All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 18, 2013 - InfoWars Nightly News
28:31
20131018_Fri_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
.
Welcome to the InfoWars Nightly News.
I'm Gigi Ornette on this Friday, October 18th, 2013.
Here's what tops the news.
Tonight on the Infowars Nightly News, Obama intensifies the drone war on U.S.
citizens with his new appointee.
Plus, hundreds of millions of dollars paid out to contractors to create the train wreck known as Obamacare.
Then, internal TSA documents reveal that no policy exists regarding terrorism.
They are concerned with one threat.
You, the American citizen.
All that and more on the InfoWars Nightly News.
House panel questions firms that put together the troubled train wreck Obamacare.
A House committee is probing the widespread technical problems with the launch of the Obamacare website, including the contractors that were paid hundreds of millions of dollars to create it.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee announced Thursday they have scheduled a hearing on the issue for October 24th.
Asked Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to attend to testify at the hearing.
But of course she has not responded very favorably to that proposition.
Much of the scrutiny is focused on the company that received the bulk of the taxpayer money to help create the website.
That company is called CGI Federal, and it's a U.S.
subsidiary of a Canadian firm, CGI Group.
According to the company's own announcement, it secured a contract in late 2011 worth a total of $93.7 million, with a base value of $55.7 million.
The Canadian-based firm is the same one that was officially terminated in September 2012 by an Ontario government health agency after the firm missed three years of deadlines and failed to deliver the province's flagship online medical registry.
You might have remembered me talking about them earlier this week.
Of course, the trouble continues with them.
Now, I have to ask, why would the United States government hire a company that was fired from Canada?
It's almost like sloppy seconds.
Anyway, the trouble keeps on with them.
Now the data going into the machine seems to be corrupt.
Oh yeah.
Obamacare woes widen as insurers get wrong data.
Insurers say the federal healthcare marketplace is generating flawed data that is straining their ability to handle even the trickle of enrollees who have gotten through so far.
And a sign that technological problems extend further than the website traffic and software issues already identified.
Emerging errors include duplicate enrollments, spouses reported as children, missing data fields, and suspect eligibility determinations, say executives at more than a dozen health plans.
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Nebraska said it had to hire temporary workers to contact new customers directly to resolve inaccuracies in submissions.
Medical Mutual of Ohio said one customer had successfully signed up for three of its plans.
And here's what can happen to you if they goof up your name.
*Dramatic music* Nothing to worry about.
It's tattled downstairs.
Who can worry, eh?
Tuttle?
His name's Fuddle.
There must be some mistake.
Mistake?
We don't make mistakes.
Bloody...
So Obama named his security chief of Homeland Security today, Jeff Johnson.
When I directed my national security team to be more open and transparent about how our policies work citizens with drones!
Or unlaw, that is, in Obama's case.
When we feel like it.
Maybe sometimes.
with drones.
Jay was one of the leaders who spoke eloquently about how we meet today's threats in a way that are consistent with our values, including the rule of law.
Or unlaw, that is, in Obama's case.
In a deep and personal way.
Very deep.
Keeping America safe requires us also upholding the values and civil liberties that make America great.
When we feel like it.
Maybe sometimes.
Except when we kill Americans with drones.
Great addition to Thank you very much.
And it's interesting because Jeff Johnson was one of the major donors to the Democratic Party.
He contributed more than $100,000 to the Democratic candidates and groups.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Johnson donated more than $33,000 to Obama's campaign.
And an advisor to the Department of Homeland Security defends the Muslim Brotherhood.
An advisor to the Department of Homeland Security has used his Twitter profile to defend the Muslim Brotherhood while accusing Egypt's persecuted Christian minority of inciting against Islam.
Earlier this month, Mohamed El-Ebiari, who was appointed to the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council by then-Secretary Janet Napolitano in 2010, tweeted that he was reappointed and even promoted.
L.A.B.R.
is a strong supporter of the radical Islamist theologian who calls for war with the non-Muslim world and whose teachings inspired and continue to govern Al-Qaeda and Islamic terrorist organizations worldwide.
House Republicans changed the rules so a majority vote can't stop the shutdown.
Oh yes, this is what happens into the wee hours of the night while you're sleeping.
