The End The End I'm William Cooper, and this is the hour of the time. The only hour that ever was or ever will be. This is the most important hour in your entire life, for during this hour you will decide your future, and thus our collective futures. The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End The End To be continued... the Waco tape that you have put together that I have been telling everybody in the world that they need to see, and they do need to see it. If you remember where we left off, you can start from there and continue, or if you can't remember, then start wherever you think it's important. Well, I know we covered this before, but anybody that didn't hear it, the case definitely shows that the government murdered the Branch of Vidians. There's a tank that they used to go in the second hole on the side of the house that is a flamethrowing tank. You can see the nozzle. You can see the gas jet. You can see the fire on that tank, and that was not shown across national network footage. If you didn't see it live, then you didn't see it. Now, you know, I want to interject something here. I can remember sitting in front of the television set watching this happen, and I remember seeing that footage on the television set live as it was happening, and myself and many other people, because it was so fleeting at that particular point, and they didn't show it as well as the footage that we now have. We thought that that was the origin of the fire, and it was even discussed on the local news and in the print media that people saw the fire start just in front of the tank as it came out of the hole in the building. That's why they had to come up with this turned-over lantern theory. That's right. In reality, what they were seeing was an actual flamethrower on this tank shooting flames into the building. Yeah, and they came up with several feet of the pants live during all this because the camera accidentally caught the agent on the roof, and that's why you heard the initial story about, oh, there were two Branch Davidians on the roof setting the fire. Well, think about that for a second. It was stupid to begin with because why would the Branch Davidians need to go on the roof? That's correct. They wrote that story like a hot rock, you know, and then the next day they're saying, well, we've got a guy that admits that they set the fire, and, of course, they've never produced him. And I've talked to just all but two of the Branch Davidians that lived, I think, and none of them admit setting the fire. In fact, they all absolutely say, no, none of us would have done that, and there was no plan for suicide, and we certainly wouldn't have set ourselves on fire. So that is just absolutely bogus. And then they came up with that to cover what they were doing, and then they come up with this lantern story, you know, oh, the tank turned over the lantern. Well, we know better than that because this, I don't know if you know it or not, but the Hour of the Time is the only radio show in the entire world that managed to get an interview with one of the Branch Davidians who had been inside of that house during the siege. We held an hour-long interview with Rita Riddle, and off the air she told me personally, and I have it on tape around here, I taped every word that she said, she said that they didn't have any fuel inside the house. They kept their fuel in barrels outside, as any sane group of people does, and that the tanks during the first two or three days ran over their fuel barrels, and all the fuel went into the ground, and the only fuel that they had inside the house was fuel that they already had inside the lanterns and a couple of little stoves that they had. They didn't have any large containers of fuel. And I found it very interesting that they said that the Branch Davidians spread fuel all over the place and started this fire, which obviously, as anyone can tell who's ever had any experience with fire, was an oil fire, a petroleum fire, a petroleum-based product, based upon the signature of the color of the flames, which were a deep red crimson color, and the dense, voluminous black smoke that just gives the whole thing away. And, of course, when you see this tank with a flamethrower on the front, realize that the flamethrower actually shoots out a petroleum jelly known as napalm, then you can understand part of the reason, at least, for the dense black smoke. Go ahead, Linda. You're doing, I might add, that both last night and tonight, you're doing a wonderful job, and you certainly know how to express yourself, and you certainly know what you're talking about. Well, the three different versions we heard from the feds right after this, or while it was going on and afterwards, were to cover the fact that three of the things they did were accidentally caught by the camera. But one thing that I noticed watching all the film footage we have, which is from a lot of different sources, was that all three of the stations were using the same camera feed, which is real weird to begin with, because they're usually very competitive, and they would not use the same camera. And every time something that the government did would come on the camera, the camera would cut away. And you've got to realize this cameraman is about two or three miles from the actual house that it's filming, and when you look through a camera viewer, you don't initially see what the camera's seeing. So there would just be maybe a half a second or a second, and that camera was coming into focus for the cameraman, because the camera's broadcasting a very clear image, but the cameraman can't see it. And then when he could see it, he'd cut away. And that became like my, it was almost like a flag for me. When the camera cuts away, I'm going to find something the feds did wrong, if I can go find that footage from some other camera angle. And sure enough, that's the truth. Every time they did that, there was