All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 9, 2020 - David Icke
01:02:16
Wanna Be A Mainstream Journalist? First You Have To Sell Your Soul - David Icke Dot-Connector
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
♪♪♪ ♪♪♪
♪♪♪ ♪♪♪
Hello ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the David Icke Dot Connected video cast.
It's another week and it's another Twitter ban for you dad.
Been up to no good. Yeah, it can't be long before Twitter banned me altogether, Gaz, given the extraordinary, stupid, bizarre levels to which they have now descended.
Very few weeks ago, they banned me for seven days for posting something that indicated that the UK Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, was a liar.
Now, calling...
Hancock a liar is not only mild compared with what he's called by other people on Twitter, but it's also the truth equivalent of saying that it's quite cold at the Antarctic.
The evidence for the fact that he's a serial liar is just rolled out daily.
And events have shown that to be so.
But this time, if it was possible, they plumbed even greater depths.
Because they banned me for seven days for posting not a story about, but a direct link to a scientific medical study that was making the link, quite rightly, Between wearing face masks and breathing in minute fibers from the mask into the lungs.
Making the point that because the masks are denying enough oxygen, the breaths of mask wearers tend to be deeper to get more oxygen in to compensate.
And thus that can suck in these minute fibers That detach from the masks into the lungs.
Now, that is a fundamentally important point to be addressed.
And if Twitter cared one iota, it doesn't, about the health of the population, it would have looked at that and had absolutely no problem with a link like that.
Indeed, supported it.
But, of course, Jack Dorsey, who's supposed to run Twitter, is just another gopher for the global cult.
The same as...
Brin and Page at Google and Wachiski at YouTube and Stamberg and Zuckerberg at Facebook.
They're all front people for the same network and therefore they are censoring, ever more hysterically, on behalf of that network by silencing any information that...
We'll dismantle the official narrative of this pandemic hoax.
And people like I've just mentioned must go eventually before Nuremberg type trials for crimes against humanity because that's what they are facilitating.
Without Silicon Valley's censorship and the extraordinary compliance of the mainstream media, where we are could not have happened.
People dying of lockdown consequences, people dying of undiagnosed or untreated cancer, undiagnosed, untreated heart disease, etc., etc., Would not be happening.
As we have on the website today, children would not be getting rashes and bacterial infections on their faces from mask wearing.
People wouldn't be going around wearing face nappies, face diapers.
None of this would be happening without the complicit Involvement, knowingly, with the people I'm talking about here, in censoring information that's exposing the consequences and the lies of what is going on.
And you know what I find sickening, Gaz?
Bryn and Paige...
That censor Google, the Google search engine, by pushing down alternative information so you can't see it.
Susan Wachiski at Google-owned YouTube, who's banned me and goodness knows how many other people who are exposing the truth and the lies.
Zuckerberg, Sandberg, at Facebook.
They are all Jewish.
Now, let that just bloody sink in.
What did the Nazis do in Germany with the consequences that followed for Jewish people?
They burned the books.
They shut down public meetings exposing the agenda of the Nazis.
They destroyed all information passing around the German population to warn them of what the Nazis were and what they planned to do.
And they controlled information.
To control perception.
To control behaviour.
To control the country.
And now we have Jewish people in Brin and Page and Wachiski, Sandberg and Zuckerberg, doing exactly the same on a global level.
I have quite a good stomach.
Thankfully. But that puts me on the brink of throwing up to even think about it.
And the Jewish community worldwide should be kicking off people that claim to be part of that community, claim, who are acting in exactly the way the Nazis did in Germany.
And what is happening as a result of what they are doing?
We are seeing a global version of Nazi Germany unfolding before our eyes in country after country after country.
And like I say, these people must go before a court for crimes against humanity.
And if there is such a law, Insulting the memory of those who suffered in Germany from exactly what these people are doing today.
They're not just censoring information either.
They're openly pushing the agenda.
So all the social media networks are just pushing the World Health Organization the whole time.
Also today, literally just before we came on air, I just saw a story from Sky News which was A poll, I'm sure it was, saying that the majority of Britons support cancelling Christmas and family gatherings and locking down.
Now, I'm calling absolute bullshit on that.
Most people don't support that nonsense at all.
But what they're doing then is they put that out, so they're putting that in people's minds of, oh, people support it.
Oh, right. Oh, because people want to be in there.
I don't want to step out of the box.
So, oh, if people support it, then...
Okay. And it's sort of preparing people for what they're blatantly going to do anyway.
