Know More News - Adam Green - The Conspiracy "Theory" Conspiracy

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 17, 2018 - Know More News - Adam Green

02:09:38

The Conspiracy "Theory" Conspiracy

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	We are in a period where conspiracy theory is flourishing.
	There has been an explosion of conspiracy theories.
	Conspiracy theorists are having a field day.
	It's like Christmas for conspiracy theorists, countless conspiracy theories.
	It feels like there's more of this out there than there has been.
	Why are there so many of these people?
	Conspiracy theories are a great American pastime.
	And not all of them are on the right.
	There's plenty on the left as well.
	They could be from the far left, they could be from the far right, they could have unconventional, deranged uh theories.
	They had very much gone down the kind of rabbit hole of conspiracy thinking.
	All kinds of ideas, uh, you know, the world is not as it seems, and so on.
	That's a very marriage preoccupation.
	Conspiracy theories are not new.
	Conspiracy theories have been woven into the fabric of American society since before the signing of the Constitution.
	A lot of these conspiracy theories have a presence or at least a grudging acceptance within the political mainstream.
	It's out there.
	It's uh it's become part of pop culture now.
	I see the pretty mainstream conservative media really flirting with these folks and maybe maybe starting to mainstream some of this craziness, so we maybe won't be able to ignore it.
	Wingnuts have the lunatic fringe is hijacking America.
	The fringe has become the center.
	The Republican chairman of Homeland Security is writing conspiracy theory letters, and they're convening conspiracy theory hearings, and Republican senators are introducing conspiracy theory legislation.
	You have politicians who are, you know, repeating conspiracy theories, who are advocating conspiracy theories.
	The most influential conservative media online is full-on embracing the conspiracy theorists.
	Every conspiracy theory are all coming together, and they've created this narrative, but it's all out of their talk radio base, it's all out of their right-wing uh online base, and they've now converged on Congress, and they pulled them into the conspiracy theorizing too.
	It's brilliant.
	has been subsumed into a conspiracy theory.
	music
	Conspiracy theories are widely publicized in books, magazines, TV shows, movies, and online.
	Odds are you're even a conspiracy theorist.
	Their profound popularity has undoubtedly attracted significant media attention.
	However, as you will see, the majority of the mainstream coverage concerning conspiracy theories is typically negative, incredibly biased, and disturbingly void of logical objective analysis.
	The conspiracy theory term is the establishment's most effective method to dismiss legitimate inquiries, control the parameters of debate, condemn the criticism of authority, deceive the public, and conceal the truth.
	Are there definitions that we can lay out here?
	Where does somebody go from asking a legitimate question to becoming a conspiracy theorist?
	The Merriam Webster dictionary defines a conspiracy theory as a theory that explains an event or situation as the result of a secret plan by usually powerful people or groups.
	A theory is an idea that is intended to explain facts or events.
	And conspiracy is clearly defined in criminal law as an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime at some time in the future.
	Thousands of people are found guilty of conspiracy charges every year in courts around the world because conspiracy is an inevitable component of human nature in society.
	By definition, conspiracy theory is a neutral term.
	It doesn't mean anything good or bad.
	It just means a theory about a conspiracy.
	However, the media has hijacked the term and uses it in a vastly different way.
	When someone in the United States says that that's a conspiracy or that's a conspiracy theory, by definition they mean it is irrational, illegitimate, and without proof.
	When we talk about conspiracy theories, we tend to speak about them in a negative light, because the very word conspiracy implies something negative, I think.
	A conspiracy theory no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy.
	Instead, it now means any explanation or even a fact that the establishment does not acknowledge or recognize as true.
	The only real criteria for a subject to be considered as a conspiracy theory is for it to be characterized as one.
	Of course, not all conspiracy theories are created equal.
	Some conspiracy theories lack in facts and credibility, while others are unquestionably legitimate and deserve further examination.
	They vary widely in supporting evidence and plausibility, but each claim should stand on its own merit.
	Nevertheless, the media broadly paints them all with the same conspiracy theory brush, lumping them all together and dismissing them as ridiculous baseless fantasies by merely mentioning the conspiracy theory term.
	This is a conspiracy theory and spruce of a conspiracy.
	I'm sorry to kill your conspiracy theories, but that is what happened.
	This is, you know, putting together these conspiracy thoughts, and I'm asking you if you agree.
	They use the term conspiracy theorist to essentially shut down any dissent, to really shut down any analysis of what the government is telling us.
	He said the government should call anybody who stands against them a conspiracy theorist.
	this isn't a conspiracy theory kind of out there conspiracy theory which does not warrant a lot of tension to discount something that conspiracy theory if they shut it down without actually answering questions political move the bottom line is is that this is a group that is driven by conspiracy theories about the government if you know anything about disinformation if you know how governments discredit other governments and discredit movements they always say conspiracy theory it's the first thing you go to because
	people don't want to be involved with conspiracy theories in any language in any country they just don't want to be involved in it it's just this term that's become this pavlovian conditioning technique and once that's thrown out we've all been trained to run away from whatever subject is being talked about as long as you can just frame it was conspiracy theory then you can get people to stop taking a look at it Outrageous, ridiculous conspiracy theories about how the world works, giving the impression that everyone's running around wearing a tinfoil hat.
	I was called a conspiracy theorist in the mainstream media.
	And I know you've been called one too, and I think it's really important to address this pejorative term.
	This woman, we need to be clear, is an out and out lunatic.
	She's a conspiracy theorist.
	Telling the truth is not a conspiracy theory.
	It's just such a cheap shot to shut down debate and critical thinking.
	The talk show host is Alex Jones.
	He's a he's a conspiracy theorist.
	He's kind of like the guru, the you know, the king of the conspiracy theorist.
	He's considered legitimate crazy.
	Alex Jones, king of the conspiracy theorists.
	Conspiracy theorists you relish the word the king of conspiracy.
	Radio show host Alex Jones.
	I'm not the king of conspiracy, I'm the king of reality.
	Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.
	Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.
	Conspiracy theorists and conservative radio halls like Alex Jones.
	They just marginalize him by calling him a conspiracy theorist.
	I don't know what he is except a conspiracy theorist.
	All you've got is shooting your mouth off with that cliched term.
	They go, You're a conspiracy theorist.
	They use it as a crutch when you're not intellectually informed.
	What we have here is a conspiracy theory.
	Mr. Barrett is a conspiracy theorist.
	He runs conspiracies.
	The lamest excuse for an attempt to debunk the conspiracy story that I've ever heard.
	This guy has absolutely no uh grasp of any of the evidence.
	So rather than arguing the evidence with us, they have to attack the messenger.
	And so he starts claiming that I have a a website that has uh information about conspiracies.
	And he he uses this pejorative term conspiracy theorist to try to uh say that any, you know, don't listen to what I say.
	This has nothing to do with the actual evidence of the event that we're talking about.
	And the reason that he's distracting you and trying to divert your attention away from this case is because that he knows he doesn't have a case.
	The only response they had was, oh, that's a conspiracy theory.
	They that's literally the best way to not argue someone on a point or fact.
	If you discount it as a conspiracy theory, everyone's brain turn off.
	They say, Oh, it's a conspiracy theory.
	And even questioning the most basic understanding of things, a four-year-old would question things.
	And if you question it at all, you're crazy un-American and you know, totally disenfranchised.
	Just don't understand the hatred for the country.
	Uh, I don't get the hatred for the country, Bo.
	Most of these people buy into this, they just hate the country.
	You know, it's just something that people have to be negative.
	Whether or not you know who did it and why is not the question to me.
	You can actually say as an American, I don't believe the official story.
	Right.
	And still be crucified as as a a kook, talentless and and somebody who doesn't deserve to be in the country.
	Move is what people would say to me.
	Why don't you move?
	There's a certain political etiquette, I would call it, about what is proper to discuss and not proper.
	And if it's too difficult, it becomes over the pale.
	It becomes conspiracy nut stuff.
	It's not just the information you put out, it's even asking the question, which is not permitted.
	I ask questions, and what perturbs me is that you don't get answers.
	Nobody wants to talk about it.
	This event that changed our entire history of our country.
	Why aren't we allowed to discuss it?
	Why aren't we allowed to ask questions?
	The moment you do, you get a reaction like he gave me.
	How dare you?
	How dare you question your government?
	In this country, I thought before and it was good to ask questions.
	It was authority.
	Challenge authority.
	But now apparently we've changed to where you're not allowed to challenge authority.
	You have to accept what the government tells you, keep your mouth shut and stay in line.
	Well, that's not the America that I served as the military.
	If someone wants to dig deeper and not accept the government's analysis at face value, they're considered almost un-American.
	The overwhelming majority of Americans don't believe the official story yet.
	Anyone who questions it is labeled fringe, a conspiracy theorist.
	We're not even saying what happened.
	We're questioning things.
	We're questioning based on reality and statistics and facts and information.
	They won't even listen to them enough to see if what they're saying is true.
	And that's really sad.
	but it's dangerous Any of those theories that you've heard of at all have any credence?
	Uh well, no.
	Frankly.
	Uh, you'd think there might be something useful in it.
	No, there's no credence to it at all.
	All of their claims are spurious.
	They're backed up by nothing.
	They're backed up by nothing.
	How strong are their arguments?
	I mean, do they just they lay out their claim and they just say conspiracy?
	And then they just leave it right there.
	Or I mean, do they really detail out their line of thinking?
	There is not one shred of evidence to back that insane assertion up.
	A conspiracy theory based on nothing.
	There is absolutely no evidence.
	Without a shred of evidence.
	None whatsoever.
	Completely crazy theory.
	You have no evidence, no backup, no proof.
	Absolutely no evidence.
	There's not a fact in between there.
	Making statements that he can't back up with facts.
	No basis in fact.
	They just don't stand up to any kind of logic or interrogation of the facts.
	conspiracies that are hiding these vast problems that don't exist that have been disproven over and over again Thank you.
	That preposterous theory that's been disproven time and time again.
	We lined up all of their claims in our special issue and knocked them down one by one.
	It's all been hackneyed and pulled apart and uh it's and you know, thoroughly debunked.
	Conspiracy theories, which are not true.
	Don't give me the conspiracy bullshit.
	Come on.
	You're a more intelligent man than that.
	Come on, come on.
	I mean, come on.
	This is this that has never been a conspiracy in this country.
	You know, people are just spinning stories.
	They can believe whatever they want, but it doesn't mean that it's real.
	No theory of anything explains all the facts, even if there are still some unsolved mysteries, which is perfectly okay.
	We have to have a certain tolerance for ambiguity.
	We can't explain everything.
	Not everything is a conspiracy.
	Some things just are what they appear to be.
	That usually tends to be the reality of things.
	The limits of debate in this country are established before the debate even begins, and everyone else is marginalized and made to seem either to be communists or with some sort of disloyal person, a kook, there's a word, and now it's conspiracy.
	See, they've made that something that that is that is sh should not be even entertained for a minute that powerful people might get together and have a plan.
	Doesn't happen.
	You're a kook.
	You're a conspiracy buff.
	The mainstream media's agenda is clear.
	They want you to believe that conspiracies don't exist.
	The world is exactly like they say it is, and anyone who disagrees is to be marginalized, mocked, and shamed.
	True investigative journalism would genuinely examine the evidence, rationally debate the issues, and logically come to conclusions.
	But instead, the corporate mainstream media shamefully resorts to deceptive tactics, incessant ridicule, and hostile name-calling.
	There are a bunch of nutcases.
	Nutty conspiracy garbage.
	Only those considered nut jobs.
	Question the official conclusion.
	The marginal.
	These nuts are still in the shadows, Mike.
	A lie that wallows in the shadows like this kooky conspiracy theory.
	This was just kooky people.
	uh...
	i don't pay attention to it There have always been crazy people who gravitated if they have schizophrenia who gravitate toward conspiracy theories.
	Crazy nut jobs have always been there.
	Alright, the evidence is overwhelming to you because you're conspiracy nut is considered a crank and a coup by most academics.
	Some nutty college professors are trotting out that nonsense, and apparently Americans are buying it.
	Most people think you're a nut.
	Most people think you're using it, they're worth listening to.
	Conspiracy nuts.
	Conspiracy nuts.
	Rather than actually debate the issue and talk about just what's going on here.
	You want to make it personal and go after the individual.
	Nothing surprises me what these wackos can come up with.
	He really lives in the land of wacky.
	Unfortunately, the act of questioning anything about this event now runs you the risk of being dismissed as a conspiracy theorist or a lunatic by the corporate media.
	Ranting like a lunatic, a lunatic.
	an absolute die-hard insane lunatic.
	Conspiracy theories.
	It was a real buzzword for loonies.
	They're idiots.
	He has the right to be an idiot.
	I'm trying to get beyond the idiot calling and actually have a conversation with you if that's possible.
	Can we believe everything?
	We've already established it.
	You think he's an idiot.
	That's your level of debates.
	Conspiracy theories.
