All Episodes
Previous Next
July 21, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
01:01:20
DR DAVID MARTIN: ALARMING INTERVIEW: PLANNED GENOCIDE
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
- Dr. David Martin.
He shared tons of information about the COVID agenda already in this last episode.
He talks about CRISPR and gene editing technology.
He also shares how the World Health Organization stated the possibility that we could actually be responding to planned epidemics.
He also shares how the United States government amended the IHR in 2005, giving them the ability to enforce mandates even at the sign of an anticipated epidemic.
Your background, it'd be great to start there for camera, and then let's dive into some of the interesting things that you're talking about in regard to, because I was bringing up the venoms.
We're here at a live event, we just played this film, Covenom 19, and I really appreciated some of the things that you were sharing, because some of the research in conotoxins, which is a snail venom, and which arguably is more deadly than even snake venom, is the technology that's been used in various capacities.
Right.
And arguably in bioterrorism.
And this is the thing that we talk a bit about this.
We're going to talk a bit about monkeypox and, you know, a bunch of really interesting things, Ukraine, Russia, things that people should consider.
And I appreciate the energetic approach that you take, which is really about staying in a place of peace And I love the verse in Isaiah 28, He will keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on Thee, because he trusts in Thee.
And I think that that's the premise by which we approach all this information.
To trust in God, but we want to be aware of what's going on.
So yeah, let's start with your credentials and background.
Well, my background is very crazy.
The official credentials are my undergraduate degrees from Goshen College in Northern Indiana.
I got my Master's in Physiology from Ball State University, where I was very involved in the Human Performance Laboratory there.
Did all kinds of studies on radioactive isotopes to measure proteins and do all kinds of other things.
And then, you know, we had the contract for a lot of the work on Gatorade's final formulation when Quaker Oats bought that.
And did a lot of work in medical technologies, physiology optimization, and so forth.
And then I went to the University of Virginia, got my doctorate, joined the medical school faculty in radiology and orthopedic surgery, and ran, at the time, the world's first medical device contract research organization for the FDA.
So that's a little bit of the official background.
But the relatively equally official but unofficial background is in the 1990s, I ran a company called Mosaic Technologies.
And what we did in Mosaic was an enormous amount of treaty-restricted technology transfer.
And what that meant, and a lot of people don't know even what that means, but after the Second World War there were an enormous number of laws passed about what countries could export and what countries couldn't export based on offensive military criteria.
Most of the penalties that went to the Axis countries of the Second World War, Germany, Japan, and the rest of a bunch of the Axis powers, and then by extension a lot of Eastern Europe, was that any offensive military technologies were restricted from transfer.
The problem with that is the United States was very interested in a bunch of the technologies that were being developed in those countries, and so the role Mosaic had was to go into countries, look at what the technologies were, look at the defense technologies, and then find civilian ways to export those.
So you can think of it metaphorically as kind of a swords into plowshares kind of business, where we went, looked for military technologies that could be civilianized, and right now things like Interventional cardiology.
Anytime you have a gamma camera that's actually measuring interventional radiology, those cameras came out of our work with technology transfer out of Russia.
Stealth material.
Anytime you shape a reflectance or an antenna using any RF shielding or RF devices, those are things.
Everybody who's carrying a cell phone is using technology that we took out of Japan and other places.
What we did was we did an enormous amount of surveying of what was going on in military laboratories around the world.
And as you can imagine, one of the things you find is biologicals and chemicals.
Because, you know, most people think of the Bond Lab, you know, where they've got the cars with guns and they've got all the kind of cool toys.
And I saw a lot of those, but we also saw a lot of biological and chemical weapons.
And so in the late 1990s going into the early 2000s, I was asked by the United States government to start profiling an enormous number of the biological weapons programs around the world.
And that's where the story gets interesting.
Because in 2003 I was asked by the United States government to go to Slovenia to the Eurotalks 2003 conference and that's a very important conference that people should kind of pay attention to because if you remember what was going on in 2003 this is against the backdrop of what was supposedly the first SARS outbreak.
It's important to realize that inside of that particular conference and what I would encourage people who have an inquiring mind to do is is go back and look at who presented at that conference and specifically work that was being presented out of the Philippines And other parts of Southeast Asia.
Because what you saw during that period of time was a deep fascination among the defense research institutions around the world in a number of things.
Anthrax, which had been made popular two years earlier, courtesy of the September 2001 biological weapons attack here in the United States, with the anthrax scare that very few people remember.
When you say September 2001, most people think about the towers falling.
Very few people think about... Oh, hold on a minute.
There was the other thing that happened in September, too, which was a biological weapons attack in the United States.
Wow.
Perpetrated, are you ready for this?
By the United States.
Of course.
I mean, we sent 700,000 or 800,000 people to their deaths for the towers that fell.
And did you ever hear about the accountability for the anthrax attacks?
Yeah, you never heard about it.
You know why you never heard about it?
Why?
Because nobody was ever held accountable.
Yeah.
That's why you never heard about it.
How many people died from anthrax?
Well, so this is an interesting question.
The headlines say that it's fibrous, you know, the notables that were the The media outlets that got hit with these, you know, these envelopes where they opened them up and anthrax spores got into them and killed them.
We actually will never know the number because there is no official tally.
We don't have a record of it.
But the point of that particular disruption Which was, interestingly, timed to be also in September of 2001, which is very, very interesting.
