today is the minus seven days the full day and forty six percent of likely u.s. voters you know were screwed all explain how they don't want to offend you that the prime minister of norway is calling for more democracy we've also got the real reason walter reed is finally being shut down today and wife herman vons are better than suicide vests but more morally tonight we have until peter of royal robles guaranteed to blow your mind at least four different directions first up is our own jake the negative milk on nancy delivered over says stuff on the balls canadian philosopher molyneux on conservatism versus anarchism then our own lou the crazy truth or reality versus charlie the crazy establishment guy veach on what really

happened on nine eleven and if you think you know the truth then i guess your truth are but what do we care about the truth this is television you're watching out on versus the man. ladies and gentlemen that are you all this is nearly upon us. thanks to the mainstream media and the russian sponsored tongue in cheek radio the fervor over the debt ceiling is starting to sound like. that ceiling budget that ceiling negotiations could pass for a fee or emergency that ceiling budget borrowing and spending that.

balanced approach. as the august second debt default deadline moves which are killing its international monetary fund when i was away and surely this is the least. likely was a slice of us. today is the minus seven days until the fall and the fear mongering is wearing thin i mentioned the growing credibility gap between washington and the rest of america and today it was confirmed statistically by a new rasmussen reports national telephone survey that found forty six percent of you are likely u.s. voters now view most members of congress as corrupt so what's wrong with the other four percent of the new. from the trends we see in traditional measures to the past few washington trending on twitter the american people are getting fed up and obama's last speech he asked us the american people to call or representatives to

ask for his balanced approach well it seems to be backfiring switchboards have been lit up with anger and why not the borrowing limit they've created will be hit in a week and since it is the mainstream calls them both sides still lack a plan people are realizing our leaders and spent more time steering dollars than working on a solution to the problem of their own creation according to economists bob or if we simply got spending levels down to what they were in two thousand and three the current revenue stream would be enough to cover all our spending and the interest on the existing debt remember two thousand and three it wasn't lack of government spending we were worried about way back then or the message of the government as a whole now is to let them spend more of your money let them borrow more while they're over their heads and that they are hoarding physical property from gold to land to gas to financial instruments the feds have at least one point six trillion dollars and liquid assets would you be borrowing more money in that situation

after more than a century in operation the walter reed army medical center will be shutting down today it's going operational be moved to the navy's national medical center in bethesda maryland a new hospital at fort belvoir virginia the government claims the hospitals being shut down due to aging facilities and as part of a cost saving strategy but this is the same military hospital that after a washington post investigation in two thousand and seven constantly found its name in negative media stories involving unsanitary conditions and poor treatment of veterans and more likely that the facility is not being shut down or for a loss of relevancy or any relative value to the effort to take care of veterans but rather to retire a name painted by so much battle. government free of profit incentive only does what's in its own interest not that of any patient that isn't part of that wounded veterans receive the care they are owed to deal with the multitude of challenges they encounter as a result of their service their government for the third time in two and

a half weeks we have another assassination and kandahar this time claiming the life of sixty five year old mare hater honeybee but the citizens of both afghanistan and the united states who work as an account in virginia resident before returning to his native country kandahar the original site of the taliban regime has seen a wave of assassinations throughout two thousand and eleven with at least ten each month since the new year began the taliban is claiming responsibility for the killing by turgon bomb but there could be more specific motivations there hamidi was reportedly meeting with residents of a local neighborhood furious over zoning issues where you know it looks like the struggle to install a pro western government is already bringing in american style busybody policies whereas taking a car the united states might get an angry phone call to an overweight bureaucrat and afghanistan citizen retaliation we're going to blow it up especially when those bureaucratic policies end up killing children in this case the city government

