reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @DrWoofAus
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭
Compared to the ABC Four Corners Albo and Dutton puppet show last night or the brainwashed on #qanda, this previous Tucker Carlson stream is what Australians should be watching. #4Corners https://t.co/I2lRIGOMfm
Video Transcript AI Summary
Australia is vulnerable to external changes due to its decency and compassion, mirroring the US experience where positive qualities were exploited. Australia's wealth in essential minerals makes it a target for countries like China, which has a large population and growing economy but lacks resources. China won't invade militarily but will subvert Australia by buying off politicians, which is already evident through mass immigration.
This immigration strains resources, lowers living standards, and erodes national cohesion by creating a population without shared history or values. The "land acknowledgement" is a humiliation ritual that weakens Australians' sense of ownership. Similarly, the trans agenda sows chaos by denying basic biological realities. The green agenda prevents Australia from utilizing its vast resources, benefiting countries like China.
The solution is for Australia to find leaders who prioritize the country's interests above all else. The current political system is corrupt, with parties aligned on core issues like the economy and foreign policy. A leader is needed who is willing to sacrifice everything for the people and challenge the status quo, even at great personal cost.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Certain people follow different rules because they have more power. And I can tell you, as someone who's living in a country that is becoming that, you know, it's not as nice at all. Now, obviously, I'm on the right side of that. So I guess I'm the beneficiary of it, but I still don't like it at all. I would much rather live in a country where, you know, the people down the street who don't make as much as I do feel every bit as entitled to run their country as I do.
I saw that in Australia And I loved it. I admired it. It made me wistful for what The United States once was. I thought it was absolutely beautiful. But I also left Australia with a kind of sadness, a sort of poignant feeling, because I felt that Australia was changing a lot faster than Australians understand.
And that there is something about the decency of Australians that leaves them vulnerable to change from the outside. And I saw when I was in Australia, a country that was maybe ten years behind The United States in its evolution away from democracy. And I saw Australia being attacked in exactly the same way that my country has been attacked. And it's a really simple formula. The people who want to change your country, who want to take it away from you, use your best qualities against you.
Australia is a deeply compassionate country. You don't shoot the birds that attack your male men. And as I said, so Australians have a deep desire to be compassionate, to be decent. What if you were to leverage that against them? What if you were to tell them that they had to obey, but rather than pulling out a gun and sticking in their face and saying obey, because that's hard to do with Australians because they're tough people.
You know, they were Gallipoli. It's a tough society. That's not going to work. Instead, you said to Australians, if you're decent, if you're a good person, then you will do this. That might work.
And in fact, it will work because it's worked in my country. This which has the same Anglo culture of decency and fairness and compassion and egalitarianism. And in my country, which has both been invaded and whose social structure has been turned completely upside down, there were no guns involved. Our best qualities were leveraged against us. Oh, you must do this.
You must accept that men can become women and gender is not a real construct, because if you don't, you're mean. And the last thing Americans want to be is mean, because they think of themselves as nice. And I think Australia is very much the same. So then the question becomes, why would someone want to take over Australia? Ah, this is what I want to mention for a moment and have you think about.
It's really simple what's going on in Australia. And it has to do not with your country specifically or your political system specifically, but it has to do with geopolitics and the basic rules of life. And the basic rule of life is that every country needs three things: food, water and energy. Beyond anything else, you cannot have a civilization without food, water and energy. And unfortunately for you, and this is a mixed blessing, Australia has the world's deepest reserves of energy and essential minerals.
Australia has the deep reserves of uranium, iron ore, lithium, coal, gold, oil and gas, etcetera, etcetera. Australia has the minerals the world needs. And in many cases, they are very close to the surface because of your geology and geography. They're easy to extract. They're cheap to extract.
So there is no place on planet Earth richer than Australia. Now, of course, Australia is not an especially rich country because you've been prevented from extracting those essential minerals by forces within your own country. So but keep in mind, Australia is the richest country in the world. Fundamentally, you have deeper resources than anyone else, period. Why is this a problem?
It's a problem because Australia has 26,000,000 people. Less than 5,000 miles away, you have a country with 1,400,000,000 people. And that country with 1,400,000,000 people, too many people for its landmass, has the world's fastest growing economy and now the world's largest economy. And it doesn't have enough resources. That country is called China.
So if you're China, you have to have China's resources. I mean, you can go to Africa, you can go to Latin America, those are very far away. Australia is right there. It's less than 5,000 miles away. It's your neighbor.
It is a lone outpost of English language and Western civilization in the middle of China's area of influence. So if you're China, you're going to take over Australia if you can. Now, of course, I'm not the first person to think of this. Strategists in Australia and the West have been thinking about this for a long time. And the solution has been to put an enormous American military base in the middle of Australia, which is rarely mentioned, but it's there and it's there for a reason.
It's there to keep China at bay. And most people in Australia, when I mentioned this to them, think it's been pretty effective. We got the Americans here and probably nuclear weapons and like, we're safe. We're not going to be invaded. Well, I could have told you that.
The Chinese are not going to invade your country with an armada of ships. They haven't even invaded Taiwan yet, which they think is theirs. And you could make a case that it is theirs. So they're not going to invade you. And by the way, why would you want to invade Australia?
It's too big and the people are too tough. Again, I refer you to Gallipoli, where in the service of the British Empire, an empire that has never treated you well, by the way. In fact, if you really want an enemy, it's Great Britain. That's my personal view. No offense or anything.
But everybody knows that it's not worth getting in a fistfight with the Australians either in a bar, you know, or or a war because they're going to extract a cost. They're going to punch you in the face. So it's not worth it. They're never going to invade you. What they're going to do is subvert you.
They're going to undermine you. They're going to take your country away from you incrementally, bit by bit, without you even knowing it. Now, how are they going to do that? Well, the very first thing they're going to do is buy off your politicians. What does it cost to invade a country?
Well, we invaded Iraq and Syria and Afghanistan and Libya, and now we're doing the same, I guess, in Yemen. I mean, The United States loves to invade people. And it's extremely expensive. In fact, we are bankrupt as a result of invading people. So why would you do that when you could just buy off Canberra?
So you take someone like Anthony Albanese. What does it cost to buy off some sort of low grade spiff like Anthony Albanese? I don't know. I haven't tried. But my guess is you could probably buy Albanese for less than it cost to buy, say, a new Tesla.
It's not expensive. This is a person with no job prospects, no obvious skills, who has the respect of nobody, including his wife. So it's like, why don't we just buy them? And by the way, I'm not attacking your Prime Minister. I'm not singling him out or your lawmakers.
I've actually visited Canberra and been up to your parliament and there's some awfully nice people. Ralph is one of them, a great guy. They're very much like the people who run my country, the legislators who run my country. You know, they're people who, you know, in a better economy would be selling used cars. But they can't.
And so they're your lawmakers and they get pensions. But it's all very, if I can just be honest with you, it's all very low grade. These are not impressive people. They're not making a ton of money. They're not creating anything.
They're bureaucrats. And so what does it cost to buy them off? Oh, not very much. A lot less than it cost to invade. Now, I'm not saying your lawmakers have been bought off.
I'm stating unequivocally they've been bought off. There's no question about it. And it's obvious in what's happening in your country. And the first reason you know that your government has been bought off by China is that your country is being invaded in a way that is designed to make you not notice, and you're being invaded through immigration, refugees and legal immigrants. 200,000 a month.
200,000 a month. No country can sustain that level of immigration without falling apart, period. Especially not a country of 26,000,000. Now, if you think about it, and by the way, Australia being a very decent country, very much like Canada, very much like The United States, You're not encouraged to say anything about this or you're a bad person because you're offering a better life to people and like, how dare you not do that? What's never noted is that you are stealing the future of your children when you do that in a bunch of different ways.
For one, the most obvious, your kids can't afford houses anymore. In Australia, just like The United States, you have a continental sized landmass, and you had a ton of inexpensive, pretty comfortable housing with space, with a little yard, nothing extravagant, but the average middle class person could afford a house and then a spouse and then children and maybe a dog and a lawn. All the things that the human heart desires, a little piece of my own, a place for my children to have children and for our generations to continue. That's the true dream of every person is to have grandchildren and then great grandchildren and see, you know, his line continue. That's the most basic desire that people have.
And it's being stolen from you by immigration, not because the immigrants are bad, just to be completely clear about it. I'm, you know, I do not begrudge anybody moving from, say, Rawalpindi, Pakistan to Sydney, Australia. I've been to both cities. I'd much rather live in Sydney. I'm not mad at the guy from Rawalpindi.
That's a completely rational choice on his part. And that's true in The United States. We've got a ton of people moving up from Latin America and from around the world, and all of them are leading better lives in The United States. Good for them. I get it.
I'm not mad at them. I'm outraged at my lawmakers for allowing it because in The US, as in Australia, most people's children can't afford to live anymore because we have a principle that is encoded in nature called supply and demand. If you have less of something that people want, its price goes up. And housing, and there are a million other things, education, healthcare, infrastructure, all of them are under unsustainable pressure by the number of new people coming in. So your leaders have destroyed the hope of a future for your children.
That alone merits a revolution, and I mean it. But being nice people, you've said almost nothing about it because you don't want to be racist. But it's not racist to say, I was born here, and my children by virtue of their citizenship in this country deserve a future. But the second effect, and this is the point, that mass immigration has on a country, is that it steals its core. It eliminates the cohesion between people.
You have over time, this is true in The United States as well as Australia, and it's about to be very true for you, given the scale of immigration, you have nothing in common as a country when a huge percentage of your population just got there from somewhere else. You don't share a common language, a common religion, you don't share a common history. I'm sure there are many people in the audience listening tonight who had ancestors at Gallipoli. No one coming to your country did. And I know that Gallipoli is one of many moments in Australian history that you recognize and celebrate and you remember the bravery, the valiance of your ancestors.
Will you do that in fifty years? Of course not. Because the guy from Rawalpindi doesn't know what that is. And why would he? It's not his fault.
But it means that your country is changing so fast that there's no country in the end. There's just groups of people with nothing in common. That's not a country. That's a series of tribes. And the reason that you do that to a country is so you can take it over.
Because you throw it off balance. There's no organized resistance. There can't be organized resistance to your program because there aren't, there's no dominant group of people to resist it. And that's exactly what they're doing. This is being encouraged by the Chinese and it's working because they're leveraging your decency against you.
When I was in Australia, the thing that shocked me the most was your, I think it's called a land acknowledgement. I found it one of the most grotesque things I've ever seen, one of the most profound humiliation rituals I've ever witnessed in my life. Every time a meeting opens, I think the school day begins this way. Every time a commercial airline lands, know, you come in on Qantas. And they announce that the land that you're on does not belong to you.
And I thought to myself, who is this helping? Is it helping the indigenous community? If so, tell me how. When you say this doesn't belong to me, is someone in the indigenous community getting a job or a government grant? No.
No one is benefiting except the people who seek to steal your country, and they are going to steal your country, and they're telling you so. When you are forced to say something is not yours, that means someone else is about to take it from you. If you're sitting at home one night and an armed group of people show up at your house with guns and say, henceforth, we would like you to say out loud every single day, this is not our house. That's not your house. And you say, but I paid for this house.
I've got a mortgage on it, it's my house. No. They stick a gun in your face every day, you repeat, this is not my house. What do you think their intention is? Why do you think they're asking you to do that?
They're asking you to do that so they can steal your house. And when they do steal your house, you won't put up a fight because you've been trained to believe it's not your house. That's exactly what a land acknowledgment is. And that's also what the trans agenda is. That's also what the green agenda is.
The trans agenda, of course, is designed to sow chaos. Again, it's a scenario in which nobody benefits. Does the trans kid who's been castrated or rendered sterile by puberty blockers, does that person benefit? No, his life is destroyed. What's the suicide rate among trans people?
No one asks. It's the highest of any group. Because pumping a child full of dangerous drugs hurts the child, of course. How does castrating a child help anybody? No one.
But what it does do is throw your society into chaos. If you can't acknowledge the most basic difference in nature, which is the difference between male and female, all of nature is predicated on that difference. And not just in the animal world, plants. Everything comes down to the binary, male, female, and of course, human civilization is based on that as well, because it's inherent in nature. It's not something we made up.
It's not a cultural construct. It's embedded in our genes. Your sex is determined by a blood test because it's at the cellular level. So why are they telling you otherwise? Because when you convince people that nature isn't real, that the laws of nature somehow don't apply, that your leaders, Anthony Albanese, that sleazy little creep, is somehow God and he can, like, eliminate the difference between men and women or control nature.
When you convince people of that, you throw them off balance and you sow chaos and chaos is exactly what you want if you're taking over a country. It's exactly what you want. If you can confuse your enemy, you've won. And that's exactly as I said, the green agenda is. I want to say it once again, Australia is the richest country in the world.
Uranium, gold, bauxite, iron ore, lithium. These are the things copper, the deepest reserves in the world. These are the things you need to run a modern society, oil and gas. And you've been told that you can't use them? Because what?
Coal is evil? You have the deepest coal reserves in the world. But you can't use it? Guess who is using it? China.
