All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 1, 2015 - InfoWars Nightly News
01:04:02
20150101_Thu_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to the special New Year's Day edition of the InfoWars Nightly News.
It's January 1st, 2015.
Happy New Year to those of you joining us.
I'm David Knight and joining me today are Joe Biggs and Rob Due.
We're going to be talking about trends that we see, very important trends that have developed at the end of this year that we see intensifying in the next year.
But one of those trends, of course, is the fight for gun freedom.
It's a continuous fight.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, eternal activism.
We've seen that in states where marijuana has been legalized, they now use that as a way to attack people's gun rights.
That's an issue that's going to be coming up this next year.
In Texas, we have a fight for open carry.
One of the few states that does not allow open carry of firearms.
And here's a report from Jakari Jackson.
As 2014 draws to a close, I say my prediction and hope for the new year would be to see less persecution of gun owners in general, and in particular, to see HB 195 pass in the state of Texas.
This is the constitutional carry bill.
Gun advocates have talked to Governor-elect Greg Abbott, who said he will sign the bill should it make it all the way to his desk.
So I'm here in Austin at the Republican Party of Texas board meeting.
And today I got the opportunity to go to luncheon with Governor-Elect Greg Abbott.
I met him and informed him that I work with gun rights.
And I brought to him HB 195, which is Representative Stickland's constitutional carry bill that he's pre-filed for the 2015 session.
And Mr. Abbott has agreed previously that he would sign this bill if it comes to his desk.
Well, I asked him, hey, can I get your autograph?
Could you sign this print-up of this bill?
And he agreed, and he reaffirmed that he would be happy One of the most recognizable supporters of HB 195 is Master Sergeant C.J.
Grisham.
Can I ask you what I was doing wrong?
So you can just stop anybody in the world from rudely displaying a gun?
How am I rudely displaying a gun?
I'm walking!
Since that video, Grisham has become nationally famous, or potentially infamous depending on your point of view, for his gun rights group, Open Carry Texas.
After countless rallies, unconstitutional arrests, and negative media coverage, the men and women who shall come and take it may finally attain what they've been after.
And we see more and more officers standing up for people's Second Amendment rights.
And if you would like to do your part to keep and bear arms, be sure to attend the rally January 13th at the Texas Capitol.
And I'll leave you now with something for the skeptics.
The people who say gun rights are fine as they are, and there is in fact nobody trying to take your guns away.
You can find more reports at InfoWars.com.
Nobody's trying to take your toys.
They haven't taken the guns.
Ban assault weapons.
Says right here.
That's all semi-auto.
And I'll be brief.
First of all, to the gentleman that's dying for attention, someone needs to inform him that there is no gun ban currently.
But, because of the work that we're doing here today, we will make your side legitimate shortly.
So you hang on to that.
Mayor Bloomberg, how you doing?
Jason, I grew up in Brooklyn.
In the spirit of gun control, will you disarm your entire security team?
You'll get back to me?
Would you like a sip of my soda?
Every day, some kind of anti-violence, anti-gun message.
Every day, every school, at every level.
One thing that I think is clear with young people, and with adults as well, is that we just have to be repetitive about this.
It's not enough to simply have a catchy ad on a Monday, and then only do it every Monday.
We need to do this every day of the week, and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.
California Senator Dianne Feinstein worked for more than a year to get the Assault Weapons Bill passed in the face of ferocious opposition from the National Rifle Association.
She says she got the best she could.
If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it.
I could not do that.
The votes weren't here.
Well, Alex Jones and InfoWars has been talking about the growing surveillance state for decades.
Now, for many people, that didn't start until Edward Snowden released the documents in 2013.
But many whistleblowers from the NSA spoke out about it right after September 11th, when the rules dramatically changed.
Now, this last year, Joe, we've seen the NSA not only unrepentant, but we've seen them really double down on what they're doing.
Where do you see this going in 2015?
Police state, you know, times ten.
Surveillance and everything.
I mean, I think in the next You'd say 10 years.
Most people, most families, I would say, have up to 50 appliances in their home, on their body, at any given time, spying on you.
You know, you've got the smart TVs, the smart lights, you can use your phone to adjust the lights.
Those actually take your passwords from your Wi-Fi.
Then you've got the new Corvette that has what they call the valet mode, which listens to your conversations regardless of the fact if the Corvette is on or not.
And I see this technology moving over into other vehicles as well.
You know, you've got your finger in it.
And then they're going to use that to essentially force people out of cars.
Because it's going to be constant surveillance of everything about the way that you drive, and they're going to use that in conjunction with the insurance companies to essentially make it unaffordable or impossible for you to drive.
Well, they try to sell the whole thing, though, by saying, this is going to protect you.
Right.
This is for your safety.
The valet mode is to make sure that the guy's not digging through your glove compartment or stealing your music.
Or going out on some long drive like you saw in Ferris Bueller's Day off by the Valley guys there.
So that's how they sell it to you, is to make you go, well okay, it's not that bad.
But they gradually do it, and then eventually everything around you is spying on you, collecting data.
Like the TV, it listens to your voice.
How does that help enhance my experience watching TV by the TV recognizing my voice and saving that?
It's total surveillance at a level that many people had never even dreamed of before.
I remember the Prisoner series from back in the, I think it was the late 60s, where they kidnap this guy, it was Patrick McGoohan who was secret agent man, kidnap him and take him to this island and everywhere he turns there's cameras that are watching him.
And I remember watching that decades ago and thinking, wow, you know, what a horrible situation that would be.
Go back and look at it now and it's like, that's nothing.
That's how they get you adjusted to it.
It's like when you go into a store and it says sign up for this credit card and it's so neat and they're gonna give you a vacation and you just rush to sign it real quick.
Not reading the small print, the terms and services.
That's how they get it.
They're planning on you to be dumb as a user to not read that and then you get stuck with like my phone.
This right here, in the terms and services, it says that the NSA can spy on my phone whenever it wants, and they're not responsible for any data lost off my phone, pictures, conversations, anything I have stored on it.
I can't, you know, hold them accountable for anything whatsoever.
There's a symbiotic relationship between the corporations for whom you are their product and the burgeoning police state, the kind of Stasi East Germany.
They never had that kind of technical capability.
That's what's really frightening.
And of course, it's not just that they're misusing the technology.
And any technology has a good side or a bad side.
It's just a tool.
And so it can be used for good things or it can be used for evil things.
They always just tell you about the good stuff.
When they show you the robots, they say, well, these aren't going to be used to chase you They're going to do menial tasks.
They're going to rescue you during a FEMA event.
They're not going to hunt you down from the government.
But they always use the technology, it seems like, for the darker side of it.
That's really what predominates.
They'll sell it with the benign stuff and then they'll move on to that.
