All Episodes
Previous Next
April 5, 2013 - InfoWars Nightly News
01:19:30
20130405_Fri_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you.
Welcome to the InfoWars Nightly News.
I'm David Knight and it's Friday, April the 5th, 2013.
2013, here are top stories.
Tonight, is America headed to the new police state?
Or just obliviously repeating history?
And, David Knight sits down with a former prosecutor who wants to legalize marijuana?
All this and more on the InfoWars Nightly News.
Well, this is big breaking news.
At least it's news to me.
Anybody that's been watching Obama for the last four years, he says that he is constrained by the system our founders have put into place.
Paul Joseph Watson covers a story here.
He says, during a speech in Denver, Colorado, President Obama remarked that his gun control agenda was constrained by the system our founders put in place, as he lambasted Second Amendment advocates who argued gun ownership is a means of protection against government tyranny.
He said, you hear some of these quotes, I need a gun to protect myself from the government.
We can't do background checks because the government is going to come and take my guns away.
Well, the government is us.
These officials are elected by you.
They're elected by you.
I am elected by you.
I am constrained as they are constrained by a system that our founders put in place.
It's a government of, and by, and for the people.
Well, as Infowars has documented, and as restates in this article, Obama has flagrantly violated the Constitution in all manner of different ways, from undermining the power of Congress, an act of treason according to Congressman Walter Jones, by insisting his authority came from the United Nations Security Council prior to the attack on Libya, and that congressional approval was not necessary, to accepting rotating status as a chairman of the UN Security Council, which is a direct violation of Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8 of the Constitution.
And actually, that's just an abbreviated list, of course.
You know, he's been doing secret assassination lists where he denies people due process, even American citizens abroad.
He signed the NDAA and said, oh, don't worry, I won't use it.
I won't use the new power that I've given myself and other presidents.
Well, you know, it was Thomas Jefferson that said, in questions of power, trust no man.
He said, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution.
Well, that means they have to actually obey the law that they've sworn an oath to.
They actually have to pay attention to things like the First Amendment and the Second Amendment and the Sixth Amendment that guarantees our due process.
But what Obama has done, as he did last summer with the Immigration Act, when he finds that he can't get support even amongst his own fellow Democrats, his own political party, what he'll do is an end around the legislation.
What he'll do is just sign something into law, as he did the Immigration Act.
And now we see Homeland Security, as we showed last week, licenses in North Carolina are saying legal presence for illegal immigrants on the driver's licenses being issued by the state of North Carolina.
And that is done under the direction of the Department of Homeland Security, which is implementing Obama's dictatorial orders.
We also see that gun control, in my opinion, is being enacted by non-legislative means.
He's going around Congress again, using Homeland Security again, to try to buy up ammunition so that we effectively can't use our guns.
There's another way to do gun control.
Well, if you want to see what government looks like when it's out of control, If you want to see, think of any dystopian movie that you've seen.
1984, Brazil, even Clockwork Orange, something like that.
Take a look at this clip.
I can't breathe!
i can't breathe!
that's about as disgusting as police brutality and a police state get.
If you think you can trust people because they work for the government, that they're from the government, therefore they're here to help you, Watch that video.
Watch it in its entirety.
It goes on for a very, very long time.
This is worse than the protesters that were being sprayed in the face in California.
I think it was Berkeley.
Some university in California where the cop, the security guard just walked along and sprayed them in the face as they were sitting there.
This guy is constrained.
And this is what happens.
This is the article.
1984's Room 101.
Video from U.S.
prison shows inmate held down and pepper sprayed at close range.
And from the tape it says, you're never going to win.
The guy who's spraying him says, the bottom line is, the house wins every time.
That's what Maine Correctional Center Captain Sean Welch said to a prisoner who was strapped into a restraint chair, his face coated with pepper spray, and his legs shaking in pain and fear.
And in the video, we see Schlosser immobilized in the restraint chair and surrounded by officers in riot gear.
He remains compliant until one of the officers pins Schlosser's head to the back of the chair.
He responds by squirming and then spitting at the officer, and without warning, Captain Welch suddenly coats his face at close range with pepper spray.
From a canister that is only intended to be used on large crowds at a distance of 20 feet or more, according to an investigator's report.
Schlosser chokes, fights for breath, pleads, I can't breathe, that's what you just heard in the clip, I can't breathe, Captain, but Welch does nothing.
Instead of following accepted professional standards and rinsing away the liquid, he puts a spit hood on Schlosser and effectively traps the pepper spray against his face for over 20 minutes and refuses to let him wash the burning spray from his face and eyes.
Now unfortunately, what happens is...
There's no discipline for this officer.
As it says in the article, the Maine Department of Corrections has closed ranks to protect this officer.
And now, what they have done instead of prosecuting him, or getting him out of the force, what they have said is, they need to find out how to keep videos like this from leaking to the public.
That's their response.
Let's just don't let this kind of stuff get out anymore.
You know, there are good cops, and there are good prosecutors.
And we're going to be talking to one later in the show, Jim Girak from Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.
We need to have honest officers and cops.
And there was some honest officer or cop in that prison who leaked that video.
There was some whistleblower who leaked that.
That guy ought to get a medal.
Instead, he's going to be in a lot of trouble.
He may not just get fired.
Those are the kind of guys that might kill him.
They might beat him up.
They might arrange for him to have an accident.
That's the kind of guys those are.
And you know, just because you put on a uniform, that doesn't make you morally superior to other people.
If you're a bad guy and you put on a uniform, you just get worse.
So we need to have some good officers who are going to stand up like the whistleblower who released that.
So when we see things like this, we have to ask ourselves, are we falling into the same kind of tyranny that we've seen over and over again throughout history?
Well, Alex Jones takes a deeper look at this very question.
I want you to listen to me very, very carefully.
Because we are all in grave danger.
A dire warning for every man, woman and child, not just in the U.S., but worldwide.
I have studied the 20th century.
And I've studied tyrannies that came before it.
And the exact pattern followed in Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Communist China, the list goes on and on.
The exact pattern that was followed in those nations is now being established here.
Do you think in Nazi Germany, the first six, seven years of the Nazis, that it was in the news that oppressive bad things were happening or that people were disappearing?
No.
Do you think from the time that Lenin was in power and decades later Joseph Stalin, do you think it was in the Russian news That the government was being oppressive and sending people to gulags and taking their children for minor offenses.
No.
The state-controlled and state-run media was promoting it as a good thing.
Now we've talked a lot about how millions of veterans are getting letters saying you have to turn your firearms in.
No judge, no jury, no psychological evaluation, no nothing.
Turn your guns in.
Others are being raided without warrants, their guns are being confiscated, they're being put in psychiatric facilities and are being billed for it.
And then being told you won't be released unless you sign papers agreeing that you're mentally ill.
I've interviewed them.
You've seen it in your local news.
It is a purge that's happening.
The hospital, my primary care physician called to have a wellness check placed on me.
And the local police perform a wellness check.
Well, the local police came up and there was nothing wrong with me.
I had no, um, you know, there was no anxiety.
I wasn't, uh, competitive.
Uh, I basically, but I wasn't, I wasn't with anybody.
So I had no witnesses and they didn't have a warrant.
And they, uh, through intimidation, forcefully, uh, commandeered my vehicle and entered my home, searched and seized my weapons.
And then, you know, carted me away in an ambulance to a psychiatric evaluation, which I was held for 72 hours.
And Homeland Security says veterans, returning veterans, are the number one terror threat, when statistically they have one of the lowest crime rates.