	They are paranoid.
	You cannot argue logic to someone who is mentally ill.
	Just think of them as mental patients.
	So that's what I do with conspiracy theorists.
	They're off their rockers.
	These are the type of people that should not have their hands on weapons.
	These are the type of people that should not have a platform to speak.
	These are the people that should be seeking mental help and and evaluation.
	This man has problems.
	All right.
	He's got problems.
	He's a madman.
	The things he has said are so crazy, it's frightening.
	These people are just a bunch of maniacs.
	These people are just a bunch of maniacs.
	The question is why why do people believe these things?
	Yeah, I spent all day today talking to scholars and academics who have studied conspiracy theories.
	These are people who are inclined to believe that the government is out to get them anyway.
	Uh the media is in cahoots with it.
	These aberrant thoughts about uh how the government is out to pull the the wool over eyes, if you will.
	I always believe it's to s exercise a level of intelligence over other people, like they know something that you don't.
	I think you're right.
	I think it's people who are looking for drama, who have general angst in their lives, they have very little to talk about that's interesting.
	They feel like they are part of some enlightened fight against the establishment.
	You see them come to life.
	They become animated when they talk about these theories and that they're gonna persuade me to change my mind into belief.
	And I think it gives them a sense of authority or power.
	Um, most of the time, I agree with you.
	I think they're just nonsense.
	If you believe one conspiracy theory, you're more likely to believe two or three or four.
	Have you ever met someone who believed one conspiracy theory?
	The most fantastical things are taken as common knowledge.
	You've been hearing the conspiracy theories uh on this for many years as well, and sometimes you have to scratch your head.
	Why are some people so eager to believe in conspiracies?
	Historically, we we see that these conspiracies come after very upsetting events.
	In a time of economic difficulty or in a time when things are going wrong in very visible ways.
	People try to seize on something awful, which may in fact be causal, it may have produced the bad outcome, or it may be just be made up.
	So if you're scared or if you're angry, and uh people, a lot of people are, conspiracy theory seems appealing.
	And if they're politically polarized and full of anger or distrust, then they can start believing something that's baseless or ridiculous.
	Each time something really scary and disastrous happens, people search for meaning.
	And in a way, it kind of helps explain uh what happened, explains this tragedy.
	It kind of gives meaning.
	It gives them a sense of control over their world, they feel, I think.
	That's why they do it.
	The assassination of JFK.
	This has to be something big comp comparable to killing a president.
	Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone, alone nut, a nobody, that doesn't judge that feels better to most people.
	People hate thinking about in a flash of an eye, terrorist bombers can come in and crash into the World Trade Center.
	They would rather see that, oh yes, there was always a system.
	There was always some overriding explanation that can let us make sense of the world.
	People always want to believe that there is a more powerful explanation for these things.
	It's not just something went wrong or there's evil people in the world.
	They want to believe that somebody's more in control, even if it's somebody who they don't like.
	They want to believe that somebody's sort of uh pulling the switches.
	The important thing is to draw a line between people who are fringe groups who believe, for instance, that uh everything bad that happens in America is part of a massive conspiracy, including September 11th was an inside job, and uh people who are obsessed about the Kennedy assassination.
	What fuels these trends of conspiracy?
	It's because of something called cognitive dissonance.
	We uh we want to balance our our view of the world with the way things should be.
	Confirmation bias, as psychologists call it, to look for only evidence that supports their theories and disregard anything that uh says otherwise.
	These are people who inhabit uh media world entirely contained by the internet, uh fringe sites, they don't read newspapers, they don't listen to the radio, they pretty much just get their news from radicalized websites that they uh go to on a daily basis.
	What I call fright-wing politics, it's way beyond left and right.
	It's really that murky ground of conspiracy theories that's been proliferating on the internet and inciting some people to take it a step too far towards violence.
	These guys actually believe what they say.
	The people that are leading the so-called truth movement, uh the ones I've met, they seem to actually believe it.
	So no, I I'm don't get me wrong.
	I I think they do believe it, and which I which is why I believe these guys are dangerous.
	I I believe these guys are anarchists that are are looking to uh tear us apart.
	I I mean this is this is the kind of group that a Timothy McVeigh would come from.
	Yeah, that's right.
	That's what makes it a little bit scary.
	The floating of fantastic conspiracy theories that in many cases have helped drive people to violence.
	What has changed about this country and and the world that has made these conspiracy theories uh more dangerous these days?
	Conspiracy theory radicalism, which almost always butts up against justifying violence.
	A lot of people who are looking into this, they're just curious, they have questions.
	That's fine.
	People should ask questions, they shouldn't believe everything they see or read.
	But when you start asking those questions, then you have to pay attention to the answers.
	And what conspiracy people do is they reject the vast body of reasonable uh accounts, and then they seize on these few little anomalies that they think uh uh disprove the mainstream view.
	What people do on the fringes is they take those anomalies and they try to construct a whole new theory, but the new theory doesn't explain all the old facts that the old theory explains just fine.
	Conspiracy theorists, like all sorts of theorists, take disparate facts and put them together.
	And what makes the conspiracy theorist a little bit different is they put the facts together in alternative ways that are tinged with a kind of paranoia.
	Classic conspiracy theory, little grains of truth, but all adding up to something that really isn't true.
	The idea of a conspiracy theorist is if I can disprove this point, then therefore I am proving the vast conspiracy.
	Any official story about anything can be torn down if the questions are incredibly broad or incredibly minute.
	I think that conspiracy theories in general really do work a bit like a game of telephone.
	Uh, you know, they are told and retold uh and tend to get more and more far out in the telling.
	Urban legend type tales that have been told and retold without any factual basis.
	People are fundamentally skeptical.
	People don't trust the explanations they have.
	This mistrust of an official explanation motivates them to go looking further, and then they want to keep going and keep going and keep going and find out what they think could be a more convincing explanation.
	Many of these people spend 10 to 12 hours a day on the internet, and um they're sort of like idios savants.
	They just made themselves experts in the minutiae of uh the conspiracy theory that they're obsessed with.
	Even when there is a clear explanation, then you have this search for for supposed other evidence out there, and people just kind of pick it up and run with it, even when it seems completely unwarranted.
	We are natural pattern-seeking animals.
	We look for and find connections.
	We connect the dots like constellations in the sky, we find the constellations of of meaning in in our complex chaotic world.
	I think that conspiracy theorists are making it more miserable for us in in this, yeah, as we pick and choose our ways of life.
	I hear you.
	When you, you know, blame the government or whoever, you're actually removing the blame from the actual perpetrator and you're putting it on somebody else.
	So in this quest to, you know, speak the truth or whatever, they're they're really doing a disservice to everyone involved.
	When you reject facts, reality, um, and you with you you grab the grasp to this idea that the government is out to get you.
	It's a slippery slope.
	What's next?
	The helicopters that fly over your house, the Medivac helicopters, the news helicopters, they're out to get you.
	You hear this stuff, and it just makes you sick to your stomach.
	I loathe conspiracy theories.
	Can't these people give it a rest for one day?
	I've given up on trying to change conspiracy theorists.
	They're gonna be with us for a long time.
	When you have policy being shaped by fantasy, you end up with, you know, pretty bad policy.
	When can seeking the truth become a bad thing?
	And how the pursuit of any kind of facts becomes so objectionable.
	Look, this dismissal is deliberate.
	It's also severely dumbing down the dialogue we should be having, and in fact, it's an endangerment to investigative journalism.
	For crying out loud to question official narratives is the role of journalists, historians, and documentarians.
	Otherwise, we'd just be getting our news verbatim from government press releases.
	Majority of Americans believe that JFK was assassinated by a conspiracy.
	Um, and also a majority of people have questions about 9-11 also.
	Um, knowing this, how does it feel to go on shows like Piers Morgan and other shows on the mainstream media and to be ridiculed and painted as a lunatic for bringing up these issues?
	Well, because that was the CIA's mission to anyone that questioned it, that's how they do.
	They try to marginalize you.
	They try to make it seem like you're a conspiracy knot.
	It's in a CIA memo that you say.
	Conspiracy theory, I mean that's declassified.
	The CIA, right after they killed Kennedy, put out these talking points.
	The first documented use of the conspiracy theory term is found in an American Historical Review article published in 1909.
	But it wasn't until the 1960s that the conspiracy theory phrase acquired its negative connotations and became commonly used as a derogatory pejorative slur.
	Conspiracy theory's negative associations can be traced back to political scientist Richard Hofstetter's 1964 article in Harper's Magazine, where he suggested conspiracy theories stem from the paranoid style in American politics.
	However, it was the CIA who ultimately weaponized the term when it was adopted as the fundamental component in their propaganda campaign to oppose conspiracy theories.
	In 1967, the CIA essentially weaponized the conspiracy theory term and engaged in information warfare when it sent a detailed memo to all of its bureaus titled Countering Criticisms of the Warren Commission Report, which was the government's official investigation into the JFK assassination.
	The memo begins with the CIA expressing their concerns, stating that from the day of President Kennedy's assassination on, there has been speculation about the responsibility for his murder in a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings.
	Critics speculating as to the existence of some kind of conspiracy implying the Warren Commission was involved, and that Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson himself benefited and was in some way responsible for the assassination.
	Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our own organization because we were directly involved and contributed to the investigation.
	This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the US government and our organization because it affects the whole reputation of the American government and casts doubt on the leadership of American society.
	Despite being marked destroy when no longer needed, the dispatch was released nine years later in response to a New York Times Freedom of Information Act request and is available online.
	The memo was marked Psyche, short for psychological operations or PSYOP, and CS, short for clandestine services.
	The memo outlines a detailed series of actions and techniques to counter and discredit the claims of conspiracy theorists.
	Its directives include instructing agents to quote, employ propaganda assets to refute the attacks of the critics, Adding, book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.
	Advising covert assets in the media to ignore conspiracy claims unless discussion is already taking place.
	And directing agents to remind their friendly elite contacts, especially politicians and editors, of the Warren Commission's integrity and urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
	CIA document 1035960 further outlines additional talking points to counter conspiratorial arguments, stating the following arguments should be useful.
	Claim the charges of the critics are without serious foundation and based on unreliable eyewitness testimony.
	Claim that it would be impossible to conceal such a large-scale conspiracy.
	I don't believe in conspiracies because nobody keeps anything secret.
	Nobody keeps the thing.
	That is the best uh defense against conspiracy theories.
	The biggest problem with conspiracies, uh, particularly government conspiracies, is government bureaucrats are not very competent, and they can't keep their mouths shut.
	There is no conspiracy because people can't keep their mouths shut.
	Can you actually imagine that our government was capable and then keeping it off of the front page of the New York Times?
	No.
	It would be a conspiracy.
	Thousands of people all over the world.
	Wouldn't it leak?
	Wouldn't some of those people be eager to talk about it?
	Wouldn't we in the media love to put it on the front page?
	Wouldn't it be a big headline?
	Don't you think that the fact that it's not on the front page means it's probably not true?
	And they look at me and they just don't believe I don't convince them.
	If something like this was going on, I promise you, someone would be blowing the whistle.
	Claim that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition.
	Billionaire businessman Mark Cuban, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks basketball team, is putting up money to distribute a 9-11 conspiracy film.
	And it's awful, you know that.
	The film will be used by American haters all over the world, and decent people should be outraged.
	It's not a free speech argument.
	It's basically you give the enemies of America all over the world who play to uninformed bigotry.
	You give them another tool in which to hurt America.
	What bothers me more is that jihadists from those on the other parts of the world are gonna use it and also point to Mark Cuban and say, look, and see what happened.
	The Americans did it to themselves.
	We're innocent, we didn't do anything.
	Blame the Jews, blame America.
	He has a speech, but I gotta tell you something.
	This will be used by America's enemies as propaganda.
	This is dangerous propaganda.
	It would not have happened in World War II.
	This is gonna get Americans killed.
	No, it's not.
	If Mark Cuban had done this in World War II, Franklin Delano Roosevelt would have thrown his butt in jail.
	People who support that also are giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
	Yeah.
	Who wants to stop with Aid and Comfort to the enemy claim that, quote, no significant new evidence has emerged.
	It's the same old stuff, the same old points, nothing new.
	If you've got evidence, show us, but there's been no new evidence in eight years.
	Go away.
	Sorry.
	Accused theorists of falling in love with their theories.
	They are too ideologically and I think emotionally satisfying to the people who espouse them.
	Claim conspiracy theorists are wedded to their theories before the evidence was in.
	Conspiracy theorists take those facts and unwind them on the basis of an original belief.
	Conspiracy theories work backwards.
	Accused theorists of being politically motivated.
	The far left fringe has embraced the conspiracy theory that elements of the U.S. government carried out the attacks on 9-11.
	It's unbelievable, but that's what they're saying.
	Why is the far left putting military and all Americans in danger?
	The left's gonna go nuts over it like they did with Michael Moore.