decided to bulldoze several houses because they claim they were illegally constructed on government land during the demolition of the homes two children were killed there is some speculation the bombing may have been revenge killings for the children one tribal leader haile khan can at least see the bright side of having put government in its place it will be impossible to demolish the houses of people illegally and government land because government officials will be afraid this land of mafia will kill them like the mare so that really a land mafia where is the city government controlling all the land in the city with zoning laws the real mafia we may never know the exact motivations of this particular suicide bomber but this was a revenge killing either in the name of the taliban or in the name of the children run down and show government cruelty. in february in the name that media advisor for the late merrick's press the following sentiments to rolling stone this will not last forever we have had military operations again and again and this is not a solution to the problem after a decade of intervention it's been painfully clear that little nation building

isn't going to transform a heavily tribal region into a pro-american one the american people know it seems that the people of afghanistan know it so when will our representatives get them out on. all right so our featured tonight with contempt for government at an all time high more and more americans are attracted to the message of presidential candidate ron paul but more important than the messenger is the message and many who come to ron paul's philosophy from my idealistic generation the millennial take that message to its extreme logical conclusion or are at least asking and we'd be better off with no government at this point one of our contenders in the first match up tonight is his philosopher savant while winning is ron paul's message of conservative libertarianism is the gateway many consider mahler's massive to be what is on the other side our other contender taking a side of conservatism is our own jake negative neo con nancy delivered oh now he's

not really a neo codon but he is a conservative a certified theologian with a degree in divinity a marine veteran of iraq and afghanistan and a proud registered republican with a strong independent streak that sets him apart from the leadership of the party so without further ado the showdown you've been waiting for gentlemen thank you so much for being with us also supply involved in stuff on why is government immoral government is immoral because it violates two fundamental moral axioms that every civilized human being takes for granted number one the non-aggression principle you do not initiate the use of force against your fellow man woman child or hermaphrodite number two property rights we own ourselves we own the effects of our actions and government violates the non-aggression principle by creating a monopoly of force a small group of people with all the guns on the planet who get to order everyone else around and people are always shocked that this concentrated unlimited application of violence to the solution of complex social problems always goes wrong and they steal and they lie and they are essentially

a criminal organization and attempting to manage and control and minimize a criminal organization doesn't work miracles and the goal of minimizing government through political action is just another governor. program and it does exactly the same thing as all other government programs it's the opposite of its intended goal which is why government keeps getting bigger and bigger the more that we try to make it smaller that's so that's why we have the problem today we must have been a bill that i missed that was passed by congress to minimize the size of government take in the face of that moral argument how do you say what we do need government for what actions as well two things one i'm not i'm in archivist and i'm not america's time a conservative but i believe that there's a need for government now it's a pretty clear i think so thought might include or we could use menarche some broadly and say conservatism by limiting government by conservative principles is a form of menard isn't ok i hear a fair one thing that still cons trying to do is try to take

a universal principle and apply it to what all governments do and what also society would look like if there wasn't a government if you look at societies across the world throughout history that haven't had government they are by far more barbaric and they target minority groups far it does society target groups far more if there is no government great and governments aren't perfect but if you look at the cases of somalia of africa in the pre-colonial times if you look at afghanistan in the one nine hundred eighty s. and ninety's when there was no cover barbaric cruel punishment to two women and children so is government perfect you know it does it pose a necessary evil yes it does in the reason why is because sometimes when it's all one of the back that's to fight for this sort of organs but you would get the can see they do believe in the anarchist ideal that government is a necessary evil and perhaps someday if humanity evolves past not needing it it would be nice to not have it right one thing about this that i mean we won't let you till it's very historical argument that that's that's very good that

a lot of people haven't because i want to sit on just a quick chance respond to that before we get more to your platform so fond of pretty primitive tribalism is just another form of government government grew out of this sort of hierarchical pyramid where you had wall. odds and witch doctors in primitive societies that is not an example of a state of society warlords and witch doctors in primitive societies had an absolute monopoly of power and violence over their citizens that is not an example of anarchy and ok it's when people are out at all on one of their fairness that's not all that's that's that's that's a good context but i want to go back and take take as a conservative there are specific things that you want to see government doing what and we all know conservatives love to complain about government and throw out some of the great philosophical axioms what are your important essential functions of government for if you think it is justified well in the united states what's kind of ironic about what our debate here is that there's a canadian arguing with an american. russian television network what government

