Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 3, 2013 - No Agenda

02:47:41

562: Blotto

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Oh, everybody has their own taste.
	Adam Curry, John C. Devorak.
	It's Sunday, November 3rd, 2013.
	Time for your Gitmo Nation media assassination episode 562.
	This is no agenda.
	Resetting the clock in more ways than one from the travel sites hideout in FEMA Region 6, Austin Tayhouse.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where the six-week cycle is intact...
	I'm John C. Vorak.
	This is Crackbottom Buzzkill.
	In the morning.
	Yeah, yeah, this is annoying.
	What do you mean it's annoying?
	Well...
	Well, it was annoying because, for one thing, I've got too many clips.
	Yeah, you had so many clips my mail server had to reject it.
	You were so big.
	Your girth was so huge.
	Now, let me just tell you what's annoying.
	People.
	I need to go back on the six-week cycle and just explain where it came from and then explain how we deal with this on the No Agenda show.
	We received from an insider at the FBI the information that the FBI needs to have some kind of event take place every six weeks to remain relevant within the national security framework.
	And we started tracking that and we're pretty much spot on every single time to the day Now, when this happens to the day, like this LAX shooting, it's okay to say, hey, six-week cycle on Twitter, but the spiking the football is really not okay.
	Spiking.
	It's like, woo, bitches!
	You did it, you wreck!
	No, no, no!
	You know, this has become such a problem in the culture, which is this kind of a weird version of the me culture that was, I think, apparent in the 80s.
	It's kind of back again.
	I think that's why people are putting these little bands and stuff on themselves, because it's all about them.
	It's gotten so bad in college football that they're going to change the rule.
	People don't know this yet, but there's a rule about taunting.
	No, no.
	You can lose the game if you taunt in high school football.
	Well, yeah, they can throw the game, but they're taking it almost that far with college.
	If you score a touchdown and do any sort of taunting after you, oh, I'm great, they'll take the touchdown away.
	Yeah, but John, there's quite a crevasse.
	Between spiking the football in a game for a touchdown and cheering on...
	Death and mayhem.
	Possible death and mayhem.
	And the best response we got was...
	Molly Wood came over for a couple days to stay with us.
	And she was flying out on Friday, and she texted Mickey.
	She says, I should know better than to ever schedule travel on the No Agenda six-week schedule.
	Actually, it's a good point.
	Yeah, you should not schedule any...
	When is the next...
	Well, as you mentioned, I'm going to look it up.
	It's going to be right after Thanksgiving, I guess.
	This event took place technically, I guess, on Friday.
	Yes.
	We got 1, the 8th...
	1, 2, 3, 4, 5...
	So it would be December...
	13th.
	13th?
	Yeah.
	12th or 13th.
	Wow.
	We have a show on the 15th, and we put the range within it.
	We put it as though the range is between the 8th and the 20th to give it a big hole with the 13th in the middle, hoping to target the 13th.
	Hoping to win on the 15th.
	Woo!
	Woo!
	Bitches, we win!
	Well, actually, I had a kind of words this morning with the ladies.
	I don't feel so bad because, as far as I'm concerned, nothing's happened.
	I have no empirical evidence of anything, of anyone being dead or nothing.
	I just have no evidence whatsoever.
	Give me one...
	Please email me one picture of a victim.
	Well, there is a picture.
	It's in the Daily News of some guy who's not even the same guy.
	It's the New York Post with that guy.
	With, like, tomato gunk next to him.
	It's not even a human being.
	That looks like a practice dummy.
	I have no idea what that guy is, but they claim.
	In fact, the thing that was interesting about this, and I got on it right away, as soon as it happened, I got on the feed from KTLA, which was just reporting around the clock, because the best part of these stories is the beginning.
	Always.
	Before they have the story straight.
	Always.
	Always.
	So we have my...
	I'll play a couple of these right now to get them out of the way, but here is the one that is probably the key to trying...
	Of course, you know, these eyewitnesses are just hopeless.
	But let's listen to the LAX story, Early Eyewitness.
	Okay.
	Very detailed.
	I wonder if we have some of the same clips by any chance.
	Well, go ahead.
	To eyewitnesses who've been helping piece together exactly what happened in Terminal 3.
	And Carolyn mentioned a few moments ago while you guys were recapping what was said at the news conference as the question was asked, could the suspect be a TSA agent?
	Well, joining us now is a gentleman, Jose.
	You're on your way to Oklahoma.
	Right.
	This was the first part.
	And it's kind of interesting.
	And we're just...
	John, are we just taking the stance right off the bat here that this was possibly just another drill, maybe not real?
	Is that where you're at in this?
	I'm actually more ambiguous than you are.
	I don't know anything.
	But you mentioned that.
	We should at least mention this before you continue with that clip.
	Why don't you play the LAX training exercise clip so we're aware of this?
	Yeah, hold on a second.
	I think we have pretty much the same here.
	I may have one little variance.
	The airport police chief, Patrick Cannon, did say that very recently his officers trained in this exact kind of a scenario and that that training proved critical.
	This morning that there were not more casualties than the seven people injured and possibly one killed that we saw this morning.
	So we're still trying to gather a lot of information.
	Let me actually play the sound clip of the LAX police chief where he actually not only admits to the training but admits to something else and corrects himself to make it even better.
	Ah, damn it.
	Unfortunately, it involved an officer-involved shooting, but that's what needed to be done in that particular situation, and that was heroic.
	We practiced to this not more than three weeks ago.
	We took every one of our officers, our patrol officers, and a couple hundred officers from the Los Angeles Police Department, and we practiced the vac scenario that played out today.
	We played out today.
	And I was talking to the...
	Did he not correct himself from saying that played out today to say that we played out today?
	Yeah, he did make the correction.
	This guy, I had that clip too.
	We have the same clips.
	This is not good, but that's okay.
	It does happen once in a while.
	This guy, by the way, is very irksome.
	He has a huge underbite.
	He has this funny way of talking that is just annoying.
	But when you look at the video, in the background is the special agent of the FBI who's in charge.
	And you'll see him looking kind of, you know, just staring ahead.
	And when the police chief goes, this is what played out, what we played out, you see him, like, put his hand to his brow, like a...
	And wipe his hand over his face.
	What is the guy saying?
	Well, we had a report on KTLA about the FBI being on the scene because apparently it was disconcerting to a bunch of people.
	Why was the FBI there in the first place?
	And they came up, I thought, with a pretty good...
	Kind of a weasel their way out of how to explain the FBI being there, you know, because apparently they're right off the bat.
	But we're getting as much as we can, bit by bit, from the different officials who are out here.
	We have seen FBI agents, and there was a question, in fact, why the FBI is involved in all of this.
	and the airport police chief explained that, well, this is a multi-jurisdictional area where you have all of these different agencies who oversee the airport, airport police, LAPD, L.A. County Sheriff's Department, the FBI, Homeland Security, and so forth.
	So it's just a multi-jurisdictional area, kind of a campus, so that's why all of these different law enforcement officials, these different agencies, are involved in dealing with this kind of crisis and with the investigation afterwards.
	Yeah, that's not what the police chief said, actually.
	I have the question and his answer.
	He did not say because it's a campus or anything like that.
	Here's what he said.
	Could you explain why the FBI is the lead agency?
	Well, this is an airport.
	It's an airport.
	This is a crap.
	It's an airport.
	That has federal jurisdiction.
	We have FBI assets here.
	Is that true?
	Does the airport have federal jurisdiction?
	I don't think that's necessarily true.
	Isn't the airport private property?
	They have FBI assets.
	Why do they even have the airport police at all, then?
	Just to tell people to move along when they're in the white zone?
	Yeah, to annoy you.
	That's why.
	Yeah, no, that made no sense.
	His answer is not that good.
	And it's in a unified command involving everybody, but the investigative lead has been decided to take by the FBI. The shooter of federal...
	His answer is not quite like, oh, this is normal procedure on the campus.
	It's like, yeah, the decision was made for the FBI to take command.
	Of course!
	It's an FBI operation!
	My take.
	Before we get...
	Well, I'm not...
	You know, this would be the theory that we...
	This would be the no agenda thesis.
	So it's not really your take.
	It is the no agenda take because this is what we've come up with since the day.
	The first event in the cycle was always, always FBI. You're just agreeing with the theory.
	I'm more skeptical about the whole thing is that I'm the one who, you know, should be all in.
	I just think the whole thing was, I don't know what to think of it.
	That's my take on it.
	And here's the thing that kind of got me.
	This is like an Ask Adam since you're the airplane guy.
	That's how we pilots refer to ourselves.
	You're the airplane guy.
	Hey airplane guy, good landing.
	Okay, I want you to play that.
	This is like a shaggy dog story to play that guy's clip where he says it's a TSA guy shooting down the escalator.
	Wait a minute, do you have this clip?
	No, no, the clip I want you to play is LAX Story San Jose.
	And then I have a question for you.
	Okay.
	San Jose Airport took in diverted flights yesterday and at least nine flights were canceled.
	Last night, a group of high school musicians from Thailand boarded a bus to LAX after their flight from JFK was diverted to San Jose.
	The group had just performed in New York and was supposed to use the same terminal where the shooting took place.
	Alright, what's the question?
	The question is, in the L.A. basin, you have Ontario, you have Burbank, you have Long Beach, which is underutilized by a lot.
	And then you have San Diego, 150 miles away.
	Why would you land a plane in San Jose, 400 miles away, 440 miles away, from LAX as a diversion when there's all these other airports nearby?
	And the other terminals were working, and they were landing planes.
	Well, I can't answer that because I just don't know what the traffic...
	Los Angeles International Airport is one of the busiest in the world.
	And it all depends on...
	And every single flight has...
	When you plan your flight, you have to say, okay, here's my first diversion, here's my second...
	Here's the airports that we'll go to in case of an emergency.
	It's more than likely, actually...
	The airline had that as their alternate, or maybe as their second alternate.
	Okay, that answers the question.
	So that is not that crazy, as long as they had enough fuel.
	It just seems nuts to me.
	Well, it's possible that...
	That's why you're not an airplane guy.
	I'm not an airplane guy.
	I never said I was.
	It just seems crazy.
	But if you're coming around from New York, I think you might be coming down...
	I think, like, over Mono Lake or Yosemite to get to L.A. It really depends.
	And it would be easier just to stop in San Jose.
	Save money.
	Yeah, but there's a lot of planes that were, like, just going to stop somewhere or do something.
	Most of them, yeah.
	This type of situation, there's a lot going on.
	So I don't think that's...
	That's strange.
	It's certainly annoying if that's what your alternate diversion is.
	If that's where you're dropped off, that's horrible.
	Yes.
	No doubt.
	No doubt.
	Okay.
	There was a lot of weird reports, and I'm sure you didn't get clips of all of them, but it was pretty funny.
	Some woman said that before her plane left, she was on the tarmac Yeah, I saw this a little bit on television.
	Mark, that's a very unusual situation.
	Why would that chopper be flying above that plane like that?
	You know what?
	That's a good question.
	That's a police helicopter that is just kind of alongside that KLM flight.
	We don't know what the nature of that, well, you know, if you want to call it an escort is or not.
	But certainly that KLM flight just kind of landed on the north runway 24R and appeared to be being followed by the police helicopter.
	We don't know that that is the case.
	It could be just kind of our angle there.
	But, you know, we will try and investigate that and bring that to you here shortly, guys.
	Okay, and just to...
	Yeah, I saw that.
	There was nothing going on there.
	I saw that happening, because I saw the KLM, and I was like, oh, that's interesting, KLM. It's just, there were people on the tarmac, and, you know, this...
	It was a joke.
	It was kind of...
	People roaming around.
	Yeah, the whole thing just really, really...
	Hmm.
	Look, what I'm missing, I don't know if you've seen it, but there's the Chopper video, and this is pretty much viral now on YouTube, where you see two guys pushing a wheelchair with really what looks like a dummy dressed in a TSA uniform.
	Like, really, I mean, if you...
	Well, have you seen the shot, overhead...
	Oh, that's the shot that you...
	The overhead shot where they pushed this guy out, and I saw that.
	Yeah.
	The guy, I know his arms are hanging to the side.
	Yeah, like the rubber head bouncing around, you know, and then there's this New York Post shot of what is supposed to be the shooter who was supposed to be dressed in, you know, first it's It's dark gray camos, then it's loose baggy clothing, then it's dark blue, and no one has seen the actual guy, only heard stuff.
	Well, here, play the LAX description.
	You have this clip, I'm sure.
	This is the conflicting descriptions.
	There's one in there that's just my favorite because it just sounds like they've got a surfer.
	Let me ask you a question.
	Sarah Welch was just talking to a witness, and he said the gunman, he thought he was a TSA agent, or at least he was dressed like one.
	Could you get any indication from any of the officials around there of what he was wearing?
	They refused to comment on that.
	They wouldn't give us any details about that.
	I heard reports earlier from some witnesses that said the guy was wearing some kind of camouflage pants or khaki camouflage pants and a blue jacket.
	That's what I heard.
	And though they also did say he was clean cut, white male, clean cut with dirty blonde hair.
	That's what I heard.
	But I heard from more than one witness and through various news agencies and reports that he was wearing some kind of camouflage pants.
	That would certainly refute what our witness said, but I'm sure there's a lot of conflicting scenarios here where a lot of people think they see something they don't see.
	Obviously, if you remember what a TSA agent, I believe they wear black pants and a blue shirt.
	Right.
	This is totally useless.
	All of this is just completely...
	I'm always looking for...
	Well, this pushes your...
	You're buying into the whole thing as bull crap.
	And by the way, you...
	I think our six weeks ago even goes back to that crazy story about what you...
	I think, again, I was skeptical about with a naked guy in the street shooting at people driving around.
	Remember that?
	Yeah.
	Two or three years ago, and the guy turns out to be an actor.
	Has there ever been a follow-up on that story?
	No, of course not.
	So what we would need from this, the airport is filled with cameras.
	We would need to have some kind of security footage.
	And if it's going to be the same level as the Navy Yard shooting, which was a guy with a shotgun with no extra ammo, with no other weapons on him, not even shooting, it's just not believable.
	At least I'm consistent.
	So there were seven people wounded?
	Where are they?
	Well, here's another thing about the wounded.
	So they took at least three or four of them to UCLA Med Center, where they were under lockdown, and they wouldn't let anyone talk to any of them.
	And I'm looking at the map, the area map, around LAX, and UC Medical Center is like...
	During rush hour is a good 40 minutes away, and there's three, at least three to five nearby hospitals that could handle this.
	Now, UC system, of course, we've discussed them being compromised with the government, the entire system, and that UCLA would be included.
	Right.
	Because all the CIA agencies, the new ones, or some of them at least come out of Berkeley, it looks like.
	So why would you go, and by the way, to get to UCLA, you have to go up to 405.
	My favorite.
	Even with sirens on, you cannot move, because people can't move over.
	If you're on the 405 in any lane and a siren guy comes, you can't move over.
	There's no place to move over to.
	It's locked.
	But there was also, they had triage with no one in the triage.
	They're rolling either a real person or a dummy.
	In front of Terminal 2, in front of the exit doors.
	Yeah, but they're rolling people by and you've got firemen just not even looking at it.
	I mean, it just wasn't believable.
	I just don't have anything tangible to say that actually happened.
	You know, I got some TMZ footage.
	TMZ, really?
	TMZ footage of people running.
	Everyone has a different story.
	Every single witness has a different story.
	And when I hear witnesses like this, the words that are used, I'm like, it's just bothersome because I don't think, you know, whenever there's a man on the street interview, it's always a moron.
	And now we get people who talk about stuff like...
	You're going through security.
	Mark, what happened?
	Well, we were just putting our belongings onto the belt to be screened.
	First of all, who says belongings?
	I put my belongings on the belt.
	Would you say that?
	Let me think about that for a minute.
	I don't think I've ever used the word belongings.
	No!
	Hey, that's my shit!
	That's my stuff!
	Those are my belongings!
	No!
	My belongings.
	That is a term.
	That's a cop term.
	Or script or something.
	Yeah, script writer.
	That is not a term that you use.
