Selling your car to Carvana is as easy as... As easy as pie? Sure. All you have to do is enter your license plate or VIN. As easy as a stroll in the park.
Okay, then just answer a few questions and you'll get a real offer in seconds. As easy as singing. Why not? Schedule a pickup or drop-off and Carvana will pay you that amount right on the spot. As easy as playing guitar.
Actually, I find that kind of difficult. But selling your car to Carvana is as easy as... Can be. Visit Carvana.com or download the app to get an instant offer today. Stay tuned. The second hour is coming up next. WHKW W245CY, Cleveland, reminding you it's time to get back to church this Sunday. A service of Salem Media Group.
Donate and listen to the podcast at WRWL.org. Alright, we're back. And John, remember how they like to tell you... Remember how Bill Gates says, as long as it's planned, the people will accept it.
As long as you plan it and you let them know you're going to do it, they'll accept it. And in a way, he's right because they use the media to tell you what's coming. So it looks like the World Economic Forum is up to it again.
So go ahead and play that clip, Derek. Well, the World Economic Forum, yes, run by Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum says that we will experience a massive cyber attack that will hit before the year 2025, which will lead to a massive collapse of the banking industry, infrastructure, and so much more. How do they know this?
It's unbelievable. Someone who's been following this very, very closely and it ties even more directly into the story that we've been covering here on the show about the CTI League files, the Michael Shellenberger released files about the cyber spying on Americans. We're going to get to that part of the story with independent journalist, Whitney Webb, who I'm thrilled to welcome back to the show.
Whitney, welcome back to Redacted. Hey, it's great to be here after a long absence. Thanks for having me back. Of course, we wouldn't miss the opportunity.
So thrilled to have you back here. So let's talk about this World Economic Forum idea that at the second in command at the World Economic Forum that we are going to see a massive cyber attack hitting before the year 2025. Pointing out, you know, in great detail, yeah, like this is going to happen, so you better be prepared for it.
Why are they saying this and who are they going to try to point the finger at? Right. So this was said at the WEF annual meeting earlier this year in January by the WEF managing director, Jeremy Jurgens. And Jurgens, as well as the WEF itself, has been involved in a series of simulations for several years now that I'm sure a lot of people in your audience are familiar with called Cyber Polygon, which has been directly affiliated with Russia's government, as well as some of Russia's biggest banks and some of the biggest commercial banks in the world. And also backed by a lot of U.S. federal agencies, which is ironic when you consider, you know, all about alleged Russian hacks over the years. They're very willing under the guise of the WEF to collaborate with the supposed hackers responsible for everything bad, you know, for several years ago.
So that's quite revealing. But aside from Cyber Polygon, there's a lot that the WEF seeks to accomplish as it relates to the cyber realm. And they've been collaborating in a lot of ways with these same big banks and also American intelligence agencies in unprecedented ways that has not really gotten any coverage over the past several years. And a lot of this is housed within a public-private partnership the WEF manages called the World Economic Forum Partnership Against Cybercrime. And this particular organization, back a few years ago, gamed out with the Carnegie Endowment, along with the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank. So some of the biggest central banks in the world, as well as some of the biggest commercial banks in the world, like Bank of America and JP Morgan, how essentially the U.S. financial system was due to be the victim of a massive cyber attack. And if you're familiar with how things have been going in the U.S. financial or banking system recently, things are not in a very good state at all. And regardless of if there would be or will be a cyber attack in the near future, the banking and financial system in the United States is in deep doo-doo, right? So if you're the big banks and the intelligence agencies, you want to avoid what happened after the 2008 economic crisis, where there was unprecedented anger at Wall Street, because the whole hope and change Obama psyop, essentially, is probably not going to work again. So how do you allow that collapse to happen?
Because it has to happen in such a way that the banks and the government are essentially blameless. Well, a cyber attack happen and you can literally blame any nation state or group for that hack. And we know this because of what WikiLeaks published right before Julian Assange was completely silenced and then later arrested and dragged out of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, Vault 7, which revealed things like the Umbridge program, among other things that U.S. intelligence and other intelligence agencies that are affiliated with this partnership against cyber crime have the ability to place the fingerprints of any nation state actor they wish, including Russia, China, Iran, and really North Korea. Any other group as well, not just nation states, put their fingerprints in a hack they actually commit themselves.