This is a group being demonized.
You've seen where Illinois has tried to put people in jail for life.
For filming or taping police in public, something completely protected under the First Amendment.
75 years behind bars.
A prison sentence that long is rarely handed down, and it's usually just for murderers or rapists.
But a local man faces 75 years in prison for a non-violent crime.
What he's accused of doing is something many people have done, but most don't realize it's actually illegal.
It's a felony if you tape it.
You guys are publicly recording.
A dozen states are using eavesdropping and wiretapping laws to arrest people who record audio of law enforcement without their permission.
I'm not shutting it off.
And now ladies and gentlemen there's a new case where a family reportedly went to a anti-government rally and so the police raided them over it and found marijuana and so because they allegedly had marijuana with their children their children were taken by the government.
Now the family got their children back At gunpoint, allegedly, and have fled, and the CNN headline doesn't even say it's the parents.
They just say that anti-government people have taken children from a home, and there's a Amber Alert.
These signs are up right now.
An Amber Alert has been issued by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
Police believe Chase and Cole Haken are with their parents, Joshua and Sharon Haken, who police are calling armed and dangerous.
Then they talked to the neighbors in the local newspaper there in Florida, and they said they were such a nice family, such sweet people.
We don't know what happened to them.
Well, they have the normal mammal instinct to protect their children.
The boys were taken from their grandmother's house in Lake Magdalene.
That is in Hillsborough County.
According to investigators, the couple lost custody of the two boys after an anti-government rally in Louisiana.
Right now, this family is, quote, on the run, but there's another chapter to all of this.
They are waiting for a judge to sign off on a search warrant before going inside.
Once they do, and hopefully soon, they're going to be finding some clues, they hope, about where Hagen and, more importantly, his children, where they might be.
The local newscasts go and show an Infowars.com bumper sticker when they talk about anti-government to try to associate people that realize we have an occupational government with collaborators running it of foreign banks that have taken over.
Trying to associate those of us that are real Americans and are aware of what's happening with terrorism or kidnapping children.
Anti-government people steal kids, kidnap kids out of home, don't say it's their parents.
By the way, these parents are both engineers With no criminal records in an upper middle class area.
Police across the state searching for two young boys.
Officials issued an amber alert yesterday.
They believe the children were kidnapped by their own father.
The police were targeting people that went to a tea party rally, this is all on record, and supposedly found them a marijuana.
Ladies and gentlemen, they're going to take your children.
Think of the ultimate crime of that, from good families, over marijuana.
We're also learning some new details about the family.
The father, Joshua Haken, was arrested a year ago in Louisiana on drug charges.
Amber Alert Search continues for two boys abducted from grandmother's home by anti-government parents.
And the headline shouldn't be anti-government people grab kids out of home.
It should be authoritarian government kidnaps children over petty pot charge and parents fight back.
This is how they're going to disappear, everybody, from marijuana, or being anti-government, or filming police in public.
This is how tyrannies work.
In the first phases, they just start arresting people and throwing the book at them because they love liberty.
Later then, they start arresting people en masse.
But only after they have their national ID cards and their cashless society.
And that's what's now going into place.
Homeland Security is the foreign army.
It is the fifth branch of the U.S.
military under foreign globalist control, openly saying veterans, conservatives, libertarians, gun owners, Tea Party people in the fetters are terrorists.
Well, you know what?
We're not terrorists.
The globalists are the ones funding Al-Qaeda worldwide in Libya and Syria.
They're the ones using Al-Qaeda to menace us, to then set up a police state and take our rights.
And they're now claiming, don't worry about Al Qaeda, worry about the American people.
You're seeing an authoritarian criminal takeover.
They're going to push us and push us and push us until we stand up against them and then they're going to call us terrorists.
Then they're going to blow up federal buildings and say, we did it, to try to get the general public in a cowardly fashion to go along with it.
And I want to tell the cowardly public something.
Giving into this tyranny ensures they're going to take all your private pension funds, your public pension funds, and your bank accounts.
That's now all being announced.
And so go ahead and serve it.
You're going to bring in our destruction.
Your cowardice, your sheep-like behavior invited every wolf on the planet to come here to feed on the joke that America's turned into.
I want America to pull up, to stop trusting government, and to get in the face of these bureaucrats, and to take action against them politically before it turns into a physical shooting war.
And if you don't like that, you're not an American, because that's what this country was founded on.
Now back to InfoWars Nightly News.
InfoWars Nightly News.
That leads us to our quote of the day.
It's from Ronald Reagan and he says, "From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule.
That government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people.
But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?" Well, that really is kind of a repeat of something that James Madison said.
Reagan kind of rephrased it in more contemporary language.
James Madison, one of the founders, said, if men were angels, no government would be necessary.
But if angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls of government would be necessary.
In other words, yes, we're not angels, but neither are the people that we put in government.
So we have to watch them.
As Jefferson said, we have to bind them with the chains of the Constitution, and we have to keep them ultimately accountable with an armed citizenry.
That goes back to the first thing we're talking about tonight.
I like Ronald Reagan, but you've got to remember that Ronald Reagan threw the Second Amendment under the bus with the Brady Bill because he had a friend who was hurt and he wanted to help him in some way.
We're also living with his legacy of the drug war, of zero tolerance, of mandatory minimums.
We saw things like giant budget deficits for the time that we're still living with, precedents that were set, deals that were struck, things that made Ron Paul, who was the earliest supporter of Ronald Reagan, resign in disgust in 1986.
So, I like what Ronald Reagan says, but we have to, as he would say, trust and verify.
We have to look at what he actually did.
And that's the way history should judge us.
Now, coming up, we've got a couple of articles about the shootings.
And that all ties in, really, to gun control.
And we're going to show you in a second article just how that ties in.
The first one, however, says, confirmed the Batman shooter James Holmes was on psychotropic drugs.
Yes, yet another mass killer on violence-causing antidepressants.
Newly released court documents confirm that Batman shooter James Holmes was taking the antidepressant drug Zoloft before he conducted his massacre in an Aurora theater last year, underscoring yet again the prevalent yet underreported connection between psychotropic drugs and mass shootings.
And while it was known that the prescription medication was seized during a search of his property, it's just now that we're realizing that the prescription medication that they found was Sertraline, a generic version of Zoloft.
Now, Zoloft is the same psychotropic drug as the article mentions that Columbine killer Eric Harris was taking before his rampage.
It has also been connected to more than 1,000 suicides and hundreds of episodes of manic aggression.
Mania and aggression, I should say.
And Lou Rockwell writes, how much longer are we going to find scapegoats among innocent gun owners and video games and not look at the real thing that connects all of these incidents, the underlying substance that's there, and that is these psychotropic SSRIs, serotonin reuptake inhibitors, That is a common thread.
Not some particular gun, not some particular kind of ammunition, or the number of magazine, the size of the magazine clip.
None of that is the common thread.
The common thread is the drugs.
And yet, these are drugs that are approved by the FDA.
These are drugs that most of the television industry depends on for the majority, or at least a large chunk of its revenue.
You can't watch television without seeing one pharmaceutical ad after the other, and they are not about to criticize this and look at what is really behind these shootings.
But even if you don't believe that James Holmes was the shooter, and many of us are suspicious that perhaps maybe he wasn't.
Maybe he was just this patsy that showed up there.
And there's a lot of evidence to support that.
Still, Zoloft could be very useful in controlling a patsy, for example.
