Ivor Cummins is a chemical engineer, business adviser (specialising in the solving of complex problems), author and podcaster, probably best known for exposing the flaws in the official narrative during the 'pandemic.' Here he talks to James about his research into the true origins of the Covid scare, the climate change scare, and much else decides. Unlike James, Ivo keeps his output determinedly Normie friendly and doesn't make any claims for which there are not copious receipts. Even so, his verdict is pretty damning. Almost everything we are suffering now can be traced back to one devious, obscenely rich and obsessively controlling family...
You can find Ivor's work at http://www.thefatemperor.com. His Youtube channel is @ivorcumminsscience. His Twitter handle is @fatemperor
↓ ↓ ↓
If you need silver and gold bullion - and who wouldn't in these dark times? - then the place to go is The Pure Gold Company. Either they can deliver worldwide to your door - or store it for you in vaults in London and Zurich. You even use it for your pension. Cash out of gold whenever you like: liquidate within 24 hours. https://bit.ly/James-Delingpole-Gold
/ / / / / /
Earn interest on Gold:https://monetary-metals.com/delingpole/
/ / / / / /
Buy James a Coffee at: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jamesdelingpoleSupport James’ Writing at: https://delingpole.substack.comSupport James monthly at: https://locals.com/member/JamesDelingpole?community_id=7720
I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but I really am.
Before I introduce him though, let me just put in a quick word for our increasing number of sponsors.
with me, James Dellingpole.
And I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but I really am.
Before I introduce him, though, let me just put in a quick word for our increasing number of sponsors.
Gold.
I mean, I'm not a financial expert.
I'm not a financial advisor, but you've got to own some gold.
You know it.
Various ways you can own it.
Either you can go through the company called Monetary Metals, which enables you to own gold and get paid interest on it, which is a pretty amazing trick, and I don't think anyone's achieved it before, but yeah, Monetary Metals, the details in the blurb below.
Or you can go through the Pure Gold Company which will deliver the gold or silver bullion to your doorstep or store it for you in vaults in London or in Zurich.
They're very very good as well.
Keep using Hunter and Gather.
Very good if you're on Keto.
I've got a few more adverts coming up.
I'm really rubbish at the adverts thing.
I forget to charge the people who advertise and stuff like that.
I'm so flaky.
All I really enjoy doing is making podcasts and chatting to people.
Ivor, for example, my special guest this week.
Ivor's a businessman, among other things, and Ivor knows how to monetize podcasts.
Ivor, don't you?
I'm so crap.
I just like doing the thing.
Yeah, I don't know, James.
I have various projects running and I get support and patron elsewhere.
I've supplied content and Zoom meetings monthly.
To be honest, on podcasts, all there really is is YouTube revenue, which is not really that appreciable.
No, you don't want that.
No, you're obviously better at working out how to do alternative projects.
Anyway, we're not here to talk about that kind of thing.
This is our third podcast together, I think.
I think it is.
We did one virtual, or two maybe, and we did one in London then, when my daughter was over with me during lockdown.
We met!
That was exciting.
I was just thinking, though, about what an extraordinary journey we've both been on in the last three years.
Because, okay, so before that time, you were doing podcasts on, particularly on diet and alternative health, weren't you?
And I was doing podcasts about what I now recognize as kind of normie politics about Brexit and stuff like that.
And I was talking to people from the the IEA, which I now as an institution, I now see as fatally compromised and talking to people I would no longer have on my on my podcasts because because they're part of the lie machine.
But I mean, are you as sort of planet-struck as I am by what you've learned in the last three years?
Yeah, well, oddly enough, not so much.
I'm not fazed by it because I have a long corporate history and I'm steeped in knowledge of corruption and bias, and then the whole cholesterol and fat nonsense I've fought for years, and the medications that are pretty useless and are rammed down our throats.
So I was kind of used to that.
But the scale, yeah, of COVID was just so enormous.
And then I learned about, you know, it goes back to the Rockefeller Foundation and Brothers Fund to the 50s and before, and I realized the scale of this is so huge.
It's not just Big Pharma and the corrupt WHO kind of making out like bandits and gaining power.
That's the initial thought you'd have, like swine flu in 2009.
But to know the sheer scale of it, and it includes climate now, ESG, DEI, All of it's a long game to manage the West like an ant farm.
So it's pretty huge, but it doesn't faze me.
I'll be honest, James.
It's just the way it is, which was my phrase for many, many years.
Just the way it is.
What do we do about it?
How do we react?
You know, that's the only question.
Yeah, but I listened to you, and I'm going to put a link to it in the blurb below this podcast.
I was driving down to Dorset, and I had a few hours to kill, and I listened to your podcast with the Norwegian guy, is it?
Oh, well, there's a few.
Dr. Jakob Nordengård, he's Swedish, yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah, Swedish.
Well, you'd split it up into intersections and it all went back to the early days of J.D.
Rockefeller.
And what I loved about it, you can tell me a bit, Bit more about it in a moment.
What I loved about it was very normie friendly.
This is one of your skills, I think.
It's one of the areas where you have the edge over me.
I mean, I am just completely suicidal.
I am not afraid to go down any rabbit hole head first.
And I don't care how embarrassing I look to Norm is, because I don't believe this line.
I think it's absolute bollocks, this line you sometimes hear that, oh, when you embrace this or that conspiracy theory, it discredits our cause.
No, it doesn't.
No, it doesn't.
We've got to keep open minded.
But anyway.
In your case, you are very, very good at showing the receipts, rooting it all in kind of normie level research and history.
You can demonstrate that so many of the evils that we experience today date back to J.D.
Rockefeller who must count as one of the most evil men in the world.
You know, we remember how we used to say about wouldn't it be wonderful if you go back in time and assassinate somebody and you know to change the make the world a better place and everyone comes up with yeah Hitler.
Well Hitler was was a saint compared to what J.D.
Rockefeller has done to the world.
Well, I mean, there's lots of ways of comparing sociopathy or whatever, or evil.
But yeah, I guess Hitler wanted the master race, the Germanic thing, to expand out.
And I guess he did want world control, though he never got there, obviously, luckily.
Rockefeller was straight for world control, not directly through war, but through internationalism, globalism.
So he, for his own business interests, and probably because he felt He probably didn't think he was evil at all.
He just felt it was his right and the ultra wealthy class he moved within, that it was their right as internationalists to manage the world and to take away the management from politicians who are idiots.
And we'd probably agree with him on that, in fairness.
So he just had this vision, a very powerful vision, and his five sons took it over, four of them mainly and the other one not so much.
But one son, Nelson, became Vice President of the United States.
David Rockefeller was massive in Chase Manhattan Bank.
And they all just went out like on a wave of money and got involved at the highest levels.
And they just, they had the father's vision.
It was handed on to them that we need to manage the world in an international, globalist basis.
We do need a New World Order.
And that phrase came from Rockefeller and it came from Kissinger.
I think it was in, was it in 2009?
He had a huge article in the New York Times and the headline included New World Order from Kissinger.
And Kissinger was the Rockefeller's boy.
They identified him as a very person of great potential usefulness way back in Harvard, like in the 50s.
And sure enough, he became enormously useful and he identified with the rest of them, Klaus Schwab, And they helped him set up the European Economic or Management Forum in 1973 and that became the World Economic Forum in 87.
