All Episodes
Previous Next
May 21, 2013 - InfoWars Nightly News
43:30
20130521_Tue_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to the InfoWars Nightly News.
I'm David Knight.
It's Tuesday, May 21st, 2013, and here are our top stories.
Tonight, on the InfoWars Nightly News, the Obama administration grandstands in tornado wreckage and hopes that you will forget about.
The IRS scandal, the AP scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, the Benghazi scandal, 7 million dollar vacations, and the Monsanto Protection Act.
Then, Texas schools dropped the allegedly propaganda-filled curriculum, CSCOPE, and police used tasers against foreclosure protesters.
All that and more coming up on the InfoWars Nightly News.
Now, NBC reports with the recent Oklahoma tornado disasters that the Obama scandals may be taking a pause because of these same tornadoes.
In a post entitled, Putting Things into Perspective, NBC's Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Brooke Brower argue that the tornado, quote, puts so much of Washington's focus over the past two weeks, that is on the IRS, Benghazi, the leak investigations, into perspective.
And they said that such scandals will now, quote, take a pause.
We even had a Rhode Island Democrat Senator White House blaming the tornadoes on climate deniers.
Well, as ridiculous as that is, I think we do need to put this into perspective.
We need to think about what would people think if disasters of this proportion were a regular, recurring thing?
And what if those disasters were not Nature, but they were acts of man.
Well, that's exactly what's going on with our foreign policy.
We're seeing terrible disasters close to the scale of what we've seen in Oklahoma City happening all the time in Obama's drone wars.
And of course, that creates amazing suffering with that death and disaster that he's inflicting on people, that man-made, repeating disaster that he's inflicting on people.
And we need to stop and put that into perspective.
And imagine if this was something that was happening on a daily basis or on a weekly basis, how we would feel about that.
What kind of hate that would engender.
And certainly there is a blowback aspect to our foreign policy.
I believe, as we have pointed out with Siebel Edmonds, that there's much more involved than just blowback.
I believe it's by design.
But we need to stop and think.
About the kind of death and suffering that's being enacted in our name by our government under the direction of Obama.
Very similar to what's happening with these tornadoes.
Now, we're not going to pause in our examination of these scandals because it just keeps unfolding and we still haven't gotten any reliable or truthful answers.
Politico reports that the White House is shifting its IRS account.
In their article today, they said the White House on Monday once again added to the list of people who knew about the IRS investigation into its targeting of conservative groups, saying that White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough had been informed about a month ago.
Press Secretary Jay Carney said again that no one had told President Barack Obama ahead of the first news reports.
Not his top aide, McDonough, not his chief counsel, Kathy Rumler, nor anyone from the Treasury Department.
Well, part of this is, that's what makes this so amazing and unbelievable.
Because this is widely reported by news outlets such as the Washington Times, the Washington Post, the New York Times.
I wonder if Obama doesn't read those either.
You know, if he doesn't read those, he could at least follow Infowars.
We have been covering it.
And this is something where you've had at least five different occasions IRS officials have been called before Congress to testify, lying each time of course, but they've gone five different times before Congress being asked questions about this very thing.
And of course, Obama and the White House want you to believe that he didn't know anything about that until just recently, until it hit the news, just recently.
Also, we had partisan bickering going on between Democrats and Republicans about this scandal.
If you remember, Chuck Schumer sent a letter with five other Democrats to the IRS demanding that they do exactly what they did do, and that is targeting Tea Party and conservative groups.
And there was also a letter from Republicans demanding that the IRS not do that, to which Schumer ...angrily replied that the Republicans were trying to intimidate the IRS, as if that's possible.
Now, through all this, Obama has supposedly been kept in the dark.
In a U.S.
News report, there's another report saying that congressional investigators were asking the old Watergate question.
What did the President know, and when did he know it, about the IRS improper targeting of conservative groups for special scrutiny when they sought tax-exempt status?
But the startling relevation of the past 24 hours is exactly the opposite.
What the President didn't know, and how long he didn't know it.
And there's the big problem for the White House.
Obama has insisted that he learned of the potential scandal from the news media just last week.
