All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 21, 2011 - InfoWars Nightly News
01:10:49
20111021_Fri_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It's Friday, October 21st, 2011.
We've got globalist apologist Jamie Bartlett joining us from London.
At the end of the transmission tonight, we have the head of Euro-Pacific Capital exposing Herman Cain's 999-9 plan, and then some.
Peter Schiff, it's jam-packed this evening.
But first, let's get into some of the news.
Well, nothing like having a chicken-necked globalist like Hillary Clinton, who flies around in armored Air Force Threes, making jokes and re-quoting and butchering Julius Caesar quotes of, I came, I saw, I conquered.
She said, basically, we came, we saw, he's dead.
And she magically arrived right on time for the killing of Gaddafi.
They say they're going to bury him at sea.
Lord knows if any of this is true.
When you have a group of congenital liars telling you something, you would be a fool to believe them.
But the video does look pretty convincing of him being murdered.
And I'm no fan of Gaddafi, but he's a small-time globalist crime syndicate, thug, tyrant, whatever you want to call it, and did try to actually build up Africa.
As tyrants go, he's nothing compared to somebody like Hillary Clinton.
And we all saw Forrest Gump hang out with President Kennedy.
That was decades ago, and I'm telling you folks, Forrest Gump isn't real, and that was a fraud as well.
So let's go to this short clip of Hillary and the CBS News Harpy.
That's not fair.
She's not a Harpy.
She's more of a Banshee, joking about his death.
So, I mean, that is the land of unconfirmed... Yes, we came, we saw, he died.
Did it have anything to do with your visit?
No, I'm sure it did.
You'll die too, Hillary.
And I wish no harm upon you.
I want you to live out a long life with all your evil.
Anybody that has to basically gloat over people's deaths who you set up and who the West got to come in out of the cold and invest with Western companies and with Sarkozy of France and the leader of England as well.
Tony Blair, and now you've cheated him and stolen tens of billions of dollars of the Libyans' money.
Well, let's actually go to some of that news.
Qaddafi's been killed without a trial.
And we've also now have the before and after photos that we'll show you in a moment.
There's a bunch of these online.
Every major city of Libya that have the highest share and are living now in Africa Has been absolutely decimated.
There's one before and after photo.
2007 versus 2011.
I mean, look at that wrecked, wrecked city of Misrata, or Mistrata.
And now the globalists will come in with our tax money and give it to globalist private corporations to rebuild it.
The very people that destroyed it.
So, very dangerous development in globalism where they fund rebels, Al-Qaeda in this case, to overthrow a country, wreck the nation, and then they have a Nobel Peace Prize winner doing it.
So, supposedly all, you know, wonderful.
But as I said earlier, we don't know if he was killed, we don't know if he was executed earlier in Central Africa when U.S.
Special Forces invaded Uganda last week.
We don't know the truth.
Now they claim they're burying him at sea, just like Osama bin Laden, and we know that that report was a fraud.
And now, The vast majority of the sailors on the US aircraft carrier that supposedly buried Bin Laden at sea, they've been busted for using some new synthetic drug called Spice.
And 49 of 64 sailors involved in burying Bin Laden at sea, burying the Keebler Elf or Santa Claus or Easter Bunny at sea or Tooth Fairy at sea, they have now been dishonorably discharged and kicked out of the Navy.
So dishonorably discharged men tell no tales.
Now, shifting gears over to the police state of England, the police have been caught in the US, Canada, Italy, you name it, provocateuring To disrupt peaceful democratic movements.
And it's a big controversy now in England, where the police have been caught perjuring themselves on the stand, provocateuring groups, you name it.
It's all coming out, the different dirty tricks that they use to try to set up different organizations.
And to also ingratiate themselves, as we just showed you, sexual relationships.
And finally, before we go to break with Ron Paul's newest campaign ad, devastating the other political horrors that he's exposing, we have a report out of MIT, where they tell the world that they've developed systems that look through your walls, and the police and military are going to be using this.
My friends, In the 16 years that I've been on air, I have seen literally hundreds of government reports admitting that the police already in America on the ground and on helicopters are looking through our walls with ground penetrating radar.
The reason you're seeing more and more admissions of this is they're getting ready to turn it loose on the population.
We're going to go to break and come back with Peter Schiff after this Ron Paul ad.
Stay with us.
Ron Paul.
A visionary who predicted the financial crisis.
A leader with a plan to solve it.
The Paul Plan?
Balance the budget.
Cut a trillion dollars year one.
Eliminate five federal bureaucracies.
End the foreign wars and nation building.
Reign in the Federal Reserve.
Pay down the debt.
Cut taxes to create jobs.
Ron Paul.
A plan to restore America now.
I'm Ron Paul and I approve this message.
Now we are listener supported by the sponsors with the online video apparel bookstore video store at InfoWars.com with the PrisonPlanet.tv memberships.
It was four years ago that listeners started a money bomb.
And, uh, it started getting a lot of attention.
I learned people had pledged several hundred thousand dollars, so I got behind it like two days before.
And with that $300,000 we raised, I was able to begin the process to move into a bigger office.
Then the next couple money bombs, we were able to build this structure, hire the people, uh, and build the TV studio.
And now we've gotten to the point where we need this money bomb around 20% of the money each year now that we need to run this operation.
You know, it takes millions of dollars to run this.
People then go, what, you're making millions?
No, no, it takes millions to run this.
You understand?
That's the cost of running this operation.
And we have now, a little bit late this year, launched it.
Normally I promote it a month out, but I've been so busy with the nightly news, so busy with special reports, so busy with everything that we're launching this just, what, like 14 days before.
And so you can start donating now if you'd like to.
We're going to broadcast 24 hours again with special guests and a lot more coming up on the 3rd.
In fact, they have the date on there.
I just finally saw this site completed this morning.
And you can be the first to donate via credit card, PayPal.
You can also mail in your donations now.
Check it out.
InfoWarsMoneyBomb.com or you can simply go to InfoWars.com forward slash MoneyBomb and start donating today.
Okay, we're back.
It's InfoWars Nightly News.
We're about to talk to our next guest on the economy.
And we've got another guest on who's kind of an apologist for the congenital liars of the establishment.
But I wanted to just talk about the report we covered last night.
Seventy-nine trillion dollars of Bank of America derivatives that they're about to have American taxpayers try to pay for and then lecture us all day about our debts.
It's just incredible.
So it's very important to realize that it's the ultra-rich waging war against the middle class, trying to con basically people that aren't aware of it.
So we're going to be talking about Herman Cain's 9-9-9-9 plan.
Where does that extra nine come in?
And with more on the economy and this vital election, We're joined by the CEO of Euro-Pacific Capital, Peter Schiff.
He's written an excellent article today that Infowars.com picked up, Business Insider, and many other sites.
There's a hidden nine in Herman Cain's 999 plan.
Now, obviously, my criticism is we were always told by the fair taxers they would get rid of the income tax and bring in a sales tax or VAT.
Herman wants both!
And those nines can become fifteens, twenties, thirties, as they've done in Europe and England.
But then there's also the FICA.
They're not going to want to get rid of Social Security in there.
