All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 23, 2011 - InfoWars Nightly News
42:42
20111123_Wed_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good evening and welcome to this Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 broadcast of the InfoWars Nightly News.
I'm Aaron Dyk sitting in.
Alex will be back next week and we have special programming tomorrow and Friday during the American Thanksgiving holiday.
Tonight in the news, what we were told was the first ever devastating cyber attack on an Illinois water pump was apparently not.
According to Paul Joseph Watson's report, the DHS advisor hastily told the Washington Post the incident was a foreign cyber attack, despite the lack of any evidence.
And it goes on to describe how the DHS and FBI officials have confirmed that they have discovered no evidence of cyber intrusion or any other malicious activity by foreign or domestic actors.
This marks a stark contrast to reports last week which focused around the alarmist rhetoric of Homeland Security Advisor Joe Weiss, who told the Washington Post, this is a big deal.
It was tracked to Russia.
It has been in the system for at least two to three months.
It's caused damage.
We don't know how many other utilities are currently compromised.
Meanwhile, the actual cyber attacks under the Stuxnet worm were directed by the US and Israel.
Meanwhile, there are tensions heating up with Russia, as Medvedev is apparently angry over continued plans to launch the missile defense system in Romania and Poland, which it sees as a threat and an escalation towards war, but the U.S.
claims is merely to fend off a potential threat from Iran.
Now that's been going on for several years, but it comes at a time when Russia's put warships near Syria and in the general proximity of the Middle East as tensions for war there escalate.
So we hope this is all just more saber-rattling, but you never know.
At the same time, it appears that sort of tension has appeared in the Russian press.
We've got a clip here of a reporter who seems to be flipping off Obama during a report.
Dmitry Medvedev has become the chairman of the Association of Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation.
Earlier, this post was held by the American President Barack Obama.
At a press conference on the results of the forum, which took place in the capital of Hawaii, Honolulu...
And that's during coverage of APEC, where obviously Obama and the other American diplomats are trying to reinforce and exert their pressure over the Pacific area.
They put in new bases in the Pacific Rim and are trying to menace even China there.
Meanwhile, a war crimes tribunal in Malaysia has found former President George W. Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair guilty of war crimes for their role in the Iraq war and all the dubious Malicious lies that took us there.
All the lies about WMDs and a whole lot more.
But don't hold your breath.
I wouldn't expect to see them in jail.
That's a political definition.
Nonetheless, we have video of this.
President George Bush and his former counterpart Tony Blair were found guilty of war crimes by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, which held a four-day hearing in Malaysia.
The five-panel tribunal unanimously decided that Bush and Blair committed genocide and crimes against peace and humanity when they invaded Iraq in 2003 in blatant violation of international law.
And of course, it's prima facie, but that's not how they analyze these things.
Instead, they're just going to start more wars, say it's for peacekeeping or humanitarian purposes.
It's because the globalists have a hit list.
It did include Iraq.
It still includes Syria and Iran, among others.
So that is in the war watch.
Meanwhile, the European debt crisis continues to mount.
Only days ago, Jim Grant, an economist, warned that the central banks are insolvent, and he pointed to the fact that the ECB, the European Central Bank, has expanded its balance sheets mightily under Tricia.
I dare say Europe is going to print money.
And then he goes on to describe how the European Central Bank has a ratio of non-AAA rated assets to equity of 14 to 1.
That's 14 to 1 ratio of non-AAA rated assets to its actual equity.
Meanwhile, the New York Fed has leveraged 100 to 1.
And just goes on to describe all the problems that are going to come with more money printing in a vain attempt to save Europe from crisis.
Of course, that will have many repercussions in the United States and around the world as well.
Now, in just a moment, we're going to speak with Brandon Smith.
