All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 17, 2012 - InfoWars Nightly News
50:34
20121217_Mon_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to the Infowars Nightly News.
I'm David Knight, and it's Monday, December 17th, 2012, and here are our top stories.
Tonight, the sheeple turn in their firearms and beg to live in a North Korea-style tyranny.
Plus, a gun control petition to the White House breaks a new record.
And pro-gun senators say it's time to talk gun regulations.
All that and more up next on the InfoWars Nightly News.
Well, in the wake of the tragic shooting last Friday, there's a lot of talk about guns.
And tonight, we're going to talk about the good, the bad, and the ugly.
We're going to ask, what are guns good for?
What is the bad information that's being put out about them?
And what are some of the ugly things that are being planned?
Well, first, let's start with the good.
This last couple of days, we've seen some people use guns for what they're good for, and that is to protect innocent people and to protect yourself against people who are evil.
And what we've seen is just today there was a shooting where two people were wounded in San Antonio.
Now in this shooting we had, details are not very clear at this moment, but we had someone who ran into a theater, shooting, and that person was stopped by an off-duty police officer who happened to be carrying a weapon.
Now, it appears, although no names have been released, the article says that the officer, in speaking about the officer, said she took all appropriate action to keep everyone safe in the movie theater.
So apparently, you had a female who defused the situation by having a firearm.
And we saw this happen also in Oregon, in Portland, Oregon, at the Clackamas Mall.
A shooter who had killed two people was faced down by a man with a gun.
Now this fellow said that, he said, as I was going to pull down, I saw someone in the back of the Charlotte move, and I knew that if I fired and missed, I could hit them.
So he's acting responsibly as someone who is a sane person and who has been trained in the use of firearms, would be expected to act.
And he said, I'm not beating myself up because I didn't shoot.
I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one that he used on himself.
And Alex Jones actually mentioned that it's not uncommon for shooters, if they've been programmed, to take the end of the event as a cue to shoot themselves.
We don't know what's going on in that event.
That's something that just happened.
But he was faced down and the shooting stopped when he saw a man draw down on him.
Will guns protect?
And that's exactly what retired New York City police detective John Beza told a surprised Fox News anchor.
Here's a video clip.
So we need to take some action.
And as a police officer, I can tell you that what needs to be done is these gun-free school zones, that needs to be repealed.
We have to have protection there.
We have to have the ability for teachers and people on campuses to be able to defend themselves Police detective joining us today with his take on this.
Very different from what a lot of people around the country, sir, are thinking.
They might listen to your remedy and scratch their heads a little bit.
Now, if you watch the full clip, you'll see just how taken back and surprised that Fox anchor is.
He really didn't expect a police officer from Bloomberg's New York to say that.
But he made a very eloquent case that if the teachers, who were brave enough to confront these gunmen empty-handed, if they'd had guns and adequate training, they could have stopped this.
They could have saved their own lives and the lives of many other people.
But unfortunately, we're told just the opposite.
We're told that we should have more gun control because the most gun-controlled areas of the country are where we have most of our shootings, and that is in the schools.
Now, Stuart Rose was on InfoWars yesterday and he talked to Alex Jones and he made this exact same point.
What he said is, it's almost as if we had tied the children up as bait in a gun-free school zone.
Demented people and just know that they're not going to have any resistance if they go into these schools because by federal law they are gun-free zones.
It is not a failure of the Second Amendment.
There's a lot of confusion about that.
And Stuart Rhodes went even farther.
Today he put on the Oath Keeper's site that he and other Oath Keepers would be offering free training for self-defense and use of guns to teachers.
They would offer that for free.
So go to his site and check that out.
Uh, and, uh, recommend that to, uh, teachers.
Hopefully there'll be somebody in your area, a member of Oath Keepers, who will be doing that for teachers.
Now, this is not anything new.
This is something that has been talked about for quite some time.
Going back to 2008, a Texas school district said that they were going to let teachers carry guns.
And they made exactly the same points as the New York City police detective.
They said, when you make schools gun-free zones, it's like inviting people to come in and take advantage, said the superintendent.
And he said, the small community is a 30-minute drive from the sheriff's office, and that leaves students and teachers without protection.
Now, it's not just some school superintendents or gun owners or police detectives who are telling us that we need to have guns in order to protect ourselves.
The person who is most synonymous with non-violence, Mahatma Gandhi, also said the same thing.
You'd be surprised, but in a Natural News article, it says, Gandhi advocated the right to bear arms.
That is, the use of violence to defend innocence against bullying oppression.
And this is a quote from Mahatma Gandhi.
He said, "I do believe that where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence," said Gandhi.
