Best of the Program | Guest: Zach Vorhies | 10/21/19

Hey podcasters, it's a great show for you today.

It's Monday.

We go over all of the Russian assets that Hillary, what a conspiracy theorist Hillary Clinton is.

We get into that.

Also, the conspiracy theory of taking guns away.

We talk about Lady Gaga falling off the stage.

I was there last week and saw it.

Also, I take you through one of my earliest predictions of how the the world was going to head for a reset, and it sounded crazy at the time.

This is probably 2005 or 2006,

and it sounded nuts.

But today,

you see it's exactly what's happening.

Also, we talk a little bit about Brexit, who can figure that out, and a Google whistleblower joins us all on today's podcast.

You're listening to

the best of the Glen Beck program.

Well, hello, Stu.

Mr.

Beck, how are you?

Very well.

I'm very interested in your weekend.

Were you?

You're the one.

No, I think there's a lot of people that are interested in the weekend.

After seeing some of the footage, and we have to get to this, of you on stage at the Lady Gaga concert.

That was not Paul.

We have to get into that.

It was not not me.

I was there.

She had every bone in her body x-rayed right after that concert.

Every bone in her body.

She has fibromyalgia really bad.

They ice her all the time just to get her out of pain.

You would not know it.

And especially after that fall, holy cow.

I don't know how she did it.

It was a, you know, when you let land on your tailbone, just, you know, after just falling, just walking, and you fall on your tailbone?

She was up.

Somebody had grabbed her, lifted her up.

They fell on their tailbone on the stage and bounced off and then fell another six feet onto concrete.

It was bad.

It was a spectacular collapse.

It did not approach the Philadelphia Eagles last night.

It was a spectacular collapse.

Or

Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Party.

You know, there are things like

that fall,

the Eagles losing, or politics that make you wish you were sucked up in the tornado here in Dallas last night.

But you weren't.

We're here.

We survived.

We'll tell you about all of these things coming up.

The Hillary Clinton thing,

she's insane.

You know, you want to talk about conspiracy theories.

First of all, she's the one that started the Barack Obama conspiracy theory about the birth certificate.

Yeah, her campaign.

It was her campaign.

They outlined the strategy and campaign memos.

She first was the first one to start the vast right-wing conspiracy.

This woman is a conspiracy nutjob.

Now, she has a multiple-decade record of conspiracy theorizing.

And all just to cover up how many people they killed.

I don't know if that's the most credible argument to make that point, but I like it.

Yeah, thank you.

So,

the latest conspiracy now is that

Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian spy.

We have Hillary outlining this theory.

Would you like to hear it?

Yes, here.

Here she is from

some podcast.

I think it's David Plough's podcast.

They're also going to do third-party again.

And I'm not making any predictions, but I think they've got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate.

She's the favorite of the Russians.

They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far.

And

that's assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she's also a Russian

asset.

Yeah, she's a Russian asset.

I mean, totally.

And so they know they can't win without a third-party candidate.

And so I don't know who it's going to be, but I will guarantee you they'll have a vigorous third-party challenge in the key states that they most need it.

This is the most incredible conspiracy I have heard.

Okay, first of all,

let me just state this before we go into the actual conspiracy.

Let me just say this.

Who is the most likely

benefactor of a third-party candidate who people perceive as a moderate Democrat?

Who's the most likely

benefactor of that?

A perceived moderate Democrat

in today's climate, a perceived

moderate from the Democratic Party.

I mean, it partially matters who the Democrats run.

Let's say it's Elizabeth Warren.

It's Elizabeth Warren.

And Tulsi Gabbard comes in as a third party.

Who has more to lose?

Well, I've seen more passion, honestly, for Tulsi Gabbard on the right than I have

on the left.

Correct.

So if you want, now listen, I'm telling you right now, Elizabeth Warren is Woodrow Wilson.

It's like he just came back from the dead, like, oh, somebody take off my top hat and put me on stage.

It's she's Woodrow Wilson.