	That's like when I did Swamp Thing.
	At a certain point, the only part that I had trouble with, and I'm not an actor, is I had...
	We noticed.
	Hey!
	Freddy the Firewall doesn't like that talk!
	I had to use the word blotto.
	Blotto for drunk?
	Yeah, I was blotto, man.
	I'm like, I have never met...
	Nobody says that except in the 1920s.
	I know, and I was playing this rock and roll heavy metal guy, and so I was completely hammered and whatever, and then I'm like, oh man, I'm sorry, I was completely blotto.
	I said, dude, I've hung out with people, they don't say blotto!
	And the writers refused.
	It's like, no, you're saying blotto.
	That's a perfectly good term.
	I'm like, okay, fine.
	The writers refused.
	Oh, the fine writers of swamp thing?
	I'm glad they have high standards.
	Well, I mean, it's just as good as belongings.
	Come on.
	We just heard, like, eight shots just ring out.
	Bang, bang, bang, bang.
	That's four.
	And we all hit the deck.
	We hit the deck.
	We hit the deck?
	What is this guy from World War II? Another thing I wouldn't say.
	My dad used to say that.
	Yeah, it's like, we hit the deck!
	Um, okay.
	For about, I don't know, 15 seconds we were all down and then all of a sudden everybody just started running through TSA down into the gates, the terminal there.
	And TSA was running with us and they just said, keep running, keep running.
	As we were running, there was probably another 15 to 20 shots that we heard behind us.
	And we just kept running.
	We got out of the terminal building, down onto the tarmac.
	And we ran over towards Terminal 2 just out underneath.
	Now, this is problematic because the only...
	I think it...
	There's a whole bunch of things that really don't work for me.
	So at LAX, security, you have to go up the stairs first to get into the security because the whole LAX is kind of built on a slope down.
	It's a very weird construction.
	And I think, I'm not sure if Terminal 3, but you can't just jump out onto the tarmac unless you're going all the way to the end, down the stairs.
	I think they have two or three gates there that may go down.
	Yeah, it's one of those double-decker things.
	The second, not that different than SFO. The second...
	Right, right, right.
	SFO at the end, exactly.
	But this is all just like, wow, and the TSA was running.
	It's like, run, bitches!
	So all the people that were in line to be screened, we stormed through the security gates.
	I mean, that's breaching security, too.
	Breaching security.
	Another word that just is like...
	I mean, I don't know, man.
	Who is this guy?
	That makes everybody nervous.
	So, but we just kept running away from the shots, obviously, and we ducked into Terminal 2, and then, you know, we kind of have made our way out here, but, you know, scary moments here for sure.
	Scary moments.
	Now he sounds like he's a newscaster.
	Scary moments for sure.
	Back to you, Bob.
	Good.
	Well, okay.
	Well, let's listen to the long-winded clip.
	Yeah.
	The one we've been putting off here, which is the guy who spotted it.
	Your early eyewitness, right?
	The early eyewitness who built it.
	We're going to listen to it with new ears, looking for script terminology or botches.
	And this guy, by the way, blows it a lot.
	If we take the theory that this is scripted, this guy stinks as an actor.
	Does he say blotto at any point?
	No, he does not say blotto.
	Okay, thank goodness.
	You know, we've been speaking to eyewitnesses who've been helping piece together exactly what happened in Terminal 3.
	And Carolyn mentioned a few moments ago, while you guys were recapping what was said at the news conference, that the question was asked, could the suspect be a TSA agent?
	Well, joining us now is a gentleman, Jose.
	You're on your way to Oklahoma.
	You were in the terminal.
	And you said you got a very clear description of what the gunman looked like.
	Correct.
	He was dressed in all blue.
	He looked like a TSA agent or security.
	Wait a minute.
	The guy in the New York Post is not dressed in all blue.
	You'll agree with me on that, right?
	Oh, yeah.
	The guy in the New York Post.
	That guy doesn't look like he's anybody.
	If I saw him in an airport, I'd be sketching.
	I couldn't even hold a rifle, that guy.
	He has no arms in the picture.
	His arms, you can see there's a cuff behind his back because one hand is hanging out beneath his buttocks.
	I'm sorry, but his buttocks or whatever that rubber is.
	He blended in with them, pretty much.
	So describe to us what unfolded.
	He blended in.
	Yeah, pretty much.
	In front of your eyes.
	We're waiting to get our tickets to go into the next step.
	What?
	So he's at the ticket counter, yet he sees this guy over at security.
	This is already wrong, John.
	This is fucking crazy.
	Yeah, no, I'm telling you, we're going to listen to all the crazy...
	I'm sorry.
	I can't, I can't, I gotta stop it.
	The guy's already full of crap.
	Oh, no, it gets better.
	Oh, jeez.
	As we were waiting, there was a big loud sound going off, and we just all froze waiting to see what it was.
	And after we heard the second round, that's when we all just went to the floor.
	We didn't hesitate.
	We all just went down.
	But then you said moments later you peeked your head above luggage.
	Yeah, because once the shots started going crazy, that's when I told my wife, Doug, get on the floor.
	I managed to get on top of her and reach for a bunch of luggage, and that's when I made a wall out of luggages.
	And from there, I glanced at the guy.
	He was walking towards us because he was not yet to be in Terminal 3.
	He was coming from Terminal 4, or we don't even know where he came from.
	They didn't hire this guy, John.
	This guy, he's just lying.
	I'm going to get on TV. By the way, that is not an uncommon phenomenon.
	I got on top of my wife so I could build a wall of luggage.
	Please.
	Please.
	So the guy apparently is coming in from Terminal 2.
	He corrects himself later.
	Terminal 4 is on the other side of the parking lot.
	Well, I'm game for some more if it's going to get funnier.
	Yeah, no, play.
	I'm telling you, get a kick out of it.
	But, you know, he's apparently at the ticket booth, which I find, eh.
	Okay, so the guy's walking in.
	I guess he's shooting already.
	But that makes no sense.
	Which does not at all jive with any of the story.
	No, the main story...
	Okay, let's go over the main, the final scenario.
	Let me tell you what, the way I heard the story, which was most believable, of this unbelievable story.
	So the guy walks up, says, are you TSA at the screening booth where they ask for your ticket?
	Which is like, really?
	You've got to ask, are you TSA? But supposedly he says, are you TSA? Yeah, are you TSA? And there's even some other report which says, no, I'm not.
	Oh, okay.
	Carry on.
	I'm just here to kill TSA. You know, that's how it always goes with these guys.
	And then he shoots someone, and then he rushes through and is shooting all over the place.
	Now, this guy is saying he's shooting from outside.
	Other people say he was shooting from downstairs.
	The escalator.
	This guy didn't even say he heard shots.
	He heard a bang, a loud noise or whatever.
	This is...
	I'm just sorry, John.
	Unless I see some video evidence...
	Well, they have to doctor that first.
	They need some time.
	So we won't see the security cam stuff.
	Yeah, they do need some time.
	Well, this guy is good, though.
	I think he's certainly...
	Oh, did I mention?
	He's clip-worthy.
	Did I mention that this happened just in time for the beginning of November sweeps week?
	I'm not kidding.
	And CNN was all in.
	I mean, CNN, they interrupted.
	They preempted Burnett for this thing.
	Everyone else went back to their regular shows at a certain point.
	CNN did not stop.
	No, CNN knows.
	They know a winner when they see one, anything.
	I mean, they made their reputation on wall-to-wall coverage of stuff like this.
	Now, just before we continue, so here's the conversation I had this morning.
	That by taking this stance...
	Because I truly, really, I can't say anything other than just because they're saying it on the news and just because you've got some people saying they heard something but no one really saw anything, I don't know if it actually happened.
	And I'm very consistent in these things.
	There's no evidence of any form right now except we do have a woman who says my husband was killed.
	She happens to be the worldwide budget account executive for Warner Brothers.
	Might as well just keep it in the entertainment industry.
	That's all we have, and that always works.
	We had Pistol and all those guys fly out there.
	That's all we have.
	We really don't have anything else, and we've got this bogative picture, which doesn't help their story any.
	No, that picture's terrible.
	And then what I got is, well, this is the no-agenda way of dealing with these tragedies.
	And I said, no.
	No, it's not.
	Somebody said that to you?
	You're my wife.
	It's not the no agenda.
	Because, and let me add to that, that when we do this, a lot of people feel hurt because it makes them feel like, oh, I can't feel bad about someone being shot and killed because now the no agenda way of thinking is telling me I'm stupid.
	No, no.
	Brainwashed is the word.
	It's not even brainwashed.
	It's just when you...
	Oh my god.
	The art...
	What is the name?
	I always promote this thing.
	The Zen TV Experiment.
	Once a year at least I tell you to Google the Zen TV experiment and it's a series of experiments and you follow these and you will understand what television does to you and how your brain fills in all the blanks.
	So this is a fantastic example where you're being told things by people who come across as very believable until you really start to analyze it.
	And by the way, only listening to them and not seeing them really helps with the analysis.
	It's very, very important.
	That's something we spotted years ago that is absolutely correct.
	Very important to do that.
	Because, you know, they put pictures over top.
	There's all these things.
	You see mayhem.
	Well, actually, I'll give you credit on this one because you're the one who made this observation when I used to do clips called Bad Acting.
	Yes.
	And it was mostly the shows, the Dick Wolf shows, Law& Order series, and then it's subcontractors.
	Right.
	And it was so obvious that these people were...
	Almost all of their acting was the visual.
	Because if you just listen to them talk, it was not even good.
	It was terrible.
	And you know what's interesting now that I think about this?
	Because when something like this happens, I jump to everything.
	I'm zapping all over the place.
	I'm trying to find everything I can.
	You cannot get any moronic clips from, for instance, NPR. Because a radio guy or someone who was trained in putting together audio reports...
	Would never put this in there, because this guy's crazy.
	He's making no sense.
	You never hear these reports.
	You only get them from television where you are so obsessed with the visual and the tension that is brought there and switching back.
	Right, and they'll be talking to you with some of this dubious information while they roll out that TSA guy, the rubber suit guy or whatever that was.
	Whatever that was.
	I think that's the one you practice the mouth-to-mouth resuscitation on or something.
	And then they threw him in the ambulance.
	Nobody, yeah.
	Let's just continue.
	This guy, it gives you a very good idea of how stupid this really is.
	So he's walking towards us.
	He managed to stop right there by the escalator, and I'm still looking at him.
	I'm still looking at him.
	He already emptied his clip.
	He's already grabbing another gun, shooting down the escalator.
	As he's doing that, that's when I... Now there's a second gun, apparently, that we have no evidence of.
	So my wife, we need to get out of here, because it's either the escalator or he's going to come towards us.
	And that's what we did.
	We just ran.
	So as we're all trying to sort out who this gunman is, again, describe to us clearly what you saw.
	And you also told us that you're witnessing two weapons.
	Correct.
	There's two weapons playing the part, and...
	Yeah, let's use some more acting language.
	This gunman looked like a TSA agent to me because he was dressed like that, like a security, a TSA agent.
	And he was pretty big.
	I mean, bigger than me, like body-wise.
	So I bet if he was going to go crazy today, he had a body armor on him.
	Body armor?
	This kid, by the way, three names, Paul Anthony, CIA, and CIA, which is just like, oh my god.
	I mean, it's Ciencia, I think is how, I actually, I didn't get the clip.
	I didn't notice that, that's good.
	Oh, when their name was first released, they were trying to pronounce it on television.
	They're like, we have the name now.
	It's Paul Anthony.
	I'm not sure how to pronounce this.
	I would just C-I-A-N-C-I-A is how you spell it.
	Like, really?
	Do you need to throw this in my face?
	I mean, that for me was just the clincher.
	And the guy has no Facebook.
	He's from New Jersey.
	By the way, a wealthy family, if that truly is his house.
	They got like a horse farm.
	So, okay, fine.
	All totally believable.
	Did you notice that all the reporting on the supposed piece of paper that he carried...
	Everyone was different.
	One said New World Order.
	The other one says, I've come to kill TSA and pigs.
	And pigs?
	Pigs?
	What is this guy from the 60s?
	Actually, I really love this part because this is also what was promised to us.
	We have all these documents, we've discussed them, these letters that go out to all the police forces around the country.
	Crazy Islamist terrorists, that's not your worry, no.
	It's people who are part of the patriot movement, people who are anti-government, people who vote for Ron Paul, people who say, end the Fed, all of these things, and lo and behold, without any proof, I've seen no paper, I've seen nothing, all of a sudden we know that this...
	And the accused gunman may have been a conspiracy theorist.
	Federal officials say he had materials referencing the New World Order.
	CNN's Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr.
	Let's bring in Barbara Starr, the Pentagon correspondent, to explain conspiracy theorists and New World Order, ladies and gentlemen.
	She's live in Washington now.
	Barbara, let me ask you this.
	You know, do you know anything at this point what officials are saying about this?
	Well, some information is now emerging.
	Our justice reporter, Evan Perez, has spoken to a federal law enforcement official who says materials found on the shooting suspect did include a rant that appeared to...
	Rant, John!
	A rant!
	I heard about Durant.
	Durant.
	I hope, I hope, I hope it was a no agenda sticker.
	Reference that new world order as well as anti-TSA, anti-government claims.
	It's not clear what really gave rise to these references.
	Federal investigators have found no known links to any groups or anything in the suspect's background to explain them.
	For people, perhaps...
	Okay.
	For people who perhaps need to be brainwashed, slavewashed now, into understanding conspiracy theory about the New World Order, Barbara Starr, Pentagon correspondent, shall explain it to you.
	Not familiar.
	New World Order is generally accepted to be a conspiracy theory where people believe that there are elites out there forming some sort of special authoritarian government.
	This is the generally accepted view of what New World Order means.
	But investigators, Alison, still looking into all of this.
	And for those of you who may just be listening to the No Agenda show now for the first time, I would like to play for you a clip where the term New World Order was pretty much first used in public by the grand conspiracy theorist of them all, the biggest, the Mac Daddy of all the elites!
	We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a New World Order.
	A world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations.
	When we are successful, and we will be.
	We have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the UN's founders.
	Excuse me.
	Is that not creepy enough for you, Barbara Starr?
	That's pretty creepy.
	That is President Bush!
	One.
	One.
	Well, two said it, and Clinton said it.
	This was the best speech you got.
	That is the definitive clip.
	So, you know, let me just roll back just for a second here what she was telling us, just so we can see if that gels with what you just heard.
	Come on, Barbara.
	Talk to me.
	Talk to me, girl.
	Generally accepted to be a conspiracy theory where people believe that there are elites out there forming some sort of special authoritarian government.
	This is the generally accepted view of what New World Order means.
	That's exactly what President Bush said.
	Not some law of the jungle for you jungle bunnies.
	Nice try on the accent.
	Hey!
	Hey, want to smoke some weed?
	Well, now that's falling apart.
	No, I know.
	Well, actually, I have...
	What do I have here?
	I've got a little...
	Hey, kids!
	Let's party the firewall!
	What do you think of the music?
	It might work.
	We don't have to play any more of that character.
	It's played.
	It's played.
	But let's play at least this one, which I think was one of these good little side stories that kind of came out of it.
	This is the LAX wrong guy syndrome.
	Oh, yeah.
	This was another good one.
	Forever to get there.
	Absolutely.
	And we heard earlier another witness told one of our reporters that as he was running away from the scene, he had...
	Police officers surround him, pointing guns at him, not knowing if he himself was a suspect, handcuffing him.
	So, you know, just a scene of complete chaos.
	Our reporter Chris Wolfe has been speaking with law enforcement officers.
	He was just at the press conference.
	He's joining us live now.
	Chris, what can you tell us?
	Yeah, we had some questions answered, Carolyn and Glenn, and so many other pressing ones, though, not answered.
	It was very frustrating for so many of the reporters out here.
	Very, very frustrating.
	Namely, were there any fatalities?
	Was anyone killed?
	We're seeing...
	I have something that I need to share.
	Share!
	Share it, my friend.
	This was really the thing that set me on...
	Okay, now I know something is up and bogative with this.
	The Southern Poverty Law Center...