And it's not even subtle.
But on the subject of social media, you'll like this, Dad.
So, obviously, Twitter and Facebook, YouTube, they're all the same people, really, at the core of it.
So, I had these two posts deleted by Facebook, and they banned me for 24 hours, right?
And they said why.
It was because of these two posts. There's absolutely nothing wrong with these posts at all.
So I appealed both of them.
I was like, you're going to laugh. What's wrong with them?
And so they came back to me saying, we're sorry we got it wrong.
And they put both posts back up and extended my ban from 24 hours to 72 hours.
Well, the thing is that they're just serving the cult.
They are creations of the cult.
And these front people are just gophers for the cult.
They may be very rich.
They may be celebrated by the woke mentality in its eternal bewilderment.
But they're just gophers.
Gates is just a gopher.
He's a very rich gopher, and he's up the hierarchy, yes.
He's been given the job of overseeing and orchestrating this pandemic hoax, but he's still a gopher compared with those in the shadows that are running this.
And what you've just mentioned about polls is very interesting.
I've written about this over the years, and the evidence and studies that find that if you put a poll out that, say, says, 80% of people think so-and-so or support so-and-so or are against whatever, then pretty soon 80% of people do or very close to it because, as you say, people want to be part of the herd.
I mean, some of us are aghast at being part of the herd and refuse to do so.
But lots of people find their security in being part of the herd and their insecurity in thinking for themselves or even attempting it.
And so this combination of This desire to be part of the herd mentality and the censorship of information to give people another way of looking at the world outside the herd mentality.
This is what has programmed the perceptions of enormous swathes of the human population over this pandemic hoax.
But thankfully, there are some Increasing people, increasing numbers in the human family that are beginning to break out of the perceptual straitjacket and start to see that the world is different to what they thought it was.
And those numbers are growing.
And what I find very comforting and very encouraging is it's starting to play out now into the Institutional professions, like lawyers, and saw a great video by a German lawyer this week, and other people in the medical profession, they are starting to break ranks.
And once they start, well, we are getting somewhere.
And the key thing in all this is that, when you think about it, the power of consciousness over programming is despite peer pressure around people.
Oh, you must do what the government says, because government's only got our interests at all, and they wouldn't lie to us, would they?
And at the same time, 24-7, media and the Silicon Valley censorship, this is what you must believe, this is what you must believe.
What is, again, very encouraging is despite all of that, That people in greater and greater numbers are seeing through the lies and the scam.
Which is why what you say about that Skype poll is correct.
There's no way those percentages of British people think the way that poll claims.
But it's all part of the mind manipulation, which is the very foundation of all of it.
Take your minds back.
Game over. That's a lot of the reason, I think, why they're trying to shut down hospitality.
I mean, obviously, they want to destroy stuff for the Great Reset and destroy the economy.
That's one side of it. But another side of it is, you know, this awakening that's happening to the scam is coinciding with time that people have been out and about a bit more.
And so, obviously, like you say, you've got the media giving you one side of it.
You've got, you know, politicians giving you the side of it.
You've got the social media censoring any other side of it and stuff like that.
So people, when they're in their houses during the lockdown period, are bombarded with this stuff.
And then when they come out of that, and they go back to work, into the office, into the factory, down the pub, then they start having conversations about their real life experience.
Do you know anyone? No, I don't know anyone.
Do you know anyone that knows anyone? No, I don't know anyone either.
It's weird, isn't it? And so people start talking, and instead of relying on what the media is telling them, they're actually relying on what they're seeing with their own eyes.
And that's why I think a lot of people now are going, hang on, this doesn't make sense.
You know, actually, well, no, my wife works in the NHS, and she's basically been doing nothing for six months.
And so now, obviously, they don't want that.
So it's a case of, right, shut down the pubs, we shut down, you know, back in your boxes again, off you go, turn on the telly.
So people aren't having that conversation anymore.
But I think the horse is bolted, if I'm honest.
Well, yeah, because once you see it, you see it.
There's no going back once you've seen it.
But this is the plan for this next lockdown.
What we've seen through the last few weeks is incessant censorship.
Building on top of previous incessant hysterical censorship.
So in this next lockdown, it's going to be even more difficult to circulate information via the internet.
Than it was before.
And that's the idea, of course.
It's to isolate people in their homes, isolate people in their bubbles, and to then stop them from that point of isolation from getting access to information that give them another fix on what's going on.
So all they hear is what they are supposed to hear.
