Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 24, 2020 - Jim Fetzer

01:54:09

Exposing COVID Psychological Operations - Crimes Against Humanity Exhibit A (MIRROR)

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	And I'm Ryan Wolf.
	Our greatest responsibility is to serve our Treasure Valley communities.
	The El Paso, Las Cruces communities.
	Eastern Iowa communities.
	Mid-Michigan communities.
	We are extremely proud of the quality, balanced journalism that CBS 4 News produces.
	The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media.
	More alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake stories without checking facts first.
	The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media.
	More alarming, some media outlets publish these fake stories because they are true without checking facts first.
	Unfortunately, some members of the media use their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda control to control exactly what people think.
	And this is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
	This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
	sick.
	follow the leader, would it unlie for a lie you'd all be blind
	death or murder, this I'm sure in these uncertain times
	The state is betting this really gets people's attention.
	ALL OF ME! ALL OF ME! ALL OF ME! ALL OF ME!
	Imagine you're looking at the internet there and you see an ad claiming that your entire family has died of COVID-19.
	Sounds unbelievable but that's exactly what happened to a family in Los Angeles.
	A Facebook ad for a claim all but one member of a Los Angeles family died from the coronavirus.
	But the story which used the family's photo in the ad is completely false.
	Mother Sarah Ansick says a professional photo of her family taken eight years ago for a holiday card... ...somehow wound up in this Facebook ad for a company called FilterMax... ...and they produce face masks.
	The ad claimed that she and her entire family, except for one of her kids, her eldest son, died after contracting COVID-19 at a church service.
	FilterMax also claimed in the ad that it is the most efficient respirator on the market and it's approved by the
	FDA.
	This may be one of the more important podcasts we've done.
	one.
	you We all know we're living in extraordinarily intense times.
	The most intense most of us have experienced, at least in our adult lives.
	The challenges that we're experiencing today are as intense as we've ever seen.
	And the challenge is not only people are dying, but people are dying alone.
	Families can't visit with their family members because of understanding of the virus and our concerns about how it could spread.
	And we're living in a world where, quite frankly, we've made decisions that are also affecting not just the people that have already passed away, but also are going to affect people in the future.
	And also there are ways we've responded to this virus are having gigantic effects around the world.
	There are people all over the world that are having all kinds of challenges.
	90% of brain surgeries haven't happened.
	I go through a whole list, but the feeding problem is one of the things I'm most concerned about.
	And people moving into poverty, which leads to deaths as well.
	The World Food Organization that the UN sponsors is saying maybe 265 million people might go hungry this year, almost double what normally happens.
	And so I started to immerse myself in every detail I could find on the science of this.
	And as I did, I came across a set of doctors, Nobel Prize winners, professors of epidemiology, some of the most qualified people in the world that were bringing up new facts that we have today that are very different than we made the decision to shut down the world economy.
	And science is about, as new facts come forward, making new decisions, but sometimes the momentum of the story and the fear takes us over.
	You know, I think that unfortunately science is difficult and you can't be partisan.
	And I think that there was a dynamic here and a dynamic which I found very anti-scientific that led to decisions being made.
	The World Health Organization has a record of exaggerating.
	And it was stunning to me that all the media would put on these so-called experts and not
	raise this issue as to why the case fatality rate is just completely and absolutely overstated.
	I was watching every day because I'm concerned that the death rate shot up 600% in one day
	and I'm no epidemiologist, but that didn't make any sense.
	I'm talking about the world death rate.
	And then I dug in and finally found the little asterisk that said they changed the diagnostic
	procedure to no longer having to do a test.
	This is as late as February.
	And that's why the number of deaths shot through the roof because anything they suspected is
	COVID, they listed it COVID.
	And then a few weeks ago, as I know you know, and the CDC made it formal in the U.S.
	that you don't need to do a test just if you suspect it.
	But there's actually even, as I understand from you, economic incentives by the hospitals, and some have been reclassified as COVID-19 deaths after the fact.
	And what is that financial incentive that you'll share with us?
	We were basically being advised as physicians as to how to correctly complete a death certificate if COVID-19 was involved directly or perhaps even presumptively or probably or peripherally involved.
	I was coached and massaged to utilize COVID-19 as a factor in the causation of death, even if I hadn't checked a COVID-19 test, even if I hadn't had an interest in one.
	Would be absolutely ridiculous to put down COVID-19.
	On the one hand, part of my life is in the trenches practicing primary care.
	And then I come down to the Capitol where I see this partisan battle for power.
	And the best way to power sometimes is to keep people free.
	We look at 60 and under, it's less than two-tenths of 1%, or about less than twice the flu.
	step up and raise your hand and say, but follow me, I'll take care of you. That's sort of
	a typical formula in the world of politics. And I think sometimes when these things happen,
	we don't recognize them at the time. It's when we looked at it through the retrospective
	scopes.
	If you look at 60 and under, it's less than two-tenths of 1% or about less than twice
	the flu. But you could really open up the whole economy and not have much increase in
	the risk.
	The problem is without the economy open, we're having more deaths of despair than we are deaths from the COVID virus.
	Now what we're seeing is the collateral damage of COVID is way outweighing the disease itself.
	I can tell you about suicide cases personally, 23 year old.
	I can tell you about anxiety, depression, alcoholism, all in my community that are skyrocketing now because of COVID.
	So I think the conversation has to switch now to how do we get the economy going again because the collateral damage of the economy shutdown is becoming far worse than the virus itself.
	We took a Hippocratic oath to do no harm and to tell the truth and we looked at our numbers and we had Some of Stanford's preliminary data was out.
	We're looking at these different studies and we're saying, well, the epidemiology of this disease is similar to flu.
	And have we ever shut down for flu before?
	We haven't.
	Does it make sense to shut down the economy, to have folks, you know, not have work, not be able to support their families?
	Whenever you have something that you're unfamiliar with, you have lots of fear.
	And then trying to change people's narrative, their mindset with new data is very, very difficult because they have that old mindset.
	I'm an infectious disease physician, and my understanding of, and I also do disease modeling, and my understanding is, you know, a disease like this sort of spreads quite widely.
	And so the numbers didn't quite add up.
	And so that's why we We put that study together, and we sampled a group of well over 3,000 people.
	We used a test kit that by now has been vetted very carefully, and we know exactly what it tells us.
	One thing that I was hoping that our study would do is reduce that uncertainty.
	We were living with such an enormous amount of uncertainty, and I think that uncertainty was really getting people worked up.
	And like many here, I wish I wish this were not a political issue.
	I wish this were, you know, an area where we could come together and say, okay, we need to count all cause deaths because, you know, the coding is not something that is reliable.
	You know, we need to understand the issue about immunity.
	We need to understand the issue about, you know, about the age distribution and the differences across ages.
	And these are, you know, these are some of the very key priorities that will help us really learn how to deal with epidemics.
	We have to start putting, wrapping our head around and making decisions in a more informed way.
	Just the testing procedure itself, I find faulty.
	The Q-tips were faulty.
	The testing with PCR testing.
	There's two types of PCR testing.
	One is called reverse transcriptase PCR testing, which is the one that they use most commonly.
	And then there's real-time PCR testing.
	They both have the same initials, right?
	RT-PCR for both of those tests.
	So when they do both of those tests and they mix all the numbers together, What does that tell you about beta?
	And the person who originally just developed and discovered and got the Nobel Prize for the PCR type testing back in the 60s said that this was a test that was meant to be used in the laboratory in order to study viruses.
	It was never, ever intended to be rolled over and used as a diagnostic.
	So that's when we hear all of these cases, cases, cases, cases.
	Cases mean nothing.
	Nothing!
	This could be one of the 36 coronaviruses that we talked about.
	It could be the fact that you had a coronavirus influenza-like illness last year, and so it's left a little tiny snip of its RNA, of its genetic material around, and we found it.
	So it's a case.
	And even all of the doctors have said if they would have had any idea that the media was going to go berserko about the number of cases, they would have stopped forward and said, wait a minute, that's wrong.
	We can't do this because the number of positive cases... Here's the thing about positive cases, Brian.
	When they say we have a hundred more positive cases, Well, how many did you test?
	101?
	If that's the case, then that's statistically impossible.
	Did you test 500?
	Did you test 1,000?
	Did you test a million?
	And you had 100 cases?
	Well, how many were negative?
	We don't know because they never tell you that number.
	They never tell you, of those 100 cases, how many were sick.
	So they fabricated this whole nonsense about asymptomatic carrier.
	Well, what's an asymptomatic carrier?
	It's you and me sitting here as a healthy person.
	We carry around trillions of viruses and bacteria with us every single day in our own microbiomes.
	We're asymptomatic.
	We are healthy.
	If we happen to have a staph, a strep, a MRSA, a something, we're healthy.
	That doesn't mean that we're going to spread it to someone else.
	So they have to change the language, change the narrative, make it sound scary to keep all this testing going.
	So the two types of RT-PCR testing The nasal swab versus the throat swab, the finger stick that they've used to look at IgG antibodies that may be more specific to the SARS-CoV virus, but we're now finding out that even if you've had the real virus that got tested with real-time PCR testing, which is accurate in a short window of less than 30 days, the antibody doesn't continue.
	We have no idea if that means you're immune or not.
	Well, that upsends their entire The entire theory about antibodies are supposed to protect you long-term.
	So if having the real infection doesn't protect you long-term, surely a vaccine isn't going to protect you long-term.
	Yeah.
	And we started fabricating the death certificates in the United States.
	And anybody who fell off a ladder and broke in and hurt their back and died got labeled a COVID-19 death.
	So now we have all these thousands of cases that have to be sorted out like they did in Italy, where they really sorted out the 25,000 deaths and said less than 1% were actually COVID-19 causal deaths.
	You know, if they come into an emergency room and they have a cough, oh, it's COVID-19.
