John Leake argues COVID-19 vaccines were promoted as religious dogma, with the Vatican’s 2022 silver coin blending mRNA shots with Catholic iconography and institutions like the NFL enforcing mandates through $6B+ in Biden-funded pressure. He frames vaccine dissent—from Dr. Peter McCullough to Novak Djokovic—as modern heresy trials, comparing mRNA tech to Luciferian hubris, rewriting "God’s language" while ignoring risks like myocarditis in teens (per NEJM 2021) and fertility damage. Carlson links this to tribalism, where vaccine refusal now triggers professional exile, echoing German-Americans’ WWII-era disavowal of heritage. Leake warns unchecked science repeats past scandals—like Semmelweis’ ignored handwashing breakthrough—while elites prioritize control over truth, leaving gold as the only hedge against collapsing trust. [Automatically generated summary]
All through the COVID experience, tragedy, I had this kind of recurring question in my mind, which no one's ever answered.
And I think that you have gotten to the answer, or close to the answer.
And the question is this.
Why were public health authorities in the United States and acting in concert with the media so intent on discouraging Americans from treating COVID?
There was this persistent and very aggressive and at times really vicious campaign to get people to stop thinking about how to treat this illness, which we were told was going to wipe out a huge percentage of humanity and just to accept the vax.
But no treatment at all, because that's fish tank cleaner.
It's horse tranquilizer.
What was that?
And I'm going to stand back and let you tell the story.
I mean, the grammar, the number of words, it's identical.
A boy prepares to receive the Eucharist.
So what Francis did with this, and I don't know if he's the guy making the decisions, is let's take the existing religious iconography, the idea of Christ the Savior, the one that will protect you, or at least your soul.
And how are we supposed to interpret this other than, well, it's the vaccine that's the Savior?
So I saw that and I thought, well, that's rather remarkable.
I wonder if there are any other indications of this overlaying vaccine iconography on top of existing religious iconography.
Well, there's that famous, not famous enough, but still famous Diego Rivera mural that I believe hangs in Detroit painting in the 30s, which presents the vaccine as a kind of Eucharist.
Well, I've not seen anything quite that crass, that extreme.
And of course, this is the context at South Africa.
Somebody at that church seems to think you have to hit people with a sledgehammer in order to get them to overcome their vaccine hesitancy.
But one of the things that Dr. McCullough and I discovered was very alarming, that the so-called Biden administration is called the, I believe it was called the COVID Vaccine Corps, which dispersed billions of dollars to various recipients.
The major sports leagues, the NFL, I think Major League Baseball, they received just an outright bribe.
I don't see how else you can characterize this.
It's just Uncle Sam is going to give you a bunch of dough, and you're going to basically force this on your league.
And there's a reason for that that we will get into.
But also the mainline Episcopal Protestant Evangelical churches, Roman Catholic churches, all of their clergy received money to, I don't know how else to put it, push the vaccine.
And there were very few pastors or priests or rectors, what was it, the Episcopal Rectors who refuse.
But how, I mean, that right there strikes me as a violation, well, of the First Amendment, which prohibits state religion, but also of their duties as Christian leaders.
You can't take money from the government to push something like that.
I mean, I would, you're asking questions now that Peter and I have been asking for five years, and we've been profoundly puzzled by this.
It's very confounding.
And, you know, ultimately, well, I want to mention the NFL as well, and then the tennis league, the professional tennis league as well.
So Aaron Rodgers, the Green Bay Packers quarterback, he goes on to Joe Rogan, and he describes this sort of struggle session that the NFL, the management, the administrators of the Green Bay Packers put him through.
Extreme isolation, shaming.
I don't know if you saw the interview, but he's this kind of good-natured, tough guy who's just sort of speaking in a matter-of-fact way with Joe Rogan.
And I began to realize whether Aaron Rogers conceptualized this way or not, it's very apparent.
He was perceived as being guilty of heresy.
It's like, I mean, the most obvious example of this is like Martin Luther in Germany.
It's like you're, I think he was a Dominican or an Augustinian friar.
I can't remember which order.
But he posts his theses on the door of the castle church in Wittenberg, and it's like the game is on.
Okay, you just committed heresy.
You know the story.
The Holy Office, the Pope himself excommunicates him.
And there's sort of no hope for him.
In the case of Aaron Rodgers, I believe it's the same psychology.
It's you're a very prominent person.
Now, in the case of Martin Luther, he's hanging around with, I think, a Saxon Duke.
You can't do this.
If you do this, because now people are looking up to you, if you commit heresy and you get away with it, the whole stamping out of vaccine hesitancy will be imperiled.
Usually the imperative is self-preservation, expansion, accumulation of power, whatever.
But whatever the imperative is, whatever the goal is, everything is subservient to that.
That's just, that's how people are.
That's how organizations are.
It doesn't answer the question: why is giving people the vaccine the only thing that matters?
I think that's, and I'm jumping so far ahead in the story, and I hope that you can shed some light on that question.
But it all goes back to the fact that public health authorities, political leadership, clergy, everyone with any power at all in the West, not just the United States, decided the only thing that matters is getting this needle into the arms of our populations.
He says, you know, the world is all, you know, turned on its head and, you know, we're going to have a hard time going back to normal and the economy is a mess.
And so it's a kind of depiction of the wasteland, you know, fertility, the happiness of the kingdom.
It's all just going straight to hell.
The only way we're going to be able to go back to normal is basically when essentially everybody on the planet gets the vaccine.
Okay, so I hope I'm not pressing on this metaphor too far, but the annunciation.
So all is bleak.
The world is a mess.
You know, normalcy has been completely turned on its head.
We can only go back to normal.
He actually uses that phrase.
We can only go back to normal when everyone gets the vaccine.
Well, remember, this is April of 2020.