Particularly given the fact that in May, prior to the September of 2001, in May the United States Army had ordered 300 million doses of ciprofloxacin, which is the drug that is used to treat anthrax.
And you heard what I just said.
In May, before September, And by the way, you get anthrax, just to be clear, you get anthrax from being a hide tanner.
I don't know about you, but I don't know any hide tanners.
I didn't know of the great buffalo hunt of 2001.
I didn't know that we were all going to go out and be hide tanners in the summer of 2001, requiring this amazing amount of anthrax treatment to be available in September of that year.
So you need to start putting pieces together and going, well hold on a minute, this is apparently this kind of nut job inside of one of the defense labs that weaponized anthrax and got it out in the mail, except for the tiny inconvenient fact of we were buying treatments for it at the tune of 300 million doses before the attack actually happened.
So you tell me.
Does that make sense?
No.
Of course it doesn't make sense.
But the reason why it's important and the reason why I'm telling you about this conference is because the conference is not what you think it is.
But the who was at the conference is more important.
Because that's where we started seeing organizations like the National Institutes of Health.
It's where we started seeing institutions like NIAID and DARPA getting together and starting to talk about how you could make all sorts of offensive and defensive responses to toxins.
One of the most fascinating toxins that received a ton of air coverage then was conotoxin.
Yeah.
And conotoxin specifically because for those people not familiar with conotoxin, that toxin is one of the most lethal toxins nature has ever produced.
Yeah.
It's a very tiny little shellfish that lives usually in the brackish and coastal waters around a lot of the Philippines and parts of the Southeast Asian islands, archipelagos, and peninsulas.
Yeah, all different types of cone cells.
Tons of different ones, but what happens is that they all have these little barbs, and inside the little barbs they deliver a toxin which is lethal within 30 seconds to the majority of people.
It is actually so deadly that, you know, you get hit by it, you're dead.
It's not an anti-venom kind of thing.
You can't have a response to it.
And the civilian use for some of these toxins, ironically, was to use them as muscle paralytics for medical procedures.
There was a discussion back at the time about using certain parts of the conotoxin venom to be a potential paralytic of the heart tissue so that you could actually paralyze a small part of the heart during the implantation of electrodes for embedded Cardioversion technology.
So Medtronic was looking at maybe a pacemaker where you could put these little electrodes in and rather than stop the whole heart, you'd actually stop just a tiny bit of the heart using the toxin and the heart would come back to life after the surgery was over.
Because small amounts of the toxin are paralytic but not lethal.
Larger amounts of the toxin are extremely lethal.
And so there were, once again, these very interesting blurring the lines of should we be doing it?
Should we not be doing it?
Is it a good thing to research?
Is it a bad thing to research?
But inside of that room, there were over 17 scheduled pathogens that were being discussed for both offensive and defensive military use.
And it was the following year that DARPA decided to start funding the militarization of all of these pathogens.
Wow.
Now the reason why that's important is because about a year later there was a very fascinating project.
The former director of the Office of Naval Research in 2004 began looking at a program to look at whether or not we could have biosecurity of the water supply of Washington, D.C.
And what I would say on camera is this.
That project, which came out of a program developed by the former director of the Office of Naval Research for the Water Supply of Greater Metro DC, is what I would call a target-rich environment for somebody to go examine.
Because if we really want to understand the depths of depravity that the government is willing to consider going, to unleash pathogens into the general population.
That particular project, tied to the 2003 Eurotox conference, would be a very, very fruitful place for people to apply research. - Wow, thank you for that crumb to lead us somewhere very helpful. - Well, and this is the point.
A lot of people understand that the only thing they call research is getting on Google and going to a Wikipedia site, and they think that they've got all the knowable knowledge that's out there.
The problem is, Google, or Wikipedia, or any of the what we call knowledge economy tools, is only as good as the questions you ask of it.
Yeah.
It's also compromised by what is not indexed.
Because sometimes information needs to be deciphered and discovered without using the internet.
Sometimes you actually have to go to paper files.
Oh, interesting.
More crumbs.
Thank you.
I can read between the lines, thank you.
And I think something that is interesting for people is understanding that this branch of the CIA, or this project called MK-Ultra, MK-Delta, MK-Naomi, they're real things, they're declassified.
I was citing some of the documents there that I brought to Dr. Ardis, and in that understanding of what happened and the discovery with MK-Ultra, it was classified as germ warfare.
And people like Frank Olson, this scientist at Fort Detrick, he gets drugged and he flies out, gets thrown out of a window, or jumps out of a window, but then the autopsy on the bones showed that he was hit in the head before he was exited the building, so this was a total murder.
It was someone that didn't feel that they could morally go through with whatever he was witnessing.
Yeah.
And people have to know about these things.
These things were happening and it was understood that they were going to release these things.
And there were soldiers in China that reported that they were doing germ warfare on international media.
But then they later said, no, no, we were just under duress.
We didn't mean what we said.
But they looked very convicted when they were saying what they were saying.
Well, you know, listen.
Unfortunately, we live in a world where integrity and accountability have long left the realm of the way in which we approach the installation of fear at a large community level.
The fact of the matter is, we understood many, many years ago, and certainly by the time of the Cold War, it became epidemic in the United States.
If you built a fear narrative, you would get the public to accept anything.
I mean, remember that the only way we allowed the First Amendment to be entirely erased is what we alleged to be the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Now, I don't know about you, and listen, the Cuban Missile Crisis involved real people, there was real threats.
I understand all of that.
