Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 18, 2013 - No Agenda

02:54:18

531: Quantum Dong

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	It's the continuum.
	Adam Curry, John C. Devorak.
	It's Thursday, July 18th, 2013.
	Time for your Gitmo Nation Media Assassination Episode 531.
	This is No Agenda.
	Preparing for Quantum Dawn 2 here in the Travis Heights hideout in Austin Tejas, capital of the Drone Star State.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where there's glass in the driveway, I'm John C. Dvorak.
	It's Craig Vaughn and Buzzkill.
	In the morning.
	The jingles are a little weird today.
	Why?
	I don't know.
	I've got to restart this thing.
	It might help.
	They're a little delayed and they're cracking up.
	You know, what can you expect?
	It's like, it's Apple stuff.
	It's the system you're taking on the road though, right?
	Yeah, that's pretty much it.
	Good.
	Yeah, yeah, excellent.
	What do you mean glass on the road?
	What happened?
	Did someone back in you?
	Last night I was putting out the recyclables and dropped the bottle right on the driveway.
	Oh, oh, and is the car on the good side of the glass or the bad side?
	No, it's on the good side.
	Okay, so you don't have to deal with it.
	You can wait for one of the...
	You don't have to deal with it.
	No, you wait for the kids to come visit.
	And you're like, hey...
	Hey, my foot!
	My foot!
	Hey, kid, go clean that up.
	Well, it's one of...
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	I was going to say it's one of those shows where it's been kind of difficult to do anything because here in Gitmo Nation...
	The Gitmo Nations of the United States.
	It's all the same on every single channel.
	Everything.
	Even NPR, PBS. Everyone's doing the same thing.
	It's the same drama.
	And that makes it very hard to find what's really going on underneath all the covers.
	You mean like the kind of obscure fact that the Supreme Court did a case where they find that all drug companies for all their drugs are not liable?
	Yeah, that would be a perfect example.
	And if you found this, I'm a little mad because I didn't hear about this.
	What's going on?
	It was right during the Trayvon Martin and Hastings thing.
	Really?
	Yeah, on the 7th of July.
	Okay, do you have anything?
	What do you got?
	What you got for me, bro?
	No, I just...
	I wasn't timing it for the beginning of the show.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, you want to talk about it right now?
	I have it right here.
	I just have to get my mail.
	But yeah, no, some woman came in apparently with her skin fell off.
	As it can happen, yes.
	And so she sued the pharmaceutical company that sold her this product, which I'll get the name of in a second.
	Hold on a second.
	So all of her skin fell off like a chameleon?
	I guess all of it didn't because I don't think you can survive without your epidermis.
	I don't understand why this is not a National Enquirer or the Globe.
	This is a perfect story for them.
	Yeah.
	Skin fell off!
	Kind of perfect.
	So she sued and won a case against the pharmaceutical company.
	And then it went to the Supreme Court and it worked its way up.
	And I think it was the day, either in the same session or just right after they did the...
	Gay marriage.
	Gay marriage.
	Makes sense, yeah.
	Right.
	And so let me just find one article here.
	These are really obscure, by the way.
	This was not covered by the mainstream media at all.
	Jeez.
	I wonder why.
	This is not a good one.
	Let me find the other one.
	Okay.
	You're well prepared.
	Do you want to talk about something else?
	No, no, no.
	I am prepared now.
	Just for some reason, I thought these were in the printouts, but I didn't look through the printouts.
	It's not there.
	In the printout.
	Did you get them fresh off the telex?
	I expected it to be in the B block.
	Rip them off the telex.
	Throw that on the conveyor belt under the prompter camera.
	In a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a lower court's ruling and award for the victim of a pharmaceutical drug's adverse reaction.
	According to the victim in the state courts, the drug caused a flesh-eating side effect that left the patient permanently disfigured over most of her body.
	The adverse reaction was hidden by the drug maker and later forced to be included in all warning labels.
	But the highest court in the land ruled that the victim had no legal grounds to sue the corporation because its drugs are exempt from lawsuits.
	And this is which corporation?
	Mutual Pharmaceutical.
	Karen, the case is Karen...
	Wait, wait, wait, wait a minute.
	It's one thing to say that you didn't read the label or you ignored the side effects, but this is the court saying that they're actually exempt from any type of damages if your skin falls off or death occurs?
	Let me read.
	Karen Bartlett sued Mutual Pharma in the New Hampshire State Court.
	Organized drug company included no warning about the possible side effect.
	Court agreed.
	By the way, it turns out that these warnings, if you just load up, that's why there's so many of them.
	Because if you are given that warning, then you apparently cannot sue the company for the actual side effect.
	It's kind of like the iTunes user agreement.
	Karen Bartlett and Mutual Pharma in the New Hampshire State Court.
	Does it say on the insert, includes flesh-eating stuff?
	Court agreed and awarded blah, blah, blah.
	Now, nine years after the tragedy began, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the state court's verdict and award justices cited the fact that all generic drugs and their manufacturer, some 80% of all drugs consumed in the United States, are exempt.
	What?
	From the liability for side effects.
	I thought this was only vaccines that they had exemption.
	Now it's for everything?
	As long as you label it?
	That's what it sounds like.
	Wow!
	Now, the kicker here, what I think is slightly misleading, is that these are all generic drugs, which, of course, everything becomes generic, right?
	It says all generic drugs and their manufacture, some 80% of all drugs consumed, are exempt from liability for side effects.
	Right.
	Mislabeling or virtually any other negative reactions caused by the drugs.
	I don't think whoever wrote this, mislabeling is not a negative reaction.
	That's the way it's worded.
	In short, the court ruled that the FDA has ultimate authority over pharmaceuticals in the U.S., and if the FDA says the drug is safe, that takes precedent over actual facts.
	Oh, it says that in the ruling?
	It says that in the stupid article.
	Okay.
	Well, I need to look into this.
	I'm going to read some of the court documents.
	Okay, the case is Karen Bartlett versus Mutual Pharmaceutical Company.
	And that may be the big cover-up that I've been looking for during the Trayvon Martin case.
	Well, there's a couple things that have been going on.
	I feel like I would like to step back into the narrative that is being held, not just In America, but Miss Mickey, she's my NPR stude.
	She listens to NPR all day in the car.
	She drives a lot, and she listens, and she gives me a report.
	And she's really good at it.
	When she's feeding back the talking points, she can almost do the voices, I'm telling you.
	She's getting really scary at this.
	She's working for NPR. Who knows?
	So there's a narrative going on right now, and it's kind of genius.
	It took me, well, until last night, we had a conversation about, you know, this is actually the talking point, we need a conversation in this country about race.
	Have you heard this over and over again?
	I'm sick of it.
	A conversation in this country.
	Oh, at least it opened the conversation.
	Snowden started the conversation.
	So let me just play a couple clips of things that have just been irking me as this conversation has been ongoing.
	And I'd like to point out, there's a couple reasons why this is front and center in the news, certainly in America, but it's spread everywhere.
	The BBC is doing it.
	Everyone's talking about, oh, America, big racist country.
	And the proof, of course, as always, is in the pudding.
	Five million viewers on the closing arguments for the cable news channels.
	And this is CNN and Fox combined.
	Over a million in the sweet spot, John.
	The 18-plus demo.
	Just beautiful numbers.
	Just beautiful.
	So everyone's freaking out.
	They're like, oh my god, this is fantastic.
	It's a bonanza.
	We can't just let it drop off the cliff after it's done.
	No, that's why we need to have the conversation.
	Yeah, no kidding.
	The advertisers love this conversation because this thing was a bonanza.
	The funny thing, MSNBC still couldn't buy any ratings.
	Of course not.
	It's unbelievable.
	People already know that...
	Here's in a nutshell.
	People know that MSNBC is good for one thing.
	Obama bought boosterism.
	If you're not looking for that, you don't go to MSNBC. If you're not looking for a good old charge on how great Obama is, why would you go to MSNBC? I always read the trades, like variety and stuff, but here's New York Times.
	Despite breaking late on a weekend evening, The verdict in the murder trial of George Zimmerman attracted an audience of more than 10 million viewers to cable news networks.
	A huge total for a Saturday night.
	No, that's a huge total for any night.
	Ever.
	Preliminary ratings showed that the hour from 10 to 11 p.m.
	when the verdict came in, Fox News and CNN both attracted well over 3 million viewers each, while MSNBC trailed badly with only 1.3 of which 510,000 in the demo.
	Meh!
	Meh!
	You idiots!
	I can't believe you can't even do that right!
	You so need the Kurt Devorak Consulting Group.
	So Fox is the one that really crushed.
	CNN had the best in the demos.
	And so this is obvious why this had to continue.
	There's just no way.
	I mean, John, you know.
	This is how it works.
	You're not going to give up this obvious bonanza.
	As for Zimmerman, he's not getting paid a nickel for all this work he's doing.
	This is the best part.
	It's all free.
	It's free.
	You've got no location fees.
	The courts are doing the camera work.
	Everything's free.
	You could not make it any better.
	Now, I do have to play some MSNBC clips because they're really trying.
	They're really, really trying.
	That is false and very cold.
	And Melissa, the other thing I want to talk to you about today, and I've been getting this from, you know, family, loved ones, all the people in my life and through social media, and I'll say it.
	Honestly, there's a lot of white shame today.
	Yeah.
	So this is the one of the...
	So we need to have a conversation.
	There's white shame.
	No white shame.
	Zimmerman is Hispanic.
	No, no.
	But that doesn't matter.
	We need to have a conversation.
	And there should be white shame.
	And I have a conclusion about this, and I'm going to get to it.
	I just have to rile everybody up a little bit about this stuff.
	Here's more MSNBC. I think there's the Morning Joe show, one of the analysts they have on.
	Your three boys have hit the American trifecta of privilege.
	They are white straight males.
	Yeah.
	By the way, white straight males, I don't count.
	That's the trifecta.
	If you're a white straight male, then you're good to go.
	Success all the way.
	For what?
	I don't know.
	So they have hit the trifecta of American privilege.
	The trifecta of American privilege.
	Boy, this is the most racist station.
	They got Al Sharpton.
	What more is there to say?
	He's the one who started this whole thing.
	Here's the irony of it.
	None of this would have even happened.
	None of these ratings would have occurred if it wasn't for Al Sharpton making a big stink over the fact that this guy, Zimmerman, wasn't, you know, indicted right away because they just let him go because apparently there was no evidence.
	And, of course, there wasn't, according to the jury.
	And so Sharpton starts the whole fire and they can't cash in on it.
	All right, hold on, hold on, hold on.
	You are so wrong.
	Because Zimmerman, you know, I think you have your words wrong, John.
	You're not watching enough MSNBC. I'm sorry, you didn't understand the verdict.
	What did you just say?
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	I thought he was found not guilty.
	No, no, no.
	He was found not guilty.
	Mr.
	Zimmerman was found not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
	He was not found innocent.
	Okay.
	I'm sorry.
	I just spoke.
	It's so wrong.
	There's a difference between being found not guilty and, you know, you're definitely not innocent.
	There's a huge difference there.
	I love that one.
	But it even carried over into other conversations about the immigration bill.
	And this, I love this one.
	I said earlier how you have these districts where the, you know, House members are doing what their district sent them to do, which is not to have an immigration bill because they're, you know, gerrymandered districts, majority white voters, older, and for them, immigrants are, you know, people in hoodies.
	Right!
	You know, they classify them as we don't want them.
	They're going to lower the weight.
	People in hoodies!
	What?
	That's what Latinos wear hoodies roaming around.
	People in hoodies.
	It doesn't matter because they're all dangerous.
	Well, you have the trifecta.
	I don't have the trifecta.
	I'm not a white straight male, a white bi-curious male.
	Where's the cash?
	Where's the cash?
	At the end of the rainbow, as always.
	That's where it is, believe me.
	Now, this was a little ditty I picked up from Fox, and I found this to be...
	A lot of people actually tweeted this and emailed me about it.
	This is Greta Van Zusteren.
	I don't watch Fox at all, but I love me a good Greta clip, because her mouth is weird.
	She's got a lot of work done.
	She can't move her mouth, really.
	It's kind of...
	It's strangely sexy.
	I can't.
	I don't know.
	Okay.
	Maybe that's why she's on the air.
	I can't explain it.
	If we had a programming meeting, I would vote.
	I'd say, yeah, it's strangely sexy.
	Keep her in there.
	But if it was like her or Diane Sawyer, there's no contest.
	Okay, so here she has the Trayvon Martin family attorney.
	And the family attorney...
	So, of course, she was not really in the trial.
	She was just the attorney for the family.
	And you'd think that she's a lawyer, but she has a secondary mission, which I found to be interesting in the grand scope of all of this.
	We respect the decision to the extent that is the standing law.
	Are you saying it was a bad jury?
	I do not believe that Trayvon got equal justice in this instance.
	And specifically how?
	Tell me the evidence that the jury didn't hear.
	The evidence that the jury didn't hear?
	Right.
	I don't think that they properly considered the evidence.
	If they had listened to the evidence and if they had followed the law, then George Zimmerman would have been convicted of murder.
	I mean, he got out of the car with his son.
	So far, so good.
	Now, so she's a lawyer, but she may be something else that we haven't quite figured out yet.
	Right?
	Yes.
	And the whole point of the jury is that we assign the job to weigh the facts.
	We draft them.
	We make them sit there.
	A lot of times they don't want to be there.
	We then present the evidence, and the judge then says, here's the evidence, here's the law, instructs them in the law, and it's your duty.
	It's not mine.
	It's not yours.
	It's not anybody else in the community.
	But it's the jury's duty to weigh them.
	And all of a sudden, suddenly, afterwards, you say they can't do their job?
	I have a greater duty beyond being an attorney, and that's to be a social engineer.
	And when the law doesn't get it right...
	Her duty is to be a social engineer.
	Maybe that's why she was hired.
	What?
	Yeah.
	She says, I have a greater duty to be a social engineer.
	I heard that, but it's just like...
	Yeah.
	Well, this is...
	I'm telling you.
	This is crazy.
	Now, there were some good...
	And what does Trayvon Martin's family have an attorney for?
	Yeah, to be social engineering.
	I don't know.
	I mean, I don't have...
	Our family doesn't have an attorney.
	I wish I could hire an attorney.
	What is it?
	Are they rich blacks?
	I don't know.
	Now, I'm going to wind this up in a minute.
	Now, this I really, really, really like.
	This is Trayvon's friend who testified.
	What's her name?
	Jarnell, I think her name was.
	Right.
	We have a family theory about her.
	Well, she's on the Pierce Morgan program.
	I would love to have seen that.
	It was fantastic.
	And I like her.
	I really, really like her.
	I don't, I think she has, I'm not quite sure why they put her on the stand, but I'm pretty sure that she's speaking from her heart, and she, and so here's Pierce, and he has a whole audience, and everyone says, oh yes, white shame, oh yes, this is horrible, oh yes, oh God, don't stand you, we have to have a conversation, we have to talk about this, thank you Brit.
	And here comes the...
	She's going to help us quantify something, which I've been waiting for a black person to say so that I can now point to it when I use this word.
	But mind you, I'm a teenager.
	Was there anything you wished you'd said, Rachel, when you finished and you went home and you saw the reaction and everyone giving you a hard time?
	Was there anything you wished you'd said when you were in there?
	Nigga.
	Why?
	People...
	The whole word said it's a racist word.
	Mind you around 2000s, that was not, they changed it around, I think.
	This is, I love this.
	Thank you for finally putting it on mainstream television that the word nigga is no longer racist.
	It started 10 years ago.
	It's used in common language.
	It starts spelling N-I-G-G-A. What does that mean to you, that way of spelling it?
	Listen to Pierce, the moron.
	What an idiot.
	What does that mean?
	Does it hurt your feelings?
	What does it mean to you?
	That means a male.
	A male, exactly.
	A black male?
	A black male?
	Does that mean a black male?
	No, any kind of male.
	Any male, any male, thank you.
	Black or what?
	Any kind of Chinese can say nigga.
	Yes, yes, Chinese, thank you.
	That's my chino nigga.
	That's my chino nigga.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, Rachel.
	Thank you for finally putting that straight.
	It's about time.
	I condemn the woman now.
	They could say that.
	And rappers and everything use it in the music.
	And that's what they mean.
	Yes.
	But nigger or nigger, I advise you not to be by black people because they're not going to have it like that.
	Because that's a racist word.
	But they're two different words and they have different meanings in your community.
	Sure.
	No, in a generation.
	He's such a dick.
	He's an idiot.
	Now it turns out, a couple things I get out of this.
	One, I would not advise people to use either term if they're white, and that would be aimed at you.
	Nigga, please!
	See, this is what the problem will be.
	But why can't I say that?
	You now will take it upon yourself to use the word constantly.
	When we check into the airport tomorrow...
	I'm hoping, yeah, you should do that to the TSA. Nigga, please let me go.
	I can't raise my hands above my shoulders.
	Nigga, please.
	You have to keep...
	What is wrong with that?
	Well, for one thing, it requires enunciation to get it straight.
	I'm good at that.
	Which is always a problem with not blacks or white.
	Everybody has a problem enunciating.
	So that's a problem, number one.
	And number two, it's a bull.
	She's not the gatekeeper of...
	Yeah, but neither are you.
	Neither are you.
	She's Emily Post.
	She says it's okay.
	No!
	She doesn't know anything, this woman.
	She's a teenager.
	And you're saying, oh, great!
	I can use it!
	I want a t-shirt of her face.
	And I said, nigga, please!
	That's what I want.
	Okay.
	Somebody in the audience will make that for you, and you have to wear it around Texas.
	No problem.
	No problem.
	I'll go outside of Austin, even.
	I'm not afraid of words.
	Can I tell you something funny?
	I don't know if I mentioned this to you.
	Mickey first lived in Los Angeles around 2002, 2003, I think.
	And she was acting, and she was there by herself for a couple of years.
	And this was around the time of the OJ trial.
	And so she came in fresh, kind of off the boat.
	You know, she's still a girl from Holland.
	And she heard everyone talking about the N-word.
	And, you know, it's funny how people just don't understand certain pieces of the vocabulary, what people are talking about.
	And for months, she thought people were talking about Nicole Simpson-Brown.
