All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 24, 2012 - InfoWars Nightly News
46:34
20120224_Fri_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello again everyone.
Welcome to the InfoWars Nightly News.
I'm Darren McBreen, sitting in tonight for Alex Jones.
It is Friday, February 24, 2012, and here's a quick look at what we have lined up for you this evening.
In my opinion, it's the most clear evidence of a false flag event by the U.S.
government.
Delta Flight 253.
The U.S.
government allowed a known potential terrorist to board the plane without a passport.
Tonight, the final segment of our four-part series of an exclusive InfoWars interview with Flight 253 passenger Kurt Haskell, who maintains that the underwear bomber was carrying a fake bomb and was the unwitting dupe in a case of government entrapment.
Then, is global warming being exploited by governments as an excuse to play God?
Rosalind Peterson of the Agriculture Defense Coalition joins us to talk about the UN's plan to regulate worldwide geoengineering of the planet.
All that and more coming up during the next 30 minutes or so.
But first, let's get right on to our top headlines.
CIA-NATO front group drafts humanitarian aid for Syria.
An effort to impose the same sort of humanitarian aid on Syria that ultimately killed around 30,000 people in Libya is now underway in Tunisia.
CNN reports that world powers, more like corrupt states belonging to the Arab League and members of the European Union, are mapping out a plan to deliver humanitarian aid in Syria under the banner of Friends of Syria.
Say hello to my little friend.
In January, it was reported that MI6, the CIA, and British intelligence are in Syria, working with the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Council to overthrow the al-Assad regime.
The Free Syrian Army is widely recognized as a creation of NATO.
It is comprised largely of militants from the Muslim Brotherhood itself, an asset of British intelligence.
So perhaps...
President Obama is, you know, shooting for another Nobel Peace Prize as the CIA launches yet another covert operation and bombs yet another country.
Evidence grows that 9-11 first responders got cancer at ground zero.
The director of Mount Sinai Medical Center's World Trade Center Health Program is preparing to publish a study that will show elevated risk of cancer among 9-11 rescue workers.
This is very sad because these are the same heroes that were barred from attending the 10th anniversary ceremony of the 9-11 attacks And those who enrolled in health care programs got screened through terrorism databases.
Once again, literally adding insult to injury.
Moving right along.
And now concerns over martial law in America as the Patriot movement is now on the FBI's radar.
A recent report by the LA Times characterizes the sovereign citizen movement as a major threat and they say it's on par with Islamic extremism.
It actually states that more than 100,000 Americans are domestic terrorists as a result of their affiliation with the group.
This is something that InfoWars, the InfoWars team, Alex Jones has warned you about for many years.
If you are, let's say, a Tea Partier, a Constitutionalist, you value your Second Amendment, then according to the government you are a bigger threat than Al-Qaeda.
And you're going to be a problem.
They're going to keep their eyes on you, so... The article entitled, Sovereign Citizen Movement Now on FBI's Radar Frames the Belief that the U.S.
is Essentially Under Martial Law.
Well, they got that right.
Along with support for introducing the gold standard, evil, as political views are becoming indicative of violent extremism.
As we've documented on numerous occasions, the federal government routinely characterizes normal behavior as extremist activity or a potential indicator of a terrorist intent.
So chances are, you are a terrorist.
Okay, let's take a look at our next story.
This is really bad.
Farmer faces possible three-year prison sentence for feeding community.
Wisconsin dairy farmer Vernon Hershberger is being charged with four criminal misdemeanors that could land him in prison for three years and fines of over $10,000.
His crime?
Supplying a private club with fresh milk and other farm products.
The FDA is actively conducting sting operations and raids against peaceful farmers, which have resulted in the farms shutting down and people not having access to their food.
Meanwhile, of course, the mega-corporations like Monsanto, where they continue to push the genetically modified frankenfoods to the masses, yet another example of tyrannical behavior by the corrupt and evil FDA.
And now it's time for a brand new Man on the Street.
This is a segment that our writer, producer, and now reporter, John Boundt, put together as he takes to the streets of Austin, Texas to investigate denial.
