The End The End Good evening. You're listening to the Hour of the Time. I'm Pete Lesprince. Bill is sorry that he was not able to make it here tonight, but our guest tonight will be Bernadette Smith. She has been working on the Disarmament Treaty, and she will tell us a little bit more about herself and what she does after this short music break. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And we're back with our guest, Bernadette Smith. Good evening. Good evening. Good evening. How are you doing tonight? Well, I'm fine, and I appreciate the chance to get such an unannounced, unexpected, sudden request to go on your program. But we need to get the information out across the nation of what's going on, the planning and the subterfuge and the different type of concealed methods of altering the power structure of American government. And we can reach a point where there will be no return. And the more and more of this that goes on, the weaker our chances are to overcome what is being laid against us. And it's real important that the people are aware of just what legislation is most dangerous. And so that's why I wanted to get on your program tonight and talk a little bit about the House of Representatives bill number 97. And what that is, it's called the Rapid Deployment Strike Force Act. And it's been introduced by Connelly, who's from Connecticut. I'll be talking a little bit more about the sponsors of the bill in a bit. The bill was introduced on January the 4th, and it's in the Judiciary Committee of the House. And the purpose, of course, is to establish a Rapid Deployment Force. The reason they're given is that drugs and guns and criminals make it necessary for Janet Reno to have a 2,500 federal law enforcement officers forced to train and to work with state policemen all over the nation. What we're looking to do is actually what we long have called a national police force, but actually it's more than that. Really what we're looking at is an international police force because it works with the regions. And regional government is not just a new layer of government. It's not a super layer. What it actually is, is a total replacement for our own constitutional framework of operation. And as they deploy these Rapid Strike Force crews throughout the country, that puts the federal government in a position to take complete control of the nation's policing system in an integrated basis. Now, I can see that this is a Trojan horse, and I think it is time to alert the public to the fact that the timing and the structure and the need that the people that are planning the New World Order, this is the time that they would bring in such legislation. It fits the need, as I will explain. And it is structured to convert us into military concepts. And I have long said, when I used to work exclusively in exposing the regional system and how it operated in all of its facets, I used to say that it had to be military. There is no incentive system in the New World Order as they're building it for the people to live under. And when you don't have an incentive system, you have to go to an iron fist. You have to go to a forcible system of which the people are afraid to speak out against their government or to do anything that is laid before them, no matter how undesirable it is or how demeaning it is. And I think that they are in fear of their government when you get that kind of control, which will be there in the New World Order. So I could see, just by the structure of it, that it would be military. And I've been watching for some time, knowing how they laid out the three stages of disarmament, there would be a time where they would have to bring in this force. Now, in the law, now what I'm talking about too, when I speak of the law, I'm not talking about theory. I'm talking about a plan that was passed into law and has been gradually implemented through the years since 1961 when the bill was first passed. And that bill is public law 87 to 97. It's called the Program for General and Complete Disarmament of the United States. And they mean that. And if you read the bill, it calls for the elimination of our armed forces. Every branch of our armed forces is to be turned over to a foreign power. And that, of course, is the United Nations, which is under socialist, communist, integrated control. The definition, as they give it in that law for disarmament, it says exactly this. As defined in this act, the terms arms control and disarmament mean the identification, verification, inspection, limitation, control, reduction, or elimination of armed forces and armaments of all kinds under international agreement to establish an effective system of international control. And that's the simplified form. But when you get into the bill and you get into the disarmament annual reports, and further, if you get into the little blue book that was done by the State Department called publication, I think it's 14, 14, and it's also known as publication 7277. And it tells that they will dismantle our basers. And armaments, all armaments except the ones that the World Army is to have, are to be destroyed. There are to be no armaments, no conventional armaments for people, or no armaments whatsoever. And they do use the term properly. Armaments, a lot of people think that means just military weapons. The militia is military. Our system of government was set up to operate in a way similar to what they have in Switzerland. It is supposed to be backed by the people being armed to enforce the Constitution and to preserve our liberty and justice. And what they want to do now is to eliminate all those firearms from the people, which is why crime has been allowed to increase so that firearms could be vilified. And it would be easy then to take firearms from those that were armed with the people who were not involved in gun ownership standing by without objecting to what was going to happen to the people that were armed. So the other facet that's in that law is that we would be policed by foreign troops to see that we stay disarmed, once disarmed, that we cannot rearm. So it is a deadly type of law if you intend to be a free people. But that law has been inching along since 1961 until now. It is at a stage of what the Germans, when they did this type of thing in that country, they called it