RADIOSeptember 12, 2022

Meet the far-left players pushing credit cards to TRACK GUNS

Visa Inc. joined several other major credit card companies this weekend in a decision to ‘separately categorize sales at gun shops.’ The decision is a huge win for gun control advocates, who argue that tracking gun sales could prevent certain catastrophic events from occurring. But this MAJOR decision wasn’t just Visa’s. So who’s behind it all? In this clip, Glenn exposes the far-left players — including the world’s largest union-owned bank — that have been making this push…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Visa, Inc. said over the weekend that it plans to start separately categorizing sales at gun shops. The move is considered to be a major victory for gun control advocates who claim, that the better tracking of gun sales may help prevent future mass shootings. Other major payment processors including MasterCard and American Express have also said, they plan to move forward, with categorizing gun shop sales. Now, this is really important that you listen. Visa said it would adopt the new International Organization for Standardization, ISO. The new merchant code for gun sales. Until now, gun store sales were considered general merchandise. The code would show where an individual spends money, but not what items were purchased. MasterCard said that following the ISO's approval of the new merchant code, we now turn our focus to how it will be implemented by merchants and their banks as we continue to support lawful purchases on our network. While protecting the privacy and decisions of individual cardholders. Merchant category codes currently exist for most type of purchases. When you buy an airline ticket or pay for your groceries, your credit card company has a special code for those retailers. It's just common sense, that we have the same policies in place for gun and ammunition stores, says the New York City mayor, Eric Adams. The industry's decision to create a firearms specific code is nothing more than a capitulation to anti-gun politicians and activists bent on eroding the rights of law-abiding Americans one transaction at a time. This is according to the spokesperson, for the National Rifle Association. So which is it? No big deal, or the furthering of the erosion of your rights. Well, let's go back to see if we can understand this story first. Let's trace -- trace this back a few months. Where was the pressure coming from? Quote, from CBS News. A group of congressional Democrats is urging credit card companies to track the -- the suspected firearm and ammunition purchases, as a means to identify and stop gun crime. The letter drafted by Elizabeth Warren, and congresswoman dean of Pennsylvania. And signed by over a dozen other progressive colleagues, urges the CEOs of MasterCard, American Express, and Visa, to back the creation of a merchant category code for gun and ammunition retailers. Okay. Now, this is really interesting. So this didn't originate with the banks. This originated with the progressive left in Congress. The creation of a new merchant category code for gun and ammunition retail stores, will be the first step. They always say this. And nobody listens. Will be the first step, towards facilitating the collection of valuable financial data. That could help law enforcement encountering the financing of terrorism efforts. Now, I thought we had done all of this, oh, I don't know, about 20 years ago, when we were looking into terrorists. Notice carefully what they say. The creation of a new merchant category gun -- category code for gun and ammunition retail stores, this is according to the -- the congressmen that signed this and the senator. The first step towards facilitating the collection of valuable financial data. Now, that's where the pressure came from. But where did this originate? Let's trace it back a little further. Because there's no way Elizabeth Warren dreamt this up on her own. This initiative was first pushed by the amalgamated bank. Now, who is the amalgamated bank. Well, if you really kind of a pay attention to this show, and you watch the specials, you know who the amalgamated bank is. They are the bank owned by the Worker's United/SEIU union. So it's a labor union bank. But not just any labor Union Bank. This is the bank that brought the Paris accord financial framework, to the United States financial institutions as well. They were the signers at the Paris Accords, the meetings that happened before. And other banks were like, we're not going to get involved in that, but it was the SEIU, labor Union Bank, that brought it here to America. And then got politicians to push and coerce and get all of the other banks to sign in on this. It was a climate credit score idea. It sounded insane back then, but it's known as ESG. And it is the industry standard now. This was The Great Reset before The Great Reset. So it was all about using banks as a pressure point mechanism, to bend everyone to their climate will. This is what the amalgamated bank brought over here. That pressure system clearly worked. Because now all of the banks, all of the credit cards, all of the insurance companies are on board with it now. So now this bank, along with Senator Warren and other Democratic congressmen, are applying even more pressure to go after our guns. Now, they just say, that's just not going to happen. Let me give you this. CBS News. Big scoop. The industry that sets international standards for credit card companies has decided to create a new code for the purchase of guns and ammo. Now, notice within this isn't the United States government. This is an industry group, meaning the financial sector, that sets the international standards. So now, we are being forced to accept international standards, and the rest of the country -- and the rest of the world, really doesn't care about guns and ammunition within because they ain't got any. We're unique in the world, with our Second Amendment. But now we have international standards. So we can't just -- we can't defy these international standards. Now, they say, they're not going to identify the exact purchase. They will separate those items from the more generic