	What?
	Yes.
	Let's just review who they are for a moment.
	The Southern Poverty Law Center is a group who are always referenced, not just by media, but also by politicians as tracking the evil that exists in America, primarily hate groups.
	White supremacists, racists, and I've always felt very uneasy about the Southern Poverty Law Center.
	They are the go-to guys.
	And they post on their website, Southern Poverty Law SPLC exclusive.
	So they have an exclusive.
	Well, they got a news organization going on?
	Apparently.
	Alleged LAX shooter referenced anti-government manifesto.
	So just think about what they're doing here.
	Ciancia's language and references...
	I'm telling you, this show is doomed.
	Paul Anthony Ciancia, who allegedly wounded three other TSA workers before being shot and critically wounded himself, also expressed antagonism towards the Department of Homeland Security and its chief until she resigned in August.
	Janet Napolitano, the source said...
	Ciancia's note called former Janet Napolitano a bull dyke and contained the phrase F.U. Janet Napolitano.
	So this is an exclusive they have now.
	Stop the presses.
	Hatewatch has no records of Ciancia and he is not known to have joined or participated in the activities of any radical groups.
	The attack which Cianci allegedly carried out using a semi-automatic.223 caliber AR-15, boy, they have that information, huh?
	I guess they got all the forensics right off the bat.
	Beautiful.
	Comes at a time when the patriot movement has been growing by leaps and bounds.
	From some 149 groups in 2008 to 1,360 last year, according to counts by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
	That explosive growth seems to have been driven by the election of our first black president and the approaching loss of a white majority in the U.S. that he represents.
	Fuck you!
	These guys are crazy.
	This is racial hatred.
	These people should be shut down.
	That's not okay, John.
	That's not okay.
	That is racist, outrageous crap.
	Yeah, no, I'm all in on that.
	You're right.
	This is a horrible, horrible racist assertion.
	I'm incensed.
	You have to remember that Obama wouldn't be elected if it wasn't for the white vote.
	Yeah, but forget about that.
	I'm incensed that these guys who are supposedly tracking racism, this is racist!
	Yeah, but this is not new to us.
	No, but I'm out of breath.
	MSNBC promotes this.
	You've been predicting it.
	Oh, but I'm so, I'm upset.
	Momentarily, because after this I'm going to smoke some weed and I'll carry on with my life.
	But oh man, this is just so not okay.
	This is...
	Stoking.
	Stoking.
	There's a bunch of people like that.
	Stoking.
	The embers of a potential race riot.
	I'm convinced that I would put Al Sharpton into this group and a lot of others that would love to sit back.
	They won't be in it.
	Sit back and watch a race riot because there's money to be made.
	There's profit in a massive race riot.
	You're so right.
	This is written by Mark Potok.
	He's the senior fellow.
	He is the Southern Poverty Law Center.
	And I have a video and audio of him actually admitting that they lie.
	You know, we have to trump it up a little bit.
	I mean, the guy is an asshole.
	I'm sorry.
	This is not okay.
	It's just not okay.
	This is un-American to do this.
	To say, these groups, whoa, it's because of black president.
	Ugh, please.
	You have no evidence of that.
	Ugh.
	So it's even more disappointing.
	Really, really, for me, well, for the show, disappointing.
	It's another installment of...
	The Obots!
	Friday night.
	Oh no, you're telling me, wait a minute.
	So in other words, this is just becoming a dead end.
	We have a jingle.
	I know.
	We have a jingle, and it's a dead end.
	I could not, and I laid back a little bit.
	You know what?
	You know what?
	I sounded like, you know what?
	You know what?
	Guess what?
	I... They have meetings before you come over.
	No, no, no.
	Not only that, they listen to the show before the dinner.
	They admitted that.
	Yeah, we listen to the show.
	Oh, this is no good.
	No.
	Oh, man.
	So they listen to the show.
	So they suck now.
	There's just another group that you can hit.
	You might as well have dinner with a couple of men on the street.
	Why somebody doesn't listen to the show and have dinner with them?
	Hold on a second.
	They don't suck.
	Don't say that!
	These are my friends!
	Actually, because I felt it early on.
	And there is a total...
	They're treating you like you're criminally insane.
	No, no, no, no.
	You feel good?
	No, there's something else.
	No, there's something else going on.
	And I think that the narrative has...
	Don't bring that up with him.
	Don't bring that up with him.
	We know what he's going to say.
	He's already said it on the show.
	Don't even talk about it.
	No, no, no.
	It's possible they have that meeting.
	I think it's worse.
	I think they have become apathetic.
	Is that the word?
	Could be.
	Just unaffected.
	Now that they've given up.
	There was that clip that we had from Glenn Greenwald last show where he says, how do the Democrats feel about this?
	They're all on the side of Bush.
	I mean, because Greenwald's a real progressive that thinks that Obama is Bush three.
	And I think that there's a lot of that kind of thinking as the drone thing continues and the spying thing continues and this ludicrous healthcare.gov thing doesn't work and never will.
	All that goes on.
	I think it throws a lot of the Democrats into a cocoon because they don't want to deal with it.
	Well, you know what actually happened?
	The professor, I think the professor is on our side.
	We did talk about healthcare.gov, and he has full access to one of the best supercomputer centers in the academic world.
	The UT supercomputer center and resources are better than Stanford.
	It's much better organized.
	It's more powerful.
	I'm sure that's what they like to say.
	No, I think they'll get there.
	Stanford just was late to the game somehow.
	And UT, it's kind of in their DNA to have this.
	But, you know, so he understands these big systems, and he would talk about it a little bit, and he understands it's not just a stupid website.
	I mean, the guy, he programs.
	That's part of what he does.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, that's a big deal.
	Well, before you go on with that little explanation, we do have to play this one clip, which kind of gets people up to speed, which is healthcare.gov enrollment clip.
	Newly revealed documents have provided hard numbers showing just how few people were able to enroll in health insurance through the new government website amidst massive technical failures.
	The Obama administration says there were 4.7 million unique visits to the site in the first 24 hours.
	But according to notes from a meeting on the morning after the launch, just six people had successfully enrolled.
	Of course, it didn't work.
	It's very obvious.
	That's...
	I love that, dude.
	Six people.
	But just to stay with the dinner for a second, because there were some little gems.
	So he just couldn't, you know, he's like, yeah, you know, this is a horrible mess.
	And we'd had a little bit of conversation.
	Like, do you think if commercial companies did this?
	I said, no.
	No.
	Jim, there's a reason why you have to wait, you know, five minutes to get your airline ticket.
	Because it's a batch process.
	It took years for the airlines to integrate their legacy systems.
	I mean, I integrated Avon ladies.
	It took years for us to do that.
	Avon ladies!
	Avon system!
	This is not easy.
	Hubris is what it is.
	Just hubris.
	It's also naivete.
	Naivete, but I think part of that is hubris.
	I think what's happening, and you see this with people we know as well.
	I don't want to point out the obvious, but Leo.
	You see that they kind of give in to it, and it's hard for them to live with the idea that it is just more of the same, you know, hello to the new boss, same as the old boss, and so they just become, they put like shields up, you know, whoop!
	Shields go up, okay, whatever, we'll just deal with it as it is, as it comes.
	And so there was not even one single mention of crazy guns.
	In fact, this thing that happened, it's not even getting anti-gun stuff rolling.
	People don't care anymore, John.
	They've now become numb to it.
	You can...
	You can't throw stuff at people every six weeks and expect them to care after a while because then you become removed.
	Well, there's a couple of problems with...
	Let's take the six weeks and assume that it's a well-thought-out cycle.
	It's probably the maximum number of times you can do this within a year, let's say.
	I mean, this is not...
	Since we spotted it, this has obviously been studied.
	You also know that Comey happened to be in L.A., the brand new director of the FBI, just happened to be in Los Angeles when this went down.
	By coincidence.
	By coincidence, yeah, of course.
	Okay, so you have this...
	You're inundating the public with these events that are all, you know, the Boston bomber or some event or another, and you end up with...
	Let me try to get through this.
	You go with gun control as your issue.
	This is what we're going to do.
	We're going to get this gun thing taken care of.
	And then you roll out your gun proposals.
	And the counter, the group on the other side, just inundates.
	They flood the market with reasons that this isn't going to work, why it's not a good idea, we've got too many guns already, there's nothing to do about it, and on and on.
	And so you do it again, you try something else, and then again, there's a flood of pro-gun stuff.
	And at some point, some of the pro-gun stuff starts to...
	That you never heard before because you've always been anti-gun and you've never shot a gun.
	You've never done anything with guns.
	But you start hearing this, which you never would have heard before.
	This is like the popularization of MP3. This would have remained an underground phenomenon forever if it wasn't for the RIAA suing left and right and losing every time.
	Suing over MP3s.
	Oh, these are illegal.
	You can't do it.
	And people would say, I didn't know you could get music for free.
	Hey, wait a minute.
	I didn't know you could download all the stuff.
	What's that Napster thing?
	And it sounds pretty good, this music, even if I'm a teenager.
	This is the problem with this approach to propagandizing the public.
	It fires.
	And I will tell you, and it's kind of interesting because there was another person added to the mix, which may have influenced everything, by the way.
	Nice guy, Peter.
	He came stag, and he actually is a consultant for Big Data, kid you not, for Goldman Sachs.
	Wow.
	And he wasn't taking the bait.
	But you know what?
	I learned a lot.
	And I think Lori at one point said, just so you know, everything you say here can be used on the show!
	I'm like, ugh.
	Okay, so...
	And quite honestly, I don't want to be like some kind of rodeo clown that shows up and you...
	Here he comes!
	Woo!
	Let's tell him something kooky!
	Throw balloons at him!
	Water balloons!
	So what actually happened is, you know, there's a very interesting mix and actually Molly Wood landed like at 8 o'clock and she came over and so...
	It was a real Obot dinner, no doubt about it, but there was no...
	You know, the conversations were, are we in a tech bubble?
	We talked about books.
	There was no political...
	And there was every reason.
	And there was alcohol involved.
	So, you know, people can easily...
	They should be slipping up.
	And I was nudging here and there just a little bit.
	We just had the Texas Supreme Court overturn, you know, the objections against the abortion law.
	Right, you have a whole spiel on that.
	Yeah, so there was a whole bunch of stuff to go.
	And it just didn't happen, John.
	Now, of course...
	So you don't blame yourself?
	Because you may be...
	As somebody wrote in to me, and I'll reveal this.
	I mean, I don't know if you've got a copy of this, Larry.
	It says, I think Adam has become a stooge for the Obots.
	He's been going to too many dinners.
	He's starting to get influenced.
	You can hear it in some of his analysis.
	Oh, what?
	He's been corrupted by the Obot group that he keeps hanging out with.
	Hold on.
	Hold on a second.
	Is this from Brian...
	I don't remember who it was.
	This was a couple weeks ago.
	Oh, let me give you this, because someone said that we were both corrupted.
	Have you been compromised?
	This question is similar to, have you stopped beating your wife?
	In that there is no good answer.
	But after I listen to Thursday's show, I feel like I have to ask.
	For months, I've listened to you guys rail against the NSA, Kaiser Alexander, domestic spying, so on and so forth.
	Now, all of a sudden, you're flipping the script and saying that it's the CIA and Alexander's just their bitch?
	Did the NSA... Did the NSA get to you?
	Do they have a record of your Silk Road purchases and are holding it over your head?
	What's their leverage, Curry?
	I didn't expect a direct response or anything, but I think it would be worth a minute or two of Sunday's show to reassure your faithful listeners.
	But then again, like I said, there's no good answer to the question.
	After all, a denial is exactly what someone who was compromised would offer, right?
	No, this is not that guy.
	Okay.
	Alright, it's not that guy.
	But he makes a point.
	But, you know...
	Mickey is my witness.
	And you know that she would not mess around.
	It just didn't really happen.
	And I think it's good.
	Maybe they drugged the food.
	What did happen...
	I pretty much just sat next to the professor and picked his brain for three hours.
	Yeah, you were supposed to ask him some specific questions.
	Yes, so first of all, lumosity.
	The bogative brain training.
	I saw a radio ad for that the other day.
	Yeah, you saw the radio ad.
	My God, you're good.
	It's amazing.
	So we talked about lumosity.
	First of all, he had heard us talk about neuroelasticity.
	Which is in the Lumosity advertising.
	He said, that is crap.
	Neuroplasticity is a real word.
	Neuroelasticity says made up.
	Totally made up.
	Okay.
	And so I said, okay, well, can't this...
	And then he said, this is not neuroscience.
	These brain games are psychology.
	So I thought that was good.
	And so the question, of course, was if you do these puzzles...
	Does it really make you smarter, as kind of the claim is?
	And he did not dismiss it immediately.
	He said, well, anything you do, like we had suggested, read a book, just as valid.
	But if you really want to sharpen up your brain, to train your brain, to exercise your brain, he says, the best thing you can do is go for a walk.
	He says physical exercise, jogging, that really does it.
	He says everything else is, yeah, maybe valid, maybe not, depends on the test, whatever, but physical exercise is always going to be the absolute best.
	And then I learned something that you and I may want to look at as a business.
	There is...
	Quite a business to be made, I think, in managing hotshot professors.
	These guys are like basketball stars.
	They get offers from all over the country, from schools, and they're flying them out, throwing hookers at them.
	It's like, first class, hotels, come look at our facility.
	And these guys have no idea how to do it.
	They're like, okay.
	They have no idea how to manage their own careers.
	And is there like an agency for professors?
	No, not that I know of.
	We'll do it.
	Well, actually, you could probably do a management group that would handle this.
	It would be the same as the sports management operations.
	Yes, exactly.
	More so than celebrity management, which is different than sports management.
	It's similar but different.
	I mean, it's really, at the end of the day, it's down to negotiating the package.
	It's the salary.
	It's the resources.
	It's a whole bunch of stuff.
	And what I see a lot of these guys doing now that I've heard some of the stories is they get invited, they go out, they get wined and done.
	And I'm like, no, you're not going anywhere anymore.
	This is it.
	Done.
	You're staying home.
	Have them call me.
	I'll talk to them.
	Just write down the number that you want.
	We can go get that for you.
	I just found it to be amazing that there's no company that does that.
	Like a sports representation.
	Probably the thing to do is look into how sports transitioned from what it was to what it is with all these agents.
	And you'd probably see the same pattern.
	It's a fractal.
	Sports is based on Hollywood celebrities and how they're handled.
	And then they said, we can do that with these guys.
	Well, you could probably do it with these superstar professors, especially nowadays when the universities all have this huge budgets and they're gouging the students.
	Yeah.
	Multi-billion dollar operations.
	They're bigger than most sports franchises.
	Exactly.
	By a lot.
	And you get a name.
	The name comes in.
	It's marketed.
	It's a big deal.
	It's great for the endowment.
	These guys are writing grants.
	You can write the grant and not submit it and take that part with you, which could be money in the bank.
	I also talked to the professor.
	I said, just stop running after NIH money, man.
	Go after DOD. MKUltra2, come on.
	Let's do something real here.
	MKUltra2.
	It was fun.
	The whole table's like...
	That would be bigger money, I agree.
	NIH money's got to be crap compared to DOD money.
	Here's the funny thing.
	He's on the floor, and the whole table's like, what's MKUltra?
	And he's like...
	He knew everything.
	That's funny because my experience, it's usually the left that knows more about MKUltra than the right does.
	The only one who knew it was the professor.
	He's the only one that knew about it.
	Wow.
	Yeah.
	I consider that to be highly weird.
	And then we talked about a whole bunch of stuff like, can we make MRIs, home-based MRIs?
	It's a tough racket the guy's in.
	Yeah.
	It's a racket.
	It's a racket.
	I read all his grants.
	It's fantastic.
	I like talking to him.
	It's good.
	I think he's a valuable resource as the official brain professor of the No Agenda show.
	He's also a nice guy, and I like having these dinners, and I learn a lot.
	But I think as a mockery, I think it may be over.
	I think the mockery of my friends may just not work anymore.
	Yeah, probably.
	But that again, maybe because you've gotten too close to the source.
	It's possible.
	It's possible.