There's no, I mean, the clinical trial for the Moderna vaccine, which Moderna had developed with the NIH, with Anthony Fauci's NIH, I mean, it had just gone into human trials.
I say just.
It actually went into human trials very quickly.
We can talk about that as well.
But how does Mr. Gates already know in April that this is going to come quickly enough, A, usually takes years to develop a new vaccine, quickly enough, and that it will be safe and that it will be effective?
Well, the answer is he already knew it was a fait accomplete.
It was a foregone conclusion.
It's coming.
It's coming quickly.
And when everybody gets it, then and only then will we be able to go back to normal.
So consider all of the assumptions in this proposition.
It's just perfectly astonishing.
The Department of Defense and Health and Human Services in July of 2020, they say, well, we've already inked the contract.
We've already signed the contract to purchase, I can't remember how many hundred million doses of Pfizer-Biontech's vaccine.
And you think we've already written the, like, it's not, we don't have it yet.
It's not been developed fully.
Human trials for phase two haven't even commenced.
This is a feta complete.
It's already been decided, and it's already been decided by the second richest man in the world that everybody's going to get it.
So it's done.
It's a done deal.
So when Dr. Peter McCullough writes an editorial in the Hill in August of 2020 saying, this is just a big gamble.
Our public health authorities, our military, our health and human services, they've all decided that this is coming, but it's a complete gamble.
This is a new technology.
It's a genetic technology.
We don't know the long-term effects.
We don't know how it's going to affect children.
This is a gamble.
And what happened to McCullough when he started talking this way?
Same thing with Aaron Rodgers.
Relentless persecution.
Relentless.
Fired from his job at a major university hospital, sued.
All of his editorships of various academic journals pulled.
His professorships pulled.
Just canceled, annihilated, sued, encumbered with attorneys, the whole thing.
So you're probably asking, okay, where is all of this going?
Let me just give you one more example to make my point.
I think professional athletes are considered, particularly in the eyes of young men who are potentially the most dangerous people to those in power.
Like if the young guys kind of get together and say we're not putting up with this, you know, then we've really got a problem because they're harder to control.
So I think the attitude of professional sportsmen is of particular interest.
Not surprising that a man, of his physical conditioning, got through it without a problem.
But he's done he's he's, his body has been infected, his immune system has mounted a response, it's overcome the the, the infectious agent, and he's recovered.
There's no better immunity than that.
I mean, if you want to understand how vaccines work in theory and in practice, it is to induce the body's immune system or stimulate the body's immune system to respond to an invading microorganism.
So there's no better vaccine than actually getting through the illness.
Why do we have vaccines, the?
The thought, going back to Jenner, is there are diseases which are extremely dangerous, which could cause horrible disease and mortality.
The idea of a vaccine is, induce natural immunity without putting the recipient through the trials and and and the danger and possible death that he would experience if he just got the bug.
Okay, does that make sense?
Of course it does so.
This proclamation vaccine immunity for Covet 19, it's better than natural immunity.
That is prima fasci, totally preposterous and absurd.
No one that's ever spent any time studying immunology would believe that for one second.
unidentified
No epidemiologist could believe that, no immunologist well.
If you watch this show, you know that we love PURE TALK.
It is amazing wireless service with absolutely the best prices and all the time we've been telling you about PURE TALK, we've never seen an offer like the one we're about to describe, and here it is, unlimited talk, taxed data with a 30 gig hotspot for just 29.95 per month not just this month, every month for life.
This is PURE Talk's top tier plan, 29.95 a month.
You'll save over 50 a A month, every month, for your entire life, and you stay in the exact same 5G network that Verizon and ATT offer, but for $1,600 a year cheaper for a family of four.
That's wild.
It's provable, by the way.
This isn't some false claim.
It's not disinformation.
It's real.
PureTalk's customer service, meanwhile, is located in the United States, not in Bangladesh.
Nothing against Bangladesh, but you're talking to Americans you can understand.
They can switch you in just minutes.
You keep your phone, keep your number, and you start saving in a really big way, unlimited for life, $29.95 a month.
This is a short-term offer.
Long-term consequences, short-term offer.
PureTalk.com slash Talker2Switch today.
PureTalk.com slash Talker2Switch to America's Wireless Pure Talk.
Because the factual truth of the matter is secondary, perhaps even tertiary, is secondary, perhaps even a distant third place to the orthodoxy, to maintaining the orthodoxy.
And what I want to, you know, so I'm telling you this story.
I mean, realizing this is something that came about through, I mean, we're now five years into this.
Years of reflection and conversation and debate with my co-author, Dr. Peter McCullough.
And so the question is, could it be that we're constantly being told follow the science?
Science is the thing that governs rational decision making.
We're always being told that.
But I think the big realization is most human affairs and decision making, it's actually not outside of something like Newtonian mechanics,
like the weights and balances on an aircraft or engineering a building or all of the things in which mechanical forces can be measured and engineered in accordance with the force that's being exerted on it.
Apart from, let's keep it simple, Newtonian mechanics.
There's so much in human existence, the way the body works, the mysteries of why do some people get sick?
Why do some people don't?
Why do some people live longer than others?
All of these questions, we call it medical science, but in fact, it is so multifactorial.
There are so many different known and unknown factors at play that none of this can be measured.
So what the medical mind has done is, I think perhaps without even being fully conscious of it, it's basically adopted orthodoxies, a doctrinal view of medicine and if if you if you look at the history can i just ask you to pause i I hope that people watching this, if they didn't fully understand what you just said, will rewind it and listen to that again.
One starts with presuppositions, and then that's how you interpret the world.
Your interpretive framework Begins with your presuppositions, and that's how you actually view the world.
Now, I come out, my formal training was in philosophy.