He runs Alt-Market.com and other projects in the name of liberty, but he, among others, has been recently demonized by none other than the Southern Poverty Law Center in their recent article, A Gathering of Eagles, Extremists Look to Montana, and it attempts to portray a tie-in between a number of
Neonazis and supposed racists that they detail in this article along with non-racists, pro-freedom, pro-constitution icons including Stuart Rhodes, Chuck Baldwin, and many others as well as Brandon Smith And it's just the kind of typical demonization you expect to see.
They specifically say Chuck Baldwin, a Baptist preacher who ran for president under the Constitution Party banner in 2008, moved 18 family members to Montana's Flathead Valley last fall after receiving what he called a divine message, telling him the state was the tip of the spear in the fight for liberty.
Then it goes on to bring up Stuart Rhodes, a Yale-educated lawyer, former Army paratrooper and head of the conspiracy-minded Oath Keepers, also moved there.
He's laying the groundwork for a new militia and calling for citizens to adopt a barter economy to escape the bondage of U.S.
currency.
Then, without any break or context, It says, Neo-Nazi April Gade also transplants to the state and has issued a call for white nationalists to come home, quote-unquote, to the Northwest.
There is no relationship between these individuals, especially this Neo-Nazi April Gade.
Chuck Baldwin and Stuart Rhodes, on the other hand, I think, do.
Now, Brandon Smith has pointed out in his article what a joke this all is.
And how, yeah, people who stand up for principles, especially the Constitution, may appear to be extremists, but that doesn't bear any relationship to national socialists who want gigantic government and authoritarian control versus people who want freedom.
Now, he also points out how what they're really upset about is that people like Chuck Baldwin are running for office in the state.
He is running for lieutenant governor, and we will talk about the other candidate who's attempting to run for governor in Montana.
And so now for more on the SPLC's crosshairs on the state of Montana, we turn now to one of these extremists, Brandon Smith.
He's the founder of the Alt Market Project, the Safe Haven Project, and works in many other ways for the cause of liberty.
Brandon, thanks for joining us.
Thanks for having me.
Great.
So why don't we get into this article and how they're trying to portray people seeking freedom and liberty in the state of Montana.
Really what we're dealing with is the SPLC, which poses as an organization determined to prevent racism or organizational racism, but really I see them as an extension, sort of a propaganda arm of the DHS now.
I mean, they run a lot of the new training programs for police infusion centers across the country.
Most of their rhetoric is based around not racism per se, but groups who are anti-state corruption.
Anyone who opposes the establishment suddenly is lumped in with neo-Nazis.
And that's really been their primary tactic for years is to, any time a group forms this anti-corruption, anti-establishment, they write these hit pieces that lump us all in with neo-Nazis, extremists.
they used the They throw the term extremist around quite a bit.
They never actually define what an extremist is in their articles, but if you go back to documents such as the MIAC report or the Virginia Fusion Center document, they tell you right there what they think an extremist is.
It's anyone who puts a Ron Paul sticker on their bumper or returning veterans.
Pretty much it's completely arbitrary.
Anybody who they think might be a patriot, they automatically demonize.
Yeah, and just like George Orwell said at a time of universal deceit, telling the truth, the revolutionary acts, So of course, patriots who are talking about the Constitution will be viewed as extremists.
But let's talk about that progression, because you mentioned the MIAC report, the Homeland Security reports, targeting returning veterans, targeting people who mention the Constitution, or portray these logos from the revolutionary times and more.
How has that shifted?
Because they really stuck with that theme and kind of beat the drum on that for many years.
Now they're actually targeting protest groups from the left and the right.
Right, right.
I think, you know, as far as the MIAC report goes, that was, you know, the exposure of that was enormous.
And we really, you know, we created a lot of groundswell support for shutting that whole project down.
Now the SPLC is coming back, and they're trying to re- they're calling for a reinstitution of all the guidelines that were within the MIAC report.
I see very soon, I mean, we're seeing it in smaller cases, but very soon I see sort of a widespread effort on the part of not just the SPLC, but the DHS to begin implementing that, those profiling techniques against but the DHS to begin implementing that, those profiling techniques against anyone who's anti-fed,
So I think we're really on the verge of a move towards actual hardcore implementation of those profiling guidelines.
