All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 6, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:30
January 6, 2006, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, we're back.
Great to have you with us, El Rush Ball, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
It's Friday.
We move on.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep, yep, yahoo.
Ditto camming at rushlimbaugh.com for those of you who are subscribers.
And if you're just joining us and have been here in a while, we're video podcasting every day now.
In addition to the audio podcasts of every day's program, every afternoon, we send down a video podcast of uh the morning update.
I do that.
I record that right after the program's over.
And we do it on the ditto cam.
And they're good.
They're funny.
In fact, I got a lot of feedback on today's.
We need uh we need investigation into the safety of journalists.
You know, touting mine safety.
And more journalists are dying every year than miners, uh, folks.
And nobody's talking about this because nobody cares, but I do.
Uh and it was our morning update.
If you're at Rush Limbaugh.com, you if you don't do the podcast, you can see it.
Still watch it.
If you're a member, just go to the uh section is the upper right-hand corner of the website.
Uh the not the ad strip, but the uh upper right-hand corner of the content page, and you will uh just click on the right uh on the on the right link, and you'll be able to watch the morning update every day if you don't want to download it automatically as podcast.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882, and the email address is rush at eIBNet.com.
Mr. Snerdley, a lot of people apparently watching on the Ditto Cam wondered what in the heck I was so worked up about during the break.
Um why don't you share that with us instead of just telling your staff on the other side of the glass?
Okay, I'm sitting here ravaged with the common flu virus, a fever today of 101.
I've still got little aches all over the place, but I am here because I'm committed to service of humanity.
All right, we were talking about the NFL.
This is this is uh wild card weekend, as you know, coming up, but one of the big bits of news here that the Chiefs, Kansas City Chiefs and the uh New Jersey Jets have come to an agreement on compensation for Herman Edwards should he leave the head coaching position of the Jets to go join the Chiefs.
Now, what I was telling Snerdley was that I I read the New York sports pages every day.
Read the Daily News, I read the New York Post, and for how many years Hedwards has been at the Jets, and they haven't won diddly squat.
They got close to the playoffs championship game last year, but the kicker blew two kick two kicks against the Steelers.
Uh and and of course they win it this season with the greatest of expectations.
Everybody gets hurt, and they're a four and twelve team.
And Herm says I want a contract extension.
Herm says I want more money.
I want I'm only being paid two million a year, I want to stay, I want to build this team, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Now, during this, whatever it is, four or five years at Herman Edwards, and I I have no brief for Herman Edwards.
I don't know him, so but during these four or five years he's been there.
You haven't found a negative word about Herman Edwards in the New York media.
They love Hermann.
He's the greatest motivator.
He's a great, he's just a great guy.
Great quotes, great press comment.
Oh, we love Herm was as always referred to as Herm.
Not Coach Edwards, not Coach Herman, but Herm.
They loved Herm.
Never.
The Jets have been no different under Herman Edwards than they've been under any other coach.
They never won diddly squat.
They're an embarrassing team.
They are the laughing stock of New York, but never once was Herm Edwards associated with he was a great guy.
He was greater than any coach that ever been in New York.
Herman Edwards.
Until two days ago.
Now that Herm wants to leave the Jets and go to the Chiefs, the same New York media.
He's the worst coach that's ever been here.
He hasn't won Diddley Squad.
Who does he think he is?
All he wants is the money.
He doesn't care about the Jets.
He doesn't care about New York.
He doesn't care about us.
He doesn't care about the team.
All he wants is the money.
If the Chiefs want to hire a 4-12 loser, let them have a 4-12 loser.
Him begin big Herman Edwards, three yards in a cloud of dust.
He'll take the great kids to the offense and he'll turn it into zip zero nada, just like he made the Chiefs' office.
Wait a minute.
For four years, this guy walked on water, could do no wrong.
Now he's going to leave the great New York media, which did nothing but stroke him and load him up with praise and confidence.
And this is the thanks they get.
Herman Edwards will.
It just means he wants the money.
He cares about nothing else but the money.
He doesn't care about the Jets.
He said last week he was going to be here for the law.
He was lying.
I have never seen such turnaround.
I have never in my life seen such a turnaround.
Guy has gone from God like status.
He may as well now be Satan's number one assistant.
It's just comical.
I'm sorry, it's just comical.
I I I get the biggest charge out of watching the supposedly smarter than everybody else, members of the media.