Here's what he has to say.
I'm in Austin, Texas on the UT campus.
I've been asking students all day about the recently passed NDAA legislation.
I was surprised to learn where the real denial is coming from.
Just one look at mainstream news will make any rational thinker conclude that Americans are in a hyper state of denial.
Public opinion isn't a stranglehold when it comes to real, open, honest debate.
Whether it's the looming war in Iran based on fear-mongering and little fact, or the blind eye given to Ron Paul's agenda to get the country back to its constitutional values.
The New Suffolk University Poll shows him with a commanding lead in New Hampshire at almost 30 points above his rivals.
At the same time, Newt Gingrich and John Huntsman have faltered.
Rick Santorum, who polls in single digits here, is looking to give Romney a run in the Granite State after his near victory in Iowa.
Are people aware that they could be kidnapped, detained without trial, and sent away to a torture facility for an untimely death simply based on the description of domestic terrorism?
Denial comes in three forms according to Sigmund Freud.
Simple denial.
Deny the reality of the unpleasant fact altogether.
Do you feel like you get all the information you need from mainstream media?
No, I don't.
I hardly watch the news anyway.
And I'm in a lying and deception class right now.
And we talked about media and, like, news, and how most of it is just... They take, like, the smallest thing possible, it's not a big deal, and blow it out of proportion so you at least feel like something important's going on, when in fact, like, there are other things that could be covered that, I mean, they don't want to cover or they don't.
Minimization.
Admit the fact, but deny its seriousness.
I just wanted to ask you if you've heard about the NDAA legislation, the bill that allows the president to detain American citizens, wish them away off to a torture facility and never be seen again, that that's been legalized as of this year.
Are you aware of this?
Um, I actually have heard of that.
That's like how they weren't going to close Guantanamo.
That was like the legislation that like decided that, I believe.
If you're labeled a domestic terrorist, which could include the fact that you're missing fingers, that you bought beer at a store with cash, that you bought baby formula... Do you take that seriously, or would you feel like, yes, that may be happening, but it's probably for a good reason?
Um, because I don't know the details.
Like, I want to say that it could possibly be for a good reason.
Projection.
Admit both the fact and the seriousness, but deny responsibility.
Once the war against Saddam begins, we expect every American to support our military, and if they can't do that, to shut up.
Would you be more prone to say, yeah, that's happening, but there's nothing you can do about it?
Um, I don't think that there's nothing that can be done.
I think if enough people are informed about it, then the more people that are informed, the more people can, you know, have an input and say, and one voice, you know, adds to that change.
So, I mean, what's the entire point of this bill?
Domestic terrorism.
They want to quiet their critics.
We represent the alternative media.
Mainstream media didn't even cover NDAA.
I have an idea that the media is sponsored by certain political parties and also certain people with power within this country.
They don't allow certain information to be transmitted to the masses.
It just wouldn't be right for the normal person's psyche.
American citizens are distracted by a number of worthless time-consuming outlets.
We are all addicted to our own self-importance.
The only way to begin to treat addiction, whether it is alcohol or drugs, for example, is to break the cycle of denial.
The mainstream media delivers a skewed reality, manipulating the American landscape with their theater of denial.
Isn't it amazing that we're denying our own slavery to a system fueled by that very denial?
John Bowne, Infowars Nightly News.
Wow, and that was a great piece put together by John Bowne.
We'll also put together our quote of the day for us today.
It's from Marcus Cicero.
Though silence is not necessarily an admission, it is not a denial either.
Once again, that was from Roman philosopher, consul, and Roman constitutionalist, Marcus Cicero.
And now it's time for part four of an InfoWars exclusive interview with Kurt Haskell, witness to the government cover-up of Delta Flight 253.
Now, it is a fact that the U.S.
government allowed the underwear bomber to board the plane even though he had no passport and was on the government terror watch list.
Passenger Kurt Haskell famously witnessed a sharp-dressed Indian man force officials to let Abdulmutallab board the plane, again, even though he had no passport and was listed as a potential terrorist.