And this was, I mean, I won't bore the audience with rehashing academic philosophical debate, but there was a very, very big debate in the 18th century between what philosophers called empiricism.
The foremost representative of this was David Hume, and then rationalism, the foremost representative being Descartes, René Descartes.
So Immanuel Kant, this sort of unusually scholarly guy living in Kunigsberg, Germany, which back then was part of Prussia.
It was actually a Hansa city, a free city in the Hanseatic League.
Very, very thoughtful, contemplative guy.
I mean, apparently that's kind of all he did was contemplate.
And he came to the conclusion, which he presented in a book called The Critique of Pure Reason, that in fact, it's not, it's a combination of both.
In order to interpret the world to make any sense of it at all, it's true that we have sensory data coming in, and you can pay attention to it and observe patterns, but you can't really interpret it unless you have certain categories that are already in your mind.
And so, you know, we live in a world now in which I think an increasing number of Americans, of our citizenry, those who are awake and have some sense that paying attention, if they're paying attention, if they have been paying attention for the last few years, and COVID-19 is an interesting story because I think what happened with COVID-19,
much of the fraud that was presented to us was so extreme and so crass that it prompted, it sort of Kant talked about reading David Hume.
He said, it awakened me from my dogmatic slumber.
And I like that phrase.
It's like people began to think our government is acting so weird.
And people with any familiarity, for example, with immunology, I hope I can say something slightly vulgar.
They're thinking, this is such colossal bullshit that, like, what is the government doing?
What is this weird priesthood of vaccinologists telling us?
It just can't be true.
So I think that awakened a lot of people from their dogmatic slumber about our institutions.
And now we're in this weird moment where a lot of American people have started to view the U.S. government in a way that a wife with a philandering husband might start to view his representations.
Like she's caught him 10 times running around on her.
He swears up and down that he's seen the light, that he tells the truth, that he's sworn off the girls.
But at that point, even if he has sworn off the girls, the trust has been totally demolished.
So we're in a weird, very unhappy moment right now.
So vaccines, like other things that we've seen in medical history, are now an object of orthodoxy.
And you go to medical school, you read your textbooks, you attend your lectures, and you are told, this is the reality of this product, of this technology, and that's it.
It's axiomatic.
There's no questioning it.
There's no examining it.
There's no critically evaluating it.
There's no even going back just to ask, well, is it optimized?
I mean, so a car manufacturer could say, well, it's axiomatic that a car has to have functioning brakes.
And you say, well, are they optimized brakes?
Are the materials?
Is the calipers?
Is all of that the best brakes that we could put on a car to make sure that a good reaction time?
The driver's not drunk.
If he hits the brakes, the car is going to stop.
Are they the best brakes?
Well, you can't ask that about vaccines.
You can't say, well, some of these vaccines, you know, they go back to the 1930s when they were developed.
Are they optimized?
You can't even ask that.
So what is that telling us?
The other thing is, don't ask any questions and observe that since 1986, the vaccine manufacturers have received full liability immunity in the event that their products injure or kill.
Christmas season is here, and although it's a bit of a cliche, it really is important to keep Christ in Christmas.
Should we focus on cookies and presents or on the reason we're doing this, which is Jesus?
Obviously, the point is Jesus.
That's the whole point.
That's the only point.
And all the decency and good cheer of this holiday comes from Jesus.
The HallowApps Pray 25 Challenge reminds us of that.
It features Chris Pratt, Quentin Stefani, our friend Jonathan Rumi, and many others.
This 25-day challenge guides you through Advent and helps you keep your focus on the true reason for the season.
Jesus.
Experience the Nativity story where Jesus brought peace and calm to a world in chaos.
That's exactly what we need right now is peace and calm and still.
And Jesus is the only one who brings it.
Period.
Hallow is thousands of prayers and meditations and music to help you connect with God all through Christmas and after, including several Christmas original songs and albums.
There's a whole world on Halloween.
It's like unbelievable.
It's changed our family's life.
Check it out.
You will not regret it.
Get three months for free at hallowed.com slash TuckerExperience Greater Peace and Stillness this Christmas.
So this is a very notable moment in this story that I found rather stunning.
So that 1986 vaccine injury act was questioned in court.
The case was Bruzowitz versus Wyeth.
There was a girl who was badly injured.
I believe it was a pertussis vaccine, developed encephalitis, severe brain damage, basically destroyed the child for the rest of her life.
So the parents sue Wyeth, which had in the interim been acquired by, I'm not going to say who they'd been acquired by.
I don't want to risk saying the wrong, but Wyeth had been acquired by one of the major pharmaceutical companies.
The case was Brusewith versus Wyeth.
And the question was, and it went to the Supreme Court, is the liability protection provided by the 1986 Vaccine Injury Act, Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, is that constitutional?
So the court ruled in favor of Wyeth.
And Mr. and Mrs. Brusewith were told, you know, sorry, there's nothing that can be done.
The act is upheld.
But there was a dissenting justice.
It was Justice Sota Mayor.
And she wrote a dissenting opinion.
And it's an excellently reasoned dissenting opinion.
It shows how far the liberal mind has come since 2010.
She writes the most reasonable, sensible, dissenting view of vaccines.
And what she says is liability, product liability, being subject to tort litigation is the primary incentive for optimizing the safety and the efficacy of the product.
I mean, are we to expect the CEO of Pfizer, which has a very long civil and criminal rap sheet for fraud, for concealing bad safety data, for overstating efficacy?
Are we to believe that suddenly the corporate board of Pfizer is going to develop such a strong, conscientious approach to business that they're just going to say, well, we don't have any liability, but I think we ought to just get busy optimizing it anyway.
We started off a first phase of this was something that hit Dr. McCullough so hard.
And there's an interesting coincidence here.
I had heard about him.