And he was a guy who was nearly dead when he was in office.

Yes, he is.

Yes.

Okay, so

how did he win?

He was put into office because of a third party candidate.

And that third party candidate was a progressive

going against the Republican.

So he was the crazy radical.

He was Elizabeth Warren.

Teddy Roosevelt is Tulsi Gabbard.

Teddy Roosevelt was known as, you know, a war hero,

you know, a tough guy, somebody somebody who had common sense and some grit, but his policies were more radical in the

in the

you know in the run-up than Woodrow Wilson.

Woodrow Wilson was not the radical in that race.

He hid a lot of what he was trying to do behind, you know, rhetoric and correct

lying as well.

Correct.

Yeah, absolutely and outlying.

You see this with Elizabeth Warren as well.

There's certainly a parallel.

So So if you want Woodrow Wilson, you have to have a third-party spoiler, one that will peel votes away from Donald Trump.

Now, diehard Donald Trump are not going to Tulsi Gabbard, but people who are just Democrats who are like, I just want some common sense Democratic candidates, please.

I'm not for socialism.

I want somebody who loves the country.

That's Tulsi Gabbard in their mind.

And if they voted for Donald Trump,

what are they trying to to do?

You'll see this rhetoric.

If you read the press, you'll see this rhetoric.

People are getting tired of having to defend Donald Trump.

He's an agent of chaos.

He's causing most of this chaos, not other people.

Okay.

And partially true.

And so if you're somebody who was in the middle,

And

you voted for Donald Trump, but you didn't really want to vote for Donald Trump, Trump.

And then he got into office and you're like, I like some of his policies, but he's just

tweeting at 3 o'clock in the morning.

And that's just too much for me.

I can't take all of this anymore.

And someone who appears to love the country

and appears to be common sense,

they will peel it off.

So the third party, Hillary, if it's Tulsi Gabbard, does not hurt

the Democrat.

It hurts the Republican.

So I don't think this is a Russian plot as much as it would be a Democratic plot.

And I don't think it's a plot.

Right.

She just happens to be a candidate that disagrees on some of these things.

And

that does make sense.

I mean, look,

the last election turned on people who wound up

known as Obama-Trump voters.

They voted for Obama and then switched to Trump in 2016.

And those people are the types of people that Tulsi Gabbard would probably appear as

a correct.

So, you know, that does not mean that it would.

First of all, we should point out, this is just a conspiracy theory from Hillary Clinton.

There's no evidence to support her.

Tulsi Gabbard said she's not running.

She's already ruled it out.

Yeah.

And so there's no reason to believe that this is happening.

But if it were to happen, it wouldn't even be a good conspiracy theory.

No.

It's actually something that could endanger Donald Trump's re-election.

Correct.

We should also point out that we can't just brush over the fact that she outlaid another conspiracy theory in there saying that Jill Stein is a Russian asset.

What evidence do we have of that other than the fact that she

ran as a Green Party candidate?

But that's not.

You know, and saying somebody's a Russian asset, could we just talk about this here for a second?

What is Russia?

What is their goal?

What is their goal?

I mean, chaos.

Yes.

They want to destroy the United States of America.

They do not want us to be a leading superpower anymore.

So they don't care.

They just want chaos.

They want distrust.

They want hatred between people and between parties.

We are, we're looking at, well, they're a Russian asset.

Anyone who they can pit against one another, anyone that they can use,

they will use.

It doesn't mean that you're with Russia or you're working for Russia.

Russia can work for anyone that will cause chaos.

Support them.

Support them.

But it might be found out.

Good.

It'll cause even more chaos.

That's all this is.

Yeah.

And Hillary is playing right into their hands.

You know what?

Hillary Clinton is a Russian asset.

That's why

she's doing it because Russia told her to do it.

That's what happened.

How crazy is that?

I mean,

I will say she's getting.

The shine is gone from Hillary Clinton at this point, even among Democrats.

And she is getting from the media.

