Dan Friesen and Jordan Holmes dissect Alex Jones’ February 7–8, 2020 coronavirus episodes, exposing his chaotic shift from claiming China’s virus was a self-targeted bioweapon to suggesting U.S. involvement—backed by debunked sources like a retracted Indian study and misquoted ABC News. They mock Jones’ reliance on discredited figures (e.g., Jim Garrow) and racist genetic theories, while he promotes Immune Gargle and other profit-driven products amid doomsday rhetoric. The hosts conclude Jones’ conspiracy-laden, contradictory claims reveal a pattern of exploitation over evidence, blending fearmongering with authoritarian fantasies like Trump’s "deep state purge" to distract from his core agenda: monetizing panic. [Automatically generated summary]
Damn, and Jordan, I am sweating *Mario plays* KnowledgeFight.com, it's time to pray I have great respect for Knowledge Fight Knowledge Fight I'm sick of them posing as if they're the good guys We are the bad guys Knowledge Fight *Mario plays* *Mario plays*
We're going to get down to business on this, but before we do, Jordan, we've got to take a moment to say thank you to some folks who have signed up and are supporting the show.
If you're out there listening and you're thinking, hey, I enjoy this show, I'd like to support what these gents do, you can do that by going to our website, knowledgefight.com, clicking the button that says support the show.
An important point here that Alex really should clarify is that Francis Boyle was not sloping on Milosevic's lawyer.
That would be a fucking weird credential.
For a bioweapons expert, considering the fact that Milosevic was an authoritarian ruler who was tried at the Hague for violating the Geneva Convention.
It sure would be strange for Alex to be bragging about one of his guest's credentials by saying he had defended the first sitting world leader to ever be charged with war crimes.
Boyle was not Milosevic's lawyer, but Alex doesn't care about the details.
In reality, Boyle, he did file charges to the International Court of Justice, accusing Serbia...
While it's not up for discussion whether or not a genocide took place in the Bosnian war, it had not been decided in a court if Serbia and Milosevic had directly or indirectly been responsible for those crimes.
That trial resulted in the determination that Serbia was not directly or indirectly involved in the genocide, but that they were responsible in the sense that they didn't do what they needed to have done to prevent it.
Whatever you're feeling about that result of the trial, Francis Boyle was not a lawyer making arguments in that case.
He was just the person who drafted the filing that left.
Gotcha.
Alex saying that Francis Boyle was Slobodan Milosevic's lawyer is a deeply troubling slip-up in his seeming knowledge base.
Not only does Alex not realize that Boyle was involved in trying to get Milosevic charged with genocide, he doesn't seem to know that saying someone was Milosevic's lawyer would not be a great thing for them to have on their resume.
Like, for instance, he's been advisor for the Hawaiian independence groups for years, which Alex could possibly bring up, but he probably wouldn't want to do that, since it involves people who don't think America is so great and don't want to be a part of it.
See, that's where you get to that full circle situation where it's like somebody's so anti-Semitic they're accidentally doing something that's helpful.
In January 2018, Fox 55 out of Champaign, Illinois, ran a story about how for the 10th year in a row, Boyle was trying to get St. Patrick's Day celebrations canceled because of concern that kids were going to get drunk and commit crimes.
He wanted bars and liquor stores to be banned from offering drink specials or advertising for the event, which seems like Alex might say would have a chilling effect on free speech.
Doesn't want people getting drunk on St. Patrick's Day.
As recently as a month ago, Boyle was making appearances on podcasts arguing that Trump needs to be impeached, primarily for his complicity with Saudi Arabia and their atrocities in Yemen.
Alex probably doesn't want to bring that up.
But to be fair, also, Boyle has called for every president since at least Clinton to be impeached.
where we get into something that's really tough and that is that francis boyle is a bit of a complicated figure from a political perspective he definitely has some real entries in his resume mostly ending about 15 years ago he has some positions that i think i can get down with like hawaiian independence but he also seems to really disproportionately hate israel and the way he expresses his opposition there seems to imply feelings that are more than political in nature yeah and i don't think i can get on board with it I want Hawaiian independence so the Jews can't get it.
Whatever the case about his sort of agreement on some things like Hawaiian independence or Palestinian rights, I do not know what he is up to and I would just as soon not consider him an ally to the positions that I have.
It's too confusing.
And whatever the case, he was not Milosevic's lawyer.
Alex has no idea what he's talking about.
pretty much ever however i'm glad that alex is back on the show now and he has francis boyle on because now we can actually hear what arguments he has as opposed to the last time he was on Because Owen Schroer interviewed him, and I have no interest in listening to that.
So we will get to hear what Francis Boyle brings to the table in terms of the bioweapon argument.
As to Alex saying that China released SARS four times, I would call on him to prove that claim.
There was the mainland SARS outbreak that occurred between 2002 and 2003, but since that was dealt with, you know, it is true that there have been reappearances of SARS.
That, however, is not the same thing as saying China released it four times.
So let's take a look at some of those reappearances.
So on January 4th, 2004, a man in southern China came down with SARS.
But all indications in his case had led experts to believe that he was infected through human-animal contact, which makes sense.
In 2017, The Guardian reported on Chinese researchers who had finally traced down the origin of SARS to a colony of bats.
It was initially believed that the source was cifit cats, but further research found that those cats were actually just an intermediate step between the bats and humans.
This same article discusses how another SARS outbreak is very possible, given the absence of a SARS vaccine and the fact that animal-human transmission could very well happen again.
This is very much likely what happened with this guy in 2004.
The rest of them are the product of lab accidents.
