All Episodes
Previous Next
May 18, 2012 - Project Camelot
01:15:20
05/18/2012 - Douglas Hagmann
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Bringing Hagman on my show.
I just want to say that there's a very interesting game being played and we have had at Project Camelot other people who have sort of blown the whistle from behind the scenes at the Homeland Security.
And so not everything and not everyone who works for that I imagine it's like a humongous organization at this point, is a bad person.
And we were told that they were planning for all sorts of things.
That's a given.
I don't think this is news to anyone.
Certainly, if you're in the United States right now, you know that they're trying to take it down.
You know they're trying to take down our financial system on a daily basis.
So for Hagman to come out on, you know, and report a whistleblower and, you know, I have this law enforcement friend or this friend who has, I don't know, former ties to law enforcement, I guess you could call it.
And he's basically saying that maybe the guy doesn't even have a source.
I mean, this is the kind of stuff that that's where their minds go, because they question just everything.
And they do it in a very sort of aggressive manner, even much more aggressive than me, believe it or not.
So it looks like, I don't know.
Okay.
I'm just getting a couple of messages here.
I'm not sure what's happening behind the scenes, but we're going to just keep on keeping on here for a little while.
I will take callers.
So if you want to call in and chat with me, this is your opportunity to do so because Obviously, my scheduled guest is now.
I also want to say that you have a chat room, so if you go to the Project Camelot website and click on chat, you can also go into the chat and then you can also ask me questions from there.
I will Yes, to try to get on there as well.
So, well, I'm kind of trying to walk and chew gum at the same time here and it's not that easy.
My site, we're taking a bunch of hacks.
Looks like I'm getting a lot of time out errors from your site and your guest site is also up and down.
Okay, so something is really, is really, I mean, actually, you know, and I am on the chat now.
So, so if you're on the chat, I'm on the chat.
And, and, and, and so feel free to, you know, to come forward to, to call in and to chat and the call in numbers are if you want to, to, to, what do you call it?
Call in to the number for Revolution Radio.
It is actually on my website, so if you go to Whistleblower Radio and you click on, you know, Whistleblower Radio or you click on the show archive and then you scroll down, we've got... 347-688-2902, Carrie.
Could you just repeat it right there?
2902, Carrie.
Could you just repeat it right there?
Yeah, 347-688-2902 if you'd like to call in.
Okay, thank you very much.
Is this Nighthawk, by the way?
Yes, it is.
Okay, I just wanted to know who I was talking to.
Sorry to be a little bit out there today.
That's okay.
I normally am right here when your show starts, but the sun was going down and I was outside messing around with telescopes.
Actually, I'm getting a caller here who's saying that I can interview him.
I would love to interview you.
And what do you want me to call you by your name and can we have you?
I'm going to add you.
Can I add this guy to the call?
Is that alright?
I would need to add him.
Can you give me a contact?
Yeah, can you just hold one second?
Let me get his Skype name for you.
Okay, it's kind of a bizarre name, so hold on one second.
Actually, what you can do is you can drag him into the call and then I'll see it and then I can take it from there.
Okay, there's his Skype name.
He's actually one of our hosts.
Here we go.
So I'm now, I'm not trying to say, um, uh, I just want to ask him if I can use his, his real name or, or, or if he wants a fake name.
No, he's fine.
He's actually one of our hosts here at Revolution Radio.
Oh, yes.
Yeah.
You're talking about Michael Hemmingson, right?
Yeah.
Oh, okay.
Okay.
Okay.
I, maybe I thought he was somebody else.
I'm not sure.
Okay, cool.
Michael, are you there?
Okay, I guess they're going to try to get him on the line.
Yeah, I have him, but I'm not hearing him.
Okay, that's fine.
Maybe I'm here.
Okay, great.
Yeah.
Okay, so so why?
Why would you know about Chinese troops?
Tell me tell me this.
Well, we've talked on email before.
Okay, so you're, you're actually down there?
Yes.
You are?
Okay, and you're actually willing to say that on the air and everything?
I already have.
Actually, I... Thank you for... I became a host on Revolution Radio because I... We were emailing and I... What's that?
No, no, I'm just, it's just, it's so funny how this goes on.
Okay, go ahead.
We had been emailing each other and then I listened to your first show on Revolution Radio and I heard Nighthawk say, well, if you want to do a show, give me an email.
I thought, well, why not?
So now I'm here as a host.
That is so funny.
I just couldn't believe you were the same guy.
That's hilarious.
Okay, great.
Well, that's, you know, that's cool and more power to you.
So, you know, there you are.
Anyway, this guy is one of my sources.
He's been a background source just because he was down in that location, down in, I don't know what do you call it, Baja or Mexico, right?
Tijuana.
Okay and yeah and and so let's talk about that because there are some people that are skeptical about what's going on and and I'd love you to just you know tell people the truth.
Well I I've I've worked as a journalist down in Tijuana since 2006 mainly covering the drug cartels and the violence down there which was pretty crazy In 2006, 7, and 8, it's calmed down a little bit.
But I had noticed over the years, the past three or four years, an incredible amount of Chinese immigrants coming in, and they were all men in their 20s and 30s.
We're talking tens of thousands.
And they all have a lot of money.
I do know that the Chinese government is Investing quite a bit of money in the Tijuana infrastructure with, you know, buildings and businesses and stuff like that.
And, you know, I'd heard for a while that there was a Chinese troop buildup on the border.
And so I started seeing, I wanted to see if this was true.
So I started going out to the desert area around, you know, Calexico and Mexicali, and I could see them.
the you know tanks and troops out there uh apparently training now the chinese embassy claims that they're just out there training because the the the desert terrain is similar to the chinese desert terrain i thought well you know if if it's similar to the chinese desert terrain why why don't they just train in china you know um i also know that good point yeah and
And there's Chinese troops also in Cuba.
In 2010, the Cuban government and China strengthened their military ties.
And so there's quite a bit of military and Navy over there.
So basically, they could invade from Cuba that way and then come up through the Baja California side through California, Arizona, whatever.
Also, Sean Morton had for, I don't know, the past 10 years, had several times talked about his remote viewing a Chinese invasion coming through Cuba and up through the South.
Right.