should be and he's arguing for an arc as of other they're largely left they wait to wait till the next next block we're going to have a polish american emigrant the baby nine eleven with someone from england that's a big area ok so it's not like this is the rise of erotic point but really as an american the government needs to do what the constitution says the founding fathers were very aware of of liberalism they were very aware of how monarchies can abuse people and the public was really knew what we should do and so therefore they put a balance of powers check and balance but i want to hunt down this this point philosophically what should government do exactly what the constitution says the constitution doesn't say that we should go out nation build other nations a constitution doesn't say that there should be a centralized bagus a constitution says that you have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness and that no human being has ownership over another human being women men children are equal in society that's what our constitution guarantees by law and i don't know what it's like in canada.

but i would tell you maybe if it is our grazie and getting our core canadian friends put a date out here and find out that actually life in america is not that bad considering what it was called around the world up into fifty eight countries i don't say this is the best place in the world live it's not perfect we've got a lot of work to do i. viewers we've got a lot of work to do but it's still the best place in the planet to live so far well i suppose that canada might be as great as america if we were also oppressing millions of people around the world with a military industrial empire. the same. kind of empire always looks a lot better than the view from outside an empire but look at the reality of the constitution is that pieces of paper do not stop bullets they do not stop nice they do not stop evil people who want to take you over there is nothing magical about a piece of paper it is not a magic spell it is not a a bullet proof piece of valid there is nothing that will ever stop right to the government took in america about eighty years to bust out of the constitution and and become even bigger and the great danger of limited government is that you then

provide a great environment for people to trade and become wealthy and you generate huge wealth in society the government comes in like a vulture and scoops up all of that wealth and uses it to further oppress the people we saw in the razor etc i still thought this is the last word here i mean i think the points made yes governments can be abusive they can allow people develop wealth to abuse people the bottom line is that there needs to be a check and a balance because if we can only control as a nation what we do we can't control what everybody else does and we do constitution provides one thing specifically military to protect ourselves and that is one thing that we can use we can control what everybody else. affair of and that's all the time we have for it so i feel like the energy of this in this debate here could go on for another hour and leave you a both of you will be back here hopefully together again on the air thank you very much for joining us thanks all right when we come back the prime minister of norway is taking a page from the rahm emanuel all the way both and not letting this crisis go to waste what does that tell us about what is wrong with our concept of government

globally and a suicide bomber as we said we end up having to move that stories that we're going to put it in the first in the first blog but we have. the moment we've all been waiting for come out right after the break if a song charlie featured on nine eleven truth so stick around because the throw down continues right here on adam vs the man. let me get that we start right here. i think. the one well. we never got the says they're keeping safe get ready because their freedom.

i want. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else and hear see some other part of it and realize that everything you saw you don't. charge is a big. welcome back to adam vs the man as is usually the case the response to the irrational violence in norway that left eight killed by explosions the prime minister's

building in sixty eight shot at the nearby ruling labor party's youth summer camp it's been a beautiful outpouring if you want to motions sympathy with victims and their families or new commitments of shared values and rights as condemnation of the rigid violence but as the now old government saying goes never let a crisis go to waste first uttered by then obama chief of staff rahm emanuel this captures the very mentality of government and people left fears exploit them and use them to give the government power or norway now as the admirably defiant prime minister jens stoltenberg said the answer is more democracy but first opportunistic propagandists wasted no time identifying the pillar with their political rivals this is always the case in such tragedies whichever way they go on the political spectrum now i'm not trying to take the political analysis out of this sort of thing said but may provoke unjust violence by anyone but this man was not a right winger as much as he was a suicidal nutjob according to reuters norway's domestic intelligence chief said

she believed the attacker acted alone and was not crazy despite his attorney's claims here's the hypocrisy somehow the police got turned onto a man who identified with the attacker and put out a search alert but later retracted it because they determined that he was disturbed and not actually linked to the. so the guy that calls in or something to mess with police or because he's just crazy too it's off the hook for being crazy but the guy that set off a bomb in sussex gave people a summarily touched by a domestic intelligence teaching to be sane and so he must be an evil person and therefore we can malign anything he was associated with political the defiance captured by the prime minister was legitimately admirable even if the true sentiment behind it was delusional for good kindly or opportunistic i believe the result of this will be more participation more political activity our commitment to our core values will grow stronger but what are those core values could it be that they need to be examined first that reading the government control who has guns and