But from the political dimension, I think we're really going to see this ramp up this year because of the GOP coming in.
They love this stuff.
You've got the guys who are coming in as the new Senate Intelligence Chair.
There's going to be Richard Burton from North Carolina.
He says he doesn't think there should ever be any public hearings or oversight of anything that the intelligence community does.
Right, because spying on the American public is top secret.
That's right.
It's just amazing, and the people go along with it.
You know, they voted in this new crop, are they going to hold their feet to the fire when they continue the spying?
They're all up in arms about it now, but as soon as Jeb Bush gets in, or one of these other guys, it's going to be, well, you know, it's our guys, it's our team spying, so it must be for a good cause.
That'll be the cover.
It's ramped up to such incredibly absurd extremes.
Talk about paranoia and control freaks.
We had the story earlier this week about how they want to look at people's poop.
Yeah.
You know, they want to go through and look at the waste that's in the septic system and see what's going on in the name of the war on drugs.
That's really where a lot of this stuff started.
Now it's morphed into the war on terror.
But at the same time, while they want to know everything about us, even what our excrement contains, We're not allowed to look at anything that they do.
At the same time that they're ramping up the surveillance, they are closing off all transparency to what they do.
And that's why this is, why William Binney has called this a police state.
He said we do have a police state.
Once you have that kind of attitude in place, once you have that kind of policy and technology in place, you do have a police state.
Well, if the government or hackers, anybody like that, want to find out your daily routines, your schedule, it's easy.
There's microphones in the coffee makers.
There's all these different devices.
Some people are going to go, well, why is that important?
Well, if you make coffee at the same time every day, that's probably going to be the time that you wake up.
So, bam, they go, okay, this is when you start your day, making coffee at this time, so I know where to find you if I need to.
I know you're not going to be outside.
I can put something in your car that can make your car blow up, whatever it may be.
When you turn on the TV, what programs you like to watch, and they track it.
They put the pieces together.
And they put that entire schedule together and they know everything you do before you even think about doing it because it's become habit to you.
Yeah, so we've got right now, we've got the corporations like Google who make their money following you and I and recording what we do and doing that for everybody.
And we've also got the corporations who are going to be working.
That feeds the surveillance state.
Now the censor state, the censorship state, is going to be fed by CISPA.
And we saw at the end of the year, in 2014, what happened with Sony and the interview.
And immediately after they went for a few days, they come out and say, oh, it's North Korea.
And even though the experts said, no, there's not anything that points specifically to North Korea, they're sticking to that story because it's a useful narrative for them to sell the CISPA legislation yet again.
And we've already heard Obama talking about that.
We need more security, less privacy.
That's what you're going to see in 2015.
Yeah, exactly.
And the security isn't going to be security for anyone but the political class, the military-industrial complex, that new business model that's just now coming into full bloom.
And, I mean, when I got here in 2009, it wasn't even nearly as bad as it was now.
I mean, you know, the tanks were a lot smaller, the cops still had battle armor, but now it is fully ramped up and these guys are ready for war whenever the society breaks down.
And that's the bad thing about it, because it starts with total surveillance, recording everything that we do, but then the back end of it is going to be when they put CISPA in, because that's when they're going to actually start taking action against people far more extensively than they're doing now.
Of course we see a lot of people as they continue to post stuff on social media, even death threats, stupidly put death threats out there.
Instantly they get the police coming after them.
But we're going to see that used as an Internet kill switch.
And that's what everybody's concerned about.
And there's a couple of different ways that's going to come at us this year.
I think one of them is going to be legislatively, because the Guardians of Peace or the Grand Ole Party, whoever, that GOP, they want to come after us legislatively.
That's where it's originated in the past.
And they have an even larger majority this time.
And in both houses, I think Obama will sign on to it, because he doesn't seem to oppose any of this stuff.
But it's also going to come in other directions as well.
I think it's going to come from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
I think it's amazing that they have all this surveillance, they can track you whenever you do something wrong, but they can't find out what shoots down these planes, or how they crash, or where they go.
That's when he knows them, dude.
I know!
It's amazing.
They've turned us all into prisoners in our own homes.
They come out with cool, trendy, neat technologies, the VR, the Xbox, all this stuff, and you're essentially You know, they make so much money off prisons, they don't even need to do that anymore.
They can keep you in your home, occupied with all this technology while they gather all the information they want and need to take from you.
And look at what happened at the end of 2014.
Scaring people because we're going to have our movies that we can't see.
You've got people standing up and singing God Bless America or whatever, going to see the interview of all things.
People said they wanted to buy it so they could be patriotic.
It was their patriotic duty to purchase that.
So they're totally buying this government narrative of which there's absolutely no proof.
People who are cyber experts, many of them have said there's no proof.
They say it points to Russia more than North Korea.
Exactly.
So that's one part of it.
And then of course you talk about keeping us prisoners in our own homes with games.
On Christmas Day of 2014, there was widespread hacking of both the Sony and the Xbox platforms.
So we've got people who have now turned into spoiled brats.
Who are fearful of the enemy abroad and will justify anything that the government wants to do to keep their games flowing, to keep their movies going.
I mean, that's their big priority, and that's what they feel threatened by, and that's why they're doing this kind of stuff, preparing the way for all this.
And Obama said, we're going to have more intelligence sharing to protect people.
That's exactly what CISPA was.
CISPA was the Cyber Intelligence Sharing Protection Act.
So, he's telegraphed right there, there's going to be a CISPA 3.
And it's going to get even worse with the Trans-Pacific Partnership because we've had, immediately after the election, we had Rand Paul and many others in the GOP talking about how one of the things that they could do that would help the most would be to pass new trade treaties.
So the only trade treaty that I know of that's coming around is going to be the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Partnerships.
Both of those have hidden in them CISPA.
And we want to talk about the economy in a minute.
We're going to get back to that.
But before we do, let's talk about the health issue.
Because I think two things that are on the headlines for health are, of course, vaccines we talk about all the time and GMO.
Now, with vaccines, the big fear is that Ebola is going to come back in a way that is going to scare the public into accepting or being forced into having these vaccines for Ebola that are going to be rushed to the market without any sort of testing.
And then, of course, we've got the GMO issue.
Well, and they have the immunity, too, on top of that.
They've granted immunity to a lot of these companies when they make these vaccines, and they just rushed one out.
One in Britain is getting tested already on humans, which is a new thing.
So we'll see what side effects are covered up in those tests, which there probably will be covered up.
But I'm getting emails from people all over the country, and a lot of them are anonymous, saying, why is my grocery store stocking up with bleach?
You know, they ordered this back in November.
It's like more bleach than we've ever had, and we're not running a bleach special.
And to me, I'm like, what does that mean?