	Alright, Mr. Liberal, why don't you get to your point instead of being a little snotty, you know, left-wing radical.
	Go ahead.
	Let's sit down and talk.
	Right, this is the right thing.
	It's not left-right.
	You're trying to create a partisan wedge to keep people on the partisan left-right paradigm.
	Accused theorists of being financially motivated.
	I get that the guys who sell this stuff for a living have a reason to sell this stuff.
	There's always gonna be a very, very, very exciting market for these things.
	There is money to be made in feeding the ragged edge of America's long-standing conspiratorial mindset.
	And you know, I'm sure it's good for business.
	These guys have a good racket going.
	It's always the end of the world, but not quite yet.
	Subscribe for one more month, because then it'll be the end of the world.
	Only 1995, and yes, you can pay in gold.
	The government and media continue to rely on the conspiracy theory pejorative label paired with the PSYOP tactics found in this Memo to dismiss conspiracy allegations to this day.
	The CIA's strategy to make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility is arguably the most successful propaganda campaign in modern history.
	The government's network of covert propaganda assets and friendly elite contacts referenced in this document were partially brought to light in a 1975 congressional investigation into government agencies' intelligence activities.
	The hearings, known as the Church Committee, were investigating the intelligence activities of the CIA, NSA, and FBI after illegal surveillance activities surfaced during the Watergate scandal.
	Do you have any people being paid by the CIA who are contributing to a major circulation American journal?
	We do have people who submit pieces to other new American journals.
	Do you have any people paid by the CIA who are working for television networks?
	This I think gets into the kind of uh getting into the details, Mr. Chairman, and I'd like to get into it because they could say the investigation revealed that the CIA was paying bribe money equivalent to a billion dollars adjusted for inflation under the table to heads of major media companies, editors, and reporters to act as gatekeepers and propagandists for the establishment.
	The commission's final report determined that, quote, the CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda.
	These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers, periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.
	In 1977, Pulitzer Prize winner Carl Bernstein shined further light on the CIA's propaganda network in his Rolling Stone article titled The CIA and the Media.
	The article exposes how America's most powerful news media worked hand in glove with the CIA, and that the church committee actually played a part in covering it up.
	After leaving the Washington Post, where he uncovered the Watergate scandal with partner Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein spent six months investigating the relationship between the CIA and the media.
	His findings revealed that for the last 25 years, the CIA built a network of over 400 covert propaganda paid operatives, secretly spread throughout influential positions in the mainstream media, including the Associated Press, Reuters,
	UPI, ABC, MBC, Newsweek, and the largest newspaper and magazine publisher, Hearst, adding, quote, by far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS, and Time Incorporated.
	At CBS, uh we uh had been contacted by the CIA.
	As a matter of fact, by the time I became the head of the whole news and public affairs operation in 1954, the ships have been established, and I was told about them and asked if I'd carry on with them.
	The CIA's secret propaganda campaign to manipulate the media came to be known as Operation Mockingbird.
	Operation Mockingbird, you know, this was a program that uh the CIA FBI was inserting operatives within all the major media networks.
	I mean, we're talking about all of them.
	Yeah.
	Papers, publications.
	My whole question is is this still going on today?
	Because they've really permeated throughout the culture of the establishment media, and really we see the establishment media today, they just parrot the establishment.
	I'm like, wait, has this gone full circle?
	You say that continues today.
	Well, I yeah, I would think probably for a reporter it would continue today, but because of all of the revelations of the period of the 1970s, uh it seems to me that a reporter's got to be much more circumspect in doing it now, or he runs the risk of uh at least being looked at with considerable disfavor by the public.
	I think you've got to be much more careful about it.
	You ask, is this still going on today?
	Well, we can look at the last National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA 2013, uh, has a provision in there that legalizes propaganda.
	Propaganda, a program by governments to manipulate people's thoughts and opinions.
	We are in an information war, and we are losing that war.
	I'll be very blunt in my assessment.
	Clearly, the United States feels on the defensive in part because it can no longer monopolize Terms of the debate.
	There's other information out there.
	There are other points of view.
	And those points of view are profoundly damaging to a country that believes that its point of view is the only point of view.
	The first lady of the United States recently addressed concerns about internet.
	She said we're all going to have to rethink how we deal with the internet.
	There are a number of serious issues without any kind of editing function or gatekeeping function.
	She said what the problem with the internet, the internet was just getting started back in those days.
	Is that there are no gatekeepers?
	Think about that.
	There are no gatekeepers.
	She wants gatekeepers on the free flow of information.
	1995 was also one of the 93 memo.
	Clinton administration feared internet's ability to democratize news.
	It says the new media's here, we've got to control info.
	We can't let the public have access, these are quotes to free information.
	This attack on free speech is happening because the old dinosaur media, the state-run media is in free fall.
	The other perfect storm of state-run media and government wanting to control information.
	If you look at where a lot of the work originates, where the first things come out on the internet, they some of them tend to be these political fringe sites, and yet they're treated by much of the media as if they're somehow credible that a quote from one of those sites is no different than something from the New York Times.
	We've got to have the media call anyone that questions us conspiracy theorists, and any media that's not the Washington Post or New York Times is a conspiracy theory.
	They want to set the Overton window.
	They want to set the parameters of debate where only what MSNBC says or CNN says with White House talking points is the acceptable political discussion.
	They knew what the internet meant for them.
	And they were conspiring like the Soviet Union to kill it in its crib.
	The great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.
	This is not our opinion or a conspiracy theory like Hillary puts in your mind, just a denial button people can push.
	They released this on the Clinton official presidential library website.
	Despite the media and government's outright condemnation of conspiracy theories, the public is becoming increasingly skeptical of the government in the mainstream media.
	It's hardly breaking news that the public has soured on the media, but the latest figures are truly sobering.
	80% of Americans believe TV and newspaper reporters are dishonest and unethical, according to a Gallup poll.
	80% putting them barely ahead of car salesmen and members of Congress.
	Faith in American institutions is at an all-time low.
	We've told you this for years now.
	According to a new gallup poll, American distrust of the news media reached an all-time high this year.
	The establishment openly admits they fear the alternative information provided by independent news online because it threatens the corporate media's monopoly over information.
	In recent decades, worldwide social change has experienced unprecedented historical acceleration.
	Particularly because instant mass communications, such as radio, television, and the internet cumulatively have been stimulating a universal awakening of mass political consciousness.
	The resulting widespread rise in worldwide populist activism is proving inimical to external domination of the kind that prevailed in the age of colonialism and imperialism.
	Persistent and highly motivated populist resistance of politically awakened and historically resentful peoples The external control has proven to be increasingly difficult to suppress.
	In earlier times, it was easier to control a million people.
	Literally, it was easier to control the million people than physically to kill a million people.
	Today, it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.
	It is easier to kill than to control.
	The mainstream media's response is to aggressively attack the internet.
	Unlike in the past, where we had fax networks and shortwave radio.
	We know the internet the internet is full of nutty theories.
	Conspiracy theory, the web, of course, is full of them.
	That murky ground of conspiracy theories that's been proliferating on the internet.
	It's been bubbling up kind of from the fringes for years and gradually making headway into the mainstream.
	On the internet, it started, right?
	I think that this internet stuff with this access now that people have has made more crazy people.
	Because people who were borderline crazy now go in there and become crazy.
	You can get you can get your creamy opinion hurt.
	They have wild ideas.
	And it's because they've been just talking to each other, and it doesn't have to be factual anymore.
	If you have everybody that's surrounding you believes the same thing, it becomes an alternative reality for you.
	By using the internet to mobilize people that feel displaced, that feel like they've been on the outskirts of society, and give them a place where they can find a sense of belonging and maybe uh make a difference in their own way.
	Um, and it's a problem, and and we see that it's effective.
	We see that they are um shaping the discussion online on message boards, on Twitter, on social media, and uh the internet, you know, we we thought that it would be this place where where uh, you know, it's wonderful in a lot of ways because a lot of different viewpoints and uh and a lot of different people have a voice like never before.
	But unfortunately, it's provided a forum where disinformation, false theories, uh people that are just trying to make a name for themselves, bloggers or whatever, that have absolutely no accountability for the truth, are able to rile up a mass amount of people online.
	It provides this voice for for fringe voices, extremists.
	The platform that it provides for fringe and radical views, alternative media, and thanks to the internet, uh it fuels these things.
	People begin to presume that these conspiracies are in fact true, uh, as they're you know, introduced to this on a daily basis.
	Um you repeat it over and over and over again, and suddenly the the conspiratorial theories begin to take on a life of its own.
	It provides uh a place for these people, a place where these people can congregate and feed off of each other's biases.
	Uh it's almost like a community that is almost like a cult, I would say, that is formed uh online and they mobilize, they find a home, they find a place where they're heard, and uh they find a sense of belonging, they find an outlet where they can where they can um a platform to to voice their deranged views.
	The extreme fringe is given a platform uh for what otherwise would not be considered reputable television.
	You know, that most broadcasts wouldn't have on the the types of voices uh with these conspiratorial theories.
	It tends to multiply online, and you see these dark corners of the internet where people pile on, and there's this very minute parsing of the technicalities of the supposed evidence, and more and more de detail gets added and accumulated, and it kind of feeds on itself.
	It really almost makes you ask the question would it have been better if we never invented the internet?
	When people who are like-minded get together, they tend to end up in a more extreme position that fits with the direction in which they were attending before they started talking to each other.
	The social media you can quickly find a bunch of people who agree with you, and uh people are often kind of tentative about their belief just because they're not sure.
	And then when they hear other people who agree with them, they become more sure and much less tentative.
	The fact that you can find like-minded others in a heartbeat, that's that's a problem.
	The establishment's solution to this terrible conspiracy theory problem was revealed by this man, Harvard Law professor Cass Sunstein.
	In 2008, shortly before being appointed by Obama to the cabinet level position commonly referred to as the information czar, Sunstein published an essay out of Harvard Law School titled Conspiracy Theory.
	He prefaces the 30-page white paper with a warning that those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law.
	He writes that His objective is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories rise, spread, and prosper, whether to ignore or rebut a conspiracy theory, and to understand how such theories might be undermined, and to offer recommendations for governmental actions.
	Sunstein begins with the claim that conspiracy theorists typically suffer from crippled epistemology, meaning they know very few things and what they know is wrong.
	And that they only hear the conspiratorial accounts.
	He doesn't provide any footnote or evidence that conspiracy theorists are more likely than others to get their news exclusively from one source.
	But he uses this false premise as his justification to rationalize his authoritarian proposals.
	Sunstein's admitted goal is for the government to eliminate conspiracy theories, but claims they will only do so if it improves social welfare.
	He considers several startling policy responses to dampen the supply of conspiracy theories, including having the government ban conspiracy theories, having the government tax conspiracy theories.
	Have the government itself engage in counter-speech to discredit conspiracy theories.
	Have the government formally hire credible private parties to engage in counter-speech.
	And have the government informally encourage credible private parties to help.
	You may be thinking, no way.
	The government would never actually ban or tax Americans' free speech.
	That violates the First Amendment.
	But this constitutional law professor does not rule out banning and taxing conspiracies.
	He states that each instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, cost, benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions.
	And if a conspiracy theory became so pervasive and dangerous that censorship would be thinkable.
	Wouldn't you just love to hear what circumstances Sunstein believes would justify repealing the First Amendment?
	Sunstein ultimately determines that his main policy recommendation is for the government to engage in what he calls cognitive infiltration.
	He defines cognitive infiltration as introducing diverse viewpoints and new factual assumptions into the hardcore extremist groups that propagate conspiracy theories.
	In other words, he wants government agents or their allies acting either virtually or in real space and either openly or anonymously to undermine the crippled epistemology of those who subscribe to conspiracy theories by planting doubts about their theories and thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity.
	Sunstein suggests that government agents and their allies enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real space groups, and attempt to undermine conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, casual logic, or implications for political action, adding that government officials would participate anonymously or even with false identities, because government cannot be seen to control the independent experts.
	Although government can supply these independent experts with information and perhaps prod them into action from behind the scenes, but too close a connection will prove self-defeating if it is exposed.
	When confronted about his Orwellian proposals by independent journalist Luke Rodowski from We Are Change, Sunstein played dumb and claimed he didn't remember the article, implied that he didn't really write those things, yet he refused to retract statements and said he's just focused on doing what his boss,
	the president wants him to do.
	Also, government whistleblowers that were gagged because they released information that contradicts the official story.
	Why do you think the government should do that?
	I think as Ricky said I've written hundreds of articles and I remember some and not others.
	Not what I remember very well.
	I I hope I didn't say that.
	Um but whatever was said in that article, my role in government is um to oversee federal rulemaking in a way that is uh uh wholly disconnected from vast majority of my academic writing, including so.
	I know that I'm just asking because you may be the next Supreme Court justice or whatever.
	Yeah, you did write those things, and that's why I want to bring them up to you.
	So all I can say is that there are a lot of things that I've written.