I don't care if it's news, economics, sports, they are all cut from the same cloth.
And uh good written.
See you, Herm.
And now they're ripping the Chiefs and being a bunch of idiots for wanting this guy, yet just last week.
Would he please make a deal?
Woody Johnson owner, please make it to keep Herm here.
Herm's great, blah, blah, blah.
Well, what?
What?
Oh.
Parody.
There is no parody.
There is no parody in it.
That's it.
Don't get me started on parody.
There's no parody in the NFL.
It's a biggest myth in the world.
There's always good, you have to have, if a bunch of teams are going to go 11-5, 12-4, 10 and 6, you're going to have to have some four and 12 teams.
There's no parody in the NFL.
I mean, it's it's you can't say there's parody in the NFL when different teams are making the playoff rotation every year, and there's a surprise team every year comes out of nowhere.
By the way, here's another interesting story.
There's a new coach at the Minnesota Vikings.
His name is Brad Childress, and he one of the reasons he was hired because Philadelphia's close to the water, and the Minnesota Vikings need a coach with familiarity with water where boats uh you know float and go on trips so forth.
But his name is Brad Childress.
He's the offensive coordinator for the Philadelphia Eagles.
And I swear to I swear to you, I'm reading a story about this.
I think it was from some Minnesota paper.
And there's right in the middle of the story, Childress is no stranger to controversy.
While as the offensive coordinator of the Philadelphia Eagles, he was brought into the controversy and interrupted when Rush Limbaugh claimed that Donovan McNabb was not as good as everybody thought that he was just getting media preferential treatment.
Uh they're even trying to say that their new coach has even got experiencing controversy because of me and the uh and the was drawn into defending McNabb during during all of this.
I just I don't know, I get the biggest kick out of it.
Andy McCarthy today, and actually another piece I want to share with you, Clarice Feldman.
She writes some great stuff, by the way, the AmericanTinker.com, one of our favorite blogs here.
Andy McCarthy, former United States attorney in the U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of Manhattan.
Uh Andy tried several cases against terrorists.
He was, in fact, I think he was involved in it in the case of the blind chic.
Omar Abdel Rochman.
And he's he's now uh uh a writer and uh senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
Has his piece at National Review Online today.
Now judges are leaking.
FISA judges discuss NSA surveillance with the Washington Post.
On Thursday morning, the Washington Post published an article that is jaw-dropping in the matter of factness with which reports uh and which are with which reports on an outrageous impropriety by at least two FISA court judges.
Now the backdrop is that of the eleven judges who sit on the special court created by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, only one, the chief judge Colleen Coller Catelli, was briefed by administration officials about the NSA's warrantless eavesdropping program prior to its exposure last month by the New York Times.
Now, at least some of the other judges are upset about this.
Consequently, the administration's evidently agreed to brief the full court next Monday.
The paragraph.
The paragraph that'll be stunning to litigators and honorable federal judges is the following.
Some judges who spoke on the condition of anonymity yesterday said that they want to know whether warrants they signed were tainted by the NSA program.
Depending on the answers, the judges said that they could demand some proof that wiretap applications were not improperly obtained.
Defense attorneys could have a valid argument to suppress evidence against their clients, some judges said, if information about them was gained through warrantless eavesdropping that was not revealed to the defense.
This is eye-popping on several different levels.
First of all, judges speaking to the press regarding matters that may end up in litigation is always a major impropriety, regardless of what kind of matters are involved.
Canon three of the Federal Code of Judicial Conduct expressly admonishes a judge should avoid public comment on the merits of a pending or impending action requiring similar restraint by court personnel subject to the judge's direction and control.
This is so elementary to fairness and impartiality, the hallmarks of the judicial function that it's almost surprising to find a rule about it.
But let's leave that aside for a second.
These are the judges of the FISA court.
Of the hundreds of federal judges in the United States, there are, as already noted, less than a dozen specially chosen for these weighty responsibilities.
They are selected largely because they are thought to be of unquestionable rectitude, particularly when it comes to things like leaking to the press.
To find federal FISA court judges leaking to the Washington Post about an upcoming closed meeting with administration officials about the highest classified matters of national security in the middle of a war is simply shocking.
And even more mind blowing is to find them discussing what they see as the merits of the issue without having heard any facts or taken any submissions on the governing law and in the cowardice of anonymity.