	Maybe it could be staff, it could be pneumococcus, it could be a whole bunch of other things, but they don't even test it anymore.
	So this pot of data that we're making public policy on, we're making laws and rules and travel restrictions and all these other things, this pot of data is a faulty bunch of mess.
	That I don't think we will ever sort it out.
	Ever.
	I don't think there's ever any possible way because they keep pouring more and more faulty data into the pot.
	It's like taking two different, three different colors of paint and pouring it into one bucket and swirling it all together.
	How do you ever separate out the red, green, and blue now that we've got a different color because we poured it all together?
	The person who created this, the idea that these things are completely inconsistent, that people have been using them up until now, are screaming about how they got false positives like crazy, right?
	This is where we are now and they're using those false positives to remove your rights.
	So this is incredibly relevant.
	The article entitled COVID-19 PCR tests are scientifically meaningless.
	It's pretty interesting.
	Now it says, though the world relies on PCR to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection, the science is clear, they are not fit for this purpose.
	Now, it's fun to say when the science is clear, when they say that, it's never clear when it comes to a conclusion they don't like.
	When it comes to a conclusion they don't like, we need more evidence, right?
	We need more research and more studies.
	But once they get the thing they like, well this is sound and the science is settled.
	Isn't that funny how that works?
	The New York Times, an article called Faith in Quick Tests, leads to epidemic that wasn't in regard specifically to the idea of how PCR tests can lead to false information.
	The article is about the idea that PCR tests have been used in the past.
	This is 2007.
	And it's very interesting how many times we can have precedence for exactly what's happening and we pretend like we don't have enough information.
	Right?
	And again, until they get the information that they like to talk about.
	It says, basically, the opening, it describes the situation, but the point is they had basically a little scare inside this medical center.
	Someone had a cough, and it started spreading, and they started testing with PCR tests, and everyone basically got out of control, everyone got scared.
	And it says, then, and basically all these people were sent home, and it was this big issue, and everybody was afraid, and people were getting locked down, and it says, then, about eight months later, healthcare workers were dumbfounded to receive an email message from the hospital administration informing them that the whole thing was a false alarm.
	Not a single case of whooping cough was confirmed with the definitive test, growing the bacterium in the laboratory.
	Instead, it appears that healthcare workers probably were afflicted with ordinary respiratory diseases like the common cold.
	Now, as they look back on the episode, this is in 2007 by the way, epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists say the problem was that they placed too much faith in quick and highly sensitive molecular tests that led them astray.
	Think about how ridiculous it is that they can realize that.
	They can write about it.
	And reflect and say, well that was where we made a mistake and now we're right here again and they do the exact same thing.
	So there's always money involved with it if you just pull back the curtain and start looking for it.
	The FDA has always been just a signature sign-off.
	When they have like CBER meetings or ACIP meetings, which is when they, the CBER meetings is when they decide that they are going to move forward with the original clinical trials, the animal trials, look safe enough to move forward to the next level of vaccine or drug testing.
	It's always a sign-off.
	They're, like with hydroxychloroquine, they created this COVID panel, and something like 14 out of 17 of the representatives on this panel were representatives from Gilead Pharmaceuticals, who are trying to make Rizumifir.
	I can never say that drug right.
	But they are really trying to make this other drug, this very expensive drug, over top of hydroxychloroquine.
	So they're shutting all of these things down in every possible way.
	Preventing physicians from prescribing it.
	Preventing patients from getting cured from it.
	We don't want to make it readily available.
	We're going to have the FDA tell all the state medical boards that if your doctors are prescribing it, they could be, unless they write into their patient's notes, That you have been advised that this drug could kill you, then they would be open to liability and perhaps medical malpractice.
	I mean, they are like surrounding this on every possible level, particularly coding over the top of it with mainstream media, letting patients know, oh, this drug isn't safe, we shouldn't be taking it, when it's completely safe and it's preventative and curative.
	But again, it's all because of the fact of the mechanism of action of how this medication works.
	actually shuts down the replication process of these viruses,
	and it makes the vaccines unnecessary, unnecessary.
	And the machine is moving forward at full tilt to get this vaccine to market in less than 18 months.
	They've done it under EUA's, Emergency Utilization Authority,
	so that they can do it without any liability.
	They can fast track it past animal studies.
	They can get it to market in 18 to 24 months when it usually takes at a minimum five years.
	No adequate testing, complete liability protection, and if suddenly a cheap, readily available drug comes into their primary markets, which is the US and the EU, and upends their entire vaccination program, No wonder they're coming at this with guns ablaze.
	It's about power.
	It's about control.
	And it's a different type of mindset.
	And it's very hard, I think, for the general people like you and me and our listeners to get your head around that.
	Because it's a different level of thinking.
	It's really a pathological, psychopathic type of thinking that you just can't get your head around.
	That it's about power and control and manipulation.
	And so that sort of leads into answering your question about who's doing vaccine PR, because we've got a multi-generational indoctrination of money, power, and control.
	The American Medical Association started, and the pharmaceutical industry in the 1950s started gaining money and power.
	And then in 1986, when we passed the National Vaccine Childhood Compensation Act, which gives the pharmaceutical industry complete liability protection for their dirty, faulty products, which then led to the ramp up of going from three vaccines in 1985 to multiple doses of 17 vaccines in 2020, and all the money, power, and control that's happened.
	So it's all, so that's the mini version of the historical backdrop of who does vaccines marketing, vaccine PR.
	It's been from the very inception, Brian.
	And to me, this is why physicians have such a hard time getting their head around vaccines are bad and cause harm.
	Because from the very beginning, it was woven into the development of physicianhood.
	We didn't start having medical schools as we know them today until the early 1920s, and that didn't really take root until the 1960s.
	And from the very beginning of physician education, it was interwoven with vaccines are good, they save lives, from the very beginning.
	So when you start to tell them, wait a minute, maybe we ought to rethink this, it causes this cognitive dissonance in their brain that they just can't deal with.
	And if they walk into their patient chart room in the morning or rip open their electronic medical record and go, wow, look at all these side effects, asthma, allergies, ADD, SIDS, seizure disorders, cancer.
	I played a role in that by injecting foreign matter into babies that I refused through my stubbornness and an arrogance to even investigate.
	Most physicians can't deal with that.
	It's easier to just ignore it, say it's not true, call it anti-science, tinfoil hat conspiracy theories, and continue to do what they do because it's woven into the DNA fabric of being a physician.
	Multiple trillions of dollars, Brian.
	Multiple trillions.
	Because it's not only just the vaccine that they're saying, well, it doesn't create a very robust antibody response, so maybe we have to give this to you every year like a flu shot.
	And we want to develop this for every human on the planet.
	Gates has said that more than once.
	And it's not just one shot, it's two.
	Because the general vaccine protocol is you get one shot, which sensitizes you, and the second shot supposedly locks in a robust antibody response.
	So 7.7 billion times two, I mean, that's over 14 billion.
	And if it's $10 each, and then it goes on and on year after year after year.
	So that's just the vaccine portion.
	That's just the manufacturers.
	That's just the sales reps.
	That's just whoever buys it wholesale and sells at retail.
	But the real money is to be made not only on the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, but on every single vaccine that's currently approved on the market.
	The real money isn't in the vaccine.
	The real money is in the drugs that we get to sell you when you start to develop side effects of asthma, allergies, eczema, ADD, ADHD, insulin-dependent diabetes, autoimmune diseases, neurological problems, seizure disorders, a long list of things like alopecia and depression and headaches and severe eczema that's not controlled by everything.
	The real driver-driver So the economic piece is through the vaccine.
	The vaccine, when you start getting sick, sends you to the doctor, then to the specialist, and then the super sub-specialist, where then they order more and more and more tests, which you get more and more and more drugs.
	So the vaccines, even on the front end, as much as this is going to be multiple billions, and in my opinion, multiple trillions of dollars to vaccinate every person in the world, multiple, multiple times, the real money is on the back end driver of the technology of tracking and making sure that you have this vaccine, And on the drugs that we get to sell when you start to develop side effects.
	I mean, think about it.
	If you're a vaccine manufacturer and you have no liability for your faulty products, which in 2002, I believe, the U.S.
	Supreme Court said vaccines are unavoidably unsafe.
	And you don't have any incentive at all to make them safer because who's going to sue me?
	I don't, you know, I just stick with the products I have.
	And they knew that they were harming children.
	They knew that they were harming children, and so Congress made them create the Injury Compensation Program so that if you were injured by a vaccine, you should be able to apply through the Federal Court of Claims for compensation.
	Very few people know about it.
	Only about 25% of people who actually file a claim actually get compensated.
	It was supposed to be a non-adversarial court.
	It's extremely adversarial.
	I've testified in the court a couple times.
	I know other people that have and say they're not going back.
	I know Judy talked about it, about testifying in the vaccine court, and how it was just a scam.
	It's just, it's a horrible place.
	It's a horrible place.
	For parents, for everybody, it's a bad, it's a really bad deal.
	It really needs to be revamped.
	So that was in 1986 that gave them this level of protection, but it only protected them for the vaccines that are on the childhood schedule.
	And that's why when they come out with all these new vaccines, why they cram them into the kids' schedule, so they can be completely covered.
	That's why they added the flu shot to starting at six months of age in babies, so that they could have liability protection for their flu shot, their faulty products.
	So that was in 86.
	Then we had, in 2001, we had 9-11.
	And so after 9-11 happened, that's what started the whole push to be concerned about bioterrorism attacks.
	And that was in 2001.
	So in 2003, they passed a piece of legislation called Project BioShield.
	And Project BioShield was supposed to be funded with $5.6 billion over 10 years and created
	a permanent source of public health funding for emergencies that they could declare or
	if there was any thought of a bioterrorism attack.