I had heard about his Senate testimony on November the 19th, 2020.
A very good man, Senator Ron Johnson, organized Senate testimony, a Senate hearing to discuss the question of early treatment.
Is there anything with a good safety profile that could possibly help to keep people from falling badly ill, going to hospital, and possibly dying in hospital?
That's what doctors do.
Is there anything that we could do to help?
Now, the first principle is safety, but what these guys were looking at were FDA-approved drugs with some of the best safety profiles in the business.
Hydroxychloroquine, it was FDA approved in 1956.
There's a wide range of indications for it.
The most common one in the States for decades was rheumatoid arthritis.
People had taken hydroxychloroquine against rheumatoid arthritis for a decade, and suddenly were told that it's dangerous.
So it was actually the eye doctors, the retina doctors, that first recognized that's not true.
Because one of the things that retina doctors have to look out for is if someone has been taking hydroxychloroquine every day for over a decade for treating rheumatoid arthritis, sometimes retinal doctors will see a toxicity that starts to affect the retina.
We're talking a five-day course of hydroxychloroquine.
So this is, again, this is absurd.
And one of the things that I think you've talked about, you've touched on in your other programs, is a tyrant will often, and where tyranny comes from in the human mind and how it develops and takes over institutions is a subject we could discuss.
But one of the things the tyrant does is insists on total absurdities.
And what happens to the people is they either accept that it's patently ridiculous or they become so demoralized that the government is making this assertion that they just give up.
It's like, okay, you know, I guess I'm just going to have to tune all of this out and, you know, go surfing in Mexico or something.
Like, just forget it.
And I think that that's actually intentional.
So I don't really like partisan politics, but remember that this is happening during the Biden administration when the first vaccine mandates get underway.
So you look at the Biden administration, and starting with the president himself, I mean, we're told that he's sharp as a tag.
So either you come to accept that and you think, well, you know, I guess he's, you know, he's sharp as a tag, I guess.
I mean, that's what we're being told.
Or you're so demoralized by that monstrous absurdity that you just say, I guess we're done.
I mean, I guess the Republic is finished, that there are people apparently behind the scenes pulling the strings, the marionettes that run the show.
I don't know who the hell they are.
I don't need to run afoul of them.
So I'm done.
I'm checking out.
And I think this vaccine ideology and religion that has been erected, it's a species of this just demoralizing anybody that asks questions.
We're going to eliminate the inquisitive mind from the public for a moment.
Upon landing, you're going to have to go into quarantine.
So I don't see any way of characterizing this apart from sadism.
That was a sadistic action.
That was turning the screws on him.
And then one of these people that participates in this, I remember one of the most revolted I've ever felt was this BBC reporter in the most condescending, smarmy, repugnant way, then does a struggle session interview with Jokovich.
Are you really going to stake your entire career?
You could be the greatest ever.
You could be the goat, Jokovich.
Are you really prepared to set all of that aside just so you don't have to receive the vaccine?
So, I am, my first interview with Peter McCullough, a buddy of mine has a studio down not too far from the hospital where he was at the time vice president of internal medicine.
Now, he was on the way out.
Like, they were about to scoot him out.
No, actually, he'd already lost his job as vice president of internal medicine at Baylor University.
He'd then got a job at what was called Heart Place, which happened to be on the Baylor campus, but a different institution.
He was about to lose his job at Heart Place.
But at the moment, he was still there as a cardiologist.
And he came down to this little studio that belongs to a friend of mine.
And we shot this beautiful interview.
The lighting, the camera, the audio, I mean, it was just absolute prone.
And I removed myself from the interview.
It's just like this Chiara Scuro lighting on Dr. McCullough.
He's wearing a beautifully tailored suit, and he's just on it.
I mean, every question cites all of the peer-reviewed literature, you know, is totally circumspect in everything, every remark, no speculation, just the facts supported by the evidence cited.
I put it on my YouTube channel, and the studio, the guy that ran the studio, he had some friends in the independent media that helped to kind of get this thing going.
I mean, he distributed the tape to the guys at the Blaze, the guys at, I can't remember, a bunch of independent media podcasters and networks and stuff.
So this thing starts to go viral.
And I'm thinking, well, this is great.
I mean, he spoke very cautiously and he spoke very well.
And about four hours later, YouTube takes it down with no explanation.
So I called Dr. McCullough and I said, we've just bumped into something that is really big and it's really dark.
It's like a black hole.
Like you, you know how you see a black hole in space?
It's actually light is bending into it.
You can't see it through an optical telescope, but what you can see is that the gravitation of the black hole is so strong that it's actually warping time space so that light is bending into it.
I said, it's like we've just bumped into a black hole.
We can't see it, but we know it's there.
What the hell is it?
And so this is actually what began the discussion.
And ultimately, I don't see any other conclusion that's plausible.
And I'm not saying this is the conclusion.
I try and stay within the realm of physics and empirical observation.
So I'll ask you, how else could you explain it other than what you just said a moment ago?
I said, I think we're going to have to leave the realm of physics and enter the realm of metaphysics, even though it's something I'm not comfortable doing.
And this was the era in the 80s of a guy named Robert Tilden.
He was this completely bizarre charlatan who would speak in tongues and would always end every episode by saying, by the way, if you send me a check and close a prayer with it, I'll see to it that your prayer is answered.
Now, the bigger the check, you know, I'm not saying that, you know, my intercession is necessarily going to be affected by the sum, but it might well be.
Just total charlatans, false prophets, wolves in sheep's clothing, guys who themselves weren't in control of their personal lives, kind of masking all of this, hiding it from themselves with this embrace of religiosity.
And I remember my mother who grew up in the Episcopal Church just saying, this is just the way these guys wear their religion on their sleeves, it's just so unseemly.