Now let's talk about the state of Montana in particular and why the SPLC has put focus on that area, because you've got a lot of well-known patriots moving there, yourself, Stuart Rhodes, and now Chuck Baldwin, who's even going to run for lieutenant governor, right? - Okay.
Yes, yes.
Bob Fanning and Chuck Baldwin are both running for the 2012 office in Montana.
I think Montana itself is sort of becoming a focal point for the movement, for the Liberty Movement, and I think that the SPLC has obviously noticed that, which is why they're producing these hit pieces now on a more regular basis, and they're focusing a lot on what we're doing.
If you look at the The SPLC's hate map, which is hilarious to me that they have a hate map, but they do.
Go check it out.
Montana actually ranks very low on their list of hates, or their spectrum of hate.
And yet they focus so much energy and so much attention on Montana.
I think the reason for that is because there's a surge of liberty movement activity, which has nothing to do with racism, obviously.
We're all anti-Nazi.
We hate National Socialists.
But we're anti-corruption.
Anti-establishment.
So, you know, what they don't want, what the SPLC doesn't want, and what the DHS doesn't want is for Liberty Movement people to stand up, walk away from their computers, leave their houses, and begin meeting face-to-face And organizing for mutual aid and mutual defense.
They do not want that.
They hate that.
So I say, you know, whatever the SPLC attacks or whatever the DHS attacks, we should keep doing that.
Keep pushing that strategy.
If they're afraid of it, then we should keep doing it.
And you hit the nail on the head right there in terms of the reversal of the portrayal of power grabs.
They know the general public, if they hear this warning about extremists in Montana, won't know that neo-Nazi means someone who wants national socialism, while they're always grabbing more and more federal power.
So how could people who want liberty be part of that?
But they know it's just a demonization tactic.
Exactly, exactly.
And it's the same tactic that's gone back for centuries.
any time an elite minority comes into power, if they can't directly attack an opponent, they'll attack his character.
If they can't debate you on fair ground, then they'll attack your character.
They'll try to dismantle your character in the public eye so that no one will listen to you.
They'll call you insane.
They'll call you a conspiracy theorist.
They'll call you a racist.
They'll call you a terrorist.
It's anything to get the public to not listen to what you have to say.
That's what the SPLC has been all about for years.
Knowing what your other work also focuses on, just in closing, talk about why it's important to disengage from the system that's become predatory in so many ways, from food freedom to our civil rights and on down the list, abusing the Constitution and more.
Talk about how you advise people to create their own systems.
Well, the primary strategy of globalization and of elitism is centralization, and centralization requires the removing of options from a system until the populace is left with only one, your option, or the option you want them to have.
If we want to fight back against that, if we want to make a change, we can't continue participating in that system by those rules.
Really what we have to do is walk away from that corrupt system completely.
And form our own, build our own systems.
In order to do that, we need to start decentralizing the economy, decentralizing governments, turning towards localism rather than globalism.
And that can be done in a number of ways.
My primary focus has been through barter networks, which allow People to trade goods and services without depending on the dollar I think that's a if we're not able to do that and we're never going to break away from the system Right.
And Edmund Burke, I believe it was, who said, all it takes for evil to triumph is good men and women to do nothing.
And just laying down, being silent, and going along with these big globalized firms, buying from the box stores and more, is only making the whole system worse.
So it's good to get the word out about that.
And thanks for joining us, Brandon Smith.
We're going to be back in a moment from break with more news.
And then coming up, we also have Stuart Rhodes, the founder of Oath Keepers.
Joining us to highlight even more subjects pertaining to the Curb on Liberty and the attempt to demonize those fighting for it.
Stay tuned, 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, Titus 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.
And we are back for break again.
Again, I'm Aaron Dyke, sitting in on the InfoWars Nightly News.
Just a quick reminder, don't forget about our 15-day free trial for PrisonPlanet.tv through the end of November.