something happening. And this guy on the roof is another example, because he was laying up on the roof pointing his gun at the window when he was initially caught by the cameraman. And that's the first little blurb we have is when the camera caught him doing that. And the footage that's shown in my video is what another camera caught him doing, and that's with him rolling over on the roof, taking off a fireproof suit. He jumps down off the roof very calmly. You know, he drops his suit. He walks away. He turns back and looks at the fire, and his head looks kind of odd-shaped, and that's because he's wearing a fireproof hood. He takes that thing off and throws it. Then he keeps walking, and he's got a rifle in his hand. Now, the feds came up with the story of the BDs on the branch Davidians on the roof because the cameraman caught him for a few seconds of that while he was laying on the roof. And, you know, every story that you heard after it, if you know what film footage is out there, you know why they invented the story. But then all those stories contradict one another, too. And that's when the press asks, wait a minute, you're telling all these different contradictory stories, and then you drop them like a hot rock. Let's have some explanation here. Since none of these stories is true, what is the truth? What really did happen? Why did you tell us this? Well, Linda, they couldn't possibly even address that request because from day one they were telling lies and then covering up for the lies and then telling more and covering up for them. And so I don't believe, I believe they reached a certain point where I don't believe that they really knew what they said or what the truth was themselves anymore. Yeah. Well, this whole thing was called a PSYOP, a psychological operation. All of the things that were being released to the press were planned lies. And then some of them, when things happened that they didn't anticipate, for instance, things would be caught on camera that they didn't want the public to know. They'd have to invent a seat-of-the-pants lie that contradicted with the planned lie. That's right. They'd just continue on and pretend that they didn't notice the inconsistency. That's correct. And the press didn't ever ask a single question about that. Not throughout the whole thing. You didn't hear the press going, look at these lies. Do you think that there's a school that they send the press to to cow them, to make them toe the mark? How do they do this to people? Well, I think a big part of it, I know with the broadcasting press at least, is the fact that the SPC is allowed to control broadcasters' licensing. How hard would it be to say, well, fine, if you don't do what we tell you to do, we're going to pull your license and you'll be off the air. The broadcasting press is completely controlled by the government. We don't have a free press because all it takes to... Well, we wouldn't have a free press anyway, Linda, because the only free press belongs to the owner. The owner has free press. This concept that whoever owns the press is going to be totally objective and give out the truth all the time is crap. It's just not true. And it never has been true and it never will be true. And that's why I advise people to get together as citizens and buy a radio station. Buy a paper. And if they shut you down, go buy another one. We started a paper. We started our Associated Electronics News on the computer because we could not get any of the national sheets for AP or UPI when they found out what we were going to do. They absolutely refused to sell it to us. I can sue them over that as an antitrust thing, but it would take five or six years and tie up all my resources and it would be a royal pain. And I doubt we'd accomplish anything. And it would cost a fortune. Exactly. So rather than get taken off on that sideshow circus, we said, well, okay, fine. We'll beat you at your own game. We started a computer network for news and it is now national and I can get out stuff on that so fast it'd make your head spin. And we get reports across that. Amazing amount of time it takes to get things electronically. And we're also going to produce a paper. We have a fellow out in California that is setting up a competing news service to compete with AP and UPI. And there is a station here in South Bend. There's a couple of guys that are trying to buy a radio station to do exactly what you're talking about. And they want to start a national link of people like yourself and other people that have been trying to get the truth out nationally at the same time to broadcast. Well, let me tell you what we've done. We already have a news service. It's called the Caggy News Service. And we feed the news to the media as we find the truth. And they completely ignore it even though we don't charge them a penny. Everything is verified. We never go by anybody's word. We don't just go by even two sources. I mean, we have to have absolute proof before we'll feed anything to anyone with our news service. And it doesn't cost anybody anything. I mean, we send this to radio stations. We send it to TV stations. We send it to the networks. We send it to API, UPI, Reuters, all of these. And not one single story that we've ever sent them has ever, ever been routed to anybody. So... Well, a lot of our stuff is getting picked up. And it doesn't always go national, but it does get picked up. And if it gets picked up occasionally... I mean, there are... I don't think every journalist we've got out there is an idiot or an agent of the government. Oh, of course not, no. But the guys over them often are. Yes. And it's the editors who control what is published and what goes out. I know at least one reporter that was down in Waco was in law school with me. Now, you know, every FBI agent has to have a law school degree, right? Mm-hmm. I thought it was real interesting that this guy would go to law school and go out