And of course they were instrumental in setting up the United Nations.
The precursor was the League of Nations and the Trilateral Commission and later the Club of Rome, ultra-rich guys, Climate Disaster Club.
But all of these organizations I'm mentioning They're all fully documented and it's just that no one knows about them because Rockefeller also cleverly basically invested in media and in top media people.
And they basically had the media not cover these things.
Because if you openly cover these things, the population will revolt.
They'll say, no, no, no, we don't want this.
Ultra-rich guys taking over the world.
We actually want our politicians bad and all as the idiots are.
At least they're ours.
But of course the people never got to find out any of this.
Rockefeller thanked the media, I think it was in the 80s when he was very elderly, for helping to keep all of these things out of the mass media.
Otherwise it would not have been possible.
So, and here we are, you know, huge vision, massive money, oil money, and taking over all of the influential bodies in the world over many decades.
And yes, you can create utter havoc.
Covid, climate disaster, all the sex nonsense we see at the moment, completely absurd stuff that it's not just male and female, it all comes from the same poisoned well, the well that they have pissed in for over half a century.
Yes, I think it's probably More complicated than that.
I don't think everything that is wrong with the world is the fault of the Rockefellers.
But, just sticking to that for a moment, it is extraordinary listening to or watching the podcast you did with the Swedish guy whose name I keep forgetting.
It becomes, well, one thing that becomes abundantly clear, which I knew already because I'd written a book about it.
I mean, you came into this from the big farmer is evil, they're poisoning us, they're making us eat bad food angle.
You knew about that before I did.
I probably knew before you did about the degree to which climate change was being used to advance their agenda because I wrote the book, what, 10, 12 years ago.
And I looked into it when I wrote this book, Watermelons.
I set out to answer the question, well, If, as I suspect, climate change isn't the great menace that it's being crapped up to be in the media, why are so many institutions pushing it?
And why so many newspapers talking about it?
And why so many experts claiming it?
Scientists, why are they?
And of course, I reached a number of depressing conclusions.
One is, follow the money.
Which is the degree to which scientists, institutions, newspapers, etc.
can be bought.
Simple as that.
But beyond that, I realised, as you've now discovered, that The whole climate change thing was completely made up.
There is no climate threat.
It's not as though, yeah, well, on the one hand, on the other.
There is no climate threat.
It's as simple as that.
They made up this thing in order to crush us and control us.
Yeah, absolutely.
I was very new to climate.
And kudos, James, I must say, I only recently found out that you broke the story, I think, around 2009 on the hockey stick and climate gate.
I didn't realise that.
The climate gate thing.
Well, I sort of named it.
I mean, somebody else, I tell the story in my book.
I was actually looking, when the story started breaking and somebody said, a commenter called Bulldust in Australia, I think, said, I wonder how long before they call this Climate Gate.
So he was probably the first person to use the word and then instantly I seized it and ran with it and popularized it.
So thank you Bulldust for inventing Climate Gate.
Not that it was exactly a stretch to invent that name, but yeah.
And that was in a period where, even though, as you've pointed out, the newspapers have been owned by the enemy, and controlled by the enemy, propagandists, since the days of Rockefeller, since Rockefeller got wise.
He was advised by, what was his PR advisor called?
Oh, it escapes me.
But that guy in the 20s, he also got rumbled in a big newspaper article in the 30s, I think.
He had done the PR for the National Socialist for Hitler's movement and he got caught.
So bad guy.
You really don't surprise me.
These people aren't fussy about who they work for as long as they get paid top dollar.
But anyway, I was able to write about Climategate in an era when...
The mainstream media, although corrupt and bought and paid for, was not quite as corrupt and bought and paid for as it is today.
You could still back then get sceptical stories into the newspapers about everything from why wind turbines don't work and they chop up wildlife, to why tidal barriers don't make any sense at all, they're just environmentally destructive, to climate change isn't real anyway.
Yeah.
Absolutely.
Back then in 2010, Der Spiegel did a huge article on the swine flu.
Absolutely devastating to the WHO and the BMJ covered it as well.
They called it a scam, the swine flu.
But then when we got 10 years later, all of the organizations had seen the problem with media actually truthfully discussing stuff.
So the money poured into the key media.
And then in 2020, they were gone.
So that's sadly a huge headwind we have.
But the climate stuff, I mean, I'm relatively recent to it, and I always was a bit sceptical at the doom-mongering.
But in the last couple of years, since COVID, I realised, OK, it's all part of the same thing.
And again, you're absolutely right, James, we can't oversimplify.
But at the same time, the first time climate Disaster was noted as a strategic potential useful thing was by the Rockefeller Special Brothers Fund in the 50s.
They identified pandemics and climate disaster as two key areas of great potential use.
And here we are.
They also have financial type disasters and they had terrorism.
And this is in the 50s.
And just in fairness, there is some science.
They were not the first.
Because Arrhenius in 1896 did model the CO2 warming effect.
But in fairness, it was not a big effect, but he thought that it may help us not go too deeply into a future ice age because there's more CO2 released.
It may be beneficial.
But there was no disaster in that.
So the science was modeled.
But the problem is, especially in engineering, it's huge.
What's the effect size?
So something can technically be true.
CO2 has a warming effect.
But what's the actual real world outcome?
And just like you say, James, the real world outcome, there is no disaster.
And I've gone through a lot of material from professors of climate science and atmospheric science, like professor, distinguished professor, John, I think Brinkley in Alabama State University.
He's been in this for 40 years with his team.
And in a recent interview, he made it clear as crystal.
The modelling is out by around a factor of two at least, so two degrees in the next 70 years.
It's maybe one degree.
We've gone up 0.5 degree in the last 50 years.
There is no effect.
And the IPCC, the official but biased funded body to create climate fear, Even they, in their 2021 report, clearly demonstrate that all of the weather events and flooding and everything else in the media that we see, they have no evidential base to be connected to man-made climate change at all.
But the media run with the story.
So their modeling in the IPCC is out by a factor of two.
And the professor gave great examples of that in different factors.
And even the IPCC can't bring themselves to lie about the weather events.
That's nonsense.
And they clearly have documented that.
So the whole thing, of course, is based on modeling.
Because real world data won't give you the disaster you're looking for.
So it's exactly like Ferguson, you know, and BSE and COVID and Imperial College.
Modeling, modeling, always modeling.
And a good friend of mine, Nick Hudson, I'm not sure you saw the two minute viral clip, where he said, basically, if something is presented as a global, right, panic or disaster coming, and the only solutions that are kind of allowed are global solutions, which will result in more global control.
And you see crushing of dissent or censorship, right?
And you see a consensus.
There is a consensus in the science, which is absurd, right?
And a couple other things, put them together, it always is a scam.
And his heuristic, you can summarize in 60 seconds, I checked it.
And it's never been incorrect.
I went through a whole range of scenarios.
It's always correct.
It's a scam if those things come together.
Yes.
I don't think that this is a point that can be reiterated often enough, because I think there are so many people out there, even on our side of the argument, Who innocently suppose, because why not, they've been bombarded with this stuff for decades now, I mean certainly at least since the 1992 Rio Earth Summit.
And they think, well...