	It doesn't mean we're not going to continue to do it.
	Of course.
	So what did they serve for food?
	Korean was interesting.
	Korean?
	What Korean is in the audience?
	I don't know exactly what this was, or why it was Korean, but they had the Korean squid, which is an interesting taste.
	The shrimp, and some of it's rather spicy, kind of hot.
	So you have a million little dishes of crazy things?
	Yeah, but then we all had a big thing of beef.
	Right.
	Which, I don't know if that was necessarily Korean.
	Oh, no, yeah, it is.
	That is the Korean thing.
	Yeah, that was quite outstanding.
	I had two pieces of the beef.
	And then, what do you call it?
	The creme brulee, homemade creme brulee.
	The Korean version?
	Yes.
	Yeah, and the professor, I think he brought a torch from the lab.
	Mickey took a picture of it.
	He was, like, standing four feet away.
	Boom!
	It's pretty funny.
	You're supposed to put those in a salamander to do it right, but okay.
	What's a salamander?
	It's like a broiler.
	It's got real high heat.
	They don't have a salamander.
	I don't think they have that.
	So, yeah, it was great.
	Dinner was great, and everything was great, and, you know, it was great.
	It was just, I'm sorry, no mockery.
	It's just not going to happen.
	Yeah, okay.
	Well, that's the way it goes.
	It's another installment of...
	And let me say to you, John C. Dvorak, in the morning.
	Yeah, in the morning to you too, Adam Curry.
	Sellout.
	What?
	He puts on the ground, feet in the air, subs in the water, and all the days and nights.
	You call me a sellout?
	Really?
	Wow.
	Okay.
	All right, fine.
	Just because I can't make it up.
	I can't make up stuff.
	That's harsh.
	Well, in the morning, everyone there in the chatroom, knowledge in the stream.com, knowledge in the chat.net.
	And in the morning to our artists, apologies to Nick the Rat.
	We omitted thanking him for the artwork on episode 560.
	And then we had Joss Pettigrew, who did the artwork for 561.
	Always curious to see what shows up at noagendaartgenerator.com.
	We always choose the art right after the show, so get your entries in as soon as possible.
	This is a value-for-value program.
	The list is going to be short today.
	But we do have, I think, two executive producers and an associate executive producer just like Hollywood.
	They are the ones that get the credits right up front for producing the program by supporting it in, well, financially, but more ways than one often.
	And who do we have, John?
	We don't have much.
	Mm-hmm.
	We do have, by the way, a couple of things on the side that I wanted to mention.
	Tim Shannon, one of our contributors, says he just came up with his note I thought was good.
	Probably the only producer to be sacked while listening to No Agenda.
	Yeah.
	On 328, listening on the stream when the man, woman but looks like a dude, taps me on the shoulder, fired.
	Yeah, that's pretty messed up, man.
	He requests a Dr.
	Kiki Karma, if you can give him one.
	Being fired.
	He was listening to the show.
	At work.
	Yeah.
	Maybe you should pay attention to driving the bus.
	Instead of listening to the show.
	No wonder you got fired!
	Shut up already!
	Science!
	Here's your karma, man.
	I've got karma.
	I'm sure you'll land on your feet.
	Yeah, you'll bounce back.
	Keep listening to the show.
	Robert Alter came in.
	We have two executive producers and one lone associate executive.
	Robert Alter, 33333.
	In the morning, I've been working in Paris for the last few months and need some karma to help make this project end smoothly.
	No, absolutely.
	Smooth ending karma for you, Robert.
	You've got karma.
	In gay Paris.
	In Elkins, West Virginia.
	It's a random hillbilly, uh...
	Came with some money so Miss Mickey can get her massage this month.
	Tell Adam to suck it up.
	Not quite sure what that refers to.
	I don't know, but I will.
	And then for Associate Executive Producer, we have Jeffrey Fitch out of Windermere, Florida, 21278.
	And all he has to say to us is thank you for your courage.
	Thank you for your courage, Jeffrey.
	We appreciate that.
	And that is it, right, for the execs?
	That is it.
	That's it.
	All through, all done.
	Go to noagendashow.com.
	Noagendanation.com or dvorak.org slash N-A and channeldvorak.com slash N-A. But dvorak.org slash N-A to help us bring the numbers up a little bit for the next show on Thursday as we begin the new six-week cycle.
	That's right.
	And we'll be on the lookout for December 13th.
	dvorak.org slash N-A. And remember, we can always use a little bit of propagation of da formula.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out...
	We hit people in the mouth.
	We hit people in the mouth.
	Water!
	Shut up, play!
	Shut up, play!
	Before we move on, John, there's a couple of things.
	It's the start of a new month.
	It is also here in the United States of Gitmo Nation, the entrance of Daylight Savings Time.
	The clocks fell back one hour, and I'm always complaining about this.
	Except in Arizona.
	Hawaii, and I think Utah also does not.
	I didn't know about Utah, but Arizona for sure.
	I decided, because I'm always very skeptical, and I dislike, it was for farmers, Benjamin Franklin came up with it, it saves electricity, it saves lives, whatever.
	I've always been quite certain that whoever's New World Order entities are behind this, they're making a bundle on it, and we're just stupid.
	And I think my main thinking has always been, it's just pure slave training.
	Let's just see what we can make them do.
	But I looked at all the different legislation that has dealt with this, as recent as 2007, actually, when we had the Energy Policy Act, and this really didn't have that much to do with policy.
	I think I've discovered what it really is about, because there's one term that keeps coming back, starting with the Uniform Time Act of 1966, and Which is really when we codified the daylight savings time, the original daylight savings time, and the time zones.
	No, that's not the original.
	No.
	Listen to me.
	The Uniform Time Act of 1966 included the codification of the time zones that we have in the United States into our law books.
	And I have the term that really makes the most sense for daylight savings time and why time zones are in place in the United States.
	And the term is convenience of commerce.
	And I think that makes the most sense as the reason why we have this.
	Is to make sure people shop more.
	Well, it was...
	It goes back so far, though, that I think there's a good theory.
	Well, it's not a theory.
	It's they write it in the law.
	It says for the convenience of commerce.
	But they were pushing this back for farmers.
	Let me just go what I know.
	I know that in the 20s it was a big deal.
	It was first invented.
	I'm looking at the wiki page now.
	In 1895 it came around.
	There was a huge...
	I have a bunch of clips.
	I don't have them on the...
	I'll bring them out.
	They're old clips from...
	where Hollywood was irked about this because daylight savings time was going to screw up movie showtimes.
	Right.
	So they had all these Hollywood characters coming out saying how terrible the idea was.
	And then their argument became, well, it was – and this always baffled me because it makes zero sense.
	It's for the farmers so they can get – they don't have to get up and stuff.
	The farmers can get up at any time.
	There shouldn't even be a clock.
	They just get up and do whatever they do and they're done.
	It's like the bitching about with the bread makers.
	Oh, they should be getting up at five, now four.
	It's just what they do.
	So the shopping thing is probably the only thing that kind of makes sense.
	Makes sense.
	Makes sense.
	Because it's like, eh, it's still daylight.
	I know when you're up in Washington State during the summer, it's kind of interesting because the sun doesn't really set.
	And I was in Iceland where the sun never set in the summer.
	You're up there and it's like 10.30 when it finally sets and you go, oh, we didn't eat dinner yet.
	We were out.
	You were out when it's sunny.
	You're just not in eating dinner.
	Exactly.
	And then you're just like, oh my God, it's almost midnight.
	We haven't eaten.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's a very strange phenomenon, but it has to do with the usable daylight hours.
	And I think they try to make it so...
	When you get up, you're starting to deal with usable daylight hours, so that shifts just enough that I guess they could change the time and make people shop more.
	Well, of all the things, in 1966 it came back in 96, I think, and then 2007, because we changed the time.
	It was supposed to be the first Sunday in November, then it was the last Sunday in October.
	Which is different from Europe.
	Now we're all screwed up.
	But every single time it says convenience of commerce.
	I'm like, yeah, that actually I'll buy.
	That's to get people to shop longer.
	That could be billions of dollars.
	It could be a lot of money.
	It would be billions of dollars.
	If people are shopping an hour more, then it would be billions.
	We need to say in the morning to all of the boys in the boneyard.
	That's Palm Springs Pride is today.
	It's like all the senior citizen gay guys, they call themselves the Boneyard.
	The gays that live in Palm Springs?
	The old guys, yeah.
	They say Palm Springs Pride is the Boneyard.
	Have you ever been to Palm Springs?
	Yeah.
	Not on Pride Day.
	I didn't know they had a price.
	And then we have just a slew of presidential proclamations.
	This is the month, John.
	We picked a month to celebrate.
	Let's see what we got.
	All by presidential proclamation.
	Remember when it just used to be simple?
	It was like American History Month or Fire Prevention Month.
	Smokey the Bear says, you know, remember how that was easy?
	No.
	It was usually a month.
	It wasn't 20 things a month.
	No.
	It is National Diabetes Month.
	I thought we already had National Diabetes Week.
	Yeah, but this is the month.
	It is National Entrepreneurship Month.
	It is National Military Family Month.
	And it is National Native American Heritage Month.
	Go Redskins!
	It is National Adoption Month.
	So how come the Redskins are like under this attack?
	I saw the Cleveland Indians for some reason.
	But the Redskins right now is at the focus of attention when you have one of the top football teams in the country, the Florida State Seminoles.
	Oh please, John, it's just cultural Marxism.
	Which brings out some guy, an Indian guy, comes running out on a horse and stabs this field with his spear.
	It's cultural Marxism.
	And that's not offensive?
	It's cultural Marxism.
	Ignore.
	Just ignore all that.
	And it's easy because it is also National Alzheimer's Disease Awareness Month.
	We forgive you if you forgot about it.
	It is National Family Caregivers Month.
	But then here's the one that I like the most, which coincided nicely with the movie on the Nat Geo channel, and with a brand new executive order.
	It is National Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience Month.
	Why do you even bother with this?
	This segment of the show is borders on crazy.
	This is very important.
	First of all, if the president is going to proclaim something and no one is going to report on it, why don't we at least look at it?
	And this is not by accident.
	I think it's funny that the movie appeared in the same period of time, yes.
	Did you see the movie, by the way?
	I did, and I can tell you the movie was a piece of crap.
	We're talking about the movie Blackout, and the only reason for it was to promote Doomsday Preppers.
	Four sweeps week.
	Okay, right.
	That's all they did.
	They actually had little chyrons during the movie that said, like, there are three million preppers in America.
	It was so blatantly obvious, it was disgusting.
	Now, this presidential proclamation of critical infrastructure security and resilience month does not come without reason.
	The president released an executive order, a very long and detailed one, called Preparing the United States for the Impact of Climate Change.
	Oh.
	And this is a very, very detailed, very broad-reaching, I would say, executive order, which is law when the president does this.
	And I'll just read you a little bit of Section 1.
	Policy, the impacts of climate change, including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures...
	More heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea level rise are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation.
	And then the president goes into essentially giving every single agency in these United States power to do anything to halt this.
	Now, what is interesting is that in this executive order he refers to Presidential Policy Directive 21.
	And this is where your month comes into play.
	Of course, we have Presidential Policy Directive 21.
	Which is critical infrastructure security and resilience.
	Gee!
	How coincidental is that?
	And this is all about cyber security.
	Yeah, this is what we should be going into.
	This is where the big dough is going to be blown.
	I mean, the government's got all this money that they collect, and they've got to spend it on stuff by scaring the public into thinking they need these things.
	And this cybersecurity thing is going to be a huge bonanza for anyone who can figure out.
	I mean, if you've got guys, these ex-CIA guys, what's his name?
	I can't remember his name, but you've seen him a million times.
	And all these other characters who know nothing about computers...
	I would put probably Alexander into that category.
	And all they do is talk about the cybersecurity threat and how we got to spend $400 billion to protect the networks.
	This means this is just money.
	The Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall lead counterterrorism and counterintelligence investigations and related law enforcement activities across the critical infrastructure sectors, which includes telecommunications.
	The Department of Justice shall investigate, disrupt, prosecute, and otherwise reduce foreign intelligent terrorists and other threats to an actual or attempted attacks on or sabotage of the nation's critical infrastructure.
	The FBI also conducts domestic collection, analysis, and dissemination of cyber threat information and shall be responsible for the operation of the National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force.
	The NCI JTF serves as a multi-agency national focal point for coordinating, integrating, and sharing pertinent information related to cyber threat investigations and representation from DHS, the Intelligence Community, Department of Defense, and other agencies as appropriate.
	FBI is now basically given full reign to spy on American citizens.
	In name of critical infrastructure, security, and resilience under the preparation for impacts of climate change.
	It's crazy!
	That makes nothing but sense.
	But that's really what's happening.
	And to celebrate this wonderful operation with critical infrastructure, security, and resilience month is just throwing it in our face, icing on the cake.
	So while we're all preoccupied with the NSA... Or LAX. Or LAX for that case.
	And by the way, I was quite happy that we had at least a change of some sort.
	Oh yeah, I was thinking the same thing.
	It was really getting the show, especially the last show, I think it was reflected in our donations.
	The amount of really cool things we had to talk about and deconstruct, it kept being the same thing.
	Who needs this NSA? I admire Glenn Greenwald in this regard.
	He knows how to dole it out.
	You know, you're starting to forget about it.
	Here's another little one.
	You're starting to forget about it.
	Here's another little one, which drives, apparently, the intelligence community crazy.
	Well, no.
	If it was all dumped at once, it would have been forgotten by now.
	It drives the NSA crazy.
	Yeah, the CIA's probably behind it.
	They probably did a study saying, look, this is the way you do it.
	No, no, no, don't bring this all out at once!
	No, no, no, you're an idiot!
	It's funny because the New York Times came out, I think it was either this morning or last night, with a very detailed, huge, wham-a-lam-a-ding-dong doozy of an article.
	Let me just see what it was called here.
	It was just like, whoa, this was the big one.
	And it includes so much about the NSA specifically, but even admits in the article, well, there's stuff that we have in the documents that we agreed with the NSA and the administration not to publish.
	Because that's what they do.
	Everything is already known.
	But all of a sudden, it dawned on me, because there's a little small thing that changed, and unfortunately, it happened at the Council on Foreign Relations, and I could not find video or audio of it.
	I do have the transcript.
	Kaiser Alexander was at the Council on Foreign Relations.
	I guess the guy is glutton for punishment or something.
	And Democrat State Senator of Maryland pressed Alexander...
	Wait, stop a second.
	So, yeah, there's a glutton...
	Why is this guy who used to be unknown to everybody?
	Because the NSA was a super secret thing.
	Why is this guy...
	I saw him twice this week.
	Once he was speaking in front of some group that said semantic behind him, and then he was with some other group, you know, talking, and then he's in front of Congress.
	This guy, this guy's hardly much of a, he reminds me of these mafia guys who all of a sudden decide to be highly public.
	Well, remember, he's leaving, so now he's going to cash in on his political capital.
	He has to get a rep for himself so he can get a couple of those board seats on General Electric.
	We can almost predict the company.
	It's like, well, how about Symantec?
	Okay, good one.
	He'll be on Symantec, he'll be on General Electric, he'll be on, let's see, what other people, IBM? Probably.
	He's got to be on IBM. He's probably talking to Mike Morello of the CIA as well, who all of a sudden comes out.
	Maybe Apple, because Apple sold out.
	Apple would be good.
	Well, anyway, let me just tell you what happened there, because I, all of a sudden, I'm like, oh, hold on a second.
	There's another little edge to this, and an email you sent me ties into this.
	So this Democratic state senator, I'm going to quote from the article, pressed Alexander to give a national security justification for the agency's use of surveillance tools intended for combating terrorism against democratically elected leaders and private businesses.
	So it's no longer about citizens like us.
	We all joke that everyone is spying on everyone, Alexander said, but that is not a national security justification.
	Alexander replied, here's the reply, that's a great question, which is not, of course.
	In fact, as an ambassador, you have part of the answer, because we, the intelligence agencies, don't come up with the requirements.
	The policy makers come up with the requirements.