And of course, the establishment media, they have predictably remained silent on this epic story as they continue to regurgitate the official government fable of the underwear bomber.
But fortunately for you, the InfoWars viewer, you're about to get a dose of the hardcore truth.
An interview with Kurt Haskell, key witness to the false flag terror attack aboard Delta Flight 253, the subsequent government cover-up that followed.
Walk us through what you saw in Amsterdam.
Sure.
Lori and I were sitting near the boarding gate.
Sitting on the floor.
There weren't any seats to sit in.
And I saw two men and they caught my eye because they seemed to be an odd pair.
One was what I would describe as a poor looking black teenager around 16 or 17.
And the other man, a Age 50-ish, wealthy-looking Indian man, and I was just wondering why they were together.
Kind of strange.
And I watched them approach what I would call the ticket agent, the final person that checks your boarding pass before you get on the plane.
And I could hear the entire conversation.
The only person that spoke was the Indian man.
And what he said was, this man needs to board the plane, but he doesn't have a passport.
And the ticket agent responded, well, if he doesn't have a passport, he can't get on the plane.
To which the Indian man responded back, he's from Sudan.
We do this all the time.
And the ticket agent said, well, then you'll have to go and talk to my manager.
And she directed them down a hallway.
And that was the last time that I saw the Indian man.
And the black man, I didn't see again until he tried to blow up our plane.
I assume, though, that they're not patting people down in the crotch area, which is where this fellow allegedly had the bombs.
We could deploy the scanning machines that we currently are beginning to deploy in the U.S.
that would give us the ability to see what someone has concealed underneath their clothing.
I also want to point out in your current role as a security consultant, you are representing some of the companies who manufacture that technology, correct?
Absolutely correct.
One thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked.
Well, the Underwear Bomber case is important because it's the most, in my opinion, it's the most clear evidence of a false flag event by the U.S.
government.
I think if you actually take the time to look into the evidence, the official version is not backed up by anything other than statements by members of the government.
There is actually a great deal of evidence that backs up what I'm saying.
So, it's important in that sense that it's a very clear picture that the U.S.
government stages terrorist attacks to forward their agenda, whatever that may be, at that time.
Not only that, but if you look at how the government's treated this case, you can see all the tools they use when they use the false flag attack, which is You know, denying evidence and telling the media to not report certain things.
Blasting in the media all the unimportant things, propaganda issues that support their story, you know, the government forwarded story, not the real story.
And it just gives you a real window how they handle these things.
And if you look at the picture of this, how they handle things, and you see things happen in the future, You know, you can take their playbook, if you will, and apply it to the ones in the future, you know, and tell what's a false flag event or not.
There had been no terrorist attacks on flights in the U.S.
since 2001, so people were kind of getting, you know, We're weary of the war on terror thinking, hey, you know, why are we spending all this money on the war on terror when there is no war on terror?
You know, nothing's happening.
We're not stopping anybody.
Number two, we had, back when this happened in December 2009, we had certain parts of the Patriot Act that were up for renewal.
They actually came up for renewal in early December 2009, just a couple weeks before this happened.
And you can look it up on the Internet.
Hillary Clinton I actually said, look, my constituents don't want to vote for the renewal.
They don't think it's needed and politically this will be damaging if, you know, my party votes for renewal of these parts of the Patriot Act.
So they delayed the vote until, I believe, February 2010 and look what happens in the meantime.
There was a A bill that had already passed the House of Representatives, and the bill was to restrict the use of body scanning machines to secondary use only.
Meaning, you would only have to go through the body scanning machines after you had set off the metal detector.
And this had already passed the House.
It was pending before the Senate for a vote in early 2010.
And again, look what we have in the meantime, the underwear bomber attack.
Incidentally, despite the fact that This bill had already passed the House and was pending before the Senate.
The TSA and Department of Homeland Security continue to order many more body scanning machines for the airport.
So, read into that what you will.
So, all of those reasons really.
Basically, they needed a crutch for the war on terror.
Nothing was happening on the war on terror for many years.