	That the N-word, you couldn't say Nicole.
	She'd never heard of a country that replaces words with first letter word.
	Like the R word, and the C word, and the S word, and the T word.
	What's the S word?
	Shit!
	Ah.
	Yeah, well.
	Nobody says that.
	Yes.
	Oh, come on, John.
	I'm sure a lot of your neighbors there in Berkeley would be like, oh, my son said the S word.
	Please.
	Please.
	Not that bad.
	But that's not where I wanted to go to.
	What I wanted to say is here's what's happening.
	So first of all, it's a ratings bonanza.
	This is actually the sweet spot for the military-legal-political complex.
	I mean, the media-legal-political complex.
	The media, of course, we know this.
	The huge ratings, big money.
	Legally, for lawyers, this is fantastic.
	Everyone's a consultant on the shows.
	Everyone gets brought in.
	These lawyers are making a grand an hour.
	This is fantastic.
	And politically, are you kidding me?
	You can use this in all kinds of ways.
	So this is a beautiful...
	That's the true trifecta of American success, is this kind of story for those three individual groups.
	Now, here's why it's really taking place and why I believe the Obama administration in its entirety has been propagating this.
	We have Eric Holder talking crap and everyone's talking shit.
	Everyone's talking S-word.
	Everybody.
	And it is to distract you, okay?
	And I'm going to say it's very simple when you look at it.
	So it's much more easy to say, well, we need to have a conversation, and it's black against white, and it's white against Chicano, and it's Latino, and it's Chinese, and it's everybody all against each other, when really, we are tribal, right?
	We hang out with our tribes, you know, we look at the other tribal, like, hey, man, you know, we got respect, we don't have respect, whatever it is, it's just how it works.
	It's everywhere, it's the same everywhere in every single country.
	That's just how the world works.
	There's no conspiracy of white people to go put the black man down.
	I'm just not buying that crap.
	What I am seeing Is that as of the numbers today, 101 million people in America are on food stamps.
	So this is not black, white.
	This is poor.
	It's like you need to be looking at the other guy going, eh, he's going to kill me.
	Oh, he hates me.
	And you're all forgetting that you're actually poor.
	You're in an economy which is broke.
	And your leaders are like, oh, yes, we have to have a conversation about black and white.
	Instead of the real conversation, which is, nigga, please, we're broke!
	And then they bring out all these stories like, well, at least you're not a kid in India.
	At least 23 children under the age of 12 have died after eating a contaminated free school meal.
	I mean, at least we're not there!
	We got food stamps!
	Yet!
	And that's why this conversation is taking place.
	Please, pay no attention to the fact that we're broke.
	I'm broke, you're broke, everyone's broke.
	101 million people on food stamps, John.
	Is that unbelievable?
	Is that right?
	I don't think so.
	U.S. Department of Agriculture right here.
	U.S. Department of Agriculture, I'm going to bring it up right here, reported that 101 million Americans are on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP, and it costs annual $114 billion as of 2012.
	Yes.
	This is all part of the ag bill.
	It's going to be less because they're cutting it out.
	It's like, hey, starve.
	At least you're not dying like Indian kids with free school lunches.
	So yeah, that's what this is about.
	That's why they love it.
	Are you kidding?
	And this is not to, and by the way, it's kind of, it's even better.
	Like, oh, you know, if we have riots or anything going on, well, you know, it's the black on white issue, the white on white, the black on black, the yellow on red.
	It's not about poverty.
	It's not about that we're failing you as leadership.
	No, it's not about that.
	That's what's going down here.
	Yeah, I'm not going to argue with that.
	101 million people on food stamps.
	Are you kidding me?
	That's more people than who have a job.
	Well, duh.
	They have food stamps.
	Yeah, but we have 301, 40 million people in America?
	Yeah, it seems like a high number.
	It's too high to have one-third of the public needing food stamp assistance.
	Yes, John.
	Which is a third of the public needing food stamp assistance, and that includes little kids, so they don't starve to death.
	And meanwhile, there are homeless out there that don't get these food stamps, and they are starving to death, and that's another large group of folks.
	This is the June 2013 audit report.
	The USDA, it's a PDF, I'll put it in the show notes, and the number's right here.
	And it's disturbing.
	It's a disturbing number, yes.
	But, you know, where is the headline on this?
	Where's the headline about, hey, you know, while you're all fighting around about who's eating...
	And by the way, we're eating Skittles!
	That's even worse!
	You know who had the best response to this?
	No, I'm done.
	But the best response?
	Our man.
	There's only one guy who can give it to you straight when it comes to black issues in America.
	Who is that?
	Pastor Manning.
	Have you heard him?
	No.
	He lives on the 12th floor there in the Martin Luther King Jr.
	houses.
	It's 10 o'clock at night.
	You get up out of your bed.
	It's raining at night.
	Well, maybe 7 o'clock at night.
	You go...
	Park your car.
	You get on the elevator there.
	So he's preaching in church this time.
	In the Martin Luther King Jr.
	houses, and as a pastor going to pray with one of your members, and a 17-year-old boy gets on the elevator with a hoodie on.
	Just you and him on that elevator at night.
	Just you and him.
	Tell me, what do you think?
	Oh, this must be a prophet of the Lord.
	He's got a hoodie on.
	This must be one of the nicest little boys in the community.
	He's got a hoodie on.
	What do you think when you see that?
	Tell me, what do you think?
	Do you begin to protect yourself?
	Do you think you need to be concerned?
	Has it been proven over and over again that these hoodie boys rob, rape, murder, and maim?
	Are you afraid of him?
	Though you don't know who he is.
	You have suspicions because of that hoodie and because of the color of his skin.
	Ain't no telling what's going to happen to you on that elevator.
	And you know it's true.
	You know it's true.
	So why do you blame George Zimmer?
	Why?
	Because you're black.
	That's why.
	You're not saved, you don't know nothing about Jesus, and you're full of hate.
	So all they had was some Skittles and a bottle of watermelon Arizona juice.
	Now this is, he's about to deconstruct this whole thing in one go, which I haven't heard anyone come up with this angle.
	You know, when you smoke pot, you get the munchies.
	Do you know that?
	See, all of those people who smoke pot can say, yeah.
	And y'all didn't know I was catching you either.
	I said, I'm going to lay and wait for that.
	I'm going to get them now.
	Because all the pot smokers are going to say yeah.
	And anybody who say yeah to the munchies, you're a pot smoker.
	See, when you smoke pot, you go to 7-Eleven.
	I get some munchies.
	I get some Skittles.
	I get something to drink.
	Because I got the munchies!
	I been smoking dope.
	I got the munchies!
	All my way back, I got the munchies.
	Now the other thing that happens when you smoke pot, you get paranoid.
	Somebody's following me.
	Yeah.
	Pop makes you paranoid.
	So you start acting in suspicious ways.
	But see, you'll never admit that, because you're black.
	There ain't no truth in you.
	Ain't no Jesus in you.
	No Jesus in you.
	Condemning George Zimmerman.
	There you go.
	Well, so the whole sermon is in the show notes.
	That's cute.
	Okay, so I have to bring this in because I just got the biggest kick out of it.
	So on my blog from our last show, somebody posted this thing.
	And I just want to point out to people that we really are apolitical on this show.
	Oh.
	Oh, absolutely.
	And so somebody points out to this article by Andrea Shea King, an old white lady, writing in the World Net Daily.
	Oh, that's a fine publication.
	Right-wing operation.
	Right.
	About how Skittles, and she goes on about this, she said, apparently somebody did this, some group, which I, by the way, I tried tracking this group down.
	I found that just a bunch of website hosting company.
	I don't know what she's talking about.
	She says...
	Among its reports, Trayvon Martin's drug use explaining how the Skittles and Arizona watermelon fruit juice cocktail he carried that night are ingredients that, when mixed with dextromethorphan, DXM, cough syrup, create lean, a concocted high, which can cause psychosis and aggression over the longer term.
	According to the autopsy report, Martin's liver showed damage consistent with DXM abuse.
	And, of course, somebody sends me this, and I say...
	Well, you know, this doesn't sound like it.
	I've never heard of this.
	It seems like it would be in the literature.
	DXM? I've never heard of this either.
	It's usually called DX, actually, by the druggies.
	CQDX? So I looked it up, and Lean is there.
	It's in the Urban Dictionary.
	Lean, and I'll tell you what it is.
	And she actually links to this, which I think is weird, because here's what Lean is.
	To create Lean, a popular drink originated in Houston, Texas, you require the following original formula.
	Promethazine with codeine.
	Okay.
	Now that'll knock you on your ass, whatever.
	Yeah.
	That's essentially the Vicodin.
	Yeah, I think it might be.
	Well, it's...
	No, this is the...
	Okay, well, this is the syrup.
	Original Sprite soda.
	Mixing ingredients with different flavors of Sprite are now available.
	And Jolly Rancher, the flavor additive.
	So we have no Skittles.
	Zero.
	We have no watermelon.
	And we have no, you know, no...
	DX, the dextromethorphan hydrobromide.
	None of this is in this lean, but that's what she goes on with.
	Okay.
	So I'm thinking, well, this is total bullcrap.
	Bullcrap, yeah.
	So I found the actual, the complete and final autopsy report, dug it up, printed it out.
	It's available.
	You can find it.
	Deliver showed no any damage.
	So she's just making this up?
	Bullcrap.
	Yeah.
	So these guys...
	She's part of the cabal then.
	That's bull crap.
	It's total bull crap.
	I mean, it's complete bull crap.
	It's trying to rewrite history.
	But why does this get published in the first place?
	And then why do people link to it and send it to me?
	Oh, please.
	But I'm just saying, and send it to me without checking one detail.
	We don't need this kind of input on this show.
	Yes, and while you're at that, we have to reiterate...
	When you send us an email, we take it seriously.
	And if you send us bull crap that just took away 5 or 10 minutes of my time, I get angry, and you go into spam from then on.
	It's really annoying.
	It really, really is.
	You have to think what you're sending us.
	We take your S-word seriously.
	And for one thing, this particular link, which was put on the blog actually...
	Did you remove it from the blog?
	Did you remove that?
	Did you nuke it?
	I should have not, you mentioned it.
	Well, no, I wanted to leave it there so people can check to see who did it.
	But why doesn't the person themselves, instead of just linking to something like this...
	Because that would be like someone else's job.
	Because this is not what we're taught.
	We're taught to lean back and let the telescreen tell us what it is.
	And it's gotten worse.
	It's shifted.
	Now it's us.
	Let those guys do it.
	Let those guys do it.
	Let Kareem Dvorak do it.
	We shouldn't have to do it.
	Yeah, well, we do.
	And guess what?
	We didn't even do that well in donations for doing it.
	It's like, hello!
	Hello, Fiscal Cliff!
	Back again.
	The summer has started officially, so there you go.
	That's nice.
	Yeah, no, it's disturbing.
	I agree.
	It's very disturbing when this happens.
	Yeah, and it happens a lot.
	Yeah.
	Why, yes, Mortimer.
	It does.
	So we should probably...
	I think we have two or three people to thank, right?
	Before we do anything, let me just say, in the morning to you, John C. Dvorak.
	Oh, well, in the morning...
	Oh!
	Well, in the morning to you, Adam Curry, and in the morning to all ships at sea, boots on the ground, subs in the water, feet in the air, and all the dames at night out there.
	Yes, and in the morning to the chat room, noaginatstream.com, noaginatchat.net.
	Thank you all for showing up.
	Those of you who are here, despite the holiday, the vacation period kicking into high gear, good to have you aboard.
	Also, thank you to our artist, Martin J.J. Thank you so much for your contribution on the previous episode, 530, for the album art.
	Can't wait to see what we get today.
	You're coaxing them.
	That's good.
	Yes.
	It's not like we're paying them.
	We don't have anybody that actually came in as an executive producer.
	We do have last week's executive producer, Edward Jacobs, complaining that we had...
	He's not on the executive producer.
	I don't know.
	He shouldn't be on the spreadsheet.
	But he's complaining that we said he was in Providence, Rhode Island.
	Not last week, but sometime before that.
	When he's in Providence, North Carolina, and he demanded a make good.
	Well, you know, credits are an important thing.
	I understand.
	If we said it incorrectly, we apologize.
	And we still thank him very much for his healthy contribution for Show 530.
	Yeah.
	Onward to today.
	4531, our executive producer becomes James Richard with $233.33.
	Wow, he got in on a good level there.
	That's good.
	Yeah, because he's the highest on the list of regular associate executive producers.
	Hi all, here's my value for value.
	I've been kind of strapped since I've had the wonderful experience of marrying a South African and petitioning to get her a green card.
	Hello, Adam.
	We have our interview with the wonderful USCIS next month.
	I'm not a celebrity, a celebrity, so I don't know if my interview will go as smoothly as Adam and Miss Mickey's.
	I was hoping to get some karma for the interview so it goes well.
	I'll give you some karma and I have a tip for you.
	Cleavage.
	You've got karma.
	Works every time.
	Did Mickey have some cleavage going?
	No.
	But then what are you advising?
	You don't know for sure.
	We're celebrities.
	We don't have to do that.
	Kent O'Rourke, $200 from Frostburg, Maryland.
	I'm just giving value for value for the best podcast in the universe.
	Thank you.
	And here's our old buddy, Joan Dottifray in Morgantown, West Virginia.
	Dame Joni.
	$200.
	And she says, she has a little long note, which we'll read.
	Second Dame Hood, and it's my birthday on Saturday.
	Should we do a birthday today?
	No, we have a birthday.
	I think we have...
	I think she's on the list.
	I would like to bestow this damehood to my 12-year-old son, Max, which will obviously convert to a knighthood.
	He and I will eventually take over the state of West Virginia.
	Maybe when I play the ceremonial for him on the podcast, he'll start listening to the show.
	He's totally on board with the whole crackpot conspiracy stuff, so there's hope.
	He also has a great sense of humor, so he'll quote-unquote get it.
	If you have any rings left lying around, we do.
	We'd love to have one, otherwise a pin would just be fine.
	We're still doing rings.
	I would give him my ring, but he's already too big for it.
	Perhaps a little karma to all listeners who support the show, and also to you guys, because we need you to stay alive and healthy to keep the show going.
	Love you both, XXO. Right.
	This is indeed the message you need to give your son, Max.
	It's like, you need to give us money, these two gentlemen in the sky, so they don't die.
	This is very good.
	This is very good.
	Absolutely.
	Karma.
	We've got karma.
	And we will be knighting Sir Max later on in the show.
	Very exciting.
	It's cool.
	Larry Lee, $200 will be our last associate executive producer in a group of four.
	Marble Falls, Texas.
	I'm driving the street from you.
	Adam mentioned Low Power FM recently.
	I wonder if Adam would be interested in passing on information to the Knights and other listeners during the show concerning the Low Power FM window for applications on the horizon for October 2013.
	The show needs a network of LPFM affiliates nationwide to broadcast in syndication.
	This is LGBT LPFM, everybody.
	How you doing?
	Now, this is not going to happen.
	Sir Larry sent me a very long note about this, and he looked into everything.
	It's You know, you need surveys done.
	It'll cost you at a minimum of $5,000.
	A minimum.
	And that's just getting the paperwork and getting legal, and then you can broadcast in like a seven-mile radius, if you're lucky.
	And then you need your site, you need your antenna, you need your broadcast equipment.
	It'll cost you $50,000.
	This is a scam.
	And this whole thing is set up to make you fail.
	It really is.
	It's like, yeah, yeah, no, it's community radio.
	Sure, we don't want the mainstream media to have all the fun.
	No, you can have it too.
	Please.
	Please.
	It's such a farce.
	Well, thank you, Larry, for looking.
	It is.
	It's a total farce.
	Yeah, it makes sense to me that it's a farce.
	It's so lame.
	It really is incredibly lame.
	And that's it.
	When they get nobody, no takers, there'll have to be a congressional hearing on this, and maybe Larry can go up and speak before Congress.
	No, it's not going to happen.
	Well, I'm just saying.
	It's not going to happen.
	It should happen.
	It should, it could, yeah.
	Anyway, those are our executive and associate executive producers for show 531.
	I want to remind people that we need some help from you on Sunday, which will be show 532, and go to Dvorak.org slash NA, ChannelDvorak.com slash NA, NoAgendaShow.com, and NoAgendaNation.com.
	There's a donate button on either of those sites if you can't get to Dvorak.org slash NA. Yes, exactly.
	Hi Biscuits, no crash forever.
	I have a couple of PR mentions here, John.
	Two, to be quite exact.
	First of all, from Karen.
	Hi Adam and John, since I'm off my school bus driver job for the summer.
	You remember Karen, she drives the bus.
	I think we've done her in Adam's email segment before.
	Since I'm off for the summer, I've been taking MMA classes three nights a week.
	MMA, I guess, is that...
	Is that the fighting?
	Yes, yeah, the multiple martial arts or something like that.
	Yeah, something like that.
	I decided to get NoAgendaShow.com printed on the ass of my shorts, so I'll be kicking people in the mouth, both literally and figuratively.
	Or was it punching people in the mouth?
	No worries, I got both covered.
	Would you look at MMA.NAShowNotes.com, John?
	Normally I do Curry.com.
	It's MMA.NAShowNotes.com.
	Karen was kind enough to let me post the picture, which I wanted to share with you and with our audience.
	It says error 404.
	Then you're not doing it right.
	Okay, do it again.
	MMA. Come on, man.
	MMA. What is this?
	My browser is now...
	Thanks, browser.
	MMA.nashownotes.com.
	Yeah?
	Yeah, I get a 404.
	No.
	Oh!
	It's a Dropbox.
	No, you're right.
	You're right.
	You're right.
	I'm sorry.
	Hold on a second.
	Let me fix that.
	Damn.
	Why did that happen?
	That's what you should have said.
	It's a Dropbox 404.
	Hold on.
	Oh, where is it?
	Oh, man.
	I'm sorry.
	That's totally my mistake.
	Well, I'm going to have to set that up later then.
	But I wanted to get your response.
	Well, I'd love to give you a response, but it's just an open box.
	No, I suck!
	Hold on.
	Let me find it.
	All right.
	Well, while I'm looking for that, I don't know what happened there.
	We have our producer Martin Peters.