But the fact that the National Telecommunications Act, which gives the government right to surveil every phone line, to trump every direction of every digital communication that exists on the planet, the fact that that was born of the Cuban Missile Crisis, for me is a very interesting You know, a bit of a puzzle.
Did we really need to lose all of our ability to speak freely, without surveillance?
Because, you know, allegedly Castro was working with the Russians to put nukes in Cuba.
Is that a fair trade-off?
Well, it's a fair trade-off if you convince the public To be afraid of the, you know, all-in terrible consequence of nuclear war, all of a sudden people go, well, if you need to surveil our phone lines to make us safe from the Russians invading through Cuba...
Then we're going to just sign up for it.
Kind of like after 9-11, kind of like after the events of 2001 to 2003, when the PrEP Act was passed, where we said, hey, the public needs to be protected from biological and chemical weapons.
So the PrEP Act, which actually extended immunity to the manufacturers of what were called medical countermeasures or vaccines, that immunity, which was an immunity shield that only benefited corporations, The public was willing to sign off on because it was in the national interest of national security because we wouldn't want anthrax to happen again.
Well, hold on a minute.
The government was where anthrax came from.
So did we solve the problem by shielding manufacturers of pharmaceutical corporations from downstream product liability?
Did we solve the problem that was the problem?
Well, of course not.
And not even close.
What we did was we manufactured a crisis.
We got a whole country to be afraid of going to the mailbox.
And then we stepped in with a... Oh, by the way, the intervention is corporations making vaccines, corporations making drugs need to get immunity shields.
That's as illogical and implausible as you can get.
We create fear and then we have a collateral effect which is not even in the same class as the fear.
Wow.
But this is what all of the psychological warfare technologies which the CIA and Stanford Research Institute, Southwest Research Institute, the Cold Spring Harbor labs, psychology departments all across the country have been programmed to get into this space since the early 1980s of creating distractions
Lee Clough at Schayette Day, a very famous gentleman who allegedly revolutionized advertising marketing through his book Disruption.
Go back and read it very carefully and ask yourself the question, I wonder if Lee Clough and Schayette Day had anything to do with any of these other things?
And then look very carefully at the government programs that Schayette Day has been associated with.
You know, Sade made famous for its amazing marketing of Apple's products worldwide.
The company that brought us that wonderful 1984 video, which was the woman running into the building and throwing a sledgehammer through a computer screen.
And, you know, it was the, essentially the advertisement that made Apple, Apple.
Go back and look.
Go back and look at what else that company's done.
Because it turns out that what we've done is we've actually started to create an environment in which we create a distraction, which gives rise to an animation of fear.
And the solution has nothing to do with the fear.
And that's really where programs, the ones that we talk about, things like MKUltra which have become declassified, let me assure you, That if you followed the lines on a number of these things, and I would highly recommend for people who haven't read it, Hank Crumpton's book, Life Inside the Clandestine Service, the former CIA director, and for a period of time at the State Department, the diplomat for counter-terrorism, counter-insurgency.
That book is a very interesting book to read, but read slowly, because Hank divulged a whole lot of things through the read-between-the-lines, That would have never gone past the CIA's sensors if they actually were reading carefully.
Another book where if you read carefully and you start putting pieces together of what Hank talked about, you find out that there's a bunch of other things that you and I probably would be very interested in knowing about that we don't know about.
And so as these things become declassified, by the time they get declassified, those ships have already sailed.
It's not like we outed MKUltra and finally the CIA cleaned up its act.
Yeah.
No.
It's outed because another program that's far more insidious is actually ongoing.
Exactly.
And even that congressional hearing that I showed was basically more like a stage.
It's a theater.
It is.
It's a theater.
They're disclosing this.
Look how horrifying this is.
To give you the illusion that we've discovered this, we're gonna get rid of it now.
Yes.
Have you disposed of this, is all the questions that the Senate is asking at the church hearing.
I'm like, why would the director of the CIA, William Colby, be outing their program?
But it's also part of the occult, where it's hidden in plain sight.
That's the word occult means hidden.
Well, and that's where I think it's important for everyone to understand, inside of the intelligence apparatus of the United States, and inside of the intelligence apparatus from which that was born, which is the United Kingdom's intelligence apparatus, going all the way back, just to give you a sense of this, going all the way back to Mary, Queen of Scots.
Okay, so that's how far back we have to go to see where all the subterfuge became very important.
Because I've literally held in my hand, by the way, the letter that was used to condemn her and to chop her head off, and at the same time held in my hand her diary.
It doesn't take a handwriting expert to know that the letter that was actually used to condemn her was not written in her hand.
You have to hold both of them to actually see it.
But you know she was set up.
What is that?
That's the same problem.
The problem is, if you're going to manufacture the evidence, if you're going to manufacture the fear, if you're going to manufacture the root cause of the reason why the public should have outrage or consternation or acquiescence, if you're going to manufacture that, then what you have to do is you have to have an audacious statement or an audacious act.
Then you have to say the response is justified.
But the more you can create cognitive dissonance between those two things, the more the public is left going, wow, clearly somebody far smarter than me is at the helm, because I don't understand how those two things work together.
Well, you don't understand because they don't.
But if you create enough of a cognitive distraction, Gregory Bateson called this the double bind, where you see reality, and then you're told what you're supposed to see, and you go, those things don't match.
But the problem is, humans have this unfortunate tendency to go, well, but the person in power said that I should have seen this.
And I didn't see it.
But they told me I was supposed to see it.