Now, we see that incompetence and ignorance are now being touted by the administration and by Democrats as being virtues.
I'm surprised that they would take that approach, but it doesn't have any credibility.
Imagine that if you were an investigator on a murder scene, and you came in and someone was shot once.
Now that's an open question.
Was it accidental or was it intentional and premeditated?
But if that person was shot six times, you would not look and say that this is accidental, it was incompetence.
That would not be your first thought.
You would be looking to see whether this is premeditated murder or whether this was murder that just happened as part of a fight.
And that's exactly what we're seeing here.
And yet, We have people making excuses for Obama saying he simply didn't know, or Eric Holder saying he didn't know.
And it's just not credible, especially as they continually change their story.
Just as we saw with Benghazi, we see an evolving story about the IRS scandal.
Now, the American spectator believes that they have found a smoking gun in this IRS scandal.
They report that the White House listed the IRS union's leader, that's Colleen Kelly, as visiting the President on March 31st, 2010.
The very next day after her White House meeting with the President, according to the Treasury Department's Inspector General's report, IRS employees, the same employees who belong to the NTEU union, They were set to work in earnest targeting the Tea Party and conservative groups across America.
The Inspector General's report said that the next day, April the 1st, 2010, the new Acting Manager, Technical Unit, suggested the need for sensitive case reports on the Tea Party cases.
And the Determination Unit Program Manager agreed.
Now the interesting thing about this is not only the timing of that, and there does need to be an independent investigator as Rand Paul has said, and we do need to look at things like connections to the IRS Employees Union, but look at the political influence that the IRS Employees Union exerts on the political process.
The NTEU Through its Political Action Committee, now this is from the same article, raised $613,000 in the 2010 cycle, giving 98% of its contributions to anti-Tea Party Democrats.
2010 cycle giving 98% of its contributions to anti-tea party Democrats.
The next election cycle, 2012, the figure was 729,000, with 94% going to anti-tea party candidates.
And so the question is, why is the IRS allowed to intimidate and harass organizations for their political activity when the union is engaged in that kind of one-sided political And we see, of course, that this auditing and this harassment was selectively one-sided in its application.
And that brings us to today's quote.
This is one from Jerry Seinfeld.
And what he said was, the IRS, they're like the mafia.
They can take anything they want.
Well, you know, that's pretty similar to what a congressman Republican Mike Kelly just said this last week when they were having the hearings, he basically said to the IRS Commissioner, you guys can do anything you want, and when you're offering the excuse that mistakes were made, you didn't know what you were doing, it was incompetence, we just keep poor records, we have poor management, but he said you don't accept any of those excuses in an audit, do you?
Of course that's a rhetorical question, of course they don't.
Now we have yet some more defense.
And this is not an incompetence defense, but this is an even more amazing defense that is coming from the far-left press.
From the Daily Beast, or what I call it, the Daily Mark of the Beast.
And this is an article that says, don't throw the IRS under the bus.
Poor IRS.
Don't intimidate them and don't throw them under the bus.
Now the article, the writer says, Obama and his fellow Democrats, if they don't rebut that narrative and defend the IRS, they'll be surrendering crucial ground in the battle that has roiled American politics since the financial crisis.
The battle over whether Washington regulates too much or too little.
It was a mess born of over-regulation rather than under-regulation.
The core problem was that after Citizens United, a section of the tax code was designed to allow people to donate.
You know, kind of like the IRS union does.
He goes on to say, to make matters worse, even the modest firewall against abuse, the fact that a 501c4s couldn't make electioneering their primary purpose, proved impossible for the IRS to competently uphold.
Yes, it's just, it's really a problem that we had deregulation of free speech.
Now, they would argue that the Union Should the IRS union, and I would argue that we shouldn't even have an IRS union, that they have enough of a secure position there, and they're paid well enough, and I don't believe that government employees should have a union, but that's my personal opinion.
But if they're going to have a union, should they be involved, should they be allowed to involve themselves in the political process?
I don't believe that that is a good idea, and I believe it's a horrible idea when you look at how this scandal has unfolded.