	One of those groups would have been, let me think, hold on, oh, yeah, ambassadors.
	So now he's slamming the State Department.
	And if you'll recall, there was a WikiLeaks cable where Hillary Clinton...
	Was ordering diplomats to spy on UN leaders.
	And I think, particularly if you take all of this into account, that the State Department, beside the CIA, the State Department may have a hand in deflecting anything away from Hillary's spying initiatives to put it all onto the NSA because Hillary's going to make a run.
	And we need to start running interference now and putting the blame squarely on other people.
	And I think if you look at the closeness between State Department and CIA, it makes a lot of sense those two are playing together.
	There are some other documents that kind of push this theory.
	Yeah, could be.
	And this, of course, comes down to...
	I like this.
	I like that.
	We've got to keep the Hillary angle going because Hillary is still working.
	She's working it.
	She's got her face done.
	Did you see that the reporter, she made $400,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs?
	Already?
	Yeah.
	By the way...
	Two speeches.
	Two speeches.
	Let's get a couple things straight about this.
	This is essentially a way of bribing somebody.
	Yes.
	So what you do, you get somebody out of office.
	It's not the same with a retired president, but it's kind of.
	With a retired president, you do these high million-dollar speaking engagements because you had promised them You know, you couldn't do anything when they were in office.
	You just said, don't worry, we'll make it up to you.
	And so you do them the bidding.
	This country's been this way forever, by the way.
	You do the bidding of this operator, the Saudis, or whoever it is that you're in bed with, and you don't, you know, there's no...
	It's not necessarily a paper trail except for millions of $5 donations that get anonymized.
	So after you're out, which is always a big fear about the Clinton Library, is that then all of a sudden you get $10 million gift to the Clinton Library, and you get another $20 million, you get another $50 million.
	And so now Hillary is essentially getting paid in advance because she's not in office, so this is not corrupt.
	But she's getting paid in advance by Goldman Sachs because her speaking fee...
	Is $200,000 really?
	Hillary, according to the New York Times, Hillary Clinton spoke at two separate Goldman Sachs events on the evenings of Thursday, October 24th and Tuesday, October 29th.
	Clinton's fee is approximately $200,000 per speech.
	New York Times says.
	Yeah, it's called a fee schedule in this case.
	It's not a speaking fee.
	It's a fee schedule.
	It's like, here's what I want from you.
	This reminds me of another interesting scam.
	People always talk about this.
	All these Japanese golf clubs.
	If you join a country club in Japan, it costs you like $100,000 a year and $10,000 a month.
	It's not what this is all about because they tried to pull this scam by...
	The Japanese operation wanted to buy the Pebble Beach in Monterey, and it started to come out what was really going on.
	The Yakuza are tying these things, and what happens, you offend a Yakuza boss, and then they say, okay, we can kill you, but instead we want you to join the country club.
	And so you become a member of this, essentially a Yakuza front, and you're essentially giving them $100,000.
	It's just like a page.
	It cannot kill you.
	This is extortion.
	Right.
	And essentially what Hillary's doing is extorting her fee.
	If I become president, who knows what can happen?
	I think you guys owe me a couple of speeches.
	Right.
	And by the way, I think it would be much more.
	I think that's cheap for where she's at.
	I don't think she knows her worth.
	No.
	Another person we could manage.
	Hillary, by the way...
	Yeah, well, she's poorly managed.
	We know that because of the first...
	When she ran against Obama.
	Yeah.
	She just had a bunch of these psycho fans that were useless, and they lost the election to Obama.
	I was an amateur.
	Let me...
	Oh, my God.
	Did you hear about this new book?
	No.
	Oh, wow.
	Hold on a second.
	It's called Double Down.
	And I have it here.
	It's not out yet, but the pre-promotion is just fantastic.
	In it, the claim is that Obama is talking about how good he is at killing people with drones.
	I love that.
	It's like, woo!
	Can't wait to read that book.
	Here's the Bill Maher show.
	He had director Rob Reiner on.
	I'm a huge fan of Hillary Clinton's.
	I'm a friend of Hillary Clinton's.
	I don't know what she's going to do.
	I don't know what her plans are.
	But if she decides to run, you will have the single most qualified person ever to run for president of the United States.
	And let me say, Wait, hold on a second.
	Let's just sit on that for a second.
	The single most qualified person to have ever run?
	No, he didn't say that.
	No, he didn't say that.
	He didn't say that.
	I'm a huge fan of Hillary Clinton's.
	I'm a friend of Hillary Clinton's.
	I don't know what she's going to do.
	I don't know what her plans are.
	But if she decides to run, you will have the single most qualified person ever to run for President of the United States.
	You're right.
	He said ever.
	That's bullcrap.
	But right now...
	Really?
	Right now, as it stands, I think she's the single most qualified person to run for president.
	Absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	I want her to be...
	But the way he said it, she's more qualified than George Washington.
	That's bullcrap.
	But if you look at the lay of the lay, and you know my stance on her, you know I want her to be president, you know why, too.
	Yeah, because you have a death wish.
	Let's listen.
	You think Obama likes using drones.
	I mean, that is the land of unconfirmed.
	Yes, we came, we saw, he died.
	That's right.
	Always a winner.
	Yeah, it is.
	No, I think if you take our country for what it is and what we really do as a political imperialist capitalist bully, there is no better.
	And, whereas the Democrats at the election of Obama were, everyone was so all in and crying and happy and hands across the border and the races and we all love each other and it's going to be great and we can overcome and we can rule.
	They were all crying, we forget that.
	Yes, no, and...
	And it was a great vibe.
	It was a great moment for the country.
	Unfortunately, those of us who looked into the background of Obama knew that there was not a lot of substance there.
	A one-time senator rammed right through.
	Whoops, here he is.
	What?
	But you take Hillary Clinton, who any political leader knows will kill you for just looking at her the wrong way.
	Google Clinton body count.
	She takes no prisoners.
	This woman will kill you.
	She will.
	She is connected to all of the military-industrial complex, to the oil cabal.
	She is fantastic, and she's a woman, so we can all feel great about what is it now?
	What does the meme shattering the ceiling?
	Is that what she's going to do?
	Shattering something.
	She's going to shatter the glass ceiling, and it could turn us around.
	I'm not saying this is the way it should be.
	I would prefer unicorns and rainbows and everyone loving and, you know, we are the world and all that crap.
	But who else, John?
	Does she not have everything we need to get back on top and scare the bejesus out of the rest of the world?
	She's a Republican.
	Well, Bill was a Republican the way I see it.
	Well, actually, what these people represent is what politicos like to call neoliberals.
	And they do have a tendency toward the New World Order, very much in line with the George Bush one.
	And they tend to be...
	Sociopaths.
	I think it was said more than a few times that Bill Clinton is definitely one.
	But if you look at...
	And she's got to be one, too.
	Yeah.
	Really?
	Hmm.
	You think?
	And by the way, Huma will look great in the White House?
	Well, you know, don't forget, we have it in the books that before the election, if she's actually running, and she will be, because all I know is every day I get, oh, that's too soon.
	Bullcrap, they got this Ready for Hillary campaign, which is wearing thin.
	You know, they're asking for the $5 and the $3 and all the rest of it.
	And I get the mailing from them, and it's like, oh, we did this and we did that.
	We're great, and Hillary's got to do it.
	We're going to do everything we can to get her to run like she's not going to run.
	But it'll be interesting.
	I think it's...
	I mean, can you think of any...
	I'd rather not have her as president.
	No, of course, John.
	I love the world.
	I love people.
	Of course I want to be...
	But where we...
	We've been doing this long enough, and you see really what's going on.
	And just look at the United States of Europe, and just look at...
	No one cares about their citizens.
	Well, let's go over a couple of things quickly.
	Okay.
	One is your assertion when you did the Hot Pockets 2002 tour, whatever year that phony year was, and you went to D.C. and you were assured by some insider, Washington insiders, that Hillary could not possibly run.
	She wouldn't be allowed to run because of one thing or another, and they were going to scuttle her campaign if she attempted to run.
	What came of that?
	It was the Secret Service.
	And if you have not followed the news, we've had a couple of arrests, we've had a couple of dismissals, and we've had a couple of suicides.
	Secret Service has been cleaned up.
	We just had a suicide just like last week.
	I have a Secret Service guy.
	So you think the Clinton clicker, the body count clicker, is back in action?
	Somebody's got their thumb on the wheel again?
	It never went away!
	What are you talking about?
	Well, I don't know.
	The Clinton body count thing seems to have slowed down.
	Oh, please.
	Here, let me just get the Secret Service guy who committed suicide.
	U.S. Secret Service agent found dead.
	Apparent suicide October 27, 2013.
	Law enforcement.
	Special Agent Rafael Prieto was under investigation for having an unreported romantic relationship with a foreign national.
	Yeah.
	So he killed himself?
	Yeah.
	Two shots to the head, gun in the left hand.
	I'm gonna kill myself!
	Yeah, so he committed suicide.
	We've had...
	But remember the whole hookers in...
	Oh yeah, I know.
	Remember that.
	We've cleaned up the Secret Service.
	We've cleaned that up.
	This is what they're so good at, the Clintons.
	But really, come on.
	I mean, we really have to be honest on this show, and this is what America does.
	We are the 800-pound gorilla, and we just have a very weak leader right now that everyone thought was going to be the great savior.
	And it didn't work out.
	And I think having a woman, which will...
	50% of the voting public will love that.
	I think I can fairly say that.
	I don't know many women who say they hate her and wouldn't want her.
	There are some women that do that.
	Of course.
	There's a lot of Hillary haters.
	Of course.
	I can't generalize, but...
	In general, it would be another historic moment.
	It's set up.
	She knows everyone.
	She has the goods on everyone.
	Come on, she's an expert at this.
	She's been doing it all her life.
	Who else is qualified?
	Ted Cruz?
	Please.
	That guy's not presentable.
	That's the problem with Ted Cruz.
	The Republican Party doesn't even exist anymore.
	It's blown up.
	There's nothing left.
	No one cares.
	This woman is it.
	Get ready for it.
	You might as well just prepare.
	Well, I'm not going to argue the point, because I put it in the book years ago that she was going to run and win after she lost to Obama, and they did the quid pro quo that got her the Secretary of State job, which just bolstered.
	If he hadn't have done that...
	If he had any nerve, he wouldn't have put her in his chest because that kept her in the eyes of the public long enough to make some waves, meet a few people around the world.
	She was just traveling constantly, just glad-handing and setting up the future.
	And then now she's still in the public eye and she should...
	Be able to coast to an easy win.
	So if you take my view, which increasingly has become...
	And I'll be voting Libertarian once again.
	I don't think I'm going to vote at all.
	I'm just done.
	Well, you're probably the right move.
	I'm just thinking, why?
	Why even bother?
	I just sit here on the sidelines and armchair quarterback it.
	What was I going to say?
	I think we're running into these women who are just like Hillary.
	They're just like, they swoon when they talk about Hillary.
	Sure.
	Sure.
	But can you deny that she would not be great if you just take into account of what we really are as a country?
	We go into other countries.
	We take a look at the worst side of the United States, the worst possible way of defining us.
	Yes, she'd be fantastic.
	Thank you.
	She'd be the first emperor.
	Thank you.
	Empress.
	Empress.
	Yes.
	Cleopatra we have here, the homely version.
	By the way, that was another irritating thing at the Obama-bot dinner.
	Another?
	Oh, wait a minute.
	What was the first irritating thing?
	No, everything was irritating.
	About show prep.
	But I threw out the Bill Gates as a eugenicist.
	Yeah.
	And it was like, whoa!
	His dad was a eugenicist.
	And we had a eugenic society.
	And everyone was like, nah!
	And the professor went, no, that's absolutely true.
	And he was on my side.
	Yeah.
	He's like, yeah, no, no.
	We had all this technology.
	Wait a minute.
	Hold on a second.
	I'm telling you.
	Again, from my experience as a liberal at the University of California, It's the liberals who knew and bitched and moaned about the eugenicist movement in the United States in the 20s, which led to what the fascist Jews on the Jews.
	Yes, that's exactly what I said.
	It was all of our concepts and ideas about purifying the races and all the rest of it.
	And these people who claim to be liberals didn't know about this?
	No one has ever claimed they're liberal to me.
	You've met them.
	You've met them.
	Yeah, I have met them.
	And when the husband is, who apparently would never sit down with a Republican, they said.
	No, that's other people.
	That's the other obots.
	They're not part of the dinner group.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, anyway, I sat down with this.
	Okay, whatever the case was, I don't know what to look for anymore when it comes to old school liberal Democrats.
	I think it's gone.
	I think they're all hippies and they just, hey, don't you remember when we used to say question authority?
	Yeah.
	There should be a bumper sticker in Berkeley.
	Question authority.
	Now they should change it to whatever Obama says goes.
	No, I think something's changing, man.
	It's changing.
	Everyone is bummed out.
	Yeah, we're bummed out because we're stupid.
	As a country, we look lame.
	We're not doing anything.
	Everyone's broke.
	Now we're taking away food stamps.
	We're dumbed down.
	We're taking food stamp money away from the 47 million people who are on it.
	One and seven.
	Yeah, this is not good.
	I don't personally get the point of that.
	I do have a clip that, since we're kind of on that, I might as well just play it, which is the food stamp clip.
	I actually had to cut this way down because it was...
	Long.
	It was really long.
	They were going back and forth because it was on the News Hour.
	And it is, the clip is called...
	Foof Stamps.
	Yeah, that must be it.
	Another John C. Devorak clip naming.
	I think the numbers have gone up so high in terms of the number of people and the numbers.
	Part of it is the economy.
	No one could deny that.
	There's serious rates of unemployment that continue.
	But this program also is rife with fraud.
	It has an outreach to bring people in.
	Another thing that they've done is get rid of the asset limits, which were traditionally part of this program.
	You can have a million dollars in the bank.
	You're unemployed.
	You can get into food stamps now.
	That's an outrage.
	We also have weaker work requirements on this program than we do on the programs for single mothers.
	An able-bodied 20-year-old who's not working isn't required to do a single thing to get his food stamp benefits.
	I think that's an abuse of the taxpayer.
	It's probably not good for the recipient either.
	Okay, here's a couple of things I want to bring up here.
	The food stamp thing.
	This actually goes back to arguments about welfare.
	It made a little more sense maybe in the 60s and 70s to go on and on about people who are able-bodied and they were getting free money.
	In today's market, you can't get a job.
	So let's just drop that.
	There's no jobs out there in most of the country.
	So we can't say, oh, he's able-bodied.
	He should get a job.
	Get a job where?
	He has to move to China or Indonesia to get a job.
	So let's just drop that part of it.
	But the thing that bugs me the most is this rife with fraud.
	You run into this with the welfare programs of the past.
	You run into it with food stamps.
	Rife with fraud.
	You run into it with Medicare.
	Rife with fraud.
	Why don't these people set up an enforcement mechanism?
	It is not rocket science.
	Half the country is a bunch of police anyway.
	That's if you want a job, you get a job as a cop.
	Why don't they put together some enforcement, some toothed enforcement, so you can investigate the fraud, bust people, throw them into the prison system where they will have a job, working for the federal prison government slave system, But they never do that.
	They just bitch about it.
	Oh, it's rife with fraud.
	Well, what are you going to do about it?
	Why don't you do something about the fraud instead of complaining about it?
	Oh, it's rife with fraud, so let's shut it down.
	What kind of logic is this?
	Well, the reason why I believe this is discussed this way is because the real fraud, the huge fraud, of course, is people like this, people who are on the inside, people who play in the markets, have inside knowledge, are a part of the free money being printed, being invested.
	It's a big, huge bonanza.
	That's the real fraud.
	And that is kind of what the original first week of Occupy Wall Street was about until it got hijacked.
	For a moment.
	For a moment.
	Quickly hijacked.
	Yeah, in the first week.
	It was like the Tea Party got hijacked.
	It was originally Ron Paul.
	For the moment.
	There was a very, very short time when I was like, holy crap, this is a great week.
	Oh, damn.
	That's about how long it was.
	And I will remind everybody.
	This will be co-opted in 10, 9, 8.