In 2003, in August, a virology grad student in Singapore was exposed to SARS in a lab that he worked at, but didn't end up infecting anyone else and was treated.
That was one, reappearance.
In December 2003, a SARS researcher was infected.
All of the people he had been in contact with were quarantined, and none of them came down with SARS.
An investigation found that he'd been working with hazardous materials in improper settings, or not improper settings, but...
So then in April 2004, the Chinese Ministry of Health reported three cases of SARS, one of them leading to a death.
This was the result of a laboratory researcher at the Institute of Virology, which did research SARS, although this person didn't actually directly research SARS, just clearly this is where they contracted the virus.
This researcher then infected the nurse who was attending to her, as well as her mother, who was there at the hospital.
Her mother tragically passed away, but the virus didn't spread further than this.
Going over the details of these additional SARS cases outside of the initial outbreak, it really seems hard for me to see any proof of China intentionally releasing SARS in any of them.
One seems like an open and shut natural case, and the rest can largely be attributed to poor procedural controls and lab settings.
The guy in December 2003 seems to be the product of his own negligence.
The guy with the Hawaiian shirt, as you called him.
Not some kind of state attempt at a bioweapon release.
Quote, having meddled away my life in various settings, I've come to the conclusion that enjoying all that is brought to you is part of growing up.
As a foreigner coming in from Scotland, I was open to the New World and all of its experiences.
I did some degrees, became a teacher, principal, college president, teacher's college principal, and found myself in China, opening schools and bringing students back to North America.
Then I did a small commercial for a resort in China and loved the experience.
Jim Garrow is a complete con man, but he's someone Alex looks at as a credible source to base his positions on.
This is just a pathetic level of non-vetting.
Honestly, I hope Alex does have him back on, because based on his past record, Jim Garrow is the sort of hard-swinging crazy dude that I need to find love for the game again.
Unfortunately, Alex is actually thinking of a different guest, but ascribing pieces of Jim Garrow's resume to him.
Alex later comes up with this dude's name.
It's Stephen Mosher.
We've talked about him a bit in the past, too.
He was the guy who was an anthropological research student in 1979 when he went to China to do a cultural study.
He published an article describing the Chinese government's practice of forcing women to get abortions, which ultimately led to him getting expelled from his PhD program at Stanford.
People like Alex will likely say that he was expelled because he dared criticize China, but the reality is that he published photos and identifying information about the women who were his informants, which is a clear breach of ethics that put these women's lives at risk.
I don't want to put this too bluntly, but it's a very serious decision when a school kicks out a PhD candidate.
That's not the same thing as getting kicked out of your undergrad program for plagiarism or partying too hard.
Like, universities make a great investment in the people they choose to accept for PhD consideration, and I know from conversations with doctoral advisors at high-profile colleges, Reed, my dad, that typically schools do whatever they can to not kick out PhD candidates.
In the case of Mosher, the board voted to expel him 11-0.
Mosher tried to appeal his expulsion, but Stanford stood firm and explained some of the reasons they were upholding his dismissal.
One of them was regarding a tape his ex-wife had given them where he bragged about lying about having top secret clearance in order to pretend to be a courier to get a free flight from California to Japan.
The school also had hired a private detective who had determined that Mosher had fabricated at least one sales receipt for a camera that he had purchased for his work, which is suspicious.
As Stanford's then-president, Donald Kennedy, described it, he seemed to have a, quote, pattern of behavior towards those you deal with.
The school was right to expel him.
You just can't take the risk of being associated with someone who would operate that way.
Multiple instances of real disingenuous practices.
This puts your work at question.
You can't do that.
Since then, he's basically written a bunch of books about how evil China is.
Along the way, in 1996, he founded the Population Research Institute, which portrays itself as a group trying to debunk the lies of overpopulation, but it's actually just a pro-life advocacy group.
The institute really is just a Catholic anti-contraception, anti-abortion front that Mosher took over in 1996, when Paul Marx, a Catholic priest who was an early leader in the pro-life movement, stepped down.
In the ensuing years to the present day, they branched off into the predictable hard-right talking points.
Like denying climate change and being anti-LGBTQ rights.
They're very untransparent about where their funding comes from, because of course they are.
But it's known that between 1999 and 2002, they received at least $130,000 from the Lind and Harry Bradley Foundation.
This is without a doubt a small chunk of the right-wing billionaire money that's coming into that institute in order for them to push their nonsense.
Alex was absolutely thinking of Jim Carrow.
Based on all the details that he gave.
Garrow pretends he was in the CIA, he pretends he was involved in Chinese adoptions, and he lives in Canada.
None of these things apply to Mosher.
Alex legitimately can't keep any of his guests' nonsense backstories straight because they're all bullshit.
So I'm going to tell you a little bit about the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak, and then you can tell me if you think that this is a unified global response.
On November 16, 2002, China reports the first case of atypical pneumonia.
More cases pop up, and then by March 2003, the World Health Organization issues a global alert, which puts into motion an international response.
Within two days, the CDC has established an emergency operations center here in the United States, and three days after that, an international network of 11 labs start working in conjunction to determine the cause of the outbreak and figure out its genome.
By July 5th, the World Health Organization declares the outbreak contained, with no local transmissions within the virus's incubation period.
A piece in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization discusses the lessons that were learned in the outbreak by Brian Doberstein, the Director of the Division for Combating Communicable Diseases for the World Health Organization's Regional Office of the Western Pacific.
Here is one of his main takeaways.
Quote, Even in the face of Chili's resistance.
As a result, the virus was identified and its genome mapped within weeks of the outbreak.