And of course, our great holiday specials where you get 44% off of a yearly membership, $39.95, that you can share with up to five friends.
Or you can get it with 18 physical DVDs, great for gift-giving, with the membership that you can also share for $129.95.
Those are great specials.
You may have forgotten we're in an economic crunch and we do need your support as well.
But back to the news, the most recent and 11th GOP debate focused on, among other things, the Iran attack.
The debate, of course, was sponsored by a neocon institute and even many of the questions were asked by some of these foreign policy wonks who always want more war.
Of course, the one candidate they tend to ignore is Ron Paul, but he said if they want to bomb something, it's their business and they should face the consequences, Ron Paul said.
Israel is quite capable of taking care of themselves.
He said Americans should not be comfortable with any military action without proper declaration by the United States Congress.
Bringing up the Constitution instead of more cries for war, that's strange.
Of course, we have some of the clips from Ron Paul at the debate.
We'll give you some of those highlights right now.
Patriotism is unpatriotic because it undermines our liberty.
We have drifted into a condition that we were warned against because our early founders were very clear.
They said, don't be willing to sacrifice liberty for security.
Today, it seems too easy that our government and our Congresses are so willing to give up I have a personal belief that you never have to give up liberty for security.
You can still provide security without sacrificing our Bill of Rights.
And that was in response to Newt Gingrich really calling for more Stasi-like behavior here at home.
Of course, the rest of those highlights are up at Infowars.com, and I'm sure you can find the rest of the debate elsewhere on YouTube.
No reason to go to CNN to watch it.
Now, in the food safety realm, a new food bill in New Zealand is alarming because it appears to take away the human right to grow food.
The new bill would make a, quote, privilege and not a right to grow food.
And it goes on to discuss, yeah, the lack of supposed right to grow food and share it, other than government authorized food, makes it illegal to distribute food without authorization, and defines food as anything including nutrients, seeds, natural medicines, essential minerals, and drinks, including even water.
All your just most basic rights.
And there's a whole lot more in this article from Investment Watch.
But a troubling sign, of course, as we see similar moves here at home.
In other news, BPA has been found to spike 1200% after eating a can of soup, according to a new study.
This is a report in AFP.
And it says people who ate canned soup for five days straight saw their urinary levels of the chemical bisphenol A spike 1,200% compared with those who ate fresh soup.
Of course, you've seen our reports warning on BPA over the years.
They've known what it does for decades, and yet there have only been warnings and calls to ban it.
In more recent years, and while it's encouraging, there is a trend to ban many of the plastics and food cans that have BPA.
A lot of the substitutes are just as dangerous.
You saw that report with Mike Adams last week.
Now, also from Mike Adams of naturalnews.com, a great article where he outlines 10 outlandish things the scientific controllers have in mind for you in the near future.
And just to give a little background on this article, it really is preferencing a lot of the long-term goals the globalists have outlined, the kind of stuff the Huxley family has been closely tied to, portrayed in Brave New World, among other things.
And Mike Adams writes about the corporate-driven science, which is different from the real science we need to explore our universe and find solutions.
But instead, this type of science has its own agenda, it's partially profit-driven, and obviously there is a control attempt in place as well.
And he's got a long list here, we'll go through a lot of it.
He talks about the organ harvesting from genetically modified patented pigs.
This is something in the near future.
We've reported on it in some of Alex's YouTube videos and a whole lot more.
It's a cross-species human-pig hybrid, and they're going to grow supposed replacement organs, all genetically modified.
Who knows if it's safe, but obviously it'll be sold at a premium, so whose life will it save?
Those who could afford it.
That's the kind of thing you will see in the future technocratic state.
You also see the rise of behavioral vaccines to rewire your brain and eliminate dissent.
Now, what exact form this may come in and when is somewhat in question, but this type of chemical lobotomy was, A, talked about in the early 50s by very people like Bertrand Russell, who speaks for the elite directly.
