Nov. 25, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
25:54
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| What we're being told is definitely not true. | |
| And the question is only nuanced really. | |
| How badly, how badly they're lying to us. | |
| My contention is that There has been, I think, a long-planned, highly-coordinated terror scheme across the world in order to persuade people that there is a public health emergency of international concern. | |
| The measures that have been introduced ostensibly to control the spread of this alleged virus were, in my view, solely put in place to weaken and damage the economies and the societies. | |
| There's very strong, very strong evidence for that. | |
| So I think that's what's going on and I think such is the level of deliberate, avoidable all-cause, elevated all-cause mortality. | |
| There's no question that, for example, medical treatments of people who are said to have COVID-19 in hospital would guarantee their end, their hastening the departure from this life that cannot be uh legitimate and there are so many angles like this where what is being done | |
| injures or kills people and you can I can tell as a very experienced biologist this is quite deliberate the other people haven't made mistakes they're not stupid they know what I know and what they're doing are dangerous uh sometimes injurious sometimes lethal lethal things and so when you add up all of those things together I can't come out uh on the side of oh this is just about money because part of the people who would have authorized it sit astride the money creation process in | |
| in the central banks already and private banks so it's not about money all their money's involved it can't just be about control because they already have gross control over most aspects of our lives whilst leaving us some freedom so they must want more control and the digital | |
| passes the central bank digital currency neither of which are in dispute is the question of what will be done with them and I'm putting it to you that they will be used to control your movement across every threshold and every transaction you do in terms of the thresholds is my contention over time every threshold will be a regulated threshold including that on your own home. | |
| And that's on the card, or if you're still lucky enough to have private transport. | |
| You know, I could try and persuade myself that they just want control, or they just want money, but I'd be lying to myself. | |
| And so I end up with, they don't mind who they hurt or who they kill, you know, to get this control system in place. | |
| And I think that that speech, even if it had no other information, I think it would suggest that they want to kill people, that many of the players that you see, including the Gates and so on, uh belong to families that have had a great interest over decades in the size of the human population certainly going back as far as a century in some cases so this is a multi-generational thing I think it's a combination of very rich people who I understand would always have tried to alter the law and business circumstances to advantage themselves. | |
| And I think to these very old foundations in which families have worked with people who have got a vision that is to take the world in this direction of totalitarianism, transhumanism and depopulation. | |
| And gradually over a long period of time, probably through the WEF and a few other three and four letter acronyms, has basically planted people, supported people, and planted them in positions in large corporates, in governments, in academia, in media. | |
| And to the point where they are already in place. | |
| Refuse genetic vaccines. | |
| It ought to be a matter of fact what exactly is in these vials that people have been injected with. | |
| But I have to tell you, I don't really know. | |
| I was certainly, when I was in industry, I was pro-vaccine. | |
| I would say I now abstain at best and I'm ashamed that I was pro-vaccine because I didn't do my homework. | |
| I worked in the field of small molecules, pharmaceuticals. | |
| I was never in the field of biologicals where the therapeutics that are vaccines were made. | |
| I never looked at the data. | |
| I never thought hard about it. | |
| I just accepted what I'd been taught at school and in university. | |
| And once you start looking, you realise it's extraordinarily questionable what's gone on for decades. | |
| But because I've not done enough homework, I'm not going to unequivocally condemn them either. | |
| What I am doing is unequivocally condemning the Covid-19 genetic vaccines. | |
| This is right in my wheelhouse of rational drug design. | |
| It's not a conventional vaccine. | |
| They have put parts together in order to achieve an objective. | |
| So, you know, I've talked about how dangerous they are intrinsically, and so it is proved. | |
| So reject them. | |
| It's my contention right now that they're not necessary. | |
| Even if there was a viral pandemic, and I'm not convinced there is, but even if there is, the people who would benefit are the ones who die without treatment. | |
| They tend to be the elderly and frail. | |