Now, this next article, The Problems with Sandy Hook Elementary Massacre, actually looks at the Sandy Hook Elementary Massacre, and he does something that's a little bit dangerous.
He not only points out the contradictions and anomalies, but he also suggests exactly how he thinks it happened.
Now, this is a huge article.
It's about 43 pages, but it is well worth a read.
And this is what Andrew S. McGregor of TheRebel.org says.
He says the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, the FBI and the BATF were all engaged, involved in the planning of the moves to bring about the required changes once the State Department had initiated moves with the UN and that is to ban guns.
And he says the modus operandi was to follow the successful moves orchestrated by the National Coalition for Gun Control led by Rebecca Peters in Australia and Philip Alpers in New Zealand in the late 1980s up to 96.
The preliminary moves, he believes, were made in July of 2012.
The American State Department, under Hillary Clinton, was in discussions with the U.N.
in regards to an arms trade treaty.
And if you recall, just before that happened, they had the, as that was coming up, a week before it was to go to a vote, that was when they had the Aurora shootings initially.
And then he says, the plan required a double whammy, a second and more heart-wrenching massacre, so as the Obama administration could say that it had the required changes to the Constitution then permitted back in July 2012, then this kind of massacre, like Sandy Hook, would never have taken place.
Well, I believe that this narrative has been crafted, as he says, for quite some time.
There's evidence going all the way back to 2009 that one of the first things that Obama did was to start to try to constrain the supply of ammunition.
And one of the ways that he did that was to initially say that they were not going to recycle brass that the military had used, once used brass, into the private sector.
And now we see that it's gone full circle, and they're even using the Department of Homeland Security to try to dry up sources of ammunition.
But there was another key component to that, and that was Fast and Furious.
Fast and Furious was all about the transfer of arms across borders, and they wanted to make sure that people were scared about that.
And the follow-up, the piece of legislation that was going to follow up on that was the UN Arms Trade Treaty, which, surprise, is about Not allowing small arms and ammunition to cross borders.
But as we know, as CBS News and other mainstream media have even reported, Fast and Furious was a false flag operation.
And in my opinion, the first shooting was an effort to try to pull that back.
They had lost that narrative.
They were being attacked by the Republicans on partisan grounds, because Republicans also have been involved in these same types of operations.
But they were being attacked on partisan grounds for political gain just before the election.
And they had the Aurora shooting one week before the U.N.
Arms Trade Treaty was supposed to take place.
And what they said they were going to do was Delay that again until after the American election.
Well, it was on the very day of the election that the UN met.
They met the same day we had our election and said, we're going to get back to this in March.
And now it's March.
It's actually past March.
And what they did was they passed it.
And we see a struggle going on in the Senate with Rand Paul and others who are trying to fight this.
And yet, we see Obama with his extra constitutional, non-legislative means trying to enact gun control.
But I want to get back to this article.
And this is the kind of information that this guy digs up.
It's really worth your while to read this.
Now listen to this quote.
He says, This abrupt ending, now this is just going through the narrative of the story, he goes in and talks about, from the very beginning, he lays his background as we just talked about here, but then he also talks about the very specific contradictions of what happened, because you know, if you remember, there were several stories that kept resurfacing the first day.
We had video clips that contradicted official stories.
I'm going to pick this up just a little ways through the shooting, and he says, this abrupt ending of the massacre is extremely telling.
It tells us that the gunman was able to listen in on the police communications and learned that the report to 9-1-1 had occurred as expected.
However, the report was of, quote, shots being fired, unquote.
Not of children being murdered.
So, the emergency dispatcher, instead of calling for the emergency response team at Carmel, or that would be the SWAT team, Simply gave the call to local police, who were able to respond so quickly that they almost caught the fleeing gunman.
And as it was, the gunman had 45 seconds to finish his shooting, leave the school building, get into the waiting escape vehicle, which was a red maroon van, registration number 872-YEO, which the first police responders saw leaving the school and requested details.
That just gives you an idea of the kind of detail that he goes into here in examining these contradictions.
It's well worth your time to look at that.
Even if you don't agree with his conclusions, you need to look at these contradictions and anomalies and think about what's going on here and how it just fit perfectly in the overreaching, the overarching scheme and timing of all these other things that were happening.
Looks very orchestrated from the larger view down to the lower view.
We've got an article here from Paul Craig Roberts talking about the assault on gold.
And he says, for Americans, financial and economic Armageddon... Oh, watch out, because that's the word that they used, the Hawken family used, and they accused them of being a death cult.
But he says, for Americans, financial and economic Armageddon might be close at hand.
The evidence for this conclusion is a concerted effort by the Federal Reserve and its dependent financial institutions to scare people away from gold and silver by driving down their prices.
He says the Federal Reserve used its independent banks, too big to fail, to short the precious metal markets.
And by selling naked shorts in the paper bullion market against the rising demand for physical possession, the Federal Reserve was able to drive the price of gold down to $1,750 and to keep it more or less capped there until recently, when a concerted effort on April 2-3, 2013, just a couple of days ago, drove gold down to $1,557, and silver, which had approached drove gold down to $1,557, and silver, which had approached $50 per ounce in 2011, down to $27.
And he points out in this context that the Fed is printing a trillion dollars and paper currency a year.
This is why people are going to gold, and this is why, even with the illegal manipulation of the market by the Federal Reserve, gold is still a good investment.
Because eventually, this paper money that the Fed is printing at the rate of a trillion dollars a year, the same thing is going to happen to it that once happened to paper money at the time of the American Revolution.
They had a phrase, not worth a continental.
Because that is exactly what they did at the time of the American Revolution.
As they got their independence, they started printing money during the war, and it was absolutely worthless.
And the founders had a memory of that, just as Germans have a memory of the Weimar Republic.
That's a much more recent memory.
And they're very concerned about just printing paper currency without any restraints.
But Americans have lost that memory.
And we are going to see that it is not gold, which is looking kind of bubbly, and that's what the Fed said.
You'll see that in this article.
It is not gold that's looking bubbly.
It is paper currency from the Federal Reserve.
Now we got a clip here from Jeremy Irons.
We don't necessarily have to have celebrities endorse the truth, but it's always interesting to see a familiar face, and especially even someone from England, point out the faults of the nanny state.
Here's that clip.
Are you a proud smoker?
Are you a libertarian when it comes to these sorts of things?
I'm a complete libertarian.
I think it's very, very dangerous and I really mean that.
I think the smoking ban is the tip of an iceberg of society, the leaders of society telling us how to be.
I think it is not their business.
But it's the tip of the iceberg, because it's an attitude.
It's an attitude where the governors think, we know what's best for people, and they're so stupid they will only not do it if we ban it.
Bloomberg's nanny state is a laughingstock of the world, and Jeremy Irons nailed it just right.
But you know, it's not really any difference in principle between telling people what size drink they can have, or if they can smoke a cigarette, and telling them that they can't smoke marijuana.
Or sending them to jail for a mandatory minimum of 10 years because of a certain amount of marijuana they possess.
Or, as we saw yesterday, taking the children away from a family because they possess a small amount of marijuana.
In principle, these things are all the same.
We laugh at Bloomberg's nanny government.
But a lot of the same people who laugh at Bloomberg will accept the idea of drug prohibition.
They don't see that they're fundamentally the same.
You know, they've been very successful in breaking us into two camps, into this left-right paradigm, into two different cultures.
One culture sees that there is a difference between, that it's very dangerous to have gun control, but then they embrace drug prohibition.
The other group says, oh, I want gun prohibition, but I don't think drugs should be prohibited.