Here they are speculating for the media about what positions they might take, depending on how the administration answers their questions.
Here they are preliminarily weighing in on the validity of defense claims in cases where FISA evidence was introduced.
This is inexplicable judicial misconduct.
If a judge pulled a stunt like this in a run of the mill criminal case, it would be grounds for his removal.
To have FISA court judges doing it is astounding.
The administration would be well within its rights to decline to provide the briefing the FISA court has asked for, at least until the judges who spoke anonymously to the press come forward and explain themselves if there can be any explanation for this.
A major problem of the whole FISA enterprise is the questionable constitutionality, not to mention the wisdom of Congress's delegating judges who have no particular expertise by virtue of being judges to exercise what our executive branch national security powers and amen to that.
We've got enough trouble with judges around the country in normal cases trying to take over the role of commander in chief or take away powers from the president that are uh uh granted by the Constitution under the commander of chiefs, commander in chief auspices, and here we go, Congress appointing people to have no experience in it whatsoever because they're judges to exercise executive branch national security powers.
So, regardless of what you think of FISA, judges who leak anonymously to the press on matters of this nature are unfit to sit on a national security court and note who's making them heroes.
Now, if we're going to have investigations, these FISA judges need to be investigated by Congress.
Arlen Spector needs to get going on this, because I think McCarthy's exactly right.
This conduct is not just unethical, it's extremely unethical.
These judges would be removed.
Were any judge to talk like this about any case that is pending or taking place before him, he'd be gone.
Why do we assume that these judges serving on a secret court are any less activist and leftist than those who serve on regular federal courts?
In fact, we know that they are as activist.
There was one judge who resigned this court in a big show.
What was it two weeks ago?
Forget this guy's name, Waco, some absolute wacko resigned over something to do with this case, and it was a big cause celeb.
But these judges operate in secret.
Nobody seems to give a damn about that.
And Congress ought to bring them all before a committee and put them under oath, and ask these judges if they've had anything to do with providing information to the press about the NSA project or if they had anything to do with this Washington Post piece.
Because I'm going to tell you, now they're leaking to the Washington Post.
First off, it was Ryzen of the New York Times.
Now there's a whole bunch of people leaking.
Some of them are in Congress.
Now we know some of these judges are talking anonymously.
All this talk about the law and the rule of law, it appears we have some judges operating in secret who think they run the country because they're a secret court and get away with doing anything, even talk about what they're doing anonymously because it's secret.
If you ask me, and I know you are asking, because I have empathy, and I know you're sitting out there, you're listening, and you are asking me.
The only person right now in our government who is acting constitutionally is the president.
He has his commander in chief powers.
These judges have no role in war making.
Congress can only declare war or fund it, but they have no role either.
They can ask for all the right to participate with their resolutions and all, but they can't do diddly squat start or stop a war.
All they can do is not fund it.
Quick timeout, we'll be back after this.
Stay with us.
I also mentioned Clarice Feldman, the American thinker.
She's written an open letter to the Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, quoting extensively from the Andy McCarthy piece at National Review Online, I just read to you.
She says, twice in uh in recent days we have seen published evidence of unethical conduct warranting disciplinary action on the part of FISA judges.
Since they have hidden their conduct under a cloak of anonymity, the normal process of filing complaints with the clerk of the FISA court is unavailing.
Therefore, I ask that you immediately institute an investigation to find out which judges are involved and seek appropriate measures to remove or discipline the judges involved.
And then she cites the Ryzen, December 16th, 2005 story in the New York Times.
The relevant paragraph there.
According to those officials and others, reservations about aspects of the program have all also been expressed by Senator John Rockefeller.
The and of course we made the point there.
How how will anybody know that if his letter that he wrote to himself was secret?
So I have questions about Rockefeller.
And uh a judge, she said presiding over a secret court that oversees intelligence.
That's the FISA court, obviously.
So somebody on the court spoke to James Ryzen.
Now somebody on the court anonymously, one or two judges is talking to the Washington Post.
So Clarice Feldman sends the open letter to Alberto Gonzalez, and it closes this way.
I urge you to act promptly and put the reporters and FISA judges under oath to get to the bottom of this apparent flagrant abuse of office.
Damn right.
It's uh folks, this is this is an ongoing, now very public effort to undermine our ability to wage war against this enemy.
And we've got to find and we've hey look, we've already got a special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, who says, I'll put reporters in jail if they don't give up the goods.