| Those people, for reasons of the aging of their immune system, do not benefit from these injections. | |
| Their immune system is not capable of doing it. | |
| So the lie is that even if there was a properly researched, safe and effective injection, it wouldn't save very many lives because the very people who are vulnerable are not capable of benefiting from that treatment. | |
| And we know this, unfortunately, from flu vaccines, which I haven't also researched and now I have. | |
| They don't reduce hospitalisation and death in the elderly. | |
| They just don't work, even though they probably do mount immune responses. | |
| So the whole thing was fraudulent. | |
| What they should have done is the genuinely viral pandemic was what Peter McCulloch, Pierre Corey and others have been doing, which is early treatment. | |
| So reject digital vaccines and in fact all kind of cover. | |
| I wouldn't, I'm now not trusting of any product from this industry that's recently been approved and that's because I'm afraid the medicines regulators everywhere are corrupt and no longer doing their job. | |
| So that's the main reason. | |
| They're talking, I heard someone at G20 the other day talking about the next pandemic and it's just bloody outrageous, excuse my language. | |
| a severe pandemic, and we've only technically had a pandemic by one, cheating with the diagnostic test, two, changing the definition of pandemic. | |
| I have thought about this. | |
| I may be wrong, so this might be contentious. | |
| I am not convinced it's possible to have a pandemic of a severe respiratory illness. | |
| I think that severe respiratory illnesses, even if we go with the narrative and say the transmission is by Some item, let's call it vaccine, but a virus that could be something else. | |
| I think the more serious these illnesses are, the more quickly they incapacitate you, they make you unwell, and the more quickly you withdraw from society and transmission terminates. | |
| And the more severe the illness, usually the more quickly you will become ill, the more quickly your transmission will stop. | |
| So it's easy to have a pandemic of the common cold, whatever that really is, because it doesn't really disable most people. | |
| But if you have flying Ebola, and they'll probably try something scary like that next time, I think it's logically impossible for what they are worried about to actually happen. | |
| They're relying on Hollywood film-type scripts. | |
| I don't think they can happen. | |
| If I was wrong, I think there would have been numerous pandemics over time. | |
| And the last ones, really, the last serious ones, are probably the middle ages which we could survive now because they're mostly bacteria. | |
| I'm not sure it's possible to have a pandemic so immunologists on the call please discuss with other immunologists put up a put up a video saying why you agree or disagree. | |
| I absolutely believe that the people you believe became ill or you if it was you that became ill and the people that around you died Definitely were ill and definitely did die. | |
| Okay, I'm not denying that. | |
| The only thing I'm saying is, as a scientist, I believe the cause of death is not what you were told. | |
| That's it. | |
| And then the other thing about... | |
| centralising the world's response to the next lie, the next pandemic by the WHO. | |
| Just a couple of sentences to point out that that would be the craziest thing you could do. | |
| Even if I loved them and they were populated by my friends who I respected, it would still be wrong. | |
| Why? | |
| By definition, if it's a new health threat, no one knows what's the best thing to do. | |
| And so if you centralize the response, the only thing you can say is you're going to end up with what one or two or three or four people think is the best thing to do, and they'll probably impose it. | |
| Whereas the best way to find out anything is the largest number of experiments in the shortest possible time, which is, I would say, the level of a country, for example, by sheer coincidence, which is what we've been doing for millennia. | |
| And rapid communication. | |
| So if locking down really works and others didn't do it, it would become very obvious very quickly. | |
| That information could be shared and others could pick it up. | |
| But here's the key point. | |
| You would determine the best response demonstrably, quite quickly. | |
| If you allow it to be centralized, we'll never know what the appropriate response was. | |
| And you will be tyrannized because you'll have no choice whatsoever. | |
| We'll be told, well, it's WHO says so, says the policeman. | |
| So you either do what I tell you or I will arrest you. | |
| Event 201, a tabletop simulation which pretty much matches COVID-19, uh took place two months before the start of this pandemic and many people will not know that that was the last of about 10 tabletop simulations all of bioterror or infectious diseases spreading around the world that have been run initially in America by the military and then eventually by everyone including WEF and W.H.O., the E.U., the C.C.P., and so on. | |