And then somebody else is sending me stuff in different states where they're having people come into these hospitals and they're saying they're Ebola, but then it gets quieted down.
And then we had the leak that happened at the CDC where they say somebody got contaminated.
And he may have contaminated others.
Up to 12 people.
And then they follow up with articles talking about how difficult it is to catch Ebola.
It's like, really?
Which is it?
Yeah, exactly.
And so I put out a piece like last week, I guess, it was about these vaccines they want to make, but they're going to be grown using cancer tumors as the medium to grow the vaccine.
And if I can't think of anything more obscene to put in your body than pieces of a cancer tumor.
I mean, we've already proven the link between SV40 and the polio shot in cancer and hundreds, tens of millions.
got that shot back in the 50s and 60s.
And now they want to actually grow them out of cancer tumors.
And they say, well, don't worry, it's not going to be for the children.
Well, who's it going to be for?
So I guess it's going in the flu shot.
I guess it's going in the-- what's the other one?
The HPV shot.
Oh, yeah.
But they never tell you-- And there's a new version of that coming out as well.
Right.
And these guys have blanket immunity.
They're never going to get in trouble for what they do.
These things will be tested in secret.
They're tested by companies handpicked by the big pharma companies.
So you never know if you're even getting a real test or not.
And that's just part and parcel for the thing.
I want to go to a clip of that real quick.
Just these are the comments that some of the doctors were having questions of when they were talking with the FDA.
They're having a big meeting about these new cancer tumor grown vaccines.
Let's go to that clip now.
Vaccines will be made from human cancer tumors.
That's right.
Unbelievably, the method of producing vaccines using cells that are derived directly from human cancer tumors has been approved even though the vaccines may induce cancer in the recipients.
They even admit it in this article.
And mainly this article is just excerpts from the minutes of these meetings where they were talking about these cancer made vaccines.
These cancer tumor born vaccines.
Here's the first section.
The vaccines may cause tumors in recipients.
These are quotes here from the meeting.
We have really identified three major factors that can potentially convey risk from tumor-derived cells, and these include the cells themselves.
And if they were tumor-derived cells, then maybe they themselves could form cancer tumors in a vaccine recipient.
That's from Dr. K.
Fact.
Tumor cell lines can cause tumors.
What I think is quantitatively different about tumor cell lines is the fact they can cause tumors.
That's Dr. L. Tumors may occur decades after vaccinations, but certainly if you're going to address the question about tumor risk of vaccines made in tumor cell lines, it's going to be a decades question.
That's Dr. C. Here's the next section.
FDA is there to help vaccine manufacturers.
But we are here to consider the issues that we would like to advise the agency to consider in helping the company continue the manufacturing process.
What should they be concerned about?
What should they be watching for?
This is Dr. D., who is the leader of the meeting.
And there's more.
I encourage you to go to Vaccines Will Be Made From Human Cancer Tumors.
Check out this article and get it out to everybody you know.
So I think the comments by those medical doctors were scary.
But there is a bright side to this.
More people are not getting the flu shot this year.
It's now got three strains of the flu in it.
We had Dr. Groupon exposing that.
But people are saying no.
My son has been telling people at his school, you know, people are getting the flu shot.
And he asked them, did you get sick?
And almost every one of them says, yeah, I got sick afterwards.
I guess they don't get the correlation.
I don't know why.
Maybe it's, you know, because of the dumbing down that's going on in the public schools and the fact that people trust these authority figures so much.
I think that's a really hard hill to overcome.
I had to fight with my doctor about it.
I had to go and debate mine directly.
I brought in a stack of articles and just said, what about this?
What about this?
What about this?
And at the end, he says, well, you've done your research.
That was her only thing she could say.
Well, it seems like they're trying to punish the children, too.
Or the parents, I should say.
Like, alright, if your child's not going to get the flu shot, he's not going to come to school.
He can't be here.
He can't participate in sports.
He won't be able to go on the field trips.
And if you're a nurse, you have to wear a face mask or you're demonized.
Or they'll fire you.
There was an article in the LA Times, I think it was, talking about how all these elites in Hollywood are not getting their kids vaccinated.
And they were just wringing their hands over the loss of what they called herd immunity.
And it's like, let's break this herd mentality that is not questioning authority, not looking at the stuff, even though you've got, as you pointed out many times in the handout, It lists all the different terrible ingredients that are in there, talks about the side effects, and yet people just ignore that and move along.
So we see climbing autism rates.
It looks like the latest projections, somebody said by 2025, half of the kids are going to have autism if we keep going.
But it's not the vaccine.
It's not the vaccine.
It's not the increasing number of vaccines.
Some of those ingredients don't cause strokes or anything like that.
Aluminum must be good for you.
Mercury must be good for you.
I mean, it is insane.
I want to switch now to another report that I just filed.
And we're going to premiere this one here today and it has to do with the GMOs.
And what I see as a trend happening, I think more people are going to agree that GMOs aren't bad for them.
That they've given up on this fight.
We've already failed these two labeling requests.
And it's a two-fold battle.
We have the battle with Monsanto, who's trying to just tell people that they're fine, GMOs are fine.
And then you have these kind of gatekeeping GMO labeling societies that have sprung up saying, hey, we'll label your product for GMOs, and we'll say whether it's non-GMO or not, and you can be in our club.
These people do not want this to go away because this is a moneymaker for them because people are paying for this now.
It's like an option.
But then when it's mandatory, well, everybody's going to be in there and it's going to dilute the playing field.
So they're kind of looking after their own pocketbooks, which I think is disgusting because they claim to be, you know, very anti-GMO, but they're pushing for no labeling laws.
Which I think is just astounding.
And then you have a debate that happened where Bill Nye the science guy was even there.
And you know, it was about half and half.
People were for and against it.
And by the time they get out of this debate, 60% are for GMOs.
I mean, it's astounding that people just can't do the simple research, the voluminous amounts of research.
Well, they come in and they present the argument from authority.
And they're very well spoken.
Exactly.
When we had those pictures of the rats that were fed GMO food and they got the massive tumors on them, that was from a study that they let run for a while.
Now they also, the industry, had produced a study that only ran for a very short period of time and said, see, no problems.
Stop the study.
We ran it for two weeks.
I spoke to a lady yesterday and she says there's a Walmart one mile from my home and there's a Whole Foods 1.5 miles from my home.
She's like, I know the food that's 1.5 miles away is better for me, but Walmart's closer.
Yeah.
And they're willing to buy cheaper food, even though it's not even real, over taking that extra half mile drive and spend a little bit more money and actually getting something that's good for you.
Now, of course, John Rappaport had an article last weekend talking about this, the same issue.
Right, and I base a lot of the report on this.