They're going to keep nine, nine, nine, nine.
But we'll find out the other hidden nine that Peter Schiff is talking about here today.
Peter, thanks for joining us.
Thanks for having me on, Alex.
So, you've written this article, but break it down.
Where is the hidden nine in Herman Cain's plan?
Well, the fourth nine is the 9% payroll tax that is imposed through what is purported to be a 9% corporate income tax.
It isn't a 9% corporate income tax.
It actually is a gross receipts tax.
And embedded in that gross receipts tax is a 9% tax on payrolls.
And the only way for businesses to recoup that payroll tax is through their workforce.
Now, granted, that represents a reduction of the 15.3% payroll tax that is already in place, where half of it is paid directly by the worker, and the other half is paid indirectly by the worker through reduced wages.
But the problem is, Herman Cain is claiming that he completely gets rid of the payroll tax.
That it no longer exists.
That's not true.
It's still there.
It's just not as high.
But the problem is, the way Herman is selling his plan to the average worker is that he's going to get a reduction in taxes because he's going to have no payroll taxes and he's going to pay just a 9% income tax and a 9% sales tax.
If that were really the case, Then pretty much all working Americans would get a tax cut under the Herman Cain plan.
Of course, if you retired, they were going to get a tax hike, but...
If you account for the fourth nine, that's not the case.
That's a game changer.
What the fourth nine means is that the majority of Americans under the 9999 plan are going to be paying 27% of their income in taxes, which is much higher than a lot of those people pay now.
So the only way the plan works, the only way it's revenue neutral, is because you have big tax increases on the middle class and lower class to pay for tax cuts for higher income workers.
Now, it is a pro-growth plan.
We are going to get more economic growth out of this plan.
We're going to get more jobs out of this plan because we're freeing up capital.
We're treating capital a lot better.
We're going to have more investments.
We're going to have more savings.
We're going to have more job creation.
But we're going to have to pay for that by putting a bill on the middle class.
Now, if we don't want to stick the middle class with a bill, then we need to cut government spending dramatically.
You know, but the government wants to pretend That we can have a growing economy, all this government spending, and stick the bill on the rich.
It ain't gonna work.
Because if we try to put the bill on the high-income earners, then we're not gonna get the economic growth, and we're not gonna get the jobs.
We're just gonna have a lot of government and a lot of unemployment.
Sure, Peter, let me interject here, because this is important.
I saw the Economic Policy Journal criticize you, why Peter Schiff and Arthur Laffer are wrong about Herman Cain 999, and it's got classic Class warfare garbage about, you just don't want rich people taxed, but sales taxes, VAT taxes, from what I've researched, just basic economics, that always hits the poorest people.
So this makes no sense.
Oh yeah, and of course the people that are hurt the most by taxes that discourage job creation are the people who are looking for jobs.
So, by keeping taxes high on the job creators, we're keeping a lot of people unemployed.
They would be better to get a job and then pay some taxes than to be unemployed and pay no taxes.
But, you know, Art Laffer is applauding the 999 plan because he doesn't know about the hidden nine.
See, I have a difference of opinion.
I figured out that there's a fourth nine.
Art Laffer doesn't even know that yet.
But the thing is, I'm in favor of moving towards a tax structure where people are taxed based on what they spend, not based on what they earn.
Now the standard liberal argument is, well that's not fair because the rich people don't spend everything like the poor people, they save some of their money.
Well precisely!
We want them to save their money because when they save their money, they're delaying gratification for themselves.
They're postponing their consumption into the future.
When they eventually spend, they'll pay the taxes.
But in the meantime, the money is used to grow the economy.
It provides capital for businesses.
Either the individual who's earning the money uses it to grow his own business, or he loans it out either through the banking system or directly to some other entrepreneur.
So why would we want to take money that was going to be used to grow the economy and send it to Washington where it's going to use it to undermine the economy?
Peter, let me expand on that because I had read your excellent There's a Hidden Nine in Herman Cain's plan today.
I hadn't read this full article.
Now I've actually had a chance.
We were talking to scan over it a bit, and they're actually criticizing you in this.
But they're saying you're endorsing his 9-9-9-9 plan, but I follow you closely.
I haven't seen you endorse Kane's 9-9-9 plan.
No, I haven't endorsed it, and I think it's a loser in the general election if Kane gets the nomination with his 9-9-9 plan.
It's going to come out that there's a fourth nine in there and, you know, the public is going to reject it because they're not going to vote for higher taxes on themselves.
But my whole point is it shows just how much of the tax burden the rich currently bear.
I mean, if you're going to reduce the taxes on the upper income people so that it's the same as people that earn less money, you can't do that.
So either you've got to massively cut government spending or you've got to raise taxes on the middle class in order to cut taxes.
on up rate taxes we're not going to get growth let me quantify this because i had a college a student call me today and he said you don't want to redistribute the west the wealth of one percent you know you're basically anti-american but it wasn't reality based and and and so quantify You're explaining to people, if you cut the taxes on the rich, yeah, that would speed the economy up, but this plan actually increases it overall on the poor, who aren't paying a lot of taxes right now, and that'll cause issues as well.
That's what you're getting at, right?
But it's also increasing taxes on the middle class.
Most people are gonna get a tax hike under this plan.
See, the real problem is government is too big.
Government is too expensive.
We have to cut government so that we don't have to raise taxes on anybody.
In fact, if we cut enough government, We can lower taxes on everybody.
But if we want all this government that we have now, it is very expensive.
And we can't put the bill just on the rich, because then the economy collapses.
So if we want all this government, the truth is the middle class has got to pay for it.
And people think that the rich are getting away with murder.
Look, I'm paying about half my income in taxes right now.
I don't know how much more I can take.
Yeah, they're trying to pretend that the rich are paying less in taxes than their secretaries.
That's nonsense.
And not only are the rich paying higher rates than their secretaries, but in absolute numbers?
I mean, think about Warren Buffett.
They're saying he's paying less rate than his secretary.
They're saying Warren Buffett is paying 17%.
Yeah, but he's paying like $10 million a year.
I mean, his secretary might be paying a higher rate, but maybe she's only paying $10,000 versus his $10 million.
But it's also a lie because Warren Buffett is the biggest shareholder of Berkshire Hathaway.
He doesn't even take a salary.
He works for free.
So his income is Berkshire's income.
And Berkshire Hathaway is paying 35% income tax.
That's Warren's money.
He's paying his taxes through Berkshire Hathaway.
Sure.
Not only is he paying a lot more in taxes than his secretary, but he's paying a higher rate.
And anybody who says otherwise, including Warren Buffett, is lying.
Well, let's expand on that.
Here in Texas, we have a stealth income tax.
That's the franchise tax.
I pay taxes on all the equipment, everything, and a percentage on my profits.
And, I mean, it's taxes on top of taxes.
So let me ask you this question.
Why, then, do we see the ultra-rich, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and others, I mean, I have my answer for it, why do we see them promoting higher taxes?
Well, you know, Warren Buffett, you know, he actually benefits from the estate tax because a lot of businesses have to be sold because they can't survive the estate tax.