The House has altered that operation of that standing rule.
So, I just want to understand, Mr. Speaker, This standing rule of the House, which I have here, has been altered by the House.
Is that what the Speaker is saying?
The House adopted a resolution altering.
A parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
When was that alteration made?
House Resolution 368.
October 1st.
Resolved, and section 2 of that says, any motion pursuant to clause 4 of rule 22 relating to the House joint resolution may be offered only by the majority leader or his designee.
Is that what you're referring to, Mr. Speaker?
That is the resolution.
So, Mr. Speaker, just so I understand the situation, parliamentary inquiry.
H. Res.
368 changed the standing rules of the House to take away from any member of the House the privilege of calling up the Senate bill to immediately reopen the government.
Is that right?
It did change the operation of the standing rule.
The Rules Committee, under the rules of the House, changed the standing rules of the House to take away the right of any member to move to vote to open the government and gave that right exclusively to the Republican leader.
Is that right?
I also adopted that resolution.
The resolution?
The chair is now prepared to entertain one minute.
I make my motion, Mr. Speaker.
I renew my motion that under the regular standing rules of the House, Clause 4, Rule 22, that the House take up the Senate amendments and open the government now.
Under Section 2 of House Resolution 368, that motion may be offered only by the Majority Leader or his designate.
Mr. Speaker, why were the rules rigged to keep the government shut down?
The gentleman will suspend.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I think democracy has been suspended.
The gentleman will suspend.
Democracy has been suspended.
It seems to be contagious in this administration.
Alright, a new study has come out that says that 2013 is the least extreme U.S.
weather ever.
So it's exactly opposite of what they've been saying.
Tornadoes are the lowest total in several decades.
The number of wildfires on pace to be the lowest it's been in 10 years.
Extreme heat, the number of 100 degree days, may turn out to be the lowest in about 100 years of records.
And hurricanes, we are currently in the longest period, which is 8 years, since the Civil War era, without a major hurricane strike in the U.S.
And the U.S.
US debt jumped a record $328 billion, with a B, on Thursday.
The first day the federal government was able to borrow money under the deal President Obama and Congress sealed this week.
Thank you.
The debt now equals $17.075 trillion, according to figures the Treasury Department posted online on Friday.
Trillion!
Wow, it's hard to wrap your head around that.
And you too can stop the tyranny by signing up for PrisonPlanet.tv.
When you sign up, you can give your username and password up to 10 people.
And stick around until after the break because we have John Corbett joining us with his last interview before the DOJ silences him.
Yes, he got his letter right after the interview today saying that he can't speak about the TSA issue.
Alex Jones here to warn you about some of the most important health information you may ever hear.
I'm talking about radiation, radioactive fallout, radioactive particles contaminating the Northern Hemisphere.
Conservatively, since the 1940s, the Northern Hemisphere of our planet has more than doubled its background radiation.
In fact, that was before Fukushima exploded.
Now the levels are going up and up and up.
Fish are contaminated in the Pacific, and the FDA, the EPA, and others, they're not worried about it.
They've been raising the levels of what they claim is safe radioactive particles.
So after more than two years of research into how to protect my family, looking at all the literature, talking to the experts, across the board they agreed iodine is key.
But of the family of iodine, nascent, natural, non-GMO, non-factory iodine that comes from the earth is absolutely paramount for your thyroid and other functions in the body.
The literature, the research, it's there.
It's not my opinion.
It is admitted that iodine is essential for the health of our bodies overall and nascent iodine is the best form.
Now, we're announcing the launch of Infowarslife.com.
We're going to bring you scores of products over the next few years that we're researching and developing.
But nascent iodine is the first product we're coming out with because it's so important And it's also listed as a fluoride detoxer.
It does so many other things.
Your body needs it.
And when you don't have enough iodine, forget the radiation, your thyroid absorbs the sodium fluoride and other things.
Nascent Iodine, an InfoWars Life survival shield in double strength at half the cost of the leading competitors.
Please visit InfoWarsLife.com today.
Well, our guest tonight is John Corbett.
Now, you may remember him as the privacy activist who did a video showing just how easy it was to thwart the TSA's scanners.
He has a website, tsaoutofourpants.com.