And what Bateson describes as the double bind is a cognitive shift.
He refers to it as a schizophrenic shift, where you actually start seeing the world through the distorted lens.
Convincing yourself that your observation is the problem.
So anytime you actually have these congressional outings of, did the CIA have people on, you know, the payroll and media?
Did the CIA have, you know, a special program where they were using chemicals and all kinds of behavioral modification techniques?
When that comes out, The only thing you know is they are outing that as a distraction against the program that's actually running.
That's the reason why I encourage people to look very carefully at things like Eurotalks 2003.
In 2005, look at the National Conference on Bioengineering in Tehran that happened to be on Easter Sunday, 2005 in Tehran.
Ask yourself, why would a US citizen be asked to go to a bioengineering conference in Tehran on Easter Sunday 2005?
And ask yourself, I wonder who else was at that conference?
See, the problem is, to your point, these things are hidden in plain sight.
But the big problem is that if we now are told the story which says that the only fact verification we have, by the way, if you're in Snopes or you're on any of the AP or Reuters fact-checking staff, the only thing you look at is Google searches and Wikipedia searches.
Well, guess what's not there?
The proceedings of those conferences.
So, we've got an interesting problem.
The verifiability of a fact can only come through Google.
Google doesn't index the facts.
Now we've got a beautiful situation where we have the government being able to say that we are perfectly capable of telling you what the narrative is.
We have a complicit technology sector that's willing to make sure that all of the facts match that story.
And every now and then, we're going to drop the actual facts in, like venoms and toxins.
But because they're so far away from the consciousness of a person's mindset that goes clearly, we wouldn't be putting toxins in the water, would we?
Clearly, we wouldn't be envenomating a population, would we?
Clearly we wouldn't do that.
Well, go back to the two dates I just talked about.
Go back to who was talking at those two dates.
Go back to who was participating.
Go back to the companies that were involved with setting up those conferences.
And ask yourself, why is it that we didn't see those things on the front page newspapers the day they happened?
Why were they not disclosed?
And that's why I'm sympathetic to the people who spend time chasing what I refer to as research.
And the problem is most of us don't know how to research anymore because we're pretty convinced that we can do it from a keyboard in the comfort of our own home.
Most research can't be done that way.
What we can do is get the regurgitation of propaganda, but we have a hard time getting research if we can't lay our hands on source documents.
Speaking of cognitive dissonance, one of the things, and that's fascinating and very, very helpful.
Thank you, David.
And something that we were just chatting about before the cameras went on, the cognitive dissonance that is triggered when looking at a study like the one that came out of Italy, where the 20 people with COVID have The presence of one of more of 36 different types of toxin-like peptides, almost identical to the venoms of animals, and it lists them all, four different types of Eastern brown snake.
They're so different from each other.
Even the amino acid chain length of a single species is still broken into different categories because of different types of those venoms.
And then, you know, the crown of thorns, starfish, California cone, all different conotoxins, 15 different cone toxins, conotoxins.
Cone snails.
And so then how does somebody then discredit the theory that there could be venoms that are actually the causative factor for covid when they see a study like that?
What do you how do is there a way around it?
Well, I think that the important thing is to realize that if you are compensated for the facts that you're presenting, you are unlikely to be an objective observer.
OK, you know, one of the things that a lot of people have have criticized me about is over the years I've been involved in briefings of intelligence agencies and law enforcement operations, investigations with the Department of Justice, antitrust investigations and so forth.
And people go, oh, look, he's part of the problem because he's actually talked to, you know, the baddies, whatever the baddies are.
Well, the fascinating thing is, the bad thing is, A, I tell people that I've done it, so there it is, hidden in plain sight.
The second thing is, if you go back and look very carefully, what you'll find is, I don't get compensated for the things I do.
Go look at my congressional testimonies, go look at my intelligence briefings, go look at my FBI briefings, go look at all of those and ask, well, where was the contract that paid you to do it?
There wasn't one.
And there wasn't one because I wasn't paid to do it.
I saw a crime.
I saw a thing that was being done, and I saw it through the business that I run.
And when I came aware of a thing that was clearly an illegal action, I went to what should have been the right places to go.
Intelligence, law enforcement, whatever that was, I went with information and said, this is something we should concern ourselves with.
Now the great news is that has been to great effect.
I know quite personally that an enormous number of lives have been saved because I found out information before it happened.
I can sleep every night knowing that I actually stopped the loss of innocent lives many times over the last three decades now.
So the good news is I actually know the value of what I do.
I also know I've never taken a dollar ever for any of that work.
And there's a reason why.
I want to know that my message is integrity filled.
I want to know that what I have to say is just the facts and just truth.
And the great thing is, as evidenced by the COVID outbreak and the propaganda associated with COVID, the reason why I have never been successfully fact checked is because I'm actually stating the facts.
So as much as people have tried to discredit the theories that I'm putting forward, and they can debate theories until the cows come home, you can't dispute the facts, because the documentation is quite literally in my possession.
And so, when a lot of people go and research, what they have is they have a theory that they're pursuing, they're chasing down their angle of a story.
And the difference for me is I've been making direct observations of these things.
So I'm not researching a thing.
I'm remembering a thing.
It's a big difference.
Because when you remember a thing, you also know where you left the breadcrumb trail so you can go back and find it again.
And so those are really helpful distinctions, and that's why in the work that we're doing, that's extremely important.