and be a reporter and that he was down at Waco. I don't know what that means, but I just thought it was interesting. Well, I don't know what it means either. Linda, let's talk just a little bit about... Let's talk about the constitutional issues at Waco, Texas. Now, from your point of view, and remember you're talking to an audience that, by and large, my audience has a copy of the Constitution. They have read it. They may not have it memorized. They may not know exactly what it all means, but they probably have a better understanding of the Constitution than any other radio audience that you're ever going to talk to. And some of my listening audience are experts. They could go head-to-head probably with any lawyer in this country. That would be too difficult. Probably beat them was going to be my next statement. But let's talk about some of these things from your point of view and realizing that you've gotten into these issues as a byproduct of confronting the actual abuse of the Constitution and then having to learn it on your own like we have to learn it on our own because they don't teach it in law school, but you've become an expert also. And you not only understand the constitutional points, but you understand the perversion of the law, which they call statute law. I learned a lot of what got me going on this from patriots who had taken the time to learn exactly where did we lose the Constitution, where did the courts lose jurisdiction, what happened to our school three courts in the federal system, why do the feds think they have all this control over the states, etc., etc., etc. The patriots inundated me with information, and they're right. They're absolutely right. I was hearing all these allegations there's no Article III court. Finally got documentation. Finally tracked it. Finally looked through the statute. They're right. We don't. The Emergency Powers Act destroyed it. We've got a Secretary of the Treasury that's working for the IMF. Who pays the judge's salaries in the courts, in the federal courts? The executive branch, by an emergency order. Our federal courts have been under an emergency order being paid by the executive branch out of the Treasury, where the director is being paid by foreign powers, foreign emoluments, absolutely forbidden by the government, or absolutely forbidden by the Constitution. And yet that's exactly how our court system is working in the federal system. The federal courts have no jurisdiction at this point because we don't have an impartial judiciary. We have a judiciary that has a seal behind every judge of the executive branch. They've got the flag flying of the executive branch in every federal courtroom. They're being paid by the executive branch. So when Clinton spoke one time of the two branches of government, he wasn't misspeaking. That wasn't a slip of the tongue. It was true. We don't have a legitimate federal court system operating anymore. So he's talking about executive and judicial, I mean executive and the legislating then. Yes, and the legislative branch is a farce. Yes, absolutely a farce. The executive and the legislative branches, where we have electoral votes electing people to office. Does anybody, as I'm sure many of the patients have checked us out, but for people that don't know, the electoral vote is what elects the president. That's right. Popular vote means nothing. Yeah, not our popular vote. And who picks the electorate? Who picks those guys that cast the electoral vote? For the most part, it's the governors of a given state. They just point to someone and say, you're it. Well, how do they figure who to pick? They pick the guys that have provided the most money to the party. Or the guy that's pointing the gun at his head. Or the gun. Or the people that have the money and control what's going on and say, Governor, you're going to pick this guy or you're never going anywhere because we won't give you any money. Right. This kind of thing. So our electoral voting is bought and sold. I mean, that's all there is to it. And they're going to vote for who they're told to vote for. This whole thing with Clinton and Perot and Bush this last election was completely staged. It didn't matter who you voted for. That's correct. You could have voted for any of them. The result was the same. And the standards were going to be a stand. But there was one that had to be elected because it had been stated at the Bilderberg meeting in Baden-Baden, Germany in 1991 that Bill Clinton would be the next president of the United States. And nobody bucks that group. Yeah. Well, that's why I say, though, it didn't make any difference who you voted for. That's right. We were going to get what we got. And the laws that are being passed by our Congress, some of these laws are absolutely incredible if you read them. And you would never believe that any thinking human being could have legitimately read them and then voted, yes, let's pass this law. Well, I discovered how that happens because I thought, man, that's an awful lot of people to fool, you know. Well, the truth is most of them don't read it. They vote for what they're told to vote for by their majority winner, by the minority winner. They get synopsis that are provided to them by law clerks that write these laws. Well, then we've got to look and see who picks the law clerks. The same guys that control the electorate. And the law clerks write the laws, and then they provide a synopsis to Congress. It's a much shorter version of the law. And it may have nothing to do with the law itself. I've read synopsises that are absolutely blatant misrepresentations of what that law is. That's correct. And yet, you know, they're not reading the law, so they don't know. And even if they did read the law, they wouldn't know because a lot of the things that these laws say in them are terms of art. If you're not an attorney, you are not going to know that when you read a phrase that says one