He said, "When my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed, or whether he should have used his physical force, which he could and wanted to use and defended me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence." I told him it was his duty to defend me And he finishes up in one more quote here from the Natural News article.
He says, a man who, when faced by danger, behaves like a mouse is rightly called a coward.
Not knowing the stuff of which nonviolence is made, many have honestly believed that running away from danger every time was a virtue compared to offering resistance, especially when it was fraught with danger to one's life.
As a teacher of nonviolence, I must, so far as it is possible for me, guard against such unmanly belief.
Self-defense is the only honorable course when there is unreadiness for self-immolation.
Now, I'm not ready for self-immolation.
I'm not ready to set myself on fire to make a point.
I'm not ready to commit suicide.
My purpose is to protect myself and innocent lives around me.
And that's what guns are used for.
That's what they're good for.
Now, we also have some bad news.
We've got a lot of bad information that's being put out in the press and elsewhere.
We have a demonization of guns.
The mainstream media has declared war on the Second Amendment.
And that is an article from Melissa Melton on Infowars.com.
It has a lot of quotes and headlines, and there are just too many to go over.
But we have one in particular that I think was a very egregious interview by an anchor at CNN.
His name is Don Lemon.
And let's go to that interview right now.
Yes, we need to address mental health.
But mental health in this particular issue, let's not get it twisted, is a secondary issue.
Who needs a bullet-piercing, bullet-piercing, armor-piercing bullets?
We need to get guns and bullets and automatic weapons off the streets.
They should only be available to police officers and to hunt Al-Qaeda and the Taliban and not hunt elementary school children.
Well now, maybe Don is speaking from the heart.
He seems to be sincere, but he's very misinformed.
But we should remember that he's also working for CNN, so what he is saying may be deliberate here.
But listen to some of the stuff that he says.
Who needs armor-piercing bullets?
Well, certainly not the shooter.
You know, by the way, it's our government that bought hollow-point bullets, which are much more damaging to people than armor-piercing bullets.
Hollow-point bullets have been outlawed by Geneva Convention, and they're only purchased by governments to use against their own people.
They don't use them in a war.
There wasn't any armor to pierce.
There weren't any bulletproof vests to pierce.
If you have hollow-point bullets, that is much more damaging to be shot by one of those than by an armor-piercing bullet.
And it's our own government that bought 1.6 billion rounds of armor-piercing bullets within just the last few months.
Now, listen to some of the other stuff that he says.
He says, let's ignore mental health.
Well, of course, because that doesn't fit in with the gun control agenda, and that's what this is all really about.
And he says, surprisingly, that police and military should be the only ones with guns.
Now, pull up this last screen here, and let's take a look at this.
Freeze it on the very last frame here.
And you see what he's got.
As he's making this pronouncement that only our benevolent government should have guns in order to protect us from Al-Qaeda, there's a news scrolling underneath that says, landmine kills 10 girls in Afghanistan.
That's right.
That's our good government.
Using landmines to kill 10 girls in Afghanistan.
But of course, that doesn't matter because they're not American girls, they're Afghanistan girls.
And we really shouldn't worry about that.
And we really shouldn't worry about the 168 to over 200 children, just children alone, that have been killed in drone raids authorized by President Obama and President Bush.
Now we've also got some other headlines here in the media's war on guns.
We've got MSNBC asking, is the American public ready for gun control?
Politico says, the price of the Second Amendment, as if the price of the Second Amendment is the death of a lot of innocent children.
The Christian Science Monitor said, Madison never meant the Second Amendment to allow guns of Sandy Hook shooting.
Well, the Second Amendment is about the right to keep and bear arms, and no one was allowed to keep and bear arms in schools.
So that's not, truly isn't, what the Second Amendment was about.
The Second Amendment, if practiced, if put into practice, would not have allowed what happened in Sandy Hook's school.
But we also got Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox News, as well as some other outlets, chiming in on this.
His newspaper, The Sun, in the UK, said, Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of freedom?
Well, no.
As I just pointed out, there was no freedom in that school to protect people, to keep and bear arms.
He also says in the same article, there were other teachers who reassured their students by saying, wait for the good guys.
They're coming.
Well, that was exactly the point of the police officer, Beza, Who said that you need to have guns because the police can't get there in time, frequently.
I've had that personal experience in my own life.
And after that happened, I vowed that I would never call 911 again and rely on somebody else to come.
It was a situation where the police station was just a few blocks down from where the incident was occurring.
And they didn't arrive there for over a half hour.
By that time, it was irrelevant whether they got there or not.
And they also said in the UK paper, The Sun, that this is another Dunblane.