Now, John has also filed several lawsuits, and the current lawsuit that he has is on his blog post I just gave you the address for.
But it is heavily redacted by the TSA.
Now, one of our writers, Adon Salazar, was able to find the lawsuit on Pacer.gov, where, interestingly enough, the redacted portions of the TSA took out are very visible there.
We can see exactly what they were concerned about.
We can see exactly what they didn't want you to know.
Amazing revelations from John Corbett.
Welcome, John.
Thank you.
Good to be here.
Thank you for doing what you're doing.
Now these are really amazing revelations.
Before we talk about them, let's talk about how you got to them as part of this lawsuit.
You were able to get at documents that they had marked for official use only.
Is that correct?
Correct.
So a challenge to most TSA procedures gets filed in the Court of Appeals and it becomes a review of the TSA's basis for their decisions.
So they provide that basis in the form of a whole bunch of documents they call an administrative record.
And in this case, the record was comprised of both public and private, and in some instances, actual classified documents, and therefore necessitated me filing two briefs, a public one and a private redacted one for the court.
Now, as part of these documents that you got, you mentioned in your lawsuit what they did not redact was that these four official use only documents, there's two threat assessments that are two years and five years old.
And you say they don't really contain any information that poses a threat to the law enforcement or anything that they should not release under Freedom of Information Act.
Tell us what you found when you looked at these documents that they want to keep secret.
Correct.
So those documents are labeled for official use only, which is an administrative classification, which means the TSA can just kind of mark it that way at will and basically try and hide from Freedom of Information Act requests and things like that just by marking documents this way.
There's very little oversight, very little review, but in this case the court did order that they turn over the documents for my review in the lawsuit.
And it's kind of interesting to look at this, because when we look at the redacted versus the non-redacted, you're reading through this and it says, it's in the public interest to release these documents because they contain the bombshell revelation that the TSA has.
And it stops.
They redact that.
But then what we find on Pacer.gov is that the TSA has literally zero evidence that anyone is plotting to blow up an airplane leaving from a domestic airport.
Correct.
That is the conclusion that the TSA came to in their 2011 assessment.
So they know that there's no risk to us and they're proceeding on with this absurd...
Security theater that we all have to be put through at the airports anyway.
Now, we all knew that it was a fraud.
I mean, even back in 2011, these threat assessments went back to 2011.
In 2011, that was a time that Representative John Micah out of Florida, who was the guy who created the TSA, he called it at that time, his little bastard child.
And at that time, he was talking about how he had looked at their failure rates, which they don't want anybody to know.
And he said it was totally unacceptable, totally useless, in other words.
He had already told us that their methods of screening were useless, so if they've got absolutely useless security at the airports, that would tell you, since we haven't had an attack right there, that there's not any threat.
But the TSA knows that.
The TSA has known that for a couple of years and have said that internally in documents, but they continue to go through this theater.
Correct.
The numbers, as Micah has said, were abysmal.
We got a little bit of evidence about that last year when I interviewed a TSA screener who flat out said the body scanner would miss things all the time.
Big, small, metallic, non-metallic, things like guns and knives.
You'd think that Something so big and obvious as a handgun would be an easy catch, but unfortunately it's not.
The TSA is unable to do this.
The new technologies are less able to catch these things because a metal detector has a pretty good chance of catching a gun.
A body scanner, on the other hand, does not.
Tell us about that video where you were able to sneak something through.
Sure, so I produced a video back a year and a half ago where I was able to exploit a vulnerability in the body scanners where they can't see objects of certain densities on certain parts of the body.
So in particular, metallic objects on the side of the body cannot be detected.
So think the ramifications of this are anything encased in metal placed on the side of the body can be taken through.
A firearm that's all metallic simply strapped onto the side of the body with no other modifications can be taken through.
And these were things that the TSA either knew or should have known during their testing.
And these are things that the TSA and the public knew after I released it in March 2012.
They're still not fixed.
These vulnerabilities where anyone can take a gun through TSA body scanners are still in effect today.
That's amazing.
Now, one of the things that, uh, most of the stuff that they redacted were your summaries of what you had seen in these documents.
But you've got one quote at least in here that says, as of, and this is a direct quote from the TSA's document, as of mid-2011 terrorist threat groups present in the homeland are not known to be actively plotting against civil aviation targets or airports.