Okay, I'm skeptical of the notion that the planet's doomed, that it's all our fault, but there must be something in it that they'll say.
And I had an argument about this with Toby Young on this podcast earlier called London Calling.
And he was trying to convince me of the bullshit line that newspapers are still asking tough questions about climate change agenda.
And he said, what about this piece that appeared in the mail by Ross Clark?
And I said, well, the thing is, that that piece was prefaced by a statement that of course we believe in climate change, and of course climate change is a problem.
And I said, this is not good enough, Toby.
And he said, well, if you... I said, climate change is not real, it's not a thing.
And of course he then said, well, you're damaging our side by saying that climate change isn't real.
But this is how, this is how, it's a question of semantics.
Because, sure, on the most trivial level, climate change is, it always has, since time immemorial.
But climate change, as we've been given to understand it, climate change as a phenomenon that we should care about, that is significant in our lives, it's a bit like, sort of, blue sky denialism.
You know, that you've got to preface everything you say by saying, of course I believe that the sky is blue.
Well, yeah it is, but it doesn't need stating.
You don't need to pay lip service to this God because that God is a false God.
As you discovered in your deep dive into the history of the Rockefellers, and you gave the example of nuclear weapons were another one, they are always on the lookout and always have been for Perceived threats, or threats that they can invent, which can only be dealt with on a global level rather than on a national level.
And that's why climate change is so important to them, because it crosses borders.
It's another excuse for world government.
So maybe you can enlarge on that.
Yeah, absolutely.
They were ultra focused on global issues that would capture the public's imagination and politicians, because remember, they want to replace politicians with a global government.
So they need to bring the politicians on board.
And for that, you need global cross-border things.
So they wanted to look at atmosphere, climate, pandemics, which cross borders.
And their key thing was to use science.
Because science by its nature crosses borders and is not understood by the vast majority and not understood by probably any politicians.
Because they're the least scientific people on the planet.
Or many scientists for that matter.
Or, well, I think a lot of scientists in an unbiased world would look and realize stuff is nonsense, certain things, but because they're so indoctrinated, yeah, the scientists are lost as well, most of them.
Or they're either funded, you know, the salary, you can't convince a man of something if his salary depends on him not being convinced.
There's all that.
But the politicians, they are evolutionarily kind of selected.
They're obviously skillful in certain things.
Political, persuasion, manipulation, people skills.
I guess, stuff like that.
It's the opposite of the scientific brain.
Right?
So politicians are easy prey because they're just idiots.
Let's be fair.
That's not being harsh.
So Rockefeller and many other organizations identified scientific things that cross borders that are global.
And it's so simple.
Of course they were correct.
It didn't take them long with a whiteboard to put down pandemics and climate disaster as potentially useful ploys, right?
Because they're self-evident.
Of course they're the things to pick.
And the terrorism one they put down?
Yeah, that could be global.
But, you know, they tried out the terrorism one and they got great progress with the 9-11 debacle, with the Patriot Act and, you know, taking away all our privacy.
So they made certain headway there.
But global terrorism was never really going to capture the imagination of the people.
You know, you could see there's a bomb here in Spain, there's a bomb here, but it doesn't add up.
The whole planet burning, pandemic killing all our grannies, That's more like it, right James?
Yeah, but even there, I don't know how on this one you are.
I mean, one of the problems they have is that...
The weather is sometimes stubbornly resistant to doing the dramatic things they would like it to do.
So they have to kind of engineer these crises.
I mean, I believe, for example, that the The fires that ravaged Australia, and the fires you get in California and stuff, are a product of two things.
One is environmental policy, whereby people are forbidden from clearing the brushwood from their land, and for managing their forestation, which means inevitably you get this pile of... Go away!
No, dog, go away!
Oh, come on then, come on in.
No, you don't.
Tinder.
And the second one is, well actually there's three, arson.
I believe that a lot of arsonists are paid by these environmental institutions to start these fires.
And three, this is where we get a bit more down the rabbit hole, directed energy weapons.
I think that a lot of these things are started by directed energy weapons.
We saw that in Canada recently, they seemed to happen simultaneously.
And I think Australia as well.
But whatever, they have to shape reality to fit their narrative.
Absolutely.
And that PR guy said to John D Rockefeller himself way back, he said, you have to tell the truth because the people will catch you if you lie.
And Rockefeller, of course, this was anathema to him because He was a scamster and a liar.
I said, oh wow.
But the PR guy says, you'll have to invest in media because you will have to create your own truth.
And then people will have the perception of your truth.
Therefore, you will be technically telling the truth, even when you're not.
And he said, that's the way you do it.
And you're right.
They've created all of these perceptions.
It's almost like hypnotism.
And Professor Matthias Desmet has been fantastic, obviously, on mass formation.
You hypnotize people with rolling propaganda.
You create their truths.
Yes, they may look out the window and look around them, like with COVID, you can't see anything happening.
Or with the mid-Pacific kind of plastic waste island, which never existed.
Or the polar bears, which are now the numbers are going right up, but you tell them they're not.
They always show you things that you can't observe yourself.
Modeling is the perfect example.
If they tell you a complex model has said the Earth is going to go up by 50 degrees, how can you validate that?
You can't.
You just have to say, well, they're the experts.
So it's the same old trick again and again.
And that's what's frustrating and really does annoy me, James, to your earlier question about, well, am I...
How do I feel about all this madness the last few years?
It is frustrating how docile and easily programmable the average population is.
I was a bit shocked by that.
I knew they were complete, I mean they were sponges for nonsense.
I've known that for 10 years on the cholesterol fat statins thing.
But I mean, I only really learned how stupid, or maybe stupid is wrong, how ignorant or weak Or cowardly or impressionable the vast majority of humans are when the COVID thing started.
And then Desmet did a great job in explaining how people go literally insane over a period because you just need large groups of people who know the psychology, the mass psychology, and deploy the mass hypnosis.
And here we are.
I mean, I have technical people, James, it's astonishing, who just bristle if you question climate.
And if you press them, they have no knowledge themselves of it.
Literally, it's down to the nice man on the telly said, and the newspaper said, and because they're all saying it, it must be true.
And they never stop to think.
I've never dug into it myself.
I've never looked at it with a critical thinker's eye.
I've never done that.
They don't think that.
They think, well, I don't need to do that.
Because all the experts say, you know, it's remarkably easy to fool hundreds of millions, billions of people.
And climate, climate is the big one.
You're absolutely right.
Climate is the big one.
It's had more traction.
They've been at it longer.
And you notice that this even happened, even during the COVID fake pandemic.
They kept the whole climate nonsense going.
Do you remember one of the stories that appeared in our bought and paid for Corrupt to the core media were stories coming out of Venice about how much cleaner the lagoon was now that tourists weren't selling it, you know, that for us not to travel and see the wonders of the world was being repackaged as a desirable goal because the places that we could no longer see were much cleaner.
Exactly.
And that's it.
And we saw that, you know, lockdowns are going to help with climate change because we've reduced our emissions.
And, you know, in the future, we might even need climate lockdowns of a sort.
They were putting the flags up the flagpole.
And the example you gave, James, they're just, this is just programming.
Programming for human robots.
And You know, we saw then when COVID rolled over and unfortunately for them, we had the new variant came out that kind of made a mess of everything for them.