thing and has a plain meaning on its surface, because of case law and because of decisions, that phrase has a specific meaning in law that's going to affect every case that comes up. They don't know that. The American public doesn't know that. The guys writing it know that. Not only that, but they don't understand that what they're reading and the meaning of what they're reading in their ordinary, everyday language is not the same meaning that those words mean in the legal sense of the meaning. Absolutely. And as far as Congress is concerned, the official dictionary of Congress, ladies and gentlemen, is the Webster's Dictionary of 1828. I didn't know that, and I didn't find it out after I had struggled for a long time in the writing of my book and attempting to understand Public Law 100-690, which I devote a good portion of my book to, to show you how legislation perverts and subverts the Constitution and the law of the land. And when I found that out and began to use the Black's Law Dictionary, Webster's Dictionary of 1828, and began to understand that the words that I thought had meaning in one way didn't mean that at all, but meant something entirely different, then I began to understand what I was reading. And you're going to have the same problems, all of you. And it's even difficult, you know, I hope I'm not overstating it, but it's even difficult for lawyers sometimes to get at the real meaning of a piece of legislation that may consist of 200 pages of fine print and all kinds of deceptive language. Is that correct, Linda? Well, those kinds of things that you're speaking of, they're called terms of art, they're taking, what they do is they'll take a phrase out of a particularly important case, say, by the Supreme Court, where the court used a particular phrase to mean a particular thing. And so from that point on, that phrase means that particular thing. And if it appears in a law, if you weren't familiar with the case, and you just read that phrase and don't know its meaning from that case, you aren't going to know what it means in the body of the law that they just wrote. So now you're talking even different from words now. Now you're talking phrases. Exactly. And so that is why if you're not familiar with the cases they snatched this out of and then put it into the law where you read it and it looks like it means one thing and it might mean something completely different, completely different. And you're bound by it because the Supreme Court said it. They quoted it in there. They don't tell you it's a quote, but that's what it is. And it's like a buzzword. It's like a key phrase that if it gets to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court knows what it means. That's exactly what's happened to us. The guys writing this know this. It's all the people reading it don't know it. So they've intentionally set out to deceive us. This is no accident. The deceit is intentional. The manipulation is intentional. The trend toward the destruction of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the sovereignty of this nation is intentional. And that means that it's treason. Yes, absolutely. We're talking about treason. We're talking about traitors. We're talking about criminals. We're talking about despicable people who masquerade as Americans and, in fact, are subversive. Well, that's exactly what we're talking about. And we're talking about murderers that would stop at nothing. People that have literally, in Waco, murdered innocent little babies without a thought. Well, you know, I hate to say this, but I hate that when people do that. Those were people in there. I don't care how old they were, whether they were 100 years old or they were 2 years old. And I noticed the press singles out, they feel sorry for the 27 children that died. I feel sorry for all of those people that died. They were all murdered, every one of them, child or not child, 100 years old or 2 years old. They all had rights. They were all entitled to the same protection under the law, and none of them got it. I agree with you. But the point I want to make with the babies thing is you can have anger and you can understand anger. Maybe you can understand revenge. Maybe you can understand things that are directed at adults. You can see how they can have some motives, however bizarre and stupid they may have been, for adults. But there's never a motive to kill a baby. Never. Well, you're absolutely right. But in a way, that's kind of falling into the political correctness that helped convict them by using the fact that they were supposedly molesting and abusing children, when in fact that they were not. The children have been used in this from the beginning. They weren't doing any of that. Yeah, that's correct. But it points it out. You know, these are some really awful, horrible people. They could just go in and murder. Period. Just go in and murder 100 people, 96 people, for no reason. And they planned to do it from the beginning. This wasn't an afterthought. This wasn't something they thought up along the way. This was a plan from the very beginning. And the purposes that we might perceive as their reason for doing this, I don't believe have ever been discovered yet. Why do you think they did this, Linda? Well, part of it, I think I know why, but since I haven't proved it, I hate to put it out across the national network. But I can put out a theory about that. Okay. Let's hear your theory. And by the way, this is international. We go to every continent, every country, every city on this earth. Perfect. Well, keep in mind, this is theory at this point in conjecture, but nothing else makes much sense. First of all, I keep finding all this international involvement with Waco. We have the British SAS flying a plane over. We have Australian authorities inquiring into what was going on beforehand. We have Mark Bro, the guy that contacted Cult Awareness Network and contacted a lot of