	All of a sudden there was immediate money there.
	And what it did is it would give the pharmaceutical industry money to start to develop a vaccine
	or a therapeutic pill or a cure for any sort of bioterrorism attack.
	And if there wasn't any attack that came, the government guaranteed the pharmaceutical
	industry they would buy back their products.
	And they would so they, you know, if you want to make a bunch of products and you don't
	have anybody that's willing to buy them, we'll buy them back.
	So the taxpayer lost on both ends of that, right?
	You put money in that they could develop it and if nobody wanted to buy it, we'll buy
	it back.
	So it doubles the amount of money that goes to the drug companies, but the taxpayers take
	the hit on that.
	It also put into place something called an Emergency Utilization Authority, which they
	It's the EUA, which means that if it's safe enough, you don't have to prove it to be safe, but if it's safe enough, then you can go ahead and use it mass scale on everybody.
	And that was part of the Project BioShield Act.
	So that was in 2003.
	So it's all about money, guaranteed purchases.
	They could get, instead of $100,000 funding on the front end, they would get $25 million funding on the front end.
	And they could issue this EUA, this Emergency Utilization Authority, to just start using it.
	Well, the drug companies weren't happy enough with that.
	They were like, they weren't happy enough with the money and the guaranteed purchases.
	They wanted to have the same level of protection for their faulty bioterrorism products that they were going to develop that they got in 1986.
	For the Childhood Injury Compensation Act for the childhood vaccines.
	They weren't happy enough with that.
	So between 2003 and 2005 there were something like 13 or 14 bills that were introduced through Congress to try to once again give them that protection.
	Nobody, you know like a lot of bills, they never moved forward.
	And so, finally there was one that looked like it was getting some traction.
	And when that was getting some traction and people started hearing about this complete and utter, complete protection, there was a big blow up on social media and all the activist groups said, we can't do this to them.
	They can't, you know, they're not going to fast track this product and have protection.
	So they kind of dropped it.
	And then at the last minute, it was December 17th of 2005.
	The Senator Bill Frist, who is the Senator from Tennessee, went over at 11.30 p.m.
	on a Saturday night after a defense appropriation bill had already been signed off on and most of the people on that committee had gone home.
	They walked over to the House, they took the legislation from the Senate, they walked over to the House and they demanded that it get tacked on the back of this defense appropriation bill And it was called Division E, Division E like elephant when it first started.
	They had skinnied it down to a 42 page piece of legislation and they insisted and it got tacked on to that defense appropriation bill.
	After the first of the year, it got given a different name, and it was called the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, which is the PREP Act for short.
	And what that actually does is any time that the head of HHS, who like right now is Alex Azar, can activate that piece of legislation for a public health emergency, What it does is it gives the drug companies, for anything they create, whether it's a pill, an IV therapy, a biologic, a technology, a piece of software, or a vaccine, it gives them 100% liability protection.
	Even if that product kills or maims millions of people, there is no recourse unless you can convince the U.S.
	Attorney General that those were created under what's called willful misconduct, that they actually intentionally made something to harm you.
	And even if you could prove it through FOIA requests of text messages and emails or whatever, they actually could actually do it, the Attorney General has the right to say we're not moving forward with enforcement action.
	There's no compensation program set up.
	There is one that they could be funded, but Congress would have to convene and fund it, and they would have to define a list of injuries that they were willing to pay compensation for.
	So, they have complete and utter 100% liability protection.
	So, fast forward from 2005 to 2020.
	That bill got activated February 4th of this year and it got put into the the Federal Register on March the 17th.
	We will be, the pharmaceutical industry, will be operating under this complete umbrella of protection until which time Alex Azar decides that we no longer have a coronavirus emergency.
	So anything that they make for this coronavirus thing, technology, tracking technologies, anything, microchipping, any of those things, zero liability protection.
	And when Bill Gates starts talking about that we need to give indemnification to the Gates Foundation and Gavi and UNICEF and the World Health Organization if they fast-track these products, he's going to lift the language right out of this bill that's already been on the books for 15 years and take it out globally.
	It's the scariest thing I've ever seen, Brian.
	And to me, it's the most important thing that people need to know about when they think that, oh, I'm going to go get that vaccine right away because I want to get back into life, or I don't want to get corona infection, is to know that there's no oversight on it at all.
	They can create anything they want.
	We're going to have this intermediate period of opening up, and it won't be normal until we get an amazing vaccine to the entire world.
	The plan to inject everyone on the planet with an experimental vaccine is no aberration in Bill Gates's envisioned decade of vaccines.
	It is its culmination.
	The decade of vaccines kicked off with a Gates-funded $3.6 million observational study of HPV vaccines in India that, according to a government investigation, violated the human rights of the study participants with gross violations of consent and failed to properly report adverse events experienced by the vaccine recipients.
	After the deaths of seven girls involved in the trial were reported, a parliamentary investigation concluded that the Gates-funded Program for Appropriate Technology and Health, or PATH, which ran the study, had been engaged in a scheme to help ensure healthy markets for GlaxoSmithKline and Merck, the manufacturers of the Gardasil and Cervarix vaccines that had been so generously donated for use in the trial.
	Similar stories play out across the Gates Foundation's decade of vaccines.
	There's the Gates-founded and funded meningitis vaccine project, which led to the creation and testing of MenAfriVac, a 50-cent-per-dose immunization against meningococcal meningitis.
	The test led to reports of between 40 and 500 children suffering seizures and convulsions and eventually becoming paralyzed.
	There's the 2017 confirmation that the Gates-supported oral polio vaccine was actually responsible for the majority of new polio cases, and the 2018 follow-up showing that 80% of polio cases are now vaccine-derived.
	There's the 2018 paper in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health concluding that over 490,000 people in India developed paralysis as a result of the oral polio vaccine.
	Concluding that over 490,000 people in India developed paralysis as a result of the oral polio vaccine,
	Samarin Nundy, editor emeritus of the National Medical Journal of India, lamented that
	this is an obvious case where Indians were being used as guinea pigs.
	Throughout the decade, India's concerns about the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
	and its corporate partners' influence on the country's national immunization programs grew.
	In 2016, the steering group of the country's National Health Mission blasted the government for allowing the country's National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization, the primary body advising the government on all vaccination-related matters, to be effectively purchased by the Gates Foundation.
	As one steering group member noted, the NTAGI Secretariat has been moved out of the Government's Health Ministry to the Office of Public Health Foundation of India, and the 32 staff members in that Secretariat draw their salaries from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
	There is a clear conflict of interest.
	On one hand, the BMGF funds the Secretariat that is the highest decision-making body in vaccines, and, on the other, it partners with the pharma industry in Gavi.
	This is unacceptable.
	In 2017, the government responded by cutting all financial ties between the advisory group and the Gates Foundation.
	There's even the WHO's own malaria chief, Dr. Arata Kochi, who complained in an internal memo that Gates' influence meant that the world's leading malaria scientists are now locked up in a cartel with their own research funding being linked to those of others within the group, and that the Foundation was stifling debate on the best ways to treat and combat malaria, prioritizing only those methods that relied on new technology or developing new drugs.
	Kochi's complaint, written in 2008, highlights the most common criticism of the global health web that Gates has spun in the past two decades.
	That the public health industry has become a racket run by and for Big Pharma and its partners for the benefit of big business.
	This use of foundation funds to set public policy to drive up corporate profits is not a secret conspiracy.
	It is a perfectly open one.
	The study from the pressure group Global Justice Now paints a picture of the Gates Foundation partly as an expression of corporate America's desire to profit from Africa and partly a damning critique of its effects.
	You could have a case where the initial research is done by a Gates-funded institution, the media reporting on how well that research is conducted is done, the media outlet is a Gates-funded outlet, and maybe a Gates-funded journalist from a media programme, and then the programme is implemented more widely by a Gates-funded NGO.
	I mean, there are some very insular circles here.
	Among the many criticisms, the idea that private finance can solve the problems of the developing world should poor farmers be trapped into debt by having to use chemicals or fertilizers underwritten by offshoots of the foundation.
	This is no mere theoretical conflict of interest.
	Gates has held up as a hero for donating $35.8 billion worth of his Microsoft stock to the foundation.
	But during the course of his decade of vaccines, Gates' net worth has actually doubled from $54 billion to $103.1 billion.
	In effect, Gates has merely used the wealth from his domination of the software market to leverage himself into a similar position in the world of global health.
	The whole process has been cloaked in the mantle of selfless philanthropy, but the Foundation is not structured as a charitable endeavor.
	Instead, it maintains a dual structure.
	The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation distributes money to grantees, but a separate entity, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust, manages the endowment assets.
	These two entities often have overlapping interests, and, as has been noted many times in the past, Grants given by the Foundation often directly benefit the value of the Trust's assets.
	And, as Gates also admits, it is not a spirit of selfless generosity that motivates his interest in vaccines and other lucrative health interventions.
	I'd like to talk to you about your approach to vaccinations.
	You wrote something recently, and like you always do, you kind of looked at the problem from a scientific and business perspective on things.
	You've invested $10 billion in vaccinations over the last two decades, and you figured out the return on investment for that, and it kind of stunned me.
	Can you walk us through the math?
	You know, we see a phenomenal track record.
	It's been $100 billion overall that the world's put in.
	Our foundation is a bit more than $10 billion, but we feel there's been over a 20 to 1 return.
	So if you just look at the economic benefits, that's a pretty strong number compared to anything else.
	As we have seen, Gates' philanthropic investment scheme has paid off well, with his $50 billion net worth having ballooned to over $100 billion after his decade of altruism in the vaccine market.
	As critics of his foundation have repeatedly pointed out, the 9 million people who die every year of hunger would be best served by securing food supplies, running water, and other basic necessities, not costly medical interventions for rare diseases.