	You should go to this site while I'm fixing the MMA. He said, you know, Adam, I heard you guys talking about this.
	It really is unclear for most of our producers if you're involved in a riot or not.
	And he said he has registered for us and set up a website, which I think you should take a look at, riotcheck.com.
	Oh, riot checkbox.
	It's got checkboxes.
	Have a look and tell me what you think.
	Personally, I think it's pretty darn spiffy.
	Riot.
	Now in a violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd.
	When is a riot really a riot?
	Use the No Agenda Show checklist.
	Be prepared when the riots come.
	Learn from history.
	And here's your check.
	More than one cop was wounded.
	Check.
	Check.
	Tear gas was used.
	You should change that to 1S, not 2 on the tear gas, please.
	Tear gas was used.
	Check.
	Handwritten signs.
	Check.
	At least one police car was turned over.
	Oh, it has to be.
	Well, I'm going to leave that one off just to see.
	The riot was not scheduled.
	Check.
	Which, by the way, most of these riots seem to be scheduled.
	And we are not celebrating, which would be, you know, just a celebratory thing.
	I'll check.
	Check.
	This clearly, 83%, this clearly was a riot.
	So it's actually, they actually do some math.
	Yeah.
	How good is that, huh?
	Let me try to see if I got no cops were wounded, but tear gas was used.
	Let's try that.
	Handwritten signs.
	Let's say no signs.
	There's no signs.
	But a car was turned over for sure.
	The riot was not scheduled, and they're not celebrating.
	Check.
	Check that.
	67, it was clearly a riot.
	No cops, no tear gas, handwritten signs, no car turned over.
	The riot was not scheduled.
	I think we can expand.
	I think we need more checkboxes, but I think it's a damn good start.
	And you can now go to MMA.NAShowNotes.com.
	This one came up 33%.
	This seems to be an icon changer convention.
	This is great, isn't it?
	You've got good material here.
	You need a bigger checklist.
	Thank you very much.
	Good job.
	A little spell check, but he's Dutch.
	I'm sure that's why it's happening.
	Take a look at MMA.NAShowNotes.com so we can move on.
	Yes, please.
	I'm sorry.
	That was not supposed to happen.
	Just sometimes things happen.
	I didn't mean for that to go that way.
	I'm going to get the job.
	Oh, yeah.
	Uh-huh.
	Right?
	That's a good-looking figure, a nice job on the butt.
	In many aspects.
	It's a nice butt with a good...
	It's a good solid, you know, and the way...
	Can you imagine that being your bus driver?
	Can you imagine that being your bus driver?
	Oh, okay.
	I can't wait to go to school.
	Yay!
	All right, well, you should take that butt and go out there and propagate our formula, which is precisely this.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	Shut up, slave.
	Shut up.
	That's a good bite.
	I like the photography, too.
	It's kind of like that whole, like...
	Yeah, it's very Instagram.
	It's that Instagram, right?
	It's an Instagram thing.
	That would be a good little art for the show.
	Well, that's why I wanted to get it out there, because I thought it would be kind of fun.
	By the way, I want to mention for the next newsletter, people are like, every once in a while, people are like, ah, this newsletter stinks.
	With that exact voice, actually.
	Pretty close.
	Yeah.
	I am going to...
	I have a good collection.
	There's a few of these around the net, but somebody who has a connection...
	Actually, one of our Chinese producers in Manchuria has a connection with a British air pilot who's retired, who apparently got into the scene of the wreck in Asiana and took all kinds of pictures, like inside the...
	No, no.
	Okay, hold on a second.
	Stop.
	This is a meme.
	I've received this from multiple people, and they all say, I got this from my buddy.
	He's a pilot.
	He's not flying anymore.
	I got this from, like, ten different people.
	And there's always a buddy who's not flying?
	Yeah.
	Well, no.
	Do you think the pictures are bogus?
	No, the pictures are being circulated, but this is one of those...
	Oh, you think that the basis for the pictures is bogus?
	All I'm identifying is that this is not coming from this person.
	This is not like some secret, like, oh, I got pictures.
	Now, everyone has these pictures.
	Yeah, but why don't we figure out who's doing the pictures then?
	Well, I wasn't going to bring this up.
	Okay.
	But I did put it in the show notes.
	There is quite a lot of...
	The pictures is a problem because the pictures we're seeing are not always of the same aircraft and also not always of the same spot at SFO because there's pictures of people walking in three feet high grass that is no longer there.
	There's pictures of the side of the plane that has yellow stripes.
	There's no three feet high grass in SFO ever.
	Thank you.
	But there are pictures, mainstream media pictures, of the guy on the cell phone, the lady taking a picture, and they're in the grass, and it's that plain, but then you see the shoots, the slides, and the slides don't have the yellow marking underneath the door.
	There's a lot of things really, really, really off with this.
	Okay, well then I won't put these pictures in the next newsletter.
	No, because you don't know.
	And so I have nothing to offer and people will still keep bailing out.
	Thanks.
	Thanks for all your work.
	I'm sorry.
	These pictures are around, and I got them too.
	I got them from our Chinese producer, but then from someone else.
	In case you haven't seen him, my buddy works at the ambulance.
	Right.
	This is one of those, like, Richard Gere came into the hospital the other night.
	He has to be demoted.
	Yeah, unfortunately.
	But maybe he got it from his buddy, but his buddy then is full of crap.
	Somebody's full of crap.
	This is almost like...
	Remember the...
	I didn't see the picture of the high grass, though.
	Maybe we should take a...
	There's a...
	I don't know if it's in that series, but there's a number...
	I put links to some YouTube videos, and I'm not interested because I can't find the reason why, other than...
	You know, this could be a Boeing versus Airbus thing.
	No, no, this is totally a Boeing versus Airbus.
	But we haven't, there's no, we're not saying there's any mechanical failure yet.
	I think we should include the pictures anyway, because there's a couple of things.
	If it's Boeing versus Airbus, which I like that thesis, it shows you that these seats are uncomfortable.
	I do know that Boeing was basically saved a couple months ago by Korean Airlines placing an 11 aircraft order for 777s.
	Now, this of course was not Korean Airlines, but they have not yet pointed to any real mechanical failure on the craft.
	If that comes up...
	If they say, hold on a second, the mechanical failure, then I'm all in that this was...
	It could even be a hoax.
	I don't know.
	I don't know anyone who was there.
	No, we do know that one guy.
	No, no, no, no, he was not there.
	No, he was on the road blocking people from going in.
	Yes, and he said that there were really weird people in unmarked black cars flashing badges that he had to wave through.
	Yeah, I'm sure that if you have a good-looking badge, you could probably get through.
	Right, but so my point is, he didn't see it either.
	He didn't see it.
	We all saw something on television exclusive to CNN. I don't want to get into this, the second half almost.
	But I was like, okay, I'm all in.
	This is just an unfortunate accident.
	These things happen.
	And now I'm seeing some of the photos.
	I'm like, wow, this is weird.
	And also, the tail number of this thing, which I think is HK7742, it's like one number reversed of the Korean airlines that were shot down.
	Remember we shot the Korean airliner down?
	Right.
	It's like one number reversed from that.
	If you look at this aircraft on flight radar tracking, which is not really like an official FAA system, the last time it flew was July 4th or 6th, but not on the 7th.
	Okay, well, I've been taken in by a hoax.
	Maybe.
	Well, or not.
	Now, I don't get what you said about saving Boeing.
	Boeing is kicking butt.
	Really?
	That's not the numbers I'm seeing.
	Really?
	I did a search, and I found multiple articles that said Boeing was basically in the crapper because they had no new orders until Korean Airlines ordered 11 new 777s in February.
	And they had a real problem.
	And they have that, but what are you talking about?
	The Dreamliner has been crap, everything's on delay, the thing is late.
	How can Boeing be doing great?
	I don't understand.
	The stock's over $100.
	Oh, okay.
	Going up.
	All right, because that's different.
	They're not cash flow negative.
	No, I don't.
	I didn't even want to bring this up at all.
	Okay, well, you did.
	No, you brought it up.
	No, you did.
	You said they saved Boeing.
	You brought up the bogus pictures.
	Who cares?
	Who cares?
	Not important.
	Everything's important.
	Are you kidding me?
	Nothing you say can be...
	I've lost my confidence in the Mongolian producer.
	That's very critical to me.
	No, I'm with you.
	I was also...
	He's always been feeding me good stuff, but now he throws a bunch of crap at me, a hoax.
	I was also disappointed.
	Yeah, well.
	And I'm sure he got it from his former, you know, the message, come on, John, you read it, it was like, my former buddy who doesn't fly anymore, like, okay.
	All right, here we go.
	So let's get into some real meat here.
	Please, I need some meat.
	So we're bringing in your buddy, one of your friends, one of the people that you really admire, Susan Powers.
	Whoa!
	Hold on a second.
	What are you talking about?
	Why are you doing this?
	Aren't you like a big fan of hers?
	No!
	I'm sorry.
	Susan Rice you hate.
	Susan Powers.
	She's married to Cass Sunstein.
	This woman could not be worse.
	None of that, but he sits right behind her during her hearing.
	He's back there.
	She's sitting there answering her question.
	By the way, she looks like an old hippie.
	She looks a little bit like Amy Goodman.
	And she is now being certified for...
	United Nations Ambassador.
	Yes, Ambassador.
	Yes, exactly.
	Now, I have a bunch of clips from her, and I've got to plan because they're hilarious, because I think she holds the record.
	I didn't realize it until I listened to her testimony that she's a Hummer.
	Hey, now.
	We haven't had a good Hummer in a while.
	I'm excited.
	But she's kind of a fast-talking hummer, and her main thing is to use um.
	And she uses um and ah a lot.
	In fact, I've got a couple of clips where I think she broke a record.
	But let me give you the model that whenever anyone asks her a question, she always starts it the same way.
	I could have made ten of these clips that would be identical.
	This is her, when she starts answering a question, she starts with um, and then she says um and um a couple more times, and then she goes on to the question saying uh and um throughout.
	But here, listen to Clastic Power's pattern.
	This is the pattern.
	Thank you, Senator, so much for raising that issue.
	I would say...
	Okay.
	So she's got three ums in a row there.
	Starts with um.
	Says ums.
	I love me a good hummer story, John.
	Thank you for bringing this to the table.
	I'm very appreciative.
	And by the way, women, women, pay attention to yourself, okay?
	You have no idea.
	You may be one of these two, and it's not pretty.
	So I am going to play a, by the way, McCain is, I didn't realize, is an um person.
	He's also a Hummer, believe it or not.
	Wow.
	Yeah, I know.
	Do you play the McCain Powers clip?
	Is that what we're doing here?
	No, no, that one we're going to skip for now.
	What's the other part?
	You tease me.
	Question to powers.
	This is a logical question somebody asks.
	It's a long-winded senatorial question.
	And then you're going to have powers gives the answer.
	But let's start with the question to powers so we know what he's talking about.
	I want to talk about the U.S. Arms Trade Treaty.
	When Secretary Kerry came before this committee in January of this year, I asked him during his confirmation process if he would support any treaty that allows the United Nations to establish and maintain a gun registry on law-abiding U.S. gun owners.
	He stated in writing that we will not support a treaty that impacts domestic arms transfers or creates a U.N. gun registry.
	I have the U.N. Arms Treaty here, and Article 12 is called Record Keeping.
	It encourages countries to maintain records on the importation of conventional arms, including small arms.
	It specifically requests that the states maintain records on the quantity, the value, the model, the type, and the end user.
	These records, it says, must be maintained for a minimum of 10 years.
	Article 13, titled Reporting, that requires signatory states to issue annual reports to the UN on all imports and exports.
	So the question I have is, do you believe that this framework could lead to a UN gun registry?
	Wow, we had to listen to that, huh?
	I wanted to listen to that because that's what we've been talking about on this show for, I don't know, a couple of years.
	I've never actually heard anybody outline it so well in Congress and what a piece of crap it is.
	But do you think she'd be like anti-gun and all that?
	She kind of skirts the issue.
	But in the process, I believe she sets the record.
	And she's running at about, I'm guessing, a 14 to 16 ums per minute.
	Wait a minute.
	Is this another Dvorak thing we can get in Wikipedia?
	I calculated this on this clip, which is one um every four seconds minimum.
	And so we're going to listen to her answer to this question with the bell.
	And this is Powers Gives Answers.
	Yes.
	And you think she's at a 14 ums per minute, which is the Dvorak-Hummer ratio.
	Again, this should be in the Book of Knowledge.
	Thank you, Senator.
	Hello.
	Let me start just by saying again that...
	We, in this administration, and certainly I, if I had the privilege of going to New York, would never do anything that would infringe on U.S. sovereignty or that would interfere in any way with American law.
	Second Amendment rights are paramount.
	American law is paramount.
	The Constitution is paramount.
	That's right.
	It's paramount and MGM and Sony.
	That's all the Constitution is.
	Again, in terms of what the UN's designs are in taking that treaty forward, I'm not myself familiar with those.
	I think what's important is that Secretary Kerry has given you the assurance that nothing the administration put forward with regard to that treaty would ever contemplate a gun registry in this country or our participation in a gun registry.
	So I think that's the key point, is irrespective of the provisions that you have pointed to, How many ums did she have in that?
	Because it was only 55 seconds.
	I think she's over.
	I think she's at 16 UPS. She was at 12 ums in 50 seconds.
	Okay, so in 60 seconds she'd be around 14.7 UPS. So she's up there.
	She goes long.
	She will go five seconds without saying um.
	But then she nails about three ums.
	Yeah.
	She does a pretty good job.
	That's when she has a talking point, but she has to um in between the talking points.
	Um.
	Yeah.
	Anyway.
	Oh, that was it?
	If you want to hear the last one.
	That was it?
	That was it?
	McCain empowers, and I'll play, uh, I'll also pound, uh, uh, pound McCain for doing it.
	All right.
	This will be a double pounder.
	Um.
	Um.
	Uh.
	Uh.
	Sarah Lindsey Graham has, uh, and, uh.
	Help of our senior, our chairman and ranking member is...
	Hold on, doesn't an ah?
	Does an ah count as half an um?
	Sorry, I'm mesmerized by this guy.
	I think an ah is half an um.
	It's an um, um, um.
	We've passed a couple of authorizations concerning Iran.
	He's now authored, with a large number of us, a resolution by the Senate or Congress that would authorize the use of force on Iran if Iranian nuclear progress reached a point that the President has described as unacceptable.
	What do you think about that?
	Well, sir, somebody aspiring to go back into the executive branch may not surprise you that I would want to ensure that the president had the flexibility that he needed to make a judgment that he thought best on behalf of people.
	Well, it gives him, it authorizes him to use force.
	It doesn't.
	What a waste.
	What a waste.
	What a waste of space these people are.
	This guy McCain is...
	Hold on, hold on, hold on.
	That's right.
	That's what he's good at.
	That's what he likes.
	That's what he wants.
	Yes, I didn't pull the battery out of my phone.
	It's bleeping again.
	Damn.
	Oh, hold on a second.
	Oh no, John, hold on.
	Please stop.
	We switch over to the BBC. Breaking, breaking, breaking.
	The former CIA intelligence contractor who's currently held at Sheremetyevo Airport north of Moscow.
	According to Interfax, the Russian agency, Snowden may soon leave the airport.
	It doesn't say to where, whether abroad or within Russia.
	And that's quoting his Russian lawyer who's been assisting his asylum.
	No more details at the moment.
	Right, breaking news from the BBC. Snowden is going to leave!
	Breaking news!
	Can you believe this?
	And do we just sit there and go, wow, that's really important.
	That is breaking news.
	I'm glad I was watching the BBC. It's like, who cares?
	He leaves, he leaves.
	What difference does it make that he's going to leave?
	We know he's going to leave the airport.
	He's not going to die as an old man in the airport.
	We do have good news, John.
	Finally, after our incessant bitching and moaning, Glenn Greenwald is going to write a book on surveillance.
	Oh, okay.
	That means the book's been written for him.
	Well, here's what's interesting.
	Does this guy have time to write his column?
	As I'm reading the blurb, since the articles detailing Mr.
	Snowden's leaks first appeared in early June, several books about national security agency surveillance have been snapped up by publishers.
	The Penguin Press acquired a book on the rise of the surveillance industrial state by Barton Gelman.
	We remember Barton as the reporter who was brought in as a consultant for the Washington Post to release the Snowden information.
	This is such a setup.
	It's so obvious.
	And he already had his book done.
	Well, he needed to boost it.
	Yeah.
	He looked at the market.
	There's a bunch of these books already out.
	Yes, there's a whole bunch.
	And he looked at the market and says, this market stinks.
	I'm going to lose my butt and never get another book deal if I can't push this market.
	We need to jack this thing up a little bit.
	This guy, and I admire a guy like that.
	This is a guy who knows marketing.
	Absolutely.
	Good for him.
	Good for Barton.
	He's on my A-list.
	Barton's on the A-list.
	By the way, talking about vested interests, tell me that there's not a vested interest in what this guy has to say.
	I don't want to play the whole clip.
	Just play the question that Rand Paul asks powers.
	Just play that clip.
	Senator Paul.
	Congratulations on your nomination and thanks for coming today.
	Was the recent military takeover in Egypt a coup?
	Thank you, Senator.
	That's all he does.
	That's all he cares about.
	Whoever comes up on any panel, he asks them that question.
	He just wants the answer so that he can then go and have a big sledgehammer over a billion and a half dollars.
	That's all that it's about.
	I have no respect for him in that manner.
	He's playing the politics as usual.
	Everyone's playing it.
	I keep hearing the way he talks.
	He's got this weird lilt.
	I would love to get it down because it's so funny to listen to his speech pattern.
	It's hard to do.
	Let's go back to Glenn.
	So Glenn, let us review.
	We review that Snowden...
	That he has himself not released anything.
	He gave whatever he gave to Glenn and Barton, to Greenwald and Barton, G and B. And these are the guys that have been releasing it, you know, along with the Guardians.
	It's all mainstream.
	It's the same WikiLeaks formula.
	And that these publications went to the White House and the Director of National Intelligence and the NSA and the CIA and said, is there any problem?
	Is there any problem with us releasing this information?
	And those departments said, no, no, it's okay.
	And right, we have documented this with the editors themselves telling us this.