by one word. We don't have one word in the English language which describes what's going on here today, but the Germans did. They called it Gleischelkang. It meant that they were bringing into conformity all of the different avenues of planning for a new system of government that now had reached a degree in progress that it would have to be interlocked for it to become effective and to be fully operating. So we're in that stage. The closest we can come to it is to call it that they are trying to bring things into conformity so that they intermesh. And so you will find in this little blue book by the State Department the word simultaneous is used. And as they progress in disarming us and building up a world army, breaking down the United States, building up a world system, a new world order, simultaneously as the one breaks down, the other builds up. So at no time are you going to be left without a government. You will have a transference from the form that you are normally and rightfully due to have, which is our constitutional system given to us by the work of our founding fathers. That is a system that is being eliminated. And the parallel government that's being brought in is the one that the socialists are now enforcing upon us. So simultaneously, as one thing breaks down, its counterpart and takeover parallel is substituted. So this is what I see in this bill, H.R. 97. There's no question that once you put the federal government side, or not side by side, but immediately in contact with the policing systems of the nation, the federal government is going to take over. You do not put the lamb to lie down alongside a lion and think that that lamb is going to last very long. It's inevitable that the federal government will be calling the tombs. They provide the money of, unfortunately, I should say, they have taken over funds from the people of our country, and they are putting out the money and calling the tombs for everything that they want to internationalize us. I want to read you a section from the blue book. It's one short paragraph. It's practically one sentence. I'll just read the first part. And it says this. Now, this is an official statement in an official book published by an official division of the United States government, the State Department. And it says this. The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever, other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations peace force. Now, what have we said there? We've said three things. We've said, not us, but them. They have declared that the armed forces will be disbanded and prohibited from being reestablished in any form whatsoever. And they have said that they're going to have a contribution to a United Nations peace force with that national armed force that used to be ours. It will become international, and it will belong to the United Nations and call their peace force. In other words, it will be the only army in the world. And that is so stated in this book also. And then the other, the third thing that they have said here is that they will prohibit the reestablishment in any form whatsoever, other than those required to preserve internal order. So what they're saying there is there is going to be this force that will be assigned the responsibility of preserving internal order. And this is coming from a national perspective. And that indicates that the internal order force has to be built simultaneously. While we're going through right now the process of the PDD-25, we don't even know whether the second stage of our military has been assigned to the United Nations already. No one can see those papers. Not even the Congress has seen the full set. And the President is the one that is going to sign over the second half of our military to the UN. If you consult the second annual report of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency's report, there is a graph in there about page 18 or page 11, somewhere in there, and shows how in three stages we will be weakened and the United Nations will grow. In the third stage, well, let me start from the first stage. In the first stage, we give half of our military to the UN. All the other major, large countries, Russia and China, are supposed to contribute that same given amount to the UN. In the second stage, the major countries give the second half of their military. In the third stage, no one has any military of its own, only forces to preserve internal order. And that is a diagram that was conceived by the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. And all these things have to be built simultaneously. So you see, the proof is there. I'll add one more bit. The proof is there that they have to do these things, and it has to appear. And this bill, HR 97, indicates that that is the power change that will make it possible for them to complete that objective. Another thing is the people that sponsor the bill. All of the people, in addition to Kennelly, except for one, are people who were in the House of Representatives in December of 1989. In December of 1989, a bill came through which was an additional amendment to this awful public law, 8-7-97. And it again repeated the definition of disarmament, just as I told you, disbanding. I read it to you, you know, the disbanding of our armed forces and establishing an international force and elimination of armaments of all kinds. That was only, that was number two, public law 101216. That was only three and one-half pages. There is no excuse for anyone who voted for that bill to say that it was too thick to cover, too thick to read. It just loomed right up at you what the definition was of disarmament. It was on, I believe, page three of it. And of the people that are supporting this bill that I'm reporting on tonight, HR 97, eight members of the sponsors of HR 97 voted for that bill in 1989. In other words, the people that are supporting it are Barbara Cannelli from Connecticut, Charles Rangel from New York, Glenn English from Oklahoma, Martin Frost from Texas, Sam Jordanson from Connecticut, Floyd Flake from New York, Gary Ackerman from New York, Lane Evans from Illinois, and then the ninth. Now, all of those have voted for the law, which was only three and a half pages and repeated the definition of disarmament and given away eliminating our armed