It's the reason why when we think about monkeypox, right, the outbreak of monkeypox, and you sit there and go, okay, well, hold on a minute.
Is there really an outbreak of monkeypox?
So we have to go back and look at how monkeypox became a thing.
There's a very interesting set of data.
NIAID, NIH and others know about this.
And they know that during the effort to eradicate smallpox, there seemed to be somewhere about a 15% of the population that seemed to have a relatively low response to smallpox or smallpox injections.
But it seemed to have a manifestation as monkey pox, and that 15% number seems to hang out in an enormous number of the observational data of populations that were exposed to all kinds of these different pox, what we call pox viral models.
What's fascinating is that in March of 2021, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, and you heard what I said correctly, NTI, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, hired by none other than Dustin Moskowitz, the co-founder of Facebook, was the one that forecast that in May of 2022, we would have an outbreak of monkeypox.
Now, you heard the dates right.
Wow.
Let's put it all together and do it in slow motion.
March of 2021, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, that was funded by Facebook's co-founder Dustin Moskowitz, forecast an outbreak of monkeypox in May of 2022.
Wow.
Predictive programming, telling you what we're about to do to you.
Published it.
Now, do you think most people would have looked up the Nuclear Threat Initiative?
In the, I don't know, in the throes of COVID?
No, you wouldn't have thought to do it for a good reason.
It's called the Nuclear Threat Initiative.
That's kind of the reason why you wouldn't go there to look for a public health document.
Because it doesn't sound like a public health kind of institution.
But they published that they were going to have not only a monkeypox outbreak that started in May of 2022, but if you read a little further into that report you find out that in the next few weeks we're going to find out that this was a genetically engineered variant of monkeypox that's engineered to be vaccine resistant.
That's in their stated objective.
Wow.
Published in March of 2021.
What makes it worse is, by the end of 2023, they're saying that we're going to have 271 million people dead.
And you heard that number correctly.
That's concerning.
Very concerning.
271 million people dead.
3.2, I think it's 3.2 or 3.something, 3.2 billion people infected.
million people dead.
3.2, I think it's 3.2, 3.something, 3.2 billion people infected. 271 million fatalities.
And the thing is disclosed to be vaccine resistant.
that.
Now that put me on an interesting inquiry, which is, okay, who's been doing research on this?
And lo and behold, you start peeling back that onion, and all of a sudden you find some very fascinating, interesting overlaps, because one of the things you find is that a lot of the labs that were working on monkeypox were working also on the African swine flu.
And ironically, one of the places that the African swine flu is being genetically modified and optimized was, are you ready for this?
The Ukraine.
Why would it be that we're having a protracted distraction in the Ukraine right now?
What's going on with that?
And why did we have to have a protracted distraction in the Ukraine?
Why did we have to have caravans of vehicles leaving biological facilities in the Ukraine?
Why did we have to move all kinds of things allegedly under the cover of night or out of labs under the cover of, you know, canopied trucks and so forth?
Why did we need to do that?
And why is it that The regions that were affected by a number of the pathogens associated with monkeypox also happened to be installations that also had the African swine flu.
And is it possible that maybe we're going to have an announcement that we have a monkeypox outbreak, but in fact what we're going to do is we're going to once again build a series of toxins.
These are going to be a family of things, which happen to be engineering the world to think.
That we are having an outbreak of a new pathology, when in fact, if you really examine the data, what you're actually looking at is data that suggests that what we may be doing is finding nature's descriptors, nature's pathogens, nature's culprits, to deal with the multiply injected populations who are now going to have a number of fatalities, not from monkeypox,
Not from a swine flu, not from a bird flu, but in fact from the injections that we gave them, where now we're taking all the symptoms that those people are going to present with, and we now have a convenient narrative that says it's a new pathogen.
Now remember, we've got a tiny little problem, because since you could get COVID without ever having SARS-CoV-2, remember?
This is the disease that mysteriously can be caused by a thing that doesn't cause the thing.
Because we were told in every declaration that closed down every state and every country that SARS-CoV causes COVID.
Except for the tiny fact that most people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 never got COVID, and most people who had COVID never tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.
So the causative relationship is slightly mysterious.
Add to that the fact that the only protracted death increases that we saw were after we started injecting people with spike proteins and all sorts of other things that were in the cocktail that we were injecting.
And now all of a sudden we're looking for the world's basket of pathogens that we can say are outbreaking conveniently as we time the fatalities associated with the injection.
If you go back and you look at the laboratories that actually have been doing, allegedly, the monkeypox work, you find that you have the perfect formula to cover, with new outbreaks, the deaths from the injection.
We are manufacturing a cover story in the form of a new epidemic.
The interesting thing about that is that if you sit back and say, the guy who wrote all the checks for this, Dustin Moskowitz, what's in it for him?
Because he's the guy who wrote the check for Event 201.
He's the guy who wrote the check for the NTI study on monkeypox.
He's that guy.
Sure.
Well, you have to ask, so Dustin, what on earth could possibly motivate you to be so interested in monkeypox?
And it turns out the answer is very simple.
It's called Sherlock Biosciences.
Because Sherlock Biosciences, interestingly enough, is the company that has the emergency use authorization for the first time in human history to edit the human genome using CRISPR technology.
And they got that EUA under the cover of COVID-19.
So is it any surprise that Dustin is putting into the scenario for the public to now take on board that monkeypox is a vaccine-resistant pathogen?
Not a surprise at all.
Because he never wanted the world to accept a vaccine platform.