	And the mainstream media refused to report on Occupy Wall Street for weeks until it was co-opted.
	No, I remember this because we were on the show and we were both befuddled And commenting on Occupy, we were reporting on it and what was going on, and we had all kinds of clips from some obscure places, but there was no mainstream.
	It was just like some demonstration, useless.
	And then, you're right, once it was co-opted and they could be ridiculed and whatever they did, I can't remember all the details now, but they were done.
	And then when the cops came in, tear gassed them out of there and busted heads.
	But by then it was already co-opted.
	That went so quick.
	The mainstream media was kept out of it specifically and on purpose until the messaging was ready, until the unions were in, and then it was done.
	So there was a moment.
	There was a brief moment.
	It was a couple weeks.
	Yeah.
	It's interesting because we had old watermelon head.
	So we had this big thing that the president, everyone was a part of it.
	Come invest in America.
	It's the open government, what is it called?
	It's like the open government whatever.
	It's kind of like a big trade thing.
	Invite everybody over.
	And all of a sudden it becomes very clear what the strategy is for the United States.
	If you look now at the euro...
	Let's see.
	Euro to dollar rate.
	It'll freak you out, by the way.
	It's about $1.39.
	Yeah, almost $1.40.
	Yeah.
	No, I keep tabs on it.
	Yeah, this has gone up, what, 8%, 9% in the past month alone, maybe?
	No, it's...
	You know, it's worth about $1.15, and they have propped it up somehow, and I don't know.
	I mean, it's good for our exporting.
	Or, or, or?
	That there is no better place in the world to invest than here in America.
	And there's no better time to do it in many ways than right now, because some of the growth and development of the last few years has sort of equalized out in some places.
	So that manufacturing, as the Secretary said, the number of manufacturing jobs here now, we're going in manufacturing again.
	Manufacturing.
	We are now China!
	We are cheap, cheap, cheap.
	We have people who will do anything.
	I'm convinced.
	And Kerry is so on the sales track for this, he'll even back out of us being exceptional.
	Because it's competitive again for a lot of different reasons.
	So make no mistake, as we look ahead to the major trends that are going to define this new age, the factors that will determine which countries thrive, as well as Which businesses thrive in this competitive marketplace?
	I think it's crystal clear that the United States is going to continue because it's the nature and base of our economy.
	Not because we're somehow...
	Yeah, you're talking over the punchline.
	Hold on.
	Wait, he says...
	Go ahead.
	He said, yeah, you can back it up to get the punchline.
	He said, he says, we're pretty sure, he didn't say pretty sure, but he says, we're pretty sure the United States will continue to survive?
	What's he talking about?
	Let's listen again to that last bit there.
	It's all clear that the United States is going to continue because it's the nature and base of our economy, not because we're somehow superior or somehow better, just the nature of how we have grown and where we've come from, from the Industrial Revolution all the way through the 1990s and the tech explosion and into where we are now.
	We will continue to lead the world.
	So we're going to lead the world, but...
	We're going to lead the world by setting up factories.
	And this is kind of where it gets a little crappy because factories pollute and I'm talking about smokestacks, but there's all kinds of other stuff that comes along with it that's going to be very problematic with the way we've set up our EPA, etc.
	But that is our future.
	I think our future is manufacturing and it will take a couple generations because the way we make stuff is not really all that great.
	But honestly, I don't think we're fantastic at making stuff.
	No, our products are mediocre, generally speaking.
	We'll get better.
	We make a lot, but a lot of it is innovative.
	Innovative.
	Innovative.
	It's very innovative.
	But when you really...
	I mean, the Google Glass, for example, is made in China.
	Yeah.
	And by the way, luckily somebody just got arrested for driving with Google Glasses on.
	A ticket.
	Not arrested.
	A ticket.
	Well, they got a ticket.
	But they should be arrested.
	You shouldn't be driving around with Google Glasses.
	This is not good.
	JC pointed out he had some documentation discussing the, I guess there's some good studies now that show that texting while driving or dealing with your phone at all, except for speaking, is more dangerous than drunk driving by a huge factor.
	Oh, I believe that.
	I believe it for sure.
	You know, there's no law in Texas against that.
	There's no...
	You can drink while you're driving.
	You can drink a beer while you're driving.
	No, there's no text and driving law.
	Well, there should be.
	Well, you know, we have pretty big roads.
	Pretty long, boring.
	It's like, eh, whatever.
	Don't worry about it.
	The president, of course, surprised me once again with his little podcast there.
	Heil, everybody!
	On Thursday, I addressed a conference for business leaders from around the world.
	And my pitch was simple.
	I love that my pitch was simple.
	What is he, a sales guy?
	Yeah, he's talking to VC, I guess.
	I don't know.
	Choose America.
	Invest in America.
	Create jobs in America.
	It speaks to my top priority as president.
	Oh!
	We know what the top priority is, don't we?
	Yeah, it's protecting the American people!
	Growing our economy, creating good jobs, strengthening security and opportunities.
	He keeps changing it.
	It was supposed to be protecting the American people!
	No, he changed it.
	He doesn't think it's important anymore.
	Well, that's very disappointing.
	All right.
	Well, I guess that put a good, just putting Obama on kills the show.
	It's not meant to kill the show.
	It's just, when I look at where we are in the situation...
	Let's just take away all the lies, the lies that, you know, well, the unemployment is like, you know, 7% or whatever.
	Lies.
	We know it's a quarter of the workforce is unemployed.
	If we look at where we can go, do you see any other solution other than becoming a manufacturing nation?
	Of laborers?
	Yeah.
	No.
	No.
	Do you see any other way out?
	I don't think it's bad, necessarily.
	I mean, we all want to be super smart and send your kid to college and become a lawyer, but we just don't need them anymore.
	We need workers.
	We need people blue-collar, blue-collar stuff.
	I know it doesn't fit with the narrative of the extraordinary American people, but that will get us out of whatever.
	No, it won't.
	It's bullcrap.
	The whole thing is a scam.
	These guys still get cheaper labor elsewhere.
	I mean, right now, Indonesia apparently is the cheapest place.
	And it's like these international companies are so big and, you know, they're heavy-footed and they're, oh, let's just move all this.
	They can move their whole facility.
	They got bean counters.
	They got spreadsheets.
	My wife would always say, spreadsheets have ruined the world.
	Mm-hmm.
	You put the spreadsheet together and you push a button and it says, oh, yeah, it's going to cost you $2 billion to move everything to Indonesia.
	But according to this calculation, it will pay for itself in one and a half years.
	So everything gets moved.
	I mean, it's all spreadsheets.
	Normally, no one would have taken these chances unless they can't put it down on paper.
	That's how high tech works.
	High tech guy comes in.
	And he's got a new chip, a new piece of software.
	He's got some bullcrap widget.
	He goes into the CEO, you, and he says, look, here's the thing we got.
	This replaces all these other things you have.
	And look, what you pay for this to replace all the other stuff will pay for itself ten times over within a year.
	You'll be making that much more money.
	You're crazy not to buy it.
	And you look at the numbers and it's true, so you buy it.
	And this is the new sales pitch.
	It gets to pay for itself fast enough.
	I did a story once for Forbes on emerging LED markets.
	And this guy who's a big LED guy, one of the big companies, he says, well, yeah, we're getting to the point where the LEDs are going to be cheaper than fluorescence and everyone's going to have to replace everything, all the incandescence and fluorescence, with LEDs.
	I said, why don't all the stop signs in all the municipalities do that?
	He says, well, right now...
	It's like a two-year payout before the LEDs will pay for themselves and then start having benefits.
	And he says most municipal elections are about two years.
	So unless you can make the money within the election cycle so the guy can get re-elected, they won't buy it.
	Right.
	It's so true, though.
	And I love looking at the light bulbs.
	Guaranteed, 1,000 hours.
	Bull crap!
	You're talking about those little compact fluorescents?
	No, just light bulbs.
	I'm not talking about LEDs.
	Oh yeah, no light bulbs, but compact fluorescents to me are the biggest...
	Hold on, hold on, hold on.
	Easy, easy.
	I'm talking about the bullshit planned obsolescence.
	Oh yeah, no, they're planned...
	Yeah, the light bulbs, they literally...
	I have six light bulbs in the kitchen.
	They all go out within a day of each other.
	Yeah.
	It's completely programmed and planned.
	And yeah, moving to LED, even in the home, it's a little investment, but it makes a lot of sense.
	Eventually, yeah, because you don't have...
	But the fluorescent, the stopgap, these fluorescents, these things are a total scam ripoff.
	Yeah.
	They don't last as long as they do, or they say they do, and actually after they're lit for a while, they start getting dull.
	You know, they don't give off, they have a little moment, like a week, where they give off the claimed lumens, and then all of a sudden they start getting, it's terrible.
	Hey, speaking of spreadsheet, John, I got an idea.
	I'm going to show my support by donating to no agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh, yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on your agenda in the morning.
	We have a few people to thank, and we will...
	Chad Watson in Ulus, Texas.
	No comment.
	$166.66.
	Barry in H-Town, $125.
	And Pearl Land, Texas.
	We've got Texans coming in.
	Thank you.
	I've been a boner for some time, he says, due to some prior comments John made about my hometown representative, Sheila Jackson Lee.
	Yeah.
	But this six-week cycle occurrence has me spooked.
	And I'm just a donate.
	It shouldn't worry you too much.
	Yeah, well, he wants to hear Al Sharpton conflict karma, if you can do that, since we're a little light today.
	Uh, yeah, um, I wonder, is it, uh, yes.
	And a karma?
	Yeah, sure.
	Okay.
	There's no real conflict!
	You've got karma.
	Jim Cash, Indianapolis, Indiana, 125.
	Timothy Shannon, Seattle, Washington.
	Uh-oh.
	Make it rain with 111...
	Next, Bambi.
	Bambi, onto the stage.
	That's right, making it rain.
	You get your jingle.
	Jeffrey Yerke, $111.11, Concord, California.
	Give it up for Raven!
	And finally, Jonathan Carey from Old Fallon, Missouri.
	Straight from Reseda, here she is, Raven!
	Give it up!
	Winners!
	I don't understand why you get such a big kick out of that.
	Anonymous, $100 in somewhere Oklahoma.
	Matthew Thomas in Bruner, Missouri.
	$77.77.
	69!
	69, dudes!
	Eric is saving the day with Thunder Bay, Ontario, 69-69.
	Ryan Nessler, also 69-69 from Altura, Minnesota.
	Craig Kuttner in Norwalk, Connecticut.
	Wilson Rondini in Boulder, Colorado.
	Dave Carey.
	In Parts Unknown.
	And finally, whoops, not quite finally, but Samuel Gorski in Howell, Michigan.
	And finally, Macy Prochowski in Stade Deutschland.
	69!
	69, dudes!
	And then we have people who listen to the show in real time, no matter when it's happening.
	They never miss an episode, never skip ahead, and are just behind.
	And that's why they're coming to the table now with Sacks of Sixes for our sixth anniversary, which is extremely kind.
	Well, I imagine that we're keeping it open until midnight.
	Oh, okay.
	I'm sorry.
	All right.
	In the newsletter.
	I encourage you.
	True, true, true.
	I'm sorry.
	Good.
	And the 666s are the Gary Howell in Houston, Texas.
	We got a lot of Texans today.
	Keith Edwards in Gilbert, Arizona.
	Christopher Gray in Grand Blanc, Michigan.
	Kelly McLemore in Brownsboro, Texas again.
	Matthew Donahue in Culver City, California.
	Israel Biz Reg, KYC Israel in Petak Tikva in Israel.
	Earth Pulse Technologies in Stewart, Florida.
	John Cook in Issaquah, Washington.
	Keith Chamberlain in Medford, Oregon.
	Nice area.
	Wine Growing.
	Matthew Wittering in Bedford, Bedfordshire.
	Charles Walters in Schaumburg, Illinois.
	Colin Peterson in Bellingham, Washington.
	That's the end of that.
	65-66.
	And he said he was a week late and a dollar short.
	Okay, that's cool.
	We'll take it.
	Armin Breuer actually sent a note.
	Hey, John and Adam, it's been a while since I've donated to the best podcast in the universe, and he kicks off our $50 donors.
	I could really use some health karma.
	I have a personal nerve dysfunction.
	And after two MRIs and three X-rays, the doctor still can't seem to find out why.
	It's not an injury, not a disc issue, not MS, nothing degenerative.
	Curious, but since NA karma works, I thought I'd give it a shot.
	Well, I mean...
	I sure hope so, man.
	We're not exactly doctors on this show.
	To say the least.
	But we do...
	You've got Carmen.
	We do believe in positive vibes.
	Positive vibes.
	Yeah, we can dole it out.
	We can dole it out for sure.
	I hope it works out for you, man.
	Yeah, really.
	We need somebody in Vienna.
	We need healthy listeners is what we need.
	Especially our Vienna man.
	Yes.
	The man in Vienna where all the people exchange notes.
	And finally, we've got two $50 donors left, which includes Sir Brett Farrell in Oklahoma City and Greg Brunsel in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
	And I think we'll donate lesser amounts for this show for I'm sorry, 562.
	I'll get it eventually.
	Go to Dvorak.org slash NA for the Thursday show, and let's see if we can get more interest.
	But this show's a little more interesting than our last show.
	Really?
	I think so.
	Okay.
	I think the LAX shooting, the way we beat it off, was outstanding.
	I love it when we beat it off.
	That's really good.
	We're outstanding at that.
	That's you.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I don't know about you.
	Well, help us out for the Thursday show.
	This is a value-for-value proposition.
	There's no other way for us to make money, because we couldn't talk about most of the topics the way we discussed them.
	That's why you don't see this kind of analysis anywhere but here, because people go after our advertisers.
	They try and bring us down.
	They wouldn't advertise at all.
	They've been off two years ago.
	If we relied on advertising, we'd have been done within three years of the show.
	Dude, I'd be living in L.A. trying to get Paris Hilton into the Mevio Studios.
	Are you kidding me?
	That's what I'd be doing.
	Dvorak.org slash NA.
	It's your birthday, birthday.
	Oh, no, my chance.
	So we have no nightings, no title changes, but we do have two birthdays.
	Rick Dolshini turns 46 on November 5th, so we say happy birthday in advance.
	And Craig Kuttner celebrates happy birthday from your buds here.
	The best podcast in the universe.
	That was a short donation segment.
	That's all that it is.
	I heard something funny that someone pointed out to me.
	This is, again, one of these things where if you're watching, you don't hear it, but if you just listen, then you hear it.
	And he actually sent this to me, and I was like, what are you talking about?
	You know how I'm always joking about Angela Merkel being a dude?
	Well, you know, she has the facial features of a guy.
	Bob Woodward, famous journalist, agrees with me.
	Kill this person because we think he might be a terrorist.
	I mean, in some cases, they have these signature strikes.
	Well, it looks like terrorists.
	They're doing things like terrorists do.
	So let's kill him.
	Or let's get Chancellor Merkel's conversations on a cell phone.
	Now, what's interesting...
	Did you hear it?
	On his cell phone.
	I just love that.
	Good old Bob.
	I have a clip on signature strikes that was kind of interesting that he'd mention it.
	The Redux?
	I got signature strikes Redux?
	Is that it?
	Yeah, that must be it.
	What we saw was a segment about something called signature strikes.
	What they are literally are guesses about what people are doing based on their behavior, not who they are, not what they've done, not that we have any information about them.
	So literally, some bureaucrat someplace is guessing that they might one day possibly do bad things, and people are being killed.
	This was the leadership of that community, 45 people decimated.
	Again, based on no hard information, no judge, no jury, no trial.
	Even if people are in favor of drone strikes, signature strikes are beyond outrageous, and there can be legislative solutions to that, and I hope there will be.
	And of course, the signature strikes also create a direct line to the president, don't they, in terms of his having to approve them?
	Well, the president approves the so-called kill list, which is the individuals.
	With the signature strikes, which supposedly they're moving away from, it's not really clear who approves or decides that.
	What we understand is it's the CIA who now believes they are so wise, they can see thousands of miles away, people sitting in a circle with guns.