We talked about it on the radio, so it's really kind of, are we going to have this fight, are they going to distract us with this fight about labeling and talking about how everything is really rigged, or are we going to get to the core of it, which is really stopping We don't want them in the cross because of the cross-contamination, because of the amounts of pesticides you have to use that then go into the water, that then turn us all into females.
The biosphenol A's and the Roundup, which makes us infertile.
It's just, it's endless.
And so they've channeled this debate into, do you want labeling or do you not want labeling?
Not whether they should even exist or not.
And that's where the debate should be.
In the same way they control everything.
They offer us Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton.
That's it.
What do you want to choose from those two?
And so they offer us a choice of the labeling thing, and of course they know how to pretty much rig the labeling issues.
Oh, they'll skirt around this.
Yeah, they know exactly how much they have to spend.
You can look at it and you can see in the early days on these referenda, they were spending a lot more.
And then they kind of realized that the sweet spot was outspending the opposition about four to five to one, I think.
But they don't succeed when they come after small communities where it's a farming community and they don't want their crops cross-contaminated.
Where they understand the issue and they can't be sandbagged with these commercials, that's where they lose.
And I think that's really where we need to focus.
I agree.
Let's take a look at that report.
My prediction for 2015?
More stupid feminist causes.
We saw a whole doozy of them in 2014.
First, the hashtag activists set about to make George Orwell proud with the Ban Bossy campaign.
Celebrities like Beyonce threw her weight behind the campaign to ban the word bossy.
The idea is that girls are less interested in leadership because they're worried about being called bossy.
So it's kind of insulting to imply that girls are this weak that they can't overcome the torture of a word.
They just want to ban the word altogether.
Despite the trauma of being called bossy when they were younger, all of the women featured in the campaign turned out to be incredibly successful in their own right.
So it's less about protecting weak little girls and more about limiting thought, totalitarian state style.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi parliament was preparing to pass a new law that would legalize rape, prohibit women leaving the home without the permission of their husband, and legalizing marriage to 9-year-old girls.
There was no multi-million dollar feminist media blitz to bring attention to this situation, nor did Beyonce back some heavy PSA to put pressure on the government of Saudi Arabia over their characterization of female drivers as potential terrorists.
And there were all sorts of ridiculous things that feminists wanted to ban in 2014.
Manspreading.
They want to ban men sitting with their legs spread on public transportation rather than, you know, cross them effeminately.
The campaign says that it's a space thing.
And some women took their hatred for men to the extreme with the hashtag KillAllMen.
And that's pretty self-explanatory, but apparently that was okay for Twitter.
But when one woman dared to start the hashtag WomenAgainstFeminism, insulted harpies set about to demand that Twitter suspend her account.
Meanwhile, ISIS is asking Twitter for suggestions on how to kill a captured Jordanian pilot.
No harpy rage there.
But one thing that they didn't want to ban?
Nipples!
That's right.
While women in Pakistan are being stoned to death for marrying men that their families didn't choose, the feminists of the free world are demanding that they be free to post nip pics on Instagram.
Girls in the Middle East are being sold into sex slavery for as little as $10 by ISIS.
But in a creepy call to have the freedom to post her nipples on social media, Miley Cyrus photoshopped an image of her childhood head attached to a grown woman's body.
Yes, this is really the big freedom that feminists are fighting for.
And what is it about clothing that is so offensive to feminists anyway?
Who can forget shirtgate?
A scientist took a giant leap for mankind when he was able to achieve the first ever landing of a spacecraft on the surface of a comet.
But he was promptly brought back down to Earth when feminists attacked his choice of clothing.
A colorful bowling shirt featuring scantily clad cartoon characters.
And it was a shirt given to him by a female friend.
But feminists also don't like superhero t-shirts or being mocked by Star Wars fans.
They want women to have the freedom to make their own choices.
Except when that choice is for a traditional role.
And feminist Guardian journalist Jessica Valenti thinks wrapping Christmas presents is really oppressive, y'all.
And apparently the Christmas holiday is oppressive to feminists around the world.
Feminine activists promoted the stealing of baby Jesus from nativity scenes as part of its Massacre of the Innocents campaign.
Their demand?
Abortion as a woman's right.
So they're going to simulate killing babies to make this happen.
Today's version of feminism is a total joke.
What used to be women fighting for the right to vote and the right to own property has been hijacked as a means for social engineering by the authoritarian politically correct brigade.
It has very little to do with actual women's rights.
But since the word feminism has become a part of pop culture in 2014, and of course there's the ramp up for the 2016 elections, with possibly two female contenders, I predict even more stupid feminist causes in 2015.
These will be exploited to promote cultural Marxism, confuse gender roles, belittle men, and mislead women, all while completely ignoring genuine women's rights issues.
Every year we make resolutions to lose weight and get in shape.
And the truth is, it's hard.
Even with diet and exercise.
Because of toxic food in our environment that is stressing our bodies more than ever before.
Working with experts in nutrition and biochemistry, I found that super high quality nutraceuticals in addition to my diet and exercise Worthy answers that synergistically worked.
I can see the drastic changes every day with the amount of weight I've lost, my increased stamina, and more of a twinkle in my eye.
That's why we are now so excited to launch the Infowars Life Resolution Pack, combining three essential formulations.
Oxygen-based cleanser oxy powder, the secret 12 bioavailable vitamin B12, And your choice of super female or super male vitality now all available at a discounted price to you and your family to bring in the new year and make 2015 a true success.
That's Infowarslife.com or 888-253-3139.
or 888-253-3139.
2015 is the year to do it, and it all starts at InfoWarsLife.com.
Sold out for weeks through the difficult and extensive proprietary process behind its creation, the exclusive InfoWarsLife Secret 12 formulation is now back in stock in the last limited shipment of 2014.
The most bioactive form that has been created with our proprietary process, this ultra-clean vitamin B12 nutraceutical has been carefully crafted and developed over the last two years and is based on cellular science of how your body actively absorbs essential nutrients.
Secret 12 is taken by mouth, right on the tongue, and then swallowed.
No needles, no injections.
Vitamin B12 deficiency is linked to scores of serious problems.
And Secret 12 is a fusion of two organic, proprietary forms of Vitamin B12, bringing you a true, nutraceutical quality Vitamin B12.
Secret 12.
Secret 12 is an excellent Christmas gift and is tailor-made to boost your New Year's resolutions.
Supplies of Secret 12 are very limited.
Secure yours today at InfoWarsLife.com or by calling toll-free 888-253-3139.
2015 is almost here, and with it comes those New Year's resolutions to finally transform your body the way you want it.
There's a reason over 88% of New Year's resolutions fail, Make this year different by equipping yourself with Oxy Powder.
The next level in cleansing the body naturally.
Using Super Oxygenation Oxy Powder.