Neither of these two groups really see the underlying freedom principle that's involved here.
It's a very dangerous thing.
And it's not just destroying the lives of people who engage in this activity, like the Hagen family.
It is also destroying our economy.
It is destroying our system of government.
It is destroying our personal freedoms of even the people who don't use these prohibited substances.
That's what's behind the War of Prohibition.
The war, as I call it, the War of Drugs.
Because it's not a war on drugs, it is a war of drugs.
They're using drugs as a weapon against us, against our economy, against our Constitution and our freedoms.
And we've got someone coming up after the break, I don't want you to miss, his name is Jim Girok, he's with Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.
This is a man who was for 43 years a prosecutor, and he saw, he was a prosecutor before drug prohibition started, before Nixon started his war on drugs, and he saw that come in, he saw Reagan go in with his mandatory minimums and his zero tolerance and his building prisons everywhere, and he saw that none of this, none of this worked.
And he saw the damage being done to society, the absurdity of this, the failure of this, and he's going to tell us, as a former prosecutor, how ridiculous this is.
We're going to talk about that right after the break.
Stay tuned.
Jakari Jackson here, and I want to talk to you for a second about water.
You know about ProPure, our flagship water purification system, but check out some of our portable water filter products at InfowarsStore.com.
The Clearly Filtered Water Pitcher.
Also, for those of you on the go, we have the Athlete Edition Filtered Water Bottle.
And, the R.A.D.
Eliminator Pro-Filtered Sports Bottle that removes radiation.
And keep in mind, we have replacement filters for all of these products.
The ever-popular grab-and-go bag favorite, the LifeStraw.
The Crystal Quest Shower Filter System.
And the Aquapod Kit, great for mass storage of water.
And while you're at the InfoWars shop, pick up a copy of our latest book, 31 Days to Survival.
You can find all this and more at the InfoWarsStore.com, and don't forget it's your support that funds our operation.
Sign up for our free newsletter at InfoWars.com forward slash newsletter.
I'm Darren McBreen and these are some of the new items that are available now at InfoWarsShop.com.
Alert the public to Obama's blatant abuse of power with the new Obama t-shirt.
Obama's joker face on the front and come and take it on the back.
It's time to publicly call him out for what he is, a tyrant.
Defend the Second Amendment with our top seller come and take it t-shirts.
And look at that, women's cut tank tops and t-shirts now available.
Nice hat.
Plus, the Don't Tread On Me flag.
And now, you can become a micro-distributor of the Infowars magazine.
Plus, get your own cop delivered right to your door each and every month.
And if you're tired like I am of you and your family being exposed to polluted drinking water, get the Pro-1 High Performance Water Filter.
It gets rid of all pathogenic bacteria, cysts, fluoride, heavy metals, and numerous other contaminants.
So join the revolution at InfoWarsShop.com.
Well, our guest tonight is someone who's had 43 years of legal experience as a prosecutor with the government, working in Chicago's Cook County, prosecuting working in Chicago's Cook County, prosecuting drugs.
And he has seen the failure of drug prohibition, and we're going to talk about this case that's going on right now, because it's at a personal level.
What's happening to this family?
How their lives are being destroyed over possession of a small amount of marijuana.
And then we're going to pull that out to a much larger picture, and we're going to talk about where this is all coming from.
Our guest tonight is Jim Geerak.
He's with LEAP.
That's Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.
And Jim attended a conference of the UN in Vienna in March.
And he's going to tell us what the UN is trying to do with drug prohibition.
Welcome, Jim.
What do you think about this crazy story that's going on in Tampa?
David, it's good to be with you.
I read this story in the Tampa Bay News, and it's really an outrage.
Here we've got Tampa dead on the run after kidnapping sons.
And it's a case where our war on drugs has converted a mechanical engineer into a kidnapper of his own two children, ages two and four.
The kids in PJs.
The story so offended me that I wrote my own headlines for the story.
And rather than complaining about the parents or the father, I think the complaint should be against American drug policy.
And the headline should read, parents kidnap kids from grandma.
Grandma refuses son-in-law use of family car.
Florida turns engineer into criminal and drug war nullifies parentage.
That's right.
It's absurd.
It's amazing that they could take their children away from them for possession of what is reportedly less than a gram of marijuana.
You know, here in the state of Washington, we've got public officials standing on the podium endorsing marijuana, marijuana legalization, marijuana sales.
We have presidents of the United States.
We have Supreme Court justices who have used marijuana.
And here we're going to criminalize some engineer and his family for trying to recover his two children because an idiotic prohibition law ...has turned a father and a mother, or at least at the moment a father, into a criminal, a burglar, a kidnapper, an armed and dangerous crazed person for trying to recover their children.
And don't forget to add to your list our own president, who has admitted that he smoked quite heavily.
I didn't say presidents, I certainly included Barack Obama.
That's right.
And I didn't inhale President as well.
That's right, Bill Clinton, that's right.
But you know what I'm really saddened by is to see how the media as well as the police departments have hyped this.
We're seeing media headlines saying that they had narcotics in the presence of their children and dangerous drug paraphernalia, you know, like rolling paper or a pipe or something like that in the presence of their children.
It's absolutely insane and yet Marijuana is a big part of the war on drugs, isn't it?
Isn't it more than half of the people that are incarcerated are marijuana charges?
Marijuana is medicine.
Marijuana is what's being approved by voters for medical purposes across the United States, around the world.
We have prohibition in place that according to a recent report, the Drug Threat Assessment 2011 in the United States, Mexico produces 21,500 tons of marijuana a year.
As I sit here in the Chicago area in front of my computer screen, a Mexican drug cartel came in and two miles from my home planted 6,000 marijuana plants.
We go down the road about two miles, and the following summer, they plant 4,000 marijuana plants in the McGuinness Woods.
My daughter lives on the north side of the city of Chicago, and they had a 4,000 plant seizure.
These huge seizures of drugs are evidence of the drug war failure, not of drug war success.
And it just shows that drug war causes what it was designed to prevent.
We intentionally try to drive up the price of drugs so that these commodities end up the most valuable commodity on the face of the earth, encouraging people to supply more and more drugs which are uncontrolled and unregulated thanks to our war on drugs.
And I call it the war of drugs.
Because it is something that benefits not only the drug pushers and the organized crime families, but it's something that benefits government from top to bottom.
It gives them authorization to do all kinds of civil liberties violations.
It lets them create massive bureaucracies.
And we had an article that just came out this week, a couple of days ago, from Russia Today, saying that a million have died from Afghanistan heroin drug production that is 40 times higher Since NATO went into Afghanistan, and that the Afghanistan that we control, that the U.S.
military controls, is now producing 90% of the poppy-based drugs throughout the world.
David, 82% of Americans recognize that the war on drugs is a failure.
It's been in place because of the United Nations Treaty since 1961.
It's been in place in the United States since Nixon declared a war on drugs in 1971.
And yet, even though it's failed and 82% of the people know it's a failure, nonetheless it's still in place.
And someone has to ask the question, why?
People know it doesn't work.
Law enforcement knows it doesn't work.
And the answer to the question is because the good guys are riding the drug war gravy train just like the drug cartels and the street gangs are.
The good guys and the bad guys are on the same side of the line of scrimmage.
Al Capone was in favor of prohibition.
The drug cartels are in favor of prohibition.
The street gangs are in favor of prohibition.
The good guys who built the prison so that it was the fastest growing housing in the United States during the 1990s are in favor of prohibition.