And of course, more and more polls will come out.
Oh, yeah, people support it.
No, they don't. You bloody liars.
But, you know... You had something happen to you this week in relation to the Times newspaper.
And it's a phenomenon that has been impacting me.
And that is, when you talk to newspapers...
And they then report the conversation.
Well, you've lost control of the information.
If you do live radio, live television, it's different.
What you say is what people hear.
But if you talk to newspapers, you're going to expect, because of A, that phenomenon, you've lost control of the discourse because they'll write whatever they want.
And you also know that through ownership...
That, like Murdoch times, you're not going to get a fair crack at the whip.
But you know that.
So that's part of the deal.
But it's gone beyond that now.
It's gone beyond that.
What we now have, extraordinarily, is excuses for journalists.
There'll never be one. Not only trashing alternative information and alternative views and people, but going to the internet corporations and demanding that they are censored.
You have people who fraudulently call themselves journalists.
It's an insult to the name and the profession.
Who go to these corporations, your Facebooks and your Twitters and your YouTubes, with videos that have got vast numbers of people who have watched them, and they have them taken down.
Now, you'll tell your story in a second, Gaz, in relation to...
What happened with the Times.
But when I did the second interview with London Real, it was on April the 6th.
And that was the interview that exposed the PCR test as a fake in the way that it's used, that the virus has never been isolated and shown to exist, and a stream of other things which have since proved to be correct in terms of it's now increasingly circulating, and not least about the PCR test.
But the BBC went to YouTube And crowed that they'd had that video taken down.
Independent television, what a contradiction in terms, ITV in Britain.
They went to Facebook, had a million views by then, and it was very soon after I did it.
And they crowed about the fact that after being approached by ITV, Facebook took it down.
Then we had CNBC in America, in North America, that was crowing in an article about the fact that they'd approached Spotify and got the same interview deleted.
So now we have people claiming to be journalists Who are campaigning for the destruction of the free flow of information and the right of people to choose to watch and hear and see whatever they through their freedom, their basic human rights choose to watch and hear.
And this is a A whole other expansion on the destruction of journalism, which virtually none exists in the mainstream.
And how these people look themselves in the mirror in the morning is quite beyond me.
I would look a right mess because I wouldn't have slept that night if I did what they did.
And the same happened with you and the Times, Gats, this week.
Yeah, I mean, in my sort of infinite naivety, I think governments are meant to serve the people and journalists are meant to hold the government to account in their role of serving the people.
That's how I look at it.
And they're meant to report the facts, but...
I was approached by the Times after the speech in London.
Now, you know, in hindsight, shouldn't have talked to him.
Should have told him to sod off because it's the mainstream media.
But I thought to myself, well, they're going to report on it anyway.
And, you know, they'll give it the, you know, we approached Gareth, he declined to comment sort of thing.
So I thought, well, I might as well talk to the guy and we'll see what happens.
So I spoke to him for over an hour and he was all right.
And, you know, he dug a bit and he poked a bit, which is his job, and asked questions of which I, you know, answered them fully.
We spoke in depth about the fact that I know more people that have killed themselves than I do have even got the virus, never mind died of it.
And all these things and, you know, the destruction of businesses, neighbors of mine that are all now unemployed, you know, all this stuff, real life stuff, not, you know, stuff I saw this on YouTube.
And we chatted, and three or four times during the interview, he poked me a bit, and then I went back with some of that, and he went, that's a good point, actually.
And I thought, oh, none of it made it.
None of it made it in, obviously.
But then when you read the Times article, it doesn't flow either.
So I don't know whether that's him being annoying, or whether he wrote them bits in, and they were taken out when it went past the editor's suite.
I don't know. But like I say, it doesn't read particularly great.
Or it might just be a crap writer.
I don't know. But yeah, then the video, you know, pushing three and a half million views was then deleted by Facebook after being approached by The Times.
So yeah, so that was great.
So I was kind of thinking like, you know, I'm just going to have an hour long conversation with this guy.
I've got loads of nuggets of information.
I've got a few truth bombs in there.
These might wake some people up.
But like I say, that's my infinite naivety, which I won't be doing again.
What was his name? Oh God, I can't remember off the top of my head.
I can't remember off the top of my head. But yeah, you know, we've worked there for a while, from what I can see.
But it's one of those things.
It is what it is. You know, I'll just take it on the chin and go, right, well, that's what you get for talking to mainstream media.
So I won't be doing that again. And then carry on.
