All Episodes
Previous Next
April 4, 2024 - David Icke
22:34
Wuhan Lab Is A Limited Hangout - Dr Mark Bailey Talks To Gareth Icke Tonight
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names, they can land me in jail.
This week, Scotland joined the ever-growing list of countries passing anti-hate speech legislation.
Can any bookies out there give me the odds of all these apparently independent nations having the same idea at the same time?
It's uncanny.
The passing of these censorship laws have received some backlash, of course, with truth is not hate trending across social media, and one group even carrying a coffin to the Scottish Parliament to signify the death of free speech.
This was mocked by plenty of the flag in Biobrigade, though.
Imagine not knowing the difference between free speech and hate speech, they sneered.
Well, firstly, they're words, mate.
They're someone else's opinion, and whilst you may not agree with them, it doesn't mean the words are hate.
I took incessant abuse as a kid and I still get a regular dose now.
You just think Pratt and get on with your life.
If you can't deal with hearing words you don't like, you're going to have a real tough time when life actually throws genuine trouble your way, which it will because life is hard.
And secondly, who gets to decide what is free speech and what is prison time punishable hate speech?
The state, of course.
I can't see them overreaching on that power, can you?
So you can land yourself in hot water for not believing or accepting that a 15 stone fella with a trouser bulge is a woman, but the unelected First Minister of Scotland, Humza Yousaf, who was the one pushing the bill through the Scottish Parliament, can happily go on an anti-white people rant without any comeback.
Because it's rules for me, not for thee.
The Scottish police have already said that Yousef, one of the world's eternal victims, isn't going to be investigated for his rant in which he lost his blob because Scotland, a nation with a 95.4% white population, has white people in positions of power.
Shock!
He reeled off a number of job roles and then spat out the word white like it was a dirty word.
Isn't it funny that those that claim to be anti-hate have so much hate in their hearts?
And isn't it funny that those that claim to be anti-racist judge everyone based on the colour of their skin?
Same with anti-sexist, anti-fascist or any other self-identified anti-discrimination group.
Whilst I don't really want to play Mr Youssef's divisive game, because that's exactly what it's designed to be.
It's meant to divide us, because these people know when the population of all backgrounds come together, it's over.
But still, I'll humour him, just to put this new anti-hate legislation to the test.
The unelected First Minister of Scotland.
NOT WHITE!
The leader of the Scottish Opposition.
NOT WHITE!
The unelected First Minister of Wales.
NOT WHITE!
The unelected Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
NOT WHITE!
The Mayor of London.
NOT WHITE!
The Lord Mayor of Birmingham, Europe's largest council.
NOT WHITE!
Of course, the real reason behind the anti-hate legislation isn't to protect the population.
They couldn't care less about any of us.
No matter what colour you are or what letter on the alphabet you identify as, if you're not in the club at the top of the pyramid, they could not give a toss about you.
You're the excuse to pass a law that controls speech.
A law that they will fire at anyone, including you, that's guilty of wrong-speak.
And believe me, it won't be long until that evolves into wrong-think, once everyone's favourite freedom hero Elon Musk gets a chip in your noggin.
Covid was a major step towards complete control, and if it wasn't for those brave people that spoke out, often risking everything to fight back against the narrative, the tyranny would be a lot Further down the road, the people eventually said no.
But the powers that be learned from that.
And so using minorities as a shield, they're pushing through silencing legislation all across the world.
Now, the reason they're threatening people into silence is because they know that the society they're planning for all of us will be sure to evoke a reaction from the masses.
So they're getting in there early with the antidote to that.
And it's for that reason that we need to shout even louder, en masse.
Free speech doesn't exist unless it exists for everyone, and that goes for people whose opinions you do not like.
When you tear out a man's tongue, you're not proving him a hate-filled bigot.
You're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
Coming up on the show tonight, Australian musician Tidy comes on to talk about the
state of the nation as it recovers from the draconian lockdowns of 2020 and 2021,
as well as his own vaccine injury.
Retired policeman Gary Waterman says he has irrefutable evidence that the government has been complicit in international fraud ...and child trafficking.
He's here to tell us just what that evidence is.
And American filmmaker Stu Peters joins us to talk about everything from his Died Suddenly documentary, the taking over of the alternative media, and why people refuse to call out Israel.
But first, our opening guest this evening joins us from New Zealand.