And I think it's amazingly hypocritical to allow them to have a freedom that individuals don't have, regardless of how they combine themselves.
And a lot of people have criticized Citizens United, saying that it takes the chains off of big corporate donations to the political process.
If you think the big corporate powers have not been donating to the political process, you haven't been paying attention.
And if you think any law is going to stop them, you're being pretty naive about it.
What this really did was this allowed some small groups and people who were small businessmen who would normally get hammered by the IRS to legally participate in a free speech process.
Except that the Democrats understood that it was going to be people who were against larger government.
This came right after the massive Tea Party rallies in Washington.
So they use the IRS to hammer these people selectively.
One more thing about the IRS.
ABC News reports, and Breitbart picked it up, that the IRS scandal, the armed police escorted reporters to a Cincinnati office as ABC News was going there to try to investigate and get comments from these reporters.
According to ABC, a quote, armed uniformed police officer with the Federal Protective Service escorted reporters through the public building.
ABC says that if the intent wasn't to scare off employees who might talk, that was the effect.
A Washington spokesman told ABC that press queries are referred to the press office, but that people have First Amendment rights.
They're entitled to speak.
One of them, who asked not to be named, told ABC News that security guards did remind employees of the official policy not to talk with the press, a warning that was cemented by the punchline, quote, or risk losing our jobs.
Now when I saw this report about the Armed security officers escorting the ABC reporters through and intimidating IRS employees about talking about this scandal in the place where so much of it is happening.
Remember that not all of it happened in the Cincinnati office.
It happened in other offices.
The audit request for knowing what people were praying came out of a California office.
So this is not the work of one office that was out of touch, out of control.
But when you see the government trying to stifle people talking to the press about what really happened, then you have to wonder about this AP scandal that happened.
And my first impression with that was that, of course, if the AP reporters understand anything at all, and obviously they must, they know, as we all do, that the government is listening to everything that everybody is communicating in digital communications, especially if those communications are going overseas, because the government doesn't even try to hide the fact that they That they listen to people.
They have a FISA Act, which allows them, in their opinion, to do that.
I don't believe that it does, because the Constitution supersedes those kinds of surveillance acts.
And I think that it applies for foreign conversations, and especially for foreign conversations that involve Americans.
But they assert that they have a legal right to do that.
And so for reporters to think that they were not being listened to when they're talking to people abroad is really not very credible.
So I believed that it was simply intimidating the AP.
But as I look at this operation going on in the Cincinnati office with ABC trying to talk to people and the IRS security guards intimidating them, I'm wondering if this whole AP scandal was really trying to intimidate not reporters, But whistleblowers.
Because as yesterday on the Alex Jones Show, Joel Skousen said that it's going to be interesting to see what these other people that haven't come forward and talked about it say.
Because there were about 30 people at the Benghazi compound that survived and witnessed the attacks.
And they've all been silenced so far.
Now in this next report we see that that may change soon.
This is an exclusive from Bajama Media.
And they say ex-diplomats are reporting that new Benghazi whistleblowers with info that is devastating to Clinton and Obama are going to be coming forward.
From the article it says, more whistleblowers will emerge shortly in the escalating Benghazi scandal according to two former U.S.
diplomats who spoke with PJ Media Monday afternoon.
Stevens' mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department.
Not by the CIA.
Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort.
But the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming insurgents with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.
Well, we know that Al Qaeda has been supplied with Stinger missiles that can shoot down civilian aircraft in Syria.
That's been reported.
But notice what it says in this report.
It says that it was issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA.
And the State Department, Hillary Clinton's State Department, was the one that sent the ambassador, Stevens, to Benghazi.
So this is really interesting because this Kind of reinforces a narrative that we've had from military and intelligence, former military intelligence people who have spoken to us, have been on the Alex Jones Radio Show, saying that this was internecine warfare between different groups in our government.
But the interesting thing is, is that they're both arming and equipping Al-Qaeda.
Al-Qaeda, our boogeyman terrorists, the excuse for the violations of all of our civil liberties, understand That we went into Libya and we put Al-Qaeda in charge.