	But there is no return on investment to be made from that kind of charity.
	The problem is when a guy who is as powerful as Bill Gates has that capacity to see himself
	as a good man, then not see that the DTP vaccine that he is giving to every child in Africa.
	It kills children, vaccinated kids, at 10 times the rate as unvaccinated kids will die.
	He has in his hands scientific studies by the highest scientific authorities in the world that says that vaccine is killing more children than diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis combined ever did.
	And that he's giving mercury vaccines to every kid in Africa when We've banned them in the United States because we know that they cause brain damage because the Institute of Medicine said that they're dangerous and they should not be given to human beings.
	And yet he's giving them to every kid in Africa.
	You know, somehow, under his watch, that WHO, which he runs, chemically castrated a million Kenyan women.
	With a hormone that was put in tetanus vaccines deliberately.
	It blows my mind that no one's talking about it.
	How come no one's talking about this?
	That's... Well nobody, you know, nobody's talking about it because of control of the ad.
	The pharmaceutical industry exercises over the political leaders.
	All of the... All of the...
	Institutions in a democracy in Europe, the United States, Australia that were set up in order to protect vulnerable little children from greedy corporations have been neutralized.
	So the agencies that are supposed to protect us and protect our children from from bad products, have been completely co-opted.
	They're what you call captive agencies.
	And that's through a number of mechanisms.
	European health agency, 50% of its budget comes from pharma.
	The CDC is now one of the biggest vaccine makers in the world, sellers in the world, distributors.
	The CDC distributes $4.9 billion worth of vaccines a year.
	So about half of its budget goes to distributing vaccines.
	vaccines and basically it is integrated with the industry, FDA.
	So it has a conflict of interest, the CDC, by nature.
	A conflict also that CDC, FDA, and NIH all own vaccine patents.
	How is that possible?
	Every vial of Gardasil that is sold, money goes to NIH and those agencies are making
	tens of millions of dollars a year selling the vaccines they're supposed to be regulating.
	The FDA gets 50% of its budget from pharmaceutical companies.
	How is that possible?
	The World Health Organization gets over 50% of its budget from pharmaceutical companies, if from industry, let's put it that way.
	If you include Bill Gates, it's even more than that, which is 10%.
	One out of every $10 comes from Gates, who is the biggest vaccine producer and maker in the world.
	So you have a conflict with the agencies.
	You then have Congress has been bought off because pharmaceutical companies
	spend double what the next biggest lobbyist spends on Congress.
	But most importantly is the press.
	The pharmaceutical industry in the United States, it used to be illegal for them to
	advertise pharmaceuticals on TV like it is in every other country in the world except for New Zealand.
	What that does is it not only allows them to push their products in the marketplace, but it also allows them to control content on the network news.
	Most of those, the highest saturation of those advertisements are on the network news.
	Roger Ailes, who founded Fox News, and who had a relative who was vaccine injured, and knew what was happening.
	I had a close relationship, a very strange relationship, with Roger Ailes.
	I spent two months with him in a tent when I was 18 years old in Africa.
	And he always, although our politics were diametrically opposed, he always was well disposed, and he would always Don't argue my environmental issues.
	I went to him with a documentary that we had just made on mercury vaccines, and he was utterly convinced by it.
	But he said, I cannot put you on my network.
	He said, in fact, I would be forced to fire any of my hosts who allowed you to talk about this on TV.
	And he said, if I allowed you on it, I didn't fire the host, I would have a call from Rupert within 10 minutes.
	Rupert Murdoch owns one of the biggest vaccine companies in Australia.
	His family has been deeply immersed in that industry for generations, and he has partnerships with Glaxo and all the big vaccine makers.
	He is one of the present forcers worldwide, but in our country, Roger Ailes told me, he said, Roger Ailes said during non-election years, during certain times of the year, Seventy percent of my advertising revenues from my news station, from my evening news broadcast, comes from pharma.
	And he said, typically there's about 22 ads on the evening news, and 17 of those are pharmaceutical ads, and there's no way.
	You know, Anderson Cooper is sponsored by Pfizer.
	Aaron Burnett is sponsored by Pfizer.
	NBC Nightly News is sponsored by Merck.
	That's why you see them constantly pushing flu shots, measles shots, you know, alarming people about diseases and, you know, about the horrendous threat of infectious diseases, never allowing any discussion about vaccine side effects on any of those networks.
	It's completely forbidden.
	And that gestalt It has infiltrated the entire, let's say, media industry in our country.
	I haven't been allowed to publish an editorial since 2008, as you pointed out at the beginning of the show.
	I used to regularly publish.
	I had a deal with the New York Times at one point with a one-day editorial from me every six months, which is the maximum amount that anybody can put an editorial on there.
	Now they won't let me put an editorial out of anything.
	Because, you know, they need to discredit me about this issue.
	They need to shut down the debate.
	They need to call me an anti-vaxxer, which I'm not.
	Because that marginalizes me.
	It discredits me.
	It makes them say, he is that category, therefore he is dangerous.
	We need to protect the public from dangerous thoughts.
	And, therefore, it is justifiable To allow people to go on TV to write editorials condemning him and not allowing him to defend himself.
	No news organization will even allow me to print a letter to the editor, much less an editorial.
	I'm not allowed to go on TV.
	Nobody else will allow me on the network because it's on my pharma.
	And what that does is it reinforces the entire kind of political control Any politician who expresses any kind of dissent against
	the orthodoxies on this issue, their careers are immediately destroyed.
	Every aspect of the current coronavirus pandemic involves organizations, groups,
	and individuals with direct ties to Gates funding.
	From the start, the World Health Organization has directed the global response to the current pandemic.
	From its initial monitoring of the outbreak in Wuhan and its declaration in January that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission, to its live media briefings and its technical guidance on country-level planning and other matters, the WHO has been the body setting the guidelines and recommendations shaping the global response to this outbreak.
	But even the World Health Organization itself is largely reliant on funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
	The WHO's most recent donor report shows that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the organization's second-largest donor behind the United States government.
	The Gates Foundation single-handedly contributes more to the World Health Body than Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Russia, and the UK combined.
	What's more, current World Health Organization Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is in fact, like Bill Gates himself, not a medical doctor at all, but the controversial ex-Minister of Health of Ethiopia, who was accused of covering up three cholera outbreaks in the country during his tenure.
	Before joining the WHO, he served as chair of the Gates-founded Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and sat on the board of the Gates-founded Gavi the Vaccine Alliance and the Gates-funded Stop TB Partnership.
	The current round of lockdowns and restrictive stay-home orders in Western countries were enacted on the back of alarming models predicting millions of deaths in the United States and hundreds of thousands in the UK.
	Imperial College in London released a COVID-19 report and that's where most of our U.S.
	leaders are getting the information they're basing their decision-making on.
	From this evening, I must give the British people a very simple instruction.
	You must stay at home.
	Enough is enough.
	Go home and stay home.
	A statewide order for people to stay at home.
	The work of two research groups was crucial in shaping the decisions of the UK and US governments to implement wide-ranging lockdowns and, in turn, governments around the world.
	The first group, the Imperial College COVID-19 Research Team, issued a report on March 16th that predicted up to 500,000 deaths in the UK and 2.2 million deaths in the US unless strict government measures were put in place.
	The second group, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in Bill Gates' home state of Washington, helped provide data that corroborated the White House's initial estimates of the virus effects.
	Estimates that have been repeatedly downgraded as the situation has progressed.
	Unsurprisingly, the Gates Foundation has injected substantial sums of money into both groups.
	This year alone, the Gates Foundation has already given $79 million to Imperial College.
	And in 2017, the Foundation announced a $279 million investment into the IHME to expand its work collecting health data and creating models.
	Anthony Fauci, meanwhile, has become the face of the U.S.
	government's coronavirus response, echoing Bill Gates' assertion that the country will not get back to normal until a good vaccine can be found to ensure the public's safety.
	Beyond just their frequent collaborations and cooperation in the past, Fauci has direct ties to Gates' projects and funding.
	In 2010, he was appointed to the leadership council of the Gates-founded Decade of Vaccines Project to implement a global vaccine action plan, a project to which Gates committed $10 billion of funding.
	Also in October of last year, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation partnered with the World Economic Forum and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security to stage Event 201, a tabletop exercise gauging the economic and societal impact of a globally spreading coronavirus pandemic.
	It began in healthy-looking pigs, months, perhaps years ago.
	A new coronavirus.
	The mission of the Pandemic Emergency Board is to provide recommendations to deal with the major global challenges arising in response to an unfolding pandemic.
	The board is comprised of highly experienced leaders from business, public health, and civil society.
	We're at the start of what's looking like it will be a severe pandemic.
	And there are problems emerging that can only be solved by global business and governments working together.
	Governments need to be willing to do things that are out of their historical perspective.
	For the most part, it's really a war footing that we need to be on.
	Given the incredible reach that the tentacles of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have into every corner of the global health markets, it should not be surprising that the Foundation has been intimately involved with every stage of the current pandemic crisis either.
	In order to understand the broader population control agenda and how it ties into the Gates Foundation's plans, we have to look at a puzzling development that took place in 2017.
	In that year, GAVI, the Gates-founded and funded alliance that partners the Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, and the World Bank with vaccine manufacturers to help ensure healthy markets for vaccines, took a strange pivot away from its core mission of vaccinating every child on the planet to providing every child with a digital biometric identity.
	The idea was first floated by Gavi CEO Seth Berkeley in a Nature article that year, Immunization Needs a Technology Boost, where he states that the goal of 100% immunization will not be reached without secure digital identification systems that can store a child's medical history.
	The different parts of this population control grid fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle.
	The vaccination drive ties into the biometric identity drive, which ties into the cashless society drive.
	In Gates's vision, everyone will receive the government-mandated vaccinations, and everyone will have their biometric details recorded in nationally administered, globally integrated, digital IDs.