Dr Mark Bailey is a researcher and author in the arena of medical science, whose latest book, written with his wife Dr Sam Bailey, tears apart the official story of the Covid-19 pandemic and indeed viruses in general.
The final pandemic, an antidote to medical tyranny, was released in February and we're very happy to have Mark on the line with us to tell us about it.
Mark, thank you so much for joining us.
The final pandemic and antidote to medical tyranny is out now.
What can viewers expect from this book?
Well, Gareth, thank you very much for having me on the platform.
And I know you've spoke to my wife, Sam, a couple of times previously, so it's great to be here.
Yeah, the final pandemic, the whole idea was that, you know, we started this research back in early 2020, when we realized that the whole COVID situation was fraudulent.
And we didn't actually initially realize the depth of the fraud, because it's been going on for more than a century now.
And obviously, we started doing some very deep dives into virology.
Now given, you know, I used to be a doctor in the system, as did my wife Sam.
So we were trained in conventional medicine with all the conventional beliefs, and we thought we knew about microbiology and germs and all this kind of stuff.
And when things didn't add up in 2020, we started performing our own in-depth research.
And you may, you probably know one of Sam's books she's co-authored previously, which is Viral Mania.
But the thing with Virus Mania, it's a huge book, you know, almost 500 pages and 1,400 references.
So for people that are new to it, it can be pretty daunting, you know, and the book does expose why the virus model is completely fraudulent.
And why infectious pandemics are not even a thing.
But we got a lot of feedback and people said, look, the book's great, but what would be even better, for some people anyway, is a shorter version and a real contemporary version as well, given what's just unfolded with the COVID situation.
So that was the idea.
We've produced a book, which is about 50,000 words, so it's not too daunting.
There's more than 400 references there, so it's all backed up with the science, etc.
But the idea of the book is just to show people, walking through, step by step, You know, what happened during COVID,
why there was no virus, you know, looking at those pivotal papers
that were published early on, why the PCR test and antigen tests are a complete fraud.
They can't possibly diagnose these conditions, which they claim to do.
And, you know, who's been benefiting from the situation?
But the book also looks at the wider landscape because people say, well, how can everyone be in on it
and all this kind of thing?
And it actually, it's not a case of everyone being in on it.
It's just a case of selling a propaganda campaign, essentially, as we saw with media and governments
coordinated around the world.
So we talk about that as well.
We look at the preposterous headlines and I think they look even more preposterous now than they did in 2020.
You know, we show feature articles from Yeah, yeah.
We show articles from The Guardian.
We show articles from The Mail, New York Times.
You know, people supposedly dropping dead in the street and all these crazy stories about, oh, it came from bat caves and it came from gain-of-function laboratories.
They were just hitting the public around the clock with this propaganda.
So the idea with the book is that Sam and I just explain it in basic terms.
We go through the science and say, there's no evidence for this.
These were all just propaganda campaigns.
There was no reason in the world to believe that anything was happening, as the media and the governments described.
And it was all farcical.
So, yeah, that's been the idea, Gareth.
Just a book that people can pick up on the coffee table and, you know, understand what's just taken place.
And also, we tied in with how history's been repeating itself for a hundred years.
So this was not the first time so-called germs have been blamed for disease outbreaks.
And we look at things like polio.
We look at things like beriberi and pellagra in the past.
All of these things that they keep blaming on germs when it can be clearly shown that there were other factors at play and unfortunately the price that people are paying is that they don't understand health and we get these fraudulent biotech and medico-pharmaceutical Industries that are telling people that health comes at the end of a needle or from pharmaceuticals or from face masks and lockdowns.
And it's the biggest scam that's in our lifetimes, potentially, that we've seen.
So, yeah, we're just hoping with this book that we reach new people.
And if they want to read our technical articles, they can certainly do that.
But this is the place to start.
That sounds great.
It's almost like, you know, putting something into layman's terms, basically, because I've found that quite a lot throughout COVID.
If you gave someone a link to something that meant they had to actually do some reading or they had to watch something for, say, two hours, oh, clear off.
But they take in the five minute sound bites coming from the BBC News or CNN or whatever.
And it's funny you mentioned some of the propaganda because there's some really good accounts on social media now all over the world actually that all they're doing is just posting or reposting the front covers of newspapers from 2020, 2021.
And you read it and you think, Oh my goodness, people fell for this.
This is extraordinary.