And now all you hear is, you know, every time the war on terror is brought up, or these enhanced procedures are brought up, TSA here, TSA there, and you see something, say something, it all goes back to the underwear bomber.
They all say, well, we need it because of the underwear bomber.
It's a crutch.
It's a crutch for any of these policies at all.
So, you know, you can see how it's played into all of this.
But there are a few things we could do to make things better.
First, we could deploy the scanning machines that we currently are beginning to deploy in the U.S.
that would give us the ability to see what someone has concealed underneath their clothing.
That has been vigorously opposed by the ACLU and privacy advocates.
The House of Representatives voted to prevent us from using it, but I think now there's been a very vivid lesson in the value of that machinery.
In your current role as a consultant, do you have an interest in body scanners?
You know, we consult with all kinds of firms, including firms that do manufacture body scanners.
You do have some interest in more sales of body scanners?
As well as a lot of other security measures, but I would point out that I've talked about this for probably the last three years.
You know, I don't really have any evidence on whether Chertoff was involved, but, you know, it's really suspicious to me that the former head of the Department of Homeland Security now works for body scanning companies, and there's so much money going around.
You know, did somebody do a favor for Chertoff here?
You know, that was paid back with some money?
I don't know.
I think it's entirely possible, but again, I don't have any evidence on this, so... I don't know, but yeah, it's highly suspicious that you have former head of Department of Homeland Security peddling body scanning machines and making who knows how much money off of them.
Metal detectors were doing fine before the underwear bomber incident and they were not the reason he got on the flight, obviously.
So, it's an unreasonable search, in my opinion, because all the body scanning machines are not necessary.
They make you show a naked picture of yourself to unknown people.
And they might cause you cancer.
We don't know.
But if you don't do that, you have to opt out.
And therefore, you have someone feeling you up, looking down your pants, and grabbing you between the legs.
That's an unreasonable search.
So, it's definitely a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
When I talk to people about this, the main response I get is, well, whatever it takes to make me feel safe.
And that's a pretty discouraging response.
To me, in my opinion, because Americans will just voluntarily give up constitutional rights based on a lie.
It's just...
It's ridiculous and depressing.
Coming up, are you willing to give up a lot of your privacy when you go through security at the airport?
How about a revealing full-body scan?
Would that be okay with you?
It does seem to me that we're becoming a police state, that's for sure.
There just seems to be getting more and more and more security, you know, based on whatever the government says.
You know, they make a statement, so therefore we need this.
Or they stage this event, so therefore we need this.
And, you know, at what point do we not need security?
At what point was the security not okay back on 9-11?
No matter what you think about the 9-11 events, even if you don't think they were another false flag attack, they could have been prevented entirely.
We knew all about them.
We knew about the attackers flying in flight schools before this happened, and it could have been prevented.
We didn't need new measures from that either.
But, uh, You know, you see where this goes.
The government uses these terrorist attacks, not only to take away our rights, but to justify wars that they're definitely using for other purposes.
You know, to steal oil, to topple regimes, to steal gold, whatever reasons you believe, to stop competing currencies backed by gold.
Whatever reasons you think, they're definitely not to liberate people.
You know, if they were, why aren't we liberating Mexico?
You know, they have all kinds of crazy things going on there now.
Why aren't we liberating North Korea?
You know, why is it restricted to these countries in the Middle East that have oil?
And now we have, if you see something, say something.
Which incidentally I did, but you can see where it got me.
You know, and talk about these body scanning machines going into bus terminals, train stations, malls, and wherever else.
So you can see how they use this.
My understanding of the NDAA and what it does is it allows the US government to detain anyone they want indefinitely if it declares that such person is a terrorist.
Now, the definition of a terrorist is left solely at the discretion of the President of the United States.
If President Obama declares you a terrorist, the government can arrest you and hold you indefinitely without a trial.
They don't even need to tell anyone they're holding you or where.
You'll just disappear.
That's what the NDAA allows.
It's totally out of the playbook of the USSR or Nazi Germany where the government can just come in and say, You're going to disappear, sorry, and you're gone.