	These digital identities will be tied to all of our actions and transactions, and, if and when they are deemed illegal, they will simply be shut off by the government, or even the payment providers themselves.
	The Indian experiment in pioneering this biometric digital economy, an experiment with which Gates has been so intimately involved, also provides a perfect example of just how such a system will be abused.
	In January 2018, a report in the Tribune revealed that all of the details, including the name, address, postal code, photo, phone number, and email, of all billion-plus Aadhaar-registered Indians, was available for purchase on WhatsApp for 500 rupees, or about 7 US dollars.
	The Unique Identification Authority of India that administers the Aadhaar scheme was then forced to admit that approximately 210 websites, including websites of the central government and state government departments, were displaying the list of government beneficiaries along with their name, address, other details, and Aadhaar numbers.
	Even more worryingly, newly obtained documents show that the Indian government is integrating Adhar collected data to create a 360-degree database that will automatically track when a citizen moves between cities or buys new property, and integrate that data into a real-time geospatial database built by the country's space agency ISRO.
	Only the most willfully obtuse could claim to be unable to see the nightmarish implications for this type of all-seeing, all-pervasive society where every transaction and every movement of every citizen is monitored, analyzed, and databased in real time by the government.
	5G, you know, the industry, and again, Bill Gates is deeply involved in 5G driving.
	He's putting in satellites, I think 500 satellites, and tens of thousands of ground antenna.
	And the purpose of 5G, if you look at the glossy ads that they have on TV, they're kind of suggesting to you that it's going to change your life to have 5G.
	And you ought to think about that, because why are they investing a trillion dollars to give you... so that you can download your video games maybe a couple of seconds faster?
	Or that you can download movies a couple of seconds faster?
	Does that make any sense to anybody?
	You know, nobody's going to pay that money for that.
	5G has zero to do.
	It's giving you faster downloads.
	It is a completely, it is a system that is completely geared toward harvesting human data.
	What it does, it's what they call the Internet of Things.
	It allows things to interconnect.
	So if you have an Apple Watch, all the data from your Apple Watch, including your phone, is going to be available now.
	And it's going to be sorted, archived, and characterized.
	Your health data, if Alexis is in your home and hears you cough, if these devices are listening to you, your cell phone is listening to you all the time.
	And all that information, a billion terabytes of information, is going to now be harvested by big companies like Microsoft and will be then sorted and sold.
	And that is what, that's why it's worth spending a trillion dollars on that to get all your data.
	And it's a system of data harvesting and surveillance.
	It's going to allow these companies to follow you every moment of your life with facial recognition systems, with chips, which of course Gates wants to put in all of us, with biometric systems, subdermal systems, with your GPS from your automobile.
	One of the things they're going to try to push us to do is away from a cash society to a cashless society, because then They'll have complete control of you.
	They'll know where you shop, what you bought, what your buying patterns are.
	But also, you know, a week ago, the Malibu police ticketed about a dozen surfers that were surfing at Point Doom for using the ocean.
	Give them $1,000 each tickets.
	Imagine if we get this 5G system in, cops won't need to go to the beach and catch them
	because they'll know you were at the beach.
	And they'll know from your GPS, from your cell phone, from facial recognition, from
	cameras that they mounted over, of where you are and what you did 24 hours a day.
	And they will simply, because we're a cashless society, remove the $1,000 fine from your payroll account.
	And that's it.
	And if they don't like anything else you're doing, they can freeze your money.
	And they can absolutely control every aspect of your life.
	That's what we're having.
	This is a, you know, if anybody doesn't realize that this is a huge play for authoritarian control of every aspect of our lives, the ultimate control is to squeeze on us, to control everything we do down to, you know, whether we can kiss our wives or get near to our children or You know, or whatever.
	And then squeeze the money out of the lower classes and funnel it up to the billionaires and create this aristocracy.
	And it's already happening.
	The rich have gotten richer since this quarantine started, and the poor have gotten poorer.
	Every other American has lost income.
	And now, you know, Bill Gates.
	Of course he's gleeful about a quarantine.
	He's a hundred billionaire.
	And now, if he can go out and buy all of our assets at a penny on a dollar, he can become the world's first trillionaire.
	These guys who have all the cash during the quarantine, you know, this is just going to make them richer and richer and richer.
	And, you know, he's going to have control of our lives and the lives of everybody.
	He is another chip that women are supposed to install that will allow you to provide you the service of regulating your menstrual cycles and your ovulation cycles.
	He has this need to control every, every single little aspect of our lives.
	And this is tyranny.
	This is a tyranny against which, you know, our ancestors in our country, they fled Europe to escape the tyranny of aristocracy.
	And now this is like a science fiction nightmare that they are And we need to fight against it.
	We need to recognize all of these milestones of tyranny.
	And we need to organize and fight back and not allow them to do this.
	And they're using the terror of infectious disease, which I've watched them do for 15 years, in order to get people to take vaccines that were not good for them, that have dramatically reduced public health in this country, but made them rich in the process.
	Now they know what the formula is, and they have all of their talking heads, these, you know, Saturday morning gasbags and pundits on TV, and their indentured servants, you know, Anderson Cooper and Sanjay Gupta, just parroting, not doing any kind of critical thinking, but parroting the, you know, the words that need to be said in order to terrorize the public into being sheep, and accepting the color, you know, bending down And allowing them to put their boots on our necks.
	And, you know, I see what's happening.
	And I think many of us see what's happening.
	We need to alert the rest of the public to this oncoming tyranny that's planned for us.
	The future that is planned for us.
	You know, where we all become production units.
	Where we all become...
	Um, enslaved consumers.
	We have to buy their drugs.
	We have to take their vaccines.
	We have to purchase their products.
	We have to stay off the beach.
	We can't get near our family.
	And that is the world they're creating.
	It's a dystopian nightmare.
	And it's what apparently Gates has been dreaming of for most of his adult life.
	My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.
	I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger.
	The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some, but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years.
	Whatever our hopes may be for the future, for reducing this threat, Or living with it?
	There is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security.
	A challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.
	I refer first to the need for far greater public information.
	The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society.
	And we are as a people Inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
	We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it.
	Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions.
	Even today, there is little value in ensuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it.
	And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.
	That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it's in my control.
	And no official of my administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes, or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.
	But I do ask... But I do ask every publisher, every editor, And every newsman in the nation to re-examine his own standards.
	And to recognize the nature of our country's peril.
	Today, no war has been declared.
	And however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion.
	Our way of life is under attack.
	Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe.
	The survival of our friends is in danger.
	And yet no war has been declared.
	No borders have been crossed by marching troops.
	No missiles have been fired.
	If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security.
	If you are awaiting a finding of clear and present danger, then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear And its presence has never been more imminent.
	It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper.
	For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covet means for expanding its sphere of influence, on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on
	intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a
	system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a
	tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence,
	economic, scientific, and political operations.
	Its preparations are concealed, not published.
	Its mistakes are buried, not headlined.
	Its dissenters are silenced, not praised.
	No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.
	It conducts the Cold War in short, with a wartime discipline No democracy would ever hope or wish to match.
	Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security.
	And the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.
	That question is for you alone to answer.
	No public official should answer it for you.
	No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will.
	But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear, and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.
	I met a man, he took my soul.
	Well, they call him the devil.
	They call him the devil.
	blame the 2001 anthrax attacks on Saddam Hussein.
	I would like to point out that the origins of this blame China narrative go back to the same people that tried to
	And that ended up being a domestic source.
	So why are we trusting these same people again?
	And it's not just the origins of those claims, the people amplifying them, like this committee on the present danger China group.
	They're basically like the project for a new American century,
	neocons repackaged around, you know, around, uh, promoting, you know,
	in, in increasing tensions between the U S and China.
	So the fact that people are buying into this, the narratives being created by people that are proven liars,
	you know, I, I just amazing to me that, that,
	that people haven't been pointing out the track record of these people behind
	these claims. But if you bother to look at it, it should be abundantly clear that these are untrustworthy
	figures and we can't just take their, their word for it.
	You recently wrote about a little-known U.S.
	government organization called the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, or the NSCAI.
	Can you explain, I didn't know about them until I had read your recent article, can you explain who they are and what they do?
	Yeah, so they were actually just created a few years ago by one of the more recent National Defense Authorization Acts, and they were appointed by various Senate committees their membership.
	It's chaired by Eric Schmidt, the former head of Alphabet, Google's parent company, and the vice chair is a former Deputy Secretary of Defense with ties to the Center for a New American Century think tank, which is run by people that used to advise John McCain, Joe Biden, Victoria Nuland used to be on their executive team.
	You know, an interesting group.
	But if you look at the other members, it's really abundantly clear that it's a combination of, you know, Silicon Valley interests, CIA intelligence community members, specifically in QTEL, and also the department members of the Department of Defense, or former members of the Pentagon.
	And basically what this group is tasked with doing is setting recommendations for how AI can be used to advance national security interests and what needs to be done Um, with respect to AI in order to maintain a technological advantage over China, not just militarily, which of course is a major interest to the Pentagon, but also economically.
	And that's why you see, you know, groups like Silicon Valley, uh, the intelligence and the military all coming together in this commission.
	So we've seen this crisis, this coronavirus crisis, advancing a lot of goals and agendas.
	How is the coronavirus affecting the work that they are doing there with this agency?
	Well, last May, they had a document that was basically was recently obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.
	But, you know, they wrote this last May.
	And essentially, they lay out the need for a lot of what they call legacy systems that exist in the US to be removed so that these artificial intelligence driven systems and policies can be implemented in order to ensure a technological advantage over China in those areas that I just talked about.
	And with coronavirus, you know, we've seen a lot of efforts not just to remove those so-called legacy systems, which are things, you know, like credit, paying with credit cards and cash, individual car ownership.