She's getting it from Democrats.

I mean, this is not being received well.

I'm telling you, she's so crazy that if Joe Biden collapses, she thinks she's going to go in and she'll take it.

Really?

I really believe

she has totally lost touch with reality.

Look at what she's been saying lately.

She doesn't have any idea what reality is anymore.

She really believes that that this was taken from her.

She is convinced herself that this was a massive plot and that the people are screaming for her.

After we had to sit through time after time after time in 2016, where they lectured us about how Donald Trump, if he loses, he's going to say it wasn't fair and it's going to say, this is an attack on our democracy.

This is an attack.

Now she's saying she lost because of Russian agents in the election.

I mean, I guess we should have picked it up when she said vast right-wing conspiracy, but the woman is just a conspiracy theorist.

And they just basically ran the Democrat Alex Jones in 2016, and I expected none of us to notice.

Yeah.

I mean, it really is amazing.

Yeah.

It's, it's, uh, it's incredible.

So here, do we have the audio of Tulsi Gabbard coming out?

This is really a great response.

Listen to Tulsi Gabbard and what she said.

I am not afraid to openly express my love for our country.

But if they can falsely falsely portray me as a traitor, then they can do it to anyone.

And in fact, that's exactly the message that they want to get across to you.

That if you stand up against Hillary and the party power brokers, if you stand up to the rich and powerful elite and the war machine, they will destroy you and discredit your message.

But here is the truth.

They will not intimidate us.

They will not silence us.

We are not here just to protest their corruption.

I am running for president to take the Democratic Party and our country back from the corrupt elite.

Tell me that doesn't resonate with a ton of Democrats.

Now, they all want to beat Donald Trump, but there is a,

I think there's a lot of people that think if it's Elizabeth Warren, she's crazy.

And if it's just between her and Donald Trump, I'd probably vote for Trump, but I won't tell anybody.

But if I have somebody who's got the the message of, I want my party back, et cetera, et cetera.

And I'm not talking about the die-hard, die-hards.

I'm talking about the people who generally, who voted for Donald Trump last time who are Democrat.

There's a lot of them.

There's a lot of those.

A lot of those.

And that's why Hillary lost, because she lost those swing votes that usually vote Democrat.

All right.

Big-time advocate of privacy, and we talk about privacy a lot on this program.

Wait until you hear the latest from Silicon Valley today.

Holy cow.

The best of the Glen Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn, and you're listening to the Glen Beck program.

If you like what you're hearing on this show, make sure you check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

It's available wherever you download your favorite podcasts.

All right, so

I wasn't planning on talking to you about this today, but

I was a little overwhelmed a little earlier

on

what's happening.

And

I asked Pat to stay in the studio here for a second

and

talk me out of this with you, Stu.

Let me just give you some of the...

some of the headlines today.

Hong Kong descends into chaos again as protesters protesters defy the ban.

NBA arenas prepare for protests.

Hundreds of thousands take over the streets in Lebanon.

New clashes in Chile.

We are at war.

The political risks grow in Latin America.

Just giving you the headlines.

Scientists fuse brains with AI implants to give people superhuman intelligence.

Let's see.

Mulvaney faced ouster threat before impeachment crisis.

Allies craft a list of potential replacements.

President in key stretch of fragile state.

Insult comic act of president becomes dangerous.

Second four years could be even crazier.

Democrats are cashing in on struggle.

I mean, it just goes on and on.

Romney may vote to remove Trump.

Alienated Republicans influenced by G7 reversal.

Goes on and on and on.

Bad.

And it's global.

Those don't include the economic headlines that are important.

The economic headlines, the Fed

has gone back in again for a second round of this thing that no financial expert can even explain.

Never happened before.

We don't know why the banks are needing these bailouts.

They've been having bailouts in the hundreds of of trillions of dollars, and we're back at it again, printing money.

Why?

No one knows.

Okay.

When I was back in Radio City Music Hall, I talked about two things on a show.