They're happy to use it. You ship your coal to China. You've got more iron ore than any country and easier to extract iron ore than any country in the world. How many steel plants do you have? Let me just do the math.
Zero. Because you've been told you can't. By the greens. Oh, and because Australians love nature so much because they appreciate God's creation so profoundly, which is, as I said at the outset, the best thing about them, anyone who loves nature is a friend of mine, that's how I feel. Anyone who loves animals is a friend of mine because it shows a deep decency.
It acknowledges perspective. God created this. I didn't. I'm going to enjoy it. I'm going be its steward.
These are the best impulses a person can have. But they've been leveraged against you and you've been disarmed. Well, you've literally been disarmed. You can't defend yourselves. You have no guns.
So take three steps back. What is all of this? It's all connected. It is a predicate to take over. And the group taking you over is China.
And I just want to say one thing. In The United States, there's a lot of talk about China and the threat that it poses to American preeminence in the world. And that is absolutely true. It does. Its economy is bigger than ours now.
And it's more real than ours because they make things. And we just sell real estate and do banking, which are not, you know, that's not a real economy. I get it. So Americans are very afraid and they're attacking China. I do not attack China.
I'm not mad at China. I'm afraid of China. We all should be. But, you know, like the immigrants who come to our country and and I don't think they improve it. I'm not mad at those immigrants and I'm not mad at China because China is acting in its own interest.
And that's what I want my country to do, and that's what I want your country to do. And I'll I'll just end with this because I I get all spun up here. The solution to all of this is to find leaders who have a very simple goal, and that is to act on behalf of Australia. And that would seem self evident. So you have what is often described as a democracy.
I mean, of course, you've got a prime minister, we've got a president, you've got a parliament, we've got a congress, whatever. It's the same system at its core because its central idea is that the people rule. Australians are in charge of their own country. If the majority of the Australian people want something over time, they will be granted it because they own Australia. They are not renters.
They're not serfs. They're not slaves. They are citizens who are equity shareholders in their own nation. This is the idea that transformed the world. This is the idea that undergirds every democratic system.
And it's certainly the core idea in Australia. And so given that, you would imagine that every leader of Australia would be looking out first and foremost to the exclusion of all others for Australia. The point is, I'm running Australia. Every decision I make should be to the benefit of Australia. And of course, I'm speaking as an American, our system's the same, and that's what we wanted.
And for, I don't know, I'm 55, my entire lifetime, we're denied that. If you look at a list of the things that Americans care about and want, And it's easily found. It's called public opinion polling. You have it in your country as well. You can ask people like, what are your top concerns?
What do you want? Australians don't want 200,000 foreigners showing up in their country every month to make their lives unaffordable. They would like lower energy costs. They would like a more robust economy. They'd like cheaper housing.
They don't want to see their community hospitals overwhelmed with foreigners. They paid for those hospitals. When they need to go to the hospital, they want medical care. This is true in every country. It's true in New Zealand.
It's true in Canada. It's true in The UK. It's true in The United States. And in all of those countries to varying degrees, they've been denied the things they want. And they've been instead told that the things that they're going to get are these abstract goals.
They're going to their government's going to end climate change. They're going to bring something called equity. They're going to, you know, like invade a bunch of other countries. You because you are such a sweet and loyal nation, have joined us in a bunch of foreign adventures around the world. You got not one thing out of it, neither did we.
No American benefited from the war in Iraq. No Australian benefited from the war in Iraq. There's agitation to start a new war with Iran. Trust me, no Australian will benefit from that either. And if we do it, hope you don't join it.
And no American will benefit either. So that's what we actually got. We told them what we wanted. We got something completely different. We got things that hurt us.
How did that happen? Well, it happened because we were tricked into thinking that the two parties vying for power disagreed with each other on a fundamental level. And it turned out they didn't. I'll just speak for The United States. I'm not an expert on your politics, though I've watched it very carefully.
In The United States, we have the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, and we are told day in and day out, and this is the most insidious propaganda we're ever told, that these parties are at war with each other and they've got a different vision of the world and they pick these battles. They fight over whatever. They fight over the trans thing quite a bit. Or Black Lives Matter. You know or some other nonsense.
They're always trying to get you to hate each other on the basis of race. They call you a racist but of course, they inspire race hatred to keep you occupied so you don't notice while they're looting your country. That's the game by the way. So, we were told this for, I don't know, fifty, sixty years that these two parties were in opposition to each other. And it was like this critical battle and every election was the most important election of your lifetime.
I'm sure you hear similar nonsense in your country. And right around, I don't know, 2015, '20 '16 in The United States, people began to realize, wait a second, on the core questions that matter and to restate the core questions that matter are the economy and foreign policy. Where does your money come from and who do you kill? On those questions, the parties were completely aligned. They acted as one.
It was the uni party, as we say in The United States, One party, a one party state. One party states are by definition corrupt because no one's watching. No one's pushing back. They can do whatever they want. And they did.
And so in The United States, we did was rather than create a third party, because that's difficult in our system, easier in yours, but in our system, it's very hard to create a third party. The two parties that made it very hard. We just snuck a guy in as the nominee of one party who didn't really represent that party. He represented effectively a third party. The People's Party.
The party that wanted to deliver to people what they actually wanted. And what they wanted was an end to immigration because it's destabilizing our country and lowering the standard of living for Americans. That's a fact. Wanted to end these incredibly counterproductive and totally immoral foreign wars. And he was this large orange man called Donald Trump.
And he became president. And the response to him was so ferocious. I lived in Washington at the time. I can barely even describe it. And of course, you, I'm sure, saw this on your televisions.
He was denounced as a racist. They always call you a racist. Whatever you think about Donald Trump, he's not a racist at all. In fact, he got a higher percentage of the non white vote in the last election than any Republican ever since Abraham Lincoln. They called him a racist.
Then they impeached him twice. They tried to kick him out of office. He was an elected president and they tried to boot him out because they hated him so much. Then they indicted him and tried to send him to prison for the rest of his life on absurd charges. Charges so absurd most Americans never understood what they were.
They were made up. And then of course famously in July of last year, they tried to murder him. They shot him in the face at a rally. We still don't know how that happened, but on some sort of broader level, we know exactly how that happened. He challenged the status quo and they tried to kill him twice.
And I'm recounting what you know to remind you that if you're going to take on entrenched power in your own country, it's a very rough ride. You know, they don't like it at all. And they've had the system in place for a very long time, and they benefited from it. And a lot of kind of low IQ mediocre people have very high paying jobs because of the system. So they'll fight like animals to keep the system in place.
And in your case, you know, you've got the government of China, which is clearly bankrolling a lot of this stuff. So that worked for us, actually. And in The United States, we had this extraordinary person, whenever you think, you know, you could like Donald Trump or not like him. But there's probably never been, well, there never has been in my lifetime, a political leader in any country who's persevered so doggedly through headwinds like that. It's almost unbelievable.
And he was reelected. And now, and I'm sure you're watching this, he is going through the incredibly difficult process of trying to sort out what's been happening for the last sixty years. But we don't even know who murdered our president, our elected president in 1963. Still haven't found out. But he's pledged to try and find out.
But think about that. Our president was assassinated with the knowledge of his own government, elements within his own government, murdered. And every subsequent president from November 1963 until November of twenty twenty four has kept that secret of both parties. What does that tell you? They're all in it together.
If there's ever an assault on a democracy, it's the assassination of an elected leader. I mean, that's the most obvious assault on democracy, and they've kept it secret. But he's kept going, and he's made progress, and I think he'll make more progress. And, you know, we'll see. But above all, it is a triumph of the core promise of democracy, which is the people have some say in how they're ruled.
And you are very far from that. I'm not criticizing you, but I just I'm watching closely and you are very far from that. And you need leaders who are willing to put your country first. And I'm just telling you, anybody who steps forward in Australia to do that and who means it, who's not just lying to you, who means it, who isn't joking, had better be ready for an extremely rough ride. But it will be worth it.
And the last thing I'll say is that it's going to take someone who's willing to pay any cost to lead your country out of where it is right now. And I would argue that's always a prerequisite for leadership. The leader is the person who's willing to lay down his life for the people he leads. And that's not just true of national leaders, that's true of leaders at every level. That's what leadership is.
It's the person who stands up and says, you are more important than I am. And if I need to literally die protecting you, serving you, I will. That's the definition of leadership. It's true in the home. The reason the father is the father is because if armed people come to the house to hurt his family, he will gladly die to protect his family.
That is true in the military. The officer is in charge because he will die to protect his men because he loves them. The father loves his children. The officer loves his men. They're willing to lay down their lives.
That's true even in companies. Any leader who's not willing to give up everything he has for the people he leads should not be the leader, period, by definition. And so I just pray that your country, which is truly, having been to most countries in the world, I can say this authoritatively, truly one of the most beautiful, wonderful, sweetest places on planet Earth, and there aren't that many left. Your country needs that leader. And when you find that leader, you will have a chance, and I will be rooting for you just so fervently.
Anyway, thank you so much for having me. I appreciate it.
reSee.it AI Summary
A discussion emerged regarding the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines, referencing a Cochrane systematic review on flu vaccines. One participant argued that the review's findings were being disregarded, while another expressed skepticism about its relevance due to its age and lack of recent data. Concerns were raised about the potential dangers of SV40 promoter contamination in vaccines, with differing opinions on its effects. The conversation highlighted varying interpretations of scientific evidence and the evolving nature of research.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭
@paul_wilson_nz @Faceles007 @shezbanga @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @Topaz20211 @PeterHotez You quoted Cochrane there... you realise what their extensive work on flu vaccines says? How does that fit in with the "anti-vax" labelling?
@paul_wilson_nz - Paul Wilson 🇳🇿🧠🔬🦕🎲👾🏳️🌈🦑
@DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @shezbanga @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @Topaz20211 @PeterHotez Whatever they say about that is irrelevant to the efficacy and safety of COVID‐19 vaccines.
@shezbanga - SheZZa 🐭🇦🇺
@paul_wilson_nz @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @Topaz20211 @PeterHotez The what??? 😳
@Topaz20211 - Topaz
@shezbanga @paul_wilson_nz @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @PeterHotez Paul seems to be suffering from cognitive dissonance, denial and confirmation bias.
@paul_wilson_nz - Paul Wilson 🇳🇿🧠🔬🦕🎲👾🏳️🌈🦑
@Topaz20211 @shezbanga @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @PeterHotez Maybe. But then I'm not the one ignoring the evidence in a high quality systematic review. 🤷♂️Somehow, I don't think you quite understand the nature of how confirmation bias works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Confirmation bias - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
@Topaz20211 - Topaz
@paul_wilson_nz @shezbanga @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @PeterHotez I'd love to see this 'high-quality evidence' you’re referring to. Perhaps you could share the review for a closer look, as it seems we’re working with different interpretations of the data.
@paul_wilson_nz - Paul Wilson 🇳🇿🧠🔬🦕🎲👾🏳️🌈🦑
@Topaz20211 @shezbanga @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @PeterHotez You can read the Cochrane systematic review then. They spell it out in detail. Assuming you know what a systematic review actually is and nature of the methodology used.
@Topaz20211 - Topaz
@paul_wilson_nz @shezbanga @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @PeterHotez That is two years old now and doesnt include the latest data known re DNA and SV40 promotor contamination, the five negative efficacy papers, or excess mortality, amongst other issues. Science is evolving.
@mcfunny - R Marcucio
@Topaz20211 @paul_wilson_nz @shezbanga @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @PeterHotez the SV40 promoter in the vaccine has no effect. it is not dangerous.
@Topaz20211 - Topaz
@mcfunny @paul_wilson_nz @shezbanga @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @Jikkyleaks @PeterHotez That’s not true. The SV40 enhancer can affect p53 expression, and altering critical pathways has unintended consequences: formation of tumours and contribute to uncontrolled cell growth, genetic pre-existing vulnerabilities and immune responses.
@Jikkyleaks - Jikkyleaks 🐭
@Topaz20211 @mcfunny @paul_wilson_nz @shezbanga @DrWoofAus @Faceles007 @FnqSilver @PeterHotez He knows. Here is a chatGPT explanation of why these limits exist, with references @Kevin_McKernan @JesslovesMJK https://chatgpt.com/share/6781c256-0848-8009-91c3-aca643979f28
ChatGPT - DNA contamination thresholds history
Shared via ChatGPT
chatgpt.com
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
He got vocal when he put Vaxxed in the film festival - pharma had it pulled. He said “It should stay and let people make up their own minds”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Summary: This video discusses the current measles outbreak in California, which is attributed to the anti-vaccination movement. A proposed bill aims to ban exemptions from childhood vaccines. The controversy surrounding vaccines and autism is addressed, with a fraudulent study linking the MMR vaccine to autism being debunked. However, some parents still believe in the connection. The video also highlights the alarming increase in autism rates and predicts a future impact. Personal stories of individuals who believe vaccines caused their children's autism are shared. The CDC is criticized for not conducting a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children and is accused of fraud and cover-up. The speaker calls for accountability and changes to vaccination policies.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In California, the worst measles outbreak in 15 years is spreading.
Speaker 1: The virus is roaring back into the headlines tonight. An outbreak somehow traced to
Speaker 2: Someone who had probably caught measles abroad visited Disneyland and may have sneezed. Measles on the march in America.