I remember reviewing that and thinking, God, that's hard.
It's like eight months of solitary.
Then talk about sadism.
Like, talk about Jogovich is, you know, flying first class to Sydney, and then he arrives and it's like, okay, we have something in store for you.
It's like you're going to face death, and then it's called off at the last second.
This is just terror.
Oh, after marching you all the way from Siberia to Moscow takes like two months and then you get there and like we're going to execute you and then oh just kidding no it's heavy and then um and then you know the you know we were talking earlier like the the Just the misery of being separated from women for months on end.
He's then sent to six years of military service in some provincial town inside.
It's like we're just not going to end the punishment for attending some liberal, you know, group of guys talking about the latest ideas out of Germany.
Like, we are going to make you really suffer for this.
So it's not that Dostoevsky hadn't experienced this on his person.
He says, you see, what he offered to you was the ability to assume responsibility for all of these people to make rocks into bread and water into wine.
And all you had to do was just make the deal, and you could have then assumed all worldly power in order to just take care of these fools, these humans with all of their flaws and their ignorance and their limitations.
You could have just taken care of them, but instead you chose to ask of them to maintain their responsibility and their free will.
This was an absurd decision that you made.
Humanity is not capable of assuming this burden.
You asked too much.
So what we are going to do is we are going to do the deal that you should have taken.
We're going to take care of them.
We're going to make sure that they're provided for.
And in return, they shall give us their obedience.
Because it's obedience that we need in order to run this ship properly.
So that's why I'm arresting you, and that's why you're not going to see the light of day under my watch.
I believe every word that you have said, I think, the last five years stands as testimony to the truth of what you said.
But we still are eliding the core question, which is, is there something about vaccines that makes them really important, the most important thing to the people who run the world?
I think that the entire edifice of our everything that pertains to public health policy, which includes the ability to invoke a public health emergency, to quarantine people, to put them under house arrest, in effect, under house arrest.
I mean, I remember I went to this march in Washington, D.C. in January of 2020 opposing the vaccine mandates.
And I wasn't allowed to enter a restaurant in D.C.
I couldn't stay in a hotel in D.C.
I had to stay in Virginia.
So it's a way, I think, this is just one way of looking at it.
If you refuse to get injected, I mean, it's kind of the ultimate.
I mean, people could say, well, if you come to work, you have to wear a uniform.
Or, I mean, there are these different sort of restrictions on personal freedom and personal space that we sort of accept.
It's just sort of part of a reasonable set of expectations to participate in institutional life.
But getting injected, and you don't know what's in the injection, you don't really know anything about it.
I mean, when you go to get your vaccine or your child vaccinated, the package insert isn't presented to you.
There is no informed consent.
I mean, it's just the pediatrician says you got to get this for your kid to attend school.
So here we go.
Free will contemplation of the reality of the, it's just not even in it.
You just agree.
So I think it's the ultimate form of obedience.
I mean, what could be, I mean, well, consider that if there's a vaccine mandate, we can lock you up.
We can shuffle you off to some shitty hotel in Sydney for two weeks.
We could prevent you from playing in the tournament.
So it's the ultimate, the ultimate method of control.
Messenger RNA, the actual molecule, was discovered in the 60s in France.
And there's something very important about this that I think goes to the absolute heart of scientists, the long-standing dream.
It's the myth of Prometheus or Lucifer.
And I actually think that Lucifer should be viewed in some ways as a kind of close stepbrother of Prometheus in some interpretation.
He's a bringer of light.
You know, if it weren't for Lucifer, you'd have this dumbass guy and girl sitting around eating mangoes or something, and they'd never awaken to the reality of the world.
They would just be stuck kind of, I mean, it sounds kind of nice, just kind of perpetually in love walking around the garden.
But the idea of Lucifer is: no, you have a brain.
Use it, explore, discover, you know, learn about your limitations.
Maybe you can even transcend your limitations.
So I think that's the idea of Lucifer, the bringer of light.
Now, I'm not saying that Lucifer is a great guy.
I'm saying this is, I think, part of this scientific archetype to transcend the limitations of our mortality.
So now you ask, what about these guys in Silicon Valley, the masters of the universe now?
I mean, the electronic world that we wouldn't be having this conversation if it weren't for the great lords of technology and Palo Alto or Menlo Park or whatever.
So I think that a lot of those guys, you might say, and I don't say this to criticize them, I just think it's a description.
You might say that they're suffering from Luciferian pride.
It's pride that, you know, I have discovered the way the universe works.
You know, I can take electrons and create a picture and send the picture.
It's almost like magic.
And I actually know a professional electrician, and you can ask him about electricity.
And, you know, I'll ask him a complex question, and he'll say, well, I would characterize that as that's a FM frequency.
But it's opaque even to the people who know the most about it.
So this was actually, and I went and looked this up because I'm very interested in electricity and what exactly it is.
And there was a huge debate in the United States at the time of electrification.
Not like TVA electrification, but 19th century.
Edison popularizes the light bulb.
All of a sudden it's amazing.
No more oil lamps.
We can stop killing the sperm whales, all this stuff.
It's like great.
But there were people in the United States, sane people, and a lot of them are Christian clergy, who were asking questions, and you can look it up.
Like, what is this exactly?
And of course, none of them ever got a straightforward answer.
And to this day, no one can really answer that question.
What is this exactly?
Of course no one really knows exactly what it is.
I'm not attacking electricity.
I'm just noticing.
And I just find it so interesting that you can, like, base your whole civilization on this thing, but nobody, even like a master electrician, can explain every part of it, right?
There's – So who's in charge?
The reason that's interesting is because if you don't fully understand something, are you really its master?
So, but this idea, yes, we don't, and I think, so I'm going to come back to messenger RNA, but what I want to say about the great lords of tech is I recently had the great privilege of meeting one personally, and I really liked him.