One, how the progressive elites, they were actually the Fabian socialists in England, how they were all for and really plotted World War I.

And the reason why they plotted it was because they wanted a new world order.

They wanted to take down the old rule, change the borders, change the financial system, and have a new world order.

This is basically the first

stab at a European Union and a first stab at a United Nations.

Okay

So what did they do?

Well, they had to have war.

To change this and to change currencies, you have to have a war.

And it has to be so bad that in the end, everything changes and no one cares.

They just want it to end.

They want the pain and the suffering to end.

And so they don't care really what the borders look like.

They don't care that they've changed currencies or changed traditions.

They want it to end.

Well, we saw that with World War I.

And we saw that the world was not the same.

We became the leader where England was the leader.

We sank.

We insisted that the greatest navy on earth sink her ships to play in this new world order.

And that was England.

We insisted that they leave their alliance with Japan and start one with us, which led to Pearl Harbor.

All of the borders that they changed, they imposed them on Germany in such a painful way that they planted all the seeds for World War II.

After World War II, they finally got their new world order in the United Nations and the EU started to spring to life.

Now that is collapsing.

The economic stability that they built is collapsing.

And they are eyeing now a borderless world.

They want a borderless world because it's good for them with trade.

If they don't have to worry about all these governments, it's good for trade.

And if we could just have one world currency,

if we could collapse all at the same time, maybe we don't owe money to each other.

Maybe it can be so bad we can just restart and everybody loses everything, but we're going to just restart.

It sounds crazy,

but I said, if you want to bring down the world, you have to bring down America and you have to bring her currency and her situation.

You have to bring it into instability and bring it down to the level of everyone else.

Then that fall

can happen and they all fall together.

It sounded crazy,

but let me ask you a couple of things.

What you need

is failing economies

and you need global crisis.

Now, they've been trying this with the global crisis to get a new economy.

They've been trying to do it the green way.

But the green way is not working.

Nobody's going to go there.

Nobody's going to go there because it doesn't make any sense to spend that kind of money without real

proof that anything is going to change, that it's going to help at all.

So, they've been trying to make green their new red.

But instead, what we have is a group of countries that are not listening to the people.

And so, you have chaos now in Hong Kong, in China, in Taiwan, in Germany, in Venezuela, Argentina, Spain, Chile, Russia, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Brexit this week.

Now, if everybody in the EU knew that Brexit was going to cause the problems that they say it's going to cause,

you would think that the EU might blink at the last minute, unless they know this isn't going to work and they need to start from scratch

and cause chaos.

You also have to have everybody printing and spending like drunken sailors.

You have to jack everyone's debt up so high

that when it falls, everybody falls.

You have to devalue currency.

This is the plan of World War I.

This is happening right now.

Now, the Constitution says

to create a more perfect union, provide for common defense,

and to promote domestic tranquility.

So if I take an oath of office and I say I will protect and defend the

Constitution of the United States, and I will protect it from all

threats, foreign and domestic.

If someone is working against promotion of domestic tranquility,

they are an enemy of the American people and they are an enemy of the Constitution.

Now, that doesn't mean we don't have strife.

That doesn't mean we don't have arguments.

But it does mean: wait a minute, wait a minute,

is what you're doing

adding in a great way

to

a road that takes us to civil war.

There was a study that came out three weeks ago, Stu.

And the number, and it was done by the left.

It was not done, it was, you know, an educational, you know, or it's a

study done not by conservatives.

And they wanted to find what are the two, or what are the leading causes of civil war?

What would trigger a civil war?

Now, why would you do that?

Why would you want to find that out?

You can see how people are going to be activated if something like this is going to happen.

Right.

What could possibly lead to that?

So if you are in good intent,

you can avoid those things, right?

If you have bad intent, so you can do those things.

So a major study is done.

What are the things that could ignite a civil war?

Number one

is to create the atmosphere where people believe

or you actually take the act to take away people's guns.

Number one, cause a civil war in the United States.