forces. The last person, the ninth person, Eddie Bernice Johnson is a new member of the Congress from Texas. And she wasn't in there in 1989, but she might have voted for it had she been in there. It's notable to mention that all of these members that I have read, all nine sponsors of HR 97 are Democrats. And if good men in public service are ever going to come forward, they had better come now or it will be too late. Because as they strengthen these networks over the people and they start using them for going in after guns and so on, on the pretense that they're going in for drugs, or they'll openly go in and admit that they're going in for the guns because the government does not want us. It's already documented. They do not want us to have firearms. So we are allowing them to get too much strength. And it's a good time right now for people to call those members that I have mentioned and tell them that we want HR 97 withdrawn. I have been seeing all along that regional government has to have a military underlay. And in HR 97 it talks about regional government, it talks about keeping these particular 2,500 assigned members of the FBI that Reno will have charge of, keeping them within their region. And they are to support the police in those regions. So you can see that when you use the word region, you know you're working with international government. I think that it's important for the people to know that through the years when they first started, that they never intended actually to take away our Constitution. It was to fool the people to make them think that it was there. They intended to use it as a cover for what they were doing. And one of the people that planned how they would operate and do the stratagems that they're doing today was a man named Charles Merriam. And Mr. Merriam had said somewhere in about the late 30s I would say, and he actually put this in a book that he wrote. And the book was called On the Agenda of Democracy. And he wrote this in his book. Now this is an exact quotation. He said, He said, Fortunately, our Constitution is broad enough in its terms, flexible enough in its spirit, and capable of liberal enough interpretation by the judiciary to permit the adaptation of democracy to changing conditions without serious difficulty. What Mr. Merriam, that's the end of the quote, but what Mr. Merriam called democracy was also listed in his book. And his definition as he listed it was communism. Everybody had a right to home, food, clothing, recreation, and these were classed as basic rights. When we know that you cannot do that unless you're in a communist socialist form of government. So what the intent was then was to keep the Constitution up in front of them and use it as a cover, just like they used the Trojan horse, so that they could bring in all of these things. And they have tied our public officials into the act. I think you remember it was Stalin's that it matters not that they're members of the party. What does matter is whether they do the work of the party. So a lot of our people haven't realized what they've been asked to do, such as our supervisors. They took on the jobs of being the regional planning agency. In other words, the international planning agency for international government. That's what they became. And our city council were assigned the jobs of dealing with the changeover of the land. And through redevelopment, that was a land grab by the federal government to convert it to the kind of uses that they wanted for the New World Order. Our governors have been indoctrinated and stacked before we ever had them elected to office. They were put in so that they would cooperate with the governor's conference. The governor's conference is something that is controlled in Chicago by the Public Administration Clearinghouse, a Rockefeller-controlled organization that gives indoctrination to the governors. So it is no surprise that our governors have not objected all through this time period where they see that our bases are being closed and it harms the economic structure of the state and the people. The unemployment that ensues when bases are closed and they see businesses moving out of the country. They know well that our army is going to be transferred to a foreign power. They know that the state militia, the uniformed state militia, will also go over. When Reagan was our governor in the state of California, he had our constitution revised and the people trusted him. They removed a section in those revisions that our National Guard can operate, can perform under any other flag other than the state of California or the United States. And I would venture to say that's probably happened in a lot of other states because during that same time period, all the state constitutions were going under the knife and being altered and chopped up and safeguards removed. That's why it's so important that we don't go into a constitutional convention again today, which the great push is on for that now. And we have another threat, which is the Conference of States. You know, I'd like to give you a little word in edgewise if you'd like to ask me a question. Are you there? Yes. Do you have a question at this point? No, I sure don't. Alright, well let me continue, Ben, if I'm not holding you up. What do you say we go to a break real quick? Yeah, that'll be fine. Okay. All right. Okay. 0000. Okay. 0000. 