PRISM program shows the surveillance state is already here

June 07, 2013

Writer

It's no small irony that 1984 was published 64 years ago yesterday. Earlier this year, Glenn was called a conspiracy theorist because he warned about the data collection of the federal government, all while the ribbon was being cut on the NSA's vault in Utah. Today, however, The Washington Post revealed that Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, and Apple are all part of a program called PRISM that gives the federal government access to the information on their servers.

"It is a brave new world. It is a brave new world. It is 1984. The things that we speculated against in the 1990s when I first read Ray Kurzweil's books and I started looking into what we were actually doing with technology. When we started thinking, what is possible when you ‑‑ when we watched Minority Report, the Tom Cruise movie, and we saw that they could monitor everything. We're here, gang. If anybody wants to talk about Common Core now and the collection of data, go ahead. Let's bring it on. Now's the time to talk to your friends about Common Core and the collection of data. Now's the time to stand up in Florida and say, 'Excuse me? You put a retinal scanner on your buses because you wanted my son or daughter's iris scan? I don't think so.' Now is the time to stand up because if you do not, if you want to play the game that this all started with George W. Bush, I don't care if it started with Jesus. 'Started with Moses, you know. He was the first one to start watching over people's stone cutting of tablets.' I don't care. Now is the time to stop it. How it started is meaningless. What they're doing with it now isn't."

"You know what amazes me is congress decided to talk about this and all they could talk about in congress is, 'Are you listening to our phone calls? Are you listening to members of congress' phone calls? Does your political machine have access to that?' Are you out of your mind, Senator? Is that really what matters to you? Well, thank you for being just like a member of the press. You only cared about it when they were attacking you. You called people like me just five weeks ago a conspiracy theorist while they were cutting the ribbon on the NSA vault in Utah. While they're cutting the ribbon of that, you call me a conspiracy theorist for saying they're collecting data, every piece of data and every keystroke of every computer online. 'Glenn Beck's out of his mind. He's crazy.' Am I now? Am I?"

"So now that you have the information that you denied, now what are you going to do with it? You didn't care about it five weeks ago but then you found out, Senator, that maybe you were being listened to. The AP didn't care about it but then they found out that, oh, maybe they're being listened to. And the American people, you're being listened to; you're being monitored. Do you care, or do you say, 'I'm not doing anything wrong; so it doesn't matter.' Welcome to 1984. 2 plus 2 equals 5. It doesn't matter. I told you when I was at CPAC. And the crowd liked it, but the elites did not when I said the disease is progressivism, the controlling of people, the people that think they're the ranchers and the average citizen is a cow. We're not cattle. We are your employers. When they're listening to us, it's fine, Senator, that they listen to us but not to you?"

"Wait a minute. What I'm doing in my bakery or as a truckdriver, whatever I'm doing, it's okay to monitor me because you're not sure about me. But as Lindsey Graham says, he's sure about him; so he doesn't mind. Lindsey, what is it that you have sold your soul for? What is it that you members of congress and the Senate, you people in the FBI, the NSA, the people in the White House. I'm not talking about Democrats or Republicans. I'm talking about human beings. I'm talking about people that, no matter what side of the spectrum you're on, unless you are a fascist or a Communist, no matter what side of the spectrum you're on, how do you sleep at night, justifying that you are listening and monitoring and collecting data on every purchase, every geotractking device I might have? All of my phone calls you say that you're not ‑‑ we can't really look in. We don't actually read. Oh, I'm supposed to believe you on this, when you didn't tell me the truth in the first place?"

"And the senators yesterday as they're talking and having their confab for the American people to get to the bottom of it, they ask Eric Holder, 'Are you listening to members of congress?' And he doesn't answer. In fact, here is, Cut 457."

VOICE: Could you assure to us that no phones inside the Capitol were monitored of members of congress that would give a future executive branch if they started pulling this kind of thing up, would give them unique leverage over the legislature?
HOLDER: With all due respect, Senator, I don't think this is an appropriate setting for me to discuss.

"Why not? Stop. Why not? Why not? The American people are listening."

"It is time for transparency. I'm sorry, but you can't have it both ways. You need to collect all the information on every single American, every single American. Make no mistake, America. They read every ‑‑ they have access to every single e‑mail that you write. Beyond that, they record and can record every single keystroke. So you write something and you're like, 'No, that's not quite right. Delete, delete, delete, delete, delete, delete.' They can record every keystroke."

