All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 25, 2011 - InfoWars Nightly News
01:03:35
20111125_Fri_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome ladies and gentlemen to another edition of InfoWars Nightly News.
It's the day after Thanksgiving, November 25, 2011, on this Friday edition.
And we're going to premiere here for the first time on InfoWars Nightly News an in-depth interview, at least part of the interview, that my team conducted with Dr. Nick Begditsch in Alaska.
Now, Dr. Begich is an amazing individual and of course his father was Congressman Begich, his brother is a U.S.
Senator.
He has researched so many patents and government secret programs and much of what we know about the global super science program, stuff that would be thought of science fiction just a few decades ago, comes from Dr. Nick Begich.
And so we're going to premiere here part of a lengthy interview that our crew did That was intended for an upcoming film, but because of everything happening in the world, we're just going ahead and releasing our chemtrail research that's groundbreaking, our HAARP research, our mind control research, everything.
We're just putting it out there, and I hope it's not pearls before swine.
I hope that you get this information and get it out to everybody you know.
If you go to prisonplanet.tv, you'll notice in the special reports, there's new stuff there almost every day now, and we've got a whole team working around the clock to bring you this information.
And it's because you do value this information that we're able to operate.
It's your support of InfoWars.com, the buying of the books and videos, your memberships here at PrisonPlanet.tv that make it all possible.
But the information that Dr. Begich covers is so groundbreaking.
And so we're going to premiere this here for you, and if you want to watch it at your leisure or download it, it's also posted in the special reports section of PrisonPlanet.tv.
So I give you Dr. Nick Begich.
And his breakdown of some of the secret sciences that are being used against the population of the planet today, including high-tech electronic mind control that in his research dwarfs chemical mind control.
So here is the Infowars.com interview with Dr. Nick Begich.
The system that we're talking about is going to be the HARP system, the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project operating up here in Alaska.
And if you also think about, and most people remember this from even high school science, But the magnetic field lines that come from the South Pole stretching around and then intersecting at the North Pole and surrounding the planet.
These magnetic field lines are very much similar to what you would see on a bar magnet illustration in your basic science books or in a motor.
If you think about the Earth spinning and actually creating a dynamo, a motor and these magnetic field lines being one of the out products of that in conjunction with interaction with The solar wind, you get things like the magnetosphere and the magnetotail, which comes back behind sort of the way the downwind of the planet, if you will, from the sun itself.
In any case, this dynamic of the Earth's motion, solar radiation, the interplay of all the various factors of the planet are looked at in separate Independent individual science, not really looked at an integrated science.
How do all those systems work together and what do they create in outcomes?
But as we look at HAARP, the primary idea is to affect the Cyanosphere and then affect these magnetic field lines.
And ideally, you want to affect those magnetic field lines at the closest place to which they intersect the planet, which happens to be at the poles.
and in the case of where Alaska sits on a map, very near the poles, the furthest northern territory in the United States, where you could locate a facility on U.S. territory that you could inject energy directly into the magnetic field lines of the Earth. where you could locate a facility on U.S. territory that We're going to be talking about an area above the Earth's surface, about 30 miles above the Earth's surface, moving out several hundred miles beyond that, the ionosphere.
It's a highly charged area.
It filters out cosmic radiation, various particle streams, that without it would make life impossible on the planet.
Now, one of the ideas behind HAARP, which is an array or field of antennae here in Alaska, 180 antennae in the array today, it fires or concentrates, focuses radio frequency energy that it literally sends up
into a relatively narrow beam affecting the magnetic field lines in one instance where the energy is normally naturally flowing from the South Pole coming up arching high above the equator then coming back into the North Pole with the energy flowing from South to North.
What happens is those magnetic field lines act as wave guides so you can pump energy out of HAARP focus it on those magnetic field lines and then it Screws itself, if you were to be able to see it, would look like a corkscrewing motion where the energy is actually moving now from north to south using the magnetic field lines as a waveguide.
Now what would that do, essentially?
If you had, for instance, an intercontinental ballistic missile that gets fired from China to the U.S.
and it traverses those magnetic field lines with those charged particles racing along them, Using them as waveguides that would create a virtual shield around the planet so any of those incoming objects, intercontinental ballistic missiles, any satellites that happen to reverse those areas or any other electronically sensitive equipment would be destroyed almost instantly.
And so when you think about HAARP, there's a couple of ways to look at it.
One is manipulation of those field lines, those magnetic field lines, which actually have been mapped.
And if you look at some of the ways those are mapped is barium particles are injected into the upper atmosphere and lower ionosphere using barium laden rockets.
What those create when you inject radio frequency energy is air glow, where you get this sort of light up effect.
So you can actually see this corkscrewing motion around those magnetic field lines and serving as waveguides.
In fact, they did that test a number of years ago in Alaska.
And they do these from time to time just more or less to illustrate what they think theoretically should happen is actually happening in place and at the time of the experiments.
Harp as an array of antenna can be focused and concentrated.
You've got to think about this in a much different way than normally how radio frequency energy behaves.
If you think about a radio broadcast antenna, a broadcasting radio frequency energy, that energy dissipates or spreads out very rapidly from the point of broadcast, the antenna, out into the atmosphere, and the further away you get, the less dense, the less concentrated is that radio frequency energy, which is why radio stations eventually fade out over distance.
On the other hand, what HAARP does is by firing this array or field of antennas, you imagine firing them in such a way as to create kind of a corkscrewing motion, a cyclotron resonance is what it's called, where that energy is then focused to a smaller and smaller area, and as it hits the ionosphere, it becomes concentrated.
And think about that in the same way as light coming off of a laser versus light coming off of a flashlight.