0000. Anybody Ooh! Everybody knows the back is over Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the back is over Everybody knows the fight is sick The good day poor and the rich they wish That's how it's good in the years Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the back is over Everybody's got the good in the years Like a hammer on the drums just died Everybody's hands are in their pockets Everybody wants a bond that's not just in a long time Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is gone That's how it goes Everybody knows Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is gone Everybody knows the burn is r இ Everybody knows the burn is goneucker by mercury Beeb is rhodic Everybody knows the burn is not Alles Everybody knows the burn Everybody knows the burn is wrong ... Everybody knows落 落 落 nose 48 Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, this is a panel. Thank you. Thank you. exclusionary rule now is endangered by the 666 which will make it easier for them to go in on the one hand to go in and go through people's homes and on the other hand it'll make it easier for the regulatory agencies and the unelected people that are behind the scenes to start putting administrative rulings down to more and more invade the rights of the people and their privacy okay thank you so it works in conjunction with the need for them to go in and get the guns so that's exactly how it fits in with what I've been talking about I would also like to go briefly for what time is left over another interlocking danger that is currently happening and keep in mind what I said was that when you get to a stage like we're in now you have to be aware that conformity is what they're working toward and we knew this years ago we could just envision this I've been in this about 27 years watching and studying and researching and reporting and speaking and warning people about the dangers of all of this and the fact that they want to abolish our states admittedly they want to abolish states put a different set of smaller sized countries in the place of the United States and I was fighting that because I knew once they did that and they broke our our states then our Constitution was gone because it's a compact between states and that's the worst thing that could happen to us is to lose that Constitution because of the greatness in the style and the protections that it gives to the people and the style in which it was written for liberty and justice so I knew at one time we would reach a point that they would would have so many of their projects completed and milestones finished that they would have to then interface them one with the other as they were mitered to be able to do eventually and then when they were getting close to going into full operation then they would have to interlock them so that they could operate as a one complete unit one complete world government system and when they would do that we always envisioned many years ago that when they came to that point with as many people as we were waking up along the way that when they did come to that point they would work very swiftly they would have to because it would become too apparent what they were doing and so they would have to work with speed to keep the people from becoming too large a majority that would be able to stop them from what they were doing so we're at that point now where they can they are more and more apparent and transparent I might say in what they're doing and even though they have used the techniques through the years of fragmenting the work so you couldn't tell how it related or putting false titles on things that they were doing so you wouldn't ever dream to open up such and such a bill because it sounded normal it sounded good and most people don't even have time to write and watch what bills are there let alone find ones that are are innocent titles so that has been the methodology that they have used to fool the people through the years but we're reaching a point now where we're reaching a point where we're working on the work so you couldn't tell how it related or putting false titles on things that they were doing so you wouldn't ever dream to open up such and such a bill because it sounded normal it sounded good and most people don't even have time to write and watch what bills are there let alone find ones that are innocent titles so that has been the methodology that they have used to fool the people through the years but we're reaching a point now where even some of the less sophisticated people are enabled to see that things are not right in government but there's still not enough out there knowing that these things that I'm telling you about today are such that just as there's public law calling for us to give away our army exist when you give away your army no have no security or labor has rót guess what the regulate not usingιο this rehearsing would say and you have no idea that these things mean that you have the beginning to say in this whole thing um anti- Tanker public law called for us to give away our army exists. When you give away your army, there's nothing to protect your system. You are just open for a take, and we are just about taken over. So it's been on a gradual basis. They prided themselves in calling it the American Revolution that they were performing. They called it the New American Revolution, and it was rather disgusting through the years to hear them talk like that. But now one of the things that they're doing also that's quite dangerous, I wanted to get into, is the Conference of States. And to get some good literature on it, I would suggest that the listeners drop a line to the Wisconsin Report, and that's located at Post Office Box 45 in Brookfield, Wisconsin. And I'll say it again, Post Office Box 45, Brookfield, Wisconsin, 53008. And that newspaper, it's a small newspaper in a small town there, and they're publishing articles on the Conference of States. And if you send a couple of dollars and ask for past issues, you'll get some very interesting material, which is put out by governors in different states, particularly the governor in Virginia. The governor in Virginia has what they call the Williamsburg Resolve, and in it there is a pictorial summary of what is proposed in this Conference of States. What they have is they're showing how each state legislature will adopt a resolution of participation, and each legislature will appoint a bipartisan delegation of four legislators and a governor to attend the Conference of States. The objective, of course, is to open up a constitutional convention, and I think probably the listeners to your show all know that we have four or five different constitutions that will overthrow what's left of our constitution from 1789 and supplant in its place a new constitution, which is communist and worldwide. I think it's important for people to know that on the ninth day of the convention, when the 1789 constitution was being written, and incidentally that was a document to control power. It is not outmoded as long as there are two people on the earth. We will need that constitution because it controls power. It controls the people who take offices over us, and the people now that have taken offices