You've heard before about his quotes including how diet injections and injunctions will create the kind of character the state desires, about how they'll have a separate class of people, the intellectual ruling class, and other types of information for the dumbed-down masses that they only use for their benefits to society.
And you've seen also proposals to put things like lithium in drinking water ahead of fluoride to help keep mood in check and more.
You've seen proposals for vaccines that will curb mood, fight addictions, fight obesity, and a whole lot more.
But really look at what direction this is all going.
Now, Mike Adams also talks about the centralized remote monitoring of all your health statistics and vital signs by the police state.
He's predicting this will go much further than just digitized medical records on some databases.
It'll go much further than the secret database of blood that they've been collecting for several decades.
States like Michigan have been fighting against it, but really this is something that was outlined in George Lucas' film before Star Wars, which was all about the rise of the New World Order technocratic state, THX 1138.
I don't know if everyone has seen that.
Now THX 1138 really is a dystopic Brave New World Order themed movie where among other things you are forcibly medicated and when the protagonists stop taking their drugs they're convicted of illegal drug avoidance.
That's exactly the kind of thing Mike Adams is talking about here and it may seem like fiction but this stuff is pre-programming for the direction of We know these New World Order entities are going.
And by the way, George Lucas talked about the New World Order, knows all about it.
Mike Adams also brings up the total secrecy of all food ingredients, sources, and places of origin.
This is already underway.
As you well know, the GMO powerhouses have fought and fought to keep labeling off of their genetically modified foods.
They don't want people alarmed about the fact that genetically modified foods may have bad consequences.
They don't even want people to know the differences.
And most of all, they don't want to be able to link any of the bad effects back to those companies.
Specifically, they want to keep the burden of proof extremely high.
And that leads to other dystopic things.
But the idea of keeping where, how, and what your food is made of is very disturbing indeed.
He also predicts the complete criminalization of home-produced foods and medicines, forcing total reliance on factory food production.
Not only do they want centralized control of everything in your life from food on down, and all the big government subsidies for corn, soy, and the rest of it have gone a long way already towards that, they want to keep you from that kind of independence.
And it may surprise you, but founding fathers, including Thomas Jefferson and others, warned that the power of government would take over the power over food and medicine as well.
And they warned about it back then.
That's part of the reason they wrote the Constitution and brought in the Bill of Rights.
Mike Adams also warns about the unleashing of global bioweapon pandemics through seasonal flu shots.
And, yes, it may surprise you if you haven't studied the issue, but they do introduce diseases, whether on purpose or not, through these new inoculations.
And the very controversial way they are produced.
And, yes, it does have a population control aspect that could, among other things, dumb down or eliminate lower IQ people the state does not want anymore.
He also predicts the total government control over your reproduction and genetic code of your offspring.
This is also happening.
You've seen that in themed films like Gattaca, but it's really the rise of A, global infertility since the rise of global government, and it's B, a brave new world order system where the state authorizes who's born and they will hold the solution for infertility at a cost, at a premium, And only those the state approves of who work within the state systems will be allowed to have children.
It's sad, but true.
And if it doesn't seem possible, I encourage you to do further research.
He also predicts wireless brain implants used by law enforcement to pacify crowds and The genetic engineering of super soldiers as well as the use of electromagnetic activation of metals and nanocrystals injected in you through vaccines that could cause you to stand down or be immobilized.
It could all be done in the name of science and since at least the 20s the Rockefeller Foundation and other powerhouses of finance and influence Have controlled a lot of the research and development of science.
Unfortunately, things are going in that direction.
You've seen the crackdown on farms, vitamins, raw milk, and a whole lot more, and we better be on watch for this kind of thing.
There is a transhumanist agenda, by the way, and that has a lot to do with the Huxley family.
Alex asked me a few weeks ago to do a report on Julian Huxley, Aldous Huxley, and their influential grandfather.
who worked hand-in-hand at the Royal Society of Science in the UK with Darwin to use evolution as a wedge for what really was eugenics control.