But in terms of what you've seen, because it's very interesting, I had myself a very, very powerful, I don't even call it a dream, it was some kind of weird vision type thing when I was in Colorado less than a year ago of Chinese troops. it was some kind of weird vision type thing when Uh, in the Denver Airport area, which is really just, well, it struck me as the most bizarre thing because it never occurred to me that that would actually happen.
You know, whenever I think, thought of Chinese troops, I always thought they would be like in, you know, in California on the borders, that they wouldn't make it that far in to our, inside our country.
I, you know, that's just, maybe I'm too much of an American or something.
I just never thought that they could do that.
Right?
No, no.
Shawna has, has seen that too.
Yeah, and so that's interesting.
I didn't know Sean did that, but I have to say that.
So the fact that you've seen these training exercises going on, we've also been told that there's a lot of underground base stuff going on, which I guess you probably don't know anything about, right?
I'm not aware of underground bases.
However, there is a significant underground system on the border.
Especially in the Calexico Mexicali area that's been there since the 1800s.
There is an actual quite a big Chinese culture in that area because a lot of the Chinese who worked on the railway system and stuff had settled in that area.
So you've got this sort of strange Chinese, Mexican, even Indian culture.
Because there were a lot of, we're talking Hindu Indians, of them working the farms out there.
But anyway, there used to be a lot of tunnels.
They built a lot of tunnels going back, you know, 100, 150 years to transport slave labor, drugs, of course.
And there used to be a lot of gambling casinos down there.
Exactly.
Now what about, do you have any information about like the coast and the shipping in that area?
Well, apparently China owns the port over in Long Beach.
Well that's, yeah, I've heard that as well.
It's hard to...
We have a, one of our people here on Revolution Radio lives in Long Beach, and he says Clinton had brokered that deal.
Yeah, I heard there was some kind of nuance to it.
I'm not sure what it is that, you know, I have heard that they're supposedly they bought that piece of real estate, but there was some kind of issue where, I don't know, they don't own certain things.
I don't know what it is.
Yeah.
You haven't heard any of the details around that then?
Not exactly, no.
Okay.
I have heard that they're trying to, also trying to buy Panama.
Yeah, I mean, it's very fascinating.
I'm also told by a certain whistleblower that they're buying farms in the inland area, the Midwest, because that's the breadbasket and they want to use that to grow food for their people.
Well, I mean, they certainly do already own much of our debt and a lot of real estate.
That's one of my theories why they would invade, say, for instance, you know, there's a big, whatever, civil war, economic collapse in the United States.
They could just say, well, we've got to come in and protect our investment.
We already owned it, you know, and so, you know, the World Court and UN would say, well, yeah, they got the right to do that.
You know, that's their property.
Well, my whistleblower and I were just, one of them, were talking about this, actually, and we were talking about, you know, I said, well, what about the New Madrid Fault?
You know, isn't that going to interfere?
And he said, no, you know, because that kind of just creates a shipping, he called it a shipping lane.
I don't know.
You know, he has a sense of humor.
Going up the north, you know, up north to south, a shipping lane, and that it would, you know, and that they would still have that, I don't know, there's like a highway they're building from Mexico up to Canada?
Yes.
I forget what it's called.
The NAFTA or something like that?
Yeah, well, you know, a lot of the hospitals are having a hard time getting a hold of medical, certain medical supplies, a lot of base drugs like the morphines and the Dilaudid and the Heparins and the stuff like that and it's all being sucked up into these basically government warehouses.
Some of them are headed into a lot of these and you can't see me but I'm making quotes FEMA camps are actually attached to federal pens, and there's a couple of places here in Kentucky where you got a federal pen, but also attached to it is, you know, 100,000 acres of Basically, a forested area with all these 50-person bungalows.
Basically, they look like family units, more or less.
And they're all empty.
And they have a couple of medical bungalows in the batch that are full of supplies and meds and drug safes and stuff like that.
But yeah, all this stuff is empty.
Okay, but you also said that there was this weird thing.
What was it?
There was this drug where this Vietnam guy told you what they do, nicking the liver or something?
I mean, it's really actually kind of sick.
Heparin, if you nick the liver with a needle and then inject somebody with heparin, they'll bleed out no mass into their body cavity in about 20 minutes.
Okay, and then they're stockpiling this heparin.
I mean, the government's buying it, right?
Well, there's all kinds of uses of it, but that's one of the more nefarious uses of heparin.
It wasn't Vietnam, it's a guard that I knew that lives up here now that used to work in a prison in Mexico, and they used to use it to get rid of problem cases.
So Mexican prisons are very strange places.
They're less prison and more sold-off as small towns.
Have you ever been around one, Mike?
Just the Chihuahua Jail, but I would call it a town.
Yeah, there's a couple that are these prisons.
They actually made a movie that featured one similar to it called Get the Gringo or something that just came out recently.
But yeah, it could be, heparin can be used to bleed somebody out internally into their body cavity and it makes no mess.
Nick the lever with a small needle and they'll bleed out through the lever very quickly.
You also have a phone call at 814 and I think that is your, is that your guest?
Yes it is, there's your guest.
Oh my God, that's awesome!
Okay, well let him in.
Doug, you're on the air and I'll turn it back to you, Cassie.
Michael, you can stay with us if you like.
You're absolutely welcome.
Is this Douglas?
It is indeed, and I apologize.
I'm embarrassed.
I talk about messing up time zones.
I apologize for being late.
Okay, no problem.
Well, I just, you know, I thought perhaps you never got, you know, my second email and maybe you just, you know, didn't know it was happening because it seems like our emails are getting crossed.
Well, actually, to be honest with you, I'm glad you brought that up because I've been having some recent trouble with my emails.
I've been getting them quite late.
You know, the date stamps are hours and sometimes even days before they show up on my system, so I don't know what's going on, but at any rate, I thank you for the invitation to your fine radio program.
Alright, well, I appreciate that.
Now, what I want to do right here is, first of all, you're on the air with Michael Hemmingson.
Is that how you say your name, Michael, your last name?
Yes, Hemmingson.
Okay, and you're a journalist as well, right, Michael?
Sort of a filmmaker journalist?
Yeah, I used to be a war correspondent, too, in Bosnia and Rwanda.
Yeah.
Yeah, so he's quite, you know, quite experienced and we just got connected because during this time when you weren't here, Douglas, you know, these people were trying to rescue me.
Well, you know, look, you know, I don't want to take away from his time.
Certainly we can reschedule, but... No, no, no.