The scientific world was shown at its best.
That sure as shit sounds to me like a unified global response being discussed.
That article in the bulletin literally ends with this line.
Quote, No man is an island, and no country can fight a global public health threat alone.
Every single case of a public health emergency will ultimately require a unified global response.
Putting it bluntly, Alex is just talking complete shit.
He's just making stuff up, and what he's saying doesn't mean anything.
But it's serious, and they're covering up what's really going on, and it's just incredible to me that it's so obviously a bioweapon and that it's so obviously race-specific on record for Chinese men.
I mean, it's so specific.
The Chinese genome is so close.
Only other group maybe as closely related for a large population is Koreans.
In that clip, Alex says that the Chinese are perfect with a bioweapon because you can kill them off while not hurting your own people.
And I think that what's important to recognize here is that Alex thinks very racially.
He thinks very much in terms of people of different ethnic groups not being, quote, his people, and I find that mentality to be racist at its core.
Also in this scenario, who is it that's deploying this bioweapon?
Because like we've talked about, I thought he said he was saying the Chinese did because they want to lower the population or save face in the trade war or whatever, but now it's about eliminating the Chinese without risking any non-Chinese losses, which is incompatible with the previous thought.
You know, saying it's the globalists, but he believes that the globalists are in bed with China and want China to take over the world, so I don't see the motive here.
Nothing he's saying makes any sense.
It's complete trash, but beneath it is a framework of a very, very racist.
First, I need to get this taken care of right off the bat.
Under no circumstances is it ethical to deploy a bioweapon against a civilian population, regardless of if it attacks young men, regardless if you feel like they're attacking you.
This is very clear in international law.
Just possessing something that could be a biological weapon, if not explicitly for legitimate research purposes, could get you to get it.
What Alex is suggesting is that it's...
He's saying this is ethical.
It would be a massive international scandal.
This is a super, super fucked up thing that he seems to be okay with, and I think he kind of sounds like a Nazi.
According to a report in The Guardian from February 1st, they had reviewed demographic information that had been released about people who had died, and naturally, you'd expect most of them to be people who are elderly or have pre-existing conditions.
They mostly were, but there were five outliers.
People aged 36, 50, 53, 55, and 58. That, as far as I can tell, is not this thing mostly hitting military-aged men.
I don't know what Alex is talking about, and I would really need him to cite his sources, which he won't do because he doesn't have one.
He's just trying to find ways to feel good about the concept of Chinese people dying.
The New York Times published an article with updated information on February 7th discussing details about 138 cases that they had reviewed.
Of these cases, the median age of the person who got the virus was 56, and the median age of someone who got it and needed intensive care was 66. They found that 54% of the cases in their sample were men, though they did point out that other reports of different cases claimed a higher percentage of men.
For instance, Lancet published a report about 13 patients in Beijing, which had a median age of 34, and 77% of them were men.
Those are both pretty outside the expected range of a broader distribution, but considering it's a sample of 13 people, it's not necessarily meant to be interpreted as representative of the wider population.
And it's not to say that all of them were young, but the median age was 34. So that means there were more younger people represented than you would expect.
But also, none of those patients died or had severe complications.
It wouldn't be too surprising if there were a lot of people across all age groups who get the virus, much like people of all ages are susceptible to catching the flu.
It's a matter of it being far more serious for older people and people with pre-existing health conditions that put them at greater risk.
Anyway, the bottom line is that I think Alex is just making all this up because he's fantasy role-playing, but there's something deeply disturbing about this new wrinkle to his language.
Who does he think China was attacking?
Who does he...
He's suggesting that someone has the moral right to use a bioweapon against Chinese military-aged men because of something.
Yeah, when you have Alex making rationalizations for the concept of deploying a biological weapon, like, even in a hypothetical scenario, you're way past anything acceptable.
So Alex talks a little bit.
In this next clip, suggesting the possibility that we did it.
The United States did this as an attack on Chinese military-aged men because China is somehow attacking us.
Alex is straight up suggesting that it's a possibility that the U.S. spread the coronavirus as a bioweapon because China's been attacking us just after saying it would be ethically right to do that.
Obviously, the United States didn't do that, but Alex is pretending that we might have and justifying it.
I know that this is a bit of a stretch, but Alex hates Somalia.
So let's say one day Trump decides that Somalia is our enemy and they've been attacking us, so he uses a biological weapon against them.
According to what Alex is saying right now, it seems like he would have to be okay with it.
He's normalizing the idea of using bioweapons on civilians at peacetime.
All you have to do is pretend their country is attacking you.
He's very unspecific about what he's actually suggesting, but underneath it is a normalization of the concept of using biological agents against civilians.
That is a point to which the Overton window cannot go.
Alex's normal, the deep state needs to be rooted out like, yeah, right, this is really bad for...
Normalizing this kind of conversation.
But what he's trying to make acceptable to talk about now is atrocities.
But it's kind of what you expect from the school of con man he comes from.
This is something else altogether.
Just the other day, he was saying that Trump should outlaw the Democratic Party, and now he is warming up to the idea of using race-specific bioweapons on civilians.
I really don't know if he knows what he's saying anymore, but I also really don't care.
It doesn't get better from here.
This is a path downward that we're on that I couldn't even predict this kind of thing.
Also, that Indian scientist who wrote the non-peer-reviewed paper that he retracted after getting feedback from fellow scientists was not a top scientist.
Alex is just making that up to make that retracted paper seem more credible, which it's not.
No one else, except right-wing conspiracy blogs, are saying the same thing that scientists said.