And then Warren gets to buy them up on the cheap through Berkshire Hathaway.
So he has an interest in breaking up a lot of these businesses, even though it's a destructive tax.
On the income tax, I don't know, maybe he just wants to be liked.
You know, it's a lot easier to be liked if you adopt these liberal agenda.
It's more difficult to have to explain to people why just taxing the rich is a bad deal for the middle class and the poor.
You know, I was down at Occupy Wall Street yesterday.
We've got a video coming out from Reason TV.
It'll be on YouTube next week.
All these people, the majority of people who are there that are mad, they're all blaming the rich.
They think the problems emanate from taxes.
I had one person say the reason we had the Great Depression was because the rich weren't paying enough taxes.
You know, that all the problems are because the rich aren't paying enough taxes.
And if we just jacked up the taxes on the rich, that everything would be better.
I mean, people don't understand that the reason the rich are rich is because they created the middle class.
They're the ones that figured out what to produce.
They created the jobs.
They created the products.
They're paying their fair share just by getting rich.
Anything they pay in taxes is just gravy.
Well, Peter, but if the young college students that call me on the radio and disagree with what I'm saying, with what you're saying, Well, just look at history.
Kennedy cut taxes in what, one bracket by 50 percent, the other 38 percent.
Tax receipts the next year doubled.
The ruling government class knows when you raise taxes It always ends up destroying business and overall revenue down the line.
So the question is, if this basic fact of economics is there, why then does the government class want it?
The answer is control.
You look at Warren Buffett, he knows that higher taxes on middle class and wealthy will be used in further banker bailouts of Bank of America, Wells Fargo and others who invested in the derivatives.
And I think in that lies the answer.
You talked about him wanting to keep the estate tax to break up companies.
That's it.
The ultra-rich In many cases, have an incentive through government to use regulations and insider deals.
Take General Electric, moving jobs offshore, getting tax exemptions, but then always calling for higher taxes on the general public.
I mean, I think it's that crony capitalist element that's involved in all of this that's shicking the working class.
They want higher taxes on all the people who are actually paying the taxes.
Meanwhile, they're not paying any because they can escape them.
And when we talk about raising taxes, Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich, and he cites Warren Buffett, but he wants to raise my taxes, and I'm already paying...
A lot higher tax than what he believes Ward Buffett is.
I'm already paying 50% and he wants to raise it.
You know, what we need to do is look back at the 19th century.
Look at how fast the U.S.
economy grew.
Look at the Industrial Revolution.
Look at how much living standards rose, percentage-wise, without even all the technology we have today.
We had much faster economic growth when nobody paid income taxes than we have today when everybody is paying income taxes.
Great point.
That's like Ron Paul.
He'll be on CNN, Fox, and they say, you want to get rid of the income tax.
How will we have a government?
He says, this capital was built behind me, this whole system, and we didn't have this income tax.
Let's look more at the 999 than briefly at what's happening in Europe, and then we'll let you go, Peter.
Looking at 999, there's that payroll tax that anybody who actually has a real business in the real world knows is there, so it's 9-9-9-9.
But what about the danger of once, let's say Herman Cain was successful, once they got into Into the position of having the camel's nose under the tent flap.
What happens then once they start trying to raise the different taxes?
A and B, what about the prospect of having the federal government now involved in sales taxes and VAT?
We think we have a nightmare now with the IRS.
What about this power grab with federal tentacles into everything?
Yeah, I mean, that's another risk that you give the government another revenue stream to exploit.
But look, I think we risk higher taxes regardless, whether they get us through a sales tax or an income tax.
And of course, you know, the sales tax is somewhat self-correcting as to abuse, which is what the founding fathers said, because if they jack that tax up too high, people won't buy.
There'll be a black market that people will try to avoid it.
So you can't put a sales tax too high or you're not going to have any sales to tax.
But I have sympathy with the idea that, look, we want less government.
We want to take away these revenue streams.
I would love to replace the income tax with a sales tax.
But yes, this layers it on top of it.
I know Herman Cain's goal is to actually eventually get rid of the income tax and go to a total sales tax model.
So that is the goal.
But of course, you know what we say about the best laid plans.
what often happens to them.
But I don't think that's really the best criticism of his plan.
I think the real criticism is to hit a nine.
You know, when you hear guys like Rick Romney arguing about, well, it's a federal sales tax on top of a state sales tax, I mean, so what?
I mean, we got a federal income tax on top of a state income tax.
So if we can get rid of the two income taxes and have two sales taxes instead, I think that's better.
I mean, it doesn't bother me to pay a sales tax.
I don't have to hire accountants.
I don't have to keep records.
I don't have to file forms.
I just pay it.
I don't even consider it.
So I would much rather have the federal government taxing me on what I spend than on the income tax.
Even if I ended up paying the same amount of tax, it'd just be a lot easier for me.
Sure.
In fact, what's the number?
Well, that's what I was about to ask.
I forget the number.
It's some gargantuan amount.
How much do Americans spend every year complying and filing income taxes?
Oh, it's like at least half a trillion dollars.
Think about industries.
Think about all the accountants.
What a waste of time.
You know, I'm in the brokerage industry.
I have people coming up with all kinds of accounts, pensions, IRAs, KEOs, estate planning.
All of this is to avoid the income tax.
Just get rid of it and there's nothing to avoid.
And then we don't have to waste all these resources doing things that we don't really need.
We can use these resources productively.
You know, we're in a gigantic economic hole now.
We need everybody possible helping us dig our way out.
You know, we don't want a bunch of accountants and lawyers getting in the way.
Peter, I've been asking the questions here tonight, but I want to get your view on Ron Paul and where his campaign is going.
A, and then B, looking at Europe, we saw the dollar get hammered today, but Europe is in a lot of trouble.
They haven't been able to get their quote deal to create this new super euro zone that's going to attempt to raise taxes to pay off all these debts.
So where do you see Ron Paul's campaign going?
A. And B. What do you see happening in Europe and the U.S.
economy?
Well, I mean, obviously I'm hopeful that Ron Paul's campaign will catch on.
I mean, right now he's still hovering around 10%, so that puts him kind of ahead of the second tier, but still behind the top tier candidates.
So he really needs to kind of break out.
And it seems like everybody has been getting their turn in the limelight.
First it was Michelle Bachman, and then her star faded quickly.
Now we got Herman Cain.
So maybe Ron Paul is going to have his day.
I don't know.
Hopefully he will.
I know that as the race progresses, eventually some people are going to drop out.
And Ron Paul is going to have the staying power because he does have, you know, very committed supporters.
So his support is not that wide, but it's really, really deep.
That gives him the staying power.
Hopefully he can stay in it long enough to catch on.
You know, I think Romney really shot himself in the foot by admitting on the last debate That the only reason he didn't want to hire illegals was because he was running for president and it would look bad.
So that's going to come back and bite him.
I think Rick Perry, you know, I mean, people, his star fizzled out pretty quickly too.
So Herman Cain's got some problems.
Can Herman Cain really stay at the top?
And if not, who's going to replace him?
I mean, maybe Newt Gingrich?
I don't know.
But Ron Paul, you know, he's got a shot at it.