The point being is this.
There are no journalists...
That work for the BBC. There are no journalists that work for the mainstream media newspapers.
There are no journalists that work for CNN. No journalists that work for MSNBC and all these other television operations around the world.
And I could say that with great confidence.
Because the limitations...
Of what you can investigate, what you can write or say, the opinions you can have and the information you can circulate is so fundamentally limited that there's no way that you can be a proper journalist in those circumstances.
You can't be.
There's too many limitations.
And this is why the real journalism is in the alternative media, where the only censorship is by Silicon Valley corporations, where people investigate things to investigate them.
With no holes barred, no limitations, no oh you can't go there, you go where the information takes you.
And that's why the proper journalism happens in the alternative media and virtually today after this hoax.
Pandemic virtually not at all in the mainstream media and you know how these people and again these media people you know they have to also face the consequences of their actions because without without them and their disgusting behavior lies censorship demonization of decent people none of this stuff that's going on now this catastrophe for humanity would have been possible because it would have been exposed And these people have children.
And these children are going to have to live in the world that they have fundamentally, centrally, contributed to creating.
And I do think, you know, That some of it, well, some of it obviously is my career is more important than the truth.
I mean, why would you be a mainstream journalist if your career was not more important to you than the truth?
You'd work in the alternative, wouldn't you?
If the truth was your goal, given the limitations that are imposed upon you in the mainstream media.
So some of them, they lie and they manipulate and demonize because it's what they have to do to keep their job.
But I think there is another area of this, which is Stockholm Syndrome.
You know, when people are, say, taken hostage, and they end up being apologists for their hostage, for the people that have taken hostage.
And I see this in the media all the time, really, because imagine if you had a smear of decency and a smear of real journalism within you.
And you every day were completely abusing, insulting the very profession of journalism.
If you admitted to yourself that you go to work every day and frickin' lie on behalf of government, on behalf of authority, To the detriment, indeed, death, destruction and economic disaster of the population.
Imagine if you...
Admitted that. Now, there'll be some in mainstream journalism, also psychopathic, I've met some of them.
My God, if people met a lot of journalists, if people spent a day just sitting there observing life in the BBC newsroom, for instance, they'd never believe another word that was ever told them by those sources.
But imagine if you had to If you had to face yourself every day, what would it do?
Destroy it, wouldn't it? If you had a smear of decency, if you had a smear of journalism, integrity within you.
So that's when Stockholm Syndrome kicks in.
Where you, to save facing yourself and your central part in this human catastrophe...
You have to convince yourself that what the government is saying is true.
Therefore, you promoting the government version of events is true.
And anyone that's challenging those events must be wrong and must be demonized and must be censored and must be trashed.
Because then you in some way can face yourself because you're completely in denial that you're lying on behalf of liars.
And instead you, at some level, convince yourself actually what you're doing is just telling the truth.
And I've got an article here.
It's on the BBC. That's how bad it is.
Of how this kind of works, the headline is Coronavirus Facebook, Twitter and YouTube fail to tackle anti-vaccination coasts.
Why would you want to tackle anti-vaccination posts?
It's another opinion challenging what the big pharma cult-owned drug cartel is telling you to believe.
Now, if you're a journalist, you want to look at all sides and Because you want the truth.
Now, this guy who wrote this is a BBC employee.
He's not a journalist.
Called Leo Kellyan.
Thinks he's a journalist. Self-deception of monumental proportions.
Leo Kellyan was the guy who wrote the article crowing that they'd been to YouTube to get that London Real interview posted.
Deleted. And he calls himself a journalist.
I mean, it's unbelievable. It's funny.
Social networks are failing to tackle coronavirus-related anti-vaccination posts containing clearly harmful information, even after the material is brought to their attention, according to a campaign group.
Of course, the campaign group is the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, which we'll come to in a second, which is a front for silencing anyone who's challenging the official story of anything.
And then, you know the BBC, guys?
The BBC has got a disinformation and social media reporter, right?
A disinformation reporter at the BBC. I mean, kettles, teapots?
Inversion? She must be investigating the BBC all the time then, but no.
She's a lady called Marianna Spring.
Who clearly has no life experience and writes like a 10-year-old, but because they have no life experience and write like 10-year-olds and will do whatever the BBC line wants, they become disinformation reporter.
And so when any of these stories breaks, Like the Centre for Counter and Digital Hate wanting to censor someone else.
They'll be running out of people soon.
Then she has to do the analysis.