international agencies. Well, look at Mark Bro. He traveled from Hawaii to California to Texas and back to Hawaii and out to Australia with no visible means of support for two and a half years. And he was putting pressure on a lady that he had brought to meet David Koresh to leave. Okay. When Mark Bro was a self-proclaimed prophet that joined the Branch Davidians in 87, he introduced a lady named Sherry Jewel to David Koresh. Mark Bro and Sherry are both computer programmers. Mark Bro did all of this international traveling with no visible means of support. So who was funding him? And why did he introduce Sherry Jewel to David Koresh? All right. They live in Mel Carmel for a while. Mark Bro gets kicked out. And as soon as he gets kicked out, he starts this two and a half year campaign to slander them. I mean, he's the one that spread all the stuff about child molesting and all that. Not just him. He had help from a journalist named Carl Stern, whose byline appeared with most of the stories that were spreading these same lies. And it's not coincidence, ladies and gentlemen, that as soon as Waco was over, Carl Stern became the public relations director for guess who? The ATF. Isn't that amazing? Isn't that amazing? Rewards and punishments. Yes. Well, in any event, here's all of this background stuff. And then once Bro gets kicked out, what does he do? He contacts Sherry Jewel's ex-husband and volunteers to testify against her in a custody battle over the Jewel's child, Sherry. And Mark Bro travels to Michigan to testify against Sherry. He was using this to blackmail her. If you don't leave there, you're going to lose your daughter. And I'm really interested in why he was so concerned that she leaves. Because he was already married by this time, saying that he was in love with her and so forth. That doesn't jive. Okay? It doesn't fit the picture. It's time for our break, folks. Don't go away. Take a deep breath. We'll be right back after this very short pause. Thank you. Hello, folks. This is William Cooper. And I want to know why those of you who have not called Swiss America Trading have not done it. I don't know what you're holding back for, folks. It's an 800 number. It doesn't cost you a penny. You get two free reports, chock full of information. Actually, one's a report. The other's a newsletter. Information that you need to know. Also, you owe it to yourself to find out what Swiss America Trading has to offer. And if you like this program, folks, then you need to show a little bit of loyalty. And if you're ever going to seek out this information, you owe it to them to call them first. Whether or not you end up doing business with Swiss America Trading is not the point. They bring you this program. They have paid for the airtime for quite a while now. And they continue to do so. They backed us when anyone else would have blew the coop, so to speak. They are loyal. They believe in the message of the hour of the time. They support us wholeheartedly and 100%. And ladies and gentlemen, if you believe in the hour of the time, if you believe that you're getting real work from this program, if you can't wait to sit down and listen to this show every night, Monday through Friday, then you need to call Swiss America Trading right now. You owe it to yourself and to your family to prepare for what's coming in the future. We know we're headed for a complete economic collapse, and you know it, too. If you've been listening to this program, you're the type of person that understands what's coming. So call now 1-800-289-2646. That's 1-800-289-2646. For the first 200 callers, you'll receive Harry Figge's report entitled Tackle the Debt. Call now 1-800-289-2646. Folks, that's 1-800-289-2646. While you're at it, mention my name. Tell them that you listened to the hour of the time, you'll also receive a free newsletter on protecting your future. Folks, by protecting your future, you're also protecting the future of the hour of the time, and of course, freedom for the world. Call now 1-800-289-2646. That's 1-800-289-2646. And you'll be glad that you did. 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. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Let me tell you a little interesting story about Mark Breaux. When I was in Hawaii, I did a lecture tour on all the islands in Hawaii. When I was there, Mark Breaux came to one of my workshops and introduced himself and asked me some very strange questions. And I still don't know why he was asking the questions that he did or why he was trying to impress upon me that he was so important. But I completely ignored this person. And the reason I ignored him was he, number one, could not look me in the eye at any time. And anyone who can't look me in the eye, I get funny feelings from those kinds of people and don't even like to be around them. Number two, he impressed me as being mentally unstable. He impressed me very clearly as having something mentally wrong with him. Now, I don't know if he does or not, but that was the personal impression that I received. And I never saw him again, nor have I ever heard from him. And I didn't know that this was the same person until I actually saw his photograph having to do with the jewel case connected to Waco. And then all of a sudden I realized this is the same Mark Breaux that I met in Hawaii. So go ahead. Kind of interesting. Yes, very interesting. All right. Now, one of the things I'm working on, I don't know if you know anything about the Infla case, but I believe that this ties to that. And 63 people that have investigated the Infla case have been murdered. Now, Infla started back in 83. Infla was a computer software writing company. And they sold a program to the Justice Department of our government for $10 million. That program would let all of the files in Justice Department and the police departments and so forth be interactive. It was a relational database that could do things none of