Available through Infowarslife.com.
Gently cleanses the body.
While you sleep with easy capsules.
Tens of thousands of individuals have used Oxy-Powder to cleanse their bodies and aid in their transformations.
Even InfoWars Nightly News Director Rob Dew has been using Oxy-Powder with incredible success.
Took it that first day, then I took it for six more days after that.
Twelve pounds melted off.
In about a week, I'd say a week.
Seven days.
2015 can be different.
Diet and exercise are important, but a lot of us have already tried that.
Oxy-Powder flushes it out.
Secure your Oxy-Powder at Infowarslife.com.
That's Infowarslife.com or 888-253-3139.
Well, we're going to move to some other subjects, but before we do, on this special edition of the Infowars Nightly News, and this is our January 1st, 2015 edition, we're looking at trends that have surfaced in the last year that we think may be continuing and building in the next year.
And on the topic of GMOs, before we move away from that, you know, the Russians have this Noah's Ark project that just surfaced in the last week or so, where they're going to collect the DNA of all living organisms.
They've already, we've already got a Millennium Seed Project where they set aside heirloom seeds for storage.
I think it's Bill Gates funding.
Yeah, exactly.
So what's up with this?
I mean, are they setting this aside, perhaps Russia, because they have banned GMO products.
They've tried to keep that out of their country.
Are they setting this up, do you think, because they're concerned about GMO or are they concerned about a coming nuclear war?
What do you guys think is up?
It could be hybridized animals that they're worried about.
And they're saying, we want to at least have a pure DNA line that we can go back and start growing these things again, because it's definitely possible to do that now.
And I think in 10, 20 years, the technology is going to, you know, we're going to be taking extinct animals and bringing them back to life.
So, that's one reason, yeah, but it could be nuclear war.
They could be gearing up for that and just saying, hey, you know, at least at the end of the day, we'll have something for the survivors to go back and rebuild humanity with and maybe replenish.
I guess Noah's Ark is a very good description of what they're doing.
I think creating chimera with genetic modification.
And again, we're talking about genetic modification.
We're not talking about selective breeding, which has been done throughout the history of mankind.
What we're talking about is transgenic manipulation of genes.
In other words, taking the genes of different species and combining them, species that could not normally mate.
So we're not talking about selective breeding.
That's not a problem.
We're talking about chimera that are being created.
And of course, you mentioned... Glow-in-the-dark cats.
Glow-in-the-dark monkeys.
Spider goats.
I mean, that's the kind of stuff that who knows what down the line we're going to get.
You may get spider dog running around terrorizing people.
Exactly.
You mentioned Jurassic Park, all the worst aspects of Jurassic Park.
Well, we're going to talk about what's going on in the economy at the end of 2014, where we see that heading perhaps in 2015 from a different perspective, from the InfoWars perspective.
But before we do, let's take a quick look at Leanne McAdoo's report about where she thinks feminists are taking us.
This is Rob Dew reporting for InfoWars.com and InfoWars Nightly News.
And looking at trends for the year 2015, I've seen one that I think is very disturbing and I want to share it with you.
And I believe we're going to see an increase of GMO products and the public accepting GM products.
And for a while the public wasn't even aware of these and it was till people like Jeffrey Smith came out and others who have said, look, we got to really look at these.
They're not being studied properly.
These are the side effects that we're seeing increases of as we see an increase in GM products being used across the board.
Well, now there's Hundreds of products being used and we don't know the full scope of these because the companies like Monsanto and others pay for their own companies to study them.
So they go out and contract with another company and say, you need to study this.
Well, just like vaccines, do you think the company's going to come back with a disfavorable report?
No.
In fact, I'm going to show you an instance where 41 out of 41 of the studies have shown there's no side effects at all to GM products, which is crazy.
But let's start with this article here.
This is from Popular Science.
In a face-to-face GMO debate, the four-side wins.
Will the debate sway you?
And this is a debate that happened earlier this month with a pro-GMO side anchored by Robert Fraley, who is Monsanto's Chief Technology Officer.
He's been there since the 90s.
And then an anti-side, which was anchored by, you know, a couple kind of professor-looking people.
Didn't really look like they had their stuff together.
In fact, When you look at the two and compare them, the for side was very well spoken, if you watch the full video, and the against side was stuttering.
Not too recently, the days of glyphosate, I mean, we've run through the best herbicide that the world's had to offer, and those resistant weeds are leading to more.
Those resistant weeds are leading to greater and greater use of herbicides.
GMO technology often gets conflated with Monsanto and Big Ag, but it's actually a breeding tool, one that can be used for many purposes.
In my own research and selection for disease-resistant cattle, I use many breeding methods, including classical selection for healthy animals, and more recently, the use of DNA markers to assist in selecting for disease-resistant genes.
In fact, they even get called out for once working with the biotech industry.
Here's that clip.
Each of these genes is regulated individually and looked at, and they are also looked at collectively.
And there is no reason to believe that they have any concern in terms of stacking them together.
In fact, Chuck, I remember one of the first times we met, you actually reminded me that the best way to bring this technology into the marketplace was to bring multiple products together so we had more durability and better insect protection.
In so many cases, the industry's done exactly what you've said.
Yes, that's true.
But this debate didn't even really look at the big issues.
Both sides seem to be arguing about climate change the whole time.
In fact, if you watch the entire video, climate change and global warming is said at least 15, maybe even 20 times during this debate.
I started counting about 30 minutes in.
To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there's as strong a scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs as there is on the role of greenhouse gases and climate change.
So that's very important.
with less environmental impact, like crops that are more resilient to climate change.
Feeding 9 billion people without destroying the earth.
Into an environmentally benign activity.
Science around global warming, just like there is on global warming.
So it's the way they frame this debate into this climate change, non-climate change.
Do we need GMOs to help climate change?
Do we not need GMOs to help climate change?
Not really talking about the GMOs themselves.
100% alignment, just like there is on global warming.
But the science speaks for itself here.
So before the debate, the moderator had everybody vote with their little keypads, and 30% were against GMOs, 32% were for it, and 38% were undecided.
Wow, so we're going to have maybe some people swayed here.
Well, by the end, 31% were against it, so they only gained 1%, and 60% were for it, a gain of 28 percentage points.
That means the team arguing for the motion, genetically modified food, has carried this debate.
You can't really have an unbiased debate when you have the for side that actually works in the industry and the against side, which also kind of works in the industry, if on the periphery, in the outside, in the government sector.
So both sides are going to be for government control no matter what.
You're really not going to have the debate on whether GMOs are good or bad for us.
You're just going to have a debate on whether they should be labeled, or whether only certain groups should get them, or only certain companies should grow them.
And you'll never get the real debate on whether these things are really causing problems or dangerous for us.