And this whole operation in Benghazi was a fight over which groups, how Al-Qaeda was going to be armed and which groups were going to do it within the government and how they were going to do it.
Now some local news, very local news actually, Texas State News.
Texas curriculum, CSCOPE, has been dropped after complaints from lawmakers.
Legislators announced on Monday that on Friday the CSCOPE governing board unanimously voted to end the lesson plan component of the program under an agreement that was brokered in 72 hours, said Senator Dan Patrick from Houston.
Lawmakers said they got complaints from parents about CSCOPE, including a lesson on the Boston Tea Party that invited students to include the perspective of Britons who might have considered it to be an act of terrorism, and other allegations that CSCOPE promotes Islam over Christianity.
Now to get some more background on this and to see if this really was a win over getting this curriculum removed, I called Ginger Russell.
We've had her on as a guest before on InfoWars because she follows Seascope very closely.
She actually has a website, TexasSeascopeReview.com.
That's T-X-SeascopeReview.com.
And what she said was that although CSCOPE curriculum was shot, that they would still be controlling assessments.
Now, that's another word for tests.
And if you understand education, you know that teachers are going to teach to the test.
So if you set what the test is, you're going to control the curriculum.
So, CSCOPE is still going to be controlling the curriculum as long as they have the assessments controlled.
Now, one of the things, besides just these particulars about the way they handle the Tea Party and the way they've handled Christianity, Another fundamental aspect of C-SCOPE is what I would refer to as its post-modern aspect.
The idea that there is no standard or knowledge for the students.
They would basically be introduced to a subject and then they would just talk about what they thought about that subject.
As opposed to studying a textbook or even better, far better, studying the original sources.
Because we all have concerns about the quality of textbooks and which textbooks are going to be used.
But this is even removed from that.
This is not having any standard of objective knowledge for them whatsoever.
It is a purely subjective debate between students who do not necessarily know any of the facts that they're talking about.
And this is the same type of thing that kind of plays into the Delphi technique that they use in Agenda 21.
It lets them very easily manipulate students and kind of plays into this whole postmodernism.
Now we should all be concerned about the possible economic unrest coming to our country.
It's something we've already seen in Europe, especially Greece, as people take to the streets to fight what they consider to be injustices committed against them by giant banks who are basically too big to jail.
And we just saw this.
CommonDreams.org has a picture of a recent demonstration where police are using tasers against foreclosure activists outside the Department of Justice.
And this is a reminder of what Gerald Salenti said, that when people lose everything, they lose it.
And it's not just the people who are going to be losing it, but unfortunately, as we see here, the real risk is that police are going to foolishly continue to brutalize people who are protesting this and not do it peacefully.
Very different from what we saw in Germany, where the police there took off their helmets and led the rioters who were complaining about what the banks were doing there.
And they handled that peacefully.
But here, The idea is that, that the police have, is that they're going to confront and taser people who are upset about how many of the laws are being set aside in this foreclosure process and how Eric Holder himself has said that he's afraid of the banks, that they're too big to jail.
That's a paraphrase of what he said, but it is essentially what he said.
Now in other foreign policy news, we have North Korea has fired its sixth missile in just three days.
North Korea fired two short-range missiles on Monday, making six launches in just three days, and it condemned South Korea for criticizing what it said were its legitimate military drills.
The launches come hard on the heels of more than two months of threats from North Korea that it would wage a nuclear war against South Korea and the United States if attacked.
Now to find out what the man on the street thinks about this, Dan Bodondi went out and asked them.
And here's that report.
This is Dan Bodondi reporting for the N4's Nightly News.
In recent news, North Korea's Kim Jong-un has threatened to nuke several cities across the United States.
Now today we'll get the public's take on that situation and also what they think about Kim Jong-un.
Who is a bigger threat to the United States?
North Korea or Iran?
I believe it's Iran right now.
North Korea.
North Korea.
I think North Korea will be.
North Korea.
I think they're both pretty bad.
Um, Iran has, uh, more capability, but, uh, North Korea, uh, definitely more dangerous right now in terms of the threat level.