So we got to stick in there.
He's got to keep plugging away.
Maybe we can get some more media coverage.
You never know.
I think he could beat Obama, so we just gotta get him the nomination.
But I still would have to say it's still a long shot, but it's not no shot.
Anyway, getting to your question about the euro and the dollar, look, I think the euro is going to rally.
I think that, you know, as bad as the problems are in Europe, they are worse here.
I'm convinced of that.
And so I think we've got bigger problems for the dollar.
And we might get a big rally in Europe.
We're at a key level right here, the way we closed out the week in the currency markets, the stock markets, global stock markets.
If they move up on Monday, we can have a huge rally in stock markets.
And we could have a huge decline in the dollar.
That doesn't mean I think there's going to be a new bull market in stocks.
I think that we're going to run into resistance up around, what, $12,400 or $1,500 in the Dow.
And then I think there's going to be another problem that's going to come up, and it's going to cause another sell-off.
I think we move sideways.
But I think we got a lot of people that were too negative, got short in that last sell-off last month.
And I think that we're going to get a rally.
Now, if we sell off on Monday big, then You know, because we're right at the resistance right now.
We're right where we should sell off.
But looking at the action in the market this week, you know, we haven't had the sellers up at this high end.
There's been buying coming in, and I think we're going through the overhead resistance.
So I think the markets look like they want to go up, and the dollar looks like it wants to go down.
I think the wild card is going to be the bond market, because the bond market could also get beat up a little bit here if the stock market goes up and the dollar goes down.
That could set up potentially the next crisis, maybe late in the year, early next year, where if the dollar and the bond market are falling a lot, that could be problematic.
Right now, I think people look at a weak dollar as a good thing.
I don't think it's good, but I think Wall Street thinks it's good.
But eventually, they might think it's too much of a good thing, and instead of worrying about the Euro, we might actually start worrying about the dollar.
Going back to Ron Paul, I agree with your analysis.
We've seen the stars rise of people like Perry, people like Bachman, and then fade.
Ron Paul has really got the issues, he's got the gravitas, he's in that 10-15 point range.
And if he can just stay in there, they had a big scientific study come out last week that he's being ignored more than any candidate.
If they gave him fair coverage, he would be the frontrunner.
And so he's got a real potential.
If this was the Indianapolis 500, he's in third place right now, there's no doubt.
And if we point out the real record of gun control, And open borders and Obamacare of Mitt Romney and the Federal Reserve tax and spend type activities of Herman Cain.
Ron Paul is going to shoot up there as that leader, even if the dinosaur corporate media tries to block him.
In closing, you have predicted much of what's happened in our economy.
More and more the mainstream media admits it's more of a depression than a recession.
Obama is falling like a rock.
Pelosi won't even mention his name.
I mean, the system is definitely out of bullets.
I'm kind of hoping that Kaine will appoint Art Laffer as his economic advisor, and then we can resurrect those old CNBC debates with me and Art Laffer, where he got everything completely wrong, and say, hey, why is this guy your economic advisor?
And that might discredit him a bit and help Rod.
Well, Peter Schiff, thank you so much for spending time with us tonight.
I look forward to talking to you again in the future.
And, of course, we've had your Europacific Capital website up.
There's also SchiffRadio.com for folks to visit.
I appreciate you joining us tonight.
Thanks a lot, Alex.
Have a great weekend.
Thank you for spending time with us.
You have a great weekend as well.
And you, the viewers of InfoWars Nightly News, I want you to have a great weekend.
But the show isn't over.
We're going to break.
We're coming back.
I'm going to debate a British think tank operative who doesn't like conspiracy theorists talking bad about the New World Order.
That's coming up after this break.
Stay with us.
It's InfoWars Nightly News.
If you believe in this information and want to support its viral spread, go to the InfoWars store at InfoWars.com.
We've got the new G.I.
Joe InfoWars t-shirts.
We've got the incredible ProPure gravity-fed filters available at InfoWars.com in the store.
We've got a new DVD, Sinus Under Attack, the Don't Tread On Me flag.
We've got all sorts of different bumper stickers to help spread the rebellion virally.
It's all there.
Wristbands, citizen rule books, in every order.
Order online at InfoWars.com today.
The water filters, the canteens, it's all there.
InfoWars.com.
Now, we are listener-supported, but the sponsors with the online video, apparel, bookstore, video store at InfoWars.com with the PrisonPlanet.tv memberships.
It was four years ago that listeners started a money bomb.
And it started getting a lot of attention.
I learned people had pledged several hundred thousand dollars, so I got behind it like two days before.
And with that $300,000 we raised, I was able to begin the process to move into a bigger office.
Then the next couple money bombs, we were able to build this structure, hire the people, and build the TV studio.
And now we've gotten to the point where we need this money bomb, around 20% of the money each year now that we need to run this operation.
You know, it takes millions of dollars to run this.
People then go, what, you're making millions?
No, no, it takes millions to run this.
You understand, that's the cost of running this operation.
And we have now, a little bit late this year, launched it.
Normally I promote it a month out, but I've been so busy with the nightly news, so busy with special reports, so busy with everything that we're launching this just, what, like 14 days before.
And so you can start donating now if you'd like to.
We're gonna broadcast 24 hours again with special guests and a lot more coming up on the 3rd.
In fact, they have the date on there.
I just finally saw this site completed this morning.
And you can be the first to donate via credit card, PayPal.
You can also mail in your donations now.
Check it out.
InfoWarsMoneyBomb.com or you can simply go to InfoWars.com forward slash MoneyBomb and start donating today.
And you are watching the Friday, October 21st, 2011 edition of InfoWars Nightly News.
And we are not funded like MSNBC and others with banker bailout money given to the corporate fascists that control those on the liberal socialist Matrix Plantation.
No, we are funded by viewers and subscribers like you at PrisonPlanet.tv and thanks to your support we then distribute this out to YouTube and other platforms where it's seen by millions of people in the aggregate every week.
That is true liberty.
Collectively waking up the planet.
Now I saw an article a few days ago by Paul Joseph Watson.
Government front group vows to abolish critical thinking.
Marxist founded Deimos is terrified that school children are questioning the establishment.
And the BBC or the Ministry of Truth folks are agreeing and this is an organization that is very upset about conspiracy theories or things not in the official orthodoxy like Obama is a man of peace or torture is good and liberal.
Uh, things like that.
Or, mercury in shots is good for you.
Uh, things like that.
Questioning 7-7, questioning 9-11.
But then I saw this gentleman on the BBC.
He seemed to be one of the most well-spoken and friendly fellas.
And I have to say that, uh, that what we're gonna find out from him in Paul Watson's article is accurate.
Because again, These are the folks that can tell you if something is accurate or not.
This is the oracle high on the mountain that you go to to find out what's veritas and what is deception.
He's Jamie Bartlett.
He is the head of Violence and Extremism Program.
He tracks, well, the troublemakers out there.
And so we're honored to have him join us.
From England, Airstrip One, where are you over there?
I'm over in East London here.
All right, you're in East London.
Can I say I'm really happy to be here and I really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you.
Well, it's good to talk to you.