No one knows what happened to you.
That's what it allows the government to do.
Now, who is a terrorist exactly?
Am I a terrorist?
Am I a terrorist because I speak out against the government and I've informed the public of a false flag event?
I don't know.
Am I a terrorist because I was going to testify on behalf of Abdu'l-Mutala?
I don't know.
What's interesting, too, is you don't actually have to be a terrorist.
The law actually says that you can just be someone that's adding aid of some sort to a terrorist.
So, again, I go back to the question, am I a terrorist for being willing to testify on behalf of Abdulmutallab?
Under the NDAA.
Seems likely that maybe I am.
Am I aiding a terrorist by telling the government that they're staging false flag events and therefore these terrorist groups have a defense to some of these terrorism trials.
Maybe I am.
Maybe I can be locked up indefinitely.
And this is a gross violation of our constitutional rights.
It doesn't get any more clear, you know, that you're entitled to due process under the law.
You're entitled to a speedy trial.
And this doesn't even allow you a speedy trial.
It doesn't allow you any trial at all.
And they're not even required to tell your family if they've taken you or anything.
It's a gross violation of the law.
It's totally unconstitutional.
It's all about power and what's telling is that I believe 93 out of 100 senators voted for this law.
Something like that, like 93 percent.
And I have to ask, so what incident could unite them so much that they would pass this clearly unconstitutional law?
And to me the answer is obvious.
The answer is that They passed this law not to deal with crazy Islamic Muslim terrorists, but to be able to label anyone in the United States a terrorist to deal with them and just take them off the streets during the coming global unrest that will happen here in the US, which I think is inevitable and will happen here very soon.
I expect a total economic collapse in the U.S. very shortly, and then we're going to have all kinds of chaos here, and the government passed this law not to deal with the terrorists, but to arrest U.S. citizens and take them off without having to do a trial or give any justification.
I think that's why you saw 93 senators out of 100 voting for it.
I was previously going to sue the government over the underwear bomber attack for intentional affliction of emotional distress, And I've recently decided not to.
And actually the statute of limitations expired on Christmas Day 2011.
So even if I wanted to change my mind now, I couldn't.
But I wanted to give the reasons why I've decided not to sue.
And there are basically three reasons.
One, in late 2011 the government came out with a bipartisan report called Report on Fiscal Responsibility or something like that.
But anyway, what this was is a bipartisan panel appointed by Obama to study the future of the economy.
And every member on the panel indicated that the U.S.
government would collapse economically in no longer than 24 months.
And this was written in late 2011.
in late 2011, so that puts us in late 2013.
Sometimes lawsuits can take several years, and this would be one that could possibly take several years.
And I've decided it would be better off to take the time we have left, which is now maybe a year and a half, and instead of me spending a great deal amount of time in this case, but to not put it into that, but to put it into making more money and preparing and saving as much money as I can to leave the country as Lori and I plan to leave the country by late 2013 probably, by the end of 2013.
So that's one of the reasons.
Number two was the NDAA.
And not due to intimidation.
I'm not really concerned about the government locking me up.
But my thinking was more along the lines of that the citizens of the United States didn't even care that this NDAA went through.
There should be protests all over the streets.
You know, the government's allowed to lock you up indefinitely without a trial?
It seems like no one even cares about this.
You know, they care more about, you know, whatever, any topic.
You know, losing union benefits in Wisconsin, for example.
You see picketing at the The Governor's Mansion, Wisconsin.
I mean, literally every person in the U.S.
should be out picketing or doing whatever in the streets over this NDA.
There's almost nothing.
So, to me, that was a sign that, do people in the U.S.
really care if I prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the underwear bomber case was a false flag event?
And the answer to me was clearly, no.
So, those two things, as well as number three, which was that every time I went to work on this case, I found that I had to put a great deal more time into it than I thought, and that this case would take probably, if not hundreds of hours of my time, thousands of hours of my time, and I'm already very busy as it is, and I decided that, you know, with myself leaving the country at the end of next year that I wasn't going to commit that kind of time.