	To Charlie Rose's great surprise with no follow-up question.
	And then, of course, we have the bogative forced plane landing of the Bolivian president, which was not a forced landing.
	So there's a lot of bullcrap, and Glenn Greenwald is espousing this himself.
	This is all part of his book.
	I don't know what's going on, but I don't know if he realizes he's lying, but it's not correct.
	And we, our little show here, has been able to find this evidence and played it for you over and over again.
	Now we have Glenn claiming something new, which I think is, yeah, this is really, this takes the cake when it comes to descriptive words to help the citizenry understand.
	Documents that prove that what he was saying was true, he had to take ones that included very sensitive, detailed blueprints of how the NSA... Now let us, let's understand blueprints.
	Blueprints is something that I think were last used in...
	Well, they still do it in houses.
	I don't think they're actual blueprints the way they were, John.
	I see printouts sometimes in construction sites.
	Yeah, they do.
	It's all been put on the computers with these various programs that now give you...
	I suppose in some great sense it is a blueprint, but it's very fine.
	Every little thing is...
	It's printed out and it's all available on the machine.
	It's all computer-based.
	Right.
	But when he says blueprint...
	Yeah, it's like you're rolling out this big thing.
	What is he actually saying that Snowden has?
	They does what they do.
	And so he's in possession of literally thousands of documents that contain very specific blueprints that would allow somebody who read them to know exactly how the NSA does what it does.
	Okay, so this to me is such a bullshit statement.
	He has in his possession documents that are blueprints that anyone who knows how to read them will know how the NSA does what it does.
	What the hell is that?
	This is nothing more than just whooping it up.
	You strip off the insulation.
	Step four.
	You take another wire and you weld it on with a soldering gun.
	I mean, what is this blueprint?
	This is bullshit.
	I'm sorry, I should say crap.
	You go to AT&T with a box that we don't know anything what's in it.
	It's a blueprint.
	But you put it on the trunk line and I don't know.
	I have no idea.
	It's bull crap.
	It's totally ridiculous.
	It's really, really ridiculous that he is saying this stuff.
	And meanwhile...
	It makes it sound as though the NSA is out there with a...
	You know, they're all a bunch of technicians with pliers in their pockets.
	Yeah.
	And they got like maybe a green visor.
	Yeah, exactly.
	With the magnifying glasses underneath.
	The magnifying glasses, yeah.
	It's like, okay, I need to...
	John, do you have the blueprint?
	I don't know how to put this wiretap in place.
	Hold on a second.
	Blueprints.
	So you're trying to dumb this down for us, Greenwald?
	You're trying to dumb it down for me, or you want to tell me what he actually has?
	Or better yet, why don't you just show us, big boy?
	Which he stopped doing.
	Now he's just throwing stuff out there.
	And of course, this is working in everybody's favor, except for the American citizens, who are supposed to be very afraid now.
	And, you know, we want to have, you know, of course, we want all this security, and this is all very important.
	You know, we have to, we want to be safe, and it's a trade-off, and it's all good.
	But meanwhile, Silicon Valley has been just hoodwinked into this.
	Microsoft is appealing to Attorney General Eric Holder to allow the tech giant to share more information with the public about how it handles NSA requests for customer information.
	In a blog post, Microsoft says it tried to open public discussion on information sharing only to be ignored or denied by government lawyers.
	Yeah, of course we're going to do that.
	We want control over you, Microsoft.
	We want to make you look bad with our agent Dvorak there who's, you know, writing up horrible things about you in PC Magazine.
	We want to make you look bad so we control you, so you do what we tell you to do.
	Am I the only one who sees this?
	Is this not transparent to everybody, John?
	I would say it's not transparent to anybody.
	Maybe to a few people who listen to the show.
	Everybody but our friend in Mongolia.
	And now we have our new girl on the block, Jen Psaki.
	Oh, God.
	I'm glad you're dogging this woman.
	Yeah, no, I have to because there's something about her that I love and hate at the same time.
	She's like Big Nurse in the One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
	She's got this snide, powerful, like she could just crush you.
	Yes.
	And like you're a little kid because she talks to everyone like they're six.
	Yes.
	It didn't work out so well the other day.
	You look down and be a nice boy, aren't you?
	I think she's a dominatrix.
	This is, I think, what I'm feeling.
	I'm seeing her in, yeah, like a dominatrix outfit with boots and a whip.
	And I have an orange ball in my mouth.
	I'm not quite sure what's happening.
	Yeah, that would be right.
	And you're not in my fantasy.
	Yeah, that would be true.
	I might be filming it.
	Well, Matt is in my dream.
	Well, I can tell you, I hadn't seen or I don't have independent confirmation, I guess I should say, about any request he's made.
	I can tell you that we have been in touch, of course, with Russian officials, our embassy in Moscow.
	Now listen to this, because she really puts her foot into it and everyone pile jumps on her.
	Has been in direct contact on the ground.
	We are disappointed.
	We know she's an ummer.
	I just want to hear what she's saying.
	Okay, I'll stop ringing the bell.
	I just want to see if she can break Powers' record.
	No, she can break Powers' record.
	You listen how bad it gets with her.
	that Russian officials and agencies facilitated this meeting today by allowing these activists and representatives into the Moscow airport's transit zone to meet with Mr.
	Snowden despite the government's declarations of Russians neutrality with respect to Mr.
	Snowden.
	So, I'm sorry, you're disappointed that they let someone into their own airport?
	I don't get it.
	Well, that they facilitated this event, of course.
	I love Matt.
	Like, I don't get it.
	Why?
	Disappointed that they let someone into their...
	Because he knows he's good.
	He is good.
	Oh, yeah, and he's definitely...
	It's like a fencing match between these two.
	Yeah, so she said, well, they facilitated it.
	Why?
	Because this gave a forum...
	You don't think that he should have a form?
	He's forfeited his right to freedom of speech as well?
	Well, Mr.
	Snowden, as we've talked about, let me just state this because I think it's important.
	He's not a whistleblower.
	He's not a human rights activist.
	He's wanted on a series of serious criminal charges brought in the Eastern District of Virginia and the United States.
	Okay, I'm sorry, but I didn't realize people who were wanted on charges forfeited their right to speak, to free speech.
	I also didn't realize that people who were not whistleblowers or not human rights activists, as you say he is not, that they forfeited their rights to speak.
	So I don't understand why you're disappointed with the Russians, but neither that.
	Leave that aside for a second.
	Okay, so now let's shuttle on down the road a little bit.
	No one's letting her off the hook on this.
	Our focus, Matt, is on how our concern about how Russian authorities...
	Clearly helped assist the ability of attendees to participate in this.
	That is of concern to us.
	Our focus is on returning Mr.
	Snowden to the United States.
	Beyond that, I just don't have anything more.
	You are saying that this essentially wasn't a press conference, but it might as well have been.
	And you don't think the Russians should have...
	Facilitated a propaganda platform.
	Oh!
	Wait a minute.
	What's this?
	Oh, it's Jen digging deeper.
	Yes!
	The hole is there!
	Propaganda platform.
	Okay, so this is, to your mind, something like them bringing out a defected spy from the Cold War and putting him on a platform and having him rail against the United States.
	Is that...
	I'm not going to draw comparisons along those lines, but let me say that Mr.
	Snowden should return to the United States to face these charges.
	One more?
	One more?
	Where everyone's jumping in on enough?
	Hey, I can't get enough of this woman.
	People meeting with human rights activists?
	I don't get it.
	Matt, this is not a universal position of the United States.
	This is an individual who has been accused of three felony charges.
	This is not a unique...
	He's been accused.
	Do you remember the old line that we're supposed to all know?
	No, no, I don't know anything about that.
	And he can return to the United States and face the charges.
	But he can also, surely, people who are accused of crimes are allowed to write a free speech, are they not?
	Matt, I think we've gone around on this.
	It's such a legitimate question.
	I mean, you talk about even in Russia.
	Here's Molly Wood.
	Journalists have been persecuted, and political activists have been persecuted.
	Exactly.
	How about Pussy Riot?
	Remember, everyone was like, oh, Pussy Riot!
	Free Pussy Riot!
	Free Pussy Riot!
	You call for free speech around the world, but you're not saying that Mr.
	Snowden has the...
	Good point.
	That's not at all what I was saying.
	We believe, of course, broadly in free speech.
	Broadly.
	Broadly?
	What does that mean?
	Broadly.
	No, broadly, unless it's a propaganda campaign by a non-whistleblower, non-human rights activist.
	You, slave!
	Our concern here was that there was obvious facilitation by the Russians in this case.
	We've conveyed that.
	We've conveyed our concerns.
	So you're not upset about the press conference.
	You're upset that the Russians facilitated it.
	We certainly are upset that there was a platform for an individual who's been accused of felony crimes.
	But what does that matter, really?
	I mean, you know...
	People that are in jail or on trial in the United States, they give press conferences or they speak out all the time.
	I mean, it sounds to me like, well, you're not really upset with the act that he spoke.
	You're upset with the fact that the Russians did something on his behalf.
	I think I've expressed what we're upset about.
	And you keep saying what we're upset about.
	But I think I've made clear what we're upset about.
	I wanted to cry one day.
	If it was clear, it wouldn't be grilling her.
	I just wanted to go, I don't want to...
	It runs off.
	Here's what's happening, though.
	This is some crazy stuff that's going on as a part of this.
	People are sending me...
	And we have a lot of sysadmins, a lot of IT people who work in this field for a living.
	This is being used, this Snowden thing, to an extreme.
	I have here...
	Let me see.
	This is...
	It's like, don't let your network be Snowdened.
	The people using this now as like a marketing tool.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Oh, and check this out.
	Today is Quantum Dawn 2, which takes place.
	Quantum Dong?
	Almost.
	Quantum Dawn.
	Quantum Dawn.
	Cybersecurity exercise to test incidents, response, resolution, and coordination processes for the financial services sector and the individual member firms to a street-wide cyber attack.
	This is going on today.
	Huh.
	So you never know what will happen, because, you know, of course, these exercises often turn into something fun.
	I just thought the whole idea of the name Quantum Dawn 2 was kind of nefarious.
	And then we have Phyllis Schneck.
	Phyllis Schneck currently works for, she's the Vice President and Chief Technology Officer at McAfee.
	And she is the likely next choice to be the next Deputy Undersecretary for Cybersecurity at the Department of Homeland Security.
	Hello!
	Uninstall that shit now!
	I keep saying this.
	You have to uninstall it anyway because it's a mess.
	You've got to uninstall it.
	Even McAfee himself said so.
	It's spyware at this point.
	It's so obvious.
	And now you go right from the company that's supposed to protect you right into the DHS? Are you kidding me?
	I've just got a couple of lists here.
	Right now today, actually it started yesterday, is the Aspen Security Conference.
	The Aspen Security Forum is taking place in, I don't know, Aspen.
	And everybody's there.
	Kaiser Alexander, Lucy Napolitano, everybody's there.
	And including the insurance sector, because this is a huge insurance boom.
	Now you can insure yourself against a cyber attack, which is just beautiful.
	But I'd like you to check out the moderators of the 2013 Aspen Security Forum.
	Let me see if I can find it.
	Where are these lowlifes?
	The website URL is aspeninstitute.org.
	Good old Aspen Institute.
	Yes.
	And over the next three, I think all the way through the weekend, they have this big conference.
	It's streaming live and I was watching it before the show.
	It's quite fascinating.
	Yeah, there's no good clips at these things.
	No, never.
	These are just blowhards.
	I think all this stuff is done in the back room.
	Sure.
	But look at who the...
	Wolf Blitzer!
	Now, look at all of them.
	Give me all the names.
	Every single person who was facilitating...
	You want the moderators, the 2013 moderators?
	Yes.
	Every single one of them?
	It works for news.
	Yeah, this Aspen Institute is sketchy.
	Christopher Isham, which is the Vice President of the Washington Bureau Chief of CBS News.
	Wolf Blitzer, the host of The Situation Room.
	Susan Glasser, editor of Politico.
	Catherine Herridge.
	That's the pixie girl.
	The chief intelligence correspondent for Fox News, she's obviously been in the, or still is, working for one of the agencies.
	Kimberly Dozler, author of Breathing Fire, Fighting to Survive and Get Back to the Fight.
	And then, oh look, counter-terrorism correspondent for NPR? These are the moderators, people.
	These people get paid to do this.
	And I'll bet you this is a cushy gig.
	Mike Ishakoff, national correspondent, NBC News.
	Leslie Stahl.
	60 Minutes.
	60 Minutes.
	Brian Rose, the chief correspondent guy that's always...
	ABC. Yeah, with Diane.
	David Sanger, the New York Times guy.
	Another political guy.
	These guys are supposed to be...
	It goes on and on.
	It's just a huge list.
	But look at it.
	They could have had two guys do all this stuff, but no, they got all these guys.
	John King, there's the New Yorker, there's Daily Beast, Time Magazine, The Economist, Wall Street Journal.
	They're getting paid.
	And I'm sure each of them is getting at least 20 grand.
	Some...
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, definitely.
	I don't think so.
	Oh, yeah.
	I think a few of them might be, but I think five would be what you'd...
	No way!
	Okay, $1.
	This is compromise.
	These people are supposed to be reporting on the very people they're facilitating.
	And I watched John King.
	He's just sucking up to everybody.
	Oh, when I was in Desert Storm, I didn't have a lot of experience with the Air Force.
	Yeah, no, this is a total conflict of interest.
	Complete!
	It's just a bunch of douche knuckles.
	And if they're getting paid more than a dollar, you're right.
	They're getting bought off, and this is essentially the way you do it with the media nowadays, because these guys aren't part of the big money, so they have to do this sort of thing to get by.
	The senator said, oh no, I wouldn't want to hear that.
	We're checking in live now at the Aspen Security Conference.
	It's secret, and you're doing it in the interest of national security.
	Don't run the risk of sharing it too widely with people.
	Some stupid panel.
	It's annoying.
	It's really annoying that this is taking place.
	It's fun to watch.
	I'll watch it.
	I mean, after the show, I'll watch it.
	I'll watch.
	Well, I can't.
	We're leaving tomorrow.
	Yeah, you can't be watching this.
	Okay.
	I'm not going to watch it because I think it's boring.
	There may be some gems in there, but it's probably not worth the trouble.
	I had enough trouble.
	I spent all my time on C-SPAN listening to the Intelligence Committee, lecturing them back and forth on FISA court.
	I have a couple of clips that are quick.
	And this is a good committee.
	They've got some good people on it.
	Unfortunately, the smartest of the group are slow talkers.
	Don't you hate that?
	Who's that?
	Well, the worst is Conyers.
	Now, just as a thing, I did a Conyers.
	Just play as much of this clip as you want.
	I tried to sweeten Conyers to shorten his five minutes down to two minutes.
	Now, just play a little bit of Conyers once so you can understand how he talks.
	Okay.
	...in which if the government cannot provide a clear public explanation for how its program is consistent with the statute...
	Okay, that's just good enough.
	Yeah, no, I hear you.
	Okay, now I tried speeding up as much as I could with Conyers 2.
	Hold on.
	I wasn't there yet.
	...in which if the government cannot...
	I like this.
	This is good.
	We should do all our clips like that.
	No, I said it doesn't really sound like Conyers, so I'm going to change his pitch and try to make him sound like Conyers at a sped-up rate.
	This will be number three.
	...in which if the government cannot...
	Provide a clear, public explanation for how its program is consistent with the statute.
	Pretty good.
	Now, that's sped up 100%, by the way.
	And this is audacity, right?
	You're running it through audacity, and you're speeding them up, but you're shortening the time span, essentially.
	Good job.
	So I can shorten it as much as I could by using the tempo.
	With tempo, it keeps the voice pretty much the same and then speeds it up both at the same time.
	And I did that on top of the 100% speed up, trying to get it down to a two-minute clip from a five-minute clip.
	And it's still terrible.
	terrible and this will be the last version of it in which if the government cannot provide a clear public explanation for how its program is consistent with the statute then it must stop collecting this information immediately and so this metadata problem to me has gotten quite far out of hand even given the seriousness of the problems that surrounded and created its need.
	This should be a service.
	It should be.
	This should be a service that we sell to Congress.
	It's a little hard to listen to.
	It's a shame because his points were great, but it's just like he can't get them out.
	So I listen to some other guys, and there's a couple of interesting things.
	And my favorite guy, of course, is this natal guy.
	Who just, and this is a little, this is a two minute clip, but it's fun to watch him when they, the assistant FBI director, this guy Cole, who's a huge apologist for recording everything.
	The FBI would just love it if we were just all had cameras in everybody's houses and they wouldn't have to do so much work.
	So, NATO is that New York guy who said, what is so valuable about what Snowden released?
	It looks like a bunch of bull crap.
	So, here he is grilling coal on the way the Patriot Act has been abused.
	The relevant standard is that everything in the world is relevant, and that if we removed that...
	A word from the statute you wouldn't consider or the FISA Court wouldn't consider that it would affect your ability to collect metadata in any way whatsoever, which is to say you're disregarding the statute entirely.
	Now in public briefings, including to this committee when we were considering the authorization of Section 215, administration officials have suggested that we view the authority of Section 215 as similar to a grand jury subpoena.
	And we specified in the statute That an order under Section 215, quote, may only require the production of a tangible thing if such thing can be obtained, unquote, through a grand jury subpoena.
	Now, can you give me, Mr.
	Cole, any examples where grand jury subpoenas were used to allow the bulk and ongoing collection of telephone metadata?
	It's difficult to go into specific examples of what grand jury subpoenas call for because they are subject to the rules of secrecy under Rule 6.
	Oh, come on.
	Are there any instances in the history of the United States that you know of where a grand jury subpoena said get all information other than...
	The content of a telephone call, of all telephone calls in the United States, or anything like that?
	The admonition in the statute is that it is the types of records that are collected by grand jury subpoena, not that it is an identical process to the grand jury process, because this is quite different from a grand jury process.
	All right, the type of data...
	Excuse me, the type of data...
	Is metadata unlimited to specific individuals?
	The type of data is metadata and that...
	Unlimited.
	What is he trying to get at?
	I mean, what...
	He's saying that it's in the 215 that they have to, that the procedure, because they added this clause in 2008, I believe, of relevancy.