category. So merchant category codes, made up of four digits, used across all sorts of industries. And it's not supposed to reveal any individual products for the purchases. Credit card companies lump firearm retailers with other outlets, classifying them as 5999. Upside down. It's a five that doesn't exist. And then three sixes. Miscellaneous retail stores, or 5941 sporting goods stores. New code now for firearm merchants, potentially suspicious purchasing powers could be flagged by law enforcement. Now, wait a minute. What is a suspicious purchase? This is part of the plan, being pushed by Democratic candidates, and the amalgamated bank of New York. A progressive bank. This is according to CBS News now. The letter drafted by Elizabeth Warren and blah, blah, blah. Came out back in June. So the congressional pressure worked. The new code has been approved, but Visa is not happy about it. Hmm. In a letter obtained by CBS News, sent by Visa last Wednesday, in response to congressional Democrats who supported the plan, the company said, we believe asking payment networks to serve as a moral authority, by deciding which legal goods can or cannot be purchased, sets a dangerous precedent. Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Visa, you have this all wrong. Wait a minute. You're just categorizing. It's just numbers. You're not tracking. You're not being asked to do anything, except if there's suspicious activity, report it. And what are you turning this into? Let me read this again, from Visa. We believe asking payment networks to serve as a moral authority by deciding which legal goods can or cannot be purchased sets a dangerous precedent. Gee, this is almost like, ESG! Where Visa, MasterCard, and American Express, will be told by their piers and pressured, you know, guys, we can't do business with you. If you're accepting these payments, you know, from gun stores. If you're actually doing business with gun stores, we can't do business with you. So is it that they're creating a national database, which I've heard. Or is it what I don't hear? They're creating a separate category. That way, no matter where you go, if you're buying guns and ammunition at Walmart -- I'm sorry, your credit card can't be used here for that. So they make it impossible for you to use your credit card to buy any kinds of guns. Gee, what would be next on the ESG scale? Now, I'm going to tell you what the amalgamated bank said in response to Visa in 60 seconds. Whether your pain is small like the little ache in the joint of your thumb, or you wake up every morning really, really large. The kind that hurts all over everywhere, all the time, or somewhere in between. The simple fact of the matter is, you want to be free of it. Well, let me suggest Relief Factor. It's not a drug. But it was developed by doctors. And it has four key ingredients that fight inflammation. The not a drug thing is really important. You don't want to be spaced out. You want to be at the top of your game. Your pain is already distracting. What. You're just going to fog over all of that pain? That makes it worse. See if it will work for you. Seventy percent of the people who try it, go on to order more, month after month. ReliefFactor.com. Seventy percent -- again, 70 percent. Are you part of that 70 percent? 1-800-4-Relief. 1-800-4-Relief. Or relieffactor.com. Feel the difference. Ten-second station ID. (music) So let me go back to this letter from CBS News, sent by Visa last Wednesday. We believe that asking payment networks to serve as a moral authority, by deciding which legal goods can or cannot be purchased. Sets a dangerous precedent. We understood amalgamated bank's request to be justified. At least in part. By an interest in blocking transition -- transactions that would fall under such a new category. And Visa's rules expressly prohibit blocking of legal transactions under an MCC. So they're saying -- they're having the balls to come out. Thank you, Visa. Having the balls to come out, and call a spade a spade. Look, this is what they want. They're going to block day before the next step is to block all transactions for firearm or an -- or ammunition. And it will all be tracked. Oh, well, I'll just pay for it in cash. No, now there's a new little special rule here, that all transactions -- all transactions are going to be watched. Now, the president and CEO of amalgamated Union Bank, we all have to do our part to stop gun violence. And sometimes it starts with illegal purchases of guns and adjust. Right. The new code will allow us to fully comply with our duty to report suspicious activity and illegal gun sales. Why? Are we -- when you're going out and you're buying your gun as a drug dealer, do you use your Amex Centurion card? This action answers the call of millions of Americans who want safety from gun violence. And we are proud to have led the broad coalition of advocates, shareholders, and elected officials that achieve this historic outcome. Boy, it doesn't seem like amalgamated bank thinks this is a small deal. Priscilla Sims Brown. She's the CEO, recently appeared on CNBC, where she was asked about her effort to see push the new category code. Quote, if we did have a merchant code for gun stores, we could detect patterns, that would indicate there had been something unusual going on. So now we're not looking for individuals, we're looking for patterns. Hmm. She says, all the banks will do is file a suspicious activity report, at which point, it will be up to local or federal law enforcement to act on those reports. Huh. So who is doing the follow-up? Where are you sending that exactly? And if that's the case, why is Visa concerned about the attempt to block transactions using these codes? This is more than just an official registration. Because that's what I hear people say. Oh, this -- you can't do that. That would be -- that would be a Federal Registration. No. It's worse than that. This is The Great Reset. This is -- and this is openly -- Visa warning us. They didn't want to go along with it. And suddenly, they said, oh, wait. We misunderstand, we're fine. Where is the pressure coming from? Is it the banking industry, is it the government, or is it both?