Um, into something that people don't really care about.
So that's, those are the reasons that I decided to not file the case.
Not due to intimidation or being paid off or anything like that.
Yeah, Abdulmutallab hasn't been sentenced yet.
He's actually being sentenced two days from now, February the 16th.
And any passenger on the flight is allowed to make a victim impact statement, telling how this matter has affected their life or lives.
And I'll be giving a victim impact statement.
Unfortunately, Judge Edmunds has limited each passenger to only five minutes, so it'll be pretty limited.
But I will be appearing Thursday and giving a victim impact statement.
Obviously I'm going to talk about what I have been all along, which is that I think the media has been lying about this case.
You know, what we're being shown in court isn't really what happened, and that this was a government setup with an intentionally defective bomb.
Now I have to be really careful how I word things, because I'm still a practicing attorney, and I actually practice in the same court on a weekly basis, so I have to kind of restrict what I say to not get me in trouble with the state bar, but it'll be something along those lines.
I'll have a pre-prepared statement.
What made me come forward is that, one, I was very irritated that I almost lost my life on Christmas Day 2009.
And, you know, I'm very irritated over who was behind it.
U.S.
government, for sure, my own government.
And I thought it was important that I come out and talk about it.
You know, I'm used to talking in public.
I do it on a daily basis at court.
I have no problem with people talking badly about me.
They do that all the time.
You know, the other side or whoever.
I have no problem getting yelled at.
I have a pretty thick skin for people talking badly about me.
As far as intimidation, I don't really care.
What is the government going to do to me?
It's not like they can cost me my employment.
It's not like they're more credible than I am.
It's not like they have more evidence behind them in this case than I do.
Frankly, I'm just not intimidated by them at all.
I think it's important that we all come out and talk about it.
If you do nothing and you're intimidated by the government and don't come out and speak about it, you're just going to encourage more of this behavior.
I think at the very least I've awakened a lot of people, people that normally wouldn't think like this, and I've convinced them that my version of events are in fact correct.
I encourage you to do the same that I have and eventually enough people will be convinced that the U.S.
government is entirely corrupt and should be replaced.
You know the next question is how do we fix the problems here?
And I think people that think we're going to do this by vote, by voting out people and putting in You know, people that will honor the Constitution and protect the rights of U.S.
citizens?
I think you're being naive.
I think this is an entirely corrupt organization running things in the U.S.
now, controlled by greed and money.
They're not going to willingly give that up voluntarily, so I don't think things are going to change here by voting, and I think you can see that with the primaries going on now, and Ron Paul, even though a lot of people are holding out their hopes for him, he has no chance.
The media is against him, and there's been allegations of vote rigging in a couple of states already.
And it's just not going to happen.
He's not going to be elected.
And that's the sort of thing you'll see with any candidate that might try and change things.
That's what you're going to get.
And it's just not going to happen.
So I don't think things are going to change.
They're going to get worse and worse and worse until there's total economic and political collapse here and this becomes a total dictatorship?
I don't know.
You're going to see a government collapse very soon though, and it's only going to change due to the people rising up.
And I'm not talking about just blogs or watching shows or whatever, but physically going out and doing things and changing things.
Not through elections.
Since this happened a couple years ago, Christmas 2009, I've really changed my belief in regards to anything that has to do with the government.
I was just a normal citizen before that.
I didn't really have any I was just a regular person, and since this happened, and you can see it from some of my early videos or writings that I made, that I really questioned what happened here.
I didn't come to conclusions right away, but my theory on what has happened has been developed over Thanks for watching!
Where I'm at at this point is that I don't believe the government in anything.
I don't trust them at all.
I think they have some sort of an alternative agenda, which has to do with taking rights away of Americans.
I'm not exactly sure why, but it's definitely there, and it's not for the reasons they're saying to protect you from terrorism, but it's due to alternative reasons.
You know, maybe the coming economic collapse, or maybe to mask that the government wants to take over the world.
I don't know, but you can see pretty obvious acceleration of the loss of our constitutional rights, and you know, I've really looked into these things a lot more since Christmas Day 2009, and again, I don't trust the government at all.