Says here, analysis by Marianna Spring.
Public health experts warn that coronavirus vaccine conspiracy theories spread quickly online and pose a great threat to us all.
Nice analysis, Mariana.
If a significant number of people decide not to take a safe and approved vaccine, our ability to suppress the disease will be limited.
Ooh, more analysis.
It's unbelievable!
Claims a coronavirus vaccine will be a tool for mass surveillance and genocide only do harm.
Mariana, have you looked at the information and the evidence to support that?
Hmm? Well, no!
No. Because if you did, you wouldn't be a disinformation reporter for very long.
And so what you have is the, and this happens right across the mainstream media, you have the appointment of safe, compliant non-journalists to parrot the line of the narrative, which ultimately, if you go deep enough to where it's all coming from, is the narrative of the global cult.
What about BBC journalists on hundreds of thousands of pounds a year that chase people through petrol station forecourts?
What's that about?
How unbelievable is that? Stephen Nolan.
Stephen Nolan is a Northern Ireland presenter for the BBC, right?
He'll think he's a journalist.
Just like Marianna Spring will.
They're both fooling themselves, of course, and trying to fool us.
Stephen Nolan is on almost £400,000 a year.
To peddle complete crap and parrot the official line of everything.
I would say to people, just go to Stephen Nolan's Twitter account and look at his posts about the virus.
He is not a BBC journalist.
He is a promoter of the official line and a demoniser of those that challenge it.
So he did a programme this week which included him standing outside a petrol station waiting for someone to come out not wearing a mask.
So he could chase them across the forecourt with his stupid freaking mask on.
And this is the BBC seeking to enforce government policy that anyone with half a brain cell, not Nolan clearly, can see as a scam.
Not least the masks and the tremendous health consequences that are already starting to emerge and we've not even bloody started yet.
And I have a story about Stephen Nolan.
In fact, I have two. Years ago, I was invited to go on his live show in Northern Ireland.
It goes out about, I don't know what it went out, 10 o'clock, 10.30, something like that.
And I questioned the producer about what it was going to be all about and were they just going to take the piss?
Because I wasn't going to, you know, if they want to take the piss, well, you know, be my guest, but I'm not going to come along and help you.
So anyway, I said, oh no, we're going to take it serious.
Bloody liars.
So anyway, I get a plane to Belfast.
And I arrive at this hotel that BBC booked me in at about 5 o'clock.
And the programme, like I said, went out about 10, 10.30, something like that.
And so, of course I'm sceptical, but I thought I'd give them the benefit of the doubt.
You're trying to get information out, just like you were talking about with the Times.
And at least I was going to actually, you know, it was going to be live.
But there's also self-respect.
And so what happened is he did a trailer, a bit like what he did this time, just before, in Northern Ireland, just before the six o'clock news.
So he's trailing his show later in the evening, live show.
And he talked about me and took the frickin' piss, right?
So I thought, hmm, okay.
So I picked the phone up and I ordered myself a taxi to the airport.
So I got my bag.
I mean, opened it. I went downstairs, wait for the taxi, got a taxi to the Belfast Airport, booked myself on an earlier plane home.
Oh, actually, it was a plane home.
I was due to go back the next day.
And I went through security into the secure area.
And I'm sitting there just waiting for the plane.
And then someone from the airline came across, a lady.
And said, there's a Mr.
Nolan on the other side of security who would like to talk to you.
And I just said to her, well, I wouldn't like to talk to her.
So I don't know what happened on the show that night, but they must have had a hole to fill, and I wish them well with it.
And then, a little bit later, I got asked by the BBC, BBC in London, this was, to go on this show to a radio interview about 9-11.
And I knew they were going to have a go at me, but I thought, you know, I can handle that, no problem.
And so I did the interview.
But just before it started, I was told on the phone that actually it's been slightly delayed because Stephen Nolan has been a bit delayed.
And I'm sitting there, Stephen Nolan?
I've heard that bloody name.
Where have I heard that before?
And it dawned on me, it's this prat in Northern Ireland.
It was Radio 5 or something else.
So anyway, I did this interview with him.
And it was the usual trash coming from the other end.
Oh, it's an insult to the people whose loved ones died in 9-11 for you to say it was a conspiracy.
So now, this is classic BBC, mainstream journalism insanity.
That somehow it is wrong and an insult to investigate why someone's loved one died as opposed to why the government said they died.
Incredible. But the funny thing was, then he took calls on his show.
And the callers were calling in and agreeing with me.