So hey, let's subpoena Ryzen, let's bring these people in.
Find out who's doing this, because these are clear violations.
Plus, in all this, this FISA court being built up to mythical status, as though it's untouchable and the final authority.
This thing is being portrayed as even more powerful than the Supreme Court.
And it's not Darren in Canada.
I'm glad you waited.
I appreciate your patience.
Welcome to the program.
Thank you, Russia.
I'm just wondering uh if I could have your opinion on an article I read.
Life on the left just got a lot scarier according to my newspaper this morning.
Uh according to a Stanford University physicist and environmental scientist, Ken Caldera, he's discovered that actually force may contribute to global warming.
And as I'm reading this, I thought, man, I'd love to hear Russia's opinion on this.
They they did a simulation where they uh ran a computer simulation where they covered the North American continent with forests, and they actually discovered that the surface temperature jumped by three degrees Celsius.
That's even more Fahrenheit.
And what they've discovered is, according to him, and I quote him, he talks about how, in other words, dark forests absorbed the sun's energy like a black car in a sunny parking lot.
And then here's the hypocrisy that made me laugh out loud.
That said, Mr. Caldera said, I I still think that we should protect forest because I quote, I like forests.
They provide good habitats for plants and animals.
So in other words, even though forced, he said absorb energy and then actually release it and make the earth warmer.
Having said that, they're still a good thing because I like them because they're they're nice things.
All right.
All right.
Uh two things on this come to mind.
Uh first, there isn't anything that doesn't cause global warming today, and there's no natural disaster or climactic Climatic event that is not the result of it.
Snowstorms in December, global warming.
More hurricanes than ever, global warming.
Dolphins not doing what we think they should do.
Global warming.
Penguins not being able to reproduce as easily in the global warming.
Now everything is said to cause it.
And it's always man-made and and it's it's always supposed to be uh uh something we're destroying the planet.
There's nothing we can do about it, by the way.
We've gotten to that point now.
Uh that's number one.
But but and I've got a break coming.
Can you hold on to the break here, Darren?
Because I've only got five seconds here before I have to go to that break.
Sure.
Yay, it's good.
We'll be back.
We'll continue.
Because I got the story here too, and I saw the quotes that you read, and the whole thing's laughable.
I mean, what what good of this guy's research and how much does he believe it if he'll chuck it?
Back in just a sec.
Okay, we're back on open line Friday.
Got Darren from uh from Canada with us.
Here's let me give you a little bit more detail about the story.
Um it is uh from the Canwest News Service.
Forests may contribute to global warming, study little cooling moisture, premature at least to plant new trees to cool the earth.
That's a bad idea.
People think we need to plant more forests.
One of the environmentalists wackos, we gotta plant more forests, we gotta we need more, we need more photosynthesis.
We need to convert more CO2 to to to oxygen.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And it starts out this way Canada's forests may actually be worsening global warming rather than cooling the planet, says a controversial study by a Stanford University physicist.
Doesn't mean we should start bulldozing the forest to flight global warming, though.
Because forests are still valuable ecological features in many ways.
Really?
Foresters, did you know that forests are still valuable, still valuable ecological features?
But we say it's premature at best and even dead wrong to plant new forests and maintain existing ones in the belief that this will cool the earth.
Now, Darren got it right.
They actually say that they did a computer model and they flooded uh the uh the the region, what are they what was it?
The uh team covered much of the northern hemisphere with forests, and they saw a jump in surface air temperature of nearly three degrees Celsius, because the theory is that dark forests, the dark trees, the leaves, absorb the sun's energy like a black sir shirt or sweater that you would be wearing.
Uh and don't reflect the heat back.
Uh and and as such, that's causing global warming.
Uh now my first observation, Darren, and by the way, thanks for holding on.
My first observation is, well, there goes the whole theory of man-made global warming, because there's more forested area of the United States today than there was when we were founded.
Do you know Thomas Sowell had a great piece, and I didn't get to it yesterday.
But I've got it somewhere over there in one of those stacks.
It was all about how the greens, the greenies around the world in this country are lying about how we're exploiting land and we're running out of land.
He said the percentage of the country that is urban developed is five percent.
And you know, if you look if you if you look at a nighttime satellite shot of uh of the earth with the cities on the east and west coast lights lit up, you can see where people in the country live.
I think 90% of the population lives near water, including rivers.
