This transcript is sponsored as a public service of Worldview Weekend Foundation. Thank you for your contribution to www.wvwfoundation.com so we can continue to offer this FREE service. 

You can also send your contribution to:

Worldview Weekend Foundation
P.O. Box 1690
Collierville, TN 38027 

Click here to watch the video of this broadcast: 
https://www.worldviewweekend.com/tv/video/was-kremlin-drone-attack-russ…

Note: This is a computer generated transcript that has not been edited for grammatical errors by a human due to the volume of transcripts we produce and post. Thank you for understanding. 

Brannon Howse: David, as I posed in my news tonight, was the drone strike on the Kremlin a false flag by Russia so they can justify wiping Zelensky and his clique, off the map or is this so they can go to tactical nukes in the field and have the international backing of a false flag event? I think Putin was known several years ago for blowing up one of his own apartment buildings to look like he was the one to protect Russians from terrorists. So he blew up his buildings and then blamed it on Islamic terrorists. Many say he actually did it himself as a false flag, and killed a bunch of people, according to some people that were over there. I don't think those people are still with us. I think they talked too much. So did Putin strike the Kremlin with a drone as a false flag? Did the CIA do it as a false flag to speed things up over there? Or is this really something that Ukraine really did? I don't know of another option beyond those. What say you?

David Pyne: Well, I mean, this is something that Ukraine could have done, but it's there are just a lot of reasons why it is an obvious Russian false flag attack on the Kremlin. Um, first of all, I mean, you know, the size of that drone and the speed, you know, easy to shoot down could have detonated on command. You know, if the Russians, you know, just ensure that it didn't do any damage to the Kremlin. The Kremlin is it's a very well-protected complex with walls up to 21ft thick. So, you know, it's possible, even if it impacted it, it, you know, wouldn't have penetrated, you know, the building. Um, you know, Ukraine had reason to know that Putin was not at the Kremlin. He doesn't sleep at the Kremlin ever. He he, uh, you know, sleeps at the presidential compound just outside of Moscow and various dachas and palaces throughout the country. So there's really a 0% chance this was an assassination attempt on Putin. And that's what every Russian leader has stated. You know, like literally they erupted and as if in unison, you know, almost as if they were the Democrats.

David Pyne: And we see the Democrats do that. There are talking points that are pre-programmed. You know, as soon as they blow a dog whistle, then they all come out saying the exact same thing. And that's what we saw the Russians do. You know, we don't see that a lot, but it indicates to me that, you know, this was a pre-planned pretext for, as you said, for either a Russian tactical nuclear escalation in Ukraine, which, uh, which I think would be an easy way for Putin to win the war at low risk, given that Biden's in the White House. I mean, the chances of Biden responding militarily to a limited nuclear demonstration attack even against Kyiv would be extremely minimal, think almost nonexistent, let alone a nuclear response. And I think that's a good thing because it just wouldn't warrant, you know, if, uh, you know, Putin were to use a nuclear weapon and super EMP mode over Kyiv and it didn't directly kill almost anyone. You know, that's just, not the trigger that we would want it to, you know, destroy the country over. Given that Ukraine is not a national interest of the United States.

Brannon Howse: When we go back to this video and watch it, folks, this little firecracker, as I was calling it on the radio today, it didn't even take down the flagpole. Did you notice that, David?

David Pyne: I didn't.

Brannon Howse: Let's watch it. I don't think the flagpole even went down.

David Pyne: Yeah. It's almost as if it was like a firework.

Brannon Howse:  Look at that footage, the flagpole is still there. So that was such a puny little firecracker. It didn't even take out the flagpole.

David Pyne: Yeah, yeah, it's very small, You know, if, you know, you create a bit serious and want to do some significant damage, they would have employed like a Tupolev 141 that's they've used in attacks on Russian nuclear bases, including one not far from Moscow. It just doesn't have any of the trademarks of the Ukrainian attack. I mean, certainly, they could have pulled something off like this as a symbolic attack. But, you know, the risks to, you know, damaging the Kremlin and let alone injuring Putin were just very minimal. So this really does serve, I think, Russian interests, as you said, more than anything, It's it's it's strategic signaling to Ukraine that, you know, Zelensky, if he dares to commence this, you know, long expected spring counteroffensive, you know, Putin could take him out. I mean, there's no question he could take him out. He could, you know, use a small tactical nuke to take out the government quarter in Kyiv, you know, would kill perhaps tens of thousands, perhaps even less. But, you know, it could certainly potentially take out, you know, Zelensky and other leaders. I mean, I'm sure they have some limited underground bunkers. But even the, you know, just the psychological effect on Zelensky, I think would be great. You know, I think Zelensky is is is known for his bluster. But, you know, something like that that perhaps killed some of his family members, his wife, or other, you know, close presidential associates. I think that would maybe cause him to want to seek peace a lot faster.