I'd have to say Iran.
I don't know, it's close.
North Korea is a lot of bluster.
Iran, we're actually, you know, in aggressions with, but, I don't know, fine.
North- Iran, I guess I would say, but, neither of them really.
Iran.
The U.S.
got it in the bag, you know?
But, uh, I would say North Korea, maybe a little bit.
Yeah, North Korea.
I think North Korea.
North Korea, probably.
Is the U.S.
a choice?
Do you believe that North Korea has the capability of hitting the United States with nuclear weapons?
Well, I think anybody can import them in a suitcase, as Dr. Heller testified to Congress years ago.
You don't need intercontinental missiles.
You can blow up all the big cities in the United States with a few suitcases.
I do think they have the capability in terms of the willingness, but I don't think there's any evidence that indicates that they do have the ability to reach the United States at the moment.
Are you afraid of this man, Kim Jong-un?
Yeah, I mean, I think he's a wild card.
No one really knows what he's capable of.
Absolutely not.
He's a fat little baby.
Not really.
Absolutely not.
If he wants to try anything, watch and see what happens.
He's really fat.
He's uglier than my dad, for real.
Yeah, very afraid.
He's a nut job.
And as you can see, the public is very aware of the threats being made by North Korea, and they have mixed reactions about it.
But the question remains, will Kim Jong-un strike?
And this is Dan Badandi reporting for the InfoWars Nightly News.
Well, having worked myself for many years in third party politics, I'm both amazed and jealous that in the United Kingdom they can actually have a change of parties, that they're not stuck with just the same two parties each time.
They actually have a multi-party democracy.
Imagine that.
Imagine if we had that here.
But one of the things that's coming out of that is that the UK Independence Party is surging.
And one of the reasons that they're surging is because they're not afraid to ask the hard questions from the governing elite, especially at the European Parliament and especially about the euro.
Remember, it was Nigel Farage who said to the head of the European Parliament, why are we putting these people in Greece?
Who appointed them as leaders?
You know, they deposed democratically elected leaders and put in Goldman Sachs bankers in charge.
They called them technocrats, and supposedly that's supposed to explain it away and make it okay.
Remember that Bilderberg actually, and it's just its second meeting in 1955, proposed the European Union and the Euro.
Those two things were creatures of the Bilderberg Organization.
And so it is right, if you're opposed to European Union, as the UK Independence Party is, as they are opposed to the financial disaster that is being wreaked across Europe with the Euro, it is right to ask questions about Bilderberg.
And here's one of the UK Independent Party members asking some questions.
These annual meetings are summits of the most wealthy, powerful and influential people in the worlds of politics, finance and business.
The biggest mystery surrounding them is why the mainstream newspapers and broadcasters have chosen not to report on them since 1954.
However, in the internet age, their existence can no longer be kept secret.
I've written to all the mainstream press and TV in the UK, asking them if they intend to report on this meeting, and if not, why not?
I've also submitted a Freedom of Information request to the Hertfordshire Police Commissioner, asking on what basis the policing is being provided, and who is paying the bill.
Two very good questions.
Let's take the second question first.
Prisonplanet.com, we have an article there that says Bilderberg organizers are agreeing to help cover the cost of security at the Grove Hotel meeting.
Hertfordshire Constabulary declined to provide a figure for either the total cost of policing the event, which is also expected to attract hundreds of demonstrators, or the contribution that is coming from the Bilderberg group.
So, according to them, the Bilderberg Group is going to be hiring some private security, and they're going to be making some kind of a contribution to offset the public cost of protecting them.
Now, they're not going to tell us exactly what, and that's what that Member of Parliament was asking, exactly what are the costs, exactly what are they covering.
Isn't it amazing?
That the world's richest men, all these billionaires, are meeting in this hotel.
They can afford to buy out and do frequently.
They just had another confab down in South Carolina, Kiowa Island, where they bought Out completely, the largest hotel there on that island.
And here they're doing the same thing in Watford.
They're taking a international five-star hotel, very exclusive, very expensive hotel, buying out the entire place, and yet they cannot afford to pay for their security.