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Whitney Webb: How You Can BREAK FREE of the Chains of the Elites

Are you truly free, or is your life quietly controlled by systems most Americans never question? In this eye-opening conversation, Glenn Beck speaks with investigative journalist Whitney Webb about how the Elites, banks, and global systems have created modern forms of enslavement, all while the public remains largely unaware. They discuss the urgent need for local self-reliance, alternative financial systems, and taking personal responsibility to protect yourself and your family. This is a wake-up call for anyone who believes freedom is guaranteed, and it’s time to see the truth and act before it’s too late.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Whitney Webb HERE

Claire's warning: The dark side of gender care EXPOSED

Claire Abernathy was just 14-years-old when doctors told her parents she’d take her own life without hormones and surgery. They promised “gender care” would save her life. Instead, it left Claire with irreversible scars, broken trust, and a lifetime of regret. Her mom was told she was required to comply. No one ever addressed the bullying, or trauma Claire endured before being rushed into medical transition. Now, years later, both Claire and her mother are speaking out and exposing how families are misled, how doctors hide risks, and how children are left to pay the price. With federal investigations now underway, their story is a warning every parent needs to hear.

The most INSANE Deep State story you've never heard

Was an NGO with deep government ties trying to RESTART the opium trade in Taliban-run Afghanistan while former Taliban members were on its payroll...only to be caught DESTROYING the evidence?! The State Department's Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Darren Beattie joins Glenn Beck to expose what he found when he was made Acting President of the United States Institute of Peace. Plus, he debunks ProPublica’s claim that DOGE “targeted” an “Afghan scholar who fled the Taliban.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Darren, welcome to the program. How are you? Darren, are you there? Is he there?

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Okay. Check if he's there. Is he? Dick Cheney. Dick Cheney.

STU: Trying to shut him down. They don't want peace. They don't want peace.

GLENN: They don't. They don't.