I guess Mike Adams is, but his website is an extremely right-wing conspiracy blog, so he doesn't get to count as other scientists.
Factcheck.org actually did talk to other scientists about that paper.
Christian Anderson, the director of infectious disease genomics at the Scripps Research Translational Institute, told them that the analyses in the paper were, quote, completely wrong.
Anderson said there was a, quote, misunderstanding of how to perform these type of analyses and said that they were just cherry-picking data.
Timothy Sheehan, the virologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, told them that if you look at the genome, there are zero signs of human tampering.
He said that because, despite what Alex keeps saying on his show, it's not like no one has the genome of it.
Another person who studied the virus, Trevor Bedford, a computational biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, actually recreated what the retracted study was attempting to analyze.
He found that the things that they were claiming to be inserts in the RNA are actually just mistakes in interpretation made by the Indian researchers.
What was claimed to be things added into the RNA were clearly segments of material that are present in closely related SARS-like viruses.
He tweeted out all of his materials, too, so if Alex is so desperate to get his hands on it, it's been there on Twitter for at least a week.
Alex probably didn't see that, though, because he's been kicked off Twitter.
I'm not going to give the U.S. government a pass and say for sure that somebody in the deep state on the American team isn't piffed and enough fentanyl being shipped in every couple months to kill the entire world population.
You're like, that's what's shipped into the U.S.?
Yes.
Enough to kill the whole world.
That means a lot of it's not even getting delivered to the drug addicts.
There's just so much of it.
That one shipment they caught coming in from Mexico would kill 10.6 billion people.
And it doesn't seem likely that they will be even in the near future.
The basic reason this is the case is that the alleles and genes that contribute to what we call race, it's not just one gene.
There are a fuckton of genes and sequences that make up each person's individual genome and there's a whole lot of overlap between different groups.
There isn't just a one-to-one relationship between genes and race.
So the view I've seen thrown around is that you could probably make some kind of an agent that slightly affects a certain group more than another, but it wouldn't be a pronounced difference.
It would be in the measure of a couple percentage points.
And it wouldn't be effective.
Another reason why most evil villains probably would never decide to deploy these hypothetical race-specific bioweapons is that a common feature of viruses is that once they begin to be passed around at human hosts, they mutate.
There wouldn't be an effective way to predict if a race-specificness of a weapon you create would even last one transmission cycle in the wider population.
It's just not a good plan, even from an evil logistics standpoint.
No, okay, so if there's one thing I know every biologist says, it's that as long as you have a sample of, say, 1 or 2,000 people, you can correctly assume what biological circumstances will arise from 7 billion people experiencing something.
That's just true.
Humans are so similar that you never see wild and massive variations occur for no reason.
Alex has zero evidence that race-specific bioweapons even exist.
When he's pressed to the wall and has to cite proof of their existence, the two things he brings up are the Project for a New American Century document and that 1997 speech that Secretary of Defense William Cohen gave.
In both of these instances, Alex's primary sources are people trying to justify greater defense spending from the U.S. government, and race-specific bioweapons are a hypothetical threat that they bring up to illustrate the kinds of dangers we may be protecting ourselves from one day.
Neither of these sources prove the existence of these sorts of weapons, nor does anything else Alex can point to.
They are examples of people trying to get more money into the defense budget.
I mean, when an old man screams at you about how the government is desiring of a nuclear war and that eventually they will release a race-based bioweapon, you know it's true, Dan.
That looks like something the U.S. would launch if you're going to be military and you're being hit with fentanyl and millions have died here and China won't stop it while you hit military men.
And it messes up their economy.
But we're not going to operate like that.
Trump can't even make a phone call to the Ukraine saying, yeah, or get a phone call.
Great.
Fight corruption, which is U.S. law.
If we give them money, they've got to agree to that.
Trump is completely paralyzed other than promoting America and being able to get some good policies in.
The level of hysteria and panic he's trying to build up surrounding this virus, adding these new layers of it's a race-specific bioweapon, maybe a false flag China's pulling on itself.
And, you know, of course he does a lot of sales for his products, and we get an update.
On something that is what I would describe as the opposite of a shock.
He's taking these things that are possibly true about the wound gel, the silver wound gel, and he's directly applying those claims to the immune gargle in that clip.
That is...
Way beyond the realm of acceptable.
And of course your products are selling out.
You're embarrassing yourself with this hysteric panic you're engaging in.
He is an apocalyptic preacher wearing one of those box signs on the corner screaming about how everybody's going to die in hell mixed with the fucking ShamWow guy.
Do you understand that they can inflict the wound on themselves?
To then get out of the fact they're losing the trade war and get out of the fact that Xi Jinping is so embarrassed and use that as a way to crack down as a police state measure.
Does that make sense to you?
It's not the most likely scenario.
My hypothesis in Endgame, 13 years old, is that China and other globalists would launch bioattacks on themselves as a way to set the precedent for political and social and medical crackdown.
It's not like I'm just saying this today.
Why are you saying it's the less possible scenario?
See, Alex is defensive about this guy pushing back on his idea that China false flagged themselves with this virus.
That indicates to me that he's not so much exploring all the angles as he is, this is the position I'm going to put forth, and anybody pushing back on it, I'm going to get kind of petty and meh.
This could be a Chinese communist test for social control, and they've got people out scripting it.
You're absolutely right.
We have seen the left hire AstroTurf, actual firms that are online that hire thousands for events like...
Charlottesville, we pointed out, and they sue us for saying it when they advertised and hired not people to get the woman killed, that part wasn't staged, but to have the clash.
Most of the white supremacists were hired to play the part.