And it was fascinating to hear his response.
He was completely bloody bewildered.
What do you mean you agree with him?
He couldn't process that information.
And in that way, how can we agree with him?
It's mad. He's saying the official story is not true.
And that's the mentality that you have at the BBC. You won't get a job there if you don't have it.
And what you have in the mainstream media.
And that's why we live in the world that we do.
Of colossal misinformation which then turns on the alternative media and talks about it peddling misinformation.
It's extraordinary.
The lack of self-awareness is just shocking.
The first thing I thought when I saw it was one, he's wearing a tracksuit that's never seen a track and two, was the...
If he's that worried about health, he's probably about six or seven stone overweight.
And that's not me trying to have a childish dig.
You're obviously not that worried, mate, about health.
Do you know what I mean? So if a guy's gone into a petrol station and he's taken his mask off a bit too soon as he's come out the door and you're going to have a go at him about it, he's probably still safer than you, mate.
Just generally. But there you go.
But you mentioned earlier, obviously the...
The Centre for Countering Digital Hate, which is hilarious because they're a tiny little organisation that's funded by some very, very nefarious people.
But there you go. But they seem to be the go-to for all the mainstream media now because it was obviously the guy from the Times.
He contacted them as well.
And this guy, Imran Ahmed, who has all of a sudden flipped from trying to shut anyone up who says anything about Israel to now it's all of a sudden vaccines are his big agenda now.
Which is odd. Seems like quite a leap to me.
Yeah, Imran Ahmed is one of these classic figures that have emerged, who, like you say, is the go-to person for the media currently.
And what they do is they go to him and he tells them why someone is a hate figure and a purveyor of hate.
Why they should be censored and so on.
And he heads this organization, the Center for Countering Digital Hate.
Now, that began in line with its title.
And that was to try to get people like me censored.
They were all part of this YouTube, Facebook censorship as well.
Censored and silenced on the grounds that we are somehow bloody racist.
But that, of course, was the cover.
It was just an excuse to silence people who are exposing the lies across the whole agenda.
And this was confirmed because the moment the pandemic hoax was played, this character and his organization Um, were targeting people who were challenging the official story of the pandemic.
And they didn't even claim that was anything to do with, um, with, with hate or racism.
But now I'm, you know, people like me were challenging the official narrative of the pandemic.
So suddenly they went from hate to is endangering the people, endangering the public.
And the common theme of all this is shutting down anyone that is challenging the official narrative across the entire range of its spectrum.
So the idea that this guy is what he's claiming to be is ridiculous.
And you It's part of a web.
I expose this in the answer.
It's part of a web that goes across into America and the whole 1% created a woke network.
And this is why the Center for Countering Digital Hate, which is claimed to be a British organization, uses the American spelling of center.
And it's funded by the Pierce Foundation, an ultra-Zionist operation, and a load of the usual suspect funders that fund this whole woke censorship network that spans the Atlantic.
And so we have in Imran Ahmed, the person that is...
given the platform by the media to if he goes on you know broadcast media to get softball questions oh Mr Ahmed what would you would Mr Ahmed what would you like to say well i'd like to say this oh thank you Mr Ahmed thank you no hey oh hold on a second mate What gives you the right to have an opinion, but then want opinions different to yours to be censored?
Why are you an enemy of freedom?
No. Thank you, Mr.
Orlman. Thank you. Thank you. And so that's this article here that I partly read from Leo Kellyan.
Just gives the whole, oh, this is what he said.
No questions. No pushback.
Not a bit. Ahmed is very much involved, his whole history is involved in the British Labour Party.
And it just turns out that this Centre for Countering Digital Hate, which is the Centre for Countering Anyone Challenging the Official Narrative of Anything, was created by big Labour Party insiders.
You know, like Morgan McSweeney, who's now Chief of Staff to the Labour Party leader Keir Starmer.
And another lady called Kirsty McNeil, who was a senior advisor to the shockingly bad Labour Prime Minister, Gordon Brown.
And, you know, how can anyone be a member of the Labour Party And have any self-respect when it's being run and directed by characters like this who have absolutely no respect for free speech, free opinion, and the free flow of information.
In fact, it's their worst nightmare.
And have such contempt for the population That they think they have the right to decide what the population can see and not see.
These are the people, members of the Labour Party, that are running your party, which has long ago been hijacked.
And what are you doing paying your subscriptions to this rabble run by, at least officially, not really, By Keir Starmer, who's never seen an official story, an official narrative. He didn't want to worship.