Go ahead, Doug.
No, we want to, you know, I mean, everyone is sort of primed to hear you.
And Michael was just kind of covering some stuff.
He's already actually talked a little bit about it.
So we're good.
And he's actually got a show as well.
So people can hear from him.
And we can actually do this with Michael another time in more depth.
But like I said, he did rescue me and I want to keep him on the air and then let him maybe ask you a few questions as well that might occur to him.
Since he has certainly the background and the qualifications to be able to, you know, think of a few good questions.
And then what I was telling people to do is to go to my front page blog and to look at what I had written and what you had responded.
I haven't, you know, shared anything specific about what you said.
Other than that you were very gracious and I thought that was kind of unusual and rather extraordinary under the circumstances.
It's not like I was paying you a lot of compliments in that post.
Well, no.
And, you know, I appreciate the fact that you had mentioned the article.
And, of course, you know, these days you've got to be really careful with the information.
You don't know, and as I tell people, look, don't believe me necessarily.
Certainly go out and do your own research, go out and do your own investigating to the extent that you can.
Be wary of who to trust, and certainly don't believe everything you read, and half of what you hear.
Okay, but be that as it may, with your source, Rosebud, since now we've got you here and I can actually sort of pin you down a bit in regard to that source.
People are real curious because I did do a preamble before you were here on the air basically kind of saying that having a whistleblower talk about what Homeland Security is doing Especially when it comes to sort of preparing for civil war, for example, in the United States, when this is kind of, you know, it's old news, at least in my groups, maybe in the mainstream, that might be sort of news.
But so you came out with this.
And then right after that, you got right on to Alex Jones.
And I have some people who think that that's a little suspect, you know, and, I don't mean to pin you down here too bad, but as far as Rosebud goes, first of all, do you believe your source?
Secondly, how did you get on Alex Jones so fast?
The first question is, of course I believe my source.
I've known the individual for quite a long time.
That's not to say that we've had contact, you know, consistent contact.
I've known this source for quite a length of time.
And, of course, I would not have put my own reputation on the line.
Just so your listeners understand, I'm a professional.
I'm a career investigator.
I've been an investigator for 27 years in the private sector, multi-state licensed, I'm a surveillance specialist.
Multiple law enforcement related certifications.
So, I mean, you know, this is not my first rodeo and certainly not my first dealing with sources.
And again, I've been used as an operational asset by the Department of Justice and so on.
So, you know, having said that, and again, it's my reputation on the line when I choose to take information from a source and say, OK, this is what I've been told.
And the second part of your question, how did I get on Alex Jones so quickly?
Mr. Jones and I have, well at least his team, we've had dialogue before.
He's known me, we've got mutual contacts, mutual friends, so it was a natural evolution.
I think between the time the initial story broke and the time I was on Mr. Jones' program, I think it was probably at least 10 days.
Now if you consider that fast or quick, I don't know.
I mean, I don't know.
Yeah, I'm not sure that that's so quick.
I actually thought it was a bit faster than that, but I'm not counting exactly.
That was just one of the questions that I had, and I've got some background sources.
Yeah, if I may, I'm not even sure of the relevancy of that.
Is there a standard that's being measured by being on a job?
Well, no.
Let me just say that I don't know what you and really, I don't know a whole lot about your background.
I'd be happy to kind of back up and have you talk a little bit about your background and what you've been involved in and all of this sort of thing.
But what happened was you have a lot of detractors out there, and those detractors kind of come to the fore immediately, and people do some degree of research on the net and start getting all kinds of stuff.
And those people are saying things also about Alex Jones and so on and so forth.
And there is something around the sort of statement of civil war.
Now, I don't necessarily agree with this, but there are people out there who believe that, you know, it If you say that the Homeland Security is preparing for civil war, it's also they're encouraging it.
In other words, you as a journalist are encouraging it by saying that.
Do you know what I'm saying?
And then what that's doing is encouraging an agenda of rebellion in the people that will then further a sort of crackdown that will involve, you know... Yeah, I see where you're going with this.
I don't mean to interrupt, but That's like saying by reporting on murders that murders are going to increase.
That's my view.
At what point do you draw the line?
And as far as the information that I received, if you received that information, would you not feel some level of responsibility to share that with With people?
I mean, you know, I don't know.
I mean, I guess that's not a rhetorical question.
That's a direct question to you.
Yeah, no, like I said, of course, I report what I hear from my whistleblowers, from the ones that I feel are good sources, so to speak.
Once in a while I'll put something out just from a source and I will neither, you know, I'll basically, if I feel that it's a developing story or if I feel that it's
You know it needs to be have further confirmation, then I will also state that obviously But in in this case you actually have a whistleblower who like you said you know that's why I asked you if you believed him Because basically he's he's coming out in a kind of big way right and and talking about preparations made by Homeland Security and Also, if I recall correctly in the article you guys are saying that basically that's what they want
Well, essentially, yes.
What I said is this.
actually yes uh...
what's you know what what i would like to said uh... is this you've got it you've got a person's who uh...
uh...
through that person's position is in the has the ability to have the ability to hear things to talk with people at the highest uh... and i think the highest but i mean i'd expect it's the highest uh... levels of of all of the department the umbrella that uh... uh... known as the department of palm on security And I shouldn't say I suspect, I know that there is a level of access there.
And now, when you've got this person or information that, you know, I'm being told, look, people want to know.
Uh, the NDAA, for example.
Of course, that's been around.
I mean, or the NDAA, uh, uh, the National Defense Authorization Act that was signed by Obama.
Wow, you know, why?
You know, people ask why, uh, you know, uh, well, you know, did that just appear out of nowhere?
All these executive orders, and I don't have my notes right in front of me.
I apologize for that.
But, you know, when you start connecting the dots, you can see a pattern emerging.
But according to my source, and here is the crux of everything, the Department of Homeland Security, and the other thing, too, you know, there's the order for the acquisition of 450 million rounds of ammunition by the Department of Homeland Security.
Some will say, well, hey, look, that's You know, that's just a lock in the price or whatever, but when they anticipate delivery, that's something different than you've got the 366,000 plus rounds of ammunition for the Department of Agriculture of assorted calibers.
That's, you know, hardly reported on.
You've got all of these dots out there, these executive orders from the National Defense Resources Preparedness back on the 16th, you know, Executive Order 13600.