| So we went to one, had everybody, but if you go back to the first one, Andrews Air Force Base in Washington, I think it was maybe 97, They planned tabletop simulations of the outbreak of infectious disease. | |
| And the only agenda item was how to control the situation, including individuals in the population. | |
| It was never about providing treatments and saving people. | |
| And they've done 10 of them. | |
| And you can go and look them up. | |
| They're all on the web. | |
| If you want to watch the video by Paul Schreier, On YouTube, surprisingly, called Pandemic Simulations. | |
| Pick the English subtitle version and stand by to be astonished. | |
| Having watched 25 years of pandemics, when it is my belief that they can't occur, it's pretty powerful. | |
| It's pretty powerful evidence. | |
| Obviously, if I'm wrong about the possibility that pandemics could occur, I still think it's quite powerful evidence, but it will be slightly less so. | |
| But so there you are. | |
| There's all this, these simulations. | |
| And so I've made myself unpopular. | |
| And it's not my job to make you happy, but it's my job to look at the data. | |
| And I did start by believing there was a virus that probably had escaped from Wuhan, and I no longer think that. | |
| It's not a question of, do I believe in viruses? | |
| It's not even a question of, do I believe in this virus? | |
| I'm only asking the question, is the epidemiological data consistent with a novel lethal viral pathogen spreading rapidly through the population? | |
| And the answer is no. | |
| And you can't get around it unless you think that Dennis Rancourt, R-A-N-C-O-U-R-T in Canada is wrong. | |
| And if he's wrong, please tell me. | |
| But based on his data, the fingerprints of influenza-like illness and deaths Which is super proportional deaths with age. | |
| That signature is missing from the all-cause mortality data in North America, where he's looked at 50 US states every week for 100 weeks looking at death, age at death and sex. | |
| And there are some states that do bear that normal hallmark. | |
| But there are many that do not, and I'm afraid if you have any that do not, and there are lots, it simply cannot be as described. | |
| But even if I'm wrong and there is a virus, the public health emergency was never sufficiently serious to have done anything. | |
| The press was, you know, the psychological operations and fear were certainly plenty, but the actual on-the-ground changes in hospitalisation and deaths never warranted locking the world down | |
| uh and you know closing the borders and closing businesses and mass testing eventually masks and then eventually vaccines but I believe it's worse than that and the reason I push it is if others look at the data and think oh my god there isn't there wasn't even a virus I think your job will be easier because you can explain why the data says that and then of course all the rest falls to pieces as the obvious fraud it is but moving on um | |
| Every single measure introduced from lockdown, masks, social distancing, mass testing and finally vaccination, business closures, border restrictions, every single one of those was ineffective at preventing the alleged spread and what's worse is they knew that before they did the first one because WHO scientists reviewed all of the public literature in every one of those areas where there were | |
| Or analogies and delivered to all of the WHO member states and over 100 page reports in the second half of 2019. | |
| Which concluded that none of these measures work. | |
| And in the event of a pandemic, we advise only two things. | |
| One, if you are symptomatic, please stay at home. | |
| And two, wash your hands a bit more often, because we don't know what the route to transmission is. | |
| Nothing else. | |
| Nothing else. | |
| All the government's public health officials knew what I've just said. | |
| And yet, in March 2020, they imposed simultaneously around the world in scores of countries, probably hundreds, Unprecedented measures that didn't work and we, you know, some of us knew they couldn't have. | |
| But by the summer there were publications that proved, peer-reviewed journal articles, that proved that lockdown did absolutely nothing to whatever this something was, the arrival and disappearance of this illness. | |
| And the reason it couldn't have made a difference is the lie of asymptomatic transmission. | |
| This absurd idea that's still around that you can give someone something you don't have. | |
| In order to be a good source of some infectious agent, you have to have lots of it in your airway. | |
| You'll be a better source if you put lots of it in your airway. | |
| If you do, you will have symptoms because it attacks you and you fight back. | |
| It's not possible to have, as it were, a lung full of pathogens and have no symptoms. | |
| As a biologist, I promise you that's true. | |
| You can't, it doesn't happen. | |
| It's also been studied and was found to be epidemiologically pretty much irrelevant. | |
| I think the amount of times it was alleged to happen matched false positive rates in the tests. | |
| So I don't think it happened. | |
| So there's another lie. | |