He is -- he is a big-time anti-globalist. I've got to tell you, what we're doing with the State Department. I absolutely love. The State Department has been a big problem for this country for a very long time. It's what's gotten us into these global wars. These endless wars, and everything he is.

And, I mean, I don't know what happened to Marco rube, but he is tremendous.

And the way president Trump is appointing different people like Darren, it's fantastic. Darren, are you there? Darren.

STU: Something must be wrong with the lines. Because we are talking to him offline on the phone here. And it does seem to be working, but not coming through our broadcast board here for whatever reason.

GLENN: Well, let's see if we can get that fixed, and maybe let me just talk here for five, six minutes on something else. Then we'll take a break and come back and see if we can get him.

There's something else that I really want to talk about. And that is this flag-burning thing. Now, it's not an amendment.

This is something that the president is putting up in an executive order and has very little teeth to it.

But I -- I -- look, I understand. As a guy putting an enormous flagpole up at my house today.

I mean, an enormous flagpole.

I love the flag. I love it!

And there are a few things that make me more angry than see somebody you set our flag on fire.

For a lot of people, that's a punch in the gut, especially our military people. And it has been planted on distant battlefields. It's raced after victory. Saluted in the morning, or should be in our schools and folded and given to the hands of grieving families. It feels like spitting on every sacrifice, that ever made this nation possible. And the argument against flag burning is really simple: It dishonors the idea of all of that. Okay?

And it defends millions of people, including me. It disrespects, I think the veterans that bled. The families who mourned. The dream that binds us together.

However, here's the hard truth: Symbols only mean something, in a land where freedom is alive.

If you outlaw the burning of a flag, the you have placed the cloth above the Constitution that it represents. You have made the flag an idol.

We don't worship idols. If you can only praise the flag and never protest it, it just stops being a symbol of freedom. And starts being an idol of obedience.

Now, that's the argument for allowing it. At least to me.

Because the real strength of a free nation is -- is to -- it's -- it's how we protect, not the speech we love, but how we endure the speech we hate!

And the Supreme Court has already ruled on this. And, you know, they -- the line they drew wasn't an easy one. Freedom of speech, stops where it directly -- directly insights violence. And that's it same thing, kind of, in this executive order.

You can burn the flag. But if I'm not mistaken, but if it incites violence, then you're in trouble.

And that's true. But the bar of inciting violence is so incredibly high. And it's -- it doesn't have anything to do with speech that offends. It's not speech that stirs anger. Not speech that wants you to punch the speaker in the mouth. It's speech only, that provokes imminent and specific violence.

And unless it's that be with the government doesn't have any right to -- to get into the business of silencing speech. Ever. Ever. Ever.

It is a hard line. And that standard is really hard. It's painfully hard.

Because what our citizenship requires, this is civics. What our citizenships require, is that we defend -- oh, I hate this.

We defend the right of your opponent to mock everything that we hold sacred.

Now, I want you to think of this. You can burn a Bible. You can burn the Word of God. But some want to make it illegal to burn a flag. Where are our priorities? You can burn the Constitution. The words that actually are the ones that stir us into action. But you can't burn a flag.

You can't burn a Koran. Can't burn them. Can't. Can't.

You will -- you will quickly come to a quick end, not legally. But you will come to a quick end. I don't ever want to be like that. Ever!

You burn a Bible. I think you're a monster. What is wrong with you? What is wrong with you?

But you have a right to do it. Why are we drawing a line around the flag? It -- the reason is -- is because we feel things so passionately. And that is really a good thing, to feel love of country so passionately. But then we have to temper that. My father used to tell me, that I think this country needs to hear over and over again, every day. My father -- we would talk to somebody. And we would walk away. And he would go, I so disagree with everything that man just said. But, Glenn, son, he would say. I will fight to the death for his right to say it. He used to say that to me all the time. Which now lees me to believe, I know where I've got my strong opinions from. Because dad apparently would disagree with a lot of people all the time.

