just going to say. I'll get in touch with you on Skype if I got somebody else that's interested. There's a friend of mine, I can't name where he is, he was terminated at UPS because he refused to go through a psychological screening. And they fired him for insubordination, okay, and he spent $500,000 on legal fees trying to win this thing the last eight years, and he might be interested in talking to you because he's all about dark money and what really controls the U.S. political scene. Yeah, happy to get happy to get the data. And, you know, if it's a way of getting information out to different audience, then. There's a lot of things when I first met him that he wasn't aware of like APAC and DDL and he didn't realize the influence, but I kind of destroyed him. Yeah, and look, America's battle is to address these, like these influencer groups, right? And, you know, ADL is the poster child, obviously, but there's many, many others. And, you know, there's, I don't know, rip that out at the root should probably solve a lot of problems. All the, what do you call them? I'm struggling to find the word, the people that sort of hook on to politicians and they're sort of giving them money and, you know, the pharmaceuticals do it, all of them sort of trying to buy influence, right? And it's that that needs to stop, but it's, it's late and I can't think of what I'm looking for. Well, thanks for having me on, Kevin. It was a pleasure talking to you. You're very smart. I know a lot of things and it was great hearing what you had to say. Yes, likewise, and I feel we just touch the subjects as there's plenty to dig down into there and I'm going to read the articles and try and get up a little bit more speed on that because it is fascinating. Yeah, if you get, if you ever bored someday, try to read the whole website and watch the videos there. It's not that long a read, and the videos aren't that long, but it'll bring you up to speed what we're all about. I mean, do you, I think I asked you this earlier, but the architects and engineers for 911, do you liaise with them at all? I don't liaise directly, but I'm about to. Are you familiar with Richard Gage? Yes. Well, he's a friend of mine. I know him. I've been on his program before, too. He really got ripped off. He develops the grassroots effort that attracted 3600 architects, and they let him go. And I think he's really miffed about that, but he's over with the Lawyers Committee right now in some capacity, and he's really very vocal about the issues that he talked about that architects and engineers. So I'd love to talk to him. I've got his contact information. I can put you in touch with me. Oh, please do. I'll tell you what, Charlie, I don't have your email address, right? I sent you an email today with the zoom link, so you do have contact. I mean, I'll have you email introduce that way. Perfect. That'd be great. Yeah. Okay. You have a pleasant rest of the evening. I've got to get the kids ready for school. Yeah. Thank you very much. You take care. Okay, bye bye. Bye bye. Alright, folks, that was cool. Yeah, just that I couldn't keep an eye on the chat at all. So, I'm not even sure how that was sort of perceived. So let's shoot back a little bit here. See, I was command. Good to see you. See, trying to try to pick something up here Rasmussen had it 71% jab 26% unjabbed. Yeah, that that number makes it right for me and look, look man, if we can get that 26% through. And I don't know. Yeah, it's about community building and kids have kids, families. See stuff about COVID. Kev, ask Hanley what he thinks a draft would look like in the USA. I can't ask him now, but I think I'm kind of of the opinion that modern military systems are so complex that drafting wouldn't work. I guess a civil draft maybe might be more appropriate. See, I asked him and says, Luckily, I dropped out of college when I did, plus the timing when I found Kevin and other guys like JC, Kevin McCairn and Jiki. If I was in school, there's no way I would have discovered these people. Oh, and Mark. Yes, of course, Housatonic. Let's see the Amiga 500 F117 simulator was used as a training tool at USFF, was it? God bless Amiga. Let's see Bolin's missile ship posting have been addressed by Dawson now Bolin is silent like an ostrich. Brian's a subject matter expert on 9-11. He's, I like talking to him about it. It's been encouragement to see some of youth staying informed and steadfast kudos. I agree. Airplane deniers and virus deniers in the same category. Yeah, and they're a psychological operation designed to muddy the waters. They don't want you understanding the technology. Let's see. MI6 runs Norwegian BCC. They set on every program that I have no doubt. Let's see. I'm tired. It's difficult for me to pick this stuff out. Let me just thank whoever was sending. I want to say thank you to Sally and big heart to Karma. Much, much appreciated. You have no idea how much those donos help. Things are very, very tight at the moment. I was speaking with Rimo today about rodent experiments, and her sort of schedule is, well, it would be February to do something, but we're thinking about it and looking to do it. So I was looking at cages and click I'll get cages and. But that's that's kind of moving. So there's some progress there. Let's see. They've got Islamic banking, sir. Someone needs to turn this information into digestible content by penetrating TikTok YouTube algorithms. Think about what Andrew Tate did, funnily enough. My generation is depressed, angry and confused. They need a purpose, but someone has to give them the talking points. Yeah, I wish I wish I had the energy to put them into flashy one minute videos that sort of drop truth bombs. I really, I really do. But I just, I think the simple fact is the format that I do.