	I mean, a lot of things regular Americans wouldn't consider legacy systems and have those, you know, replaced with these technologies that they want to see widely implemented.
	But we've also seen a big media push to give a lot of positive PR.
	Uh, to these, uh, new systems.
	It's not just technologies being implemented with the support of government, but also, you know, the media and lockstep with them, uh, basically trying to push these big changes, uh, onto the economy.
	And of course, uh, the effect of the lockdowns, um, and the economic impacts of those, um, uh, have the end result of basically having the economy being remade in a huge way.
	A lot of those jobs will never come back.
	And it's very likely based on what we're seeing take place now that a lot of these AI systems.
	Will become an integral part moving forward of the workplace if these people get their way.
	And I think it's no coincidence that a lot of the people advising the Trump administration about reopening the economy, there's a lot of overlap with this very same commission that I'm talking about, as well as, you know, billionaires like Jeff Bezos, who have openly talked about for years introducing robots and AI into the workplace.
	Ryan, do you think that this will have an effect on the surveillance state as well?
	What role will this play?
	I mean, obviously, artificial intelligence is going to be one of the main forces, the ingredients of this new operating system of surveillance globally.
	Yeah, and this is something else that her work has touched on, the idea that this contact tracing Idea that it's the same exact concept that they're essentially applying previous agendas to what's happening now and using this to to push it to Orwellian levels to draconian of the point exactly what we've always been warning out warning about to the point that we're now what we were just touching on yesterday.
	The idea of actual like trackable injectable nanotechnology in regard to vaccines and plenty of other things.
	To the point to where this can now be tracked on a phone outside of your body, and even manipulated from outside of your body.
	And these are the kind of things that if we would have mentioned, like, a week before this started, we would have been laughed off of YouTube.
	Oh, you're so crazy!
	And as her work points out, this has been something they've been working on since, what, 2010, if I have that correctly?
	And before?
	Obviously, they've been doing a lot of pretty scary things long before that.
	But this idea that this is something they're just applying to now and it goes much further than just the injectable type things.
	I mean, we can all see what's happening.
	All the martial law type levels, the even ideas that we have to be constantly tracked to stop pandemic too, right?
	The idea that we all know it's just about to happen.
	And even the idea that she gets in doing that work, that this is something that's predictive, which I found to be the most alarming aspect of the whole thing.
	It's a pre-crime aspect to medicine now, where it's like, oh, well, you know, we're we think you're going to get sick in three weeks.
	So let's treat you.
	And guess what?
	You didn't get sick.
	So it worked.
	It's like, hey, it all is all perfect.
	You know, this is the kind of things we should all be horrified about.
	I'm sure Whitney could add more to that.
	So, you know, it's it's just horrifying.
	Right, so that's just one aspect of these technologies.
	That's funded by DARPA, by the way, but there's a lot of other things that they have developed in tandem with a lot of these DARPA-backed vaccine technologies that are being promoted as well.
	It's not just these injectable sensors, but there's also things like injectable nanotechnologies that these new vaccine technologies Specifically, the RNA and DNA vaccines that they're promoting now.
	In order for them to actually work, they have to be combined with nanotechnology.
	And if you look at what DARPA also funds and has been funding for years in the field of nanotechnology, it's all very disturbing.
	And one of their uses for that are what they call a brain-machine interface, which DARPA has been funding since 2002.
	And this goes back to Dick Cheney.
	Who was very enthusiastic about that program, so that should, you know, show you what kind of politician is, like, interested in this type of research, right?
	But these days, it's under a different program that's called N3 that's about non-invasive neural platforms, and basically these are also injectable nanobots that, with the right magnetic frequency, can control, basically, they basically openly say they can influence human thoughts, They can induce the appearances of images directly into the brain and a lot of this stuff.
	They claim that this will help soldiers.
	Being treated with PTSD, but DARPA themselves, if you listen to what their leadership actually says, one of them, a former director named Michael Goldblatt, he said he sees no difference in a brain implant that controls people's thoughts and a cochlear implant that helps the deaf hear.
	So a lot of times these technologies are sold as helping us with healthcare, but the people actually involved in researching this stuff see no difference between those types of applications and these horrific dystopian applications that totally would upend You know, human freedom and human thought and independence as we know it, right?
	Would the government misuse this technology?
	I mean, I think your audience has an answer to that, you know.
	Well, typically everything is always weaponized first.
	Anyways, any things that could be used to better humanity always end up getting weaponized and used against it.
	Now, we have seen that recently Inovio Pharmaceuticals Incorporated has been receiving funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, in addition to DARPA, DARPA, who you just mentioned, And the Department of Defense, among others.
	What exactly are they up to?
	Is it this work here?
	I know that they're trying to develop a vaccine, but I mean, this is mind-blowing scary.
	I mean, just those groups alone.
	Right.
	So, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, really early on, got funding from the different organizations you mentioned to develop a DNA vaccine for coronavirus.
	And at the same time, there was another company that's also DARPA-backed called Moderna that had an RNA vaccine.
	DNA vaccines and RNA vaccines are a category of vaccine that have been around for a couple years, but have never, ever, ever been approved for human use.
	And one of the reasons is because they don't generate the immune response necessary.
	But if you look at what these people say, they say the way to generate that immune response is to combine those vaccines with nanotechnology.
	And that has been totally removed from a lot of the articles giving positive PR, To Inovio and to Moderna.
	The DNA vaccines are actually really nuts if you actually read about how they're injected into you.
	It's not with a needle and syringe.
	You have to basically have muscle tissue exposed and they like use this crazy, what DARPA calls a gene gun.
	And then they like electrocute that part of like exposed muscle.
	So like your cells take up the DNA.
	And actually, if you look at other DARPA tools that involve the use of what they call artificial chromosomes, Um, they've basically done experiments about adding a 47th chromosome to the human body that can be used for a variety of applications.
	And they say it's for healthcare again, but they also say that it could be used as a weapon to subvert the DNA of enemies at the genetic level.
	And if you remember back to, you know, the Project for a New American Century, September 2000 document, Rebuilding America's Defenses, they talk openly about race-targeted, genetically-targeted bioweapons and things of this nature.
	And the fact that people like Dick Cheney were responsible in a lot of ways for putting DARPA on this path is honestly very concerning.
	And as I mentioned earlier, they are selling this to us as, oh, this will help protect us and keep us safe.
	Or in the case of this, this biosensor, prevent the next pandemic.
	We're hearing that from a lot of people now.
	Oh, this is pandemic one.
	There's going to be a pandemic two.
	We have to prevent the next pandemic before it starts.
	They are setting up this narrative where they're basically doing pre-crime on a healthcare level and saying that we have to basically submit to these, these technologies for our own good.
	But if you actually look at the other, the, the admitted purposes for what DARPA wants this for, I mean, it just opens up a whole can of worms that really destroys the Um, official narrative and shows that this has the most insane potential for misuse compared to any other technologies that are in common use right now.
	This movement is still, they're still pressing.
	They got their foot on the gas.
	Basically, they're still coming full steam ahead.
	And, uh, it seems like we're coming to a breaking point.
	Are they going to let up and let people out?
	And then longterm, where are we going to be at?
	You know, and when I say longterm, even just a few months from now by the elections.
	Well, I'll begin.
	I think that it's it's sad to have to make my opinion the horrifying thing that I think it's going to be.
	But I think based on our own history, based on 9-11 response afterward and the way they pushed it in, just like now, I think the sad reality is that at the very least, we're going to see all of these measures that have been forced in, at best, slightly reduced and maintained because pandemic too.
	Right.
	Well, it's got the fear still there virus.
	Just like I said a long time ago.
	This is Isis 2.0.
	This is the virus is the new Isis is ubiquitous anywhere all the time thing.
	We have to be fearful of and I think what we have to see is and I think I think I actually saw this from your video Spiro that Bill Gates was tied to all of these wrong numbers, right?
	All of these models that were used for the basis of increasing these things.
	2 billion will die, so we need martial law, we need more, you know, all these things they forced in, and then were very quickly reduced.
	I mean, very quickly.
	They came out and said all those were wrong, and that was real quiet, and now we're finding out now that Bill Gates was tied to both models that were wrong, and the point being that when they found those out, Nothing changed the model that the actions didn't reduce even for people that are supporting Donald Trump on that side saying that it's you know, he's the one being fooled.
	He hasn't changed these actions.
	He's still forcing in the martial law measure active actions and we have to see that so I ultimately I think what's going to happen.
	Is if it stays as it is now, it will be slightly reduced.
	We'll maintain this weird new normal with the agenda of forcing all these things in and can having more control.
	But sadly, a little bit worse than that, something you were also touching on.
	I think it may be that we see the intentional creation of pandemic too, with the intention to not only force in these things, you know, lockstep, as we talked before, you know, force it in completely, but also in a way, as James Corbett pointed out, Allowing us to the rope with which to hang ourselves.
	So we're here talking about this now and we're saying we shouldn't we shouldn't we should be questioning it.
	Maybe we shouldn't be listening.
	They swing back around and say, see, it only happened because they weren't listening, you know, and that's what we have to be fearful of.
	It doesn't mean we should be censoring.
	We should be speaking more on it, but we should be doing all we can right now to stop that from being the future that I sadly see coming.
	Yeah, so to that, I just want to bring up the point of the lockdown protest, which you sort of touched on, which is that I think right now there's a huge effort to sort of push those protests into the left-right paradigm and further increase the divisiveness that we're seeing in American politics right now.
	And of course, I think that's no coincidence that that's happening in an election year.
	But I actually did a series back in January.
	I am very convinced, based on that series that I did, three-part series about a company called Cyber Reason and their election simulations, that there most likely will not be an election this year.