When you think about HAARP, think about it as a mechanism on the ground that's designed to interact directly or plug into those magnetic field lines and actually then use the environment itself as part of the machine on the ground.
And think about it in this sense.
Think about that machine on the ground, this field of antenna broadcasting radio frequency as a primer, the small amount of energy, because the big energy is contained in the natural environment.
The idea is, if we understand enough about how these mechanisms work, then we can trigger various cascading effects where it sort of builds on the energy that's naturally in place.
And so, when you think about HAARP, not just in the effect of magnetic field lines, but another opportunity to manipulate energetic systems within the Earth has to do with the ionosphere itself.
And imagine that ionosphere is a bubble around the Earth, Several hundred miles thick.
Again, starting about 30 miles off the Earth's surface.
Now, that's a highly charged area.
Tremendous amount of energy potential there.
In fact, some will remember a number of years ago, there was a shuttle experiment with a drug, a tether, a dangling wire through the ionosphere to see what would happen.
And energy was picked up as it moved because when you move something, a conductor through an electric field that's as charged as the ionosphere, it actually begins to move current.
Which it did.
It shunted that current straight into the shuttle and the animals blew it out of the sky.
The thing that came out of that that didn't get widely talked about was the amount of energy produced could be useful, for instance, for keeping a low-orbiting space platform in orbit around the planet.
Being able to charge it up by just tapping the energy by the fact that it's orbiting the planet and moving through the ionosphere would be one way to charge up these kinds of space-based platforms, whether they were for weapon systems or running low-orbiting satellites.
But basically moving Energy into space in normal like shuttle payloads is prohibitively expensive, very difficult to pull off to any great degree, but if you could create an energy source sufficient to run these kinds of systems, Then you eliminate all kinds of logistical problems, and you're able to keep these things aloft for great deals of time.
Part of the HAARP idea was, if you could focus radio frequency energy, you could even concentrate it and send energy directly to the same kind of low-orbiting space platforms, as an example.
One of the other thoughts with HAARP systems are the actual heating of the ionosphere.
And when it's heated, because this energy is concentrated, what happens is the ionosphere then lifts up, moves out several hundred kilometers.
Now imagine if you're a satellite drifting through space where there's no atmosphere, and all of a sudden you hit a column of atmosphere.
What will happen is it creates friction and that friction causes that satellite to burn up and all of a sudden you've got a satellite down.
When you turn the instrument off, everything goes back to normal and you have plausible deniability on a satellite going down because nobody knows this kind of technology generally exists.
Now the other place you can use it in that same application, imagine that column going out several hundred miles into space.
From its normal atmospheric level way down here.
Now you've got an incoming comet or asteroid coming in from outer space.
Tremendous velocity.
Now normally those objects, when they hit our atmosphere, they again encounter tremendous friction.
They burn up and most objects just dissipate before they ever hit the surface.
But big objects, the kinds of objects people are worried about, if you could, say, go from 30 miles of atmosphere to 200 miles of atmosphere, almost seven times as much distance, and project a trajectory downward, what you're able to do in that instance is literally allow those larger objects to burn up Way before they hit the Earth.
In fact, the Strategic Studies Institute in London in reviewing Soviet research on this very same technology was suggesting that it could be used for an anti, not an anti-satellite technology so much as an anti-asteroid or comet based technology.
But all of those things also create a side effect.
When you move that much atmosphere up into space, and it's about 30 miles diameter, these columns, so imagine 30 miles in diameter and a couple hundred miles up.
Well, below that are pressure systems, high pressure, low pressure systems, and jet streams, all of which can be altered by the manipulation of the ionosphere in this way.
And that then creates downstream weather effects that cannot be modeled, that cannot accurately be predicted, and therein lies huge problems.
When you start to manipulate by technology applications to create one effect, you might inadvertently create a number of other effects, as is the case with HAARP.
Looking at sort of where are these facilities, you know here in Alaska we have one at Gokanna which is about 250 miles northeast of Anchorage.
Then going across Canada there's a number of these facilities that are controlled by the Canadian government.
Rosalie Bertel has reported on those.
Then there is one that sits Right up here in Northern Norway, and this is run by the Max Planck Institute, and then there are five old transmitters in the former Soviet Union.
Literally, when you look, they go around the globe.
These can be used in conjunction with each other, triangulating to hit the same point, creating unique and different resonance effects, and creating even more power.
Flipping the planet upside down in Antarctica, China put in a facility a couple years ago to begin working in this technology.
And then Aerocibo, Puerto Rico, off the coast in the southeastern United States, also has a facility that's been retrofitted to essentially do the same thing as HAARP.
The ionosphere-Keters, which are what these were previously called, actually originated in the former Soviet Union, People remember them from the 1970s when they created what was called the Woodpecker signal, and it was exactly as it sounded.
It was this weird static that was rhythmic and coherent, man-made.
Ham operators picked it up all over the world, and because they could triangulate where it was coming from, they isolated the location of these five transmitters in Russia, or the former Soviet Union.
And those transmitters were associated with health effects in Oregon, power failures in central Canada, and a number of other anomalous phenomena in the 1970s.
And those were the predecessors of HAARP.
It's the very same technology with a modern twist.
The old transmitters would take 15 minutes to reset the frequency because you had to readjust all these antenna.
Now, with HAARP, it's done in milliseconds by adjusting the software.
So very efficient.
You can change things.
You can cause them to do different things.
It's not a big project in terms of reset.
And it's a small expenditure.
I mean, HAARP, they've spent $100 million on, which in military terms is like cab fare.
It's not even cab fare.