The Global Development Council.
Your source is, you know, you kind of started to say that the crux of the matter is having to do with your source.
Yeah, and here's the thing.
You've got the Department of Homeland Security engaged in a pattern of activity in preparation of what my source is saying.
Look, they're expecting violence on the streets of America.
And there's three or really we have three elements here.
You've got the prospect of an economic collapse.
We all know that Greece is really the model for America in terms of the economic collapse.
You've got the racial divisiveness that's appearing in America.
Two words for that, Trayvon Martin.
Look at the behavior of Obama and the holder, the Obama administration and holder with respect to Trayvon Martin.
Look at the overcharging of that case.
You've got, if you've ever read any indictment Any criminal indictment, read that indictment, and one can see the passive language used in that indictment.
That's not by accident.
You've got the overcharging, as I said.
Now you've got the possibility of him being charged with a hate crime, George Zimmerman being charged with a hate crime.
All of this is being done to set... this case is being set up for failure.
Quite frankly.
And when that happens, think of what happened with Rodney King.
And this is not by accident.
My sources tell me, look, revolutionaries thrive on chaos.
We have revolutionaries, not only in the White House, but the 42, 40 plus czars, uh, have cut their teeth on the Saul Alinsky tactics.
They've cut their teeth on the 1965 riots.
They've cut their teeth on the 19th or the Watts riots.
They've cut their teeth on the 1968 riots.
They've lived, uh, through and with the, uh, whether underground bombings, um, you know, you pick up the night.
I mean, this is all coming to pass.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry to interrupt you here, but I think we kind of get the gist of what you're saying there.
But I guess the question becomes, and this maybe has to circle back around to you talking more about your background, You know there are statements on your sort of resume that you have fortune 500 clients The FBI and the Justice Department in other words.
It sounds like maybe you're working for these people Can you appreciate that?
Well, okay.
Yeah, of course.
Am I working for them?
No.
But as an investigator in the private sector, to be very specific now, in the mid-1990s, I was used as an operational asset by the U.S.
Department of Justice.
My name is out there.
I'm not anonymous.
People know who I am, so, you know.
Okay.
But, you know, you're talking about, and I think it's the way you and, well, at least Rosebud, it sounds like you have, to some degree, Rosebud's same point of view of, well, the Obama administration and what you call the czars in the background there, and where they're coming from.
In other words, you're saying they cut their teeth on Well, you know, the weather underground, etc., etc.
And, you know, saying that they're used to sort of rioting in the streets and that they are prepared for that kind of thing is not the same thing as saying that they want it.
So, you know, there's a leap there.
And it's an interesting leap.
You know, in a sense, if you're warning people of that, You know what I'm saying?
In other words, they're going to go out and they're going to create it because they want it.
In other words, they're going to put hecklers, they're going to put people on the street to disrupt even peaceful demonstrations, to turn them into... I mean, this is very, very possible in the near future, especially if they want things like martial law, right?
Well, if I get the gist of your question, You know, am I in agreement with my sources?
Is that the core question here you're asking?
Well, yeah, what I'm saying is, you know, you were saying that they, again, to get back up, you were saying that the czars and Obama and these people that are working for him, they cut their teeth on the weather underground and people, you know, things like that, which is riots.
Okay?
And things going on.
And so basically you also are saying that this is what's something that they want to have happen.
You said that in your article, or Rosebud did.
Right.
That they want that.
And so what I'm saying to you is what some people would say is, and I understand where you're coming from, you're saying just because you're reporting that doesn't mean that that's your point of view.
Doesn't mean you're trying to encourage it either.
You're trying to help them get their job done.
In other words, by talking about it, you know, there are people...
There are people, I mean you must know this, that say that Alex Jones does the same thing.
That he's a great guy, that he reports all this good stuff, but at the same time, a lot of time he is doing what's called rabble rousing.
You get that, right?
And so he's trying to get people, there's a fine line between getting people to take intelligent action against their government and hit the streets as a mob, right?
Yeah, I think that was kind of a, with all due respect, I think that was a rather convoluted statement.
Look, the way I see it is this, and certainly I don't speak for Alex Jones at all, I don't speak for anyone but myself, the fact of the matter is, you know, we are watching, okay, none of this is My perspective now, we are watching our Constitution being shredded.
Of course, this did not start with Obama or this administration.
It started well before that.
I would say, you know, it started perhaps, you know, in the early 20th century, okay?
And at what point are Americans going to say, wait a minute, you know, We are losing rights every day.
So what do we do about this?
We inform, at least in my end, I inform the public, my listeners from my radio program, and also my readers of my columns.
So I inform them.
And if I have a source, like the source I have that says, hey, this is taking place, Yeah, I'm going to write about it, because, yeah, I don't want to see this country turned in to... I mean, we're headed right now, or we're in a state right now that we're about to lose a republic.
Yeah, I agree with you completely.
I mean, this is where, you know, I mean, you got to understand that I'm having you on my show because I'm kind of giving you the benefit of the doubt, if you will.
All right.
Because I believe that you're not just printing this because you want to rabble rouse, okay, fear monger, galvanize people to reach so that they can then be cracked down on and thrown into jails, right?
No, really, that never occurred to me.
To be honest with you, I mean, that never occurred to me.
Really?
Truly.
I mean, no, no, of course not.
No, no, no.
All right, well, I mean, that's, you know, this is just, you know, this is the kind of thing that is out there.
I mean, to me, that's pretty perverted and twisted logic.
I mean, anyone.
Okay, so let's apply that same standard to people reporting on homicides.
Like I said before, by reporting on something, is that encouraging it?
By reporting on the Watts rise, did the reporters actually encourage it?
I don't think so.
No, but there is a way of reporting things in a certain way.
You know, you have to understand, I mean, maybe, you know, it's great that you wrote to me and all that.
I assume that you don't really know Camelot or the audience out there in this particular sector all that well, right?
Well, apparently not.
Apparently not.
I'm getting that feeling here.
Look, here's the bottom line.
I've got a source that gave me information.
And a source, of course, a confidential source.
I trust the source.
The information I was given, I reported on.
I happen to agree That this country is in a lot of trouble, we're losing our republic.
Okay?
I happen to agree that a lot of the thoughts out there, and I think anyone with any ounce of common sense can see, this country being turned into a socialist, Marxist state.