Speaker 3: This outbreak is showing no signs of letting up. There are already more
Speaker 1: cases this year than there were.
Speaker 4: Tripled to six 144 measles cases reported in 27 states.
Speaker 5: And I mean, is this all basically because of the anti vaccination movement because Parents aren't vaccinating their kids?
Speaker 6: Yeah. You know, I I I think so.
Speaker 4: A bill that would ban exemptions from childhood Vaccines is advancing through the California legislature.
Speaker 3: We are authoring legislation that abolish the personal belief exemption.
Speaker 7: I think you're starting to see why it is that mandates are so important.
Speaker 8: There has been some inaccurate information circulating about vaccines, mostly stemming from a British study linking vaccines to autism.
Speaker 3: We still continue to fear the can cause autism even though that's been debunked.
Speaker 8: Repeatedly and thoroughly debunked.
Speaker 9: You may have heard vaccination causes autism in one out of a 110 Children. Fuck that. Total bullshit. It doesn't. The bill requiring children to be vaccinated has passed with bipartisan support.
Every child must meet immunization standards before joining public schools, private schools, and daycares.
Speaker 10: I would strongly encourage everybody. Look at the science, look at the facts, CDC, the center for disease control can give you good information. Get your children vaccinated.
Speaker 3: I have waited a long time to tell my story, and I want to tell it truthfully. I was involved in deceiving millions of taxpayers regarding the potential negative side effects of vaccines. We lied about the scientific findings. The CDC can no longer be trusted to do vaccine safety work, can't be trusted to be transparent, The CDC can't be trusted to police itself. Just a few thoughts.
William W. Thompson, senior scientist, US Centers For Disease Control and Prevention.
Speaker 6: Hello?
Speaker 8: I was sitting at my desk where I teach at Simpson University my phone rings and it's doctor William Thompson.
Speaker 6: Brian, you and I don't know each other very well. I don't know how this is all gonna play out. You have a son with autism, and I have great shame now when I meet families with kids with autism because I've I have been part of the problem.
Speaker 8: My son, Steven, was born in February of 1998. Steve, what does the cow say? Sweet, sweet.
Speaker 11: Thank you.
Speaker 8: 2 weeks after his 15 month vaccines, then he lost all language. He lost all eye contact. You pick him up and he would just hang limp this is a time where CDC was just starting to do these studies on vaccines and autism as a scientist I have over 60 technical and scientific publications in major international scientific journals And I was contacting the CDC and was deeply critical of their studies and so the CDC decided that the scientists who was going to I was saying about the statistics. I received a letter from a CDC attorney in 2004 saying that I was no longer permitted to contact the CDC. Fast forwarding to 2014 Thompson said to me, Brian, if you listen to me And if you do what I tell you to do, I can guarantee you will be able to access a treasure trove of data and I would like to guide you through these
Speaker 6: So I want to be a resource. I want to be valuable to you. I want you to have someone in the system.
Speaker 8: For Years I had been trying to crack this edifice of the CDC and just getting little glimpses of what was not right.
Speaker 6: The CDC has put the research 10 years behind Because the CDC has not been transparent, we've missed 10 years of research because the CDC is so, paralyzed right now by anything related to autism.
Speaker 2: I am a licensed clinical psychologist and a board certified behavior analyst. In 1978, I want to say the prevalence of autism was about 1 in 15,000 children. It was a very rare disorder. I was working at a clinic at UCLA, which was pretty much the only known center for treating children with autism. And we had maybe six to 10 children who we were working with.
Somewhere around the early nineties, shortly after I opened card, the growth of autism has been So high and so rapid that I've never felt like I could ever catch up anymore. From a official diagnostic perspective, The way that we define autism, we were looking at deficits in 2 areas. The first is social communication and social interaction. And in that area, we require 3 specific symptoms to be present. Symptoms such as no social emotional reciprocity, no nonverbal communication, that means eye contact, for instance or no development of relationships.
The 2nd required area of deficit is the presence of stereotypic, repetitive, restricted behaviors. And these are things like hand flapping, body rocking, insistence on routines being the same. One of the new additions is the the presence of a sensory dysregulation. If a child has an inability to sense things correctly, not necessarily hearing things the way we do, That could be classified as a symptom of autism. So if you have 5 symptoms, 2 in the area of repetitive behaviors and 3 in the area of social communication deficit, then you will get a classification of what's called autism spectrum Traum disorder, ASD.
Speaker 5: We begin though, as always, keeping them honest. Breaking news tonight. Just Hours ago, the British medical journal, BMJ, did something extremely rare for a scientific journal. It accused a researcher, Andrew Wakefield, of outright fraud.
Speaker 12: I got a call on the 19th May 1995 from a mother telling me the story of her child, his progression into autism following a vaccine. And I said, how can I help you? I know nothing about autism. You've come through the wrong number. And she said, no, doctor.
My child has Terrible gastrointestinal issues, and no one will take them seriously. I was an academic gastroenterologist doing research With a particular interest in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, inflammatory bowel disease, I knew nothing whatsoever about autism. When I was at medical school, it was so rare. We weren't taught about it. We heard a succession of stories which were very, very similar.
Medicine is about Pattern recognition, and there was a clear pattern emerging. So we decided, a group of us, including the World's leading pediatric gastroenterologists at the time led by professor John Walker Smith decided that these children Merited thorough investigation.
Speaker 3: Well, Doctor. Wakefield, has been shown used absolutely fraudulent data. He created a fake paper. The journal allowed it to run. All the other studies were done showed no connection whatsoever again and again and again.
So it's An absolute lie that has killed thousands of kids.
Speaker 12: And what we discovered and reported for the first time was this link between what to be a novel type of intestinal inflammation and autistic regression in previously developmentally normal children. And among Those the majority had regressed into autism according to their parents following the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine. It wasn't our place to censor their story because maybe uncomfortable for public health. Our job was to report that story accurately in order that it might lead to further investigation. And the paper explicitly said, This paper does not prove an association between MMR vaccine and the syndrome described.
More work is needed to resolve
Speaker 3: As an investigative medical journalist, I've spent the last 7 years working on one of the best medical talk shows in the world. We know in medicine that there have been many, many studies proving that vaccines do not cause autism. But the problem I have always had with that is Thousands and thousands of parents all telling the same story. My child got a vaccine, usually the MMR vaccine, And then that night or the next day broke out a fever. And then when they came out of the fever, lost speech, lost the ability to walk, Basically, regressed into what we know as autism and never came back.
Doctors used to be told to listen to the patient. That was the Cornerstone of medicine as we know it. But something's changed recently where the patient doesn't know what they're talking about. And these parents with their story of their children just been written off as though they have no idea what's really going on with their child. I have 2 kids.
And anyone that Past children knows that when we first have babies, we are overly sensitive to every little hiccup, every cough, every sniffle. So to say that a parent was just unaware that the child had issues and suddenly they realized that 1 year later that, oh, they have autism, That doesn't make sense to me. And so I wanted to look into this story and find out, what is this disconnect between medicine, science and real parents.
Speaker 13: I couldn't wait to be a mom. I remember specifically, before we even got married, talking about how important children would be in our lives.
Speaker 14: I wanted a daughter first and I wanted a son And we were planning on having 4 children.
Speaker 13: We were gonna be the most perfect parents that we could be.
Speaker 14: Bella was born, and That was a wonderful experience.
Speaker 13: Bella was just this angelic, perfect child. She hit all her milestones. I got pregnant with Billy quite quickly.
Speaker 15: Hello. Say hello to Billy.
Speaker 13: We've now got a beautiful girl and a beautiful boy, and life is just amazing. So at 2, 4, and 6 months, Billy had his normal baby vaccine. A little bit snivelly, chesty, coldy after maybe the last one. So me, in my perfect mother mode, rushed to the doctor. I mean, is he okay?
Do I need to Give them anything. Yes. You need to give them antibiotics just to make sure there's not an infection in there. It didn't clear up. Rushing back The doctor, and we need more antibiotics.
Let's just keep this going in him. And I remember my mother calling me out. My mother's a sort of homeopathic hippie. I'm calling her and saying, what are you doing? Chucking loads of antibiotics down your thumb for what?
And I'm saying to her mum, with all due respect, you're an artist and their doctors So they know best. He was due with MMR vaccination at 12 months. So the morning, exactly to the day, my friend said to me, Listen. I've heard that there may be a problem with this vaccine you're about to take billing for the MMR. And I said, are you crazy?
What is the matter with you? If there was a problem with vaccination, it would be headline news. The doctor would be calling up saying, do not bother coming in. This is not a safe vaccine. None of that is happening.
You're being negative. You're being careless, and you're listening to what some rumor that you heard somewhere. Billy could become deaf if I don't take him in now and get him to send him off.
Speaker 8: You know, most of the evidence linking measles with autism is kind of settled down and most of the doctors and scientists agree that it probably isn't the major cause.
Speaker 11: I've been working in pediatrics for almost 20 years. I think most pediatricians View vaccines as they're the number one thing they do for kids.
Speaker 16: Okay. Here we go.
Speaker 11: Alright. Alright. Okay. I'm young enough to not remember the days of kids in an iron lung because they were battling polio. You know, polio has essentially been eradicated from this country.
In 98, the the Wakefield Study came out. My son had just been born. That study kind of pointed a finger at the MMR. As a parent, I was Scared to give the MMR to my son. And as a matter of fact, we I didn't give it to him on time because I wanted to see I wanted to see What additional studies would show?
And over time, additional studies did show that, no, no, it's safe. And so he did get the the vaccine. You know, if everybody stopped vaccinating, we'd be going back to the dark ages.
Speaker 8: When a CDC scientist who'd been there at that time 17 years tells you This is how you access data. It didn't take me very long to realize, Oh I better do what he says because he knows what he's talking about.
Speaker 6: I just want to tell you one thing. Right now I'm sitting in a very pretty position in terms of providing you a lot of information.
Speaker 8: He asked me What data sets are you going to request? And I said, Well, I'm going to request 2 of the studies that you've done on Tamarasol, the mercury containing preservative that's used in some of the vaccines. And he said, Well, that's fine, but I want you to request the MMR data set first and this is the study by Frank DeStefano and his colleagues in 2004.
Speaker 6: It was the one study where we could end up creating a mess while the CDC tried to, you know, tried to sort out something they couldn't understand.
Speaker 13: The day Billy got the MMR was a living night. That's worth saying my life, to be honest with you.
Speaker 14: I came in and I saw him lying in his cot listless. He started this uncontrollable Shaking, uncontrollable shaking. Imagine coming out of a frozen pond.
Speaker 13: His eyes were doing this, and he was shaking Like this.
Speaker 14: And I remember she grasped him and held him really tight to her chest.
Speaker 13: There's immediate fear in John and there's immediate, mommy, this is not gonna happen. Well, I don't know what is wrong with you, but this is not gonna happen. And we get to hospital. We rush him in. Doctors are coming in and Looking at him, and that's when they said he's had a reaction.
He's had a seizure. He's this is normal. This is common for many, many children You have this this vaccination. It's absolutely okay. You're going to be fine.
Nobody ever told me There would be any side effects of any of the vaccinations my children had.
Speaker 14: Following his febrile convulsion that he had the same day of the MMR, We were told, to take him home.
Speaker 13: He sat in the bed with us for the night. He seemed he seemed just very, very sleepy. Funny, he didn't really ever wake up to the belief that we had before.
Speaker 2: For me, it became really necessary to start looking at What types of medical issues are these children going through? What are the other factors that have affected them, that have brought them to this level of Symptomology that we call autism. This is now probably the mid nineties. I came to notice that there was a, a very high use of antibiotics amongst these children. But b, what became pretty interesting was seeing the number of families who were reporting that their child Had a regressive type of behavior occur right after their vaccinations.
So a lot of these parents were showing me footage of their children who had been completely developing normally until 18 months, And then all of a sudden post vaccination had developed incredible regression. Children who had anywhere close to 50 to a 100 words and had completely lost all of their words. Children who were extremely attached and interactive with their parents and had suddenly become isolated, no longer responding to their own name. This was all happening right after their MMR vaccines.
Speaker 17: My oldest son, Ian, was born normal, developing normally. He was this beautiful boy, and we ended up at our 12 month visit, which is his 1 year. Then they gave him multiple vaccines at once. And within 7 days, he had a 104 fever and a rash all over his body. He had previously been noted in, In our videos, home videos that he was walking and actually running at that point.
7 days after the vaccine, he was no longer able to do that. He was falling down. He became a really sick, sick little boy.
Speaker 12: So the question for those of us investigating autism, is age of exposure to MMR a risk for autism. And in order to understand why that might be, you have to understand something of the history of MMR vaccine. In 1987, there was an MMR vaccine that was being used in Canada, produced by SmithKline Beecham and that vaccine caused meningitis. It was recognized quickly, and that vaccine was withdrawn in Canada. The same month that it was withdrawn in Ontario, it was licensed in the UK.