over us want to be unlimited in their power against us. But the 1789 constitution limits the power that man can exercise over his fellow man. So it's important for us to stay with it, and don't be talked into the lies about it, that it is a horse and buggy. It's not horse and buggy at all. It was written for something that is eternal, and that's man's injustice to man. It is there to give people safeguards and to protect their rights. So I think it's important for them to realize the danger of allowing a constitutional convention to be opened up. But that's what the Conference of States is leading towards. And the diagram, the pictorial diagram, shows that the governor and four legislators from each state will go to this conference. Our governors have been trained in one-worldism. It wasn't, well, it wasn't, let's see, about 1949, about 45 years ago, that they had 26 states signed up to give up sovereignty to go into a federated world government. And that was led by Alan Cranston. And it would have gone on to get as many as possible, probably the full number of states, had it not been stopped by people in California. It took them one year to finally get enough people to put a stop in California. And when California tumbled in that effort, then the rest of the states pulled out. But it shows you how far back, if you can go back 45 years and know that the state houses were willing to do this, you know that they've had control of the state houses for quite a long time. And if you see the people that belong to the organizations that Rockefeller set up to keep their minds and their direction towards one-worldism and how they control the organizations that public officials belong to, then you won't wonder how it's all happened. And our governors belong to that, and it's called the Governor's Conference. That's just one of many in the organizations that Rockefeller heads. So for our governors and legislatures to attend a conference of states is to put us in the hands of the wolves right there. The next thing that they would do would they would pass a resolution of participation, and that would be that they wanted to participate in getting a petition drafted. And the petition would be to the federal government to make amendments. And in this plea that they would be sending to Washington, the effort would be there that they would be asking for a constitutional convention when they're asking for amendments to be made. Now the Williamsburg Resolve is written in the same doctored up, camouflaged language, making it look like the states aren't being treated fairly. They want to be co-equal. That in itself is a mistake. The states are not co-equal with the federal government. The states are superior to the federal government. The federal government has only been allocated a certain amount of power to do certain jobs in the country. The states are superior in so much as they could at any time meet, and they could interpose and stop any of the plans that the federal government has for the Open Skies Treaty, for the NAFTA Treaty, the GATT Treaty, for the Disarmament Treaty, any of those, the UNIDO Treaty. The UNIDO Treaty was the basis of the treaties that required a new social order and a new economic order to be installed in the United States. But our governors are not doing any of that. They're not protecting their people. They are working with the federal government to bring us into a different social system and a different economic order. So I would say that if you'd like to see a copy of this pictorial summary, you can get a copy from the Wisconsin Report, the Post Office Box 45, send a donation of a couple of $2 or $3, and ask for some of the issues that contain the pictorial summary, and she'll send you some other issues and additions. Also, I'd like to compliment the Council on Domestic Relations. They're trying to get the Tenth Amendment effort throughout the nation, and that's real important because this Conference of States is rolling fast. I think they have 33 states now, and all they have to have is 34 to open up this conference to get going on this petition and force a constitutional convention. If a constitutional convention opens up, it is not limited to subjects. There's no way it can be limited. That has been already stated by Warren Burger, who was the chief justice at one time of the Supreme Court. He says you cannot put a muzzle on a constitutional convention. So if it's opened up, they can easily bring in another constitution. But I would like to warn the people of this. If we are unfortunate enough to have that transpire, they need to remember that on the ninth day of the convention, it was James Madison who moved from the form they had formally under the Articles of Confederation, and he changed it from we the states to we the people. And when that constitution was ratified, it went to the 13 original states, and it had to be ratified in those states by delegation of the people. But it was ratified so that it became the people's document and the people's authority over the federal government. It granted certain powers and no more. But it was the people's document to control, and it was the people's document to guard. So according to this pictorial summary, it makes you think, according to the way they've got it written up, that it is okay for the state legislatures to pass these resolutions and amendments. There's no way that our 1789 constitution, which is lawfully the constitution, that is in effect. It may have been denied the exercise and the recognition, but it's still the lawful constitution here. There has been nothing to declare that it is not the lawful constitution. So if they open up a convention and they get that far and they try to bring in another document, they have no authority to pass it. It has to go before a vote of all the people because the 1789 constitution belongs to all the people. It's just like the deed to your house. If someone was going to buy your house or push you out of your house and you didn't want to sell or you didn't want to be forcibly removed, you would not have to sign the deed. If you didn't want to sell your car, you would not have to sign over the pink slip. And it's the same thing with our constitution. We are not willing. We have not given consent. Consent of the governed is a principle