And I think that this article, and specifically what this source had provided to me, makes a whole heck of a lot of sense.
When you start connecting the dots, people say, well, why did, you know, why, why is this, why is Obama signing these executive orders?
Why is this happening?
Why is that happening?
Well, you know what?
Nothing happens in a vacuum.
So connect the dots.
Yes, I happen to, to, to agree with my source.
I happen, you know, and when my sources, you know, DHS, they are, they're, they're, they're waiting for this, you know, or I'm sorry, they're, excuse me, They're taking their marching orders from the Obama administration.
Let's go into that a little bit because that was also another point that I was making.
My understanding is Obama is not the guy in charge.
I agree with that.
Okay.
So when this, this source of yours is saying Obama is, is, you know, is basically calling the shots on this and his administration is calling the shots on this.
My information is that it's Bush senior and his group that are basically calling the shots and Obama is simply, he's actually miserably following orders.
That's my understanding.
Okay, I see where you're coming from there.
Yes, I would have, look, who created the Department of Homeland Security?
It was George W. Bush, of course.
Who created, I mean, you know, the Patriot Act, it was a bipartisan deal, but, you know, it originated after 9-11, of course.
Of course, the Bush administration has a big hand in this.
Now, that is well beyond, okay, the actual who's behind who's behind who.
Look, I don't know.
I don't have that level of knowledge.
All I'm saying is, I've got this one source telling me that, you know, and look, Obama might not be the one, you know, that's ultimately calling the shots, but Obama's not a stuffed shirt either.
Okay, he is saying things, he is doing things, that, you know, on his own, obviously.
Well, I mean, no, really, let's get down to the nitty-gritty here, because if your source is saying, as you quoted him to be saying, that he's laying a lot of this at Obama and Obama's, I guess he called them the czars behind him, Their door.
In other words, he's laying this at their door.
He is not alluding to the Bushes.
He is not alluding to somebody behind the, you know, scene pulling in the guy's chain or, you know, or a puppet master.
I am asking you here if you think, you know, I mean, you obviously sort of have agreed to me that the Bushes have a big You know, hand in this, you called it.
But let's, let's, I mean, again, you know, and I hate to kind of throw you in the deep end here, but in Camelot, you know, it's a given because we deal with black projects, we deal with whistleblowers from black projects.
So we're talking to people that are involved in the secret space program, that are involved in the secret government.
And from our point of view, you know, Obama is a front man and he serves a purpose.
And they're, they're, they're very quickly grooming Romney and probably Jeb Bush to be the next front men.
Right.
And I agree with that.
And they want to move Obama out of the way.
And this is one of the ways they can do that.
They can get people like you or Rosebud to go out there and say, well, Obama and them are planning for civil war.
They're doing this, they're doing that.
And let's get rid of Obama.
Right.
Yes, I'm here.
And yet the alternative to Obama is going to be Jeb Bush.
That's, you know, and Romney, who is he's going to go down because he's got so many financial, you know, snafus in his background that, you know, and that's a kind way of putting it.
Okay.
Douglas Hagman and Michael Hemming.
Hemmingson, are you there?
Yes, I'm here.
Yes, I'm here.
Okay, great.
Sorry for the bit of confusion here.
Okay, well, you know, Douglas, right before the break, I was basically kind of asking you a question, and I don't know, you know, I understand that you still work for Fortune 500 companies, and I can assure you that if they knew you were on my radio show, they might be having fits right now.
Do you know that?
Well, you know, okay.
Yes, I do.
But to understand the nature of my work, okay.
Look, I work for, okay, my ultimate product ends up in the hands of Fortune 500 companies There are go-betweens.
So, I mean, you know, again, I've been in this business, I've been an investigator 27 years.
I do understand how the system works, but, you know, on the other hand, I don't believe That my business, what I do as an investor in the private sector is going to be affected by what I say with respect to the companies that I work for and the type of work I do, the corporate fraud angle.
Now, you know, I could be totally wrong.
I could wake up Monday morning and then say, holy cow, you know, boy, was I wrong!
And, you know, that's very well, that's very possible.
But let me say this before we go on.
I really, I think, That we are probably more in agreement with each other than it may seem by this conversation.
Well, yeah, that's why I was asking you if you could tell me who you think is really running things.
Well, look, the whole problem, you know, of course, is the fictitious right-left paradigm.
Look, I'm a reformed neocon, okay?
I mean, I was, you know, I was just a Raw, raw Republican, you know.
They bombed us.
Let's go bomb the hell out of them.
And, you know, thinking nothing else.
Waving the flag and, you know, playing the Lee Greenwood songs and, you know, getting caught up in all that.
And then things began, you know, during the second part of the Bush administration.
I started to think, wait a minute.
Things aren't adding up here.
And look, I was a hard sell and a slow sell.
Because, you know, I'm a stubborn guy.
27 years doing investigative work, I like to see facts.
So then, you know, you have to stop.
And it takes a while to research and, you know, become informed and to verify things.
So who's running things?
You know, look, it's a globalist agenda.
The Bushes are a part of it.
You've got the Rockefellers.
You've got Soros.
You've got all these people.
Of course Obama is a front man.
Of course he is.
But does he have no say?
Of course not.
And because of his race, although he's not African American, he's more Arab than African, But the race card is being played.
The globalists are using the race card to their advantage.
And again, the people that we have in office, like it or not, I'd be saying this if it was George Bush or George Smith or whoever, the person we have in office is truly A revolutionary.
I mean, when I say revolutionary, not in a good way, in a Che Guevara way.
And I don't think anyone can doubt that.
He's got the, I mean, you know, he's a Saul Alinsky revolutionary.
I mean, it's, and they thrive on chaos.
And of course, what's the best way to break down, you know, what's the best way to attack America, to destroy America?
Zebrinsky, however you say his name.
I mean, this is the guy who taught Obama what he knows.
Okay, okay.
Okay, so I don't think you would be, I don't call those people revolutionaries.
I mean, maybe you do coming from a very far right-wing perspective, but let's get real.
I mean, these people, you know, they have agendas.
They've been rolling them out.
I mean, it had to do with, you know, invading, you know, Afghanistan, and then you go into the Middle East, and you do this whole thing.
I mean, they've got a very long, you know, they're as bad as the Chinese.
They've got a very long view, and they're rolling it out.
And Obama's just part of that scenario.