The 100,000 policemen Clinton said we gotta hire because we got so much drug prohibition crime are in favor of the war on drugs.
The communities and the cities and the villages and the chiefs of police are in favor of the war on drugs because they get to forfeit the drug dealers' riches and make them their riches.
Yes, absolutely.
Without a trial.
So, without a trial.
And then you wonder about why would the TV and the media in Tampa cover this absolutely crazy story about the father kidnapping his two-year-old and four-year-old with the help of the mother.
It's absurd.
It's because $400 million a year in anti-drug money goes to TV and radio stations to put anti-drug messages on.
I don't know if that explains the ridiculous coverage, but the TV and the radio and the newspapers in Florida should be all over the drug war with two feet with a stranglehold around anyone who supports drug prohibition in this war on drugs that, number one, causes what it was designed to prevent, i.e.
puts more drugs uncontrolled and unregulated everywhere.
Secondly, it's the heart of the guns, the gangs, the crime, the prisons, the terrorism, the deficits, the healthcare crisis, the bullet holes and uninsured kids.
It is the war on drugs which is public enemy number one.
A war on drugs favored by the United States when we go to the United Nations like this commission on narcotic drugs in Vienna.
Before we get to that, Jim, it is such an amazing failure.
It's so much worse than the original prohibition against alcohol.
We never had a situation with alcohol where they took people's children away from them because they caught them with a little bit of bathtub gin.
We never had a situation then when these people grab their children and try to run and the media sensationalizes it and demonizes these people to the extent that what it's something that is already a tragedy.
Here these people's lives has already been destroyed and now they may literally be destroyed.
They may be shot and killed because they've labeled them as armed and dangerous.
They call them anti-government terrorists even though the people in Louisiana said there was no anti-government rally.
And then they say that they're perhaps death cultists because the word Armageddon was used and yet we know from postings of this guy that he's a secular atheist.
You know, he's not part of any religious death cult or anything.
So they're creating this narrative, sensationalizing this, and instead of examining this and looking at this and saying, how did we get to this point?
How did this small amount of marijuana that is so widely used, as you pointed out, so many people who are in very prominent positions have used, so many people throughout this country have used, do we really want to say that it's okay to destroy these people's lives for that?
David, our drug policies in the United States, this prohibition, zero tolerance drug war is insane.
It causes heartbreak, heartaches, breaks up families, destroys neighborhoods, criminalizes, the wife of this guy is a civil engineer, he's a mechanical engineer, these are the people who are the best in math, the smartest people, and so they're smoking some marijuana in the front yard or hotel room, so what?
Exactly.
So what?
Exactly.
You mentioned the difference between the prohibition of alcohol during the 30s, which Al Capone still thanks us for, and here in Chicago especially, but the difference between that and the war on drugs.
The difference is, and the reason the war on drugs has been so much more harmful, It's because you needed capital to go into the alcohol business because it was a bulky substance.
You needed trucks and warehouses and you needed money for those things.
But in the war on drugs, we enable any kid with a pair of gym shoes and a pistol to go into the drug war because you can put a tremendous amount of money worth of drugs into a pocket without it being a bulge.
Absolutely, absolutely.
And certainly there are drugs that are harmful.
We're not saying that we are pro-drug.
What we're saying is that the way to stop that is not through prohibition, but the way to stop that is through churches, through counseling, through other means that the community has.
You know, you don't hit everything with a hammer.
You know, there are certain things that it's not appropriate for government to try to solve.
We need policies in place that have people deciding themselves that I'm not going to use drugs.
Not because the government tells me not to, but because I have decided it's not a good idea.
And because I'm going to use self-discipline and self-born intelligence and not use drugs.
Absolutely.
I am a former drug prosecutor.
I have never used an illicit substance.
I am opposed to drug use, but I am heartily more opposed to the war on drugs, which is the heart of the deterioration of the morality and life standards here in the United States and around the world.
Absolutely.
I'm in the same situation.
I don't use drugs, never have used drugs, and it isn't because the government prohibited it.
It isn't because the government told me that they would lock me up.
It's because I knew I didn't want to use it.
And it's never stopped anybody on the basis of don't do it because the government says don't do it, or because the government may lock you up.
But let's take it to the bigger picture now.
Let's go to the United Nations.
You were just at a recent conference in March in Virginia.
Tell us about that.
In Vienna.
The United Nations Headquarters for the Commission on Narcotic Drugs is in Vienna, Austria.
Sorry, I was thinking Vienna, Virginia.
But go ahead.
Vienna, Austria.
Very good.
And there's some 185, roughly, nation states that have entered into three prohibitionist treaties.
The first one in 1961, the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.
And then there were subsequent treaties in 1971 and 1988.
These three United Nations treaties are the foundation of prohibition for the world.
They are the foundation of drug war for the world.
The 1961 Convention requires the nation-states who are parties to the treaty to go back to their countries and to criminalize the list of drugs contained in those treaties.
And that list of drugs, of course, is ever-growing and includes the old standbys of cocaine, heroin, marijuana, PCP, angel dust, the new ecstasy, date rape drugs, pages and pages of drugs.
So now, Article 36 of that single convention on narcotic drugs says that the countries have to go back and not only criminalize them, but to provide for prison sentences And for the deprivation of liberty, for the violation of the terms of the treaties and the criminal laws that are required to be enacted.
So when I went to Vienna from March 11th to the 15th for the week-long conference, I knew that when the representatives of the world effectively ratified those three treaties, they were Mandating that the horrors of drug war continue for another year worldwide.
So even though in Mexico they're killing over 60,000 people since Philip Calderon had taken office, and of course he's now out, Uh, but it is prohibition that is causing those murders.
In Chicago, we have columnists that are writing that we need to start using drones to police the 100,000 gang members who are fighting over the control of drug turf here in Chicago.
Wow.
Yeah, it's exactly what, here again, just like the U.N.
Arms Trade Treaty.
We see the United Nations creating a set of laws and trying to impose those in different areas.
Drugs is just another area where they're doing it.
And it is the United States that has one of the greatest say in what the United Nations does do and doesn't do.
And there are about 17 countries that are really the leaders in this prohibition movement that require us to continue to criminalize drugs.
And it's the heart of the deterioration of morality worldwide, where people don't care about one another, where we have taken the golden rule and shredded it, where somebody gets caught with drugs and the answer to their predicament is, forget about your fellow man, Rat on the guy who sold to you.
Put the blame on them.
The antithesis of the Golden Rule.
Yes.
And now we wonder how somebody can come up and empty a gun and somebody laying on the ground.
Well, it doesn't matter anymore because we don't care about the other guy.
Absolutely.
We care about how much money can we make in this zero tolerance idiocy.
And if I can just throw in that there's a conference going to be held on April the 17th at a college a short distance from where I'm sitting.
And the former head of the DEA is going to be one of the speakers.
And this person who, as far as I'm concerned, is responsible for this horror story of drugs everywhere, crime and violence and gangs and corruption and overflowing prisons and the inability for our country to pay our bills.
He's going to be over here giving a speech on the harms of marijuana, along with his partner, a doctor, and I don't want to use the names, and these are people who are now making money by selling drug-free workplace things to the Fortune 500 companies of America, who are profiting off of the disaster which they created.
That's absolutely absurd.
I was just looking at an article.
Marcos, do you have that article I sent you about the health risks of marijuana versus Other drugs that are FDA-approved?
I mean, it's ludicrous the difference between, you know, when you look at the death rates of those.
Maybe I didn't send you that article.
No one has ever died from marijuana, ever.
Absolutely.