It's the snowflake in the pile of snow out front that we walk through in the course of all this.
But when you look at the impact of each of these technologies that we've touched on today, it's not the same game anymore.
These are earth-shaking technologies, the very technologies that will either transform or enslave.
Most science, at least in the U.S., is developed, most of the high science, anyway, is developed through military research labs, military contracts, and some contracts through is developed through military research labs, military contracts, and some contracts through the National
But all of the military work, and much of the work done by the National Science Foundation and others, represent compartmentalization, separation of the sciences in small bits and pieces, so basically one side doesn't know what the other is doing.
In fact, the first The first paper I ever presented at 19 was on the contrasting sort of our approach of compartmentalization in our approach to science, and the Russian approach, the Soviet approach at that time, which was to use generalists, take people from all disciplines, integrate them into the same room, so that you could develop the higher ordered thinking.
Because then you brought all of these various disciplines, even when they didn't seem to fit, You brought them together and they tended to feed off of each other in a way that built better and more comprehensive science.
In fact, as it relates to electromagnetic exposures, the science developed in the Soviet Union said, and they set the regulations, not that they enforced them, but they at least had them on the books, they were a thousand times more stringent than the U.S.
standards in the same areas because of that integrated approach.
When you look at the productive capacity of the USSR during the Cold War, They couldn't produce their way, you know, into an outhouse.
It was a mess.
But what they could do is compete on science.
And the way they competed on science with us, and were able to not only excel in some areas, surpass us in others, and stay up with us in most, Was by integrated science, as opposed to compartmentalization.
It's cheaper, it's more efficient, and it yields usually better results.
On the U.S.
side, we do the opposite.
We continue that model of compartmentalization to the detriment of really good science, and at a huge, huge economic cost.
The duplication within that system, the cost of man hours within that system, and the waste that's created in that system.
Now what does that all mean in the broader context of You know, the U.S.
spends in the regular defense budget somewhere around $700 billion a year, which is a big number.
You know, we've got a couple of wars going on on top of that.
The Chinese spend about $70-80 billion is what our intelligence tells us.
At least that's what's publicly released.
When you run inefficient science, and the Chinese don't run inefficient science, they steal everything they can that's already been developed and then take it from there.
And they do it at rice bowl wages.
You know, they're not paying top flight scientists quarter million, half a million a year.
and salary and benefits and they're not paying Davis-Bacon wage rates to build ships.
They're building them for a bowl of rice and what you get in China for 70 billion is what you get in the US for probably far in excess of what we actually spend because you can't measure it in dollars or currencies.
You have to measure it in productive output.
And what the Chinese are doing with their productive output is making sure that they can move millions of men and women in their armed services anywhere they want to put them on the planet.
That's what's going on there.
For every ship they build, we think about it because they actually build hardware and they build it faster than virtually anyone on the planet.
And it's causing a lot of concern.
It's when you start to think about how does all this play into the geopolitics of the planet.
Climate change and energy and the issues we've been talking about the last couple of days, they really do fit together.
You know, China is moving to energy independence.
They're building a core.
Cold liquids plant every 18 months from start to finish.
They have so many planned online, their objective is to be free of the West in terms of contributions to basic natural resources.
What are they doing with all the trillions of US debt that they're collecting?
What are they doing with all the dollars that they're collecting?
They're going around the world.
They're outbidding Western companies by outbidding us on mining opportunities, the venture capital opportunities, the rare earths and mineral opportunities, and all those plays all over the world.
They're outbidding everyone.
And why are they doing it?
Why would you want to hold a bunch of U.S.
paper right now that you know is going to be dropping in value?
You're better off buying the commodities.
You know, when the market fell apart and copper hit $1.30, $1.30 a pound, which was the lowest it had been in years, the Chinese bought more then than they ever bought in their history.
And they bought it all the way up until it blew through the old record price by 10% while the economy is still in the toilet in the U.S.
and Europe.
And commodity prices are breaking through the roof.
And all those investments those Chinese made with all those cheap U.S.
dollars, well they still had a little bit of value.
And we all thought they were nuts for paying 10, 20 percent more than the market said those assets were worth.
What a deal they made!
on all those commodities, not just what was already finished.
What does it mean just copper alone?
There's eight days worth of copper in warehouses in the world to fulfill eight days worth of global demand right now, today.
That's how underproducing we are in that specific commodity.
Zinc, Nickel are in similar situations where there's very limited supplies on hand.
Rare Earths is even worse and all of those are controlled by China.
When you start to think about Earth-penetrating tomography as a technology for locating underground mineral resources as an example, oil and gas resources.
Some of that technology was tested and it was tested in over 20 states on a number of wells that were drilled by Halliburton back in the 80s and into the 90s.
And what they looked at was using a very simple method of earth-penetrating tomography.
They were able to look And with absolute 99.9% accuracy, grade and quantity and quality of oil and gas layers through the earth, matching up perfectly against actual drill logs from when they physically drilled those wells.
Using this type of technology.
Now imagine and remember what we were talking about earlier about the public owns energy resources in most instances in Alaska, in all instances are publicly owned.
But if you could with certainty image the underground geologic structures and know exactly where oil and gas is, now you no longer have risk associated with the drilling activity, which is why everyone says, you know, we ought not to be in the energy business.
But when you can define where those deposits are, then you can maximize or optimize what you get on the lease, because now everyone has good information.
People want to bid on that lease competitively.
You're going to optimize the public's return on those resources.
So using our technology for doing some things maybe makes a lot of sense, but there's lots of ways to do earth-penetrating tomography and identify those mineral resources and oil and gas resources.
HARP is one of those technologies that perhaps we could use in this way.