Well, Dunblane was a school shooting in the UK, where 16 children were killed.
And the aftermath of that, they got all handguns.
All handguns were confiscated in the UK and destroyed.
And what happened to gun crime?
It skyrocketed.
Paul Joseph Watson has a very good article on that.
I suggest you go to Infowars.com and look at the archives.
And then we have Rupert Murdoch himself tweeting, we should have the courage to ban automatic weapons.
Well, automatic weapons were not used in this shooting.
There's a lot of misinformation, a lot of bad information about what was involved.
We also have MSNBC chiming in.
Ed Schultz says, a Glock pistol qualifies as an assault weapon.
Well, we'll see that there's a lot of confusion about assault weapons in just a moment when we get to Feinstein's proposals.
And he also writes on Twitter, Ed Schultz, write all the feel-good laws you want.
It's the confiscation of these types of weapons that counts and will have an impact.
There you go.
He's calling for full-out confiscation of firearms.
That's really what they're looking for.
Well, in addition to that, we've also got the media demonizing homeschoolers and preppers in terms of criticizing This fellow's mother, who they are quick to point out was a homeschooler, and they're quick to point out that she was a prepper.
There's headlines in both the Telegraph in the UK as well as Salon.
What is a prepper?
What is this strange thing called a prepper?
Who are these strange people that think that they have a right to provide food for themselves in case of an emergency and have the right to protect themselves in case of an emergency?
Who are these strange people?
Next we go to Americans now have been turning in their guns in droves.
We have people in Brooklyn, San Francisco, Oakland, Evanston, Illinois, Baltimore.
All these people are giving up their guns because they are so frightened about these evil things.
But there's a little bit of misconception.
Maybe we could get Mike Adams to help us with that and clear up exactly what makes guns so dangerous.
This is a video from Mike Adams of Natural News.
Hi, this is Mike Adams of NaturalNews.com asking the question, do guns kill people?
Now, I love my liberal friends on issues like GMO labeling, and support for organics, and even things like decriminalizing marijuana.
But recently, my liberal friends have been telling me, guns kill people.
This is a very popular meme, apparently, across the internet.
Guns kill people.
And I find that very interesting because I've been carrying a gun for years, but it's never killed anyone.
So I thought today we would take a look and put a gun on the ground and film it and see if we can answer the question, can a gun kill someone?
This is my Glock.
And this Glock has never killed anyone.
God forbid it.
Hopefully we'll never be engaged in such an action.
Ready?
Kill! Kill! Kill, kill, kill, kill, kill, kill!
Kill!
Oh, I know what you're thinking.
It's not loaded.
Alright, let's make sure it's actually loaded.
Show you the magazine.
There's the mag.
Rack it, tap it again.
Boom!
It is loaded.
And amazingly, it's still not killing anyone.
Maybe it needs a magic wand.
Let's try the magic wand.
Shoot something!
Shoot!
Fire!
Kill!
it's just not working what a pathetic firearm Huh?
I know what you're thinking.
It's not a real gun.
Oh!
You're wrong!
It is a real gun.
And guess what it took to actually make it shoot?
It took a human being, touching the trigger, making a decision to pull the trigger, in a safe direction by the way, there's a backstop over that way, and actually having a conscious being do that.
The gun didn't kill anything all by itself.
Now, I know what you're thinking.
Maybe handguns don't automatically kill people, but maybe shotguns do!
Take our Benelli M4 Tactical Shotgun, which is another essential piece of equipment on just about any ranch.
It's also great for home defense anywhere.
Let's see if we can make this shoot by itself.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Shoot, shoot, shoot, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Shoot, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Shoot, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
What a pathetic shotgun.
I know the safety's on.
Ah, there we go.
Now it should shoot, right?
Now it'll kill something.
Go, go, go.
Now some of you might think it's not loaded 'cause I haven't pumped it.
That's because it's an M4.
You don't pump these shotguns, folks.
They're semi-auto.
Oh, semi-auto, yeah.
Obama says I don't need a semi-auto shotgun, therefore I shouldn't have the right to own one.
Okay.
What a pathetic shotgun.
Let's see if it's actually going to shoot.
That's going to kick a little bit.
Oh!
I guess it is actually.
I guess it will shoot when you pull the trigger.
What do you know?
And yes, it was pointed in a safe direction with a very large backstop and nobody around.
So there we go.
The shotgun will only shoot or kill if a human operates it and makes a decision to actuate a finger.
Well, this finger.
to do the shooting action.
So just like an automobile, which is a lot more dangerous than a shotgun, an automobile can mow down 20 or 30 people all at once, if the driver is sufficiently insane to make that happen.