	Oh yes, they must be bad guys.
	Let's kill the 14th.
	That's your CIA.
	That's the guys you don't talk about.
	That's the guys we don't talk about.
	CIA. Killing people.
	Signature strikes.
	Surgical.
	They apparently wiped out some village elders.
	That's with the.45 dead.
	There was some big meeting they were having.
	It was a town hall meeting in Vermont, and they're all standing around bitching about whatever, and they, boom, just kill all 45 of them with one signature strike.
	So that seems to be annoying a lot of people.
	There's a little bit of development around, there's a new player who's an old player in the Snowden thing.
	Let me just see, I had a number of, so actually we do need to talk about, I hate to do it, we do need to go back for a second because there's two pieces of legislation.
	Now, one has already passed through the committee.
	This is the Feinstein legislation.
	And I have both of them marked up in the show notes, 562.nashownotes.com.
	I am not going to...
	It is impossible, actually, for me to analyze these on the show.
	Because what the Feinstein stuff does, and also the USA Freedom Act, which is entered by Leahy, amongst others...
	Really refer to all this other legislation and it's really doing nothing more than solidifying what is already there but just putting a couple of parameters around it.
	And in Feinstein's case, it's really to make sure that she's told of everything.
	So that if they have the goods on her, I guess she can interject.
	And that is seen by most as really just codifying what is already being done.
	And again, it's only about the NSA. It's not about the CIA or about the FBI or the National Reconnaissance Office or any of that.
	It's only about the NSA, which makes sense.
	Because, at least from my perspective, where the NSA is just a big data suck-up storage situation, we just want to know who's retrieving.
	Literally, if you look at the legislation, it's about who's retrieving the information, who can request information, who can request a search, what the parameters of the search are.
	It's just so the policymakers and the people who also can be spied on have control over that situation.
	Then we have...
	That's already passed through the House Intelligence Committee.
	That's probably what's going to pass.
	Then we have this USA Freedom Act, which has been endorsed by Silicon Valley.
	And they sent a letter.
	I don't know if you saw this letter, John.
	It's AOL... Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.
	And they sent this open letter to Leahy, Lee, Conyers, and Sensenbrenner, who are all sponsors of the USA Freedom Act, And I'll just say, this is why they are supporting this USA Freedom Act.
	Our companies have consistently made clear that we only respond to legal demands for customer and user information that are targeted and specific, allowing companies to be transparent about the number and nature of requests will help the public better understand the facts about the government's authority to compel technology companies to disclose user data and how technology companies respond to targeted legal demands we receive.
	Transparacy in this regard will also help to counter erroneous reports that we permit illegal agencies, quote, direct access to our company's servers.
	This is interesting to me that these companies are sponsoring this bill, and this USA Freedom Act actually stands for...
	I have it here.
	It stands for...
	It's kind of a funny name.
	Where the hell is it?
	Oh, that's the FISA Improvements.
	I'm sorry.
	I'll get it in a second.
	It's really Leahy, who was one of the authors of the Patriot Act.
	He was pissed about a signing statement that took place about Section 106A or something.
	It wasn't 215?
	No, no, no, no.
	Of the Patriot Act.
	Oh, okay.
	I'm sorry.
	Yeah.
	So the Patriot Act has 106A, which is about who can access certain information.
	It's really his way of getting back at...
	The signing statement that came out with the Patriot Act.
	But what's sad about it is it really is more of the same.
	It's just saying, okay, we can spy on people and we'll allow an, what do you call it?
	What's the legal term for it?
	Amicus curiae?
	Is that how you pronounce it?
	C-U-R-I-A-E. Yeah, I don't know how to pronounce it.
	Which is basically an independent party to oversee the spying operation.
	It may have been 215, because 215 does refer to the patriarch.
	It's 702 that refers to Fison.
	No, no.
	I'll find it right here.
	It's 106A. Hold on a minute.
	I got it here, John.
	I went through this all last night.
	It's just not all that interesting, because it's really just...
	He has a hard-on about something that he got screwed on in his initial legislation or whatever.
	It's kind of a get back at the Republicans thing or something.
	It's really a little weak.
	But what you're seeing is that the technology companies, they're kind of getting a free ride.
	Because, yeah, there's all this collection.
	But both of these bills are really about under which circumstances the government can go to these very companies who sent the letter and get your shit.
	That's really what this is about, and that they can do this with clean hands, a pure heart, because it's legal under the law.
	But this really leaves the door wide open to just leave these companies.
	You don't even have to do anything special to circumvent what the government is doing anymore.
	Just don't use Gmail.
	Just don't use Yahoo.
	You just don't need to use it anymore, if you really care.
	Certainly don't use Facebook.
	That's all you have to do.
	Because if you do, you essentially are buying into the system that is now being codified to specifically allow these companies to hand over your information to the government under the typical laws.
	If someone could be killed, it's not even terrorism anymore.
	If someone's in danger of death, they can hand over your information.
	If either of these acts pass.
	If someone's not paying their taxes?
	Um, no.
	That, no.
	Well, they've got to fix that.
	Unless you can somehow relate that to death.
	I mean, it's very simple.
	Queries, like what selectors can be used.
	You know, national security.
	It's easy.
	You know, national security.
	You can put that in however you want it.
	They're trying to bring in the Civil Liberties Oversight Board.
	They've changed some things.
	Like, they want to now have the audit for...
	I remember the immunity the telcos got.
	Yes, of course.
	That was from 2008, I believe.
	Up until 2007.
	So they want to move that and include 2010 through 2013.
	So there's extra immunity stuff in here.
	It is for the Silicon Valley companies, this USA Freedom Act, to give them free reign to just, under the right circumstances, to hand over your stuff to the government.
	And people just seem to be okay with that.
	And I don't understand why we're allowing ourselves to be trapped like this.
	It's not necessary anymore, is it?
	Well, what you're saying, when you say trapped, what you're saying is that we don't need Microsoft anymore, really.
	We don't really need Yahoo, for sure.
	Yes, that's what I'm saying.
	I mean, you might be in a sewing club, you know, and then you want to meet with Yahoo groups and discuss knitting techniques.
	Right, but I mean, the only thing that these, this is a much broader conversation, of course, but The only thing these companies do is connect people and try to make money off of it by making the connection, but then anything else you do, they're just using you to make money.
	Yeah, you're a product.
	Yeah, I mean, we have a chat room, and so people can come in here and connect.
	No one's making money off of that.
	It's a non-money-making operation.
	It's open 24 hours a day.
	You can go in and connect and then you can talk on email or whatever.
	You don't really need these companies.
	We've been conditioned into thinking that we need them.
	You don't really need Gmail.
	A hundred people can surely share one email server that will work.
	You can have a lot more than 100 people sharing an email server.
	Those things are low bandwidth.
	Sure, but you understand the point that I'm making is that we don't need these companies.
	And I think they're a little afraid that one day someone might kind of figure that out and it might become like a thing.
	We have seen big companies go down in the past that people thought would never go away.
	Even MySpace in recent memory Well, MySpace is still there.
	Yeah, but it's not what it was.
	And same with LiveJournal.
	They're all progenitors of Facebook, which is now...
	But look at this podcast.
	We don't need Google.
	No, we don't need anything.
	We don't need Google.
	People have said to us that we should be streaming over Google Hangouts.
	Why would we do that?
	I was thinking about that.
	What is the...
	You know, I've never been to a Hangout.
	Oh, me neither.
	I don't even understand why it's...
	I guess the name maybe got some subtraction to that.
	You know, because the president does it and the vice president and they get people...
	You know, this PR. It's like Twitter.
	Now, I read their S1 document.
	I've filed one myself in my career and I've taken a company public and I find it interesting to see what they're doing.
	This company has no actual visibility of being profitable.
	They really don't.
	Now, they may not care, but when you look at it really just purely at what it is, The concept of making money off of something that the internet inherently can do, but just because you've created this place where you make the connection and you lock everybody in and lock all development out, which is what they've done.
	No developers can make any more apps or anything.
	And so they have the audience, but isn't it amazing that you can have 100 million people using your product that you can't make money?
	This is dumb.
	Well, there is a thesis in Silicon Valley that you just get the eyeballs first, you figure out how to make money second.
	Right.
	Well, we've been through this, and it's called the bubble, and it will explode eventually, and then we go around and do it again because it just doesn't work.
	Well, let's talk about that for just one quick second because I got an email from one of my friends who works for the New York Times, and he says he's freaked out because he's seen this two or three times, these bubbles.
	And he, like a lot of people, see that, wow, isn't this just like 1999?
	And I want to remind people that there's a couple of things you should note.
	One is that if you think you're in a bubble, you're not in it yet.
	Is that fact?
	Pretty much, generally speaking, when you're in a bubble and it goes, no one's saying anything.
	It's like, oh no, this is fine.
	Maybe there'll be a bubble.
	It doesn't look like a bubble.
	Or it looks like a bubble, but it turns out it's not a bubble.
	It's always this, you know, everybody's, you know, the stock market recommended buy, buy, buy is always at the top.
	Yeah, I know.
	It's gone up 10x, but buy more.
	It's going to go up another – it's going to double.
	I mean, everybody's kind of – when they're kind of skeptical, oh, this could be a bubble.
	It's a bubble.
	It's going to pop.
	We're doomed.
	It never happens during that period because everybody's too cautious.
	Right.
	So I think the bubble's a ways away.
	Right.
	And I think we've only been seeing the beginning of it.
	We haven't seen any.
	We don't have Pets.com and Webvan and all these things.
	Well, if you look at valuations of a lot of this stuff, everything that has.io after its name, I mean, there's a lot.
	There is kind of this Ponzi scheme of the angel investors.
	They flip stuff as quickly as possible to VC for like the typical...
	You know, A round.
	And then basically, as long as you can have an Instagram once in a while, you know, or something like that that you can sell to essentially Google or Facebook, Then that's it.
	Isn't that kind of what everyone's after?
	Oh yeah, everybody wants to make a billion dollars selling on Instagram.
	But is there anything, can you think of one product, let's just call it.com product,.io, that has any semblance of existence?
	You look at these lists of these investors, especially the angel guys, and what they've invested in.
	There are literally a thousand companies with, eh, kind of maybe some of them have a half-baked idea.
	Some of the ideas are stupid.
	But they're just kind of, you know, there's just, it just doesn't feel like 99 to me.
	In 99, because I was doing the Silicon Spin show and I was always like befuddled by this.
	Because I have these executives at the table, and we'd be talking about what seemed like crazy talk.
	And you'd hear things like, my favorite one was, well, you don't get it, Dvorak.
	It's a new economy.
	Oh, believe me.
	I remember those new economy things.
	You don't get it.
	You're dumb.
	You don't get it.
	It's a new economy.
	It's a new economy.
	And all stores are going to be out of business.
	Everything was going to be done on the internet.
	We had a lot of that.
	And we had all these other...
	And then you had these crazy things like Webvan, which never made any sense to me.
	And the newer versions of it still don't make sense to me because it's too expensive.
	What was Webvan?
	Webvan was the home delivery of groceries.
	Right.
	So, you know, the startup companies would get a lot of deliveries because people were working their butts off and they never went home.
	But the web van idea was never a really good idea.
	Pets.com was the worst of the group.
	And this was, you know, you have FedEx, because you're too lazy to get off your ass and get in the car and go to the store.
	You have FedEx deliver dog food to the house.
	Right.
	Now, this made no sense to me.
	And you bring it up with these guys, one after another, and these were...
	You know, CEO-level guys, and they say, no, you don't get it.
	It's a new economy.
	I'm not hearing anything to that extreme.
	Just, you don't get it.
	It's a new economy, new economy.
	I got nothing like that going on.
	Everyone's very cautious and circumspect, so it's not a bubble.
	Well, maybe it's not a bubble in the financial sense, rather than a bubble that the people are now sucked in.
	And no one knows, kids are not being taught how to...
	I mean, if you look at it objectively, kids are not even being taught what a file system is.
	Seriously, the file system is being hidden.
	Just take it away.
	And I think it's very sad that innovation is being kind of hidden from view.
	How things work.
	Yeah, that...
	It's kind of like cars, you know, what happened with cars, and we've kind of seen it.
	People don't know how they operate.
	They don't know what a motor does.
	They have no idea how that works, and now, of course, cars aren't necessarily a bubble, but But it just feels like we're putting a lot of our lives, our digital lives, our information, our history, we're putting it into these places and systems, and it's vacuous.
	A lot of it is just going to disappear, will go away, and it leads to nothing except help the surveillance state and make us dependent on technology that others are managing for us when we could pretty much manage a lot of it ourselves.
	Maybe that's what I'm trying to say.
	I think you're living in a dream world if you actually even think that's possible anymore.
	Well, let that be my dream world.
	The dream world concept is this.
	Let me play two clips.
	Since we're talking about financials and stuff, I just haven't coincidentally got these clips because I thought they were funny.
	They were taken from the front line.
	This is a guy interviewing a fund manager at Prudential Insurance about all the research that's been done over the last number of years about index funds versus mutual funds.
	And this is part one of index funds.
	Do you want to explain what these are?
	Do you need to set that up?
	Yeah, index fund is where you're just essentially investing in a fund that reflects, for example, this S&P 500.
	And it's just whatever the S&P 500 does is you get the benefit.
	If it goes up, it goes down, and it goes up and down.
	But if you look over a 100-year period, if there was such a thing as an index fund in the Dow Jones 100 years ago, you'd be filthy rich.
	I mean, this market goes up and down, but overall, it's going up to the right.
	And mutual funds, of course, we have an expert that picks all these funds.
	A fund manager.
	A manager.
	They manage it and they say, oh, let's put a little bit of this and a little bit of that.
	And then they supposedly have all these funds for different kinds of investors.
	They've got the conservative and they've got the guy who just wants to make some money from bonds, which is all bull crap because they always end up putting the money in the same stocks anyway.
	But it's beside the point.
	So we have...
	This is the kind of...
	Now, you're talking about delusional.
	This is what we're talking...
	Wait a minute.
	Are you calling me delusional?
	No, you said that they're...
	There's a lot of delusional...
	Investments, yes.
	There's a lot of it.
	So play index funds part one and you'll hear this part of it.
	Year after year, actively managed mutual funds fail to beat index funds.
	Studies have borne this out repeatedly over various time periods in bull and bear markets.
	I asked the head of retirement at Prudential, which markets dozens of actively managed funds, what she thought about this.
	Yeah, I haven't seen any research that substantiates that.
	I mean, I don't know whether it's true or not.
	I honestly have not seen any research that substantiates that.
	So all the research that's done at Vanguard that makes that argument, you've looked at that?
	No, I haven't.
	I haven't read everything.
	But so much of it depends on, you know, what I need is different than what you need, and there's not an asset allocation or a fund strategy that's right for everybody.
	Wow.
	That's great.
	I have never looked at a spreadsheet.
	What I love about the pitch is that everybody has their own needs.
	This is like going into a winery.
	It bugs me to know, and by the way, what everybody wants is to take a bunch of money and either keep that money so it doesn't go anywhere or make more money.
	That's pretty general.
	That's about it.
	It's like you go into the winery, and there's a bunch of wines there, and you look at the list, there's a bunch of them, and you ask the person, and you know that there's a couple of famous wines that these guys make.
	Say, what's your best, you know, so you want to do some wine tasting?
	I say, no, I just want to taste a couple of wines.
	What's your best, what is your best wine?
	Now, I don't care what anybody says.
	There's always a best wine.
	There's a worst wine, too, but there's a best wine.
	And then when you get this answer, oh, everybody has their own taste.
	I just usually walk out.
	Thanks.
	Yeah, thanks a lot.
	Because that doesn't tell me anything.
	Everybody has their own taste.
	So in other words, if there was some skunk pee, somebody would like that?
	Is that what you're telling me?
	I just find it incredibly insulting.
	So the guy in the show, on the Frontline show, now he goes to another expert.
	He's not a fund manager, but an analyst.
	To discuss what he just discussed with this nutball from Prudential, who apparently just could, I don't know, it makes no sense.
	I've never seen any research on that.
	And so he gets kind of an interesting answer.