But let's look at the studies that they keep talking about, all the studies.
As a scientist I let the data tell me whether there's safety concerns and after 20 years and thousands of studies and I feel the weight of the thousands of academic colleagues throughout the world that have done these safety studies that haven't found unique concerns that I have to accept the evidence for what it is and let the data tell me whether it's safe.
So, here in Natural Society, peer-reviewed research proves biotech studies on GMOs are flawed and inaccurate.
and it quotes a ScienceDirect.com article, and this is what they had to say about the studies after looking at them.
"Our review also discovered an inconsistency "in the methodology and lack of defined criteria "for outcomes that would be considered toxicology "or pathologically significant.
"In addition, there was lack of transparency "in the methods and results, "which made comparisons between the studies difficult, The evidence reviewed here demonstrates an incomplete picture regarding the toxicity and safety of GM products consumed by humans and animals.
Studies for 9 out of the 47 crops approved for human and/or animal consumption.
We can find no studies on the other 38 approved crops.
14 out of the 21 studies were general health assessments of GM crop on rat health and most of those studies, 76% were performed after the crop had been approved for human and/or animal consumption.
So in conclusion, this popular science debate was framed from the start to get a positive GM result, no matter what anybody else said or what anybody else did.
They brought in well-spoken people, put them against bumbling kind of professor types, They weren't really good public speakers, and that makes them have less confidence, which has the people watching them have less confidence in their abilities.
And therefore, you're going to get the result in the pro-GMO side.
I encourage you to go watch the debate for yourself.
And just remember this.
Back in the 50s and 60s, they were saying, smoking's good for you.
Agent Orange isn't bad, Army.
Don't worry about it.
We're just going to spray it on the troops.
So there's plenty of times out there that government has been proven wrong.
So we always need to be vigilant and do our own research for ourselves.
One way you can do your own research is get this book.
You can find it anywhere.
Seeds of Deception.
This is a book I read when I first got here, getting into this, and we had Jeffrey Smith on.
And I didn't believe him.
I was like, these GM products can't be that bad.
They're talking about this being the holy grail of food production.
And after I read this, and at the end, what's really amazing is all the indexing that was done.
All the sources that are in here.
You really need to check this book out for yourself.
We sell it in the Infowars store.
But you can probably also find it in your library.
We also have Genetic Roulette, which talks about the adverse effects related to GE foods, genetically engineered foods.
So do your own research.
We also have a video series called the GMO Trilogy that you can get for yourself.
Now I want to go to one final article.
The Secret GMO War, Double Agents, Betrayal and Greed.
This is by investigative reporter John Rappaport and this is what he had to say earlier this week when he was on the Alex Jones Show about the GMO labeling hypocrisy.
On one side, you've got the people who say, we want to pass mandatory labeling laws that say what's in the food in the sense that it's going to say this product contains GMOs, genetically modified organisms.
Okay.
On the other side, you've got the people who are saying, well, we're going to do this voluntarily, but we're going to do it in a different way.
We're going to say this product is non GMO or GMO free.
These two things do not coexist well together.
If one side really, especially if mandatory labeling gains the upper hand, if that ever happened across America, then the people who are voluntarily labeling would really be out of business on that score because there would be no need for what they're doing.
Now that happens to be a million dollar business, what they're doing.
Not only is Whole Foods creating a niche for themselves by saying, well, we've got now 20,000 or 30,000 products that have no GMOs in them, but in order for them to say that, they're sending these products to the non-GMO project.
Which in turn contracts with labs to do all sorts of testing.
This is a million, multi-million dollar business that would shrink down very, very small if mandatory labeling came in.
So this led me to question, you know, who really wants what here?
Is Whole Foods, for example, really in favor of mandatory labeling?
Or do they obviously realize that this would put a big crimp in their approach to the whole thing?
And what I've discovered is that people are not always Not always who they seem to be, are they?
This whole thing about Scott Faber, as you point out in your article, Executive Director of JustLabelIt, the preeminent organization dedicated to mandatory labeling of GMO foods.
But he's also working on the other side, and he has some very, he speaks out in praise of GMO.
So here's a guy saying, well, we need to label it, but then he is actually, he seems to be for GMO at the same time.
And not only that, but in his former position, he was a vice president of the Grocery Manufacturers Association of America.
Now this is the group that's poured millions of dollars, also committing, you know, illegal acts, to defeat mandatory labeling in Washington, Colorado, California, Oregon.
So, you know, this is a guy who's been talking out of both sides of his mouth.
What is he doing being the executive director of JustLabelIt when prior to that he was trying to defeat LabelIt?
It's what we see over and over again, isn't it, John?
We see people who are working, we see one group that is controlling both sides of the issue.
Somebody like Scott Faber is the perfect example of that.
Somebody who says, well, I'm going to head up the Commission or the Organization for Mandatory Labeling.
Meanwhile, he's got connections to the industry and he makes an amazing statement that you've got here.
He says, we do not oppose genetically modified food ingredients.
We think there's many promising applications of genetically modified food ingredients.
I'm an optimist that the promises that were made by the producers of the technology will ultimately be realized.
We'll have traits, blah, blah, blah.
He goes on with all this in praise of GMO.
This is the guy who's out there pushing for labeling.
So maybe if we look at this, we start to realize that as they do in all of these issues, whether it's the presidential election where they control both the Republican and the Democrat, they are controlling both sides of this labeling issue.
In addition to this labeling hypocrisy, we've also seen bill initiatives get defeated in Western states, and then when you look at the money that was for and against these labeling initiatives, Monsanto always comes out on top because they have more money to spend and they can just weave lies together and make you believe that GMO products aren't bad for you.
When in fact, they are.
So unfortunately though, I believe with the amount of money and the stupidity of the American who just doesn't want to do their own research, I think you're going to see GMOs come into the forefront this year and become more popular.
But we can't stop it.
We can get out there, do our own research, make our own videos, and tell people out there about the truth.
These things haven't been studied.
There have been no long-term tests.
They don't even study most of the products that have already been approved.
So we have to demand studies, we have to demand independent studies, and we need to start doing it now.
If we don't, all will be lost and one day we're going to wake up with the 50% cancer rate, with the 50% leukemia rate.
Everybody's going to be sick and diseased and we're not going to know why because the answers were in front of us at that time.
But wait, now we've locked down the internet.
This has been Rob Dew reporting for InfoWars.com.
Hope everybody out there has a Happy New Year and stay informed this year.
This could be a year where we change the tide.
Of the many people out there that are just walking around as zombies falling asleep.
We need to do our part.
Thank you.
Okay, now the last thing that we want to talk about on this special January 1st, 2015 edition of the Nightly News is the coming issues with economics.
And of course, at the center of that is always the bankers.