But you and your wife, Sam, have worked together researching viruses and contagions since around about 2007, I believe.
And I always think when you've got two people researching something that's so in-depth, you know, there's so much detail involved, do you ever strongly disagree on certain theories?
Are you ever opposed?
And if so, how do you resolve that?
No, we're actually a really tight team.
We always have been.
We first met in 2007 when we were both doctors in the hospital and we just hit it off straight away.
We had this great rapport together and seemed to just be in total agreement on what we could see were the problems with the medical system, the problems with the pharmaceutical industry.
We also both worked as clinical trials physicians.
We worked in trials involving big pharma products, so we got to see the inside of the industry as well.
We both came from that really similar background.
When we started off in this path, I think it was the one time I sat Sam down and said, look, I've been doing a bit of research and I think the whole The virus existence thing is problematic.
In fact, I don't think they have any evidence that they exist.
And it took probably about 10 minutes of Sam just sitting there going, you know, are you sure?
Are you sure?
But, you know, she knows when I research something, I do it really deeply.
So she took it up and said, look, we've got to start communicating this to the audience, you know, with the situation in 2020.
Because it was clear to us that it was a complete fraud going on when they announced in March 2020 that there was a pandemic.
I mean, clearly nothing was happening.
So, no, we've always been a really tight team.
And the only disagreements we might have is that I love the technical stuff.
And, you know, Sam does her weekly video, which is often 15 to 20 minutes.
And some of the material that I want to put in there, Sam's like, no way.
Like you just said, Gareth, if it's too much, people go to sleep.
They want like a five to 10 minute presentation, just the summary of the issues.
And there's a minority of the audience that want the deeper dive.
And that's why we have our technical papers as well, if people want to read those.
Of course.
You mentioned, just at the start of the interview actually, you said gain of function.
Because that Wuhan lab theory is still, you know, doing the rounds within so-called freedom circles.
What are your thoughts on that?
Do you see that as a limited hangout?
Yeah, absolutely.
It's complete gaslighting.
I mean, we've made videos called gain-of-function gaslighting and bioweapons BS.
Sam's just made a video recently saying, you know, when you wish upon a bioweapon.
To us, this is a parody because you can clearly not do gain-of-function on things that don't exist.
So viruses, there's no evidence they exist, and pathogens in themselves.
So microorganisms that they claim they can weaponize is just complete nonsense.
If they had these things, they would show them to us, like, in their publications, but they don't.
So, I mean, if people want to really take a deep look, we've researched this for years, and it all comes back to the same problem.
There's nothing to do gain-of-function on.
It's not what they're doing.
There's no contagious entity that's spreading around.
So anything that talks about gain-of-function extra, they can only be talking about, like, experiments involving injectable products, like vaccines.
nothing else. And people get worried that could they be dropping something from the air,
could they be putting something in the water or the food supplies. Again, these are not
contagious entities. There could be chemical entities which are poisonous and that's nothing
new. And in fact, our research has shown, and we've presented this before, that chemical toxins
are by far, far, far, thousands of times more toxic than any toxins that you'll find in nature.
So a toxin that you might find in nature is something like snake venom or box jellyfish stings, you know.
These things are so difficult to weaponize.
They're a complete waste of time.
And they have tried that before.
The British and the Americans and the Russians have all tried weaponizing biological agents before.
They give up.
There's no point.
They end up just resorting to chemical weapons or conventional weapons, which are far more effective.
Yeah, there's nothing going on there, Gareth, apart from a gaslight, basically.
And you'll notice what it does is that it keeps people in the paradigm.
So people that are starting to question COVID, people that are starting to question so-called germs and viruses, etc., they get scared by these stories about biolabs.
And that's all they are.
They are stories.
There's no foundational science to it.
So You know, patents, emails from Fauci, what goes on at UNC Chapel Hill with Ralph Baric and his team.
I mean, none of that is evidence of biological weapons.
And we've carefully gone through all these documents and none of them show a working model or existence of a pathogen.
Unfortunately, it's become one of the major things that's keeping people on the plantation now, is that they think, oh yeah, it's all a scam, but something's going on in the biolabs.
And yeah, something may be going on, but it's nothing, as I say, it's nothing to do with contagious entities.
No, I think what it did is when people started to ask questions and they felt inside themselves that actually I'm being lied to, something's up, it gave them an avenue, didn't it?