There we are.
We've got the chart right there.
Zero deaths from marijuana.
You look at all these other drugs, most of them legal, and you look at the Tremendous number of deaths that are there.
And yet you're talking about former DEA heads.
There was just a recent article from the Huffington Post that former DEA heads are calling for the nullification of Colorado and Washington marijuana laws, of course, along with the United Nations calling for that.
So both the United Nations and these DEA heads are all calling to nullify this state law that was passed by a majority of the people.
Sure.
And every one of these people is feeding at the trough of drug war.
Yes.
I mean, it's law enforcement, it's the treatment community, it's the prison builders, it's the people who are gobbling up the media money and the anti-drug ads, it's the people who supply the prisons, it's the people who are running the shelters.
Every single person who's going to be speaking at this thing, three of them, on April the 15th, are all making their living off of The drug war.
Off of servicing people who are addicted to drugs.
Drugs that are everywhere.
My own high school kids that live in my area now have heroin in their well-to-do schools.
It's easier for the kids to buy nickel and dime bags of heroin than it is to get a beer.
Or a package of cigarettes, because those substances, which are dangerous, you can't buy them because the licensee is worried about losing their license if they sell to persons of non-age or outside the rules.
But with a drug war in place, it's the cartels and the street gangs that set the rules.
What can be sold?
How strong will it be?
How will it be packaged?
No, there won't be any labeling.
What will it be cut with?
We don't know.
There's no regulations or standards.
We've got people that are overdosing because they don't know what they're consuming.
We've got people who, friends, their friend falls from drug use and is on the ground and they're worried about taking him to the hospital for fear that they're going to be arrested for a conspiracy or cooperating in the providing of the drugs or using of the drugs.
You know this so well because you've done this for decades.
You saw how it worked.
You were a prosecutor in Cook County and I guess you got into it initially thinking that you were going to do the right thing.
You're going to stop drug use through interdiction and you saw how it worked over time.
Is that correct?
David, I was a prosecutor in Chicago in the early 70s, and we didn't have a drug problem to speak of in the early 70s.
The Vietnam War was in play, and we had soldiers who were using marijuana and heroin.
So those were problems, but they weren't really a huge problem in the United States until we started the war on drugs.
Until 1971, Nixon said, we're going to get tough and we're going to prosecute drugs.
The best heroin in Chicago in 1970 was 2% pure.
Jump forward 40 years of drug war, the kids are now using 90% pure heroin.
How does that make the kids safer?
Yes, and we saw the same thing happen with alcohol prohibition.
We saw the concentration of what was prohibited go up and the danger accordingly go up because it's kind of an economic issue.
They want to move around the most concentrated potent forms of it.
Sure.
The highball was invented during prohibition of alcohol.
It didn't exist.
You'd bring the flask and you'd buy a 7-Up and you'd pour the booze into it.
And now today we've invented crack.
It didn't exist until we found out you could take the powder and then with a little recipe and not much work.
You could make it into larger quantities in a smokable form, which is one of the most addictive means by which a person can ingest a substance.
Because by inhaling, it's the quickest way to get the drug to the brain.
Absolutely.
And I have to wonder at the efforts that we see, again, being led by the United Nations with this arms trade treaty, the efforts at gun prohibition.
Because guns have always been a large part of prohibition.
Once we do that, I can expect that we're going to see the same sorts of things.
We're going to have even less control over firearms, and we're going to see all kinds of new, imaginative, dangerous weapons that it's going to increase exponentially, just like we saw the potency of alcohol go up, the potency of all forms of drugs go up after We're going to see some really potent firearms if they're successful in creating a prohibition of that substance, because it's just natural.
It happens with anything they prohibit.
David, with regard to guns, we need to take away the reason that people are shooting one another.
That's right, and that's the key.
In Chicago, the superintendent of police says 80% of the killings are from gangs fighting over the control of drugs.
Exactly.
Doesn't that tell us something?
So, if you want to talk about the control of drugs or you want to talk about guns, you need to take away the reason that the people are using the drugs and why the people are buying and using the guns.
Yes, absolutely.
And those are harder questions to answer, but those get to the heart of what's wrong.
You can't, by increasing penalties and punishment and building prisons and just saying no, reform what's in people's heads and what's in people's hearts.
Absolutely.
We've seen that played out in real life, haven't we, over decades.
Well, thank you so much, Jim Geerak.
Thank you for speaking out in integrity over what you've seen over decades.
You've been there before this all started.
You saw it as it grew, as it changed, as they tried Uh, pouring it on harder and harder as you talk about Reagan's zero tolerance and just saying no.
They've tried throwing every kind of forceful interdiction to it and it just keeps getting worse and worse.
And the absurdity of it with this family is just one of the final straws, hopefully for people to wake up.
Thank you for speaking out and telling us what you've seen, because you've been there, you've been on the inside, and you have a wonderful perspective.
You've seen how this has failed from a law enforcement perspective, as well as your fellow colleagues at Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.
I tell everybody to go there.
What's the website again?
what's the website again www.leap.cc and there's another one, cops against drug that's an alias of legalized drugs Cops say legalize drugs.
There you go.
Leap is easier.
Just put in leap.cc.
There you go.
Okay.
Thank you very much, Jim.
Appreciate it.
Great to be with you.
End the war on drugs.
Legalize, control, regulate drugs.
Thanks.
Yes, absolutely.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
Well, there you have it.
There are no controlled substances.
There's only controlled people.
And where's that control coming from?
The United Nations.
Just as we see with gun control, with Agenda 21, with so many issues.
It is the United Nations that is formulating the laws that are being pushed on everybody else.
It's the United Nations that is calling for the will of the people in Colorado and Washington to be overturned.
And it is United Nations that is trying to prohibit guns.
And we already see what happens when you prohibit any substance.
It gets far more dangerous.
And they fail to interdict it.
But it creates more power for the government.
And they love that.
So, if you want to know more about what's going on with us, stay tuned to Prison Planet TV.
You can get a subscription if you're watching this on YouTube.
You can share this subscription with at least 10 other people can be viewing it simultaneously, but you can share it with even more people than that.
And we're going to continue to report on all forms of prohibition.
Whatever they're trying to prohibit, it is not according to the Constitution, and we're going to fight that.
We're going to fight for sanity, and we're going to fight to make sure that families like the Hagen family are not destroyed over some kind of petty regulation over the amount of marijuana that they happen to have.
Just absolutely absurd.
Well, that's the end of our show.
We've talked about the UN Agenda on Drug Prohibition, about the UN Agenda on Gun Control, and we've got another special report coming up about yet another UN Agenda, Agenda 21.
So stick around right after the credits, and we'll see you again tomorrow night at 7 Central, 8 Eastern.
8 Central, 8 Eastern.
8 Central, 8 Eastern.
So thanks for joining us today.
So Rosa, tell us really quick for viewers that don't know, what is agenda 21 and why should people be concerned?
Agenda 21 is, you know, you'll hear about it.
You'll think, hey, is it Catch-22?
Is it Area 51?
What is it?
It's a real United Nations plan.
It was implemented in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
It was signed on to by 179 nations.
It's soft law.
It's not a treaty.
So it was not ratified by our Congress.
And it was agreed to by George H.W. Bush in 1992.
And what it is, it's the plan to implement sustainable development worldwide.
It's actually the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all plants, all minerals, all construction, all means of production, all education, all information, and all human all education, all information, and all human beings in the world.
In other words, everywhere that human beings interact with the world, with the environment, or with each other, this is all inventoried and controlled.