But wait, I hear you say, assault rifles must kill people!
If handguns don't kill people and shotguns don't kill people on their own, maybe assault rifles will kill people!
Like this one.
A little ACR with the ACOG sight.
Let me get it all prepped and everything.
See that?
We are loaded, ready to rock.
Let's start with the Magic Wand on this one.
Because we need a little extra magic.
Shoot.
Shoot.
I'm not waving hard enough, I guess.
Shoot!
Shoot something!
For God's sake!
You little ACR.
Pathetic rifle.
Shoot something!
That's ridiculous.
I know.
Let's throw stuff on it.
How about some zeolites?
Shoot!
Shoot!
Let's hit it with something.
Oh Oh, crap!
I put a pretty big hole in that bag.
Shoot! Shoot! Shoot! - Good.
Damn it!
Pathetic assault rifle.
Won't even kill anything by itself.
Maybe it's not even functioning.
Let's find out.
Oh, I guess it's functioning.
If the user wants to pull the trigger.
Once again, in a safe direction.
Okay, so there you go.
There you go.
I couldn't make any of these guns kill people, or even just shoot dirt.
Unless I made the decision to pull the trigger.
Now, Obama says you don't need an assault rifle, therefore you shouldn't be allowed to have one.
Well, that's a great argument for Adolf Hitler in 1937?
8?
9?
in nineteen thirty seven eight nine because if the jews had had this then not as many of them would have been gassed in the gas chambers First you disarm the population, and then the government commits genocide.
Yeah!
So whatever you think about guns, recognize, number one, that guns don't kill people, and number two, that if guns are taken away from citizens, the government will have a monopoly on this.
And whoever has a monopoly on this will, as history has shown, eventually enslave the other group and commit genocide.
And that's what you really need to know about guns.
Well, as Mike Adams said, a car can also be used to kill people.
As a matter of fact, close to where I lived in North Carolina in Chapel Hill, that's exactly what a disgruntled or crazy student did.
He drove a car deliberately into a crowd of people.
So we shouldn't forget that anything can be used for that.
We shouldn't forget the person behind the gun.
That's really the point of Mike Adams' video.
It's the person behind the gun and that's what Don Lemon of CNN was trying to get us to forget.
He was trying to get us to forget the responsibility of the person behind the gun and the fact that there can be evil people behind a gun or crazy people behind a gun or there could be good people behind a gun.
That makes all the difference in the world.
But we shouldn't forget who's behind the legislation.
We've talked about what guns are good for.
We've talked about a lot of the bad information being put out there about guns.
Now let's talk about some of the really ugly stuff that's being planned for us.
Well, first of all, the gun agenda people wasted no time in setting a record for a White House petition In a short period of time, they got 155,000 signatures on a White House petition in just a couple of days, reports USA Today.
And Democratic operatives have been urging Obama to seize the initiative and to use attacks, as Rahm Emanuel says, never let a crisis go to waste.
They've been urging him to seize the initiative on attacks.
Back in 2010, Chris Matthews said that Obama needed to take advantage of a massacre to get fresh momentum behind his presidency.
They said he has to find some way between now and November to demonstrate that he is a leader who can command confidence.
In short of a 9-11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can't think of how he could do that.
Well, he's taking their advice now.
He's getting out in front of this and he's using this tragedy for political purposes.
As Alex Jones said, it's rather ghoulish to see how quickly people have exploited the deaths of these innocent children to achieve a situation that Is going to put a lot of people at risk and could destroy our freedoms, as Mike Adams points out.
Well, what sorts of things are they going to do?
Well, Dianne Feinstein has proposed a new assault weapon ban.
Well, what is an assault weapon ban?
Well, the Washington Post, of all people, doesn't really know.
They said, and everything you need to know about the assault weapons ban, they said, what counts as an assault weapon?
Well, the trouble starts here.
There is no technical definition of an assault weapon.
There are fully automatic weapons and there are semi-automatic weapons.
And complicated flowcharts were used to lay out exactly what an assault weapon was when they were banned, that gun ban that ended in 2004.
Certain models of AR-15s and AK-47s were banned.
Any semi-automatic rifle with a pistol and a bayonet mount was an assault weapon.
But a semi-automatic rifle with only a pistol grip would be okay.
It was complicated.
And its complexity made it easy to evade.
It also made it easy to entrap people.
Because it was not very clear, but look at that.
If you have an AK-47 or a semi-automatic rifle with a pistol grip and a bayonet, it's an assault weapon.
But if it doesn't have the bayonet mount, it's not an assault weapon.
I mean, it is strictly what makes the liberals afraid.
It's very arbitrary.