So uh which makes sense.
It's that's always the way humans have settled.
So it means that that whatever we're doing, I mean, if if if that much forested area can raise temperatures three degrees Celsius, then what does it mean to everything else?
CO2s, fluoro chloroflorbins, whatever they are, irrelevant, chlorofluorocarbons.
Irrelevant.
This isn't but then, as Darren points out, the guy goes on to say, you know, even despite this.
I want forests protected.
I like forests.
They provide good habitats for plants and animals.
So now what did you say your reaction to that was when you read it?
Well, i the it was the hypocrisy of it all.
If we were talking about SUVs, then if they're causing global warming, you get rid of them, you outlaw them.
But forests are causing it, but I like them because they're warm and fuzzy.
Well, SUVs keep my kids safe.
Exactly right.
Exactly.
So he doesn't have the courage of his convictions.
If he's just if he really has this earth-shattering discovery.
Yeah.
And if global warming is being pretended as the catastrophe, and it is, it's being portrayed as the catastrophe.
It's gonna wipe us all out.
Well, that's okay.
We should be wiped out because we need to save the forests for uh the habitat for plants and animals.
But you know, Rush, I almost felt a wave of pity after I read it because I thought these guys have nothing left to hug.
They hug trees and they stab them in the back.
What's left to hug?
Hug trees, stab them in the back.
Yep, that's it.
The latest culprit, forests.
And look, let's take it down to even a more root level, if you will allow me.
The real culprit is leaves.
The real culprit is leaves, because that's what provides the dark portion of a forest that allows the heat to be trapped.
Snerdley says he saw National Geographic Show last week that the Earth's core is slowing and that that's creating global warmth.
The core.
The core where we've never been, we've never been to the core of the earth, other than in a movie where James Mason and the Duck.
Remember that uh disaster movie?
Voyage to the center of the earth.
Yeah, well, that's the only time we've ever journeyed to the center of the earth.
That's the only time we've ever been there.
And that was in a movie.
So essentially, uh we've never been there.
So the Earth's core is slowing, uh, and that's going to create global cooling.
Uh it is correct.
The Earth is now cooling.
National Geographic Earth is cooling because the Earth's core is slowing down.
And we're all doomed, and yet, and yet all the forestation out there, that's why temperatures are rising.
You know, as we're all doomed.
We're all doomed because global warming is happening, the Arctic ice sheet, but this is not true either.
The Arctic ice sheet's getting bigger.
A lot of glaciers are getting bigger out there.
The wackos are trying to put out pictures that show it getting smaller.
But now we get global cooling because the core is slowing down.
Yeah, but that's the same bunch that let those penguins die.
If it was National Geographic, it was the same bunch that during March of the Penguins let those three penguins die because it wasn't their role.
They're filming nature, and they're filming an episode here to show us how man-made global warming is impacting negatively species on the planet.
Then a chronicle of the penguins.
Penguins are three feet in the ravine.
Just go down there and get them.
Three feet down, three feet as a pet duck.
Duck ducks served like a canary in a mine, I guess.
That's why you take it to the center of the earth.
Animals were popular in movies back then.
At uh I'm gonna have to order that movie.
That was a that was uh that was a that was a fun movie.
It was scary.
Dinosaurs down there, all kinds of stuff.
Um it was.
But but nevertheless, we it it this this folks, it's be it's it's always been a joke.
All of this global warming hysteria, global cooling, it's always been a joke.
It might we might be warming up, we might be cooling.
I don't know which is which, but whatever, it's because of forces way beyond our control.
We're not in charge of it, we're not responsible for it.
We can't start it, we can't fix it.
We can't stop it, so we can't cause it.
If we if we were causing global warming, we could stop it, and we can't.
If if our actions are creating more violent hurricanes, we can stop what we're doing to cause.
We can't.
So therefore we can't cause these things.
By the way, Forbes magazine, January 9th issue.
Forbes, by the way, one of my all-time favorite magazines, bye-bye Kyoto.
One thing George W. Bush got exactly right was Kyoto.
The treaty isn't working, and a lot of folks who bought into it are now looking for an exit strategy.
This is by Dan Seeligman.
Final paragraph after many years of European chatter about the monstrous evil perpetrated by Bush rejecting Kyoto.
It is of possible interest that the increase in carbon emissions in the U.S. during those years was slightly lower than it was elsewhere where they had were actually obeying the Kyoto Protocol.