And that's a long discussion as to how that happened, but not worth getting into.
But then we had suddenly Ukraine!
And then Ukraine hypnotized the people for the next 6 to 12 months.
And then they came in in earnest with climate.
And you know you saw Veritas, Project Veritas, a hidden camera with the CNN senior person, programming person?
And he said, unasked, the question, well, what are you going to do now that Covid's over?
And he said, oh, it's going to be climate and we're going to get longer out of that.
Everything's going to be climate disaster.
You know, and he just said it because that's what comes down from the CEOs of the media organizations who are all members of World Economic Forum.
And World Economic Forum is the most amazing management infrastructure because you have all of the corporations, including media, everyone and the banks, all up to their neck in WEF.
They're on the board, they're on the trustees and they're all paying members.
And that's how you roll out the narrative that's required across all industrial facets and media and corporations and ESG and DEI.
You just keep rolling it out.
And yeah, there's intelligent people in those organizations who are saying, hold on a minute, this seems bizarre and this doesn't make sense.
But they keep their mouth shut because everyone is saying it.
And you know, humans, the second fear after the fear of death is the fear of social exclusion or professional exclusion.
So everyone keeps their mouth shut.
Cowardice is the survival way.
And that's, we really do need more people to step up Well, that's the thing, Ivor.
Look, you actually answered the question I was going to ask, which is why more people at senior levels, who aren't stupid, aren't resisting?
Because what do they think is going to happen when the world that they're helping to bring forth Bears bears its evil fruit when it when it when it when it when it manifests itself fully when we can no longer travel when we're all confined to 15 minute cities when.
Pandemics can be declared by fiat from the World Health Organization and governments are required to compulsorily to vaccinate its populace with these toxic untested Yeah, no, it's a great question.
I think at the very top, the guys have no concerns because they will be separate.
It's just like with the climate stuff.
special kind of island where they're exempt for all this why do they participate in their own civilization's destruction yeah no it's a great question i think at the very top the guys have no concerns because they will be separate it's just like with the climate stuff they repeatedly will not include private jets and with the vaccine passports
there were even regions that demanded a vaccine passport to enter the country except private jets were exempt and also from masking and And even first class passengers on standard mainstream flights were exempt from the passport.
So the people at the very top... Were they?
Yeah, that was, was it Seychelles or a couple of regions where that popped up and some media covered it, alternative media.
Hey look, the rich and the wealthy are not subject to this.
And also that guy Andrew Tait did a great one minute rant where he basically said, right, he stopped flying On standard flights, he's using his private jet to go everywhere because he said he gets in the limo, no masks, driver's not wearing a mask, no mask needed, gets in the plane, no masks, pilot's not wearing a mask, you get there, you walk in, no passports, no problem, vaccine passports.
He said, this is the way it is, guys.
Wake up.
It's only for you, the cattle.
So I think the very wealthy know that they will still have their steak, their caviar, their fine wines and everything and all the fuel they want.
And then when you come down to just senior corporate people who are not super rich, I think they're betting that maybe all of the stuff that's being planned won't really come to pass.
And then they're also well paid enough that they can pay, you know, the taxes.
They can pay the fuel taxes.
They'll be able to buy their way around this.
It'll only be ordinary people who get screwed.
And I think they have a fair point.
That you will be able to appoint.
If you have lots of money, you'll buy your way out of a lot of the future nonsense.
This is an ant farm for the masses of ants.
And the really wealthy ants, they're going to be okay.
They're going to be on the fat of the land, I would guess.
There'll be all kinds of exemptions.
You know, just like the super wealthy currently avoid all the tax, because they're wealthy enough to get the best advice, the best, you know, legal people, and they avoid all the stuff that the rest of us are saddled with.
It's always been thus.
Well, speaking as an ant,
Who maybe could have, who could have clawed his way onto one of those sort of, not the top tables, but near, you know, I mean, people from my generation, my university generation, one or two of them, you know, some of them, my former friends have managed to, to pull the trick whereby they, they nail their colours to the mast of, of, of, of the, of the good ship WEF or New World Order or whatever.
So they, so they think that they've, They've got it right.
But I have to say, it just... I couldn't live with myself if I did that.
I just believe in the... I kind of believe in the human race.
Is that old-fashioned of me and a bit, you know, naive?
No, I think it's pivotal, James.
It's the classic, a few good men, or nowadays a few good men or women.
Or trans or etc.
But no, it's crucial because only the people of principle.
And to me, it's simple.
It's to do with principle.
You don't have to be religious.
You don't have to be spiritual.
You know, we're not those things, I think.
It's just principle.
It's right and wrong.
And I often said during COVID in interviews, there's only two things that drive me.
And people knew when they saw this that it was true.
I stared into the lens.
One is truth and science.
My whole career, I've gotten trouble for it.
I won't tolerate falsifying a root cause.
It's a principle I have.
And the other is the future of the children.
I have five children.
And myself and my wife have always been focused on their future.
And that's why I'm kind of unstoppable.
But it's just principle and I'm not boasting about it.
I'm not saying I'm holier than thou.
Because it's not about holiness.
It's just old-fashioned principle.
It's old-fashioned right and wrong.
And we've just lost a lot of people.
I think a lot more humans 40 or 50 years ago were inherently principled.
And I think the last 40 or 50 years of technology and phones and nonsense and safism and two parents having to always work and just a rat race.
I think it's morphed the population and we now have fewer people of principle.
And that's where we need to build our stock of principled people up again.
Yes, just picking up on one tiny point there.
Yeah, I am a Christian and I do very much see this ultimately as a spiritual war between good and evil, but I think where you and I would agree, whether one of us is Christian and one of us is not, that ultimately what really matters is the truth.
And I think once you make the truth your watchword, everything else becomes so simple because that is your...
There is such a thing as truth.
It's hard won, but it does exist.
And so much of what has happened in the world is dependent on lies and deception.
You gave a very good example, the models.
By the way, when do you think modelling, when they discover the evil power of modelling, is it going back to MIT in the 90s.
I think I watched the documentary by...
All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace.
Did you ever see that one?
Is that the BBC documentary, Adam Curtis?
Adam Curtis.
I'm a bit of a...
Even though he's not totally on board with stuff, I think, Adam Curtis does give good documentary.
He throws up some ideas and I remember that's my favorite of his documentaries because it talked about Eugene and Howard Odom, these two charlatan ecologists in the 1950s who came up with this bullshit idea that somehow the environment existed in a steady state and that I mean, you know, it was all bound up with computer modelling and MIT and stuff.
But tell me more about computer modelling, because it does seem one of the main problems that we've got, one of the main weapons used against us.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, modelling is perfect.
In the right hands, with honest end effects, I mean, you've got to put in start effects and end effects and all these criteria, and it's a classic garbage in and garbage out.
You slightly tweak end effects and other kind of factors or proportions in the model and you can make it say anything you want.
So modeling in industry and in legitimate hands, you know, you, you, you can model things very well.
I used to use, God, I can actually still remember the equation Delta P equals FL Rho V squared over 2GD.
That's a 30-year-old memory.
I used those equations to model the pressure in systems I was designing, and they were very accurate, and you could save a ton of money and time by not getting the wrong pipe, wall thicknesses, etc.