the databases they had before could do. It was a truly innovative way of manipulating data. At the time, Ed Meese and his friend Earl Bryan had a competing computer company. And they tried to get Infla to sell out to them. And Infla wouldn't do it. So instead, Earl Bryan took copies of the software. The program is called Promise. Infla's software. And sold it all over the world to, like, Saudi Arabia and places like that for millions of dollars. And they also got the Justice Department to default on paying Infla. So Infla was forced into bankruptcy. Well, in the bankruptcy, the bankruptcy judge rules that, yes, Infla had been defrauded by the Justice Department. And that judge was replaced by one of the attorneys that had helped defraud him. Then he gets up to the Court of Appeals. And the Court of Appeals said, yes, you know, the Department of Justice has defrauded these people. But you sued in the wrong court. You know, you can't sue in bankruptcy court. That's true. So then Jack Brooks and the Judiciary Committee investigated all this and determined, yes, all these horrible things had happened. These copies of the software had been sold all over the world and so forth. Well, in the meantime, Earl Bryan gets the software to Wackenhut. Wackenhut is supposed to be a private security guard company that guards American installations all over the world. But their board of directors is all ex-CIA and all ex-FBI. Their second largest stockholder is Rothschild. And I pulled a financial disclosure report on them, so I know this is all true. Their second largest stockholder is Rothschild. Their first largest stockholder is Wackenhut himself. The rest of the stockholders read like a who's who of all the banks and insurance companies that own stock in the Federal Reserve. Yeah, we've done extensive investigation, both in the Inslaw case and Wackenhut. And for any of you who want to check this out, you can get the financial statement and the complete list of stockholders off of any financial database that's open to the public, including the Dow Jones, including CompuServe. You can get it for free off of my VBS. Or you can get it for free off of Linda's VBS. Why don't you give that number out if you want to? I don't know if you really want to. 317-881-2743. And it's in a file called Wackenhut.zip. And if you're not computer fluent, that means it's compressed. It's a zip ending. You need a program that will open it. Okay, why don't you give that number out one more time? 317-881-2743. Okay. It's busy a lot. Our network is carried by different people in different states. But in another state, you could probably find someone local to you. I've got news for you, Linda. It's going to be a lot busier after what you just did. You know, we're having people complain about having trouble getting in now. We only have one line here. But we do have nodes that are in all the other states. So if people do get through, they could ask us who they can contact locally that's a node of our network. Or if they have a BBS system, they can become a node of our network and get this up automatically. Anyway, back to Wackenhut. Wackenhut hired some of the top programmers in the world to rewrite code onto the NSLAB program. And one of the people that was in charge of these programmers was a fellow named Mike Reconishuto. Mike Reconishuto testified before the Judiciary Committee about what was going on with Wackenhut. They were doing this research on this program at a Cavazone Indian reservation in New Mexico. The week after Mike Reconishuto testified about this, he was picked up and put in jail on a methamphetamine charge by the feds. And he had said before he testified that if he testified, he'd be arrested. And that's exactly what happened to him. Now, Wackenhut was exposed in an article by John Connolly in 1992 as being the company that was guarding CIA shipments of what was being called textiles and pharmaceuticals to Iraq. While we were at war with them in Desert Storm. The Friday before the Branch Davidians burned down, Janet Reno announced that she was not going to prosecute the shipments of textiles and pharmaceuticals to Iraq. And yet, this was exactly who she was talking about. She was talking about Wackenhut and the CIA running bomb-making supplies out of the world to come at war with them. All right, now, Wackenhut is who was working on modifying this computer code. Now, what can this computer code be used for on a worldwide scale? Hold on, Linda, please. Sorry for the interruption, ladies and gentlemen. But my little daughter, Poo, was having laughter fit in the background. And, of course, we don't want to disrupt this interview with Linda Thompson. Linda, now that I've got everything quiet again, why don't you continue where he left off? Okay. What is significant with Wackenhut and this computer program is what could a program like this be used to do? We know that it was sold all over the world. What were they modifying the program? Were they modifying it so they could get in all of the codes that were sold all over the world? Or were they modifying it to make it interactive all over the world? Now, here again is some more speculation. But if anyone is paying attention, we know that they're now using little computer chips in dogs to track them. Now, these have to be scanned by a scanner from six inches away. But we also know that all of the cars that have been put out in 93 have a barcode where the VIN number is. And only three weeks ago it was announced that toll booths are able to scan these barcodes as cars drive through from a distance. So the technology is there to scan barcodes and obtain information by scanner from a distance from a moving object. And they're already using this in the commercial trucking industry. And if you travel the highways very much, you'll come to places where you'll see a sign. Vehicle identification system in operation at this point. And if you go by and if you