You know, so, you know, I just, Calling them revolutionaries, that's just like no way.
I appreciate you're probably alluding to like some of his connections in Chicago and this and that.
You know, if you want to call Illuminati members of the Illuminati revolutionaries, then go right ahead.
But we've got real problems with that because, you know, in my... No, no, I understand that.
You know, here's the problem between you and I right now with respect to this.
I guess we're getting into the subject well beyond the scope of the actual subject matter.
You know, certainly the information I received has nothing to do with, you know, look, my source, you know, if I'd say, hey, who's really running things, you know?
Well, DH, I mean, my source sees what my source sees.
I take that information and I provide it to my listeners.
Beyond that, I mean, you know, it's so, you know, we're dealing with a, well, actually, we're commingling a couple of issues, which we probably shouldn't be doing.
I probably should be sticking with just the information that was given to me.
Well, no, I mean, this stuff was all in, it was in the statements that came across.
I mean, they were alluding to who was running things.
I mean, that is the subject and we are talking about that.
And we're talking about whether or not that indeed was Obama or is Obama and his cohorts, so to speak, and so on.
So what I'd like to do at this point, I get where you're going.
What I'd like to do is back up.
And you know, because we didn't get to have sort of an official beginning to this, you know, with everything that happened.
And I think in fairness to you, allow you to say a bit about your background.
Talk about, you know, what you've been involved in, how you got to this place, and how you became what is in essence kind of an investigative reporter of some type.
Because As an investigator, my understanding is investigators work in the dark.
They work in secret.
But you're publicizing stuff.
So you're doing kind of what I do.
And so you've made a crossover somehow, someway in your career.
I'm just curious the trajectory.
Maybe you can talk about how you started out, what you've been doing, and how you got to this place.
Okay.
Yeah, I will do that.
Let me just address the latter part of your statement first.
I am an investigator.
by profession, and of course, more as a hobby, if you will, or an interest, because I don't golf, I don't hunt, I don't have a life, basically.
I'm saying that jokingly.
But I care about the future of my country.
I've taken a great interest in attempting to do what I can to expose the fraud and the corruption in our country.
So they're two separate issues.
I'm a professional career investigator.
The other part of that is, of course, not how I came to be.
The other part of that, and the more public side, again, totally two different things.
However, I do use my investigative skills for the latter.
But anyway, Again, beginning 27 years ago, I got into the investigative field.
I worked in the private sector.
I've clocked over, right now, 8,000-plus investigations, well over 50,000 hours.
I'm a surveillance specialist.
I wrote a textbook called Tactical Surveillance.
It's used in numerous law enforcement academies, and you might say, wow, geez.
You're teaching people how to do surveillance.
Well, no.
Well, yes, I am, however, but, you know, surveillance is not a bad thing when you're going after, you know, attempting to reign in fraud and if it's done within the legal parameters of the U.S.
Code.
And that, of course, is part of my background.
And as I went on as an investigative specialist in surveillance, of course, And also in general investigations.
I'm also certified in the forensic discipline of blitz matter analysis, for example.
So I've worked as a consultant on homicide cases.
I've worked as an operational asset on intellectual property theft with the Department of Justice.
I've worked as an operational asset on surveillance cases with both New York and Pennsylvania State Police.
During the 1990s, I've conducted numerous background investigations for Fortune 500 and Fortune 100 companies for board members.
Specifically, you know, for employment purposes.
That's what I do for a living.
That's my primary profession.
Are you at liberty to be able to name some of those Fortune 100 companies?
No, I would never do that.
Can you tell me, are they in the aerospace industry?
Are they in a certain sector of industry?
The majority of them are in the insurance industry.
If that helps.
That's a pretty generic Pretty general term, the majority are in the insurance industry.
So having said that, following the events of September 11, 2001, what I did, myself and a couple of other investigators who basically I consider at the top of their profession, we got together and we said, hey, let's see what we can do, use our skills.
One was extremely adept at using the internet and tracing things down there and so on.
We all got together, formed Northeast Intelligence Network, formed a website that did not go public.
We just worked in the dark for a while.
Provided we contacted, well, we contacted the FBI, said, look, you know, we'll monitor Arabic language websites.
We had a linguist or a translator, Arabic translator on, somebody who's fluent in Farsi, and we were watching the conversations and dialogue on Arabic language websites.
And we provide information to the federal government.
And we did that for a couple of years.
I did that for a couple of several years.
Can I just ask you, were you ever trained, you know, in law enforcement or as a CIA asset?
No, no, I have never been a CIA asset.
Or FBI?
Yes, I have worked as an operational asset for the extremely adept at using the internet and tracing things down there and so on.
We all got together, formed the Northeast Intelligence Network, formed a website that did not go public.
We just worked in the dark for a while.
We contacted the FBI and said, look, we'll monitor Arabic language websites.
We had a linguist or a translator, an Arabic translator on, somebody who flew in the Farsi, and we were watching the conversations and dialogue on Arabic language websites, and we provided information to the federal government.
And then we did that for a couple of years.
I did that for several years.
Okay.
And that brings us to the point where...
Go ahead.
Can I just ask you, were you ever trained in law enforcement or as a CIA asset?
No, I have never been a CIA asset.
Or FBI?
Yes, I have worked as an operational asset for the FBI.
Have you been trained?
In other words, can you use a gun, this kind of stuff?
I don't even know what it all entails when somebody is trained, but have you been trained by law enforcement or any of this?
Yes, yes.
To answer your question, yes.
But I do not work as a commissioned law enforcement officer.
I am not a commissioned law enforcement officer.
I'm an investigator in the private sector.
Okay.
Any other questions?
I'm just trying to... Well, it brings me to the point where after, again, 2001 happened, we got together, we started Northeast Intelligence Network, providing information to the FBI, and, you know, I've got a letter saying, hey, you know, sure, we'll take your help.
In fact, this is, I think, before even InfraGard was created.
But anyway, as time went on, again, you know, approximately mid-Bush term, I started realizing, wait a minute, things aren't adding up here.
You know, what I'm seeing on the news is not what I'm seeing actually taking place.
There's something wrong here.
And then from there, You know, I guess you can call me a reformed neocon.
I said, hey, look, all I'm looking for is the facts.
All I'm looking for is the truth.
I don't care where it leads.
I don't care if it leads to Bush.