New survey, new poll.

Second,

impeach Donald Trump.

Now, why is that?

They believe impeaching Donald Trump is a fuse to civil war because we're so close to an election.

Why would you impeach him when the people should decide?

Let the people decide.

It's all out there, so let them decide.

But also because the press has so discredited itself, and Congress and the administration and the judges and everyone else has so discredited themselves that everything will seem

like a coup.

I mean, look what Hillary Clinton is saying.

She's currently saying she lost because Trump was a Russia asset and it's happening again.

Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset.

I'm telling you right now,

everything is in line.

Everything is in line right now for

global war and a reset.

There are people, like it or not,

that do have tons of power and money

that believe they know what's best.

And what's best is a reset.

And these people just don't know.

They just won't get out of their way.

They're just too stupid.

And they will reset us.

But the way to do it is through global war.

Can you guys tell me where

this isn't moving forward in this direction?

Can you guys tell me where that doesn't make sense?

Where this doesn't follow the pattern of history?

It does seem to align well with that pattern, for sure.

I mean,

there's arguments in that, like, we have been able to avoid those level of conflicts more frequently than in past centuries, sure, which is encouraging maybe, but but again, if you have a study out that says the two main fuses for that,

and those two fuses are being led and lit right now by the Democratic candidates,

it's not like we've avoided, yeah, well, we've avoided those things, but these two specific things, current data on what would push us over the edge, and you have the media and the Democratic Party pushing for those two things.

Basically, their platform, right?

I mean, their platform is this thing that could cause incredible amounts of chaos.

Yeah, pretty, pretty compelling case.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn.

And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

Hi, it's Glenn.

If you're a subscriber to the podcast, can you do us a favor and rate us on iTunes?

If you're not a subscriber, become one today and listen on your own time.

You can subscribe on iTunes.

Thanks.

Zach Voorhees was a Google engineer for almost 10 years before discovering the AI censorship program called machine learning fairness.

He blew the whistles and he delivered about a thousand pages of internal documents to the DOJ and to the public.

He is now trying to raise awareness about Google's intention to meddle in the elections and giving China access to its Manhattan project called Deep Mind.

Welcome, Zach Voorhees.

How are you?

Glenn, thank you very much for having me on the show.

It's a pleasure to be here.

Thank you.

Zach, you are incredibly brave.

Let me just, let me start with a kind of a personal question.

What goes through your mind the night before you decide to go public against a company like Google?

You know, this was a really long time coming.

I've been seeing them tiptoe towards this

total control of the internet.

So for me, it's a moment of atonement when I can finally go out and warn the public about what's coming down.

And they've already been seeing it.

So, you know, there's this buildup and then it comes out and it's a release.

And it's actually quite an emotional moment for me to be able to finally do this after years of waiting

and all the due diligence and collecting this information and making sure that it goes into the right hands.

Zach, I have to, first of all, thank you for what you've done.

done.

I have to tell you, I'm shocked by the American people

that

we haven't reacted more strongly against this.

A brave new world was right, not 1984.

We've just been given this drug of information, and it doesn't seem like we care.

Either that or people don't actually believe

this is going to turn into something really horrible.

Yeah,

you know, and the media told us that Google was the best company ever.

And when Google went IPO,

they said that they were going to do no evil and that they were going to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.

And

who could go against that?

Right.

You know, it was right there in their, you know, essentially a constitution of what they were going to do.

And then after Donald Trump won the election, they threw all that away.

And it was shocking to see it.

Give me an example of what you saw.

So right after Donald Trump won the election, there was an executive meeting, like an all-hands that they had, that they broadcasted to all the employees so that they could watch.

Yeah, I saw part of it.

And

you saw part of this, yeah.

And it was really bizarre.

The The CFO broke down into tears, and

Sergey Bren said that he was personally offended by the election of Donald Trump.

But what really surprised me was the CEO, Sunder Pachai, who said that they were going to use their

AI machine learning in order to combat misinformation online.