And again, nothing against gay people, but you know, 35, never got an acting job.
It was a bunch of little pot-bellied gay dudes in Nazi outfits, you know, out there for the kids.
And you know, a few real Nazis showed up.
I hear what you're saying.
God bless you, Maria.
Alright, when I come back, I'm taking five calls in the next segment!
So Alex, he doesn't take five calls when he comes back.
He is not good at taking calls at all, ever.
That's not just today, ever.
He gets ready because he's got Francis Boyle coming up.
This guy who drafted this bioweapon legislation back in the late 80s and now is here, comes on Alex's show all the time, every time there's a public health issue to say that it's a bioweapon.
And this is one of the leading experts in the world, not just on the medical side, the genome, and then the RNA side, but also on the geopolitical and the UN sources.
And he said, look, the UN knows this is a bioweapon.
The way Alex is presenting this interview is explicitly dishonest.
There's literally no excuse for him to present Francis Boyle as a leading expert on the medical side of things, because he has zero background in science.
This is one of the many, many instances of Alex being unable to stop himself from embellishing things to make his narratives less questionable to impressionable listeners.
It's not enough for him to present his guest as the guy who was involved in drafting that US statute on bioweapons back in the late 80s, and here's why.
The claims that Alex is having Boyle on to make are not at all relevant to that.
He is coming on to discuss how the coronavirus is a bioweapon, which has nothing to do with his actual field of expertise, namely law.
The content of their conversation won't really be in line with what Boyle has credentials to discuss, so it's pretty important to make up things to add to his resume, like he's a leading expert on the medical side of bioweapons, when he's not at all.
In the world of gambling, this is called a tell.
The fact that Alex is creating this fictitious aspect of Boyle's knowledge base gives him credibility in a field that he has no involvement in, and that tells you that Alex is creating an illusion, as opposed to reporting or doing a sincere interview.
No journalist operating in good faith and according to ethical standards would ever do this, because it sets up the interview that's coming up on a lie, which calls into question literally everything that's said You would think.
Yeah, and it tarnishes...
Francis Boyle from the jump because he doesn't correct Alex.
And his main argument here seems to be set up like this.
He believes that the coronavirus is a bioweapon that was released from the Wuhan Biolab because he believes that all biosecurity level 4 labs exist to do is create offensive bioweapons, although he admits in that very clip that they also do research for vaccines.
The levels of biosecurity a lab is subject to is related to the relative danger of the things that are studied there.
Level 1 is for things that generally don't hurt people who are in good health.
Level 2 is for agents that have a little more dangerous side to them and they require slightly heightened precautions like hepatitis or HIV.
Level 3 is for things that can be contracted much easier and can often be transmitted in the air like SARS or yellow fever.
Level 4 is the highest level because the things that would be worked with there are specifically things that can transmit as easily as level 3 agents, but are also potentially deadly and are things for which we have no known treatments or vaccines.
So in the past, this would have included things like smallpox and Ebola.
Level 4 labs are the level that they are because of the security protocols that are required to work with those agents.
It has to do with the airflow in the lab and how that's controlled, how waste is handled, what sorts of protective clothing and gear are required by the researchers.
So these things that they're studying and working with in Level 4 labs, whether you like it or not, Francis, are things that could be a gigantic threat to people.
In the 20th century, over 300 billion people died from smallpox, and if it weren't for people doing the work that is done in the conditions of level 4 biosecurity labs, it's unlikely that it would now be eradicated.
Francis Boyle can suggest all he want without proof that these biolabs exist only to create offensive biological weapons, but it doesn't mean anything.
They clearly serve an important function.
And without them, it would basically be impossible to do the sort of work that's required to come up with treatments and preventions for diseases that could be the next plague.
Also, fun fact, any samples that come back to Earth from space, from places that are thought to have ever possibly had habitable environments, they have to be handled at biosecurity level 4 labs.
But I guess that's probably just because they're trying to make a space bioweapon, not because the labs are perfectly designed to limit any possible interaction of the Earth's atmosphere with completely foreign things that could be dangerous.
So anyway, they serve a number of purposes.
This is just bullshit.
Being spouted by a guy who has no real standing.
He doesn't really have any reason.
But he might not have any reason to know anything, and it's very unlikely that he has inside information based on him in the past saying, I have no inside information.
But Alex has a source.
He has a source.
Seems contradictory to all the things Alex has been saying already, which is weird.
My Pentagon sources told me a week and a half ago they believe it's a leak weapon.
They were planning for us or others developing a vaccine for themselves, but somehow they thought it was edited so it would be continuated or however it works, and then it somehow mutated or it didn't work.
The live vaccine failed.
They don't know.
They just believe it was an offensive weapon they were developing a vaccine for that somehow got out.
So, for this entire show, Alex has been saying that he believes that this is a false flag, race-specific bioweapon attack that the Chinese government pulled on themselves to save face because Trump is so great that they're being humiliated in a trade war and so they could depopulate the country.
All these various thoughts.
Now, Alex is saying that his fake Pentagon sources told him that this is a bioweapon that was being developed to be used against us that the Chinese lab was creating a vaccine for that accidentally got out.
This is a direct contradiction of literally everything else he has said on this episode.
If the Chinese are making this bioweapon to use against us, that kinda contradicts the race-specific bioweapon stuff.
If they're creating a vaccine, that kinda contradicts the goal of depopulating China.
If it accidentally got out of the lab, that contradicts the stuff about it being an intentional release by the Chinese government.
This isn't a situation where Alex is considering multiple possibilities.
This is him within the span of a few hours pretending to credibly report two entirely incompatible narratives.