And this is very significant because this offers, you know, these intelligence agencies unprecedented ability to have to conduct false flag operations in the cyber realm. And this group specifically has a lot of solutions aside from, you know, things with the banking system that they cannot really justify implementing unless there is some sort of large cyber attack. So what is the partnership against cyber crime want? They're very open that they want a regulated Internet and they're essentially seeking a policy that was efforts were made to implement during the Obama administration in the U.S.
They called it a driver's it's for the Internet. So essentially what this public-private partnership at the WEF is pushing for is for every person's access to the Internet to be tied to a digital ID or a government issued ID, but presumably a digital ID just because of where government issued ID programs are all going essentially around the world. And the goal of that, of course, if your ID is linked to your Internet access, intelligence agencies know exactly what media you are consuming in terms of, you know, what you read and also what you post online. And that has been the goal for a very, very long time. So people aren't necessarily going to consent to that unless they are made to believe that anonymity and privacy online are dangerous. So how exactly can you convince people that that needs to happen?
Well, you have some sort of event where anonymous hackers do something online that causes major disruption globally, and then the consent can be manufactured through fear and panic, as is often done, that anonymity and privacy needs to be eliminated, that we need to know exactly who is doing what online to prevent a calamity of that scale from ever happening again. And this is the exact solution that these guys have been cooking for a very long time. And the intelligence agencies involved are Israeli intelligence, British intelligence, and then the U.S. Secret Service, FBI and Department of Justice. And you have several of the biggest banks in the country like Bank of America involved directly with this group, as well as major U.S. tech companies like Microsoft and Amazon partnered with all of this.
And this is exactly what they're seeking. And they have all the tools to allow something like this to happen. And when you have the fact that some of these actors want a war where the U.S., for example, goes to war with Iran, among other things, and they have the ability to attribute, you know, cyber attacks of any scale to any entity at all.
And this is a big problem because when these alleged hacks take place, whether it's blamed on Russia, Iran or China, the headline will blame these countries. But if you actually read the article itself, they don't actually have the evidence to make that case. They say we believe it's this country or that it's a group affiliated with this country. And their reasoning ranges from, you know, they'll say things like we have medium probability that it's, you know, they're tied to Iran.
And, you know, all these, you know, phrases that show that they don't actually have evidence. And then there's an effort to manufacture consent potentially for military action based on all of this stuff. So it's definitely very alarming and people should be paying attention to it when you consider that you have the biggest banks involved, the biggest intelligence agencies and some of the biggest tech companies in the world. And another thing that this WEF group is seeking is for banks, banking regulators and intelligence agencies to essentially fuse their operations under the guise of cybersecurity. And the more you think about that, the more insane it is. I mean, it's just an insane policy.
Bringing it together under one umbrella. And of course, we even heard Nikki Haley, who's a, you know, certainly the neocons absolutely love Nikki Haley right now, pushing her big time. And she over the past couple of weeks has called for this lack of anonymity on the web, wants everyone to be registered as you're using the internet, right?
Yeah. And so have people, you know, media personalities like Jordan Peterson, for example, has pushed for the same end of anonymity online. You also have people like Elon Musk who bought Twitter, you know, why he was buying Twitter, saying that we have to verify all humans and essentially, you know, allegedly to control the bot issue on Twitter. But there's this broad push essentially everywhere you look from the power elite to end online anonymity. And people are obviously resisting that because it changes the nature of the internet and supercharges the surveillance capabilities already built into to a hugely significant degree. And it's a bigger problem when you consider that the Department of Justice specifically has a pre-crime program that they've been operating since the Trump administration called deep, where people have literally been arrested for things they've posted on social media.