	I've written I guess there are even more things I've said to agree that uh I may agree with some of the things I've written, but I'm not exactly sure.
	Focus on uh what my boss wants me to do.
	I just want to know is it safe to say that you retract saying that conspiracy theorists should be banned or taxed for having an opinion online is it safe to say that I remember that or I don't remember the article very well, so uh I hope I didn't say either of those things.
	But you did, and I and it's a written.
	Do you retract them?
	I'm focused on my job.
	So you're not retracting that.
	Do you still believe that?
	Do you still believe that there's no people should have freedom of speech?
	Thanks very much.
	Yeah, I'm happy to talk about this by the way.
	I can I can go on the record.
	He's the man who wrote about it.
	So Cass, do you still believe in the Joseph Garbles approach?
	Please don't.
	Please don't.
	I'm asking a question.
	I know, I know, but you're not gonna have to, you know, you know, that's the job of journalists to ask questions.
	Sunstein then runs away from the question like a coward, pretending he doesn't remember the article is a bold-faced lie and an insult to our intelligence.
	The paper was already receiving a great deal of criticism at the time, and he even released a book shortly after titled Conspiracy Theories and Other Dangerous Ideas, where he expanded on the paper.
	He should have just named his book Dangerous Ideas by Cass Sunstein, because nothing is more dangerous than promoting government censorship in covert propaganda.
	But when someone calls Sunstein dangerous, it's all a big joke to him.
	The great quote which is on the back of uh Cass's book, uh, it's from uh Glenn Beck, and it says, Cass Sunstein is the most evil man, the most dangerous man in America.
	Bravo.
	That's you can't do better than that.
	Uh for for for an introduction.
	Despite the Orwellian policies in Sunstein's paper and the government's long history of secretly manipulating the media, any accusation that media figures may be covert government agents is dismissed outright.
	Changing the mind of conspiracy theorists is often very hard to do.
	It's true, and here's why that's a lie, and you're part of a conspiracy.
	And so it ended up that when you gave them evidence to the contrary, they believed the original theory even more.
	Conspiracy theorists believe that the agents of the conspiracy have unusual powers, so that apparently contrary evidence can be seen as a product of the conspiracy itself.
	They assume that's all just you know government plants or something.
	It's hard to fix it because they're it has a self-sealing quality.
	Anything can be folded into the original conspiracy.
	Of course, the denial is part of the conspiracy.
	It's very hard to break a conspiracy theory.
	Joining me now is Harvard Law School professor and author of the new book, Conspiracy Theories and Other Dangerous Ideas, the man himself, Cass Sunstein.
	Cass, am I to believe it's you?
	Or is it just a hologram that appears to be you?
	It's me, but of course I would say that.
	Right, exactly.
	In your book, you write about just how hard it is to debunk conspiracy theories, because those who believe in them, and I will quote you, are unlikely to give respectful attention to the debunkers who, in their eyes, may after all be agents or dupes of those responsible for the conspiracy in the first place.
	Sunstein criticizes conspiracy theorists for suspecting that people in the media are government agents, yet that is exactly what he is proposing.
	His hypocrisy is astounding.
	Sunstein's recommendations for the government to cognitively infiltrate conspiracy theory groups online with government propaganda was evidently put into place by the United States Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, DARPA.
	In 2011, DARPA unveiled its social media in strategic communication program with a solicitation on FedbizOps.gov for innovative research proposals in emerging technologies to improve its methods of detecting and conducting propaganda campaigns in social media.
	Through the program, DARPA seeks to develop tools to help identify misinformation or deception campaigns.
	Encounter them with truthful information, reducing adversaries' ability to manipulate events.
	They are basically asking for new technologies to carry out Cass Sunstein's call for cognitive infiltration of conspiracy groups.
	However, the concept of manipulating public opinion with online propaganda did not originate with Sunstein.
	It is a common propaganda tactic practiced by governments and corporations around the world.
	It has been reported That Israel pays college students to promote the Zionist agenda.
	China pays commenters to spin bad news to shape public opinion.
	Russia also has their army of trolls.
	Even Canada is involved.
	So is it okay to have the government monitor social media conversations and then to wade in and correct some of those conversations?
	In 2014, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden leaked documents to journalist Glenn Greenwald.
	The leaks contained presentation slides from the United Kingdom's government communications headquarters, which is the British equivalent of the NSA.
	The documents reveal that the government has been systematically attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse through a previously secret unit known as the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group, or J Tree.
	The document received from the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group is quote, the art of deception, training for online covert operations.
	Oh boy, this ought to be good.
	They've got the memos internally from how they do it, and of course, the five eyes all participate in this intelligence gathering operations together.
	So if Britain does it as they're doing it here, will they share the information and uh uh with the US and the other five eyes?
	Yes, and if you don't know the Five Eyes, that's US, Britain, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada.
	It's what they call themselves.
	It's their intelligence groups working together.
	Hey, what can you do in Britain?
	What can you do in Australia and America?
	How can we violate each other's laws without having to do it ourselves and get our hands dirty?
	In this case, they do it with propaganda.
	And people crazy conspiracy theories.
	They have a manual for how to do it.
	Using uh online techniques to make something happen in the real or cyber world.
	Information ops, influence or disruption, technical disruption, known in GCHQ as online covert action, the four Ds.
	Deny, disrupt, degrade, deceive.
	Under the title Online Covert Action, the documents detail a variety of means to engage in influence and info ops, as well as disruption and computer net attack.
	While dissecting how human beings can be manipulated using leaders, trust, obedience, and compliance.
	In other words, they have a manual on how to get you to bow your head.
	And one of the keys to that is to get trusted leaders in the media to say, no, no, this is right.
	The government is right.
	Now everybody comply.
	In this line, you'll see highlighted conspiracy stories.
	Uh, you know, uh plant some of those online, etc.
	Use uh on the right-hand side, you see hindsight bias, confirmation bias, anchoring and priming, priming targets to believe a certain thing, and then confirm their bias already, etc.
	They have all these psychological tactics to get you to believe things that aren't true.
	But my favorite is at the bottom there.
	Propaganda, branding, marketing.
	They know they're doing propaganda.
	They have a manual that says do propaganda in the media.
	And one of the things they do is they get thought leaders in the media to totally agree with the government, use compliance, obedience, and social networks.
	This is propaganda 101 manual.
	We've literally got it now.
	Now we know exactly what the government's up to.
	So when you see this online, know that that's exactly where it comes from.
	It's scary stuff, man.
	That this is what our government is now doing.
	The British government and all the five eyes that cooperate with them.
	Big brother is here, and he's got some unbelievable propaganda headed in your direction.
	The establishment has been waging war on conspiracy theories and the truth for decades, and the media and internet have been thoroughly infiltrated.
	It's literally a conspiracy against conspiracy theories.
	Two of the biggest conspiracies the establishment attempts to dismiss by labeling conspiracy theory are the New World Order global government conspiracy and the 9/11 attacks.
	For people perhaps not familiar, New World Order is generally accepted to be a conspiracy theory where people believe that there are elites out there forming some sort of special authoritarian government.
	This is the generally accepted view of what new world order means.
	A lot of times when people use the term new world order, you're already into the conspiracy arena.
	A belief in an overarching conspiracy of a new world order.
	A new world order.
	The new World order, which is kind of a growing conspiracy group that believes the world is going to be taken over by forces and black helicopters and so on.
	Wild conspiracy theories, new world order, that kind of stuff.
	They do not view the federal government as we do, as representatives of us.
	what they regarded as an oppressive force that is trying to have a UN kind of sanctioned takeover and elimination of our rights.
	There are actually people saying they're going to shuffle us off all into train cars and send us to work camps.
	I mean, it's crazy stuff.
	Conspiracy theory, the idea that the government is secretly plotting to impose martial law, to take Americans' guns away from them, to throw anyone who resists into uh concentration camps that have been built by FEMA secretly, and ultimately to force the United States into a kind of socialistic one world government.
	The so-called New World Order.
	new world order fiat currency the adoption of fiat money mean paper money that is not backed by gold Many people in the Patriot world trace that conspiracy, that alleged conspiracy to the formation of the Federal Reserve in 1913.
	One of the biggest warnings that Thomas Jefferson gave after they set up the republic was watch out for the banks.
	The minute they start controlling the money supply, they will have tremendous power, and they will wield that power uh to squash democracy.
	The worst possible outcome, unfortunately, is the one we have right now.
	The question is do we all work for central bankers?
	That's what I want to address to our guest tonight.
	Is this global governance at last?
	Is it one world, the central bankers in charge?
	Aren't we all just living and dying for what the central banks do?
	Of course we are, because if we look at the economic data, there's nothing to get excited about in that.
	What should be the proper relationship between a chairman of the Fed and a president of the United States?
	Well, first of all, the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means basically that uh there is no other agency of government which can overrule actions that we take.
	Is the Federal Reserve a conspiracy theory?
	A lot of people in Washington starting to believe that.
	I don't think so.
	It's a long-standing institution that's designed to stabilize the economy and whether it m makes mistakes or not, works or not.
	It's uh it's not a conspiracy.
	Tell that to some members of Congress.
	The Fed is an independent institution, which means that it's not subject to Congress.
	The president doesn't have oversight of the Fed.
	The Fed is a separate entity.
	Who has oversight of Janet Yellen?
	Uh, Janet Yellen is principally the person who has oversight of Janet Yellen.
	We just want to let you know the New World Order has no legitimacy.
	And that we as a people are not afraid, and we are waking up to the robber barons and the big banksters who are looting this economy with the Federal Reserve.
	Well, we have megabanks that are getting 85 million dollars a month of U.S. taxpayer money.
	Most of it goes to Europe and England.
	British taxpayers, EU taxpayers, have to pay to these mega bankers.
	They're in there setting this up.
	It's come out.
	Those things all relate to a single conspiracy theory.
	The idea that there is a plot on the part of the government to create a uh one world government, a socialistic uh totalitarian regime to be called the New World Order.
	We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations, a new world order, a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations.
	A new world order can emerge, a new era, freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace.
	An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony.
	What is at stake is more than one small country.
	It is a big idea, a new world order.
	When we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order.
	An order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and Vision of the UN's founders.
	When our founders declared a new order of the ages, they were acting on an ancient hope that is meant to be fulfilled.
	A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor.
	Now we can see a new world coming into view.
	A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order.
	What you had there was a statement of something that was, you know, a very a very coherent statement of the reality of modern economies that had the word the words world order in it, which is which is unfortunate because those words are now buzzwords for conspiracy.
	We are in a global economy.
	Nothing will stop that.
	Jumping from there to this vast wor new world order conspiracy, there's not a fact in between there.
	There is a chance for the president of the United States to use this disaster to carry out what his father, a phrase his father used, I think only once, and hasn't been used since, and that is a new world order.
	And those people who have been yelling, oh, the UN's gonna take over global conspiracy theorists.
	They've been crazy, but now they're right.
	Well, what when God's happening there also exists an extraordinary opportunity to form for the first time in history, a truly global society.
	So that the problem of the Bush Presidency will be the emergence of a new international order.
	Within the next four years, we will see the emergence of a new international order.
	The beginning of a new international order.
	After 1989, President Bush kept said, and it's a phrase that I often use myself that we needed a new world order.
	I think his path will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when really a new world order can be created.
	It's a great opportunity.
	President Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon today calling for a new world order to tackle our global economic crisis.
	Could it be the beginning of a beautiful friendship, a global new deal, a new world order?
	And the president outlines his vision of a new world order in which the U.S. would participate fully.
	We've got to give them a stake in creating the kind of uh uh world order that I think all of us would like to see.
	The affirmative task we have now is uh is to actually um uh create uh uh a new world order.
	A new world order.
	Never before has a new world order had to be assembled from so many different perceptions or on so global a scale.
	And this present window of opportunity during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be here for open for too long.
	Already there are powerful forces at work that threaten to destroy all of our hope and effort to erect an enduring structure of global cooperation.
	David Rockefeller admits to building a new world order in his book Memoirs, chapter 27 titled Proud Internationalists, where he writes, quote, some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interest of the United States, characterizing my family and me as internationalist, and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure, one world, if you will.
	If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
	proud internationalists.
	Rockefellers, come back.
	We don't want your New World Order, you know?
	Rockefeller, we know what you're doing.
	We know what you're doing to the world.
	Rockefeller, your new world order will never come in.
	You're running out of time.
	We don't want your world government.
	Live do that right now.
	Your world government will fail.
	You guys say you guys can run things you can't.
	I'm telling you right now, national sovereignty will prevail.
	You guys will never have a new world order.
	I'm just here to deliver that message right here.
	It's not so much as a sinister conspiracy, it's just knowledge is out there.
	If we look for it, you'll realize that our national sovereignty is under threat.
	I see it's a conspiracy in the sense that some people believe in globalism, some people believe in the North American Union.
	I don't.