When Skylab launched the first time, we realized that back in the 70s, we realized that it created a hole in the ozone layer.
And everybody watched it, you know, and they said, oh, after a few hours it all filled in and everything went back to normal.
But think about this now.
I mean, think about it as a practical matter.
The Earth is turning, you make a hole, everything's moving, eventually it gets filled in, or it appears to get filled in.
Maybe it did, maybe it didn't.
Think about if I dip a cup of water out of a pond, and all the water levels back out.
Did it fill back up?
Well, if I keep dipping those cups of water out of that pond, eventually there is no pond.
But it sure looks flat and level with just a couple dipped out.
So what was it?
Skylab creates an ozone hole.
How many billions of cans of aerosol would have had to get up there?
And it didn't start down here, you know.
It started up there, where you actually delivered particulate material to the place that you're trying to affect and created a chemical reaction.
3,000 satellite and rocket launches, over 3,000 worldwide, did more for the ozone depletion on the planet, I assure you.
than all the air spray that everybody ever discharged.
And again, nobody takes any responsibility.
Blame it on the guy with the aerosol can, while governments stand back and go, we didn't do anything here.
This is the problem, and the arrogance of it all.
And often it's the case where the other guy is blamed for something that our own government has done.
In fact, if you look at environmental issues generally, virtually all the Superfund sites, 90% of them, are government sites, where the government made the mess, and then the rest of us get to clean it up.
Now we're experimenting with science that's much, much different than leaving a mess in some local location on the ground.
We're manipulating the entire geophysical systems of the planet and trying to learn how to do it better, how to dial it up a little more efficiently.
how to control those outcomes with a more precision and a more higher resolution as our science advances.
We've written the book "Controlling the Human Mind" and we wrote and produced the video "Mind Control" which Alex has carried for years.
And I always consider that the most important work.
Even when you associate some of the mind effects things with harp, they're big and they're important.
But as we got more into that subject, it became, for me, the most compelling and important work that we've published.
Because the idea of interfering with human consciousness, this idea of being able to interfere with free will, if you will, something that even God will not do in most religious traditions, interfere with free will, is now within the capability of man.
Should man do it?
I say absolutely not.
Again, thinking about personal liberty and personal freedom, the basic premise of the First Amendment of the Constitution, the right of free speech, the right of assembly, the right of free expression of religion, all of those presuppose a fundamental right, the freedom to think.
That's the First Amendment, because it presupposes all of that.
Without the freedom to think, none of the other liberties matter at all.
And this is the century that we're in.
The CIA, actually the work in this goes before the CIA.
You go back to the work at Harvard, work being done at the hypnotherapy labs at Harvard in the 1920s by a guy named Estabrook.
And Esterbrook had this idea that you could create what we would call today the Manchurian Candidate.
You know, some super spy that would be pre-programmed to do destruction or gather intelligence and if captured would have absolutely no knowledge of any of it.
Well, he started this work in the 20s.
By the 1930s his work was classified.
By the 1960s, the material he had published, he acknowledged that he created these super spies.
That he spent nine to ten months, and one out of five people were subject to this level of programming.
Where he would subject them to nine to ten months of programming, where he literally split the personality into two separate human beings within the same body.
Programming one to be the super spy, where they could function in another country without detection, and if captured would have no memory of their true self.
And yet when they return to the United States, this altered consciousness could be re-triggered to remember everything they collected in the foreign country and their true self.
The problem is, you can't put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
Once you fracture a human being in this way, you've effectively destroyed them forever.
He believed this was a good idea.
And he advanced this technology in the same material that he published advancing the idea that using LSD to alter people's consciousness for mind control experiments was legitimized and reasonable and a good thing.
That's what he wrote in his published work.
At the same time, the Central Intelligence Agency later was revealed to be experimenting with LSD on 8,000 men and women in the armed services alone, not to mention the civilian sector.
This came out in a congressional report that was on activities within the CIA right after Watergate.
Remember Watergate?
There's ex-CIA operatives breaking into this building for the bag men of the Nixon administration.
Well, there are no ex-CIA guys, number one, unless they're dead.
And number two, the fact is when they got caught, What they got caught doing were mind control experiments.
The church committees and the Congress actually heard the testimony as the CIA busied themselves shredding the documents because they acknowledged over 140 programs under MK Alternate sub-programs.
That were directly involved in the manipulation of human behavior using chemical means and electromagnetic means and one of the organizations they worked through at the time was the Mankind Research Association operated out of Bethesda, Maryland which was a front for Navy intelligence organizations and the Central Intelligence Organization developing Mind control technologies and an understanding of what those would be about.
More than a Manchurian candidate, manipulating people over huge geographic areas for very specific outcomes.
At the same time, they were engaged in a great deal of research on what they called paraphysics, or parapsychology, or ESP in those days.
A number of those reports prepared as far as our analysis of Eastern Europe that were eventually released under the Freedom of Information Act are posted on our website.
You can go and look there and you'll see hundreds of pages of these declassified documents that are heavily redacted.
I mean, a lot's blacked out, but you get a general sense of what we were doing.
And here's what they discovered.
And it's not in the published work, it's not in the other videos, it's not in that material, but here's the conclusions after all of it.
And I met the Northwest Field Director, got to know him real well over the years, of the Mankind Research Association, the kind of stuff they were doing back in the 70s.
And he kept his data, he's got a great box of data, talking about all of these experimentations.
And what they concluded was that A, extrasensory perceptions, these odd little things that people could do, were real.
Not in all instances, but in enough instances to cause them some alarm, military planners.
Because what also they discovered is that human beings generally have these innate capabilities that we used to call extrasensory perception.