These two things cannot both be true.
Yet one of them he's pitched based on hard science, quote-unquote, and the other is not a theory.
It's what his totally real Pentagon sources told him.
I have a very strong feeling that Alex is having a field day, selling shit off of the virus panic that he's creating.
And because of that, he doesn't really give a shit if the things he's saying about the outbreak are internally self-contradictory.
It doesn't matter because his audience is very dumb and they won't notice super glaring problems with his narratives like this.
It's all just building fear.
And he's willing to do it however he can because fear translates directly into money.
So, Alex, he's talking to Boyle, and one of the things I noticed pretty clearly was that all he really has to go on is that Indian paper that got retracted.
So you asked me last time Boyle came up if he was an active teacher, and it appears that he is.
And so I wanted to get a sense of what kind of a teacher he was, so I consulted the website Rate My Professors, where Boyle has received 18 ratings with an average of 2.7 out of 5. Too high.
One review says, quote, more of a conspiracy theorist, but still a fun, interesting lecture every time.
Another says, quote, this is a great class if you want to get some credit and not have to go to class, but the class itself doesn't have a lot of substance.
As to your point on ethnic-specific biological weapons, yes, we've tried to develop them here in the United States under the influence of the neocons who believe in these things.
So it's interesting to me in this sense that Francis Boyle does believe, using the same sources that Alex uses, that these race- or ethnic-specific bioweapons do exist.
However, he does not believe that that is true in this case.
Look, the problem is, I don't care what your motives are, and you, Francis Boyle, specifically, not wanting to scare people, you are a guest espousing things on a program where the guy is trying to scare people.
So you are being used as a tool to scare people, whether you like it or not.
And it's interesting, because for the most part, you know, Boyle is accused of being more left.
In his conspiracy theories.
More on the left side of things.
And it makes you realize that maybe a lot of people have very similar information that comes to them, whether it be from a left perspective or a right perspective in terms of conspiracy theory communities.
Because he's using all of the same talking points as Alex.
This Johns Hopkins tabletop exercise that we talked about that has...
Not real applicability to the actual outbreak that ended up happening after it.
He's using these same touchstones.
The PNAC document.
All of it is the same.
He has the same interpretation of the Indian study that was retracted.
He's using this Bill Gates, Johns Hopkins tabletop exercise.
It's really weird to me because he wants Trump impeached.
He has very different politics, it seems, than Alex.
They come together on the conspiracies about a new world order or something.
But I thought you had Pentagon sources who were telling...
How does this track?
How does this make any sense?
Alex is pretending he has Pentagon sources that are feeding him this information about it being a bioweapon and all this shit, but somehow Trump's advisors just won't tell him.
The argument Alex is trying to lay out here is that the man says they're working on vaccines and treatments in these bio labs for the sake of public safety.
And that's why, you know, you keep a gun in the house for safety.
And, you know, if guns aren't handled appropriately, people end up dying.
If security protocols aren't followed strictly and appropriately, some of this research can pose a danger, and in those cases it can result in some deaths.
It's pretty hard to dispute the fact that advancements in vaccine science have absolutely outweighed the costs of any of this research, and if you don't agree with that, I would suggest you look into some of the conditions that don't exist anymore that are basically nightmare diseases.
Alex can't even figure out how to be against this shit at this point.
He wants to say it's a race-specific bioweapon that the Chinese false flagged themselves with, but then he talks to Boyle, and Boyle's not into that argument.
Boyle is all about attacking these biolabs.
So now Alex has to pivot, or disagree with Boyle, and risk destroying the thin veneer of credibility he has as an expert.
If Alex disagrees with Boyle, he's no longer useful in any way to validate his narratives about how scared people need to be, and thus why they need to buy his product, so that is not an option.
And thus, Alex has to now be against these bio labs.
It's just a mess, because Alex doesn't prepare, and he has no idea what he's talking about.
In fact, I won't just physically take the torture and all of it.
I will take all of the sin on.
So that I metaphysically then can forgive you and take you on because that's how the universe works.
It's energetic.
And God's got to be that sacrificial lamb that goes between the two to then because you can't have new free will creatures given that much power who aren't going to mess up and do evil stuff.
But they've just got to make the spiritual decision to go with God and then God will cheat the rest of the way to take us over.
And you know...
At this level, God's going to take folks over that are still turning against God.
I don't want to get into stuff, but I've seen the next levels.
And they're indescribable.
And this isn't just like the simplification people here in all this.
But there's a lot of rebellion going on against the nature of the universe.
You know, the truth is, the Bible doesn't say using Old English before the Norman took over almost a thousand years ago, before the Vikings took over England.
They came in and they banned the entire language of the Saxon.
But it was only the cuss words that continued on, the classic things people would say.
Like, Bullshit.
They found 2,000-year-old plaques that say something is BS and what the Anglo-Saxon would call something for whatever weird reason they had BS.
There are some suggestions that the word bull had connotation with the idea of something being nonsense, but that's most likely due to the old French word for fraud, which is bull.
I very strongly think that Alex is just making shit up to try and make it seem more important that Trump said bullshit in a speech because he's really, really hung up on that.
So Alex is really convinced that it's old English stuff and somehow about free speech issues or something.
I don't know.
But he really gets excited about this and he ends up working himself up into a frenzy where he swears and they have to cut it out of the brunt.
Fighting the info war while at the same time preparing yourself and your family is a 360 win.
We have...
Our main 16-ounce super silver with nano silver that's been documented by the Pentagon to take out the SARS family of viruses, which is the same as this one, it is sold out.