And the question that I had was, well, who decides what's misinformation?

And that's what led me down the rabbit hole to discover

the ways that they were going to use

machine learning to combat fake news and exactly what they were defining as fake news.

Oh, which

I discovered were actual real events that had happened.

Yeah.

It's quite amazing what they're doing.

And

there's really no way to track.

Are there more whistleblowers in Google that might come out?

Are there more people that felt like you?

And if so, what's it going to take for them to come out?

Well, let me tell you that there's a person by the name of Kevin Cernecki

who has a lot of, he's got 2,000 pages, and he delivered this information to the labor boards.

or state and federal.

And

the thing is, is that this is now under a sealed order by the arbitrator.

This can't come to the public at this time, but I know that there's 2,000 more pages ready to be disclosed, hopefully sometime in the future.

And Kevin has been the target of Google retaliation for giving this information to the National Labor Review Board.

What do you think he might have?

Well, he specifically told me that he has information related to systematic targeting of the conservatives that were working at Google

and so yeah he he he gave this to the National Labor Review Board and when Google found out about this they ambushed him with HR they took his laptop and then they constructed an alternative theory where he was actually maliciously hacking into their system in order to get documents to discover their legal strategy.

And so they filed criminal suit against him, and they have drained $100,000 of his own money for him defending his legal actions with the company.

This sounds a little like what Zuckerberg did to the creator of Oculus.

Tell me what they're doing

to affect the election.

Right.

Well, recently you've probably heard something happen with Tulsi Gabbard.

Yes.

I'd like to go into that a little bit.

All right, go ahead.

So following a very successful Democratic debate, Tulsi Gabbard had her

account, her ad account deactivated right as people were searching for her.

And I know how

accounts like hers goes down because I've seen it happen to Jordan Peterson.

And the way the insiders are able to take down accounts is that there's this longstanding bug within the Google system.

And the way that it works is if you have a target address, let's say Jordan Peterson, and you take his email account and you change it and you create a new account with that, and you keep on doing this over and over and over again until there is a collection of spam email addresses.

Those spam email addresses then start pushing spam to other people's email accounts.

The AI systems will see this spam network and they'll bring it down, but they'll also bring down the original accounts.

And so when I was talking to Tulsi Gabbard's attorney, he described me the exact same situation of what I saw with Jordan B.

Peterson.

So when Google says, oh, we don't know what's happening, you know, it must have been a bug or a suspicious activity.

What that says to me is that

it was a vulnerability that was executed by

a group of insiders.

Now, why would it have to be executed by insiders?

Insiders, because they know

this exploit exists.

They may not work for the company.

It's unknown.

But there is a group of insiders with knowledge of certain exploits, and they are able to do an attack like this and give Google the pleasure of plausible deniability.

Wow.

Okay, I'm going to take a quick break, and then I want to come back, and I want to ask you because

you wrote a very powerful article,

or were quoted in an article, about the Manhattan Project.

And this is something I've discussed for a long time.

I think

AGI and ASI is real, and I think it is beyond our imagination.

We're dealing with an alien life form.

We don't know what it's going to be, but we do know whoever is controlling it, at least at first,

is going to be leaps and bounds ahead of anybody.

And I've been talking about,

I kind of wish the United States was doing this, but I also kind of don't.

I don't want the government to have it.

I don't want anybody to have it, quite honestly, but I know it's inevitable.

Well, you've been quoted as talking about a Manhattan project that Google is doing, but they're not doing it with the United States, which is terrifying.

All right, so Zach, we're talking to Zach Voorhees.

He is a Google whistleblower, former senior software developer at Google.

And I want to talk about the AI project, Deep Mind, who you say now Google is partnering with China on.

Please tell me that's not true.

Well, I mean,

Google's got its offices in China.

China has

a policy, a principle of civil-military fusion, which was started in 2017, which China gets access with its civilian infrastructure and is able to fuse it with its military apparatus.