Some have referred to as gifts of the spirit.
They come by a lot of different names.
But what they are is natural attributes of what human beings are.
We're created in the image of a creator.
That means more than how we look.
It has to do with what we are.
And what we are are very capable individuals.
But in order to reach those higher capabilities, in order to reach those higher states of awareness, in order to actualize your full potential as a human being, you have to be able to slow the mind.
You have to be able to create a situation where the mind, if you were to look at it with an EEG and look at the brain activity, you get very coherent, very rhythmic patterns.
The kind associated with the emotions of love and empathy and compassion.
Same kind of patterns show up.
Higher ordered thinking is associated with these coherent patterns, these rhythmic patterns.
Fear, flight, responses, anger, hate, you get incoherent patterns all over the map at a higher amplitude, at a higher pulse rate, that indicate agitation, confusion, inability to think.
What we do know is that in states of fear, worry and anxiety, you cannot, you cannot ever reach your higher capacity as a human being.
So the easiest mind control technique, keep people in a state of fear and worry and agitation and we're defeated before the first volley is fired.
That's not what we need to be about.
You know, when you think about it, when you're walking confidently, consciously doing what you know you're capable of doing, how empowering it is to step into each act that you take on as a human being in a productive and meaningful way, Without fear, without worry, it's when your mind falls into what some call that zone that the athlete knows, and the artist knows, and every one of us knows, in those instances where those sparks of creativity come through.
That is our normal state of consciousness.
If you were to look at it in the lower range of the alpha range, where you are in that most creative mindset, You'd be between 7 and 8, 7 and 9 hertz, pulses per second.
The planet naturally oscillates at 7.83 hertz, pulses per second.
Isn't that interesting?
Correlates perfectly with the ideal state for awake, conscious living, when you're awake.
And yet the fields that we surround ourselves with in this room right now, in every room where everyone's watching this because the power grid is operating at 60 Hertz, 60 pulses per second, an agitating signal all the time in our background noise, if you will, our noise.
Because think about it, in a crowded room all the noise you hear and you're having a conversation with your friend, and you block out all that background noise.
We do the same thing with electromagnetic fields.
I'll tell you when you notice it.
I couldn't use this analogy in Germany.
I'll tell you why in a minute.
But think about when the power fails in your community, when the power goes out, completely goes out, the power grid's down.
Now everybody remembers it, given all the winter storm activity.
And the first thing you notice, how quiet it is, because the refrigerator's not humming along, the air conditioner or the heaters aren't blowing air around.
The second thing you notice is how your whole body exhales as you relax.
Same feeling when you come in from a hard day of work and you're wearing your insulated soles on your shoes and the first thing you do is you kick them off and you come back into ground with the pulse rate of the planet and you relax.
That relaxation is the silence.
Do you know what the sound of being born into an explosion is?
Silence.
We're living in that explosion, in the fields that surround us every moment of every day.
When I used that analogy this last year in Stuttgart, everybody looked at me like I was crazy when I said, you know, when the power fails.
It never fails in Germany.
People with gray hair never remember a power failure since World War II ended.
You know?
I mean, we don't even think about that.
I mean, you're talking about the contrast in technology.
I can't even use the same analogy in Europe.
It just doesn't make sense.
Because our technology happens to run smoother.
And we invented the power grid for all practical purposes.
But again, I say it humorously, but at the same time recognizing under all this are these very real effects that we have to recognize.
So how do you learn how to control You know, people ask me all the time, you know, you talk about a lot of technologies generate a lot of concern, some levels of anxiety.
That's not my intention.
My intention is to inform so we can begin to think about this stuff in a productive, constructive way and how we address it.
But more importantly, the more important part of this message and anything that I've said in the last couple of days is about the fact that we are more than we think we are.
There are no small things.
There's only things that are undone.
Each thing that we do as individuals matters.
It matters a lot.
More than you might even realize or recognize.
And there are no small things.
And what I do versus what you do, it's not a size issue.
It's getting the work done.
All of us have a sphere of influence and we need to assert ourselves in that sphere of influence.
What that means is, it might mean that we have a conversation with our family or our close friends.
We don't feel any anxiety having done that.
When the anxiety creeps in, back off!
Think about what you're doing.
It should be like breathing if you're working outside of fear and outside of worry.
And you're working in a way that is possible, where you acknowledge it's possible.
Do what you know you can do to further your version and your view of the truth.
And do it in a respectful way.
And do it with confidence.
And don't lift the burden if it's too heavy.
There's someone else that'll lift it for you.
Or lift it with you.
But do something.
in favor of what you believe to be right and true whether it's on any of the issues we've covered today or on some other issue but something that you care about and recognize there's a billion other people doing the same thing and we're not waiting for an organization to form we're already standing in it.
It's called the human race.
Participate in it.
Be what you were created to be, and assert yourself in the world today by effecting change, by direct action, in a respectful and rational way, and without fear and without worry, because that is the zone in which things can happen.
Fear is the adversary, it has always been the adversary, and it's the easiest method of controlling human behavior.
When you think of the whole 1984 scenarios, which I think are here now, I mean, certainly are here now, on steroids, those guys are rolling over in their grave because it's a lot worse on steroids, those guys are rolling over in their grave because it's a Huxley, you know, he wrote Brave New World, and the essay most people missed of his was one of the very last ones he wrote, which was Brave New World Revisited.
When he went back and sort of looked at it and said, oh no, it's 40 years ahead of where I thought it was.
Now this is in the late 1950s and I think he died in 62 or 63.
So the very end of his life and the things that are most important to read aren't what somebody wrote early in their career, it's what they wrote at the end.