And that report is forthcoming.
I've done a lot of research, and I'm going to bring you that in the near future.
So be on the lookout for that.
Finally in the news, Old Gov has posted really what is an old example, the U.S.
State Department's website that attacks conspiracy theories that include September 11th, health freedom, and a whole lot of others.
Now, this has been up for a while, but it remains important because this is a continuing attempt to kettle free speech on the internet to find a pretext to clamp down.
You saw their attempt to brand the water pump failure in Illinois as a cyber attack.
That failed in the short term, but they will increasingly blame all sorts of things on the Internet and the proliferation of free speech therein as they bring in more controls there and try to clamp down on the population in general.
And so with more on the state's attempt to demonize opposition under the guise of conspiracy theorists and a host of other labels, We turn now to Oath Keeper's founder, Stuart Rhodes, also a constitutional lawyer and has many other credits to his name.
Stuart, thanks for joining us.
Thanks for having me on.
Now, we were just covering one historical example of, in this case, the State Department trying to demonize conspiracy theorists.
But it's part of a larger pattern we've seen where people like White House Informations are cast.
Sunstein have openly written papers talking about even outlawing conspiracy theorists, talking about infiltrating groups that have views counter to the state and a whole lot more.
Are we saying this kind of thing playing out now as they continue to demonize patriot groups, groups like the one you founded, groups like Occupy Wall Street, and everything else going on in the current spectrum of political activity?
Well, sure.
Sure, it's all part of an information war.
You know, that's what you guys are calling Infowars, right?
So it's the same thing that's been going on for a long time.
They have managed to monopolize media.
You know, when I was a kid, there was only NBC, ABC, CBS, etc.
And now they have to compete with us on the Internet.
It's kind of like our printing press.
And so it's a powerful tool.
And so they know that the truth is You know, it's the dagger in the vampire's heart.
And so, the only way they could possibly fight us is not to, you know, attack the truth, because that just brings the truth out.
So instead of demonize us, as Brandon Smith said in his interview earlier, they just attack your character and try to make you marginalized in the eyes of the viewers and listeners, so they won't listen to you.
It's not working, though.
Every time they write an article demonizing us, all it does is bring more attention to us.
It's free advertising.
So I think it's kind of funny, in a way, that they keep attacking us like this.
Because the more they attack us, the more we know we're over the right target.
Yeah, exactly.
Now, obviously, Occupy Wall Street continues to be one of the big stories throughout the year.
As people, as we discussed before getting ready for this interview, that they have a righteous anger and they may or may not understand the right solutions, but they definitely have a right to free speech.
And we've seen an attempt to clamp down on that free speech.
Nonetheless, through local ordinances, petty laws written to fight things like drug dealing, when obviously there is a First Amendment right to free speech.
Well absolutely right, and whatever the validity of any of these ordinances against overnight camping or whatever, when they're first drafted, now they're being used to stifle political speech.
Which is, you know, core political speech is considered by the Supreme Court to be the very zenith of protected free speech.
And so, like I told one person in Sacramento, who was opposed to the protesters there being able to stay overnight.
in the Sea of the Shadows Park, he said, you know, he's worried about anarchists coming in from Seattle and causing trouble.
I said, well, then you arrest the anarchists when they show up and, you know, break windows or whatever, you arrest them.
You don't stifle the free speech of peaceful protesters because of what you're worried about somebody, you know, what they might do in the future.
That would be, you know, unconstitutional.
That's prior restraint.
You can't do that.
So we have to be consistent.
Even if we think they're useful idiots or they're being manipulated by communists, which is somewhat true, I don't think it's fair to say that that's the case for all the protesters there.
But even if you don't like their speech, it doesn't make a difference.
In America, if you're going to defend the Constitution, you have to defend it all the time for everybody.
It doesn't make a difference if they like their speech or not.
They're right to free speech.
And if you allow their free speech to be crushed because you don't like them, guess who's next?