that is in the Declaration of Independence. And they have to have our consent. And we do not intend to give our consent. So I think up front it's important to let them know that they haven't got a ghost of a chance with the Conference of States because we are not giving our consent to relinquish the 1789 constitution no matter what they do. They have no authority to bring in another one. They have less authority to even think they could pass it. And we are not willing to see it happen. So I think that's important for people to keep in their mind. So I think I'm going to summarize. I don't think we have too much more time left. In summary, I hope everyone will call the members of the House of Representatives, especially the ones that I have listed already. And that again, repeating, is Barbara Connelly, Charles Rangel, Glenn English, Martin Frost, Sam Jerdensen, Floyd Fake, Gary Ackerman, Lane Evans, and Eddie Bernice Johnson, a lady. Sounds like a man's name, but it's a woman. And she's from Texas. And call these people and tell them that we do not want HR 97 enacted and we want it withdrawn. And the person that is the lead sponsor is Barbara Connelly. She's the one to put most pressure upon. And as far as the Conference of States, it's very important that you realize that there are some people left in government that are good. But you'll find them on the lower levels. You won't find as many. The percentage is very low on the state level. The governors, practically every governor, is in league with these people. There has to be one governor that came into New Mexico. He has no political experience. He's a construction man. They elected him as governor. And it will be interesting to watch and see what happens there. But the rest of the governors attend these conferences, and they are in league with the federal plan. There's definitely a collusion. But you'll find more people, a higher percent of good people that are dedicated on the lower subdivision levels of government. And so we do have what you call two instructive packages. One is the sheriff's package, and one is the supervisor's package. And it tells you how to work with them, to show them what's going on on the federal level, and to ask them to unite with their fellow counties and put pressure on their state governor to turn this thing around and save the country in time so that we don't have to go through a civil war. The direction that we're in, they're leading us into a civil war. And if there's anything we can do to resolve this peaceably, we should make every effort. So if you want to contact the Second Amendment Committee, from which I'm the chairman of, you can contact us through Post Office Box 1776 in Hanford, California, 93232. The sheriff's package is a $30 two-inch high package, and the supervisor's package comes with an instruction tape, and that is $20. So from what I've given, if you have anything to add, if you'd like to say something now, I think I should yield to you for the last five minutes. Well, I think you pretty much said it all. And I think I've talked quite a bit, and I do appreciate you letting me just go straight ahead. And it's been easier to make people understand just where we're coming from. These are intricate subjects to try to lay before the people. A lot of people are not familiar with how the power structure operates in our nation. And so when you try to tell them that this is a deviation, they can't relate because they don't know how it's supposed to normally operate. So that's not everyone, but, I mean, there are a lot of people that are in that category. So it's difficult to try to tell them how we're supposed to do things, and then when people are subverting with the intent to alter our system and bring us into a different form of government, it's a difficult task. So it's easier if someone is as generous as you and lets me just go ahead and try for it. And I hope that I have made some people understand just a little bit more of the dangers we're in. And not to forget that we're in that period of conformity. They will move rapidly. And as Senator Jenner had said, he said one time, he said, when they spring the trap, my friends, you will be helpless. You will have had it. And your time now is right now. If you're going to have that save in this country, it's now. And it isn't for somebody else to do. Don't let George do it. George and his colleagues in the colonial days, they did a lot for us. We need to prove that we were worthy of the sufferings that they went through to give us a true, proper form of government. And it's up to us now to protect it once it was given to us. We haven't seen it in operation since way before, well into the 30s. And it's just gotten worse and worse all the way along. It's less and less constitutional operation here. We're almost at the point where, except for the framework that stands of elected offices, which won't last long, we're just at the point of not having it in operation at all. So I haven't covered some of the things I would like to talk about. We have about three minutes left. Is that correct? About a minute. Oh, well, the privatization that is going on, there was an executive order from Bush when he was president that they can sell off the parts of the counties. So the idea that they have is to abolish cities, counties, special districts, and then the state. But it will come so fast it will make your head swim. And that executive order was given, and it's executive order 12803, I believe. And it calls for the selling of roads and tunnels and bridges and water supply and electricity supply and hospitals and schools and prisons and not limited to these things, but recycling plants and airports and just all parts of the county that the federal government has any funding in or has ever had any funding in. And they're allowed now to sell that off to private hands. Anybody can buy into it. Foreign countries could buy in. And there's how you could see the dissolving of our one nation into a multiple of little small countries as foreign countries come in with money and buy us out. Well, thank you for talking for us, Matt. Well, thank you for allowing me. I appreciated the chance to get this out to your listening audience. Okay, good night. Good night. That should be all, folks. Good night and God bless. Good night.