An assault weapon is a meaningless term.
Totally arbitrary.
And the truth is that they were only used in two to eight percent of gun crimes.
It had absolutely no effect on gun crime when they did the assault weapon ban.
Now, Joe Dedame Manchin, if you remember, this is Senator Manchin.
He used to be governor of West Virginia.
When he ran in 2010, he ran as a strong pro-Second Amendment candidate.
And now that he's a Senator, even though he's a Democrat Senator, he's now talking just like Dianne Feinstein.
He says, I believe this is a time for all of us to sit down and move in a responsible manner, and I think the NRA will.
And if Dianne Feinstein is saying basically that assault weapons, I don't know anyone in the sporting or hunting arena that goes out with an assault rifle.
I don't know anybody that needs 30 rounds and a clip to go hunting.
I mean, these things, these are things that need to be talked about.
Well, he's basically sounding like a standard Democrat.
And yet, remember, this is somebody that the NRA gave an A rating to.
And the NRA is very concerning.
They've been AWOL since all this stuff happened.
They have been silent on Twitter.
Even reportedly, as USA Today says, they took down their Facebook page.
Now this is not the time for gun owners or people who advocate gun freedom to run and hide.
And I hope the NRA gets some backbone and starts doing something about this.
And actually, Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America, as well as the National Association of Gun Rights, have both pointed out that in the Brady Bill, Jim Baker, the NRA, was quoted by USA Today as saying, we already support 65% of the Brady Bill back when they passed it.
And it was the NRA that wrote the instant check portion of the bill.
So we have to not overly rely on any one organization to stand up for our freedoms, and we have to stand up for our freedoms ourselves.
Now, another ugly thing that's coming along is there's actually, in Arkansas, there's actually an armed task force is being used to patrol the streets.
In Greene County, Arkansas, the police chief says, police are going to be in SWAT gear, and they're going to have AR-15s around their neck.
If you're out walking, we're going to stop you.
And we're going to ask why you're out walking.
And we're going to check for your ID.
Now, that's exactly what Stuart Rhodes said in his conversation with Alex Jones yesterday.
When Alex Jones talked to him about the constitutional implications, Stuart didn't start talking about legalese or the fine points of the Second Amendment wording.
What he said is, it comes down to two different visions of America.
One is, like this place in Arkansas, where we have martial law.
And in that America, you're not going to be allowed to move anywhere freely.
You're going to have something like the TSA everywhere you go, coming at you.
And you're not going to be allowed to protect yourself.
Well, there's also another vision of America, and that's the one that the Second Amendment gives us.
That's the one we're allowed to move about freely, where we're presumed to be innocent until proven guilty, where we're treated with dignity, and where we're allowed to have the tools that we need to protect ourselves and our families.
And that's the America that is worth fighting for.
Now this has been taken up, this entire newscast has been taken up with news about this tragic shooting and the tragic ways that it is being misused by the media and by gun control advocates.
But we do have one more piece of news here that is very important.
We just had to put this in here.
Pediatricians are now calling to keep thimerosal in vaccines.
Now, thimerosal, if you don't understand, is mercury.
They want to keep mercury in the vaccines.
A mercury-containing preservative, rarely used in the United States, should not be banned as an ingredient in vaccines, U.S.
pediatricians said Monday, in a move that may be controversial.
In a statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics endorsed calls from the World Health Organization committee that the preservative, thimerosal, should not be considered a hazardous source of mercury that could be banned by the United Nations.
Now, to put this in context, this is the same group, this American Academy of Pediatrics, is the same group that just prior to the Proposition 37 vote in California, that, if you recall, was a proposition that would allow truth in labeling on food products there, so that you would know that your organic food really wasn't organic if it was genetically modified.
Just before that election, this same organization, the American Academy of Pediatrics, came out and said that organic food really wasn't important to give that to children.
You really didn't need to have organic food.
So the same people say that pesticides on your food is okay, now say that mercury in your vaccinations are okay as well.
And I just have to interject a personal note.
I was told when I went to get contacts, I hadn't used them for a number of years, I was told by my optician that, well I told him that I couldn't use them because the cleaning solution with thimerosal just made my eyes go blood red the minute I put them in.
And he laughed and said, well thimerosal has mercury in it, that's been banned in eye drops for a long time.
So they banned it in eye drops because you can see the results immediately for many people But when they put it in vaccines, you don't see those results for quite some time, and they might manifest themselves in some, not only, sometimes it's immediate reaction that people have to vaccines, but many times it's a very delayed reaction that is not easily traced to the source.
So just keep that in mind when you're thinking about vaccinating your kids, that the American Academy of Pediatrics thinks that mercury is just fine for them.