I don't care if it leads to Cheney.
I don't care if it leads to your mother.
Okay?
I just want to find the truth.
And from that, you know, for, you know, like I said, almost 30 years, you develop a lot of law enforcement contacts.
And these law enforcement contacts get tapped by certain agencies.
They rise through the ranks.
I got dozens of friends who work for federal agencies and law enforcement agencies and what have you.
You know, it just so happens this one particular person was in a place, a certain place, that was able to offer me with information.
So I guess that kind of brings us up to speed.
I don't know if that answers your question or not.
Yeah, I mean, you know, I think it helps people that are listening kind of try to get something, you know, a context, in other words, to put everything into.
With with with respect to you and and I appreciate that what I would like to say is Is because you see you do seem to have some kind of law enforcement Well, you would call it training.
Is that training by the FBI or is it training or you you know?
I don't want to pry if you're not able to reveal.
It's municipal.
No, it would be okay Municipal police officers training But, look, if you study to be a lawyer, you become a lawyer, but you don't take the bar to practice law because that's not what you're interested in.
I was never interested in becoming a police officer.
So, I mean, quite frankly, I just could never justify getting shot at and the paperwork for, what, $35,000 a year or whatever they get paid.
So, you know, I decided to stick with the private sector.
Uh, and I've got additional continuing education certifications and also other law enforcement related doc, you know, certifications that go with that.
So you were trained initially in some of those tactics, whatever that is.
Yes.
And it varies by state.
So, I mean, you know, uh, but no, I was never trained by the FBI.
I never went to the Academy.
I have nothing to do with the CIA.
I have, you know, I have, I know CIA agents, but no, I don't work for any government agency at all.
Okay.
So, I mean, it's all private, but, but, you know, I understand.
Okay.
Uh, uh, let me ask you this.
Uh, do you know who a guy named Drake is?
Um, Drake?
Yeah.
He's out in the public right now talking about, uh, sort of a patriot type of things.
I don't know why it sounds familiar, but it does.
Sounds like you don't know right off.
You actually may have heard his name because he's starting to get around, but I was just curious whether you'd ever crossed paths with him.
Let me ask you this.
Have you got ties with various Patriot groups around the U.S.?
No.
You mean Patriot groups?
No.
But you know they exist, right?
You know they exist, right?
Well, of course.
Of course.
No, I don't.
No, no, no.
No, I don't have ties with them.
I'm not a Tea Party member.
I don't have any ties with any militias.
I don't have any ties with them.
No, no, no.
Okay.
Well, I mean, I'm not trying to, you know, I mean that I wouldn't consider that a bad thing.
I'm just, you know, yeah, I'm just stating a fact now.
I mean, You know, and look, and again, I just, you know, cutting to the chase, I don't mind, you know, the trackers, or whatever, I mean, it just gets, it gets, and I expect that, okay?
I put the information out there, and, you know, look, if you choose not to believe it, or, not you, but people choose not to believe it, that's totally up to them, you know?
I don't live for anyone's approval, certainly the approval of anonymous people behind fake false names on the internet, or people that never get out of their mother's basement and play my voice backwards.
Do you know who Steve Quayle is?
Yes, he's a good friend of mine.
Okay, so you're familiar with the books he's written about, for example, the Anunnaki, the very tall beings?
Yes.
Have you read those books?
Yes, why?
Just curious, because the Camelot audience, we go in that direction, so I was just wondering if you had any knowledge.
I didn't want to ask you about that if it would be coming out of left field for you, but if you knew who Steve Quayle was, I figured that you would know certain things, because he covers a gamut, right?
Oh yeah, yeah.
In fact, on my show I interviewed him on Wednesday, or Thursday, yesterday I guess it was.
And I talked to him today.
So yeah, I mean, he's a good friend of mine, Steve Quayle.
Very good friend of mine.
And he's written, I think, nine books, ten books now maybe.
Breathe No Evil, all that stuff.
I agree with 99.8% of what he says.
Okay.
Now, Michael, you've been real quiet over there, Michael Hemmingson.
I just want to give you a chance to talk a little bit.
Our guest didn't hear us talking about the Chinese troops at the border of Mexico, and I don't know if he is aware of that.
Michael has got some evidence of this being the case.
And so I just wanted to ask if you yourself, Doug, have any evidence to that effect?
Has anyone ever told you about that?
I've talked to Steve about various things, including but not limited to Russian troops already in this country, for one thing.
Russian.
Okay.
Yes.
So, I mean, certainly I've got some level of knowledge, but I would defer any of that to Mr. Coyle, who I would consider the expert on that.
Or, you know, your guest right now.
I mean, I don't, look, I don't know.
I mean, I don't have any firsthand information.
Okay.
So you haven't had any whistleblowers to that effect?
I was just curious.
Okay, I'm sorry, sir, I didn't quite catch... I heard somebody say something, I didn't quite catch it.
I was going to say that Steve has been tracking the Chinese troop issue for a couple years.
Right, right.
Okay, so Michael, do you want to share some of your information, just while we've got, you know, Douglas here, just for his edification, just to share what you know?
Yeah, well, I'm a journalist down in the Tijuana area.
Mainly dealing with the drug cartel, but I have been tracking, you know, literally tens of thousands of Chinese immigrants moving into the area.
And they're all men in their 20s and 30s.
And I've seen some Chinese military out in the more desert type area of Calexico, Mexico, quote unquote, training.
And actually, that guy, Bill Brockbreder, not that I think he's a great source, but he had said he had heard that the Chinese military were dressing up as civilians and coming in.
There's also a lot of Pakistani people coming in, too, which is, I find, kind of curious.
And also that they may be putting on Mexican... Sir, if I may ask you, when you say coming in, do you mean coming into the United States?
Oh, no, no.
Coming into Tijuana.
Oh, okay.
All right.
Yeah, I'm sorry.
I've also been told that the Chinese military could be dressing up as Mexican military.
Now, the Mexican military guys wear the ski masks, so they won't get blackmailed with their families.
So, you can't tell their nationality with these ski masks on.
Right.
Right.
Honestly, I've heard that, too.
And Steve and I were just talking about this related subject here, where in the United States there's an area very well known by all the federal agencies where other than Mexicans, 40,000 per month, at least 40,000 per month, other than Mexicans from countries including China,
Including but not limited to China, have come up through into the United States, and this has been going on for quite some time.