I won't go on.
I love that stuff.
But you can model things, and they're real world.
I'm impressed by them.
I don't understand it, but it sounds good.
It does, doesn't it?
So you can model stuff.
I want some pipes installed.
Yeah, get your pipes looked at.
So this is, it's a really good technology if it's in the right hands.
In charlatan's hands, it's a disaster.
So I think the modelling really came to the fore as a charlatan's tool with Neil Ferguson is my memory.
The BSE and the other scams that he did his modeling for and it turned out he was out by a factor of a hundred each time and at the time I thought how can someone be that stupid or ignorant and how can everyone listen to him when he's repeatedly incorrect and I assumed he was just some kind of idiot but now of course I understand he was funded
And there was a reason he was modeling disaster and there was money behind his modeling throne.
So they've just realized over decades modeling is perfect.
You can put garbage in right intentionally and you can get out the garbage you want whether it's a climate disaster or.
4% you know infection fatality rate for COVID.
It doesn't matter and it works because the politicians are clueless on modeling and technical matters and the media journals generally and the hacks also and the vast majority of the population.
So I mean you gotta hand it to them.
I mean modeling you can create reality, supposed reality, And it'll get you what you want.
And if real world, like you said earlier, you look out and you can't observe any of these things.
Well, the problem is most people just say, yeah, both.
Or there's the future aspect.
The modeling says this will happen in 50 years.
So now you can look around and use your own eyes, empirical evidence and say, yeah, but I don't see anything.
And you can actually tell the goal, the dolt, you can tell the person you're hypnotizing.
Yeah, but it's 30 years time because our model shows a hockey stick.
And then the poor idiot goes, Oh, oh, 30 years time.
I mean, You know, it's so easy.
It's shocking.
Just a quick note, James, on the Christian.
Well, I'm Catholic, originally Christian.
I don't really believe in God figures or any of that stuff.
But spirituality, I think, is important.
But I often quote things from the Bible.
Because the Bible had a ton of wisdom in it.
It had Stoicism and it had all these great stories.
So I often quote the Bible, even though I don't believe in God figures, because there was a huge amount, like Peterson points out, or Nick Hudson in South Africa, we had a discussion on this.
If people moved back to a Christian sensibility, you know, it would make such a difference.
But as Nick said, we now have a God-shaped hole.
So we've gotten rid of the religion, and the charlatans are there with shovels, filling the God-shaped hole with nonsense.
And that's one of our big problems.
Yes, yes, yes.
Happy is the man that getteth wisdom and the man that findeth understanding.
I particularly like Proverbs and the Psalms.
There's so much sense there and if you actually lived your life by those codes, you'd be a happy man and a sort of productive member of Civilization.
But, yeah, people aren't.
Yeah, I was wondering about one of the big eye-openers for me.
I was having a chat to somebody the other day about all the different fields of endeavor and labor that have been exposed in the last three years as Charlatans.
So you were talking then about Neil Ferguson and you rightly point out that this guy has a track record of failure and you mentioned BSE but it goes back even further than that.
This was the guy that modeled foot and mouth as well.
So this is a guy with a track record of spanning decades of abject failure getting his models Wrong by the hundred times you've suggested.
And yet, he was presented to us during COVID, or in the early days of COVID, as the authority who justified all the extreme measures were going to be taken.
Because remember, he modelled that there would be, I think, half a million deaths If if no action were taken and I think his his Imperial College model funded by the Gates Foundation was also used as the basis for American policy as well.
So this guy had enormous power, but there's one detail.
I thought you you slightly underplayed which is he could never have got away with this.
If the media had done its job, all it would have required is a few reporters, investigative journalists, and you know the Mail pays its, for example, it's got top dollar journalists who do this, and they would have known about this stuff.
All they had to do was write a series of articles saying, this guy was wrong about foot and mouth, he was wrong about BSE, How can we trust him now?
How can this be the basis of government policy?
They didn't do it because they were on board with the program.
They knew what was going on as well.
So the media hasn't done its job, but also what I've discovered is that, not that we couldn't have guessed, economists have not got a clue.
That is a kind of complete fantasy profession, if you can call it that.
But then science has been exposed.
I mean, The fields of virology, I do not trust.
I don't even believe that maybe viruses even exist as sold to us.
Immunology, absolute rubbish.
Climate science, just charlatans through and through.
I mean, you come from a sort of science background.
Even you must find it shocking the degree to which scientists are not real scientists.
Yeah, it is.
It is astonishing, really.
I mean, we used to have a phrase seven, eight, nine years ago, even, that epidemiology is the science of making shit up.
Because it was so bad, the epidemiology, funded by corporates on fat, cholesterol and healthy whole grains, vegetable oils, which are poisonous, that they twisted epidemiology to say that they made you have a healthier outcome.
Epidemiology is generally Filled with junk papers that everyone quotes.
Virology now has taken a massive smash for sure.
I don't really get into the no viruses because when I was a kid I was fascinated by viruses and I think it was long before the bad guys took over the science.
So it was really you know and there's an argument of course that the RNA viruses you know a billion years ago are our ancestors and then became DNA for stability.
So to be honest my whole history Incorporates viruses.
So I just don't get into that one.
You've got your foot in a normie camp.
You're clinging on to the last vestiges of your old world.
My big toe is hanging on and the rest of my body is floating away into truth.
But, you know, the other one, immunology, in fairness, Professor Bede Stadler, I interviewed in the summer of 2020, and that YouTube took the interview down, even though he's the vaccine Pope of Switzerland, the Fauci of Europe, and he's an industry guy, and he's a professor emeritus of immunology.
But he said himself that when COVID came along, the immunologists all Looked away from Immunology 101 and just would not discuss it.
And they all were spouting stuff that was complete anti-science immunology wise.
So immunology was kind of okay, but all the immunologists realized we can't talk real immunology right now in this environment.
And he had students who are now in their 40s who came to him and said, oh, it's great what you're doing, speaking out BIDA and telling the world that this COVID thing is nonsense.
And he said, but why don't you?
And they all said the same thing.
Well, our career, we can't.
So immunology, everyone got to know you can't talk real immunology in this issue.
They didn't know exactly why.
They didn't know it went all the way back to Rockefeller in the 50s.
They just knew you can't speak.
So we see that in a lot of the sciences.
There's still good scientists.
There's still honest scientists and critical thinkers.
And a key aspect of real science is there is never a consensus that carries ever in real science.
It's a scam if they say that like with cholesterol or whatever.
And the other thing is you always question your own hypotheses.
That's a true scientist.
You never say my hypothesis is correct.
You cannot.
You're always looking for evidence that breaks your hypothesis so you can make your hypothesis better.
But what we see in all the sciences now is consensus is created.
They will never question.
And if you bring up a black swan that questions the hypothesis, that's the kernel of science.
They reject it and censor it.
So it's anti-science.
And the other thing is, the center of science is the placebo control, the control group.
Any science that doesn't have a control is zero evidence-based, because it's meaningless.
It's like epidemiology, right?
What do they do?
They try to eliminate the control, didn't they?
Always.
During COVID.
Always.
Even a country like Sweden had to be vilified and attacked simply for acting as a control.
The biggest thing that these scamsters fear in climate, COVID, virology or any of these scams is a control.