Well, we're going to be coming up right after the break with an interview with someone who is a Michigan State Representative, and we're going to be talking to him about the Feinstein Amendment, as well as an anti-NDAA amendment that was passed in Michigan.
Now, Dianne Feinstein likes to masquerade as a protector of individual rights, and yet she's the one calling for assault weapons bans, and she's also the one who basically created a beard For the 2013 NDAA.
We'll talk about that right after the break.
Recently the Harvard School of Health looked at more than a dozen scientific studies concerning fluoride and confirmed what countless other scientists have been documenting for decades.
Sodium fluoride in the body reduces IQ and increases cancers.
You see, the aluminum industry and the fertilizer industries would have to pay to store all the toxic waste they produce.
But instead, they get our counties and cities to pay to put the poison in our water.
It's not just fluoride we're getting, but lead, mercury, arsenic, the list goes on and on.
And a lot of this toxic waste comes from China.
Unfortunately, fluoride and its derivatives are only one of hundreds of toxins being added to our drinking water.
We're battling the globalists on so many fronts.
Health is an area where we can all take control of our lives.
And it all starts with that basic building block of water.
It is time to purify our family's water.
The ProPure filtration system with added fluoride filters is the best system from my research to protect you and your family.
Infowarsstore.com already has the lowest prices on ProPure water filtration.
But until December 10th, we are going to offer 15% off the already lowest price.
I know what I'm giving my family this Christmas.
ProPure.
Go to InfowarsStore.com and get 15% off the already lowest price out there with the code WATER15.
15 water one five and you get 15 off at infowarsstore.com christy hightower here for a planet infowars update uh I know it's been a little while, I apologize.
We have moved studios, we've expanded, there's been a little bit of a shift going on.
So I just want to make this real quick.
We've had several contests actually, starting with the Bob Costas, thinking that he is, you know, end-all to end-all.
Saying that the Second Amendment should be restricted.
Well, the mission, actually, that I want to talk to you about is a Planet Enforced mission in the resistance group.
And guns causing crimes is like spoons causing you to get fat.
So the mission is for everyone to send a letter to Bob Costas and send him a spoon.
And the contest actually is videotaping yourself writing a letter Now, obviously, there's a little humor in here, so I hope to laugh.
I expect to laugh at some of these.
And send him a spoon, because we just want him to have piles of spoons.
How ridiculous his comments on the Second Amendment were.
So go take that.
Go take that and make me laugh.
And then the next, actually, that I wanted to talk to you about is in the Infowar video reports.
And this we had here in Austin, Texas, the Drone Mob, where we used the hashtag on Twitter, Drone Mob.
And basically, if you were there and you filmed, we want you to go and edit your video.
It doesn't even have to be that long, but whoever has the best drone mob video is going to win $1,000.
So both of these are video contests.
Both of these are just you getting active.
I apologize if you couldn't make it to Austin, but hopefully we'll be getting to do more cool events like this in the future.
And also there's actually on InfoWars.com, there's more about the drone mob contest and exactly the deadline is the 21st and I want to say it's at midnight.
So go check out those details.
And get those awesome videos in because people need to know what we're up against.
The drones are not a joke.
This isn't going away.
This is an awareness campaign.
So keep that in mind as well.
And lastly, on a little lighter note, this has kind of been an ongoing romance.
I've actually mentioned these two before.
Um, Herbick07 and Lady Liberty are both Planet InfoWars users and, um, they sent me their picture!
They actually have visited each other several times now and, um, I want to say probably six months or so.
And they actually met in the Freedom Lovers group there on Planet Infowars, so it can happen to you, and since we're all moving into the holidays, and it's cold, you want somebody to cozy up with, especially people that understand and believe and are aware like you are.
So go check that out.
It's not a dud, I promise.
You can find love in this patriot world.
So thank you again, Planet InfoWars users, for all you're doing.
Hopefully we'll get an Ask Alex segment here soon.
Keep up the great work and keep talking because we're listening.
Alex Jones here with a message that could revolutionize health in this country.
Going back about a year and a half ago, I began to learn about the incredible health effects of longevity products.
Erin Dykes lost 92 pounds.
We're going to show you some before and afters.
Aaron, break down what happened.
Your story.
I've worked really hard with diet and exercise to try to lose weight, but I just didn't get the results.
It just didn't happen.
Then I saw what you were doing with Infowarsteam.com.
I wasn't even trying to lose weight, but I got it because I wanted to feel better energy.
I wanted that nutrition.
Didn't even understand how that could kickstart my own weight loss goals.
But the products did that for me.