You.
The same ordinances will be used against you.
Don't think they won't.
So it was recently reported that not only did some 18 cities crack down on the local Occupy movements all at once, but this was apparently coordinated through Homeland Security.
There were meetings with mayors and police chiefs across the country, and really the suggestion that Homeland Security was leading the march on this front.
What do you make of that, Stuart?
Well, I mean, it shows two things.
One is the degree to which local police now answer to Homeland Security.
And they're now part of that octopus, unfortunately.
But it also shows you that, you know, we might be in for manipulation.
This is what I really worry about, is that, you know, constitutionalists should look at the big picture and say, okay, the power elites might be setting up a false paradigm for us.
That is, is that if you can get conservatives to cheer and support the cracking down by police on these protesters because they're leftists, then you wind up with the conservatives and the constitutionalists of America protecting the status quo, which is fascism right now.
This is not a free market.
I mean, the socialists are stupid and wrong about their solutions.
Marxism and destroying the free market is not going to save us either.
But what we have right now is not where you would have failures being allowed to fail.
And so what we have is really fascism.
So if the power elites can get conservatives and constitutionalists to defend the status quo and support the crackdown on these leftist protesters because they don't like Marxists, they still win.
So they win either way.
If there's a successful communist, which is not going to happen in America, But if that were to happen, they would still win because they would control the Politburo.
But if they could get conservatives to defend the status quo and support the violation of free speech and cracking down on the police state, you know, coordinated through DHS suppression of these protesters, then the elites also win.
Because they have now, you know, taken away the moral high ground of the Bill of Rights and thrown it in the trash with conservative support.
So either way, they win.
And as far as the larger economic fallout, the breakdown, they've tried to disguise the fact that it's a crony capitalist problem of these Wall Street figures, at least the nefarious ones, working with the Washington politicians that they bought out.
I hate to sound too basic here, but didn't the founders warn us against this kind of thing?
And what kind of solutions or recourses do we have?
Oh yeah, in their time it was called mercantilism.
It was the East India Company.
It was the cronyism back then.
Today, I think the proper term for it is fascism.
It's the marriage of big government and big business.
Like Jerry Spence once described, it's like two copulating dogs in the street who are stuck together in their obscene enterprise.
That's what this is.
It's big business and big government both.
Sucking us dry and enslaving our children.
And so let's call it what it is.
It's fascism.
Call it fascism.
Yeah.
So it's also been reported there were a number of sheriffs in California, I think one in Oregon also, who began this other type of process of saying, no, we've had enough of this federal encroachment.
We've had enough with the way Homeland Security and other agencies want to use disaster response, emergency preparedness to crack down on localities.
Let's talk about some of those issues.
Well, I mean, I think it's a wonderful thing to see happening, and I give full credit to Sheriff Mack for making this happen.
I think that he has lit a brush fire in the minds of sheriffs across the country, and we're now seeing the effect.
And it's been, you know, somewhat of a delay in the fact that it's happening.
Like the one sheriff said, he has been enforcing the penal code for so long that he never really understood his oath until now.
I certainly hope that that sticks and that keeps on snowballing, keeps on growing.
This is where the focus of the Freedom Movement needs to be, is on local resistance at the county level and getting the sheriffs to do the right thing and the same thing in the state, the state level also.
This should be the focus of effort is standing up as counties As towns, as states, and utilizing what's already there.
The sheriffs are already there.
The apparatus of the state is already there.
Use it!
That's the whole point of Oath Keepers, is to get those guys to take their oaths seriously, and take the separation of powers between the federal government and the states seriously.
And I think in California, the feds really overstepped.
Drying out the entire farmland of California, killing their crops, It was a huge overstep and we're seeing the reaction now.
I think those sheriffs are going to get a lot of support from their communities.
I'm interested to see what happens now.
What's the feds reaction going to be to these sheriffs standing up?
They're probably going to start calling them racist.
What else do they have?