But that was the essence of freedom. That is the essence of what sets us apart. Standing for universal, eternal rights like free speech. It's not easy. It means you have to take the size of those people that offend you. It means -- it doesn't mean you have to disagree with it. You can fight against it. You can argue back and forth.

But you -- can you tolerate the insults to the things that you love most. That is so hard, and that is why most of the world does not have freedom of speech. It's too hard! But our Founders believed people are better than that. Our citizens can rule themselves!

And the only way you can rule yourself is if you don't have limits on freedom of speech. So the question is, do we want to remain free? Or do we want to just feel good? It really is that simple. It's why no one else has freedom of speech. It's too hard! I think we're up to the task. Okay. Give me 60 seconds. And then we will try again.

The -- there's certain moments in history, that test not just entire nations, but the hearts of those who live in the nations. And right now, the people of Israel are living in one of those moments. Sirens in the night. Families huddled together.

Elderly men and women. Who remember a time when help never came. All of them wonder. Is anybody going to stand with us, this time?

The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews exists to answer that question. They provide food, shelter, security, and hope. Real hope and help in the middle of a crisis! And every act of generosity from people like you sends a clear message. You are not alone. When you support the fellowship, you are joining hands with believers all around the world to lift up God's people, when they need it most. And it is a promise in action. It's a testimony that our faith isn't just words. It's love delivered right on time. And this is your chance to be part of something that really, truly matters. Something that is eternal. To stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel. And say, we're with you. We're not going to fight your wars. Not going to fund your wars. But we're with you. You have a right to live and exist in peace. To learn how you can help. Visit IFCJ.org. IFCJ.org. Go there now. IFCJ.org. Ten seconds. Back to the program.
(music)
All right. Let me -- let me bring Darren in. Darren, are you there now?

DARREN: Yes!
GLENN: Oh, God. Thank goodness.
Thank you for putting up with us. I don't know what happened with the phone system. But, first of all, tell me what the US Institute of Peace is. I've never even heard of it.

DARREN: That is a fantastic question. And I'll try to give the abbreviated answer, because I know we don't have several hours.

GLENN: Good. I know.

DARREN: But US Institute of Peace is one of lesser known, but quite important member of the NGO archipelago, that was created in the '80s. It belongs to the same cohorts as national endowments for democracy.

GLENN: Oh.

DARREN: And some other -- some other better known NGOs that really in the broad context of things. In kind of the sweep of things, was created as a kind of reorganization of the government structure in the aftermath of the church type committee hearings that expose a lot of the dirty dealings of government agencies such as the CIA, and so sort of a broader response to that government lie was to create this NGO layer of governance, with an armed distant plausible deniability, a kind of chameleon character of not exactly being government, not exactly being private, in order to fulfill some of those more sensitive functions that had been exposed in the course of the church hearings.

And so US Institute of Peace is one of those NGOs that had particular focus on conflict regions. But, of course, as I think you -- you suggested earlier, peace requires at the very least, an asterisk. Because there involves a lot of things, that conventional, most American citizens would not think should belong as part of the portfolio of something calling itself an institute of peace.

GLENN: So what was the thing with the -- with this Taliban member that was getting money from us?

DARREN: Right. So this is an interesting case. So there's a whole saga of a takeover of the US institute of peace under -- under DOGE.

And that's really a fascinating story unto itself. Just to give you a sense of what these characters were like. They barricaded themselves in the offices.

They sabotaged the physical infrastructure of the building. There were reports of there being loaded guns within the offices.

GLENN: Wow!

DARREN: There was one, like, hostage situation where they held a security guard under basically kind of a false imprisonment type situation. It was extremely intense.

Far more so than the better known story of USAID. And in the course of all of that, they tried to delete a terabyte of data, of accounting information that would indicate what kind of stuff they were up to.

What kind of people they were paying. And in the course of that, DOGE found that one of the people on their payroll. Was this curious figure, who had a prominent role in the Taliban government. And then seemed to kind of play a bunch of angles across each other.