Nations that obeyed the Kyoto Protocol put more pollutants and garbage into the atmosphere.
In fact, here's the way it starts.
The year just ended was a fateful time for the Kyoto Protocol.
It was the year in which the treaty, negotiated in '97, formally took effect.
It was in February.
It was also the year in which Kyoto became operational, i.e., a whole bunch of rules were adopted at a conference in Montreal.
That was in November.
Finally, 2005 was the year in which it became painfully obvious the treaty was a fiasco.
It was obvious to some of us Long before the results were in.
We understand liberals.
We understand who these mad cap environmentalist activists are.
They're simply displaced communists.
They're anti-corporate zealots.
They're anti-capitalist.
It's real simple.
Once you know who they are, you can take what they say and put it through that filter and you can answer every objective they claim to have.
Steve in Sacramento, my adopted hometown, great to have you with us on the program.
Steve, hello.
Good morning.
Hi, how are you, Steve?
Fine.
I was a uh 1970 when I graduated after 18 years of secular education.
I was a staunch greenie because of my tech career education.
Uh for over thirty years, I've been a uh marine biologist, ecologist, systematist, earth scientist, and one thing uh the greenies are really blowing it.
They're really blowing it because you know, solar energy is supposed to be the panacea, right?
Yeah.
Okay.
Well, where are they putting the big uh the big a lot of big panels or putting them out in the deserts, right?
Mm-hmm.
All the wasteland.
The deserts actually reflect heat, solar energy, back out into space and keep a balance of heat on the earth.
Sort of like when you put the panels in the deserts, they're absorbing the heat and keeping it on the earth.
Well, isn't that the idea though?
No, you're still you need to keep the the the solar panels get to get their convert heat to electrical energy.
Yeah, if it's all about keeping a lot more heat than normal normally would be kept on the earth.
So the greenies are actually polluting the earth by putting solar panels out in the deserts.
Okay, slow down for a second.
I'm not an expert on solar panels except in this one.
When I bought my first house in Sacramento, I was required to have them on there.
Right.
So they were on the house.
And solar panels in small areas, it actually can affect the microclimate because it's actually uh absorbing more solar energy on the earth that normally would be kept on the earth.
It's actually capturing it.
Okay, well that would that was my co now that was my question.
But but but before I get to the question, all I was told was this is gonna reduce your consumption of electricity, and it didn't.
Well, yeah, it it will.
But the biggest problem is putting all the solar panels into all the and out into all the uh deserts because the deserts are responsible for reflecting a lot of energy back out into space or heat so that the earth doesn't heat up too much.
Right.
Okay, let's do that.
And when we put solar panels out there, the the the earth will heat up, not to mention the plan on putting a solar panels out of space to make the earth look bigger and then projecting the heat back down to earth.
That'll that'll cer certainly overheat the earth by doing that.
Right, okay, okay hang hang on a second here.
Now let me because let's put this in the context of the previous call.
We just had the story about the Stanford scientist who has discovered that forestation actually absorbs heat uh and is actually increasing global warming because the the dark color of the leaves is like you know, a black car, black shirt, and so the reason I can't buy into that is because the deserts are very massive, especially in the southern hemisphere, and they are reflecting a lot of the energy back out into space.
And oh over the time you go back to the record, the earth has warmed up and cooled down in a in a in an oscillation fashion.
And any given decade, we could be in a slight warming or slight cooling, but we're not the earth is not warming up overall.
There's no doubt about that in my mind.
That's r that's right, because the what you're saying here is that the desert counteracts what happens in the forest.
The earth has these ecosystems that work naturally.
I've even read that when they were worried about all the clear cutting down on the Amazon.
Oh no, we're destroying the great ecosystem that gives us the Panama Canal, you're gonna totally goof it up, no rainfall, no And we found out that Europe all of a sudden magically was growing more forestation.
Just the Earth compensate, it's bigger than we are, folks.
It's bigger than we are.
Well, I have one question for you about your solar panels in the desert.
Now let me ask let me ask the question.
If the solar panels in the desert are robbing the or are preventing the desert from doing what it normally does, and that's reflecting the heat, that's because the solar panels are capturing the heat and holding it.
Yes, they're they're they're they're converting a lot of the heat and and the light actually to solar to actual electrical energy, but in the process there's also a lot of heat absorption on the earth that would norm not normally be there.