Poor folks.
They have to push it off on the public as they typically do.
Now as to the second question that he's got, let's take a look at this article from Urien Massan, which has that clip embedded in it.
And as Urien quotes, he said, this is a quote from the Member of Parliament, he said, These annual meetings are summits of the most wealthy, powerful and influential people in the world of politics, finance and business.
The biggest mystery surrounding them is why mainstream newspapers and broadcasters have chosen not to report on them since 1954.
However, in the Internet age, their existence can no longer be kept a secret.
He says he's written to all the mainstream press and TV in the UK asking them if they intend to report on this meeting, and if not, why not?
That's a good question.
Why not?
Why have they not reported on this?
Why is it only within just the last couple of years that since, say, The Guardian and Drudge have picked up on this, it's started to be understood that this is what's going on?
Before that, everybody said, oh, it's just a conspiracy theory.
Well, there was a conspiracy.
There's been a conspiracy at Vildenberg every year since 1954.
They've conspired to create things like the Euro.
They've conspired to create things like the European Union.
But it is a conspiracy.
But it is no longer a secret conspiracy.
Infowars has been covering this a long time, and of course Jim Tucker, who just died, covered it for many decades.
And now the secret is out.
Why?
Because of the Internet.
And we've got, right after the break, an interview with someone from Ustream.
His name is Chris Cantu, and he's going to be talking to us about the capabilities of Ustream, which is what InfoWars is going to be using to bring you live updates from Bilderberg in London in just a couple of weeks.
Stay tuned for that interview.
Our viewers have demanded it, so now you're going to get it.
More pro-Second Amendment gun shows in the month of June.
What we've learned is you cannot hide behind an I-beam when there's a .50 cal present.
Brothers in Arms, .50 cal ammo review and more.
coming in the month of June to the InfoWAR.
The important thing about the Pro-1 filter today is that the material we use for removing fluoride and other heavy metals now will remove the latest form of fluoride called hydrofluorosilicic acid.
There's no other fluoride reduction filter out there that will remove that type of fluoride.
It's extremely important because Today we're hearing more and more cities are using that form of fluoride.
We've been having medication forced on us through the water system for quite a while.
Most people don't realize it.
Most people don't realize the negative effects of fluoride.
There's a wide range of health effects that are attributed to fluoride.
Bottom line, why should somebody get this new Pro-1 Pro-Pure filter?
The reason to buy the Pro-1, it's an all-in-one filter.
It's convenient, easy to use.
It doesn't require the add-on fluoride filter.
In addition, this filter removes the latest form of fluoride called hydrofluorosilicic acid.
Hello, this is Hank Hill, and I'm telling you what, you need to listen to Alex Jones.
Infoworth.com My judge, what is the secret of the universe?
Infoworth.com Well, in past years, we've done live news streaming from Bilderberg using Ustream.
And we've got someone on the phone today from Ustream, Chris Cantu, and he's going to talk to us about some updates to its capability.
These are things that are going to help you get the information out to other people, to help wake people up.
Social streaming and the way that's going to work.
But there's also some information about how you can use this to be a Paul Revere, to be the next Alex Jones.
And how you can use this information to protect yourself and your family when you're filming the police or some other government agency and they want to confiscate your phone and cover up evidence.
So joining us here is Chris Cantu from Ustream.
Welcome Chris.
Thank you for having me, David.
Now, let's talk about how big Ustream has gotten lately.
It was huge compared to some of the mainstream media with the Mars landing.
I think you had more people than CNN watching it on Ustream Live, didn't you?
Correct.
Ustream is about six years old now and was started by a few veterans who wanted to communicate with their family while they were working overseas.
And so we're in our sixth year now, and it's just unbelievable the amount of traffic and the amount of exposure that Ustream gets, and that we're not tied to any mainstream media or Google or YouTube.
We're kind of a standalone entity that allows a broadcaster to go live in a number of ways, whether it be mobile phone, desktop, or professional high-end encoding, to go live and to capture as many viewers as possible to see your content.
And according to that article, you had something like 3 million people watch the Mars landing.