I'm sure you can try to do an anthropology study for the Hive board to teach us.
No, no, I'm going to stop being mean.
What is your organization really about?
Common Purpose?
All those folks trying to teach the school children about the evil internet?
Paul Joseph Watson's article was a ridiculous, ridiculous, I think, intentional misunderstanding of what we said.
The headline, and I've got the article in front of me, Government Front Group Vows to Abolish Critical Thinking.
It's completely ridiculous.
What we did was to say that We need more critical thinking in schools, because the simple fact is, at the moment, there's a lot of good stuff on the internet, there's a lot of liberating information on the internet, a lot of information that has shown governments at times to be corrupt and corrosive.
But there's also a load of rubbish on the internet.
You surely can accept that.
And all we're saying is that we need young people to be better at critically assessing and evaluating the information they consume.
There are Holocaust denial sites splattered all over the web.
We need to make sure kids aren't sucked into this stuff.
You know, in his article he says that...
I, or Demos, is trying to tell students they should only believe what the government and the mainstream media tells them is true.
Where is that in the report?
I never said anything of the sort.
It's completely ridiculous.
We need people to be critical of our governments because they do lie.
And they are sometimes... Well, wait a minute.
Hold on, hold on.
We've got you here so you can set the record straight, I mean, from your perspective.
But, I mean, has the organization that you're part of not come out, because he had links to it, and said 9-11 truth, people that question 7-7, that this is dangerous conspiracy theories.
So, see, from our perspective, we've looked at the real facts, and you guys are connected, according to his report, to Common Purpose, that we've seen involve some pretty creepy stuff.
Okay, just to answer my question, what's your view on 9-11 and 7-7 and government-sponsored terrorism?
I don't think that 9-11 nor 7-7 were inside jobs.
And I don't think that it's an official account, I think it's the account of thousands of experts, of journalists, of academics, of people that are interested in the subject.
I've never said, actually, for the record, that there's anything dangerous about people who believe 9-11, the 9-11 truth movement.
The report I wrote, which again was completely misinterpreted by Paul Joseph Watson and others, ...said that I was accusing 9-11 Truth as of being terrorist.
Absolutely not.
All I said was, if you look across right-wing, left-wing terrorism, religious terrorism, you often find a conspiracy somewhere in that.
Well, that's not particularly surprising.
If you look at the Angry Brigade left-wing terrorists, they also thought there was a conspiracy against them.
So that's all I've ever said.
Well, hold on.
I mean, it's come out of the major British papers.
And I've interviewed Steak Knife and others, that the leadership in many cases of the IRA violent arm was actually led by British intelligence, MI6, MI5, British Commandos, SAS, as a pretext to scuttle peace deals in Northern Ireland and to have a pretext to crack down.
Gulf of Tonkin to get the U.S.
into Vietnam, a lie.
It's come out in even the Leningradian that in Germany the government didn't just infiltrate neo-Nazi groups, they created them.
And so the idea, you know, from when I got what you were saying is that some of these extremist groups are into conspiracy theories.
I actually have seen the opposite.
I've seen government actually infiltrating groups and trying to make them violent.
I don't doubt that that's happened as well.
I'm not going to sit here and try to deny that our governments are whiter than white, that they've never done anything untowards, that they've never infiltrated groups and pushed them further on.
There's apparently one example where MI5 agents, an entire IRA cell, was actually made up of only MI5 agents all watching each other because no one knew what the others were up to.
But that doesn't mean to say that every single thing that ever happens is always by definition a conspiracy.
I think each time you weigh up the evidence, you look at the case in hand, you think about it empirically, you think about it rationally, and you come to your conclusion.
Okay, well that's what I do.
Hold on.
I mean, I believe they killed Gaddafi.
Hey, I believe they killed Gaddafi because I know his background, I know the case, I've watched the video, I've done the research.
Now the bin Laden thing, that's totally separate.
That's fake.
But am I a conspiracy?
Listen, when the government and mainstream media have been caught lying on purpose over and over again, Rupert Murdoch infiltrating, police spying on people, all this stuff, I would be crazy to just believe what government and mainstream media tell me.
I've never said you should believe.
I've never said that you should always believe what government and mainstream tells you.
I mean, if you're, if we're, I mean, we're looking at my report, my report about critical thinking.
People, young people, any people who are critical thinkers, should not only question what the establishment tells them, what the mainstream tells them, but I would also hope they would be equally critical and hold the same standards of evidence and information against alternative sources of information.
Yeah, but that goes on.
I'm sure you would agree with that.
Well sure, I would say question everything, including the BBC.
Precisely.
Question the music, question them all.
I have no problem with that whatsoever.
But the unfortunate fact is, for a lot of young people in particular, they don't question things equally.
They believe anything that's anti-government.
Now sometimes the government does lie, but not always.
Okay, well here's an example.
Here's an example.
Over 80% in the polls I've seen of the British people believe that the royal family was involved in killing Diana, but mainstream media still makes fun of them as crazy.
Over 90% of Americans believe the government killed Kennedy, but the media pundits still make fun of the public.
The mainstream media and government are so out of touch, you have Diana, for heaven's sakes, telling her butler, making a video, writing in the diary, Prince Charles says he's going to kill me in a fake auto accident.
That's right there.
Then you have all the No, no.
She didn't say Prince Charles is going to kill me in a fake auto accident.
She said at one point, I'm worried that I'm going to die in an automobile accident.
It's quite different.
And if you look for links and connections, you'll find them.
No, she said he told me he's going to kill me.
There have been inquests into Diana.
There are many things... Okay, Dr. David Kelly said they're gonna kill me and put me in the woods, and I've been on BBC Radio and they make fun of me for that.
When it's on record, he sent emails out saying, if I don't shut up, I'll be found dead in the woods.
Undissolved pills, no blood at the scene, and all these doctors have come out and said he was clearly murdered and dumped there, and mainstream media... Let me guess, you think Dr. David Kelly committed suicide?
Actually, actually, I don't feel like I have enough evidence to make a decision because what I don't do is just decide that I understand the world perfectly and know every single fact.
The witnesses saw men in black uniforms run away from the body.
So, I mean, but this is the difference.
I don't see every single world event and decide before I know the evidence whether it was a conspiracy or not.
With something like David Kelly, I don't know enough of the facts.
I'm not completely sure.
Okay, did the government lie about WMDs?
Did the British and US government lie?
Yes, I believe they did.
Well, they admit they lied, premeditatedly.
I believe they did, yeah.
But this is the point.
This is the issue I have with the way that my organisation is presented sometimes in the alternative information media, which is that we're some kind of spokespeople for government.
It's ridiculous.
I'm critical of government all the time.
I've got a report coming out next week which is slamming the Home Secretary for not allowing these right-wing protesters, the English Defence League, to protest They're trying to stop them from protesting and I'm saying it's completely wrong.
Why in the world people think that we as an organization are some kind of a government front is ridiculous because we criticize them all the time and that's my whole point.
You know the world is not black and white and it's not made up.
I understand that.
What about Common Purpose?
Do you guys get any funding from the government or Common Purpose?
Absolutely nothing from Common Purpose.