And you know, Bush didn't, Obama's not doing anything about it.
The current administration's not doing anything about it.
The former administrations have been doing nothing about it.
So, yes, you know, can I verify that?
Beyond a reasonable doubt, of course not.
By any court standard, of course not.
But do I believe it's taking place?
Of course I do.
Uh, because I believe people like, like Mr. Coyle, and I believe that his sources are pretty accurate.
And you sound like you, well, you, you're there.
And if you've seen it, then okay.
Yeah, so what do you think about that?
Just out of curiosity, I mean, in other words, the information is such that the Chinese are kind of moving into our country.
And I mean, you sound like you're upset about what other of these other things that are going on.
Does that bother you as well?
I mean, you know, in other words, Okay.
And does your source, Rosebud, or does any of these people, do they talk about what might be being allowed to happen in that regard?
No.
And see, I think that's kind of like the funky area of this interview.
It's because the information provided by my source is so narrow.
When I say narrow, I mean limited to certain things.
Sure.
So, you know, the conversation and the information never got to the point at the level that we're discussing now.
So, you know, speaking from my source, I could not verify any of this, but I truly believe what you're talking about.
Yeah.
Do you believe that, I mean, is your source like an ongoing source?
Do you expect to get more information from this person?
I already have some.
Oh, really?
Yes, I do.
Right now, I'm working with Judy McLeod, the editor of Canada Free Press.
We're discussing exactly what we're going to do with this and how we're going to... We're discussing this information at the present time.
Okay.
So, under these circumstances, you don't want to reveal any of it?
Well, no, I really, I think it'd be a little bit premature at this point for that and another reason, which I can't really get into at this point.
Okay.
When can we, you know, I mean, if for people that are listening that want to keep an eye on your site, should they be aware, you know, keep an eye, like could it come out next week or how, what do you think?
Yeah, I look based on everything.
Including, yeah, I'm going to say Monday, probably.
Monday or Tuesday at the latest.
Cool.
Okay, well, we'll definitely be looking for that.
Now, we are on some kind of time limit here.
I don't know what the situation is.
And usually I have a two-hour show, but obviously you came in the last hour as it happened, Douglas.
So I'm going to see what the radio show host here is saying.
Nighthawk says you can go over.
The next show is my normal show, which is always up for grabs if you need it.
I just do a round table.
Okay.
Well, I also don't want to sort of put you in a situation where you weren't planning to stay on more than an hour.
So how do you feel, Douglas?
Do you want to do this for longer?
Do you want to come back another time?
How do you feel about that?
Well, if I may, and certainly if I can ask your indulgence, I do have a very early morning appointment that I've got to get to.
And I apologize for being late.
That was my fault.
I really am sorry about that.
No problem.
This happens all the time on the radio, believe me.
It's almost comical.
Time zones just drive everyone crazy.
Believe me, I don't even know what time zone I was in today.
Now, however, I do want to say this.
Please don't think that this whole thing was contentious.
It really wasn't.
Like I said, I think you and I are more on the same page than Perhaps the listener or you might even think.
I think we're saying the same thing.
I think the minutiae might be getting in the way.
Yeah, I agree.
I mean, I'm not having an issue at all with you.
I do apologize because you probably don't know Project Camelot.
You were kind enough to respond to a blog post that I made, but my interview style is kind of unconventional.
It's very well known to be that.
And, you know, I do like to kind of get into things with people, and, you know, in your case, you know, this kind of came out of left field because we didn't get to do the preliminaries, so to speak.
Yeah, and again, I so apologize for that.
And you know what?
Look, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and additional scrutiny, and I think you're a responsible host for getting into, you know, not only my background, but hey, you know, Uh, is it all just Obama?
Of course not.
And so, you know, kudos to you for looking at the larger picture.
And again, you know, my source doesn't have information about the larger picture.
Okay.
You know, so.
Alright, well we're...
Thank you.
Thank you very much for coming on the show, and I hope we can do it again sometime.
We will be looking at your site.
I know that everyone, we've got quite an audience out there, believe me, for the show, and they were very interested to hear you.
When they knew you were coming on, they'd been sitting around waiting, and they were very excited that you actually did make it.
So thank you for that, and hopefully we can do this again, like I said, another time.
So I'm going to let you go.
I would love to.
And I want to thank you for the invitation.
And again, my apologies for my tardiness.
No, thank you for the invitation.
And indeed, we'll do it again.
Because I do think we got some things to work out, but I think we could also work with each other and provide a lot of good information.
That sounds great.
Alright, you take care and I'll let you go.
Michael, I want to thank you also for stepping in here because you were a real trooper.
No problem.
I really do appreciate that and I don't know why I didn't realize that you had gotten a radio show.
I want some of the profits for having referred you or whatever it is.
About five cents, right?
Yeah, I know.
We don't make money doing this, but I just want to say that that's just great.
Have fun at Shasta.
I'm sorry?
Have fun at Mount Shasta there.
Thank you so much.
Yeah.
And, you know, and now that I know you're out there speaking, Michael, uh, let's, let's do this again.
You and I as well.
I'd love to have you on my show.
I'd love to go down some of the roads that you've gone down because you sound like you've got a fascinating background.
I thought at the minute I talked to you and, uh, and so if you'll come and be, be a guest on my show sometime, we can make a real official, you know, appointment for you to do that.
Uh, I, that would be great.
Okay.
Sounds good.
Awesome.
Alright, thank you everyone.
Good night.
Thank you for indulging us tonight.
I know this was a wild and crazy ride and we'll be back next week.
Alright Carrie, thanks a lot.
I'm still waiting on Sean David for live from Shasta here.
Did you want to come back later if I can get everything settled out?
Yes, if you got Sean and you want me to come, I'll do it.
Okay, I'm going to go ahead and shift and do my newsy bit here for a half hour.
I may be calling you back here in about a half hour, okay?
Okay, I'm going to try to scramble up some food.
Okay, yeah, it sounds like you've had a long day, man.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Alright, thank you so much for stepping in there and you did a great job.
No problem.
It kind of freaked me out when I come in here and I see, like, 13 producers all trying to call the server at the same time, and every one of them has you as one of the add-ins.
I'm like, oh my God, this is chaos, man.
But we got through it.
That's live radio for you.
All right.
I'll talk to you later.
Later.
▲
Export Selection