Sort of how they evaluate.
You know, when I look at studying someone's work, I start with the last thing they wrote.
And work my way backwards.
Because there's the pinnacle of their knowledge.
And Huxley's pinnacle of the knowledge was the last warning, the last shout in the movie theater saying, hey, it's 40 years ahead of the game, and it probably isn't going to be chemistry that does it.
It's going to be something else, and it's the electronics of this century.
It's the tools that we've been talking about misapplied to the population.
Those are the things that are causing Huxley today to roll over in his grave, because even that warning was 40 years too old.
I mean, that warning in the late 50s, and his conclusion then, was nothing.
compared to what has emerged in the 21st century and what came out of the last of the last century.
This technology to change not just our emotional states but the way we perceive the world is already exists on the planet.
New breakthroughs are being anticipated by military planners.
This last year, 2010, DARPA let two contracts, University of California, for developing methods and means for creating electronic telepathy.
Where we can electronically transfer thoughts into the mind of another person in a way that they cannot distinguish the artificial from their own.
Now think about that in the 21st century.
If you can create a complete memory set, one of the stated goals of Air Force planners, to complete a complete memory set that you cannot distinguish the real from the fiction.
Is that the witness you want on your trial in the courts of the 21st century?
The guy who can swear by that memory, and yet that memory is as false as a $3 bill.
That's the technology of this century.
It'll challenge the very institutions that we depend on for justice, for liberty, for freedom, synthetic memory.
It's being even played off in terms of Gulf War syndrome and in terms of the shock that people come out of the war with.
You know, the shock, the fear, the memories, Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome that boils out of these war efforts.
And so what are we hearing about?
Ways to wipe the memory clean so people can forget all those bad experiences.
Do they really go away?
Or do they just get driven deeper into the subconscious where they do their real work at breaking down the consciousness of a human being?
Where they can't get played out, they can't get worked out, they get suppressed.
And suppressed conflicting ideas are the root to a lot of the psychosis we see in the world today.
This is the solution to military planners.
Wipe out the memory of the gladiator so they don't know what they did.
And somehow that will excuse the behavior and save that person's soul.
No, it won't.
It'll mask the pain and let it break out in some weird, irrational way, because that's what happens when you suppress these kinds of memories.
Secondly, maybe we want these guys to remember what they did because maybe some of the things that they were directed to do they shouldn't have done in the first place.
Maybe the memories that they have of the abuses that we inflict on others are memories that somebody ought to be testifying to someday, instead of bearing, because now we have a technology that can mask the behavior of our troops in combat, That's not the answer.
In the past wars, the wars that our fathers fought and our grandfathers fought, when they returned from battle, the stench of death was still in their noses and they worked hard to avoid wars in future wars to save the next generation from experiencing the same trauma they did.
Trauma is the outcome of war, but it also makes us, as human beings, resist war, make it our last effort, not our first effort.
If we take it out, we make it neutral, where there's no pain, there's no residual memory, it becomes easier and easier to inflict war on others.
It becomes easier and easier to use that as the solution, rather than diplomacy and fair play.
Is that what we want?
Is that the reflection of American values we want our military paranoid closet planners to engage in for us?
Or do we want them to uphold the values, instill those values on the next generation of military planners, so that American values are what's projected to the world by our example, not by our hidden agenda?
You're thinking about Alaska strategically, and most Americans don't, But let's talk about Alaska just for a minute, and how this feeds in to what's happening around the world.
Firstly, Alaska is 18% of all the land in the United States.
It has a greater coastline, Alaska alone.
If you take all the western states, all the west coast, all the east coast, and all the gulf coast, and you add it all up, Alaska's coastline is bigger.
And we have a 200-mile federal limit in those coastal waters, which is significant.
Now, let's look at where Alaska sits.
On the map.
Here's Alaska.
Place Alaska just for a moment as if it were the top of the world.
And then look at where it sits.
North America.
Here's L.A.
The same distance to L.A.
I hit Japan.
The same distance I hit Northern Europe.
Same distance as for me as Alaskan to fly to Tokyo, to L.A.
Or to Oslo.
I can get there in virtually the same amount of time from Alaska.
Which is why Federal Express located their international hub in Anchorage, Alaska, and UPS put their international hub in Fairbanks, Alaska.
Because they could serve Asia, Europe, and the United States with the shortest distance between points, hubbing out of Alaska.
Now, if you think about it, the Aleutian Chain, which actually, you can't see it so easily on this, but it comes down right to here, and here's Japan.
Okay?
So, Alaska to Japan is this distance.
Alaska, I don't even hit Seattle.
I can't get to the next state, but I can get to Japan.
Now think about it.
Raw materials coming out of Alaska feeding the Pacific Rim.
The best markets are to feed the Asian markets.
Now there's no railroad link, so I mentioned yesterday we can't get from Alaska into the Midwest.
If we could link approximately right here, At Prince Rupert.
If we could link at Prince Rupert to the railroad system in Canada, we could then move Alaskan commodities all the way into the Midwest, the industrial belt, and be able to use those mineral commodities to do value-added and re-industrialize the nation.
One quarter of all the oil and gas left undiscovered in the world exists right here.
In the Arctic Circle.
That's the estimate.
Alaska has hundreds of trillions, trillions of cubic feet of natural gas.
Now think about the North Slope of Alaska, which is right here where our oil and gas is.
Now think about us moving oil and gas through an empty Arctic.
The Arctic Sea is almost to the point where we can start to move freight from Europe to North America across the pole.
Think about it.