Instead, their focus is on fundraising, recruiting, and propagandizing.
Kind of sounds like our own government.
Their focus is on fundraising, recruiting, and propagandizing.
But that's a direct quote from the TSA documents.
Correct.
And the big deal about this is that the TSA comes out in public, especially in front of Congress, and says, look, we need to molest the people.
We need to take these body scans showing their nude body in order to let them through because otherwise the terrorists are going to blow planes out of the sky.
Internally, they know that's not the case.
Internally, they know that the threat from these kinds of terrorists and from non-metallic explosives and so forth is minuscule.
They weren't able to find any evidence that anyone in the country was plotting any such attack.
So it is kind of...
Kind of normal for our government now, apparently, to exaggerate the threat beyond any kind of reality.
We saw the NSA telling us that if we don't let them wiretap the entire country, that there were 50-something plus that they were able to break up, and then it comes out that there maybe were one or two.
With the TSA, it's zero.
Absolutely zero terrorist attempts, absolutely zero evidence of any terrorist attacks being plotted, and this is the TSA's own analysis.
And we've pointed out many times that they've got another agenda.
And we can see that agenda.
I can see that agenda when I fly.
I don't fly nearly as often as you do, but I see that the general public has been pacified.
They'll just unquestioningly go through these procedures no matter how absurd, no matter how ridiculous, no matter how ineffective they are, the public will go through them.
I've seen people Brag about the fact that they were excited and only took them X amount of time to get through.
I don't see anybody other than myself when I'm flying.
I'm usually the only one who opts out, who challenges the system, who refuses to go through this.
The rest of them are just blindly going along with this and happy if it happens very quickly, whatever they do to them.
Yeah, well, the government has a lot of America scared.
They come out and say that these terrorists exist in public and that we need to have these security measures.
It gets a lot of people to the point where they really start to believe that the TSA is helping.
The comments on the internet so far regarding this revelation that you guys posted yesterday, occasionally people comment things like, well, you know, there's no terrorist attacks, it must show that the TSA is working.
Yeah, exactly.
That kind of logic is pretty crazy.
It's the old bear repellent logic.
I'm selling bear repellent.
There are no bears.
It must be working.
What is working is the control of the population.
Just as I mentioned, they just passively go through it.
You talk about the fact, well, hey, it looks like it's working.
Earlier this week, I don't know if you saw the story or not, we broke the story in Houston Airport.
They're threatening people, saying if you make any disparaging remarks to the agents, or you make any jokes, you might be arrested.
This is population control.
This is training for the population.
This is exactly what B.F.
Skinner did when he would offer positive operant conditionings to his animals.
Basically, you get to the airport, you want something really badly.
You want to get on that plane, you're feeling pressure as far as time, you want to make sure you make your connection.
And if you don't make any waves, you immediately get rewarded by them letting you get on a plane.
It's exactly what B.F.
Skinner did to his animals.
It's just population control.
Yeah, it does seem like an attempt at conditioning the American people to be controlled, to be comfortable with these security procedures.
And even the children that go through, there are kids now that have not been alive before the TSA, that don't even know what it's like to not have a government that demands to put their hands between their legs as a condition of flying.
Absolutely.
Now, in your lawsuit, you also cite some legal precedents.
You refer to a case, U.S.
v. Aukai, A-U-K-A-I.
And you say that in that decision, searches may not be more extensive or intensive than necessary to further the purpose.
And also, seizures must be evaluated against a reasonableness test that balances the threat against the efficacy and the intrusiveness of the search.
That's in Illinois v. Lidster.
Correct, so it stands for the prospect that the government is demanding to search us without a probable cause, without a warrant.
And we call this, or they call this, an administrative search.
And it's a narrow exception to the Fourth Amendment that the Supreme Court has carved out.
But the exception is contingent on the TSA searching only for things that constitute a direct threat to aviation safety.
So if the TSA begins to search for drugs or to search for child porn or to search for evidence of other kind of general criminality, they've broken that narrow exception and they're just conducting a warrantless search.
This applies here because these full body scanners are not calibrated to detect weapons or bombs.
They're calibrated to show everything.