Where's the pushback from the Labour Party against Johnson and the fascism that's going on?
Nowhere. Oh no, well the extraordinary, this pandemic's extraordinary, so we understand that the government has to have extraordinary powers.
One party state, Keir Starmer.
That's what you're part of.
And so are these characters that I'm talking about.
And if there is a journalist out there in the mainstream media, summon some self-respect and question these people like Imran Ahmed about why they think they have the right to their opinion while censoring the opinions of anyone else.
That they want to silence.
Eh? They call it journalism.
Do you remember that? Probably not.
Ahmed said when he was asked about me by the Times, he said he was concerned, which I like.
I'm glad he's concerned. I'd be more concerned about the fact that he looks like a thumb.
But the other thing about the CCDH, and the same with campaign against anti-Semitism and all that lot, they were just pushing and pushing and pushing the fact that the Labour Party from top to bottom was institutionally anti-Semitic, all that sort of stuff.
That's gone now, isn't it?
That's gone. No worries about that anymore.
The goal has been achieved of totally subjugating the Labour Party into a complete and utter irrelevance to anything.
Yeah, that was the job. Make it pro-Israel.
There's Starmer. Done. Done.
Fixed it for you. He spends his days on his knees with his tongue out facing Tel Aviv, or Jerusalem as it is now.
I mean, so, you know, you're never going to get pushback in that direction from Starmer.
But you don't get pushback from Starmer on anything.
If it's the agenda, Starmer supports it.
If it's the agenda, Johnson supports it.
That's the political world that we live in.
A completely and utterly subservient one-party state in which the policy is being driven by people who have never seen a ballot box in their life.
The other big thing they use as well is the fact-checkers.
They make me laugh. Because they're getting more and more ridiculous now.
So you've got obviously these fact checker things that come up on videos and they come up on posts on Instagram and Facebook and stuff like that.
So you can post something that's completely accurate, verifiable, first person account or whatever.
And it will have that film of fact checking.
And now you click on it and it's like false.
And then underneath it, it will say a bunch of stuff in a foreign language that you can't read.
So it's been fact-checked by someone in Greece or Turkey or whatever, and you're like, what does that mean?
Who's that? It doesn't tell you why it's inaccurate, just that it is.
All right. Thanks for that.
That helps. This is...
What a classic example of inversion.
You know, I've been saying for all these years, if you want the truth...
Listen to what the authorities tell you.
And the fact checkers are part of the authorities.
And reverse it.
Because you're going to get so, so much closer to the truth when you do that, that if you take it on face value, that what they're telling you is true.
So fact checkers.
What is that in its normal dictionary definition?
It is to look at information, to look at purported evidence, and to check if it is true.
That is a fact checker.
Inversion. What are fact checkers that we see on the internet and employed by the usual suspects, all of which I've named already in this chat?
They are the inversion of fact checkers.
Their job is to take the official story of everything as being true and therefore in the name of fact checking trash anything that challenges the official story and exposes it as being not true.
That's why you look at a fact checker And you will see over and over again, organization after organization, day after day, week after week, you will see the official story supported as true and challenges Said to be disinformation.
That's what they're there for.
Why these so-called fact checkers?
Don't they have connections into the usual suspect like Soros and all the rest of them?
Because they're simply there to disinform while claiming to be exposing disinformation.
Now, these things can be used In a positive way.
For instance, wearing a mask is a symbol of subjugation and submission, right?
Yes. That's why it's there.
But taking your mask off It's a symbol of freedom and you expressing your freedom.
So these symbols can be used in a negative way or a positive way.
And it's the same with these fact checkers.
You see, when fact checkers who are only there To support the official story and to trash any challenge to it.
When they say this story is false or this story is disinformation, then people with a mind of their own, people who've done that, immediately look at that story and see it in a more positive light.
Because if these fact checkers, owned by the cult, are seeking to trash it, Then it must be something the cult wants trashed.
Because that's the reason the fact-checkers are there.
And why they're employed by these book burners in Silicon Valley.
I saw, I saw...
You can turn it on its head and use it against them.
I saw a real underhanded one yesterday.
So, where Carey Mullis said that basically it can't be used to test for free...
Infectious diseases, the PCR test.
Reuters did a piece, right, where...
They're probably the worst, aren't they?
They are, but what the headline basically said was that people on the internet are claiming that Kerry Mullis wrote in a book that, you know, the PCR test doesn't test for infectious diseases and, you know, X, Y, and Z. False, right?