I found myself suddenly losing weight, more energetic, wanting to exercise, wanting to eat the right foods, and they don't even advertise it as weight loss!
I want to challenge our radio listeners to go to Infowarsteam.com.
Sign up as a distributor and get wholesale pricing discounts at InfoWarsTeam.com.
InfoWarsTeam.com
Representative Tom McMillan from Rochester, Michigan.
Now, Representative McMillan introduced in the Michigan House a bill that passed unanimously, 107 to 0, basically limiting some of the provisions of the NDAA Act.
That happened just two days after the Senate passed the new NDAA Bill of 2013.
So I want to get his take on that.
Representative McMillan.
Thank you for joining us.
Sure.
Thank you.
It's not too often you see a bill pass unanimously.
That was pretty impressive to see both parties come together to take a stand for some aspects of liberty.
Absolutely.
You know, in the hearing that I had on my bill, I chair the committee it went through, and Justin Amash and the ACLU were sitting next to each other.
And I, you know, it's got left and right, you know, people who really care about liberty are coming together on this.
Yeah, it shouldn't be a left-right issue.
I mean, there shouldn't be any party that's against liberty and due process.
But it was really distressing, I think, for a lot of us, including me, to see a nearly unanimous passage in the Senate of the NDAA bill last year.
They've walked that back a little bit.
Just two days before your bill passed unanimously in the Michigan House, the Senate, the U.S.
Senate, passed unanimously another NDAA bill, this time with a Feinstein Amendment.
And let me read you the text of that.
An authorization to use military force, a declaration of war, or any similar authority shall not authorize detention without charge or trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the U.S.
apprehended in the United States unless an act of Congress expressly authorizes such detention.
What do you think about that?
What's your take on that?
You know, and I'm sitting in the Michigan legislature.
My close friend, Justin Amash, I know I've read some things that he feels that that unless, you know, the NDA is that unless.
I mean, from what I can gather and, you know, I heard the word similar or similar.
So, I mean, it sounds to me like we and states need to continue to stand up and defend our citizens.
So next year, I'll be doing the same thing as I did this year based on The information I can tell they could still take away our due process.
Right, right.
Yeah, his take on it was basically he thought it was a head fake I think is what he actually wrote on Twitter or Facebook.
Because it really doesn't, you know, he pointed out that, well, the act of Congress that they're going to refer to is the authorization for the use of military force going all the way back to 2001, as well as the NDAA itself.
Those are both acts of Congress.
But I guess, you know, what I had Stuart Rhodes on from Oath Keepers yesterday, and we were talking about this, and Stuart Rhodes' take on this is that it assumes powers for the Congress that they don't have.
They don't have the right to pass an act that takes away our due process.
Yeah, I mean, I'm glad that people like you and Amash and others are shining a bright light so that people like myself and I hope every legislature should be standing up for their citizens in every state.
But, you know, we've got to hit this thing head on before it just keeps expanding and eventually is used.
So, no, I agree that we've got to be very particular and very loud.
You know, I think my legislation, which is in the Senate, it's on second reading today and it very well could pass.
Tomorrow is our last day of the year, so I'd have to reintroduce next year.
So we're trying to make sure it gets through.
Oh, so you don't think it will pass this year?
It'll have to be reintroduced next year?
Well, it came out of the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday unanimously.
It's on the Senate floor.
I just talked to a senator who's getting phone calls from his constituents saying, get this thing passed.
And it's on second reading on the agenda, so it very well could go through second and then final passage either today or tomorrow and hit the governor's desk.
Well, one of the things before we get off of the Feinstein-Lee amendment I thought was interesting was Rand Paul's proposed amendment was essentially a restating of the Sixth Amendment, stating that the Congress didn't think that that was, you know, basically getting that restated so people don't get the impression that the Congress thinks that they've repealed the Sixth Amendment, which a lot of us get the impression that they think they have.
And I think it's interesting that his amendment, that just restated the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, Was not the one that they voted on.
It was this much weaker one from Feinstein, which basically, it didn't do anything to protect us from Posse Comitatus or the military acting as police.
It didn't do anything to guarantee due process for persons.
It just talked about citizens, but the Constitution talks about any persons.
Sure, sure.
so there's a lot of issues with this feinstein amendment very very weak compared to the rand paul statement and and it's interesting that the senate shied away from endorsing the sixth amendment yeah um...
you know it's it is it's um...
we saw this last year i think when you know justin and others made a big uh...
big deal about the two thousand twelve and the a There was an amendment that basically did nothing, and everybody went home and said, we did something.
And I actually talked to a congressman who Yes, exactly.
Now the bill that you've got, is that House Bill number 5768?
and said, well, with that amendment, I was fine.