	I talked to one woman at Prudential, who's head of retirement, and asked her if she was aware of the studies that showed that index funds did better over time than the actively managed funds, and she says she wasn't.
	That's unbelievable.
	I find that actually unbelievable.
	These people that are in the business know that the index funds do better, right?
	They convince themselves that's not true.
	But wait a minute.
	All the studies, how can they convince themselves that's not true?
	Because they're convinced they're recommending the fund that's going to do better.
	And of course there are hot funds.
	The financial media loves them.
	Yeah, that's great.
	Yeah, well, it's because if everybody went with index funds, there'd be nothing to talk about on CNBC. You don't have anything to sell the advertisers.
	This again kind of reflects on our show.
	It's all part of the commercial mercantile scene.
	It's all bullcrap.
	I have a little interesting thing in that vein that I picked up.
	One of our producers is just a total big pharma nut.
	And she loves researching stuff and sending, you know, worse than I am.
	You know how I am with the...
	With the big pharma stuff.
	And this also kind of shows you how the scam works.
	This is Gwen Olson.
	That's not our producer, but Gwen Olson, she used to be a rep for big pharma selling to doctors and hospitals.
	And she talks specifically about...
	Well, I'll let it play for itself, but she connects the dots between two...
	Drugs and the one company that makes them, which is just really, really cool, and it's about the cholesterol-lowering drugs and the knowledge that actually, you know, cholesterol does not necessarily cause heart attacks, but when you lower someone's cholesterol too low, it can cause a whole bunch of other problems, one of which we've heard about.
	They know that cholesterol is what causes heart attacks, but as long as they're making billions of dollars off of cholesterol lowering drugs, they're going to sell them to you and they're going to convince you that you have to take a drug to be healthy.
	But they taught me, as the rep selling the drugs, that, hey, guess what?
	You can lower cholesterol too much.
	And if you do that, you can wreak havoc in every other body system that you have.
	In fact, all of the clinical data shows that people with lower cholesterol levels, especially those over the age of 55, if they have lower cholesterol levels, they will die of...
	Other things such as cancer, autoimmune disorder.
	They can also have severe impotence.
	Well, they won't die from impotence, but it might be a major imposition on them.
	And that is one of the major side effects that we're seeing with the cholesterol-lowering drugs, is impotence.
	Let's take the cholesterol drugs for example.
	Does anybody know what the number one cholesterol-lowering drug is right now that's on the market?
	It's called Lipitor.
	Okay?
	Now, the same manufacturer that makes Lipitor, their number two selling drug is Viagra!
	Hey!
	Go Pfizer!
	Yeah, no, I... Yeah, that's a good one.
	I had never heard it spelled out that way.
	No, no, she's good.
	That's borderline clip of the day.
	I'm almost going to give it to you.
	That's beautiful, though, isn't it?
	It's like, hey, first, let's make an impotent, then let's give him a drug for it.
	Yeah.
	It's beautiful.
	Yeah, so that's how this...
	I was reading an analysis of like 401k, how that is actually like a huge scam, that really the fees that they take, if you do the math, which is, you know, it boggles my mind because it's just math.
	But the way the fees schedule works on 401ks, that at the end of 30 years or something, some crazy amount, like 70% of your money has actually gone to the bank in fees.
	Yeah, the 401k thing is disconcerting.
	I'm not sure how it works, but there's a lot of stuff on the internet you can read about.
	It turns out it's not such a great deal.
	While you were on the drug topic, I do have a drug clip.
	There was a woman that was, this is part of, I guess, a made-for-TV documentary or something.
	She's irked about, she was taking some breast cancer drug, and she was finding that the very, they would point her, the insurance company would say, you've got to buy drugs.
	From these guys.
	This is part of that scam.
	This is a generic drug.
	She went and she documented the difference in prices.
	You see this every once in a while when you're searching for something on Amazon.
	There'll be a film canister.
	25 cents plus shipping.
	Then you'll see the same film canister for $2,000.
	Have you ever noticed this?
	That's money laundering, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	There's money laundering going on with some of these items.
	Yeah.
	But listen to this clip.
	This is the drug price variation clip.
	One store quoted a price 40 times more than the other.
	How could that be, especially when generic drugs are commonly thought to be so inexpensive?
	I was shocked.
	I was confused.
	I thought, what am I missing?
	You know, this doesn't compute.
	Thompson, who'd never been a consumer activist, said she felt compelled to try to figure this out.
	I started just on my own to phone some other pharmacies in the Twin Cities here.
	Last June, she made another round of calls like she did more than a year prior.
	And what she found was that nothing had changed.
	Wildly varying prices for her generic breast cancer drug.
	How can I help you?
	Hi, I'd like to find out what the retail price is for a 30-day supply of a generic drug called Letrozole.
	$11.04.
	It's $29.88.
	$45.99.
	This is $364.99.
	Ooh, I didn't realize it was that much.
	It's $435.
	$455.
	It didn't seem fair and it seemed to me especially egregious when it involved a life-saving cancer drug.
	It just upset me.
	So this is the part of this insurance scam that's going around too, because we've seen this.
	The drug companies, and of course the generic drug companies have been bought up by the real drug companies to make this even more complicated.
	Yeah, exactly.
	That's what the Bertha Foundation guy did.
	He sold his generic, he was kicking the drug company's ass, sold his generics company to, what's the word, the G? Glaxo.
	Glaxo, yeah.
	And it became Glaxo Generics.
	They own the whole industry.
	So you run into the situation.
	Of course, the insurance company is collecting.
	They're involved in this somehow.
	There's kickbacks.
	I mean, this is all corrupt.
	When you have price ranges that she outlined from $11 to $450 for the same exact product, there is a corrupt aspect to it.
	I don't know what specifically it is, but it's obviously a corrupt situation, and this is really intolerable.
	Well, Hillary Clinton, when she's president, will put an end to all of that.
	Guarantee you.
	Guaranteed!
	All right, let me just see if I got anything left.
	Big solar flares.
	We've had a whole bunch.
	We had an X flare.
	That's nothing really fantastic.
	But I am keeping an eye on it.
	There's really not much.
	Yeah, well, we have these protests going on in Brittany, in France.
	Oh, that's nothing.
	I got a clip blitz here.
	Clip blitz?
	Hit me, brother.
	Yeah, a bunch of clips.
	Let's do it.
	End of show clip blitz.
	Yes.
	Here we go.
	Ready?
	Yeah.
	Well, give me a chance.
	You think that the problem's in Brittany?
	Play beheadings in Brazil.
	All right.
	Clip blitz.
	Another dark cloud has cast a shadow over the build-up to the 2014 World Cup in Brazil after a former pro football player was found decapitated in Rio de Janeiro this week.
	The head of João Rodrigo Santos was found outside his home in the early hours of Tuesday.
	The motive for the crime remains unclear although the victim's wife reportedly worked for the military police in one of Rio's pacification units designed to crack down on gang activity.
	The incident comes three months after an amateur referee in northern Brazil was decapitated after he fatally stabbed a player for refusing to leave the pitch.
	That's how professional sports should be played everywhere, as far as I'm concerned.
	Okay, Clip Blitz continues.
	Okay, here's another thing.
	Now, you're talking about the whole protest in Brittany?
	Here, play the Kenya, or Kenya, and by the way, we talked about Kenya being a crap hole.
	Play this Kenya horror story.
	Okay.
	In Nairobi, Kenya, hundreds of people took to the streets to protest sexual violence after a 16-year-old girl was gang raped and her accused rapists were freed.
	The victim, known as Liz, was beaten, raped, and left for dead in a pit latrine in June.
	She suffered severe injuries, including a broken back, and is now confined to a wheelchair.
	Liz identified three of six alleged attackers, but their only punishment was being forced to mow the police station lawn.
	It's funny you say this because this morning when we're having this conversation about how people are upset about maybe someone being shot at the airport, I actually said the atrocities that go on in the world are so much larger and so crazy that we don't hear about ever.
	I know, we don't.
	Clip Blitz is good.
	What's next?
	John, on your Clip Blitz.
	Alright, naming cats.
	Okay, this is great.
	Jeannie, Jasmine, Big Mickey, Little Mickey, Ray Zaney, Gray, Forrest Gump.
	He's a little slow.
	Jeannie, Jasmine, Ginger, Cookie, Candy, Gaffney, and Tucker.
	What the heck is this?
	700 cats.
	What is this?
	The Woman with 700 Cats is a new series on one of these stupid channels.
	Someone told me, and I didn't look up the article, there was a New York Times article about how cats are responsible for killing millions of people a year around the world.
	Oh, with that disease they've got?
	Well, first of all, they kill every single animal in the world.
	They kill 2 billion birds, 12.3 billion animals, and millions of people.
	Cats, man.
	You think Al-Qaeda is bad?
	We need to be looking at these cats.
	I don't trust cats.
	I don't trust them either.
	They're very, very sketchy.
	So just as a last clip, this is a little long one we have to play, but there's a show on called Teen...
	Teen Kids News.
	It's once a week, and there's a bunch of teenagers that...
	And where do I find this show?
	What channel?
	Oh, I think it's on a PBS channel or something.
	You have to look it up.
	Teen Kids News.
	It's a weekly news program, a news magazine.
	Nice.
	Essentially done by teens, and it's usually pretty idiotic.
	But they had this one where they went out in the streets and they asked kids, like teens, young teens, who most of them don't remember 9-11 because they're not old enough.
	9-11's getting pretty long in the tooth.
	And so they asked them about the terrorism thing and all the kids are scared to death except one or two, which is interesting.
	But then they summarize at the very end with a couple of tips that I know you're going to get a big kick out of.
	We want to know, how safe do you feel America is from a terrorist attack?
	I feel that we've set up our security since 9-11 has happened and we're more aware of what's going on now so we have troops around to protect us and in case anything does happen I think we'll be ready for it.
	Honestly, I don't think it's very safe.
	I mean, you're always going to find somebody or something, like we could have a plane hover over our head and drop a bomb on us right now.
	But the security systems at the airports have definitely improved, especially on internationals, and I think it's getting much less of a threat than it was before, like in 9-11.
	How safe do you feel America is from terrorist attack?
	I think America is very safe from terrorist attacks because ever since 9-11 we've increased all forms of security including at airports and other places where people come into the country.
	Well, safe in the sense that I don't believe anything would happen, but not safe in the fact that people are always worrying about it.
	So it's almost better off to be unsafe than to, like, for example, on the anniversary of 9-11, it was almost worse than anything happening, the nervousness over what could happen.
	Honestly, I don't feel that we're that safe because it's a very diverse country.
	There's different types of people in the country and people coming in every day.
	So it's not far from today or tomorrow that something bad might happen.
	We're not that safe.
	Pretty safe.
	After 9-11, I think it has improved a lot.
	But before, it could obviously use some tweaking.
	But now, I feel pretty confident that it's fine.
	With the death of Osama bin Laden, the world is probably a bit safer today than it was on 9-11.
	But that doesn't mean we should let our guard down.
	The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has this advice.
	If you see something, say something.
	Report suspicious activity to the police or call 911.
	For Teen Kids News, I'm D.U. Well, John, I have to say, right on the cusp of ending the show, you get the clip of it.
	Clip of the day.
	I literally have chills going up and down my spine, and I'm looking at the website.
	This is an Emmy award-winning program.
	Number one rated educational show.
	This is shown in schools.
	This is...
	I'm almost speechless.
	I'm looking at this website and of course they don't really tell you who's behind it other than they work very closely with NBC Sports and Fox News.
	Sounds about right.
	And this is Alan Weiss.
	Here we go.
	Before we go, I need to look at this.
	Creator and co-executive producer Alan Weiss.
	Co-executive producer and director Tanya Wilk and Mary Lou Yacoub.
	Who is this Alan Weiss?
	Have you done any research on this?
	No, I just watch it and enjoy it because I know if you see something, to say something.
	This is just an outrage.
	If you see something...
	Alan Weiss, let's see, we have the Summit Consulting Group.
	Of course, we need to have IMDB, maybe.
	This should be banned from schools.
	If your child comes home and says, oh, we watched teen kids news today, then you should immediately call a meeting at the school, the PTA. Is this the guy who did Alan Weiss and an incredible successful career in Hollywood?
	He did Blue Hawaii for Elvis Presley?
	Really?
	That can't be the guy.
	Could be.
	FAQs.
	What is Teen Kids News?
	It's the leading television news program for teens and kids nationwide.
	The weekly FCC-friendly 30-minute show aims to inform, educate, and inspire.
	Okay.
	Well, you know, let's stretch one little more thing, then.
	You're not going to hurt me anymore, are you?
	Oh, yeah.
	So you were talking about, you mentioned, I wouldn't have done it if you hadn't have mentioned Fox's involvement.
	Here's something that Fox, Fox, Fox, you know, the people that bring you Fox News and all the rest of it, a kind of a, this is an experimental show, cartoon show, they're thinking of rolling out called High School USA. And so the clip is HS. How do you know it's experimental?
	Because it shows up late in a bundle of shows that appear to me to be pilots.
	Okay.
	And this is a clip of High School USA. I've got two clips.
	And I want to ask you if you think that this is appropriate for anything.
	Really?
	Spread the funds out evenly in the school.
	Instead of just hiring more and more janitors, you probably would have gone unnoticed.
	But this was just dumb.
	Superintendent Kunstler!
	Superintendent Kunstler!
	Yeah, it's pronounced Andrea.
	Andrea, I'm telling you, the students here are the smartest I've ever known.
	If you just give us one more chance to take this test, I promise we can do this without my breast milk.
	Wait, hold on.
	Your breast milk?
	Dan, what the hell's going on at your school?
	Nothing that's not going on at every school across America.
	Ah, fine.
	Whatever.
	You can retake the test.
	But if you fail this time, I'm shutting down this perverted place for good.
	Perverted?
	Really?
	You're the one who likes to pee on people, counselor!
	This is on what channel?
	This is on Fox.
	Fox.
	Fox Network.
	Now, we're going to go to part two where the school kids passed the test and they got rid of the janitors.
	They hired too many and they're cleaning the bathroom as we speak and this is how it ends.
	You know how much you love status quo.
	That's true.
	But I just feel that since we passed the test without my breast milk, it must not have been that good.
	No, but your tutoring was...
	Mr.
	Strucker!
	Marsh, it turns out all the time you spent breastfeeding, you were also reading to the students from textbooks.
	You're a great tutor.
	Oh, yeah.
	Look, everything worked out great.
	Cool.
	But it won't be great for long.
	You may have won this time, Dan, but next time, I'm gonna get you.
	And I'm gonna get you good.
	Yeah, yeah, big deal.
	You're gonna pee on me.
	It's pronounced...
	Poo.
	I picked a bad time to quit drugs.
	Is that unbelievable?
	And I'm concerned about kids not knowing what an operating system or a file system is.
	Forget about it.
	Alright, that's great.
	Thanks, John.
	You're welcome.
	I knew I'd liven things up.
	That really aired?
	That's real?
	Yes, I picked it up all over the air, OTA on Fox.
	Wow.
	Alright, well, I know that we're not exactly FCC friendly on this show, but parents, if I had a choice between High School USA and the No Agenda show, I think I know what I'd choose.
	Holy crap.
	And I'm going to look into this teen kids news.
	That's very, very disturbing.
	See something, say something.
	Everything's better since we killed Osama Bin Laden.
	Jeez Louise.
	Alright.
	Hey, this show is value for value.
	If you think you learned anything, or got some insight you haven't gotten anywhere else, support us.
	Go to dvorak.org slash n-a.
	Or just go to noagendashow.com.
	There's plenty of ways to find out how you can support us.
	And we have our show notes, 562.nashownotes.com, coming to you from FEMA Region 6, Travis Heights Hideout in Austin, Texas.
	In the morning, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from FEMA Region X, northern Silicon Valley.
	It has its own little area.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We'll be back on Thursday, everybody, right here on No Agenda.
	The best protest we have in the United States of America, and in fact in many countries around the world, is this podcast!
	Someone's getting corn-holed today.
	Sounds like a recipe for success to me.
	The best podcast in the universe!

▲