So the sheriffs are standing up against an unconstitutional, egregious federal trampling of the rights of the farmers in California by not giving them any water.
And I think they're gonna have a lot of support in the local communities for the sheriffs.
And I'm kinda curious to see if the feds do a response. - Now we spoke earlier with Brandon Smith of altmarket.com and he was discussing his rebuttal to a Southern Poverty Law Center article which demonized yourself.
You have the notoriety of having made the cover of their magazine, and many other patriots who have moved to Montana to try to pursue freedom, but instead you've been branded as neo-Nazis and racists.
I mean, obviously they're afraid of the message you're trying to send out, to simply be constitutionally minded.
Well, they never directly call me a neo-Nazi or a racist.
They know I would sue them for libel successfully.
What they do is they talk about me, and they talk about some neo-Nazi, and they talk about me some more.
And so they create this false association in the minds of the reader, which only exists In the article.
I'm associated with neo-nazis because they put me in an article about neo-nazis.
That's the only real connection between us.
Well, sure, they have unrelated sentences side by side, but the implication is there, and the illustration on the cover of the magazine also helps hammer it home as though you're working with these neo-nazis.
But it's just kind of a tip of the hat to the fact that you've been effective in this work.
This particular entity, the SPLC, has just gone out of its way to try to brand any attempt to restore the Constitution as a type of racism.
And they're especially afraid of the idea that people in a state like Montana would stand up.
And Montana is the modern version of what Massachusetts was like in the time of the founding fathers of Boston.
It is kind of a hotbed of radical freedom thought.
And so we are the modern counterpart.
And so I think there's a good reason why they focused on us.
They're afraid of it.
They're afraid of people in Montana asserting their sovereignty and standing up to the federal government.
And they're afraid of people moving here, and my friend Smith, who talked earlier, and I, along with Chuck Baldwin and others, have been encouraging liberty-minded people to move to Montana as kind of a free state, or a free haven state.
And so move here and it's already got the climate of liberty, already got a spirit of independence.
and resistance here and we're encouraging more folks to move here and make it even stronger.
And I think that has a good chance of being the spark.
Look at Massachusetts during the revolution.
It was the hotbed and the spark that spread to the rest of the colonies and as a nation, as a young group of colonies and free states, they rebelled and asserted their liberty.
And the same thing could happen here.
You could have the western states being the focal point For a new renaissance of liberty.
But the founders, you know, showed us, right in the Constitution itself, that the answer is in the states.
That's why we're so focused on state sovereignty, nullification is the proper answer, as Jefferson and Madison pointed out in the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions.
That is where our focus should be.
I encourage people to really focus on your county sheriffs and your states, and strengthening your local communities, and getting strong, strong enough to say no to federal money, But also strong enough to stand up and say no to federal edicts and commands.
What are they going to do?
I mean, really, they don't have enough federal officers to come into your state and enforce the laws all by themselves.
They just don't have enough.
They need the cooperation of local police.
If local police deny the cooperation, they're a paper tiger.
What are they going to do then?
Send the army in?
Well, then the answer to that is to teach the army about their responsibilities to not enter into a state with force and to not violate the Constitution.
Stuart Rhodes, OathKeepers.org, strong enough to say no.
Thanks for joining us.
And at the close of the broadcast, I'd like you to be reminded, first of all, that tomorrow and Friday we have special broadcasts on the InfoWars Nightly News.
We're going to bring you some exclusive interviews, one of which has never been seen before, both of which you should watch and get out to your friends and family.
Right now through the end of November, we also have a 15-day free trial of PrisonPlanet.TV.
You can try it out, see how great the InfoWars Nightly News is, watch Alex's live radio show three hours every day, and all the other special things we offer.
We also have special discounts for the holiday season.
The Patriot yearly subscription at 44% off, $39.95 to get a full year of PrisonPlanet.TV that you can share with five other friends, family, whomever.
And we have the InfoWarrior special offer
▲
Export Selection