	It used to be more secretive, you know, the new world order was talked about 30 or 40 years ago, and uh nobody would say it out and open.
	Now they talk about the new world order, so it's not as secretive and it's not as conspiratorial as it was 50 or 60 years ago.
	People believe in internationalism, and and I think they're very sincere.
	They just think the world would be better off if we had one world government.
	Right.
	I don't.
	I mean, I don't even like the size of our federal government, let alone one world government.
	I want government to be local.
	Now I risk sounding like a conspiracy theorist.
	But it's no longer a theory.
	What I'm about to say is fact.
	The secret organizations of the world power elite are no longer secret.
	They have planned and are now leading us into a one-world communist government.
	Through organizations such as the Council on Foreign Uh Relations, the Royal Institute for International Affairs, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, and many others, they have consolidated power on a mass level and are moving towards a world government.
	On the outskirts of the National Capitol today, black limousines with darkened windows converged to a hotel where private security guards imposed to ironclad control.
	The Libos carried royalty, political power brokers, and industrial titans to a secret meeting that will last all weekend.
	It's known as the Bilderberg Group.
	Could their objective be world domination?
	Bohemian Club in California.
	Where every year at this time, the elite from around the country get together for two and a half weeks of uh fun and games.
	What is the Bohemian Grove?
	Well, it's a kind of summer camp for the powerful, an all-mail gathering in great secrecy.
	Each year, guests like Henry Kissinger or Spig View Brzezinski address members on their areas of expertise.
	There are rituals, bonfires, and the burning of effigies.
	The motto of the Bohemian Club is weaving spiders come not here.
	Simply put, that tells members to leave their business and political deals at home and simply have a good time.
	But some people say with this much power and this much money located in one place, there is more to the Bohemian Club than campfires and canoeing.
	Major decisions are being made there outside of the democratic uh processes.
	So this is one of the main meeting houses.
	There is a uh very pro-world government, anti-national sovereignty uh sentiment running through it, and so they bring the the media, the top Hollywood people together, the head of banking, the uh academia uh with government, and uh basically uh it is a huge networking event where they try to cement this global agenda.
	Uh consider yourself a Catholic.
	What happens when you worship Moloch at the Bohemian Grove?
	Good.
	Can you tell us what happens there?
	You actually believe all this junk.
	Bill Clinton said that Republicans run around naked in the woods there.
	That's where all those rich Republicans go up and stand an echo against redwood trees, right?
	I've never been to the Bohemian Club, but you ought to go, it'd be good for you.
	Get some fresh air.
	And you don't want to know what Richard Nixon said about the place a Bohemian Grove that I attended.
	But give you something on this old character management.
	It's just terrorists.
	I watched everybody like that's the place you attended.
	It's a secret society.
	Can you tell us at least who invited you?
	You know, it's nice to know that there's some people who have fantasy lies that have nothing to untouch the video.
	Bye bye.
	You can't answer the question.
	You're gonna open up on the Bohemian Grove.
	Bye-bye.
	You might as well just answer the question.
	It's gonna be a lot easier.
	People are just gonna, it's gonna be on YouTube.
	People are just gonna speculate that there's something wrong unless you tell us there's nothing wrong.
	Come on.
	I'm just trying to be transparent and open.
	That's all I'm trying to do, new, and you're kind of making yourself look kind of guilty.
	Have you been there for the ceremony with uh the cremation of care?
	Uh frankly, that's uh that's uh I don't think that's something I need to talk to you about.
	Really?
	That's right.
	Well, I'm Alex Jones, and I snuck in there in 2000.
	I'm the guy that blew it wide open.
	We got the video.
	It's been on national TV.
	Well, I disrespect you for that.
	You do?
	I do.
	But it's a lot of big public officials going in there.
	You don't we deserve to know?
	You took an I don't know anything about you.
	And I don't know about your film.
	But if you go in there with an understanding, you violated that understanding by releasing that film, and I don't respect you for that.
	Really?
	I'm sorry, you took an understanding when you went in there that you would not do that film.
	And you did you have an understanding when you went in there?
	No.
	Did you crash it?
	Yes.
	Yeah, and that has no trespassing signs there, too, doesn't it?
	No, they put them on there.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry, sir.
	I've been there before.
	I know what I want the circumstances are.
	And I'm sorry you uh violated the understandings.
	That was not that was not a gentlemanly thing to do.
	Well, what about the ritual?
	Is the ritual genuinely?
	Sir, everything I you I don't I don't owe you this comment.
	Oh no, I'm you you you you have you this is what's called ambush journalism, and I disrespect you for that as well.
	So thank you.
	And goodbye.
	Let's leave your damn business.
	Let's go to John in San Diego.
	What's going on, John?
	Can you address the Bohemian Grove Club private presidential?
	You know, these guys in San Diego.
	It's just it's too nice.
	The weather's too nice there.
	Because there's what happens, because they used to have a house in San Diego.
	Not everybody.
	But you go out to the beach and you, you know, do all that, and then some kind of substance gets in your mind.
	Uh-huh.
	And then John just demonstrated, like, can I uh I just the Bohemian whatever?
	Whatever.
	You know.
	Um John, San Diego.
	What's going on, John?
	How do you feel about the private presidential resort, the Bohemian Grove having I don't know what you're talking about, and I don't care.
	Well, it's you know, you get the Kool-Aid crew.
	Um, the Bohemian Grove.
	All right.
	Yale University is 300 years old this year, and were you to visit its campus, you would see that it still has exotic clubhouses, which look like tombs where Yale's legendary secret societies meet.
	The video tape provides a grainy glimpse into what appear to be the initiation rituals of a secret society that's been around since 1832, whose members have gone on to be leaders of Wall Street and the White House, the Senate and the Supreme Court.
	The famous Skull and Bone Society.
	The rituals are still a secret.
	Even though it may seem silly to us, it seems to mean something to them, and you can't argue with s the success of Skull and Bones.
	True.
	Famous alums include Senators, John Kerry and John Chafee, to name two, and three presidents.
	William Taft, George Bush, and George W. Bush, who's been reluctant to talk about Skull and Bones.
	Does it still exist?
	Um the thing is so secret, I'm not even sure it still exists.
	The tape is a valuable artifact, an extremely rare view into the secret society that groomed the American ruling class for generations.
	You were both in Spell and Bones, the secret society.
	It's so secret we can't talk about it.
	What does that tell us?
	Uh not much because it's a secret.
	Is there a secret handshake?
	Is there a secret code?
	I wish there were something secret I could manifest.
	32, secret number?
	There are all kinds of secrets.
	You ever sold ruins in college and Bush?
	Were you in the same secret society as Bush?
	Were you in still in both?
	Thank you for cutting my mic.
	Thank you.
	Are you gonna arrest me?
	Excuse me.
	Excuse me.
	What are you arresting me for?
	Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
	Is anybody walking this?
	I'm not doing this.
	I want you to-Ow!
	Ow!
	Ow!
	He's got a taser on his chest.
	Ow!
	Why?
	Why are you doing that?
	Oh my god!
	Becca!
	Becca!
	What?
	Did y'all hear what you asked John Kerry to give themselves taser?
	Did you hear the question?
	He was like, is it not true, Senator Carey?
	That you are a member of Skill and Crossband, a secret society with George Bush.
	I can't really think that's a very good question.
	And I'm going to answer that question.
	I'm going to answer that question.
	What does that mean for America?
	The conspiracy theorists are gonna go watch.
	I don't know.
	I haven't seen the website.
	Number 322.
	I first of all, he's not the nominee.
	And uh, but uh look, I look forward to you prepared to lose.
	No, I'm not gonna lose.
	I just wanted to meet them face to face.
	I I wanted them to admit what they were doing.
	Who is they?
	He was in the office of the trilateral commission.
	Trilateral Commission.
	Yeah, the Trilateral Commission.
	All right, what is the Trilateral Commission?
	It's an organization founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller to bring together business and political leaders from the United States, Europe, Japan, so they could work together for uh better economic and political cooperation between their nations.
	That's what they'd like us to believe.
	But you see, what they're really up to is a scheme to plant their own loyal members in positions of power in this country.
	Those who are involved in the trilateral commission and the council foreign relation usually ends up in positions of power.
	To work to erase national boundaries, create an international community, and in time bring about a one-world government with David Rockefeller calling the shop.
	Would you like to hear the names of just a few of the people who have been on the trilateral commission?
	Not particularly.
	James Earl Carter.
	Heard of him?
	Look, Mr. Klein.
	Henry Kissinger.
	You're to him.
	Dick Cheney.
	Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, as well as a whole host of well-known politicians and CEOs of multinational corporations like Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, Shell Citigroup, and others.
	George Bush.
	Now you remember at the at the convention.
	Everybody thought it was going to be Ford for V. You know what happened?
	David Rockefeller just picked up a phone, put in a call.
	Hey, Ronnie, forget Jerry, it's George by.
	No matter who won in November, they had their man in the White House.
	He shut up the world order with his family, donated the land for the UN, and founded every major private globalist organization in every major country.
	The Council of the Americas, founder and honorary chairman, David Rockefeller.
	The America's Society chairman?
	David Rockefeller.
	The Forum of the Americas, founder, David Rockefeller.
	The Institute for International Economics, Financial Backer, and Board Member David Rockefeller.
	The Trilateral Commission, founder and honorary chairman, David Rockefeller.
	Rockefeller's influence also extends to the current administration.
	He was chairman emeritus of the CFR when Vice President Dick Cheney once served as a director.
	A relationship that Cheney concealed during his congressional career.
	It's good to be back at the Council on Foreign Relations, as uh Pete mentioned.
	I've been a member for a long time and was actually a director for some period of time.
	I never mentioned that when I was campaigning for re-election back home in Wyoming.
	Oh.
	Thank you very much, um, Richard, and I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters.
	Um, I have been often to uh, I guess the mothership in New York City.
	Uh, but it's good to have an outpost of the council right here down the street from the State Department.
	Uh, we get a lot of advice from the council, so this will mean I won't have as far to go to uh be told uh what we should be doing and uh how uh we should uh think about the future.
	Gentlemen right here in the blue.
	It's been reported that um you and your wife are in the globalist CFR, which is a council on foreign relations.
	Um, and um I'd like to know if that is true.
	Well, first of all, uh I'm I'm not uh the Council on Foreign Relations.
	Uh, I don't know if I'm a official member.
	I have sp I've spoken there before.
	Uh it basically is just a forum where a bunch of people talk about foreign policy.
	Uh, and so there's nothing.
	Uh there's no official membership.
	I don't have a card or you know, a special handshake or anything like that.
	If you've ever heard any of our call-in shows, you know that we have people that uh think about the conspiracy theories.
	Of people like you.
	Uh, you would be a poster child for these people because you have served on the board of the Council on Foreign Relations.
	You started help start the Trilateral Commission, and you've been to the Bilderberger groups.
	Well, yes, I haven't known it also for years, so that's partial redemption, I suppose.
	But otherwise, yes.
	But what is what is belonging to all those groups?
	We talked about the Trilateral Commission when you're here in 1999.
	But what about the association with that?
	Is there too are people too close in this world?
	Uh, people in business too close to the the governments?
	Well, you know, there is such a thing as insidious influence.
	And the question is, how does it operate?
	Does it involve bribery?
	Does it involve some sort of psychological domination of individuals?
	I don't believe in this notion of some sort of secret societies controlling people.
	But of course, in any political system, there are sort of over the table and under the table arrangements.
	How do the American people know that 9-11 was a stage wasn't engineered by you, David Rockefeller, the Trilateral Commission, the CFR, and Bilderberg group, sir?
	How do you know it was a sick?
	Okay.
	It's a question.
	Answer my question.
	You sponsored Al-Qaeda, sir.
	You are a criminal.
	You sponsored Al Qaeda.
	In 1979, you gave him money.
	That's true.
	You're a CMR scum.
	You are CMR.
	New World Daughter scum.
	You and David Rockefeller will never have a new old daughter.
	That's my question.
	Shut up.
	Answer.
	You will never get a new world order.
	Never.
	National sovereignty will prevail.
	The new world order's going down, sir.
	You can laugh.
	Wake up, people.
	Wake up.
	Research the new world order.
	This is important.
	Look it up.
	Investigate it.
	You mentioned something earlier that you've done that comes out right in the spot that you're saying many times by our callers across the country.
	And that is a suspicion that there is a conspiracy for the trilateral commission and the council on foreign relations.
	You ran the trilateral commission for how long?
	About three years, I think.
	Something like that, three years.
	Not only did I run it, I hope to find I can organize it with David Rockefeller.
	So if I never argue or is our conspiracy mind, and you're in one of the conspirators.
	It's a criminal, illegitimate foreign banking cartel that runs America.
	118 people only sit on 288 corporate boards that unify kind of this media conglomerate and corporate uh corporate America.
	So you have people involved in craft foods, Monsanto, so many different things, defense corporations, the pharmaceutical industry lobbying together, all sitting on these boards, and it really is such a small amount of people who are really controlling all these things from the top down.