I don't think they're working in the best interest of U.S.
U.S. citizens. U.S. citizens.
Alex Jones here, announcing the first of many trips that I'm going to take across this wonderful United States that we live in.
And we get so busy here at InfoWars.com, the nightly news, the daily radio show, the documentary films, and all the other things we're doing that I tend to never go out and give speeches anymore.
And I've got a lot of ideas bubbling around in my head about the history of the New World Order.
What makes them tick and how to defeat them.
So I'm titling this key speech I'm going to give.
It'll run around two hours long.
Blueprint to Defeat the New World Order.
And we're also going to have a surprise premiere of a short documentary film we've been working on at the event.
First off, I'm going to be going to Dallas, Texas.
Sunday, February 19th, 2012.
To the historic Lakewood Theater.
And the next Sunday, February 26th, I'm going to be in Orlando, Florida.
You can find out more about the events and buy tickets at infowars.com forward slash events.
Now unfortunately, every event I've ever had, we've had to turn people away.
So get your tickets early at InfoWars.com forward slash events.
There's a lot of crazy stuff going on in this world.
The craziest of all is this explosive awakening.
I can't wait to meet you and shake your hand.
I'll see you in Dallas and I'll see you in Orlando.
Infowars.com forward slash events. Infowars.com forward slash events.
Doesn't get any more out of control than that, ladies and gentlemen.
It's pretty un-American, what we're doing here at InfoWars.com.
I mean, not only are we promoting liberty, but we're selling 1776 flags.
Now that...
is Al-Qaeda.
A recent report issued by the UK government calls for the UN to exclusively regulate worldwide geoengineering of the planet as an excuse to combat global warming.
There are numerous patents and scientific proposals that focus around using man-made clouds and dispersal of aerosols to alter the atmosphere.
Discussion of geoengineering technology is often framed as a future consideration, but governments are already conducting such programs at an advanced stage.
We are now joined by Rosalind Peterson of the Agriculture Defense Coalition, which is a watchdog group that monitors uncontrolled experimental weather modification programs and geoengineering.
AgricultureDefenseCoalition.org is the website.
And Rosalind, right out the gate, I wanted to ask you about the calls on behalf of scientists To reduce global warming by injecting the atmosphere with aerosols.
And we know the old saying goes, it's not nice to fool with Mother Nature.
Do you think that the governments are exploiting global warming as an excuse to play God?
I think that they are.
Many of the scientists, and there aren't many really, that are advocating geoengineering or climate remediation, they sometimes call it, But they're talking about solar radiation management, which means that you're going to add particles and gases into the atmosphere artificially to reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching the Earth.
And the idea is to use these schemes to mask the symptoms.
They will have no effect on climate, as far as changing our climate, and they won't have impacts on the weather, except that when you reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching the Earth, It does have an effect on ocean climate and our weather in that means.
And so what's happening is that we are using and talking about these schemes in a way that says that we want to control the entire Earth's atmosphere and that we're going to increase the pollutants and other things that are going to come down from these pollutants, chemicals and particles reaching the Earth.
After a period of time after they're introduced into the atmosphere by the tongue.
Well, I know that President Obama's sciences are.
John P. Holdren, for example, he's a big advocate of geoengineering.
There are proposals to disperse sulfur dioxide to reflect sunlight.
And, in fact, there's an article I'm looking at right now in the London Guardian titled, Geoengineering the Radical Ideas to Combat Global Warming, where leading climate scientist Ken Caldera, he promotes the idea of aerosols, injecting aerosols into the atmosphere.
But an environment loaded with sulfur dioxide, for example, now this is kind of stuff that sounds dangerous.
I mean, isn't that the main compound in acid rain?
Are these mad scientists we're talking about?
Well, yes.
Sulfur dioxide is the component in acid rain that causes tree decline.
And when they talk about putting that into the atmosphere, or aluminum oxide, which is also being suggested by David Keith, They're adding particles and these chemicals into the atmosphere, which are going to come down.