He was a brilliant man, a stunning intellect.
And I've long admired him.
It was a confidential meeting, but I have long admired him.
I've read his biography.
I think he's a miraculous guy, I mean, in terms of intellect.
It's too simple to say that when people have conflicts like the one you're describing, if in fact that's a real conflict, it's too simple to say it's only about the money.
There is a phenomenon that I have lived personally over decades where if you're too close to something and you're benefiting from it and you like it, it's not about money, if you like it, if you like the world you live in, which I did, it's very hard, maybe impossible to see its real character.
And, you know, something that has been a matter of great controversy and strife and anger and high emotion that has come up in public discourse recently is the ancient anthropological constant of tribalism, tribalism.
And if you're not a tribalist, if you don't see the world in terms of tribe, then, and I beg your pardon for being academic again, but I think Wittgenstein, the great linguistic philosopher, would have said, you don't understand the conversation.
In other words, tribalists, guys who hate each other and are involved in reprisals and this kind of zero-sum race to the bottom.
To be fair, some lunatic Serbian artillery guy had actually direct hit on his gas station.
So, okay, all right.
I get it.
You know, back during the Yugoslav war, and why these jerks decide to shell Dubrovnik?
I mean, it's like, what do you guys, clearly these guys had just completely lost their minds.
Why are you shelling Dubrovnik?
Why did you just, okay, a gas station.
Okay, all right.
So just blow the shit out of that gas station.
So, you know, here we are like 16, no, 26 years later.
And the whole gas station is a shrine to Serbian villainy.
So can you imagine every day walking in to your place of work and there is everywhere on the wall a reminder of the injustice that you suffered 26 years ago at the hands of the Serbs.
So I just, this was fascinating.
I was like, I got to talk to this dude.
So he spoke broken German, some of the Croatians from the old Austro-Hungarian Empire.
They can still speak a bit of German.
And I said, why do you believe that they shelled Dubrovnik?
Like, that doesn't really make sense.
Like, what is the strategic value of shelling Dubrovnik?
You know, I think I'm related to Sir John Leake was, I think he was Queen Anne's admiral during the War of Spanish Secession.
And there's a book about Sir John.
And, you know, I've read the book and it's like, well, he sounds like a cool guy.
But the trials and travails of his struggle in the war of Spanish secession, I mean, it's like, who cares?
So I can't get into the internal logic of this conversation about, you know, this tribe did this and then that, and then we're back and forth and who killed more than the other guy?
And would you say it's true that people without a tribal identity are at grave disadvantage against those with a powerful tribal identity because they don't understand what they're looking at at all?
Well, I remember during, before my grandfather died, he fought in Italy.
He slept on the ground for two years.
And he slung it out with Jerry in Italy.
I mean, like hot combat.
And my great-uncle, Bobby Weitzel, was killed in Italy.
And it was very traumatic to my great-grandmother.
But the thing that, so, and my great-grandmother, by the way, her family was originally from Germany, so there was this kind of confusion about that.
And I remember talking to my grandfather, and he said, one of the most disturbing things I remember, he said, there's a machine gun nest, and we kind of were able to maneuver and get close, and somebody tossed a grenade into it, and the grenade went off, and then the guns fell silent.
He said, so then we entered the machine gun nest, and the soldier manning it was just a boy.
He didn't even have a beard.
He was like a 14-year-old.
And he said the Germans were moving all of their manpower to the Eastern Front to fight the Russians.
And so they had just pulled back these positions in northern Italy, north of Florence.
And they were very clever.
He said they kind of set these things up where just a little kid could operate it.
He said, and they had these fascinating little maps.
And then you could actually, with a lever, you could identify with binoculars where are the Americans.
And then you could move a corresponding lever to put the gun to sight the gun.
He said, it's very ingenious.
He said, but I remember thinking, this is just friggin awful.
And by the way, that also happened in the First World War, where millions of Americans of German ancestry changed their last names, called themselves Dutch, the Pennsylvania Dutch are obviously German.
But they were so ashamed of their own tribe that they pretended they weren't part of that tribe.
The American adventure or project has been unbelievably successful until, I don't know, 2000.
So why do I mention war and tribalism and all of this?
If you're in the vaccine ideology and you've completely 100% been indoctrinated in it, it's like I can't talk to you.
It's like you're in another tribe.
And I think that is perhaps the point of the whole thing.
Let's divide, let's stamp out vaccine hesitancy, and then those who take the communion, who receive the boy who receives, those who receive it will then be permanently separate from those who are hesitant and refuse.
So it's like you've just created a tribal identity.
And he who hesitates, he who refuses, well, if he's in Washington, D.C., the nation's capital, he can't stay in a hotel.
He can't have a steak dinner with Senator Johnson near Capitol Hill because he's not vaccinated.
So I think that's what this is about.
But I want to get, we might be running short on time, but I do want to talk about messenger RNA.
So this Promethean or Luciferian intellect and the pride that is taken in that, there's no grander expression of this than messenger RNA.
So the original idea was, well, if you think about messenger RNA, there's a trinity of the way proteins, the building blocks of life, or proteins.
So there's replication, which is a DNA strand replicates itself.
There's transcription, which is the DNA using RNA, which is one half DNA strand, to send information outside of the cell nucleus into the external part of the cell, the sort of watery part of the cell.
RNA then instructs, that's called transcription, and then translation, that RNA instruction then tells the cell what to do.
And I mean, it's like you're talking about electricity.
I mean, if you start studying molecular biology, you think, oh my God, like this is, this is so fascinating.
It's so interesting.
Like, and Francis Collins, who was the head of the NIH when COVID came, he wrote a book in 2006.
So Francis Collins wrote a book called The Language of God.