And one of the

founding principal engineers, Fei Fei Li,

whose work with Google is opening up a

has been opening up a lab in China.

And so there's these people that are connected with China very strongly between Google and China that are opening up

this new lab.

Google's got China's got access to Google's infrastructure because

their AI technology has no borders, according to them.

And so

the question that Peter Thiel

opinion in his New York Times op-ed

asked the question, is Google committing treason by

allowing China to have access to this information?

And I think that it's an important question that we need to

start asking is how much access does China have to

this very important intellectual property?

So what do you say to the treason question?

Why should you consider that they might be committing treason?

What do they have access to?

Right.

So Google's Deep Mind is a really incredible project.

You might have heard a few years ago about how there was a new type of AI that was able to trance every single chess player out in the world, and then it was able to be retooled and it beat the best Go champion in the world.

What DeepMind is, is a general transferable intelligence.

So when someone makes a machine learning intelligence program, It's usually trained on to just one problem, let's say chess or let's say checkers.

But a transferable AI is able to take the intelligence that is grown towards a specific problem set and then transfer to a related problem set.

So

this would also be called a GI, artificial general intelligence?

General intelligence, yes.

So this is what we're building, is we're building an artificial general intelligence.

And that general intelligence will be, you know, adept at many different tasks, possibly the entire spectrum of human tasks that people do today could be done by this one machine.

And it has, as its access,

all of the public information

on the Internet plus all of the hidden information that Google has stored in its data servers.

Think of the public Internet plus the Library of Alexandria.

You You start to get, you know, an idea of the wealth of information that this AI now has access to.

So, Zach,

it's my understanding when you hit AGI, if you can, if ASI, super intelligence, is possible, it will come from AGI having access to the internet and all of the information.

That's when things get dicey.

I mean, I've read about the studies where they try to keep AGI in a box and

try to convince me to let it out of that box to get on the internet, and it always fails.

We're starting with deep mind on the internet.

I mean, deep mind gets as its access, you know, read access to all the information that's on the internet.

Wow.

Because for these AIs, you need to to train them with something.

Right.

So in order to train them, you know, first you use curated data, like a collection of faces or a collection, you know,

articles.

But then as it gets more intelligent, you widen the data that you're allowed to push into this intelligence network.

Okay, so the Chinese government then, the military, has access to all of the information in America.

Yes, because Google doesn't have borders on its technology.

You know, the technology,

you know, its base of operations in China has the same access that

someone in the UK or a Google lab in the UK or a Google lab in the United States does.

And so, you know, and this is what Google has said themselves, is that, you know, this technology about AI is borderless, quote unquote so does it go the other way do we have access to all the information that Google has in China

that is unknown and I don't I don't know the answer to that question I assume that because of the Great Wall of China yeah you know there is certain information that the rest of Google may not be privy to but I don't I don't I can't speak more on that

so how far how far away are we I mean this is one of the reasons reasons why 5G cannot be in the West from a Chinese company

because the Chinese companies will have access to all of our information, and they'll also have control to shut information off should they choose.

Is that just, is that horse already

out of the barn?

We have Zach Voorhees on.

He is a Google whistleblower, former Google senior software developer.

Zach, I know that DeepMind has said that they haven't moved their operations to China, but does that even matter if they have access to the DeepMind information and the Google information?

Yeah, that's right.

You know, if access to this information is transferred, you know,

the Chinese military can get a copy of it.

Right.

And we need to audit this thing because,

you know, DeepMind is

likely the most advanced AI system on the planet.

And China is a rival to the United States.

And according to their 2017 mandate,

any of the civilian, you know, projects need to be shared.

with the People's Liberation Army of China.

Doesn't this bother the people at Google that they are in bed with such an oppressive state?

They all say they're for social justice.

Good heavens, what about the justice in China?

You know, it's interesting because

Google has made a really big stink about working with the Pentagon.

And,

you know, there was a project started called Project Mavi and Project Jedi.

And this was going to be an AI collaboration with the Pentagon.