| So all of it was a lie. | |
| Every single measure was a lie. | |
| I don't think most people knew it was a lie. | |
| You know, the politicians are pretty stupid and they just get told what to do and what to say. | |
| But then, on top of that, I just alluded to it, but just very quickly, the medical treatments that were forced on patients, that is, hospitals were required to do, doctors were required to do them, included things like sedation and ventilation. | |
| Ventilation is life-saving if you have a head injury and have stopped breathing, or if you have a pneumothorax, a hole in your chest wall and you can't breathe. | |
| For everybody else, if the patient ends up with an open airway, And they're still conscious and breathing. | |
| Unless I'm wrong, I'm not a doctor, but I've been around respiratory for over 30 years. | |
| The only way you would ever sedate and ventilate that person, I would think probably, is if they're in such pain, either from 60% third degree burns, you probably would want to knock them out and maybe you'd ventilate them. | |
| Or maybe they've come off a motorcycle and they've literally broken 40 bones, something like that. | |
| But everybody else, me, your granny, turn up with an open airway, a bit panicky, Short of oxygen, but nothing wrong with their breathing apparatus. | |
| That's because these diseases are not obstructive airway diseases. | |
| They're not like asthma. | |
| or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. | |
| So why did those hospitals impose and why was this wild talk about the UK needed I think 30,000 ventilators and can we have car manufacturers and vacuum cleaner manufacturers making them? | |
| Do you remember? | |
| That's what they were saying. | |
| That was another lie. | |
| I don't think it was appropriate to put anyone on a ventilator. | |
| Frail people are injured and killed by mechanical ventilators, even though, as I say, they're miraculous lifesavers in certain circumstances. | |
| So if you have a relative that went to hospital and died on a ventilator, that hospital murdered your relative. | |
| They murdered your relative. | |
| And I think a lot of them did know what they were doing. | |
| I know people here In Florida, I know doctors who resigned after protesting. | |
| And that's because they said, you're murdering the patients in this hospital. | |
| So that's one thing. | |
| Then also other treatments. | |
| They were given midazolam, a sedative, morphine, a painkiller, which reduces respiratory efforts and cardiovascular function. | |
| And they're inappropriate for a viral or pneumonia type illness. | |
| Why were they given? | |
| To kill them. | |
| And if you had a relative that died with potassium amorphine on board, they were murdered by the hospital as well. | |
| And I think most of the time the hospital staff knew it. | |
| I would recommend that you listen to an interview, a podcast interview, by Marjid Nawaz. | |
| And he interviewed, two or three months ago, a very good guy called, I think it was Stuart Wilkie, So he has receipts, as Majid calls it, that is evidence of over-ordering and over-dispensing of those two drugs. | |
| And I do know, as a pharmacologist, that they're not an appropriate thing to give to people with an open airway who have allegedly a respiratory pathogen, either a viral pneumonia. | |
| You just They're not the right things to do. | |
| I can tell you that the doses used, they're not far off what are used as part of lethal injection execution in the States. | |
| Often used, they're not absolutely the same, but they will sedate, then slow respiration, then you can either use something like potassium chloride to stop the heart or a neuromuscular blocker, which has not been used. | |
| These things are not appropriate with people with an open airway who have a viral disease. | |
| Why were they given? | |
| And the answer is because they were told to by some central diktat. | |
| I think they bear closest resemblance to, and may even be, what was once known in Britain as the Liverpool Care Pathway, which is a way of helping someone pass As I think the Health Secretary in Britain said once, help the dying pass. | |
| But these people aren't dying, mostly. | |
| You know, they're admitted to hospital and most of them will survive, certainly if they're given the right treatments. | |
| So briefly then, just lastly then, to the vaccines. | |
| I beg you not to take any. | |
| I'm not Covid-19 vaccinated myself. | |
| I mentioned the argument for why The frail elderly that were apparently especially at risk of dying could not be saved by injected, intramuscular injected vaccines like flu vaccines. | |
| And I can't think of a single argument why that would not obtain under the narrative conditions of some new virus called SARS-CoV-2, which I'm not convinced is in circulation. | |
| But even going with the narrative, I don't think it could ever have worked. | |
| And that's because the people who might respond rapidly, vigorously to a vaccine, because they've got a good wide-awake immune system, yes, they might respond, but they wouldn't have died anyway, because they're healthy, plenty of reserve in all of their organ systems and good immune systems, so they would have taken it out. | |