And we saw a major sleight of hand, I think a real betrayal of the country.
as the Congress came back from the election in terms of insuring derivatives for the bankers.
And, of course, the bankers make money, speculators make money, whether the market is going up or going down.
They thrive off of volatility.
And the instrument that they use for that are derivatives.
But, of course, they can lose their shirt with derivatives, but not if the American taxpayer is on the hook with FDIC insurance.
And that's what the Congress did to us as they came back from the elections in 2014.
I think that's going to have major repercussions in a short period of time because they rushed to get that through.
They didn't want to wait and let the Republicans...
Take the full credit for that or blame for that when it happens.
The Democrats jumped in and did that right away.
So their masters and the banking community were really concerned that they had their insurance in place.
This is a tactic that they've been using since the Federal Reserve was created.
Essentially, it's to privatize all profits.
And then any losses are public, you know, are under the burden of the public, who never gets to see any of those profits.
We're always on the downside, no matter what it is.
If the economy's going up, we're on the downside.
If the economy's going down, we're on the downside.
It's just worse.
And the amazing thing to me is that most of the opposition has come from a few Democrat senators.
We don't really see the rank and file of the Republicans upset about this as much as I would expect, considering the fact that the thing that really kicked off the Tea Party was the bailouts.
That was what they were so upset about.
They're now laying the foundations for this again, just six years after it happened.
And we saw all of the different regulatory stepping stones that were put in place.
It wasn't like one day they woke up and all of a sudden it hit the fan and, oops, we made a mistake.
They were consistently changing the regulations going back into 1995, 1999.
They were changing the structure of the way the economy was regulated.
And I don't generally agree with regulations, but if they're going to get insurance from the taxpayers, there ought to be regulation and strings attached to that.
So we can argue whether the banks ought to have any insurance at all.
But if they do have insurance, they need to have some controls put on them.
That's a Glass-Steagall Act that was removed under Clinton.
But then they went in and they changed the way the mortgages were set up.
It was a very deliberate strategy to break the chain of title, to securitize these things, to create derivatives, and then to make sure that these derivatives were going to be insured.
So we see that building up again.
And I think one of the key things that's going to create this volatility that may cause everything to collapse this year is what we see happening with oil.
Anytime oil has drastic moves in price, whether it's going up or going down, it has tremendous consequences for the economy worldwide.
And this move has been drastic.
And it's going to start taking away these marginal players, taking them out of the game, which they'll be consolidated.
And then it'll go back up, back to its normal level, probably about $4 or $5 a gallon in a couple of years, maybe even less than that.
I mean, it went down so quickly.
But we've always seen oil never goes down quickly.
It always goes up quickly.
And that's been a trend that's been happening since OPEC's been.
Well, I remember when I left Afghanistan in 2007, it was around mid-tour, and I remember calling my mom and going, what's going on back in the States right now?
She's like, gas has gone up, you can't even believe, and it was just like in a matter of months.
Yeah.
It went up so fast.
And they told us one of the reasons, we're going to have cheaper gas when we go in here and invade these countries.
I guess we're getting it now.
Well, we're going to get it good and hard, because the country that has been at the center of all these big price moves, at the center of OPEC, of course, has been Saudi Arabia.
They're also the linchpin on the petrodollar.
That was the deal that was made with them by the Nixon administration, that basically they could have OPEC as long as, and we would protect them, we would give them military equipment, as long as they banked everything with the Federal Reserve and established, essentially, the petrodollar.
And I think in defense of that petrodollar, we've now seen Saudi Arabia and probably the CIA, which is controlling them, of course, you have Prince Bandar, who is intimately connected with the CIA.
When he was here for a long time as ambassador, he's basically living in Langley.
So you see them making this move.
It's aimed directly at Russia to destabilize things economically.
It really is an act of war.
just as sanctions are.
This is really sanctions on steroids.
But it's also targeted at domestic production, I think, because this is something that is set up to take out the domestic producers.
We see that America is now in a surplus of oil, a net exporter of oil.
We have the exploding markets that are being developed here.
And this is a move by Saudi Arabia to take out those competitors.
But I think it's also a move by our own government to take out a sector of the economy that would be most interested and most able to oppose them on this coming carbon taxes and carbon credits because that's aimed at the fossil fuel industry.
If those people are no longer there.
Or if there's less of them.
Yeah, or no longer viable.
They're on the ropes because there's fewer of them.
They don't have as much money.
They would be the ones who would fight this planned takedown of our economy.
economic structure through cutting energy production through cutting our use of fossil fuels.
I think that's a large part of what's behind it.
And there's already been thousands of jobs lost in the refinery sector, in the oil sector around the country, up in Canada, down here on the coast, especially where there's a lot of refineries.
They're just closing them down because it doesn't cost enough to produce it now.
There's no cost benefit.
Well, they're trying to hurt small businesses too.
Take, for example, the local Awesome Brewery.
You know, they're trying to make money on their beer, and instead the distributors are the ones who are taking all their profits and not allowing them to put that money back into their business and help grow.
And that's a law put in by the big guys.
So it's just something we see with this consolidation of power.
Three big guys get into the game and go, we want to get rid of the smaller people.
We want to control everything.
And who also make good beer, GMO-free, healthy for you.
Oh, they don't want that.
No.
Definitely not.
Now, a lot of people are going to be watching this and say, okay, if there may be a new viewer, they're going to say, why should I care about what's going on with Wall Street?
Why should I care about what's going on with the bankers because I don't have stocks?
It is going to affect you.
And, of course, you need to research the history of the Federal Reserve to understand that they are at the bottom of most of the things that have been happening in this country from the income tax on.
They have been driving wars.
They've been driving income tax.
They have been the ones who basically pumped and dumped our economy and took a lot of mortgages out as putting them underwater, put the bailout on the U.S. taxpayer.
So that's something that's really going to have a large effect.
But then for those...
Who are not investors, you're going to have a direct effect, especially those people at the bottom end of the scale.
You know, we had a lot of movement this year, a lot of people demanding that they get an increase in minimum wage.
And yet we also learned this year that most of the people, most of the new jobs, especially at the low end of the scale, are going to illegal immigrants.
And we've got wide open borders.
I don't see that changing.
I see that getting much, much worse for people who are just trying to earn a working wage.
Illegal aliens won't take your job and it's going to be those robots they're starting to build right now too as well.
That's true.
They're not going to complain about any kind of money whatsoever.
They're just going to do what they're programmed to do and move on and it'll save those places tons of money.
You're not happy with $7.25, whatever it is you make, you want $10?
Fine, you're out.
I think to a large degree, the open borders that the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce and others want, and that's of course why the Republicans basically supported it.