We have the one-ounce about to sell out.
The three-ounce still available.
It'll be sold out at current rates about a week and a half.
This is the most explicit I've seen where he's talking about a condition and a product, which are the two constituent pieces that you need to be making a health claim.
From everything I've read up on and I understand about how the FDA regulations work, this is a breach of, or at least he's making a health claim, and now he needs to notify the FDA and he has 30 days to substantiate that claim.
I would have just stopped there, and we'd have an episode about the 7th.
And this sort of development of Alex being like, this is a race-specific bioweapon, and the Chinese are asking for it because their genome is all the same.
And my friends, we are here with you on Saturday afternoon with an emergency broadcast.
President Trump announced through his chief science advisor, who heads up major federal agencies, Anthony S. Fauci, that they are investigating the novel coronavirus out of China as a man-made biological weapon.
And they called for other scientific institutes and the general scientific community, as well as governments and the media, to look into that.
So, this is a story that has one source, and it's Zero Hedge, which has really been on the leading end of, you know, spreading completely false information about the coronavirus in the past month, which has led to them being kicked off Twitter after accusing a Chinese scientist of creating the virus and doxing him.
I wonder if they're getting any ad revenue from my Patriot supply.
I don't know.
Anyway, I'm not even going to ever listen to Zero Hedge, so I checked out their site, and I wanted to find their source on this story.
It turns out their source is an ABC News article with the headline, quote, White House asks scientists to investigate origins of coronavirus.
Important note, this is not breaking news that requires an emergency Saturday show for Alex.
This article was published on February 6th, which was Thursday, prior to his Friday show.
He had no idea this even happened until one of his interns found the Zero Hedge article, which is just a shitty process for a news outlet.
The first paragraph of this ABC News story is this.
The White House on Thursday asked U.S. scientists and medical researchers to investigate the scientific origins of the novel coronavirus as misinformation about the outbreak spreads online.
This article is literally about the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Kelvin Droegemeyer, being worried about that retracted Indian paper which, quote, had shown the urgency for accurate information about the genesis of this outbreak.
This guy was worried about how this paper, which was deeply flawed and retracted, had resulted in a barrage of misinformation and wanted to make sure that the National Academy of Sciences was able to answer the questions people had which led them to accept this deeply flawed and retracted paper as accurate.
Important to keep in mind that paper is one of Alex's only sources for the claims that he makes that this is a bioweapon.
The only thing close to helping Alex's narrative here, which is coincidentally the part of that ABC News article that Zero Edge quotes, is from Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
He's asked, quote, about concerns that stem from misinformation online that the novel coronavirus could have been engineered or deliberately released.
His response is, quote, There's always that concern, and one of the things that people are doing right now is very carefully looking at sequences to see if there's even a possibility, much less likelihood, that that's going on.
And you could ultimately determine that.
So people are looking at it, but right now the focus is on what we're going to do about what we have.
That would be something that scientists would rule out, and it makes sense that this guy would say that.
However, there's a big difference between what he's saying and Alex's decision that this definitely is a bioweapon, which he absolutely has determined.
Definitively, for sure, it's been proven.
Check the white papers.
It's in the WikiLeaks.
This article is about a White House official calling for a meeting of experts to collaborate, largely inspired by the flood of misinformation related to the Indian paper that is the basis for Alex's reporting.
In essence, this is about the White House wanting to push back on the very thing that Alex is engaging in, which makes it kind of ironic that he read a twisted version of this article in Zero Hedge, then decided to do an emergency show on Saturday about it to declare a victory.
I'm telling you, we need to start this media consulting.
So here's what we're going to do.
We've got this consulting firm for just science.
And what will happen is any time a journalist calls looking for a quote, the scientist will then call us and they'll say, here's my reasonable response to this question.
And I will say...
Do not say that.
Absolutely do not say that.
That is a very reasonable response.
I understand it and you understand it, but they are going to go nuts with it.
He's just someone who was interviewed to provide a little extra to that ABC News article.
The person in the White House who called for the meeting of experts was the head of the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
But Alex doesn't know that, because he read a different article.
He didn't read the article.
All he knows was in the Zero Hedge article, and they don't mention that dude.
They don't mention the Office of Science and Technology Policy, dude.
They only talk about Fauci, because...
Like I said, he's the one who's closest to their narratives.
Also, Trump didn't appoint Anthony Fauci to any position at all.
He's been in the National Institutes of Health since 1968, and he's been the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984, as long as I've been alive.
Trump did appoint the guy who's the head of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and that guy, Kelvin Droegemeyer, is his main science advisor, but he is not Anthony Fauci.
Alex has no idea what he's talking about because he doesn't prepare and he just does bad work.
Also, John P. Holdren might have been called a science czar, but his official title was, you guessed it, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, exactly the same as this other dude.
The president, through his medical spokesperson, who's very respected, made a lot of calls about Fauci in the last few months, or knew who he was, and they say he's very respected, a quote legend.
Alex's headline from InfoWars is just a reposting of the article from Zero Hedge with a little spin added to it, with added implications that the White House is specifically interested in investigating this as a bioweapon.
That's an unfair reading of the actual article, but it's in line with the Zero Hedge article.
The Zero Hedge article is based on the ABC News story, which it's misrepresenting by only focusing on and distorting the quote from Anthony Fauci in order to create their spin.
You have this base story from ABC News, which has spin added by Zero Hedge, which is then reposted with added spin by Infowars.
And now, Alex is reporting on that story on his show.
To add credibility to his story, he says even ABC News is reporting on this and points to the ABC News article that was the basis for the Zero Hedge story and secondarily for his own report.