| The elderly person, 85, you know, marginal renal function, poor lung function and so on, They could die if they get a common cold, and they often do. | |
| So yeah, if there is this new lethal virus, they would not have been saved by the vaccine, because their immune system would not have mounted a rigorous response to it. | |
| So that's one thing. | |
| The whole strategy was wrong, and I'm afraid my... I know three of the four people in the main drug companies making these damn things, and I call them out. | |
| I won't waste time today, but I've called them out by name And they should sue me or resign and engage in a debate or something, but just don't carry on doing what you're doing. | |
| But the design of these materials was such as to cause the expression widely around your body of something called spike protein. | |
| Which, according to the biology of this alleged virus, is the only direct acting toxin in the whole, you know, get-up, the only protein within this whole pathogen. | |
| Why did they pick the only thing that could possibly have harmed you? | |
| Even if you believe the narrative, well, I can't answer that. | |
| All other parts, all other novel, non-new, foreign parts of the pathogen would have done. | |
| And the fact that four drug companies independently, supposedly in competition, independently arrived at the same formula tells me that it's collusion and malfeasance. | |
| And a lot, but not all, of the adverse events reported I think are consistent with expression of spike protein where it shouldn't be. | |
| Where it never would be in the narrative if you were just infected in your airway. | |
| But there's no question that essentially we have had half the population of the world injected with a material which when expressed in the body will produce toxicity, sometimes lethally, and it was wrapped in a vehicle, lipid nanoparticles, that allows it to travel all around the body including to your brain and to your reproductive organs and so on. | |
| that in encasement using lipid nanoparticles would would do that was known well known to the industry at least 10 years ago at least 10 years ago in peer-reviewed journal articles so the idea that someone made a mistake shouldn't have formulated it that way all under pressure no no experts in pharmaceutical r&d not not the pharmacology but the formulation i've spoken to some of them and they they said the same as me yes i was shocked when i saw this lipid nanoparticles will bypass | |
| Normal barriers in the body will leave the site of injection and we end up anywhere. | |
| And I think that explains substantially the diversity of side effects that have been seen. | |
| Over the last 50 or 60 years, federal law, American law, has been gradually added to and modified to cope with emergency situations. | |
| Originally, you know, volcanoes, floods, hurricanes, things like that. | |
| But increasingly, to cope with things like infectious disease pandemics. | |
| And what has happened is that around 2005, the legislation was altered such that instead of the Food and Drug Administration deciding whether a potential treatment should or should not be granted authorization or approval, | |
| The law as it stands currently allows one individual, the Health and Human Services Secretary, to decide, in the event that they judge there's a sufficient emergency, to authorise the use of anything which brackets may be effective. | |
| That's the only criterion. | |
| And because initially they were thinking about, you know, sending Food down to New Orleans, sending people with fire trucks to put out a city that's on fire or evacuate people from Yellowstone if a volcano went off. | |
| They wouldn't know. | |
| There wouldn't be a standard. | |
| It would be you use your judgment. | |
| If this may be effective, you may authorize it. | |
| But I think the trick has been to include things that are highly precise and have a long history of being properly regulated. | |
| Well, I'm afraid they're not. | |
| And so, I thought until a week ago that the FDA had provided emergency use authorization so that these injections could be distributed. | |
| Well, they did grant it, but it was a performance. | |
| They had no legal role in this drama at all. | |
| The same with the EMA and the MHRA. | |
| I will put it this way. | |
| They pretended to review uh what pharma has submitted which was a pretend dossier and that explains why the trials weren't done properly why the toxicology was done you know incompletely it's because they knew that the FDA the EMA were not going to be marking their homework But it was going to be approved under what's called Other Transaction Authority. | |
| Now OTAs has been used by agencies as distant as NASA in the 60s and as recently as the Health and Human Secretary to authorize the distribution of these badly developed Dangerous, not necessary injections. | |
| So I bet that's a surprise to you all. | |
| So isn't that a surprise? | |
| I mean, that's just an absolute shock. | |
| So just in summary, I don't believe the narrative at all. | |
| I think almost all, if not all of it, is a lie. |
Export Selection