	Actually, pretty much every U.S.
	intelligence agency and the Department of Justice and a bunch of other, the Pentagon, right, they issued a joint statement last year basically saying that a hostile foreign actor was definitely going to manipulate and upend the 2020 election.
	And so they've been setting up that narrative, not just, you know, these official government statements, but also mass media in the last half of last year, saying it was basically guaranteed that American democracy would not survive the meddling attempts that we are going to see.
	And of course, we haven't seen them yet.
	So that means they're going to come.
	So I think there's a high likelihood of another shoe that's going to drop to further, you know, create chaos and confusion and divisiveness among the American populace, whatever that may be.
	Um, what this, uh, Israeli intelligence front company was simulating last year is very disconcerting, but of course, it's worth pointing out.
	It had a lot of involvement from us intelligence there who, of course, are not trustworthy actors.
	Um, and the fact that they're basically telling you that there's going to be some crazy meddling attempt at either from Russia, China, or Iran, or all 3.
	Um, is, is very disconcerting.
	So I think people, um, would be wise to go back and revise some of those narratives that were being put out last year.
	During the time they were putting this out, by the way, it was known to what the DOD and the U.S.
	intelligence community that there was going to be a pandemic too, right?
	So we're talking about like last November and all of this.
	So all of these narratives were, you know, they were seeding really, um, at the same time that they knew that there was going to be some sort of mass pandemic.
	That was going to be global.
	And they had simulated this, of course, last year at Crimson Contagion and Event 201.
	So I think it's worth taking all of that together and looking at the big picture and going back and revisiting this election narrative, because they're basically making it sound like this hostile foreign actor is going to attack the very heart of American democracy on Election Day and that there's going to be, you know, basically terrorist attacks on Election Day is what this narrative was about, essentially attacking our critical infrastructure, a lot of it through cyber attacks.
	Um, and things of that nature.
	So it's definitely worth, um, revisiting that.
	So in terms of what I think may happen in the election, I would urge people to go back and reread that series.
	It was published at mitpressnews.com.
	Um, but I think a lot of, uh, the success of, of this agenda has to do with it.
	Can Americans this time finally transcend, uh, or at least more Americans transcend the two party agenda?
	Hopefully people that finally realized that, um, The Democratic Party is not a real opposition party, can hopefully get out of that and see that we really need to come together and fight a, you know, technocratic police state that people on both sides should ostensibly oppose.
	So we need to try and reach those people in the least partisan way possible in order to
	try and bridge that gap that they're actively trying to create through these divisive media
	ploys in terms of how they're reporting on the protest lockdowns and basically saying
	that anyone that opposes these policies is a Trump supporter.
	That of course is not true.
	But they're definitely playing it that way.
	And it's being, it looks like some of these protests may be being astroturfed to play
	into those hands.
	And then we're seeing this blame China narrative being created now by PNAC neocons who have
	reformulated.
	I mean, there's a lot of moving parts right now, but I think people need to do their best
	to see the big picture.
	And the big takeaway needs to be that we need to come together to fight this overarching
	agenda that's not just in the United States.
	This isn't a control system that's exclusive to the United States.
	This is a global system that they're pushing to implement.
	So people really need to emphasize, you know, unity and things like that in this period of time if we want to see.
	You know, the next couple months, you know, generate positive outcomes as opposed to more negative outcomes.
	One final thought, though, that I'd like to add really quick is that there is a lot that people can do right now while we're in this situation to try and, you know, stick it, I guess you could say, to these control systems, and that would be to divest from them.
	Basically, you know, what we've been hearing a lot is data is the new oil, right?
	So now that, you know, the oil markets have upended themselves, what they want is your data.
	They want everyone's data, but they want your data, right?
	So the way to fight that is not to give it to them, to try and, you know, unplug a little bit and create, you know, alternative networks and systems where you can, you know, not have to support these guys, essentially divest from a lot of these control systems that, and, you know, economic systems, you know, and things like that.
	So we can build alternatives to the type of, you know, systems they're trying to implement right now.
	And decentralization is the answer, the antidote, really, to a lot of the stuff they're pushing right now.
	So I think it's really important for people to go and look at those sort of alternatives and think about how to develop them right now, right?
	I think that's definitely an important point to point out.
	And also the fact that the mainstream media push to convince you that this is good for you shows that they want people's consent, right?
	So your consent matters.
	So if you don't consent to this, you need to stay vocal about it and stand your ground.
	But what they're trying to do is persuade you To consent to this system for whatever reason.
	So it's important to, um, you know, realize that you as an individual, um, and us as a collective, we have power and we have the power to say no.
	And they're afraid of us saying no, otherwise they wouldn't be doing all of this.
	Right.
	So, uh, those are just my final concluding, slightly positive thoughts for people.
	An obligation, which I share, and that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people.
	To make certain that they possess all the facts that they need and understand them as well.
	The perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.
	I am not asking your newspapers to support an administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people.
	For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they
	are fully informed.
	I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers, I welcome it.
	This administration intends to be candid about its errors.
	For as a wise man once said, an error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.
	We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors, and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.
	Without debate, Without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed, and no republic can survive.
	That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy.
	And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment, the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution, not primarily to amuse and entertain.
	Not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply give the public what it wants, but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate, and sometimes even anger public opinion.
	This means greater coverage and analysis of international news, For it is no longer far away and foreign, but close at hand and local.
	It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news, as well as improved transmission.
	And it means, finally, that government at all levels must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security.
	And we intend to do it.
	And so it is to the printing press, To the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news, that we look for strength and assistance.
	confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be, free and independent.
	So here's this, so here's Dylan Rattigan, here we go.
	That is a mathematical fact!
	This is not some opinion!
	This is a mathematical fact!
	Tens of trillions of dollars are being extracted from the United States of America!
	An entire integrated system, financial system, trading system, taxing system, that was created by both parties over a period of two decades, is at work on our entire country right now!
	And we're sitting here arguing about whether we should do the $4 trillion plan that kicks the can down the road for the President, or burn the place to the ground.
	Both of which are reckless, irresponsible, and stupid.
	And the fact of the matter is, until we actually, and I'm sorry to lose my temper, but I'll tell you what, I've been coming on TV for three years doing this, and the fact of the matter is, There's a refusal on both the Democratic and the Republican side of the aisle to acknowledge the mathematical problem, which is that the United States of America is being extracted.
	It's being extracted through banking, it's being extracted through trade, and it's being extracted through taxation.
	And there's not a single politician that has stepped forward.
	Everybody, you know what his voice is.
	It's Dylan Rattigan, ladies and gentlemen.
	This bill is a additional... I mean, what did this bill...
	This bill is a bunch of money for the richest thousand people to consolidate the hammerlock across the totality of the American economy using taxpayer money to strangle taxpayers.
	And so... While calling it a bailout for taxpayers.
	All of it is just an exploitation of the biological event.
	And so my cynicisms, again, can't keep up with reality.
	It is staggering.
	I don't even know...
	It's one thing to have a financial crisis and repair the financial crisis in a way that's to the benefit of the wealthy to accumulate more assets.
	It's even more beyond comprehension to allow a buyer to basically allow the government and billionaires to exploit the biological crisis to do a massive further consolidation while calling it a rescue.
	A year's worth of drama and took, you know, from September 08 until March of 09.
	The last time to steal a few trillion dollars in assets.
	And in this case, because the biological panic is so severe because they've already done it once before, they're able to facilitate the theft in a matter of days, which is rather impressive.
	And so I share with people the NBC News coverage of this.
	They're not going to report it that way, are they?
	No.
	The correct leadership here is to step up and say, This is not a bailout for the American people.
	This is giving cash to a small group of investors and banks so that they can buy up bankrupt assets from everybody else.
	And then the Fed is going to give out that money to corporations at the Treasury Department and the Fed's behest.
	There's no accounting for where they're going to spend that money before they spend it.
	There's only going to be a perfunctory oversight board of five people who are going to look into $4.2 trillion worth of money given out.
	Well, again, there's a $4 trillion at the Fed, then there's a $2 trillion with the government.
	It doesn't really matter.
	Your point remains the same regardless of the dollar amounts or where the allocations are.
	It's an abomination beyond all comprehension.
	They are actively restructuring the American economy in a way that simply consolidates ownership of assets to a smaller and smaller group in the private sector, using each catastrophe as an opportunity to use taxpayer money to accomplish that.
	And then they call it a bailout for the people.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So this is just a big con and because the people who own the government are now going to, they're just extracting wealth.
	That's right.
	No, they're just getting free money from the taxpayer to go to buy distressed assets from Americans at a time when the assets are distressed because of the biological catastrophe.
	So basically, because you have a lot of people that are in distress from the catastrophe,
	it's a great opportunity to rapaciously strip them of all their assets and make them your
	tenant and take away all their ownership.
	But the only way you can do that is if you have money.
	And so the only place you can really get money is from the government.
	So you get these big companies that get the money from the government, so that the big
	financial institutions get the money from the government, so that they can then just
	eat all the assets and take complete ownership of everything.
	And so you don't think the American...
	And then Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer call it a bailout, and Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth
	Warren say, looks good to me.
	So we've been betrayed by our entire political class, including our pretend heroes of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.
	Unequivocally.
	Wow.
	Taggeringly so.
	Okay.
	But the fact is that somebody should have stopped this bill.
	Do you understand the political... It's stunning to me, because the political value of somebody standing up and saying, this bill is garbage.
	Sure, you have to support the banks, you can't have a financial crisis, but at the same time, you must have intense strings attached to any money that comes out, one.
	And two, you have to provide universal income and universal health care, at least for the duration of the crisis.
	That is obvious to any human being, regardless of your political persuasion.
	The willingness to consciously not see the obvious is impressive to me, actually.
	I've sort of been learning about the degree of human mental illness and its ability to only see what it wants to see, and this is a staggering example.