	So you can't just go get everything you want.
	You have to do relevancy.
	And in the relevancy proposal, it says it has to be similar to how a grand jury would determine...
	The word relevant.
	I think the term is relevant and not relevancy.
	Well, it's the same root.
	I can use it either way.
	Yes, I know.
	But in Section 215 itself, the term is relevant.
	And it is that interpretation...
	Right.
	They've interpreted it as everything is relevant.
	Well, of course everything's relevant.
	Everything is connected.
	But it also says in 215 that it has to be based on the way a grand jury would do it.
	And they're saying, and so he's trying to get to the point, which is, has this ever been done where a grand jury would have said, yeah, take everything in the world and put it in a database?
	And he just wants him to say, admit that this has never been done.
	This is a completely new idea.
	And so anyway, so he goes on with that.
	Sensenbrenner, who is the guy who wrote The Patriot Act, or one of the writers, he says they're going to pull 215 out of it if they keep abusing it like this, which I thought was interesting.
	Oh, please.
	That's never going to happen.
	That's not going to happen.
	But...
	But we do have one guy, this guy Scott, who's another slow talker.
	But I thought this was the absolute best of all the clips that I have.
	Senator Scott.
	And apparently there's some evidentiary clauses, I guess in some U.S. code, that allows in court cases.
	You know when there's a court case, a guy is knocking on your door, a cop is knocking on your door, and he's going to ask you if you can move your car.
	You mean like that?
	Exactly like that.
	And so then he sees a dead body.
	Right.
	Hey!
	Hey!
	I see a dead body over there.
	He can bust in without probable cause because you see something.
	Well, that is probable cause right there.
	Yes.
	There's a way of...
	No, this is...
	There's some...
	It's not...
	Yes.
	Initially, when they got to your house, they didn't go there with probable cause.
	No, that's why he's not in the house.
	Now you have probable cause because you discovered the crime in the process of going to the door.
	Yes, correct.
	So if you hadn't gone to the door, you wouldn't have found this.
	Nothing would have happened.
	Which is why I don't open the door.
	So if you go from door to door to door and you start harassing everybody, busting into the place.
	So let's say I got the body upstairs.
	They bust into the place and run upstairs.
	There's a body.
	And they say, well, I saw the body in the process of busting in.
	And the point is that there's all kinds of ways that you can get arrested.
	Yeah, like having a dead body in your house is a good way to get arrested.
	Well, obviously, but you can't just do a dragnet.
	That's the thing we don't allow in this country.
	You can't just dragnet.
	You can't record everybody's phone calls and start listening in to find crime.
	John, what are you talking about?
	This is being done.
	It's over.
	This is all just waste of energy.
	I don't know what they're doing up there.
	I'm telling you, it's still illegal to take and listen to any phone call you feel like looking for a crime because everybody might have a crime going on and who knows what the crime might be.
	I've got tons of crime going on right now.
	So only Scott has brought this up with these guys saying that this collection is bull crap because there's exclusionary stuff.
	They're going to end up using this collection, which of course we know on this show and we've talked about before this thing even opened up.
	That the idea of making this collection is not for terrorism.
	It's for either blackmail or, you know, just grabbing a few bad guys out of the way.
	Yeah, or front-running getting financial information so you can trade.
	Okay.
	Front-run is actually trading before a trade.
	Anyway, but play Senator Scott trying to get this out.
	It's just kind of pathetic, but he at least makes the point.
	Thank you.
	Mr.
	Cole, did I understand you to say that you do not have an expectation of privacy on your phone records?
	The Supreme Court ruled in Smith v.
	Maryland that you do not have a sufficient expectation of privacy in the phone records, as we've talked about it.
	Okay, that's fine.
	Mr.
	Douglas, you indicated that you just get the numbers, not the names.
	If the numbers are relevant under whatever standard you're using, why are not the names equally relevant?
	Good question.
	Well, the names are not collected in the metadata.
	Well, where's the limitation?
	If you can get the numbers, why can't you get the names?
	Well, we can through other legal process, and that's what the FBI will do.
	And so if we receive a phone number...
	Well, no, I mean, why don't you get it all at once?
	Where's the statutory limitation?
	Because it's more hours.
	That's an obvious answer.
	It's not done by a computer.
	There's no more hours involved.
	They could do it.
	No, they could, but it takes a whole other process.
	There's more work.
	There's more work for the computers.
	No, but a guy still has to walk to the other computer.
	I don't think so.
	I think it can all be done at once.
	I think he's right.
	You can do it all at once.
	John, you're missing my point.
	You're missing my point.
	My point is the FBI, wherever he's answering them, they just want more work.
	Oh, I see what you're saying.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, they want to get paid by the hours.
	Yes!
	Overtime.
	Oh, now we have to go get all the names.
	Oh, boy.
	Okay, well, if you insist.
	That's actually a good rationale.
	Thank you, thank you.
	The question here, I think that this indicates the fact that, as the Deputy Attorney General said, that this program is carefully set up in such a manner as to minimize the invasion of privacy.
	One of the reasons...
	One of the reasons this program is found reasonable is the fact that the collection is very limited, the access is very limited.
	That's because you have made up the program.
	I asked you a specific question.
	If this is available, where is the statutory limitation to what you can get?
	There is no statutory limitation.
	You're kind of making it up as you go along.
	Yeah.
	We're not making it up.
	We're seeking the approval of the court, and this collection has been repeatedly approved by numerous judges of the FISA court, found to be in compliance with the statute.
	Okay, once you get the information, we know through the recent case on DNA, once you get DNA from somebody, you can use it in ways that you could not have obtained the information, but once you've got it, you can run it through, no probable cause or anything, through the database.
	My question is, once you get this metadata, where's the limitation on what you can use it for?
	It's in the court's order.
	Where is the statutory limitation?
	Now, explain this, John, because some people, if this were on CNN, people would fall asleep.
	Yeah.
	But this is no agenda, which is very important that we have this.
	So when they're talking about the statutory limitation, what exactly does he mean in this regard?
	Because he keeps hammering on that.
	Well, apparently there isn't one.
	That's the point.
	He's trying to get one of these guys to admit.
	Which means you can keep this information forever and it can be used against you in perpetuum for the rest of your life.
	Is that what I'm understanding?
	That's what I think, yeah.
	Even though they say they're only going to keep it for five years, I still believe that the five-year limitation is based on the...
	They're just like billions of calls a day.
	I think it's based on the perceived maximum capacity of the storage and how much...
	I mean, at some point, it's bigger than Google if you're going to start saving all this crap.
	And so, which is another reason I think they don't want to keep the names.
	I think it just adds to the database.
	So he wants to know, you know, where can you stop?
	And the other guy keeps saying, well, it's in the court order, but the court order is a secret.
	And in fact, you want to go back to something interesting.
	There's this, at the beginning of the whole thing, let's see, classic powers.
	Here's the thing that's kind of weird.
	This is the...
	The guy who is the chairman kind of putting guidelines around this about this hearing called classified setting bullcrap concept.
	And then if you can go back to this Scott thing later.
	Again, assure ourselves of the answers that we need.
	Before we begin with questions for our witnesses, I must stress that the...
	Oh, first of all, without objection, all their members' opening statements will be made a part of the record.
	Before we begin with questions for our witnesses, I must stress that the programs this hearing is addressing remain classified.
	I expect the witnesses appearing before us today, particularly on our first panel, to answer questions from members with as much candor as possible given the unclassified setting.
	But I also wish to caution members of the committee that they should be cognizant of this unique dynamic when phrasing their questions.
	The simple fact that certain programs have been leaked does not mean that they have been declassified, and members and witnesses alike would be violating the law were they to disclose classified information during this hearing.
	I would also like to note that the committee intends to hold a subsequent classified briefing for members so that we have an opportunity To more closely examine those programs and pose questions to our witnesses that are not appropriate in this open setting.
	You see, that's when I tune out.
	I'm like, oh, well, all the good stuff is going to be secret.
	Just like the court is secret.
	Everything is secret.
	Everything is secret.
	What bothers me is that, well, yeah, that's fine.
	I mean, that's always been bothersome.
	And that's nothing we're going to be able to do about that except CARP. But what gets me was the thing you said just before that, which was just because everybody in the world knows about the slideshow and everybody in the world knows about prison.
	It's still not declassified.
	Yeah.
	It's still classified so you can't talk about it?
	Yes.
	How does that make any sense at all?
	We have rules.
	They must be followed.
	You must listen to how the rules are put in place.
	I'm asking you.
	Does that make any sense at all?
	I'm answering you.
	But with the Nazi?
	Yes, they're Nazis.
	It's crazy.
	No, it has not been officially declassified, which will not happen until 2027.
	And by the way, this has been sent out to the military, as far as I know, that if you have a classified or top-secret clearance, you can't talk about this.
	You can't talk about the article written in the Washington Post.
	No, and we know that, and this was tweeted a million times...
	That defense contractors have received emails saying, you can't look at that.
	It may be tempting.
	You may want to go look at Glenn Greenwald's column, but you can't do that.
	And they're blocking access to the Guardian.
	The whole thing is ridiculously stupid.
	And we get it.
	We're on our backs.
	Go ahead.
	It's okay.
	We want safety.
	Save me.
	I want to be safe.
	I don't want to get blown up.
	Don't hurt me.
	Please do whatever you want.
	The conversation is over as far as I'm concerned.
	Now all we can do is just laugh at it.
	Which we attempt occasionally.
	I've stopped carrying a phone.
	I'm done.
	I don't carry a phone around.
	I'm just done.
	Okay.
	I'm done.
	I'm so done.
	Let's finish up with Scott as he tries to make a point in a very awkward manner.
	But I think everyone heard what he was saying and it got nowhere, of course.
	But let's finish him.
	The statutory limitation says that we can acquire the information as ordered by the court.
	The court sets limits on what we can do with it and we adhere to those limits.
	Well, is there a limit in criminal investigations or an exception for criminal investigations without probable cause?
	With respect to information obtained under Section...
	Once you've got the metadata...
	Can you run a criminal investigation without probable cause?
	The metadata can only be used in pursuit of a terrorism investigation, and the only thing that is done with that is that telephone numbers are generated out of it for further investigation.
	It cannot be used for a criminal investigation unrelated to terrorism.
	Wait a minute.
	You're talking about minimization?
	The court's order provides that we can only use this data for purposes of a terrorism investigation.
	Why is the court required to place that limitation on it?
	Because the Court looks at the application that we are submitting and determines that with all of the restrictions that are imposed here, this is a reasonable method of collecting this information and that it complies with both the statute and the Fourth Amendment.
	Is there an exception under minimization for criminal investigations?
	Section G, Minimization Procedures 2C... The procedures applicable to this kind
	of collection allow it only to be used on the terms specified by the court.
	This is really getting on my nerves.
	So here's...
	There's another two minutes of this.
	Well, this is the problem with these guys.
	They're not very succinct.
	But let's wrap it by saying, here's what the trend, the true trend is on this, whether you like it or not.
	And of course, we already know this is going to happen.
	They collect this stuff and they have this bullshit argument that, oh, this is only for this, we're never going to look at it and all the rest.
	And then there's going to be some evidence that there'll be a crime committed with somebody that can make the link We're good to go.
	And then it's going to result in a murder, or it's going to be a bunch of people killed, and then they're going to come and say, why couldn't we use that information to stop this homicide when we had the information before us?
	We could have used it for the homicide investigation, but they couldn't because there's a limitation, the statutory limitation, it could only be used for terrorism.
	We really need to have this information released for general law enforcement purposes because it will save lives.
	The school shooting could have been prevented if we had all this data that they've collected for us.
	They've done a good job of that, of Americans talking to Americans.
	So we need this stuff to be released, and it's going to save lives.
	We're going to get sued because this information is available and we didn't use it to stop and prevent this horrible tragedy.
	This is all over.
	My summary?
	The Unabomber was right.
	You say that every show.
	Because it's true!
	This is exactly what he wrote.
	Well, let me ask you the question then.
	If you have all this data, you've got all these phone calls, and you can prevent a murder of a small, innocent child who is going to be killed, and you'd know this because of the phone calls that were available to you to listen in on, wouldn't it be right?
	Totally.
	The right thing to do?
	Totally.
	I think everyone should walk outside naked all the time.
	So this is just a small piece of the larger puzzle.
	And right now, as I oversee the landscape that is media, I see that we are now in a period of messaging.
	And the messaging is coming through in a number of ways, and they're all kind of subtle.
	But we're already past the...
	You're right.
	So I will say, unequivocally, there will be a point someone's going to get killed and be like, oh, if only we had the permission to do this.
	And this is kind of what happened with Boston, although it was a mucked-up operation.
	And to accentuate this, this is brilliant.
	I could not have thought of this, actually.
	The Rolling Stone magazine, I'm sure you've seen, has Joe Haar kind of in a Jim Morrison doors, kind of beautiful rock star-y pose.
	In fact, I think if you could put the two together, you'd see it's almost the same vibe.
	And this is to program your brain.
	It freaks people out.
	Of course, it's also to sell magazines.
	There's no doubt about that.
	But it does not compute in your brain.
	Your brain goes haywire when you see a beautiful young kid and you know that he is, of course, science is in.
	We have all the videos we've seen and shown everything.
	We know he did it.
	We don't have all the videos.
	And he confessed, even though he says no.
	But he still wrote it down and confessed on the inside of the boat.
	So the story is unimportant.
	It is the programming in your brain that makes your brain go, how can this be?
	So now you're like, well, any kid could be a bomber.
	It could be the kid next door.
	It could be any rock star.
	But it could be the kid next door.
	That kid looks suspicious to me.
	This is the programming that is going on.
	Now let's take journalists.
	Journalists, you're being programmed too.
	You're being programmed...
	And I've looked into this woman now, this Kimberly Dvorak.
	She's full of crap.
	This is like...
	I don't know where they picked this woman up.
	She has no history.
	She's like a conspiracy theorist website owner.
	I don't know who she is.
	The one who's...
	Right.
	She has no credibility.
	Listen to this piece.
	This is about Hastings.
	And...
	She's on some California, I guess San Diego station or whatever.
	And this is not reporting, okay?
	I really want it all to be true, but this is not reporting.
	This is messaging.
	And I don't know where this woman came from, but she's a shill.
	Yes, there is.
	What have you learned?
	And I know you talked to some family members, did you not?
	I spoke with some very close friends of the family.
	Very close friends of the family.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	I think the most concerning thing that I heard, and again, I just want to say I have not confirmed this with Michael Hastings' wife, but...
	Haven't confirmed it with Michael Hastings' wife?
	Like you're in touch with her?
	No.
	A close family friend did confirm that Michael's body was sent home in an urn.
	Okay.
	When you are cremated, They don't send you home in an urn.
	This is television bullcrap.
	They send you home in a box, in a bag in a box.
	They don't buy an urn.
	You can buy an urn.
	No, no.
	You can buy an urn, but the coroner does not go out and buy an urn and send you back in an urn.
	I'm sorry.
	It's a lie.
	This is not true.
	It's not true.
	Even if you want someone to be cremated, Well, maybe it wasn't in an urn, per se.
	She's just generalizing.
	This is bull crap.
	This is a message.
	She is out there to send a message.
	The message is, they can get your car, they can control your car.
	Meaning he was cremated.
	And it wasn't the request of the family that went forward and asked for something like that.
	In fact, the family wanted Michael's body to go home.
	But she doesn't know that because she didn't talk to the family.
	And for a coroner to go out and do an autopsy and then send a body home in this...
	In an urn.
	In an urn.
	Come on, John.
	This is bull crap.
	This is bull crap.
	I didn't hear this report.
	It's shocking for a couple of reasons.
	If there was any evidence in his, you know, body...
	At the time of death.
	Alcohol, drugs.
	Anything.
	That's gone.
	That evidence is now all gone.
	I'm going to continue with this woman because I don't like it.
	I don't like what I'm hearing.
	This is your new beat.
	Yeah, no, I don't like that.
	Here she is on RT. Now, she's on RT and she's with, what's her name?
	Break the set girl, Abby.
	Abby.
	Now you're getting to the point where I now may be buying into your thesis.
	Listen to this.
	So this is Abby, who is, I'm sorry, cute, dumb.
	Abby is on the show and she's talking, break it down for me a little bit.
	I'm a moronic talker.
	And she's on Skype in her lair, in her secret office where she's investigating all of this.
	This is stupid.
	I wanted to pull up an article from the Huffington Post where former National Coordinator for Counterterrorism Richard Clark said that Hastings' car crash was consistent with a cyber, car cyber attack.
	Okay, so listen to what's going on here.
	Hastings comes out and says, oh, yeah, that was consistent with a car cyber attack.
	Yeah, that could be a good time.
	Why is he saying this all of a sudden?
	And why is this woman corroborating what he says?
	There's reason to believe that intelligence agencies from major powers, including the U.S., know how to remotely seize control of a car.
	Kimberly, can you speak to why this crash looks like it could have been the result of a car hack?
	I mean, could you bleed the witness anymore?
	That is...
	Some of that, I mean, and I actually took it one step further.
	I spoke to, we have a lot of drone manufacturers here in San Diego.
	I spoke to Drone Manu...
	Hello, Drone Manufacturer!
	I'd like to have...
	Okay, just play it, play it.
	You're making it worse.
	And I went out and spoke to a couple of these folks, and they said that it's...
	Folks!
	You don't even have to hack into the computer system of a vehicle.
	You can just trigger a sensor, and it's going to make the car either slam the brakes on, accelerate...
	Because this is what Drone Manufacturers know about.
	You know, headlights go out, windshield wipers.
	There's a number of things by just triggering a sensor on the vehicle.
	And that way, there was no recourse to that.
	You couldn't go back and find who hacked into the system because all they did was touch the sensor.
	This woman is off the list.
	If I was her and I wanted to take this to the limit, I think I could do a much better job.
	For one thing, I would have done the following.
	I would have said that, which is, I believe, to be malarkey, but especially if it's remote control.
	There's no receiver on these things.
	No, no, no, no.
	We've talked about this.
	Yeah, there's some.
	You could do something.
	But I would right away go right into the Toyota thing and say that these auto-controlled cars were controlled remotely, right?
	There's now evidence, because I've talked to people, there's now evidence.