Now that that's that's one problem.
The other big problem is they want to put a whole series of solar panels out in space uh uh on both sides of the earth to make the earth look a lot bigger so it can capture more solar energy than Beam that heat, that energy back down to Earth.
Well, that's also going to be heating up the earth as well.
Yeah.
Well, uh, didn't what was it?
Somebody help me out on this, you guys.
There was some idiot that wanted to put a giant mirror somewhere over the northern over the north pole or something to warm it up up there to reflect sun.
Remember we had this story late last year.
There was a it was it wasn't solar panels.
They wanted to put, they were going to try to put a giant uh Oh, that's right.
They were gonna put aluminum foil over the glaciers.
That way they were gonna put aluminum foil over the glaciers to so the sun wouldn't melt them.
That's that have you heard that?
Uh there's all kinds of crazy plans.
The problem is this if you go back through Earth history, you'll see that the that the polls are.
The problem is it's stupid.
...have both grown and shrunken dramatically over time in an oscillation fashion.
And that's going to happen uh continually.
Well, that's because it's bigger than we are.
We can't we think we control all this.
We're the these people are a bunch of ego mono.
I can on the one hand, they think they're we're no different than rats and cows and trees.
And the other hand, we are so powerful and we so vain that we can the idea of ten foil on the glacier is just absurd.
Before you even start talking about oscillation.
Oh, this is gonna be good.
Prescott uh Arizona.
Hello, Phil.
You're next on Open Line Friday.
Nice to have you with us.
Hi, how are you?
Can you hear me?
Yeah, yeah.
Here you find well, I don't hear you fine.
You sound pretty muscled like you're a muffle like you're on a cheap phone, but I can make it out.
Okay.
Well, what I wanted to talk about uh was that uh you were mentioning how Bill Clinton never seemed like he was interested in uh tackling huge national security issues.
Uh but I've seen an example um in the Wen Ho Lee case where they actually railroaded um Wenho Lee so they could at least look like they were tackling national security.
No, this is a fascinating case, and I don't think enough people, a, know about it, or B, remember it.
When Ho Lee, Chinese descent, working out at uh what what Los Alamos, right?
Los Alamos nuclear lab.
When Ho Lee was accused by the Clinton administration of stealing secrets and sending them back to China during the whole period where the Clinton administration was involved in all this funny money coming in from China in the 96 presidential campaign and uh the John Wang Charlie Tree days and all of this.
There was never this man was kept in jail for I don't know how many months, but at one point, when they took him into federal court, a federal judge, and he sent me his book, Wen Ho Lee sent me his book, and it opens with this judge's apology.
The judge, I forget his name, Federal District Judge, apologized to Wen Ho Lee for everything the United States government had done to him.
Falsely accusing him, uh keeping him in jail.
This is unprecedented.
You I mean, sometimes charges are dismissed and they're thrown out or what have you.
The judge made it plain that he was apologizing on behalf of the United States government for what had happened to uh to Wen Ho Lee.
And and Phil's point here is he's taking off on the opening monologue today, which is the Clinton administration during the 2000 had the CIA plan to try to leak phony information to the Iranians so that when they put their nuclear bomb together it wouldn't work.
Now the point of this was that the Clinton administration knew in 2000 an Iranians are working on nuclear weapons.
And they didn't do anything about it, and they had this this CIA plan that was so bad that it was doomed to fail, and it did.
And his point is Clinton just wanted to look tough on this stuff, just wanted to look big on this.
So we indict Wen Ho Lee when no evidence, keep him in jail, and is you know, he was it was worse than what happened to Ray Donovan.
Where do I go to get my reputation back?
And now he's filed a counter suit.
I think the last I heard was he's filed some sort of uh some sort of a counter suit.
But I won't r I I won't forget what this judge said to him as his book opens, apologizing profusely for the entire U.S. government for what he did.
And of course, you know, the mainstream press and all of Clinton's buddies hardly gave it scant attention, folks.
This is the bunch that did the Waco invasion, Ruby Ridge.
Uh what what other one other example I've been leaving out, but we talk about civil liberties today and how we're losing them.
It's bumped back.
Just a second.
Stay with us.
Because even with a cochlear implant and only eight electrodes in my ear, where you have 40,000 hair cells, I could tell it wasn't compressed.
Gotta take a break here, folks.
One hour of open line Friday remaining.
▲
Export Selection