The first thing they did when they come back is to pass a continuing resolution that isn't just a continuing resolution, it's a full omnibus bill to continue funding for an entire year.
And funding this open immigration amnesty because that's what the big corporations want.
They see this cheap pool of labor that they can import as being a stopgap measurement until they can come in with a full robotic automation and basically gut the lower levels of the economy in terms of employment.
No more small jobs like that.
No more driving your own cars.
It's just gonna be a digital world.
And if you are working in a factory or something, you're going to probably have a robot overseer who's going to be analyzing everything you're doing, making algorithm changes, moving people around.
That's where it's going to get really scary when you have the robot boss.
And you're going to have that watch that's telling your heartbeat if your heartbeat's high, like, sir, you're doing something.
Take this pill.
They'll have something ready for you.
Well, a lot of bad news, but guys, before we go, let's talk about Good news that we saw.
Some good trends that we saw.
What would you say is a good trend?
I think a good trend is that we saw a lot of people wake up to a lot of issues that we've been talking about a lot this last year.
I think police militarization has been the big thing people have woken up to.
But that movement has then been hijacked by this race game.
Instead of just looking at it like we don't need cops with tanks.
And I'll tell you the difference, and it's sad, when you guys were in Ferguson, our view counts were up through the roof.
On YouTube, on Ustream, when we did the live broadcasts, they weren't nearly as big in Spokane when it was a peaceful protest, people just standing up.
Which is sad.
Maybe that's, you know, we still had our hardcore audience there and they were interested in the information.
But at least this is an issue I think we fully pushed to the forefront after many years of building the dikes and the dams and warning people and raising the flags up.
Now they see it.
Now they see it happening.
Now when they see these drills going on, maybe they're going to think twice going, wait a minute, do we really want this going on in our community?
I mean, I even have police officers coming up and approaching me on these trips saying, hey, you know, this stuff has really made me open my eyes to my unit that I'm with right now, to my department of what's going on.
You know, should I talk about this?
Should I bring this up to my boss?
I mean, and a lot of them are...
Are just wide awake now and they are excited.
And they need to be wide awake because it's not just going to be the people flipping burgers, but it's going to be the police who are going to be replaced by the robots.
I mean, that's not science fiction.
That's what the DARPA projects are really about.
And we already have the California Highway Patrol identifying itself repeatedly for people who want to get a job with the CHP repeatedly as a paramilitary organization.
What does that mean?
Well, you've got paralegals, you've got paramedics, they help the doctors and lawyers.
What does the paramilitary do?
They see themselves as a wing of the military.
So, if you're going to talk about a militarized police state, that's exactly what we're looking at.
But I think it's very interesting.
When I look at it, and look at the Bundy Ranch situation, again, that was another one that was a peaceful protest.
It was born out of, at the heart, there was a dispute over the legitimate disposition of the lands in the West.
and how that was going to be used with the Environmental Species Act and all these other things.
But why we got involved was because of the police brutality that was happening out there over that issue, because they created a free speech area.
And that's something that we've seen before in California.
Yeah, we've seen that in political conventions over and over again.
But we saw these police state tactics happening there and we saw the people standing up to it.
So that's why we went out there.
And I think what we saw there was a peaceful but firm resolution to the problem because people stood up peacefully to the government and exercised their Second Amendment rights.
And I think the most important thing about the Second Amendment is to realize that it is a deterrent.
Yeah.
the unauthorized use of force just as we had the mutual assured destruction of the cold war between the US and Russia and that we both have nuclear weapons we don't want to use these things that's a nuclear option but it is a restraining thing and that's the point of the Second Amendment that it restrains that so I think we've seen some very positive things in the last year I think we've seen Infowars and the alternative media be able to establish stories that bring them to national attention and And I think we've seen some things really move.
And we're going to talk about that and some other programs and how there's been a real change.
I think that's tomorrow that we're going to be talking about that.
Exactly.
And I think there's some interesting technology coming out.
They're starting to work with different materials.
Graphite's being used now as a nanoparticle, which could be some interesting developments there.
And people are creating technology that actually takes plastic and kind of renders it back into gasoline and oil.
We have this problem with plastic everywhere.
It is everywhere.
If you go to a beach that hasn't been cleaned, it looks like a trash dump.
And you can go to any Texas beach down here.
The parts that they clean look great, but the parts that they stop cleaning, I mean, it's disgusting.
Because it's all just floating out in the ocean.
It's all floating out in the ocean.
And, you know, the garbage barges are going out there just dumping it.
It's going down through the sewers or whatnot.
So I like people creating environmental solutions that are actually green alternatives, not this fake green we're going after carbon dioxide.
But, hey, we're going to fix a problem, which is we've got a lot of plastic lying around.
Let's figure out a way to render it back into something useful, something that we can burn again.
Well, it'll be interesting to see what happens in 2015.
I hope you stick with us because it's very important for people to stay informed.
It's important for you to inform yourself as well as your friends and family.
That's the basis of taking action.
You have to know what's going on before you can take action.
If you're not a subscriber to Prison Planet TV, please consider supporting our operation here.
With one subscription, you can share that with 20 other people simultaneously, as well as have access to all of Alex Jones' documentaries.
That's a great way to wake people up, to give them the big picture on one issue.
And then, of course, keep informed with what's going on on a day-to-day basis, watching the InfoWars Nightly News each weeknight.
Well, thanks for joining us.
And again, Happy New Year.
We hope that this is going to be a year that is going to be one where freedom moves forward.
We hope that this is going to be one where freedom moves forward.
This one ounce silver round is .999% fine silver.
Inspired by the legendary Spartan King Leonidas and his refusal to lay down arms in defiance of Emperor Xerxes.
Molon Lave, that's Greek for come and take it.
This is available now at InfoWarsTore.com.
Act now as supplies are limited.
And don't forget, free shipping and a free gift.
That's InfoWarsTore.com.
For all of recorded history, civilizations around the world praised the health benefits of silver.
At InfoWars Life, our mission is to bring you the highest quality, purest, cleanest, effective colloidal silver on the market today for the lowest price available.
You don't have to be a doctor to know the fall and winter months are the most dangerous time of year in North America when it comes to you and your family's health.
Infowarslife.com is very excited to announce our biggest run yet of silver bullet colloidal silver exclusively available at Infowarslife.com.
Now Infowarslife.com has taken colloidal silver to the next level using a cutting-edge technique that is free of toxic artificial additives.
Now more than ever, it's important to stock up on high quality silver bullet from InfoWarsLife.com and to help others during Christmas by teaching them about the powerful benefits of silver.
Secure your silver bullet today at InfoWarsLife.com or by calling toll free 888-253-3139.
You are watching the InfoWars Nightly News which airs 7 p.m.
Central at InfoWarsNews.com.
▲
Export Selection