And that's not a narrow search anymore.
That's a search to find anything that they can possibly find.
Yeah, it's a dragnet search.
It's very much like what Snowden is complaining about, and it's great that people are seeing that, but people have become pacified about the TSA when this is an actual physical search of your person, not just looking into your computer.
They're actually physically searching you, and we see all evidence that they're going to take this elsewhere, because they are the Transportation Security Administration.
It's not the Airport Security Administration.
They're taking this already to the streets.
They're looking to roll this out and I'm sure that they're going to, if they don't stage a terrorist attack, they'll use a terrorist attack someplace to justify taking it to malls or to take it to streets.
But I think going back to these legal issues, this shows the danger Of our accepting the fact that the Supreme Court can carve out exceptions to the Fourth Amendment for people.
Because once we take away the idea of reasonable searches, I believe that what the Fourth Amendment is saying is you can't do unreasonable searches.
Which means that you've got to have a reason for the search.
They define in that second part of the Fourth Amendment, they say the reason for the search, you've got to go before a judge and you've got to be particular about what it is you're looking for, where you're going to look for it, who you're going to search.
You've got to have a reason to conduct that search.
And over and over again we see that the mode of operand, the way the government is operating, is just to do these dragnet searches on everyone with the presumption that everyone is their slave or everyone is a guilty terrorist.
Correct.
We've definitely seen a slippery slope.
Not just predicted it, but it's happening.
These exceptions are carved out from the Fourth Amendment that kind of seems sort of reasonable at the time they do it, like 30 years ago when air piracy was a big deal.
They said, all right, put some metal detectors in airports.
And look at where that got us.
That got us to literally have the government touching us to have them Putting in these high-tech nude body scanners that don't actually work but are certainly quite invasive.
On the other side with the NSA and essentially taking in everyone's data and saying, well, we're not going to look at it, we're just going to keep it around in a locked box.
So that's how we're getting around the Fourth Amendment.
This slippery slope has to stop or else it will end with no privacy at all.
Well, thank you for your efforts.
Tell us we're about out of time.
Tell us what happens at this point with your lawsuit.
Where do we go from here?
So at this point, the government gets a chance to respond.
The U.S.
Attorney on the case is now un-furloughed, so we can expect maybe a timely response.
That's right, he's been on vacation for two weeks, though.
Yeah, a little bit of vacation in the U.S.
Attorney's office.
And we'll go from there.
So this is the last challenge to the constitutionality of the body scanners and the pat-downs.
The other ones have either been dropped or dismissed.
So this is our last chance to have a court actually look at Thank you.
TSA is doing and tell us if it's constitutional or not.
Wow.
That's just amazing.
Amazingly sad that this is our last effort to do this.
And amazing that people would stand for this.
Like I said, this is worse than what's going on with the NSA because they're actually invading your body, not just your information.
In my opinion, it's even worse.
But thank you so much, John, for your efforts on this.
We'll be following this very closely.
Thank you.
Take care.
Thank you.
Bye bye.
Well, it's an amazing story.
I mentioned B.F.
Skinner because his most important work is beyond freedom and dignity.
If they can rob you of your dignity, it's very easy for them to rob you of your freedom.
They're connected.
You have dignity and freedom that is inherent.
As being a person, a human being.
If you want to know more about your rights, as well as those that are respected, not just your God-given rights, but the ones that the Constitution actually expressly recognizes that these people are violating, go to the Infowars store and pick up the Citizen Rulebook there.
That's something you can keep on you, it's something you can pass around, you can inform others and yourself as to what the actual rules that the government has Before them that they're supposed to obey, but obviously they don't.
And if you want to keep up with this lawsuit, as well as other news, subscribe to Prison Planet TV.
Your subscription can be shared with up to 10 other people simultaneously.
It's a great way to pass the word around.
It's a great way to wake people up from the conditioning that they're trying to put on us through the airports, through the media, through the crony news, as I like to call them.
Well, that's it for tonight.
We'll be back on weeknights at 7 Central, 8 p.m.
Now you can watch The Alex Jones Show live as it happens at Infowars.com/show.
You'll find links to all of our content there and a free 15-day trial for Prison Planet TV.
▲
Export Selection