	Drone manufacturers.
	Go ahead, do it.
	There are cars next to those cars in close enough proximity that they can take over the controls of the throttle accelerator and floor it and turn the brakes off and follow them.
	There's always been a chase car.
	Follow them until they crash.
	You're ruining my point.
	My point is, this is messaging time.
	And we have messages for everybody.
	And this is for the journalists.
	We've got little messages.
	And this woman, this Kimberly Dvorak, I think she probably took the name just to sound more credible.
	I'm not kidding.
	Actually, there's a lot of journalists.
	There's a number of famous Dvorak writers.
	Yes, I know there is.
	And keyboard makers.
	I mean, this is quite an industry your family's got going on, you slobber brother.
	Where's the money?
	All right, so now...
	We already have where people don't...
	They're completely apathetic.
	They don't care about your phone calls being listened to.
	It's become a joke.
	Like, ha, ha, ha.
	Well, you know, the NSA is listening anyway.
	The government's...
	Ha, ha, ha, ha.
	So everyone's like, eh, whatever.
	I got nothing to hide.
	Because they're stupid.
	Because they don't know what's going to happen.
	Okay, go on with the thesis.
	Now here's the next piece.
	And this is how the private sector gets brought into it in the most disgusting way.
	This is Rochester Airport, Rochester, New York.
	Iacusa's car was inspected by the valet attendants on orders from the TSA. But why only valet parked cars?
	That's what we wanted to ask the TSA director about.
	We reached him by phone.
	Are the cars in the short-term lots and the long-term lots getting searched as well?
	No.
	No.
	So what's the difference?
	Those vehicles are in the garage, short-term, long-term parking.
	Even if they carried pretty large amounts of explosives, would not cause damage to the front of the airport.
	But those that use the valet, the car could be there for a half hour or an hour or so.
	You know, there is a vulnerability.
	Okay, so let me explain what's going on before I continue with the clip.
	At Rochester Airport, if you valet your car, which is quite common these days for parking, your car gets searched on behalf of the TSA by the valet company.
	And only cars that are valeted because it could cause significant damage to the front of the airport.
	I think this is very conscientious on these people's part.
	I'm going to ask you a question.
	So I guess there's an epidemic of cars blowing up at the airport.
	There must have been dozens by now.
	How many have there been since, I don't know, 1950?
	How many cars have blown up at the airport in valet parking?
	Zero.
	Zero.
	But then what's the problem?
	Well, this is...
	I want you to listen to the whole report because you can, of course, guess where this is going to go.
	So this comes up because a woman, Schill, called up the TV station.
	Hey!
	There was like a...
	They searched my car.
	I didn't say that they could search my car.
	But now listen to the report and how it is brought smoothly upon you.
	We went to the valet parking today.
	One of the attendants showed us the notice that they have to put in the cars.
	You're required.
	They tell you you have to search the car.
	I have to do it.
	So the TSA is telling these guys they have to search private property, their car.
	And look at what we noticed on the kiosk window.
	A large sign that alerts customers that their vehicle will be inspected.
	We showed this to Lori Iacuzzi.
	I want to show you a picture I took at the airport today.
	This is the valet kiosk.
	Do you remember seeing that sign?
	No, it wasn't out there.
	I think the public should be aware of the fact that if their car is going to be searched, they should be informed of it.
	Lori said she doesn't mind the security measure at all.
	Of course not.
	Oh, don't mind at all.
	In fact, she makes it feel a little bit more secure.
	I feel more secure.
	She just wants to be told that if her car is getting searched, I asked the owner of the company that runs the valet parking, when did they put that sign up?
	He wouldn't answer that question.
	The TSA says this is part of its overall security plan and that it's a proactive move to keep you and your family safe at the airport.
	The attendants told me they've only been doing this for about a month.
	It's a part of the overall plan, John.
	The overall plan to go off the actual, out of the terminal and make sure your car is searched.
	Now, here's the final bit, how they're co-opting private enterprise into this police state.
	So what exactly do they inspect, Berkeley?
	Well, the attendants told me that it's kind of a three-phase thing.
	They're ordered to search the trunk, the engine, and scan the inside of the car.
	They say it takes about 30 seconds to do it.
	They say they don't go through your console or your glove boxes.
	The TSA says they're instructing these valet attendants to look for large amounts of explosive materials.
	How stupid is this?
	This is nuts!
	It's totally nuts.
	All it's going to result in is a bunch of stolen laptops.
	Well, of course it's criminal enterprise, but when this happens, it's over.
	It's just over.
	Everyone's like, okay, whatever.
	There's no...
	I know, and then the news media is complicit because they play the clip of the dingbat.
	Well, if I knew, it'd be okay.
	Yeah, I feel much safer.
	What difference does it make if you know or not?
	I feel much safer now.
	I feel better because I knew in advance they were going to search my car or I didn't know if everybody would now take the marijuana out of the trunk.
	Yeah.
	I mean, you know, which again, I mean, this is like the TSA that had been put in place to stop terrorism and look for bombs and weapons at the airports and they bust people left and right for dope.
	Yes.
	And then still we have bombs going off in Boston.
	How could you let that person go through with illegal substances?
	You have to bust them for dope.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, no, the whole thing is a setup to just, I mean, the police state's on its merry way, but, you know, curiously, this has been going on, I don't know, when do you think it really began?
	It began in the mid-80s, I believe, maybe, at least by 1990, at least during the Clinton administration, it was really going full tilt.
	I think this is a suggestion from the chat room that they should also check your in-car audio system, check a playlist, make sure you're not listening to any radicalized music.
	Wasn't there something about reading anti-government literature?
	Anti-government literature.
	We went to the house, they had anti-government literature.
	I don't even know what anti-government literature is.
	This is a...
	Literature.
	Well, I want to bring this up then, since we're on it, and then we need to go to our very short donation segment for today.
	So as a part of the recent...
	Appropriations bill that was signed into law, people have noted that the H.R. 5736 was also ratified deep inside the 600 and whatever pages of the Authorization Act.
	I did not catch this.
	This is part of the Smith-Munt Act.
	Specifically, the Smith-Munt Modernization Act of 2012.
	And what's interesting is that we talked about this on episode 410.
	So this is last year, God knows, maybe about a year ago probably, if you think about it.
	And in our show notes, which are a thing of beauty in this case, I was able to pull out the Authorization Act, which we marked up at the time.
	And do you know what this is about, the Smith Modernization Act of 2012?
	It was something that was not modern, I know that.
	Okay.
	Well, let me read our highlighted pieces to you.
	A bill to amend the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 to authorize the domestic dissemination of information and material about the United States intended primarily for foreign audiences and for other purposes.
	This is the Propaganda Act.
	Right.
	I'm remembering it better and better.
	Gary, go on.
	General authorization.
	The Secretary and the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which is fun.
	I put a link in the show notes.
	You can take a look at that.
	And the Secretary is the Secretary of State.
	That would be John F. Carey.
	Are authorized, this is now in law, to use funds appropriated or otherwise made available for public diplomacy information programs, i.e. propaganda, to provide for the preparation, dissemination,
	and the use of information intended for foreign audiences abroad and the use of information intended for foreign audiences abroad about the United States, its people, and its policies through press, publications, radio, motion pictures, the Internet, and other information media, including social media, and through information centers in the United States.
	instructors, and other direct or indirect means of communication.
	So this goes on.
	I hereby call this the Mainstream Media Funding Bill 2013.
	Everybody's going to be having their hand out now, baby.
	And we should get a piece of this.
	We should.
	I'm thinking the same thing.
	So this is what, you know, originally Voice of America and stuff like that was funded by this, and when they dropped leaflets from airplanes in 1948.
	But now it's social media, so you can start a company and say, hey, I'm going to do whatever propaganda you want, which the whole reason for this Smith-Mundt Act was so that the United States government could not turn its propaganda machine onto the American people.
	This has now been overturned and approved.
	Right.
	Essentially, we can propagandize ourselves.
	And I believe that includes we can do psyops on the American public.
	On ourselves, yes.
	On ourselves.
	Yes.
	So we can run these games, maybe, you know, which the media is adept at.
	And they're all now meeting together over there in Aspen.
	Yep.
	Movers and shakers are at least a lot of them.
	And here's how it goes.
	Hey, you know, this is great.
	You came to moderate for us.
	Yeah.
	So we have this new budget.
	And we were thinking maybe you could add a little something extra in your segment at the end of the news.
	You're getting close to that Lumberg style, which I like.
	We write it for you.
	You don't have to actually do any extra work.
	In fact, we have a piece all pre-produced with a donut.
	So you can just come in and it's all good.
	It's good to go.
	You don't have to do much.
	It's a donut.
	Isn't that what it is?
	It's a donut.
	And we even have a version where you can do the voiceover.
	If you want.
	If you want.
	But if not, we have professionals.
	We've hired Curry Dvorak to do the voiceover work.
	They're pretty good.
	A little annoying.
	This, to me, is a bigger scandal than anything else we've talked about today.
	It is...
	Remember, it's motion pictures.
	Okay?
	Okay.
	Motion pictures.
	So I'll just read part B1. Except as provided in paragraph 2, the Secretary and the Broadcasting Board of Governors may, upon request and reimbursement of the reasonable costs incurred in fulfilling such a request, make available in the United States motion pictures, films, video, audio, and other materials prepared for dissemination abroad or disseminated abroad pursuant to this act.
	In other words, when they go in Egypt and you've got their shills, because this is what the CIA does, baby.
	I mean, sorry, the other State Department.
	They'll write up articles.
	They infiltrate the press.
	They write it up about what's going on.
	It becomes truth here.
	But now they can just go ahead and just publish it in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, but also Politico and Salon and The Guardian and all of these great publications.
	And you know what?
	These a-holes will all take the money, every single one of them, every single one of them.
	And if it's not at a managerial level, it's at the individual reporter or editor level.
	Or it's got to be a conference speaker level.
	Right.
	I mean, let's face it.
	Do you want food stamps?
	Or do you want to be in with the cool kids?
	I'm looking at you, Dvorak.
	Yeah, well, sure.
	By the way, the show's over.
	We're available for...
	The show will be over, especially with this last donation segment.
	Of all of our thousands of people listening, 17 people...
	Thought it wise to donate over $50.
	Hold on a second.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	Let's do this.
	I'm going to show myself mood by donating to No Agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on No Agenda.
	You have 17 people to thank.
	Can I add insult to injury?
	Okay.
	Just to get you all really riled up?
	I'm not going to get riled up.
	Oh yeah, you will.
	Because I'm already eyeballing this law.
	Hi Adam and John.
	Love your show.
	Love you guys questioning everything.
	You're the only show that makes me have a good laugh about power politics, but I can't get myself to contribute because you're missing the biggest point of our lifetime.
	The destruction of our Earth.
	Duh.
	Just look at this video and tell me the current CO2 levels aren't man-made.
	Temperature always follows the CO2 levels and we are in for a rocky ride.
	Keep up the great work.
	Love your show.
	Time to wake up.
	Mark.
	Well, I had another...
	I had a guy...
	Okay, we're going to do these one-on-ones.
	I mean, can you believe that?
	I love your show, everything, but because you're not on board with my program...
	This is the thing.
	This is why we ask the general audience to contribute because there's a-holes like that guy who have their one agenda.
	They have one agenda.
	We have no agenda.
	They have one agenda and whatever it is, if we don't address that agenda in the way they want us to, they're never going to donate.
	You know what the joke is?
	You know what the joke is?
	They wouldn't donate anyway.
	Yeah, of course.
	I mean, it's just like one of the...
	So I have this guy who writes about once every two months.
	No signature.
	No return address.
	It comes in the post office box.
	Box 339 El Cerrito, California.
	94530.
	If you want to send us a check.
	We got, like, no checks on today's show.
	And he writes a note and it says, I love your show.
	I don't have the note because I get so mad I usually tear the note up and throw it.
	But, Mr.
	Curry used the Lord's name in vain twice on show 528.
	Oh, man.
	And I refused to donate to a sinner.
	I usually, I say, I sometimes even apologize.
	Sorry, I didn't mean to take the Lord's name in vain.
	Just to stop this kind of communication.
	Yes, well, anyway, so he says this note, and of course he doesn't sign it.
	I know he's in Pittsburgh, or at least he drives to Pittsburgh to mail it.
	Well, God will punish me.
	Anyway, so we get a lot of these.
	Now, we do have a lot of people that donate less than $50.
	We want to thank all of them.
	We're not meaning to demean them, but the whole thing is a proportion.
	So we have the X number of people that donate.
	It's almost like a pie chart.
	And so when we have the low donors that donate to get recognized, we have actually low donors all the way down to the bottom, except for the subscribers, which is a pretty consistent number, and they're always getting pulled away by PayPal.
	PayPal then cuts them off and blames us.
	This is not going well.
	So this is a struggle for us, and I want to make sure people realize that.
	But let's thank the people who did come in, the 17 of them.
	Derek Boley, $100 from North Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
	And I might as well read these notes.
	I was going to say, you can read every single note.
	I can read all the notes now again.
	We can go back to reading notes.
	This is good.
	Hi, Agatha and Jebediah.
	Here's my knighthood turbo payment plan installment, which is good.
	That means he's going to be paying $100 every so often.
	Please have some get well soon karma for my dad, who is not well at the moment.
	So let's get him some karma.
	Yeah, of course.
	I'd love to do that.
	This is going to be a fun segment.
	You've got karma.
	Good luck to Adam and Mickey on the trip.
	Also, the donation graph at noagendanation.com does not appear to be upgrading.
	So can Eric the Shill please have a look-see?
	Regards, Thirsty of North Sydney.
	Okay.
	Edward Holsey in San Francisco over here, I can wave it out the window, there he is, $100.
	He would like a clippity club, we haven't had that for a while, to celebrate Hillary's facelift.
	Oh, and may I point out, for those of you who haven't seen Globe magazine, that on the cover of Globe magazine, it says right there, Hillary's new facelift.
	Yeah, and we have a picture of the side-by-side in the last newsletter.
	There's a good shot of that.
	And we were right again.
	It's Clippity Club.
	The message is clear.
	Just Clippity Club.
	I miss her.
	I really miss her.
	I miss her.
	She'll be back.
	Yeah, but I miss...
	Okay, well...
	She'll be back younger and more vibrant with more energy.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Lynn Fogwell in Raleigh, North Carolina, another $100, and he, or she, says free TVs is not a ride until the slaves break the store windows and run off with the big screen TVs.
	We have to put that on the checklist.
	Yes.
	This is a definite marker.
	Grand Duke Von Pelsmacher is my hero.
	Give him karma.
	Sir Lynn Fogwell, or Sir Sir Lynn Fogwell.
	Sorry, he's a guy.
	You've got karma.
	Wait a minute.
	Call me sir, goddammit.
	I did it again.
	No, that's where it comes from.
	It wasn't me.
	No, it was that guy.
	So it wasn't me.
	Yeah, well, we lost another donation from that guy in Pittsburgh.
	Although, I will say this.
	He won't donate anyway.
	Yeah, exactly.
	This is like, as a PC magazine, you always have these guys, I disagree with what Dvorak wrote.
	I'm canceling my subscription.
	You go look and he doesn't subscribe.
	Exactly.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Always.
	Yeah, of course.
	Ian Prentice.
	Oh, wow.
	Let me get my jaw off the floor.
	You didn't say Eon.
	Wow.
	And, by the way, I'm waiting.
	I'm waiting.
	Oh, sorry.
	I was so enjoying all of the long notes.
	Here we go.
	69!
	69!
	Ah.
	He has got a birthday on the 20th.
	Yes.
	I think.
	Which is what?
	Should we get it on Sunday?
	Oh, no.
	It's a birthday for today.
	No.
	It's in yellow.
	It must be on the list.
	Yeah, it's on the list.
	Yeah.
	Here's a donation to get me to grand gentleman level of donation before my 30th birthday, July the 20th.
	Joseph...
	David Gervasio in Jersey City, 6969.
	69 dudes, thanks for doing what you do.
	He'd like some karma.
	Happy to give it to him.
	It's all for today and today only.
	You've got karma.
	Our buddy Robert Goschko up there in the money center of Sherwood Park, Alberta.
	ITM, John and Adam, keep hitting him in the mouth.
	Baron Bob.
	It's Baron.
	Baron Rob.
	Kyle Bauer in 6969 Worcester, Ohio.
	Read as anonymous or don't read.
	Okay, but he likes some karma.
	Way to go.
	We've got karma.
	Yeah, we need anonymous on the list here.
	There's another one.
	Ash from Gitmo Nation East says anonymous on here, but her name appears on the spreadsheet.
	6969 Hertfordshire, UK. I just took my car to be serviced and it cost less than I expected.
	So I thought I'd donate some of the spare cash to the best podcast in the universe.
	And she would like some swazzle nuff karma.
	Absolutely.
	Well, I'll close the segment with the karma since we're at the end here as well, right?
	That was the last one?
	Yep.
	69!
	69, dude!
	You've got karma.
	Perfect.
	Okay, $69 straight up from Boren Pennenberg in some place in the middle of nowhere, Netherlands.
	And he would like a karma shout-out to Miss Mickey and Miss Mimi.
	It's Koudekerk on the Rhine, which translates to...
	To Koud...
	Koud...
	Wait, wait, let me guess.
	Koudkerk on the Rhine River.
	You got on the Rhine River part.
	Now, if you separate the words Koud and Kerek...
	Church.
	The cloudy church.
	Cold church.
	The cold church.
	The cloudy church.
	I like cloudy church.
	The cold church on the Rhine.
	Yeah, baby.
	Holland.
	Wow.
	I'm getting good.
	Yeah, you are.
	Noah.
	Good old Noah.
	Yeah, Noah.
	In Amsterdam.
	Yeah, Noah.
	We know Noah, yeah.
	We need a birthday shout-out.
	I don't see him on the list.
	Yeah, he's on the list.
	Okay.
	Well, it's not colored yellow.
	No.
	Well, it's not for Noah.
	Noah requests Nelson Mandela's birthday be celebrated and put on the list.
	Noah, she's deferring her donation.
	Shout-out to Mandible.
	Mandiba.
	What are you talking about?
	Noah says today is July 18th, Nelson Mandela's birthday.