And at one point in time, you had 500,000 concurrent.
I think the most that CNN had was like 426,000.
Correct, and those numbers are just astonishing.
Another example is during the Boston bombings, someone had put the police scanner and tied it to a webcam, and we had at one point over two million people watching that police scanner as they were searching for the suspects.
I remember that.
We were watching it here.
We're watching it here at InfoWars.
It's amazing how you can take a tool and a piece of technology and give it to humans, and we'll just find any way to make it work for us when we need it.
So, it's really an amazing tool.
That's right, and one of the things I like about this, we're going to be using this, like I said, at Bilderberg.
It really levels the playing field for alternative media.
It lets people cover stuff live, get the spontaneity of it.
And one of the other things that's important is if you get into a hassle with the police, because even though it's been shown time and again that the public has a legal right, we've had court after court strike down any state laws and uphold any lawsuits against the police, and yet they still continue we've had court after court strike down any state laws and uphold any lawsuits against the police,
And in the case most recently out in California, we had five people who were calling 911 and telling them that this guy was getting beaten to death by a gang of cops, and five people were recording this, and the response of the police was to go around and confiscate everybody's cameras.
They even followed one woman to her house and camped around her.
She had her lawyer there, and then they took the camera.
If they had been streaming that live, that would have been out there for people to see, and we would have had at least a better chance that justice would be done.
Absolutely, David.
And Ustream has free and paid services.
But even with the free service, you can download our app on iOS and Android.
And let's take it in that particular situation.
You pull out your camera, and now you're streaming live video to the Internet of what's going on in real time.
And as soon as you see something that would kind of throw you off or suspect that your camera may be confiscated, you can simply stop streaming and say, you know, do I want to upload to the cloud, and you hit yes.
And then as long as the device doesn't power down in the next few minutes while all of the data gets posted to the cloud, that video will be saved on your Ustream channel page so that when you go back to see it, you can download it, and now you have access to this video, even though you may not and now you have access to this video, even though you may not still
And that's really the next phase of this revolution is being able to stream live in real time and then have your video stored in the cloud versus stuck on a memory card that may get confiscated.
That's right.
It's very important like we said.
Leveling the playing field for alternative media, helping people be Paul Revere's out there, do their own reports, get their own stuff out.
But it's also a way to help protect your family or yourself in very critical situations because in this particular case the guy was killed.
And if the police realize that this stuff is going out live, that they're not going to get away with confiscating the cameras and confiscating the evidence after the fact, that's going to perhaps rein them in in a way that city councils and other governments are not doing that.
So that's a really critical thing.
But let's talk a little bit about how this is going to work with Bilderberg.
One of the things we like about this that is going to be different this time than when we covered it last time is the tie-in to social media, and to Facebook, and to Twitter.
Tell us a little bit about your social streaming.
Good point there, David.
And I take an example of YouTube.
You film a video, you post it to YouTube, it's basically a one-way interaction.
People can leave comments down at the bottom, but it's not real-time, it's not really a two-way engagement.
With Ustream, and this is something you won't find on any other platform, is that we give you the embeddable video player, but we also give you a module called the social stream, which should be embedded anywhere that the video player is.
Now what the social stream allows you to do is communicate in a two-way method with the people viewing your content at any given time.
So your viewers can log in either with their Ustream account or their Facebook or Twitter accounts And then be able to start chatting and communicating with you in real time.
Now, the power of that is that when someone logs in with, let's say, their Facebook account, and they make a comment on the InfoWars stream, a duplicate message gets put back on their Facebook wall that says, hey, I'm watching this cool video.
Come check it out.
And there's a link down at the bottom to go now to the InfoWars channel page in this example.
So now you have a bunch of messages being posted out in both Facebook and Twitter.
Where I may be following someone and not even know about this live event but I see that they commented on it and I see the link to go watch it and now I'm watching it and now I'm engaged into that live content in real time.
So it's really a tool that allows your video content to go viral through Facebook and Twitter as well as you stream.
That's great, because one of the reasons we're covering this, obviously, is because up until just a few years ago, when some of the mainstream papers like The Guardian started carrying it, when Drudge started posting articles about Bilderberg, most people didn't believe it existed.