The name was simply changed from Trivirox In the UK, it was used for 4 years and likewise, it caused meningitis and had to be rapidly withdrawn. There was a public outcry, there was an acute loss of confidence by the public in vaccine policymakers, and the vaccine should, at that point, have been destroyed. It wasn't. It was then shipped to developing countries like Brazil, where it was used in a mass vaccination campaign and there was an epidemic of meningitis. It was entirely predictable.
Now scientists studied that epidemic And what they found is that the risk for meningitis was associated with age of exposure. The younger You've got the MMR vaccine, the greater the risk of meningitis. For people like me investigating autism, the question was, Is there a similar risk in autism? Is age of exposure to MMR a risk for autism, Just as it was for meningitis. We shared with the US Congress and the CDC the hypothesis.
The story as told to us, at which we have an obligation to report, is that the majority of children regressed Following a period of normal development in the face of MMR vaccination, that does not mean it is the cause of the disease.
Speaker 3: The Institute of Medicine is a body of scientists and physicians that review the available data on vaccine safety And then advise our government on vaccine research policy. Well, because Andy Wakefield had put forth this theory that The age at which you receive the MMR may increase your risk of autism. The IOM looked to the CDC to do that very study. It was a study about timing. Does the earlier you receive the MMR vaccine increase the risk of autism?
Speaker 8: When we talk about the MMR study and and then on the inside, I also found out that one of the people preparing these data sets for me was Bill Thompson.
Speaker 6: They don't really want people to know that this data exists. Again, I just can't believe we actually got you that data.
Speaker 12: Thompson couldn't send these documents directly to Brian Hooker because that would have been illegal. What Thomson identified was a legal loophole that is referred to as a citizen's request, that allowed Thomson to deliver to Brian Hooker potentially classified information In a legal way.
Speaker 13: You get checked in England with your babies at certain Times held by health visitors. So at 9 months, Billy had his full blown check, and it says no parental concerns, They'd be laughing, babbling, talking, so we pass that with flying colors. 18 months is when they next come in, And by this time, we know there's something seriously wrong with Billy.
Speaker 14: Probably within 5 or 6 days, The first signs really was this vacancy, he wasn't the same smiley little baby that he was before, he had a blank expression, Then the diarrhea kicked in.
Speaker 13: His tummy started to get bigger and bigger, bloated, rock hard bloated tummy. He would start to walk on tiptoes. His hair fell out in a dreadful high pitched scream, sort of whiny Scream developed from him and then came the head bang. The constant banging against his crib, the constant banging against the floor or a wall or anything that he could find to bang his head on, he would thrash it and thrash it. John and I would lie in bed at night just listening to this thud.
Thud.
Speaker 14: Thud. Thud.
Speaker 13: There's nothing. He's now not even noticing his sister who used to play with. John comes through the front door after work, no recognition that we were his parents or this child even belonged to us. Nothing. Nothing's gone.
Speaker 14: I mean, that was the time where Our boy changed from what he was to a real Tragic, tragic case of a child who regressed into this autistic state and lost everything. Lost everything.
Speaker 8: The CDC the way that they do research studies is very reactionary. They look at something that's creating a press and creating a buzz that could actually lower vaccination rates and that's what they study. They don't study vaccines proactively. So if Andy had never done his original study, gotten that published in The Lancet, would have never created The uproar that rightfully it should have created, then the CDC would have never studied this.
Speaker 12: The press conference for The Lancet paper was called by the Dean of the Medical School, who was the chairman of the media committee.
Speaker 8: The general association between
Speaker 12: I had done an extensive research into measles vaccine safety and MMR vaccine safety in the pre licensing phase. In other words, what Safety studies had been done before these vaccines were put onto the market and into children. The 250 page report was compiled by me showing that the vaccine safety studies for MMR, in particular, were lamentable. They were lamentable. There are many, many assumptions have been made about the safety of this vaccine, and there had been problems which had been airbrushed.
So I wrote to my colleagues. I'm the dean, and I said, going forward, there are going to be questions about what parents should do next. I cannot, in due conscience, support the continued use of the MMR vaccine having done this research. I said I will continue to vigorously support the use of the single vaccine, but can no longer support the use of the triple MMR vaccine. So the dean, as chairman of that committee, had 3 choices.
He could have not had a press conference. He could have banned me from the press conference. Or when the question came up as inevitably it would, What do parents do next about vaccinating their children? He knew what my response would be. He could deflect the question to someone else.
When the question came up on the day, he directed it straight to me.
Speaker 8: To assure you, we are not at odds on our market, separate in the
Speaker 12: All I recommended at that press conference was that parents Opt for the use of the single vaccines, single measles, single mumps, single rubella until the issue had been resolved scientifically. What happened when I made that recommendation, unilateral decisions were made by the government in the UK to withdraw the Importation license for the single vaccines, Merck opting in the US to cease the production of the single vaccines, giving parents no option. I said To a senior representative of the Department of Health, why if your objective is to protect children against serious infectious disease, why would you take away the option of how parents do that. And she said because if we allow parents the choice of single vaccines, it would destroy our MMR program. In other words, the concern was for the protection of the program over and above the protection of children.
Speaker 18: No one's career has ever been advanced in the medical industrial complex By being outwardly and openly critical of the vaccine industry. I'm Mark Blackzel, father of a daughter Diagnosed with autism back in 1998. I've written 2 books that have come out of the autism movement have been Projected into autism advocacy ever since. Mikael was born typical. Everything was fine, was developing Normally through her 1st birthday, we have vivid memories of, you know, early language, joint attention, lots of play.
She was Adorable, beautiful, cute. And then somewhere in the months after, she began to slip away and she lost language And she began to retreat into a world of her own. And at 2 years 9 months, we got A formal diagnosis of a full syndrome autism.
Speaker 7: It
Speaker 18: was a hopeless, pessimistic future that was laid out in front She was going to be disabled for the rest of her life likely to be non vocal in an institution. And that the best thing we could do was to Accept the inevitable. Part of the story we heard from the Harvard experts was autism was genetic. It was low and relatively constant prevalence. The more I learned the more clear was that that whole orthodox view Was false, completely false.
Revolutions only happen in science when there is an anomaly. An anomaly that the old orthodoxy can't explain. With autism, the anomaly was the explosion in cases which meant that what people were trying to describe as a genetic neurologically based condition Couldn't be genetic. It could only be environmental. It could only be some set of things that had happened to children.
And you had to ask the question, what might it have been?
Speaker 14: One of my personal training clients Was the Director of Programs for LWT London Weekend Television.
Speaker 7: And
Speaker 13: Skye said, why don't you do a program And people out there may may there may be someone out there with this condition.
Speaker 14: He said this is gonna be a unbelievable story.
Speaker 13: We've got nothing to lose. Right now, This child is either gonna kill himself because he's gonna smash his head to pieces or we're gonna go insane because everybody here Is miserable.
Speaker 14: That program was aired, and we received 250,000 email hits.
Speaker 13: Computers were kind of new then. The whole Internet computer thing, ours crashed. We set up a Billy Tummy website just in case somebody 1 person might helpers crashed the television station's computers crashed. They had never seen anything like this before. The parents have exactly the same story as us.
Antibiotics, some are chicken pox a lot. Vaccine. Bang. The symptoms The diarrhea, the constipation, the hype, pitch, scream, the banging of the head, we've all lived through it. It's the same story.
Speaker 14: And it was Polly's idea to put all of this stuff together in a magazine called The Autism File.
Speaker 13: Let's all Ask the questions and maybe someone can help.
Speaker 14: These questions from these parents were not being answered By the doctors that they went to see, they came to us out of desperation, and we had 45 1,000 subscribers within 4 months.
Speaker 8: When I originally got the MMR autism data. I came up with my own analysis plan and I set through logically and systematically how the data should have been approached. I looked first of all at males versus females. Then I looked at black males. The relative risk of them receiving an autism diagnosis was Astronomical and it was highly statistically significant.
I really had to scratch my head and say, I know nothing about the MMR vaccine. And so that's when I originally called Andy.
Speaker 12: Wow. Really? After everything that had happened, everything we'd all been through, everything that the families had suffered for the last 15 years And the CDC had known all along there was this MMR autism risk.
Speaker 8: As I Started to divulge more of the conversations and I think it really hit him that this was a major
Speaker 12: The first thing that Thompson did was to plot a graph, a graph of percentage of children vaccinated Against age at first MMR vaccination. The children with autism are represented by the pink line, the children without autism by the blue line. Now if there's no link between early MMR and autism, those two lines should track together whatever the age of first MMR. And they do track together until they get to 15 months, then they separate, and they continue to separate Thereafter. This was their 1st indication that MMR vaccine was causing autism.
And that finding alone rocked Thompson back on his
Speaker 8: This was a huge issue for Andy.
Speaker 12: So I said to Brian, Brian, are you recording these conversations?
Speaker 8: Recording phone conversations was not really palatable to me. I almost seemed cruel.
Speaker 12: The whistleblowers can disappear as easily as they came. They're like a fish on a hook, and your job is to get them into the boat.
Speaker 19: Temple walked at 12 months. So he had been walking for an entire month Before we went in for the next set of vaccinations. The minute we walked into the pediatric office, Lou, his twin, she's screaming her head off. I mean, she knows what's going on. She doesn't want the doctor touching her.
I look up And there she's got the shots lined up. 3 for him, 3 for her. By the 2nd shot, Lucinda had flipped herself over. So I had to Stop looking at what I was doing. Unstrap her, get her out.
Well, a minute I get her out and I calm her down a little bit and I look over. He's screaming. I look at the shot and I noticed that 1 of hers was gone. There are only 2 shots left for her. And I asked the the nurse practitioner.
I said, what happened to that other shot? She says, oh, Oh my goodness. I gave it to him. I said, which one was it? She said it's the it was the other MMR.
I said, call her doctor. This baby is screaming his head off. You've given him an extra shot. I don't know what the effect of that's gonna be. We're leaving and I left.
So she never got her shots. I go home. This baby cried, cried, cried. I put him down on his little blanket. He starts banging his head on the floor, banging his head on the floor.
Next morning, I go in his room, and he's staring in the in the space. And he's looking around like this. As if, you know, he's a bit paralyzed. Not the baby who was always doing this every morning smiling for me to get him out of bed. And I pick him up and he does this.
And I said, what has happened to my baby? So I call the clinic, and I said, I think my child's had adverse reaction to those those shots yesterday. She says, no. No. No.
I'm waiting for a representative from Merck. I don't think it was a reaction to that.
Speaker 8: Bill Thompson looked at African Americans He saw that those African Americans that got the MMR on time were 2.64 times more likely to get an autism diagnosis than those African Americans that receive the MMR after 3 years of age.
Speaker 6: What this was suggesting is that Among the blacks, the ones that were getting vaccinated earlier were more likely to have autism.
Speaker 8: At that point, The group of researchers that was working on this particular study, they were having weekly meetings. Colleen Boyle, who was the head of Developmental Disabilities Branch, named Marshallyn Yergen Alsop, who was one of Thompson's direct supervisors, Frank DeStefano, who was the head of the Immunization Safety Office and then a postdoctoral research associate named Tanya Vasin. In that meeting, Thompson brought up the fact that African Americans were showing a highly statistically significant risk of autism if they got the MMR on time.
Speaker 6: What is said in these closed door meetings? I mean Do people say, oh, well, this is unacceptable or or is it just do they always say, oh, this can't be right or I'm not gonna lie, But I also don't want to say things to you right now that aren't, that aren't some written form. Right.
Speaker 8: The analysis regarding the African Americans was the 8 on the Richter scale earthquake that just stuck through the CDC.
Speaker 19: I take him to see the pediatrician that I know. And she looks at me. She closes the door, and she whispers. She said, sure. I believe he has autism.
I said, what? Like, Raymond? She says something like that. Someone refer you out to a neurologist, and we go see the neurologist the next week. He says he has every classical symptoms of autism.
I do not believe this. I was angry. When he was explaining to me what kind of autism is, he told me he was born that way. I said, no. He wasn't.
Speaker 12: Clearly, there was a very high risk of autism in African American children. But here's the thing, we know that autism is 4 times more common in boys. And so to see that effect mirrored In the African American children was a compelling finding.
Speaker 8: When I looked at African American males only, The relative risk was 3.36. It just blew my mind and that's when I wanted to call Bill Thompson on the phone In his statement to me was oh you found it.
Speaker 6: It appears in the final publication is that that race in general is downplayed. Of course it is.
Speaker 19: Temple's is amazing. She is fluent in 3 languages. She speaks French like a native. She is an a student. She plays classical piano.
With all of the guilt that I feel from that day, One of the best decisions I made for her was to walk out of that office without her being vaccinated. At the end of this journey, I don't wanna be one of those mothers standing there saying what I wish I woulda, coulda, shoulda done. I wanna be able to say, I gave it everything that I had.
Speaker 20: I gave it my best shot. His twin is going into the 11th grade. And for someone who still can't manage to cross the street, now am I grateful he's here? You bet. I'm grateful my son lived.
And I was so naive that He would live a fulfilling life. He would end up being a happy man, having a family. My dreams were him. And every year It goes by. The older my son gets, the further the dream seems to be.
Speaker 15: All about vaccines. So what do vaccines do?
Speaker 2: Vaccines build up your immune system And make you stronger to fight off disease.