He wanted the world to accept CRISPR.
And he has set the whole world up to fall for it.
Perfectly.
And no one is talking about it.
Nobody.
So...
So people like CRISPR would be, people would, what is CRISPR?
Yeah, that's a great question.
We should be asking that.
What that is, is this palindromic repeating sequence where you go into DNA or RNA and you clip out sections or clip in sections and you edit, literally edit The gene of the human or the gene of whatever the eukaryotic or prokaryotic cell is or anything else.
You take a thing that is a thing and you clip in or clip out whatever you want to add or subtract.
From your own self?
From yourself.
So I want you to think about this and I try to do this in a way that gives people a bit of a mental picture.
This is not a technical correct picture.
This is a mental picture that I want you to think about.
Sure.
Are you familiar with diabetics that have to have Dialysis, because their kidneys have failed?
Of course.
Right?
Imagine if in, I don't know, a year and a half or two years, we set up gene editing centers.
Yeah.
Where every couple months you have to go in, and you have to have blood or tissue taken out, and then you have blood or tissue put back in, and you're running a dynamic editing system that is your upgrade.
Because another pathogen got released, or might get released.
If you look at what the World Health Organization just talked about last week in Geneva, what you find is a very fascinating conversation.
Because what they talked about is the possibility that we could actually be responding to planned epidemics.
Did you hear what I just said?
Planned.
Not actual epidemics.
And it was the United States government who amended the IHR 2005 guidelines in their proposed amendments that actually took out the fact that we at least have to have a recognized pathogen.
Now it can be for a recognized or an anticipated epidemic.
It's going to be fascinating to just tell people that on Thursday we're thinking that it's probably going to be a swine flu, so go line up.
And by the way, you're going to have this very interesting RFID chip, or you're going to have something else that's going to be embedded.
And before you go to the grocery store, before you get on a bus, before you get on a plane, before you get anywhere else, we're going to go ahead and read the chip to make sure that you're not an at-risk crazy who hasn't gotten his latest upgrade.
Oh, wow.
I'm letting people know this because until we actually realize this is a felony criminal conspiracy.
This is racketeering.
This is domestic terrorism.
These are things for which felony laws exist.
These are things for which the prison terms are minimum 99 years and if it's an institution that's promulgating those things it's a hundred million dollar per count violation fine.
That's what we should be focused on, because the fact of the matter is, since the 2003 Eurotalks conference, I can sit here with absolute certainty and say that we saw a world in which we knew that if we were going to manage a population, and that means manage its numbers and manage its behaviors, we realized that the biological threat was far more valuable than the nuclear threat.
And so what we'll do is we'll use the invisibility of a pathogen to bring the world to its knees.
And as Kim often says, and I know as an Australian you've heard the song enough, rather die on your feet than live on your knees.
I mean, this is a time when people really need to stand up and really pay attention.
Because we are on the verge of the cover-up of all times.
According to Pfizer's CEO can lead to the loss of half of the world's population.
Really?
Yep.
Huh.
They're telling you.
Just telling you.
It's right out there.
And it seems permission based.
In the spiritual realm, permission based, so I tell you something and I'm looking for an acceptance from you.
For example, the world is overpopulated.
They want us to think the earth is overpopulated.
That way, when we give voice to that, we're volunteering ourselves to be a sacrifice.
You don't realize that that's what they're doing, but that's exactly what they're doing.
Well, and that's the reason why we have to have these conversations.
These conversations are the most important we can have right now, because what we have to realize is that this entire thing is programming the public to accept a genocide of global proportions.
You know, we've been told under the modern revision of where we're going with what is called the blockchain world or the natural economy, which is a term that they like to use, that for the world to meet its carrying capacity, we have to have the equivalent of 5.5 times Earth.
Just so that the current population can live.
Now, if you're told that we need 5.5 times the number of Earths that we have just to hold the carrying capacity of the Earth right now, besides the prima facie evidence of the fact that that can't be true because we're all living here right now on this Earth, on the one Earth we have, we're doing that right now.
And you get in a plane and fly over and look out the window, it is so densely underpopulated.
So the fact that we allege that we need 5.5 Earths just to make it, you know, livable.
What they're really saying is we're reducing the population by 80%.
Yep.
We're cutting it down to one-fifth of what it is.
Yep.
And we need to say it.
That's what it is.
This is not about how many more Earths do we need.
This is a moral justification, a logic justification, a cognitive assent to the reduction of the population by 80%.
Yeah, you got it.
And David, I think you'll find this interesting.
What I think is the underlying premise that allows people to accept this is that we believe in a sacrificial principle.
Correct.
And sacrifice must be made for the greater good.
It's a belief that God needs, like, so in a theological realm, that God is needing a sacrifice and it's an atonement for one's own sins.
Yep.
I know because when I would watch films where people, even when I would watch like, for example, you find this even really interesting, like the apocalyptic films where populations would get wiped out, I didn't realize that subconsciously the satisfying aspect of something that's just traumatic, that's fictitious, why would I bother watching this?
It was an atonement.
It was the people being taken, and this was a satisfaction of the judgment that I felt that I was under.
And so other people dying was a necessary, but sound, reality that I was willing to entertain in my mind until I said, no, God is not a God of sacrifice.
And God loves, and this is why Christ said, mercy is better than sacrifice, to Harkin and the Fat of Rams.
It's beautiful.
And I point out the fact that we've been advised, and if we come through the lens of a traditional either Christian or Judeo-Christian narrative, what you find is that we have a very interesting problem.