Instead of bringing freight from Europe To the United States, this distance, a third of the way around the world, we can shorten that distance to a quarter of its distance and move freight directly into Northern Europe and into their rail systems, connecting into their commodity flow, or into Russia and Asia.
Jumping over the poles with our freight, not just in the air, But in the sea.
This will change everything and puts Alaska in the most strategic place because commodities are equal in price no matter where they're produced.
The differences then become how cheap is it to get it to the next point.
So we need rail to get it into the Midwest of the United States, where then it has the opportunity of being exported off of our western ports, or through the St.
Lawrence Seaway, or off of our eastern ports.
Or we have the option, in the not too distant future, of shipping direct into these markets raw goods, or adding value here in Alaska.
Alaska has the greatest energy resources.
All these minerals require energy for value added, and we have the opportunity to do that now.
Now what would that mean?
If we began to move these commodities, these energy resources in the United States, half of our trade deficit is energy-related and the other is buying value-added products back from China.
If we could eliminate 50% of our trade deficits by eliminating imported energy, We strengthen the dollar again.
We reinvigorate our economy again.
We now have a domestic supply of energy and we keep our money rolling in our own economies.
The same is true with value added to our commodities.
We have an opportunity to take a big chunk of our economy back from the rest of the world Embed it back into our nation and use the advantage that we have.
Alaska is the stepchild.
Recognize our state.
Recognize this place as an incredible opportunity for Americans to be liberated by looking at the balance sheet.
Think about it.
We always talk about the profit and loss statement, the income and expenses of the nation when we talk about the debt and how we're going to fix it.
It's always about the taxpayer and putting it on our backs.
The balance sheet are the assets of the nation, which includes our energy resources, our mineral wealth, our force, our public lands.
How do we make them pay in a way that offsets the Treasury demands against the taxpayer?
Get full value for our commodities.
Make sure those multinationals pay money here.
Because here's what happens.
And we play it out in Alaska every year.
Here we have oil and gas that the nation needs.
We have a pipeline that can run it down to Valdez.
And the pipeline is running at 616,000 barrels a day today.
It's designed to handle 2.1 million barrels.
Why aren't we moving U.S.
oil through a U.S.
pipeline Is because it's cheaper to corrupt a third world government somewhere else on the planet, keep the oil and gas in the ground in the U.S.
because a multinational doesn't have any care about our national needs or our national priorities.
It's about the bottom line.
If it were a national oil company that cared first about the national priorities, then that oil and gas would be developed and be feeding U.S.
markets, even if it cost a little more, because the offset is U.S.
jobs, U.S.
taxes generated, U.S.
rollover in our economy of every one of those dollars spent domestically seven times, a seven times multiplier in the economy and the tax base when we spend money at home.
That's the difference.
Bring it back because it's a domestic priority, not a multinational priority.
Our domestic priorities need to carry forward, or these companies that are retaining these rights need to be put under performance.
You know, these leases on the North Slope don't require any performance.
They hold them.
They hold them.
They pay the fee.
They don't have to ever produce them.
In Russia, if you didn't produce, you lost your right.
Later they took them anyway, but at least they had the incentive.
You're going to spend the money.
You're going to produce these fields, or you're out of here.
So they did.
In the U.S.
we don't make them produce anything.
We just give them the right to tie up the public resource, call it their safety deposit box in our safe economy, because our men and women are defending this turf.
To defend them, to save their bacon, after we're done trying to save it from whatever third world country they've corrupted, they always can come back home and produce it domestically.
And by then, they've screwed us down so much on the royalties and taxes under the guise of, well, if it's not cheap enough, we'll do it elsewhere.
We understand all that.
We know how economics works.
We know how capitalism works.
But we also understand how our national interests work and multinational companies don't, because they don't care.
It's not in their self-interest to care.
They're looking at the six billion other consumers that don't live here, who are their potential future markets, because this economy, from their perspective, doesn't have those opportunities.
It's dead.
They want to go where people are changing from bicycles to automobiles.
And that's the rest of the world.
People have asked me about my father.
He was lost on a plane with Hale Boggs in the early seventies.
Hale was a majority leader at the time.
I mean, you can look at all of the Interesting coincidences, you know, the guy that took Hale Boggs to the airport, he was working in Texas at the time for another campaign, and Boggs got a ride to the airport by a young Democrat from Oklahoma, William Jefferson Clinton.
Yeah, the same one that later became president.
Now this is 1972.
Boggs gets on the plane, he goes to D.C., makes a connection to Alaska, comes to Alaska, gives a speech, breaks the story a little bit about what was coming.
We didn't know, it wasn't known as Watergate then, it was just this big scandal he mentioned.
And the next day he gets on a plane flying to Juneau from Anchorage and disappears, never heard from again, with my father.
Now, Boggs was on the Warren Commission.
He wanted the Warren Commission reopened.
It was saying so around that time.
Six months before, he had called for the resignation of Hoover, who he believed absolutely corrupt.
Because of his own perversions, Hoover's, he used knowledge to blackmail the Congress.
He had the inside track on every congressman because he had tapped their phones, intercepted their mail, basically violated all their personal privacy rights.
And this is the leadership of the country for goodness sakes.
This is our entire Congress that he corrupted so that he could maintain his position in the FBI.
Boggs wanted him out.
Boggs came to Alaska, by then Hoover was gone, but the plane disappears, the Hoover administration continues, the Warren Commission never reopens, and Watergate breaks three weeks later.
October 16, 1972, the plane goes down.
You know, McGovern's in his last throes of his death race because he isn't winning anything.
Richard Nixon's the clear winner.
Everybody knows it.
Hale Boggs is the Majority Leader of the House, standing in line to be the next Speaker, the third most powerful position in the Congress.