have a radar detector on, your radar detector will go off and it will beep about three times. And that is the system querying your automobile. Now, as far as I know, they're only using this on major trucking firms. And they've only installed this on some trucks, not all. They're being exposed on cars, too, now. And the thing is, these little pellets in dog's ears and so forth are being used pretty much all over now to identify dogs and track them from a distance. I have been told but have not confirmed that they're being offered to some poor mothers to put in their children as a way to supposedly help track their kid if their child is abducted. Yes, and we've heard that. We've talked to some of these welfare mothers. We have been told by them that the offer was that it would be much easier, that the welfare system would go much easier for them and that they would have less trouble if they would submit to this test program. And none of the people we've talked to will admit to having actually taken the chip. So it's not a quantum leap in logic to assume that we do have the technology to implant a chip in a human being that can be scanned from a distance. It's also not a quantum leap in logic to assume that satellites that can read newspaper print, you know, on the newspaper you're holding in your hand could read chips implanted in human beings. It's also not a quantum leap in logic when you look at the bills that are presently pending in Congress that will require parents to get their children shot or face felony penalties and which provide a mechanism to track the parents who don't get their children shot and another bill that's pending that requires all Americans to get flu shots to wonder how long is it going to be before we all get flu shot 666 with this little pellet in it. Well, I hate to equate it with 666 because then you're getting into something that cannot be proved or disproved, but I can tell you this through our investigation. That's exactly what is intended. The entire pet implant program was set up as the test vehicle in order to do this. We know that in 1989, Dan Rather said on the 6 o'clock news, I was watching it, we have videotapes of this, Dan Rather said that the pet implant program is so successful that some authorities are recommending that you have your children to keep them from disappearing into the milk carton kids syndrome. So we're calling a flu shot 666 for those who believe in physical prophecy, that whether you do or not, it's still a very scary thing to envision that we can all be tracked from a central computer with a chip in our hand or wherever they put it, and the technology is there. And I'm speculating here, but Wackenhut does control private prisons all around the country that have been built under the auspices of FEMA. Not only in this country, Linda, but we have found that they are the major contractors for many prisons in foreign countries also. They are perfecting the method that I believe will be used in the labor camps of the future. They also control Unicor, which is the slave labor that prisoners work under right now in prisons. They also own a number of food service supplies, refrigerated food service supplies to prisons. Now, right outside my office, there is an Amtrak station that's never been used for boarding or loading passengers at the dead train station where they repaired broken trains. It's had an enormous amount of money put into it in the last couple of years, and it was supposed to be closing two months ago, and it was bailed out with $10 million to keep it open two more months. Now, when you realize that it's been projected to close for six months before this date, in the meantime, they've put in fencing everywhere, three layers deep, up along the railroad tracks. The top of it has barbed wire that faces in. There are four helicopter wind socks out there with no explanation for why they would even meet them. The fencing is cordoned off into areas marked red zone and blue zone and green zone, and they've put in these huge gas furnaces that look like the kind of furnace you have at your house, but much, much bigger. Gas pipelines all up and down the whole place into warehouse buildings that were never heated. We've talked to people that used to work there. These buildings were never heated while the buildings were used. Now that they're warehouses, they've suddenly installed, you know, what looks like hundreds of thousands of dollars in huge furnaces and new gas pipelines. Then on top of that, in front of some of these warehouse buildings, they've installed turnstiles like you'd see at a zoo or someplace that a lot of people are going to go in and out of with the fingers all the way up, and prison bars around the turnstiles so that there's no way to get in or out except through the turnstiles, and the turnstiles have sensors on them, electronic sensors. Now, I filmed this on videotape, and I'm trying to make a short little quick videotape to get out to people that don't believe me. And the other thing that they did within the last time that I was out there, within the preceding week, they put up little numbered blocks along the train tracks on the fence that are people-sized. Okay? Like you see for parking spaces, only they're not parking space-sized. They're people-sized. Now, they're not expecting a ton of people in this place because even throwing manned, they have 250 employees for three shifts. That's roughly 82 people a shift. That's nothing. They don't need any of this for security out there. It's a dead train station with a lot of beat-up train pieces. Linda, let me stop you right there because I'm telling you right now, this is awfully scary what you're saying, and somebody is going to warrant some proof of what you're saying. Can you give them, can you give it to them? How can they get it? Well, right now, this minute, the only way they can get it is come over. I've got some, we made some still photographs