So you're like, hang on.
He did say that. So I clicked on it, right?
No, no, no. He didn't say it in a book.
He said it in an interview with this guy here.
Right? Yeah.
But they've got you with a headline.
And that's the whole point.
So people go, oh, that's bollocks, false.
And they won't even click and read this big article where it explains where he said it, who he said it to, and here's a link to the original thing.
And you're like, I read it and I thought, you canny bastard.
Do you know what I mean? That's just...
But that's what they're like, innit?
But you see, Gaz, that example you raise, Reuters, this situation, just tells you flat out...
In front of your face, that they are manipulative liars.
I've never said, for instance, that Kerry Mullis said it in a book.
I've said he said it, and he did.
But like you say, the headline, most people all see the headline, oh no, that's not true.
No, Reuters said, and Reuters, oh, they're a big news agency.
Yeah, who owns them? And to what end?
A news agency that's sending out the same story to all these different outlets all over the world who are just printing it.
What a great scam!
If you want to get news outlets all over the world to promote and say the same thing, promote the same disinformation, get yourself a global news agency which produces one story about a subject.
And then it goes out across the wires and across the electronic circuits and is read or printed, published by outlets all over the world.
It's perfect.
And that's what the news agencies are there for, ultimately, by those who own them.
And another one, like, you know, it's not a news agency, but in terms of being a central point, Of everything now is Amazon.
And, you know, what did he make in June?
Was it 13 billion in a day?
I mean, done pretty well out of this pandemic.
Dave censored Dr.
Thomas Cowan's book. So obviously Amazon have come along.
They've undercut massively the whole, you know, the whole bloody publishing industry period.
They've finished it. Bookshops are done.
So everyone's getting everything from Amazon.
And now they're in a position where they can go, no, we're not having that.
Nope, we're not having that.
And you're like, yeah, all right, that happened accidentally then.
So, yeah, The Contagion Myth, that book you've mentioned, I think you mentioned it on last week's podcast, actually.
They've banned that. Yeah, The Contagion Myth demolishes the pandemic myth.
And so it has to be shut down.
And I've been writing for quite a long while now.
10, 12, 15 years.
About this process of which Amazon is part.
And it works like this.
For the same example, you can say Google, you can say YouTube, you can say Facebook.
And you can say Uber.
You start out with the launch of a company.
And For some reason, I can't work out money.
Money is no bloody object.
You need money to expand, expand, expand, expand.
No problem, no problem.
And what happens is because they are competing with other companies that have to watch the bottom line that have to have some kind of relationship between expenditure and income these other companies can't compete With these organizations that have money no object in terms of investment.
They don't have to make a profit.
Look at how long it took Amazon to make a freaking profit.
But they're always there, always there, expanding, expanding, expanding, expanding.
And the idea was, and we've seen it now, we're there, that you fund these companies, money no object, And those that are trying to compete where money is an object, they disappear.
And you are building a monopoly or a nearest, damn it, monopoly.
And once you've got your monopoly, and in those build-up years, don't frighten the children, you have the free flow of information.
I'll post what you like on...
On Facebook, post what you like on YouTube and, oh no, you can get to the top of the search engine if you have a different opinion on Google.
Oh no, we'll sell anything, says Amazon.
And then you reach the point.
There was always coming.
Where you've got your monopoly or your near monopoly.
And at that point, the reason for your very creation, the reason for your very existence then becomes clear.
You now monopolize whatever area you're operating in.
And thus you can start calling the shots.
So Amazon, you, oh no, we'll sell anything, we'll sell anything.
We've got a monopoly now.
Where else are you going to get it from?
So now we'll start deciding what you can see and what you can't see.
Because this Jeff Bezos guy, who owns the Washington Post, another place where you can't be a journalist if you work for them, Now he's calling the shots on what can and cannot be seen and what cannot be circulated through Amazon with its vast monopoly on books.
And Thomas Cowan is the latest example.
But there'll be more because this is meant to get more and more extreme.
We're on the road to something.
Where we are is only where we are.
So, people.
Go to davidike.com.
Have a look at the picture of the little child with the infection all over its face because of wearing a mask at school.
And ask yourself how much more you are going to take.
Before your need for self-respect and your need to protect your own children is too much for you to go on denying.
Now the vast majority of people watching this video, because they are watching it, will already be in that situation.
I'm not having it. But those that are watching it, who are still having it, please have a think.
▲
Export Selection