	It's a big club, and you ain't in it.
	You and I are not in the big club.
	The owners of this country, the real owners, the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions.
	They own you.
	They own everything.
	They own all the important land.
	They own and control the corporations.
	They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls.
	They got the judges in their back pockets, and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear.
	They got you by the balls.
	Hundreds of mainstream news articles a week are saying there is a new world order, a global government that will be run by the very banks that are collapsing society by design.
	Here is uh Time magazine headline New World Order, and they say a new bank of the world will rule the United States.
	Here is uh the Financial Times of London, and now for a world government is the headline.
	They're openly announcing that the banks will rule the planet.
	The ultimate goal that these people have in mind is the goal to create a one-world government run by the banking industry, run by the bankers.
	I met Rockefeller through a female attorney I knew who called me up one day and said, uh, one of the Rockefellers would like to meet you.
	Sure, I'd love to meet him.
	And I met him and I liked him, and uh he was very, very smart man, and uh we used to talk and share ideas and thoughts.
	And um he's the one who told me uh 11 months before 9-11 ever happened that there was going to be an event.
	Never told me what the event was gonna be, and out of that event we're gonna invade Afghanistan to run pipelines from the Caspian Sea, we were going to invade Iraq to take over the oil fields, establish a base in the Middle East, and make it all part of the New World Order later, 9-11 happened.
	And I remember he was telling me how you're gonna see soldiers looking in caves for people in the in uh Afghanistan and Pakistan and all these places, and there's gonna be this war on terror, of which there's no real enemy, and the whole thing is a giant hoax, but it's a way for the government to take over the American people.
	He told you it was gonna be a hoax.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	There's no question.
	He says, there's gonna be war and terror.
	And he's laughing.
	9-11 was done by people in our own government and our own banking system to perpetuate the fear of the American people into subordinating themselves to anything the government wants them to do.
	That's what it's about, and to create this war, this endless war on terror.
	And that's the way we and that was the first lie.
	And the next lie was going into Iraq to uh get Saddam Hussein out with his weapons of mass destruction.
	Look, this whole war on terror is a fraud.
	It's a farce.
	It's very difficult to say it out loud because people are intimidated against saying it.
	Because if you say it, they want to make you into a nutcase.
	It was 9-11 that allowed this war on terror to begin.
	And until we get to the bottom root of 9-11, the truth of 9-11, we'll never know about the war on terror.
	I have trouble believing this, but a new poll by Scripps Howard and the University of Ohio says 36% of Americans believe it is likely or somewhat likely that the U.S. government either assisted in the 9-11 attacks or did nothing to stop them.
	Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th.
	Malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty.
	Are you one of those that was an inside job, guys?
	Well, let me tell you something.
	An inside job.
	How dare you?
	How dare you?
	9-11 was not an inside job.
	It was an Osama bin Laden job with 19 people from Saudi Arabia.
	They murdered 3,000 Americans and other farmers, including over 200 other Muslims, and we look like idiots, folks, denying that the people who murdered our fellow citizens did it when they are continuing to murder people all around the world.
	So we heard from you, you go away.
	Thanks for coming on.
	You have no evidence that the government's behind 9-11.
	And I frankly think it's an awful thing to allege, considering it's not true, and you haven't proved that it is.
	I'm merely saying it is wrong, blasphemous, and sinful for you to suggest, imply, or help other people come to the conclusion that the U.S. government killed 3,000 of its own citizens because it didn't.
	It's ridiculous to suggest anything other than the Al-Qaeda destroyed those buildings.
	Stop asking me to raise this ridiculous topic on the show and start asking your doctor if Paxil is right for you.
	Whatever one may feel about President Bush.
	That that the government would deliberately kill three thousand people.
	Shaney really wanted to present.
	To accuse the president of this, that's a terrible accusation to me.
	To say that these guys want to attack our country, in spite of the fact I don't agree with their policies, I don't agree with how they prosecuted the war on terror.
	But to say that they are behind it, or that they wanted to attack us and killed 3,000 Americans, it's so far beyond the pale to defy credulity.
	Anyone who thinks that 9-11 was carried out by the government isn't a truther.
	They're idiots.
	This whole idea that you have some documents which you say at least reinforce the idea that the government had advanced knowledge that 9-11 could happen.
	And didn't didn't work to stop it.
	Now I find a hard time believing you actually believe that.
	Oh, come on, Jesse.
	No, not to come off.
	Every wait a minute.
	Every war starts with a false flag operation.
	We can't in all seriousness sit there and try and make uh anybody.
	Let me ask you this.
	Wait a minute.
	Let me just say.
	Let me ask you something.
	How many, how much studying have you actually done of 9-11, other than what the government's told you and what mainstream media has told you?
	I was interested in studying it.
	I was on the national newspaper.
	I've taught me every day for five, six months.
	Really?
	So I know about it.
	Let me ask you this.
	You cannot say that any member of the Bush administration knew it was going to happen or wanted it to happen.
	It's a ridiculous thing to say.
	Ridiculous.
	You believe that uh Dick Cheney, George Bush, and the whole administration should be prosecuted for a fair act.
	You're making up you Rosie O'Donnell like scandals.
	That says that 9-11 was an inside job.
	Well, why why are you not allowed to ask anything about it?
	Why would you approach the government to I I approach the government?
	I read everything possible.
	I watched all the hearings.
	You're right, I haven't read.
	You looked at my reading list.
	Have you led the 9-11 report?
	And you think it's a piece of fiction.
	No, I believe everything in it.
	I believe Uh my government's never lied to me, have they?
	And you notice how if you bring up 9-11 and they have any questions about it, immediately everyone attacks you over it, tells you you're crazy, calls you Rosie O'Donnell, insult you.
	Why?
	Because I ask questions, defense of free speech.
	Popular speech, the First Amendment doesn't need to be defended.
	It's unpopular speech, is why we have that amendment.
	You question 9-11, you're asking unpopular speech today.
	According to a recent poll, 49.3% of the people in New York believe that our leaders knew the 9-11 attacks were planned, and that they intentionally failed to act.
	Are 49.3% of us just fucking crazy?
	There are a group of screwballs out here, uh, and I mean truly screwballs, who believed that we were not attacked on 9-11 by terrorists to flying planes, that those people really weren't killed by terrorists, uh, that that's not what happened.
	And in fact, uh, George W. Bush was sitting somewhere in the White House basement with one of these and plungers and he blew up those buildings.
	Uh that's what these people believe.
	They are truly crazy people.
	Just so you know, we're not uh muffling intelligent dissent here.
	If you hear the shouting, it's a group of demonstrators who've come.
	Oh, 9-11 was an inside job.
	Oh, get a life.
	Get a life, 9-11 was an inside job.
	This woman, we need to be clear, is an out and out lunatic.
	She's a conspiracy theorist.
	She's a 9-11 truther.
	She thinks that water fluoridation is a government conspiracy.
	The people who said that 9-11 didn't really happen, or that 9-11 was an inside job, that 9-11 was not actually an attack on our country, but was rather a hoax perpetrated by our government in order to enslave us or something.
	Yeah, Rachel.
	Because someone who wants the truth about why things are the way they are must believe that 9-11 either never happened, or that it was a hoax, or that the government completely engineered every facet in order to enslave humanity.
	Because apparently it's too hard to believe that this government would not care about the lives of human beings in order to advance geopolitical goals.
	Is it really too hard to believe the fact that Bush and his cabinet turned a blind eye to let the attacks happen or even ensure that they happened?
	A 9-11 truther.
	If you don't know what a 9-11 truther is, let me quickly tell you about them.
	The 9-11 for truth, I didn't know what that meant, that it was a real buzzword for loonies.
	Perhaps the most fascinating of terms that have become a pejorative for the establishment is truther.
	It's so-called truthers.
	The truthers who perpetuate the theory that the United States orchestrated the attacks on September 11th.
	One of the groups that I've been warning about for a very long time are these 9-11 truthers.
	Take the the 9-11 truthers.
	These truthers are exactly the kind of people who want to rock this nation's foundation, tear us apart, and plant the seeds of dissatisfaction in all of us.
	These 9-11 truthers, who I've been telling you for years, are dangerous.
	I find it amazing this uh kind of pejorative term truther for seeking the truth.
	Everybody's like, truther, you're a truther.
	You know, when idiots are calling brilliant people stupid.
	You got a real problem.
	If a truther is simply a person that cares about evidence and facts, no matter how ugly or uncomfortable they may be, then maybe that's a label we should all embrace.
	Those people who would like to destroy us are enemies uh like uh Al Qaeda.
	They'd like to destroy us, and they will work with anyone.
	There are also people like white supremacists or 9-11 truthers that would also like to destroy the country.
	They'll work with anybody they can.
	You know, it took me about a year to start hating the 9-11 victims' families.
	I didn't think I could hate victims faster than the 9-11 victims.
	You have a warped view of this world and a warped view of this country.
	Well, explain that.
	Let me give you an example.
	I'm not gonna parallel this with you.
	Let me give you an example.
	Lick was saying without a shred of evidence that President Bush and Bush the Elder were directly responsible for 9-11.
	Now, that kind of stuff is not only loony, it's defamation.
	In respect for your father, shut up.
	At least don't tell me that.
	In respect for your father, who was a poor authority worker, a fine American, who got killed unnecessarily by barbarians by radical extremists, yes, fine.
	Trained by this government respect the people of America.
	I'm not gonna go.
	Cut his mic.
	Cut his mic.
	I'm not gonna dress you down anymore.
	Out of respect for your father.
	This is our house here.
	If somebody comes to your house and begins spitting on the floor, you'd remove them.
	Glick was out of control and spewing hatred for this program and his country using vile propaganda.
	These nuts are still in the shadows, Mike.
	And you're giving them power.
	Rosie O'Donnell, is she mainstream media every day?
	She's got milk.
	Well, listen, she just said this crap this week.
	And what happened to her?
	Tower seven.
	And what happened to her?
	Her audience cheered for, and people said, boy, Rosie's onto something.
	Tower seven fell because we blew it up.
	I mean, these screwballs are among us, Bill.
	Rosie's not gonna be on that forum much longer because of what she's doing here.
	Do you believe that the government had anything to do with the attack of 9-11?
	Do you believe in a conspiracy in terms of the attack of 9-11?
	I do believe that it defies physics for the World Trade Center Tower 7, Building 7, which collapsed in on itself.
	It is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved.
	World Trade Center 7.
	World Trader 1 and 2 got hit by planes.
	Seven, miraculously, the first time in history, it is a physically impossible.
	And who do you think is responsible for that?
	I have no idea.
	But to say that we don't know that it imploded and it was an implosion in a demolition is beyond ignorant.
	Look at the films, get a physics expert here from Yale from Harvard, pick the school.
	It defies reason.
	Okay, one because that's I would do it.
	It's the unthinkable.
	It is the unthinkable.
	But imagine if somebody could convince you of that, could prove it to you, Elizabeth, just seven.
	I don't think it would happen.
	More than 1,300 architects and engineers examine the evidence about building seven's collapse and disagree with the official report issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
	It was in full free-fall acceleration.
	That is impossible because in a natural collapse, columns would have to buckle.
	When columns buckle, there is a minimum resistance.
	It's asymptotic, if you know what that means.
	means it never goes to zero.
	Five sheets of glass were broken in that test.
	Danielle and Ivan, you guessed correctly, and you each receive one.
	The only thing that I've found that is even similar to what we're doing are people who are trying to disprove 9-11 being a terrorist attack.
	I have literally found probably ten websites using an example of dropping a bowling ball through panes of glass to explain why the Twin Towers is a conspiracy.
	You're gonna guess your way through this.
	I did not guess.
	I was up till three in the morning.
	Look at them conspiracy theories.
	So it's impossible.
	You can't read the thing.
	So here's here's what uh I guess in layman's just get my hands here, Peter.
	So what he's saying is that uh the top floor collapses, hits the next floor, hits the next floor, hits the next floor, so it's bang bang, bang bang, the weight of the upper floors.
	It would slow down.
	What I'm trying to say is it was in full free-fall acceleration.
	All of its potential energy was being converted to what I just described.
	The thing just ssss collapsed like a pancake.
	Newton's third law of motion, which states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
	This means that two opposing forces will neutralize each other.
	In a head-on collision, the two cars absorb each other's kinetic energy and transform it into physical deformation or damage.
	After that, the system comes to a rest, as there is no more energy to be dissipated.
	The top section, pushing on the bottom section, it's gonna be equal forces as it goes.
	Both sections are gonna be uh demolished at the same rate.
	So by the time you've crushed up 15 stories below it, the top 15 stories are also gonna be crushed.
	And so there's nothing left now to crush the rest of the building.
	Something of this kind is what we should have seen when the top section of the towers collapsed onto the lower one.
	The upper and lower sections should have mutually destroyed each other until all the energy is dissipated and the system comes to a rest.