"Now let me ask you something: How is it that the members of congress, the people in the White House can, A, tell us that there is no war on terror. We are not having a war on terror. There is no such thing as a war on terror. There is no such thing as jihad. It's a state of mind."

"How is it that that is winding down, it's almost over, it doesn't even exist, and yet they need to have this kind of security? How is it they say we can't invade people's privacy and ask them, ask them for their ID at the voting booth. How dare you stop someone on the street and ask them for their green card. How dare you ask anybody any question at all if you're near the border? How dare you violate civil rights, the civil rights of people who don't belong here? How dare you even ask me how many people are here without a visa? How dare you even expect me to know how many do have a visa and then never showed up at their schools? How dare you even ask those things, you racist, but yet you need to know everything that I do and every American in this country. How dare you. You can't have it both ways. It doesn't exist both ways. You have painted us as the enemy. You are not protecting us; you are protecting your own power. It is time for people to stand up and say 'We are the employers. You are the servant. We want access to all of the things that you do.'"

"Boy, it is very interesting. It is very interesting how these people have created the Bubba effect, how these people are on the verge of making people like Anonymous into heroes. And they say, 'Well, they had full briefing of this.' Well, I didn't. In fact, not only did I not receive full briefing on this as a taxpayer, as a shareholder, as an owner of this damn country, not only did I not receive a briefing, nor did any of the other shareholders and owners of this country, just an elite of the elite in Washington knew that and meanwhile you lied to the shareholders. You told us under oath you weren't doing any of these things. But you ask for our trust now? Read the Declaration of Independence, America. You better read it now. This is all about civil rights. What right do you have to read my information? What right do you have to follow me? What right do you have to scan my children's eyes? What right do you have to continue to grow this out‑of‑control state that at the best you say, 'Well, we're just sloppy.' Well, you're too damn sloppy."

"I have said for a while, give these people no more power. I have said for a while, 'You better get off Google. You better drop your damn Google mail.' Well, what are you going to do? Said for a while I don't carry a cellphone. I've told you what Ray Kurzweil told me, the head of Google intelligence, of what they can do. He laughed at me when I talked to him about my concerns, and he didn't laugh at me because it was a conspiracy theory but because it was an infantile understanding of what they can already do."

The DARK truth behind the Macrons' absurd lawsuit

WPA Pool / Pool | Getty Images

While the media obsesses over elite scandals, Glenn is having a field day exposing the Macron lawsuit farce—and the twisted truth it tries to bury.

The era of unchecked narratives is coming to an end. We're reclaiming reality, one scandal at a time.

On his show, Glenn couldn't hide his glee over French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte suing Candace Owens for claiming she's really a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux. Glenn called Brigitte the "Jeffrey Epstein of France" for grooming a 15-year-old Emmanuel when she was his 40-year-old teacher, and speculated that she is pressuring her husband to silence the rumors. Glenn also mocked the blatant overkill, which included childhood photos, birth announcements, and a desperate proclamation that Brigitte is "a woman."

But it goes deeper: The liberal elites have long proclaimed that transitioning is "wonderful," so why sue over the insinuation? It's hypocrisy—elites demanding silence on grooming while forcing conformity. This isn't about truth; it's control, proving no one's above scrutiny.

Want to see the absurd lawsuit firsthand? Download the Macron v. Owens lawsuit PDF here and see the evidence for yourself.

Download the PDF here.

BREAKING: Top-secret 2020 House Intel report on Brennan's ICA revealed

Brooks Kraft / Contributor | Getty Images

The following oversight report from the House Intelligence Committee examines the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) rushed out by the Obama administration before leaving office in January 2017.

This report has never been released to the public. Until now.

The House Intelligence Committee’s review began in 2017, shortly after the ICA’s release, and continued through 2020, paralleling a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation into Russia’s role in the 2016 election, which concluded in fall 2020.

Before its declassification by President Trump and public release by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, this report was among the U.S. government’s most highly classified documents. Its sensitive level of compartmentation prohibited storage on top-secret computer networks. Only five physical copies existed, all secured in safes under strict protocols. This extreme classification suggests the Obama administration sought to prevent the public from learning the extent of its alleged deception.

Download the PDF here.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn's Show Prep