Which is, because we adopted the 4th century innovation, which, by the way, came out of the Roman Empire, did not come out of, you know, the Levant.
This is the Roman Empire.
In the 4th century, we adopted the notions of things like original sin, transmutability of the broken nature of man, all of those things.
Those were invented in the 4th century.
Wow.
Yes.
Isn't it interesting that the only places that confirmed asymptomatic spread of COVID were places that also believe in original sin?
No country on earth that doesn't have either a Judeo-Christian or Christian background, no country had asymptomatic spread except the ones that also have original sin.
Here's what's happening.
We're using the metaphor energy of a belief system that we already have to hijack the human race into another form of submission.
Just like you said about sacrifice.
We're actually using the theology that way too many of us have seen corrupted without paying attention to its corruption.
That very theology is what is being used to bring us to our knees.
But this time, we need to understand what the God is.
Because it's not the God that you think it is.
And it's not some sort of vengeful God that's some grandfather figure sitting on a cloud somewhere going, no, no, no, bad people.
No, that's not what it is.
These are sociopathic individuals who have hijacked every energetic field to make sure that they get to create man in their image.
Whether that is the cyborg delusions of an Elon Musk or a Stephen Hawking.
Whether that is the permanent dependency illusions of an Anthony Fauci or a Pfizer or a Moderna.
No matter what it is, this is actually creating humanity to be permanently enslaved and permanently dependent.
Which has never been the will of any divine creator ever, ever, ever in the history of humanity.
We were meant to walk naked in a garden.
We were not meant to be hooked up to a CRISPR gene editing tool, with our minds and our intellects uploaded to a cloud, consuming something that was barely recognizable as consumable, served to us in an augmented reality of immersive digital.
That's not what we were built for.
Wow.
And that is not the future I'm going to be part of.
Wow.
Amazing.
It's been said that the whole of the mainstream media is an extension of Gnostic belief.
Gnostic belief is the belief that the material realm is evil because it was made by an evil creator that they named the Demiurge, or the Architect, who created the world out of ignorance.
And in a rage, he created this, well, Sophia, the being, created him.
And he, ignorant of the God that came before him, created this world, trapped people in material bodies.
And so many movies are thematically all based around it, but it's then the basis that we're trapped in material bodies.
Every idea that we have of love is fiction.
We have implanted memories, which is the Blade Runner concept, all Gnostic.
And then God is represented as the God of biomechanics.
Yeah.
We're God's machinery.
We have no value or worth to God.
The antithesis of this is the gospel story.
We have just such value to God that he's willing to send his son and deliver him up, not sacrifice Mankind then commits to sacrificing Christ.
God speaks to us through a sacrifice because it's how we understand things, not the heart of God.
Psalm 40 verse 6 says, God has not desired or required sacrifices or sin offerings.
Amazing!
It's life-changing, and it certainly changed my mind.
It took me out of a state of frequency that, for me, made it very hard for me to be a good father and husband.
And so I see the practical reality and how it's all about this individual journey that we have.
Jesus was in an oppressive government, and yet he always would talk about people's personal relationship to God.
He never really railed on the government.
No.
And that's the beauty of what we're leading people to and saying, look at all this.
We're telling you to look at this, not to rail on it, not to be angry, not to hate people.
We're telling you this to say, look at your true relation to God.
Look at how all these things that are around you are manifestations of things that represent a part of who you've been at one point in your life or who you are presently.
And we've manifested some of these realities.
And then what we... Yeah, sure, I'm not blaming the individual for the actions of others, but I'm saying that The Bible talks about us being carnal and salt and that we have the ability to step free from all these things by understanding, believing in God.
Well, I think it's really important to sit back and say that if we ever make the mistake of thinking that somehow the Bill Gates's of the world, the Anthony Fauci's of the world, the Peter Daschik's, the Ralph Baric's, you know, the Peter Daschik's, the Ralph Baric's, you know, the Yuval Harari's, these archetypal villains.
If we think that they're the problem.
They're quite fictitious, right?
Right.
Right.
They are only playing the role that...
That fits into a narrative that at one point or another we've accepted.
Wow.
I pointed out many years ago that when you have an extended life lithium battery, and I want you to think very carefully about this, an extended life lithium battery costs the lithium miner his life.
Because the average age of a lithium miner is 35 years of age.
But we call it an extended life battery.
Listen to what I just said.
Did any of us concern ourselves with that?
You know, when we plugged in our Tesla at home, did we sit there going, well, that was an acceptable sacrifice because the greenness of my behavior because I'm driving a Tesla is worth the life of an unconsidered lithium miner somewhere in South America.
We don't have that conversation because it's uncomfortable.
Right?
Everybody who has lined up and said, well, I hate what the government did with COVID.
I hate what the government did with SARS.
I hate what the government did with injections.
Okay.
Check out what's the battery that's powering your cell phone right now.
You are indifferent to that death.
And by the way, cunningly named Extended Life.
Isn't that funny?
That we call that battery an Extended Life battery, the one that costs someone their life.
That's the one we call Extended Life.
See, here's the problem.
The problem is we have to have what I call repentance.
Which is to not look outward, to not say, oh, there's the bad guy.
You know, the COVID people are the bad guys.
No.
That's atonement.
Our indifference to every unconsidered loss of life that we ever participated in, our indifference towards that is the rage we feel.
And if we think that we are venting that rage, On the bad guys, because now we've got the COVID guys.