Speaker 15: A vaccine is safe?
Speaker 2: Yes. The studies involving millions of children have shown no connection Between vaccines and autism.
Speaker 15: Stick to the schedule.
Speaker 3: The CDC's own vaccine schedule, which we are required to adhere to as parents in America, recommends that our children get the MMR between 12 18 months. But in this hidden data provided to us by William Thompson, It is clear that for African Americans, this is actually the most dangerous time to deliver the NMR.
Speaker 11: The CDC, in my opinion, is is one of the it's Where I go to if I need information about an infectious disease. I I probably either go on their website or open one of the reference books Every day. That building is filled with a lot of scientists that are smarter than me.
Speaker 3: The analysis plan is one of the most important parts of a scientific study. It's the the laws or the rules by which the scientists will adhere to while doing the study. And this analysis plan is put together by the scientists themselves. Sometimes their superiors weigh in. But once they've locked that analysis plan, they've said, this is how we're going to use the data.
And you can't deviate from that analysis plan, Or you're at risk of fraud, scientific fraud. Did they deviate from the analysis plan after seeing something that they didn't like? If they did, we have a real problem.
Speaker 12: Thompson not only played a major role in developing the analysis plan, He was the numbers guy. He was responsible for collecting the data, analyzing the data and presenting the results. And by November 2001, The results were in.
Speaker 6: Now with the MMR autism one, the we had an analysis plan that we were supposed to execute as Was written and, I'm going to be sharing these draft analysis plans that we had and you can see Whether we did what we said we're going to do.
Speaker 8: That analysis plan had been agreed upon not only by the co authors, but also CDC superiors.
Speaker 12: In order to conceal the effect of the MMR, what they had to do was to reduce the number of children in the study In order to reduce what is referred to as the statistical power, that is the ability of the study to detect a difference, If one genuinely exists. In the analysis plan, they had agreed to use 2 sources of information. The first was children's school records, and the 2nd was the children's Georgia birth certificate record. So while every child in the study had a school record, Only half of the children in the study had a Georgia birth certificate record because the other half had been born in other states. So the analysis plan was explicit.
Information on a child's race was to come from their school record. But when confronted by data that revealed an increased risk of autism in African American children, So they deviated from their analysis plan. They chose to get the race data, not from the school record, but from the Georgia birth record.
Speaker 8: Instead of having 3,000 individuals in the study it went down to about 1800. The relative risk went down from 2.64 to 1.8, but more importantly that relative risk was no longer
Speaker 16: I obtained the Nobel Prize for my contribution to the discovery of the AIDS virus. The vaccine out this Interaction is a worldwide problem, not only in this country, in Europe, but also
Speaker 9: in Asia, even in Africa.
Speaker 16: The MMR vaccination In a very early stage of infancy before the age of 2, it was more prominent in Children, and this was hidden for some time. This forward, of course, ranks very high To my opinion, in the ticks of medicine science, CDC in the past has done a very important work on the discovery of AIDS. So I'm very disappointed to see a different situation with CDC And dealing with Southeast.
Speaker 0: Shortly after, Julie Gerberding became head of the CDC, I began to communicate with her and ask her to come to my office. There didn't seem to be, objective research going on. There was, the CDC trying to promote, Vaccination for children, and then they were doing the safety research themselves.
Speaker 21: In CDC's judgment, the best Public policy is to continue vaccination unchanged while aggressively working to try to identify Causes of developmental disabilities.
Speaker 0: The CDC I just thought was institutionally conflicted.
Speaker 8: The CDC can't
Speaker 18: take money directly pharma, but they can set up a foundation and the foundation can attract donations from commercial interests and does Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Now Pfizer, Sanofi, Adventist have huge multi $1,000,000,000 vaccine and businesses. They're profitable. They've grown because some of these new high-tech vaccines that are patented, that are high priced Get protected by this little cocoon of regulatory capture in HHS and are guaranteed multi $1,000,000,000 franchises.
Speaker 4: When I was working at Merck, I was a sales rep for Vioxx. The whole scandal started when it was discovered that Merck had manipulated data and covered up the fact that Vioxx actually caused twice the amount of heart attacks and strokes than the placebo. What I learned from that experience was just Because things are on the market does not mean they are safe. I think We get into a very dangerous territory with vaccinations. If a drug company gets just 1 vaccine added to the schedule, they can make upwards of $30,000,000,000 in 1 year.
Speaker 18: It's no secret. I think they've published their intention, which is they want to create an environment of constant vaccination from cradle to grave. They want infant vaccines, expanded flu shots, DTaP boosters, Gardasil shots, meningococcal shots. They want adult vaccines. They want you and me to come in and get a constant barrage of shots.
And then they want vaccines for the elderly.
Speaker 4: We have a highly profitable product because the safety testing isn't as rigorous as a normal pharmaceutical drug. The gold standard is double blind Line placebo based long term study and that just isn't done with vaccines because they're classified in a different way as as a public health measure and they haven't been tested in combination with other vaccines. Yet doctors give 6 to 9 doses per visit. It's insane. If pharmaceutical drug was tested like this, it wouldn't be on the market.
But because it's a vaccine and the safety testing is less rigorous,
Speaker 2: Our children are being experimented on. I don't like to look at autism from a behavioral perspective. I look at it from more of a what causes it in each child. When I wanna define autism, I have to say that it's the inability to detoxify the way you're supposed to or at the rates that you're supposed to.
Speaker 20: And it
Speaker 2: all has to do with this toxic overload. These children are not detoxifying from the vaccinations. Same thing with GMO products. The pesticides in our food. If I can prevent the child from being exposed to more toxins, then when I'm teaching the child, at least The child is getting better and not continuously getting worse.
Speaker 13: Without a doubt, what's happened to Billy has changed his life. What I have on my hands now is a 19 year old man. He's 6 foot 2. He is, volatile. On good days, Billy is brilliant.
He's an angel. On bad days, the side of things can trigger him and he's scary.
Speaker 8: I'm gonna go downstairs and get daddy
Speaker 7: right now.
Speaker 8: You need to
Speaker 13: you need to stay up here, okay?
Speaker 8: I'm gonna kill daddy right now.
Speaker 13: Bill, listen to me. I'm gonna stay with you up here and you're gonna
Speaker 2: The reason they become aggressive and dangerous in some cases is because they have no ability to communicate.
Speaker 13: Because mommy asked Kent,
Speaker 8: but Kent's bringing the sweetcorn and
Speaker 13: then bringing the chickens here
Speaker 8: because this is your fault, mommy.
Speaker 2: If you were not able to express your needs, your wants, your desires, your happiness and sadness, and so on, you would become aggressive. That's often when we see the worst part of autism.
Speaker 14: We had to occupy his room and use his video player. And of course, that is a massive intrusion in his space, and he's, He got very upset.
Speaker 1: Where else in this house? Can you play a video? Play a video. Remember? Listen.
Chill. Push The stress level, Philip.
Speaker 13: No. Don't touch dummy. Out there, there's millions of me. There's millions of polytommies with vaccine damaged children. I am telling you this because I do not want you to live the life that I've led.
I do not want you to go through the pain. I did not wanna see you suffer or your family suffer. That is why I'm telling you, I have no other reason to tell you about it. It's not my concern. My kit's already damaged.
Speaker 22: I am a senior research scientist here at MIT in the computer science and artificial intelligence laboratory. I have a bachelor's degree in biology from MIT, and I have MSE and PhD degrees also from MIT in electrical engineering and computer science. I became interested in autism a long time ago when my best friend at time had a son who was diagnosed with autism following, an a DPT shot. He had a high fever after the shot, seizures a week later, and then was Later got diagnosed with autism.
Speaker 18: We have to accept the fact that autism is new. That before 1930 the rate of autism in the world was effectively 0. And then for a long time, it was 1 in 10,000.
Speaker 22: I got interested in studying autism 8 years ago when I Saw the numbers go up. And I was quite alarmed because I could see that the trend was exponential growth. And exponential growth is extremely scary. Since
Speaker 18: really The mid to late 80s, we've gone from this low prevalence environment to a rate of increased where the trend is still vertical. We have not seen a flattening In trend
Speaker 22: Every couple of years, the CDC provides a number of what percentage of the kids are diagnosed with autism. And you've got the dots going all the way back to 1975. You draw the line. It is a perfect exponential curve. If we assume that things are going to continue as they have For the past 30 years into the future, we can predict that by 2032, 80% of the boys born will end up on the autism spectrum.
Half the children, 80% of the boys.
Speaker 4: If you think the vaccine is only a problem for African American kids like me, you're wrong.
Speaker 15: There's an even bigger problem, One that puts all kids at risk, and it's called isolated autism.
Speaker 12: When the CDC researchers set out to do the study, they asked themselves the question, if early MMR vaccine causes autism, In which children would we be most likely to find this effect? Their answer is children with no developmental concerns
Speaker 7: For the 1st year of life,
Speaker 12: children who were perfectly healthy until they received their MMR vaccine. They call this group isolated autism. Now this does not refer to an isolated case of autism or an isolated group with autism. They isolated autism out is the children who had no comorbid conditions apart from their autism. No cerebral palsy, No mental retardation, no visual or hearing impairment, no epilepsy and no birth defects.
This risk group includes Essentially, every healthy child in the world.
Speaker 8: I'm a single father raising a 15 year old, Severely autistic, nonverbal teenage daughter. When she
Speaker 3: was 15 months old, she Received a round
Speaker 8: of vaccines that included the MMR and the DTaP. She developed a high fever, and the fever broke. She lost everything.
Speaker 23: My daughter was 6 weeks old when I took her in for her vaccination. 2 hours later, she had a 5 minute seizure and 2 hours after that she had another 5 minute T shirt.
Speaker 20: Mom is here. Come on. Come on. Come on. You're okay.
You're okay. Come on, baby. Come on, babe. Come on. You can do it.
Come on, babe. Come on out. Come on. Come on, baby. Come on.
Keep breathing. Come on. Come on. Come on. Come on.
Speaker 23: The vaccination gave her severe brain damage And she had seizures every day for the rest of her life until she died in my arms at the age of 15.
Speaker 7: There is no good reason to choose not to get a vaccine.
Speaker 17: Got his MMR and he got his DTP. And within days, he stopped talking.
Speaker 24: Projectile vomiting, convulsions.
Speaker 21: He went blind in his left eye.
Speaker 23: That took our healthy, happy baby and made him unwell.
Speaker 20: She lost all acquired speech.
Speaker 10: He lost his speech. He lost his eye contact like the flick of a switch.
Speaker 7: If vaccines were unsafe, I think this would be an interesting and reasonable discussion.
Speaker 25: Obviously, some minority get hurt by this Stuff. I don't understand why this is controversial.
Speaker 2: Vaccines are safe. Get vaccinated.
Speaker 25: It's like, you know what? Shut the fuck up And let me take every vaccine that Merck wants to shove down my throat.
Speaker 2: Autism is not a side effect of vaccine or to say it another way because some people don't want don't Hear this well. Vaccines do not cause autism.
Speaker 5: Hear this well.
Speaker 17: Hear this well. Please hear this well.
Speaker 13: Hear this well.
Speaker 17: Vaccines can and do Cause autism.
Speaker 2: My grandson. Daughter, Lily. My daughter. My son was fully vaccinated.
Speaker 19: My son, Jackson. I had
Speaker 4: a healthy, typically developing boy.
Speaker 17: Please hear this well. One day, everyone will know the truth about vaccines. Hear this well.
Speaker 6: I actually think the most interesting results are the elevated ones for the isolated ones The ones that don't have other co morbid conditions. The effect is where you would think it would happen.
Speaker 8: In isolated autism, He saw a very, very strong effect specific to those kids that got the MMR on time. When Bill Thompson ran those numbers He saw an astronomical effect. Some of the numbers were actually the relative risks were as high as 7 or 8 Times higher with these kids that were diagnosed with just isolated autism, no other diagnosis, versus those controls.
Speaker 15: Isolated autism is confusing because it sounds small, but it really is a big problem. Because all healthy children, no matter what race, are at risk. For example, my sister's 18 months old, and she's supposed to get her MMR shot right now. But if she does, she's 7 times more likely to get autism than if my parents wait until after 3 years old. So I hope my parents don't do it.
Speaker 3: Here's what's really scary. When we look at isolated autism, we see that there's a Up to 7 fold increase in the incidence of autism between those that received the vaccine between 12 18 months versus those that Got it after 3 years old. But let's be perfectly clear, every child in this study had received the MMR vaccine. What would the numbers be if you compared children who got the vaccine between 12 18 months versus children that never got the vaccine at all? This is often referred to as the vaxxed versus unvaxxed study.
And the CDC refuses to do this study. Even though every drug that we take has been through this exact study. There's a group who take the drug, and then they compare it with a group that do not take the drug, And they see, are there more side effects and complications with the group that takes the drug? So why does the CDC refuse to do the vaxxed versus unvaxxed study? Probably because when we look at the results of this study, we realize that the risk would be astronomical.
And is likely to be one of the major reasons we're seeing this skyrocketing increase of autism worldwide.