	95 years old.
	Also Mandela Day.
	I'm not reading this right.
	The movement asked people to donate 67 minutes of their time in reflection of the 67 years Mandela spent serving his community, his country, and the world.
	So here's $67 to oblige.
	Happy birthday.
	Shout out to Mandela.
	It says Mandaba.
	Mandaba.
	Mandaba.
	Whatever.
	Whatever.
	But I like that.
	67.
	And exactly one person did this.
	I'm liking it.
	Kevin Benson, 66-66, New South Wales.
	Andrew Haverson in Gravenhurst, Ontario, Canada.
	50, these are all 50s, Michael Gates, 50 in Colorado Springs, Josh McDonald, $50 Brunswick, Australia, Victoria, and Chris Slowinski, Sherwood Park, Alberta.
	Oh, well, that's another guy.
	Well, that's good.
	Wasn't Chris up there in Sherwood Park before, was it?
	I don't know.
	The beginning of the spreadsheet.
	And finally, Kyle Bauer and Philip Meason.
	No, it was Robert Goschko.
	We got two.
	We got two guys in Sherwood Park.
	Yeah.
	Kyle Bauer in Worcester and Philip Meason in Welshpool Pows, 50 each.
	And that'll conclude our segment of donors that produced and helped produce show 531.
	And I see that Kyle also put in a, is on a 33 podcast license, so we'll make sure Kyle gets that as well.
	So it is very nice.
	This was, of course, disastrous for us.
	But it doesn't matter, because there's tons of dough out there now from the government, and we can take that, and we can just start going, hey, let's see.
	Do you think we'll be able to slip it in so people don't notice it?
	We've been able to deconstruct stuff so well, we should be able to construct.
	But do you think we can just go like, hey...
	Hey, give us some money?
	Yeah.
	I think it's okay for the TSA to check my car.
	And we have ways of proving it's okay.
	Yes, I think it's good.
	I like feeling safe.
	Better safe than sorry.
	How about you, John?
	What else are you going to do?
	You have to be safe, because if you're not safe, then the terrorists will kill you.
	You can put this in the book, Red Book.
	We're going to have tons, tons of episodes where you've got CIA and NSA and just all kinds of pro crap.
	Working together.
	Yeah, showing up on your TV shows.
	Everyone loves NCIS and Hawaii Five-0, whatever crap there is.
	By the way, Orange is the New Black.
	Have you seen this?
	No.
	You should.
	This is the new Netflix series.
	What is it about?
	Women's Prison.
	Oh, huh.
	Yeah, I've heard about it.
	Let me tell you something.
	Absolutely, astoundingly fantastic.
	Why?
	It's just so good.
	It's written by the woman who wrote Weeds, I think.
	It's kind of a short-term, medium-security prison.
	First of all, there's a lot of great, realistic lesbian sex in it.
	Need I say more?
	Well, yeah, you need to say more.
	It's just a good show.
	It's a good show, and it's free.
	Lesbian sex on Skinamax.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	This is lesbian sex like it really happens.
	This is the real deal, which is not at all porny.
	In fact, it's so real that it's not really sexy.
	It's kind of weird in that respect.
	But I will say, I think, if you look at the players, we've got Amazon, who, I don't know what they're doing.
	They have a $150 million fund somewhere that they're making something.
	Well, I don't know what you're doing, but it's crap.
	I've never seen it, never heard it.
	You have no idea.
	Go away.
	I'll definitely rent some mainstream stuff from you.
	Then we have Hulu, which is owned by the idiot television networks.
	Amazon, by the way, will stream for you.
	Any of your people that have the Amazon Prime account, you get free.
	And it's the only place I know you can get it.
	Rubicon.
	True.
	Then we have HBO, who I think are going to be the big losers in all this.
	Because really, if you look at what Netflix is doing, releasing all the episodes at one go, making stuff that people want, if I were a betting man, I'd put my money on them.
	I think it's really good.
	It's really an outstanding product they've put together here.
	I think they're definitely making a move on things, and HBO seems to be dropping the ball left and right.
	I don't know who they lost, but once they dropped the ball on Mad Men, it was a signal that they've lost whatever mojo it was, and I assume it's a person, because a lot of times you have these meetings, and there'll be five guys in a room, and then there's the one guy who's really not the head of the meeting, but he's the smart guy.
	Yeah, he left.
	He's always submarine, things that should be submarine, and green light stuff that should, and they got rid of him.
	And I don't know who's running the show over there at Netflix, but someone's doing a great job.
	That guy!
	That guy from HBO! The guy from HBO, they brought him over.
	Alright, so I guess what we're saying here is, we need your help.
	I think we have shown our value today, and it's not even over yet.
	I've still got a couple things that we've dissected.
	I see John's got some stuff.
	We do this.
	Because now everything you see, everyone's going to have the handout, everyone's going to be, oh, Mr.
	Government, can I have some money for that propaganda cash?
	Propaganda pennies, bring it on over here.
	Every television executive is going like, this is great!
	And it passed, and you don't hear, you know what, it's funny, you don't hear the mainstream media talking about this.
	Where their next paycheck is coming from.
	So this is bad for us.
	What we've seen here is very, very poor.
	We highly appreciate the people who have stepped up.
	Super appreciate our one executive producer and our associate executive producers.
	Thank you.
	But we also have to get through the summer.
	And to prove that we're real about this stuff, I am flying to Europe tomorrow.
	And I arrive Saturday morning.
	There's going to be a show Sunday.
	And it will not be any less than normal.
	Except it will be on the road.
	And you'll be taking your road gear.
	This will be interesting to see how it goes.
	Please help us out.
	We need all the help we can get.
	All right, so it's a pretty short list.
	Dame Joan.
	Dame Joni.
	Dom Joni.
	Dottie Frey.
	She celebrates on Saturday.
	Ian Prentice turns 30 on the 20th, and happy 95th birthday to the man who's still hanging in there, Nelson Mandela.
	Happy birthday from all your buddies here, the best podcast in the universe.
	It's your birthday, yeah!
	And we have, see, no title changes.
	We do have a knighting, and this will be Mac's daughter Frey.
	This is son of Dame Joanie, and here we go.
	Gods!
	Knights!
	Squires!
	Prepare for battles!
	Get prepared for battles?
	It's not a knightie?
	Grab your sword.
	Don't ask me what I'm doing here.
	Alright, Max, step on forward, my friend!
	Wow, do you have the coolest mom in the universe or what, dude?
	Dude!
	And not just a cool mom.
	We've got a lineup of stuff for you that you might enjoy.
	So, Max, from today on, you should be known as Sir Max, Knight of the Noah General Roundtable for you, sir.
	When you're old enough, hookers and blows, or red boys and chardonnay, hot pants and booze, wenches and beer, ruby-ness, rumen and rosé, gushes and sake, vodka, vanilla, bong hits and bourbon.
	Your Uncle Adam will show you how to do those.
	Really, Mom?
	You sure you wanted to listen to this show?
	You can still go back, you know.
	You can still withdraw.
	Listen when he's ready.
	Yeah, when he's ready.
	Thank you very much, Dame Joni, and welcome, Sir Max, to the roundtable of the nights here at the No Agenda Show.
	That would be kind of amusing.
	What?
	I mean, at least it would be kind of amusing in a meta sense.
	I don't think it would be amusing.
	You definitely wouldn't think it's amusing.
	So you go, you're in Holland, you get there to the hotel and you check in.
	I'm already not thinking.
	First of all, we're not at a hotel.
	We're at an Airbnb.
	Okay, you're at an Airbnb and you're...
	Whatever it is.
	It doesn't make any difference to the story.
	So you show up, you get all over...
	Say, I'm going to check the gear out.
	And you plug it in and it goes pop and a big cloud of smoke comes out of the box.
	And this is funny.
	Why?
	Why?
	I don't know.
	It just seems funny to me.
	I've blown up things.
	I did this with a router once.
	So I go to the hotel.
	I got this router.
	And I needed it to do some voice stuff.
	And I plugged it in.
	It goes, pop!
	Yeah.
	And I go, wait, what?
	Pop?
	It's a Chinese thing.
	I look at it and it's the only one I've ever seen that has one of those little bricks that didn't have 240-120.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	It was just 120.
	That popped it.
	This was overseas, obviously.
	And it popped it.
	And I went, oh.
	It's funny you say that, because since we're running on an AC wall wart on this thing...
	I had to get a, which is the whole reason why most companies do DC, even though it's inferior as an audio product, I had to get a 220 to 12 volt AC adapter, going from AC to AC, because you can't get a universal one.
	Now that's a true, you're not getting, you're getting a true adapter, which is a pretty good, you're not getting one that's just a converter.
	No, it's a converter.
	It's a converter from 220 to 12, but it doesn't convert to DC. It stays AC. And I had to order one from Geneva.
	Oh, what?
	You can get it from Amazon.
	No, no.
	Go ahead, please.
	If you find one in America, good luck.
	No, I could not find one in America.
	Oh, that's right.
	They go the other way, the ones you get here.
	Yes, exactly.
	Right, you can plug a...
	Right, okay.
	I think we need to look at...
	Let me see.
	Yes, I think we need to look at a little bit of...
	Science!
	This was very interesting over on the BBC's.
	Ed Davey, who is the Minister of Energy and Climate, was on this show...
	And I know the host because I've seen him on stuff.
	I can't remember his name.
	Actually, it's the same show that Alex Jones was on.
	So you know it's kind of a propagandistic show that whatever they're saying, it may seem like this point-counterpoint, but really it's just propaganda.
	Right.
	And so it's Ed Davion.
	And this guy's all on his face about the climate change.
	But the message that is being portrayed is a new one.
	And I think it's very interesting that we pay attention to this because, of course, Gitmo Nation East, beta test for the rest of the world.
	Ed Davey, welcome.
	In a speech on June the 2nd, you said that healthy skepticism is part of the scientific process.
	Then a couple of weeks later, you described anybody who challenged the climate change consensus as, quote, crackpots and conspiracy theories.
	Which, by the way, I resemble that remark.
	So what is it?
	Well, I do think we should always challenge the science.
	Of course we should.
	There's a healthy debate amongst climate change...
	But not what everyone agrees!
	I love how he's stuttering through this, by the way.
	But the vast majority of climate change scientists believe that climate change is happening and that man-made activity is causing it.
	So it's a tiny number of people who believe...
	What's a vast majority mean?
	97%.
	What's a tiny number?
	Why doesn't he give us numbers and statistics, if it's so solid?
	I'm not here to be a crackpot and a conspiracy theorist.
	I'm here to show you the messaging so you can recognize it.
	...
	is causing it.
	So it's a tiny number of people who believe that it's not happening and that man isn't responsible for it.
	Everyone who doesn't believe, raise your hand without talking.
	For it.
	And I have to say I agree with President Obama in his recent speech when he said we don't need another meeting of the Flat Earth Society.
	We need to get on and tackle climate change.
	And I agree with him.
	The Flat Earth Society does exist and they believe in climate change.
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	We read Breitbart, too.
	Okay.
	So...
	Just remind me.
	Yeah, wait.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, you're right.
	Sometimes I forget that not everyone reads the vast amount that we read.
	So that's the setup.
	So this shows that this is obviously all in.
	We're all in to President Obama.
	This is the whole thing.
	Everyone agrees.
	Science is in.
	Take the chief scientist of the government who's just stepped down, Sir John Beddington.
	You and I, through our taxes, pay for these scientists.
	He said in his speech as he left that the evidence was unequivocal, unambiguous.
	The guy who left.
	If scientists in my department, Professor David Mackay, is of a similar view.
	So I have to say, the science is on the side that we need to take action.
	And let's just...
	Here it comes!
	Hang on for a second.
	Let's just imagine that the huge majority of scientists are...
	Huge majority!
	...wrong.
	Let's just say that climate change deniers are right.
	Do you think it's sensible that we gamble?
	That we say, well, actually, even though most of the scientists say it's happening, we should ignore them.
	I say that we take a cautious approach.
	And just as you and many others, I hope all your viewers, ensure their houses against a very unlikely chance of fire burning their house down, I think, given the risks of climate change are much greater, with more devastating effects for humankind, we should actually invest in a little insurance policy to tackle climate change.
	Insurance!
	It's insurance, John.
	Let me ask you a question.
	If it's about climate change, I'm not interested because on the off chance that maybe, maybe, maybe they're wrong.
	I just want some insurance for the Earth.
	What about...
	That logic also applies to global cooling.
	Correct?
	So why don't we take insurance on global cooling?
	Well, global cooling is also caused...
	By the way, a number of the original global coolists are now global warmists.
	Are sticking to their guns.
	I mean, some of them have flipped over to the money, which is the global warming.
	Hold on, hold on.
	You asked me a question.
	Okay.
	Global warming and global cooling are both caused by evil people.
	Global cooling is caused by people.
	So we need to insure against people.
	Yeah, we should shoot everyone.
	You want to hear more?
	Yeah, some of the global coolists have been on.
	And, of course, one of the theses of this show, just an offhanded thesis, which is that the warmists are trying to get us to trigger global cooling with their ideas to kill off the population, worldwide population, because which is that the warmists are trying to get us to trigger global cooling with their ideas to kill off the population, worldwide population, because they really We want to kill humans.
	We want to get down to 500,000, the optimal number.
	That's the Georgia Guidestones.
	Exactly.
	Okay, so you've now taken this to a...
	I mean, why don't you just throw in Elders of Zion or something?
	Just throw that in there.
	Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
	They actually believe in warming.
	All right, let's finish up Ed Davey here.
	I'm afraid you're not seeing the full picture.
	Just sticking with that one bit of information, when this...
	Andrew Neal is the guy's name.
	...plateau started to develop, and some academics...
	Here he is.
	It's very funny because he says, look at this.
	The temperatures have plateaued.
	It seems like this plateau will continue until 2020.
	So, you know, clearly CO2 is not following.
	The temperatures are not following CO2. So your models are wrong.
	What are we going to do?
	You're right about it.
	In 2006, the people who advise you...
	Such as Phil Jones at the Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia, again a world centre of climate science, he described the idea of a plateau as nonsense and stupid.
	The Met Office denied that a plateau was even happening.
	And Andrew, that's why, as I said in my Met speech, which you read out a few minutes ago, I think we should have healthy scepticism within the climate change science.
	Why?
	Because climate science is incredibly complicated...
	It's incredibly complicated.
	It's incredibly...
	It's new science.
	It's new science.
	New science.
	Shocking.
	New innovative.
	Innovative.
	It's innovative, John.
	It's innovative science.
	It's new...
	The models are innovative.
	Science.
	And science.
	And no one...
	Actually, if you talk to the climate change scientists, including the people you mentioned, none of them actually say we know everything for sure.
	Just...
	What happened to the majority?
	What happened to the majority?
	I thought they did.
	The science is in.
	What are you saying?
	This is not possible.
	Of course they don't.
	Few scientists ever say they've done anything.
	But the question is, would you be prepared, is any government prepared to take a gamble on the future of our planet...
	You want to insure the planet called Lloyds of London?
	This is the same bullcrap logic.
	By the way, this is the meme...
	The meme du jour.
	This is the meme logic that we have floating around on all kinds of issues.
	And I would say the TSA Homeland Security meme is the same thing.
	Same thing.
	We have to do this because why take a chance that the terrorists will kill you?
	So we're trying to head toward the non...
	Yes.
	Yes!
	Non-risk society.
	And that's what he's saying.
	It's the same thing.
	It's the same theme.
	That's right.
	Non-risk society.
	Yes.
	It can only be achieved by out-and-out fascism.
	And so what you've proven by this clip is that the globalists, the global warmists are all fascists.
	Yes.
	They act like it.
	Yes, they are.
	Absolutely.
	It is truly disgusting.
	Truly.
	I mean, to say, okay, well, maybe they're wrong.
	Okay, you found me out.
	That's essentially what he's saying.
	Yeah, I know the guys who said that, and I was saying this, and like, I don't know, but do you want to take a risk?
	I mean, seriously?
	Do you want to take a risk of burning up?
	That's exactly what it is.
	It's very, very sad.
	That's the way it is.
	It's the way it works.
	I have a fun commercial for us of a new product.
	And this product will be coming out this flu season, and they have a podcast, and they've got a whole social media campaign.
	Yeah, they've got the government money.
	Well, we know that when it comes to a vaccine, you don't have to worry about anything, because if people die or whatever from your vaccine, no skin off my bones, literally.
	This is a new vaccine, and I think it's worth listening to their social media distributed commercial.
	Okay, we get it.
	You've already been told you need to get the flu shot.
	But you're healthy, right?
	You've never even gotten the flu before.
	Or maybe you have.
	But you're only sick for a few days.
	Who's this fast-talking idiot?
	It sounds like Christopher Hayes.
	Maybe it is.
	Big deal.
	So why should you care about flu block?
	I'd like to share a very sad and true story with you.
	Okay, this is the same meme, okay?
	This is the exact same meme as you just want to make sure.
	This is FluBlock.
	Katie Taylor, a healthy high school senior, was excited about graduating and pursuing her dream of becoming a veterinarian.
	She was fighting the flu when she became dehydrated and was hospitalized.
	On February 3rd...
	How bad is this?
	Do you hear the audio on this thing?
	It's horrible.
	It's really bad.
	It's really horrible.
	In 2011, Katie died as a result of complications from the flu.
	I know what you're thinking.
	This must have just been a freak occurrence.
	But this isn't as uncommon as you might think.
	According to the CDC, each year 32,000 otherwise healthy adults between the ages of 18 and 49 are hospitalized due to complications from the flu.
	Of those, 680 result in death.
	Get it through your head.
	No one is invincible.
	Not even you.
	Plus, you don't want to get grandma sick.
	Or the kids.
	Or a stranger you meet at the grocery store.
	It gets better.
	Even if they don't end up in the hospital.
	It's just rude.
	It's rude getting grandma sick.
	Anyway, let me tell you about FluBlock.
	FluBlock is just different.
	It's just different.
	Just don't worry about it.
	It's just different.
	FluBlock protects you against the seasonal flu, just like all the other flu vaccines.
	It's still a shot, and it still hurts.
	But it's different.
	Let me explain.
	Different.
	FluBlock is made of highly purified proteins.