and got a few copies of that made, but I also did go out and videotape the whole thing. And I've just simply got, I have never operated a video camera before, and when I filmed this, I laid the camera down on the seat and I filmed my leg part of the time. And I've got to find somebody that can cut out that piece where I filmed my leg. But other than that, we've got a videotape we can copy, and people can see this for themselves. Have you done anything to safeguard this videotape or those photographs? Sure. We've got them in different places, different people have seen them. But we've been taking tours out there. We've been taking groups of people from around here out there to see this themselves. I mean, you can see it from the streets. You can walk around. Where is this at? It's on 202 Garstang Street off of Emerson Avenue in Beach Grove. So if you go to Beach Grove, Indianapolis, which is just southeast of downtown Indianapolis, and you can get to it right off Interstate 465. You get off at the Emerson Avenue, Beach Grove exit off 465. You go north about a mile and a half. Garstang Street's on your right. And you'll see Amtrak trains ahead of you on your right, too. I mean, it's kind of hard to miss. There is a traffic light, but the traffic light just north of it is Main Street to Beach Grove. So if you get there, you've gone too far. The traffic light just south of it is at a Kroger store. So it's between the Kroger and Main Street off Emerson Avenue in Beach Grove. You turn right onto Garstang Street, and they've also put up a new sign lately. There's an old sign that says Garstang Street. There's a new blue one that says Walter Barracks Avenue or Walter Barracks Boulevard or something. It's Walter Barracks, B-A-R-R-I-C-K-S. It's blue. So there's actually two signs on that street. So just turn onto that street. You're going to be driving alongside of it. You can pull up into the parking area of it. The first left-hand turn is into the parking area. Follow that down and around. And the farther back you get into it, the worse it looks. It doesn't look too bad up front. It looks like, well, they've got some security fencing up. They've got a few cameras. Not any real big deal. Then you go down to the next entrance to the place into the parking lot. You see that they've repaved the whole parking lot. They've got a little guard shack there that's got a set of turnstiles inside of it. The only way to get to it is to walk through these turnstiles, and you come out into a fenced-in area that loads right up at the railroad track. And that's where it says Red Zone in big letters on a sign. And then there's these little numbered compartments, little numbered signs on the fence. And it's not a parking area because you can't get in there and park. And then you go on a little further down and go into the next entrance up into the left, and at the end of that you're going to see a big, huge fenced-in area right up along the railroad track, a big warehouse building with another set of these turnstiles in front of it. And that's where you can see the gas pipes and so forth that have been run to all these warehouses. And they even say natural gas right on them. And these huge furnaces. Now, we had a guy fly over and take aerial photographs of this place, and these furnaces are everywhere. And one of the buildings has got solar panels. I don't know what that means. But these furnaces have been installed at all these buildings. So keep in mind this is a place that was supposed to be. I've got to interrupt you now. And what you're describing is terrifying if it means. And you haven't said anything about what it means, and I haven't either. But my mind can picture what you're saying and what you're describing is terrifying. I would like any CAGGI members anywhere in the area to get there, get videotaped, get photographed, ask questions. Let's find out what this is. Because it may not be what the implication is. We don't know. I haven't gotten any good explanation for this from anybody. You know, we ask people that work at Amtrak. They said they don't know. Well, personally, I think that what you're implying is probably exactly right. But we still have to substantiate it. And the only official answer from Amtrak is, well, it's extra security. Extra security for what? You know, 250 employees that were supposed to have been laid off for a bunch of beat-up train pieces? Well, that's what we have to find out. In a low-crime area? You know, we don't have any crime out there. This makes no sense. Well, for those of us who know what's coming, it makes an awful lot of sense. But we still have to verify that what you're describing is, in fact, what it is and what it's meant to be. And they're still putting up new fencing out there. And another thing is a helicopter ball on the electrical wires. Don't you know, to indicate an unusual helicopter landing? Uh-huh. And the four-helicopter wind sign. Now, we couldn't find any helicopters out there because one day I got in and we were able to get in the whole thing. They had left the front gate open. And we went in and that's where we got our still pictures was when we were going in to the part that we usually can't get to. Yeah. Linda, I hate to interrupt, but the reason I was originally interrupting was just to get that in because we're out of time. Sure. And we've got to go. But we'll talk off the air and decide whether or not you should come back for another episode of the Hour of the Time. And, gee, you sure have helped clarify a lot of things. You've certainly verified an awful lot of things that I've been warning people about. And you did a wonderful job in Waco, Texas. And we've got to go now. Folks, that's it for tonight. Anyway, don't forget to listen to the Hour of the Time again tomorrow night. Good night. And God bless each and every single one of you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The End The End The End The End