This is a very essential part of the plan to know, is that you will be tracked, monitored, and controlled through this plan.
Well so, I know last week Oklahoma just passed a new ban, their statewide ban against Agenda 21, and they're joining Alabama and also Kansas I believe, now banning in Kentucky.
So what are some new ways that the fight against Agenda 21 is winning?
Well, it's really important to take it to the legislative level, because believe it or not, a lot of legislators don't even know about Agenda 21 or what it is, Agenda 21 Sustainable Development.
They may think they know what sustainable development is, but they don't really understand that behind that green mask is this plan to inventory and control through technology.
It's really globalization is the standardization of systems.
So, yes, several states, of course, I think there are nine states right now that are actually in the stages of trying to pass legislation to block Agenda 21, sustainable development, and to outlaw collaboration with non-profits like ICLEI, the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives, that are engaged in implementing Agenda 21.
And it goes, of course, it's all the way through the system, So, it mainly comes into your town, though, as a land use plan for smart growth and the wild lands project.
So, people don't recognize what it looks like.
Because it sounds so good.
It sounds good, and that's one reason why, like Alabama passed it.
Not long ago, the governor signed into law this ban against Agenda 21, but then right on the heels of that, Baldwin County tried to pass their general plan, and it was 100% Agenda 21, but because you don't see that term in there, a lot of people didn't realize it, and they really had to push back.
So, it's happening everywhere now.
Well, what do you say to people who say, this is just an old document, it's from 1992, it's non-binding, and so it's no big deal and it's not really anything we need to be concerned about.
Yeah, you know.
I hear that all the time.
Of course you do.
And if you say anything, you're crazy, you need to wear a tinfoil hat.
Yeah, and you've got a tinfoil hat.
You know, that's what they do.
Of course, your disinformation agents, you know, or people who are actually controlled opposition, they'll tell you not to mention Agenda 21, or they'll tell you you're crazy, you know, the mainstream press.
In fact, it is a non-binding agreement, but it was signed onto by the United States, and then the very next year, in 1993, President Clinton created the President's Council on Sustainable Development, and the sole purpose of that council, which was ten federal agencies, along with a lot of energy producers like Dow Chemical and Enron, And the World Resources Institute, Sierra Club, and other environmental groups.
Their entire task was to implement Agenda 21 in the United States.
And that is exactly what they did through federal agencies that have changed their policies.
And of course now they're using grants and all kinds of pressure on states and local agencies.
It's a global plan, but it's implemented locally.
Well, actually, I saw this today.
For people that say this doesn't exist, this is actually from the UN Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform's Twitter account.
And they actually say on here, Agenda 21 established nine major groups for UN to formally engage civil society for the future we want.
Yeah.
So to make it sound all-inclusive, it's the future we want.
And there's nine major groups and they said, find out more here.
Yeah.
They're really trying to get people on board.
We're civil society and this is the future we want.
Yeah, the future we want.
That's actually what they called their 20th anniversary of the Rio Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, this past June.
And they called it the future we want.
It's like, hey man, this is not the future we want.
This is the future you want.
I'm going to tell you this is the future we want.
Right, they're telling you.
I'm grabbing you under the table and holding you hostage.
But civil society, you know what that is, you know, supposedly that's like all of us joining together, you know, us the people and we the people and saying what we want.
But really that's a lie.
What civil society is now is non-profit organizations that have teamed up with government and huge corporations to give the illusion that there's public buy-in on these plans.
And so it's being rammed through all over the world.
It's happening right now.
Yeah, actually, I'm late to the game on this.
I just came across this document today and it was funded by the EU and the World Wildlife Fund and it's from a group called the One Planet Economy Network and it's scenarios for a one planet economy in Europe and it kind of goes along with, they keep mentioning 2050 in here, which I know on your website, Democrats Against UN Agenda 21, they actually mention One World One Vision 2050.
Well, here it's 2050 for Europe and they have these scenarios that they say May or may not happen if we don't get on board with carbon taxes, get on board with being environmentally friendly and everything.
And one of them actually says, I'm going to read this to you and get your reaction to this.
Nearly every aspect of life is heavily regulated by the state.
In 2050, Europeans are forced to adopt green lifestyle habits, for example, bans on non-essential individual long-distance travel.
And it also says the state controls or heavily influences all available channels of education, media, and marketing to spread this message To continually reinforce the adoption and mold perceptions of sustainability.
There's that word again.
And then it says civil society also plays a role in selling this message of green lifestyles.
So there again we have that civil society.
And actually there was another scenario in here that mentioned a footprint tax.
And I mean, again, I'm new to the game on that.
I had not heard of a footprint tax.
I had heard of a carbon tax and cap and trade and all that.
But footprint tax actually encapsulates the carbon tax with an ecological tax and a water tax.
something else and it puts it all together and makes this new footprint text like you exist, give us money.
Right, yeah, basically your footprint, you know, right now considered in the United States, every single human being in the United States basically would owe about $457 a year just to live, just to exist.
You got up this morning, give us $457.
Yeah, you know, this is again, I mean, on that scenario, I would say it's not going to take until 2050, you know, if we don't do something about it.
I mean, this is happening right now.
They're really moving towards this.
This is the goal, to have the state involved in every aspect of your life.
It's about creating total dependency on the government, and it's about behavioral modification.
So whether they have to use, you know, they're trying to use, you know, first they'll do it to you in your school and your place of business.
It's very trendy right now.
Right, it's cool.
It's the future we want.
But those few people who are going to hold out against it, you know, then it's going to be force.
You know, then you'll be required and then you'll be paying taxes, you know, to use water.
If you want to use more than 10 gallons of water a day.
You know, obviously you're not going to be able to.
You'll be restricted.
This is about creating artificial scarcity and then using that as, you know, a part of this culture of emergency.
Emergency.
And making it so that you are literally too paralyzed to do anything to fight this, you know, and that you will go along to get along.
And you're saving the planet.
Right, well they say they scare everybody into thinking this world is hugely overpopulated and that humans are the biggest blight on the planet and that we're doing this so we deserve all of these things to happen to us because we're just wrecking the planet every day and we're told that.
We're just reaffirmed that every day in media and in movies and just everywhere.
Hey, imagine being a little kid in school right now and being told that you are killing the planet.
Yeah.
You know, imagine the pressure on a child and then also that you can save it.
You know, look at what that means for a child to have that kind of... The weight of the world literally on their shoulders.
I know, I'm six years old, it's like I'm brushing my teeth, I shouldn't be running the water too long.
I gotta stop, what am I doing?
I'm hurting the planet every moment.
It's horrifying.
Well, actually, I came across this as well.
The European Commission just put out this report called A Decent Life for All, Ending Poverty and Giving the World a Sustainable Future.
And basically, in this document, they're saying they're going to now take it upon themselves, the European Commission, to implement Agenda 21, as the mothership there, through an overarching unified policy framework.
They always have these great titles for that.
But basically, it's an environmental global government's...
Absolutely.
Scientific dictatorship is basically what this is.
And this just came out.
So this is recent now.
They're saying they're going to do it.
But there's so many groups it's hard to even keep track of all these reports.
I know.
You've got three people.
You have nine groups, you know.
Everywhere.
And this is it.
And of course the EU, you know, is like...
I mean, everywhere is ground zero, but the EU is already way along because this plan is about regionalization.
It's about destroying jurisdictional boundaries and about creating these megacities and megaregions so that you literally have no influence on what goes on in your government.