Brannon Howse: Tell me what tell tell us laypeople about a tactical nuke. I know we used to talk about those with Doctor Peter PRI, the late Dr. Peter PRI, who you Now, of course, our audience needs to understand, if they don't know David runs is one of the leaders of the EMP Task Force, EMP Task Force US our friend, mutual friend, Dr. Peter PRI, whose radio show I used to produce every Monday, and he used to sit at this very news desk and we produced his TV show. David now is one of the leaders of the EMP Task Force keeping the work of Dr. PRI going forward. So we used to talk about nuclear, tactical, you know. You know these field nukes are the battlefield. Yeah. Tell us, as a layperson, how big are these? How are they shot? Are they, you know, telling us everything just as though we don't know because most people think about nuclear weapons as a missile taking off or an ICBM? How do these tactical nukes get delivered? Are they what are they shot from? Are they shot from a shoulder device or are they shot from a tank? How are they shot?

David Pyne: So Russia has 5000 tactical nuclear weapons, of which 2500 are battlefield nukes, which are in the 0.1 to 1 kiloton range. So mostly subkiloton nukes. As Dr. Pryde taught us, you know, these nukes are advanced generation. They're more advanced than anything we have. I would call them maybe mini-nukes or micro nukes, but they're optimized to use on the battlefield, you know, for, you know, tactical utilization to take out entire, you know, blow holes in Ukrainian lines, perhaps taking out a battalion or brigade at a time. But they can also use it as an as a be used, as I stated, you know, for more strategic purposes, such as in a super EMP mode over Kyiv. But essentially, so they're employed at, you know, at the lowest range level there. They have Russia has, I think, two S7 and two S4 mortars and eight-inch artillery pieces that fire these tactical nuclear weapons at a range of perhaps 22 to 40km. But of course, they can also be delivered via, you know, hypersonic missiles or, you know, bombers or various other means.

David Pyne: Um, you know, so there are a lot of different options in terms of delivery systems. You know, Russia has, you know, nuclear delivery systems not only in Russia itself but in the annexed territories of you that it's annexed from Ukraine as well as Belarus. So a lot of frontally deployed nuclear delivery systems. And interestingly, these, you know, the battlefield nukes that they have deployed and produced don't create any they don't emit any radioactive fallout. So that's what makes them so optimal for battlefield usage because it used to be, you know, tactical nukes that we employed. For example, we employed 7200 in Europe to deter the Soviet Union from invading Western Europe at the height of the Cold War. You know, those did omit to emit radiation. And that would pose some difficulty because obviously, we'd want to keep our troops at a distance. We wouldn't be able to travel anywhere near the impact zone, whereas these nukes, particularly, you know, the smaller versions, you know, would not pose a major threat to Russian Russian troops. Were they to be used in battle?

Brannon Howse: So Putin has been dragging this thing out for a long time here. But what you're saying is if he has the international acceptance of going to tactical nukes based on this so-called assassination attempt there, we just saw with that little firecracker and he goes to tactical nukes, he could therefore win this thing pretty quickly. Is that what I'm hearing?

David Pyne: Yeah. I mean, I think if you were to use one, two, three, and a kind of a strategic or super EMP mode, I think that would have a major impact, mainly not only on Zelensky but also on Biden. You know, Biden is very averse to nuclear threats. He's the most anti-nuke president we've ever had. You know, he wanted to unilaterally disarm us even further than he has thus far. Then we have, you know, under the Obama-Biden administration. And it's just really inconceivable that he would that Biden would react, you know, in terms of a direct military attack or let alone the use of tactical nuclear weapons, the ones we have. I mean, we're just so overmatched. Uh, you know, Russia overmatches us at least 2 to 1 in strategic nukes and about 35 to 1 in tactical nukes, just in terms of quantity, let alone quality. So I think it'd be a low-risk proposition if, as I mentioned, Putin were to employ tactical nukes in, you know, in what I call a nuclear demonstration attack, which minimizes civilian deaths to the most minimal level, but also, you know, had an oversized, you know, strategic impact on, you know, psychological impact on Biden and Zelensky. And once Biden, of course, I think Biden would lean very heavily on Zelensky to, you know, to seek peace and might even negotiate a peace deal on his own to prevent further nuclear escalation against the US or NATO. Um, and that would you know, Zelensky relies entirely on US military and financial support. So if he were to see Biden, you know, do a flip and, you know, deny that or suspend it, I think Zelensky would move very quickly to try to negotiate the best possible kind of. Conditional surrender deal with Putin.

Brannon Howse: DPYNE.substack.com DPYNE.substack.com. He's got some great information up there and I'm glad you reached out to me last night because I was going to reach out to you. So we were both thinking the like I wanted your feedback on this little firecracker over the Kremlin. So thanks for joining us tonight. All the work you're doing at the EMP task forces us.

David Pyne: Yeah. Thanks so much.

Brannon Howse: Check out your substack folks. DPYNE.substack.com.

This transcript is sponsored as a public service of Worldview Weekend Foundation. Thank you for your contribution to www.wvwfoundation.com so we can continue to offer this FREE service. 

You can also send your contribution to:

Worldview Weekend Foundation
P.O. Box 1690
Collierville, TN 38027 

Click here to watch the video of this broadcast: 
https://www.worldviewweekend.com/tv/video/was-kremlin-drone-attack-russ…

Note: This is a computer generated transcript that has not been edited for grammatical errors by a human due to the volume of transcripts we produce and post. Thank you for understanding.