And the information about that project kept on being leaked to the public and to Reuters and through a bunch of different news agencies.

And what happened was an employee brigade started to form to resist Project Maven.

And it was this brigade that gave Google the excuse to be able to cancel their project with the Pentagon.

Now, what's really funny is that no one has ever started a brigade about stopping Google's

military cooperation with China.

It hasn't even been brought up.

And so I find it very troubling that while the employees are willing to protest military cooperation with the Pentagon, that there isn't such a thing with the Chinese military.

So when I talk to my friends, Zach, and I say I was just over to a friend's house and

they had Google Home or Alex, I can't remember.

And they said, they walked in the door and they said, lights, turns on the lights.

They have Google Nest.

They had, I mean, it was a Google home.

It was a Google home.

And I said, are you out of your mind?

And they said, oh, Glenn.

And I said, no, no, no, oh, Glenn, they have all your information and people don't understand.

Can you please explain why

giving them that kind of access to your house is a bad idea, if indeed you think it is?

I would feel a lot better about it if the United States had this information on other citizens in other countries.

You know, there is a saying in Silicon Valley, which is, if the product is free, you are the product.

And so, you know, know

what's happening I believe is that Google is selling your data to intelligence communities around the world and out why would they want it why would they want it

because

why why would Google want it no why would the intelligence agencies want it

because it gives them power intelligence is the most valuable form of military power

which is why deception is used

in

forms of warfare.

And so having information on the buying habits of every single American on U.S.

soil is very valuable if you're the manufacturing powerhouse of the world.

Aaron Powell, so I asked Tim Poole this question,

and I haven't heard back from him yet.

I asked him this weekend:

why don't we just pass a law that makes our information

our information?

You can't sell my information.

You collect it.

I can sell it to you, but

you can't keep it.

You can't have it.

Is that a possible solution for all of this or not?

Right.

It needs to happen because, you know, when you go on a plane, you get an 80-page end-user license agreement just to use the internet.

Right.

And the reason why they have this huge license agreement is because they're selling your data.

You know, and

there needs to be

a way that the United States treats your personal information as a piece of property

that you have the rights to.

And that,

you know, companies can't be trading on the open market

all the psychometric information.

You know, your race, your gender, your location, how many kids you have.

You know, what are your vulnerabilities?

You know, what time do you go to bed?

What time do you wake up?

You know,

where do you go to work?

You know, all these, you know, all these little bits of data get fused back in these huge data centers, and they create these, you know,

if not explicit profiles, also shadow profiles.

And people have been talking about this where, you know, they found their data on Facebook.

And Facebook already knew who they were.

And then when they

signed up, all of a sudden, it recommended all these people that they knew in real life.

Why?

Because Facebook has created a profile of you, regardless of whether you've created

an account with them.

And this happens within Google, and this happens with companies like Palantir.

There's multiple companies out there that are collecting all this information that's available to purchase and to scrape.

And they're creating profiles of every single person.

in the United States.

Now, here's why it's dangerous, Glenn.

Okay, that data gets sold to the Chinese military.

Let's say you start talking about forced organ harvesting, and this displeases China.

Well, now they know exactly where you are, who your friends are, and how they can target you.

And the United States does not have the same information on Chinese nationals living within China.

So they can take out our assets in the United States at will, and the United States has no ability to retaliate.

And

you have no idea that it's even coming from China.

You could start to have things released about you

that are true or not true.

And it could be just because you're outspoken against

Chinese human rights policies.

And you're taken out with your credibility by the Chinese.

And nobody knows that.

Is that one of the fears that you're talking about?

Yeah, I mean, it could be a targeted assassination or it could be assassination of your reputation

through one of these news organizations that,

you know, takes money from, you know, other governments around the world.

Zach, I appreciate your honesty and I appreciate your willingness to

be a lightning rod on this.

I hope that people begin to pay attention soon and hope to have you on again.

Thank you, Zach.

Appreciate it.

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.