And what he claimed was with the Human Genome Project, with all the advances that had been made in understanding molecular biology, DNA, RNA, messenger RNA, that scientists were reading the code in which God had created life.
So you're probably wondering why I mentioned the Silicon Valley guys.
So code.
You code things.
You enter a code, you transmit the code, and then that initiates an operation, an instruction to do something.
And we're headed this way in a big way with artificial intelligence.
But the idea is it's like God is a divine coder.
And using nucleic acid, he coded up there in the celestial laboratory.
He coded life.
And now the human intellect has reached a point where we can read the code.
Okay, so that's interesting.
Okay, so I read the book, God's Language.
That's cool.
I mean, maybe we're reading God's language.
I think Einstein said, I want to know God's thoughts.
Okay, so far so good.
But what these mRNA vaccine guys did, they went one step further.
We're not only going to read the language of God, we're going to start writing in the language of God using messenger RNA.
We will now use pseudo-uridinated messenger RNA to instruct the body to produce the proteins, the building blocks of life that we want it to produce.
But consider the contradiction of that, because to go back to The Grand Inquisitor by Ivan Karamazov, it's a paradox, because in a way, what the Grand Inquisitor is suggesting is just give us all of your free will, and we'll take care of you.
It's like we're going back to the prelapsarian state where you're just taken care of.
You don't have to ask any questions.
You don't have to try and figure anything out.
You're just told the way the world is, and you accept and you obey.
So this is the tension in being human.
And the messenger RNA stuff where the whole thing becomes so fantastically absurd, and this is another really important point that we try to convey in our book.
There's so much these guys don't know.
So they get these little glimmers of insight.
It's like, holy Toledo, can you believe what we just observed?
Where it becomes very childish and very intellectually challenged is the next thought, oh, now we've figured it all out.
My favorite medical historian is Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr., a very, very interesting guy.
And he once made an observation, which I thought, God, if you could just frame that, put it on the wall of every library, excuse me, of every laboratory.
I'm going to ask you one last specific question about messenger RNA.
So I think, as you said a number of times, we don't really know its effects and we don't know certainly where it's going long term.
But the one thing that strikes me we should be very concerned about is the possibility that it changes people in a way that they pass on to their children, that it changes their genetic code.
Because that's, of course, destroying humanity as we know it.
Is there any indication that that is happening or could happen?
i'm trying to get my emotions under control but yeah that's really i'll tell you something else when you talk about young people So fertility.
In July of 2021, the New England Journal of Medicine, to their credit, published a peer-reviewed case study of a young man, an adolescent boy, who developed myocarditis, inflammation of the heart.
Consider the symbolism of this.
A young fit boy develops myocarditis, inflammation of the heart, shortly after receiving a messenger RNA COVID shot.
I actually had dinner with Dr. McCullough that night.
He was very alarmed by this.
He said, you know, I mean, I've been practicing cardiology for 30 years.
I very, very rarely see myocarditis.
And this preposterous assertion that, well, it's just a little bit of heart damage.
He said, this is ridiculous.
You need your heart to keep beating every second or millisecond for the rest of your days.
Why would you take any unnecessary risk that could damage young people?
Okay, you could say in a nursing home, our risk-benefit analysis is that, you know, take the risk with the vaccine because these people are very frail if they get – we could argue that.
Maybe we should have a discussion.
But just to say all the young boys and little girls should get this shot even though they're not at risk of COVID-19.
I mean, that's dark, but it's about to get darker.
So the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, who's also an adjunct professor at the Harvard Medical School.
So in terms of institutional prestige, it doesn't get any more prestigious.
I mean, you're talking about number one public medical professional probably on earth.
Professor at Harvard, editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine.
I mean, that's like the Pope.
His name is Dr. Eric Rubin, and he was also an advisor on the FDA deliberative committee to decide whether we should approve the messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine for young people.
I think the original decision is people under the age of 18.
We have the transcript of the deliberative committee meeting.
The question is, should the FDA, and I'm the, in effect, he's the most prestigious advisor in the room, should it be approved for young people?
So this is his reasoning.
And I just quote the transcript.
Okay, so the question is, do we approve this for young people?
To be clear, there's still the FDA and the CDC technically acknowledge that an adverse side effect of the COVID-19 vaccine is myocarditis, particularly in adolescent males.
Okay, so but that is so qualified with the assertion, but it's so rare that we needn't really concern ourselves with it.
It's a very low-risk outcome.
So that is the assertion in order to prevent there from being any repercussion.
Now, Senator Ron Johnson held here a Senate hearing in May of this year.
I actually attended with Dr. McCullough.
And the question was, has myocarditis been deliberately obscured?
The risk?
Has it been covered up by the U.S. government?
The same agencies who approved it for young people?
And the answer is yes.
And I think that this is very, very important.
There isn't going to be a public acknowledgement from the same group of guys that they've made catastrophic errors in all of this.
Do you remember what I was saying earlier about a large percentage swath of the American people no longer believe anything their government agencies tell them?
The McCullough Foundation, of which I am the vice president, we just published, I should say, we posted, we did an exposition of a paper that was recently published in which a patient, it's a published paper.
It's a published case study.
It's not a question of speculation.
It's been published.
Now, molecular biologists, I'm sure, could debate about this.
But the finding is a person who had cancer of the bladder, which is a very severe cancer, in that tumor, so in the bladder cells that had become dysplastic, that the when cancer begins to develop, remember I was telling you about the coding?
You get coding errors and it starts forming these malignant cells, which are chaotic and that don't work, but they keep replicating.
That's the problem with cancer.
It's like this dysfunctional thing that just keeps replicating.
It's kind of a horror show.
Now, I don't pretend to be an oncologist, but the finding is, is that messenger RNA was found in the cancerous cells of this tumor.