And what happens?
He disappears at the most critical time in our history.
In fact, if you remember what happened right after Watergate broke, and then Agnew got bounced, you know, as the Vice President.
Ford slid in behind him.
Nixon resigns.
Ford moves up.
Ford pardons Nixon, and Rockefeller rolls in as the Vice President.
And then, if you remember, it was, I think it was Squeaky Fromm, wasn't it, Squeaky Fromm?
It was one of the Manson girls that takes a pot shot at Ford to knock him off, because she wanted him dead.
And who would have been President?
Rockefeller.
Now isn't that interesting?
You know, I mean, talk about conspiracy theory.
How about conspiracy reality?
That's how it played out.
Everybody's forgotten it.
You know, if you're not 50, you don't remember.
You know, but a lot of us remember when all this happened and it played out.
Now Boggs is off the scene, Carl Elbert is the speaker.
Carl was an alcoholic.
I mean, he's come to my house all the time, talked to my dad, the guy could barely sit on a bar stool and he was speaker of the house.
You know, those were the days when you got stopped by the police for drunk driving and they said, hey, drive on home and sleep it off.
You know, it was a different world and a different era.
But Carl Albert was not in a position at that time to step into the presence of the United States.
What I think would have happened had Boggs lived.
Carl Albert would have stepped down.
Boggs would have stepped up.
They would have got rid of Agnew and Nixon at the same time.
And the third in line to be president would have been, and that would have been, Hale Boggs.
And the whole game would have changed in this country.
And personal freedom and liberty would have been restored then.
Instead of going into disrepair even further now.
Now, Dad brought Boggs to Alaska to campaign.
Dad had that campaign in the bag.
He brought him here to show him, to talk about the same issues, many of the same issues that we've talked about over this video.
The idea that Alaska has this tremendous potential for the United States that ought to be realized.
This was right before the Native Land Claims, the biggest settlement in indigenous history in the United States as a freshman.
Congressman, my dad, got passed a 44 million acre land transfer to indigenous people intact with mineral rights, oil and gas rights, energy rights, timber, surface estate, water rights, everything intact.
And they moved that over along with just under a billion dollars in 1971.
The first year he was a member of Congress, as a freshman.
Now, people say freshmen can't get anything done.
I know personally, they're wrong.
My brother Mark is a freshman senator, two years in the job.
He's the fifth-ranking Democrat in the U.S.
Senate and the only member of the U.S.
Senate without a college degree.
He did it in two years because he knows how to work hard, stand for something, and do something.
Now, Mark and I don't agree on everything, as brothers never do.
But I can tell you this, he's as committed to public service as I am.
We have a different way of expressing it.
But his risk at getting something done is as great or greater as they've ever been.
You know, when you think about congressional deaths, you know, you think about my dad's, what happened is they found out in 1993 Through FOIA requests that the military actually knew that my father or somebody at that crash site was alive.
Two people were alive according to the FBI records that eventually got released.
Two people were alive at a crash site that has never been found.
Crash sites never been publicly identified nor has the people who were alive at that site.
Lost in the shuffle of bureaucracy.
The documents we saw that Roll Call, prestigious publication in DC, got under a FOIA request, Freedom of Information Act request.
All the key names were redacted.
Well, we went after the data from the military, the Air Force overflights, the data that was developed for the biggest air and sea search in the history of the world!
And all the records they told us were destroyed.
A few months later, because we raised a lot of heck over that, a few months later, mysteriously on my brother's doorstep, a pile of boxes with all those original documents, not redatted.
Gee, they hadn't been destroyed at all.
We'd been lied to again.
I want to tell you, as the son of a United States Congressman, That if it can happen to him, it can happen to anyone.
That's why we need to get into this fight and engage our government.
It shouldn't happen to anyone.
That our risk to our personal freedom, to our life, should be at risk as people give up their private life in order to carry on everyone else's.
In the case of Wellstone, many remember his plane crash in Eveleth, Minnesota.
You know, it just happened to be the same town my dad was born in.
My uncle was a mayor there, was a state legislature there.
Coincidence?
Kind of interesting.
Do you remember Carnahan?
The senator before him that died in Missouri?
That was the anniversary date of my dad's disappearance.
October 16th.
You know, is it coincidence?
Maybe so.
But it certainly begs the question, you know, I mean, how many people die in plane crashes?
My brother beats Ted Stevens in an election.
Ted Stevens dies in a plane crash a couple years later.
What people don't remember is he was already in a plane crash before, where his first wife was killed.
Died in a plane crash.
People forget about it.
Mike Gravel's wife died in a plane crash.
People forget about it.
You know, people forget about all of this, and yet it keeps happening.
And people say, well, you know, politicians fly a lot.
You know, plane crashes are a little disproportionate to the rest of the population.
How about business travelers?
You're going to talk about people flying a lot.
It seems to be one of the hazards of the job that congressmen and senators seem to die in plane crashes when they're about to make some of the biggest changes that the country needs.
So, having said it, there's always risk involved, I suppose, in public service.
But the question has become is, what risks are we taking as citizens?
And what risks should we take?
I mean, at least we should have our voices heard.
At least we should speak out.
At least we should participate in the activist organizations that we believe in, as long as they're functioning on reasonable, value-based approaches.
I mean, violence isn't the answer.
Certainly not the answer right now.
That's the excuse the government needs to finally shut down what little is left of our personal liberty.
Let's not give them that.
But let's stay in the fight and let's see what we can do together.
Maybe we can, I believe we can, continue to make a difference as we actualize our own potentials and engage the fight from the standpoint of change.
▲
Export Selection