I've got no idea where this ridiculous story has come from.
Do you have any evidence for this?
Does anyone have any evidence for the link between Demos and Common Purpose?
Paul Joseph Watson's making it as quite a central part of his story.
Because Julian Middleton, who founded Common Purpose, was one of 20 people who founded Demos.
It was a large group of people that came up with the idea of setting up a think tank.
We've never had anyone... Well, listen, here's an example.
I'm attacked... This is really important to get this straight.
We've never done any joint events with Common Purpose.
He said that Julian Middleton sits on our advisory board, and she does not.
This is just completely inaccurate.
Okay, let me ask you a question.
Do you get any government funding?
We get some government funding, yeah.
And you know what?
All of our accounts are publicly available.
You can go in there and check them for yourself.
No, I know, but I mean, you're a group saying we should trust the government more.
And you're funny about the government.
Well, a very small amount of our money comes from government.
And actually, I don't think that I've said anywhere in the report we should trust the government more.
I don't know where... Have you read the report?
Have you read the report?
I've scanned over it.
Jamie, let me just stop you right there for just a second.
Let me just bring something up.
Have you seen the video clip?
Uh, of the head of visor consultancy, Peter Powers, saying, it's incredible why we had the exact same trains and exact same bus being attacked at the exact same time and exact same place.
It's incredible.
It's incredible.
I mean, all of this, that happened on 9-11.
They run drills.
So that it confuses the rest of the government and the echelon NSA systems.
We see this over and over again.
We have the official story from pillar to post completely impossible.
I went over there days after it happened.
I investigated it.
I've witnessed it for myself.
I've interviewed the police officers.
I've interviewed the people that witnessed the government planting the bombs at Oklahoma City.
I mean, I'm aware of this.
I'm aware of Operation Gladio.
I've interviewed, but I've also had family who was in the CIA, okay?
Who would not deal drugs for the U.S.
government and murder people.
So I happen to know about this stuff, okay?
I'm not naive.
So I understand that it's come out in federal court that our own government ships guns into Mexico and cocaine back in to destabilize our country.
Did you know that's come out?
I've not heard that, no.
But, you know, just for example, to take this, um, this, this drill story from Pfizer Consultancy, you know as well as I do, that's completely ridiculous.
He's come out numerous times, which is ignored by the alternative information scene, saying, this was a desk-based exercise, we ran hundreds of different models, there was 20 or so people there, all of whom were police officers.
What, he said that, It's got nothing to do with what happened on 7-7, and if it did, it's a pretty rubbish way of doing it, getting 15 or 20 points or something.
We've said it was a tabletop.
PowerPoint, desktop, present.
No, it turns out there were drills, physically.
And so why is it that that story is repeated over and over, even though the man himself has come out repeatedly to say that he has done this.
No, he's come out repeatedly to try to spin it.
No, no, no, no, no.
I'm afraid I don't think so.
It's absolutely obvious that what happens here... What branch of the British government funds you?
We've had nothing from intelligence agencies, if that's what you're thinking, or security agencies.
Most of the money that we've ever had from the government, and I think it makes up about 5% of the money we get, maybe even less than that.
And the rest tax-free foundations?
What are some of the loving foundations that fund you?
It's usually just to run events, and our events are public, and they're open for anyone to come to.
And you know what else?
And I would like to say this.
I am more than happy for Paul Joseph Watson, or any of your UK listeners, to come into our office, and I'll give them a tour.
They can follow me around for a week.
They can see what I do.
It's really not that sinister.
Everything we do- Will you show them the alien spacecraft in your basement?
No, that's off-limits, I'm afraid.
That's only for me.
Look, look, you're a nice, amiable person.
I don't think you individually are a bad guy.
So I'm not here... Thank you very much.
I'm not here indicting you.
I mean, and I hope you think I'm a friendly person.
I loved your stuff.
I loved the John Robinson story with you.
I actually thought it was extremely courageous what you did there.
And a very, very mysterious and strange set of events it was too.
Well, I mean, it is true that mainline Christian conservatives mainly go to Bohemian Grove and have gay sex together.
And I'm not bashing people for their sexual persuasions.
It's the fact that things aren't what they seem a lot of times is what I've found and what I've experienced.
And I wish 7-7 was an intelligence operation or a group they set up and let do this.
I wish that 9-11 wasn't an inside job.
But Larry Silverstein, Says, pull the building, gave the order, watch it come down.
I don't just have... But you also know that Larry Silverstein has said over and over again, that means evacuate the building.
Yeah, it was already evacuated five hours before.
See, I knew where you were... Hold on!
I knew you were going there!
He was talking about the New York Fire Department leaving.
He wasn't talking about evacuating the building.
But I knew you'd say that.
I knew you'd say that.
Let me finish.
This is important.
Because I've done countless reports on this.
We have the police say, get back, they're going to bring down the building.
I've talked to the cops and said there was a 10-second countdown.
I've got the newscast where they said they were going to blow it up.
I have the BBC saying it had fallen 25 minutes before it did, and I brought that up knowing you'd respond with Silverstein's cover story of what Pullitt meant.
But I'm saying it doesn't just end there.
I know that you can fit a lot of anomalies together and find any relationship you want, just like Paul Joseph Watson's tried to do with Demos and Common Purpose.
It's entirely fatuous.
But, answer me this, I've always wanted to ask you this question, and it is an important one.
Why do you think that the American government would have felt the need to enact a controlled demolition on the two towers to actually bring them down?
Would it not have been more rational to just allow two planes to fly into the buildings?
That surely is enough of a cause for war, if that's what they were planning.
Why multiply the chances that you're going to get caught exponentially by actually bringing them down under control demolition in front of the entire world that was watching?
I don't understand.
Well, let me give you the answer.
Do you really want the answer?
It's a complex... I want to know what you think, yeah.
No guts, no glory.
Fortune goes to the bold.
Bottom line, well let me finish.
Bottom line, those buildings already had asbestos and structural problems.
Psychologically, you do it on a weekday morning to control the week's news cycle coming up.
You have the first plane hit to get all news cameras aiming.
It's a perfect psych warfare job, and I've had top former State Department psychological warfare experts on, like Dr. Steve Pachinick and others, to say, yes, it's a perfect PSYOP.
Then the second plane hits.
Everybody now knows it's a terror attack.
Then you have the controlled demolition so the insurance money can be paid and the rest of it.
Building 7 that's running the attack with the CIA, FBI and others way down the street from it, 47 stories.
It's got the explosives in it.
I interviewed Peter Jennings who said that yeah there were bombs going off and dead bodies.
Of course he died right after we interviewed him.
Are you suggesting that the two planes flying in on their own would not have dominated the news cycle for weeks to come?
No, no, no.
When people had to see that giant image, plus they had to get rid of the crime scene.
Okay, let me ask you this, because there's thousands of points.
Do you believe, not one, not one, but two, magical passports went out of their coats, out of their jackets, fireballs, through the building, out of the wreckage, down to the street, four or five feet of dust, and were found by the FBI later that day?
Do you believe that?
I'm really not qualified to answer questions like that.