Because the man in the street or the woman in the street can understand a control.
Yeah, but they didn't do the thing you said was brilliant and they were fine.
Even an ordinary person, even a politician, dare I say it, even a politician can understand that.
So they eliminate the control, the systematic elimination of control groups during COVID was astonishing.
And I knew exactly why they were doing it.
But I was astonished that they were, they were being that Like, it was open what they were doing.
Eliminating every control.
Tanzania, Sweden, you know, even in the vaccine trials.
After a couple of months, they killed the control and gave the vaccine to the control group.
It's just they did it everywhere.
That's a dead giveaway.
100% guarantee it's a scam.
If anyone even hints against using control groups.
100% guaranteed scam.
Let me just get rid of this dog.
It's annoying me.
Daisy!
Ivo!
Ivo!
Can you take this dog?
It's annoying me.
It's hard to concentrate when there's a dog leaping up at you and rubbing its smelly fur on you.
I'm glad you're so firm.
Yeah, but you know what they do?
They rub it, they go and roll in dead animals and then the smell of the dead animal goes on your... I'm just having a whiff there, there's something dead.
It's probably sort of dead sheep or something.
Anyway, I was thinking then about poor old, you mentioned Tanzania, and I was thinking poor old President Magufuli, who called out the scam, And then mysteriously died.
Because they can't have that, can you?
You can't have an African leader speaking out against this global... a global scam.
No, and interestingly... And the Sweden thing.
I remember all the arguments that were being produced apparently With expertise and in good faith by... It was amazing how the media always had an explanation as to why Sweden was anomalous and why it wasn't a fair example and you only had to look at this or that data from a bordering country.
They came up with all these stories to nullify the control, didn't they?
They did, and it was clear as crystal.
In the first few weeks, I mean, as early as April, I was going through Sweden data and publishing it every day.
Their latest data, the trends versus the surrounding countries and other countries.
And I was open to the idea that lockdown could have an effect.
But I said, we'll know.
We'll know if they hold the line.
We'll know within a month or two without any doubt.
And the answer was, of course, the lockdown did nothing measurable.
But you're right.
The narrative had come from the top, whatever about Ferguson enabling it with his non-peer-reviewed junk paper.
And Anders Tegnell pointed out when the BBC said, but how can you not lock down and put people at risk?
And he said, well, basically, there is no evidence supporting lockdown at all.
The only thing you have anywhere in the world is a non-peer-reviewed paper from Ferguson.
Otherwise, all the evidence, we are following the evidence.
And he was correct, of course.
But the immediate onslaught was because the word had come down the massive pyramid.
So you'll never even see who started the word coming down.
It's too far up in the clouds.
The word had come down.
We need lockdown.
to protect us from this bubonic plague which it was just a flu but there you go so everyone knew everyone knew That to not lock down was making us all look bad for locking down and destroying our economies and making our kids mask and shutting our schools.
You can't have a country not doing that because it's a control.
So everyone had a vested interest in attacking Sweden and the charlatan can always make up BS reasons why something is not so.
They were very lucky that the Nordics in general They do not have a strong kind of, you know, winter peaks in flu deaths and then troughs in the summer.
They tend to be more level.
So that and many other reasons made the Nordics appear that they were more protected.
It was a complete illusion.
But this was where they got lucky.
They got lucky with the other Nordics being quite different than Sweden in dynamics of mortality.
And they just used it.
I mean the charlatan will always find something that makes the charlatan's case and then hammer it again and again and again.
That's propaganda as Dr. John Lee said.
He was fantastic in the UK.
His definition of propaganda is to keep telling us what we already know.
If you tell people something that's kind of against the narrative or against what we know, or especially if it goes against your own interests to say it, and you may get some abuse, or you may get less money or less opportunities by saying it, you know, that's real.
But if you keep hearing what everyone's saying, and it keeps getting repeated, that's propaganda.
It's almost certainly false.
And there you have it.
Yeah.
Do where are you with hindsight on on the whole pandemic?
I mean that wasn't a pandemic.
Do you think it was just rebadged flu that just just nothing not a not a novel virus if one believes in viruses at all, but just that it was essentially a psyop the whole thing or do you think there's anything in it?
Yeah, that's a great question because it's been controversial even on the people who are against the whole COVID madness.
There's different camps have emerged.
I sometimes wonder are some of those camps malicious in order to divide and conquer on the right side of the history.
But anyway, be that as it may.
I'm currently based on, I have a massive network of immunology, virology, epidemiology, medical specialists, people, so I always leverage them and anything I'm saying I always check against them, you know, I don't want to do solo run.
Broadly my best guys across the world and gals, they broadly, I'll just fix this, they broadly go with the laboratory created gain-of-function technology which is real.
You can manipulate viruses.
We've been doing it for a long time.
If you believe in viruses, that is.
And that's broadly the consensus.
So it's never proven true.
Like I said, there's no proven consensus.
But the broad consensus with who I trust is that gain of function and that SARS-CoV-2 was a phenomenon.
It had an impact similar to a bad flu, so certainly it's not a big pandemic.
That was all a lie.
But essentially, I don't go with that the flu was simply rebranded.
I tend towards that when a new virus, especially an engineered one, comes into a population, there's viral interactions in the host and the flu may be deactivated.
I'd still though acknowledge it's extraordinarily how the flu deaths Really disappeared right when the COVID deaths came in.
So I acknowledge that is very tantalizing and would make one wonder.
But I'm staying a little more orthodox on this one.
I'm not even sure that we will make any headway.
And I know you said you got to tell the truth.
But in this case, I'm not telling a lie by sticking with my angle.
But I think if you go to no viruses or if you go to it was simply the flu and there was no SARS-CoV-2, your possibility of converting people or converting the normies, we must convert or we are all screwed.
I think that possibility collapses fast and that's dangerous.
I'm a corporate guy.
I am a strategic guy generally.
I won't lie strategically.
But I will choose to avoid certain things I see as strategically not good at all for our success of overturning these scumbags who are running this ant farm and making it more of an ant farm.
This is one of the many reasons I love you, Ivor, as well as respecting you.
I think that one thing I've learned over the last three years Is that we all have different parts to play and different strengths and weaknesses and we have to play to those.
And I see I would never I mean, I think you're I think you're wrong about bioengineered viruses.
I think that's that's another part of the distraction.
I think it was it was pure propaganda.
They just Fake news bombed us into believing something that was not so.
And I think, you know, looking at the excess mortality figures, if it was a lab-engineered virus, they did a really crap job, because it didn't really make much difference to the excess deaths.
And I do believe that it was a fake news story designed to propagandize us into feeling a need for this unnecessary vaccine, which maybe we can come to in a minute.
But look, I don't see any point arguing about this stuff because, as you say, when I say this stuff, there are going to be a certain proportion of people who are going to be, who are going to find my sort of no virus arguments or whatever so out there that they're not ready for it yet.
And you are very much the gateway drug that leads people towards the Dellingpole outer regions.
Uh, we're all on a journey.
We're all at different stages of the journey.
And again, going back to that, your discussion with, with the Swedish guy, I thought it was brilliant the way nobody listening to the, that podcast, not even Toby Young, who is very resistant to anything that takes him outside his normal paradigm.