	Alternatively, as shown in this experiment with two towers made of snow, the top section could have fallen off to the side after the initial collapse.
	What could not have happened is this.
	A little tiny chunk of the building can't possibly fall and crush the entire structure below it.
	This is such a simple fundamental concept that architects and engineers were astonished in seeing it totally ignored by NIST.
	This is high school physics, and our whole society is being led to believe that these fundamental laws Of physics.
	Hard science.
	Don't apply anymore.
	Bill, you do me a favor.
	On your next radio factor, you ask your listeners how many people think 9-11 was an inside job.
	You won't be able to get through the thousands of phone calls you'll get from people who believe that.
	Marginal enough.
	The more you look at stuff, especially uh specific incidents, specific events um in our uh around the fateful day.
	It just um it just raises a lot of questions.
	That was Charlie Shane ranting like a lunatic about the September eleventh attacks.
	Now word comes that Sheen will be narrating a new film about 9-11 conspiracy theories.
	Doesn't surprise me.
	This is Charlie Sheehan.
	The fact that you know he's gonna get the money to, you know, sort of go forward with his views is what is somewhat shocking to me, and the fact that he'd even express them publicly.
	Your thoughts.
	Well, he does prove that the Apple does not fall far from the very tree at all, with uh Martin Sheen being his father.
	What surprises me is Mark Kubin here.
	You're absolutely right.
	In fact, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks is funding all of this.
	I always liked him what is he doing?
	I I don't know what in the world he is thinking about at this point in time.
	Funding this I don't think we should be getting behind this stuff at all, and Cuban should keep his money in his pocket.
	This is a disgrace to them, and Martin Sheen's kid there better better watch it as hard as we wouldn't watch any of the And this uh we're looking out for you, Charlie Sheen.
	Don't do this.
	You're not gonna come back from it if you do, and that's not a threat.
	I'm just telling you, I know the country, Bo knows the country, Gerald.
	If they continue to attack me personally, it only gives credence to our side of the argument.
	People want the truth.
	They want the truth.
	And what's been offered to us uh resembles nothing of this.
	We have been getting an overwhelming response to our show, but it's tonight's question of the day.
	Charlie Sheen speaks out.
	Do you agree with his assertion that there is a government cover-up of 9-11?
	Let's take a look at how the vote is going so far.
	Eighty-two percent of you say yes, only eighteen percent of you say no.
	You think that's a that's a well-informed opinion that that George Bush knew about 9-11 ahead of time.
	This big conspiracy the government.
	You're calling it a conspiracy theory, right?
	And that's what conspiracy theories are.
	Last time I checked, there are a lot of people today in Dallas standing on a grassy nose, still disputing the single bullet theory, and Arlene in office.
	You sit there and say, let's debate the issue.
	What?
	That maybe America did bring down the towers, that maybe when all the Jews left the building, maybe they knew something that you didn't all know.
	It was sad because they didn't really take a look at any of the stuff I was asking them to look at, any of the evidence or any of the stuff that generated those questions, you know.
	And they said, Oh, he's uh he's another tinfoil hat wearing Hollywood clown, you know.
	All of the volumes and volumes of information that contradict the official story have been blacked out from the U.S. mainstream media.
	Why have so many of the major media outlets not talked about these alternative theories that exist behind 9-11?
	Why is that?
	Mark Twain said that in the beginning a patriot is a scarce man hated and feared and scorned, but in time what his cause succeeds, the Timot join him because then it costs nothing to be a patriot.
	A lot of people don't have the courage that uh you have, AJ.
	What do you think they're afraid of that that's going to happen to them?
	They're afraid of being beaten up by the hordes of neocon intimidators who try to go out there with their Gestapo Nazi tactics to to to try to bludgeon everybody with their blogs and radio shows to shut up.
	But they've lost power because people have learned that they're a bunch of liars.
	They lied about the WMDs, they've lied about everything, and now their credibility is totally blown.
	Is it really that hard now to believe that September 11th is the first time?
	All right, goodbye.
	Yes, isn't that nutcase?
	Uh, let us go to You're a terrible American, Sean Hannity.
	You're a mainstream media mockingbird, a new world order shill, and a nine-eleven whitewasher.
	And what happened on 9-11?
	Why don't you educate us, oh brilliant one?
	9-11 was an inside job on one level.
	It was purposely allowed to happen as a pretext for the war on terror on another level.
	Elements within the shadow government helped and made sure it were to happen for a pretext.
	Why don't you open your eyes?
	Look at Operation Northwoods, Sean Hannity.
	Yes, a declassified government plan to commit terrorism in this country by crashing planes and blaming on a political enemy.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	So stop with the music.
	Let's talk about the issue seriously.
	Look it up on the internet, Sean.
	Okay, you know if it's on the internet, it's got to be true.
	No, it's a declassified document, Sean, in the National Army.
	I know, sir.
	Yeah, Northwoods.
	Why don't you substitute the word for our action?
	Exactly what happened on 911.
	Yeah, but that's not what you called about, is it, Alan?
	Well, let's talk about a more serious issue in fact that 9 11.
	That 9 11, what it was imploded by the government, Alan.
	You got it, my friend.
	Operation Northwood declassified plan where our government planned terrorism against this country, Sean.
	How do you explain that, Sean?
	I know.
	I I just can't.
	I you know what, George.
	I'm agreeing with George Bush did it.
	George Bush and Dick Cheney.
	Sure, they're skull and bones and skull and bones.
	Skull and bones.
	He's a Bilderberg pawn, he's an Illuminati member.
	Yeah.
	Absolutely.
	Goodbye.
	There is a group that's sending letters to our troops in Iraq and DVDs, claiming 9-11 was an inside job.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah.
	And that they should rethink why they're fighting.
	Who they ought to take these excuse me, folks, I'm going to say this.
	We ought to find the people who are doing this, take them out and shoot 'em.
	Really?
	Just find the people who are you're sending those letters to our troops to demoralize our troops and do what they're doing.
	You take them out.
	They are traitors to this country and shoot them.
	You have a problem with that?
	Deal with it.
	But anybody who would do that doesn't deserve to live.
	You shoot 'em.
	You call them traitors, that's what they are, and you shoot 'em dead.
	I'll pay for the bullet.
	Mark Dice, the founder of the resistance, which he calls a media watchdog group, says that the U.S. government was responsible for the September 11th terrorist attacks, and that the armed forces should know it.
	I think that it's very beneficial that we inform them as to the true circumstances that got them in the situation there on that.
	I think that if they're able to make better decisions based on the facts and they can decide to direct their lives and their careers and the positions and the direction that they want to go.
	I think feeding them a constant stream of propaganda is one of the most detrimental things to them and and to our service.
	I don't even want to dignify this with a response, really.
	And I don't think they're they're gonna want to take the time to open mail from some uh fringe political sect.
	They're they're too busy winning this war in Iraq.
	They're too busy decimating Al Qaeda.
	Why in the world would they care what you and a couple of other coups in Southern California sent them in the mail?
	They don't.
	These letters will end up in the toilet or on the firing range.
	They don't care about it.
	The only reason you could say what you're saying right now is because Marines, for generations, have been willing to fight for people like you to say outrageous things like you're saying, like 9-11 was an inside job.
	How about you take Mark Dice out and put him in the middle of the firing range?
	Tie him to a bow post, don't blindfold him, let it rip and have some fun with Mark Dice.
	These people are just folks, I'm telling you, outrageous.
	Instead of immediately investigating the monumental failure in government, the Bush administration opposed any probe and be attacked for well over a year until mounting pressure from the victim's family members forced the issue to be addressed.
	President Bush signed legislation today creating an independent commission to investigate the September 11th attack on America.
	The President named a supporter, Dr. Henry Kissinger, Secretary of State in the Nixon and Ford administrations to head the panel.
	He has a penchant for secrecy, which is not what's needed here.
	Several family members approached Kissinger and requested a meeting at his office in New York.
	Prior to the meeting, Kristen Breitweiser conducted a thorough investigation of Kissinger's potential conflicts of interest.
	Lori asked some very pointed questions.
	Would you have any Saudi American clients that you would like to tell us about?
	And he was very uncomfortable, kind of twisting and turning on the couch.
	And then she asked whether he had any clients by the name of bin Laden.
	And he just about fell off his couch.
	Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger stepped down from the position Friday.
	You know, I don't testify.
	I mean, I'd be glad to visit with them.
	And even the president and vice president agreed to meet with the commission, but with a catch.
	They insisted on meeting together behind closed doors and not under oath.
	Why are you and the vice president insisting on appearing together before the 9-11 commission?
	Because the nine commission 9-11 commission wants to ask us questions.
	That's why we're meeting, and I look forward to meeting with them and answering their questions.
	Why you're appearing together rather than separately, which was their request.
	Because it's a good chance for both of us to answer questions that the 911 Commission is uh looking forward to asking us, and I'm looking forward to answering them.
	Let's see.
	We have to have one story.
	So I'll say part, and if I get it wrong, hedge a little bit and give me the next.
	I want to thank the chairman and vice chairman for giving us a chance to share views on a on uh on different subjects.
	And they had a lot of good questions.
	And uh I'm glad I did it.
	I'm glad I took the time.
	What topic did the commissioners want to spend most of the time on?
	Uh I I really uh probably best that I not go into the details of the conversation.
	It's a president and vice president of the United States.
	Don't you think they should be able to stand up and and and speak their own words?
	They should go under oath.
	They should be in public.
	Don't you think that the families deserve to have a transcript or to be able to see what you're saying?
	You asked me that question yesterday.
	I got the same answer, yeah.
	Since when do you bring in witnesses that don't have to testify in open where they're brought into closed door rooms and allowed to testify together?
	I know you said there'll be a time for politics, but you've also said you wanted to change the tone of Washington.
	Howard Dean recently seemed to muse aloud whether you had advanced knowledge of 9-11.
	Do you agree or disagree with the RNC that this kind of rhetoric borders on political hate speech?
	Yeah.
	Uh there's time for politics.
	And uh, you know.
	It's time for politics, and uh I uh it's an absurdist in the commission was finally formed and its report released, many questions were still left unanswered.
	Questions that many people in this country still have.
	In fact, a recent poll by Ugov reveals that 38% of Americans have some doubts about the official story we've been told.
	What happened that day?
	There are so many unanswered questions.
	What would you have done on September the 12th, 2001?
	What would you have done if you'd been president?
	I would have done a legitimate uh uh legitimate investigation to find out what exactly happened on 9-11.
	The 9-11 Commission looked at virtually every aspect of uh the terrible tragedy of 9-11.
	They looked at virtually every aspect of it, but there's always remaining questions.
	If you want to tell me that there's something going on beyond two planes going in the buildings, I never saw anything that suggested it.
	That was the most investigated event, probably in FBI investigative history.
	It has been looked at thoroughly by everybody.
	Uh frankly, you have people who witnessed the planes going into the buildings.
	Again, the 9-11 investigation was one of the most uh comprehensive that I have ever seen.
	Michael Shayer is the uh former head of the CIA's bin Laden unit.
	Was the 9-11 Commission report a whitewash?
	It was a whitewash and a lie from top to bottom.
	A deal announced yesterday between the White House and the Commission investigating the September 11th attacks is proving to be rather controversial.
	You and Lee Hamilton wrote in the New York Times today, you have no doubt that there was obstruction on the part of the CIA in preventing you and your panel, the 9-11 Commission appointed by the president, approved by the Congress from going forward with its investigation.
	It's a scam, it's absolutely disgusting.
	I'm very much for uh issuing a subpoena to to those in the White House that would obstruct this investigation, and that's what we have here: an obstruction of a full investigation on the most serious attack on the homeland in the last 150 years.
	Lee and I write in our book that uh we think the commission in many ways was set up to fail.
	We thought we were set up to fail.
	They were afraid we were gonna hang somebody that we would point the finger.
	So, what we have here, in my opinion, is a major cover-up.
	Major cover-up, like unlike anything I've seen since Watergate.
	I've been in this city 20 years.
	They don't want anything to come out and they'll ruin the career and the life of anyone who dares to put forth information that's truthful.
	Thank you.
	This is an attempt to prevent the American people from knowing the facts about how we could have prevented 9-11, and people are covering it up today.
	And we can't let it stand.
	So there's nothing reputable about that commission report.
	It's a piece of fiction, it should be discarded, it's omissions and lies.
	We are more than a decade after the tragedy of 9-11.
	Why do these truthers have such staying power?
	I want truth.
	I've been lied to.
	I mean, it's beyond the reasonable doubt that the 9-11 Commission did not tell the story.
	The family members of the people who died on 9-11, uh, the first responders, uh, the survivors.
	These people are demanding accountability.
	They want to know why their loved ones died.
	We don't just need transparency, we also need justice.
	Many people in New York who suffered, and people all around the world who suffered from 9-11 uh need uh the the truth in order to achieve uh closure.
	These kinds of theories are unusually resistant to correction.