Speaker 12: Just like the African American children, they went into the room And they sliced and diced the data in an effort to get rid of that effect. This is Colleen Boyle's meeting notes, How they plan to present the data by these age groups, but after the fact, when the data are in, she writes reformat and then she puts in new Age groups. Even this failed to achieve the desired effect since in the end, they simply omitted The relevant findings from the paper altogether.
Speaker 6: I I was just looking at that. I'm like, oh my god. I cannot believe we did what we did, but we did. Yeah. So it's all there.
It's all there.
Speaker 9: And you in the health field, you who run our health Agencies in this country who are sitting here today. You have an obligation to these kids that you just saw there, To make sure that these studies are complete, thorough, so that everybody knows that we have all the facts. And you don't have that. One of the things we did because this was such an important topic was to have them be sworn in. So they were under oath.
And if they were doctoring the results, of a study and they did it deliberately, they committed a felony. It used to be 1 in 10,000, And now it's 1 in more than 250 kids that are being damaged in this country that are autistic. Now those kids are gonna grow up. They aren't gonna die. It's not like a lot of diseases where they get infected and they drop dead.
They're gonna live to be 50, 60 years old. Now who do you think is gonna take care of them? It's gonna be us, All of us, the taxpayers. And it's going to cost, I think, as you said, miss Maloney, 1,000,000,000,000 of dollars. So we can't let the pharmaceutical Companies and our government cover this mess up today because it ain't gonna go away.
And it's gonna cost the taxpayers Trillions more if we wait around on it. And for our FDA and HHS and the health agencies to continue to hide behind this facade that there have been studies conclusively prove otherwise is just wrong too.
Speaker 3: So the CDC wasn't just doing the study inside of a bubble. In fact, it was the exact opposite. They were under fire. You had congressman Dan Burton in front of the congress demanding answers about mercury and the MMR and vaccine studies and the connection to autism. Dave Weldon, congressman from Florida, is reaching out to Julie Gerberding with serious complaints on how he thinks this entire issue is being handled.
On top of that, the Department of Justice is requesting files and data from the CDC because of a previous study called the Verstratin study They had so many anomalies, it looked like scientific fraud was taking place, so they were suspicious. So then you look at the emails that Thompson's provided to us And you see that he's reaching out to his line manager, doctor Melinda Wharton, throwing up red flags saying, I first spoke with you in September of 2002 regarding the sensitive results we have been struggling with in the MMR autism study. How do you struggle with scientific results? I mean, facts are facts. Data are data.
That doesn't make any sense. So you got Dan Burton breathing down their necks. The Department of Justice is requesting files. And William Thompson finds out that Colleen Boyle has brought in a lawyer to help her decide what materials are are too sensitive to provide to the Department of Justice. This obviously freaks William Thompson out because later in the email to Wharton, he says, I will be hiring my own personal attorney.
And it's extremely unfortunate that we need to be concerned about whether our own legal rights are covered When participating in a study such as this, then what's going on here? We have government scientists lawyering up Over a children's safety study. Clearly, this does not sit well at all with doctor Thompson because at the end of this email, he makes what looks to me to be a clear threat. My level of concern has also caused me to seriously consider removing myself as an author on the draft manuscript. So then a few days later, Thompson writes directly to doctor Walter Orenstein, head of the National Immunization Program, saying, I am not interested in taking all of the political heat that will go along with that study.
Thompson has gone all the way To the top of his department. I mean, we don't ever get a response from Walter Orenstein, but Thompson is very clear On what happened next?
Speaker 6: The higher ups wanted to do certain things and I went along with it. In terms of chain of command, I was number 4 out of 5.
Speaker 8: Doctor Thompson talked about destruction of documents And that in fall of 2002, there was a meeting with the trash can rolled in and they selected documents to be destroyed.
Speaker 6: I led all the analyses with the Stefano saying literally everyone else got rid of all their documents. So the only documents that exist right now from that Saudi Aramine.
Speaker 8: These documents were no doubt federal records. They were very important documents because they showed a very strong statistically significant effect.
Speaker 12: He felt that quite rightly, it would be illegal to destroy those documents. And so in his office, he kept not only the hard copies, but the computerized files for that study.
Speaker 8: There was a dramatically different result presented before and after The time frame that Thompson alleged that these data were destroyed. If I never had the documents before October 2002, There would be nothing that would show that they actually had the results in hand and they decided to destroy those results. I filed a formal complaint to the office of research integrity and the Department of Health and Human Services. I heard back not long after the complaint was filed. And the letter basically stated that every coauthor except for doctor Thompson denied that any such meeting was scheduled.
They denied that any material was destroyed or thrown away. They were calling doctor Thompson a liar. It was their word against his. Doctor Thompson predicted that this would happen.
Speaker 6: There's things I haven't even shared with you because I can't prove it. And that's what I struggle with. I don't wanna share things with you that I can't prove, that there aren't Hard records. Because I am worried that the other 4 people will pollute and say, no, that's not true.
Speaker 8: Doctor. Thompson provided meeting notes to me for precisely the time where the co authors are claiming that no meeting took place.
Speaker 6: That's what I keep seeing again and again and again where these senior people just do completely unethical vile things, and no one holds them accountable.
Speaker 3: So look, once you have the data, a scientific study like this is a relatively simple process. You just run the data, You get the results, and then you publish those results in a paper. In their own analysis plan, this study was only supposed to take 6 months, From May 2001 to December 2001. So if they weren't destroying data, why did this study end up taking 4 years. The question everybody needs to be asking the CDC is what the heck happened between October 2002 and February of 2004.
Speaker 6: The reason you don't see anything else circulating on the study, it was 5 of us behind closed doors for 2 years. Wow.
Speaker 3: So after 2 years of Secret meetings behind closed doors. This definitely merges with the final draft of the MMR study. And they're gonna present it to the Institute of Medicine.
Speaker 0: People on the IOM move from industry, government, academia, government, industry And they then they bounce around. It's all the same people, and there wasn't a really good policeman in all this to really make sure that the vaccine safety these are done properly and that they're done objectively. It just didn't seem to me like we were we were running a system that was credible. I had written to Julie Gerberding, and I asked her to postpone the February 9th Institute of Medicine meeting. This the Institute of Medicine report I wanna postpone because of my concern that this was not an exercise in discovering the truth, But was instead a meeting being driven by a desire to short circuit important research and draw premature
Speaker 3: The problem is William Thompson being the lead scientist, he's going to have to present their findings And he's not happy about it. In fact, he's so upset that he goes above the lead author DeStefano, above Walter Orenstein all the way to the head of the CDC, doctor Julie Gerberding. And in an email, she says, dear doctor Gerberding, I will have to present several problematic results relating to statistical associations between the receipt of MMR vaccine and autism. Basically saying, I'm not gonna continue this lie. If you put me up there, I'm going to tell the truth.
Speaker 26: Thompson was originally scheduled to provide a briefing because he basically told director Gerberding that he would have to say that There is a causal association. He was switched at the last minute with Frank DeStefano. He was able to report to the IOM Falsely, we have found no association between MMR and autism.
Speaker 12: The IOM was the point of no return. And so deprived of the truth, The IOM declared MMR vaccine safe.
Speaker 0: It was a rush to judgment, to shut the door permanently and completely on the MMR autism link. It's absolutely appalling that much of what I said turned out Exactly to be true. They were trying to short circuit the research.
Speaker 6: It's the lowest, you know, it's the lowest point in my career that I went along with that paper.
Speaker 3: After their brilliant work on the MMR study, DeStefano and his team received an award from the Department of Health and Human Services. And then several years later, doctor Julie Gerberding received an award of her own, a high paid job as head of the scene division at Merck. Clearly, Merck appreciated the work she had done investigating their vaccine.
Speaker 6: Just to let you know, I wrote a paper on my results on MMR. Yeah. And it will include something that I got from you.
Speaker 12: Brian was about to publish a paper Using data that could only have come from an inside source of the CDC, a whistleblower and from that point forward, William
Speaker 8: Thompson Andy approached me and said it's time to publicize the CDC Whistleblower.
Speaker 12: Ironically, 12 years later, while Thompson is bearing his soul to Brian Hooker, in front of Congress, Colleen Boyle is just Peddling the same old CDC fraud, but this time, it's to a new player and that's Congressman Bill Posey from Florida.
Speaker 1: I wonder if the CDC has conducted or facilitated a study comparing vaccinated children with unvaccinated children yet. Have you done that?
Speaker 21: We have actually done a number of studies looking at the relationship between, Samerasol vaccines and autism and other developmental disabilities.
Speaker 12: The lies from the CDC were still the same. The difference now is, we had William Thompson.
Speaker 21: Vaccines and their components Did not increase the risk for autism.
Speaker 1: My my time is very limited here. So clearly, definitely, unequivocally, you have studied Vaccinated versus unvaccinated.
Speaker 21: We have not studied vaccinated versus unvaccinated. Okay. As it
Speaker 1: reminds, just stop there, that was the meaning of my question. You wasted 2 minutes of my time.
Speaker 12: Brian had also submitted a related paper to a journal called Nature Neuroscience. In that paper, he had specifically referred to an unnamed source of the CDC. And my worst fears were realized when a journalist from Nature Neuroscience Contacted the CDC, contacted Walter Orenstein. The message went on to Frank de Stefano, who sent it out to the co authors saying, keep your heads Dan, this may be coming your way.
Speaker 8: The fear was all of a sudden we'd be dredging a river for Bill Thompson.
Speaker 12: I said to him, Brian, we've got to do 3 things. We have got to get Thomson a whistleblower lawyer, we've got to make sure that his documents Who know their identity are their enemies.
Speaker 27: Do vaccines cause autism? In the last 30 years, the childhood vaccine schedule has tripled while the US autism rate has skyrocketed From 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 50. Dozens of published research papers show that yes, Vaccines and autism are linked. Yet the debate rages on in part because of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act Passed by Congress as a result of pharmaceutical lobbying. It shields drug companies from liability for injuries and deaths caused by the vaccines they manufacture.
Vaccines that the federal government admits are unavoidably unsafe. Instead of suing the pharmaceutical company directly, parents are forced to petition the Department of Health and Human Services. And If federal health officials oppose compensation, the case is argued before a special master in the U. S. Claims court.
Many refer to this as vaccine court. Here are some shocking facts about the so called vaccine court. Pharmaceutical companies do not have to participate in the proceedings at all. Taxpayers pay for all damages. The US Department of Justice acts as the government's lawyer with taxpayers footing the bill for their defense.
Speaker 26: Beginning in 2002, there were already thousands of cases accumulating In vaccine court, and the average compensation for autistic child is in the range of $5,000,000. So just do the math. The government was facing several 100,000,000,000, possibly a $1,000,000,000,000 in liability. As the autism epidemic grew, They had to develop a fraudulent study that would exonerate MMR to deliberately defeat the cases in vaccine court To avoid paying the $1,000,000,000. So the 1,000 of autism petitioners were denied their fair day in court by a corrupt And deliberate obstruction of justice is is one of the most unethical medical decisions of all time because it was made with knowledge to sacrifice these children as a direct affront to the congressional mandate That they be all be compensated.
Speaker 3: In the fall of last year, I got a call from an inside source who told me that in 2 weeks, there's gonna be a whistleblower from the CDC who's going to come out and say that the CDC had committed Fraud on the MMR study and that they knew that vaccines were actually causing autism. I mean, that's a huge story. Unfortunately, it was a story I would not be able to tell on a medical talk show because a lot of our funding was coming from the pharmaceutical industry. And we were also very good friends with the CDC who had appeared on our show many, many times. But I knew that once this story broke, 2 weeks later, That the mainstream news media would pick it up.
Fox would be on it. CNN was would be on MSNBC. We're talking about the biggest medical story In the last decade or 2 at least. So that 2 weeks came, I saw the video that was posted by Andrew Wake and Brian Hooker, and I heard the words of William Thompson and his confession.
Speaker 6: Oh my god. I cannot believe we did what we did, but we did. It's all there. It's all there.
Speaker 3: And I watched the blogosphere go crazy. Tweets, Facebook, Social media, everybody talking about it. But not 1 mainstream media source went anywhere near the story. In fact, on CNN, someone put the story up on Ireport, and CNN took it down. And in that moment, I realized, Wait a minute.
Not only is my medical talk show being produced by the pharmaceutical industry, all of television is. We were never going to get this story. But we certainly did get a story.
Speaker 2: A highly contagious measles outbreak. Major outbreak.
Speaker 6: Measles outbreak.
Speaker 2: Measles on the march in America.
Speaker 3: This outbreak is showing no signs of letting up.
Speaker 4: But in 2014, the number tripled to 644 measles cases reported in 27 states.
Speaker 2: It's a really Amazing to consider the number of cases of autism every year and to contrast that To, let's say, the number of children who acquired measles by going to Disneyland. It's a tiny number of children who, acquired measles. And it's a vast number of children who are being diagnosed with autism every day.
Speaker 6: We don't know what Causes autism. I mean, that's fair to say. We're not sure as a scientific community what causes autism, but we know that vaccines do not.
Speaker 3: Now I'm not saying that Sanjay Gupta is a bad guy. In fact, I think that he tries to do a lot of good, just like many doctors do. But if they're being lied to by the scientific body that provides them with their information, what happens to all of us? What happens if a good doctor sees the same data that I saw.