Someone was even killed, I think, a few months ago for Facebook posts he made about Joe Biden and then was swatted and shot in the street in front of his house for posts he made on social media. Tying all of this to your government ID considering, you know, all of those factors as it relates to US law enforcement in the Department of Justice, which again is partnered with all of these things, is an extremely awful idea. And the fact that you have all these financial services entities involved at the same time there's this push for digital ID, not just for the internet, but to tie your digital ID to your banking through central bank digital currencies or heavily regulated stablecoins and deposit tokens. I mean, programmable money.
I mean, the implications here are huge. And there's obviously a lot of resistance from certain quarters of the US population and elsewhere against the digital ID push and the CBDC push. But have the internet go down for X amount of time because of some massive cyber attack and they bring it back and say, oh, well, we have to know who you are.
And now the only way to get online is to use our digital ID. You know, they're going to get the kind of fast, rapid onboarding and mass adoption that they are seeking for those programs. Wow. Now, you believe that this cyber attack is a false flag operation. Is it is it your concern that Israel would want the United States to attack Iran first, that they wouldn't be able to do this?
What is your reporting show on that side of it? So it's not really just my reporting, you know, it's reporting from mainstream media outlets and also things that Mossad directors have openly said in interviews is that for the past 20 years, they have Mossad has had almost unlimited funding and energy directed towards Iran regime change policy. And that a key component of that, according to former Mossad director Meir Dagan, among others, is getting the US to strike Iran first. And there's been a push for a long time from, you know, the neocon sectors within the United States to have the US preemptively strike Iran, among other things. And you had pushes coming from some of the biggest donors to the GOP, for example, Sheldon Adelson, when he was still alive, the biggest donor to the Republican Party and also to Trump, was also pushing for preemptive military action against Iran.
You know, he isn't necessarily around anymore, but that type of policy idea has been floated for a very long time. And after the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, the IRGC general, who was very famous, there was rhetoric coming from Mike Pompeo when he was CIA director and also Trump that if Iran launched any sort of retaliation, including a cyber attack, they would respond with military action to Iran. So there has been a lot of fear mongering about exactly this. And of course, it's important to keep in mind that next year, the exact year when the WEF managing director has predicted this attack is going to take place, is an election year in the United States. And a lot of the same rhetoric about some imminent cyber attack, whether from Iran, Russia and or China, was being utilized to a significant degree in the 2020 election as well. And you actually had what I've argued is an Israeli intelligence front company, a cybersecurity company called Cyber Reason, was gaming out and conducting simulations with DHS and some of our top law enforcement and intelligence agencies, how hackers could disrupt the 2020 election, have the election canceled and martial law declared exactly what hackers would need to do for those conditions to be met. So there is a lot of stuff going on in the cyber realm that not enough people are paying attention to. And the most concerning thing about this, I would argue, besides the WEF warnings, is that you have a series of entities, many of which are tied to foreign intelligence, sitting on the most critical infrastructure systems in the United States, have access to those systems and other groups have given access to those systems to people that haven't even been vetted by our own government.
It's madness. And is that tied to the CTIL files, which Michael Shellenberger, journalist Michael Shellenberger... Alrighty, we are back. What do you have to say about all that, Big John McTernan?
Are you there, Michael? My head is spinning with it all. Some of it I agree 100%. Some of it I'm not sure of and some of it I disagree. But I'd have to take notes to go over that with you, everything that she... First of all, my objection to it is, yeah, they're going after Iran, but at the same time, Obama gave them, what was it, $60 billion?
Yeah, yeah. And Obama was, he had Iranian, that key advisor for him was an Iranian woman and the Muslims were coming, he brought them all into all levels of the government. And then Trump wasn't going to go to war. I mean, they might have wanted to go to war, the generals and all, but he wasn't going to go to war with Iran unless they provoked this. And then Biden, like the candy man, he's been giving $60 billion, $6 billion, $10 billion to Iran. And in the meantime, Iran is the leading terrorist, probably, country in the world and it wants to destabilize certain sections of Islam. It wants to take over Islam and it wants nuclear weapons with Israel. So when I listened to her, it was almost like Iran was this innocent, if I didn't know better, Iran is this innocent country that these big bullies are after. When Iran is extremely dangerous, I mean, Saudi Arab