	I don't even know.
	I really I don't even I don't want to do the rest of the show.
	How the hell?
	I mean, this seems nuts.
	I mean, it is nuts.
	It doesn't seem nuts.
	It is nuts.
	But it's nuts that it's being allowed to happen, and it's going to be allowed to happen, Dylan, because the people who are supposed to tell people about this are bought by the same people who are instituting this policy.
	They're bought by the same people who this policy is made to serve, which is the richest 1% in the country.
	I think as soon as they possibly can, they will.
	I'm sure they're anxious to do that.
	in the United States. So I don't care. Ali Veshi and Chris Hayes are not going to tell you the
	truth about this bill. The banks got bigger after Barack Obama bailed them out. They made the banks
	bigger. They kicked 5.1 million people out of their house.
	Are they going to do that again?
	You think they're going to start kicking people out of their houses? I think as soon as they
	possibly can, they will. I'm sure they're anxious to do that. I think that there's going to be a
	legal. It sounds like they're going to have to wait three months before they can really start
	destroying people's lives. But I'm sure they're anxious for the opportunity.
	It's staggeringly criminal.
	It's staggeringly.
	Brilliant on their part.
	Staggeringly criminal.
	So that's why I said it's like the mafia.
	This is like the bill the mafia would come up with.
	You give the people a turkey at Thanksgiving and then you steal protection money from them for the rest of the year.
	There you go.
	That's what's happening.
	And then you relate to them as if you're their best friend in the world and then you let them vote for you and call yourself a democracy.
	So this is going to make income inequality much worse.
	It'll be harder for people to get their fair share of the profits that they generate in the businesses that they work at.
	But what they're doing right now politically is dangerous and may provoke Some social problems.
	So you're saying that you think the yellow vest scenario is likely after people figure out what is happening?
	Maybe, or maybe Donald Trump can redirect that energy to kill Mexicans or, you know, there's lots of places that you can point hostile energy to other innocent victims to avoid having to deal with it yourself.
	And they're very manipulative that way.
	Right.
	So they find a whipping boy, a scapegoat.
	And then all the people's, every problem you have because of this corporate bailout, they can then funnel that energy towards a scapegoat.
	Yeah, and that scapegoat can be the Republicans, that scapegoat can be the Democrats, so you can blame either one of the parties.
	That's the beautiful thing about the two corrupt parties working together so magically in these situations is, there's lots of finger pointing as to whose fault it is.
	Was it, you know, where's Mitt Romney?
	Where's Bernie Sanders?
	Where's the Republicans?
	Where's Donald Trump?
	All of that energy is really beneficial to them because it allows them to continue to do whatever they want while everybody's blaming somebody else.
	It's sort of a who's on first to blame.
	And then beyond the political blaming, you can get into all of the identity targeting.
	It's not about breaking up the monopolies at this point, even just the corporate monopolies.
	It is literally about breaking The corrupt hammerlock of the two-party political system that is choking America to death.
	And I'm told every time I try to break that, I give suggestions to break that, people tell me that I'm dumb and I don't understand how politics works and it can't be done and this is it.
	We just have two parties and that's the way it's going to be forever.
	It's a sick country.
	Yes.
	This is a sick country.
	But it's also a beautiful country full of beautiful human beings and it has incredible potential.
	The politics in this country are satanic.
	The human beings in this country are oppressed and abused.
	Our country is run by rotten criminals who enrich themselves at the expense of everybody else and they still tell you you can't have health care.
	How are you going to pay for it?
	It's funny, right?
	And then they're 10 trillion up.
	Anyway, the joke explains itself.
	Yeah.
	Well, you know, the problem is that this is because they're taking advantage of this biological crisis.
	And we also can't protest because of this biological crisis, nor will we probably be able to protest for another year until there's a goddamn vaccine.
	Pretty brilliant on their part, wouldn't you say?
	Because you can't imagine the level of evil that is being perpetrated right now, right?
	It's unbelievable.
	Again, it's mind-boggling.
	But it's also much more sophisticated.
	It's extremely sophisticated and gentle.
	And it's all being done in the context of helping you.
	Of a bailout.
	We're saving you!
	There you go.
	Now you're learning.
	Yeah, we're going to save you.
	We're going to give you health care for five minutes.
	Well, as soon as we can get out in the streets, I'm going to get a yellow vest and a bullhorn, and we're going to do something.
	Yeah, I mean, listen, just stay six feet apart from your fellow protesters.
	Say what you want about America, land of the free, home of the brave.
	The owners of this country don't want that.
	I'm talking about the real owners now.
	The real owners, the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions.
	Forget the politicians.
	The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice.
	You don't.
	You have no choice.
	You have owners.
	They own you.
	They own everything.
	They own all the important land.
	They own and control the corporations.
	They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the State Houses, the City Halls.
	They got the judges in their back pockets.
	And they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear.
	They got you by the balls!
	They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying.
	Lobbying.
	To get what they want.
	Well, we know what they want.
	They want more for themselves and less for everybody else.
	But I'll tell you what they don't want.
	They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking.
	They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking.
	They're not interested in that.
	That doesn't help them.
	That's against their interest.
	That's right.
	They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they get f***ed by a system that threw them overboard 30 years ago.
	They don't want that.
	You know what they want?
	They want obedient workers.
	Obedient workers.
	People who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork, and just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime, And the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it.
	And now they're coming for your social security money.
	They want your retirement money.
	They want it back.
	So they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street.
	And you know something?
	They'll get it.
	They'll get it all from you sooner or later.
	Because they own this place.
	It's a big club.
	And you ain't in it!
	You and I are not in the big club.
	By the way, it's the same big club they used to beat you over the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe.
	All day long, beating you over the head in their media, telling you what to believe, what to think, and what to buy.
	The table is tilted, folks.
	The game is rigged.
	And nobody seems to notice.
	Nobody seems to care.
	Good, honest, hard-working people.
	White collar, blue collar, doesn't matter what color shirt you have on.
	Good, honest, hard-working people.
	Continue.
	These are people of modest means.
	Continue to elect these rich suckers who don't give a f**k about them.
	They don't care about you.
	At all.
	You know?
	And nobody seems to notice, nobody seems to care.
	That's what the owners count on.
	The fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant, because the owners of this country know the truth.
	It's called the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it.
	You have to be asleep to believe it.
	All one side of the universe is plaguing our country.
	Plaguing our country.
	Our country.
	Plaguing our country.
	Our country.
	Plaguing our country.
	They got you by the balls!
	Even if I'm on the losing side of a fight, I still want to go down swinging.
	It would suck to be so close to such an unjust fight and not be able to do anything about it.
	Yes.
	It is hard to look at that situation and really understand it.
	And it's horrible to look back at it now and know that we didn't do anything about it.
	Because I agree with you.
	You gotta go down swinging.
	And I'll tell you this, if you fight with all you've got, more often than not, you won't go down at all.
	You win.
	But you gotta make that attitude part of your everyday life.
	The extra rep.
	The extra mile.
	The extra round.
	The right choices.
	To make yourself stronger mentally and physically.
	Stand and fight.
	Fight against weakness and against fear.
	Fight against weakness and against fear.
	Fight against time and decay.
	Fight back!
	Go down swinging.
	Give every day everything you've got.
	And when you face a challenge, even something where you don't believe you can win, maybe it's a situation where you cannot win.
	But if you can't win, remember this.
	You have nothing to lose.
	You watch those nature documentaries on the cable?
	Yeah.
	You see the one about lions?
	Yeah.
	Look at this lion.
	He's the king of the jungle.
	Huge mane out there.
	He's laying down under a tree in the middle of Africa.
	He's so big.
	He's so hot.
	He doesn't want to move.
	Now, the little lion cubs, they start messing with him.
	He's biting his tail, biting his ears.
	He doesn't do anything.
	Nothing.
	Now, the other animals, they notice this.
	They start to move in.
	The jackals.
	Hyenas.
	They're barking at him, laughing at him.
	They nip his toes and eat the food that's in his domain.
	They do this, and they get closer and closer and bolder and bolder, until one day, that lion gets up and tears the shit out of everybody, runs like the wind, eats everything in his path.
	Because every once in a while, the lion has to show the jackals who he is.
	It's too late to be scared. I'm going to the other room.
	You come out when you're ready.
	Thank you.
	you There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part, you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop, and you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!
	I'm a fighter, take a step back I'm on fire, nothing's gonna kill me
	Nothing's gonna stand in my way Tryna break me, but I can't break
	I'm a bad dream, and you can't wake Nothing's gonna kill me
	Nothing's gonna stand in my way Are you talking to me?
	We're all both idle to the floor Ticked off, yeah we need a little more
	Cause we are ready for a street fight Stand down, there's a fire in my soul
	All alone, yeah I'm losing all control Cause we are ready for a street fight
	I'm a madman in the trenches Leave you broken and defenseless
	Nothing's gonna kill me Nothing's gonna stand in my way
	I'm a car crash on the highway Better stay down, under my chains
	Nothing's gonna kill me Nothing's gonna stand in my way
	What?
	One country, two stories.
	Plaguing our country.
	Plaguing our country.
	Plaguing, plaguing, plaguing our country.
	I ain't playing no games!
	We're all four-title to the floor.
	Sister, can we need a little more?
	Cause we are ready for a cheap fight!
	It is a mathematical fact!
	This is not some opinion!
	This is a mathematical fact!
	Tens of trillions of dollars are being extracted from the United States of America!
	The Jackets... The Beanies... The Mockingbees... They got you by the balls!
	If you fight with all you've got...
	More often than not...
	You don't go down at all.
	You win.
	To the world.
	Until one day... That lion gets up and tears the shit from the airplane.
	Because every once in a while... The lion has to show the jackals... Who he is.
	It's too late to be scared.

▲