We're missing the point.
Because repentance is recognizing that the unconsidered view of life, which each one of us has embodied implicitly and explicitly, the unconsidered view of life is actually just the metastatic extreme of what we're seeing in the people who inject lethal toxins into people's arms.
And yes, we rage against that.
But until we have the integrity of recognizing That if you have a 401k, which is a lot of people, until you actually look in your 401k and tell me that you don't have Rio Tinto in there, tell me that you don't have BHP Billiton, tell me you don't have those stocks in, until you can tell me that, don't tell me that you're opposed to a COVID injection.
Because the problem is, we love to create the vilification of the bad guy without examining the impurity and the hypocrisy of saying, oh, hold on a minute.
Yes, it's terrible when I see a kid go to school with a face mask.
But it's far more terrible to see a three-year-old in Peru or Colombia or any of the lithium mines across the Andean region.
It's far worse to see a three-year-old kid watch his 35-year-old dad die so that you can have the battery in your phone.
And we didn't care about that.
Repentance is actually saying that every action we take must be considered.
And the anonymization of the death that we don't even count can no longer be on our watch.
Wow.
No, I appreciate you sharing that, David.
And this concept I'm talking about with somebody atoning for their sins by taking a scapegoat that they perceive as worse than themselves and offering them up, this is what people were doing during the times of Jesus.
They said, oh, he's eating with Republicans and sinners, they're saying, these people are worth nothing, they're detestable, why don't you just get rid of them, kill them?
That's what they're implying, and that's when Jesus said, it's not those that are whole that need a physician, but those that are sick, go on what this means and I'll have mercy and not sacrifice.
You're living a sacrificial way by scapegoating somebody else, but it's your own sins, and you just need to understand that I love you, and I accept you.
And so, that's the freedom, and that's the natural reality that helps us to forgive our enemies.
Otherwise, everything else will carry that energy.
That unforgiveness towards people like Bill Gates will carry that energy.
It will make us difficult people to be around.
You don't think a lot of the people in this movement are struggling?
They're struggling greatly.
We need to help people.
We need to help people to step out of this.
You don't have to live like that.
We don't have to be captured by this.
That is controlled opposition.
Right.
Because you've been stimulated by something and now you are acting in a way that you would not have normally acted.
You're controlled by that stimulus.
That's exactly right.
And you are controlled opposition.
That's exactly right.
You're set up that way.
These characters are positioned to be this way.
The Johnny Depp Amber Heard trial is just a farce.
It's just to control, to make you then scapegoat this woman, which is not a kind thing to do.
And you're being debased by doing that.
It's not kind to ridicule a woman in front of the world for her lying.
But it's all acting.
Right.
Scapegoating, putting people out, hanging people out to dry.
Our minds will continue to be like this.
And this is the judgment, the self-judgment, that Matthew 7 says, Judge not, lest you be judged.
For whatever judgment you measure upon others, it shall be measured upon you.
And that's a self-pronunciation against me.
Of course it is.
It's not God dumping it on me.
That's the thing that God is trying to save us from.
We're like a suicide cult.
Wanting to blame everyone and it's all our own self-judgment.
But we can step right out of it by just saying God is love.
And I love the verse, perfect love casts out fear, for fear has torment.
And the word for torment in Greek is penal infliction.
It's a penalty system.
Just drop it, and then you're in that freedom.
David, you've shared so many amazing, powerful things.
I know that we've got... you stayed a lot longer than you expected to, and I really appreciate it.
Oh, I love it.
I love these conversations.
These are beautiful moments, and, you know, I know some things make it to film, but the conversation is worth sharing, because this conversation is a real conversation.
Yeah.
And the flow of it, and the architect of it, and the path that it takes is actually a gift, and you're welcome to share it in any form that you'd like.
Thank you, David.
I'm very appreciative of that.
And these are great things that you've shared and revealed, and I think that It gives people the right place energetically to think about these things.
Just before you go, have you been thinking at all about, because of what these technologies are, what things that people can do to get better?
I know that's not your specific area.
Yeah.
You're not necessarily a health guy, but you're very aware.
Yeah.
Do you have any thoughts on that?
Well, so I've said many times that the strongest defense against all of this is connection.
Yeah.
The reason I love sitting down, the reason why I hate doing virtual, is because the strongest power that exists in the world is human connection.
The sooner we understand that whether it's sitting down around a common dinner table and having a meal together, whether it's sitting together and having a conversation, whether it's walking the river walk, whether it's whatever you're doing, analog connections is always the single best defense against any of the things that are being perpetrated right now.
So, connect.
Connect.
Connect.
Because connection casts out all fear.
If I know I'm not alone, I can go through anything.
If I have the illusion of being alone, I can't go through anything.
So, the strongest that you can ever be is standing next to another person who is both giving and receiving strength from you.
That's the best thing to do.
Second, be conscious of consumption.
And this is actually a real health thing.
We have decided that it's acceptable to supplement our way and to do all sorts of interventions to try to make up for the deficiencies of industrial agriculture or whatever else.
We need to actually start going, well, hold on a minute.
How about I at least plant a tomato plant?
You don't have to farm a garden.
But how about putting a window box and having wheatgrass in your window box or having celery or whatever?
You can be in an apartment in the middle of a city.
You can actually go back to something where your life force is infusing the food that you're going to consume.
And it turns out, guess what?
If you start doing that, you'll start getting addicted to better food.
▲
Export Selection