Nobody who paid any attention to what you said about the history of the Rockefellers could doubt that the The climate change agenda, pandemics, were the invention of these very, very rich people who needed an excuse to justify supranational, anti-democratic measures, such as we're experiencing today.
That's the big story, really.
I certainly think so, James.
Dr. Norton Gurd himself will only stick to what's fully documented.
The enormous Rockefeller archives are amazing, but so many other sources.
If you only stick to fully documented facts, and they tell a story that absolutely should convince an average person that something is seriously wrong with all this nonsense of the past few years, I consider that successful.
If you go beyond the documented, essentially proven facts and you speculate.
For instance in Amsterdam last month I gave two keynote talks.
On the Friday, sadly, Professor Desmet's mother died and he could not make his Friday evening keynote.
So they asked me, could I do an extra talk?
And I was in transit from the airport and I said, yeah, and I put stuff together.
So I gave two talks, but we had a lot of discussions with the audience there at the Science Summit Uncensored, a great event.
And quite a few people challenged me on not having mentioned the Rothschilds.
And the power behind the curtain that's much bigger than Rockefeller.
And I explained to them that I believe there's a huge amount in that.
It's probably very important.
But not for our strategy and our goal.
Our goal is to awaken the people to push back against this monstrosity of totalitarianism that is coming down the track.
And so far it's pretty successful.
So it's an existential threat to all of our children and grandchildren, to our whole future.
It's a huge deal.
So we've got to, like in Sun Tzu's Art of War, I'm a big fan, principles of strategic War playing, really, or real war.
This is a war.
And to go down and talk about Rothschilds hands our enemy a weapon of propaganda to say, oh, he's talking about the Rothschilds.
He's an anti-Semite.
It's handing them a weapon to use against us.
So I am quite careful what I talk about for that reason, because I believe it's an existential threat.
To us and our children.
Therefore, I've got to be really careful to play the rules of war perfectly as I can.
And that's it.
Could you give me, because some people are going to be watching this discussion and they're going to be thinking, well, I haven't seen, I haven't heard this podcast of Ivers.
I don't know what they're talking about.
Can you give me the, Give me your elevator pitch.
Say I believe that climate change is real and I believe the pandemic was terrible and that no measure was too strong to deal with this existential threat.
Give me the elevator pitch on the Rockefellers and how they created this world we're living in.
Okay, right.
Elevator, like really short.
So essentially, John D. Rockefeller was the big guy.
He set in motion a New World Order, and he knew it would only occur long after his death.
So it was a huge vision.
His five sons took that on, set up the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, because they were the brothers, and the Rockefeller Special Studies Project in the 1950s.
They brought in Kissinger, they created the Trilateral Commission, got some of the top world leaders and influencers into that, And they also had essentially been instrumental in creating the League of Nations, which became the United Nations.
They funded the United Nations building in New York on their land.
They view it as their own private club.
They saw the United Nations as the future world government, ultimately.
And they also were instrumental in setting up the WHO under the United Nations.
They identified in the 50s, on a whiteboard with no scientist presence, ...present pandemics and climate fear of disaster as two key strategic vectors that they could use to get the New World Order.
So that's where it came from, guys.
Right?
Whatever about the science, which I'll finish with.
The Club of Rome was set up by Pecci, one of Italy's richest men, who was a partner in Chase Bank alongside... Who was funded by Agnelli.
Funded by Agnelli, yeah, who is the Chase Bank guy, a good friend of David Rockefeller's.
Everywhere you go, they're connected.
As Dr. Nordengird said, when I asked him, is there anyone involved in a senior level driving this madness who is not connected to the Rockefellers?
And he just smiled and said, you can't be.
You can't be anyone in any of this climate or pandemic stuff without being connected to Rockefeller.
That's just a fact.
And that's the way it is.
Ultimately, the UN, the WHO, we know how they went.
Rockefeller also set up the WEF.
The WEF in 2019 signed a contract to fund the UN climate stuff and sustainable goals.
They're all in it together.
They're enormous.
Everyone who's anyone is in this infrastructure of myriad NGOs and non-democratic international bodies that I've mentioned, and they are driving the agenda.
Now, the only question is, if they identified climate and pandemics back in the 50s on the whiteboard as ultra-rich businessmen who wanted a world government, it's still possible that pandemics and climate disaster are still, it'd be an amazing coincidence, but it's still possible they are a real global problem.
And the guys just got lucky.
Come on.
But let's just look at the science.
Covid we've been through, and we know now the whole thing was nonsense, right?
So that's done.
And then if you look at climate change, there are myriad professors who are speaking outside, getting sanctioned, getting censored, you know, losing their careers, and they're going through myriad facts about climate change.
I mentioned one, the temperature has gone up around 0.5 degrees in the last 50 years and has had no effect, right, obviously on planetary climate systems.
They are driven by planetary and solar system factors, cloud cover and myriad other things that the IPCC doesn't want to even include in their models, right?
The best prediction is another one degree by the 2100 in the next 70 years or 80 years.
One degree will have no material effect on the planet in terms of us living on it.
Even the IPCC and economic modeling says.
That that extra degree, and they assume two degrees, that extra temperature by 2100 will only reduce the future world GDP theoretically by 1.5%.
In other words, no measurable effect on GDP or human progress.
This whole thing, if you combine the origins of it, which are all documented, And where it came from, and then you look at the science and find out that everything we hear is mostly nonsense and put them together.
How could you possibly believe this modeling nonsense?
It makes no sense either in its origins and genesis or in the current real world data.
It makes no sense on any vector.
It's only what the nice man on the telly says, right?
The media say, and it's all driven clearly by WHO And by all the other organisations and we know where they came from and we know what the agenda is.
It's not a conspiracy theory.
It's simply geopolitics and world government and it's doing exactly what I would do if I had spent 50 years wanting that system.
I would do exactly what they've done.
That's another little test.
What would you do?
You'd do exactly what they've done.
There is no other route.
Yeah.
It's obvious.
Yeah.
Yeah, if you had not a shred of... Thank you, that was brilliantly done.
If you had not a shred of morality, if your end goal was purely materialistic, then yeah, you would do what they did.
On the subject of Rockefeller, there was a time when all I knew about Rockefeller was Oysters there was an oysters Rockefeller I think and and there's a the Rockefeller skank which I think was a hit for Fatboy Slim that
I never thought of Rockefeller's as anything other than a kind of a neutral thing or possibly even a benign thing because one had heard stories about philanthropy and so on and I was reminded of when I used to live in South London I remember there was a beautiful red brick library that one used to pass, the Carnegie Library and it had in letters Carnegie Library and I remember thinking
Oh, the great age of philanthropy.
Not only is this building beautiful to look at, but it stems from a sort of generosity of spirit that we've lost.
And of course now we've, in the last three years, what we've learned, what we should have known much earlier, is that philanthropy has been, long since, been weaponized against us.
That it's not what we're told it is.
It's not an act of good.
It's an act of, well, tell us about that.
Yeah, Carnegie I featured in my big two hour interview in Stockholm with Dr. Nordengård, because they're all important.
They were all connected together.
The ultra wealthy wanted more than simply their money and their yachts.
And they realized correctly that philanthropy would redo their image.
A bit like Bill Gates went from a megalomaniac thrown out of the Supreme Court in the early 2000s for megalomania and the Microsoft Antitrust.