And you might feel like that now, but think about, you know, you have a representative government now, but the mask will be completely off, you know, and then you'll have something like the EU that is basically run from Brussels, and individual nations have very little power.
So this is the goal, and they always use that green mask of getting rid of poverty and, you know, being all cool with the environment and everything is going to be great.
Yeah, like here, for example, here in Austin, everywhere they're knocking down whole areas and then they're putting up these mixed-use development buildings, which are basically like these tiny apartments with these little tiny, you know, you can go outside in your little garden area that's like this tiny, and then it's on top of all these businesses.
So basically you work there, you live there, All you see when you drive by it is just a huge front of this building with all these bicycles all over it because of course if you're going to live there and work there, why would you need a car?
That's bad for the environment.
Everybody is moving into these because it's just so trendy.
How do we get people to realize they're buying into their own enslavement basically through trendiness?
Yeah, well, you know, the thing that's about that, I mean, if those were built without government subsidies, you'd be like, yeah, cool, I don't care.
You want to go live in an apartment on top of a shop?
Go for it.
But these are paid for with government subsidies for infrastructure and for development.
Your taxes pay for those because they're not in demand.
And, you know, maybe in center cities like, you know, maybe some parts of Austin or something, and some parts of San Francisco.
They're putting these things out all across the nation.
They're going out into towns of less than 2,000 people and saying we need to have these mixed development tiny buildings.
And in Texas, I mean, you can drive for hundreds, I mean, you can drive a very long way in the dark and see nothing.
It's just empty land.
I know, and people, you know, a lot of people don't realize that about the nation.
If you fly over the nation, of course I have a carbon footprint, you know, like the size of the Empire State Building, probably, because I go back.
You need to pay your footprint tax, Rosa.
What are you thinking?
You know, when you look down, it's an agricultural country that we live in, and it's big.
And the thing is, is that when you are subsidizing high-density development, you're building vertical sprawl.
In the centers of cities.
And that is a huge pressure on your infrastructure.
And also, you know, think about this.
If you want a dog, if you have kids, if you... You can shove them in the closet.
You know, where are they going to go?
Of course, dogs eat meat, and meat eating is unsustainable.
Yes, well apparently everything we're doing now is unsustainable.
It's pretty much all on the list.
So, what kind of future then, if these people have their way, what kind of sustainable, efficient future are we actually going to have?
Yeah, it's pretty tough when you really look at it because we're talking about megaregions, megacities, which are basically densely developed, high, high, you know, what are they, they're like tall, super tall buildings, you know, in the centers of cities, and you basically will not be able to live outside of those.
And you're not going to... Everything you do will be tightly controlled.
And you'll get your 10 gallons of water a day, you'll have to pay your carbon tax, you'll pay your water tax, you'll pay your footprint tax, you're literally not going to be able to eat anything that didn't come from right around there, so you're not going to be sourcing food from anywhere else.
This is the real hit on the locavore thing, you know, is that you're not going to be able to get food from anywhere else.
And of course, if you have restrictions on water, this is going to have a huge impact on what you can grow in the area.
They don't want anybody growing anything now.
No.
They're breaking down on people's backyard gardens now.
That's it.
They don't want you to be.
It's the federal government, it's the corporations, and it's civil society in a huge sort of cabal together.
You know, the huge banks.
We're talking about, you know, the continuation of the Nazi system.
This is really what it's about.
And, you know, people think that, I mean, you might think I'm fear-mongering.
Unfortunately, I'm not.
This is reporting on the reality of their plan.
This is the future they want.
Exactly, and then they use the Delphi Technique when they go into these meetings to sell it to the people.
Yeah, and think, you know, I mean, I just, I'm so like fired up about this because think about the Delphi Technique, man, that is a Rand Corporation mind control technique that's being used now in government meetings.
When you're brought in to a meeting, you know, here in the in the Central Texas area and told, you know, that or anywhere in the United States and told to give your opinion on this new plan, Yeah, choose between these four options and you don't want any of them.
Right, and it's too bad.
And the thing is designed to give the illusion of public buy-in, but it's also designed to neutralize the opposition and to convert enemies.
Think about that.
They are propagandizing you and they literally will, when the people who are running those meetings, will literally sideline you, malign you, and shame you.
They use communitarian tactics to shame you so you won't speak out.
Yeah, well they actually had a meeting here recently and we weren't able to attend, but it was all about how to handle the opposition when they come to these meetings.
And the opposition would be anybody who comes in there and has even the biggest question about why do I need this?
Why are you here?
You dare to question?
Why are you in my small town of 2,000 people telling me I need to move into a mixed-use development workshop?
Workshop houses are actually on the meetings I went to, several of those clicker questionnaires where they were asking people, what do you think about workshop?
They just put that in there, like, what do you think about a house with some land and also a workshop house?
But these meetings are predetermined, aren't they?
Totally.
The entire thing, you know, you may think it's unique to your town.
It is not.
It's the same all across the nation and the world.
These plans are all the same plan.
And the plan calls for high-density development in the center of your city, no private vehicles, restriction on mobility, restriction on every aspect of your life.
And we can be the civil society.
Well, what do we do?
educational system with common core standardization of systems that's uniformity and bring everything into so-called harmonization so that it can be more easily managed and controlled and we can be the civil society well what what do we do what do we do now get to fight this well hey get on board you know Don't get paralyzed by this.
Don't think that, you know, there's nothing you can do, because guess what?
There's, you know, the resistance is growing constantly, day by day, and people are getting the information.
You want to get the info out.
We've got flyers on our websites, you know, that you can print out.
Take that one... Ms.
Democrats Against UN Agenda 21.
Right.
DemocratsAgainstUNagenda21.com.
Yeah, go on there, print out those flyers, you know, take one and make it, take it to a copy place, get a hundred, walk them around and put them on doorsteps.
Don't hand them to people, you know, because you'll be arguing with them all day.
And then you want to, you want to educate yourself and others.
You want to go to those government meetings and you want to anti-delphi them.
And I tell you how to do that in my book, How to Anti-Delphi a Meeting.
Yeah, it is right here.
Yeah, there's the book.
And, you know, basically what you want to do is refuse to collaborate and expose collaborators.
Bring your video camera with you when you go to these government meetings.
And, you know, they're bringing men with guns into these meetings.
I'm talking about police officers.
They are doing that.
I've been witness to that several times.
Yes, and they're in there because they don't like you saying something.
The second time I went to one of these meetings, I was just sitting at the table, just taking notes, just doo-doo-doo, and one of the meeting people came around and tried to stand right behind my shoulder.
Uh-huh.
Just like, just, you know, and it was so obvious, and I just turned and looked right in his face, like, why are you doing that?
It's pretty obvious why, but, you know, and he just gave me a look like I could go die in a fire and then walked away, but, I mean, they're very intimidated, but also intimidating to people who, you know, don't know any better, so.
Yeah, that's right, and that's the thing, is to be tough, be strong, don't allow them to intimidate you, because these people are committing treason.
And this is the reality.
This is it.
And, you know, we are growing in our force, we are speaking out, we are taking over our government meetings, we're removing people from office who are collaborators, we're educating our legislators and our sheriffs, and we are taking back our nation and the world.
This is everywhere.
Doesn't matter if you're in Australia, New Zealand, Europe, wherever you are, it's happening there, too.
And that's how it needs to be.
Thank you so much for joining us today, Rosa.
Really appreciate it.
Thank you.
Are we good?
We're good.
They'll look into that camera there, but usually we just look at each other.
Okay.
▲
Export Selection