Yes.
But, you know, you see this a lot where there's, you know, cover that they think that, you know, they pass a meaningless amendment and then they can claim that they've stood up for freedom.
So it's when we've got people like yourselves and just and others, it's able to make sure that people understand what's really going on.
Yes, exactly.
Now, the bill that you've got, is that House Bill number 5768?
Yes.
Okay, I'm looking at the text of that.
And what that bill says is basically that no agency of the state, employees or political subdivision or Michigan National Guard members would help.
The armed forces of the U.S.
in any investigation, prosecution, or detention of any person.
Based on that section of the NDA, right?
Yes, right, right.
Yeah, exactly.
So, now is there anything in the bill that would prohibit or penalize any federal actors if they violate the rights of Michigan citizens?
In other words, does this interpose the You know, I didn't, and I know there's other states trying to get something like that through.
I think it's Missouri or somebody, but I don't know that that could have gotten through.
I really patterned it after Virginia.
I was able to say, look, Virginia, the governor signed it, so it's not that radical.
We're merely saying that our sheriffs and our police and our authorities are not going to assist in doing this.
That's as far as we went.
Right, right.
So they're not going to assist, but they're not put in a position where they need to resist.
Yeah, I mean, I hear you and I understand the interest, but it's one thing to say we're not going to assist, and it's another thing to say that we're going to lock up federal agents.
I think that there's going to need to be more groundswell of support if there's an interest in going that direction.
I understand.
Well, we'll see what will happen because we've got a bill that's He's going to be introduced here in Texas by a state representative that actually does that.
It does interpose the state as protecting the citizens of Texas against federal encroachment.
And he basically goes back and references habeas corpus, posse comitatus, as well as about five or six amendments of the U.S.
Constitution that the NDAA and the authorization of the use of military force kind of attack essentially directly.
Well, I really appreciate it.
Yeah, no, I appreciate that.
But I'm thinking in Texas, the TSA, they tried to do that and couldn't get it through.
So it'll be interesting to see the debate because I have a TSA bill similar to where you're going to basically say that you will lock up People that are, you know, assaulting citizens.
So it'll be interesting to see the debate there in Texas.
Right, yeah.
There's actually, exactly, there's two criminal provisions in there.
One of them is one year and $10,000.
The other is six months and $5,000.
So they've got some teeth in it.
So it'll be interesting to see what happens.
And actually, the TSA bill is coming back as well.
So we've got both a TSA bill and we've got an NDAA bill.
So we're not giving up down here.
You said you've got a TSA bill that's coming up.
Tell us a little bit about that.
Well, no, it's still in committee.
I've been trying to get it out of judiciary, but it's You know, it's patterned after, I think, Texas or others.
So we'll be watching, and it certainly is helpful when one state moves in a direction and others can say, look, you know, this is what that state's doing.
So I'll be watching closely.
Yeah, the TSA bill got a lot of support when it was in the House.
It was some shenanigans that were played by the Lieutenant Governor in the Governor's office once it went to the Senate.
So, you know, initially it looked like it was going to pass in the Senate as well last time.
But he's also added some provisions, and at this time, to protect children, because that's something that's a real concern, and David Simpson, the representative that put that in, was talking about it, got really touched about a case of an autistic child who was taken away from his parents and started screaming, man on boy.
I mean, it's just horrible, the kinds of things that our government feels like they can subject us to at this point.
I agree.
So, well, I certainly wish you luck in getting both of these bills through and moving the ball a little bit in that direction.
However far we can get it, we'll take it and keep coming after them.
Sounds good.
Okay, thank you very much.
Appreciate your work.
Thank you.
Well, it'll be interesting to see what happens in Michigan.
Of course, as we pointed out, that bill does not actually interpose the Michigan state authorities to protect the citizens of Michigan from encroachment by the federal government.
But at least it doesn't have the Michigan authorities participating with them.
So, the NDAA problem has not gone away.
The Feinstein Amendment did not take it away.
And the bills out of Michigan and Virginia don't take it away.
But it'll be interesting to see what happens with the Texas bill.
That one's got some teeth.
So that's really where the fight's going to be.
So stay tuned.
And if you want to find out what's going on with that, you want to check into PrisonPlanet.tv for all of our reports and updates on this and other issues.
We have a special Operation Wake the Sleeping Giant.
You can get 10 subscriptions, actually 10 simultaneously streaming subscriptions to PrisonPlanet.tv.
That means that you can actually hand out more because most of them probably won't be watching at the same time, but you'll find a lot of good content there.
It helps our operation.
I'm David Knight.
▲
Export Selection