Speaker 24: So you're you're a scientist, basically. So you're studying this, And you feel a 100% comfortable. You even said you have kids, so you're you're a family person. You would feel very
Speaker 3: And how long have you been a doctor? And sort of what's your area of specialty?
Speaker 24: Sure. I've been a family medicine physician for over 10 years now and treating families, everyone from newborns all the way up to my oldest patient is 96.
Speaker 3: So do you administer vaccines as a part of that?
Speaker 24: Yes. I do administer vaccines. In our clinic, we follow the CDC recommendations And we give that information to our patients and we give them a schedule of when their children are gonna need to be vaccinated and so on and so forth.
Speaker 3: There's something I wanna show you. This is the formal complaint about what they've been given by William Thompson, the whistleblower of the CDC. Okay? There's all sorts of reference materials in here and things like that. I'm just gonna give you time to look at it, study it as long as you want.
Okay? Okay. When you feel like you have a grasp of it, it's gonna you're gonna I know. Take some time. Appreciate you taking the time.
Alright? Okay. So I have sent you What William Thompson has said is the fraud at the CDC. All of that data that was missing. Did you get a chance to really look it over?
Speaker 24: It's, it's just really unbelievable how blatantly the data was switched around. It made me question whether or not this organization that's been mandating how I practice medicine for the past 10 years, if they're lying about this or leaving data out about this particular study, what else am I being lied to about.
Speaker 11: I'm still trying to digest it because this study which was used To kinda give the definitive answer to us pediatricians that, oh, the MMR is not Related to autism, I I kind of feel like I've been lied to. When they set out to do the study, they wanted to look at the data and interpret the data. But then there's a piece of data that they chose to ignore. The data they excluded
Speaker 3: It was really, really significant.
Speaker 24: Think about it. It's a big deal. It is a big deal for a physician to have to deal with the fact that for the past 10, 20 years, we've been potentially destroying the brains of children.
Speaker 11: Everything I've been telling my patients for the last 10 years has been based on a lie and a cover up.
Speaker 1: Parents making decisions about their children's health deserve to have the best information available to them. They should be able to count on federal agencies To tell them the truth.
Speaker 12: Once Brian and I had outed Bill Thompson, he got himself a whistleblower lawyer. He provided all of his documents on the fraudulent CDC study To Congressman Posey, who then went before the Congress.
Speaker 1: Considering the nature of the whistleblower's documents, as well as the involvement of the CDC, A hearing and a thorough investigation is warranted. So I ask, mister speaker, I I beg, I implore, my colleagues on the appropriations committees to please, please take such action. Thank you, mister speaker. I yield back.
Speaker 12: It's now been 7 months since Congressman Bill Posey urged the Congress to subpoena Bill Thompson, and they have done nothing.
Speaker 8: Bill Thompson wants to be subpoenaed by Congress. As a CDC employee from the federal government, He cannot speak voluntarily because of the threat of jail time.
Speaker 24: Absolutely. William Thompson needs to go before Congress. He needs to go before the whole nation. Everybody needs to see what he has to say.
Speaker 0: He needs to be deposed in in front of a committee in congress. And Julie Gerberding has to be brought in and and deposed because this is a very, very, very disturbing revelation for this researcher to come forward and be saying now that they were indeed deliberately, concealing critical information About an MMR autism link, horrible, horrible, development.
Speaker 3: Deviation from an analysis plan, a mission of crucial data, Destruction of documents, obstruction of justice, misleading the congress, grievous harm to innocent children. This has to be investigated.
Speaker 6: You and I are in agreement. Vaccine cases should not be in the CDC. Absolutely. You would end up with an agency like the National Transportation Safety Board.
Speaker 0: The next thing they need to do is they need to, Somebody needs to reintroduce the Weldon Maloney bill. It needs to be very, very quickly enacted and you need
Speaker 8: to take all of the vaccine safety responsibilities out of These children have been maimed by the actions of Colleen Boyle, Frank DeStefano, Marcheline Jurgen Alstorp And Tanya Bassin, my son has been debilitated for 17 years. I think jail time is too good for these individuals who have perpetrated such fraud.
Speaker 12: The notion of vaccinating children, protecting children Against serious infectious disease with vaccines that are safe and effective autism being reported as a consequence of the single vaccine, only of the triple vaccine. So my feeling is that we need to review vaccination policy Across the board, but in the first instance, I do believe we can make the problem far less if we separate those vaccines out Into that single measles, mumps, and rubella.
Speaker 22: I just cannot imagine what it will be like if we really do face a future in which half the children born end up on the autism spectrum. I mean, it will be so disruptive of the school system. There'll be so little money to be able to spend on the
Speaker 7: on the normal children to help them,
Speaker 22: to bring them up and to educate them. We're just gonna have extremely sick children and parents that will be, so distracted by, by the challenge of bringing up these children that are so sick that our society will not be able to focus on anything else.
Speaker 18: The implications of that For our country, for our competitiveness as a nation, for our economy are massive. They must know and they do know that there's A national emergency.
Speaker 22: I mean, this is gonna be a complete catastrophe if we just let it happen.
Speaker 3: What will you say The next time a mother sitting there with her baby in her hands says, Doctor. Rachel, Is the MMR vaccine safe?
Speaker 24: I'm gonna tell her. I'm gonna say, you know, Honestly, I'm not gonna give the MMR vaccine to my babies, and here's why.
reSee.it AI Summary
Flight MH17, carrying delegates to an AIDS conference, was tragically shot down over Ukraine. Many victims were researchers and scientists heading to the event in Melbourne. The conference almost got canceled, but a candlelit vigil was held to honor the victims. Among them were renowned HIV/AIDS researchers. Disturbingly, documents suggest Western pharmaceutical companies conducted HIV/AIDS research on Ukrainian military personnel.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
“Dozens of delegates, scientists and researchers on Flight #MH17, en-route to an #AIDS conference, were among the 298 victims of the crash in Ukraine after it was shot out of the sky over the war-torn area on July 17. The five day AIDS conference in #Melbourne, #Australia was almost cancelled as it became evident that many of the dead passengers from flight MH17 were researchers and delegates heading to the conference, convened by the International AIDS Society. A silent, candle-lit vigil has been held at the conference to honor the victims. Although not all the passengers have been named, it is believed that some of the world’s leading HIV/Aids researchers are among the victims of the doomed flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur” - Biolabs in #Ukraine - fast forward Covid vaccines causing (V)AIDS.. HIV protein in Covid spike protein, nah nothing suss, just another coincidence https://borgenproject.org/aids-researchers-flight-mh17/ “Documents and materials recovered by Russian troops show that Western pharmaceutical companies operating in territory under Kiev’s control conducted #HIV/AIDS research on Ukrainian military personnel” https://on.rt.com/c8d6 Wonder if #UkrainePete knows anything?
reSee.it AI Summary
Moderna is being discussed in relation to a controversial topic called Modernagate. @Veronic05502788 questions the significance of a specific letter group, suggesting it is related to dead cellular debris. They provide a link for further investigation. @DrWoofAus is encouraged to enter the letter group in a search. @Veronic05502788 criticizes scientists for manipulating primers and using scare tactics to introduce toxic substances to the public.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Moderna is trending.. Let's not forget their fingerprints on the weapon as found in #Modernagate #CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG
@Veronic05502788 - Veronica Bernard
@DrWoofAus Well... what is CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG?? A dead cellular debris of the humans, the animals and the plants, nothing else - you haven't understood anything yet either from this decades-long fraud.... enter the letter group in the BLAST search https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi?PAGE_TYPE=BlastSearch&BLAST_SPEC=OGP__9606__9558&LINK_LOC=blasthome at Enter Query
404 Error - NCBITwitterFacebookLinkedInGitHubSM-TwitterSM-FacebookSM-Youtube
blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
@Veronic05502788 - Veronica Bernard
@DrWoofAus Sequence, scroll down to the blue box on the left, click on it and wait for the result - it is always searched for nucleotide sequences of dead cell debris only, but every human, animal and plant has it and must excrete!!!! every time these pseudoscientists change the primers,
@Veronic05502788 - Veronica Bernard
@DrWoofAus you can invent something new again to scare humanity to bring toxic Substances into the people and that is criminal!!!
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
CNN's military affairs correspondent, Jamie McIntyre, reports from outside the Pentagon where a plane crashed. McIntyre observed the firefighters trying to extinguish the ongoing blaze. He closely inspected the area and found no evidence of a plane crash near the Pentagon, except for the damaged building itself. The only remaining pieces were small enough to be picked up by hand. The fire continues to burn in certain parts of the Pentagon.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Outside the Pentagon, CNN's military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre. And Jamie, you got very close to where that plane went down.
Speaker 1: That's right, Judy. A while ago, I walked right up to next to the building was, firefighters were still trying to put out the blaze. The fire, by the way, is still burning thing, in some parts of the Pentagon. And I took a look at the huge gaping hole that's in the sideway, but from my close-up inspection there's no evidence a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon, the only sight is the actual site of the building that's crashed in. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are are small enough that you could pick up in your hand.
reSee.it AI Summary
On 9/11, mainstream media witnessed an explosion and later called it in. Professor Steve Jones scientifically proved the presence of thermate, supporting the theory of an inside job. CCTV footage from the Pentagon carpark was confiscated by the FBI, revealing a missile strike. Pools of molten metal at ground zero for a month pointed to the use of thermite. The prewritten Patriot Act, WTC7's interesting tenants, and its convenient collapse raise further questions. Explore the evidence: [links provided].
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
911 🧵 - mainstream media news helicopter witnessing explosion then getting called in #911Truth #911Lies
Video Transcript AI Summary
It appears that there is something happening in the other building. We are being instructed to move away from the area.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Wow. That that that apparently does look like it is in the other building at this point. Back off. They're telling us to back off.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 is in shock and informs Lloyd about the World Trade Center. They are on the roof of a garage after voting and witness the second tower exploding. Speaker 0 clarifies that it was not a plane but a bomb that caused the explosion.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Oh my god. Oh my god. Oh my Lloyd, Clifton. Lloyd, do you know about the World Trade Center? I'm on The 2nd tower just exploded.
No, I'm on. I went to go vote this morning, and I went to park my car. And I'm on the roof of this garage. And I as a matter of fact, it just caught the 2nd explosion on video clip. No, a bomb.
I Saw it. It no no plane hit nothing. The building exploded.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
The real scientific proof that 9/11 was an "inside job" is from Professor Steve Jones, who scientifically proved the presence of thermate.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
FBI confiscated all CCTV footage from the Pentagon carpark - @TomFitton of @JudicialWatch sued for the footage. That's clearly the same missile from earlier tweet. The FBI confiscated 20+ tapes
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Camcorder footage from a member of the public
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
“Pools of molten metal at ground zero for up to a month after 9/11 point explicitly to the use of Thermite”
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker describes witnessing the collapse of the World Trade Center and hearing what sounded like gunshots. They saw the building being taken down and people running away. The speaker observed explosions and then turned around to run for their life. Another speaker adds that the only way a building can collapse with acceleration is through controlled demolition using precisely timed and placed explosives.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It's gone. It was it was
Speaker 1: It's all by floor instead of popping out.
Speaker 0: It was like was it they fit the identity. Yeah. They didn't
Speaker 1: It's not popping out.
Speaker 0: It was it the heads down? Yeah. Then they would play it. Take down the building.
Speaker 1: All the way down.
Speaker 0: All of a sudden, there was, like, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, like bullet shots. I saw from On the corner, boom. Boom. Boom. Boom.
Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom.
Boom. Boom. Just like 20 straight hits just went down. And as the bombs were gone, people just started running. And I sat there and watched A few of them exploded, and then I just turned around.
And I just started running for my life because at that point, World Trade Center was coming right down From the corner. Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom.
Boom. Boom. Boom. The whole building just went. And as the bombs were gone, people just started running.
I sat there and watched a a few of them explode.
Speaker 1: Only way that a building can accelerate as it collapses is by having pre engineered, Precisely timed and precisely placed explosives. In other words, controlled demolition
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
The Patriot Act was prewritten before 911
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
WTC7 (3rd building) contained some interesting tenants including FBI/CIA. Building reported to be holding various ENRON case evidence. Barely damaged - "Pull it" (lucky it was prewired with explosives Larry)
Video Transcript AI Summary
I received a call from the fire department commander who said they were unsure if they could control the fire. Due to the significant loss of life, they decided to pull the building.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I remember getting a call from the, fire department commander telling me that they were not sure they're gonna be able to contain the fire. As in, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe there's a lot of things to do is is pull it. And they made that decision to pole, and then we watched the building
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 describes a horrific explosion in the lobby of a building, followed by two more explosions. They mention that the entire building collapsed, causing chaos and trapping many people inside. Speaker 0 asks if the secondary explosion was planned, and Speaker 1 confirms that it was. They explain that they were inside the building, waiting to go upstairs when the explosions occurred. Speaker 0 clarifies that a plane hit the building first, followed by the secondary explosions. Speaker 1 confirms this and mentions that they witnessed a large airplane flying into the second building. They describe the experience as surreal, like a movie. Speaker 1 also mentions the possibility of more buildings exploding and expresses confusion and disbelief about the situation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What happened?