	The 9-11 conspiracies have stood up to the facts disproving them.
	The 9-11 conspiracies have not gone away.
	We just want people to understand there's FBI whistleblowers, there's people within this government, there's patriots, there's citizens, family members, rescue workers, survivors of 9-11 that want their questions answered.
	We demand uh truth from our government, which we have not been getting from.
	American people deserve to know the truth about what happened to their nation on 9-11.
	Every single major rhetoric we are proven.
	Will this 9-11 conspiracy theory become like the Kennedy assassination?
	Analyzed for generations as an unsolved mystery.
	But I think 20 years from now, people will look at 9-11 the way we look at uh the assassination of JFK today.
	It wouldn't possibly have been done the way the government told us.
	The establishment viciously attacks conspiracy theories.
	But the truth is that many of these conspiracies are supported by legitimate evidence and warrant serious debate.
	While many people are losing trust in the media and waking up to the New World Order's agenda, the establishment still has a small majority under their spell.
	Why is it so hard for the general public to accept that conspiracies exist and that the government and corporate media would lie to cover them up?
	Have to understand.
	Most of these people are not ready to be unplugged.
	And many of them are so inertia, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.
	People who don't like conspiracy theorists only because they're afraid that what they're saying might actually be true.
	I know a red flag when I see one, and I know I know when people are reacting almost religiously, when people won't look at something, automatically people just shut off.
	They don't want to hear it.
	No matter how much evidence.
	Do you think that's because as a society there's this benevolent father theory where people cannot imagine that a father would do A, B, or C to his own child, whether that's incest or murder or horrific abuse.
	Some people can't even hold that concept in their head.
	If you're a person who can't, it's impossible to have a conversation about not believing the official story.
	Thinking that we're above uh such things, that it could happen in other countries, but it couldn't happen here.
	That's a lack of humility, and that's excessive pride.
	And so not being able to see our dark side or our weaknesses is the most dangerous thing.
	It's difficult for people to comprehend and accept conspiracy theories because of fundamental aspects of psychology and sociology.
	The left cerebral hemisphere is largely responsible for creating a coherent belief system in order to maintain a sense of continuity towards our lives.
	New experiences get folded into the pre-existing belief system.
	When they don't fit, they are simply denied.
	Counterbalancing this is the right cerebral hemisphere, which has the opposite tendency.
	Whereas the left hemisphere tries to preserve the model, the right hemisphere is constantly challenging the status quo.
	When the discrepant anomalies become too large, the right hemisphere forces a revision in our world view.
	However, when our beliefs are too strong, the right hemisphere may not succeed in overriding our denial.
	When we hear information that contradicts our worldview, social psychologists call the resulting insecurity cognitive dissonance.
	Specific neurons and neurotransmitters, such as norepinephrine trigger a defensive state when we feel that our thoughts have to be protected from the influence of others.
	If we are then confronted with differences in opinion, the chemicals that are released in the brain are the same ones that try to ensure our survival in dangerous situations.
	In this defensive state, the more primitive part of the brain interferes with rational thinking, and the limbic system can knock out most of our working memory.
	Physically causing Narrow-mindedness, no matter how valuable an idea is, the brain has total processing it when it is in such a state.
	On a new level, it reacts as if we're being threatened.
	Even if this threat comes from harmless opinions or facts that we may otherwise find helpful and could rationally agree with.
	You guys are idiots!
	No!
	Have you no actually tried?
	Yes, I have!
	No, you never disgrace.
	No, you guys are even screened.
	Because you are spitting.
	You are spitting on the memory of everyone.
	Every family member.
	You are spitting on the memory.
	We're coming.
	Well, I'm a family member.
	My uncle died on 9-11.
	What do you mean I'm spitting on his memory?
	I respect that.
	I really resent that.
	And if you're not willing, if you're not willing to read anything, if you're not willing to do it.
	I read all the crazy theory.
	You fucking care on 9-11!
	Did you see those planes go into the building?
	You think this is a good thing?
	Why can't you comprehend that planes crash into buildings because terrorists took it over?
	Why can't you comprehend that?
	Well we can and Why can't you comprehend it?
	Yeah, but if you physics still design so it's sin, not a jet liner going 600 miles an hour.
	Look, because the government could keep you thinking like an inside job.
	People continue to be either oblivious to the fact that this information exists or completely resistant to looking at this information.
	So the question becomes why?
	Why is it that people have so much trouble hearing this information?
	From my work, I think we would be remiss not to look at the impact of trauma.
	Yeah I was, I was bad man.
	I saw him fall.
	I saw him die.
	We're dying now.
	We're dying now.
	You're a disgrace because you don't know anything.
	You're disgraceful.
	You're the voice go on, go home and watch the reality.
	Go back to the You're a hero, aren't you?
	Stop!
	Stop your buddy, then you'll think we're all like more.
	As we know, the horrors of what happened on 9-11 were televised all over the world, and we were televised, in fact, live.
	We witnessed the deaths of almost 3,000 of our fellow Americans.
	We know this had a very um severe and traumatic impact on a large uh majority of the population.
	911 was an inside job!
	You were not there!
	You were not human!
	You were not there!
	9-11 was a psychological warfare operation.
	It's an example of uh trauma-based mind control.
	This is a kind of mind control developed by the CIA and other intelligence agencies that influx massive trauma on people and uses that trauma to uh essentially uh control uh their their psyche.
	Yeah, 9-11 traumatized the American people so badly that most people just don't want to go there.
	Uh it's only takes a certain kind of courage and uh a fearless desire for truth.
	Social psychology often looks at the basic human need to fit in and calls this the normative social influence.
	Most people want to belong to their peer group, they want to be the same as everyone else when it comes to opinions.
	In fact, they judge their own personal sanity by bouncing ideas off their their neighbors and friends who will answer back and agree on these same topics.
	People are afraid of being ostracized, they're afraid of being alienated, they're afraid of being shunned, they're afraid of their lives being inconvenienced, they'd have to change their lives, they're afraid of being confused, they're afraid of psychological deterioration.
	To begin to accept the possibility that the government was involved is like opening Pandora's box.
	If you open the lid and peek in a little bit, it's gonna challenge some of your fundamental beliefs about the world.
	When we grow up, our moral and ethical compass is almost entirely forged by our environment.
	So our actions are often a result of the validation we get from society.
	It doesn't matter if the topics or the or what you're given are facts or are utter nonsense, as long as everyone agrees at the same time.
	You'll say, Well, I'm sin.
	And your friends will all agree because they've had the same information given to them.
	The human mind is like a computer.
	No matter how efficient it may be, its reliability is only as great as the information fed into it.
	If it is possible to control the input of the human mind, then no matter how intelligent A person may be, it's entirely possible to program what he will think.
	And yes, it's even possible to program people to laugh at the mere mention of the word conspiracy.
	Controlling the media is the key to all of it, because if you control the media, you control the mind.
	All you have to do is keep giving them new updates every so often.
	And you can change an entire country or a nation or a block of nations.
	We're all getting the same uploads, upgrades at the same time along certain paths.
	You've grown up with this father figure who's on television every night at six o'clock.
	Uh in your house, in your room, staring right at you.
	Uh, and he's a father figure.
	Would he tell you a lie?
	That that's so you naturally never suspect him.
	And this same man will lead you through new topics.
	He'll he'll introduce experts on the topics, but have the little summary at the end of every talk, and you are now left with the conclusion that's presented to you.
	As you you don't arrive at it, it's given to you, and it's good enough for you.
	The only truth you know is what you get over this tube.
	Right now, there is a whole, an entire generation that never knew anything that didn't come out of this tube.
	This tube is the gospel, the ultimate revelation.
	This tube can make or break presidents, popes, prime ministers.
	This tube is the most awesome goddamn force in the whole godless world.
	And woe is us if it ever falls into the hands of the wrong people.
	There are hundreds of TV stations, newspapers, and radio shows.
	But the truth is that almost every avenue from which we get our information in the mainstream media is controlled by only six corporations that have one specific interest: profit.
	News censorship is happening every day, but not necessarily from the top-down blacking out the stories, but also in the form of self-censorship, framing, backpaging, all to protect the interests of those corporate conglomerates.
	So who are the big six corporations that control nearly everything you see, hear, and read?
	First, there's Comcast, formerly owned by GE, which controls MSNBC, NBC, and Telemundo.
	And there's Disney, which owns ABC The History Channel, and CNN.
	I'm sorry, and ESPN.
	Next, Viacom, the parent company of MTV, Paramount, and B E T, CBS with all its affiliates.
	And there's News Corp, which owns Fox News, the New York Post, and the Wall Street Journal.
	And finally, Time Warner, the parent company of CNN Time and People Magazine, as well as Warner Brothers.
	And when the twelfth largest company in the world controls the most awesome goddamn propaganda force in the whole godless world, who knows what shit will be battled for truth on this network.
	Do you trust the American government?
	I have certain rules I live by.
	My first rule, I don't believe anything the government tells me.
	Nothing.
	And I don't take very seriously the media or the press in this country who are nothing more than unpaid employees of the Department of Defense, and who most of the time function as kind of an unofficial public relations agency for the United States government.
	Let me be absolutely clear.
	It's not trusting.
	No one does.
	I don't trust the corporations in this country that you inadvertently work for every time you take this line with me.
	Let me tell you, the people don't trust you, and the people don't trust the media.
	Right.
	And I understand in America, we are fed propaganda, and if you want to know what's happening in the world, go outside of the U.S. media.
	Because it's owned by four corporations.
	One of them is this one.
	And you know what?
	Go outside of the country to find out what's going on in our own country because it's frightening.
	Television is not the truth.
	We'll tell you anything you want to hear.
	We lie like hell.
	We do it in illusions, man.
	None of it is true.
	But you people sit there day after day, night after night.
	We're all you know.
	You're beginning to believe the illusions we're spinning here.
	You're beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal.
	You do whatever the tube tells you.
	Do you dress like the tube, you ate like a tube, you raise your children like a tube, you even think like the tube.
	This is mass madness, you maniacs.
	See, my mind doesn't work that way.
	I got this real moron thing I do, it's called thinking.
	And I'm not a really good American because I like to form my own opinions.
	I don't just roll over when I'm told to.
	Sad to say, Most Americans just roll over on command.
	Not me.
	Not me.
	I think it's interesting that at this time where we have so little trust in our political figures, where ordinary people have so little trust in their media that we have to remain open-minded to any kind of possibility.
	I see no rational, objective discussion going on anywhere in the country.
	People wish to be bobbleheads.
	They wish to nod their head in agreement with whatever whoever is in charge.
	They're too afraid to challenge authority.
	So that takes care of at least a majority of people.
	So that's why we're here.
	Questioning is patriotic.
	Questioning is what we're supposed to do as citizens.
	That's our duty.
	A hundred years from now, I don't want people reading and think that we all believed.
	I want people to know that there was a minority opinion that didn't go along to get along.
	And always remember what Thomas Jefferson said.
	Dissension is the greatest form of patriotism.
	If you don't hold people's irons, feet to the fire elected officials, you'll get bad government.
	If you hold their feet to the fire, you'll get better government.
	If you make some very sensible points, and you make some crackpot points.
	That's your opinion.
	Yes.
	How many people here think I make crackpot points?
	One.
	How many think I make sensible points?
	You're in a minority, my good friend.
	You're the minority.
	Intelligence looks like insanity to drooling imbeciles.
	Democracy is threatened in a way it hasn't been in 200 years, and if America doesn't stand up, we're in big trouble.
	People better show up, start reading, stop being bought off.
	If you only have an hour a day, read something intelligent.
	Read several sources.
	Educate yourself.
	Find out what's going on.
	Don't stay asleep or go deeper into the mind control, because it will get worse for you.
	If you're looking to the mainstream media to give you information, you're getting you're getting what these secret societies like the Bilderberg and the Trilateral and uh the Council on Foreign Relations want you to know so that you support them and you don't fight against it.
	One thing that has become important for me personally is to educate myself, is to take responsibility.
	There's that wonderful quote from Mahatma Gandhi where he said that we must be the change that we wish to see in the world.
	You're not a conspiracy theorist if you just look at the newspaper and you said, I read this in Newsweek, I read this in, you know, the New York Times and so forth, and I want answers.
	Some conspiracy theories have turned out to be true after all.
	You know, the great Gorbidal.
	He said he was not a conspiracy theorist, he was a conspiracy analyst.
	And he said there will come a day if it's not already here, where it will be an article of fate that there are no conspiracy theories.
	They will call me a conspiracy theorist.
	Now nobody's laughing.
	You can't just call us conspiracy theorists anymore and have us just shut up.
	And the conspiracy theory labels being replaced with well, these people are informed.
	So it's now a badge of honor.
	It doesn't throw the public off that the so-called authority figures of dinosaur media and corrupt government tell you, oh, don't listen to them.
	They're conspiracy theorists.
	We must expose the conspiracy to public view.

▲