In the same way that I'm not, and you're not, qualified to answer questions about structural demolition.
Who is qualified are demolition experts and structural engineers, and you know what the overwhelming majority of them say.
Oh, that global warming's man-made and real?
Architects for 9-11 truth, a rabble of a few, you know, a handful of architects who actually don't know much about structural engineering at all.
Hold on!
That's it!
Hold on!
Hold on!
Stop!
Architects and engineers for 9-11.
Hold on a minute.
You know it well, don't you?
Outrageous!
Outrageous!
I gotta counter that.
All well, but the overwhelming scientific consensus from both demolition experts and structural engineers is that the buildings fell pretty much as one might have expected, and there was no way to control demolition.
I want to counter that.
We're not here talking about... I knew it would turn into a discussion about 9-11.
I'm going to phase you down for a minute.
Stop.
I got to make a point.
I'm going to give you one minute to make your statement, and you've already been talking for a minute, and then I'm going to get two minutes to counter, but I wanted to finish The earlier point, but now you've really discredited yourself.
So you've got a few people that don't really know much about structural engineering.
There are 1,600 architects and engineers.
Many of them now, hundreds of them, have actually been involved building giant buildings, A whole bunch of them have built 30, 40, 50 story, and they've got very famous architects and engineers coming out now.
NIST has had to change their story six times on how Building 7 fell, and now admits free fall, and has had to make up this thermal expansion garbage.
All of this is going on, and for you to say they've just got a few people in architecture and engineers, who do you have?
Control Demolition Incorporated that gets the contracts to blow up these buildings, the wreckage, Oklahoma City and 9-11?
Are you talking about those guys?
Now, you've got the floor, go ahead.
To respond to that, or to speak generally?
No, no, no, you just said that the overwhelming... just like Al Gore kept saying all the scientists, global warming's man-made.
When 9-11 Architects Engineers for 9-11 Truths submit a well-thought-out, properly peer-reviewed, and not by one of the Truth-O-Journals, articles about this, where they not pick holes in the official account, but actually present an alternative account that can be properly scrutinized by anonymous peers of theirs, then I'll start listening.
And when that happens, because that's how we arrive at knowledge, then I'm open, I'm all open, To be convinced.
Because for me, you know, this is the difference.
I'm not wedded to the idea that 9-11 wasn't an inside job.
Because if it was, I'd really want to know.
I have no vested interest in trying to cover up, you know, if the government's murdering its own civilians.
I've got no interest in covering up.
Do governments ever stage terror?
Historically, I think they have, yeah.
I mean, the whole origin of the word terror is from the French Revolution by the French government.
So, yeah, state-led terror absolutely is possible when it happens.
Okay, then let me ask you this question.
No, no, I want you to listen.
I watched Al Gore, this big fat con artist, who's an oil company baron, involved in unbelievable corruption, giant houses everywhere, carbon footprint, you know, the size of 50 families or whatever.
You've got this guy, jet-setting all over the world, invested in gore and blood carbon trading in London, all these huge Rothschild Rockefeller investments in it, carbon trading, all this money, tens of billions invested in selling this.
Saying ice caps are getting smaller, polar bear numbers are down, polar bears can't swim, all of this patent crap that I can disprove.
I mean, the polar bear population is up five times what it was 60 years ago.
You know, the ice caps always shrink in the summer, expand in the winter.
But he kept saying, peer-reviewed, peer-reviewed, peer-reviewed.
Now it's come out all these emails where they try to block peer-reviewed publications, where they had an intercoterie of government-funded scientists hiding the decline.
And now the whole hoax is falling in on itself.
They weren't government funded, but yeah, you're talking about the University of East... Anglia.
East Anglia, that's it, with the... they were trying to... No, it had ICCU in funding, what are you talking about?
Well, it wasn't the British government trying to fund them.
I mean, you know, everything ultimately... well, a lot of stuff ultimately comes from government funding, because a lot of taxpayer money goes into government.
They said hide the decline, it's a load of crap!
How does moving your coal plants to China... Listen, I was disgusted.
I was absolutely disgusted with that.
And you talk about global warming.
It's another subject which I feel completely unqualified to pass judgment on.
And I won't pass judgment on subjects which I feel wholly unqualified and I haven't looked at the evidence strongly.
Well, I've looked at it deeply.
Listen, I've had, I have tried to cover a military event in Brooksville, Florida, and I have a witness, Mike Hanson, and the military went all over the neighborhood, and I have a video of this in my film, The Takeover.
All over town saying, like a Twilight Zone episode, don't talk to Alex Jones, he's crazy.
It was a military drill to practice taking over U.S.
cities.
I've been to these all over the country.
And then I'm standing there in the woods trying to videotape the public municipal airport where giant aircraft are landing to practice inserting troops in a U.S.
city, and an undercover military guy jumps out of the bushes and starts lighting things on fire to blame me for it.
I've experienced government-sponsored terrorism.
And me and Mike had to physically stop the guy.
Is that government-sponsored terrorism?
Yeah, it turned out he was working with the army.
Yeah, I mean, as government, I think you're belittling the word terrorism, if you think.
Well, no, that's a provocateur action.
Pretty shoddy.
The US government would do that to me for trying to just cover something?
I wouldn't want to belittle the word terrorism, because terrorism is an extremely serious offense and an act, and so... Setting fires is terror.
Arson is terror, buddy.
It's terrorism.
Arson in a populated, lighting things on fire in a populated area is terrorism.
Lighting things on fire in a populated area is terrorism.
Arson is pretty low bar.
Lighting things on fire in a populated area is terrorism.
Absolutely.
The oldest thing in the book is to set fire to things to terrorize populations.
What do you think our troops did to Indian villages?
Burn them out.
Look at Waco, they burned those people up.
I bet you think that's a conspiracy theory.
No, I read into Waco and I read into Timothy McVeigh of course, but there are equally cases.
Take for example the Reverend Jim Jones.
Terrible, terrible person.
Killed 900 and... I think it was 920 or so American citizens, or had them commit mass suicide.
He was a large conspiracy theorist too.
He was absolutely schizophrenic paranoia, is what he suffered from.
What do you want me to say about things like this?
Well, the Heaven's Gate people... I mean, if you take the entire spectrum of alternative thought, it's going to run the gamut from reasonable and well-researched, that the system calls conspiracy theories, right through to total lunacy.
But let's go back to Jim Jones.
I've actually studied him.
He was working for the CIA.
He was working for the governor of California.
He did have contracts.
I don't think so.
Have you read the amazing biography of him called Maven?
I've actually watched documentaries in the original newscast.
So have I, so have I. And I think by far the best and most well acclaimed biography of Jim Jones is by the journalist that spent time with him right at the last minute when he murdered that US congressman.
Yeah, they shot up the airplane.
They shot him in the airplane, exactly.
He actually concluded that He was not working for the CIA at all.
At all.
No, he had been.
He had been working for them.
And you can say he probably went nuts at the end.
It may not have been.
But I mean, you just had to admit that.
Listen, he used the idea that the CIA had infiltrated his group.
to stop people from leaving.
He used it to stop people connecting with their families.