who doesn't have an idea that not letting people defend themselves has consequences that the very idea of democracy of the majority imposing its will on the minority with the threat of violence creates a culture of violence and disregard for individual rights we have to be very clear to distinguish between extreme views opinions that's completely legal legitimate to have what is not legitimate is to try to implement those extreme views by using violence so by his call for democracy we can deduce the exact sickness of the current paradigm we can see the contradictions in the values represented by our systems of government all around the world it's not ok to implement extreme views by using violence but. if you have moderate views if your views are supported by fifty one percent of the population then it's ok to impose them by the threat of violence it's almost too easy to compare this to the shooting from tucson earlier

this year that took the lives of six and moved a dozen others including congresswoman giffords similarly this attack would have been less that we had there been someone we carrying a concealed weapon in the vicinity and the giffords shooting only because of the attackers clumsiness was he stopped or changing magazines and his gun and also were the police of ninety minutes to ride the killer was able to pick off victims one of the time in an orderly manner and then control is not only based on the threat of violence for enforcement countrol kills well not out of congressman but based on the unders being violently criminally insane in such a way that makes them a threat to society should be isolated for life and should be taken care of reasonably in isolated from the rest of society ironically under norwegian law the maximum sentence he can receive a vote and we were nude is twenty one years this thing called justice under their democracy and the prime minister was more of it democracy is to wolves than a sheep voting on what's for dinner but in norway as in all modern governments the

people are the sheep and the government is the teeth of the wolves something is wrong with ira our entire concept of what government should be government is force and is the body of people in society with a socially granted monopoly on organized violence there was a responsibility to only use that force when morally justified sadly it is the moccasin that idea which serves the roman empire only to a point it is corrupting modern government. it's been ten years since nine eleven and americans are still debating what happened that day the nine eleven for the movement has been building steam since then and mainstream media still seems to be afraid to touch the issue but not here at adam vs the man we're joined today by charlie each of the british love police who as an outspoken activist there was perhaps not outspoken on the issue of nine eleven but certainly took a stand and was selected by the b.b.c. to take part in a documentary in which he as

a conspiracy theorist was taken around to various experts and had his there he's debunked in this case it worked and he changed his views on nine eleven going from the truth of believing it was an inside job to perhaps a more moderate skeptic or other contender in this conversation tonight is luke redoubt skee from new york who was there when nine eleven happened as a young adult he's been engaged in truth activism for. almost a decade now including months of work with we are change international and has done incredible work bringing some of the evidence of this discussion to light lucrative thanks so much for being with us and charlie all the way from london. to visually with us tonight. it is all outstanding thanks so much for being with us now to our late what about this changed your mind this experience with the b.b.c. and what exactly changed in terms of your position. well i

think like many people in the conspiracy theory world it kind of formed my opinions on documentaries and hearsay and conjecture and connecting dots which perhaps people jump to quickly to connect the conspiratorial world plots and what happened with the documentary obviously i got chosen for being a skeptic and so forth is just presented me with a. reasonable kind of fallible people presenting to me how they think it happens and i'm here with my model united airlines so. i'm going to reclaim my goal of an honest spec of the mind all right so would you say that it was a it was a series of little of my or debunking for you individual things that they said you experts for that they knock down kind of wanted to time but as a whole took away your doubt not that the official story is completely true but that the government could have been behind it. well let's not let this all jump to

the official stories or official conclusions here i had a son in the house of a cia agent who does work for the cia and he said the nine eleven commission report is a pack of lies and it's the agency protecting their asked what probably happened on nine eleven this is more than my theories is that the cia because they have warnings from around the world were tailing these nineteen hijackers and they were probably watching them that very morning saying oh it's good to see whose houses they go to let's go see who they meet let's go see what networks are going to cover here and they pulled off nine eleven when they were ready and i mean it's the simplest explanation that nineteen hijackers crazy fanatics like you're just talking about a guy in norway these are people who just money just to pull off these crazy world i don't know i'm i'm i'm a little skeptical of that directly because if that specific theory if they were really that mad people that mad don't get that organized but look you are here