And so it was this open secret, you know, that it was out there.
So one of the main reasons we're going there is not just to see who's going there, because we're not going to be inside the private meetings, but to shine a light on the fact that there is this huge private meeting is going on between giant corporations and politicians from all over the world.
And we need to shine.
It's kind of like a sunshine law, you know, trying to shine some light on what's going on here and get people to ask why this is going on.
And so it's real important that with this social stream, people can not only share it with other friends and really kind of pass this around, but they can also comment back and forth live.
That's going to be a really interesting feature that you've got there.
Absolutely, and I would recommend, to your point David, about going viral and breaking through the mold into the mainstream.
If people were to set a hashtag, and a hashtag is just a pound symbol or number symbol with the word after it, so as an example, Pound Bilderberg.
If people were to start tweeting and using that Pound Bilderberg, It's kind of you're just info jamming Twitter with Pound Bilderberg and over and over again.
And then you could see it start to trend on Twitter, which would be amazing during that next few weeks or when Bilderberg is.
If you could see that as a trending topic, it's kind of like a Google search bomb.
You could almost do a Twitter bomb with that hashtag and really just put it into the mainstream and people would be forced to cover it at that point.
Absolutely.
Definitely a tool to be able to do that.
Absolutely.
Yeah, it broke in just the last couple of years, it broke into the mainstream, but we want to get it more broadly covered, get people to really ask why this is happening and what's going on here, and is this something we really want to see.
So that's going to be a great tool.
And one other thing, now people can watch this, they don't need to log into Ustream, and they can watch it on pretty much any device, any phone, any kind of computer, iPad, tablets, that sort of thing, right?
Absolutely.
The way that our infrastructure is, is that we do the additional transcoding for mobile devices, both Apple, iOS, and Android.
So yeah, I mean, we've even seen within the last year, mobile viewership of video content has been spiking upwards of 30%.
So people aren't tied to their desks anymore.
They're out and about, you know, going about their lives and watching content through a mobile device.
Which, through Ustream, you will be able to take advantage of.
And I'll also mention, again, that we do have a free service, so I'd recommend all the viewers out there go to Ustream.tv, sign up with the username, create a channel, and use that channel and access whenever you may need it.
If you see police brutality or you see something that needs to be captured, whip out your phone and start streaming it to your channel.
Right, get that app and get that free app and set that up.
Yeah, that's a great idea.
Well, we're really looking forward to this.
It's great to partner with you on this and it's a great service.
We're really excited about the upgrades this year.
Absolutely.
And I would just leave with a short story in that in the early 2000s, living in Austin, Texas, I would be flipping through the channels and I'd come across Alex Jones, you know, just on a desk with a bunch of papers and standard deaf camera and just going at it.
And if you take, you know, what AJ has done as a model, as an open source mold, now in the year 2013, you can be the next Alex Jones.
You can sign up with the Ustream account and start streaming content.
It could be as simple as just reading articles that were posted that day.
But the main thing is, is to do something.
It doesn't do any good if you have all this information and are awake and you sit back and you don't do anything about it.
That's really the only way that we're going to win this info war is to go out and make your voice be heard.
Absolutely.
We've got to wake people up.
That's why we talk about everybody being a Paul Revere.
Well, thank you so much, Chris.
Really appreciate you coming on here.
We're really looking forward to working with you to stream.
Appreciate it, David.
Look forward to the Bilderberg streaming and we'll make it happen this year.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
Well, those are going to be some exciting developments and a new way to spread the word with people through social networking.
Get them to follow the live news updates as they're coming straight out of Bilderberg in London.
And we're also going to have reports that we're producing that will be on Prison Planet TV and on the Nightly News.
And so if you'd like to get that information out to other people, you can get a membership.
And 11 people can be watching that simultaneously, as well as our Ustream coverage of Bilderberg.
Consider getting that if you're watching this on YouTube.
And that's it for tonight.
We'll be back tomorrow night at 7 central, 8 p.m.
▲
Export Selection