He would tell the families of the people that had deserted the People's Temple that the CIA had pulled them out and had infiltrated them and that they were trying to convert them into spies and were going to try to make them contact the People's Temple.
Sure, but what I'm telling you, what I'm telling you, Jamie, is that this is a standard Deal.
In fact, Cass Sunstein, do you deny the White House regulations are, said infiltrate conspiracy groups and put out disinfo, discredit them and sow discord with them?
I mean, the implication that people that question the system are Jim Jones and cause violence and extremism and Jim Jones is literally looking into a giant I mean, it's actually the government I see that spreads conspiracy theories about Al Qaeda hiding under tables.
But I think it's a caricature of my position because I've never said that the government doesn't do those things.
I've just said because it sometimes does them, doesn't mean it always does them.
Do you think I'm an extremist as an extremist analyst that tracks, what is it?
Jamie is the head of the Violence and Extremism Program.
His primary research interests lie in terrorism, radicalization and extremism, conspiracy theories, And integration policy.
Hey, what about Tony Blair and his secret program to bring in illegal aliens?
That's now been confirmed.
What was that exactly?
Are you talking about immigration levels in general?
Well, no.
Secret agreements with France, the trains with the illegals coming in for years, to then turn them into a political army.
I mean, that's standard big foundation operations, but it's now come out.
That wasn't the story that I understood.
The story that I understood was that the Labour Party, for a number of years, was pursuing a very open immigration policy because they thought that it would change the face of the British population, probably for electoral reasons, because immigrants tend to be more likely to vote for the Labour Party.
These are the sorts of conspiracies that I think I would like People like you, people like Paul Joseph Watson, who are often, you know, you guys are often tenacious and very smart.
Channel your energies into those things, because there's a lot of rubbish taking place and a lot of lies that our governments do feed us.
I'd just like your efforts to be directed at that.
Well, all I can say is we appreciate you coming on here into the arena because that certainly is admirable.
Jamie Bartlett, I mean, let me give you the last minute or two here to make any points you want.
It's just for those of us that have really researched seven seven uh... and those of us in our interview uh... research nine eleven those of us that have actually experience the government provocateurs those of us that have actually been attacked by government thugs and told to shut up there's no going back and i think there's a lot of denial in the establishment and and and and and people like you that you know work in sociology and things and and and and outreach
Of just how corrupt and wicked the Western ruling class has gotten.
But that's my view, and that's what I've experienced in the world.
I don't think you're a conscious disinformation person.
I think in some respects you are a bit naive.
Now you can say that about me as well, and this cosmology idea that I need order to the world, and I like to sit up here as a Grand Poobah, or a Jim Jones advising everybody.
I mean, I get that whole idea.
But, again, you've got the final comments.
Go ahead.
Well, just another enormous thanks.
I really appreciate it.
And I extend and I keep that invitation to people who want to contact me and want to come to our office and see what we do.
It's really not that sinister.
I don't think you're a crazy lunatic by any means.
You're obviously an extremely intelligent person.
And I just want to say as well that, you know, What I want is for young people, for everybody, to criticise, to critique, to be sceptical about all the information they get.
And me, the same.
I know that sometimes I fall into traps of believing what I want to believe and reading what I want to read.
And I think it's something for all of us to do.
But keep up the good work.
Always questioning.
And thank you for your time.
Okay, so I get from what you're saying is, Paul got it wrong, I got it wrong, that you guys aren't saying just trust mainstream media, you're saying question everything then.
Because when you have the mayor of London coming out and saying we've got to stop these evil 9-11 conspiracy theorists, I mean, I think that really shows that establishment thought is really crumbling and realizes it's on the verge of collapse.
And I do think there's a danger in it, the ruling class has been so corrupt, so deceptive, and has been caught doing it so much that I do find people now don't believe anything, and it's not even questioned.
They do buy into the wildest conspiracy theories you can imagine, say about myself.
But that's because even some of the most dumbed down people now know they can't trust the system, but now they're even unable to differentiate anything.
But I think that's just the overall fault of a system caught lying so much.
But you just, you know, to me, I want as much as you want, and this is why Demos was founded, to make the British state and society more democratic, more pluralistic, more open, for people to feel like they have more sense of control and more power over the things that happen in their lives.
And I think that is what is at the root of all of this, and I think that's what we want to change.
But just because that is the case, I wouldn't want people to just believe any crazy conspiracy Because it happens to go along with their worldview.
No, you have to have standards of evidence that you apply equally to whatever information you receive.
Yeah, but I agree with you.
But listen, I've done deep research.
I know the stuff I'm talking about.
I've got so much proof I can't even articulate it all here in a discussion.
I've had to make five, six films on 9-11.
I'm telling you, it's an inside job.
You need to look into it and look into the facts.
I have looked into it.
Yeah.
Well, you haven't looked deep enough, Jamie.
Jamie, thank you.
Is there a website where we can visit Demos and find out more?
Yeah, it's www.demos.co.uk.
All the information's there.
You'll find all of it.
All right, well, I'll tell you, we're going to dig into your organization even more now, and hopefully you'll come back with us.
I know I'm going to get lots of angry emails from people.
It can be very difficult when you get thousands of them to reply to all of them, and I'll do my best, but I don't always have the patience to do that.
Alright, hey, say hi to the folks over there.
I wish you well.
Say hi to O'Brien for me.
I will do.
And next time you're over, look me up.
All right.
Take care, buddy.
Thank you.
There you go.
Well, a very charming, friendly, nice fellow.
Very hard to be mean to him.
I almost feel guilty slapping him around.
But I did hear a lot of little political points and lawyer points where, oh, there's a few straggly architects.
They need to put forward peer-reviewed.
They have.
We've presented it.
Check it out for yourself.
That's it for this edition of InfoWars Nightly News.
I will not be here.
Monday night, Aaron Dykes will be sitting in.
I know I've been out of town a lot.
I'm going to be out in the field with former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura to shoot a couple episodes of his program, Conspiracy Theory, which means questioning that the Earth is flat.
So I'll be out in the west somewhere in the high desert with Ventura.
I'll tell you more about that when I call into my own TV and radio show on Monday.
Mike Adams is sitting in on Tuesday because I'll be gone all weekend.
I'm going to spend Tuesday with my children, but, you know, I'll end up calling in on my own show.
And I'll be back next Wednesday here for InfoWars Nightly News.
And we are not George Soros or New World Order or Rothschild or Rockefeller funded.
We are funded by you, the supporters of this transmission, PrisonPlanet.TV subscribers.
And we're having our fourth annual Money Bomb.
We need to raise a half million fellow reserve notes to be able to continue at this current pace of absolutely devastating the New World Order propaganda system.
So please donate today at InfoWarsMoneyBomb.com or InfoWars.com forward slash Money Bomb.
And you can also donate by becoming a PrisonPlanet.tv member or buying memberships for your friends and family and really scaring Cass Sunstein at the White House that knows that we're on to them and understands that the villagers are coming with our truth, with our information warfare torches and pitchforks.
So again, InfoWarsMoneyBomb.com.
I'm Alex Jones signing off.
Great job to the crew.
▲
Export Selection