Sort of one of these sixer types in the middle of Afghanistan.

The question is, what the heck is an organization like this, having an individual, who is a former Taliban member on their payroll.

It underscores how incredibly bizarre the whole arrangement is. And to just reinforce that. I think even more bizarre than having this former Taliban guy on the payroll is the kind of schizophrenic posture exhibited by the chief -- one truly bizarre thing is that one of the US Institute of Peace's main kind of policy agendas was basically lamenting the fact that the opium trade had dissipated under Taliban leadership. They had multiple reports coming out, basically saying, this is horrible, that the opium trade is diminished under the Taliban. Meaning, finding some way to restore it. How bizarre is that!

GLENN: What was their thinking?

DARREN: Well, it's -- it's very strange, and it depends on what kind of rabbit holes you want to go down. But the whole story of opium and Afghanistan and its connection to, you know, government entities, is a -- is a very intricate and delicate and fascinating one. But it seems very clear that the US Institute of Peace was involved in that story to some degree because their public reports. They had a full-the time guy of basically lamenting the fact that the opium trade dissipated under the Taliban. And, meanwhile, they're funding this former Taliban guy.

GLENN: Unbelievable. Now, ProPublica got this. And you have released the statement on it. And ProPublica just completely white-washed this -- said this guy was a victim, and his family was taken hostage. Was his family ever taken hostage because he was exposed?

And correct the ProPublica story, would you?

DARREN: Yeah, I mean, the ProPublica thing, as usual and as expected was a total joke.

GLENN: Yes.

DARREN: I mean, this guy, I'm not an expert on this particular person's history. But what's very clear is he was a former Taliban guy, and he was probably one of these people, who was playing all sides, made a lot of enemies. I know that there were several kind of attempts on his life by the Taliban, in the course of various -- various decades.

This has nothing to do with -- with DOGE.

I mean, he's a known quantity in the region.

And somebody who has made a lot of enemies.

And he was not -- he was on the payroll of the US institute of peace.

And nobody is expecting something like that. So then, and, again, there's this sort of hostile takeover situation.

Where the people are barricading he themselves in. Trying to delete all this data.

And sure enough, what's in the data, is stuff like this.

These random former Taliban guy, making his contract with $130,000.

GLENN: You know, this is the -- this is the real Deep State stuff, that I think bothers people so much.

Look, we expect our CIA to do stuff, we don't necessarily want to do it. We expect it.

When it's in the State Department.

When every department is pushing out money to NGOs to overthrow governments and everything else.

It's out of control!

It's just completely out of control.

And who is overseeing all of that.

DARREN: That's a great question.

I think part of the NGO -- UCEF was almost a cutout of a cutout.

A fourth of its money came from USAID.

In many ways, it was a cutout of USAID. Which itself was a cutout.

So there are many layers of distance. Plausible deniability.

And UCEF, I think institutionally really perfected this chameleon structure of being able to plausibly present itself as government. When that was convenient for what they were doing.

And also to present itself as a private organization, when that was convenient.

It's a very intricate setup that they had, that was truly optimized for this chameleon character of plausible denial operations. In conflict zones. Doing God knows what, with American taxpayer money.

And it's just an absolute hornet's nest.

We have recovered that terabyte that they tried to delete. And once we get things settled in the building itself, I intend to do a kind of transparency effort, whereby we release all of this material to the public.

GLENN: Good. Good.

DARREN: Just like I'm doing at the State Department. I'm currently acting as secretary at the State Department. And doing a transparency effort here. After I eliminated the global engagement center, which was sort of the internal censorship office within the State Department, decided, we've got to -- we've got to air this out to the public.

So within the next couple of weeks.

We'll have our next tranche of helps you of thousands of emails, documenting what this were doing.

GLENN: I would love you to go back on, through those emails.

I think you guys in the State Department are doing an amazing job. Thanks for being on.