	No-line flu viruses are ever used during the production process.
	Okay, this is what I don't understand.
	So it doesn't do crap.
	Exactly!
	It's a vaccine that has no virus in it.
	How does this work?
	Well, it actually does have a virus in it.
	Let me just read there from the...
	From the FluBlock website?
	FluBlock is the first transvalent influenza vaccine made using an insect virus.
	Hmm.
	Baculovirus expression system and recombinant DNA techniques.
	In other words, they're taking an insect virus and they're doing a kind of a manipulation, a genetic manipulation on it, and then shooting you up with that.
	But it hurts.
	Oh, that's a winner.
	And it hurts.
	Wow.
	I would wait about 10 years.
	Before you actually use this?
	But you look at their social media campaign, they're all over the place.
	This is a big deal.
	Well, people don't ever look into anything, so there's, okay.
	I saw it on Twitter.
	Must be good.
	New executive order came out, John, which we need to discuss.
	New executive order.
	And you know me.
	When there's an executive order, I love to read it.
	Indeed.
	This is a very disturbing one.
	Give us a number.
	They don't do numbers anymore.
	Aha!
	Isn't that weird?
	This came out July 15th.
	Executive Order.
	HIV Care Continuum Initiative.
	Continuum.
	What does continuum mean?
	It means the process of continuation.
	Continuum.
	In a world in and of itself.
	It's the continuum.
	Interesting.
	You spell it C-O-N-T-I-N-U-U-M. Yeah, U-U-M. Continuum.
	Continuum.
	Okay.
	This is a very frightening one, I find, for a number of reasons.
	Because it involves Obamacare.
	And how that is going to be implemented.
	It's so transparent they're not even hiding it anymore.
	Well, no one reads these things.
	I know.
	I know.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm doing it again.
	Executive Order.
	Accelerating improvements in HIV prevention and care in the United States through the HIV Care Continuum Initiative.
	By the authority vested in me as President, by the Constitution, and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to further strengthen the capacity of the federal government to effectively respond to the ongoing domestic HIV epidemic, it is hereby ordered as follows.
	Now, first let's talk about the word epidemic.
	What does the word epidemic mean?
	It means, you know...
	What it means.
	No, this is very specific.
	Words matter.
	Okay, well let's look it up.
	Epidemic.
	Spreading rapidly and extensively by infection and affecting many individuals in an area or population at the same time.
	An epidemic outbreak of influenza.
	Widely prevalent.
	An outbreak of a contagious disease that spreads rapidly and widely.
	Right?
	Right.
	Well, that's what it says.
	Now let's look at the CDC, the same government who was putting out this executive order.
	Facts, fast facts on HIV in the United States.
	49,273 people diagnosed in 2011 with HIV infection.
	Actually, it stays the same.
	The number of people living with HIV, while the annual number of new HIV infections has remained relatively stable.
	Well, wait a minute.
	It's an epidemic, yet it remains relatively stable.
	That doesn't make sense.
	That's not an epidemic.
	Well, let's read on the executive order.
	Section 1, policy.
	Addressing the domestic HIV epidemic is a priority of my administration.
	In 2010, the White House released the first comprehensive national HIV-AIDS strategy, setting quantitative goals for reducing new HIV infections, which there are no new HIV infections.
	It's about the same.
	Improving health outcomes for people living with HIV and reducing the HIV-related health disparities.
	The strategy will continue to serve as the blueprint for our national response to the domestic epidemic.
	It's an epidemic, John.
	Which it's not.
	I'm sorry.
	It's just a lie.
	It's not an epidemic.
	Well, there's some obvious reason to call it an epidemic.
	It has increased coordination, collaboration, and accountability across executive departments and agencies with regard to addressing the epidemic.
	How many times can you use this?
	It has also focused our nation's collective efforts on increasing the use of evidence-based approaches, be careful, evidence, to prevention and care, prevention, among populations and in regions where HIV is most concentrated.
	I remind you, this is an executive order, okay?
	Based on these and other data, I'm jumping around a little bit, recommendations for HIV testing and treatment have changed.
	New information, people.
	The US Preventative Services Task Force now recommends that clinicians screen all individuals ages 15 to 65 for HIV. And the Department of Health and Human Services guidelines for use of antiretroviral agents now recommends offering treatment to all adolescents and adults diagnosed with HIV. This is in the next paragraph.
	Furthermore, ongoing implementation of the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, provides a historic opportunity for Americans to access affordable quality health care.
	The act is expanding access to recommended preventative services with no out-of-pocket costs, including HIV testing.
	Oh my gosh!
	And beginning in 2014, insurance.
	This is fantastic!
	You will be forced, my friends, to get an AIDS test.
	Free.
	Free?
	This is very, very, very disturbing.
	This is an executive order.
	This is not like just a little memo.
	This is an executive order that says the recommendations have changed between 15 and 65.
	By the way, if you're 65 or older, you don't count.
	Because you don't have sex, apparently, anymore.
	Tell that to Anthony Quinn.
	Yeah.
	I'm very disturbed by this.
	You should be.
	They're going to force grab your blood, give you an HIV test whether you want it or not.
	You have not had risky sex yet.
	And they're going to take your DNA and put that in a catalog too.
	Why not?
	And put your phone number on the test tube.
	Why not?
	Yeah, why not?
	You know why?
	Because it's better to be safe.
	It's better to be safe than sorry.
	Yeah, and of course, I'm not going to get into the entire debate about the difference between HIV and AIDS and what my personal thoughts are.
	On the extensive study I've done, you can take a look at the guy who apparently found the HIV virus now denounces the whole thing.
	So at best, this is an insurance scam, which of course everyone else will be paying for because, oh, go get an AIDS test, HIV, whatever, free, free!
	And, you know, you're right.
	It's, oh, get your DNA. They'll jack up the price like they do with everything else.
	It'll be free but not cheap, but it'll be free.
	Oh, man.
	You know, somebody soaks up the money, and I think the DNA's got to be in that deal.
	Why not?
	Yeah.
	It's not worth the trouble to just do an AIDS test on everybody unless you get some of the other stuff out of it.
	Exactly.
	Let's see what else the guys get going on.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	Get everything while you're at it.
	Because you can't take a chance.
	I can't wait to get to Europe Saturday morning.
	Oh, it's going to be horrible over there.
	Well, that's why.
	I know.
	Whenever I'm over there, I'm so appreciative of living here.
	Yeah, and all we do is carp.
	Isn't that amazing?
	Yeah.
	Great article.
	Did you unsubscribe from the paper edition of the New York Times?
	I unsubscribed from the...
	Yes, I did.
	Except for the Sunday edition, which I'll...
	There's a great op-ed, and you can get it online, of course.
	It's in the show notes, from the grandfather...
	By the way, before you go on with that, ask me why I stopped subscribing to the paper edition.
	John, why did you stop subscribing to the paper edition of the New York Times?
	It's too much paper.
	You feel guilty.
	I mean, all these trees.
	And you don't read about...
	You read maybe one or two of them a week.
	Yeah.
	Maybe.
	And the papers sit around the house.
	It's annoying.
	It's a huge mess.
	Yeah, I know.
	I know.
	There's a great op-ed by the grandfather of the 16-year-old kid that got droned.
	Awalaki's kid?
	Yeah, that guy.
	Yeah, it's a great op-ed.
	Actually, it's un-New York Times-like.
	It's pretty much like, screw you holders.
	There's something going on with the New York Times and the Obama administration.
	Yeah, well, they fell out of love.
	Because the Obama administration didn't go to them with all the bullcrap NSA stuff.
	They gave it to the Brits.
	They gave it to the Guardian and to the Post.
	The Post doesn't really count.
	That's what's going on.
	That's why they're angry.
	Like, hey, hold on a second.
	How come we don't get on the gravy train?
	How come Glenn Greenwald doesn't even live in America gets all this?
	That's the way I see it.
	I think it started before that.
	I think after it started, that's the result, is they got cut out.
	I think it began before that.
	I think that, what you're describing, was just the result of the divorce.
	Well, they got the new BBC guy running the show now.
	Well, he may have something to do with it.
	Could be.
	He's the guy that left, the director general.
	He left the BBC to run the Times.
	The New York Times, really, who cares?
	I'm so done with the New York Times.
	Yeah, you can say that, but still, if you work in a little local radio station someplace, they won't run stories unless they showed up in the New York Times.
	It's really pathetic.
	Talking about the drug business, I do have a clip.
	I thought it was a really overproduced clip from China TV. The Chinese have gone into this mode of attacking anyone who's...
	Bribes, bribes.
	All bribes are bad.
	Even though the whole government and the whole place is structured around bribes.
	But the GlaxoSmithKline has got their tit in the ringer over there.
	And apparently they've had their tit in the ringer.
	This company, they can't seem to do any of this right.
	And this package, which I thought was really...
	I don't know who produced this package I do not believe it's possible that the Chinese The British-based drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline is mired in scandal again.
	Chinese authorities say the company has been running an enormous bribery network for the past six years, involving some 700 Chinese middlemen.
	The goal, they say, was to boost drug sales and raise the price of its medicines in China.
	Four senior executives from GSK China are being held.
	The suspects are believed to have collaborated with travel agencies to funnel bribes to doctors and officials by creating fake conference services.
	A vice president of GSK China confessed the costs of the large bribes would eventually be passed on to patients through higher medicine prices.
	These allegations are shameful and we regret that this has occurred.
	We will cooperate fully with the Chinese authorities in their investigation and will take all necessary action required.
	However, this is not the first bribery case involving GSK. It's been punished in the past for commercial bribery in the United States, New Zealand and Italy.
	In July 2012, the drug giant was fined US $3 billion, a criminal and civil charges of healthcare fraud in the US. GSK is not the only foreign company that's been investigated by China in the past few months.
	European food group Nestle and Danone were also targeted, being accused of price fixing.
	At a press conference on Wednesday, China's Ministry of Commerce expressed its determination to regulate the commercial industry and optimize the investment environments.
	China stands against any form of bribery in the business sector.
	Companies which conduct illegal business in the Chinese market will have to be responsible for their activities, no matter if it's Chinese or foreign companies.
	China will carry on its opening up policy that's unchanged.
	The case shows China's determination and efforts made to optimize its investment environment.
	I love these stories because here's how you can make the package.
	The Chinese Minister of Cultural Affairs said the no agenda show absolutely must be, is required listening for all Chinese.
	He furthermore said, I mean, that's how you do it.
	Yeah, that would work.
	But this package, I believe, was done by a different drug company.
	You get no kidding.
	It even has the drug company music.
	Yeah, it's like, what do we have in the library?
	I think I got something left over from that vaccine that didn't work out.
	I can use that one right here.
	I've been watching Chinese news for a long time on these networks, and I have never heard a package just slick.
	That is pretty funny.
	And it was well-caught, and they had the stooge from GlaxoSmithKline, who sounded like a great PR guy.
	We're stunned by these allegations!
	We're going to do what we can to stop it!
	That's funny.
	I have one last little ditty from New York.
	Now, for the past six weeks, I finally gave up.
	It's in the show notes for the last show.
	The GAO, the Government Accounting Office, whatever...
	Accountability Office came out with a report that all the money that was raised for Haiti, almost none of it went to Haiti.
	That's from three red books ago.
	We're almost on four years now.
	I'm so tired of the Haiti story.
	You know what, Haitians, sorry, you lose.
	Now, when we had Superstorm Sandy, not categorized as a hurricane, even though people are now calling it a hurricane, it was not categorized that way to screw people out of insurance.
	We had this organization set up by hedge fund managers called the Robin Hood Foundation, and they went out and they raised all this money.
	And they had a concert.
	Remember?
	We had a big concert at Madison Square Garden.
	Yay!
	Concert!
	Change my icon!
	Go to the concert!
	Anytime there's a concert, you know there's a scam.
	Yeah.
	And we looked at the Robin Hood Foundation, who are incredibly wealthy, And they don't actually give the money to people who are standing there with their house broken.
	No.
	They give it to, I think, what do we count?
	Like 90 little non-profits all over the place?
	Yeah.
	But here non-profits, this is the non-profit culture of America, which is just a whole bunch of people sucking off someone else's teat.
	Right.
	You should mention the fact, by the way, we are not a non-profit.
	No, we are not a non-profit.
	You cannot go to the government and say, I donated no agenda, let me take that off my taxes.
	That will not work.
	Because we pay the taxes for you, you see.
	Is that the way it works?
	Apparently.
	Yeah.
	Here is a report that came out that is a local story.
	You probably won't hear about it because, you know, we all feel good.
	We feel good.
	We change our icon.
	You know, we feel bad for everyone.
	And the Jersey Shore.
	Jersey Strong.
	We feel bad for everybody in New York.
	And we all gave money.
	And, you know, the Robin Hood.
	The Robin Hood, man!
	They take from the rich and they give to...
	Within days of Superstorm Sandy making landfall last October, a number of charitable organizations started collecting donations from kind-hearted souls freely giving their monies to help with Sandy relief effort.
	If you're a kind-hearted soul, hold on to your balls.
	Or so they thought.
	This morning, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced that a huge amount of those donated funds have yet to be filtered to Sandy victims.
	Oh, really?
	Gee, you don't say.
	I am stunned by this knowledge.
	So intended.
	This is about transparency.
	This is about accountability.
	This is about us all understanding that the money goes where the donors intend it and the relief is delivered effectively and efficiently.
	Schneiderman's office found that 89 charities raised more than half a billion dollars.
	These are all, they're never going to mention the name, of course, but these charities, they didn't raise any money.
	They got the money from the Robin Hood Foundation.
	By April, only 57% of that had been given in Sandy Relief, leaving at least $238 million still in the hands of Bill's non-profits.
	$238 million!
	Yeah, I could use 1%.
	And not in the hands of Sandy victims.
	Art Lighthall lives in Breezy Point, Queens where more than 350 homes were destroyed during Sandy.
	People are trying to rebuild these homes.
	They need the assistance because in many cases they did not get support through FEMA and in many cases they had no insurance or the insurance proceeds were small or they're fighting with insurance companies.
	This is very interesting because they don't say the biggest fundraiser was the Robin Hood Foundation.
	They say it was the Red Cross.
	And here's the Red Cross with their mantra, which is why I despise the Red Cross.
	With about $300 million in Sandy relief, they say that all donations specified for Sandy relief were in fact done so.
	Schneiderman says at least 17 organizations report that they may use Sandy donations for non-Sandy purposes, including future disasters.
	Yeah, don't worry, we'll hold on to that for you.
	For the next time you're in trouble.
	Future disaster.
	Yeah, like maybe a fund, maybe a hedge fund or something from one of the guys who raised the money initially, the Robin Hood Foundation.
	Yeah, I don't know.
	But New York State Senator Joseph Adabo says that is a problem.
	We ask those who have retained the money.
	Did he say axe?
	Did he really say axe?
	It sounds like he said axe.
	I got to listen.
	What is he, Senator?
	What is he?
	No, it's a problem.
	We ask those who have retained the money collected to do the right thing.
	Get the money out to the intended beneficiaries, which are the victims of Hurricane Sandy.
	So, again, you were being robbed by douchebags and elites and people who just have nothing better to do, who are pretending.
	No.
	And nothing ever comes of it.
	Take me out on a high note, baby.
	I'm depressing myself here.
	You know, I've got to find some funny clips.
	I haven't found many.
	We have nothing funny anymore.
	I know.
	That's why maybe the donations are down.
	There's no sense of humor left.
	Because we're going with the...
	Well, let's play this then.
	We've got Mort Zuckerman, who's on the...
	That stupid McLaughlin report.
	All these guys are all about Snowden being a traitor.
	And Pat Buchanan is the worst of the group, by the way.
	This guy ran as a quasi-conservative libertarian.
	The guy cares nothing about any sort of law and order, any belief in the Constitution.
	In fact, if you want to know, he's been pushing for years for a constitutional convention to rewrite the Constitution.
	So this guy's really bad.
	But listen to this Zuckerman character.
	He's so out of it, and it's like, why is this guy even on the air?
	What is the topic here of Zuckerman?
	This is Zuckerman on Snowden.
	Well, first of all, let me say, Snowden is not a Muslim.
	I want to make that clear.
	Seriously, this is one of the most serious things that has happened to the United States.
	Because we had intelligence on any number of potential attacks on the United States, by common consent, at least 50 of them, okay?
	And I will say what I've said before on this program.
	If we were in a situation where people were able to, where we were unable to interdict those attacks and we started to get attacks like we had in Boston every month or every two months, this country would be totally changed.
	So I think the government has the right to do what they think is necessary and appropriate under these circumstances to try and protect this country from those kinds of attacks.
	But that's the word, totally changed.
	That is the word.
	Protect.
	Protect.
	You just want to have insurance to protect yourself.
	You don't want it to go to shit.
	Nah.
	That's about the funniest thing I could find.
	Yeah, that was hilarious.
	I feel great now.
	Thanks.
	Okay.
	Alright, so, let's summarize.
	Donations low.
	No funny clips.
	We're doomed.
	Better get funny.
	What?
	We better get funny?
	This has to be hilarious.
	This is an entertainment show.
	Oh, wow.
	All of a sudden you...
	It's a news-ertain...
	Oh, I went to the crapper?
	Yeah, what are you doing?
	Nothing.
	Nothing changed.
	It just happens at a certain hour.
	That's weird.
	That's weird.
	Did you get an ad, or have you now paid for your Skype?
	Hello?
	I can't hear you.
	Really?
	It's completely gone now?
	No, no, I can hear you, but I just...
	I haven't paid for my Skype.
	Okay.
	Alright, John.
	The next time we speak, if we are lucky, I will be in Gitmo Nation Lowlands.
	We are literally stopping in Amsterdam so I have a safe place to do the show before going on our vacation, which will mean two shows off.
	Next week.
	So we're bringing this to you because we feel we have to do it.
	But we're going to run a show on both those days.
	Yeah, well that too, but Sunday we're going to have an actual show.
	Right.
	Well, those other shows are actual.
	Yeah, but that will be a live show.
	Right.
	With live stuff.
	Exactly.
	Hey everybody, in the morning I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, that is, I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We'll talk to you again on Sunday from two different continents right here.
	On no agenda.
	The best podcast in the universe.
	Turn off your television.

▲