They're going to cause acid rains.
They're going to pollute our air and water.
They're going to cause increasing asthma.
And one of the reasons we took sulfur out of diesel fuel here in California is to reduce the increase in asthma in adults and children across the state of California.
And now we're going to add it back into the atmosphere, supposedly to reduce global warming.
But global warming, as you said, is being used as an excuse to begin to do the testing and research on these programs.
Well, I'm even looking at, you know, I found a quote and, you know, we've got all these different scientists, even Nobel Prize winner Paul Crutzen, he suggested using 747s to dump huge quantities of sulfur particles again into the far reaches of the stratosphere to cool down the atmosphere.
I have a quote from scientist Tim Flannery, where he warns that mankind might not, or they might need to pump sulfur into the atmosphere to survive.
So the world governments and scientists are getting us used to the idea of geoengineering, but we have plenty of evidence that suggests that they've been doing this for a long time.
Am I right?
Yes, we have evidence to suggest that they have been doing atmospheric experiments for a long time.
We have NASA documents.
We have university studies.
We have all kinds of information that this has been conducted over a period of time.
Experimental weather modifications are ongoing in the United States, according to NOAA, and also worldwide as well.
And so there's documents to that effect.
So we are having a tremendous impact on the climate and on our weather.
Well, let me ask you this.
Do you think that some of these experiments have gone beyond the experimental stage and now that they're full-blown, fully operational, covert programs?
Yes, I think some of them conducted by the military are probably covert activities of which we don't know, but there are so many that are public because of the research being conducted on these experiments that we know a lot about many of them I'm going not only here, but in the United States, but around the world.
Wow.
Well, we've only got a few minutes tonight, but before we go, I was hoping you could briefly tell us about the melting of the glaciers in the Arctic and around Alaska.
You posted some very interesting research on your website where it appears that many government agencies and leaders in the United States have discussed how the natural resources of those areas could be exploited if those areas were artificially warmed.
I thought that was very interesting.
I was hoping you could elaborate on that.
Yes, it's been discussed back since the Carter administration and then the Nixon administration that warming the colder areas such as the Arctic and Alaska would allow for the exploitation of natural resources, oil, gas, and other minerals in those areas.
It would be an advantage for the military and also shipping to be able to travel in those areas.
During the winter months when most of the time it's frozen.
And Shell Oil has talked to Charlie Rose a couple of years ago in a program where they talked about being able to get in now that the climate is changing there and things are warming so that they can extract oil and natural gas in the regions.
And now the permits are being approved for them and other companies to do so.
You know, I think I even saw a CNN report on your website that says that shipping lanes are wide open in that area because of climate change.
Yes, that's correct.
And also, there's military threats of engagement as well between Russia and the United States in that CNN report, which I do have on the Alaska section of my website.
And you can really now look and see just exactly how much money and how much they want to continue to artificially warm those areas, because if they froze again, then they couldn't do the exploitation of the oil and natural gas in those areas.
So there's actually part of our government is thinking about and wants to keep this artificial warming that's occurring, partially because of aviation Jet contrails according to Stanford reports and NASA reports that these contrails warm the environment and when you keep those contrails up, contrails produce water vapor, jet engines produce water vapor.
So we're artificially warming those areas and I think it's for financial exploitation of those areas.
Wow, interesting indeed.
Well, we certainly want you to keep us posted on any new developments there.
Meanwhile, I encourage everyone to visit the Agriculture Defense Coalition website.
I mean, it is loaded with valuable information.
It's got all kinds of studies, PDF files, videos, you name it.
I spend lots of time there myself, and I visit the website often.
So, Rosalind, it was great to have you with us.
Take care, Godspeed, and please come back and spend more time with us in the near future.
I will, and thank you for having me on your show today.
Thank you.
All right, well, thank you for tuning in tonight.
Hope you all have a wonderful weekend.
We will be back next week, Monday through Friday, 7 p.m.
Central Time, usually about that time.
We try the best we can.
Until then, good night, God bless, and we'll catch you again next week.
▲
Export Selection