to claim it back for the government to give the government some credit as opposed to charlie wants to give it back to the muslim extremists how do you how do you respond to that well first of all charlie i just want to say man i have no hard feelings against you you can change your mind all the time you know i have a lot of respect but i do have to say this respectfully still very much a skeptic of the official story and i do have the said do have a couple problems though one of the problems is how you categorize the not eleven truth movement as just paranoid people who just watch you tube videos and connect dots that aren't there well yes there are some people like that because it on answer questions that make speculations and theories but i just want to clarify i'm not one of those guys and from my experience seven eight years being involved in this i've been working with family members rescue workers survivors whistleblowers within the government and this movement is filled of millions of people around the world who want to countability injustice for three thousand lives are lost are not allowed in and we don't claim you know the truth but we seek it and we demand it from our government so i just want to clarify that ok but you how do you respond to this is the specific. charges right charlie that the core element of the

government's story which is that it was nineteen islamic extremists yeah. and charlie is saying without the help of government with with maybe at worst accidental or if this is a carelessness or even criminal negligence on the part of the american government worse but that it really was carried out independently you're saying that there are enough questions that you can almost rule that out yes and many bottle within that eleven truth movement don't believe in the official story which is this book of holes because they don't even bring up the world trade center building seven which was the third skyscraper that was three hundred feet away from the towers not hit by an airplane collapsed into itself and we have a video of larry silverstein actually the owner of the complex explaining that he took it down on that day i don't play that all right play that this is the way it's was from the one. of the.

names of. the. three dozen people died sir can you get the answer please. well that's actually the wrong video that's that larry silverstein saying he pulled the building but always got that loaded on this play that one yeah that's what you should but no no we don't have that one of them but everybody knows the video p.b.s. documentary larry silverstein says he pulled pulled took out a building seven that's that's what i want to do to get a comment from charlie beach what do you think about larry silverstein statement. go ahead charlie. yeah i like the new world trade center seven it's got big crowds sign on the silverstein properties and i spoke to a controlled demolition expert forget his name up there on the said look he says pull it normal term and this seems to be some confusion here because the building

seven was creaking and groaning because it didn't smash while this debris was on fire it was it was a mess so the firemen were saying that we should pull out a building and that larry silverstein didn't expose himself as some sort of zionist evil overlord he just said look he just paraphrased the fireman saying we have to pull people out oh no no no i want to be on right here but i didn't see from what i've seen of the evidence there was not significant structural damage to building seven when they put the thing above but then they move which i want to clarify which we played the video before is i asked larry silverstein i had the same questions i didn't believe it as well or so i asked and i really was the owner of the world trade center complex one to seven and the whole complex complex is why didn't he say just remove the firefighters the firefighters weren't there by the way because the water lines were broken and second of all the fire chief which he supposedly spoke to about that comment denies even talking to a month that day and that's why questioning this i went out there and talked to larry silverstein which he saw the video before but and that's why it doesn't add

up because we talk to him like a gentleman i talk to him even privately before without cameras and he wouldn't even answer the question he looks scared every time we bring this up that's what we do we demand you know we ask the questions and these questions never get answered and he runs away just like you saw in that previous clip and i just want to say you know the b.b.c. did take iran charlie did they ever explain how they reported building seven collapse in twenty six minutes before it actually collapsed. yeah mountain as i said even the b.b.c. report that i was involved in that she says the details are sketchy on the ground as i say the chinese whispers everyone's talking about buildings are collapsing in new york this one is on fire it's creaking it's growing we don't know what damage there was at the bottom so that probably said yes building seven the solar mongrel this building is coming down by it will come down no they said they said it did collapse but if it did if the declasse organically naturally you know how come they could report on a b.