Speaker 1: It was an explosion. He's in the lobby, and then fucking this the 3rd explode, and the whole lobby collapsed on us.
Speaker 0: What was it like? What was it like? Horrible. It's like hell. You don't wanna know.
Speaker 1: The whole building just collapsed on us inside the lobby.
Speaker 0: Is that The secondary explosion?
Speaker 1: Yes. It was.
Speaker 0: That was the plan from
Speaker 1: Yeah. Definitely secondary explosion. We was inside waiting to go upstairs. And on our way upstairs, the whole fucking thing blew. And he just just collapsed from everybody inside the lobby.
So much of the 1st tower coming down 2nd area? I don't know about the first one, but I know the second was it was terrible. Then there was a third one too to that one. 3rd explosion after that? Yes, sir.
Everybody was inside the building. The way you can go upstairs, and they they just they just let loose. Everything just let loose inside the building.
Speaker 0: So what what you told me is that there was a plane or whatever hit the building and then the secondary explosion?
Speaker 1: It was like 3 explosives after that. We came in after the after the fire. We Came when the fire was going on already. He's in the staging area inside the building Okay. Waiting to go upstairs.
Alright.
Speaker 0: And then the 3rd exploded.
Speaker 1: The whole the whole lobby collapsed on the lobby inside.
Speaker 0: And and and it's just they came after that.
Speaker 1: Oh, just me. Everybody tried to work their way out.
Speaker 0: He's trying to help All the brothers. A lot of people a lot
Speaker 1: of people trapped inside. I'm sitting in
Speaker 0: the Brooklyn Navy. We are in the Brooklyn neighborhood. We watched the 1st explosion As we watch the children, so black, very large airplane fly right into the 2nd building, came out of the south right right in front
Speaker 1: of our eyes.
Speaker 0: Is just
Speaker 1: I know. It's least beautiful.
Speaker 0: It it was so surreal, like
Speaker 1: the movie said.
Speaker 0: 2nd 2nd and 3rd explosion. Yeah.
Speaker 1: We were in the building
Speaker 0: for a 3rd one collapsed. He's on his drive here for the other one. Just try to drive. I need anything to do today. Do you park?
He's gonna fight is still here. Take off your jacket. Come on. When you're in here You're just trying to leave
Speaker 1: it with your
Speaker 0: bottom bunk and open up your jacket. He's gonna dehydrate that. That's what he People would understand. There may be more. Any one of these fucking buildings could blow up.
Understand. This ain't done yet. How does this
Speaker 1: This is happening. On top of this
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
This video questions the authenticity of the footage showing Flight 175 hitting the South World Trade Center tower on 9/11. The speaker points out two impossibilities. Firstly, they claim that a real airplane couldn't have sliced through a building with a steel facade and reinforced concrete flooring. Secondly, they highlight a building that appears behind the tower in the video, suggesting a CGI glitch. The speaker concludes that this video, along with others, is a fake created by the news media.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Super slow motion video of flight 175 that hit the South World Trade Center tower on 9eleventwo thousand and one. Take a really close look because there are 2 impossibilities Iim going to show you here. This video was allegedly shot by Michael Herzikani, a Diamond Merchant based in Los Angeles, California. The first impossibility is a real airplane couldn't have sliced through a building with a steel facade with reinforced concrete flooring and 47 Steel Support Beams, a Jetis wing canit slice through steel building like a hot knife through butter. But that's the story the news media wants us to believe.
And most people are still believing this hoax. But the second impossibility is in plain sight. In fact, I can't believe it took me over 12 years to see. Let me show you a still of this video. I've highlighted a building that's clearly behind the South World Trade Center tower.
Yet, when we pay close attention to the video, Flight 175's wing should appear in front of the building, not behind it. This is a layering CGI glitch And this proves that this video, which was seen all over the world over and over and over again, year after year, is a CGI rendering. Thus, it's not an amateur witness video. It's a fake. And this is one of many, many fake videos put out by the news media.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
CNN's military affairs correspondent, Jamie McIntyre, reports from outside the Pentagon where a plane has crashed. McIntyre states that he walked up to the building and observed firefighters trying to extinguish the ongoing blaze. He mentions that there is a large hole in the side of the Pentagon, but upon closer inspection, he found no evidence of a plane crash nearby. The only remnants visible are small enough to be picked up by hand. The fire continues to burn in certain areas of the Pentagon.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Outside the Pentagon, CNN's military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre. And Jamie, you got very close to where that plane went down.
Speaker 1: That's right, Judy. A while ago, I walked right up to next to the building was, firefighters were still trying to put out the blaze. The fire, by the way, is still burning thing, in some parts of the Pentagon. And I took a look at the huge gaping hole that's in the sideway, but from my close-up inspection there's no evidence a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon, the only sight is the actual site of the building that's crashed in. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are are small enough that you could pick up in your hand.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss the collapse of the Twin Towers and question the official explanation given by NIST. They argue that the top sections of the towers should have mutually destroyed each other, but instead, they fell at close to free fall speed, indicating the removal of supporting structures. The speakers suggest that controlled demolition is the only explanation for this acceleration. They emphasize that a building cannot achieve free fall without being blown up, as the energy would be used to crush the structure below. They conclude that the fundamental laws of physics were ignored in the official investigation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Pushing on the bottom section, it's gonna meet equal forces as it goes. Both sections are gonna be, demolished at the same rate. So by the time you've crushed up 15 stories below it, the top 15 stories are also gonna be crushed. And so there's nothing left now to crush the rest of the building.
Speaker 1: Something of this kind is what we should have seen when the top section of the towers collapsed onto the lower one. The upper and lower sections should have mutually destroyed each other until all the energy is dissipated and the comes to a rest. What could not have happened is this.
Speaker 0: A little tiny chunk of the building can't possibly fall and crush the entire structure below it.
Speaker 1: This is such a simple fundamental concept that architects and engineers were astonished in seeing it totally ignored by NIST.
Speaker 2: This is high high school physics. And our whole society is being led to believe that these fundamental laws of physics, hard science. Don't apply anymore.
Speaker 1: Assuming that the top section on the left contains enough potential energy to destroy the rest of the tower And assuming we dropped both upper sections at the same time, which one would hit the ground first? It would be the 2nd, of course. As it finds no obstacles in its path, the section on the right would quickly accelerate to free fall speed and maintain it all the way to the ground. The section on the left instead needs to use some of its energy to destroy the structure below so it could never achieve free fall speed. In the case of the Twin Towers, however, both upper sections fell with an acceleration close to free fall speed as if their path had been practically free from obstacles.
It took each tower between 10 and 12 seconds to collapse to the ground while an absolute free fall time would have been 9.2 seconds. In other words, both upper sections of the towers found enough energy to destroy 80,000 tons of healthy structure below The law of momentum conservation won't allow it.
Speaker 3: A building cannot do free fall with a huge structural steel structural system in place to support it.
Speaker 4: The twin towers couldn't could not have come straight down through the resistance of 80,000 tons of structural steel at the speed of of practically freefall. That just would not happen.
Speaker 0: If in fact it actually hit and made an impact, it was effectively crushing anything, pushing hard on this core structure below it. The core structure is gonna push back equally hard and that's what's gonna cause the top section of the building to slow down.
Speaker 5: As energy is drained away from the system to deform those members, it would slow down the descending mass
Speaker 0: fall at a speed, which can only occur if the structure has been removed, the vertical structure.
Speaker 1: The same Shyam Sunder from NIST has acknowledged that free fall can only be achieved with the absence of a structure below.
Speaker 5: Free fall time would be an object that has no, structural components below it.
Speaker 1: But what could have removed the supporting structure below since the falling section didn't have any extra energy to do so?
Speaker 0: The fact that it's coming down at free fall. Says all of the energy is being used to just make it go straight down, which means it's coming down through itself and not breaking up the building as it goes. Something else has to be clearing the way.
Speaker 1: There is only one known way to allow that Kind of acceleration while removing the supporting structure.
Speaker 3: A building cannot do free fall without it being blown up. That's the only way it could come down at free fall.
Speaker 5: The only way that a building can accelerate as it collapses is by having pre engineered precisely timed timed and precisely placed explosives. In other words, controlled demolition.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Salomon Brothers building in New York collapsed due to being weakened during the morning's attacks. Details are limited, but the trade center is still engulfed in smoke and ash. The building's collapse has left an empty space in the New York skyline, symbolizing the city's financial prosperity. New York is struggling to comprehend the events of the day.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now more on the latest building collapse in New York. You might have heard a few moments ago. I was talking about the Salomon Brothers building collapsing, and indeed it has. It seems that this was not a result of a new attack, it was because the, building had been weakened, during this morning's attacks. We'll probably find out more now about that from our correspondent Jane Stanley.
Jane what more can you tell us about the Salomon Brothers building and its collapse?
Speaker 1: Well, only really what you already know. Details are very very sketchy. As you can see behind me, the, trade center appears to be still We see these huge clouds of smoke and ash. And we know that behind that, there's an empty piece of what was a very a familiar New York skyline, a symbol of the financial prosperity of this city, but, completely see disappeared now, and New York is still unable to take on board what has happened to them today.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
The bomb in the building started clearing up.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The bomb in The bomb in the building started clearing up. Sorry. It seems to come. What'd you say? The bomb in the building started clearing up.
Got it.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
In New York City, the South Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed in 10 seconds, followed by the North Tower 29 minutes later. Later that evening, World Trade Center 7, a 47-story office building, also collapsed in 6 seconds. The official explanation was that falling debris from the twin towers caused a fire inside the building. However, this would make it the third building in history to collapse due to fire. Other buildings, like the Empire State Building, have survived similar incidents without collapsing. Similarly, a skyscraper in Los Angeles burned for 3 hours and a building in Philadelphia burned for over 19 hours, but neither collapsed.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: 959, New York City, New York. The South Tower of the World Trade Center collapses to the ground in approximately 10 seconds. 29 minutes later, the north tower follows suit, collapsing in approximately 10 seconds. Later that evening at 5:20, World Trade Center 7, A 47 story office building 300 feet away from the north tower suddenly collapses. The building's tenants included the CIA, Department of Defense, IRS, secret service, and Rudy Giuliani's emergency bunker, and the SEC was using it to store 3 to 4000 files related to numerous Wall Street investigations.
Although every single building surrounding building 7 stood intact, it fell straight down into a convenient little pile in six Seconds. Official explanation, falling debris from the twin towers created an internal fire which ignited several fuel tanks inside the building. If this is true, then it would be the 3rd building in history to collapse because of a fire. The first 2 would be the twin towers. On July 28, 1945, A B 52 bomber lost in the fog crashed into the 79th floor of the Empire State Building.
Fourteen people dead, $1,000,000 in damage, but the building stands intact to this day. On February 14, 1975, A 3 alarm fire broke out between the 9th 14th floors of the North Tower. According to the New York Times, the fire leads to intense scrutiny of the towers, and eventually to a decision to install sprinklers. On May 4, 1988, A 62 story skyscraper in Los Angeles burned for 3 hours and spread over 4 floors. It did not collapse.
On February 23, 1991, a 38 story skyscraper in Philadelphia, built in 1973, burned for more than 19 hours and spread over 8 floors. It did not collapse.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
Our truck is full of dust, preventing our deck from working. Earlier, a woman covered in blood from head to toe sat in our truck. She claims to have been on the 82nd and we just heard another explosion. We'll stay here until it's no longer safe.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Their tape right now because our truck is full of dust. That's exactly how much dust we're talking about. Our deck is not working. However, I can tell you, we had a woman sitting in our, live truck earlier who is literally covered in blood from her toes to her head. She was sitting in our truck filled with dust.
She says she was actually on the 82nd. In fact, we just heard another explosion. We just heard another explosion a moment ago. So we're gonna stay here as long as we can, but as soon as it becomes dangerous, of course, we will move. Let me tell you a little more about this woman.
@DrWoofAus - Dr Woof 🐭🦊
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the discovery of pools of molten metal in the rubble of the World Trade Center buildings after the 9/11 attacks. They mention that the molten steel was found weeks later during the removal process, including underneath World Trade Center 7. The speaker questions the lack of mention of this evidence in official reports and suggests that thermite, a substance that can cut through steel, may have been involved. Thermite produces molten iron and aluminum oxide as byproducts.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The way we do this is by cutting the beam at an angle. I started looking at the molten metal. All 3 buildings, both towers in the rubble, in the basement areas and building 7, there's these pools of molten metal. You get down below and you'd see molten steel Molten steel running down the channel rails like you're in a foundry. And, like, like, like, a blob.
Okay.
Speaker 1: The molten steel was found 3, 4, and 5 weeks later when the rubble was being removed. He said that molten steel was also found underneath World Trade Center 7.
Speaker 0: So I'm looking through the official reports. What do they say about the molten metal? They say nothing. Wait a minute. This is important evidence to where that come from.
Thermite is so hot, and it'll just cut through steel, through structural steel, for example, like a knife through butter. The products are molten iron and aluminum oxide, which goes