So that they could go, Oh, I knew there was something going on.
But at the same time, it keeps, you know, the need for lockdowns, masks, vaccines, everything else, it keeps it alive.
I know that, um, Andrew Kaufman spoke about the fact that actually some of these biolabs and all this stuff, maybe this gain of function was actually to do with the vaccine.
So it's interesting you mentioned the use of injectables.
That is obviously something that could be the case.
Has anyone within the medical establishment ever taken you on in terms of the no-virus theory?
Because I'll understand, you know, they'll call your names.
They'll say, oh, quack, tinfoil hat, you know, the usual drill.
But in terms of actually going, no, I'm going to refute these claims and here's why you're wrong.
Yeah, so what they tend to do is they strawman what we do.
So, say Sam's done a fun five or ten minute presentation, they try and make out as though that's the extent of our evidence and they don't refer to, like I published the paper in 2022.
It's almost 30,000 words that completely refutes SARS-CoV-2 and the entire virus model, in fact.
So nobody's made an attempt to formally refute that paper.
So yeah, we just get silly stuff saying, oh, that paper's crazy.
There's no point even responding to it.
To put this in perspective, this is nothing new.
So the Perth Group in Australia, they wrote a 60,000 word refutation of HIV existing.
And they published that, you know, now seven years ago.
Nobody has refuted that paper either.
It's out there.
But no virologist, no infectious disease specialist, nobody will attempt to refute it.
So no, we don't.
We don't get anyone who's able to seriously refute this material.
We've had a couple of people stray in to the no virus community thinking that they had smoking guns ready to prove us wrong.
And usually they find out pretty quickly that they're way out of their depth.
We don't just do superficial analysis.
We've looked at everything from isolation, genomics, antibodies, animal experiments, epidemiology, proteomics, etc.
There's nothing that we've left, you know, We've turned over every stone, basically, refuted virology on every single aspect.
And unfortunately, it just seems to be ignorance that people are not aware of this.
And, you know, they'll make comments like saying, oh, no virus is a psy-op, and they provide zero evidence that we're part of a psy-op.
Or they'll say something like, you know, these guys are just running distraction from the freedom community when they forget that we were actually the first ones out of the gates in 2020 pointing out to people that this was a fraud.
So now we have more and more people waking up to the fraud, even, you know, within the freedom community.
But interestingly, they can't seem to acknowledge that the fraud goes one step deeper.
That the foundational fraud to what just happened was that there was no virus.
There was nothing.
There was a propaganda campaign and a test that they rolled out and a condition with a completely nonsensical case definition.
If you look up the WHO, it just says on their official, you know, definition for COVID-19 that a confirmed case is based on the PCR result or a rapid antigen result.
I mean, people can't What's strange to us is that doctors can't see the problem here.
They just fabricated a condition out of nowhere, rolled out a test within a few weeks, and wherever the test went, the cases started appearing.
Then they had the mainstream media and the governments pushing a fair narrative around the clock.
So no, we don't.
We don't have any serious refutations and we're open to it.
Gareth, at the moment Tom Cowan and I have been running a monthly slot.
We invite any virologist or scientist from around the world to come on our platform and present a paper which they say shows evidence of SARS-CoV-2 or any other virus.
And what we'll do with them is we'll walk through the methods section step by step.
We'll say, does this follow the scientific method?
Is it controlled?
Is there an independent variable?
So these are all the things we need to establish whether something exists or not scientifically.
But no takers.
You surprised me.
I'm not surprised.
If they step into the breach, they're in a lot of trouble and I'm not sure what they would present because as I say, we've analysed all of their papers from top to bottom.
I don't think there's anything left.
No.
That's amazing work, Mark.
What I see, and it's not just within the medical realms, but in everything basically, is that if they don't have a riposte, if they don't have a way of coming back, then they just start calling you names.
I know Grift is a good one.
I'd be surprised if you've not had that one, Mark.
People like to throw that name around to people that they don't want to actually converse with, really.
But we think it's fantastic what you and your wife are doing, and it's an absolute pleasure to talk to you.
And like I say, thank you so much for taking the time to go in-depth, but also to make this book more accessible to, I don't like the term everyday people, but you get my point, don't you?
People that are like, you know, I'm a busy person, I've got kids, I don't have time to sit down and read 500 pages, but I can read this.
That's great, and thank you so much for joining us.
Definitely.
▲
Export Selection