This entire story is just propagandists spinning an ABC News story for their own purposes, so it's a little weak to then say that ABC News even agrees with us on this.
An honest outlet would just cover the ABC News article directly and accurately.
And then, if they wanted to give added focus to Fauci, they're welcome to do that in an appropriate fashion.
What Zero Hedge and Alex are doing is blatant bullshit.
And I say that, much like Trump, to indicate that this is serious.
If you want to see how blatant this shit is, consider this.
The ABC News article is the source for the Zero Hedge article, which Alex is reporting on, but he's pretending that he put this article out and then ABC News is forced to stop covering up and report on this.
Don't toot your own horn, because there's a problem with this theory.
That interview with Francis Boyle happened on February 7th, and he's trying to pretend that in response to that interview, everybody called the White House, and then Trump had his science expert announce that they were investigating this as a bioweapon.
Leaving aside that Trump didn't do that, the ABC News article he's basing that narrative on was published on February 6th.
The article predates Alex's interview with Francis Boyle.
This is just a pathetic display of narcissism and embarrassing.
First of all, anyone in the tech industry or the mainstream media that is pushing censorship of those of us who are telling the truth about this, those organizations are complicit in the deaths.
That are going to continue to occur even outside of China.
They are in essence rooting for the virus by denying people accurate information that we need in order to be safe, to be prepared, to self-isolate, to avoid joining crowds, you know, to stay off the cruise ships and all the things that people need to do to stop the spread.
I'm going to stop you, Mike, and I want you to start over, but I'm not trying to act tough saying execute them.
If I was breeding a weapon that could kill a billion people in my garage and knew I was doing it, I mean, I deserve to be killed.
I mean, I'm just at a point, I'm just, the default is people making race-specific weapons and stuff, it's already outlawed, don't do it, or a mob's going to come and lynch your ass.
I mean, just at a certain point, it needs to stop.
So, I mean, of course, I would agree with him that if people are creating race-specific bioweapons, then they should be put up on trial for war crimes.
I don't think it's healthy to, you know, do a show where you're saying that anybody who's researching vaccines is secretly trying to create offensive race-specific bioweapons and then be like, at a certain point, mobs are going to come lynch you all.
Second, he's a professor of humanities with a degree in history and philosophy.
He has no real standing here as an expert, so naturally he's the sort of person Mike is citing as an expert on virology and epidemiology and virus expansion rates.
Neil Ferguson has no standing here.
He's not somebody who you cite as an expert in public health issues.
But...
He's a past Infowars guest, and he's saying what they want somebody to say.
He worked at the Imperial College, and go fuck yourself.
So, earlier in the show, and on the 7th, Alex has been suggesting that they won't send out the RNA pattern or the sequence, because if they do, people will look into it and they'll find, oh my god, this is a Franken-virus.
Even if they were like, the only way to get rid of it is with bleach, they'd be like, ha ha, that's what we told you all along, but now you shouldn't drink bleach because they've been secretly putting the virus inside bleach now.
I don't know how many virgins these Islamic terrorists get for blowing themselves up, but there's probably bonus virgins out there if they infect all of New York City or something with this virus.
I don't know how their virginomics system works, but they're insane, and they think they're going to get rewarded for killing Americans.
Now, guess what?
They've been handed a new way to do that.
It's a whole new vector, super easy to release in the United States.
The CDC will not be able to contain that when that day comes.
I don't know when he was in school or, you know, I don't care, really.
It happens every year.
Schools close during flu season.
It's not every school district.
It's not every city.
But you can Google it very easily and find articles year by year by year about schools closing because of an outbreak of the flu at the school.
That happens all the time.
Mike is a fucking asshole pretending that it's unheard of that this year their school is closing because of the flu because it helps him push his bullshit narratives.
That is a reference back to him believing that his interview with Francis Boyle precipitated the ABC News article that came out prior to the interview.
This ends with about 15 minutes of Alex doing sales pitches.
It's bad.
We're not going to listen to any of that.
They're done talking about the coronavirus nonsense for now, and Alex and Mike have a little bit of a discussion about Trump's firings of Colonel Vindman.
And because he's a symbol of nationalism and populism, he's had his best week since he came down that escalator four and a half years ago, in my view.
Do you agree with that?
How is the deep state going to strike back now?
They're talking about it's bad.
He fired vitamin in the ambassador, Sondland.
That should be the tip of the iceberg.
He needs...
Talk about purge.
He needs to purge anybody that's been Soros, anybody that's a neocon, anybody that's been deep state, anybody that's a leftist, because they're all slaves.
They're all committed to evil.
There's no way they're not going to keep sabotaging.
So, I mean, what we see over the course of this couple days is like a real pivot.
In the coronavirus narrative towards, like, it's now definitively it's a bioweapon.
It's probably race-specific.
China might be false-flagging themselves, but if it's the United States, then it's just payback for fentanyl, and it's totally ethical for us to do that.
That's super weird.
Alex talks to Francis Boyle, and then he has to sort of backpedal and be like, yeah, biolabs are the problem.
This is all very troubling stuff.
I don't like where it's going.
I don't know where it can go.
But then, a trend that we saw on, I believe it was on the last episode, where Alex was talking about outlawing the Democratic Party.
That's still in there, too.
But it's put to the back burner, because Alex needs to push all the stuff to sell the products.
We write up some templates, and if you can plug Trump into one of these templates, Then you know it's bad because these are shit written by Goebbels and pro-Stalinists and Putinists and all of these people.
And if you can just put Trump in there, then we know it's a bad idea.