So it seems to be integrating.
Now, the question is, is it integrating in a way that can be passed on to the offspring, or is it so dysfunctional that it's killing the host before it can be passed on?
And I don't know that we yet know that.
But remember, science is the topography of ignorance.
I mean, there's a lot about this that is very, very concerning.
There's also a study that this messenger RNA seems to have transcribed into liver cells.
So, you know, to really get to the bottom of this, you would have to have molecular biologists who aren't entranced by this, that would have to really be willing to seriously evaluate it without presuppositions.
And I just don't know that we're there.
That's the problem where we are.
If you receive the vaccine, if you approved it, if you told your patients they need to get it, are you really going to be an ⁇ unless you have a kind of Damascene moment where you're like, okay, I totally screwed all of this up.
So I got interested in forensic medicine, and I got to be pals with the pathologist, the forensic doctor at the Vienna Institute of Forensic Medicine.
And she wanted to get some of her papers published in English.
And she said, you know, I can, I know the basic medical terms, but I don't know how to write in a good, nice, flowing style.
This was before all these translate things.
So, you know, I'll do my basic translation.
I'll make sure the medical terminology is correct, but could you put this into a paper that somebody might want to actually read?
So I did a few translations for her, and I got to be pals with her.
And I got to where I was hanging out at the Vienna Institute of Forensic Medicine, you know, once every couple of months when I was researching my first book.
And I became so fascinated.
I even thought about writing a screenplay about this.
So there was a professor of anatomy at the University of Vienna Medical School in the 1840s.
And I'm sorry that his name is suddenly slipping me, but he was an anatomy professor.
And every day he took his students to the Institute of Forensic Medicine for anatomy class.
They would do anatomical studies of cadavers.
And then from the anatomy class, the students would then go to the obstetrics department of the University of Vienna Medical School.
And there, the head of obstetrics was a guy named Professor Ignaz Semmelweis.
The professor of anatomy is doing a demonstration, is using a scalpel on a cadaver, and then accidentally cuts himself.
That injury, that wound, then becomes horribly infected, and he dies.
He gets sepsis, and he dies.
Semmelweis starts thinking, that's interesting because The disease progression with the professor, it reminds me of what these girls in the maternity ward are suffering.
Now, remember, this is before the germ theory of medicine.
I think an Italian had proposed it, but it hadn't caught on.
So Semmelvise says, Could it be that the corruption that is transferred from the cadaver to my friend with the scalpel, that the students they're coming directly here from anatomy?
Could it be they're transferring the same corruption from the body to the genital tracts of my girls in the maternity ward?
Could it be that if I have them wash their hands with chlorinated lime, it's what gravediggers or undertakers use to cut putrefaction, what'll happen?
So he tells the kids, wash your hands with chlorinated lime before you examine the girls in my maternity ward.
So let's test your powers of deductive reasoning.
What happened to the incidence of child bed fever in the maternity ward when they started washing their hands?
You've been infected with a deranged superstition.
Everybody knows it's got nothing to do with that.
You're just putting stupid ideas into the heads of your young and naive students.
Stop it.
So Semmelweis says, no, I'm not going to stop it.
I'm going to continue researching this and I'm going to continue publishing this.
So this turns into a battle royale in Europe.
Okay.
Now, interestingly enough, Oliver Wendell Holmes is doing the same at the exact same time.
I mean, I don't know, maybe they heard of each other.
He's doing it at Harvard, and he, Holmes, is not getting a bunch of blowback at Harvard, but Semmelweis in Vienna is.
Okay, so this is how badly this escalates.
And remember this, be useful to remember given the current climate of things.
So the eminences of Europe say, we have to silence this guy.
Semelvise then starts firing back.
You guys at this point have reached a moment where you actually know that I'm telling the truth.
Like the reality is the evidence has now come in.
It's so strong that you know I'm telling the truth.
But you would rather than adopt my protocol of hand washing.
You would rather that young moms, young mothers, and their infants in maternity wards all over the continent of Europe, you would prefer that they die rather than admit you're wrong.
When we talk about you're up against censorship and you're up against the imposition of falsehood, and no matter what you say, you're just going to be told to shut up, shut up, shut up.
So the question was in the 1920s and 30s in Germany, is there a link between long-term use of tobacco and carcinoma of the lung, cancer of the lung?
And here's where you have to be really particular.
So it's not that everyone who smokes is going to get lung cancer.
It's not true.
But could it be that in some cases, among some of the population, there's an underlying susceptibility.
And if that susceptibility is activated by years of heavy cigarette smoking, could in that susceptible population, could it cause carcinoma of the lung?
There was an epidemiologist in Germany named Fritz Linket, and he did a meta-analysis of all of the data from pathologists to doctors to everybody you could talk to that had ever made any observations on this.
And he concluded, yes, not in everybody, but in a statistically significant susceptible part of the population, cigarette smoking causes carcinoma of the lung.
So Sir Austin Bradford Hill was probably the most famous epidemiologist of all time.
We have these Bradford Hill criteria of evaluating causation.
So in 1950, he does a landmark study, and he concludes, yes, again, not everybody, but in a susceptible population, smoking causes carcinoma of the lung.
In spite of his prestige, the tobacco industry, all of its hired gun doctors, and the tobacco industry did have hired gun doctors.
That was systematically obscured for another 16 years.
It's all shocking, but as I think the story, the amazing story you just told, reminds us we should not be shocked because this is how people are and how always have been.
And even if the recognition you receive for telling the truth is posthumous or doesn't come at all, it doesn't matter because it's a virtue in itself to tell the truth.
And that's why I'm grateful for the book you wrote with Peter McCullough.
And I'm grateful for this conversation, which was like twice as compelling as what I expected.