And the next morning he woke up and suddenly cared about black babies in Africa.
You know that's a lie.
You know it.
It's obvious.
But over the years, Bill Gates in his jumpers with his waving arms is viewed by most people as, oh, doesn't he help kids in Africa?
That's how easy it is.
It's the biggest scam in the universe.
And it's been done for all of time to varying degrees.
So Carnegie, absolutely.
Ford Foundation, they keep their archives in the Rockefeller archives.
They were important too.
And the Vanderbilts, you know, the railway, they all got into philanthropy.
Because at the turn of the century, or the 1900s, people were beginning to hate these barons, oil barons and moguls.
And there was a lot of public opinion going against them.
So what they did is they set up philanthropy.
And over time then after the philanthropy phase passed and they threw some money into fooling everyone and got the heat off.
You know, it's a bit like the aluminium in a fighter jet when a missile comes at you.
You do an evasive manoeuvre and you fire a load of aluminium swarf out and the missile goes for the hot swarf, you know.
That's what they did.
They threw out a load of a distraction.
Philanthropy.
And that was it.
Job done.
Missile failed.
So that's what they did.
But then it became much worse because Rockefeller went beyond philanthropy into the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Special Studies Project.
And that was now to take advantage of the success they had got with philanthropy to retool their image.
That had worked great.
And now it was time.
Business.
So they began to fund activists.
So, Just Stop Oil and all the, they began to fund activists and political groups from the 50s.
And that's where it went beyond philanthropy into directly achieving the vision of a world government.
And people, it'd be interesting for people to know that David Rockefeller, the primary guy of the sons or the brothers, David Rockefeller did memoirs, I think in 1989 or, you know, he was in his 80s.
And he said, many people over my life have accused me of wanting one world government and a kind of one world government system.
And he says, well, if that's the accusation, he said, I accept that and I am proud of it.
So he actually said it himself.
This was his life's work and it had worked and he was proud of it.
And he also made the comment not fully validated, because the one I just gave you is on the record.
Another comment from an insider around 20-30 years ago had Rockefeller effectively saying at a big media with the top media owners there, thanking them for having not covered their endeavors and their plans.
Otherwise it would have been impossible in the light of public scrutiny to have achieved all that we have achieved.
And that was said in the same period as he said I'm proud of it.
All of this is just global geopolitical power and it's working for them.
There's not a shred of conspiracy theory in any of this.
That's the irony James.
There isn't a whit of conspiracy theory in any of this.
It's just The way the world works.
And people have been conditioned for decades to believe questioning powerful organizations and people who are influentially kind of manipulating our world in a chess game to perceive that as a conspiracy.
It sounds like a conspiracy theory, doesn't it?
But the thing, and this is the irony, James, and I'll finish on this.
For all of human existence, humans lower on the ladder.
have distrusted powerful people who ran their lives, right?
They always have.
It's a human survival instinct.
And somehow in the last 30 years, they have programmed people to distrust people who distrust powerful structures above us that run our lives.
Imagine!
Wow!
Imagine.
Actually, but before you go, Did you see that Yuval Harari, one of the leading lights of the, a transhumanist, creepy transhumanist, I mean he's like Nosferatu, isn't he?
Darling of the World Economic Forum.
And he made this speech saying that so-called conspiracy theorists were, they flirted with anti-semitic tropes, they should really be banned.
And it's interesting, the government, the UK government is introducing anti-terror, it's rewritten its anti-terror legislation to incorporate a section on conspiracy theorists, arguing that they represent a terrorist threat.
So we are going to get, for talking about this stuff now, we are going to get branded as a terrorist threat.
That's how bad it's got.
Yeah, James.
And you know what?
It's right in line with what we said a few minutes ago.
This is exactly what I would do, or you would do, if we were driving this kind of one world government.
Conspiracy theorists who are actually discussing, based on real data, the reality of the world, are a threat to them.
Obviously, because they talk truth.
Now, not the crazy conspiracy theories and alien shit and all that, but they use that as propaganda.
They try and direct people on your side, who's supposed to be powerful, and they try and direct them into aliens and flat earth.
That's another ploy.
But yeah, it's a threat to them.
And in Ireland, the hate speech laws were absolutely stunning.
They've kind of been stalled based on public reaction.
That's another reason they want censorship of social media because there was a successful social media campaign to highlight to politicians what was actually in the hate speech legislation.
And the wording is so shocking that it even shocked me.
Basically, they've changed from a Garda or police commissioner had to authorize a warrant to search someone for potentially hateful material under the 1980s Hate Speech Act, which had to incite violence and clearly be a crime.
Now their wording is a single policeman, based on information he gets from anyone, can order to go into someone's house and take all their devices and look for anything hateful.
Now, the hateful content does not need to incite violence and does not need to be shared with anyone.
If a person in their own house writes something that by their non-written rules is hateful, and that includes trans and everything now, they're trying to include everything, You can be charged, and if you don't give a PIN or encryption code, that itself is written as a crime.
But remember, this is thought crime, because how can you possibly have a crime for stuff that's in your personal possession that is not shared with anyone?
The legislation says that's a crime.
It's unbelievable.
I mean, it's just, it takes the Constitution, right, just shits on it, and smears the walls of the room.
It's just, it's shocking.
But it went through Irish Doyle, the Parliament, and then it was going through the Senate.
And luckily there was a public campaign and politicians began to realise what was actually in it.
It's insane!
But they tried to get it through.
And it sounds a bit like your one you mentioned or Canada have passed theirs I believe about hate speech laws and internet censorship control.
It's nuts!
But last thing I'd say is this essentially proves what we've been discussing.
That stuff this clearly insane is now being done to head us off at the pass, the rational thinkers, the good people, that they're going to these lengths simply proves what we said earlier.
It's a scam, and to be honest, they're worried the scam won't fully get over the line.
That's why we're seeing the latest madness. - Ivor, tell us where we can find your stuff. - Right, Jebs.
Yeah, it's just if you search my name, currently, you can still basically hit straight through to my YouTube, Twitter, at Fat Emperor, and Facebook and LinkedIn.
I'm currently still on all the platforms.
I've been censored, attacked, shadow banned, but I've been Careful enough to ride the razor's edge to stick only to documented facts.
So I got a lot of abuse and shadow banning, but I'm still on all the platforms.
So yeah, I think my YouTube is probably one of the primary places to find all these interviews that you mentioned, etc.
Great.
And it only remains to thank all you lovely viewers and listeners for your ongoing support.
I really appreciate those of you who support me on Locals, on Substack, on Subscribestar, on Patreon, and by buying me a coffee.
And please support my sponsors, and yeah, thanks very much.
And thank you again, Ivor.
It's been great talking to you.
I hope we do the next one in the flesh again.
It's always nice to see you.
Absolutely, James, and thank you.
And I just realized a few minutes ago, I had a pencil behind my ear for the whole interview.
I've just come in, I'm doing cladding, wood cladding on the walls.
So just so people are wondering, why has he got a pencil behind his ear?
Is he a carpenter?
Well, sometimes I am.
Thank you, James.
I think it's a good look.
By the way, I see you're only 47% uploaded at the moment, so you'll need to leave your computer on for a while.
